Marxists Continue to Lie and Defend Jihadis in America

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, August 3, 2018:

Enemies of the United States continue to lie and provide cover for jihadis in the U.S. while defaming those speaking truth about real threats to the Republic.

In an article entitled “American Islamophobia’s Fake Facts” published July 31, 2018 in a little-known online blog,  the author lies and defends terrorists (jihadis) in an attempt to challenge the mountain of evidence reagarding the Islamic Movement in the United States.

While the article may never be read by more than a handful of people, the arguments in it are often raised by those collaborating with America’s enemies, so UTT thinks it wise to give our readers they ammunition they need to defeat these false and often nonsensical comments.

The article in question can be found here.

Here are the article’s main arguments followed by UTT’s rebuttal with facts:

“A major theme of those falsehoods is telling the U.S. public that Islam is inherently dangerous and that American Muslims, even if they do not embrace extremist religious beliefs or violent actions, are still a threat to national security.”

In fact, all Islamic doctrine mandates war against non-muslims until the world is under Islamic rule.  There is no book of Islamic law (sharia) nor a text book used in U.S. Islamic schools – or any other Islamic school for that matter – that teaches another “version” of Islam.

That said, neither UTT nor other prominent national security organizations believe all “American Muslims are a threat,” but we have made clear that muslims who adhere to sharia and seek to impose it on others in any way, are a threat to liberty since sharia necessarily enslaves people, including muslims.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s (MB) By-Laws state their objectives are to establish an Islamic State under sharia – same as ISIS and Al Qaeda.  The doctrinal writings of the MB make clear their main line of operation is in the non-violent realm.  Espionage, counterintelligence, subversion, political warfare, and the like are their primary tools to overthrow the U.S. government.

Conspiring to overthrow the U.S. government is a violation of U.S. Federal Code, Title 18, Sections 2384 (Seditious Conspiracy) and 2383 (Conspiring to Overthrow the Government).

Evidence in the largest terrorism financing trial ever successfully prosecuted in American history [US v Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (“HLF”), Northern District of Texas, 2008] reveals the most prominent Islamic organizations in the U.S. are a part of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Movement.

“The Brotherhood has not been designated as a terror organization by the U.S. government, and there are not the slightest grounds for thinking it, or any other secret force, controls any national Muslim-American group.”

Let us start with the fact that the designated terrorist group Hamas is an inherent part of the Muslim Brotherhood.  If the finance department of a major corporation were laundering money, the indictment would not read “Finance Department, Company X” – the company would be indicted.

The fact the entire Muslim Brotherhood has not been designated a terrorist organization is a reflection of a failure by U.S. officials, not an indicator the MB is not a danger to the American people.

The evidence in the US v HLF trial reveals the most prominent Islamic organizations in the United States are a part of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Movement here.  These include, but are not limited to:  Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), Muslim Students Association (MSA), Islamic Medical Association (IMANA), Association of Muslim Social Scientists (AMSS), Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA), International Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT), and many others.

Evidence from other federal trials reveal the Muslim American Society (MAS) and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) are both Muslim Brotherhood organizations with CAIR being the 4th organization created by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee, which is Hamas in the United States.

A declassified document from the FBI’s Indianapolis office dated December 15, 1987 states:

“The North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) was organized by the leaders of the Muslim Students Association of the United States and Canada (MSA) in 1973 as the parent organization of various Muslim groups in the U.S. and Canada. The leadership of NAIT, MSA and other Muslim groups are inter-related with many leaders and members of NAIT having been identified as supporters of the Islamic Revolution as advocated by the Government of Iran (GOI). Their support of JIHAD (a holy war) in the U.S. has been evidenced by the financial and organizational support provided through NAIT from Middle East countries to Muslims residing in the U.S. and Canada.”

A declassified FBI confidential informant (CI) report dated 8/17/1988, details the Muslim Brotherhood’s activities in the United States at the time and states:

“(CI) advised that in addition to the internal political structure and organization of NAIT as controlled by the IIIT leadership that as members of the IKHWAN they are involved in organizing external political support which involves influencing both public opinion in the United States as well as the United States Government. (CI) has advised that the Ikhwan is a secret Muslim organization that has unlimited funds and is extremely well organized in the United States to the point where it has set up political action front groups with no traceable ties to the IIIT or its various Muslim groups. They also have claimed success in infiltrating the United States government…the IIIT leadership has indicated that in this phase their organization needs to peacefully get inside the United States Government and also American universities. (CI) noted that the ultimate goal of the Islamic Revolution is the overthrow of all non-Islamic governments and that violence is a tool…”

The “Ikhwan” is the Muslim Brotherhood.

The idea that the Muslim Brotherhood does not control “any Muslim-American group” is ludicrous.

“The document, dated May 1991 and titled “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America,” is real, but there is no evidence that it represents the views of anyone other than the single Brotherhood member who wrote it.”

An Explanatory Memorandum was discovered during the 2004 FBI raid of the Annandale, Virginia home of senior Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood operative Ismail Elbarasse.

The author of the document – Mohamed Akram Adlouni – was a member of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Shura Council and is listed as the number 2 man for the U.S. MB’s Palestine Committee, also knows as Hamas in the United States.  Therefore, the author was not some random muslim as the article infers.

The Memorandum begins with confirming the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood previously approved strategic goal:  “The general strategic goal of the Group in America which was approved by the Shura Council and the Organizational Conference for the year [I987] is “Enablement of Islam in North
America, meaning: establishing an effective and a stable Islamic Movement led by the Muslim
Brotherhood which adopts Muslims’ causes domestically and globally, and which works to
expand the observant Muslim base, aims at unifying and directing Muslims’ efforts, presents
Islam as a civilization alternative, and supports the global Islamic State wherever it is.”

Mohamed Akram Adlouni worked to bring the goal – stated above and approved the the Muslim Brotherhood leadership – to fruition.

Oddly, the author of the article admits Islam is working to be a “civilization alternative.”  What is this but a revolutionary strategy to replace the Constitutional Republic with and Islamic State under sharia, in violation of U.S. federal code?

Following the presentation of the Memorandum to U.S. Brotherhood leadership, the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood officially published its “Implementation Manual” which implements many of the items discussed in the Memorandum.

Examples of this include:  programs for youth and women, creation of media and political organizations, and others.  Most notably, however, are:

(1)  The historical and ideological details in An Explanatory Memorandum are consistent with other Muslim Brotherhood doctrine, to include MilestonesToward a Worldwide Strategy for Islamic Policy and the speech given by U.S. MB leader Zeid al Noman in Missouri in 1981 detailing the Muslim Brotherhood’s history in America.  The transcript of this speech was entered into evidence in the US v HLF trial.

(2)  In section 20, An Explanatory Memorandum states:  ” We must say that we are in a country which understands no language other than the language of the organizations, and one which does not respect or give weight to any group without effective, functional and strong organizations.”  After the Memorandum and the Implementation Manual were published, the number of Islamic organizations created, beginning in 1992, increased drastically and remains at 80-120 Islamic organizations created annually in the United States – exactly what these plans call for.

(3) The stated role of the MB in America per An Explanatory Memorandum is to wage Civilization Jihad to “destroy Western civilization from within” and to “sabotage” our “miserable house” by OUR hands – getting Western leaders to do their bidding for them.  The U.S. MB has succeed in doing this on numerous occasions.

When the U.S. State Department wrote the constitutions for Iraq and Afghanistan creating Islamic Republics under sharia – which fulfilled Al Qaeda’s objectives in those two places – that is Civilization Jihad by OUR hands.

When Muslim Brotherhood groups ISNA, MPAC, and CAIR petitioned President Obama to shut down training inside the U.S. government which factually detailed the domestic and international Islamic threat, but “offended muslims,” the President shut the training down.  That is Civilization Jihad by OUR hands.

“The other main thread in the anti-Muslim narrative — the charge that mainstream Muslim-American organizations generally, and CAIR (the Council on American-Islamic Relations) in particular, have ‘terror ties’ — is similarly based on a single piece of ‘evidence’…The document that supposedly verifies the claim that CAIR and other groups are linked to Islamist terrorism is a list of ‘unindicted co-conspirators’…In the more than 11 years since the list was made public, no new information has emerged that corroborates the inflammatory assertion that CAIR or the other Muslim-American groups are terrorist organizations or fronts for Hamas.”

The fact the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) is a Hamas organization – a designated terrorist organization – is in no way based on the unindicted co-conspirators list.  It is, however, important to mention the U.S. government identifies CAIR in the unindicted co-conspirators list as being a “Member of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee” which is Hamas, and Hamas members are called “terrorists.”

Here are a few of the many facts revealing CAIR is Hamas:

  1. The Palestine Committee (Hamas) Meeting in 1994 lists CAIR as the 4th organization operating under it (Hamas). This document was entered into evidence at the US v HLF trial.
  2. Hamas is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) by the U.S. government and many governments around the world.
  3. In a 2003 Senate Sub-Committee hearing on “radical Islam,” Senator Charles Schumer (NY) stated, “To make matters worse, the prominent members of the Council’s (CAIR’s) current leadership who you Mr. Chairman invited to the hearings today, they declined to testify, also have intimate connections with Hamas.”
  4. In the December 2007 government filing in the US v Sabri Benkhala appeal (Eastern District of Virginia), the government stated: “From its founding by the Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists.”
  5. In a document retrieved from CAIR’s headquarters in Washington, D.C. by one of its interns – Chris Gaubatz who was actually working undercover – CAIR openly discussed supporting Osama bin Laden. The document was titled “Proposed Muslim Platform for 2004” (dated 3/08/04) and states, in part, “Attempt to understand Islamic movements in the area, and start supporting Islamic groups including Mr. bin Laden and his associates.”
  6. In a 2004 FBI raid at the Annandale, Virginia residence of Ismail Elbarasse, a senior Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood leader, the archives of the U.S. MB were discovered. One of the documents found listed the leaders of the U.S. Palestine Committee (Hamas). On the list were the names of CAIR founders Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmad (alias Omar Yeheya).
  7. In the government filing rebuking CAIR’s motion to have its name removed from the unindicted co-conspirator list in the HLF case, U.S. prosecutors stated, “As of the date of this response, the Court has entered into evidence a wide array of testimonial and documentary evidence expressly linking CAIR and its founders to the HLF and its principals; the Islamic Association for Palestine and its principals; the Palestine Committee in the United States, headed by Hamas official Mousa Abu Marzook; and the greater HAMAS-affiliated conspiracy described in the Government’s case-in-chief.”
  8. In the government filing rebuking ISNA/NAIT’s motion to have their names removed from the unindicted co-conspirator list in the HLF case, U.S. prosecutors stated, “The U.S. Muslim Brotherhood created the U.S. Palestine Committee, which documents reflect was initially comprised of three organizations: the OLF (HLF), the IAP, and the UASR. CAIR was later added to these organizations…the mandate of these organizations, per the International Muslim Brotherhood, was to support Hamas.”
  9. In ruling to leave CAIR on the unindicted co-conspirator list in the HLF case, Federal Judge Jorge Solis listed a portion of the overwhelming evidence against CAIR and wrote: “The Government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR, ISNA, and NAIT with the HLF, the Islamic Association of Palestine (“IAP”), and with Hamas.”
  10. In a 3-0 ruling, an Appellate panel agreed to leave CAIR, ISNA, and NAIT on the unindicted co-conspirator list in the HLF case because of the overwhelming evidence.
  11. In a February 2010 affidavit from an FBI Special Agent in the immigration proceedings for Hamas leader Nabil Sadoun in Dallas, Texas, the affiant declared the U.S. Palestine Committee was affiliated with Hamas. He further identified four (4) Hamas organizations created by the Hamas in America: Holy Land Foundation, Islamic Association for Palestine, United Association for Studies and Research, and Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).
  12. In a letter dated February 12, 2010 to U.S. Congresswoman Sue Myrick (NC) from Assistant U.S. Attorney General Ronald Weich, Mr. Weich wrote “Enclosed (is) evidence that was introduced in that trial (US v HLF) which demonstrated the relationship among CAIR, individual CAIR founders, and the Palestine Committee. Evidence was also introduced that demonstrated a relationship between the Palestine Committee and Hamas.”
  13. In a letter dated April 28, 2009 from the FBI’s Assistant Director, Office of Congressional Affairs, to U.S. Senator John Kyl (AZ), the FBI leader details why the FBI cut off all formal ties to CAIR and identifies it as an unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF trial because of its relationship with Hamas.

UTT encourages its readers to print this article and keep it handy when ignorant or nefarious people attempt to minimize the massive jihadi threat inside the United States.

We need a much greater sense of urgency in dealing with this threat, and that includes destroying the intentionally false comments and publications by enemy sympathizers and collaborators.

UTT Answers the Critics

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, June 12, 2018:

Many jihadi and Marxist organizations frequently publish overtly defamatory and false comments about Understanding the Threat (UTT) and its President John Guandolo.

UTT would like to inject some truth into this situation.

The following is a list of the common attacks UTT endures, followed by UTT’s responses:

“Guandolo has made a career out of…promoting ludicrous Islamophobic conspiracy theories.”

In fact, UTT offers $1000 cash and the removal of relevant material we teach and publish to anyone who can bring something to our attention that is not true about sharia’s authority in Islam and what it says, or about the Muslim Brotherhood’s Jihadi Movement in the United States and their modus operandi.

UTT has made this offer on TV, radio, and in direct emails to U.S. Muslim Brotherhood leadership for over 3 years.

So far…no takers.

“Guandolo has made a career out of demonizing Muslims…”

UTT believes speaking truth about the evil and barbaric system that is Islam’s sharia brings light to muslims trapped in this system and who are enslaved by it.  This, to us, seems the best way to demonstrate love and compassion to the muslim community, as opposed to calling a barbaric system “good” and “peaceful.”

“Guandolo’s trainings are little more than anti-Muslim witch-hunts.”

In fact, sheriffs, police chiefs, and prosecutors have opened cases as a direct result of UTT’s 3-day “Understanding and Investigating the Jihadi Threat” for police, intelligence professionals, and military personnel.  One police officer who attended UTT’s 3-day program identified a wanted Al Qaeda terrorist wanted by the FBI less than one week after the training, and stated UTT’s training was the reason he was able to do so.

“At an event in 2011, Guandolo claimed mosques were fronts for the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Property records, leadership at U.S. Islamic centers/mosques, investigation by UTT, and testimony in federal courts reveal approximately 80% of the over 3000 mosques in all 50 United States are controlled by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.  The Muslim Brotherhood calls Islamic centers/mosques the “axis” of their Movement, and their stated objective is to wage jihad to establish an Islamic State under sharia – the same objective as ISIS and Al Qaeda.

“Guandolo was dismissed from the FBI.”

John Guandolo left the FBI on 1 December 2008 after being recruited out of the FBI by the Department of Defense for a significant pay increase and significantly more responsibility.  His departure from the FBI was voluntary and honorable.

“Among his many bizarre and Islamophobic claims…that former CIA Director John Brennan was a secret Muslim…”

In fact, in February 2013, UTT’s John Guandolo was the first to break the story on a TV show hosted by The United West’s Tom Trento discussing U.S. government personnel with direct knowledge of John Brennan’s conversion to Islam when Mr. Brennan was the CIA Station Chief in Saudi Arabia in the 1990’s.  In June 2017, former CIA Station Chief Brad Johnson publicly stated on the Glazov Gang TV show that many people in the CIA told him they heard and knew of John Brennan’s conversion to Islam.

See the video HERE.

“Among his many bizarre and Islamophobic claims…that Muslims are “obligated” to lie, and that it is “unprofessional” for officials to seek information about Islam from Islamic religious leaders (imams).”

Authoritative Islamic law – sharia – mandates lying by muslims to non-muslims when the objective is obligatory.  In Islamic law, jihad is obligatory.

The Um dat al Salik (Reliance of the Traveller) is authoritative sharia approved by the highest authority in Islam – Al Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt.  It states:   “Speaking is a means to achieve objectives…it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible…and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory.”

Islamic scholars and all sharia mandate lying by muslims to non-muslims when the goal is obligatory.  Advancing Islam is obligatory.  Jihad is obligatory.  Islamic leaders who know and understand sharia lie to non-muslims to advance Islam and have been caught doing so on numerous occasions.

Therefore, it is unprofessional for a non-muslim to use an Islamic scholar or Imam as the source of understanding of Islam because Islamic scholars and Imams know sharia and, therefore, understand their duty under sharia to lie to police chiefs, pastors, Members of Congress, Presidents, school board officials, and others in order to advance Islam.

Guandolo claims most Islamic organizations in America are a threat.

The largest terrorism financing trial ever successfully prosecuted in American history – US v Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, Dallas 2008 – was the culmination of a 15 year FBI investigation.  The evidence in this case reveals there is an “Islamic Movement” in the United States primarily led by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.

The evidence also reveals the most prominent Islamic organizations in the United States are a part of this Muslim Brotherhood network whose stated objective is to wage “civilization jihad” until they establish an Islamic state (caliphate) under sharia (Islamic law).

The Muslim Brotherhood’s published By-Laws also reaffirm this.

Evidence in the US v HLF trial reveals the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood was ordered by MB headquarters in Egypt to create a Palestine Committee to be a node for the terrorist group Hamas in the United States.  The USMB created four (4) organizations to fulfill this mission, including the HLF and CAIR.

US v HLF and other evidence reveals MB groups in America include, but are not limited to:

Islamic Society of North America (ISNA)

Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR)

North American Islamic Trust (NAIT)

Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA)

Muslim Students Association (MSA)

Muslim American Society (MAS)

Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA)

International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT)

Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC)

Muslim Youth of North America (MYNA)

It is UTT’s hope the reader will read and study these responses so he/she can boldly speak truth using these responses as a guide.

UTT encourages our readers and followers not to be angry with our adversaries.  They are doing what they do.  We should pity them that all they have are lies and ad hominem attacks.

They certainly do not have the truth.

Also see: 

Trump Excludes Brotherhood-Tied Groups from Iftar Dinner

AP Photo/Andrew Harnik

Breitbart, by Neil Munro, June 7,  2018:

President Donald Trump excluded a variety of domestic Islamic groups linked to the Muslim Brotherhood from his first White House annual Islamic ‘Iftar’ dinner.

The exclusion is a sharp change from former President Barack Obama, who put the Brotherhood-linked groups front-and-center in his Iftar dinners and his Middle East strategy. His regional strategy crashed once the Brotherhood groups in Egypt, Syria, Libya, Tunisia, and other countries were unable to restrain their Islamic radicalism during the so-called “Arab Spring.”

Reports show that most of the invitees at the dinner were the ambassadors of Islamic countries, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Morocco. The dinner marks the end of the Islamic Ramadan season of fasting.

Among the excluded political groups were the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR). Also excluded were the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), which cater to Muslim immigrants from Arab countries and from the Indian sub-continent.

CAIR has been declared a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates and was named by federal prosecutors as an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas-funding operation. MPAC was “established in 1988 by followers of the Muslim Brotherhood and admirers of Hezbollah… [and]  is yet another Islamist wolf in the ‘social justice’ clothing of the hard Left,” said Andrew McCarthy, a prosecutor who convicted several Muslims for the New York jihad attacks.

Exclusion is a financial hit for various groups, some of which rely on domestic — or even foreign — donors who support them because of the groups’ claimed ability to advance Islamic goals in U.S. politics.

The exclusion also shows that the White House rejects the groups’ unproven claim to be legitimate and popular political representatives of Muslims in America. Polls show these groups have little sway among the Muslims who live in America. Also, Muslims in America are already represented in Washington by their local congressional representatives.

The White House did not say if it invited representatives of Islam reform groups which who reject Islam’s demand that government should follow Islamic dictates. For example, Trump did not publicly announce an invite to the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, which is led by Zuhdi Jasser.

Also, Trump has not announced any replacement for Obama’s anti-terrorism policy, which gave these Muslim groups taxpayer funding and political legitimacy in exchange for their promise to quietly suppress political violence by Muslims. Trump’s deputies have abandoned that policy but have not announced a replacement policy.

While the White House did not publish an official invite list before the dinner, the excluded groups protested in remarks to the media.

“I wouldn’t anticipate that any credible mainstream American Muslim organizations or leaders would be invited or agree to attend, given the administration’s Islamophobic and white supremacist positions and policies,” Ibrahim Hooper, the CAIR spokesman, told the Guardian newspaper.

The “Islamophobic” claim suggests that opponents of CAIR’s political agenda have a mental disease, akin to a phobia.

“There has been no real engagement, no real effort to even invite members of our faith communities, to have conversations with the White House or administration,” said Hoda Hawa, MPAC policy director, told the Guardian newspaper.

The MPAC group maintains a strong anti-Israel policy and has close ties to Islamic radicals in Libya and Egypt. In June 2012, for example, MPAC applauded the Brotherhood-backed President of Egypt, Mohamed Morsi:

Less than one week ago, Dr. Mohamed Morsi became the first democratically elected president in Egypt’s thousands of years of history … Indeed, the transition to a sustainable democracy does not come after one election — it will be a continuous effort and will need the support and hard work of the Egyptian people and the international community.

Morsi and other Egyptian Islamic radicals won an initial election in 2012 but were removed by the military in a 2013 coup, despite quiet support from Obama. MPAC opposed the coup.

MPAC also complained that Trump has left them with little or no influence in the White House. “With the Trump administration, we have seen no effort by them, by the president himself, his senior officials, who are noted anti-Muslim extremists, Cabinet officials, towards engaging in a productive dialogue with the American Muslim community,” Omar Noureldin, MPAC’s vice president, told an NPR interviewer. Trump, not Islamic political activists, must change, he said:

I believe it’s incumbent on the president and his Cabinet and senior White House officials to extend those olive branches genuinely. And until they do so, we don’t believe that there’s going to be a meaningful dialogue or ability to move the needle on the issues that affect our communities.

Linda Sarsour, a jihad advocate who was welcome in Obama’s White House, also was excluded from the dinner.

Obama’s support for the Brotherhood-linked groups proved futile because they were unable to moderate their peers’ Islamic revolutionary zeal in Egypt, Libya, or Syria.

In September 2012, for example, four Americans were killed by Islamic gunmen in Benghazi while other Islamic radicals surrounded the U.S. embassy in Cairo. In Syria, the Brotherhood-linked Islamic groups were unable to build any political alliances with any moderate or non-Muslim communities, ensuring a bloody civil war that continues in 2018.

***

DHS Denies Grant to Islamic Radicalization Enabler MPAC

by John Rossomando
IPT News
June 23, 2017

The Department of Homeland Security has ruled that the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) will not receive the $393,800 Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) grant approved by Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson on Jan. 13, days before Johnson left office.

The DHS released its list of grant recipients on Friday. MPAC is not on it. The change came after “DHS utilized its discretion to consider other factors and information when reviewing applicants,” a spokeswoman said in an email to the Investigative Project on Terrorism. “The Department considered whether applicants for CVE awards would partner with law enforcement, had a strong basis of prior experience in countering violent extremism, had a history of prior efforts to implement prevention programs targeting violent extremism, and were viable to continue after the end of the award period. These additional priorities were applied to the existing pool of applicants. Top scoring applications that were consistent with these priorities remained as awardees, while others did not.”

In a statement, MPAC acknowledged that working with law enforcement isn’t a priority: “Our position on this issue has consistently centered on community-led initiatives that improve mental health resources, access to counseling, and a host of other social services without the involvement or spectre of law enforcement.”

Still, it disputed the loss of the grant, saying it would consider “all legal options…”

“The exclusion of groups like MPAC point to a DHS that is ineffective in coordinating with communities and unconstitutional in its treatment of a religious minority,” the statement said. “MPAC will continue challenging the trajectory of the Trump administration’s efforts in this space by advocating for a holistic approach that empowers rather than sidelines communities, focuses on all forms of violent threats, and fosters a climate of trust over fear.”

MPAC pledged to use the money for targeted interventions under its Safe Spaces program for people at risk for radicalization. Created in 2014, Safe Spaces aims to improve relations between Muslim institutions and law enforcement.

MPAC Executive Director Salam Al-Marayati introduced the program as an alternative to law enforcement agencies using informants to infiltrate mosques. The roll out meeting included Johnson, U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., Rep. Bill Foster, D-Ill., and other Muslim community groups including the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).

Al-Marayati vehemently objects to anything that involves mosques or informants in terror investigations.

“Counter-terrorism and counter-violence should be defined by us,” he said at 2005 Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) conference in Dallas. “We should define how an effective counter-terrorism policy should be pursued in this country. So, No. 1, we reject any effort, notion, and suggestion that Muslims should start spying on one another. Everywhere I go either somebody tells me that officials have met with them publicly or they tell me that they know who those folks are that are representing law enforcement. So we know they have communicated one way or the other with the Muslim community.

“The question is how do you deal with it in a healthy, open, transparent manner? That is why we are saying have them come in community forums, in open-dialogues, so they come through the front door and you prevent them having to come from the back door,” Al-Marayati said.

Government agencies preferred CVE programs, especially during the Obama administration. But there’s no way to measure whether they work, a Government Accountability Office report issued in April said. The GAO “was not able to determine if the United States is better off today than it was in 2011 as a result” of CVE programs.”

The House Homeland Security Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight and Management offered similar criticism during a hearing last September. The committee has “no way of gauging whether CVE efforts have been successful – or harmful – or if money is being spent wisely,” said U.S. Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa.

MPAC may have won the grant simply because it is “the most organized group,” said Heritage Foundation counterterrorism scholar Robin Simcox. But that “is going down the wrong path. Often this means giving it to some very, very divisive voices who will play into the Islamist narrative; they will play off grievances. They will encourage a feeling of segregation and otherness, and we are promoting other problems for the future.”

MPAC promotes a narrative that Muslims are victimized by a hostile non-Muslim society, Simcox said. That message helps breed terrorists.

“I think it creates an environment where these radical ideas are in the ether, and it’s no surprise to me that somebody then [would] take that final step into violence,” Simcox said.

Research backs up Simcox’s assertion.

Grievances “framed around victimhood against Western foreign policy and military intervention” are among “a kaleidoscope of factors” in fueling extremism, Swedish jihad researcher Magnus Ranstorp has found.

MPAC’s recent messaging has emphasized threats to Muslim Americans’ freedom and security, including promoting a conspiracy theory that internment camps could be revived for them. In February, MPAC posted an image of Star Trek actor George Takei, on its homepage, with the heading “Stand Up for Muslims in the U.S.” The image linked to a petition in which Takei described his experience during World War II: “When I was just 5, my family was rounded up at gunpoint from our home in Los Angeles into an internment camp. We were prisoners in our own country, held within barbed wire compounds, armed guards pointing guns down on us.”

“A Trump spokesperson recently stated the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II “sets a precedent” for Trump to do the same today,” Takei wrote. [Emphasis original]

But that spokesman, former Navy SEAL Carl Higbie, had no role in the Trump transition and only spoke for himself. No one in the administration has endorsed such a scheme.

But Takei’s statement, which MPAC embraced, claimed that “Trump continues to stand by his plans to establish a Muslim registry and ban immigrants from ‘certain’ Muslim countries from the U.S. It starts with a registry, with restrictions, with irrationally ascribed guilt, and with fear. But we never know where it might lead.”

Takei didn’t start the internment analogy. “Challenging patriotis (sic) of AmMuslims is un-American – what happened to Japanese Americans-loyalty test, confiscating their wealth #CruzHearing,” Al-Marayati wrote a year ago, in a Twitter post he later deleted.

Promoting the internment conspiracy theory destroys the credibility of “soft Islamist” organizations like MPAC that don’t engage in terrorist acts themselves, yet validate the jihadist narratives, Simcox said.

Al-Marayati has long promoted the narrative that the U.S. is waging “war on Islam,” one of the most potent terrorist recruitment tropes.

He called U.S. counterterrorism policies a “war on Islam” in a 2009 interview with Al-Watan Al-Arabi. Al-Marayati also engaged in “war on Islam” rhetoric when he chided U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz a year ago for using the term “radical Islam” during a hearing about the Obama administration’s avoidance of using the phrase “So @SenCruz, do you want to have a war with Islam rather than a war on terrorists?” he wrote in a tweet he later deleted.

MPAC Whitewashes Jihad

Al-Marayati appeared on C-Span in 2014, and balked when asked why Muslims weren’t speaking up against jihadism: “Well I think we’ll call this violent extremism. And one thing we have to be clear about, we should not be countering jihad,” Al-Marayati said. “Jihad to the violent extremists means holy war. But jihad in classical Islam means ‘struggle.’ So let us at least not use religious terminology in fighting groups like ISIS. It just plays into their hands. They want this to be a war on Islam, a war on religion.

“We should be at war on criminal behavior, war against terrorism.”

Al-Marayati again rejected the connection between jihad and violence during a Jan. 25 debate with American Islamic Forum for Democracy founder and President Zuhdi Jasser. Jihad is not holy war, he said, but a struggle against oneself.

“We must allow the Muslims to reclaim their faith and not let Islam be defined by the extremist distortions of Islam,” Al-Marayati said.

Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna disagreed, writing that jihad only had to do with fighting and argued that purely spiritual jihad was spurious. MPAC co-founder Maher Hathout described himself as an al-Banna disciple.

“Many Muslims today mistakenly believe that fighting the enemy is jihad asghar (a lesser jihad) and that fighting one’s ego is jihad akbar (a greater jihad),” al-Banna wrote in his tract On Jihad. “This narration is used by some to lessen the importance of fighting, to discourage any preparation for combat, and to deter any offering of jihad in Allah’s way. This narration is not a saheeh (sound) tradition.”

Jasser sees a dichotomy between Al-Marayati’s public rejection of violent jihad and his group’s embrace of Tunisian Muslim Brotherhood-linked cleric Sheikh Rached Ghannouchi. MPAC hosted Ghannouchi at a 2011 dinner, and Al-Marayati flew to Paris in 2013 to attend a conference with Ghannouchi. The sheikh is a member of the International Muslim Brotherhood’s Guidance Bureau.

Back in 1990, Ghannouchi spoke at a conference in Tehran, Iran where he called for the “destruction of the Jews” and invoked Ayatollah Khamenei’s “call to jihad” against America, “the Great Satan.” Ghannouchi aspired to wage “worldwide jihad,” a 1991 State Department cable said. Ghannouchi still favors violent jihad, 5 endorsing the Palestinian knife jihad against Israelis in 2015.

“The central problem with MPAC … is the schizophrenia with which they deal with American issues versus how they deal with global issues,” Jasser said. “The Islamists assume Americans are not very smart, so they are going to listen to their apologetics about jihad and then not connect it to what happens when the Ghannouchis of the world get into power.”

MPAC leaders have made their own pro-terrorist and anti-Israeli statements.

Al-Marayati didn’t seem to have a problem with Hizballah calling its terror campaign against Israel “jihad” in a November 1999 interview with PBS’s Jim Lehrer.

“If the Lebanese people are resisting Israeli intransigence on Lebanese soil, then that is the right of resistance and they have the right to target Israeli soldiers in this conflict. That is not terrorism. That is a legitimate resistance. That could be called liberation movement, that could be called anything, but it’s not terrorism,” Al-Marayati said.

Similarly, MPAC Public Affairs Consultant Edina Lekovic served as managing editor of Al-Talib, the defunct newspaper of UCLA’s Muslim Student Association, when it published an editorial saying Osama bin Laden was not a terrorist in its July 1999 issue.

“When we hear someone refer to the great Mujahid (someone who struggles in Allah’s cause) Osama bin Laden a ‘terrorist,’ we should defend our brother and refer to him as a freedom fighter; someone who has forsaken wealth and power to fight in Allah’s cause and speak out against oppressors,” the unsigned editorial said.

MPAC Defends Al-Qaida and Hamas Financiers

Another hit against MPAC’s credibility is its history of apologism for terrorist financiers.

Just after 9/11, Al-Marayati painted Muslims as victims after the federal government shut down the Benevolence International Foundation (BIF) on suspicion it provided material support to al-Qaida. Its leader, Enaam Arnaout, had close ties with Osama Bin Laden, court documents show.

He had similar reactions after Treasury Department asset freezes in December 2001 targeted the Holy Land Foundation (HLF), which illegally routed charity money to Hamas, and the Global Relief Foundation, which provided assistance to Osama Bin Laden and al-Qaida.

“Selective justice is injustice – it does not help us in the war on terror and continues to project the image that the U.S. is anti-Islam,” Al-Marayati wrote in July 2002 press release posted on MPAC’s website defending all three charities.

Closing these terror-linked charities could send the message to Muslims abroad that America is intolerant of religious minorities, Al-Marayati said that October in a New York Times op-ed.

When the Treasury Department shut down the Islamic African Relief Agency (IARA) in 2004, saying it “provided direct financial support for” Osama bin Laden, Al-Marayati described it as “a bit disturbing that the announcement of shutting down another charity… [took] place just before the month of Ramadan in the peak of the election season.”

Arnaout pleaded guilty to violating the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) and acknowledged that his group hid the fact it used a portion of its donations to fund terrorists overseas.

HLF’s leaders were convicted of providing material support to Hamas in 2008.

MPAC’s magazine, The Minaret, cast these charity closures in an anti-Semitic light in a political cartoon it published in its March 2002 issue. It shows President George W. Bush doing the bidding of Israel and the Anti-Defamation League knocking down a building with a foundation labeled “Islamic Foundations (Holy Land, Global Relief, etc.” The top of the building being knocked down says, “Relief for Muslim Orphans” and “Support for U.S. Muslim Free Speech.”

This was not an isolated incident. A January 2000 Minaret cartoon showed “The West” apologizing for the Holocaust and handing over money to an old woman holding a cane with the label “Jewish holocaust.” At the same time, an Arab wearing a keffiyeh labeled “Palestine” says, “Ahem ‘scuse me” followed by a person with a crutch and bandaged foot labeled “Indian genocide” and a black person emblazoned with “African slavery.”

During the 2006 Israeli war with Hizballah in Lebanon Al-Marayati similarly diminished the Holocaust.

“And as far as the Holocaust is concerned, we’ve come out very clearly saying that the Holocaust is the worst genocide, war crime, in the 20th century. We’re against Holocaust denial, but we’re also against people who exploit that as a way of shoving this kind of war propaganda and dehumanization of the Arab peoples and the Muslim peoples as if they have to pay the price for what Nazi Germany did to the Jews back in the 20th century,” Al-Marayati said in an interview.

“MPAC’s default position is that the government is on a witch hunt against Muslims, and that any identification of organizations or non-profits doing quote end quote humanitarian work must be anti-Muslim if they are identified as a terror group,” Jasser said. “And if they are found to support terror, they say they are not the rule; they are the exception.”

MPAC’s statements and actions suggest that DHS’s decision to rescind Johnson’s decision to award the CVE grant was the right thing to do.

Why Did Marco Rubio Submit an Islamist MPAC Resolution Against Islamophobia?

Front Page Magazine, by Daniel Greenfield, June 20, 2017:

The Senate can’t seem to repeal ObamaCare. Or get much of anything done. But it found time for important matters like this… as Judith Bergman at Gatestone reveals.

On April 4, 2017, the US Senate passed Senate Resolution 118, “Condemning hate crime and any other form of racism, religious or ethnic bias, discrimination, incitement to violence, or animus targeting a minority in the United States”. The resolution was drafted by a Muslim organization, EmgageUSA (formerly EmergeUSA) and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC).

The resolution includes the claim that…

Whereas, in 2015, hate crimes targeting Muslims in the United States increased by 67 percent, reaching a level of violence targeting Muslim Americans that the United States had not experienced since the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, attacks, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation;

There’s also boilerplate language about anti-Semitism and hate crimes in general.

Kamala Harris, Feinstein, Susan Collins and Rubio introduced it. And the Islamists credited them.

“Thanks to the hard work of Senator Marco Rubio, Senator Dianne Feinstein, Senator Susan Collins and Senator Kamala Harris we have achieved the approval of Senate Resolution 118, an anti-hate crimes bill drafted by Emerge-USA.”

Emerge USA is exactly what you would expect from Islamists.

Over the years, EMERGE has held a number of events at terror-linked mosques, like: (a) Masjid Al-Qassam (a.k.a. Islamic Community of Tampa), which was founded by Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader Sami al-Arian, and (b) Masjid Darul Uloom (based in Pembroke Pines, Florida), where “Dirty Bomber” Jose Padilla was a student and the late al-Qaeda Global Operations Chief Adnan el-Shukrijumah was a prayer leader. EMERGE has also sponsored speeches made by various Muslim extremists, such as Sayed Ammar Nakshawani, who has called for the destruction of Israel.

EMERGE’s executive director, Nauman Sabit Abbasi, is the president of public relations for the Islamic Foundation of South Florida (IFSF), a radical mosque that seeks to “establish a powerful base for the growth of Islam in North America,” and whose youth leader once wrote on the Internet: “[Y]es, Allah … has Decreed that we will over-take the World in numbers…” Abbasi’s Facebook page urged to people to “support the true leadership of the world who are at war with Zoinists.”

So why introduce the resolution and what is the agenda? Judith Bergman asks.

 Why would the House of Representatives find it necessary to make such redundant statements, if not in order to redefine the concept of a hate crime? Perhaps by including “hate speech”?

And she notes that…

On May 6, EmgageUSA published the following on its Facebook page: “Representative Barbara Comstock, second term Republican from Virginia’s 10thDistrict is teaming up with EmergeUSA and MPAC to successfully pass a House Resolution which condemns ethnic, religious and racial hate crimes.”

The Senate unanimously passed its version. And this shows once again that Islamist groups are still managing to get their claws into Republicans.

Meanwhile an MPAC piece credits ADL involvement. And that would figure.

LITWIN: Obama’s ‘Countering Violent Extremism’ Program Funds Extremist MPAC

AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais

AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais

Breitbart, by Dr. Oren Litwin, February 9, 2017:

Recently, news media reported that the Trump Administration was planning to refocus the Obama program of “Countering Violent Extremism” (CVE) specifically on Islamist extremism.

This would make a welcome change from the previous policy, in which the fox was set to guard the henhouse. Case in point: in one of its final acts of the Obama era, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) awarded a $393,800 CVE grant to the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC).

With ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, MPAC has a history of sanitizing jihad and portraying terrorists as noble. MPAC founder Maher Hathout described Hezbollah as “fighting to liberate their land” and exhibiting “an American value — freedom and liberty.” MPAC president Salam Al-Marayati spoke of Hezbollah’s “legitimate resistance” and maintained that “when Patrick Henry said, ‘Give me liberty or give me death,’ that statement epitomized jihad.”

Longtime MPAC staffer Edina Lekovic previously worked at the UCLA publication Al-Talib and was listed as managing editor of its July 1999 “spirit of jihad” issue with Ayatollah Khomeini and Osama bin Laden on the cover — a year after the embassy bombings in Africa. The text declares: “When we hear someone refer to the great Mujahid (someone who struggles in Allah’s cause) Osama bin Laden as a ‘terrorist,’ we should defend our brother and refer to him as a freedom fighter.” MPAC stood by Lekovic when these details came to light in 2007.

MPAC has also displayed a particular hostility toward the Jewish state. Al-Marayati embarrassed himself by fingering Israel as a potential suspect hours after the 9/11 attacks. In 2013, the Anti-Defamation League selected MPAC as one of the “top ten anti-Israel groups in the U.S.,” observing that it has sponsored anti-Israel events and “helped propagate the notion that American foreign policy is directed by Israel.” MPAC has also disseminated bogus stories accusing Israel of intentionally flooding Palestinian homes and murdering Palestinians to harvest their organs.

MPAC has also targeted Muslim reformers for criticism. When Zuhdi Jasser was named to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom in 2012, MPAC called it “an affront to all Muslims” and characterized Jasser, who battles supremacist interpretations of Islam, as a threat to religious freedom. Interestingly, MPAC’s outburst came not long after it hosted a dinner for Rachid Ghannouchi, a Tunisian Islamist who had blessed the mothers of suicide bombers and hoped that Arab nations would “get rid of the bacillus of Israel.” MPAC celebrated him as “one of the most important figures in modern Islamic political thought and theory.”

MPAC also feeds the lie that the war on terrorism is a “war on Islam,” claiming that FBI sting operations entrap innocent Muslims and depicting investigations of terror-supporting charities as politicized witch hunts that marginalize the Muslim community and result in “taking food out of the mouths of Palestinian orphans.” MPAC has not been an uncritical backer of government CVE efforts, but now it has 393,800 reasons to cheer them on.

Washington once knew better than to put its faith in MPAC. Al-Marayati’s appointment to the National Commission on Terrorism was withdrawn in 1999 after his past raised concerns. Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) blasted MPAC in 2008 when it protested a hearing focused on keeping foreign aid out of the hands of terror-linked groups. Furthermore, declassified internal emails indicate a degree of discomfort within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence regarding MPAC’s Muslim Brotherhood ties.

For now, the MPAC grant persists; but for how long? Weeks before his inauguration, Reuters reported that Trump’s transition team had asked the State Department and DHS for the names of those involved in CVE programs: “Some career officials said they feared the incoming administration may be looking to undo the work that the Obama administration has done on countering violent extremism.”

Work that provides an Islamist organization with nearly $400,000 deserves undoing. If the new president truly intends to drain the swamp, Homeland Security would be an excellent place to start.

Dr. Oren Litwin is a writer at Islamist Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum.

New Report: The Purge of US Counterterrorism Training by the Obama Administration

purged-rpt

February 7, 2017, New Unconstrained Analytics Report:

On June 28, 2016, the Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights and Federal Courts held a hearing chaired by Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) investigating a series of policies established by the Obama Administration during 2011-2012 that effectively neutered FBI counterterrorism training and blinded our nation’s national security, defense and intelligence agencies to the threat from Islamic terrorism.

In what some experts have termed a hostile “political warfare campaign” driven by an alliance between the administration, Islamic organizations and cooperating media figures, analysts and subject matter experts were blacklisted, and books and training materials were purged from official counterterrorism training programs government-wide.

This “purge” has contributed to clues being missed by the FBI in major terrorism cases, including the April 2013 bombing of the Boston Marathon, and more recently the June 2016 massacre at The Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida, by Omar Mateen, who had been the target of previous FBI investigations in 2013 and 2014.

Patrick Poole of Unconstrained Analytics has written a new report detailing how this counterterrorism training purge happened, the players involved, the surprising but overlooked findings by a GAO report, and the consequences of having our law enforcement/military/intelligence professionals intentionally denied important training on the threat doctrine of the enemy, As a result, they have been blinded, losing any ability to identify, and then defeat, the enemy.

REPORT – Purged: A Detailed Look at ‘The Purge’ of US Counterterrorism Training by the Obama Administration (pdf)