Muslim Scholar: Group That Sponsored Ellison’s Hajj a ‘National Security Threat’

icna1.JPGby John Rossomando
IPT News
December 19, 2016

The group that paid for U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison’s December 2008 hajj to Mecca is a “national security threat,” a Muslim scholar wrote in a 2010 email.

Ellison now is vying to become the next Democratic National Committee chief.

The Muslim American Society (MAS), the group that paid $13,500 for Ellison’s pilgrimage, had ties with terrorism and had a phony commitment to the American constitutional order, al-Husein Madhany wrote in the email, which was posted on the “Muslim Justice League” listserv. He made these assertions as part of a discussion of how the Muslim community should respond to the Ground Zero mosque controversy.

The listserv included top U.S. Islamist and liberal intellectuals, as well as Obama administration representatives. CNN terrorism analyst Peter Bergen and prominent American Muslim playwright and polemicist Wajahat Ali also were part of the list. “When I said that I believe MAS halaqas (religious gatherings) to be a national security threat, it was only part in jest. My caution comes from what I have personally heard said at MAS halaqas during my time in graduate school and based on what I know about their ideological (but financial) ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas,” Madhany wrote .

Madhany, who has ties to the Brookings Institution, Council on Foreign Relations, Georgetown University, and New America Foundation, co-authored a 2008 piece for Brookings with President Obama’s former U.S. Special Envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Rashad Hussain, about the role of Islam in counter-terrorism policy.

At the time, Madhany wrote, some non-governmental groups were building a case for designating the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates as terrorist groups.

Part of that case was built on the fact that “MAS continues to teach to their members — at its highest levels of leadership — that all governments should become Islamic and that non-Islamic judicial systems should be boycotted or replaced, by soft power and by force, Madhany wrote. “They do this while promoting the idea in public that their goal is to support and defend the U.S. Constitution.”

Madhany is no conservative. His 2008 Brookings piece argued that using the terms “Islamic terrorism” or “Islamic extremist” gave religious legitimacy to Al-Qaida, suggesting “Al-Qaida terrorism” instead.

Madhany was not the first or the only person to connect MAS with the Muslim Brotherhood.

“In recent years, the U.S. Brotherhood operated under the name Muslim American Society, according to documents and interviews,” the Chicago Tribune reported in 2004. In 2008, federal prosecutors said that MAS was founded as the “overt arm” of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.

Convicted Al-Qaida financier and jailed prominent U.S. Muslim Brotherhood leader Abdurrahman Alamoudi confirmed this assertion in 2012: “Everyone knows that MAS is the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Brotherhood bylaws call for “the need to work on establishing the Islamic State, which seeks to effectively implement the provisions of Islam and its teachings.”

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) classified MAS as a terrorist organization in 2014.

Madhany’s e-mail offers a glimpse of how people on the inside view MAS, Islam scholar Daniel Pipes told the Investigative Project on Terrorism. Right after the Sept. 11 attacks, Pipes detailed several instances in which American Islamists preached that the U.S. Constitution ought to be replaced with Islamic law.

“This is an insight into what people who understand this organization actually think of it,” Pipes told the IPT. “It fits into a context of frank discussion that in recent years has been closed down, and it shows what sort of organization that Keith Ellison takes money from and endorses.”

The MAS Connection to Ellison’s 2010 Fundraiser

During his 2010 re-election campaign, MAS President Esam Omeish hosted a fundraiser for Ellison in which Ellison criticized what he saw as Israel’s disproportionate influence on U.S. foreign policy. The IPT exclusively reported on his comments Nov. 30.

“The United States foreign policy in the Middle East is governed by what is good or bad through a country of 7 million people. A region of 350 million all turns on a country of 7 million. Does that make sense? Is that logic? Right? When the Americans who trace their roots back to those 350 million get involved, everything changes. Can I say that again?” Ellison said.

Omeish, Ellison’s host at the fundraiser, has voiced support for Hamas. Following Israel’s 2004 assassination of Hamas founder Sheikh Yassin, Omeish, a Libyan by birth, mourned the terrorist leader as “our beloved Sheikh Ahmed Yassin.”

During a December 2000 Jerusalem Day rally in Washington’s Lafayette Square, Omeish praised Palestinians for knowing “that the Jihad way is the way to liberate your land.”

Ellison Speaking at Next Week’s MAS Convention

Ellison first addressed a MAS convention in 2006 and has made repeated appearances at the organization’s events. He is scheduled to speak at MAS’s joint convention with the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) starting next Monday in Chicago. ICNA is a predominately South Asian Islamist group that advocates creatinga global Islamic state ruled by shariah.

Ellison also is listed as the keynote speaker at MAS-ICNA’s appreciation dinner.

The MAS convention Ellison will address will hear from radical speakers such as Ali Qaradaghi (Alternately spelled Al-Qurra Daghi in the MAS-ICNA program), secretary general of the pro-Hamas International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS), one of the world’s most influential groups for Sunni Islamist clerics. It counts former Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh as a member.

The Clinton administration banned this organization’s founder Yusuf al-Qaradawi from entering the U.S. in 1999 due to his support for terrorist attacks against Israel. In 2014 the UAE classified the IUMS as a terrorist organization, along with MAS and dozens of other Islamist groups.

Qaradaghi’s Twitter feed is replete with praise for Hamas and calls for Israel’s destruction. He also has attacked the anti-ISIS coalition for killing Sunnis in Fallujah and Mosul.

“Hamas is an Islamic resistance movement. It defends its people and our first Qibla (The place where Muslims face to pray.) It endeavors to liberate Occupied Palestine. And any attack on it is on the interests of the Zionist Project,” Qaradaghi wrote in a July tweet.

Like Omeish, Qaradaghi eulogized Hamas founder Sheikh Yassin as recently as March: “On such a day like this in 2004. Shiekh_Ahmed_Shahid# was martyred. By three rockets from Zionist Apache planes. After his leaving dawn prayer.”

Several pictures show Qaradaghi posing with top Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal. “The Commander Mujahid Khaled Meshal honored me with a noble visit,” he wrote in September 2015. “We conferred on the conditions of the Muslims, al Aqsa and Gaza; and we saw good prospects for the steadfastness and Ribat of our people in the interior.”

In March 2015, Qardaghi signed an IUMS declaration condemning an Egyptian court’s classification of Hamas as a terrorist organization. An Egyptian appeals court later reversed the decision.

The MAS-ICNA conference heard a similar sentiment during its 2014 convention. Tariq Ramadan, grandson of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hasan al-Banna; describedPalestinian terrorist attacks against Israel as “legitimate resistance.”

“I’m sorry to tell you, and this is where you have to stand as American Muslims—the Palestinian resistance is a legitimate resistance and they have the right to resist,” Ramadan said.

No record exists of Ellison ever calling MAS out for its extremism, as he previously did when he repudiated Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan.

Ellison wrote in The Washington Post in a Dec. 2 op-ed that he “should have listened more and talked less” when it came to Farrakhan’s anti-Semitism, but his continued involvement with MAS suggests he is deaf to its rhetoric.

Also see:

Homeland Security Chief Speaks At Hamas Front’s Confab; Shares Stage with Holocaust Denier, Muslim Brotherhood Leader

Screen-Shot-2016-09-04-at-8.48.38-PM

The DHS head told the group which worked to finance Hamas, “Tonight I will not talk to you about counterterrorism.”

CounterJihad, by Paul Sperry, Sept. 4, 2016:

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson — whose job it is to protect America from terrorists — spoke at the annual gathering of an Islamic group the Department of Justice considered a terrorist front on Saturday, where he heaped praise and unearned legitimacy on his dubious host.

After traveling to Chicago as a featured speaker at the Islamic Society of North America’s convention, Johnson took the stage and boasted, “I am the highest ranking U.S. government official and the first sitting Cabinet officer to ever speak in person before this convention.”

There’s a reason for that: ISNA has been identified by the U.S. Justice Department as a front group for the radical Muslim Brotherhood and its Palestinian terrorist branch Hamas.

Still, Johnson said, “I am proud to have broken that glass ceiling, and to have created the expectation, in the future, that government officials of my rank will attend your annual convention.”

U.S. prosecutors would argue that’s nothing to be proud of: In 2008, they listed Johnson’s host as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorist financing trial in U.S. history. Despite repeated efforts to expunge its name from the list in court appeals, ISNA still remains on the list today.  Responding to an appeal by ISNA and other Muslim groups to remove it from the list, federal judge Jorge Solis ruled that, “the Government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR, ISNA and NAIT with HLF, the Islamic Association for Palestine (“IAP”), and with Hamas.”

The federal terrorism case, U.S. vs. the Holy Land Foundation, resulted in guilty verdicts on all 108 felony counts against HLF and five of its leaders, who conspired to funnel more than $12 million to Palestinian terrorists, including suicide bombers.

ISNA was “intimately connected with the HLF and its assigned task of providing financial support to Hamas,” said U.S. Attorney James T. Jacks in a federal court document. “HLF raised money and supported Hamas through a bank account it held with ISNA.”

Jacks said HLF leaders sent “hundreds of thousands of dollars” to Hamas terrorists through bank accounts controlled by ISNA and its financial arm, the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT).

Hamas was designated a global terrorist group in 1995 by President Clinton.

Added Jacks: “The evidence introduced at trial established that ISNA and NAIT were among those organizations created by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood,” whose “ultimate goal is the creation of a global Islamic State governed by Sharia law.”

Former Attorney General Eric Holder recognized Jacks for “exceptional service” in a 2010 Justice Department awards ceremony. So the Obama administration does not dispute the merits of the terrorism case in which ISNA was implicated.

Johnson said his appearance at the ISNA event was part of carrying out a “priority” set by President Obama to “build bridges to American Muslim communities.”

“Tonight I will not look at the large group of Muslims before me in this room through a homeland security lens,” he said. “Tonight I will not talk to you about counterterrorism.”

Instead, Johnson portrayed Muslims as victims of counterterrorism efforts, comparing the scrutiny of Muslim-Americans in terrorism cases to the historic discrimination suffered by African-Americans.

“I look out on this room of American Muslims and I see myself,” he said. “I see a similar struggle that my African-American ancestors have fought to win acceptance in this country.”

On a more personal note, Johnson compared the suspicion Muslim-Americans have fallen under — after Muslim-Americans launched recent deadly terrorism attacks in Boston, Chattanooga, Tenn., San Bernardino County, Calif., and Orlando — to the “McCarthyism” he said his grandfather experienced in the late 1940s and 1950s.

Charles S. Johnson was investigated for his ties to the Communist Party by the House Un-American Activities Committee following his hiring of known Communist operatives as president of Fisk University and defending them after they had been exposed as subversives. Johnson also faced questioning about his own membership in communist fronts.

In addition, ISNA’s convention program shows Johnson was listed to participate in a breakout session calling on Muslims to “turn the tide, confront our challenges and seize our opportunities.” The panel included Tariq Ramadan, who was formally barred from entering the U.S. in 2006 “for providing material support to a terrorist organization” — until, that is, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton lifted the ban on his visa. Ramadan is the grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood and the son of the important Brotherhood leader Said Ramadan.

Also listed on the ISNA panel with Johnson was Khizr Khan, the Sharia law advocate who famously took the stage at the Democrat National Convention and complained about GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump’s proposed moratorium on immigration from Muslim nations tied to terrorism. In a treatise on the merits of Sharia law, Khan “gratefully acknowledged” Said Ramadan as a source expert on the subject.

In his speech, Johnson called Khan and his hijab-clad wife “American heroes.”

Also listed as “featured speakers” at ISNA’s 53rd annual convention were Jamal Badawi, a founding father of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood who was listed among unindicted co-conspirators who helped HLF raise money for Hamas terrorists, and Muzammil Siddiqi, a Muslim cleric who currently chairs NAIT, the bank for the Brotherhood in America and the custodian of most of the mosques in America.

In 1995, Siddiqi defended jihad and praised suicide bombers: “Those who die on the part of justice are alive, and their place is with the Lord, and they receive the highest position, because this is the highest honor.”

During a 2000 anti-Israel rally outside the White House, Siddiqi openly threatened the US with violence if it continued to support Israel. “America has to learn … if you remain on the side of injustice, the wrath of God will come. Please, all Americans. Do you remember that? … If you continue doing injustice, and tolerate injustice, the wrath of God will come.”

Listed alongside DHS Secretary Johnson was Imam Yasir Qadhi, who has called the Holocaust “false propaganda” and described Jews as “crooked-nosed.”

Also see:

One of the early and most important indicators of the Brotherhood’s surreptitious expanding influence within the Intelligence Community [IC] showed up as a terminology scrub of official strategic documents dealing with counterterrorism. As Robert Spencer explains, the trend toward politically correct Global War on Terror (GWOT) language began with a misguided effort by Jim Guirard, the founder and president of the TrueSpeak Institute[40], a lobbying group influenced by input from the Muslim Brotherhood, including Yousef al-Qaradawi, the senior jurist of the Muslim Brotherhood. Unfortunately, thanks to Mr. Guirard, senior U.S. government officials, either incompetent or unwilling to fulfill their professional duty to “know the enemy,” fell under the Brotherhood’s influence and began substituting a garbled lexicon of inaccurate Arabic vocabulary[41] in place of the actual words the enemy uses to describe what he does and why he does it.[42]

Islam’s “Quiet Conquest” of Europe

Gatestone Institute, by Giulio Meotti, August 10, 2016:

  • “Islam is a French religion and the French language is a language of Islam.” — Tariq Ramadan.
  • In 1989, Dalil Boubakeur, rector of the Grand Mosque of Paris, justified the persecution of Salman Rushdie by Ayatollah Khomeini. Last year, Boubakeur called for the conversion of churches into mosques.
  • In Britain, mainstream Muslim organizations are dispensing “Islamic justice” through more than 85 sharia courts attached to mosques.
  • Civil war in France is what the Islamic State is looking for: unleashing a blind repression so that the Muslim population will show solidarity with the revolutionary minority. Yet, there is still worse possible outcome: that nothing happens and we continue as is.
  • Real “moderate Muslims” are silenced or murdered.

Last month, the Wall Street Journal published an interview with France’s director of domestic intelligence, Patrick Calvar. “The confrontation is inevitable,” Mr. Calvar said. There are an estimated 15,000 Salafists among France’s seven million Muslims, “whose radical-fundamentalist creed dominates many of the predominantly Muslim housing projects at the edges of cities such as Paris, Nice or Lyon. Their preachers call for a civil war, with all Muslims tasked to wipe out the miscreants down the street.”

These Salafists openly challenge France’s way of life and do not make a secret of their willingness to overthrow the existing order in Europe through violent means, terror attacks and physical intimidation. But paradoxically, if the Islamists’ threat to Europe were confined to the Salafists, it would be easier to defeat it.

There is in fact another threat, even more dangerous because it is more difficult to decipher. It has just been dubbed by the magazine Valeurs Actuelles,the quiet conquest“. It is “moderate” Islam’s sinuous project of producing submission. “Its ambition is clear: changing French society. Slowly but surely”.

That threat is personified in the main character of Michel Houellebecq’s novel, Submission: Mohammed Ben Abbes, the “moderate” Muslim who becomes France’s president and converts the state to Islam. And from where does President Ben Abbes start his Islamization? The Sorbonne University. It is already happening: Qatar recently made a significant donation to this famous university, to sponsor the education of migrants.

In France, the quiet conquest has the face of the Union of the Islamic Organizations of France (UOIF), which a Simon Wiesenthal Center report charged with “anti-Semitism, advocacy and financing of terrorism and call to Jihad… ”

Not only does UOIF not encourage the integration of Moslems in France,” the report states, “it actually provides a nursery for the most radical Islamist positions.”

In Italy we have just witnessed the strategy of this “moderate Islam.” The largest and most influential Islamic organization, l’Unione delle comunità ed organizzazione islamiche in Italia (Ucoii), sponsored Milan’s first Muslim councilwoman, Sumaya Abdel Qader, a veiled candidate of the center-left coalition. Qader’s husband, Abdallah Kabakebbji, openly called for the destruction of the State of Israel: “It is a historical mistake, a scam”, he wrote on Facebook. His solution? “Ctrl + Alt + Delete”.

Qader won the race over a real moderate Muslim, the unveiled Somali activist, Maryan Ismail. I met Mrs. Ismail at a pro-Israel forum in Milan. After losing the election, she broke with Italy’s Democratic Party in an open letter: “The Democratic Party has chosen to dialogue with obscurantist Islam. Once again, the souls of modern, plural and inclusive Islam were not heard”.

Take two “stars” of this French “moderate Islam.” The first one is Tariq Ramadan, the grandson of Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, the motto of which is: “Allah is our objective; the Prophet is our leader; the Quran is our law; Jihad is our way; dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”

Ramadan does not hide in Raqqa or shoot at French citizens. By applying for French citizenship, he would like to become one of them. His office is in the Parisian suburb of Saint Denis; he has written 30 books and he has two million Facebook followers. Ramadan has academic chairs all over the world, he is the director of the Research Center for Islamic Law in Doha (Qatar) and the president of the European Muslim Network. He publicly campaigns for Islam along with Italy’s former prime minister, Massimo D’Alema. Ramadan recently explained his vision for Europe and France: “Islam is a French religion and the French language is a language of Islam”.

Ramadan’s project is not the hoped-for Europeanization of Islam, but the not-hoped-for frightful Islamization of Europe. He opposes the assimilation of Muslims into French culture and society. A few days before the election in Milan, Ramadan was in Italy to endorse the candidacy of Sumaya Abdel Qader.

The second French “star” is Dalil Boubakeur, the rector of the Grand Mosque of Paris. In 1989, Boubakeur justified the persecution of Salman Rushdie by Ayatollah Khomeini. In 2002, he testified for the prosecution against the writer Michel Houellebecq. In 2006, he sued Charlie Hebdo in court, after the publication of the Danish Mohammed cartoons. Last year, Boubakeur called for the conversion of churches into mosques and asked to “double” the number of mosques in France.

Dalil Boubakeur, rector of the Grand Mosque of Paris, last year called for the conversion of churches into mosques and asked to “double” the number of mosques in France. (Image source: TV5 Monde)

In the United Kingdom, mainstream Muslim organizations are dispensing “Islamic justice” through more than 85 sharia courts attached to mosques. Divorce, polygamy, adultery and wife-beating are only some of these courts’ matters of jurisprudence. In Germany, vice-chancellor Sigmar Gabriel criticized Saudi Arabia for financing Islamic extremism in Europe. It is the same kingdom which last year offered to build 200 new mosques in Germany.

Qatar, with its Al Jazeera television megaphone, is also very active in sponsoring Muslim Brotherhood Islamic radicalism all over Europe. The Qatari royal family, for example, in 2015 donated £11 million to Oxford’s St. Anthony’s College, where Tariq Ramadan teaches. Qatar also announced that it was willing to spend $65 million in the French suburbs, home to the vast majority of the six million Muslims in France.

Today in Europe, several scenarios are possible, including the worst. Among them, there is a civil war, which many are beginning to talk about, including Patrick Calvar, the director of domestic intelligence. This is what the Islamic State is looking for: unleashing a blind repression so that the Muslim population will show solidarity with the revolutionary minority. Yet, there is still worse possible outcome: that nothing happens and we continue as is.

The end is more important than the means. The Islamic State has the same goal as most of the members of so-called “moderate Islam”: domination under the sharia. Many supposedly “moderate Muslims”, even if they do not commit violent acts themselves, support them quietly. They support them by not speaking out against them. If they do speak out against them, they usually do so in coded terms, such as that they are “against terrorism,” or that what concerns them about violent acts by Muslims is the possibility of a “backlash” against them.

Violent jihadis, however, are not the only means of transforming Europe, and perhaps are even counterproductive: they could awaken the nations they attack. Soft and more discreet means, such as social pressure and propaganda, are even more dangerous, and possibly even more effective: they are harder to see, such as the West’s acceptance of dual judiciary and legal systems; sharia finance (if there had been a “Nazi finance” system, in which all financial transactions went to strengthening the Third Reich, what effect might that have had on World War II?), and the proliferation in the West of mosques and extremist Islamic websites. Although there are indeed many real “moderate Muslims”, there are also still many who are not.

To conservative Muslims, however, any Muslim who does not accept every word of Allah — the entire Koran — is not a true Muslim, and is open to charges of “apostasy”, the punishment for which is death. According to a leading Sunni theologian, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, based in Qatar, “If they [Muslims] had gotten rid of the punishment for apostasy, Islam would not exist today.”

That is why the late writer Oriana Fallaci once said to The New Yorker: “I do not accept the mendacity of the so-called Moderate Islam”. That is why real “moderate Muslims” are silenced or murdered.

This might summarize the current Islamic mainstream mentality: “Dear Europeans, continue to think about a shorter working week, early retirement, abortion on demand and adultery in the afternoon. With your laws, we will conquer you. With our laws, we will convert you”.

Giulio Meotti, Cultural Editor for Il Foglio, is an Italian journalist and author.

How Islamists Are Slowly Desensitizing Europe And America

Photo Erica Simone / Shutterstock.com

Photo Erica Simone / Shutterstock.com


The Federalist, by M.G. Oprea, April 8, 2016:

Charlie Hebdo, the French satirical magazine whose offices Islamists attacked in 2015, published an editorial recently titled “How Did We Get Here?” that has raised some eyebrows. In it, they ask how Europe has become where European-born Muslims have attacked the hearts of Paris and Brussels. Their answer has proved distasteful to many on the Left.

The editorial has been harshly criticized and the magazine accused of racism and xenophobia. The Washington Post says Charlie Hebdo blames extremism on individual Muslims—the veiled woman on the street, the man selling kebabs. There’s some truth to this accusation, and to the extent that there is, Charlie Hebdo is wrong. But this, and other critiques, miss the larger point of the article, which is to demonstrate the gradual and quotidian way in which criticizing Islam has been silenced.

It’s worth quoting Charlie Hebdo at length:

In reality, the attacks are merely the visible part of a very large iceberg indeed. They are the last phase of a process of cowing and silencing long in motion and on the widest possible scale. Our noses are endlessly rubbed in the rubble of Brussels airport and in the flickering candles amongst the bouquets of flowers on the pavements. All the while, no one notices what’s going on in Saint-German-en-Laye. Last week, Sciences-Po* welcomed Tariq Ramadan. He’s a teacher, so it’s not inappropriate. He came to speak of his specialist subject, Islam, which is also his religion…

No matter, Tariq Ramadan has done nothing wrong. He will never do anything wrong. He lectures about Islam, he writes about Islam, he broadcasts about Islam. He puts himself forward as a man of dialogue, someone open to a debate. A debate about secularism which, according to him, needs to adapt itself to the new place taken by religion in Western democracy. A secularism and a democracy which must also accept those traditions imported by minority communities. Nothing bad in that. Tariq Ramadan is never going to grab a Kalashnikov with which to shoot journalists at an editorial meeting. Nor will he ever cook up a bomb to be used in an airport concourse. Others will be doing all that kind of stuff. It will not be his role. His task, under cover of debate, is to dissuade people from criticising his religion in any way. The political science students who listened to him last week will, once they have become journalists or local officials, not even dare to write nor say anything negative about Islam. The little dent in their secularism made that day will bear fruit in a fear of criticising lest they appear Islamophobic. That is Tariq Ramadan’s task.

The Charlie Hebdo editorial correctly points out that in Europe the dominant liberal culture has pounded into us that we must adapt to Muslims who come to our country, and never ask them to adapt to any of our ways. Doing so would be colonialist and wrong. It’s a double standard, of course. As the welcoming countries, Europeans must suppress their own culture and ideals for those of the Islamic immigrant population. But when they go abroad to non-Western countries, either to live or to visit, it’s considered offensive not to adapt to their ways of life.

Learning a Culture Should Work Both Ways

No one who found the Charlie Hebdo op-ed so offensive would ever suggest Morocco ought to welcome McDonalds or Wal-Mart with open arms. They would say the country is being ruined with Western culture. They want non-Western countries to remain exactly as they are—preserved and frozen in time-while the West must endlessly adapt to anyone who makes it their home.

The article highlights the important fact that Europe has failed to ask its Muslim immigrant population to assimilate. This fact was demonstrated recently when police discovered that the only surviving terrorist from the Paris attacks, Salah Abdeslam, was able to travel from Paris to Brussels and conceal himself there until a few days before the Brussels attacks. He was aided by a large community of French and Muslim Belgians whose loyalties clearly lie with their own community, not with Belgium, or Europe at large. What’s more, a 2013 study shows the shocking degree to which European Muslims hate the West.

Asking immigrants to assimilate doesn’t mean white-washing their culture and religion, asking them not to wear the hijab, or demanding that they eat pork. But it does mean asking them to accept, to some degree, the culture of the country to which they have willingly moved. These are things like women’s rights, tolerance, free speech, or criticism of religion. It also means not having to apologize for having a culture of one’s own. This is the point that Michel Houellebecq made in his recent novel, “Submission.”

Slow-Boiling Our Brains

Europeans have been lulled into accepting that it’s wrong to criticize Islam or scrutinize it in any way. The Charlie Hebdo editorial points out that it’s a slow process, an insidious wearing away of what is and isn’t acceptable to say or think. The process must be slow, because few people would accept a proposal dictating what topics they’re not allowed to discuss. So, you gradually shame them into it.

This establishes a pre-conditioned mindset so the line of acceptability can be moved further and further until the problem of global jihad can no longer be effectively explored because we aren’t even allowed to ask fundamental questions. This is Charlie Hebdo’s point about Tariq Ramadan, whose grandfather founded the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood and whose father was an active member of the group. Through the guise of intellectualism and purported adherence to moderate Islam, he instructs his audience ever so gently that the problem has nothing to do with Islam, and that suggesting so is ugly and base.

We acquiesce, because, as Charlie Hebdo points out, we fear being seen as Islamaphobic or racist. We are made to feel guilty if the thought flashes through our head that we wish that the new sandwich shop run by a Muslim sold bacon, or that a woman wearing a hijab makes us a little uncomfortable. That fear that we feel when we entertain those thoughts, the op-ed argues, saps our willingness to scrutinize, analyze, debate, or reject anything about Islam. And this is dangerous.

Fierce Reactions Aim to Condition Us Into Fear

Although Europe is further along in this process, there is a clear relevance to the United States. We are already being instructed on college campuses and by our own president that Muslims are a sort of protected class regarding criticism. President Obama even went so far as to censor French President François Hollande when he used the forbidden phrase “Islamist terrorism.”

The latest incident of shaming those who do push back ishappening in Kansas, where the Islamic Society of Wichita invited Sheik Monzer Talib to speak at a fundraising event on Good Friday. Talib is a known fundraiser for Hamas, the militant Islamist Palestinian group that the United States classifies as a terrorist organization. He even has sung a song called “I am from Hamas.” U.S. Rep. Mike Pompeo dared to put out a press release objecting to the speech out of concern that it would harm the Muslim community, particularly in the wake of the Brussels terrorist attack.

In response, the mosque claimed Pompeo stoked prejudice and Islamaphobia and that they had to cancel the event because of protest announcements and because some individuals on Facebook made some offhand comments about guns. Cue a local media frenzy, letters to the editor accusing Pompeo of government overreach, and the predictable arrival of two CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) representatives to skewer Pompeo.

This is just one example of how criticizing or questioning the actions of a Muslim community—even one that is supporting a Hamas fundraiser—has become anathema. The line of acceptability has been moved so now it’s Islamaphobic to object to someone with links to Islamist groups being invited to a U.S. mosque while we’re in the midst of a global battle against Islamist terrorism. People don’t even want to discuss it. The conversation is over. Just as Charlie Hebdo asks, so should we ask ourselves, “How did we get here?”

Although the particulars of the Charlie Hebdo editorial may go too far, and I do not endorse everything the article says, the overarching message is that Europe has slowly let this happen year by year, decade by decade, like a frog in a pot slowly brought to a boil. Post-colonial guilt and shame have stopped Europeans from openly loving and defending their own culture. The state of things in Europe today is the natural conclusion of that neglect. We in America are on the same road.

M. G. Oprea is a writer based in Austin, Texas. She holds a PhD in French linguistics from the University of Texas at Austin. You can follow her on Twitter here.

“Moderate Reformer” Tariq Ramadan Defends Brussels Attack

tariq-ramadan1Frontpage, Daniel Greenfield, April 3, 2016:

Tariq Ramadan was barred from the US under Bush, but Obama threw open the doors for him. Ramadan was billed as a moderate reformer. And here is the “moderate reformer” on the Brussels attacks. After the formality of condemning the attacks, mumbling that terrorism is wrong, Ramadan pivots to the same old song and dance.

We cannot, today, afford to disconnect these events with the violence, terror and death that have long been commonplace in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Libya, and in Africa and Asia more widely. European and American foreign policy does not happen in a vacuum, as those who target us have repeated in countless videos: You have caused war and death in our countries, now you will suffer the consequences.

Now the “war and death” that ISIS terrorists are talking about is the US and the rest of NATO pushing back against its genocide of Christians, Yazidis and other minorities. Or to put it another way, American intervention against Islamic terror doesn’t happen in a vacuum either. “You have caused war and death in our countries, now you will suffer the consequences.”

But what is Tariq Ramadan really suggesting? That bombing ISIS is wrong?

We must hear those who criticize the incoherence of our allegiances and our support of dictatorships.

What dictatorships? Obama threw them overboard. And the Islamist alternative is itself a dictatorship. That’s what ISIS is.

Does the condemnable violence of their reaction mean we can ignore their arguments?

What ISIS arguments would Tariq Ramadan like us to listen to?

Tariq doesn’t answer. Instead he recycles the same old tedious nonsense. ISIS wants to wreck Muslim integration in the West. (The Brotherhood and the Saudis and Erdogan have done that on their own already.) Muslim terrorists are irreligious and need to be taught Islam propertly. (Fight Islamist indoctrination with our flavor of Islamist indoctrination.)

But then Tariq Ramadan informs us that if we don’t bomb the right Muslims, then maybe we also deserve to be bombed.

 We cannot support dictatorships, be political and economic partners with states who export literalist Salafi doctrine, be silent when civilians are massacred south of our borders and hope that we will not receive a response to the injustice and humiliation we have provoked.

Wait… so we can’t bomb Muslim countries and not expect to be bombed. Also we can’t not bomb Muslim countries and not expect to be bombed.

According to Tariq Ramadan, we need to bomb the countries that Islamists want us to bomb (non-Islamist dictators) and not bomb the wrong ones (Islamist dictators and terror groups) or… we will receive a response to the injustice and humiliation we have provoked.

But that probably sounded better in the original Jihadist.

France bombed Syria. So it deserved to get bombed. So why did Brussels deserve to get bombed? Well it wasn’t bombing Syria was it. So it deserved to get bombed. This is the Islamist Catch 22 that Tariq Ramadan is offering. Anything you do or don’t do is an excuse for Islamic terrorists to bomb you.

Who Really Ought to be Banned? Geert Wilders or Terror Supporters?

Carson_Ellison-e1400763054875CSP, by Kyle Shideler, April 29, 2015:

Representatives Keith Ellison (D-MN) and Andre Carson (D-IN) have called for Dutch Parliamentarian Geert Wilders to be banned from the country, in a recent letter to Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and Secretary of State John Kerry. The two Muslim lawmakers allege that Geert Wilder’s strong stance against the immigration influx of primarily Muslim migrants to Holland and his opposition to Islamization equates to a violation of the 1998 International Religious Freedom Act.

On its face the assertion is patently absurd. As Freedom House reports, the Netherlands maintains nearly perfect scores for political and civil liberties. Wilders is a lawmaker in his native Netherlands, and can be expected to weigh in on issues of importance to his constituents, which is exactly what the Dutch court found in 2011 when he was acquitted on charges that his comments regarding Islamic immigration rose to the level of criminal hate speech.

In fact in the Netherlands the violence has been directed almost solely in the opposite direction, with the assassinations of Pim Fortuyn and Theo Van Gogh for their speech deemed critical of Islam. Wilders himself lives under constant threat of death. In 2009, the Dutch security services reported that Wilders personally received two-thirds of the 428 death threats against all Dutch politicians.

In comparison, Carson and Ellison both wrote letters in praise of the Hamas-linked Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) for their 16th annual dinner, which featured attendees from such repressive states as Sudan, Qatar, UAE and Oman, all of whom rank as “Not Free” on Freedom Houses’ reports. Sudan in particular is ruled by an indicted war criminal, Omar Bashir, known for its genocidal campaign against the predominately christian South Sudanese and against ethnic minorities throughout Sudan including Darfur. There’s no indication Carson or Ellison complained to CAIR about these states’ representatives.

Indeed, Reps. Ellison and Carson are more likely to be sharing the stage with the kinds of individuals who really ought to be banned from the United States.

For example, the Department of Homeland Security was ordered to place Canadian Muslim Brotherhood leader and vocal Hamas and Hezbollah supporter Jamal Badawi on a hands off list, despite the urging of DHS officers who called for him to be blocked from entry. Badawi has publically expressed support for Hamas and Hezbollah, and sat on the board of the International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS) that issued a 2004 fatwa permitting the murder of Americans in Iraq. Badawi was listed as an unindicted Co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism finance trial which provided funds to the terrorist group Hamas, whose charter calls for the extermination of the Jewish people.

In 2014, Jamal Badawi and Rep. Andre Carson shared a stage at the 39th joint conventionof the Muslim American Society (MAS) and the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA). MAS is recognized by federal prosecutors as the “overt arm” of the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States, and ICNA is considered to be a front for the Pakistani Islamistorganization Jamaat-e-Islami. The Muslim American Society has been listed as a terrorist organization in the U.A.E.

Also on the stage was Tariq Ramadan, a key European Muslim Brotherhood leader who was banned from the United States for his financial support for charities tied to Hamas until the Obama Administration reversed the decision. In 2013 Carson’s office also arranged for a room on Capitol Hill for an event by the Egyptian Freedom Foundation, a group close to the Muslim Brotherhood which was attended by convicted Palestinian Islamic Jihad organizer Sami Al-Arian. Al-Arian was deported from the United States two years later.

Rep. Keith Ellison has similar associations. Ellision also shared a stage with Badawi, in 2011 in Minnesota, and the two were both highlight speakers at the 50th Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) convention in 2013. ISNA was also listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF funding trial and in that case Federal Judge Jorge Solis wrote that the government provided “ample evidence” for connecting ISNA to Hamas. Ellison has also shared the stage with Tariq Ramadan which he did during a Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID) event in 2010. Ellison also expressed support for Sami Al-Arian, urging listeners of a Tampa Bay radio station to support al-Arian during the PIJ organizer’s terrorism trial.

Ellison and Carson are pretending that open and honest debate by an elected official about the role of Islamic immigration to the Netherlands is on par with incitement to commit violence.

Yet, when it comes to those who actually incite violence, or provide material support for terrorism, they are far more likely to be in the United States at Ellison and Carson’s invitation than against their objections.

Tariq Ramadan’s Research Center Holds International Conference In Europe For The First Time

Tariq Ramadan p12412-300x169By gmbwatch on March 18, 2015:

Islamist media is reporting on the third Annual International Conference of the Research Center for Islamic Legislation and Ethics (CILE), headed by Global Muslim Brotherhood leader Tariq Ramadan. According to the IslamOnline report, this is the first time that the conference has been held in Europe:

BRUSSELS – The third Annual International Conference on Islam and Contemporary Ethical Dilemmas was inaugurated in the Belgium capital, Brussels, on Saturday, March 14, presenting an insight on Islam and global ethics.

‘We are paying the price of a certain restrictive conception that says Islam is only Fiqh,’ Dr. Tariq Ramadan, the director of the Research Center for Islamic Legislation and Ethics (CILE) told attendants.

In his speech titled ‘Global Ethics and Applied Ethics’, Dr Ramadan presented an overview of three main sources of Islamic ethics which are law (fiqh), philosophy-theology and Sufism, in a bid to help audience understand how ethical values and principles are produced from within.

Dr. Ramadan also urged Muslims to go deeper in understanding the objectives of Islam, and not just stop at the level of Fiqh.

He was speaking at the inauguration of the third Annual International Conference on Islam & Contemporary Ethical Dilemmas held in Brussels.

Read the rest here.

According to the CLIE website, the following individuals of interest were expected to participate in this year’s conference:

In March 2014, the GMBDW reported on the the 2nd Annual CLIE international conference that was expected to include Wadah Khanfar, with a background in the Muslim Brotherhood and likely Hamas and Yemeni Muslim Brotherhood figure Tawakkul Karman a winner the Nobel Peace Prize.

The Research Center for Islamic Legislation and Ethics (CLIE), headed by Global Muslim Brotherhood leader Tariq Ramadan, was launched in January 2012 and represented a significant coming together of Global Muslim Brotherhood leaders Ramadan and Youssef Qaradawi, noting that the Deputy Director is a close associate of Qaradawi’s at the International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS).The new center appears to be the latest in the series of research centers being established by the Qatar Faculty of Islamic Studies (QFIS). The launch ceremony for Center was co-organized by a group that included five U.S. universities, among them Georgetown University, together with representatives of two organizations headed by Youssef Qaradawi and the Global Center for Renewal and Guidance. According to Saudi media, the Global Center for Renewal and Guidance is a U.K. based organization created to improve the Islamic education curriculum and headed by Abdullah Omar Naseef who has held many important positions Saudi Arabia including serving as Vice-President of the Kingdom’s Shura Council, President of King Abdul Aziz University, and most importantly as Secretary-General of the Muslim World League (MWL) from 1983-1993. Dr. Naseef also heads the Cairo-based International Islamic Council for Da’wa and Relief, (IICDR), an umbrella group or 86 Islamic organizations, many of which are associated with the global Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas fundraising, or support for Al Qaeda.

Tariq Ramadan is the grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood. For his profile, go here.