Egyptian Ambassador Takes Aim at Top Muslim Brotherhood Jurist

ISLAMIC SCHOLAR AL-QARADAWI POSES IN LONDON. REUTERS/Toby Melville

ISLAMIC SCHOLAR AL-QARADAWI POSES IN LONDON.
REUTERS/Toby Melville

CounterJihad, by Kyle Shideler, Aug. 30, 2016:

Last week the Egyptian Ambassador to the United States Yasser Reda used the opportunity of a Wall Street Journal op-ed to focus attention on the ideologues who promote and support terrorist violence, and called for United Nations efforts to curb terroristic speech with international policy instruments in a manner similar to terror financing. For the subject of their piece, Egypt’s Ambassador focused not on Islamic State’s Al-Baghdadi, or Al Qaeda’s Al-Zawahiri, but rather a man he identified as “the pontiff of terror,” Muslim Brotherhood leading cleric and sharia jurist Yusuf Al-Qaradawi.

The Egyptians have good reason to fear Qaradawi, a long-accomplished jurist with “more than a hundred tomes on theological and jurisprudential issues” to his name, who in 2013 called for those who overthrew the Muslim Brotherhood regime of Mohammed Morsi to be killed.

Qaradawi’s proclamations played a substantial role in the Arab Spring, particular legitimizing jihad in Libya against Qaddafi and in Syria against Hezbollah and the Assad regime. Qaradawi’s pronouncements also played a role in massive and highly anti-Semitic protests in opposition to Israel Operation Protective Edge against Hamas throughout the Middle East, Europe and the United States.

Prior to the Arab Spring, Qaradawi was perhaps best known for providing fatwas authorizing suicide bombings for the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, and calling for the death of Americans during the occupation in Iraq in 2004.

Unfortunately Reda’s rebuttals falls into some common rhetorical pitfalls. In particular, Reda attempts to contrast Qaradawi’s support for suicide bombings with a prohibition against suicide found in Islamic law. While it’s admirable for the Egyptian diplomat to admit that Qaradawi deals in questions of Islamic jurisprudence and not an artificial “extremism” unrelated to questions of Islamic jurisprudence, Reda’s argument against Qaradawi’s positions lack a solid basis.

The very statement Reda quotes to condemn itself invokes Qaradawi’s defense against the charge. Reda quotes Qaradawi on Al Jazeera suggesting that suicide operations must be undertaken as part of a military effort by a Jamma (party or group) and not by a single individual. But Qaradawi’s formulation eliminates the possibility that a person has taken their own life only out of their own personal despair, and not in order that “they fight in the cause of Allah, so they kill and are killed.” (Sura: 9:39)

Even while making an effort to minimize Qaradawi’s juridical authority, Reda ultimately seems to accept that Qaradawi’s interpretation carries serious weight among his audience, and that those who hear his appeals to violence on the basis of sharia may act upon it.

Far too many western analysts cannot bring themselves to make even this reasonable concession to reality.

Reda also dispatches with the nonsense notion that Qaradawi’s views, which uphold suicide bombings, jihad and revolution are, in any way, the views of a “moderate.”

Qaradawi has been a bugbear for several Arab States, including Egypt, but also the United Arab Emirates, which designated Qaradawi’s International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS) as a terrorist group.

Reda’s proposed solution raises some questions and some concerns. Reda proposes a United Nations apparatus to designate ideologues like Qaradawi, in the same manner as designating terror financiers, and to sanction them accordingly.

To begin with Qaradawi is already the head of a U.S. and Israeli-designated terrorist finance organization, the Union of the Good, as being designated by the United Arab Emirates.  Despite this no sanctions have ever been placed directly on Qaradawi or business associated with him.

Qaradawi, who has been banned from entry to numerous countries including the United States, France, and Ireland, faces an Interpol “red notice” seeking his arrest and return to Egypt to stand trial on charges of incitement to murder.

In other words, if the nations of the world were so inclined, the ability to take action against Qaradawi exists.

Yet Qaradawi continues to enjoy the patronage of Qatar and Turkey, nations that have sought to expand their prestige and position in the Muslim world through a mutually beneficial alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood. As a result, it’s unlikely to see international consensus regarding an effort to sanction him for his calls to violence.

The other problem, of course is Egypt’s own history of seeking to utilize international forums to silence opponents have not always been focused on Muslim Brotherhood and other jihadist ideologues.

Instead Egypt (with the support of the United States), sponsored a 2009 resolution targeting freedom of speech under the rubric of protecting against religious discrimination. As Anne Bayesfky noted at the time:

…Ambassador Hisham Badr, was equally pleased–for all the wrong reasons. He praised the development by telling the Council that “freedom of expression . . . has been sometimes misused,” insisting on limits consistent with the “true nature of this right” and demanding that the “the media must . . . conduct . . . itself in a professional and ethical manner.”

The new resolution, championed by the Obama administration, has a number of disturbing elements. It emphasizes that “the exercise of the right to freedom of expression carries with it special duties and responsibilities . . .” which include taking action against anything meeting the description of “negative racial and religious stereotyping.” It also purports to “recognize . . . the moral and social responsibilities of the media” and supports “the media’s elaboration of voluntary codes of professional ethical conduct” in relation to “combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.”

This is particularly worrisome since the U.N.-based effort is modeled on using “incitement to violence” to trigger legal penalties, which seems similar to the sort of trigger for sanctions proposed by Reda.

While it’s possible that the current proposal by Ambassador Reda is intended only to narrowly focus on the kinds of jihadist ideology promoted by clerics like Qaradawi, it pays to be cautious.

Still Reda’s editorial displays a rare level-headedness about the depth of the problem, and a willingness to call out not just jihadists but Islamic scholars and clerics who provide legitimacy to jihadist terror.

At a minimum however cooperation between U.S. and western countries and Arab states looking to crack down on Muslim Brotherhood ideologues and their networks would be a key turning point towards responding to the current threat, and one that the U.S. has largely turned a blind eye to. Certainly expanding current terrorism laws to include those, like Qaradawi, who provide ideological and material support to terror, along with including the Muslim Brotherhood as a designated terrorist group, would be a good first step towards “countering the pontiff of terror.”

What Is More “Annoying” Than A Suicide Bomber?

Yusuf_al-Qaradawi

According to the International Union of Muslim Scholars, the answer is Donald Trump.

By Counter Jihad, April  25, 2016:

Secretary-General of the International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS) Ali Qara Daghi told the AFP that his organization finds it annoying that so many Americans support business magnate Donald Trump in the 2016 election.  “This is really annoying us so much that he has these levels of support,” he told reporters.  “His remarks are not consistent with common sense or moral values because he is not honest and exploits attacks on Islam in order to gain access to power.”

It is good to hear that Daghi thinks that remarks by important people should be consistent with common sense and moral values.  The IUMS and its leadership have issued a number of statements we should revisit in light of this new standard.

[T]he International Union of Muslim Scholars [is] run by Muslim Brotherhood chief jurist Yusuf Al Qaradawi. Under Qaradawi the IUMS issued fatwas in support of Hamas suicide bombings, and the targeting of Americans in Iraq during the Iraq War, and on called for jihad against secular leaders in Syria, Egypt and Libya. IUMS is considered a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates.

Is it consistent with common sense and moral values to endorse suicide bombings?  Should Americans have been “annoyed” when someone called for their sons and daughters to be targeted in Iraq?  What should we think of the common sense or moral values of people who have endorsed these practices?

Qaradawi and the IUMS also took a hand in the attacks on Danish embassies in the wake of the publication of Mohammed cartoons.  Qaradawi says this in his own words.

[I]n the matter of the cartoons of the Prophet  Muhammad in Denmark, that wronged the Prophet. We called on [da’awna] the Islamic umma, the International Union of Muslim Scholars, and the umma rose up, from one end to the next, in the Easts and the Wests, in the North and the South, hundreds of millions rose up. The Islamic umma, if it found who to awaken it, would rise up and responded [to the call]. The umma has not died.

Qaradawi is facing a demand for extradition by Egypt for his role in the Muslim Brotherhood’s attempt to overthrow the constitution in that country in 2013.  In the wake of the Egyptian army’s move to prevent the destruction of their constitution, Qaradawi issued a formal call for jihad against Egypt.

Yet somehow Qaradawi has managed to pass as a “moderate” in the Western press even while he was expressing support for Hamas’ suicide attacks.  No one should be fooled.  Neither Qaradawi or the IUMS is moderate.  However annoying Donald Trump may be, the reason his rhetoric garners such widespread support is because of people like them.

Shutting Down Islam’s Cauldrons of Hate

Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Breitbart, by JAMES ZUMWALT, Jan. 3, 2016:

Four days after the November 13 Paris attacks, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said the U.S. will have “absolutely no choice” but to close down mosques where “some bad things are happening.” He suggested people need to—and are finally starting to—understand this.

In a word association game, conservative Donald Trump’s name would not trigger as a response that of France’s liberal president, Francois Hollande. Yet Hollande also agrees it is time to shut down some mosques.

During World War II, the U.S. used Navajo Indians to transmit messages in code over open radio nets. Most codes at the time were susceptible to being broken but, since the Japanese did not understand the Navajo language, its code never was.

Similarly, our failure to understand Arabic leaves us oblivious to the coded anti-West hate messages delivered in many mosques. If we understood them, we would not be surprised Muslim radicalization takes place in mosques serving as hate cauldrons.

The lack of Arabic speakers in critical U.S. government and military intelligence positions has plagued America ever since 9/11. Purportedly, when U.S. forces invaded Iraq in 2003, it only had a handful of translators available.

Westerners’ Arabic illiteracy makes it easy for Islamic religious leaders to speak out both sides of the mouth—expressing moderation when addressing us in our native tongue but revealing a radicalized side when addressing believers in Arabic.

Such was the case with television Imam Yusuf al-Qaradawi—considered one of the most influential Islamic scholars—in an interview with the German news magazine Der Spiegel in 2006.

It was noted during the interview, Qaradawi “magnanimously conceded that there is also room in heaven for devout Christians and Jews. But on his Arab-language website a short time later, he made it clear he believes Christians and Jews are ultimately nothing more than infidels” for whom Paradise is non-existent.

Qaradawi felt it necessary to quickly make this clarification lest he leave believers confused. His message is the same promoted in the Quran: Inhuman infidels have but three options: convert to Islam, death or, where allowed, pay a tax to Muslims, known as “jizya,” to practice their own religion. (U.K. Muslim cleric Anjem Choudary has taken this last option to a brazen extreme, claiming he accepts U.K. welfare as jizya payments.)

Der Spiegel went on to report the following:

In a Berlin mosque, a television crew secretly recorded the sermon of a Turkish imam who described the Germans as godless and railed against their alleged stench. In London, hate preacher Abu Hamza al-Masri called upon the faithful to murder female tourists in his native Egypt, saying: ‘If a woman, even a Muslim woman, is naked and you have no way of covering her up, it is legitimate to kill her.’

In researching its article, Der Spiegel had sent correspondents to visit mosques from Nigeria to Indonesia to sit in on imams’ Friday Prayers, as that day’s prayers are the most important for devout Muslims. Some countries, such as Egypt, have to post police outside mosques on such days “to ensure that religious speech doesn’t suddenly turn into political invective.”

In countries like Pakistan (birthplace of San Bernardino mass killer Tashfeen Malik), Der Spiegel reported “religious scholars whipped their listeners into a holy frenzy and drew a sharp line between the Dar al-Islam, or House of Islam, and the Dar al-Harb, or House of War—the two spheres into which schools of Islamic legal thought have divided the world.”

According to this interpretation of Islam, there is a sphere where Islam already reigns (Dar al-Islam) and one where it does not, but eventually will (Dar al-Harb), thus making the latter a sphere of perpetual war until it happens. Nothing lies in between— i.e., there is no place on Planet Earth where non-Islamic control is to be respected and left in peace. Apparently, world peace only evolves upon global submission to Islam—i.e., in the form of a global caliphate. And, until the caliphate is established, every Muslim has a duty to carry out jihad to achieve it.

This theme is repeatedly taught in mosques, brainwashing followers to believe infidel life is valueless and Allah will only welcome into Paradise those Muslims committed to jihad. Such brainwashing includes banning believers’ independent thought to question such Islamic teachings as the words of the Quran are those of Allah and, therefore, not subject to man’s interpretation. Meanwhile, these imams, hypocritically, proffer their own Quranic interpretations for their flocks to follow.

Unsurprisingly, such brainwashing in mosques around the world nurtures fertile soil in which the seed of radical thought blossoms.

For President Hollande, the Paris attacks cast a light into the dark teachings of mosques in his country. Acting on a state of emergency declaration immediately after the attacks, which parliament later extended through February 26, 2016, security operations were mounted to search mosques nurturing radical beliefs. The raids uncovered various indicia of a not-so-peaceful religion, including guns and jihadist documents hidden behind walls,resulting in several mosques plus various Islamist front companies being shut down for engaging in a “pattern of radicalization.”

French authorities have now conducted more than 2,700 warrantless raids on houses and businesses, arresting hundreds. One such house raid generated discovery—in a Muslim woman’s possession—of a “fake pregnancy” belly covered in tin foil used to shield explosives from detection.

Mirroring France’s concerns, German Chancellor Angela Merkel also authorized searchesof suspicious mosques. One in Stuttgart had been attended by 20% of the German fighters who ultimately made their way to Syria.

Former FBI agent John Guandolo warns America has become a breeding ground for jihadist networks. Of the more than 2,200 Islamic centers and mosques in the U.S., “the vast majority of them are a part of this network—they’re hostile.”

Similar to the Navajo code talkers, Islamist imams are delivering coded messages—only theirs contain anti-West, hate-filled invective. Trump, Hollande and Merkel all understand this and seek to shut down the cauldrons of hate from which they emanate. Unsurprisingly, President Barack Obama has yet to get the message.

Lt. Colonel James G. Zumwalt, USMC (Ret.), is a retired Marine infantry officer who served in the Vietnam war, the U.S. invasion of Panama and the first Gulf war. He is the author of “Bare Feet, Iron Will–Stories from the Other Side of Vietnam’s Battlefields,” “Living the Juche Lie: North Korea’s Kim Dynasty” and “Doomsday: Iran–The Clock is Ticking.” He frequently writes on foreign policy and defense issues.

CAIR Supporters Issued Threat at Black Lives Matter Protest

997133256Center for Security Policy, by Kyle Shideler, Sep. 14, 2015:

In early September, demonstrators stormed the Sacramento office of California Governor Jerry Brown, in a raucous protest in support of California AB 953, an “anti-racial profiling” bill. The demonstration was supported by the local and state Council on American Islamic Relations chapters, CAIR-Sacramento Valley, and CAIR-California. During the protest, demonstrators took over the governor’s office chanting slogans, including, reportedly, “This is what a pharaoh looks like.

While seemingly an odd statement to make in the midst of an American political demonstration, with the presence of Hamas-linked, Muslim Brotherhood front CAIR, the chant takes on a disturbing, and potentially deadly connotation.

For the Muslim Brotherhood, a “pharaoh” denotes a secular dictator, or “taghut”, comparable to the Egyptian rulers from the time of Jahiliyyah, that is the period of pre-Islamic ignorance before the coming of Mohammad and the revelation of the Quran.

This is most simply demonstrated from the words of Khalid Islambouli, the assassin of Anwar Sadat, who yelled, “Death to Pharaoh!” before opening fire. As recently as 2008, Iranian television unveiled a documentary, “Assassination of a Pharaoh” in honor of the killer.

Nor is this the only significant reference to the Muslim Brotherhood using the term. “Return of the Pharaoh,” a prison memoir regarding the suppression of the Muslim Brotherhood under Gamal Abdel Nasser, was authored by Muslim Sister Zainab Al Ghazali, a contemporary of Sayyid Qutb. Al Ghazali’s book remains an important textbook for Muslim Brothers, even in the United States, where it was prominently featured on 2010 Tarbiyah Handbook issued by the Muslim Brotherhood-connected Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA).

The term is also used by chief Muslim Brotherhood jurist Yusuf Al Qaradawi, in his 1990 work “The Priorities of the Islamic Movement in the Coming Phase,” where he writes:

“The most serious danger threatening the Muslim Ummah and the Islamic Movement is the rule of the Pharaohs who believe that their opinion is infallible and is right itself that can never go wrong.” (Qaradawi, pg. 189)

March 10th, 2003,  Qaradawi would announce in a sermon, “America is the Pharaoh of the new era, and the greatest deceiver in the world, killing people and assassinating them without properly charging them… ” Ten days later, on March 24th,2003,  Qaradawi issued a fatwa legitimating as martyrs those who died fighting Americans in Iraq.

In a 2011 fatwa, Qaradawi invoked Pharaoh while discussing when “moderates” (such as himself) viewed Offensive Jihad as legitimate, saying:

   1- To ensure the freedom to propagate the call to Islam, to prevent fitna in the religion (of Islam), and to remove the physical obstacles which prevent the call to Islam from reaching the multitudes of people. This was the reason for the conquests of the rightly-guided (caliphs) and the companions (of the Prophet), as well as those who followed them in righteousness. (They fought) to remove the power of the tyrants who controlled the necks and minds of men, and who said what Pharaoh said (Ed. emphasis added) to those of his people who believed (in Islam): “Have you believed before I gave you permission to believe?” This is the embodiment of the goal expressed in the saying of the Almighty: “Fight them on until there is no more fitna.”

On July 18th, 2013, following the ouster of Muslim Brotherhood president Mohammed Morsi, Muslim Brotherhood Supreme Guide Mohammed Badie labeled Egyptian Army leader Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi, “worse than Pharaoh...” Three days later on July 21st, Qaradawi declared thatthose who had overthrown Morsi had disobeyed a legitimate Islamic ruler, and could be killed.

The Center for Security Policy has been noting with concern the influence of Muslim Brotherhood-related groups within ongoing anti-police protests, beginning with CAIR’s involvement with the Ferguson protests in November of last year.  CAIR officials at the time hadcompared the events in Ferguson to the FBI shooting which killed Luqman Abdullah, a Detroit area Imam tied to convicted cop killer Imam Jamil Abdullah Amin (AKA H.Rap Brown).

As events in Ferguson reached a fever pitch, a supporter of Al-Amin, Zale Thompson, assaulted two NYPD officers with a hatchet, while another Amin supporter, Jaleel Tariq Abdul-Jabber, was arrested in December for threatening police officers over Ferguson.

CAIR continues to publicly promote its role in the Black Lives Matter movement. In July  CAIR National attorney Jennifer Wicks said that BLM was “absolutely intertwined with the Muslim community.”

Law enforcement and intelligence officials should recognize that the phrase “Pharaoh” carries with it significant ideological overtones, and if invoked by a Muslim Brotherhood associated organization may be suggestive of future violence, as demonstrated above.

Chattanooga Shooter’s Mosque Fundraised on Behalf of Jihad in 2009

Islamic Society of Greater Chattanooga

Islamic Society of Greater Chattanooga

Center for Security Policy,by Kyle Shideler, July 18, 2015:

As we reported Friday, the Islamic Society of Greater Chattanooga (ISGC) is tied to the Muslim Brotherhood through the Hamas-linked North American Islamic Trust (NAIT.) Now new evidence has been revealed showing that ISGC actually raised funds for the building of their new mosque in 2009, by referencing jihad and key Muslim Brotherhood figures.

According to a 2009 Iftar fundraising dinner slide show, first apparently noticed by Twitter user @alimhaider, contained an overt reference to key Muslim Brotherhood figure Yusuf al-Qaradawi.

The title of the slide, “In the cause of Allah” is an English translation of Fi Sabil Allah, as in the phrase “Jihad Fisabilallah”, which means violent jihad against unbelievers. Classic Islamic law reference book, the Reliance of the Traveller, notes in its index, “Fisabilallah: See Jihad”. There is no other reasonable interpretation of the phrase in context.

The reference to jihad in the fundraiser related to the Mosque, was done as a means of explaining that a contribution to the building of the mosque qualified under “Zakat” (annual tithe which is obligatory in Islam), under the category of funding Jihad.

ISGCZakat-300x225

Reliance of the Traveller notes, “The seventh category is those fighting for Allah, meaning people engaged in Islamic military operations for whom no salary has been allotted in the army roster (O: but who are volunteers for jihad without remuneration)…”

The slide “Cause of Allah” references Yusuf Al Qaradawi, and S.A.A. Maududi, founder of Pakistani Islamist group Jamaat-e-Islami. Both Qaradawi and Maududi are prolific on the subject of Jihad.

Qaradawi has been noted for his avid support for the terrorist group Hamas and their jihad against Israel, including issuing fatwas authorizing suicide bombing, and has supported jihadist movements in Somalia, Sudan, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya and most recently in Egypt. Qaradawi is the leader of the Hamas financing network known as the “Union of the Good”, which utilizes Zakat funds received by its charities in order to support Hamas.

In his work, “Islamic Education and Hassan Al Banna,” Qaradawi discusses how it was the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan) which revitalized the classical concept of Jihad for a modern age:

The aspect of Ikhwani training which makes it eminent and unique is Jehad or crusade i e. : Crusader·like training…The real implication of · Jehad (crusade) had been dismissed from Islamic training and way of life, before its conception among the lkhwans.

And in his “Priorities of the Movement in the Coming phase” Qaradawi says:

…it is a duty to defend every land invaded by infidels, stating that such jihad is imperative for Muslims in this land as an individual obligation and that all Muslims must support them with money, arms and men as required until all their land has been liberated from any aggressor who usurps it. Therefore, the Islamic Movement cannot stand idle and watch while any part of Muslim land is occupied by a foreign aggressor.

The other modern Islamic scholar referenced by the document, Maulana S.A.A. Maududi, was famous for successfully merging classical Islamic concepts of Jihad with a modernist language of revolution. He noted the following in his work “Jihad in Islam”:

It must be evident to you from this discussion that the objective of the Islamic ‘ Jihād’ is to eliminate the rule of an un-Islamic system and establish in its stead an Islamic system of state rule. Islam does not intend to confine this revolution to a single state or a few countries; the aim of Islam is to bring about a universal revolution. Although in the initial stages it is incumbent upon members of the party of Islam to carry out a revolution in the State system of the countries to which they belong, but their ultimate objective is no other than to effect a world revolution.

So the Islamic Society of Greater Chattanooga announced in 2009 that it openly aligned its views of Jihad with the views of Qaradawi and Maududi, and told its Muslim congregants that donating to the construction of ISGC was permissible, because it represented funding jihad.

Chattanooga shooter Mohammed Yusuf Abdulazeez and his family were regular attendees as ISGC. Despite claims by the mosque leadership that Abdulazeez was a rare attendee or little known there, a photo from a family Facebook account shows that Abdulazeez held his graduation party at the mosque, and that it was well attended, indicating they were well known regulars.

This fundraising document was publicly available information, three years before U.S. District Attorney William Killian attended the grand opening in 2012 and expressed his friendship with a mosque leadership who built their mosque with a promise that funding them represented an investment in jihad.

Now that investment appears to have matured.

U.S. District Attorney William Killian should recuse himself from this case, because of his association with ISGC, and the investigators must begin to conduct a detailed and through investigation of ISGC itself, and what role its support for violent jihad may have played in the attack in Chattanooga which claimed the lives of five servicemen.

German Intelligence Report Confirms CSP Report on Brotherhood Role in Anti-Israel Protests

image-1145Center for Security Policy, by Kyle Shideler, July 2, 2015:

A recent article in the Jerusalem Post cites a recent German Intelligence report warning that hundreds of Hezbollah and Hamas operatives are present in Germany, and playing a role in stoking anti-Israel protests and tensions there. In particular the report, authored by Germany’s internal security agency known as Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) notes approximately 300 Hamas members present in Germany, and played a role in orchestrating anti-Semitic and pro-Hamas protests during Israel’s Operation Protective Edge:

“Hamas was successful” in mobilizing its organization and people outside of its core support to participate in anti-Israel protests, the BfV report said. There was “public anti-semitism at pro-Palestinian demonstrations” against Israel’s Operation Protective Edge, the agency said, adding, “It was noticeable that a large number of mostly young people with an immigrant background expressed themselves in an anti-Semitic and hate-filled way.”

This analysis by German intelligence serves as confirmation of a Center for Security Policy product produced during Operation Protective Edge, which cited the ability of Muslim Brotherhood front organizations to carry out mass protests on behalf of Hamas, some of which turned violent, in both Europe and the United States.

That report, entitled, “Command and Control The International Union of Muslim Scholars, The Muslim Brotherhood, and The Call for Global Intifada during Operation Protective Edge,” examined how instructions and messaging for Brotherhood activities flowed out of the pronouncements by Muslim Brotherhood chief jurist Yusuf Al-Qaradawi. The Center’s piece concluded:

An examination suggests that both the timing, and the content of numerous worldwide Gaza protests do indeed correspond with the timing and nature of the declarations issued by Yusuf al-Qaradawi and the International Union of Muslim Scholars, and echoed by formal Muslim Brotherhood channels regarding Operation: Protective Edge. In all cases there are signs of support for jihad, and specifically support for Hamas, and in many cases, the Muslim Brotherhood more generally. In cases where speakers’ statements could be acquired, there was a correlation with themes expressed by Qaradawi. In numerous cases protest organizers included groups with known ties to the global Muslim Brotherhood, and in some cases, direct ties to organizations established or affiliated with Qaradawi.

The Brotherhood’s apparatus has been designed, since the late 1980s, to quickly and rapidly support Hamas internationally, and it continues to fulfill that role.The BfV report should be taken to heart by Western intelligence agencies. Analysts should be encouraged to draw lessons from Hamas’ “successful” mobilization of political and public relations support, and recall that providing propaganda on behalf of a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization falls well within material support statutes.

The Caliphate is Reborn — Western Stupidity Continues

isisdabiqGates of Vienna, by , June 23,2015:

On June 29, 2014, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS or IS) declared the formation of a new Caliphate and rebranded itself the Islamic State. As the author Robert Spencernotes, a plan for the restoration of the Caliphate was sketched out ten years ago by the Jihadist terror network al-Qaida. It has been carried out more or less exactly by the Islamic State. IS itself recognizes al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden as an important predecessor, as well as the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq (which ultimately became the Islamic State), Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

When a new Caliphate was declared in June 2014, many people considered it to be a bad joke. However, a year later, the Islamic State is still around. It has been successfully pushed back on several occasions, following significant military resistance. Yet it has also displayed an ability to adapt, and to conquer new territories when it has suffered a defeat on other fronts. The Islamic State is clearly not a joke.

The Egyptian activist Hassan al-Banna founded the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928. He, too, sought to reestablish the Caliphate. It was considered a major blow by many Muslims when the Turkish reformer Mustafa Kemal, or Atatürk, formally abolished the Caliphate in 1924. Al-Banna was preceded by other Muslim activists such as Rashid Rida. Banna is the grandfather of Tariq Ramadan, who is currently Professor of Contemporary Islamic Studies at the prestigious University of Oxford, England. Ramadan has served as a high-level advisor to the authorities in Britain, France and the EU.

The influential Egyptian Islamic scholar Yusuf al-Qaradawi is widely considered to be a spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood. He was a follower of the MB founder Hassan al-Banna in his youth. Qaradawi has confirmed that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is a former member of the Brotherhood. Baghdadi on June 29, 2014 declared himself Caliph Ibrahim of the Islamic State. By reestablishing the Caliphate, al-Baghdadi was merely fulfilling the desire of millions if Muslims worldwide, a goal which the Muslim Brotherhood have been fighting towards for nearly a century.

The author Graeme Wood published an in-depth article in the American magazine The Atlantic which has been referred to by many: “What ISIS Really Wants.” I don’t agree with all of his claims. Nevertheless, he concluded that “The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic. Yes, it has attracted psychopaths and adventure seekers, drawn largely from the disaffected populations of the Middle East and Europe. But the religion preached by its most ardent followers derives from coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam. Virtually every major decision and law promulgated by the Islamic State adheres to what it calls, in its press and pronouncements, and on its billboards, license plates, stationery, and coins, ‘the Prophetic methodology,’ which means following the prophecy and example of Muhammad, in punctilious detail.” One pious Muslim Mr. Wood talked to commented that “I would go so far as to say that Islam has been reestablished” by the IS Caliphate.

Read more

Also see:

Islamic State’s Dabiq 8 Focuses on Unifying Ummah, Criticizing Islamists

273030034
CSP, by Kyle Shideler, March 31, 2015:

The Islamic State issued it’s eighth edition of the glossy web magazine Dabiq. While most editions focus on some theme or another, Dabiq 8 may be the most clear yet. Each article is clearly selected to carry across the theme that the Islamic State represents the whole of the Muslim Ummah, and that Islamist organizations which purport to operate within a “nationalist” context are not legitimate.

The magazine begins by establishing the Sharia obligations for unity and against factionalism, citing the hadith, “whoever is killed under a blind banner, calling to ‘asabiyyah (tribalism or factionalism) or supporting ‘asabiyyah, then his death is a death of Jahiliyyah.”  Free Fire Blog has previously referenced this hadith, as it forms the basis of the Al Qaeda work “Jihad and the effects of intention upon it” by Sheikh Abul Qadir Abdul Aziz.

Building on this theme, Dabiq quotes “Khalifah” Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi from his Ramadan message saying,

“By Allah’s grace- you have a state and a khilafah, which will return your dignity, might, rights, and leadership. It is a state where the Arab and Non-Arab, the white man and black man, the easterner and westerner are all brothers. It is a khilafah that gathered the Caucasian, Indian, Chinese, Shami, Iraqi, Yemeni, Egyptian, Maghribi, American, French, German, and Australian.”

This is a direct rebuttal to analysts who mistakenly stressed racism as a factor expected to impede Boko Haram joining Islamic State, and a general policy of the U.S. government which has stressed the jihad in West Africa as being linked solely to “local grievances”.  The writers of Dabiq 8 stresses, “it was a rejection of nationalism that drove the Mujahidin in Nigeria to give bay’ah to the Islamic State and wage war against the Nigerian Murtaddin (apostates)…” They continue on this theme by applauding the Danish Muslim who targeted free speech cartoonist Lars Vilks and a Copenhagen Synagogue for rejecting a conception of “Danish” citizenship in favor of religious identity.

The writers continue on this theme in order to criticize Al Qaeda’s operation in Syria accusing Jabhat Al-Nusra of allying with Islamist militias who remain focused solely on Syria, rather than global jihad across borders, noting:

The scenario of nationalist “Islamism” working together alongside nationalist secularism to set up a nationalist government with elements of “Islam” and democracy within a constitutional framework is the same scenario that Egypt, Libya and Tunisia have experienced. the crusaders, expecting the eventual division of the two sides over the cake, sit back and wait to support the side more favorable towards their interests against the other…

Although the game is clear to those with a sound understanding of iman and waqi (faith and current affairs), it was unclear to the jihad claimants of sham (the Jawlani front).

The focus then pivots slightly to a discussion of Caliph AbuBakr as-Siddiq (the first Caliph following Mohammed) who prosecuted the “Ridda Wars” and discusses the logic behind As-Siddiq’s unwillingness to compromise with Arab tribes that refused to pay Zakat (a tithe which is one of the pillars of the faith.) The point being raised regards what the Islamic State views as the failure of other Islamic groups to implement the full shariah, and seeking justification for IS’ prosecution of violence against those groups.

This theme is touched on again as the magazine celebrates the swearing of bayah by Boko Haram, the attack on the Tunisian Bardo Museum, and the suicide bombings of two Shiite mosques in Yemen noting:

“May Allah Accept all those mujahidn who fight, massacre and terrorize the Kuffar while not differentiating between them under the influence of irja (an Islamic heresy which is understood to separate Islamic belief from the fulfillment of religious obligations) or on the grounds of nationalism.”

This leads into articles focusing on Islamic State’s expansion into Libya, which relies on these claims to justify IS’s attacks on Islamist militia faction “Libyan Dawn.” In particular the writers criticize the “Manhaj (school of Islamic jurisprudence) of the Muslim Brotherhood, accusing them of attempting to implement Shariah in Libya on a piecemeal basis. In particular AbdelHakim Belhadj, a major Libyan jihadist figure and leader within Libyan Dawn, is labeled as a Murtadd (apostate), which would appear to dispel earlier reports that he may have been aligning with Islamic State.

Islamic State’s quarrel with the Muslim Brotherhood is based on their opposition to the tactic of “gradualism” articulated by Muslim Brotherhood Jurist Yusuf Al Qaradawi, but which draws upon the program established by Sayyid Qutb in his work Milestones, and on the work of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan Al-Banna, both of whom supported utilizing progressive revelation to develop Islamic societies towards the eventual full establishment of Shariah law. Historically, this difference has always been a source of tension, with Islamic State’s predecessor, Al Qaeda in Iraq, coming under criticism from Al Qaeda

Dabiq 8 goes on to provide a substantial criticism of “Ijra” [Irja], the heresy of the Murji’ah, and a term which the Islamic State has utilized to refer to the Brotherhood and its related forces since the Caliphate Declaration which stated:

So let those leaders be ruined. And let that “ummah” they want to unite be ruined – an “ummah” of secularists, democrats, and nationalists… an “ummah” of murji’ah (a sect that excludes deeds from faith), ikhwān (the “Muslim Brotherhood” party), and surūriyyah (a sect influenced by the ikhwān claiming to be Salafī).

***

Jihadology:

Click the following link for a safe PDF copy: The Islamic State — “Dābiq Magazine #8″

NOTE: For previous issues see: #7#6, #5, #4, #3, #2, and #1.

Official in Turkey’s Ruling Party Refers to President Erdogan as ‘Caliph’

Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan, right, received Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, left, after passing between two columns of 16 troops, each dressed in the warrior regalia of past Turkic states, bearing period armour and toting weapons ranging from swords to lancers. Adem Altan/AFP via Getty Images

Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan, right, received Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, left, after passing between two columns of 16 troops, each dressed in the warrior regalia of past Turkic states, bearing period armour and toting weapons ranging from swords to lancers.
Adem Altan/AFP via Getty Images

CSP, by Aaron Kliegman, March 19, 2015:

An official in Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) caused controversy this week by tweeting that the country should “get ready for the caliphate” and referred to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan as “caliph.”

Fuat Özgür Çalapkulu, the man who wrote the tweet on March 17, is the head of the AKP in the southeastern province of Siirt. He was responding to Erdogan’s opponents who object to the Turkish leader’s plan to change Turkey’s government from a parliamentary system to a presidential system. Erdogan would be the leader, thus giving him more power.

Erdogan’s main criticism came from Selahattin Demirtaş, pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) Co-Chair, who said his party “will never let you [Erdogan] be president” in such a proposed system of government. Çalapkulu was mainly countering this statement with his tweet and also referred to past comments by Erdogan opponents that the leader could not even be a village headman (muhtar).

Çalapkulu backed off his words, however, after receiving harsh reactions because of them. On March 19, he changed his Twitter account to private so that only confirmed followers can see his comments and released a written statement saying he had a different meaning for the term caliph.

Part of his statement reads, “I use this word to refer to a leader who has command of all the problems, institutions and administration of his country; a leader who is the independent and powerful voice of the world’s downtrodden; the protector of the oppressed; a good, successful, pioneering and visionary leader.”

It is possible that Çalapkulu did not mean to use the title caliph with its full religious connotations or was being facetious, but the tweet is worth noting given Turkey’s increasing Islamic identity and pivot away from the West under Erdogan’s rule.

More importantly, the AKP official is not the first person to refer to Erdogan as a caliph, in jest or not. Some of Erdogan’s followers have called him this title before and essentially pledged allegiance to him like many have been doing recently to Abu Baker al-Baghdadi, leader of the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS).

Furthermore, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, one of the most influential clerics in Sunni Islam and spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, has said that Istanbul, Turkey is the capital of the coming caliphate and has suggested that Erdogan is blessed by Allah and could be the one to lead the Islamic world order.

Çalapkulu may have been joking or using caliph in a non-literal way, but in its full context the AKP official’s tweet is part of a larger narrative where Turkey is becoming more Islamic and identified, at least by some, as a central part of a future caliphate. In fact, Erdogan and the AKP have actually perpetuated this image and a neo-Ottoman atmosphere. Erdogan’s religious-based policies and centralization of power are helping in this endeavor.

***

Speaking of images, have you seen Erdogan’s “White Palace”?

How the Muslim Brotherhood fits into a network of extremism

Essam Mustafa, from Interpal, with Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh

Essam Mustafa, from Interpal, with Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh

The Telegraph, By Andrew Gilligan, Feb. 8, 2015:

The Government is preparing a major clampdown on organisations linked to the terror group Hamas after the long-awaited publication of its review into the Muslim Brotherhood.

The review, by the former British ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Sir John Jenkins, has been delayed for months amid disputes about how strongly it should say the Brotherhood is linked to terrorism.

It is expected to say that the Brotherhood, a multifaceted organisation, is not itself a terrorist group and should not be banned, a verdict most analysts agree with.

However, the report will dismiss claims by the Brotherhood that there is “no evidence” of links between it and terrorism. “There are clear links and Jenkins will trigger further action against some Brotherhood and Hamas-linked groups,” said one official source. Many of the groups have already been squeezed by removing their bank accounts.

Only a summary of the Jenkins report will be published. However, a separate investigation by The Sunday Telegraph has found a number of clear overlaps between the Brotherhood’s UK operations and those of organisations linked to Hamas, which is banned as a terrorist organisation throughout the Western world. In particular, it is striking how often they appear to share premises.

One person involved in counter-extremism said: “When you start forensically going through the names and locations, there’s no way the Brotherhood can keep up the denials.”

The Sunday Telegraph has established that the main hubs for the Brotherhood’s operations in Europe are Westgate House, a serviced office block at the Hangar Lane roundabout in Ealing, west London, and Crown House, about half a mile north of it on the North Circular Road.

The two buildings contain at least 25 organisations linked to the Brotherhood, or to Hamas. A third building very close by – Pinnacle House on Old Oak Common Lane – houses Interpal, another major charity which has had close links to the Brotherhood and Hamas. Interpal is banned by the US government as a terrorist organisation.

Muslim_Brotherhood_3191823c

Crown House, above, and, below, Westgate House, both in London, are the Muslim Brotherhood’s main hubs in Europe

Muslim_Brotherhood_3191822c

Interpal is allowed to operate in the UK after claiming it has broken its links with Hamas, a claim accepted by the Charity Commission.

However, its managing trustee, Essam Mustafa, was pictured just over a year ago accompanying the Hamas leader, Ismail Haniyeh, on an official visit in Gaza. The two were later filmed clapping and singing together. Mr Mustafa is a former member of Hamas’s executive committee.

The organisations based at Westgate House include the Cordoba Foundation, described by David Cameron as a “political front for the Muslim Brotherhood” and run by Anas al-Tikriti, the key spokesman and lobbyist for the Brotherhood in Britain, though he claims not to be a member himself. The Cordoba Foundation’s office is on the seventh floor of the building.

Mr al-Tikriti states openly that “the Brotherhood supports Hamas. I believe that if you are occupied you need to fight back.” Mr al-Tikriti co-founded a group called the British Muslim Initiative with a senior commander in Hamas, Mohammed Sawalha, and a Hamas “special envoy,” Azzam Tamimi.

The seventh floor of Westgate House also houses the Muslim Charities Forum, an umbrella body for 10 British charities, at least six of which have funded Hamas organisations and most of which can also be linked to the Brotherhood.

The Muslim Charities Forum was stripped of £250,000 in Government grants in December in what the Communities Secretary, Eric Pickles, described as a decision to “cease funding any organisation that supports or is linked to individuals who fuel hatred, division and violence.” More than £100,000 of the grant has already been paid, however.

Six of the Muslim Charities Forum’s 10 members are or were members of the Union of Good, also known as the 101 Days Campaign. The Union of Good is designated by the US Treasury Department as a terrorist organisation created by the Hamas leadership “in order to facilitate the transfer of funds to Hamas”.

The Union of Good is chaired by Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a key intellectual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood who has twice turned down offers to become its political leader.

Mr Al-Qaradawi, who is banned from the UK, is a strong supporter of suicide bombings, describing Israeli civilians as legitimate targets. The Union of Good’s founder and general secretary was Essam Mustafa, the managing trustee of the British charity Interpal.

Members of the Muslim Charities Forum include Muslim Aid, which has admitted funding organisations run by Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad; Islamic Help, which works closely with a Hamas front organisation in Gaza; Muslim Hands, which also funds Hamas front bodies; and Human Appeal International, accused by the FBI, CIA and in the leaked US diplomatic telegrams of funding Hamas and of other terrorist links.

The Cordoba Foundation’s Anas al-Tikriti

The Cordoba Foundation’s Anas al-Tikriti

The Brotherhood’s objective is to replace secular democratic government with an Islamic caliphate under sharia law. Members swear an oath of allegiance declaring that “the Quran is our constitution” and “to die for the sake of God is our greatest objective”.

The Brotherhood’s leaders insist that it works democratically – albeit to secure the replacement of democracy – and says the British Government review is a form of “pandering” by Britain to Gulf dictatorships.

Hamas’s 1988 founding charter states that it is “one of the wings of the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine”, but the British government has tended to treat Hamas and the Brotherhood as unconnected.

The organisations based at Crown House comprise broadly the Brotherhood’s UK outreach wing. They include the Palestinian Return Centre, the Brotherhood campaign group with the closest links to mainstream politics.

The PRC last month met David Quarrey, director for the Middle East at the Foreign Office, according to its website, and was also present at the Labour Friends of Palestine annual dinner in November, addressed by the Labour leader, Ed Miliband. Many MPs have spoken at its events.

The PRC has close links to the Brotherhood, sharing directors with the Muslim Association of Britain, the Brotherhood’s main declared British affiliate.

However, it is also claimed by the Israeli government to be “Hamas’s organisational branch in Europe” whose members are “senior Hamas leaders who promote the movement’s agenda in Europe”.

The PRC denies these claims. However, it has regularly hosted Hamas leaders, including Mr Haniyeh, at its annual conferences.

Other organisations at Crown House are Middle East Monitor (Memo), a news site which promotes a strongly pro-Brotherhood and pro-Hamas view of the region. Memo’s director, Daud Abdullah, is also a leader of the Brotherhood-linked British Muslim Initiative, set up and run by the Brotherhood activist Anas al-Tikriti and two senior figures in Hamas.

Memo’s “senior editor”, Ibrahim Hewitt, is chairman of Interpal, the Hamas and Brotherhood-linked charity.

Another organisation at Crown House is the Emirates Centre for Human Rights (ECHR), also set up by Anas al-Tikriti. Its website was registered to his wife, Malath Shakir. Its founding director, Abdus Salam, is the husband of Mr al-Tikriti’s sister.

The ECHR has co-organised at least two meetings at the House of Commons with the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Human Rights. The ECHR’s director, Anas Mekdad, has personally tweeted supporting recent terrorist attacks in Jerusalem. He is the founder of AlMakeen Network, a UK-based website which also publishes articles praising the Brotherhood, Hamas and suicide bombings.

Other extremist organisations based at Crown House, though not formally linked to the Brotherhood, include the Islamic Education and Research Academy (IERA), which sends extremist preachers around British universities and mosques.

Both Westgate House and Crown House have other tenants and there is no suggestion that all their tenants are Islamists or extremists.

Feeling the Pinch on Free Speech

free spCSP, by Kyle Shideler, Jan. 22, 2015:

An article in USAToday by Dean of Journalism DeWayne Wickham calling Charlie Hebdo’s decision to feature another image of Mohammed on its post-attack cover, “fighting words”, not protected by the 1st amendment reminds us how badly damaged Free Speech protections have become.  Much of the free world claimed to rally around Charlie Hebdo crying JeSuisCharlie, in the wake of the brutal terror attack perpetrated by jihadists aligned with Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. The world was rightly outraged that these people were killed for having the temerity to publish cartoons. The problem is that as outrage fades, few people are paying attention to the continued efforts to use the attention that violence wrought to achieve Al Qaeda’s goals, without violence.

For example by the Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation’s effort to see Charlie Hebdo prosecuted:

“OIC is studying Europe and French laws and other available procedures to be able to take legal action against Charlie Hebdo,” he said. “If French laws allow us to take legal procedures against Charlie Hebdo, OIC will not hesitate to prosecute the French magazine,” he said. “This (the publication by Charlie Hebdo) is an idiotic step that requires necessary legal measures,”[Secretary General] Iyad Madani said on his Twitter account while condemning the republication of the anti-Islam cartoons.

The Organization of the Islamic Cooperation has led the charge to see the criminalization of defamation of religion (interpreted by the OIC to mean Islam only) enforced by governments. Unfortunately the U.S. State Department has cooperated with implementing these efforts under the “Istanbul Process” for the past several years.  Wickham’s claim that because violence against the speaker will inevitably result, the publication of images of Mohammad are not protected speech is the exact line of thinking represented by the Istanbul Process’s “test of consequences” concept and shows how successful the OIC’s effort to peddle this narrative has been.

The OIC’s ]continued efforts have been backed by Muslim Brotherhood chief jurist Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, whose International Union of Muslim Scholars, also announced renewed support for criminalizing free expression:

Influential preacher Yusuf al-Qaradawi wants a law to be brought in by the UN to forbid the “contempt of religions,” according to an article he wrote, which was published on the organization’s website. “The Union calls on Islamic countries to submit a global law draft criminalizing the defamation of religions and the prophets and the holy sites of all, through a global conference to discuss clauses in complete freedom,” the preacher added. He condemned the decision by the French journal to publish the cartoon saying that it gave “credibility” to the idea that “the West is against Islam,” AFP reported.

The irony of course is that OIC member states, including Jordan, Egypt, U.A.E., Algeria and Turkey (putting the Istanbul in the Istanbul Process) all attended the Paris Unity Rally following the Charlie Hebdo attack, taking credit for standing against terror and in favor of free speech. The same is true for some supposedly “moderate” Muslim organizations in Europe. For example, the French Council on the Muslim Faith (CFMF), which condemned the attacks, calling them, ““an attack against democracy and the freedom of the press” while at the same time CFMF’s membership includes the Union of Islamic Organizations of France, whose leaders have had close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, and Qaradawi. The same is true of the Muslim Council of Britain, considered to have links to Jamaat-e-Islami, the Pakistani Islamist group which has held massive protests against Charlie Hebdo in Karachi.

What needs to be recognized is that as horrific as the attacks were, they are not the main effort against free speech. It is not terror attacks like the Paris assault that will ultimately diminish free speech. Terrorism is, as in death by lethal injection, only the painful pinch of the needle that you feel. It does no good to address that threat, but ignore the efforts of groups like the OIC that represent the pressing of the plunger to finish the job.

Also see:

Irish Islamic Cleric with MB links Threatens Lawfare Against Journalists over Cartoons

Image: Andy Delaney/Photocall Ireland

Image: Andy Delaney/Photocall Ireland

CSP, by Kyle Shideler:

Irish Muslim Cleric Dr. Ali Selim of the Islamic Cultural Centre of Ireland threatened legal action against any Irish media which dared to republished the famous cartoons produced by Charlie Hebdo, the target of a massacre carried out yesterday by three jihadist gunmen which killed twelve people:

When asked by Niall Boylan on 4FM if he (Boylan) retweeted the cartoon would his life be in danger, Dr Selim – who condemned the shootings – said: “Not your life would be in danger but definitely we will check the Irish law and if there is any legal channel against you, we will take it,” he said.

The Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Watch, an intelligence digest which tracks Muslim Brotherhood connected groups, has previously documented that Dr. Salim is an Irish Muslim Brotherhood leader, with ties to Muslim Brotherhood chief jurist Yusuf Al Qaradawi:

The Islamic Cultural Centre of Ireland (ICCI) is an important part of the European Muslim Brotherhood serving as host for the European Council for Fatwa and Research (ECFR), the theological body headed by global Muslim Brotherhood leader Youssef Qaradawi. The ICCI is also the registered headquarters for Qaradawi’s International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS). Noah Al-Kaddo, the ICCI Executive Director, is also an officer of the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe (FIOE), the European umbrella organization for the Muslim Brotherhood and the parent organization of the ECFR. Ali Selim is the private secretary to ICCI Imam Hussein Halawa and is described as a “resident theologian.” Mr. Selim attracted a great deal of local media attention in September 2006 when he told a newspaper interviewer that, ideally, he would like to see Shariah law adopted in Ireland in the “event of a Muslim majority.”

Selim, perhaps unintentionally, illustrates the key role played by Muslim Brotherhood groups in the overall global effort by Islamists to institute Islamic law- including blasphemy law. While Al Qaeda (or perhaps ISIS) may have been responsible for the murder of the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists, acting as sharia enforcers, it’s Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups which attempt to implement “lawfare”-abusive litigation and other legal tactics- to achieve the same end, often successfully. The two efforts are not diametrically opposed, rather they are symbiotic. MB groups offer an apparently reassuring way out, telling us what we must, and must not do, to avoid the wrath of their fellow ideologues.  For this reason it’s just as vital to oppose Islamist lawfare and legal intimidation as it is to engage the kinetic jihadist actors. Sadly Selim’s confidence in openly stating such an agenda shows just how far down the road to imposed blasphemy laws much of the West has gone.

Defining Jihad Downward

Screen-Shot-2014-12-12-at-2.44.37-PM-190x142CSP, By Kyle Shideler:

My colleague Adam Savit has already taken the BBC to task for their write up of a recent report on Jihadist violence in the month of November, which neglected to include the murder of Israelis. This led me to drill down deeper into the report by the International Center for the Study of Radicalisation and Political violence. Not only did the report neglect to include Hamas violence in its study of jihadi attacks, but it does so explicitly and intentionally. The report notes:

This definition excludes Shia militant groups such as Hezbollah that justify fighting in the name of jihad but are located outside the Sunni tradition. Indeed, the jihadists of al Qaeda, the Islamic State and like-minded groups regard Hezbollah as ‘apostates’ and have been among the most vociferous opponents of Shia militant groups in places like Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen.

The definition also excludes the Palestinian group Hamas which advocates ‘jihad’ and – unlike Hezbollah – is widely recognized as Sunni. Its religious, social and political doctrine, however, is not Salafist.
Jihadist groups such as al Qaeda have repeatedly condemned Hamas for recognizing man-made laws and becoming involved in democratic elections, while Hamas, in turn, has repressed – and fought against – jihadist groups.

This justification is at best ignorant, and at worst mendacious.

While it is true that Hezbollah is fighting Islamic State and Al Qaeda in Syria, Hezbollah also has a long history of cooperation with Al Qaeda. Are the authors of this report unaware that it was Hezbollah which introduced Al Qaeda to the truck bombing techniques used in the Africa Embassy bombings (a role for which they have been held responsible in court) and that relationships between Iran’s terrorist facilitators the IRGC, Hezbollah and AL Qaeda were forged during the Pan Arab and Islamic Conference held by Sudan in the 1990s? Perhaps they are equally unaware that Hezbollah’s patron, Iran, has been held responsible for its role in 9/11 in federal court, due to its role in facilitating the movement of the hijackers, and that the 9/11 Commission notes the role of Hezbollah’s master terrorist Imad Mugniyeh in assisting the 9/11 attacks? One supposes that given its narrow justification the ICSR would not consider the  Embassy bombings or the 9/11 attacks  “jihadist” violence either.

Then there is the ICSR’s statement on Hamas. Hamas is the wing of the Muslim Brotherhood responsible for engaging in jihad terror against Israel. Hamas is completely open about this connection, having documented it in its original founding charter. Hamas was perhaps best described by leading Hamas representative Ismail Haniyeh who remarked that Hamas is the “jihadi movement of the Brotherhood with a Palestinian face.” From its earliest foundation, The Muslim Brotherhood’s own founder Hasan Al-Banna described his movement as consisting of “a Salafiyya message…”  Prior to founding the Brotherhood Al-Banna was himself a member of the Salafi groups, including the Society for the Prevention of the Forbidden.

Further more, Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sayyid Qutb’s most important work “Milestones”, was a major inspiration for Osama Bin Laden (according to the 9/11 Commission report again) and consists entirely of a discussion regarding how to restore the world to Islam, while using the methods of the early Muslims (i.e. Salaf).  The original founder of the MAK (Afghan Service Bureau) Abdullah Azzam together with Osama Bin Laden, and the author of “In Defense of Muslim Lands” the doctrinal work which best established Jihad as an fard al-ayn (individual obligation), was both a Muslim Brother and a co-founder of Hamas.  Azzam’s picture is still visible in the offices of Hamas today.

Besides Sayyid Qutb and Abdullah Azzam,  other Muslim Brotherhood members have also played a key role in creating the very doctrine of Al Qaeda, such as Abdul Mjid Aziz Al-Zindani, the leading cleric of the Yemeni branch of Muslim Brotherhood, was a close mentor of Osama Bin Laden and a contact of the AQ-linked Ansar al-Islam.  Al-Zindani was also a board member of the specially designated entity the Union of the Good, an organization run by Muslim Brotherhood cleric Yusuf Al Qaradawi, whose primary purpose is to fund Hamas.

The claim by ICSR that Hezbollah and Hamas should be excluded from an accounting of Jihadist violence merely because they (at times) have disagreed with Al Qaeda or other jihadist groups is utterly inane. After all Al Qaeda and ISIS are currently locked in a struggle themselves (see for example this video released today by MEMRI featuring ISIS members interrogating Jabhat al Nusra members and denouncing them as apostates), and Muslim Brotherhood-linked militias in the Syrian civil war fight alongside Al Qaeda, and yet the ICSR can’t quite bring itself to declare that Al Qaeda is not a jihadist group.

Jihad as religiously-obligatory warfare to establish Islamic law remains a concept which extends across both Sunni and Shia sects, and amongst all schools of Islamic law. There is no legitimate justification for excluding these groups, and to do so is to reduce the term “jihad” or “jihadist violence” until it is becomes meaningless. The reality is that Jihadist violence is a threat larger than simply just the “Salafi-jihadi” matrix which some insist on shoving it into.

White House Statement Ignores Brotherhood’s Continuing Hamas Support

797IPT News
December 5, 2014

The White House this week issued a statement explaining why it does not view the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group. It was in response to an online petition which attracted more than 213,000 signatures in support of designating the Egyptian-based group.

The statement emphasizes a lack of “credible evidence that the Muslim Brotherhood has renounced its decades-long commitment to non-violence.”

The Brotherhood has another decades-long commitment, however, one that clearly endorses and supports terrorist attacks against Israel. That support began with Article Two of the Hamas charter, which clearly identifies it as “one of the wings of Muslim Brothers in Palestine.” It continues today with statements inciting and supporting Hamas attacks.

As the war between Israel and Gaza raged in August, a statement on the Brotherhood’s website translated by the Investigative Project on Terrorism praised “the valiant resistance factions [who] gave them [Palestinians] a lesson in heroism, faith, and courage. They decimated their soldiers and their officers…” Violent confrontation, the statement continued, “is the natural position which must be adopted with the heroes of Palestine, who have proven that the defeat of the Zionists as possible, which is closer when the will of the Umma [people] is united, with God’s will.”

President Obama publicly stood by Israel’s “right to defend itself against what I consider to be inexcusable attacks from Hamas,” including its indiscriminate rocket fire at Israeli civilian communities. The Brotherhood, by contrast, called for more attacks and “the defeat of the Zionists.”

That was not enough for the administration to question its “decades-long commitment to non-violence.” Other Brotherhood statements show that this is consistent rhetoric, even in more peaceful times.

A June message called “resistance to the occupier Zionist enemy” – a sterilized reference to terrorism – “a legitimate right and a sacred duty approved by all laws and customs and constitutions, and it is the only viable way to restore rights and reply to aggression.”

An April 2010 statement, marking the 62nd anniversary of Israel’s creation – what Palestinians call the Nakba, or catastrophe – said the only acceptable path is to continue trying to destroy an existing country.

“T]he Zionist destruction will only be by an Islamic, Arab plan which rejects peace begging initiative proposed since 2002; rejects normalization measures with the Zionist entity; reviews peace agreements and diplomatic relations with it; rejects foolish negotiations between Zionists and Palestinians which are like negotiations between the lamb and the wolf pack,” the Brotherhood statement said.

The United States has considered Hamas a terrorist group since 1995, when President Bill Clinton signed an executive order decrying “grave acts of violence committed by foreign terrorists that disrupt the Middle East peace process” and threaten American national security.

The United States has a record of aggressively pursuing Hamas-support operations within the country. It shut down the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF)’s assets in December 2001, labeling it a Specially Designated Global Terrorist. This action was based on the foundation’s routing of millions of dollars to Hamas-controlled charities in the West Bank and Gaza. Later, the governmentprosecuted and a jury convicted the foundation and five former officials.

Internal records seized by the FBI and entered into evidence in that prosecution showed that HLF operated under the umbrella of a group called the Palestine Committee, which was created by the Muslim Brotherhood and tasked with supporting Hamas politically and financially.

Some might argue that was a long time ago. But a look at Brotherhood actions and rhetoric indicates it continues to be fully supportive of Hamas and its violent attacks against Israelis.

Reports earlier this week indicate that members of Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood branch were arrested for trying to smuggle weapons into the West Bank to facilitate terror attacks.

Yusuf al-Qaradawi, considered the Brotherhood’s most influential cleric, urged Muslimsto wage “the greatest battle of liberation” against Israel and the Jews in an online posting last month. Qaradawi, who also has a highly-rated program on Al-Jazeera, has an ever-expanding record of endorsing terrorist attacks and has prayed for the chance to “go to the land of Jihad and resistance” and “shoot Allah’s enemies, the Jews,” before he dies.

Interpol issued a bulletin Friday indicating that Qaradawi, 88, was wanted by Egyptian authorities for “incitement and assistance to commit intentional murder.”

After Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi, a Brotherhood official, was forced from office in July 2013 in the wake of massive street protests against his rule, the Brotherhood’s political party posted a memo on Facebook inciting followers to take out their frustrations by burning Coptic churches.

“The Pope of the Church (Coptic Pope Tawadros II) took part in the ouster of the first elected Islamist president. The Pope of the Church charges Islamic Sharia with underdevelopment [and] stagnation,” the memo from the Freedom and Justice Party’s branch in Egypt’s Helwan Governorate, near Cairo, said.

“And for the Church to adopt a war against Islam and Muslims is the worst crime. For every action is a reaction.”

Before Morsi’s ouster, the White House welcomed a delegation of Muslim Brotherhood officials, even helping clear their path to avoid standard airport inspections as they landed in the United States.

State Department officials had numerous contacts with Brotherhood officials in the years leading up to Egypt’s Arab Spring revolution.

U.S. Ambassador Anne Patterson reported in an April 2010 cable that Muslim Brotherhood Supreme Guide Mohammed Badie had “reaffirmed the MB was a non-violent” movement.

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper similarly described the Muslim Brotherhood in February 2011 as “largely secular” and said that it “eschewed violence.” Four months later, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said the U.S. planned to expand dialogue with the Brotherhood as part of a commitment “to engage with all parties that are peaceful and committed to nonviolence.”

Read more

Breaking News: Interpol Alert Seeks Arrest of MB’s Qaradawi

Youssef Qaradawi

Youssef Qaradawi

by IPT News  •  Dec 5, 2014

Interpol issued a bulletin Friday seeking the arrest of the Muslim Brotherhood’s most influential cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi. The bulletin was sparse on details but said that Egypt wanted the 88-year-old Qaradawi “to serve a sentence” for crimes including “incitement and assistance to commit intentional murder.”

Qaradawi lives in Qatar. He also is alleged to have had a hand in a massive prison break of Brotherhood members and others during the revolution against then-dictator Hosni Mubarak. Mohamed Morsi, a Brotherhood official who went on to become Egypt’s president in 2012, was among those who escaped.

Qaradawi has been a fierce critic of Egypt’s new government and of Morsi’s July 2013ouster after one year in office. “From the day he (new President Abdel Fattah alSisi) came, all we saw is killing and bloodshed, detention and women being raped,” Qaradawi before elections in May.

In February, Egyptian officials demanded that Qatar extradite Qaradawi. They also asked Interpol to arrest Qaradawi a year ago.

Qaradawi described the recent acquittal of ousted Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak as “the saddest day in the history of human justice and a disgrace on Egyptian judiciary.”

According to the Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Watch, Interpol issued a “red notice” which is both its highest level alert, and a move subject to later review by the international police agency.