Posted tagged ‘Islamist organizations’

« WarSclerotic home page
« Older Entries

Rethinking “Radicalization”: Dutch Researcher Discusses What Makes a Homegrown Terrorist

December 26, 2017

Rethinking “Radicalization”: Dutch Researcher Discusses What Makes a Homegrown Terrorist, Investigative Project on Terrorism, Abigail R. Esman, December 26, 2017

(Terrorism is obviously bad and we need to do our best to prevent it. However, my principal concern is about political Islam, aka Islamism. Islamists often do not need to engage in terrorism; they can rely instead on whatever democratic processes are available to Islamise nations. Look at Canada, for example. “Islamophobia” laws restrict free speech about Islam and its anti-democracy, pro-theocracy tendencies. In America, CAIR fights “Islamophobia” as well as organizations which want Muslims to respect American law. Here’s video on America and Sharia law.

(– DM)

On Nov. 2, 2004, Dutch filmmaker and writer Theo van Gogh left his home and set off to work, riding his bicycle as he did most days through the quiet streets of Amsterdam.

Minutes later, 26-year-old Mohammed Bouyeri, a Dutch-Moroccan Muslim angered by van Gogh’s writings and films about radical Islam, fired eight shots at the filmmaker. As Van Gogh stumbled, Bouyeri shot again, then stabbed him with a butcher knife, piercing straight through his chest. Then he sliced across Theo van Gogh’s throat in a failed effort to decapitate him before stabbing him one final time. It was, as many later said, the country’s 9/11, the arrival of Islamist terrorism to the tranquil tulip fields and calm canals of the Netherlands.

Mohammed Bouyeri acted alone, but he was a leading member of what later became known as the Hofstadgroep (Hofstad Group), a loosely-knit circle of Dutch Muslim youth from Amsterdam and The Hague with extremist ideas and half-hatched plans to execute terrorist attacks around the country. In the days following Van Gogh’s death, police raided a home in The Hague, arresting seven Hofstadgroep members after a standoff lasting several hours.

Their trials, and the trials of other members, have shaped much of the Dutch understanding of Islamist terrorism both for citizens and law enforcement. Above all, the cases showed definitively that European Muslims could be radicalized, and that even Muslims raised in the West had become a threat.

In fact, as Bart Schuurman, a research Fellow at the International Centre for Counterterrorism in The Hague, argues in his upcoming book, Becoming A European Homegrown Terrorist, the Hofstadgroep case ultimately came to define homegrown jihadism in Europe. Thanks, too, to the work of Dutch journalists Janny Groen and Annieke Kranenberg, studies into the women in and around the Hofstadgroep have provided important insights into the radicalization of Muslim women in the West, and their role in homegrown jihad.

For his research, Schuurman spoke with Hofstadgroep members and studied the police interviews with the Hofstadgroep to better understand their actions and thought processes.

On the eve of the publication of his new book, Schuurman talked to the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) about his findings, what they say about the making of a homegrown terrorist, and how his research can help bring new insights to the fight against Islamist terror.

Abigail R. Esman: The Hofstadgroep was limited to the Netherlands, and the group preceded (by over a decade) the rise of ISIS and even social media. How is knowledge about that group still useful for a more global and more contemporary analysis of home-grown terrorism?

Bart Schuurman: The Hofstadgroep is indeed an older case as it was active between 2002 and 2005. As such, it was part of what could be called the first wave of European homegrown jihadism. I argue that insights we can derive from how and why people became involved in the Hofstadgroep are still relevant now for several reasons. First of all, like the current foreign fighter phenomenon, the Hofstadgroep’s extremist inner-circle also initially tried to join jihadist insurgencies overseas. Only when this failed, did some of them begin to consider and plan terrorist attacks in the Netherlands. Secondly, the Hofstadgroep was not a phenomenon unique to the Netherlands, but one example of the broader phenomenon of European homegrown jihadism that is still with us today. While much has changed in terms of context, such as a shift in focus from Afghanistan to Syria, many of the underlying dynamics driving involvement in this type of terrorism remain unaltered. I think that the field of terrorism studies sometimes has the unwarranted tendency to see every development in the terrorist threat as heralding a fundamentally ‘new’ situation to which our previous explanations and theories are of little to no utility. I’d argue it’s exactly the opposite; especially because it’s relatively easier to access high-quality data on older cases, they are a great resource for informing the ongoing debate on what can motivate (and prevent!) people from becoming involved in terrorism.

ARE: Are there any other groups like the Hofstadgroep today, either in the Netherlands or elsewhere?

BS: In ideological terms, the Hofstadgroep could be broadly characterized as driven by an extremist Salafi-Jihadist worldview and focused on waging a ‘defensive’ jihad against what they saw as Western geopolitical aggression and the threat posed by heresy and apostasy. I think it’s safe to say that such views have continued to be embraced by Islamist extremists in the Netherlands and Europe more broadly, although it is difficult to assess the scale on which this has occurred. But it is crucial to distinguish between holding radical or extremist views and becoming involved in any capacity in terrorist violence. The vast majority of radicals never cross this threshold. What I think we see today in Europe is that relatively small numbers of (would-be) jihadist terrorists continue to pose a serious threat and that they are embedded in a broader ‘radical milieu’ from which they draw support. While this threat is a very real one, I think it is important to keep in mind that these individuals and groups are not representative of the Muslim community as a whole. A key observation that we sometimes miss, is that Muslims are in fact the number one victims of groups like [ISIS] and al-Qaeda when we look at the violence in countries like Syria and Iraq.

ARE: What did you learn about the personalities of those likely to join such groups, or to act as lone wolves? (Is there also a similarity between those who join groups and lone wolf attackers?)

BS: Most researchers would agree that there is no such thing as a terrorist profile, at least not one of any practical utility. Most terrorists are relatively young and most are male; beyond that considerably diversity has been observed in terms of socioeconomic background, family obligations etcetera. None of which means that personality factors cannot play a role at all. In fact, things like past involvement in violence or previous socialization to extremist beliefs can be important parts of the explanation for why someone became involved in terrorism. Perhaps the most important thing that I took away from my Hofstadgroep study in terms of the influence of personality factors, is that extremism and terrorism cannot simply be explained as stemming from psychopathology or deprivation. On the whole, group-based terrorists are not driven (primarily) by mental health problems or lack of opportunities to pursue alternative career paths in society. The uncomfortable truth is that, for many of these individuals, involvement in terrorism is a more or less conscious decision. An interesting finding about lone actors is that many of them did not ‘go it alone’ for tactical considerations, but because they failed to join or form a terrorist cell of their own. This may tie into the higher prevalence of mental health problems among lone actor extremists, which can make them appear untrustworthy or simply disagreeable and therefore prevent them from being truly accepted by other extremists.

ARE: Is there a difference between those who join local groups and the lone wolf types who are influenced by ISIS and Al Qaeda? That is to say, do they see the larger terror groups in the same way Hofstadgroep members saw their own group?

BS: Again, while some lone actors (Unabomber, Breivik) make a conscious decision to operate alone, many would have liked to join others but failed to do so. But both lone actors and participants in groups like Hofstad are generally heavily-influenced by the larger radical milieu of which they are a part; taking inspiration from videos, writings, speeches etc. of leading figures and groups.

ARE: You distinguish between radicalization and fanaticism in your work. Can you explain what these are?

BS: I have been critical of the concept of radicalization for a long time. Although it has become a household term since 2004, it doesn’t really explain how and why people become involved in extremism and terrorism. Radicalization suffers from lack of a clear definition and it is inherently subjective. A century ago, those in favor of extending voting rights to women were often labeled radicals by their opponents. Few would (hopefully!) dare make that same argument now. Not only do our views of what is ‘radical’ change over time, but by associating radicalization so closely with terrorism, we have lumped together activists who, although we may disagree with them, are essentially advocating change while remaining within the limits of the liberal democratic order, with individuals and groups committed to the use of extreme violence to get what they want. If that isn’t problematic enough, most interpretations of radicalization continue to overstate the degree to which beliefs influence behavior. Saying someone was ‘radicalized’ prior to committing a terrorist act doesn’t really help us understand that act; there are millions of people with radical or extremist views and the vast majority of them never become involved in terrorism in any way, shape or form. So while extremist beliefs are usually an important component of the overall picture of why people commit terrorism, they are insufficient by themselves to function as an explanation. For that reason, I think we should stop talking about radicalization and instead study the pathways to lead to involvement in terrorism, as this implicitly draws attention to the multitude of factors that constitute such processes. Fanaticism struck me as a more useful concept because, as it was developed by British psychologist Max Taylor, it recognizes that not all ‘fanatics’ will act on their beliefs but stipulates conditions under which they are more likely to do so. “Fanaticism” is thus able to overcome, at least to some degree, “radicalization’s” greatest shortcoming; namely, why the vast majority of radicals never become terrorists.

ARE: Why are fanatics more likely to become violent?

BS: It is more a question of when, rather than why. Fanaticism (or radicalism, if you will) is more likely to actually lead to violence when 1) the beliefs adhered to are distinctly militant; 2) when the fanatic/radical also holds to millenarian views, such as that the apocalypse is nigh and can be hastened by the individual believer; and 3) (to me most importantly) when the radical/fanatic is not exposed to contrarian views that can challenge his/her extremist convictions or inject some grey into a black/white world-view.

ARE: You also indicate that the Hofstadgroep members were less concerned with creating change than with making a statement about their own Islamic identity. In a way, it seems you are saying it was more about themselves than about the world. That’s an interesting perspective for me, because it parallels my own ideas about terrorists being narcissists, and I wonder if this isn’t in fact true of other terrorists and terror groups – not just Islamist. Is this a view or an approach to terrorism we have overlooked? Maybe we’ve been missing the real picture. Or is it some of both?

BS: I am always a bit careful using terms like narcissism because people can then be quick to pathologize such statements. But there is definitely something interesting going on in terms of identity. A key question for me is always; why would anyone join a terrorist group? The most likely outcomes are death or a life in prison. Now, while jihadists (at least profess to) want to die for their beliefs, terrorism has a much longer and broader history than Islamist extremism alone. There have been many secular terrorist groups who were not keen to go to an afterlife. So, what does terrorism offer that can make some people takes these risks? A large part of the answer lies, I believe, in the attractions of group membership. Things like status within a particular community, the notion of being part of something grandiose and important, the feeling of living an important and exciting life, the comradeship formed under fire, these are key factors binding people to terrorist groups, whether we’re talking about [ISIS], the IRA or the Italian Red Brigades. I think it would be great to delve more deeply into such factors in future research.

ARE: Finally: How can your research help counterterrorism analysts and law enforcement going forward?

BS: I hope that my work will be able make a contribution to the work of counterterrorism policymakers and practitioners in two ways. First of all, by providing a unique primary-sources based account of how and why involvement in a key example of European homegrown jihadist group occurred, I hope to contribute to their subject-matter expertise. More importantly, I hope that my findings will challenge counterterrorism professionals to keep critically re-examining the assumptions about such processes that they use to guide their own work.

Categories: Islamic radicalization, Islamic supremacy, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation, Islamist infiltration, Islamist moral values, Islamist organizations
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Boston Islamic Seminary Training Next Gen Extremists

November 21, 2017

Boston Islamic Seminary Training Next Gen Extremists, Clarion Project, Sam Westrop, November 21, 2017

Anti-Semitic Teachers at the Boston Islamic Seminary (left to right): Hisham Mahmoud, Yahia Abdul Rahman, Amr El-Fass and Suheil Laher. (Photos: social media)

New research by the Middle East Forum has uncovered evidence of extreme antisemitism among faculty members and guest speakers appointed by the Islamic Society of Boston to teach and promote its latest project: the Boston Islamic Seminary (BIS).

BIS was established in 2016 to “equip future religious leaders with the intellectual, spiritual and practical training to serve the American Muslim community.” Currently, it offers “continuing education” classes, but it hopes to offer an accredited graduate degree program by 2019, which will “train chaplains, imams, and other leaders to serve in a variety of contexts.”

And what exactly will this next generation of chaplains and imams learn at BIS?

Faculty listed on the BIS website include Yahia Abdul Rahman, who is described as an expert on “sharia-compliant” banking. On his social media accounts, Abdul Rahman has posted stories from “The Ugly Truth,” a website that describes itself as “intelligent ‘anti-Semitism’ for thinking Gentiles.”

Elsewhere, Rahman has shared claims that any Muslim who fails to oppose Israel is no longer a Muslim and is afflicted with a “Jewish heart.” Other posts of his claim the Jews were complicit in the 2008 financial crisis.

Another BIS lecturer, Suheil Laher, previously served as head of the (now-defunct) al-Qaeda charity, CARE International. On his old website, Laher published calls to jihad and linked to an al-Qaeda fundraising website. On his current website, Laher refers to homosexuals as “depraved sinners.”

Other current BIS faculty members include Amr El-Fass, who suggests that Jews are to blame for intra-Arab conflict, and Hisham Mahmoud, whom moderate Muslim groups denounced after he likened homosexuality to pedophilia and advocated that homosexuals should be punished.

Guest speakers are BIS are just as extreme. In June 2016, BIS invited Abdelrahman Murphy to address a BIS audience. Murphy, who is a former employee of the Islamic Society of Boston, works for the Qalam Institute, which hosts a document on its website warning that Muslims who seek “cleanliness” and “purity” should “not resemble the Jews.” Murphy has stated: “There is no such thing as an innocent Israeli.”

Another speaker at the BIS event with Murphy was Yousef Abdallah, who serves as the “East Coast Operations Manager” for Islamic Relief, a prominent Islamist charity. Abdallah has posted jokes on social media about “stinking” Jews, has written that Chris Christie is “down on his knees before the jewish lords” and has shared a story praising “martyrs” who provide guns to “kill more than 20 jews” and “fire rockets at Tel Aviv.”

The Middle East Forum has uncovered several other examples. We asked the Boston branch of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) — which often talks about other examples of hate speech — for comment, but it did not reply. Curiously, the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Boston also failed to respond.

For many readers, this must all seem like a familiar story. BIS is a project of the Islamic Society of Boston (ISB), which, since its founding over 10 years ago, has displayed much evidence of extremism. Inaugural trustees of the ISB included Yusuf Al Qaradawi, the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, who was praised by Bin Laden, and Abdulrahman Alamoudi, an al-Qaeda fundraiser who was jailed in 2004 for conspiring with the Libyan regime to assassinate a Saudi crown prince.

In 2004, Boston Jewish leaders condemned another mosque trustee named Walid Fitaihi, after he denounced Jews as the “murderers of prophets” and claimed that they “would be punished for their oppression, murder and rape of the worshippers of Allah.” The very same Walid Fitaihi is now listed on the BIS website as a faculty member.

The Boston Islamic Seminary promises to educate the next generation of Muslims in Massachusetts. These chaplains, imams and community leaders will in turn educate Muslim communities all over America for many decades to come.

Thus far, none of Boston’s political or religious leaders has expressed alarm over the extremists behind Boston’s newest Islamic institution. The question remains: Exactly how much hatred for Jews and other minorities must be revealed before leaders will speak out?

This article appeared originally on Middle East Forum and was reprinted with permission.

Categories: Boston Islamic Seminary, Islamic Society of Boston, Islamist moral values, Islamist objectives, Islamist organizations, Islamists and Israel, Islamists and Jews, Islamists in America
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

CAIR Conducted Sensitivity Training for Philadelphia Teachers

October 11, 2017

CAIR Conducted Sensitivity Training for Philadelphia Teachers, Investigative Project on Terrorism, John Rossomando, October 11, 2017

(Please see also, CAIR Loses San Diego Schools Partnership. — DM)

Nihad Awad, CAIR’s executive director, testified before the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) last spring that CAIR was a religious organization whose primary purpose is to spread Islam.

********************************************

Philadelphia’s public school system allowed the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) to conduct sensitivity training for its teachers last year, CAIR press releases and school district documents obtained by the Investigative Project on Terrorism show.

CAIR attorneys conducted a presentation for educators on Election Day, focusing on Islamophobia and the civil rights of Muslim students, a November press release said. The seminar was described as the first in a series of planned workshops on those issues.

“In the current political environment, Muslim American students are facing increased rates of bullying, emotional abuse, physical threats, and verbal epithets due to their faith, race, or ethnicity,” CAIR Philadelphia said in the release.

CAIR Philadelphia provides zero evidence to support this assertion.

Still, the director of the school system’s Multilingual Family Support Center argued that, “We need CAIR helping our schools.”

Asheq Fazlullah, a member of CAIR Philadelphia’s executive committee, and then-CAIR attorney Ryan Houldin conducted the Nov. 8 training, a school district email shows.

For a subsequent session, Fazlullah and Houldin would discuss “issues of diversity, equity, and fairness” at a January 3 professional development day, Colette Langston, principal at Philadelphia’s Swenson Arts and Technology High School, wrote in an email to teachers. The morning seminar was called, “Cultural Sensitivity and Diversity Workshop #1 Topic: Islamophobia.”

The school district did not provide course materials in response to the IPT’s public records request. School district officials did not respond to queries as to whether they conduct sensitivity training for other religious groups including Christians, Jews, Sikhs, or Hindus.

The school district’s reliance on CAIR could raise constitutional issues because the group’s executive director has described CAIR as a religious ministry.

Nihad Awad, CAIR’s executive director, testified before the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) last spring that CAIR was a religious organization whose primary purpose is to spread Islam.

“[Awad] testified at length about the Employer’s role in conducting educational services in the fields of religion, culture, education, society, and history concerning Islamic issues. These services are provided to both Muslims and non-Muslims alike. [Awad] described the Employer’s role in explaining the Islamic faith itself,” Charles L. Posner, regional director of the National Labor Relations Board, wrote in an April 7 ruling.

Awad’s acknowledgement prompted the San Diego Unified School District (SDUSD) to publicly back away from a CAIR-sponsored anti-bullying program. The Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund (FCDF) was suing to bar CAIR from influencing public school programming.

San Diego’s anti-bullying plan violated California law, along with students’ 1st and 14thamendment rights because CAIR is a religious organization and because the program gave Muslim students special treatment, the lawsuit said.

Those arguments could apply equally to Philadelphia’s public schools. “The San Diego case is far from over, so there is no doubt it could have precedential value in a legal challenge to Philadelphia schools’ partnership with CAIR,” FCDF Executive Director Daniel Piedra told the IPT.

School districts may not aid one religion, one religion over another, or religion over non-religion, an American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) legal bulletin said. It cites the seminal 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case, Lemon v. Kurtzman.

“Under the so-called ‘Lemon test,’ a court must inquire (1) whether the government’s action has a secular or a religious purpose; (2) whether the primary effect of the government’s action is to advance or endorse religion; and (3) whether the government’s policy or practice fosters an excessive entanglement between government and religion,” the ACLU bulletin said.

In the San Diego case, FCDF argued that CAIR’s definition of Islamophobia is too vague and that what it considers bullying could ensnare legitimate criticisms of Islamic practice. FCDF also asserted that the SDUSD’s “anti-bullying” program unconstitutionally established Muslims “as a privileged group within the school community.”

FCDF cited a 1993 statement by CAIR’s national spokesman Ibrahim Hooper to The Minneapolis Star-Tribune as part of its complaint against SDUSD. Hooper told the paper he “wouldn’t like to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future. … I’m going to do it through education.”

“We know that CAIR is committed to advancing its anti-Islamophobia initiative nationwide, so we are equally committed to making sure it dies in San Diego. Ideally, that would be done by a precedential court decision,” Piedra said.

None of the school district records indicated that the program is being repeated this school year. The Philadelphia School District declined to comment whether the San Diego case would impact future decisions about working with CAIR.

Categories: CAIR, CAIR - religious institution, First Amendment, Islamic indoctrination, Islamist objectives, Islamist organizations, Philadelphia public schools
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: 4 Comments

Brandeis University: Backing Hamas on Campus

September 27, 2017

Brandeis University: Backing Hamas on Campus, Front Page Magazine, Sara Dogan, September 27, 2017

Editor’s note: David Horowitz Freedom Center is naming the “Top Ten Worst Schools that Support Terrorists.” The latest school to be named to this list is Brandeis University. Known for its Jewish origins, Brandeis joins the University of California-Berkeley, the University of California-Irvine, the University of Chicago, DePaul University, and San Francisco State University on the list. Coinciding with the naming of Brandeis to this list, the Freedom Center placed posters on the Brandeis University campus exposing the links between Students for Justice in Palestine and the terrorist organization Hamas, whose stated goal is the destruction of the Jewish state.

As revealed in recent congressional testimony, Students for Justice in Palestine is a campus front for Hamas terrorists. SJP’s propaganda activities are orchestrated and funded by a Hamas front group, American Muslims for Palestine, whose chairman is Hatem Bazian and whose principals are former officers of the Holy Land Foundation and other Islamic “charities” previously convicted of funneling money to Hamas. The report and posters are part of a larger Freedom Center campaign titled Stop University Support for Terrorists. Images of the posters that appeared at Brandeis and other campuses may be viewed at www.stopuniversitysupportforterrorists.org.

Brandeis University

Brandeis University was named for the first Jewish justice on the Supreme Court, Louis D. Brandeis, and is one of only a few prominent American universities to be founded primarily by Jews. In spite of these strong ties to the American Jewish community, Brandeis has stood apart in recent years for its hostility to Israel and its strong support of Israel’s terrorist enemies. In the past year, swastikas have appeared in multiple locations on campus and the campus SJP chapter has held an event supporting Hamas’s policy of refusing to normalize relations with Israel or its allies. Brandeis rescinded an honorary degree to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a critic of radical Islam and advocate of Muslim women’s rights, while granting one to notoriously anti-Semitic playwright Tony Kushner. Brandeis also hosted a secret listserve where prominent professors exchanged emails attacking Israel—even comparing the Jewish state to Nazi Germany— and supporting the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement that is supported and funded by Hamas. When a Brandeis student used her personal twitter account to call for an Intifada, she was vigorously defended by the campus chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP). Two additional Brandeis students sought to restore relations between the university and Al Quds University in Palestine, which is a recruiting ground for the terror group Hamas.

Supporting Evidence:

In November 2016, a swastika was found on the door of the men’s restroom in the campus library at Brandeis.

On November 3, 2016, Brandeis SJP held an event titled “Apartheid is Not ‘Green’: Greenwashing and Palestine.” The purpose of the event was to demonize Israel and to claim that the Jewish state uses its record of positive environmental activism to hide its alleged “apartheid” and mistreatment of the Palestinians. The event description stated: “Israel inaccurately portrays itself as environmentally conscious in order to justify and distract from its violence against Palestine.” Of course all the violence in the Middle East conflict is the result of a 70-year unprovoked aggression by the Arab states and terrorist organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas against the Jewish state.

On March 8, 2016, Brandeis SJP held an event called “Presentation & Discussion on Pinkwashing.” The term “pinkwashing” is used by Israel’s enemies to claim that the Jewish state uses its overwhelmingly positive record on gay rights to hide its mistreatment of the Palestinians.

In May 2015, Former U.S. Ambassador Thomas Pickering, known for his extreme anti-Israel views, gave the Commencement address at Brandeis. In an op-ed recently co-written for Politico.com, Pickering repeated Hamas tropes such as “Israel’s half-century-long occupation” and stated that “the marginal improvement in Israel’s security provided by these expansive Israeli demands can hardly justify the permanent subjugation and disenfranchisement of a people to which Israel refuses to grant citizenship in the Jewish state.”

On April 23, 2015, Professor Noam Chomsky, known for his extreme anti-Israel views, spoke at Brandeis. During his speech, he described Israel’s actions towards Palestine as “vicious, brutal and criminal” and claimed that Israel “is alone in denying” its “illegal occupation of territories.”

During March 21-27, 2015, Brandeis SJP held Israel Apartheid Week on campus. Israel Apartheid Week is a weeklong series of anti-Israel events designed to demonize and destroy Israel. Events included a talk on “Facing the Ongoing Nakba.” (Nakba, an Arabic term meaning “catastrophe,” is used by Hamas and its supporters to describe the creation of Israel). The “Nakba” event included a display of the false Hamas maps which purport to show the infiltration and colonization by Jews of Arab “Palestine.” The Week also included a talk by Professor Sa’ed Atshan, an anti-Israel activist who currently serves as a professor in “Peace and Conflict Studies” at Swarthmore College, who has called Gaza an “open-aired prison” and has referred to Israeli military strategy as “scorched-Earth policy.”

In December 2014, Brandeis junior Khadijah Lynch, an undergraduate department representative in the African and Afro-American Studies Department, was exposed for her violent anti-American and anti-Israel tweets, including “amerikka needs an intifada. enough is enough” and “a social justice themed institution grounded in zionism. word. thats a fucking fanny dooley.” When Jewish student Daniel Mael published her public tweets, Lynch attacked him and Mael subsequently received death threats. Brandeis SJP defended Lynch in a public statement on Facebook.

On November 9, 2014, Brandeis SJP posted a petition in support of convicted Palestinian terrorist Rasmeah Odeh on its Facebook page. Odeh was convicted by an Israeli military court in 1970 for her involvement in two fatal terrorist bombings. She was subsequently convicted of immigration fraud by a U.S. federal jury in 2014, after she failed to disclose her previous conviction on her application for U.S. citizenship. Odeh has claimed that she was tortured into confessing to the Israeli bombings, but U.S. prosecutors have uncovered Israeli military reports indicating that they found “explosive bricks in her room” along with “extensive bomb-making materials and explosives.”

In July 2014, a Jewish student at Brandeis, Daniel Mael, exposed a secret faculty email Listserve of 92 left-wing professors at Brandeis. Some participants in the listserve expressed extreme anti-Israel views while also supporting Hamas’ rhetoric and positions. Professor Donald Hindley, for instance, referred to the Jewish state as “The Vile, Terrorist Israeli Government,” in a post about the kidnapping of three Israeli teenagers by Hamas terrorists. Hindley also sarcastically wrote: “Zionist olive trees grow wondrously on Palestinian corpses…In that way, we combine great trees with our own holocaustic ethnic cleansing.” Hindley also compared an eventchallenging the anti-Semitic BDS movement to a Nazi rally, describing it as “Germany in the later 1930s with everyone at least a Nazi sympathizer” and asking “Will the lunch be kosher?” Also on the listserve, Brandeis sociology professor Gordon Fellman sought signatures for an open letter to “end the illegal occupation in Palestine.” According to the letter, “the government of Israel, having provoked the firing of rockets by its rampage through the West Bank, is now using that response as the pretext for an aerial assault on Gaza which has already cost scores of lives.”

In April 2014, two Brandeis students, Eli Philip and Catriona Stewart, who served as co-presidents of the anti-Israel, Jewish student organization, J. Street U., received a $10,000 grant from an organization called the Davis Projects for Peace to travel to Al Quds University in Palestine to attempt to repair relations between Al Quds and Brandeis. The previous relationship between the universities formed in 2003 was severed in 2013 after Al Quds hosted rallies for Hamas during which participants performed a traditional Nazi salute. Philip and Stewart previously disrupted the speech of an IDF member on campus.

Under pressure from students and faculty, in April 2014 Brandeis withdrew an honorary degree offered to women’s rights activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Some students protested giving the honorary degree to Somali-born Ali, who has condemned the mistreatment of women in Muslim countries, including female genital mutilation, because she is a vehement critic of radical Islam. The tipping point in the controversy came when eighty-seven Brandeis faculty members signed a petition calling for rescinding Ali’s degree because of her “extreme Islamophobic beliefs.” (The term “Islamophobia” has been used polemically by the Muslim Brotherhood to censor any criticism of Islam, including Sharia law.)

Brandeis had previously awarded an honorary degree to playwright Tony Kushner, who has a long history of anti-Semitic statements, among them the claim that “The biggest supporters of Israel are the most repulsive members of the Jewish community.”

During February 2014, Brandeis SJP staged “Israel Apartheid Week,” a weeklong series of anti-Israel events designed to demonize Israel and create a rationale for its extinction. Events included a speech by notorious anti-Israel activist Max Blumenthal, author of Goliath: Life and Loathing in Greater Israel, a book about which one reviewer commented, “It is no exaggeration to say that it could have been published by the Hamas Book-of-the-Month Club (if it existed).”

On March 26, 2012, members of Brandeis SJP disrupted an event featuring members of the Israeli Knesset which was held at a local Temple. The SJP members wore shirts with “apartheid” written on them in Hebrew and shouted slogans, including “Israel is an apartheid state and the Knesset is an apartheid parliament!” and “We will not welcome Israeli officials to any Brandeis University event until apartheid ends!” These actions are consistent with Hamas’s policy of refusing to “normalize” relations with any pro-Israel groups.

On April 4, 2011, a university panel featuring six members of the Israeli Knesset was disrupted by Brandeis SJP activists who repeatedly called the members “war criminals” and attempted to distribute fake warrants calling for their arrest. The students particularly targeted Avi Dichter, former head of Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security agency, accusing him of torture. One student called to him in Hebrew, “Don’t worry Avi Dichter, we’ll meet you in The Hague.”

Categories: Academia and Hamas, Academia and Israel, Academia and Palestinians, Brandeis University, Islamist organizations, Students for Justice in Palestine
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Illogically Choosing Friends & Allies in This War

September 25, 2017

Illogically Choosing Friends & Allies in This War, Understanding the Threat, September 25, 2017

If the Bonnano crime family (mafia) initiated a turf war against the Gambino family in New York, does that mean the Gambino crime family is a friend to the New York Police Department?

If the Islamic State publicly condemns the Muslim Brotherhood, does that mean the Muslim Brotherhood is a “friend” of the United States?

In today’s illogical world, the answer seems to be yes to both these questions when you ask senior U.S. government officials.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s objective from its inception until today is to wage jihad to establish an Islamic State (caliphate) encompassing the entire world.  This is the same objective as Al Qaeda, the Islamic State, and all other jihadi groups across the globe.

Last spring the Islamic State called the Muslim Brotherhood out for being apostates.

Why would the Islamic State, many of whose members are Muslim Brothers, do such a thing?

Remember, this is much more a counterintelligence and espionage war than it is merely “terrorism,” and our enemy is primarily engaging us in the information battlespace – propaganda and the like.

Deception is key to how they fight and how they win this war.  And they plan on winning.

When Islamic leaders and groups come against each other, it is over matters of sharia or power.

When the Islamic State calls out the Muslim Brotherhood as “apostates,” the antenna of savvy UTT followers should go up.

At the same time President Trump was moving to designate the Muslim Brotherhood a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO), the Islamic State declares the MB “apostates.”  The MB then turns around and uses this to prove they are “moderate” to draw American politicians closer to them.

This “contrast” between the barbarity of the Islamic State and the suit-wearing jihadis of the Muslim Brotherhood’s U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO), Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), Hamas doing business as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), Muslim American Society (MAS), Muslim Students Association (MSA), Muslim Advocates, and all the others, is exactly what the Islamic Movement is after.

Our enemies use this contrast to appear more “moderate” to give the impression we can work with them. The problem is, our leaders in government, law enforcement, intelligence, and religious communities are falling for it.

Never forget, they all want the same objective and – per Islamic Law (sharia) – are obliged to lie in pursuit of this objective.

Categories: "Moderate Islamists", Islamist objectives, Islamist organizations, Islamist terrorists, Muslim Brotherhood, Muslim Brotherhood affiliates, Sharia law
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

U.S. Islamists Promote Nationwide Protests Despite Israeli Concessions

July 28, 2017

U.S. Islamists Promote Nationwide Protests Despite Israeli Concessions, Investigative Project on Terrorism, July 28, 2017

(Their cause for anger is not Temple Mount but the existence of Israel. — DM)

In solidarity with Palestinian factions and terrorist groups, pro-Palestinian Islamist organizations in the United States are gearing up for more anti-Israel protests today, even though the original cause for their anger has been rescinded.

Israel removed metal detectors Tuesday which were installed near an entrance to Jerusalem’s Al Aqsa Mosque in response to a deadly July 14th terrorist attack. Terrorists managed to smuggle their guns into the mosque the morning of the attack. Yet Israel’s acquiescence has not silenced its main detractors.

Still, rallies planned throughout the country are being pushed by American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), and Jewish Voice for Peace. Similar gatherings last week featured harsh anti-Israel rhetoric.

In a published set of talking points, AMP claimed the removal of metal detectors “doesn’t mean that the sanctity of the Noble Sanctuary is guaranteed, nor that Israel will not try other methods in the future to alter the status quo in the Aqsa mosque.”

This message builds on years of false Palestinian claims that Israel is keeping Muslims from praying at the mosque.

The metal detectors were installed only after Palestinian terrorists attacked and killed two police officers.

U.S.-based Islamist figures and groups are even challenging Israel’s right to install additional surveillance cameras on the Temple Mount – the compound that houses the mosque and site of the last Jewish temple. While enhanced surveillance measures often follow terrorist attacks, any action to improve Israel’s national security – no matter how minor – is met with a disproportionate anger from groups opposed to Israel’s existence in any form.

AMP held an “All Out for Al Aqsa” rally last Saturday in Times Square, featuring speakers who called for Israel’s destruction and radical chants from the crowd.

“You [Israel] are a hypocrisy state that will eventually be, will eventually go away. Israel will not last long,” said AMP-New Jersey president and national board member Sayel Kayed.

The rally featured similarly threatening chants made in Arabic.

“With life, with blood/we sacrifice for you Al Aqsa” and “the gate of Al Aqsa is of iron [Hadid], no one can open it but a martyr [Shahid].” These chants, translated by the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), show how U.S. Islamist groups cultivate an atmosphere where terrorism and violence against Israel is openly encouraged.

“There is only one solution; Intifada, revolution… “Long live the Intifada”.

Other anti-Israel student groups are joining the fray. Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) at the University of Illinois-Urbana Champaign (UIUC) posted a statement on Facebook last Friday inciting violence, the Algemeiner reported.

“Long live the Intifada!,” the group exclaimed, adding in Arabic “Long live resistance,” words commonly invoked by anti-Israel activists referring to violent uprisings and terrorism against Israel.

The growing anti-Israel hysteria permeated the Islamic Center of Davis in California July 21, when American imam Ammar Shahin delivered an anti-Semitic sermon.

“Oh Allah, liberate the Al-Aqsa Mosque from the filth of the Jews. Oh Allah, destroy those who closed the Al-Aqsa Mosque…Oh Allah, count them one by one and annihilate them down to the very last one. Do not spare any of them,” preached Shahin, the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) reports.

Council on American-Islamic Relations Executive Director Nihad Awad did not comment on the Shahin sermon. But he did urge all imams to talk about the issue, saying “Israeli occupiers are suppressing religious freedom in #Jerusalem.”

Again, this is purportedly over metal detectors and security cameras following a deadly terrorist shooting.

CAIR’s St. Louis chapter organized a march last Sunday that cast metal detectors and security cameras as a “siege” of the mosque and featured chants of “free Al-Aqsa.”

CAIR’s Georgia chapter is co-hosting an anti-Israel event, with the far-left Jewish Voice for Peace outside the Israeli Consulate in Atlanta.

AMP alerted its network to additional nationwide protests, including today at noon outside the Israeli embassy in Washington D.C. There is also a planned demonstration the same day in downtown Chicago at 4:30 p.m. and in New York City. On Sunday, a “March for Al Aqsa” is scheduled to take place at the Wilshire Federal Building in Los Angeles at 3:00 p.m.

U.S.-based Islamists are joining Palestinian factions from across the political spectrum who continue to call on Palestinians to protest against Israel on Friday.

For the second straight week, Hamas has called for a “day of rage” while Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah incites violence by encouraging its supporters to “intensify”confrontations with Israeli authorities throughout the West Bank and Jerusalem. Abbas went a step further on Wednesday and gave the green light for Fatah’s Tanzim terrorist group to organize mass demonstrations on Friday.

On July 14, the Muslim Brotherhood led the way with calls for an “Islamic Intifada” – a violent uprising – against Israel following the day’s deadly Palestinian terrorist attack.

“The Muslim Brotherhood calls upon the sons of the Islamic Umma (nation), its Ulema (Muslim religious scholars), figures and blocs for an Intifada in order to stop the (alleged Israeli) violations of holy sites…,” the Brotherhood wrote on its official Arabic-language website and translated by the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT).

The Brotherhood admitted its main motivation for “our intended uprising” is to “pressure all Western governments, Arab regimes and international organizations to intervene to stop violations by gangs of the Zionist entity…”

Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated groups in the U.S. are heeding this call, organizing nationwide protests, inciting violence, and seeking to pressure the U.S. government into forcing more Israeli concessions.

Categories: American Muslims for Palestine, CAIR, Hamas, Islamist organizations, Islamists in America, Israel, Jewish Voice for Peace, Temple Mount terrorist attack
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Brigitte Gabriel and Dave Rubin: Terrorism, The Muslim Brotherhood, and Linda Sarsour

July 9, 2017

Brigitte Gabriel and Dave Rubin: Terrorism, The Muslim Brotherhood, and Linda Sarsour via YouTube, May 19, 2017

(The transition of Lebanon from a vibrant homogeneous society into an Islamist state where Muslims, formerly friends of Christians and Jews, became violent enemies — about five minutes into the video — bodes ill for much of Europe. Although this video was posted on YouTube on May 19th, some of the content suggests that the interview occurred significantly earlier.  — DM

 

Categories: "Feminists", Activism, American values, Brigitte Gabriel, Freedom of religion, Freedom of speech, Islam and homosexuals, Islamist infiltration, Islamist moral values, Islamist organizations, Islamist terror attacks, Islamist terror groups, Islamist victimhood, Islamists and freedom of speech, Islamists in America, Israel and Lebanon, Lebanon, Linda Sarsour, Useful idiots
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

Paranoid Terrorist Apologism Dominates ISNA Convention in Chicago

July 7, 2017

Paranoid Terrorist Apologism Dominates ISNA Convention in Chicago, Investigative Project on Terrorism, John Rossomando, July 7, 2017

(What a great place for the U.S. Army to look for recruits. Maybe they can find another Nidal Hasan. — DM)

The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) wants to be viewed as a mainstream Muslim organization, but its recent convention suggests it remains anything but moderate.

ISNA’s annual convention drew thousands of people in Chicago last weekend, spreading paranoid messages such as claiming President Trump wants to put Muslims in concentration camps, and presenting speakers who cast convicted terrorists as victims.

Invoking Japanese internment camps from World War II, speaker Zahra Billoo warned that Muslims face a similar fate despite assurances from politicians today.

“And we know from our experience that unless we have laws in place… and we [know they have done this] with other communities, that they’re going to send us to concentration camps,” she said.

Billoo is the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ (CAIR) San Francisco director. In the past, she has urged Muslims to “build a wall of resistance” between themselves and law enforcement, equated Americans in the Israeli army with ISIS terrorists, and accused the FBI of fabricating terrorist threats for public consumption.

ISNA saw her as an ideal person to lead a political discussion. Joining her was a former CAIR official who used the opportunity to advocate for convicted terrorists, including one whose case has been championed by al-Qaida and ISIS.

“…[Some] of them are our leaders,” Cyrus McGoldrick said. “Some of them are our youth, who were entrapped, some people were framed, I’m talking about Imam Jamil Al-Amin, I’m talking about Tarek Mehanna, I’m talking about Dr. Aafia Siddiqui. A number, hundreds, hundreds of leaders who, and Muslims who are in prison right now. And we forget them, we forget them. No one’s talking about that at this convention. We need to do more.”

Jamil Al-Amin, a Black Panther formerly known as H. Rap Brown, was convicted in 2002 for killing a Fulton County, Ga., sheriff’s deputy who tried to serve an arrest warrant.

Tarek Mehanna was convicted in 2011 for conspiring to provide material support for al-Qaida and lying to federal investigators. After traveling to Yemen seeking training in order to then fight U.S. soldiers in Iraq, Mehanna returned to the United States where he posted al-Qaida recruitment videos and other documents online.

Aafia Siddiqui, an MIT-trained neuroscientist, represents the most extreme case McGoldrick cast as “political prisoners” to his ISNA audience. Afghan security officers detained her in 2008, finding “handwritten notes that referred to a ‘mass casualty attack'” and a list of New York landmarks. During subsequent interrogation, Siddiqui, known as “Lady al-Qaida,” managed to grab a soldier’s M-4 rifle and open fire. She allegedly shouted, “I’m going to kill all you mother**kers!” and “Death to America.”

Before executing prisoners James Foley, Steven Sotloff and Kayla Mueller, ISIS offered their release in exchange for Siddiqui.

Ironically, U.S. Armed Forces recruiters set up a booth in the exhibit hall not far from where McGoldrick defended convicted terrorists.

Despite such rhetoric, ISNA remains politically influential. It played a key role in convincing former FBI Director Robert Mueller to purge FBI training materials dealing with Islam. Former ISNA President Mohamed Magid served on President Obama’s Homeland Security Advisory Council. During the Obama administration, ISNA representatives met with then President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden, and ISNA hosted then-DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson at its convention last year.

ISNA’s congressional allies include people like U.S. Reps. Don Beyer, D-Va.; Keith Ellison, D-Minn.; Andre Carson, D-Ind.; U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah and U.S. Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill.

Another ISNA speaker, John Morrow, who teaches at Ivy Tech Community College in Indiana and directs the Covenants of the Prophet Foundation, launched into conspiratorial rhetoric accusing the U.S. of using the CIA to support jihadi groups with the intent of spreading anti-Muslim hatred.

“How do you ensure that the public continues to support the War on Terror, which is really a war on Islam and Muslims?” Morrow asked. “By means of terrorist attacks, by means of false flag operations, that way the eternal endless war of the globalist totalitarian fascists continues unabated to the pleasure of big brother, or as we know him in Islam, the one-eyed liar.

“The philosophy is clear. Keep the focus on fear.”

This is the same narrative that ISIS jihadist recruiters use to lure disaffected Muslims into becoming terrorists.

Prominent Muslim activist Linda Sarsour falsely asserted that white supremacists were a bigger terror threat in the United States than Muslims.

“I will not be on a national platform condemning terrorism as a Muslim. I will only condemn terrorism as a human being because that’s the only place that we should be condemning terrorism, because terrorism should never be framed as a conversation that should be just had with Muslims in a country where white supremacists have killed more people since 9/11 than Muslims have,” Sarsour said.

Even the liberal New America Foundation now admits that Muslim terrorists have killed more Americans since 9/11 than white supremacists.

Sarsour accused the Trump administration of being an “authoritarian racist regime” that needed to be resisted.

“I hope, that when we stand up to those who oppress our communities, that Allah accepts from us that as a form of jihad,” Sarsour said. “That we are struggling against tyrants and rulers, not only abroad in the Middle East or on the other side of the world, but here in these United States of America.

“You have fascists and white supremacists and Islamophobes reigning in the White House.”

The ISNA convention also featured hatred of Israel.

Several speakers promoted the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement that aims to isolate Israel. Sarsour proudly proclaimed that the prominence she received due to her involvement in the Women’s March in January gave her a better platform to discuss the BDS movement.

“I have been able to have our country reckon with this conversation about what does it mean for a Muslim or a Palestinian American to be part of the resistance and to be working with allies who are now taking up the cause of BDS and supporting the Palestinian people,” Sarsour said. “So, what I am saying to you is don’t be afraid to be the center of controversy.”

Billoo repeatedly referred to the Jewish state as “apartheid Israel.”

McGoldrick attacked the Muslim Leadership Institute (MLI), which “invites North American Muslims to explore how Jews understand Judaism, Israel, and Jewish peoplehood.” MLI brings people to “occupied Palestine,” McGoldrick said, indicating he had no interest in recognizing its legitimacy. He condemned MLI for teaching Muslims about Zionism in a positive manner and for instructing them about Judaism in “so-called Israel.”

This kind of hateful rhetoric is a staple at ISNA conferences. In 2009, a speaker lamented Jewish “control of the world.”

In 1993, ISNA signed a declaration calling Israel’s creation a crime. “To recognize the legitimacy of that crime is a crime in itself and any agreement which involves such recognition is unjust and untenable. The League of Ulama in Palestine declared on Sept. 14 ’93 that no one has the authority to concede the rights of the Islamic Ummah in Palestine.”

It would seem that ISNA’s radical past still is very much part of its radical present. Politicians should think twice before working with ISNA as long it tolerates and gives a platform for narratives that enable terrorist recruiters.

Categories: Islam and Israel, Islam and terrorism, Islam and western "decadence", Islam and Western civilization, Islamic Society of North America, Islamist organizations, Islamist victimhood, Islamists in America, U.S. Army
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Islamic Relief Fails a Whitewash

July 3, 2017

Islamic Relief Fails a Whitewash, Gatestone Institute, Samuel Westrop, July 3, 2017

(Please see also, What Hamas Wants. — DM)

Even if the Canadian branch of Islamic Relief claims not to have directly funded these Hamas groups, its own accounts reveal grants of millions of dollars to its parent organization, Islamic Relief Worldwide, which oversees the movement of money to a number of Hamas fronts.

Islamic Relief branches also receive money from several terror-linked Middle Eastern charities, including those established by Sheikh al Zindani, whom the US government has designated a “Global Terrorist.”

Islamic Relief did not much care for the exposé. Reyhana Patel, a senior figure at its Canadian branch, first persuaded the Post to bowdlerize the article by removing some of the sourced material and adding sentences in defense of Islamic Relief.

On May 20, a Muslim cleric, Nouman Ali Khan spoke at a fundraising event in Toronto for Islamic Relief, one of the largest Muslim charities in the world.

Khan preaches that prostitutes and pornographic actors are “filth” and that “you have to punish them … They’re not killed; they’re whipped. And they’re whipped a hundred times.” Khan has also declared that God gives men “license” to beat unfaithful wives, and that Muslim women are committing a “crime” if they object to the religious text that he says permits this abuse.

Muslim cleric Nouman Ali Khan says that God gives men “license” to beat unfaithful wives, and that Muslim women are committing a “crime” if they object to the religious text that he says permits this abuse. (Image source: Rossi101/Wikimedia Commons)

Before the event took place, this author had written about Khan and Islamic Relief in the National Post, with the help of colleagues at the Middle East Forum.

Islamic Relief did not much care for the exposé. Reyhana Patel, a senior figure at its Canadian branch, first persuaded the Post to bowdlerize the article by removing some of the sourced material and adding sentences in defense of Islamic Relief.

Patel then published in the Post a response that denounced our research as “false… one-sided and unsubstantiated.”

Really? In a rather major failing, she failed even to address Nouman Ali Khan’s presence at the Islamic Relief event.

Instead, she boasted of her own humanitarian goodness and attacked the Middle East Forum (MEF) as an “anti-Muslim think tank” that “uses some of its resources to paint a negative picture of Islam and Muslims.” MEF has always, in fact, argued the very opposite. It believes that if radical Islam is the problem, then moderate Islam is the solution. This very maxim can be found in dozens of articles on its website. MEF supports a number of moderate Muslim groups working to challenge extremism, and encourages others to do the same.

It is old habit of Islamists to accuse anti-Islamist activists of being anti-Muslim, because it allows them misleadingly to conflate Islam and Islamism. That obfuscation severely inhibits the work of moderate Muslims trying to free their faith from the grip of these extremists.

Patel’s only reference to the charges of Middle East Forum, in fact, appears to be a deliberate misquote. She writes that MEF “labelled Islamic Relief Canada a ‘terrorist organization which regularly gives platforms to preachers who incite hatred against women, Jews, homosexuals and Muslim minorities.'” Islamic Relief does indeed regularly give platforms to such preachers — Nouman Ali Khan is just one example in the weekly pattern of this charity and its branches across the world.

But MEF did not claim that Islamic Relief was a “terrorist organization.” I wrote that it was “financially linked with a number of terrorist groups.” Islamic Relief branches have, for example, indeed given money to several groups in Gaza linked to the designated terrorist group Hamas. These include the Al Falah Benevolent Society, which the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Centre describes as one of “Hamas’s charitable societies.” And even if the Canadian branch of Islamic Relief claims not to have directly funded these Hamas groups, its own accounts reveal grants of millions of dollars to its parent organization, Islamic Relief Worldwide, which oversees the movement of money to a number of Hamas fronts.

Islamic Relief branches also receives money from several terror-linked Middle Eastern charities, including those established by Sheikh al Zindani, whom the US government has designated a “Global Terrorist.”

Although MEF believes that Islamic Relief is financially linked to terror, no one wrote that the charity itself is a terrorist organization. Others, however, are less circumspect. In 2014, the United Arab Emirates designated Islamic Relief as a terrorist organization. And in 2016, the banking giant HSBC shut down Islamic Relief’s bank accounts in the United Kingdom “amid concerns that cash for aid could end up with terrorist groups abroad.”

Perhaps Reyhana Patel hoped that by smearing the Middle East Forum, and telling her readers about her love of “diversity … tolerance and inclusion,” she could sell Islamic Relief as a force for good. The charity’s regular promotion of hate preachers and financial links to terrorist groups, however, says otherwise.

And is Patel herself really so dedicated to supporting peace and tolerance? Her social media posts and a short-lived career as a journalist suggest not. Patel has a history, it seems, of attacking organizations that oppose religious extremism. In 2014, Patel wrote an article condemning Student Rights, a British organization that works to expose homophobia, racism and other forms of extremism on campus. Without seriously addressing the group’s research, Patel described the organization as “sensationalist and misleading.” Sound familiar?

Patel has also defended gender-segregation imposed by Muslim student groups at Britain’s public universities, and then complained that Muslim women who oppose this misogynistic behavior “seem to want to discredit and deamonise [sic] me.”

Further, Patel has expressed praise for Malia Bouattia, a prominent student activist in Britain whose anti-Semitism was the subject of national media coverage. In 2011, Bouattia condemned a university with a large Jewish population as a “Zionist outpost.” In 2014, she opposed a motion at a student conference that condemned ISIS on the grounds that such condemnation was “Islamophobic.” That same year, a British parliamentary report concluded that Bouattia was guilty of “outright racism.”

If this is the company Reyhana Patel keeps, then perhaps Nouman Ali Khan’s extremism is a perfect fit for Islamic Relief Canada.

Islamic Relief was designated a terrorist organization by a pious Muslim country. Western banks have closed its accounts over terrorism concerns, and, just last month, Britain’s Charity Commission starting investigating the charity for hosting a preacher who justifies killing homosexuals.

The Islamic Relief franchise is a charitable front for extremism in the West. That it has managed to build a favorable reputation is testament to the careful doublespeak of its officials. Such duplicity should not be tolerated.

Samuel Westrop is the Director of Islamist Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum.

Categories: Hamas funding, Hamas' supporters, Islamic Relief, Islamist moral values, Islamist objectives, Islamist organizations, Islamists and the media, Islamists in Canada
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Exclusive: Jihadi Cult Associate Arrested in NY With Firearms Stockpile

July 2, 2017

Exclusive: Jihadi Cult Associate Arrested in NY With Firearms Stockpile, Clarion Project, Ryan Mauro, Martin Mawyer, July 2, 2017

Police reveal the weapon’s cache of Ramadan Abdullah

A long-time associate of a U.S.-based Islamist terrorist organization, Muslims of America (MOA), has been arrested in Johnson City, NY. Authorities discovered that he had a large cache of weapons inside a storage locker. A source inside MOA says the weapons were intended for the group’s “Islamberg” headquarters in Hancock, NY.

The suspect, 64-year old Ramadan Abdullah, was previously arrested in 1977 when he and another man tried to rob a candy store in Brooklyn and someone was murdered in the process. When police searched his home, they found enough material to build 50 bombs. In the end, the charges against Abdullah were strangely reduced (see below).

On May 31, Abdullah was arrested after trying to steal four boxes of ammunition from a local Gander Mountain store. When police questioned him about the purpose of the ammo, his answers made them suspicious, and they obtained a search warrant for a storage locker he was renting in the town of Union.

During that search, police found a large assortment of weaponry including:

  • 8 assault weapons
  • 4 loaded handguns
  • 1 loaded shotgun
  • 2 rifles
  • 64 high-capacity ammunition feeding devices
  • flak jackets
  • 1,000s of rounds of ammunition, including .50-caliber armor-piercing rounds

Searches of other residences linked to Abdullah turned up another loaded handgun, more high-capacity ammunition feeding devices and ammunition, including .38-caliber rounds.

New York State Police Major Jim Barnes would not say whether Abdullah was connected to terrorist groups or any organizations, but confirmed that police believe Abdullah had made trips overseas.

“There’s no indications there was a plan in place to commit an act of violence. However, it begs the question, what was he doing with all this and what were his intentions down the road?” said New York State Police Maj. Jim Barnes.

“It’s just a tremendous blessing to be able to take all these high power weapons and high power ammunition off the streets, and who knows what kind of large scale tragedy that this investigation may have prevented later down the road,” said Johnson City Police Chief Brent Dodge.

Abdullah is currently being held in the Broome County Jail without bail.

Abdullah is a longtime associate of the U.S.-based Islamist cult Muslims of America.

Ramadan Abdullah

(MOA), which has been described as a terrorist organization in documents from the FBI and other agencies. A 2003 file says MOA is linked to terrorists in Pakistan, including Al-Qaeda affiliates.

The group’s headquarters is a 70-acre compound in Hancock, NY called “Islamberg.”  It is just a 50-minute drive from where Abdullah was arrested.

MOA is led by a radical cleric in Pakistan named SheikhMubarak Ali Gilani, who demands a cultish loyalty from his followers in America. Gilani indoctrinates them to follow a hate-filled extremist ideology that includes violent jihad against perceived enemies of Islam and a belief that they are fulfilling apocalyptic prophecies.

The group has claimed to have 22 “Islamic villages” across the U.S., mostly in rural areas, which have been used as guerilla training compounds. The group also has a history of committing acts of terrorism and crimes including murder, gun smuggling, narcotics trafficking and money laundering.

A 2007 FBI report warns that MOA “possesses an infrastructure capable of planning and mounting terrorist campaigns overseas and within the U.S.”  It says “members of the MOA are encouraged to travel to Pakistan to receive religious and military/terrorist training from [Sheikh] Gilani.”

Confidential sources inside MOA say that Ramadan Abdullah has been a significant member of the group since it first formed in the United States in 1980 and helped buy the land that became “Islamberg.” Additional research substantiates their information that he is close to MOA members.

They say that he is an “elder” and often visits Islamberg to spend time with older members but does not live inside the commune. He’s also provided firearms instruction for MOA, they report.

The sources say that Abdullah’s weapons were destined for the group, specifically Islamberg.

Abdullah has no apparent blood relationship with another convicted MOA member bearing the same name. In 2001, Ramadan Abdur-Rauf Abdullah fatally shot Fresno County Deputy Erik Telen with a shotgun. Court documents identified his father as a law enforcement officer in Brooklyn named MahdiAbdullah. The murderer lived in New York and on the now-abandoned commune named “Baladullah” in California.

“We were told some bullsh** that the weapons were coming to MOA to help us defend ourselves against an upcoming biker rally. They had armor-piercing bullets coming to them. Why would they want that if they are just protecting themselves against some bikers?” said one source who learned about the explanation following a meeting that was held by MOA after Abdullah’s arrest.

Back in May 2016, a previous biker rally was held against Islamber,g the group’s Hancock, NY location.  MOA’s website claims their interfaith allies “thwart[ed] a planned attack by anti-American bikers.”

The demonstration turned out, however, to be nothing more than a few bikers and cars driving past the compound in a mostly silent and uneventful protest.

Even though the biker’s protest was small, peaceful and uneventful, MOA officials reportedly said they were upset that there wasn’t greater police protection and therefore needed more weaponry for self-protection, the source said.

Clarion Project’s Ryan Mauro at the entrance to Islamberg.

Contrary to MOA’s private assertion, there is no evidence that a second biker’s rally is planned.

One source said that he was shocked over MOA’s claim that there was a lack of police protection during the first rally.

“That’s nonsense,” he said.  “There were cops everywhere during that first protest.  Sh**, MOA even had people in the trees with guns ready to shoot anybody coming on the property.  These weapons (from Abdullah) weren’t coming to MOA for any upcoming biker rally,” he said.

“And here’s the kicker,” the source continued.  “Ramadan Abdullah was there!  He was at that rally, just last year.  He was on the property.  He was MOA.  He’s still MOA.”

Law enforcement sources have told us that New York State Police knows that Abdullah was a member of MOA during its early years, but are operating with the belief that he was kicked out by Sheikh Gilani in the early 80’s because he was banned from “Islamberg” and other communes.

One source in MOA with direct knowledge of Abdullah being “kicked out” recalled it this way:

“Ramadan was one of the original founders of the group but refused to follow Sheikh Gilani’s orders to move onto Islamberg when the land was first purchased. He didn’t want to move onto the land in tents and shabby trailers in the dead of winter and pay the required fee, and he was seen as being disrespectful. So, Gilani kicked him off the land, but he very much remained a member.”

A MOA-affiliated source further explained:

“Ramadan Abdullah is like many punished members. You can still teach skills like how to use guns or if they can use you for another reason, then you’re called upon to provide help. You just can’t live on the compounds, but you can visit. 

The police would probably never know for a fact whether a member is MOA, former MOA, an affiliate of MOA, etc. unless he completely came out against them. I can’t believe they’d say he hasn’t been a part of MOA since the early days.” 

Unfortunately, the district attorney’s office has not been responsive to our offers to provide additional information.

In addition, another source said:

“Being kicked off the land and being kicked out of the group are two different things.  Lots of members are kicked off the land for disobeying orders, refusing to pay tithes or rent or because they got arrested.  But you’re still a member.”

MOA members who have been arrested and are on parole are also the ones who are most likely to get “kicked off the land” but remain in the group. Under state law, police may enter the property of any parolee without having to first obtain a search warrant. To avoid searches by the police, MOA officials do not normally allow parolees to live in their communes.

Abdullah has been arrested several times in the past, so the security-conscious MOA would obviously not want him to live on the land. Living away from the land also allows for plausible deniability.

In 1977, Abdullah and another individual were charged with the murder of Ali Shawish, in a botched attempt to rob a Brooklyn candy store.

In the night of the shooting, police went to Abdullah’s Brooklyn home at 12:15 a.m. to question him. Upon entering, they discovered enough bomb-making materials to construct 50 bombs.

The police found 14 pounds of gunpowder, three pipe casings, fuses, and chemicals like potassium cyanide, sodium nitrate and aluminum nitrate, which are used as accelerants by bomb-makers.

Abdulalh, a chemistry student at the time, said the chemicals were for a school project. He was charged with possession of explosives and criminal possession of a dangerous weapon.

Strangely, both the murder and explosive possession charges were drastically reduced to a “minor misdemeanor weapons possession” charge.

One police officer, speaking off the record, suspects Abdullah received the reduced charge because he “snitched” on someone.  But the officer still expressed shock that a murder and explosive possession charge could be reduced to a minor misdemeanor weapons charge.

The incident comes after the authors’ confidential sources in MOA reported that the group sees the election of President Trump as a fulfillment of End Times prophecies and is arming up in anticipation of jihad and raids on their camps.

MOA recently declared a vague “campaign” for Kashmir against India, a battlefield that the group has previously been engaged in. MOA has also been expressing solidarity with the Hizbul Mujahideen terrorist group in Kashmir, an organization that it has had a relationship with.

MOA obviously denies that it is an extremist organization and blasts its critics as anti-Muslim bigots. It is helped in this endeavor by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a group with its own extremist ties which include being identified by the U.S. Justice Department as a Muslim Brotherhoodentity. CAIR and MOA are increasingly close, attacking their opponents’ character at every turn.

The arrest of Ramadan Abdullah and the discovery of his arms stockpile should be a wake up call to the danger posed by MOA and its Pakistan-based leadership.

Ryan Mauro is ClarionProject.org’s Shillman Fellow and national security analyst and an adjunct professor of counter-terrorism. He is frequently interviewed on top-tier television and radio. Martin Mawyer is president of the Christian Action Network.

Categories: Islamberg, Islamic training camps, Islamist organizations, Islamists in America, Muslims of America (MOA)
Tags: , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

« Older Entries