Islamist organizations | WarSclerotic | Page 8

Posted tagged ‘Islamist organizations’

Islamist Organization Threatens Violence against the Trump Administration

November 28, 2016

Islamist Organization Threatens Violence against the Trump Administration, Dan Miller’s Blog, November 28, 2016

(This article is based in part on a Clarion Project article posted here earlier today. The views expressed here are mine, and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic or its other editors. — DM)

An article posted today by The Clarion Project — which supports the reformation of Islam and opposes Sharia law and Islamic jihad — states that an Islamist organization named “Muslims of America” is planning violent confrontations with the Trump administration.

Khalifa Hussain Abdallah, (foreground) known as ‘K1’ within the group for his top ranking as an original founder, is said to be a key supervisor of these preparations for armed conflict.

Khalifa Hussain Abdallah, (foreground) known as ‘K1’ within the group for his top ranking as an original founder, is said to be a key supervisor of these preparations for armed conflict.

Here’s an interview by Bill O’Reilly with Clarion Project National Security Analyst Ryan Mauro. Presented on January 15, 2015, it deals with Muslims of America and other Islamist groups active in Obama’s America:

The Clarion Project article published today states that,

Multiple confidential sources inside of a powerful jihadist group within the United States have informed the Christian Action Network and the Clarion Project that members have been told to arm themselves in anticipation of raids by the Trump Administration.

It seems odd that sources inside the organization would give advance warning of its intentions, but they appear to have done so. The organization seems well motivated, equipped and trained to carry out its threats.

The members believe that President-elect Trump is part of a satanic-Zionist conspiracy to destroy Islam, and that he is fulfilling apocalyptic End Times prophecies. Any action taken against MOA is seen as part of a war on Islam, a situation that permits violent jihad.

The preparations for armed confrontation are described as “self-defense measures,” but one source cautioned that the group could decide to take “offensive” action if it believes armed conflict is imminent. [Emphasis added.]

. . . .

The Pakistan-based spiritual leader of Muslims of America (MOA), Sheikh Gilani, told top MOA officials (known as “khalifas”) to order all unarmed members to obtain firearms, licenses and hunting permits in order to resist raids on the group’s approximately 22 compounds that they expect to happen under the Trump Administration. Additional “security” was also called up and assault rifles have been mentioned as desirable.

The group now expects the FBI “to reopen its cases against them as a homegrown terrorist organization,” one of the confidential sources told Martin Mawyer of the Christian Action Network and Ryan Mauro of the Clarion Project.

The sources independently stated that members across the country were told of instructions from Sheikh Gilani to “be prepared to fight.” The message reportedly relayed to members was to “hear and obey,” using language identical to the oath of allegiance members sign when they join the group. He predicted, “You will be tested.” [Emphasis added.]

. . . .

MOA members have a long history of terrorism, extremism and criminal activity including weapons trafficking. A 2007 FBI report obtained by Ryan Mauro of the Clarion Project states:

“The documented propensity for violence by this organization supports the belief the leadership of the MOA extols membership to pursue a policy of jihad or holy war against individuals or groups it considers enemies of Islam, which includes the US Government.” [Emphasis added.]

It warned that MOA “possesses an infrastructure capable of planning and mounting terrorist campaigns within the U.S. and overseas.”

According to an article posted by The Clarion Project in 2013,

A secret Canadian intelligence report described al-Fuqra as a “militant Sufi sect” that believes “there is a Satanic Zionist conspiracy to destroy Islam and that the Fuqra is God’s chosen instrument to defeat the enemies of Islam.” Among those they say are complicit in the conspiracy are Jews, Hindus, other Muslims and the governments of the U.S. and Canada.[5] Gilani has said, “We are fighting to destroy the enemy. We are dealing with evil at its roots and its roots are America.”[6] He says that the “U.S. has become a pawn of hidden hands that use America’s wealth and the innocent blood of their sons and daughters to wage their wars against Muslims.”[7] [Emphasisadded.]

MOA says it has 22 settlements across the United States.[8] A 2006 report for law enforcement put the number at above 35 and estimated that the organization has 3,000 members. It said that the organization is set up like “classically structured terrorist cells” and that Gilani is “now known as an international terrorist.” It said that at least seven of the communes are used for paramilitary training and that members are also sent to Pakistan for further instruction. [9]There are unconfirmed reports of members being trained in Sudan.[10]

A former high-level MOA operative that was a NYPD informant says that MOA also has set up operations in Trinidad, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Venezuela. He said that the paramilitary training is now only given to a select group. He describes MOA as being cult-like and said that most of the children are taught privately on its premises and are illiterate. He says he witnessed vicious punishments, including the beating of a 50-year old woman, for violating the strict moral code set by Gilani.[11] Two former female MOA members were interviewed by a filmmaker in 2011 and told stories of abuse, polygamy, forced marriages, brainwashing and terrorist activity.[12]

MOA believes that Gilani is a miracle-making representative of Allah. He claimed he exited his body to meet Jesus and the forthcoming Mahdi in 2009. Khalid Khawaja, a former pilot for Osama Bin Laden and a close friend of Gilani’s, says that “One white American [follower of Gilani’s] told me that there are thousands of people in America, who, if they are asked to cut off one limb so that they can stay with him, they are ready to do that.”

“If you push him to that stage, that he has no option but to declare jihad on America… it will blow like a volcano,” he said.[13]

He also said, “I am sure of one thing, Osama does not have even one of his followers as committed as Sheik Mubarak Gilani. Osama does not have even one as committed as the least of his people.”[14]

Gilani says that Jews are “an example of human Satans”[15] and that “I have never seen, in the whole of my life or even in the past thousand years, a Jew who will tell the truth.”[16] In making that case for Muslim-Christian relations, Gilani says, “the Jews tried to murder Jesus, son of Mary.”[17]

MOA believes that the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were part of a Satanic-Zionist conspiracy to wage war on Islam and stop Muslim-Christian unity. Gilani has referred to Osama Bin Laden as a “Saudi activist.”[18] MOA’s newspaper, the Islamic Post, praised Iranian President Ahmadinejad when he called for an independent investigation into 9/11 at the United Nations.[19]

The MOA also believes that evil “jinn beings” possess human beings. It says that the movies Star Wars, The Lord of the Rings, Avatar, The Exorcist and Harry Potter were part of “jinn” plots to corrupt minds and spread Satanic influence.[20]

Jamaat ul-Fuqra has a history of terrorist and criminal activity. At least a dozen members have been convicted and its members have been accused of involvement in at least 10 assassinations and 17 firebombings since 1980.[21]

A 2004 report funded by the Justice Department said that “members of the Fuqra group have raised money by taking advantage of a variety of social service programs, including worker’s compensation, public health care, welfare, and food stamps programs. Other crimes committed by Fuqra members include the creation and use of false identification cards, birth certificates, and other forged documents.”[22] The group recruits heavily from those with criminal backgrounds.[23] The group is also known to use security companies as fronts. [Emphasis added.]

A secret tape made by Gilani’s followers in Pakistan in the 1980s proves that the purpose of the camps in the U.S. is to facilitate paramilitary training. In the video, Gilani boasts of having “one of the most advanced training courses in Islamic military warfare” and invites interested Muslims to contact MOA offices in Pakistan or in several states in the U.S.

The film shows Gilani followers receiving the training and practicing the hijacking of vehicles, use of firearms, hand-to-hand combat, setting off explosives and other violent acts. In one scene, an instructor says, “Act like you are a friend, then kill him.”[24]

In 1989, the FBI raided a storage locker in Colorado Springs used by a Fuqra member and discovered weapons, explosives and plans for terrorist attacks, including the murder of Imam Rasad Khalifa in Arizona. He was a Muslim that was branded an apostate for his interpretations of the religion.[25] He was killed in 1990 exactly as the plans described.

The FBI discovered that the Fuqra members had to pledge, “I shall always hear and obey, and whenever given the command, I shall readily fight for Allah’s sake.”

The biggest Fuqra terror plot was attempted in 1991 and it aimed to kill 4,500 people. Five operatives tried to bomb a Hindu temple and an Indian cinema in the Toronto area during the Hindu Festival of Lights. The terrorists possessed a book authored by Gilani that says, “The mission of this Jamaat ul-Fuqra is to lead Muslims to their final victory over Communists, Zionists, Hindus and deviators.”[26]

In October 1992, law enforcement authorities shut down Fuqra’s 101-acre commune at Buena Vista and discovered that it was essentially a terrorist training camp financed through crime. A poem was found that reads, “Come join my troops and army/Says our Sheikh Gilani/Prepare to sacrifice your head/A true believer is never dead/Say ‘Victory is in the Air’/The kafir’s blood will not be spared.”[27]

One terrorist involved in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, Clement Rodney Hampton, was a Fuqra member and had been trained by the group near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. He was convicted for his role in another campaign to bomb several New York City targets.

In December 1993, Sheikh Gilani reportedly attended a terrorist conference in Khartoum, Sudan. Among the groups represented were Hamas, Hezbollah, Egyptian Islamic Jihad and others. [28] Some reports say that Osama Bin Laden was present, a believable claim as he lived in the country at the time.[29]

In 2001, Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and executed in Pakistan when he was on his way to interview Gilani. He has never been charged and denies involvement but says that Pearl was sent to assassinate him.

In 2009, Clarion Project National Security Analyst Ryan Mauro obtained two MOA tapes. One showed women training at its Islamberg headquarters in military fatigue. Only the first two digits in the on-screen date could be seen, indicating it was made in 2000 or afterwards. The trainees were seen marching in formation, practicing hand-to-hand combat, learning to use knives and swords and firing guns into a lake.

A second video showed MOA leaders declaring that the U.S. is a Muslim-majority country and vowing to defend it from foreign and domestic enemies. The speakers said they would never declare jihad on their country but “will not sit idly by and let our country be destroyed by this hidden hand.”[30]

In February 2010, Pakistan refused entry to two high-level MOA members.[31] It was reported in early 2010 by multiple sources that a large number of MOA members had suddenly moved out of their communes.

The current threat by Muslims of America must be taken seriously. Although many of their notions are loony, that makes them more, not less, dangerous.

Categories: Anti-Zionism, Antisemitism, CAIR, Clarion Project, Donald Trump and Islamists, Donald Trump and jihad, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic integration, Islamic radicalization, Islamic settlements in America, Islamic terrorism, Islamist organizations, Islamist training camps, Islamists in America, Muslims of America, Obama and Islamic terrorism, Trump and Islam
Tags: Anti-Zionism, Antisemitism, CAIR, Clarion Project, Donald Trump and Islamists, Donald Trump and jihad, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic integration, Islamic radicalization, Islamic settlements in America, Islamic terrorism, Islamist organizations, Islamist training camps, Islamists in America, Muslims of America, Obama and Islamic terrorism, Trump and Islam

Comments: Be the first to comment

Qatar’s Shopping Spree to Buy and Displace the West?

November 11, 2016

Qatar’s Shopping Spree to Buy and Displace the West? Gatestone Institute,Giulio Meotti, November 11, 2016

Qatar sits on the executive board of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the UN agency that has just erased 3000 years of Jewish history in Jerusalem, and has set its sights on the main chair at UNESCO: as the successor of UNESCO’s secretary general, Irina Bokova.

Human rights organizations have already promoted a campaign to prevent Qatar’s Kawari from taking the UNESCO seat. Citing a vast amount of anti-Semitic material present at the Doha Book Fair, Kawari’s flagship, the Simon Wiesenthal Center launched a campaign against his candidacy.

Qatar is the puppeteer behind UNESCO’s anti-Semitic resolution on Jerusalem, and a world center of Islamic extremism. Qatar does not make a secret of trying to submit Western culture to the Muslim crescent.

The Soviet Union, during the Cold War, invested in propaganda operations in the West to subvert capitalism and democracy. Communism found precious allies in the so-called “useful idiots” who facilitated Soviet work in academia, newspapers and publishing houses. Political Islam has been using the same convenient outlets and mechanisms to spread Islamic sharia law in the West.

The old role of Soviet propaganda has now been taken up by Islamic regimes. Qatar, for instance, is not only interested in buying large segments of Europe’s economy (Hochtief, Volkswagen, Porsche, Canary Wharf and Deutsche Bank), but also in playing a key role in Europe’s culture.

Qatar sits on the executive board of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the UN agency that has just erased 3000 years of Jewish history in Jerusalem, and has set its sights on the main chair at UNESCO: as the successor of UNESCO’s secretary general, Irina Bokova.

The favorite for this race is, in fact, the former minister of culture of Qatar from 2008 to 2016, Hamad bin Abdulaziz al Kawari, who currently serves as “cultural adviser to the Emir,” Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani. In 2017, the UNESCO leadership is supposed to go to a representative of the Arab world, according to the rule of geographic rotation; Kawari will have to defeat the candidacy of a Lebanese and an Egyptian.

Kawari recently landed in Rome, apparently to start his promotional tour, and he met with its mayor, Virginia Raggi, who received the Islamic emirate’s delegation. Kawari received an honorary degree from Tor Vergata University, Rome’s second most important university. The photo of the ceremony speaks volumes about political Islam’s level of penetration in Europe’s academic culture. Abdullah Bin Hamad Al Attiyah, Qatar’s former deputy prime minister, even spoke at Tor Vergata.

2037

Qatar’s Hamad bin Abdulaziz al Kawari (center), who serves as “cultural adviser to the Emir,” is pictured receiving an honorary degree from Rome’s Tor Vergata University last month. (Image source: Askanews video screenshot)

Kawari also had a meeting with Italy’s minister of culture, Dario Franceschini and minister of education, Stefania Giannini.

Last June, Kawari was also in the Vatican to meet with Pope Francis and sign an agreement between the Vatican Apostolic Library and the Qatar Foundation for Education. Kawari, fluent in Arabic, English and French, is an affable man of the world, at home in Paris, where he graduated from Sorbonne University; his climb to the leadership of UNESCO has the support of the rulers of the Gulf and Saudi Arabia.

Human rights organizations have already promoted a campaign to prevent Kawari from taking the UNESCO seat. Citing a vast amount of anti-Semitic material present at the Doha Book Fair, Kawari’s flagship, the Simon Wiesenthal Center launched a campaign against his candidacy. In a letter to Kawari, Shimon Samuels, Director for International Relations of the Wiesenthal Center, said the material on display every year in Doha “violates the values promoted by Unesco“.

Samuels listed at least 35 anti-Semitic titles, including nine editions of the anti-Semitic forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, four editions of Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler, and four editions of Henry Ford’s The International Jew. “From this point of view, Doha is far from Paris,” said Samuels, referring to the general headquarters of UNESCO.

Qatar is the puppeteer behind UNESCO’s anti-Semitic resolution on Jerusalem, and a world center of Islamic extremism. Doha just held a meeting between the Palestinian Authority’s leader, Mahmoud Abbas, and the heads of Hamas, a terrorist organization devoted to the destruction of the State of Israel. Qatar does not make a secret of trying to submit Western culture to the Muslim crescent. The only question is, which country’s culture will UNESCO erase next?

The Qatari royal family is now much involved in “the arts.” According to the BBC, “To take a recent example, the Qatari royal family sponsored the Tate’s Damien Hirst retrospective. It’s now moved to Doha, where Tate director Nicholas Serota attended the official launch.” Major works by Warhol, Bacon, Rothko, Koons and Hirst are all thought to have made their way to Qatar.

Qatar is buying academic chairs in Europe’s universities, such as the pact between Doha and Rome’s Tor Vergata. What is the university presumably expected to do for Qatar in exchange for that? Qatar academic purchases are also the subject of Le Monde’s investigation entitled, “Tariq Ramadan: le sphinx,” which details how Tariq Ramadan, the well-known European Muslim intellectual, was been able to obtain a chair at the University of Oxford. Mediapart, the French leftist magazine, ran a long exposé about Tariq Ramadan as “Qatar’s showcase.”

The Qatari monarchy, in 2015 alone, donated £11 million to renew Oxford’s St Antony’s College, where Tariq Ramadan works. Sheikha Moza, the wife of Emir Al Thani, inaugurated the magnificent building designed by the late architect, Zaha Hadid.

Qatar also financed the creation of an Islamic section at the Bloomsbury publishing house and the “Doha Debates” program that aired on the BBC. It would be interesting to know how Qatar’s sharia can find agreement with the sybaritic Bloomsbury’s British culture.

The attorney-general of Qatar also signed an agreement with the president of Sorbonne University, Philippe Boutry, in Paris, for the enrollment of hundreds of migrants from the Middle East. The Sorbonne accepted 600,000 euros a year, for three years.

Many British universities also receive large donations from Qatar. University College London, for example, has an archeology campus in Qatar. The Qatar Development Fund recently donated $4.3 million to the Margaret Thatcher Scholarship Trust at Oxford University.

Qatar is also having a shopping spree in American universities, and is funding their university departments in the Arabian desert. Universities such as Cornell, Carnegie Mellon, Georgetown, Texas A&M and Virginia Commonwealth have all signed agreements with Emir Al Thani. Each will receive $320 million dollars a year.

Students of American Universities based in Doha are also invited to attend the sermons of Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the spiritual mentor of the Muslim Brotherhood, who is known for his hate-ridden religious edicts. The Simon Wiesenthal Center has called it “outrageous” for Cornell University to decide to open a campus in Doha while the kingdom funds Hamas’s war against Israel.

The Financial Times once called Qatar “the world’s most aggressive deal hunter.” Emir Al Thani is now promoting a takeover of Western culture. But very few in Europe seem to care about that. Is it because “it is difficult to avoid its money and influence“, especially for an economically depressed Europe? With their telling silence, are they simply aligning with Qatar’s sharia rulers, and hoping they will chosen to be bought out next?

Categories: Academia and Islamists, Antisemitism, Arab nations, Human rights organizations, Islamist organizations, Israel, Jerusalem, Palestinians, Qatar, UNESCO
Tags: Academia and Islamists, Antisemitism, Arab nations, Human rights organizations, Islamist organizations, Israel, Jerusalem, Palestinians, Qatar, UNESCO

Comments: Be the first to comment

CAIR’s Agenda: Islamization of America, Not Protecting Muslims from Civil Rights Abuses

October 31, 2016

CAIR’s Agenda: Islamization of America, Not Protecting Muslims from Civil Rights Abuses, Jihad Watch, Andres Harrod, October 31, 2016

(Excellent reference material on CAIR and its associated Islamist organizations. — DM)

cair-terrorist-organization-hp_3

This article is part of the Organization Trends series.

Summary: The terrorist-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) claims to be America’s largest civil rights organization for Muslims. But its agenda has more to do with the Islamization of America than with protecting Muslims from civil rights abuses.

Capital Research Center last examined the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and its aggressive, jihad terrorism-whitewashing Islamists in the August 2005 Organization Trends. CAIR statements and actions in recent years show that this organization, which sprang out of the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, has in no way changed its radical spots—a fact that ought to call into question its continuing respectability in media and politics.

The basics

Information about CAIR’s revenue sources is surprisingly difficult to come by. IRS filings reveal donations to CAIR by Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors ($30,000 since 2008), Silicon Valley Community Foundation ($90,000 since 2008), and Tides Foundation ($5,000 since 2002). CAIR is actually registered as CAIR Foundation Inc., a public charity recognized under section 501(c)(3) of the tax code. That entity reported a budget of $2,632,410 in 2014 and gross receipts of $2,355,032. It also claims to have had 28 employees in 2014 and 40 volunteers. Many of CAIR’s state and local chapters are separately incorporated as nonprofits.

CAIR was founded in 1994 by Nihad Awad, Omar Ahmad, and Rafeeq Jaber. The three men were linked to the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), which was established by senior Hamas operative Mousa Abu Marzook and created to serve as Hamas’ public relations and recruitment arm in the United States. CAIR opened an office in Washington, D.C., by using a $5,000 grant from the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), a charity that the Bush administration closed down in 2001 for collecting money “to support the Hamas terror organization.”

CAIR’s ties to terrorists are recognized on Capitol Hill. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) has said, “CAIR is unusual in its extreme rhetoric and its associations with groups that are suspect.” Before leaving Congress in 2013, Rep. Sue Myrick (R-N.C.) said, “Groups like CAIR have a proven record of senior officials being indicted and either imprisoned or deported from the United States.”

Ghassan Elashi, a co-founder of Texas CAIR, was convicted in 2005 of terrorism-related offenses and sentenced to almost seven years imprisonment. CAIR civil rights director Randall Todd Royer was given 20 years for federal weapons and explosives convictions in 2004. Bassem Khafagi, a community affairs director at CAIR, was convicted in 2003 on bank and visa fraud charges and shipped back to Egypt. Rabih Haddad, a fundraiser for CAIR’s chapter in Ann Arbor, Mich., was detained in 2001 for overstaying his visa. Authorities found a firearm and considerable ammunition in his home. He served 19 months in prison and was then deported to Lebanon in 2003. CAIR board member Abdurahman Alamoudi was sentenced to 23 years imprisonment for directing at least $1 million to al-Qaeda. (See Foundation Watch, December 2015.)

“Contending that American Muslims are the victims of wholesale repression, CAIR has provided sensitivity training to police departments across the United States, instructing law officers in the art of dealing with Muslims respectfully,” according to DiscoverTheNetworks. The estate of 9/11 victim John O’Neill Sr., a senior FBI counter-terrorism agent, filed a lawsuit claiming that CAIR’s goal “is to create as much self-doubt, hesitation, fear of name-calling, and litigation within police department and intelligence agencies as possible so as to render such authorities ineffective in pursuing international and domestic terrorist entities.”

CAIR and its allies have spent years pressuring the FBI to give Muslims special treatment in investigations. As of 2012, FBI agents weren’t allowed to treat individuals associated with terrorist groups as potential threats to the nation, according to an FBI directive titled, “Guiding Principles: Touchstone Document on Training.” The fact that a terrorism suspect is associated with a terrorist group means nothing, according to the document. (“Terrorist? Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” Matthew Vadum, FrontPage Mag, Sept. 24, 2012)

In the aftermath to 9/11, CAIR refused to blame Osama bin Laden for those terrorist attacks. Earlier, in 1998 CAIR denied bin Laden was responsible for two al-Qaeda bombings of U.S. embassies in Africa. The group claimed the bombings resulted from “misunderstandings of both sides.” The same year CAIR objected to a Los Angeles billboard that called bin Laden “the sworn enemy,” claiming it was “offensive to Muslims.”

Guess who’s coming to dinner

CAIR’s list of gala dinner honorees from its 2015 annual banquet underlines CAIR’s continuing extremism. (CAIR’s aversion towards critical observers kept this writer out of the gala dinner.) CAIR recognized Omar Suleiman, an American sheikh who has defended sex-slavery and encouraged the murder of adulterous Muslim women by family members. He describes himself as an “advocate for a global non-violent resistance to apartheid Israel,” claiming recent stabbing attacks in Israel “are not random acts of violence. They are the unfortunate result and response to decades of … ethnic cleansing of an indigenous people.” Interestingly, his past condemnations of homosexuality as a “repugnant shameless sin” did not prevent him from declaring that Muslims “stand in solidarity with the LGBTQ community” before a Texas LGBT group after the Orlando, Florida, massacre earlier this year.

During the same month, the annual banquet for CAIR’s New York chapter honored Imam Siraj Wahhaj and the executive director of CAIR’s Florida chapter, Hassan Shibly. A Hezbollah defender, Shibly equates Israeli “apartheid” and “state terrorism” with Nazism, while he supports sharia law in Muslim-majority societies and spews conspiracy theories concerning U.S. national security. Considered by American authorities a possible 1993 World Trade Center bombing conspirator, the pro-jihad, pro-sharia Wahhaj is a former CAIR board member.

CAIR branches invited extremists to their 2016 gala dinners as well. CAIR’s Minnesota chapter honored Johari Abdul-Malik, the imam of a terrorist-tied mosque who has advocated sabotaging Israeli infrastructure. A CAIR-Cincinnati banquet hosted keynote speaker Alaf Husain, vice president of the Muslim Brotherhood-derived Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), which has decried Israel as an “apartheid” state from its founding. After 9/11, when Husain was president of the Muslim Students Association (MSA) from which ISNA developed, he admitted to a mere “oversight” when links were discovered between the MSA website and terror-tied groups.

CAIR-Cleveland hosted Canadian sheikh Alaa Elsayed and the writer Murtaza Husain. The dinner featured a “Mother’s Day Tribute,” which is ironic, given that Elsayed has supported wife-beating, bigamy, and polygamy. His comments upon a past Canadian honor killing focused on the importance of a daughter wearing a hijab, not her murder by her father.

Yet Husain focuses his literary ire on those who would in any way scrutinize Islam and Muslims. He has called Muslim reformer Maajid Nawaza a “well-coiffed talking monkey,” “native informant,” and “porch monkey,” and he’s described Iranian-American commentator Sohrab Ahmari as “one of the most prominent Iranian ‘Uncle Tom’s’ of the neoconservative movement.” He has condemned American law enforcement surveillance of certain Muslims, while ignoring the valid concerns that led to such scrutiny.

CAIR-Cleveland is no stranger to controversy, having hosted Monzer Taleb, an unindicted terrorism-financing conspirator who sang “I am from Hamas” at a 2009 fundraising banquet. Nonetheless, CAIR’s Florida chapter co-hosted Taleb yet again at a 2014 event in Tampa, and he recently planned to address a mosque in Wichita, Kansas, but cancelled after a public outcry. Speaking in his defense and using his own self-description, CAIR-Dallas/Fort Worth executive director Alia Salem reportedly described him as a “motivational speaker and leader within the Muslim community.” He is an “upstanding citizen” and “very prominent community leader” in his Dallas home area, Salem said.

As in life, so in death CAIR’s extremism continues, as shown by CAIR condolences for the deceased Ahmad Sakr in 2015. “Very few people in our community have left a legacy comparable to that of Dr. Sakr,” said CAIR-cofounder Awad of a founding member of the Muslim Brotherhood-derived Muslim Students Association. “My very first few English sermons in 1989 as a student in Austin were read from his books,” said CAIR’s southern California chapter executive director, Hussam Ayloush. “No words can describe how much we owe him.”

Sakr impresses objective observers less in light of his 2011 lectures at a Florida camp for Islamic schoolchildren. In one he declares that “here in America the Congress puts themselves in the position of Allah” by instituting laws contradicting Islam’s supposedly divine decrees. Such a legislature is a false pagan institution, he said. “How can you see Allah on the Day of Judgment and he says ‘you crazy man, you crazy woman you put yourself in my position, you want to take over my position, go to Hell,’” Sakr stated. After asking the schoolchildren whether they are proud as Muslims or Americans (they respond with the expected answer of Muslims), he said that “America is trying to entangle itself with every foreign country and to control it.”

In another children’s camp lecture, Sakr emphasizes the orthodox Islamic understanding that “Islam is a total way of life” in contrast to other religions. Accordingly, not only should Muslims prioritize Islamic commands in case of any conflict with secular governance, but his pupils should seek the Muslim Brotherhood’s goal of an “Islamization of science and technology”; “Islamize your profession,” he stated. Reflecting Suleiman, Sakr said of homosexuality that “all of us have to condemn it and say this is unnatural,” and he referenced the Islamic teaching that God destroyed Sodom with an earthquake.

Hating Israel

According to a 2015 Anti-Defamation League (ADL) report, CAIR has a longstanding hatred of Israel, as demonstrated by the CAIR executive director Nihad Awad at a 2014 Washington, D.C., rally. He said Israel is a “terrorist state” and that the American-Israeli Political Action Committee “should have its hand off the United States Congress. They have corrupted our foreign policy.”

CAIR “chapters continue to partner with various anti-Israel groups that seek to isolate and demonize the Jewish State,” the ADL notes, such as the anti-Semitic and jihadist-tied Council on the National Interest (CNI). CAIR and CNI collaborated in presenting a 2006 Washington, D.C., lecture by the Islam apologist Karen Armstrong.

CAIR National Board member Sarwat Husain (no relation) similarly wrote in 2009 that Israel practices “state sponsored terrorism at its best.” “No other country in the world have [sic] terrorized as many people for so long as Israel has for more than half a century.” CAIR-Georgia executive director Edward Ahmed Mitchell has tweeted that the American-Israeli Political Action Committee “is the only explanation for US’s morally bankrupt Israel policy.”

CAIR San Francisco Bay Area (CAIR-SFBA) executive director Zahra Billoo has declared that “Zionism is racism” and that “Israel ‘defending’ itself is analogous to Nazi Germany defending itself from Jewish uprising.”

Mongi Dhaouadi, the executive director of CAIR’s Connecticut chapter, does not let facts disturb the anti-Israel animus. At a 2010 Connecticut rally he ranted that Israel had “murdered” 1,400 people during the 2008–2009 Cast Lead military strikes against Gaza, thereby furthering the completely unsubstantiated charges of indiscriminate use of military force by the Israelis. His CAIR chapter executive director colleague in Arizona, Imraan Siddiqui has referenced debunked propaganda posters that claim “Palestinians were cleansed from their land.”

Not surprisingly, Dhaouadi and Siddiqui have led their respective CAIR chapters in supporting Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel. (See Organization Trends, January 2016.) CAIR-CT in 2014 called for Connecticut to sever financial ties to an Israel that “discriminates against its citizens on the basis of ethnicity and wages a war against innocent and unarmed civilians,” according to Dhaouadi. Like CAIR’s California chapter, CAIR-AZ in 2016 opposed an Arizona bill requiring state pension system divestment from any company boycotting Israel. “It would be un-American to deny constituents the right to work to change the illegal and discriminatory actions of a foreign government,” Siddiqui said. In 2011 CAIR’s Los Angeles chapter (CAIR-LA) opposed criminal prosecution of University of California (Irvine) students who disrupted an Israeli ambassador’s speech.

Siddiqui, CAIR-LA former vice president and current CAIR National Board member Masoud Nassimi, Billoo, and CAIR as an organization signed a 2014 statement supporting BDS because “funding racism and Apartheid is un-American.” Supporting the “BDS Campaign to end occupation” would recreate a “non-violent tactic that was employed successfully during the South African freedom struggle.” Among the demands was a Palestinian “right of return” for millions descended from Palestinian refugees.

Corey Saylor, in 2007 the director of CAIR’s Department to Monitor and Combat Islamophobia, rejected what he called undue reliance on the “Israeli Apartheid lobby.” His antipathy towards Israel flows logically enough from his work from 1998 to 2001 with the now-defunct American Muslims for Jerusalem (AMJ), whose November 1999 fundraising dinner struck one participant as “crudely anti-Jewish.” Speakers like Awad and Abdurahman Alamoudi, who was subsequently convicted on terrorism charges, “vied with one another in verbally assaulting the State of Israel and American Jews,” Middle East scholar Daniel Pipes reported.

Such events were no exception for AMJ, which helped organize a notorious October 28, 2000 rally outside the White House at which Alamoudi expressed support for Hamas and Hezbollah before cheering crowds. AMJ executive director Khalid Turaani likewise attended conferences calling for jihad against Israel. He proclaimed to Palestinians at a 2002 AMJ conference that “Allah will allow you to conquer the land of Palestine. Its men, its women, and its servants are in a state of jihad until the Day of Judgment.” He added that “for too long the extremist pro-Israel groups have literally gotten away with murder” and that “we will never forget Jenin,” a reference to the myth that Israel perpetrated a massacre in that city.

Turaani’s fellow conference speakers included the notorious anti-Semite Alison Weir, who likened the Palestinian terrorist to a “terrorized victim who has tragically but explicably turned to violence.” Even more anti-Semitic was the neo-Nazi William Baker, who invoked the aforementioned Palestinian “Right of Return” in such circles. In their midst CAIR founder Omar Ahmed declared that “pro-Israeli groups have brainwashed Americans.”

Several of the conference speakers such as Yahia Abdul Rahman had links to the Islamic Shura Council of Southern California, an organization uniting several Muslim Brotherhood groups and individuals. The Islamic supremacist and Hezbollah defender Mather Hathout discussed Israeli “apartheid” and “Israeli-occupied territory” in Congress, a body “more Zionist than the Knesset” (Israel’s parliament). Former ISNA president and jihad/sharia proponent Muzammil Siddiqi stated that “Zionists have created much confusion and misconception in the minds of Americans” concerning Jerusalem. He had discussed Jerusalem at AMJ’s first meeting in Washington in 1999 at which he falsely asserted that “Muslims established and practiced the most tolerant multi-religious and multi-faith character of Jerusalem.”

Contrary to the anti-Israeli invective of CAIR and its allies, CAIR has “for many years … refused to unequivocally condemn Palestinian terror organizations and Hezbollah by name,” ADL notes. Accordingly, in a 2013 interview Ayloush condemned any group that “engages in the harming of civilians” but refused to name Hamas specifically. Any such question concerning Hamas, he added, is “not acceptable,” and “proves that you have nothing but bigotry in you.”

“As a civil rights organization we’re not here in the business of being dragged into the Middle East affairs,” Ayloush said of CAIR, falsely describing it as a purely “American organization.” Organizations like the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) have amply documented CAIR’s serial condemnations of American and Israeli national security policies. Ayloush himself described American support for various dictatorships in Muslim countries as “partly responsible” for the 2015 San Bernardino jihadist massacre.

CAIR might have tried to acquire a more diverse, multicultural image with the 2013 appointment of Jacob Bender as the executive director of the organization’s Philadelphia chapter. Although the “first American Jew to head a chapter of a Muslim community organization,” the ADL notes, “Bender’s previous activism reveals a record of hostility towards the Jewish State that is consistent with CAIR’s anti-Israel agenda.” Bender and CAIR laughably claimed that Islam did not motivate a January 2016 stabbing attack on a Philadelphia policeman by a man screaming “Allahu Akbar.”

A fifth column

CAIR’s ideology presents a threat both to American civil society and U.S. national security. “If we are practicing Muslims, we are above the law of the land,” CAIR Dallas/Fort Worth executive director and Hamas apologist Mustafa Carroll said in 2013. Syed, whose CAIR-Missouri featured in 2013 the venomous Khalid Yasin, once appealed online to Muslims to “Report anti Islamic and anti Muslim content on the internet to appropriate authorities … take actions according to the Shariah.” Given sharia’s death penalty for blasphemy, his call could have lethal implications depending upon where Muslims worldwide heeded it.

Other CAIR members like Dallas leader Alia Salem, speaking after the 2015 Garland, Texas, attack upon a cartoon exhibit that invited artists to depict the Muslim prophet Muhammad, also seem more influenced by sharia than by the principle of free speech. “When does free speech become hate speech, and when does hate speech become incitement to violence?” Salem asked. “Free speech is not the same as responsible speech.” After the publication of the 2005 Danish Muhammad cartoons, Sarwat Husain said that the “West has crossed all the boundaries of civility for the followers of Islam” and displayed “unethical double standards” in equating anti-Semitic expression with criticism of Islam. She decried a “free passport and an open season to degrade Islam, Muslims” for Western media and asked whether they wanted a “right of freedom of expression or an intentional attempt to provoke a violent reaction.” While the “freedom of expression in a democratic society must always be balanced by the no-less-important notion of social responsibility,” the West’s “dogma of free speech and the freedom of expression is destructive to the rest of the world.”

Husain’s condemnation of strict, even satirical scrutiny of Islam, makes sense given her one-sided adulation of Islam, as indicated by an article of hers from Christmas 2015. Her ecumenical appeal to Christians that “Islam respects and honors Jesus as a prophet, the same way it respects and honors Muhammad” falsely equated Quran 98:5 with Jesus’ Greatest Commandment. While this commandment directs Jesus’ followers to “Love your neighbor as yourself,” the zakat in Quran 98:5 does not have the common meaning of “charity” as translated by her. Rather, the almsgiving demanded by Islamic doctrine from its followers resembles more a compulsory tax serving only the Islamic community, including its jihad-related military demands. (“Uncharitable,” by Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review, April 23, 2011)

Husain also draws a deceptive equivalence between the Greatest Commandment’s “Love the Lord your God” and Quran 98:5’s stipulation that believers “were not commanded except to worship Allah.” Yet this worship must have the “correct religion,” as the subsequent verse 98:6 condemns rejecters of Islam as the “worst of creatures” who “will be in the fire of Hell,” an important caveat considering the differences between Christianity and Islam. As Husain herself wrote in 2010, Islam claims that Jesus was not crucified, but rather “God saved Jesus and took him to paradise until the hour would come to complete his mission in the end of time.”

Husain’s dubious assessments of Islam extend beyond theology to more temporal matters like women’s rights as shown by her participation in a 2006 St. Edward’s University panel in Austin, Texas. As a reporter recounted, Husain “felt privileged to be a part of a religion that gave so many rights to its women” and believed that the “fight for feminism in the West has been done already for Muslim women in Islam.” While women worldwide have struggled for equality for centuries, supposedly “all those rights were given to women 1,400 years ago” in Islam, according to her and notwithstanding numerous Islamic doctrines oppressing women internationally today. While she has recounted the lasting success of her arranged marriage at the age of 17 in India to a man she had never met, abusive Islamic child marriages in Nigeria, for example, have been far less blissful.

Like Husain, other CAIR officials unswervingly express a Panglossian optimism about the House of Islam’s condition. CAIR’s website proclaims that “several scholarly works suggest that religion (Islam) is not the cause of terrorism,” while the executive director of CAIR’s Minnesota chapter, Jaylani Hussein, argued during a terrorism case that jihad did not mean “holy war.” “In America the greatest threat to any American is right-wing extremism,” Syed stated in 2015.

CAIR’s Oklahoma chapter executive director Adam Soltani tweeted after Orlando jihadist slaughter that “there is absolutely nothing in Islam that calls for the killing of homosexuals or anyone else for that matter.” Siddiqui made similar claims completely contrary to the lethal facts concerning Islamic doctrinal condemnation of homosexuality. In turn, Ahmed Bedier, CAIR-Tampa’s founder and past leader who has accused Israel of “Nazi-like tactics,” presented at CAIR-CT’s 2010 banquet various World War II Muslims who, he said, were heroic because they sheltered Jews during the Holocaust while the “Catholic Church looked the other way.” His analysis not only involves discredited accusations against the Vatican, but ignores various Islamic genocidal ambitions against the Jews both during and after the Holocaust.

For CAIR officials like Cyrus McGoldrick, CAIR-New York’s America- and Israel-hating former civil rights director, a top concern is an irrational “Islamophobia” prejudicially targeting Muslims. “War depends on Islamophobia. Zionism depends on Islamophobia,” he said in 2012. “This goes back to the original colonization of this country and moving Native Americans into concentration camps that we call reservations.”

CAIR’s “Islamophobia” obsession often reaches absurd dimensions, such as when CAIR-Florida in April “condemned a xenophobic alert sent out by the University of Central Florida.” In this case involving a false report of a gunman on campus, CAIR-Florida inexplicably criticized “‘Middle Eastern origin’ as part of the alleged suspect description.” CAIR National Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper urged in 2013 with like ludicrousness that media avoid the now ubiquitous term “Islamist.” This “has become shorthand for ‘Muslims we don’t like’” and a word “currently used in an almost exclusively pejorative context.”

In CAIR’s twisted understanding moderate Muslims like Zuhdi Jasser who publicly confront dangers from within their faith face derision as “Uncle Tom Muslims” and “Uncle Zuhdi” from Billoo and Dhaouadi respectively. Billoo has repeatedly condemned American military personnel on several Memorial Days, leveling the accusation that they are “engaged in terrorism.” Yet Dhaouadi has uncritically quoted Muslim Brotherhood founder Hasan al-Banna, and Billoo has expressed admiration for convicted terrorism supporter (and CAIR-SFBA honoree) Sami Al-Arian and faux moderate Muslim Tariq Ramadan.

For all of their vitriol against United States Navy veteran Jasser and his fellow service members, Billoo and Dhaouadi have never condemned their fellow CAIR chapter executive director in Michigan, Dawud Walid. He has supported Hamas involvement in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, claimed that Muslims have “no other choice” but suicide bombing attacks against Israel, and espoused various conspiracy accusations against law enforcement. In glaring contradiction to Sarwat Husain, one of his 2016 Facebook postings condemned saying “Happy Easter” to Christians as a blasphemous affirmation of Christianity’s triune understanding of God. “Who are those who incurred the wrath of Allah?” Walid asked in a 2012 sermon. “They are the Jews.”

Nonetheless, no one should expect Husain to expose Walid’s assaults on interfaith harmony, given her history of duplicity. The Investigative Project on Terrorism caught her in 2008 observing that “it is very important, media in the United States is very gullible” and “especially as a Muslim, if you have something to say, they’ll come running to you. And take advantage of that.” A CAIR slide also revealed by the Investigative Project revealingly described the “Characteristics of a Journalist” as “They will expect you to do their work. Let them … Does little primary research … Under extreme deadline pressure … Fears charges of inaccuracy.”

While journalists may labor under such shortcomings, the double games of Husain and others provide a clear, compelling indictment of CAIR’s nefariousness. There is simply no justification for responsible authorities to respect CAIR’s claim to be the “nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization” when the group conceals its jihadist agenda. The group’s harmful actions were devastating in 2011, when CAIR and 56 other organizations successfully convinced the federal government to purge training materials of derogatory information about Islamic doctrine. Instead, government officials should follow the FBI’s 2008 decision to end normal relations with CAIR, an organization that is freedom’s foe, not friend, more meriting of prosecution than policy influence.

Categories: CAIR, CAIR funding, Civil rights, Islamisation, Islamist organizations, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Israel, Sharia law
Tags: CAIR, CAIR funding, Civil rights, Islamisation, Islamist organizations, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Israel, Sharia law

Comments: Be the first to comment

The New Anti-Racist Racists

October 28, 2016

The New Anti-Racist Racists, Gatestone Institute, Douglas Murray, October 28, 2016

There is a trait campaigning groups have that is well known. Once they have achieved their objective, they continue. Usually it is because there are people with salaries at stake, pensions, perks and more.

Suddenly the SPLC seemed to spy a new fascism. The SPLC saw this new fascism in people who objected to people flying planes into skyscrapers, decapitating journalists and aid workers and blowing up the finish line of marathons.

One got the impression that it had become immensely useful for some people to be able to smear those concerned about Islamic fundamentalism, and try to make them akin to Nazis. The only other movements who find this equally useful are, of course, Islamic extremists.

Here is this “anti-racist” organisation, largely made up of white men who present themselves as being anti-racists, and yet who spend their time attacking Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a black immigrant woman. At the top of any list of “hate-groups,” the SPLC must in future be sure to place itself.

The SPLC’s list of “anti-Muslim activists” also includes a practising Muslim, Maajid Nawaz, one of the most principled and courageous people around calling out the extremists in his faith for their bigotry and hatred. He does so, like Hirsi Ali, at no small risk to himself.

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SLPC), based in Montgomery, Alabama, has struck again. The self-appointed boundary-markers and policemen of free discussion have issued what they call a “Field Guide” to help “guide” the media in “countering prominent anti-Muslim extremists.” It is hard to know where to start with such idiocy, so let us start from the beginning.

The SPLC was founded in 1971, ostensibly to fight for civil rights among other good causes. By the end of its first decade it was targeting the KKK and other racist organisations. So far so good. But like many a campaigning organisation, they experienced the happy blow of basically winning their argument. By the 1990s, there were mercifully few racist groups in America going about unchallenged. When a member of the KKK cropped up everybody in civil society pretty much understood that here was a bad person who should not be given a free pass.

But there is an odd trait in campaigning groups that is well known. Once they have achieved their objective, they continue. Why is this so? Usually it is because there are people with salaries at stake, pensions, perks and more. Campaigning for a particular thing or against a particular thing has become their way of life and their means of earning. And so they find a way to continue. For some years, the SPLC staggered around in such a manner, as pointless and purposeless an organisation as could be imagined.

And then in the last decade something happened to this increasingly obscure institution. It is not for me to speculate why or how this happened, whether it had to do with new staff or new money, but the focus of the organisation changed. Suddenly the SPLC seemed to spy a new fascism. They did not spy it in people who flew planes into skyscrapers, decapitated American journalists and aid workers or blew up the finish line of marathons. No, the SPLC saw it somewhere else. The SPLC saw this new fascism in people who objected to people flying planes into skyscrapers, decapitating journalists and aid workers and blowing up the finish line of marathons. For the SPLC, the big threat on the horizon was not Islamists but those people who objected to Islamists — that is, people they called “Islamophobes.” In the same way, they did not seem to have any particular problem with jihad, but they developed a huge problem with people they called “counter-jihadists.” To their existing lists of designated “hate-groups” they now added such people.

More honest groups might have balked at such a stance. More informed groups would have walked a thousand miles from such a stance. But the SPLC did no such thing. In fact, one got the impression that it had become immensely useful for some people to be able to smear those concerned about Islamic fundamentalism and try to make them akin to Nazis. The only other movements who find this equally useful are, of course, Islamic extremists.

The media today in America are increasingly wary of Islamic extremists. Most journalists do not want the parameters of what should be discussed dictated by Islamic fanatics. Whereas an organisation such as the SPLC, which did something good forty years ago, is the sort of institution that the media is for the time-being happy to hear from. Perhaps after this latest development that will no longer be the case.

The SPLC’s latest production is disgraceful, discrediting and sloppy even by its own increasingly disgraceful, discredited and sloppy standards. For this publication, they have listed “Fifteen anti-Muslim activists,” most likely in the hope that they will scare the media off inviting them on, or the wider public from being allowed to listen to them.

Among the list is Ayaan Hirsi Ali. The SPLC lists a set of allegedly outrageous things that she has said, which have appeared in such obscure and extreme venues as The Wall Street Journal and The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. They mention in passing — as though it were an incidental mishap — that Hirsi Ali’s film-making partner, Theo van Gogh, was slaughtered on an Amsterdam street by a jihadist, with a death-threat to Hirsi Ali pinned into van Gogh’s dying body. But they still clearly cannot imagine why anybody would have a problem with such a thing. One wonders how the staff of the SPLC would feel if one of their colleagues was murdered in such a manner? Doubtless they would shrug it off. Yet it remains that case that here is this “anti-racist” organisation, largely made up of white men who present themselves as being anti-racists, and yet who spend their time attacking a black immigrant woman.

Hirsi Ali is of course well known for being an ex-Muslim. But the SPLC’s list of “anti-Muslim activists” also includes a practising Muslim. Of course, if Maajid Nawaz were an Islamic extremist then SPLC would have nothing to say about him. But Maajid Nawaz is not an extremist — he is one of the most principled and courageous people around calling out the extremists in his faith for their bigotry and hatred. He does so, like Hirsi Ali, at no small risk to himself. If the jihadists within Islam are ever going to be defeated, it will be because of Muslims like Nawaz, who are willing to argue for reform on liberal, progressive, pluralistic and democratic grounds.

Yet for the SPLC, this Muslim is not just not the right type of Muslim — he is “anti-Muslim.” The charges that SPLC levels against Nawaz are (this is not satire) that he has (a) co-operated with, rather than worked against, the British police (b) suggested that customers in banks should have to show their faces (c) once failed to abide by the most hardline interpretation of Islamic blasphemy law (d) once visited a strip club on his stag-night.

2001

The Southern Poverty Law Center decided to turn itself into a racist organization, with its attacks on principled and courageous critics of radical Islamism such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali (left), a prominent ex-Muslim writer, and Maajid Nawaz (right), a moderate practising Muslim writer, radio host and politician. (Images source: Wikimedia Commons)

Who knows what lapses in personal decorum have occurred among the staff of the SPLC? Perhaps one of them once had extra-marital intercourse? Or perhaps one of them once consumed a glass of Merlot, in contravention of the hardest-line interpretations of Islamic scripture? Who knows, but who the hell would anybody else be to judge, and who the hell do the SPLC think they are? It seems that the SPLC has decided to turn itself from an anti-racist organisation into a racist one. An organisation that used to prosecute white racists has ended up attacking black and Muslim immigrants. At the top of any list of “hate-groups,” the SPLC must in future be sure to place itself.

Categories: Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation, Islamist organizations, Islamists in America, Islamists vs Islam, Islamophobia, Racism, Southern Poverty Law Center
Tags: Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation, Islamist organizations, Islamists in America, Islamists vs Islam, Islamophobia, Racism, Southern Poverty Law Center

Comments: Be the first to comment

The unseen war: The Islamist assault on dissidents

October 21, 2016

The unseen war: The Islamist assault on dissidents, Asia Times, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, October 20, 2016

Since September 2001, terrorism has dominated the headlines. But there is a much less discussed form of terrorism — assault on dissidents in which the very systems meant to protect them fail and hand them over to their killers.

The attack on dissidents is robbing families of their loved ones, instilling fear in communities, and obstructing many pathways toward deep reform within the House of Islam. It is long overdue for security forces and governments to modify their policies and stand unwaveringly by the universal human right of free speech.

Last month, Jordanian writer and political activist Nahed Hattar was murdered in cold blood outside a local court for “insulting Islam” by sharing a satirical cartoon on his Facebook page.

2016-09-28t150210z_88909722_s1beudxnneab_rtrmadp_3_jordan-writer-shooting-580x387

Relatives and activists cry during the funeral of Jordanian writer Nahed Hattar, who was shot dead, in the town of Al-Fuheis near Amman, Jordan. Photo: REUTERS/Muhammad Hamed

Hattar was murdered by a “known extremist” cleric as he was facing trial by his own government which opposed his freedom expression. These autocratic and quasi-theocratic governments often light the fuses of radicalism which at times they explode themselves and other times hand over blindly to rogue assassins who they empower.

In Bangladesh, bloggers who question theocracy are slaughtered in broad daylight – this year alone, at least eight dissident bloggers have been murdered. In Pakistan, dissidents and even lawmakers who break rank with the religious establishment are murdered with impunity – often with their own bodyguards tipping off and aiding the killers. When they are not killed, Muslim reformers, dissidents and freethinkers are threatened, stalked and made to live in fear. With the continued advance of Islamic State and those who are inspired by them, the problem is growing.

While some of these cases make headlines, many go unnoticed by the broader public. Worst of all, those who tacitly endorse such crimes are more prevalent than ever. Even in the United States, non-violent Islamists enthusiastically harass reformists on social media and at public events, spotlighting them with slanderous comments, inciting others to hate them, and leaking false personal information about them online.

You’d think that the broader society would completely marginalize such malignant actors. Unfortunately, you’d be wrong in many cases.

Nonviolent Islamists who knowingly cause dissidents to be targeted with harassment and threats aren’t just allowed to continue their malicious activities – they are positioned as representatives of the Muslim community in the media and even in the halls of political power, from Washington to London and even at the United Nations. It is when these individuals are granted legitimacy through political and social clout that they become even more dangerous.

For example, in the United States, Islamist groups like the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), whose leadership has targeted members of the Muslim Reform Movement (including myself) as well as women’s rights and LGBT activists, have trained law enforcement on how to treat Muslims – when they themselves incite hate campaigns against minorities within the Muslim community.

At the United Nations, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) claims to represent all of the world’s Muslims and even purporting to fight anti-Muslim bigotry. However, the OIC’s ideology and resulting actions – which include seeking to criminalize any speech or art they deem “offensive” to their interpretation of Islam – are exactly what inspire radicals to slit the throats of dissidents. Their governments and attendant systems are the malignant cauldrons that brew the ideas, culture, legalisms, and ideologues that suffocate reform.

The OIC, true to its name, has one purpose and that is to maintain control of the “House of Islam” by Islamists and suppress the diverse voices of anti-Islamist, pro-liberty reformers. Each Islamist regime does both domestically and globally. Domestically, they do so either directly or passive-aggressively by giving militants impunity over the murder of reformers, and globally they do so by making the free world in the West believe that Islamism and its attendant sharia states is the only possible form of Islam.

How can this be stopped? Through the education of the Muslim community as to the nefarious aims of Islamist regimes and their sympathizers; and by holding politicians, the media and national security establishments worldwide accountable for their empowerment of the worst within the Muslim community. While we must pay urgent heed to stopping violent extremism, that is only a tactic among many tried by Islamist movements. We must more importantly engage boldly and take sides in the war of ideas within the “House of Islam.” We must disarm non-violent Islamists as the theocrats they are in their war against dissidents, minorities and truth-sayers.

Categories: CAIR, Islamic dissidents, Islamic reformation, Islamist "democracy", Islamist organizations, Islamists in America, OIC, Zuhdi Jasser
Tags: CAIR, Islamic dissidents, Islamic reformation, Islamist "democracy", Islamist organizations, Islamists in America, OIC, Zuhdi Jasser

Comments: Be the first to comment

Soros Money, Muslim Advocates Leader, Helped Weaken Homeland Security Policies

October 7, 2016

Soros Money, Muslim Advocates Leader, Helped Weaken Homeland Security Policies, Investigative Project on Terrorism, John Rossomando, October 7, 2016

(Please see also, Pentagon still unsure of whether to link Islam with violent jihad. — DM)

1855

A Muslim legal group, girded with $1.8 million in grant money from George Soros’s Open Society Foundations (OSF), has helped influence major policy changes in the war on terror, including the Department of Homeland Security’s screening of individuals with suspected terror ties and the FBI’s training program for its agents working in counterterrorism.

Internal records, made public by the hacking group DC Leaks, show OSF spent $40 million between 2008 and 2010 on programs aimed at weakening U.S. counterterrorism policy.

Muslim Advocates’ Executive Director Farhana Khera played a key role in shaping the foundations’ spending. Khera co-authored a 2007 memo that “informed” the foundations’ U.S. Programs Board’s decision to create the National Security and Human Rights Campaign (NSHRC), a Sept. 14, 2010 OSF document discussing the program’s reauthorization, shows.

The NSHRC’s goals included:

Closing Guantanamo Bay, eliminating torture and methods such as the extraordinary rendition of prisoners, and ending the use of secret prisons;

Ending warrantless and “unchecked” surveillance;

Ensuring that anti-terrorism laws and law enforcement activities do not target freedom of speech, association or religious expression;

Reducing ethnic and religious profiling of people of Muslim, Arab or South Asian extraction;

Decreasing secrecy and increasing oversight of executive actions, and expose U.S. government or private individuals who abuse or violate the law.

Some of these policies, such as closing Guantanamo and ending enhanced interrogation techniques, already were also advocated by Obama administration. OSFclaimed its work laid the groundwork for implementing those policies. The Edward Snowden leaks cast light on the depth of the government’s warrantless surveillance activity. The other goals are more difficult to assess.

Muslim Advocates was founded in 2005 as an offshoot of the National Association of Muslim Lawyers. It often criticizes U.S. counterterrorism strategies that use sting operations and informants as discriminatory.

Papers released by the anonymous hacker group DC Leaks show that OSF budgeted $21 million for the NSHRC from 2008-2010. OSF spent an additional $1.5 million in 2010. The NSHRC also received a matching $20 million contribution from Atlantic Philanthropies, a private foundation established in 1982 by Irish-American Chuck Feeney billionaire businessman.

OSF made 105 grants totaling $20,052, 784 to 63 organizations under the NSHRC program. An Investigative Project on Terrorism tally shows Muslim Advocates received at least $1.84 million in OSF grants between 2008 and 2015.

A funders’ roundtable created by OSF in 2008 helped coordinate the grant making among several left-leaning foundations, ” in order to “dismantle the flawed ‘war on terror’ paradigm on which national security policy is now based.” At least “two dozen” foundations participated in the roundtable’s strategy sessions as of the end of 2008.

Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, called the Soros foundations’ $40 million program both hypocritical and ironic. He noted that the2011 OSF-funded Center for American Progress report “Fear, Inc.” complained thatseven conservative foundations donated $42.6 million to so-called “Islamophobia think tanks between 2001 and 2009.” The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and other major Islamist groups routinely use the $42.6 million funding number to portray their opponents as being pawns of dark forces.

“It’s amazing that one foundation donated an amount that CAIR and [Muslim] Advocates say is the huge sum of money that funds the entire anti-jihad campaign,” Jasser said. “… That wasn’t from one foundation. That was an addition of [the money given to] everybody that they threw under the bus.”

By contrast, OSF and Atlantic Philanthropies spent $41.5 million in just three years. OSF dedicated another $26 million to the NSHRC program from 2011-2014.

OSF additionally funded a study by the New America Foundation equating the terror threat posed right-wing extremists with al-Qaida. An Oct. 17, 2011 memo discussing NSHRC grants notes that New America received $250,000, partly to write two reports. The first aimed at creating a “‘safe space’ in which Muslims in America feel free to hold controversial political dialogues, organize without fear of unwarranted government surveillance.” The second aimed to “correct mistaken public beliefs that Al-Qaeda’s brand of terrorism is unique to Islam and that most terrorists are Muslim.”

The paper promised “to show how adherents of each extremist ideology use different language to justify very similar political means and goals. By demonstrating parallels among militant groups, this paper will aim to separate politically focused terrorism from the religion of Islam.”

Arguments from this report continue to help frame how Democrats and their allies talk about the jihadist threat. New America’s statistics and arguments recently came up in a House hearing about the threat from homegrown Islamic terrorists.

“According to the New America Foundation, there have been more incidents of right-wing extremist attacks in the United States than violent jihadist attacks since 9/11. I’m not minimizing jihadist attacks. In that light, can you explain what your office plans to do with respect to domestic right-wing extremism?” Rep. Bill Pascrell, D-N.J., askedDepartment of Homeland Security Office of Community Partnerships Director George Selim during a House subcommittee hearing last month.

New America’s effort to conflate right-wing extremists with al-Qaida glossed over a major difference – namely al-Qaida’s reliance on mass casualty attacks and suicide bombings.

New America’s latest data shows that jihadists have killed more people since 9/11 than right-wing extremists.

“What you’ve uncovered is the fact … that the Soros foundation works to obfuscate on national security,” Jasser said. “Muslim Advocates clearly is a prime example of the sickness in Washington related to dealing with the central reforms necessary to make within the House of Islam.

“You’ll see that the Soros foundation is spending money on organizations that deny the very principles they are defenders of, which are feminism, gay rights, individual rights. Muslim Advocates’ entire bandwidth is spent on attacking the government and blocking any efforts at counterterrorism.”

Muslim Advocates also opposes discussion on reform within the Muslim community and supports those who have theocratic tendencies, Jasser said.

“You have evidence here that the Soros foundation is part and parcel of the reason for the suffocation of moderation voices – reformist voices – in Islam,” Jasser said. “Muslim Advocates really ought to change their name to Islamist Advocates, and what the Soros foundation really is doing is just advocating for Islamists.”

OSF also contributed $150,000 in 2011 and $185,000 in 2012 to a donor advised fund run by Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors. It used this money to pay Hattaway Communications, a consulting firm run by former Hillary Clinton adviser Doug Hattaway, to develop a messaging strategy for Muslim Advocates and similar organizations. Hattaway’s message strategy painted Muslims as victims of American national security policies.

Khera used Hattaway’s strategy to paint the New York Police Department’s mosque surveillance strategy as “discriminatory.”

1856-1

“Their only ‘crime’ is that they are Muslim in America,” Khera wrote in a June 6, 2012 op-ed posted on CNN.com.

OSF funded groups, including Muslim Advocates, the ACLU, and the Center for Constitutional Rights, filed lawsuits challenging the NYPD’s surveillance program as unconstitutional. Police Commissioner William Bratton ended the policy in 2014.

The NYPD monitored almost all aspects of Muslim life ranging from mosques and student associations, to halal butcher shops and restaurants to private citizens. A federal district court dismissed the suit, but the Third Circuit Court of Appeals revived it in October 2015. New York settled the lawsuit in January, placing the NYPD under supervision of an independent observer appointed by City Hall.

Downplaying Radicalization and the Jihadist Threat

OSF accused conservative opponents of “borrowing liberally from Joe McCarthy’s guilt by association tactics.” It complained in a Sept. 14, 2010 memo to its U.S. Programs Board that the “homegrown terrorism narrative” resulted in “discriminatory” targeting of Muslims by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the FBI.

Khera often expresses similar sentiments. She accused the FBI of engaging in “entrapment operations” to target “innocent” Muslims after former Attorney General Eric Holder called sting operations an “essential law enforcement tool in uncovering and preventing terror attacks.”

Khera likewise characterized law enforcement training materials discussing the Islamic extremist ideology as “bigoted, false, and inflammatory” in her June 28 testimony before a Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights, Federal Courts.

She and her organization played a central role in late 2011 when Muslim groups called on the Obama administration to purge FBI training materials that they deemed offensive. FBI counterterrorism training materials about Islam contained “woefully misinformed statements about Islam and bigoted stereotypes about Muslims,” she complained in a Sept. 15, 2011 letter. She objected to describing zakat – the almsgiving tax mandate on all Muslims – as a “funding mechanism for combat.”

Yet numerous Muslim commentators describe zakat as a funding mechanism for jihad. A footnote for Surah 9:60 found in “The Meaning of the Holy Qur’an,” says that zakat can be used to help “those who are struggling and striving in Allah’s Cause by teaching or fighting or in duties assigned to them by the righteous Imam, who are thus unable to earn their ordinary living.”

The Assembly of Muslim Jurists in America issued a 2011 fatwa saying zakat could be used to “support legitimate Jihad activities.”

Following Khera’s letter, then-White House counterterrorism advisor John Brennan announced a review of “CVE-related instruction across all levels of government.” This review resulted in a purge of 700 pages of material from 300 presentations. Thisincluded PowerPoints and articles describing jihad as “holy war” and portraying the Muslim Brotherhood as group bent on world domination.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s bylaws describe these ultimate ambitions and imply the need for violence: “The Islamic nation must be fully prepared to fight the tyrants and the enemies of Allah as a prelude to establishing an Islamic state.”

Khera’s influence with the Obama administration

Khera enjoys close connections with the Obama White House. Visitor logs show that Khera went to the White House at least 11 times.

Khera played a central role persuading the Obama administration to purge Department of Homeland Security records related to individuals and groups with terror ties, former Customs and Border Patrol (CPB) Agent Phil Haney told the Investigative Project on Terrorism.

His superiors ordered him to “modify” 820 CPB TECS records about the Muslim Brotherhood network in America, Haney said. Irrefutable evidence from the 2008 Holy Land Foundation (HLF) Hamas financing trial proved that many of these groups and individuals assisted Hamas, Haney said.

The HLF trial substantiated deep connections between American Islamist groups such as the Islamic Society of North America, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and a Hamas-support network created by the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States.

A 2009 OSF funding document claims credit for helping persuade then-Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano to order a review of border screening procedures. It also reveals that Muslim Advocates worked with “DHS staff to develop a revised border policy.”

The Muslim Advocates’ report recommended the “review and reform of … [Customs and Border Patrol policies and practices that target Muslim, Arab and South Asian Americans for their First Amendment protected activities, beliefs and associations; and … law enforcement and intelligence activities that impose disparate impacts on Muslim, Arab and South Asian communities.” It also asked DHS to prevent CPB agents from probing about political beliefs, religious practices, and contributions to “lawful” charitable organizations.

Muslim Advocates claimed a pivotal role in getting the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to reverse a new 2010 policy enhancing the screening on travelers from 14 countries, many of them predominately Muslim. The rule was proposed in the wake of the attempt by underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to blow up a Detroit-bound plane weeks earlier.

Muslim Advocates and several OSF grantees met with Napolitano and other top DHS officials, and the policy was canceled three months later. Muslim Advocates claimedthat the Obama administration “made special mention” of its role in reversing the TSA policy.

“This broke into the open with the great purge of 2011 and 2012,” Haney said, recalling Brennan’s letter to Khera announcing that materials she complained about would be removed.

The purge accompanied a practice of meeting with Islamist groups as community partners, Haney said.

In addition to the purge of training material, documents related to people and groups with terrorism ties such as Canadian Muslim Brotherhood leader Jamal Badawi and the Pakistan-based Tablighi Jamaat movement also disappeared from CPB records. (Tablighi Jamaat often serves as a de facto recruiting conduit for groups such as al-Qaida and the Taliban.)

Investigators might have had a better chance of thwarting the San Bernardino and the June Orlando shootings had those Tablighi Jamaat records remained available, Haney said, because the shooters’ respective mosques appeared in the deleted 2012 Tablighi Jamaat case report.

The Obama administration’s “absolute refusal to acknowledge that individuals who are affiliated with networks operating here in the United States, and their deliberate deletion of any evidentiary pieces of information in the system, has made us blind and handcuffed,” Haney said. “The proof of it is San Bernardino and Orlando.

“They obliterated the entire [Tablighi Jamaat] case as if it never existed.”

Haney’s claims have met with some skepticism. Haney stands by his claims and says critics “made a lot of factual errors.”

Still, Muslim Advocates’ success reversing the TSA policy was among the accomplishments showing that it “has proved itself to be an effective advocate on the national stage,” an April 25, 2011 OSF document said. It recommended renewing a $440,000 grant to “support the core operating costs of Muslim Advocates.”

In doing so, the Soros-funded OSF weakened U.S. national security and potentially left it vulnerable to the jihadi attacks we have been seeing in the homeland since the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing.

Categories: Countering violent extremism, Department of Homeland Security, George Soros, Islamic reformation, Islamist organizations, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Law enforcement, Obama and Islam
Tags: Countering violent extremism, Department of Homeland Security, George Soros, Islamic reformation, Islamist organizations, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Law enforcement, Obama and Islam

Comments: Be the first to comment

Hugh Fitzgerald: Teaching About Islam In Tennessee

October 2, 2016

Hugh Fitzgerald: Teaching About Islam In Tennessee, Jihad Watch, October 2, 2016

A Bangladeshi Muslim student reads the holy Quran at an Islamic school during Ramadan in Dhaka, Bangladesh, Wednesday, June 29, 2016. Muslims throughout the world are marking the holy month of Ramadan, during which they fast from dawn till dusk. (AP Photo/A.M. Ahad)

A Bangladeshi Muslim student reads the holy Quran at an Islamic school during Ramadan in Dhaka, Bangladesh, Wednesday, June 29, 2016. (AP Photo/A.M. Ahad)

For nearly a year some Tennessee parents have been up arms about the teaching of Islam to seventh graders in their public schools. They are disturbed that more attention has been given to “studying” Islam than to Christianity or Judaism. And they especially were upset that the students were asked to recite and write out the Shehada, in a unit on the Five Pillars of Islam: “There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is his prophet.” Some called it “indoctrination.” And the Tennessee State Board of Education, in response, has decided to omit the section “Islamic World, 400 AD/CE-1500s” from the seventh-grade social studies curriculum. Instead, the schools will, in a “streamlined” form, still teach 7^th graders about Islam, but now in a history section titled “Southwest Asia and North Africa: 400-1500s,” and omitting subjects previously taught, such as “the origins of Islam” and “the life of its founder Muhammad.”

It is easy to imagine how this played out in the mainstream press. Tennessee, the buckle on the Bible Belt, where less than a century ago a certain Mr. Scopes was put on trial for teaching evolution, is at it again. A bunch of narrow-minded parents in Maury County, rubes right out of central casting, pitchforks at the ready, have managed to show just what prejudice and Islamophobia can do, and have forced an end to seventh-graders in Tennessee from learning all about the “religion of 1.6 [sic] billion people.” One of the photographs accompanying an article about the parents’ protest shows the hand of a student pointing to a page in an open Qur’an; the caption underneath reads “Parents fear their kids will know too much about this book.”

But was this really a victory for the Know-Nothings, the haters of diversity, the right-wing Christian fundamentalists who don’t want their children to learn anything about the faith of more than a billion people? Or did those parents have a point? And if they had a point, might there be another way of making it?

The teaching of Islam, if done rightly, would not eliminate but, rather, reinforce, any sensible Infidel’s deep doubts about the “religion of peace.” What the students were taught was comically superficial, but they no doubt came away thinking that they had learned something about Islam, and discovered there was nothing to worry about. After all, these are 7^th graders.

They learned that Muslims are monotheists, just like Christians and Jews. A comforting thought. But they did not learn that Muslims are taught to regard those fellow monotheists as the “vilest of creatures,”and Muslims as the “best of peoples.” They did not learn that Islam divides the world uncompromisingly between Muslims and non-Muslims, and that a permanent state of war exists between them, and will continue to exist, until Islam everywhere dominates, and Muslims rule, everywhere. They learned that, as one of the fill-in-the-blank questions given to them asked, “the Muslim word for God is Allah.” But they did not learn that the Muslim God is different in almost every respect from the Christian one. They did not learn that the expression “Allahu akbar” does not mean that “God is great,” but that “Our Muslim God is greater than yours,” and that it is a war-cry.

They did learn to write down the Five Pillars of Islam: Shehada, Salat, Zakat, Sawm, Hajj, but what did they find out about what those words mean?

They not only wrote out but recited the Shehada, the declaration of the Oneness of God: “There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.” They learned that the Shehada is what non-Muslims recite in order to become Muslims, to join the faith, the community, the umma of Islam. But they were not told that once you become a Muslim, you can’t get out, that the punishment in Islam for apostasy is death. So these American kids recite and write out the Shehada in class, you can imagine with what naïve solemnity (or on the playground, as they talk about it later, hilarity), and begin to think that “Wow, I could be a Muslim now if I wanted” or at home, reciting it to annoy their parents, “See Ma, I said it and nothing happened. I didn’t turn into a terrorist, I didn’t start throwing bombs. Chillax.” The parents are annoyed, of course, but do not think to ask their children if they realize why anyone can become a Muslim merely by reciting the Shehada, when to become a Christian or a Jew requires extensive study. The reason, they could tell their children if they knew it themselves, is that Muslims want to make it easy for non-Muslims to convert, for these converts are seen not so much as individuals learning about, and wrestling with, theological matters of moment, but regarded more like recruits to an army – just recite here — the Army of Islam.

When the students were taught about the Second Pillar of Islam, Salat, they learned that it is the ritual prayer said five times a day by all Muslims. They may have been impressed with how devoted Muslims must be. But they did not learn the contents of those prayers. How many Americans know that every Muslim, in saying his daily prayers, is denouncing the Kuffar – Christians and Jews — seventeen times a day? Do you think the teachers in Tennessee knew this? Do you think, if they learned it, they would dare to mention it to their classes? Wouldn’t that get them in trouble with a cheerfully denying local member of CAIR (“who told you this nonsense”?), or with some self-righteous journalist who insists that this cannot possibly be true, it’s one more Islamophobic canard? Of course it would.

Of what conceivable value is memorizing the word “Salat” and learning “Muslims pray five times a day” unless students find out what those prayers contain, and especially what they say about Infidels? As with the Shehada, something very important has been left out.

Robert Spencer explains what is in the five canonical prayers:

In the course of praying the requisite five prayers a day, an observant Muslim will recite the Fatihah, the first surah of the Qur’an and the most common prayer in Islam, seventeen times. The final two verses of the Fatihah ask Allah: “Show us the straight path, the path of those whom Thou hast favoured; not the (path) of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray.” The traditional Islamic understanding of this is that the “straight path” is Islam — cf. Islamic apologist John Esposito’s bookIslam: The Straight Path. The path of those who have earned Allah’s anger are the Jews, and those who have gone astray are the Christians.

This is not my interpretation; it comes from the classic Islamic commentaries on the Qur’an. The renowned Qur’anic commentator Ibn Kathir explains that “the two paths He described here are both misguided,” and that those “two paths are the paths of the Christians and Jews, a fact that the believer should beware of so that he avoids them.The path of the believers is knowledge of the truth and abiding by it. In comparison, the Jews abandoned practicing the religion, while the Christians lost the true knowledge. This is why ‘anger’ descended upon the Jews, while being described as ‘led astray’ is more appropriate of the Christians.”

Students learn that Zakat is the charitable giving required of Muslims. Admirable, they think, good for Muslims. But what is not said is that in the giving of Zakat, the recipients of that charity are only other Muslims. It would make no sense for Muslims to support those who have not accepted Islam. As Quran 8:55 puts it: “Surely the vilest of animals in Allah’s sight are those who disbelieve” And the Quran (28:86) adds: “Never be a helper to the unbelievers.” The Quran (48:29) also says: “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves.”

How many of those students in Tennessee do you think were told that “Zakat” can only go to fellow Muslims? Or, even more unlikely, how many might have had that practice explained to them by reference to 8:55 and 28:86 and 48:29? Why none, of course. The students will learn, and their teachers too may well think, that Muslims are unusually generous because one of Islam’s Pillars is this required giving of alms. But the alms are only intended to support and promote Muslims, not to help humanity.

The last two pillars – Sawn and Hajj — are in themselves inoffensive. But piquant details connected to their observance could have been added.

Sawm is the dawn-to-dusk fasting, during the month of Ramadan. Some liken it to Lent, though it requires refraining, during the day, from food altogether, and not, as for Christians at Lent, giving up this or that pleasurable practice (e.g., drinking wine, smoking, eating a particular food). Do you think the students knew that Ramadan is associated with an upsurge in violence by Muslims? Or learned that Muslims have been known to attack, and even kill, Infidels for eating during Ramadan?

Hajj is the fifth pillar of Islam. Muslims are required to make, at least once in their lives, the pilgrimage to Mecca, to circumambulate the Ka’aba seven times widdershins, and perform certain other rituals, such as the flinging of pebbles at the Devil, represented by three pillars in Mina. Muslims of every race and sect, make the hajj. But beneath the outward display of unity, sectarian strife continues, even in regard to the hajj. The Iranian government, for example, this year did not permit its own citizens to make the hajj, as a way of expressing displeasure with the Saudis. And the Saudis have always forbidden Ahmadis, whom they regard as not real Muslims, from making the hajj. Was any of this mentioned?

The objection to the teaching about Islam should not have been that students learn too much about Islam, but that they learn too little. The recital of the Shehada, as we noted above, is a quick and easy way to swell Muslim ranks. But having these American students recite the Shehada, and merely pretend to “be Muslims,” is not without consequences. They may have imprinted on their young brains an impression of a harmless Islam that later will be hard to dislodge. Some people think, for example, that Obama’s memories of being a child in Indonesia, where he was taken with the muezzin’s call to prayer (“the call to prayer is “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset”) may partly explain his consistently sympathetic – and wildly inaccurate – descriptions of Islam.

But what else has been left out? Why, in what is effectively an “Introduction to Islam” unit, was the duty of Jihad apparently not mentioned? Shouldn’t Islam be described properly as a “fighting faith”? How did Islam spread, so rapidly, across North Africa, and through the Middle East? What happened to the many non-Muslim peoples subjugated by conquering Muslims? And if Jihad was mentioned after all, was the word glossed as “an internal struggle to be a better Muslim” or as what it is, a real war for territory, to enlarge Dar al-Islam, and to subdue the Infidel? Of course not.

We are told that the “life of Muhammad” was taught to students in Tennessee. But what about his life was taught? That he raided camel caravans, and received messages from Allah through the angel Gabriel? Do you think the students were also told that he took part in dozens of military campaigns? That he observed with pleasure the decapitation of several hundred bound prisoners? That he led a raid, for women and loot, on the inoffensive Jewish farmers of the Khaybar Oasis? That he consummated his marriage to little Aisha when she was nine years old? That he was delighted when his followers killed Asma bint Marwan and Abu ‘Afak for mocking him? That – despite or because of this record — Muhammad is considered the Model of Conduct (“uswa hasana”) and Perfect Man (“al-insan al-kamil”) for all Muslims, and for all time? Parents should demand not that the life of Muhammad be omitted from the curriculum, but that it be taught in greater detail.

If you are not Muslim, what would you most want to know about Islam? Surely you would want to find out what is said about non-Muslims in the Qur’an and Hadith. Students should not be shielded from the many passages in the Qur’an that denounce the Unbelievers; they have a right to know, and teachers a duty to teach, this aspect of Islam, rather than have it remain unremarked, or deliberately hidden. It is not too late for the parents to draw up their own syllabus, one that they should make public, in order to force discussion of all of these unpleasant but indispensable matters. Instead of allowing themselves to be caricatured as the “parents who fear their kids will know too much about this book”— the Qur’an — the parents in Tennessee might consider demanding a fuller study of Islam in the schools, “because we want our children to be able to answer such questions as these”: Why is it so easy to convert to Islam by reciting the Shehada? And why is it so hard – and so dangerous — to leave Islam? Why is Zakat limited only to other Muslims? Why, in the five required daily prayers, is an imprecation against Jews and Christians repeated seventeen times? Why does Islam still permit slavery? Who are the “vilest of creatures”? Who are the “best of peoples”? Who was Aisha? Who was Asma bint Marwan? What is “Jihad”? What is a “dhimmi”? What is “jizyah”?

That’s a start.

What can CAIR and its willing collaborators respond?

Categories: Islamic indoctrination of children, Islamist organizations, Islamists and the media, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Quran
Tags: Islamic indoctrination of children, Islamist organizations, Islamists and the media, Islamists in America, Islamophobia, Quran

Comments: Be the first to comment

Canadian Red Cross Outsources Guide for Refugees to CAIR

September 28, 2016

Canadian Red Cross Outsources Guide for Refugees to CAIR, Clarion Project, John Goddard, September 28, 2016

canada-red-cross-booklet-hp

Photo: images from the teacher’s guide

The Canadian Red Cross has funded a teachers’ guide depicting Canadian society as practicing a “terrorist ideology of hate” against Muslims.

The guide, written ostensibly to coach teachers on how to help Syrian refugee children adapt, suggests that “hate,” “discrimination” and “Islamophobia” amount to a terrorist ideology, and that non-Muslim Canadians are its perpetrators. The solution is Islam, the guide says.

“The core values and central tenants of Islam are immutable,” it says, “and are the best counter-narrative to the terrorist ideology of hate.”

The Red Cross is expressing vague misgivings about the publication.

“The original intention… was to provide educators with a resource to help children deal with cultural transition and possible trauma due to war and significant cultural change,” the charity’s spokesperson said in an interview. “In our view, the majority of the publication achieves its intended purpose, but there are specific areas that we don’t feel fit with its original intention.”

To produce the booklet, the Red Cross gave $3,000 from its “Syrian refugee resettlement fund” to the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM), formerly CAIR-Canada. The group changed its name three years ago after its parent organization, the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), was repeatedly shown to have ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas.

Canada has accepted 31,000 Syrian refugees in the past year, but the guide shows less concern for refugee children than for “Canadian Muslim youth.” The word “refugees” does not even appear in the title, “A Guide for Educators: Helping Students Deal with Trauma Related to Geopolitical Violence & Islamophobia.”

The 16-page booklet portrays Muslim youth as under attack not from Islamic State terrorists or President Bashar al-Assad’s Syrian forces, but from non-Muslim Canadians.

“To constantly feel under attack, to have to defend one’s faith, and to be continuously called upon to condemn the actions of criminals and terrorists is emotionally traumatic,” the booklet says.

The word “trauma” appears often, mostly referring to Muslim life in Canada. “Trauma can be related to historical events such as the history of colonization,” the guide says. And: “Being marginalized and categorized as ‘the other’… can be traumatic.”

The guide includes specific tips for teachers. One is to examine oneself for anti-Muslim bias — “recognize your own judgments and biases.” Another is to let Muslims proselytize in schools — “provide space for Muslim students to speak to their peers about their faith.”

In italics, the tip sheet says: “Care should be taken by teachers on the language and tone they take when discussing world events and the Islamic faith.”

TV commentator Ezra Levant put the last point in plainer language. “This is an instruction to anybody working in the school system to shut-up about Islam — it is a favored religion,” he said last week on his online news channel, The Rebel.

The self-described conservative channel sent the Red Cross more than $25,000 this summer to help with forest-fire relief in Fort McMurray, Alberta, but will never donate to the Red Cross again, Levant told viewers of The Ezra Levant Show.

“I think the Red Cross should withdraw its support [for the booklet] and apologize to Canadians,” he said.

Two years ago, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police abruptly cut its collaboration with the NCCM on a “United Against Terrorism” guide. The police force “could not support the adversarial tone” of the booklet, they said.

The Red Cross said its specific objections to the teachers’ booklet include three reprinted op-ed pieces. One is by the head of the Winnipeg-based Islamic Social Services Association, a partner on the booklet, comparing the circumstances of Canadian Muslims to that of Japanese-Canadians interned during World War Two.

“We are in discussions with the organization that produced the publication,” the Red Cross spokesperson said. “I’m not sure what the end result will be.”

Another collaborator on the guidebook was the Canadian Human Rights Commission, an ostensibly neutral federal government body, which “translated the booklet into French to reach a broader audience,” a spokesperson said.

Two years ago, the NCCM sued then-Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his press secretary for libel when the press secretary referred to NCCM as “an organization with documented ties to a terrorist organization such as Hamas.” The case is still before the courts.

Categories: CAIR, Canada, Islam - submission, Islamic indoctrination of children, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation, Islamist organizations, Islamists in Canada, Islamophobia
Tags: CAIR, Canada, Islam - submission, Islamic indoctrination of children, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation, Islamist organizations, Islamists in Canada, Islamophobia

Comments: Be the first to comment

CAIR’s Awad: Anti-Terror JASTA Bill Part of “War on Islam”

September 26, 2016

CAIR’s Awad: Anti-Terror JASTA Bill Part of “War on Islam” Investigative Project on Terrorism, September 26, 2016

It might be one of the few things on which Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton agree: President Obama was wrong Friday when he vetoed the “Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act.”

The bill, which passed the U.S. House Sept. 9 after passing the Senate May 17, would allow Americans victimized by foreign terrorist attacks to sue countries responsible. Specifically, 9/11 victims could sue Saudi Arabia, which generated 15 of the 19 hijackers who struck the World Trade Center, Pentagon and Flight 93, which crashed in a Pennsylvania field after passengers fought back.

But in an interview with the Arabic-language Al Sharq Al Awsat, Council on American-Islamic Relations Executive Director Nihad Awad cast the legislation as an anti-Muslim attack.

The bill “is a continuation of the series of [actions] attaching terrorism to Islamic societies, the Islamic world and Islamic countries, as well as Islamic personalities, since it aims to demonize Islam,” an Investigative Project on Terrorism translation of Awad’s remarks said. “… so that things have reached the point of attaching the accusation of terrorism against Saudi Arabia, which is the heart of the Muslim world, and accusing it is an accusation of Muslims all over the world.”

He compared the bill to campaigns against mosque construction in the United States and said it is pushed by the same ideology that “supports the campaign of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, saying that those who voted for the resolution in the Congress are those waging war on Islam and they always vote for wars and conflicts, and are exploiting the families of the victims in this crisis.”

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., co-sponsored and advocated for the bill, which enjoyed bipartisan support. In a statement, he pledged to make this President Obama’s first veto to be over-ridden by Congress.

More importantly, Awad’s description that the bill’s supporters “are those waging war on Islam” is especially dangerous and reckless. That message, that the West is at war against Islam, is considered the most effective at radicalizing Muslims.

CAIR officials used to repeatedly invoke that message, but seemed to have backed away from it in recent years. Awad’s revival was directed at an Arabic-speaking audience.
Former U.S. Sen. Bob Graham, who served as co-chairman of a congressional 9/11 inquiry, has long advocated for the release of 28 pages of his committee’s report focusing on the hijackers’ connections to Saudi government officials. Those pages were released in July. In a New York Times oped earlier this month, Graham said they raise more questions and advocated for the release of more investigative material still deemed classified.

His motivation for this campaign, and for supporting JASTA, had nothing to do with Muslims, he explained.

“It can mean justice for the families that have suffered so grievously. It can also mean improving our national security, which has been compromised by the extreme form of Islam that has been promoted by Saudi Arabia,” Graham wrote.

President Obama claims he vetoed the bill out of concern for unintended consequences, that it might open the door to similar litigation against U.S. military and government officials in other countries and “would neither protect Americans from terrorist attacks nor improve the effectiveness of our response to such attacks.”

Both Trump and Clinton said they would sign the bill if elected president, CNN reported.

Categories: 9/11, CAIR, Islamist organizations, Islamists in America, Obama and 9/11, Obama and Islamic terrorism, Saudi Arabia, U.S. Congress, War on Islam
Tags: Islamist organizations, Islamists in America, Obama and 9/11, Obama and Islamic terrorism, Saudi Arabia, U.S. Conress, War on Islam

Comments: Be the first to comment

Trump Sees the Jihadist Trojan Horse

September 25, 2016

Trump Sees the Jihadist Trojan Horse, American Thinker, Ted Belman, September 25, 2016

(This article relies substantially on materials posted by Dr. Bill Warner, much of which is presented in the following video:

The article also elaborates on the relevance of the presented material to America’s November 8th presidential elections. — DM)

Ever wonder why there are so many Muslims and Muslim countries in the world? Over the millennia many countries were conquered, but didn’t remain Persian or Greek or Roman as the case may be. You see, the countries conquered in the name of Islam, became and remained Islamic. For example Pakistan, part of India, and Malaysia both were Hindu; Turkey, Iraq, Syria, Egypt and N. Africa were Christian; Afghanistan was Buddhist. They are all Islamic now.

This transformation was not by chance but by design. All these countries were conquered by force then shorn of their wealth and many of their women. Then the Muslim conquerors introduced Sharia and continued fighting the local inhabitants. The inhabitants were either forced to convert or accorded Dhimmi status. As time went on all cultures submitted and eventually became Islamic.

The advance of Islam was finally reversed in Spain and stopped at the Gates of Vienna in 1642. Thereafter the power of Islam went into decline but other than Spain, it never lost its hold on the people it conquered. This decline was reversed in the Twentieth Century when Arabs became wealthy as a result of their vast oil reserves. This wealth was then deployed to conquer the west, not by Violent Jihad, but by Stealth Jihad.

This design was referred to as The Islamic Doctrine. It consists of Koran (14%) which stipulates that “there is no god but ALLAH and Mohammed is his messenger”, Sira, Mohammed’s biography (26%) and Hadiths, traditions, (60%). There are two different Korans combined into one, the Mecca Koran and the Medina Koran.

Dr. Moorthy Muthuswamy writes,

About sixty-one percent of the contents of the Koran are found to speak ill of the unbelievers or call for their violent conquest; at best only 2.6 percent of the verses of the Koran are noted to show goodwill toward humanity. About seventy-five percent of Muhammad’s biography (Sira) consists of jihad waged on unbelievers.

Mohammed started as a religious preacher in Mecca. It was during this period that the Koran 2:256 stipulated. “There is no compulsion in religion” and 109:1 stipulated “You have your religion I have mine.” Ultimately he was chased out of Mecca and migrated with his followers to Medina.

Then began the Jihad period. From then on people were forced to convert under pain of death or were forced to live as Dhimmis (second class citizens) and pay (Jizya) for the privilege of living there.

This Jihad continued until there was no more discord.

Koran 2:193. “Fight them (Kafirs) until there is no more discord and the religion of Allah reigns absolute but if they submit, then only fight those who do wrong.”

Thus it continues until everyone in the territory has submitted to Islam, accepts Dhimmi status and pays Jizya.

Quotes from the Qur’an and Hadith on war, violence, infidels, and unbelievers may be found here. For example:

Ayhat 8:12, “I shall cast terror into the hearts of those who are bent on denying the truth; strike, then, their necks, [O believers,] and strike off every one of their finger-tips!”

Sura 9:5,29,41. “Slay the idolators [non-Muslims] wherever ye find them, and take them captive, and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the last Day…. Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! “

This inconsistency in the Koran is resolved by the doctrine of abrogation, wherein the Medina principles abrogate the Mecca principles.

Migration intends to overtake the host country through this doctrine. It is driven by Islam’s proscription against assimilation, and its will to dominate.

51% of the Koran concerns itself with the Kafir. It is a political doctrine not a religious one. There is no golden rule. Kafirs are to be subjugated. Muslims are to dominate.

Dr Bill Warner summarizes this as follows:

Migration is part of the doctrine of jihad. Migration is so important that the Islamic calendar is based upon the Hijra, Mohammed’s migration from Mecca to Medina. Why? Because it was migration that lead to the creation of jihad in Medina. And it was jihad that made Islam triumphant.

In the past Muslims tended to stay in Islamic countries. Today, the new politics is to migrate to Kafir lands and immerse themselves in local politics. This is the jihad of money, writing and speech. Their politics is to bring the Sharia to Kafir culture. An example is using Islamic money is to build departments in universities that will support Sharia and never criticize Islam.

To understand how they do it, read 4 Stages of Islamic Conquest.

Unfortunately this migration is encouraged by globalist leaders such as Chancellor Merkel and President Obama. And of course, Hillary Clinton aspires to be one of them.

Professor Belhaj explains elites “encourage migration and accommodate Islam”, and described the harmony between Muslim migrants and neoliberalism as “structural, and not accidental”. “Migration is useful for the neo-liberal model of the borderless, minimal, global society…”

The Muslim Brotherhood met in 1991 and produced a document which set out its strategic goals for North America. The document was entered as evidence in the 2008 Holyland Terror Funding Trial. It contained among other things, the following paragraphs:

Enablement of Islam in North America, meaning: establishing an effective and a stable Islamic Movement led by the Muslim Brotherhood which adopts Muslims’ causes domestically and globally, and which works to expand the observant Muslim base, aims at unifying and directing Muslims’ efforts, presents Islam as a civilization alternative, and supports the global Islamic State wherever it is.

…the Movement must plan and struggle to obtain “the keys” and the tools of this process in carry out [sic] this grand mission as a ‘Civilization Jihadist’ responsibility.

The process of settlement is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process’ with all the word means. The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers…

[W]e must possess a mastery of the art of “coalitions,” the art of “absorption” and the principles of “cooperation.”

Pres Obama and Secretary Clinton, upon taking office, embraced the Muslim Brotherhood and worked with them to depose Mubarak and Assad. Luckily General al Sisi reversed their victory in Egypt and Assad, with the help of Iran and Russia, thwarted their plans in Syria.

In “Why is Obama in Bed with the Muslim Brotherhood?” I wrote “The alliance between the Obama administration and the Muslim Brotherhood is the cornerstone of Obama’s New Middle East policy.”

Capt. Joseph R. John, USN (Ret), the Chairman of Combat Veterans for Congress PAC, wrote in June 2016:

Members of the Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR, and MPAC have sinister goals that are not in support of the US Constitution or The Bill of Rights. They have become a very dangerous “Fifth Column” in the United States, appointed by Obama to very high and sensitive positions in the US Government agencies.

For nearly 8 years Obama has been filling the Washington bureaucracy including DHS, the CIA, DOD, the National Security Council, the White House, the State Department, every US Intelligence Agency, and the US Armed Forces with thousands of members of the CAIR, MPAC, the Muslim Brotherhood, and other Muslim Brotherhood front groups.

In June of this year Donald Trump recognized the danger of Muslim migration and said, “This could be the all-time great Trojan horse.” And so it is but the US elites refuse to recognize it.

On August 15/16 he gave a speech on immigration and terrorism in which he clarified;

A Trump Administration will establish a clear principle that will govern all decisions pertaining to immigration: we should only admit into this country those who share our values and respect our people.

In the Cold War, we had an ideological screening test. The time is overdue to develop a new screening test for the threats we face today.

In addition to screening out all members or sympathizers of terrorist groups, we must also screen out any who have hostile attitudes towards our country or its principles – or who believe that Sharia law should supplant American law.

Those who do not believe in our Constitution, or who support bigotry and hatred, will not be admitted for immigration into the country.

So you can see, rather that limiting his policy to weeding out terrorists, he advocates weeding out Jihadists who want to subjugate America to Islam. This is not racism. It is common sense.

Trump has been stressing that Hillary Clinton wants to let in 550% more refugees than the 10,000 Obama let in. In response I wrote “Don’t be duped about Muslim migration to the US” in which I pointed out that the problem is much bigger and that no distinction should be made between refugees and immigrants.

According to a report highlighted by Megyn Kelly,

According to the Report, Obama has issued over 832,000 green cards to Muslim majority countries in his first 6 years of his presidency. In addition, 482,000 Muslims overstayed their visas and are not being sent back. These Muslims support Sharia to an astonishing degree. In Afghanistan 99%, in Iraq 91% and in Pakistan 70%. When in the US 70% vote Democrat.

And now Obama is intending to allow in another 1 million Muslims.

Jewish Americans are very supportive of allowing such numbers into the US. They argue either we have a duty to do so or that Jews should be more welcoming given the history of America banning Jewish immigration in the thirties and forties. But this analogy doesn’t hold up at all. Jews were no threat to Americans personally and to their values, whereas the Muslims are both. Furthermore Muslims are very anti-Semitic and very anti-Israel. The Muslims have many other countries they could go to. The Jews had no other country willing to take them in. Jews are, in effect, welcoming their enemies into the country.

As for a duty to allow Muslim immigration or any immigration, there is none.

We need Donald Trump.

Categories: 2016 elections, Donald Trump and Islamists, Hillary Clinton and Islamists, Islam - submission, Islam and colonialism, Islamic immigration, Islamic refugees, Islamic supremacy, Islamisation, Islamist organizations, Islamist vetting, Islamists in America, Muslim Brotherhood, Obama and Islamists, Sharia law
Tags: Donald Trump and Islamists, Hillary Clinton and Islamists, Islam - submission, Islam and colonialism, Islamic immigration, Islamic refugees, Islamic supremacy, Islamisation, Islamist organizations, Islamist vetting, Islamists in America, Muslim Brotherhood, Obama and Islamists, Sharia law

Comments: Be the first to comment

Archives