by Salubrius
Have the critics of Senator Michele Bachmann and her colleagues engaged in biased spin by ignoring a proven longstanding conspiracy commencing in 1987 to subvert the US Government from within? I don't know of any of the critics that have not ignored a Muslim Brotherhood proven conspiracy. Yet they castigate Michele Bachmann and her colleagues for proposing an investigation of Muslim Brotherhood subversion within the US government WITHOUT REASON..
Bachmann and her colleagues have called for an investigation of Muslim Brotherhood influence on the Federal Government, mentioning some top advisors that may have an association with the Muslim Brotherhood. The critics of Bachmann include Anderson Cooper in a half hour long program on CNN charging Bachmann and the others had no reason for their proposed investigation, but without any mention of this proven conspiracy that shows very good reason for it. These critics of Bachmann who ignore the proven conspiracy also include Senator John McCain and Congressman Keith Ellison.
An Explanatory Memorandum On the General Strategic Goal for the [Muslim Brotherhood] Group In North America[ is a document seized by the government that was used in the prosecution of the 2008 United States v. Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development case. The verdict found the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development guilty of laundering money to known Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas. According to critics of Islamism such as the Anti-Defamation League, some observers have suggested that this document "identifies a conspiracy by the Muslim Brotherhood to convert the United States to an Islamic nation." The document also lists a number of Islamic organizations that are linked to the Muslim Brotherhood to working together to achieve the goals. They were referred to as "unindicted conspirators".in the charging document. Some of these "un-indicted co-conspirators" such as CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) have asked a court to remove them from the list of conspirators but after scrutiny of the evidence, the court declined to do so. CAIR holds itself out as an organization to protect the civil rights of Muslims.
When I mentioned the outline of this conspiracy to subvert the government from within to my granddaughter, a recent graduate from Dartmouth, she said that this "grand jihad" remark was likely a casual remark of someone that had no significance. But it was not a casual remark.
The outline of the conspiracy was in a memorandum that was written in 1991 by Mohamed Akram, a senior Hamas leader in the U.S., a member of the Board of Directors for the Muslim Brotherhood in North America (also known as the Ikhwan) and one of many unindicted coconspirators in the HLF trial. Strategic goals number 6 was: "supporting the establishment of the global Islamic State wherever it is". The Memorandum calls for the "Ikwhan", another name for the members of the Muslim Brotherhood. to engage in a "civilization settlement" process. It explains "settlement process" as a 'grand jihad' eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within, and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions." That is what criminal prosecutors sometimes refer to as a "smoking gun". It was not a casual remark.
Mohammed Akram sent the memorandum containing the plan for subverting the US government from within and to engage in the grand jihad to the "Shura Council" of the Muslim Brotherhood, seeking its approval, saying:
"My request to my brothers is to read the memorandum and to write what they wanted of comments and corrections, keeping in mind that what is between your hands is not strange or a new submission without a root, but rather an attempt to interpret and explain some of what came in the long-term plan which we approved and adopted in our council and our conference in the year (1987). -- Mohammed Akram"
The Shura Council of the Muslim Brotherhood has the duties of planning, charting general policies and programs that achieve the goal of the Group. Its resolutions are binding to the Group and only the General Organizational Conference can modify or annul them and the Shura Office has also the right to modify or annul resolutions of the Executive Office. It follows the implementation of the Group policies and programs. It directs the Executive Office and it forms dedicated branch committees to assist in that.
Author Robert Spencer has characterized this process as “stealth jihad.”
The Muslim Brotherhood has not repudiated the memorandum or responded to critics.. The memorandum was cited by the September 2010 Center for Security Policy (CSP) report, by Team IIB, "Shariah: The Threat to America" and endorsed by several members of Congress. This report was characterized by the global news agency IPS "inter press service" as "the latest development in a summer filled with intensifying attacks on Islam in the United States" which charges that many "apparently-lawful U.S. Muslims are waging a 'stealth jihad' to impose sharia on the U.S. through peaceful means" and furthermore claims that "virtually all major Muslim-American organisations are affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood", a Sunni fundamentalist organisation. The report suggested sharia is "the preeminent totalitarian threat of our time". It called for a "draconian" ban on Muslims who "espouse or support" sharia from full participation in government and the armed forces, prosecuting and banning immigration to the U.S. by those who adhere to sharia.
On November 24, 2008, the government obtained guilty verdicts against the Holy Land Foundation and five individual defendants in the retrial. Holy Land was found guilty of giving more than $12 million to support the Palestinian militant group Hamas, which the US designated as a terrorist organization in 1995, and made supporting the group illegal.
The jury found against the Holy Land Foundation on all 108 charges. The charges included conspiracy to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization, providing material support to a foreign terrorist, and conspiracy to commit money laundering.
The Department of Justice under Obama has not sought to investigate and indict those listed as "unindicted conspirators". They have dropped completely any further investigation needed to bring charges against them. Andrew McCarthy, the former US attorney who prosecuted he defendants in the first World Trade Center bombing, in an article in the National Review Online, has raised an interesting question:
"...since Secretary Clinton’s tenure began, with Huma Abedin serving as a top adviser, the United States has aligned itself with the Muslim Brotherhood in myriad ways. To name just a few (the list is by no means exhaustive): Our government reversed the policy against formal contacts with the Brotherhood; funded Hamas; continued funding Egypt even after the Brotherhood won the elections; dropped an investigation of Brotherhood organizations in the U.S. that were previously identified as co-conspirators in the case of the Holy Land Foundation financing Hamas; hosted Brotherhood delegations in the United States; issued a visa to a member of the Islamic Group (a designated terrorist organization) and hosted him in Washington because he is part of the Brotherhood’s parliamentary coalition in Egypt; announced that Israel should go back to its indefensible 1967 borders; excluded Israel, the world’s leading target of terrorism, from a counterterrorism forum in which the State Department sought to “partner” with Islamist governments that do not regard attacks on Israel as terrorism; and pressured Egypt’s pro-American military government to surrender power to the anti-American Muslim Brotherhood parliament and president just elected by Egypt’s predominantly anti-American population.
So I was hoping maybe the [critics of Michele Bachmann and her colleagues] could explain to us: Hypothetically, if Huma Abedin did have a bias in favor of the Muslim Brotherhood, and if she were actually acting on that bias to try to tilt American policy in favor of the Muslim Brotherhood, what exactly would the State Department be doing differently?"Salubrius
Source: Original Post
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment