Friday, February 10, 2017

Jihadist Groups in the US: What Next? - Benjamin Weingarten




by Benjamin Weingarten

To what lengths would America's leaders go to protect a group that the United Arab Emirates (UAE) deemed a terrorist organization?

  • Meanwhile, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) continues freely to operate in America. In the wee hours of election night 2016, in fact, its Los Angeles office leader called for the overthrow of the U.S. government.
  • The Trump administration has stated its commitment to fighting Islamic supremacism, including the Muslim Brotherhood itself.
To what lengths would America's leaders go to protect a group that the United Arab Emirates (UAE) deemed a terrorist organization?

A bombshell new report from the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) reveals the alarming answer.

It involves a man who in his almost 50 years of public life has done more for America's enemies -- first of the Communist variety and later of the jihadist brand -- than perhaps any other: Iran lobbyist-in-chief John Kerry.

In the most recent case, he did so in secret, apparently well aware of the political consequences of exposing the potentially catastrophic policy he was pursuing to the light of day.

As IPT's report details, Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim American Society (MAS) were classified as terrorist groups by the UAE in 2014, as two of the 83 entities identified as such for their ties to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.


(Image source: Courtesy of the Investigative Project on Terrorism)

Furious at such a charge, CAIR pushed Secretary of State Kerry to lobby on its behalf. Kerry's State Department reportedly complied, meeting with UAE officials regularly to plead CAIR's case.

State signaled such a stance publicly almost from day one. As IPT notes:
At a daily State Department press briefing two days after UAE released its list, a spokesman said that State does not "consider CAIR or MAS to be terrorist groups" but that it was seeking more information from UAE about their decision. He added that "as part of our routine engagement with a broad spectrum of faith based organizations, a range of U.S. government officials have met with officials of CAIR and MAS. We at the State Department regularly meet with a wide range of faith based groups to hear their views even if some of their views expressed at times are controversial."
"Controversial" is an interesting way of describing the views of a group that makes common cause with jihadists and jihadist sympathizers. There is an irony, as IPT recounts:
Just days before the UAE's 2014 designation of CAIR as a terrorist group in the organization's San Francisco chapter bestowed its "Promoting Justice" award to Sami Al-Arian and his family. Al-Arian secretly ran an American support network for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) terrorist group in the late 1980s and early 1990s. PIJ was responsible for terrorist attacks which killed dozens of Israelis and several Americans.
CAIR's jihadi ties are numerous and longstanding, involving not only the links of its founders and present leaders to Hamas, and as critics say, apologists for Islamic terrorism, but also for impeding counterterrorism efforts. Lawyers in a class-action lawsuit representing the family of slain former FBI counterterrorism official John P. O'Neill -- who perished in the 9/11 attacks at the World Trade Center -- named CAIR part of a criminal conspiracy to promote "radical Islamic terrorism," and declared that CAIR has
"actively sought to hamper governmental anti-terrorism efforts by direct propaganda activities aimed at police, first-responders, and intelligence agencies through so-called sensitivity training. Their goal is to create as much self-doubt, hesitation, fear of name-calling, and litigation within police departments and intelligence agencies as possible so as to render such authorities ineffective in pursuing international and domestic terrorist entities."
More directly, as jihad expert Daniel Pipes noted in a 2014 expose, "At least seven board members or staff at CAIR have been arrested, denied entry to the U.S., or were indicted on or pled guilty to (or were convicted of) terrorist charge."

Because of the litany of actions that CAIR has taken on behalf of and in association with Islamic supremacists -- as was unearthed during the Holy Land Foundation trial, which represented the largest terror financing case in U.S. history and in which CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator -- back in 2008 the FBI officially ceased contact with the group.

During the Obama years, however, groups like CAIR were embraced under the jihad-enabling "countering violent extremism" (CVE) paradigm. CVE outsourced "de-radicalization" efforts to "peaceful Islamist," Muslim Brotherhood-tied groups. CVE was the antithesis of the comprehensive counterjihadist program America required.

With respect to John Kerry's efforts on behalf of CAIR in particular, the story gets worse:
In December 2014, CAIR met with top officials of the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Justice Department, asking them to pressure the UAE to remove them from the list, according to reliable sources intimately familiar with the communications. On December 22, 2014, CAIR issued a press release asserting that "the two American Muslim organizations and the U.S. government pledged to work together to achieve a positive solution to the UAE designations."
In response to a letter sent by CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad sent to Secretary Kerry protesting the UAE designation, Kerry responded on May 5, 2015 in a letter to Awad stating, "Let me reiterate, first, that the U.S. government clearly does not consider CAIR to be a terrorist organization. As your letter noted, the Department of State rejected this allegation immediately after the UAE designations were announced in November, and we will continue to do so....U.S. officials have raised the issue of CAIR's inclusion on the UAE's terror list with UAE officials on multiple occasions..."
That portion of the letter now appears on CAIR's website. But at the time that the letter was sent to CAIR, according to knowledgeable sources, there was an agreement between CAIR and the State Department to keep the letter secret. An excerpt from it was posted on CAIR's website only in May 2016, a year after it was received. The IPT has learned that Kerry and CAIR made this agreement to keep the letter secret...to protect Kerry from public embarrassment. In light of CAIR's numerous ties to Hamas and other unsavory aspects of its record, Kerry had good reason to believe that the letter could cause a public relations disaster for him.
Kerry's efforts proved unsuccessful; the UAE did not budge.

The lifelong leftist enabler of America's foes, whose public career commenced with propagandistic testimony to the U.S. Senate on the Vietnam War, redounding to the Communist's benefit, and closed with his support for Islamists including CAIR -- not to mention the mullahs in Iran -- never paid a price for such efforts.

Meanwhile, CAIR continues freely to operate in America. In the wee hours of election night 2016, in fact, its Los Angeles office leader called for the overthrow of the U.S. government.

The Trump administration has stated its commitment to "eradicating" Islamic supremacism, including challenging the Muslim Brotherhood itself, which represents the tip of the Sunni jihadist spear. This stance is reflected not only in policy speeches delivered during the presidential campaign, but in the testimony, past public remarks and actions of the principal members of President Trump's National Security Council.

The Muslim Brotherhood may very may very well come under scrutiny in the near-term, as will the efforts of those who oppose the group, as Senator Ted Cruz has re-upped a bill that calls upon the Secretary of State to submit a report on its designation as a foreign terrorist organization.

That bill's text provides helpful background on just why it is that the Muslim Brotherhood deserves such a classification, noting:
  • The many countries that have declared the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization or barred it from operating
  • The explicit calls for violent jihad, with the end goal of imposing Islamic law over all the world of the group's founder and spiritual leader Hassan al-Banna, and the consistently violent Islamic supremacist content of the Brotherhood's core membership texts
  • The terrorist efforts of numerous jihadist groups explicitly tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, and the efforts of individual Muslim Brotherhood members designated as terrorists by the U.S. government themselves
  • The litany of terrorist financing cases involving the Muslim Brotherhood, including the aforementioned Holy Land Foundation case, whereby:
Department of Justice officials successfully argued in court that the international Muslim Brotherhood and its United States affiliates had engaged in a widespread conspiracy to raise money and materially support the terrorist group Hamas. HLF officials charged in the case were found guilty on all counts in November 2008, primarily related to millions of dollars that had been transferred to Hamas. During the trial and in court documents, Federal prosecutors implicated a number of prominent United States-Islamic organizations in this conspiracy, including the Islamic Society of North America [ISNA], the North American Islamic Trust [NAIT], and the Council on American-Islamic Relations [CAIR]. These groups and their leaders, among others, were named as unindicted co-conspirators in the case.
According to a July 2008 Justice Department court filing:
"The mandate of these organizations [ISNA, NAIT and CAIR], per the International Muslim Brotherhood, was to support HAMAS, and the HLF's particular role was to raise money to support HAMAS' organizations inside the Palestinian territories."
Should the Trump administration challenge the Muslim Brotherhood, it is reasonable to think that it may threaten its offshoots, one of which is the very Islamic organization in CAIR that the Obama administration specifically sought to protect.

Should CAIR come under fire, it is a safe bet that the Left will close ranks, arguing that conservatives are on a witch hunt akin to the Red Scare to snuff out peaceful Muslims in America.

Those who wish to triumph over the global jihad must challenge this narrative fearlessly.


The argument against CAIR and similar groups is simply this: If you aid, abet or enable to jihadists, you will be prosecuted, and swiftly. You are standing with those who wish to kill innocent Americans, and the government's first job is to protect the life and limb of its citizens.

Efforts to rid America of jihadists, shut down their funding networks and punish those who give them aid and comfort are about defending the homeland against a subversive ideology of conquest that seeks to undermine our Constitutional system and supplant it with a totalitarian one based in Islamic law, Sharia.

"Liberals" or "Progressives" might seek to use CAIR as a cudgel to argue that "conservatives" wish to trample on the rights of Muslims. The task of the rest of us will be to expose a supposed civil liberties group as a cleverly-designed front for a theocratic, political Islamic supremacist movement that seeks to overtake the civil liberties of all Americans.

That is all the more reason why it is important to bring it to light.


Benjamin Weingarten

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9908/jihadist-groups-cair

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

The Islamic Jihad and Peace with Jews - Bassam Tawil




by Bassam Tawil

The Palestinian anti-normalization "enforcers" do their utmost to conceal the Islamic aspect of their campaign. They are not eager for the world to know that Islam supplies much of the ideology and justification for their anti-Israel activities.

  • On the face of it, the anti-normalization campaign appears driven by political motivations. However, it turns out that there is also a powerful Islamic angle to this campaign of hate, which is aimed at delegitimizing Israel and demonizing Jews.
  • The Palestinian anti-normalization "enforcers" do their utmost to conceal the Islamic aspect of their campaign. They are not eager for the world to know that Islam supplies much of the ideology and justification for their anti-Israel activities.
  • Fatwas (Islamic religious decrees) and statements issued by leading Muslim scholars and clerics have long warned Muslims against normalization with the "Zionist entity." Such normalization, they have made it clear, is considered an "unforgivable crime." The authors of these hate messages are not opposed to normalization with Israel because of settlements or house demolitions, but rather because they believe Jews have no rights at all to any of the land.
  • In 1989, more than 60 eminent Muslim scholars from 18 countries ruled that it was forbidden for Muslims to give up any part of Palestine.
  • The vicious campaigns to boycott Israel and Jews, while political in dress, are in fact deeply rooted in Islamic ideology.
  • These campaigns are patently not a legitimate protest. They are not even part of an effort to boycott Israeli products or politicians and academics. The real goal of the campaigns is revealed in the words of the Muslim leaders: that Jews have no rights whatsoever to the land, and must be targeted through jihad as infidels and enemies of all Muslims and Arabs
  • Settlements, checkpoints and fences are irrelevant; Muslim scholars want Jews off what they define as sacred Muslim land. Supporters of BDS and the anti-normalization movement would do well to consider this fact. Failing to do so is tantamount to aiding and abetting Muslims to destroy Israel, and kill as many Jews as possible in the process.
Muslim scholars have feverishly citing chapter and verse from the Quran and the hadith, the words of the Prophet Mohammed, in their efforts to encourage Arabs and Muslims to avoid normalization with Jews.

The Quran and hadith have also been leveraged to promote boycotts against Israel and Jews -- thereby refuting claims by anti-Israel activists that their campaigns are just about politics.

Palestinians have long maintained that their campaign to ban normalization with Israel is mainly directed against the Israeli "occupation" of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. The Palestinian anti-normalization movement, which continues to target Israeli and Palestinian peace activists who hold -- horrors! -- public meetings, has in recent years gained momentum, largely thanks to the ongoing anti-Israel campaign of incitement and indoctrination in the Palestinian media and mosques.

In recent years, Palestinian anti-normalization activists have managed to foil several meetings between Israelis and Palestinians, under the pretext that such encounters cause damage to the Palestinians. The activists justify their disruption by citing what they see as Israeli practices against Palestinians, and violently object to any meetings with Israelis, including those who wholeheartedly support the Palestinians and oppose the policies of the Israeli government.

The most recent incident occurred at the Ambassador Hotel in East Jerusalem, where Israeli and Palestinian activists gathered to talk about peace and coexistence. Shortly after the meeting began, a number of anti-normalization activists stormed the conference hall to protest the meeting.

"Meeting with Zionists is an act of treason," one of the protesters shouted. "There are no solutions. Palestinian must be freed, from the (Jordan) River to the (Mediterranean) Sea. Shame on you!"

The protesters claimed that they were opposed to the meeting because Israel was "demolishing Arab houses and killing Palestinians."


Palestinian "anti-normalization" activists disrupt an unofficial Israeli-Palestinian peace conference Jerusalem's Ambassador Hotel, in 2104.

Hind Khoury, a Christian woman who has previously served as Palestinian Authority ambassador to France, received the brunt of their anger. Khoury's attempts to persuade the protesters that the meeting was not about normalization, but about achieving a just and comprehensive peace, fell on deaf ears. Ironically, it was the intervention of the Israeli Police that allowed Israeli and Palestinian activists to proceed with their conference.

Such scenes have become commonplace at the East Jerusalem hotel, a preferred site for unofficial peace conferences organized by Israelis and Palestinians. Anti-normalization activists raid the conference hall several times a year in their attempts to disrupt such gatherings.

The anti-normalization activists have also been vocal in Ramallah and other Palestinian cities. The Palestinian newspaper Al Quds, which recently published an interview with Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman, has also come under attack. For these Palestinians, conducting an interview with an Israeli government official is engaging in "media normalization."

"The newspaper must apologize to the Palestinians," the protesters demanded.

On the face of it, the anti-normalization campaign appears driven by political motivations. However, it turns out that there is also a powerful Islamic angle to this campaign of hate, which is aimed at delegitimizing Israel and demonizing Jews. The Palestinian anti-normalization "enforcers" do their utmost to conceal the Islamic aspect of their campaign. They are not eager for the world to know that Islam supplies much of the ideology and justification for their anti-Israel activities.

Fatwas (Islamic religious decrees) and statements issued by leading Muslim scholars and clerics have long warned Muslims against normalization with the "Zionist entity." Such normalization, they have made it clear, is considered an "unforgivable crime."

The authors of these hate messages are not opposed to normalization with Israel because of settlements or house demolitions, but rather because they believe Jews have no rights at all to any of the land.

"Normalization with the Zionist enemy means turning the presence of Jews in Palestine to something normal," explained one scholar, Adnan Adwan. "Normalization means accepting the right of the Zionist entity to Arab lands and Palestine."

In response to an inquiry from Palestinians about the perspective of Islam regarding peace and normalization with Jews, a group of leading Muslim scholars issued a fatwa stating that this was completely haram (forbidden). They even went farther by ruling that any form of peace with Jews was also haram, despite the fact that Prophet Mohammed signed a treaty, known as the Constitution of Medina, with Jews and other non-Muslims shortly after his arrival at Medina from Mecca in 622 CE.

In their fatwa, the Muslim scholars wrote: "It is true that Prophet Mohammed signed a treaty with the infidels, including the Quraysh tribe and the Jews, but he did not make concessions that are contrary to Islam." They pointed out that Prophet Mohammed did not strike the deal with the infidels in order to allow them to stay in their homes permanently. Nor did the prophet promise to abandon jihad (holy war) as a result of this treaty, they added in their fatwa. "There is no evidence whatsoever that the Prophet or any of his successors had made peace with infidels controlling Islamic lands," the fatwa clarified.

To support their argument, the scholars quote verses from the Quran which -- they maintain -- prohibit Muslims from making peace or ever placing their confidence in Jews. One verse which they claim refers to Jews is taken from Surah Al-Anfal (The Spoils of War): "And if they intend to deceive you, then verily, Allah is All-Sufficient for you. He it is Who has supported you with His Help and with the believers." (62) According to the fatwa, this verse from the Quran refers specifically to Jews.

The scholars continue with another verse from the same Surah Al-Anfal to explain why Muslims must continue to fight against Jews:
"O Prophet (Mohammed)! Urge the believers to fight. If there are twenty steadfast persons amongst you, they will overcome a two hundred, and if there be a hundred steadfast persons they will overcome a thousand of those who disbelieve, because they (the disbelievers) are people who do not understand." (65)
Yet a further verse from the Quran is then cited to substantiate their ideology of war against the Jews -- verse 7 from Surah At-Taubah (The Repentance):
"How can there be a covenant with Allah and with His Messenger for the Mushrikin (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) expect those with whom you made a covenant near Al-Masjid al-Haram (at Makkah)? So long, as they are true to you, stand you true to them. Verily, Allah loves Al-Muttaqun (the pious)."
According to the fatwa, the "treacherous" Jews have since failed to "repent" (presumably, convert to Islam) and that is why it is forbidden to make peace with them.

The Muslim scholars also point to several fatwas prohibiting peace and normalization with Jews issued in the past century. The ban dates back to 1935, when a group of Muslim scholars and clerics ruled during a conference in Jerusalem that it was forbidden for Muslims to sell Arab-owned lands to Jews. A year later, scholars from Egypt's Al-Azhar University, one of the first Islamic universities in the Arab world, ruled that it was the duty of all Muslims to engage in jihad "to salvage Palestine." In 1989, more than 60 eminent Muslim scholars from 18 countries ruled that it was forbidden for Muslims to give up any part of Palestine.

Other Muslim scholars have referred to another verse in the Quran to justify banning normalization with Jews. In Surah Al-Mumtahinah (The Woman to be examined), verse 1 states: "O you who believe! Take not My enemies and your enemies as friends, showing affection towards them, while they have disbelieved in what has come to you of the truth." They also quote the following hadith (a saying attributed to Prophet Mohammed) to support their claim against making peace with Jews: "Those who side with the unjust to assist them in their injustice, while knowing that they are unjust, walk out of Islam."

The vicious campaigns to boycott Israel and Jews, while political in dress, are in fact deeply rooted in Islamic ideology.

The anti-normalization activists and those promoting boycotts, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel perceive Jews as the enemies of Allah and Prophet Mohammed. These campaigns are patently not a legitimate protest. They are not even part of an effort to boycott Israeli products or politicians and academics. The real goal of the campaigns is revealed in the words of the Muslim leaders: that Jews have no rights whatsoever to the land, and must be targeted through jihad as infidels and enemies of all Muslims and Arabs.

Muslim scholars have left no room for doubt about their view of the true nature of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Settlements and checkpoints and fences are irrelevant; Muslim scholars want Jews off what they define as sacred Muslim land. BDS and anti-normalization movement supporters might do well to consider this fact. Failing to do so is tantamount to aiding and abetting Muslims to destroy Israel, and kill as many Jews as possible in the process.


Bassam Tawil is a scholar based in the Middle East.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9891/islamic-jihad-jews

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Gad Saad On Hysteria And 'Collective Munchausen' Around Donald Trump - Malhar Mali




by Malhar Mali


Pinpointing the psychological pathology of the anti-Trump Left.



Reprinted from Aero Magazine.
“AS SOMEBODY WHO ESCAPED LEBANON AND ACTUALLY HID UNDER DESKS TO AVOID DEATH SQUADS, I DON’T TAKE WELL TO THESE IDIOTS FROM WELLESLEY COLLEGE WHO SAY, ‘I’M SCARED TO GO AND BUY MY HAMBURGERS NOW THAT TRUMP WON,’ BECAUSE IT TRIVIALIZES WHAT TRUE TRAUMA IS.” — GAD SAAD
Gad Saad (@GadSaad) is an outspoken social critic of the lunacies found in the extremes of both political sides. A controversial figure to some, his family fled the Lebanese civil war under threat of persecution for their Jewish religious heritage. He’s a Professor of Marketing and holder of the Concordia University Research Chair in Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences and Darwinian Consumption. Dr. Saad hosts a popular YouTube show called The Saad Truthand has appeared on shows such as The Rubin Report, The Joe Rogan Experience, and the Adam Carolla Show. He writes a column for Psychology Today titled Homo Consumericus.

I spoke to him about the hysteria around a Donald Trump presidency, speaking out as an academic, and the field of evolutionary psychology and its detractors. The following is our conversation transcribed and edited for clarity.

 Malhar Mali: There seems to be an extreme strain of thought held by some that Trump’s inauguration will signal the apocalypse and return of the third-reich, that people of color will be rounded up, women will be sexually assaulted en-masse, and LGBTQ citizens will be executed on sight. What are your thoughts on that?

Gad Saad: Early last year I introduced a theory to explain the mass hysteria associated with social justice warriors. I called it “collective Munchausen” syndrome. Munchausen disorder is when somebody feigns a medical illness or injury to garner sympathy and empathy. Munchausen syndrome by proxy is when you have somebody under your care — say your child — and you harm that third party to garner sympathy. “Look, my child is hurt!” So it’s a really morbid, grotesque psychological desire to draw attention to yourself because you enjoy the sympathy you receive.

I took this psychiatric disorder that I’d written about in a medical journal and then I argued that the manner in which social justice warriors respond is really a manifestation of collective Munchausen. It’s more than just mass hysteria — which is a known psychological mechanism. It has a specific goal which is to turn the attention inward to: “Oh my god, we’re such victims.” So the faux-fear we’re seeing now with all of these, for lack of a better term, schmucks is a form of collective Munchausen. It’s: “Oh my god, we’re going to be gang-raped, the third-reich is coming for us.” I put up a satirical video where I reported that the inauguration death patrols were coming for me whilst hiding under the table in my study.

The naturally lobotomized individuals do not understand the gist of my position: I do this not because it’s not reasonable to have concerns about anything Trump may or not do. I could say, “I really dislike his education cabinet for the following reasons.” And that’s reasonable. Any candidate you bring before me, I would have agreements and disagreements with.

The problem arises when you have a discourse fully detached from reality. It’s beyond satirical and grotesque in how much stupidity is exhibited. A typical comment on my social feed might state something to the following effect, “I’m a woman of color,” she’s attending some school in Maine and she’s saying, “I’m afraid. Can I still go to class?” Just work it through. What’s going to happen when Trump becomes president? He sets up roadblocks on every street corner whereby he whisks away all people of color to the designated gang-rape centers? What could explain that hysteria? The only thing that explains it is a departure from reality — and hence collective Munchausen syndrome.

 MM: We value victims — which is a good thing —  but there are groups popping up and individuals who seem to be vying for higher statuses of victimhood. You call this “victimology poker”.

GS: Everyone who is suffering from collective Munchausen and mass hysteria are obviously of a particular political bent — the ultra-Left (who typically belong to the Democratic party). And these people have built their whole ethos, edifice, zeitgeist on Identity Politics. Identity Politics leads to victimology poker and the oppression olympics. These groups just end up competing to see who is more oppressed because it is the mechanism through which they attempt to solve problems. If you and I are having a genuine debate, I would present my evidence and you yours. The better evidence would win out.

That’s not what happens in an Identity Politics debate. My victimology card has to trump yours!  (Laughter) therefore people have to come up with ever stronger cards and hands and end up falling into victim mindsets. This leads to people thinking absurd lines of thought like — and I’m being satirical here — : “How will I go to the store and feel safe buying tomatoes once Trump is in office?” or “What will happen to my children? Will Trump cause us to cannibalize our children?” “Will sex still be permitted?” When you’re getting into that kind of delusional discourse it seems extraordinary that this is viewed as reasonable discourse. These are professors, these are colleagues of mine who feel perfectly comfortable departing from reality in this way.

Hate Trump as much as you want. Hate specific policies by him but don’t engage in this grotesque discourse. Especially because it trivializes actual lived trauma. As somebody who escaped Lebanon and actually hid under desks to avoid death squads, I don’t take well to these idiots from Wellesley College who say, “I’m scared to go and buy my hamburgers now that Trump won,” because it trivializes what true trauma is.

 MM: What would you say to your critics who would claim that you unfairly focus on left-wing lunacy and give right-wing craziness a pass — thereby “normalizing” Donald Trump?

GS: I call that the, “But what about Israel, bruh?” position. So I can’t talk about Islamic craziness unless I grant equal airtime to criticizing Israel?  That’s not how life works. We create a hierarchy of things that compel us. Some people fight for Tibetan freedom, others for Cypriot rights from Turkish occupation. So we don’t have to grant equal time to different issues.

I inhabit the ecosystem of academia. The ecosystem of academia is not run by Right-wing craziness. The academic setting, media elite, and the Hollywood elite are all part of the Left-wing lunacy. So everyday I don’t face the threat of the KKK or Right-wing fascism but I do see the extraordinary harm that is caused by what takes place in universities. That reality is caused by Left-wing lunacy. Hence as a person with a functioning brain I don’t need to provide equal amounts of criticism — that doesn’t mean I’m condoning Right-wing craziness. When I see some Republican senator who comes out with a position that is anti-science and evolution denying, I will be the first to typically criticize that. It’s not as if I exist to pick on the Left and grant cover to the Right. The reality is, in my daily life, I see a lot more danger coming from the Left.

MM: You’re one of the most outspoken academics who speaks about Islam and “Social Justice Warriors”. Are your views rare in academia or do you think there are other academics who support your message but are afraid to voice it. What motivates you to be a part of this debate and speak out?

GS: Yes it’s rare. If we were to estimate the number of people who hold positions similar to mine, it would be higher than those who are actually speaking out — because they’re afraid of voicing their opinions. I get personal communiqués from academics where they say, “I support what you’re doing” or “I’m behind your message” but they’re not comfortable speaking out. But they’re scared to even “like” one of my Facebook posts because someone would see it and that would mean they’re supporting supposedly “fascist” ideas such as freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, rights for Jews, and rights for gays. Those are supposedly all very “controversial” topics that they don’t want people to know they support because those are all “fascist” opinions. People with a “progressive” mindset don’t possess the correct moral compass in navigating these issues; they fear being accused of being a “racist bigot” for supporting freedom of speech and more generally foundational liberal values. It is astounding.

There is some change underway. Heterodox Academy is a collective organized by Jonathan Haidt precisely to recognize the fact we need to provide greater political diversity and more generally a greater diversity of opinions in academia.

Why do I do what I do? I think it’s my personhood; my unique constellation of genes that make me very angry and offended by un-truths. I get genuinely angered at profound bullshit. I feel I must give my voice to contribute to the debate and if everybody had that bent, bad ideas would not have as much airtime.

I think the loftiest pursuit in life is that of truth and therefore I try to honor that ideal at every opportunity.

To continue reading, click here


Malhar Mali

Source: http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/265744/gad-saad-hysteria-and-collective-munchausen-around-malhar-mali

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Muslim Brotherhood protests Jordan’s removal of Qur’an’s jihad verses from curriculum - Robert Spencer




by Robert Spencer

Hat tip: Dr. Jean-Charles Bensoussan
 

Most significant is the “removal of all reference to jihad and opposing the occupation of Palestine.”

President Trump may designate the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, as Saudi Arabia did three years ago.

Jordan’s King Abdullah II visited the U.S. last week and met many officials from the new administration, including Trump. In October, a report stated that Jordan was becoming close friends with Israel, and that “some Palestinians fear they’ve been jilted by Jordan, which seems to be cozying up to Israel rather quickly.

Against this backdrop, the Muslim Brotherhood is unhappy about Jordan removing the Qur’an’s jihad verses from its curriculum. Most significant is the “removal of all reference to jihad and opposing the occupation of Palestine.”

The Brotherhood is often regarded as the wing of jihad that pursues its goals against the House of War by peaceful means, but this is not always the case. If the occasion calls for it, the Muslim Brotherhood may opt for violence.

After its founding in 1928 by Hasan al-Banna, “as an Islamic revivalist movement following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire,” the movement became more violent. It blamed the “Egyptian government for being passive against ‘Zionists’ and joined the Palestinian side in the war against Israel and started performing terrorist acts inside of Egypt.” Al-Banna called it the duty of all Muslims to perform bloody jihad, stating “their pure blood is a symbol of victory in this world and the mark of success and felicity in the world to come.”

In keeping with the vision of al-Banna, Palestinian children have long been taught violence and hatred against Israel as part of their school curriculum.

“Muslim Brotherhood Protests Removal of Jihad Verses From Jordanian Curriculum”, by Ali Waked, Breitbart, February 5, 2017:

JAFFA, Israel – Dozens of Quranic verses have been removed from the Jordanian national curriculum, including those referencing jihad, prompting criticism from the Muslim Brotherhood and its representatives in Jordan.
Huda Alatoum, an educator and high-profile MP for the Muslim Brotherhood, said that “far-reaching changes” have been introduced in Jordan’s school program that remove verses and hadiths (oral traditions) “pertaining to Prophet Mohammed’s life.”
“About 40 percent of the curriculum about Arabic language and Islam have been changed, including the removal of all reference to jihad and opposing the occupation of Palestine,” she charged, adding that “325 verses and 75 Islamic texts have been removed.”
She concluded by warning that “even worse changes” are ahead.
Alatoum said she decided to hold a press conference after her protest efforts in parliament met with failure…….
Al-Monitor reported on the curriculum changes:
A religious and political dispute continues to brew in Jordan over a controversial move by the Ministry of Education to revamp the curricula of the three elementary grades. According to Deputy Prime Minister Jawad Anani, the changes are part of the government’s strategy to combat extremism in society.
Changes to school textbooks introduced this year involve coverage of Islam, history, Arabic and civics. For example, in civics, reference is made to acknowledge Christians as a demographic component of the population with pictures of churches as well as mosques. In religion, entire verses from the Quran and sayings by the Prophet Muhammad have been removed, while in Arabic literature, a picture of a veiled woman was replaced with one showing an unveiled woman. In Arabic-language textbooks for the third grade, a Quranic verse was replaced by a text on swimming. No changes were made to books on the sciences, mathematics and art.
The issue of extremism in the school curricula and the reforms proposed are dividing the country. Conservatives, including the Muslim Brotherhood’s Islamic Action Front (IAF), which contested the Sept. 20 Lower House elections, have denounced the move “as an affront to our heritage and values aimed at distancing future generations from its religion, its Arab identity, its history and traditions.”
Alatoum’s campaign became a sensation on social media.
“That’s what the West wants, a generation that knows nothing about its religion except prayer and fasting,” Misbah tweeted. “They amend the curriculum pretending to root out extremism, but they introduce only corruption instead.”
@raialyoum1 هكذا يريد الغرب جيل جديد لا يعرف عن دينه سوى الصلاه والصوم فقط ينزعون المناهج بحجة مكافحة الفكر المُتطرف ويزرعون الفساد ليل نهار
— محمد مصباح (@lithawawda) February 5, 2017
“Allah bless Huda Alatoum,” Ibrahim Altamimi tweeted after a speech she gave in December.
@KSA_620 ☝🏼لله درك د.هدى العتوم👍🏼
— ماعدت أهتم (@IbrahimAlTamim4) December 23, 2016
Mohammed Bilal called the new curriculum “American Islam,” saying, “Dr. Huda Alatoum, MP, talks about effectively teaching American Islam in her country. Allah forbid.”
الدكتورة هدى العتوم النائبة في البرلمان الأردني ، تحدثنا عن الإسلام الأمريكي في بلادها .
لا فض فوك . https://t.co/VcgZdtEE1O

— محمد البلال (@mohdgnibi) January 2, 2017
Another user protested “the Jordanian liberals’ attempt to change the curriculum.”
@ahmadru_303 @EHSANFAKEEH
الليبراليون في #اﻷردن يسعون الى تغيير #المناهج_الدراسية / كلمة النائب هدى العتومhttps://t.co/Ox5epPO47O
— المعتصمة بالله (@tenstars9992) December 24, 2016
Jordan’s King Abdullah II visited the United States last week and met several officials from the new administration, including President Donald Trump….


Robert Spencer

Source: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/02/muslim-brotherhood-protests-jordans-removal-of-qurans-jihad-verses-from-curriculum

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Pity the Children of the Islamic World - Eileen F. Toplansky




by Eileen F. Toplansky

Basically, the UNRWA is a terrorist training camp.

In April 2016, a video by Hamas was exposed showing "hysterical children in the company of exorcising preachers. It is a humiliating and invasive rite practiced at the Al-Nil School in Gaza City." It is, however, hardly a surprise for people who have followed this never-ending child abuse, as this video exhorts the children to become "warriors" in the jihad or holy war against Israel and the infidels.

These children are taught to hate. Yet, when the French historian of Moroccan heritage, George Bensoussan, stated that "[i]t is a shame to deny this taboo, namely that in the Arab families in France, and everyone knows it but nobody wants to say it, anti-Semitism is sucked with mother's milk" he was put on trial for saying this."

As Khaled Abu Toameh explains "[Palestinian] children do not dream about becoming doctors, pilots or engineers; an entire generation of Palestinians, particularly those in the Gaza Strip, has been raised on the glorification of suicide bombers and anyone who kills a Jew."

In fact, "what is happening to the Palestinian people, who have forever been led by leaders who care nothing for their well-being, is a tragedy of national proportions." And, of course, the first victims are the children.

Since 1996, the Palestinian Media Watch (PMW), under the direction of Itamar Marcus, has exposed the schoolbooks and propaganda material used to brainwash Palestinian children. In 2015 a report issued by PMW highlighted the Palestinian Authority's teaching its children to "reject Israel's right to exist, encourag[ing] them to view Jews as evil and direct[ing] them to embrace terrorist murderers as role models. This report exposes a world of demonization, incitement and hate that Palestinian children are urged to adopt."

When shown the hateful material emanating from the PA, then Senator Hillary Clinton "condemned the PA's messages to children and stated that the official PA TV broadcasts were 'a clear example of child abuse.'" In fact, the textbooks "do not give Palestinian children an education; they give them an indoctrination. When viewed . . . in combination with other media that these children are exposed to, we see a larger picture that is disturbing… because it basically profoundly poisons the minds of these children."

Common themes running through the hate-filled messages include:
  • Israel has no right to exist.
  • Israel will disappear and be replaced by Palestine.
  • Violence -- “armed struggle” -- is legitimate to fight Israel.
  • Muslims must fight an eternal Islamic war against Israel.
  • Killers of Israelis are heroes and role models.
  • Martyrdom or death for Allah is the utmost honor.
  • Jews are “monkeys and pigs.”
  • Jews are “enemies of Allah.”
  • Jews are the “most evil of creations.”
Schools are named after terrorists and Hitler is honored. On January 20, 2017, young children on a PA TV children's program recited a poem promoting the escalation of violence: and recited "my rock has turned into an AK-47." On January 8, 2017 a "young girl chants at a Fatah rally north of Nablus, that '[d]eath is insignificant… I love Palestine, blood is spilled for it."

In February 2017, a UN Watch report titled "Poisoning Palestinian Children" highlights the endless teaching and incitement to jihadist terrorism and anti-Semitism that is the foundation of teaching to Palestinian children. The report's graphic pictures expose "more than 40 Facebook pages operated by school teachers, principals, and other employees of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) which incite terrorism and anti-Semitism. It includes UNRWA staffers in Lebanon, Jordan, Gaza, and Syria." The potent examples in the report show teachers and staffers "celebrating the terrorist kidnapping of Israeli teenagers, cheering rockets being fired at Israeli civilian centers, endorsing various forms of violence, erasing Israel from the map, praising Hitler and posting his photo and overtly anti-Semitic videos, caricatures and statements."

Basically, the UNRWA is a terrorist training camp. The United States gave $380 million in 2015, the EU $136 million, the UK $100 million, and Canada $25 million. Even when UN Watch exposed similar cases last year, nothing was done and, in fact, a UNRWA spokesman "lashed out at UN Watch" for exposing the truth. Legal violations of the UNRWA, which are discussed in the report, the act of inciting terrorism, the public display of Facebook posts which celebrate radical Islamic terrorism, and the violation of internal United Nations policies are clear-cut reasons why UNRWA needs to be dismantled. Clearly, nothing short of this will make a difference.

Not content with poisoning children's minds in school, the Islamic world countenances more and more children marriages. In Iran, where the marriage age is nine years old, "the rate of child marriage is increasing exponentially in the Islamic Republic of Iran, [as well as] Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, and even some Muslim communities in the West. The U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child has warned Iran over the rise in child marriages and for allowing sex and execution at age 9" according to Dr. Majid Rafizadeh.

Further depravity is demonstrated with the news that in the United Kingdom "a six-year-old girl with learning difficulties was removed from school and taken to marry an older man in Pakistan."

In Pakistan, "Pakistani lawmakers had to withdraw a bill aimed at curbing the practice of child marriage after a prominent religious body declared the legislation un-Islamic. The bill, which proposed raising the marriage age for females from 16 to 18, also called for harsher penalties for those who would arrange marriages involving children. Despite the laws in place, child marriages, particularly involving young female brides, are common in parts of the country. It's estimated that some 20 percent of the girls in the country are married before they turn 18."

What we repeatedly see is child abuse of the highest order and religiously endorsed pedophilia. It is endemic in the Islamic world and it is now rearing its ugly head in the West with no sign of abating.

If, as the Talmud states, "the world exists only because of the innocent breath of schoolchildren" then the world that the Islamists are creating and that the West appears to be ignoring, is a dire one, indeed. Mokher Sefarim Mendele, Yiddish storyteller, wrote that "children without childhood are a dark and fearsome spectacle." Children taught to be suicide bombers, young girls whose very bodies and souls are destroyed -- how can a society continue this ongoing assault on its young?

Children "deserve to be brought up valuing peace, but Palestinian children are being deprived of a peaceful future and are victims of their own leaders." The entire Islamic landscape is sacrificing its young and this depressing scenario must be halted if we are ever to truly live in peace and harmony where children's nightmares are stilled.

Eileen F. Toplansky can be reached at middlemarch18@gmail.com

Source: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/02/pity_the_children_of_the_islamic_world.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

How Deep Was the Obama-Iran Relationship? - Amir Basiri




by Amir Basiri

Many within the Iranian-American community consider NIAC to be a de facto lobby for the Iranian regime.

The Obama administration’s effort to engage Iran remained a matter of suspicion until the 44th American president left the White House. Concerns began mounting especially after Obama turned his back on the 2009 uprising in parallel to the revelation of secret correspondence with Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

As more light is shed, the more we realize how far this relationship expanded. Known members of Iran’s lobbies and others enjoyed unprecedented access to the White House. This new knowledge calls for a complete overhaul of the corrupt U.S. foreign policy establishment.

Shocking Numbers

Through the course of the nuclear talks that rendered the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the Obama White House welcomed a slate of different Iranian-American so-called “experts” and organizations who agreed completely over how Washington must engage in Tehran rapprochement.

Trita Parsi, President of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), a known Iran-funded lobby, was reportedly welcomed in up to 33 meetings in the White House, from 2013 to 2016.

Seyed Mousavian, a former Iranian diplomat and head of its national security council, was hosted at the White House at least three times,” the Washington Free Beacon explained.

Parsi’s record was second only to Jeremy Ben Ami, President of J Street, described as a strong advocate of the Iran appeasement camp, who visited the White House on 44 occasions.

And finally, one NIAC alumni, Sahar Nowrouzzadeh, National Security Council Director for Iran in Obama’s White House, reached the point of obtaining daily access to the White House and promoting a pro-Iran regime approach.

“President Obama’s NSC Director for Iran, Sahar Nowrouzzadeh, apparently worked as a lobbyist for NIAC,” according to Western Journalism.

Who is Trita Parsi?

Described as having links to the Obama White House's cheerleading of the narrative in support of the Iranian regime, Parsi, head of NIAC, was able to meet with several senior Obama administration officials in dozens of White House visits, according to the logs.

Ben Rhodes, Obama’s deputy national security advisor, provided exclusive access to Parsi in private talks. He also arranged meetings with Colin Kahl, former Vice President Joe Biden’s national security advisor.

Various sources also indicated Parsi meeting with other senior officials including NSC director for Iran.

One instance shows West Wing intern Solomon Tarlin, known to support J Street, signed Parsi into the White House.

However, Parsi is a figure who during the Bush administration dined with Iran’s former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, suggesting that he pursues the interest of the Iranian regime in its entirety, and not the so-called “moderates“.

Parsi was also pictured in conversation with the brother of Iranian President Hassan Rouhani.


Parsi is known to brag about his access to senior Iranian regime officials.
“Few analysts in Washington have the access of Dr. Parsi to decision makers in Iran,” he described in a bio.

NIAC

NIAC, a Washington-based lobbying organization founded by Parsi in 2002, focuses on influencing senior American officials and politicians. A piece written by Iranian dissident Alex Shirazi in the Daily Blaze sheds more light on NIAC’s intentions, serving completely in Iran’s interests.

NIAC was architected by the little known Namazi family in Iran, described as favoring “political interests in the Islamic Republic.”

Insight into NIAC’s background can be obtained from regrets made public by Carl Gershman, President of the National Endowment for Democracy. Gershman accused NIAC of misrepresenting its true nature.
“… NIAC showed itself as a lobby organization, so we have nothing to do with them anymore.”
Al Arabiya English cited the Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg referring to Parsi as an individual who “does a lot of leg-work for the Iranian regime.” (Goldberg at one point retracted this description, but shortly afterward retracted his retraction.) 

NIAC misleadingly presented its agenda as meeting U.S. national interests. The very regime NIAC sells is known for “Death to America!” mantras and killing at least hundreds, if not thousands, of American personnel.

NIAC goes as far as claiming to advocate “human rights” in Iran and “civil rights” in the U.S., insulting Americans by placing their country alongside the ruthless regime in Iran.

In fact, NIAC lobbies for a friendly U.S. relationship with the current Iranian regime and strongly opposes economic sanctions. All this goes while Iran state media describe NIAC as the "Iran lobby in the U.S."

NIAC and Parsi Exposed by Others

There has been abundant reporting about the true nature of NIAC and Trita Parsi.
“…Parsi admits that his group only has 2,500 to 3,000 members. Internal documents, uncovered by Lake, show that less than 500 people responded to a membership survey that the group put out last year. So, far from representing the views of any appreciable number of Iranian Americans, it is far more accurate to say that NIAC represents the views of Trita Parsi.
“…may be guilty of violating tax laws, the Foreign Agents Registration Act and lobbying disclosure laws, according to law enforcement authorities…
“… former FBI special agent in counterintelligence and counterterrorism Kenneth Piernick, said, ‘It appears that this may be lobbying on behalf of Iranian government interests.’”
The report continues:
“…the group’s acting director for policy, Patrick Disney, authored a memo last year in which he stated, “I believe we fall under this definition of “lobbyist.’” And according to other communications Lake obtained, Parsi himself used the word ‘lobby’ to describe the purpose and mission of NIAC.”
Parsi and Zarif

Released email records indicate close ties between Parsi and Tehran, especially through Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif. Reports in this regard are quite vivid.

According to NIAC emails released under a lawsuit, in April 2006, Zarif, then Iran’s ambassador to the U.N., gave a copy of Iran’s 2003 offer for a “grand bargain" to Parsi, subsequently released to the press and used in a campaign to prove Iran was ready for peace and dialogue. (For more information on Parsi’s role in providing a copy of Iranian offer to the press, read the Washington Post, Anti-War, and IPS reports.)

A few weeks later, Parsi launched the “Iran Negotiation Project” and began arranging meetings between Congressional members and Zarif. Then in his 25 October 2006 email, Parsi told Zarif about Congressional members who had decided to oppose George Bush’s policy on Iran and requested a meeting.

A Deeper look into NIAC

Many within the Iranian-American community consider NIAC to be a de facto lobby for the Iranian regime. In 2008 as criticism against NIAC’s pro-regime activities mounted, NIAC and Parsi raised a defamation lawsuit against one of its critics, attempting to destroy him through the financial burden of a lawsuit and as a result silence all other critics.

In 2012 a court dismissed the lawsuit and sanctioned NIAC and Trita Parsi for abuses which included false declarations to the court, ordering them to pay $184,000 towards the defendant’s legal expenses.

This lawsuit forced NIAC to release some internal documents that turned out to be devastating. The Washington Times and many others published these documents.

NIAC claims to have a goal of preventing war between the U.S. and Iran. Critics, however, affirm NIAC’s lobby has always primarily focused on business and the peace mantle it wears is nothing but a face for its lobby efforts.

In a memo sent to Washington lobbyist Roy Coffee, Parsi explained the true nature of his efforts.

Back in 2002-03, Parsi used his access to the U.S. Congress to prepare reports about the latest developments regarding Iran and send the reports to Tehran.

Final Thoughts

This newly revealed White House log shows how the Obama administration bent over backwards in hosting advocates seeking Iran’s interests, and not that of America.

Allowing Parsi into the White House more than 30 times, despite his foreign policy positions being completely in line with the Iranian regime, provides intriguing insight into how far the Obama administration went to aid the mullahs, while they continued, and continue today, to describe America as the “Great Satan”.

The access provided to the likes of Parsi and NIAC provides all the knowledge needed about the true nature of the highly flawed nuclear deal sealed by the Obama administration with Tehran.

And this is only a tip of the iceberg of how far Obama’s failed appeasement policy provided unprecedented access to NIAC, and to this end, the Iranian regime.

This signifies the necessity of the new Trump administration to completely overhaul agencies dealing with Iran, and to impose radical changes on Washington’s Iran policy altogether. 

Amir Basiri

Source: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/02/how_deep_was_the_obamairan_relationship.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.