Recently, we wrote about Huma Abedin's time on the Board of the Muslim Students Association (MSA) at George Washington University. A woman she served alongside with on that Board is Souheila Al-Jadda, who is currently a member of the Board of Contributors for USA Today. Al-Jadda has also served as a legislative assistant for Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH).
Nearly one year ago, a program on The Learning Channel (TLC) was the source of controversy when Lowe's decided to pull its advertising from TLC's All American Muslim (AAM), a show that followed the lives of five Muslim families in Dearborn, MI. Concerns raised initially by the Florida Family Association (FFA) were validated when we examined the background of the Imam featured in the show. His name is Husham Al-Husainy. In the show, he was highly respected and presided over the wedding of a Muslim girl and her fiance, who converted so they could marry.
Here is what we wrote at the time, thanks to Walid's translation of the Jerusalem Document, via Human Events:
Al-Husainy is a signatory to the Jerusalem Document of 2009, which reads more like Mein Kampf. It refers to the war on Zionism as a war between “good and evil.” Zionism is considered an “aggression” that is infecting “the entire human race.” Muslims are told to “get ready for the Holy Jihad.”
If one is inclined to believe this is the “struggle within” version of jihad, the reading of the following phrase after translation should prompt a reevaluation:
“We remind our sons to get ready to carry out their duty in Holy Jihad and continue the path which our young valiant men in Hezbollah began in Southern Lebanon.”
Here is a radio interview from 2007 between Sean Hannity and Husham Al-Husainy who would not denounce Hezbollah and ultimately cut the interview short when he hung up on Hannity:
With this as a backdrop, let's look at the words of Souheila Al-Jadda. During the AAM controversy, she wrote an article for the USA Today, which said, in part, the following:
To me, and many other Muslim Americans, this is the strength of the TV show — demystifying a community that has long been misunderstood. With an opening night audience of 1.7 million, according to Broadcasting & Cable, All-American Muslim will hopefully change the national discourse about Muslims from that of suspicion and exclusion to one of greater trust and inclusion.
Propaganda charges
But a number of critics and activists are unfairly attacking the program, claiming the show is Muslim propaganda that hides the extremist agenda. Some are even pressuring companies, in addition to Lowe's, to pull their advertising to force the show off the air. These attacks are not only short on substance but also wrong on principle and bad for America. They undermine ever-evolving American values of pluralism and tolerance.
A little bit later, Al-Jadda invoked the Ground Zero mosque controversy as another case in point (yes, it seems that Al-Jadda supported construction of the mosque, despite Feisal Abdul Rauf's ties to extremists):
It's no secret that anti-Muslim rhetoric continues to plague public discussions about this community. From New York Rep. Pete King's Muslim radicalization hearings in Congress this year to the anti-sharia movement to the debate surrounding an Islamic center near Ground Zero in New York, Muslims hear this drumbeat of suspicion even a decade after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
Additional irony is provided by Al-Jadda when she terms the problems people had with AAM as being "bigotry and stereotyping". Al-Husainy wouldn't denounce the virulently racist / anti-Semitic Hezbollah. Giving the USA Today contributor the benefit of the doubt would require an assumption that she doesn't know the views of Al-Husainy and would denounce them if she did. It's been nearly a year since the All American Muslim controversy and about five years since Al-Husainy hung-up on Hannity. Isn't it about time for Al-Jadda to denounce him (and Hezbollah / Hamas / MSA)?
Uh, that poses a bit of a problem, however.
Al-Jadda served on the Board of the Muslim Students Association at George Washington University with... Huma Abedin. She would have to denounce a Muslim Brotherhood organization with which she is inextricably tied.
Moreover, thanks to the Florida Family Association, it was learned that an All American Muslim styled program was broadcast to six million high school students in America in which two MSA Presidents were profiled.
Incidentally, in a New York Timesarticle that mentions GWU by name, the following is said about the MSA:
Donations from Saudi Arabia largely financed the group, and its leaders pushed the kingdom’s puritan, Wahhabi strain of Islam. Prof. Hamid Algar of the University of California, Berkeley, said that in the 1960s and 1970s, chapters advocated theological and political positions derived from radical Islamist organizations and would brook no criticism of Saudi Arabia.
That would be the same Saudi Arabia that commissioned Abdullah Omar Naseef to found the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA) and put Huma Abedin's parents in charge of it.
After twelve years at the IMMA as an Assistant Editor, Huma went to work for Hillary Clinton as her closest advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff (after having already served the First Lady as an aide since 1996, one year before she was listed as being on the MSA Board).
Here again is the screen shot of that 1997 MSA Board at GWU:
Ben Barrack is a talk show host and author of the book, Unsung Davids
Things are getting interesting with respect to the history of the George Washington University (GWU) chapter of the Muslim Students Association (MSA) - in particular, the 1997 - 2002 timeframe.
Earlier this week, we reported that Huma Abedin served on the Board of GWU's chapter of the MSA in 1997 and left some time before early 1999. Andrew McCarthy then rightfully pointed out that none other than notorious al-Qaeda figure Anwar al-Awlaki served on the same Board, though after Abedin left; al-Awlaki served as a "Chaplain" on GWU's MSA Board from late 2001 - 2002.
That leads us to another "Chaplain" who served on the same MSA Board alongside al-Awlaki - and for a much longer period of time. Mohamed S. Omeish served as "Chaplain" from at least October, 1999 - April, 2002. During the time when both men served on the MSA Board at GWU, they were the only two listed as Chaplains.
If one has a difficult time finding it significant that while Huma and al-Awlaki served on the Board but never together, perhaps the significance of al-Awlaki and Omeish serving on the Board together - and in the same capacity - will not be lost on them. Omeish is a rather big fish when it comes to the nexus between the Muslim World League and the Muslim Brotherhood. In fact, if one believes that al-Qaeda leadership is expendable while leaders of organizations that have been known to finance them are not, the fates of both al-Awlaki and Omeish may just serve as the perfect microcosm.
Mohamed Omeish headed the U.S. branch of one of bin Laden's favorite Saudi charities, the International Islamic Relief Organization, which was raided after 9/11. Tax records I've obtained show Omeish shared an office with Alamoudi, the convicted al-Qaida-tied terrorist and godfather of the Muslim mafia in America. This is the same "moderate" Muslim leader who federal prosecutors caught on tape complaining bin Laden hadn't killed enough Americans.
The IIRO was formed under the Muslim World League (MWL), again, a large Saudi Arabian umbrella group whose Secretary General from 1983 - 1993 was none other than Abdullah Omar Naseef. It's important to remember at this point that from 1996 - 2003, both Naseef and Huma Abedin served on the Board of the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs. Huma served on the IMMA Board as Assistant Editor from 1996 - 2008 while also serving on the same MSA Board in 1997 that would later welcome Omeish and al-Awlaki as Muslim "Chaplain(s)". As the leader of IIRO in the United States, Omeish led a group created with the help of Naseef's MWL.
Incidentally, two IIRO branch offices - in the Philippines and Indonesia - were listed as terrorist entities by the United Nations as recently as May of 2011.
Click here for a chart that explains Naseef's role with and ties to MWL and IIRO.
Moreover, according to Sperry, Omeish shared an office with none other than Abdurahman Alamoudi, who was convicted of charges related to terrorism in 2004. The Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report provides a bit more detail on the relationship between Mohamed Omeish and Alamoudi:
According to the sworn statement of a US federal law enforcement officer as well as various public records, Mohamed Omeish is also an officer of the American Muslim Foundation and the Success Foundation both located at the same address as the MAS headquarters in Virginia. The former President of the American Muslim Foundation and Secretary of the Success Foundation was Abdul Rahman Alamoudi, convicted in a plot to murder Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah on behalf of Libyan leader Muammar al-Gaddafi. Both organizations received donations from the SAAR Foundation where Mr. Alamoudi was employed as an executive Assistant during the 1990s’.
So even if one ignores Huma Abedin's time at IMMA, the MSA charter at GWU raises more red flags. Ms. Abedin served on the Board of an organization whose future Board members had direct ties with or included Anwar al-Awlaki and Abdurahman Alamoudi.
Let's take a look at another Omeish - Mohamed's brother, Esam. In Sperry's 2007 article, he identified Esam as the head of the Muslim American Society (MAS) who hired the man who served as a Chaplain alongside Esam's brother:
Esam S. Omeish also sits on the board of the 9/11-tied mosque in Washington that helped the hijackers get licenses and housing, and whose imam prepared them for martyrdom operations in private closed-door sessions. Omeish personally hired the imam, Anwar Aulaqi, who fled the country on a Saudi jet about a year after 9/11...
A few months prior to the Fort Hood shootings, before which shooter Nidal Malik Hasan is known to have corresponded with al-Awlaki several times via email, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton invited Esam onto a conference call, which he attended. When the State Department was asked if it was aware of Esam's background, the question apparently fell on deaf ears.
The State Department has not replied to questions as to whether it was aware of Omeish's past comments when he was selected as one of approximately 100-200 invitees to participate in the conference, which included academics and Muslim leaders.
Aside from it being the State Department's job to know such things, it was also asked this question at a time when Huma Abedin was still Clinton's closest advisor. Are we to believe Huma knew nothing of Essam's background? Wouldn't it have been easy for her to reach out the MSA chapter at GWU, where she once served as a Board member, to find out?
The Fox article quoted Esam Omeish from the conference call as well:
In the conference call with Clinton last week, which was advertised as a forum to discuss how to bridge the divide between the United States and the Muslim community, Omeish expressed support for President Obama and offered that Muslim-Americans needed to get more involved in politics.
In 2007, Esam had to resign as a member of Virginia's Commission of Immigration after video of him in December of 2000 surfaced. Ironically, that video was shot just outside the White House, which was still occupied by the Clintons at the time. Here is an excerpt from that video:
Discover the Networks reports that Esam also resigned his post at MAS after the video surfaced. Again, are we to believe, based on the State Department's silence, coupled with its inclusion of Esam on the 2009 conference call, that they were unaware of Esam's history?
Another video from 2006 captured Esam calling for the release of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners. Perhaps the most attention-grabbing moment comes at the 3:00 mark, when Esam calls on George W. Bush to "stop calling Islam 'Islamic fascism'".
Unfortunately for Esam, that's not what Bush said and by alleging that he did, Esam entered dangerous territory. Peaceful practitioners of Islam should have agreed with Bush's word choice. Those who didn't warrant increased suspicion.
Here is video of George W. Bush referring to America's enemies as 'Islamic fascists'. It would be the first and last time he used that term.
The subject of Huma Abedin's Form 86 has come up in the past. Should we not also learn about her time at the MSA and if she had any connections with Board members who succeeded her, especially since a few of them have turned out to be either notorious and/or suspicious?
Ben Barrack is a talk show host and author of the book, Unsung Davids
While doing some research for this post, I came across a document that appeared to have been written less than one month after 9/11; it was written in the form of a journal but did not have an author's name (I have since learned it and reveal it at the end of this post ). It consisted of a first hand account of someone who lived near to and worked in Washington, D.C.; it was someone who worked near the Capitol Building; it was someone who knew Congressmen and Senators personally; and it was someone who was a strong Christian.
As I read what this person obviously knew in the hours after 9/11, it became blatantly obvious to me that the individuals at the highest levels of the George W. Bush administration knew it too. If the author of this account had been listened to then, the rise of Islam across the Middle East, Europe, and here in America since, may have been significantly reduced, if not outright prevented. These observations are so spot-on from someone who had much less information than Bush's inner circle did that I'm convinced this is not an issue of Monday morning quarterbacking; the Bush strategy after 9/11 was fatally flawed and his administration chose the path of least resistance. In short, the administration lied to us and to itself.
Read the entire account here if you'd like. I've excerpted portions that particularly struck me for their prescience at the time. This is some of the author's account of what he experienced on September 12, 2001:
By mid afternoon on Wednesday I was convinced that not only was the United States a victim of Islamic Jihad, but that the attack had been perpetrated by an organization controlled by a Saudi citizen and that most of those involved were Saudi, and that furthermore the attack was financed for the most part by Saudi businessmen and members of the Saudi royal family.
At the end of the day I made the following statement to my wife:
"These attacks were planned, financed and carried out by Saudi nationals and as a result the real culprits will never come to justice. We will bomb some third world nation like Afghanistan and our government will say our "moderate" Islamic friends with all the oil were not involved. Worse, we will put a handful of people in jail like we did the last time the World Trade Center was bombed. The Islamic fanatics will think a trade off of four or five in jail getting three meals a day, versus thousands of Americans dead, is a great deal.
So far, he accurately identified what the Bush administration would do with respect to Afghanistan. We also know that based on the fact that al-Qaeda financier - Abdullah Omar Naseef - was not held to account for his role in funding al-Qeada, there were some "moderate" Islamic friends who escaped American wrath over 9/11. Naseef was once the Secretary General of the Muslim World League (MWL), which is funded by the Saudi Royal family. He also founded the Rabita Trust, an entity that was identified by the U.S. Treasury Department as financing al-Qaeda; it was listed as a terrorist organization and its assets frozen one month after 9/11.
Here is an excerpt from the author's account about his experiences on September 13, 2001:
As I talked to congressmen and Senators my worst fears were realized. I carried documents with me showing clearly that most funding for Osama Bin Laden’s terror network came from moderate states like Saudi Arabia. While the Saudi government itself claims that it has no ties to these terror organizations, each year the government gives $10 billion to fundamentalist Islamic organizations, many of them located in the United States.
When I confronted one well known Senator about the millions of dollars going to Bin Laden’s terror network from Saudi businessmen, he said to me, "Yes, but they are coerced into giving it to him."
I responded to this by saying, "Maybe those millionaire Saudi businessmen should be more fearful of us than they are of Bin Laden."
Later that day almost the identical conversation took place between myself and a member of the House leadership and then again with someone within the Bush Administration. It was made clear to me that none of the wealthy Saudi Arabians who finance Islamic terror would meet the wrath of the United States for fear of angering the "friendly" state of Saudi Arabia. This was made clear to me by members of the House and Senate, both Democrat and Republican as well as by some in the Administration. I was appalled.
The author was quite correct about those "moderate" Islamic friends facing no consequences. Perhaps the most chilling excerpt from the author was found in his account of what he witnessed on September 14, 2001:
My stomach churned as I watched Muzammil Siddiqi, the Imam for the Islamic Society of North America, stand on stage with President George W. Bush in the National Cathedral. Imam Siddiqi is a radical extremist who has participated in anti-American demonstrations in front of the White House as recently as October of 2000. He has in the past called for a Jihad or holy war against this nation. While the Christian and Jewish leaders at the event prayed for our nation and for the dead and dying from the attack, Imam Siddiqi did not do so. At no time did he condemn the acts of the terrorists nor did he pray for America or for the families of those who lost their lives in the Jihad attack against the United States...
As the service closed I felt the chill of the presence of the awesome power of God. I was clearly reminded of the very first of the Ten Commandments, THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GODS BEFORE ME (Exodus 20:3). The National Cathedral had been defiled... Our Christian President had bowed his head to prayers offered to other gods, prayers that may have been for those who would destroy our nation and enslave our children to an alien religion. At that moment the hand of protection of the true God was removed from our nation.
Since the Jihad attack on the United States on September 11th the President has surrounded himself with and sought advice from radical Islamic leaders who have openly called for the violent overthrow of the government of the United States. In addition, the President has invited six of the seven Islamic nations known to sponsor terror into his "coalition against terror".
By late Friday it became apparent to me that our nation was in fact not going to fight a war on terrorism, but rather follow the same old track of "punishing those who actually committed the crime." This was not a "crime;" it was an act of war.
Siddiqi eventually stepped down as president of the Muslim Brotherhood group but he has not really left the ISNA; he now serves as the Religious Director for the Islamic Society of Orange County (ISOC), which recently welcomed Congresswomen Maxine Waters (D-CA) and Loretta Sanchez (D-CA).
Here's a portion of the author's entry about the week of September 17, 2001:
A sharp line began to form in Washington between those of us willing to tell the truth about what had happened on September 11th and those who wish to continue to live in the fantasy world of pluralism. The ACLU began a campaign to stop "oppression" of Muslims in the United States. They began the campaign by signing up organizations to protect the "civil rights" of Muslims.
Meanwhile the "moderate" Islamic organizations had a word of their own for Muslims in America: DO NOT HELP THE FBI. Internet sites warned Muslims that: "The FBI has a history of harassing and harming minority and immigrant communities. Some people are spending a long time in jail because they or their friends talked to the FBI."
As for the author's assertion that George W. Bush wrongly stood with radical Islamic leaders... Once again, here is video of Bush on September 17, 2001 inside the Islamic Center of Washington mosque. The Executive Director of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) - Nihad Awad - stood behind Bush as the president espoused the religion of our attackers:
He spoke at the same mosque more than one year later on December 5, 2002:
Those who argue that the Bush strategy was based on a tried and true adage that says, keep your friends close and your enemies closer, run into a big problem.
It's a strategy an excuse that has failed us miserably since 9/11.
Islam is on the rise all across the globe. The Muslim Brotherhood front groups Bush attempted to appease have smiles from ear to rear. In fact, Bush himself, in an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal earlier this year, actually seemed to urge people to embrace the Brotherhood's rise in the Middle East:
These are extraordinary times in the history of freedom. In the Arab Spring, we have seen the broadest challenge to authoritarian rule since the collapse of Soviet communism. The idea that Arab peoples are somehow content with oppression has been discredited forever.
Yet we have also seen instability, uncertainty and the revenge of brutal rulers. The collapse of an old order can unleash resentments and power struggles that a new order is not yet prepared to handle.
Some in both parties in Washington look at the risks inherent in democratic change—particularly in the Middle East and North Africa—and find the dangers too great. America, they argue, should be content with supporting the flawed leaders they know in the name of stability.
But in the long run, this foreign policy approach is not realistic. It is not within the power of America to indefinitely preserve the old order, which is inherently unstable. Oppressive governments distrust the diffusion of choice and power, choking off the best source of national prosperity and success.
Today, Naseef, at least one of the men who should have been the object of as much American ire as bin Laden was, watches safely from afar as a woman who served with him on the Board of an organization he founded - the Islamic Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA) - now serves alongside Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as Clinton's closest advisor.
In the days and weeks after 9/11, George W. Bush's approval rating shot to 90%. When he left office, he was at 34%. 9/11 was his moment of truth and his approval rating steadily fell after the invasion of Afghanistan; they jumped after the initial success in Iraq, and they steadily declined thereafter. Bush had the American people behind him after 9/11 and he ultimately squandered much of our support by not leveling with us and by not identifying everyone who was responsible for hitting us.
In hindsight, the anger at Bush, Cheney, Rove, et. al. was not all that unwarranted, though the vitriol and expressed reasons for that anger often were. The decision to go into Iraq was a devastatingly wrong one. That should be obvious now. Iraq was a threat to Saudi Arabia more than it was to us. Saddam Hussein threatened the Saudis in a way not all that dissimilar from how he threatened Kuwait in the early 90's. In essence, the United States aligned with a nation that was actually culpable for 9/11, against their enemy.
It's time for us on the right to acknowledge that many of those who screamed the loudest about invading Iraq being the wrong thing to do, were correct. George W. Bush should do the same.
WHAT SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED AFTER 9/11
Based on the insights of the author of that prescient 9/11 account - William Murray of the Religious Freedom Coalition - the argument that Murray knew the truth while Bush and his advisors did not is poppycock. That's why this is not about Monday morning quarterbacking; it's about what should have been done.
POSSIBLE SCENARIO: In the days after 9/11, George W. Bush repudiates all groups associated with the Muslim Brotherhood. The president goes to Congress and seeks to have the Brotherhood labeled as a terrorist entity / enemy. CAIR, ISNA, MSA and any other front groups for the Brotherhood in the U.S. are put on notice and identified as what they are - entities that seek the destruction of the United States from within. The accounts of all such groups are frozen and leaders are either arrested or sent out of the country.
Any and all individuals with verifiable ties / loyalties to the aforementioned groups and who either hold jobs or any political influence inside the U.S. Government are prohibited from serving in those capacities.
Bush gathers all of his advisors and top Cabinet officials together to determine how best to become energy independent as quickly as possible. He orders is Energy Secretary to loosen as many regulations as humanly possible; this will encourage increased drilling and refining. With a 90% approval rating, the political capital at the president's disposal is virtually unlimited. The goal is energy independence within two years. Aggressive? Yes. Impossible? Americans have a history of exceeding goals in times of crisis and war. In this case, not letting a crisis go to waste would have been a good thing.
Bush decides to invade Afghanistan upon getting Congressional approval, which leads Saudi Arabia to believe it's successfully staving off American ire. Going into Afghanistan is the first in a hypothetical chain of events:
Target Osama bin Laden and destroy the Taliban, which was responsible for both running the terrorist training camps and harboring bin Laden.
Stay focused in Afghanistan while buying time to allow for energy independence in America. The world is made to believe that we are attacking those who we perceive attacked us. Singling out Saudi Arabia as being complicit in 9/11 at this point likely would result in a loss of oil and a debilitating energy crisis in the U.S.
Once the U.S. is confident it can survive the Saudi Arabian oil spigot being turned off, top tier al-Qaeda financiers - sources of Osama bin Laden's funding - are identified publicly by the President and targeted as enemies of the United States. Abdullah Omar Naseef, for example, is tightly connected to the Saudi Royal family but he has also been identified as a financier of al-Qaeda. Groups that Naseef has either led, founded or both, are proven to have been financed by the Royal family, which seeks to protect Naseef.
The decision is made by the Bush administration that while it will not target the Saudi family specifically, it will not respect the family's wishes with regard to which al-Qaeda financiers are off-limits. Bush then informs the Royal family that if the oil spigots are shut off, that policy is subject to change and the Royal family risks the same fate as those 'untouchable' al-Qaeda financiers.
Those who scoff and call such ideas ridiculous lose the argument when we see how reality has unfolded since September 11, 2001.
In either case, it's safe to say that Murray was right and the Bush administration was wrong.
Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), the first Muslim elected to U.S. Congress, has taken great offense at a series of letters sent to the Inspectors General of various Departments and Agencies demanding answers about Muslim Brotherhood influence in the halls of U.S. power.
Ellison has now sent a letter of his own to Reps. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Trent Franks (R-AZ), Thomas Rooney (R-FL), and Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA). The letter demands that Bachmann and her fellow congressmen reveal their sources and the evidence of their claims. One of those claims is that Hillary Clinton's Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin, has familial ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.
You can read more about the case against Huma Abedin and Hillary here but it's also important to focus on the strategy Ellison is employing in his attack against Bachmann; he cites Republican Party officials who have been identified as being problematic in the fight against Islamic fundamentalism.
As evidence for these allegations, you reference MuslimBrotherhoodinAmerica.com, a Web site created by Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy (CSP).
Mr. Gaffney has a long history of making unsubstantiated anti-Muslim allegations, including:
• Accusing then-ISAF Commander General David Petraeus of “submission” to Islamic law because he condemned Florida pastor Terry Jones’ burning of a Quran;
• Accusing presidential candidate Herman Cain after meeting with ISNA of meeting with “the largest Muslim Brotherhood front in the United States” (language that appears verbatim in your letters);
• Accusing New Jersey Governor Chris Christie of “corruption” and “treason” for appointing a Muslim lawyer to be a judge;
• Accusing anti-tax advocate Grover Norquist of “enabling and empowering Muslim Brotherhood influence operations against our movement and our country”;
• Accusing former Bush Administration official Suhail Khan of conducting a “Muslim Brotherhood Influence Operation” against the American Conservative Union (ACU), the host of the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), and
• Accusing Republican Virginia House of Delegates member David Ramadan of waging “stealth jihad” by seeking elected office.
The sad truth is that Ellison is right about Gaffney's claims, which is an indictment of the people whom Gaffney identifies. Starting at the beginning... In a 1991 Muslim Brotherhood document penned by Mohamed Akram, The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) was identified as a Muslim Brotherhood organization.
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 so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions.
Ok, so instead of Ellison pointing to Herman Cain's visit with the head of the ISNA - Mohamed Magid - in 2011 as a refutation of Bachmann's concerns, Americans should be questioning Cain's decision to do so.
Of course, let's not forget Chris Christie's bombastic response to a legitimate question about why he appointed a Muslim with questionable ties to a county judgeship. His defense of Sohail Mohammed is definitely suspect.
Then, of course, there is the Grover Norquist / Suhail Khan dynamic. Here is video courtesy of Jay Mark Campbell from CPAC 2011. Note the absurd claim by Khan, whose father was an early founder of both ISNA and another Muslim Brotherhood group - the Muslim Students Association (MSA), that there is "no Muslim Brotherhood in the United States." Take note at the 2:45 mark, where Khan doesn't just lie but he pretends that the lifework of his father doesn't exist.
Isn't that a bit disrespectful?
Khan and Grover Norquist go way back. Conservatives who tend to blindly support the Republican Party as the best of two options should be extremely wary. In much the same way that the Democratic Party was infiltrated, there are forces at work that seek to do the same with the Republican Party, whether wittingly or unwittingly. By using the argument that he does, Ellison seems to be banking on those who blindly support the Republican Party.
Contrast this post with the one I put up yesterday that included an interview with Retired Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer on Fox & Friends. The subject of that interview was a newly released report, sponsored in part by the DHS, that concluded 'rightwing extremism' is a growing concern in America while all but ignoring Islamic extremism.
Now, as it stands today, there are two Muslim Congressmen. One is Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) and the other is Rep. Andre Carson (D-IN). This video is now becoming a problem for Carson because it shows him at a recent ICNA-MAS convention at which he said that American public schools should be modeled after Islamic "madrassas."
ICNA stands for Islamic Circle of North America and it is a Muslim Brotherhood group that seeks the overthrow of the United States government from within, a fact that is demonstrably provable, courtesy of a 1991 document that was seized by U.S. authorities and used in the Holy Land Foundation trial.
MAS stands for the Muslim American Society, a group that was formed one year after that 1991 document was penned. Unfortunately for the MAS, that group has identified the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Muslim Students Association (MSA) - both groups that were also identified in that 1991 document as Muslim Brotherhood groups - as like minded organizations.
So while the DHS is building up the rightwing extremism straw man, a Congressman of the United States is speaking to groups and individuals who should be considered domestic enemies.
Well, apparently, this revelation wasn't lost on Carson, who is now walking back his assertion that American public schools should be modeled after madrassas.
My remarks at ICNA call attention to the fact that faith-based schools throughout this country have excelled because of innovative instructional methods and a willingness to engage different learning styles – whether visual, auditory, or kinesthetic. While I do not believe that any particular faith should be the foundation of our public schools, it is important that we take note of the instructional tools these schools utilize to empower their young people. Christian, Jewish, and Islamic schools have experienced notable success by casting off a one-size-fits-all approach to education, and this is a model we must replicate. Having attended a parochial elementary school myself, I’ve seen these successes first hand. If we are going to take American education to the next level, we must expand successful models and implement the practices that will enable success for our students.
Busted... Liar...
In a sane world, Carson would be brought up on charges of treason as these groups seek the destruction of western civilization... in their own words, which are stated clearly in that 1991 document. Here is a direct quote:
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 so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions.
Unfortunately, the world is a little insane right now.
