The Muslim Brotherhood is the Enemy

The Muslim Brotherhood is the Enemy

Posted by Frank Gaffney Jan 30th 2011 at 3:31 am in Featured StoryIslamic extremismMiddle Eastsharia | Comments (33)

Suddenly, Washington is consumed with a question too long ignored:  Can we safely do business with the Muslim Brotherhood?

The reason this question has taken on such urgency is, of course, because the Muslim Brotherhood (or MB, also known by its Arabic name, the Ikhwan) is poised to emerge as the big winner from the chaos now sweeping North Africa and increasingly likely to bring down the government of the aging Egyptian dictator, Hosni Mubarak.

In the wake of growing turmoil in Egypt, a retinue of pundits, professors and former government officials has publicly insisted that we have nothing to fear from the Ikhwan since it has eschewed violence and embraced democracy.

For example, Bruce Reidel, a controversial former CIA analyst and advisor to President Obama, posted an article entitled “Don’t Fear Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood” at the Daily Beast.  In it, he declared:  “The Egyptian Brotherhood renounced violence years ago, but its relative moderation has made it the target of extreme vilification by more radical Islamists. Al Qaeda’s leaders, Osama bin Laden and Ayman Zawahiri, started their political lives affiliated with the Brotherhood but both have denounced it for decades as too soft and a cat’s paw of Mubarak and America.”

Then, there was President George W. Bush’s former press spokeswoman, Dana Perino, who went so far on January 28th as to tell Fox News “…And don’t be afraid of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. This has nothing to do with religion.”

One reason we might be misperceiving the MB as no threat is because a prime source of information about such matters is the Muslim Brotherhood itself.  As the Center for Security Policy’s new, best-selling Team B II report entitled, Shariah: The Threat to America found:  “It is now public knowledge that nearly every major Muslim organization in the United States is actually controlled by the MB or a derivative organization. Consequently, most of the Muslim-American groups of any prominence in America are now known to be, as a matter of fact, hostile to the United States and its Constitution.”

In fact, for much of the past two decades, a number of these groups and their backers (including, notably, Saudi billionaire Prince Alwaleed bin Talal) have cultivated extensive ties with U.S. government officials and agencies under successive administrations of both parties, academic centers, financial institutions, religious communities, partisan organizations and the media.  As a result, such American entities have been subjected to intense, disciplined and sustained influence operations for decades.

Unfortunately, the relationships thus developed and the misperceptions thus fostered are today bearing poisonous fruit with respect to shaping U.S. policy towards the unfolding Egyptian drama.

A notable example is the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).  A federal judge in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial – which successfully prosecuted the nation’s largest terrorism financing conspiracy – found that CAIR was indeed a front for the Ikhwan’s Palestinian affiliate, Hamas.  Nonetheless,  Fox News earlier today interviewed the Executive Director of CAIR’s Chicago office, Ahmed Rehab, whom it characterized as a “Democracy Activist.”

True to form, Rehab called for the removal of Mubarak’s regime and the institution of democratic elections in Egypt.  This is hardly surprising since, under present circumstances, such balloting would likely have the same result it did in Gaza a few years back: the triumph of the Muslim Brotherhood and the institution of brutally repressive theocratic rule, in accordance with the totalitarian Islamic politico-military-legal program known as shariah.

An important antidote to the seductive notions being advanced with respect to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt – and, for that matter, in Western nations like ours – by the Ikhwan’s own operatives, their useful idiots and apologists is the Team B II report.  It should be considered required reading by anyone who hopes to understand, let alone to comment usefully upon, the MB’s real character and agenda.

For example, Shariah: The Threat to America provides several key insights that must be borne in mind in the current circumstances especially:

  • “The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in Egypt in 1928. Its express purpose was two-fold: (1) to implement shariah worldwide, and (2) to re-establish the global Islamic State (caliphate).
  • “Therefore, Al Qaeda and the MB have the same objectives. They differ only in the timing and tactics involved in realizing them.
  • “The Brotherhood’s creed is: ‘God is our objective; the Koran is our law; the Prophet is our leader; jihad is our way; and death for the sake of Allah is the highest of our aspirations.’”
  • It is evident from the Creed, and from the Brotherhood’s history (and current activities)…that violence is an inherent part of the MB’s tactics. The MB is the root of the majority of Islamic terrorist groups in the world today.
  • The Muslim Brotherhood is the ‘vanguard’ or tip-of-the-spear of the current Islamic Movement in the world. While there are other transnational organizations that share the MB’s goals (if not its tactics) – including al Qaeda, which was born out of the Brotherhood – the Ikhwan is by far the strongest and most organized. The Muslim Brotherhood is now active in over 80 countries around the world.

Of particular concern must be the purpose of the Brotherhood in the United States and other nations of the Free World:

  • “…The Ikhwan’s mission in the West is sedition in the furtherance of shariah’s supremacist agenda, not peaceful assimilation and co-existence with non-Muslim populations.”
  • “The Ikhwan believes that its purposes in the West are, for the moment, better advanced by the use of non-violent, stealthy techniques. In that connection, the Muslim Brotherhood seeks to establish relations with, influence and, wherever possible, penetrate: government circles in executive and legislative branches at the federal, state and local levels; the law enforcement community; intelligence agencies; the military; penal institutions; the media; think tanks and policy groups; academic institutions; non-Muslim religious communities; and other elites.
  • “The Brothers engage in all of these activities and more for one reason: to subvert the targeted communities in furtherance of the MB’s primary objective – the triumph of shariah.”

In short, the Muslim Brotherhood – whether it is operating in Egypt, elsewhere in the world or here – is our enemy.  Vital U.S. interests will be at risk if it succeeds in supplanting the present regime in Cairo, taking control in the process not only of the Arab world’s most populous nation but its vast, American-supplied arsenal.  It is no less reckless to allow the Brotherhood’s operatives to enjoy continued access to and influence over our perceptions of their true purposes, and the policies adopted pursuant thereto.

DOJ in bed with Islamic supremacist groups



DOJ  in bed with Islamic supremacist groups


Posted: September 06, 2011
1:19 pm Eastern

© 2011

While doing research for my new book, “Stop  the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance,” I  discovered some startling information about the full extent of Muslim  Brotherhood infiltration in the Department of Justice and its brazen pro-Muslim  activities. And when I inquired for documentation related to these activities,  the DOJ’s response to me indicated that the agency’s ties with Islamic  supremacist groups in the U.S. are far more extensive than anyone has realized.

I was especially interested in DOJ actions extending certain civil-rights  laws to Muslims in voting, particularly insofar as they involved the DOJ’s Lema  Bashir. Essentially, they wanted to covert a religious class into a racial one,  to create majority-Muslim legislative districts. Lema Bashir was at the center  of Virginia’s failing to mail military ballots in time in 2008. The same  mistakes were repeated in 2010, and United States military voters were heavily  disenfranchised because of calculated inaction by Bashir and the DOJ throughout  2010. Disenfranchising the military vote is policy. You could make a case that  bad mistakes were made in 2008, but when those same mistakes were made and made  worse in 2010 by a devout Muslim who calls Israel “northern Palestine,” I submit  that it is no accident, but deliberate policy.

There seemed to be no way they could withhold the documents whose existence I  discovered, so on Feb. 28, 2011, I made a Freedom of Information Act request. I  wrote to Nelson Hermilla, the chief of the FOIA branch of the DOJ’s Civil Rights  Division.

I asked him for “all communications between any employee of the Civil Rights  Division and the Islamic Society of North America [ISNA], the Council on  American-Islamic Relations [CAIR], the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination  Committee [ADC], the Muslim Students Association [MSA] or any affiliated student  group. In particular, but not limited to, the request includes all  communications related to appearances at or sponsorships of conventions or  meetings of this organizations by the Department of Justice including  conferences in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010.”

Join  Pamela Geller in her fight to battle jihadist initiatives in our local  communities — read “Stop The Islamization Of America: A Practical Guide to the  Resistance”

ISNA and CAIR, of course, were named unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy  Land Foundation jihad terror funding case. The MSA is a Muslim Brotherhood  organization. They’re the last groups the DOJ should be working with.

I also asked Hermilla to provide “transcripts of speeches delivered by Civil  Rights Division political appointees or section managers at any meeting of the  Islamic Society of North America, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the  American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, the Muslim Students Association or  any affiliated student group. If transcripts of such appearances do not exist,  please provide a list of such appearances instead.” And for “resumes of all  attorney and intern hires in the Civil Rights Division in which the resumes list  prior employment at the Islamic Society of North America, the Council on  American-Islamic Relations, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, or  the Muslim Students Association.”  In addition, I requested “all travel  authorization forms, expense submissions and records of payment for any  Department employee to attend any convention, conference or meeting with or at  the Islamic Society of North America, the Council on American-Islamic Relations,  or the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee,” and “any memorandum,  document, email, telephone conference record or proposal discussing the use of  civil rights laws in the Housing Section, Voting Section, and Education Section  to use laws enforced by these sections to bring cases or potential cases on  behalf of a protected class defined as Arab or Muslim or Islamic.” I asked him  to “include any documents which discuss the applicability of civil rights laws  to these classes from these three sections.”

(Column continues below)

 

Specifically, I asked for “records relating to the meeting of the ‘Monthly  Outreach Meeting’ (or a regular occurring meeting organized by the Civil Rights  Division with substantially the same purpose even if it is referred to with a  different name inside the Department) with Muslim and Arab groups at the Civil  Rights Division. Specifically, include lists of attendees at each monthly  meeting, the agenda of each meeting and any minutes or summary prepared  subsequent to each meeting. Please also specifically note the meetings at which  the Attorney General of the United States attended.”

I asked for all such records dating back to 2006.

I knew these documents existed, indicating broad collaboration between the  Justice Department and Muslim Brotherhood groups, and this was confirmed on  April 29, 2011, when the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division finally  responded to my request. Nelson Hermilla wrote me that “clearly your request  encompasses thousands of records. The total located on a preliminary search  totals 14,100 documents. Each document likely contains numerous pages.” Hermilla  also complained that “it is not clear in what manner the collection of all  five-year’s records might contribute to the general public understanding.” He  explained that these documents would only be made available to me if I paid  $1,400.

This is astounding. I made a fairly narrow request, narrowed down to specific  groups and carefully defined activity that the Civil Rights Division doesn’t  even have direct jurisdiction over – “Muslim Outreach” – and they come up with  14,100 matching documents. A knowledgeable Justice Department insider told me:  “You couldn’t generate 14,000 pages of documents if you asked for communications  with lenders or apartment or hotels as part of the Housing Section enforcement  activities. There are very few things in Civil Rights that would generate 14,000  pages of anything. It has got to be a treasure trove of information.”

Indeed. It is also remarkable that the Justice Department would deny that  these records would advance “the general public understanding.” Given the  increasing number of cases in which Shariah is used in American courts and the  Obama Justice Department’s assistance of stealth jihad, Islamic supremacist  legal initiatives, this claim is extremely flimsy.

I intend to pursue this matter until the shameful records of this  infiltration are made available to the American people.

Pamela  Geller lays out the realities of Muslim encroachment in her brand new book,  “Stop The Islamization Of America: A Practical Guide to the  Resistance”

Read more: DOJ in bed with Islamic supremacist groups http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=342081#ixzz1XHjNluBr

How Obama protects the Teamsters

How Obama protects the Teamsters

By Michelle Malkin  •  September 7, 2011 01:41 AM

My column today sheds light on the longstanding bromance between Barack Obama and the Teamsters. I especially want you to have all this information handy when Obama complains on Thursday about all the infrastructure that’s still not getting built despite the $230 billion in porkulus money set aside for construction projects.

I’ve been reporting for more than a year about how Big Labor will benefit from Obama’s new government infrastructure bank/public construction slush funds — and how feckless U.S. Chamber of Commerce officials in Washington are going along with the union-exclusive project labor agreements that punish taxpayers, employers, and non-union workers. Pay special attention to those goodies in Obama’s jobs speech. The jackals at Teamsters headquarters in D.C. can’t wait to tear up more of your tax dollars on government projects doled out by the crony-in-chief.

As usual, Jimmy Hoffa Jr.’s Tea Party-bashing is a calculated distraction from his festering ethics problems and internal Teamsters strife. According to the FBI via the Center for Union Facts, four of the last eight Teamsters presidents have been criminally indicted and since FY 2001, racketeering investigations have yielded more than 2,000 indictments and awarded more than $3 billion in fines and restitution. In past union elections, Hoffa’s team was caught laundering union funds for electioneering and for campaign polling on dues-payers’ dime. Hoffa now faces a new challenge to his union presidency from his own far Left flank this fall. Make sure to read about the latest election corruption he’s embroiled in below.

Barry and Jimmy: Birds of a feather.

***

How Obama protects the Teamsters
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2011

Barack Obama and Jimmy Hoffa are like Tweedledum and Tweedledee, Lady Gaga and hype, the “Jersey Shore” cast and hairspray: inseparable. The president can no more disown the Teamsters Union’s leader than he can disown his own id.

At a Labor Day rally in Detroit on Monday before Obama spoke, Hoffa stoked anti-tea party hostility by urging his minions to “take these son of a b*tches out.” (Botched grammar added that extra boost of street-gang authenticity to the labor lawyer’s threat.) The same civility police on the left who decry any references to crosshairs as incitements to violence are now mute about Hoffa’s brass-knuckle rhetoric. The Chicagoans in the White House refuse to comment.

Those calling on Obama to condemn Hoffa’s uncivil tone are deluding themselves. The 1.4 million-member Teamsters lifted Obama to power with a coveted endorsement and bottomless campaign coffers funded with coerced member dues. Over the past two decades, the union has donated nearly $25 million to Democrats (compared to $1.8 million for Republicans).

What quid pro quo protection has the Teamsters’ money bought? Let us count the ways.

Calling off Teamsters corruption investigations. Back in May 2008, as he jockeyed with rival Hillary Clinton for Big Labor support, Obama promised to end longstanding federal probes into the Teamsters’ mob racket. In 1989, the union was facing federal racketeering charges after Justice Department officials determined it was operating as a “wholly owned subsidiary of organized crime.” The Wall Street Journal reported that Obama phoned several Teamsters heavies to convey his vow to begin dismantling the independent federal watchdog overseeing the Teamsters; an Obama spokesman confirmed it.

Teamsters reformers now consider the review board a “toothless mechanism,” according to a recent article in the left-wing The Nation magazine. As one Hoffa critic put it, “You’re so tied up into a corrupt culture. You have this culture of protecting each other.”

Meanwhile, a federal court has determined that Hoffa and his goons raided the Teamsters treasury to try to buy his own re-election support with jobs and pensions. As a court-appointed watchdog determined this spring: “The conduct revealed in this investigation reflects a culture, or mind-set where elected union officials do not clearly distinguish between their fiduciary responsibilities to the union and their separate political objectives of achieving election.”

Nevertheless, Obama’s crime-fighting crusaders are far more preoccupied with cracking down on Gibson guitars made of rare wood and covering up the Operation Fast and Furious gun-walking scandal than with cleaning up the Teamsters’ graft and pay-for-play dirty business.

The Cadillac health plan exemption. While he regularly lambastes “millionaires and billionaires” who benefit from tax loopholes, Obama has zero to say about the crony Cadillac health insurance tax exemption he doled out to the Teamsters and other Big Labor groups. In January 2010, Hoffa and his pals met behind closed doors at the White House to ensure that they would be shielded while other middle-class Americans were forced to bear the burden.

Obamacare waivers for the brotherhood. While he calls for shared sacrifice, Obama has zero to say about the exclusive Obamacare waivers he has awarded to Teamsters chapters, including:

the Western Teamsters Welfare Trust in Seattle

the Teamsters and Employers Welfare Trust of Illinois in Springfield

the Teamsters Local 485 Health and Welfare Fund in Brooklyn, N.Y.

– the Teamsters Local 617 Welfare Fund in Ridgefield, N.J.

the Teamsters Local 734 Welfare Fund in Chicago.

No comment on obscene Big Labor salaries. While he regularly lambastes Wall Street salaries, Obama has zero to say about the bloated salaries and benefits of Teamsters brass (pdf). According to internal data compiled by Teamsters for a Democratic Union, 120 top Teamsters officials made more than $150,000 in 2009 — the largest number ever. Forty made more than $200,000 — also an unprecedented number. Hoffa pulls down nearly $400,000 a year, including an exclusive housing allowance and cost of living raise.

Shutting out non-union competition for public contracts. While he rails against “special interests,” Obama has zero to say about the executive orders he signed in the first days of his presidency to give unions a leg up. Executive Order 13502, for example, essentially forces contractors who bid on large-scale public construction projects worth $25 million or more to surrender to union representation for its employees. This codification of so-called project labor agreements significantly raises the cost of highway and school construction projects (by as much as 15 percent among California public schools, according to a new study by the National University System Institute for Policy Research).

The Obama protection order shuts out the vast majority of contractors in America. As I’ve noted before, 85 percent of the construction industry workforce is nonunion by choice.

Instead of putting Americans to work, the Teamsters have been busy yanking members off projects and idling construction projects from California and Nevada to Indiana to New York in order to shake down employers.

Now, you tell me: Who’s waging “war on workers”?

Obama’s failure – by the numbers

Obama’s failure – by the numbers

Rick
Moran

Jeffrey Anderson at IDB has an
excellent piece breaking down President Obama’s failures by the
numbers.

It has now been a little over two
years – and eight full economic quarters – since the end of the recession Obama
inherited. It’s time to ask: How does his record of economic growth in the wake
of a recession stack up against the records of other
presidents?

[...]

According to the NBER, in the 60
years prior to Obama’s tenure, we had 10 recessions. In the two years following
those respective recessions, average real (inflation-adjusted) quarterly GDP
growth was 5%, according to federal government figures. In the two years of
Obama’s “recovery,” average real quarterly GDP growth has been just 2.4%, less
than half of the historical norm coming out of a recession.

What’s the difference (in more
practical terms) between 2.4% and 5% growth over two years? According to Obama’s
own budget, this year’s GDP will be about $15 trillion. (It’s running neck and
neck with the national debt.) A 2.6% shortfall, therefore, equals about $780
billion over two years.

If you divide that evenly among the
U.S. population of 312 million people, that works out to a shortfall of $2,500
per person – or $10,000 for the average family of four. Call it the Obama
penalty.

Some might argue that the anemic
post-recession growth rate under Obama has resulted from his having inherited a
worse recession than most. There’s little doubt that he inherited a particularly
long (18-month) and significant recession. But the historical record suggests
that, pre-Obama, the general rule was: the worse the recession (or depression),
the better the recovery.

In other words, one would have
expected such a severe downturn to be followed by a particularly strong stretch
of economic growth. That, of course, hasn’t
happened.

To really grasp the titanic failure
of Obama’s policies, the growth numbers are most significant:

Average real quarterly GDP growth in
the two years coming out of those recessions was 6.2%. The 2.4% figure under
Obama has been a mere 39% of that – which, come to think of it, roughly matches
Obama’s current approval rating.

And strikingly, among those six prior
long recessions in the postwar era, even the lowest rate of GDP growth in the
two years to follow was 4.7%. That’s almost double the tally under
Obama.

Awesomely bad. And the most
frightening thing about Obama is that he doesn’t know what to do to fix
it.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 55 other followers