U.S. met with Egypt Islamists: U.S. diplomat (Muslim Brotherhood)

U.S. met with Egypt Islamists: U.S. diplomat (Muslim Brotherhood)

6:39am EDT

By Edmund Blair

CAIRO (Reuters) – U.S. officials have met members of the Muslim Brotherhood’s political party, a U.S. diplomat said, after Washington announced it would have direct contacts with Egypt’s biggest Islamist group whose role has grown since U.S. ally Hosni Mubarak was ousted.

Washington announced the plans in June, portraying such contacts as the continuation of an earlier policy. But analysts said it reflected a new approach to the way it dealt with a group which Mubarak banned from politics.

The Brotherhood is one of Egypt’s most popular and organized groups, with a broad grassroots network built up partly through social work even in Mubarak’s era.

The contacts may unsettle Israel and its U.S. backers. The Brotherhood renounced violence as a means to achieve political change in Egypt years ago. But groups like Hamas, which have not disavowed violence, look to the Brotherhood as a spiritual guide.

Under the previous policy, U.S. diplomats were allowed to deal with the Brotherhood’s members of parliament who had won seats as “independents” to skirt the official ban. This offered a diplomatic cover to keep lines of communication open.

“We have had direct contacts with senior officials of the Freedom and Justice party,” the senior diplomat told Reuters, referring to the Brotherhood’s party that was founded after politics opened up following the ouster of Mubarak.

The diplomat said U.S. officials did not make a distinction between members of the Brotherhood or its party. “We don’t have a policy that makes a distinction, that one or the other is off limits,” he said, without saying when the meetings took place.

The diplomat was responding to a question about whether any meetings had occurred, after Freedom Justice Party Chairman Mohamed Mursi told Egypt’s Al-Dostour newspaper last week that U.S. officials had not made contact since the policy shift.

Speaking to Reuters on Sunday, the party deputy head Essam el-Erian also denied any meetings had taken place with U.S. officials when asked about the diplomat’s comments.

It was not immediately clear why the two sides gave different accounts.

“HIGH-LEVEL” MEETINGS

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was asked in an interview broadcast on Saturday with Egypt’s Al-Hayat television whether Washington would be ready to work with a future government that included members of the Brotherhood.

“We will be willing to and open to working with a government that has representatives who are committed to non-violence, who are committed to human rights, who are committed to the democracy that I think was hoped for in Tahrir Square,” she replied, according to a U.S. transcript.

Under the former Egyptian president, the Brotherhood was banned and its members often detained. Mubarak often presented himself as the bulwark preventing Egypt’s slide into Islamist hands, an approach that analysts said help secure him backing from Washington and other Western powers wary that Egypt could turn into another Iran or Gaza.

The group took a backseat in the early part of the anti-Mubarak uprising, which was broadly led by youth groups who put national concerns above religion. But the Brotherhood and its party have taken a increasingly prominent role since.

The diplomat said the U.S. contacts had been with “high-level” members of the Brotherhood’s party but did not give names. From the U.S. side, he said the contacts were not at ambassadorial level but he did not give further details.

“We had occasionally had these contacts in the past … The difference is in the past we had seen parliamentarians,” he said.

Egypt’s parliament was dissolved after Mubarak’s fall. Fresh elections for the lower house are due to start in November, with a vote for the upper house early next year.

The Brotherhood is expected to perform well in the vote, although many analysts expect a fairly fragmented parliament with no single unified voice emerging.

The diplomat said contacts with the Brotherhood were part of an bid to understand Egypt better and explain U.S. policies.

“From our perspective it is important to be in touch with all of the emerging political forces here in Egypt, across the board, that are peaceful and committed to non-violence,” he said.

“It helps to understand Egypt and the way the political system is developing, and it helps us to deliver our message and get them to understand where we are coming from,” he added.

(Additional reporting by Tamim Elyan; Editing by Rosalind Russell)

Advertisements

Obama’s Analysts:Oops! We Put Muslim Radicals in Charge of Libya

Ben Johnson,The White House Watch

Even as the Obama administration celebrates the killing of American-born
al-Qaeda operative Anwar al-Awlaki and his
traitorous friend Samir Khan
in Yemen,its analysts are beginning to admit
their war by decree in Libya empowered Islamic extremists bent on
exporting jihad throughout the region. Thanks to Obama’s
policies,al-Qaeda-linked radicals may be pillaging Muammar Qaddafi’s stockpile
of weapons and receiving shipments of contraband from overseas.

In the closest thing to an admission Obama administration figures lied us
into war,Reuters reports:

During the half-year campaign by rebels to drive Muammar Gaddafi from
power,U.S. and NATO officials downplayed fears that al Qaeda or other militants
would infiltrate anti-Gaddafi forces or take advantage of disorder to establish
footholds in Libya.

Since then,however,the assessment of top experts inside the U.S. government
has sharpened.

Former CIA asset and Obama adviser Bruce Riedel summarizes,“There is a great
deal of concern that the jihadi cadre now are going to be exporting
their ideas and weapons toward the east and west.”

This author reported
the cause of their alarm a month ago. The National Transitional Council
(NTC),the body the United States now exclusively recognizes as the official
government of Libya,elected
Abdel Hakim Belhaj commander of the Tripoli Military Council in late August.
Belhaj is the co-founder of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG),which the
State Department designated a foreign terrorist organization in December
2004
. The New York Times relates
that LIFG members received “combat experience in Iraq or Afghanistan” —fighting
the United States. Belhaj,who met Osama bin Laden twice,now commands 8,000 troops,Libya’s largest fighting force.

U.S. analysts,who covered up the links the “rebels”have to Islamic
fundamentalists,now worry Belhaj and his LIFG warriors have raided Qaddafi’s
arsenal,despoiling it of anti-aircraft weapons that could one day be turned
against U.S. or NATO planes.

The radicals may not need Qaddafi’s weapons,as other nations in the area are
reportedly replenishing their cache. Rebels in the city of Zintan intercepted a
cargo shipment to Belhaj from the nation of Qatar,which Belhaj insisted
contained food and milk. Those who opened it say it contained weapons. Taking
note of the interference Mohamed Benrasali,a leading figure in the Libyan
government,replied,“We are very sorry the Qataris have taken the decision to
support Belhaj’s brigade. This will backfire on our Qatari friends.”

Despite Benrasali’s tough talk,one suspects the fire will aimed in his
direction.

Qatar was influenced to support the rebels by Sheik Ali Salabi,a Libyan
Islamic scholar who lives in the monarchy….

Read more

THIS IS AN EXCELLENT COMMENTARY AND SHOULD BE READ BY EVERY AMERICAN!!!

 

THIS IS AN EXCELLENT COMMENTARY AND SHOULD BE READ BY EVERY AMERICAN!!!

 

 


(When you have read what Pat Boone wrote about Obama(below), you may want to click on the link to “Snopes”, which brings up a page telling you that this is an actual letter written by Pat Boone – and very well written, I might add.)


The President Without A Country

 

 

By Pat Boone

 

“We’re no longer a Christian nation.” – President Barack Obama, June 2009

” America has been arrogant.” – President Barack Obama

“After 9/11, America didn’t always live up to her ideals.”- President Barack Obama

“You might say that America is a Muslim nation.”- President Barack Obama, Egypt 2009

Thinking about these and other statements made by the man who wears the title of president. I keep wondering what country he believes he’s president of.

In one of my very favorite stories, Edward Everett Hale’s “The Man Without a Country,” a young Army lieutenant named Philip Nolan stands condemned for treason during the Revolutionary War, having come under the influence of Aaron Burr. When the judge asks him if he wishes to say anything before sentence is passed, young Nolan defiantly exclaims, “Damn the United States ! I wish I might never hear of the United States again!”

The stunned silence in the courtroom is palpable, pulsing. After a long pause, the judge soberly says to the angry lieutenant: “You have just pronounced your own sentence. You will never hear of the United States again. I sentence you to spend the rest of your life at sea, on one or another of this country’s naval vessels – under strict orders that no one will ever speak to you again about the country you have just cursed.”

And so it was. Philip Nolan was taken away and spent the next 40 years at sea, never hearing anything but an occasional slip of the tongue about America. The last few pages of the story, recounting Nolan’s dying hours in his small stateroom – now turned into a shrine to the country he foreswore – never fail to bring me to tears. And I find my own love for this dream, this miracle called America, refreshed and renewed. I know how blessed and unique we are.

But reading and hearing the audacious, shocking statements of the man who was recently elected our president – a young black man living the impossible dream of millions of young Americans, past and present, black and white – I want to ask him, “Just what country do you think you’re president of?”

You surely can’t be referring to the United States of America, can you? America is emphatically a Christian nation, and has been from its inception! Seventy percent of her citizens identify themselves as Christian. The Declaration of Independence and our Constitution were framed, written and ratified by Christians. It’s because this was, and is, a nation built on and guided by Judeo-Christian biblical principles that you, sir, have had the inestimable privilege of being elected her president.

You studied law at Harvard, didn’t you, sir? You taught constitutional law in Chicago? Did you not ever read the statement of John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and an author of the landmark “Federalist Papers”: “Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers – and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation – to select and prefer Christians for their rulers”?

In your studies, you surely must have read the decision of the Supreme Court in 1892: “Our lives and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent, our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian.”

Did your professors have you skip over all the high-court decisions right up till the mid 1900’s that echoed and reinforced these views and intentions? Did you pick up the history of American jurisprudence only in 1947, when for the first time a phrase coined by Thomas Jefferson about a “wall of separation between church and state” was used to deny some specific religious expression – contrary to Jefferson’s intent with that statement?

Or, wait a minute: were your ideas about America’s Christianity formed during the 20 years you were a member of the Trinity United Church of Christ under your pastor, Jeremiah Wright? Is that where you got the idea that “America is no longer a Christian nation”? Is this where you, even as you came to call yourself a Christian, formed the belief that “America has been arrogant”?

Even if that’s the understandable explanation of your damning of your country and accusing the whole nation (not just a few military officials trying their best to keep more Americans from being murdered by jihadists) of “not always living up to her ideals,” how did you come up with the ridiculous, alarming notion that we might be “considered a Muslim nation”?

Is it because there are some 2 million or more Muslims living here, trying to be good Americans? Out of a current population of over 300 million, 70 percent of whom are Christians? Does that make us, by any rational definition, a “Muslim nation”?

Why are we not, then, a “Chinese nation”? A “Korean nation”? Even a “Vietnamese nation”? There are even more of these distinct groups in America than Muslims. And if the distinction you’re trying to make is a religious one, why is America not “a Jewish nation”? There’s actually a case to be made for the latter, because our Constitution – and the success of our Revolution and founding – owe a deep debt to our Jewish brothers.

Have you stopped to think what an actual Muslim America would be like? Have you ever really spent much time in Iran? Even in Egypt? You, having been instructed in Islam as a kid at a Muslim school in Indonesia and saying you still love the call to evening prayers, can surely picture our nation founded on the Quran, not the Judeo-Christian Bible, and living under Sharia law, can’t you? You do recall Muhammad’s directives [Surah 9:5,73] to “break the cross” and “kill the infidel”?

It seems increasingly and painfully obvious that you are more influenced by your upbringing and questionable education than most suspected. If you consider yourself the president of a people who are “no longer Christian,” who have “failed to live up to our ideals,” who “have been arrogant,” and might even be “considered Muslim” – you are president of a country most Americans don’t recognize.

Could it be you are a president without a country?

 


To all of you who love your Christian beliefs and your country, forward this message to all in your address book. We simply cannot be subjected to another term by this president!

http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/patboone.asp

Barack Obama, Man of the People

Barack Obama, Man of the People

By Steve
McCann

The portrait of Barack Obama’s presidency is that of
an egocentric — not only incapable of leadership, but someone who views the
office as a vehicle for the satisfaction of his delusion that the world not only
owes him a living, but a sumptuous one.

A trait common to many who espouse socialism,
inclusive of dictators and Democrats, is an insatiable appetite for
self-indulgence.  While those on the conservative side of the political spectrum
are often accused of hypocrisy when it comes to matters of sex and morality,
those on the left are equally guilty, if not more so, in matters of money,
paying taxes, and lifestyle.

Regardless of the public image they may convey, Barack
Obama and his wife never fail to take full advantage of a lifestyle that would
be the envy of any modern-day monarch while the bulk of the American populace
struggles to afford life’s necessities.

He is but another in a long line of those who promote
socialism and proclaim to be “of the people” with only the interests of the
citizens at heart — as they duplicitously pursue a personal agenda.   Beyond
the unquestioned belief by those on the left that they are the most capable,
thus superior and pre-ordained to govern the masses, the traits most common to
the vast majority of self-described “progressives” in positions of power are
jealousy, greed, and massively inflated delusions of
entitlement.

Many in the West who espouse a Euro-socialist
government model, inclusive of an implausible cradle-to-grave social compact
with the people in order to garner votes, have toiled either in public office,
government bureaucracy or within the education establishment.  Private wealth
is, according to ideological first principles, “ill-gotten” and tainted with the
blood, sweat, and tears of the honest workers exploited to attain
it.

Yet there is no sociological taint associated with the
money accumulated by government through excessive taxation of these same
“evil-doers” in order to pay for generous public-sector salaries and lavish
benefits, particularly for those in elected and appointed
office.

However, the lifestyle achieved by the affluent, who
made their money through private wealth and job-creation, is much to be
desired.  In the myopic thought process of many of those on the left, they, as
moral and intellectual superiors to the greedy capitalists, are also entitled to
this same standard of living — particularly as they “sacrificed” so much for
the welfare of the common folk by toiling for so “little” while the rich and
famous live well, having made their money so easily on the backs of others and
without any perceived “sacrifice.”

The risk-taking process and the overall societal
benefit of private wealth accumulation is foreign to the thought process of the
adherents of socialism, particularly among the governing class in Western Europe
and the United States, as virtually none have created wealth or jobs.  Despite
publicly denigrating them, it is not a coincidence that so many leaders and
upper-level bureaucrats in government are eager to socialize with and get in the
good graces of the accomplished “wealthy.”  Once out of office or no longer in
government and with their earning power enhanced by fame, a mad dash begins
among these people to accumulate as much wealth as quickly as possible, and
those connections are invaluable.

Bill Clinton, whose net worth was less than $200,000
when he became president, has focused much of his post-presidency on becoming a
multimillionaire.  Thanks to speaking fees, inside investment information, and
book royalties, his estimated net worth is now $80+ million.  Al Gore reported a
net worth less than $1 million when he became vice president, yet he has
parlayed his connections into amassing a net worth considerably in
excess of $100 million.

Not to be outdone, Tony Blair, former Labour Party
prime minister of Great Britain, was worth about $350,000 upon assuming office
in 1997 (he resigned in 2007).  He now owns three homes in England and has net
worth above $35
million
.  Many of his former ministers have accumulated
significant wealth while taking excessive advantage of taxpayer largess while in
office.

Among those in the House of Representatives and the
Senate who espouse Euro-socialist doctrine, many have amassed considerable
wealth not only upon leaving office, but while still in the Congress, where they
live a life of exaggerated privilege at the expense of the American
taxpayer.

In his brilliant satirical allegory of the Russian
Revolution, Animal Farm, George Orwell devastatingly indentifies the
mindset of the left.  In the book, the pigs, who represent the socialist ruling
class, insist on keeping all the milk and apples to themselves.  The other
animals, the working class, think they should be shared as the socialist/Marxist
philosophy espouses.

The excuse the pigs proffer to the
rabble:

Comrade, you do not imagine, I hope, that we pigs are
doing this in a spirit of selfishness and privilege?  Many of us actually
dislike milk and apples.  We pigs are brainworkers.  The whole management and
organization of the farm depend on us.  Day and night we are watching over your
welfare.  It is for your sake that we drink that milk and eat those
apples.

The success of the revolution and an ultimate
classless society, explain the pigs, depends on their leadership; therefore they
must eat the best food.  In essence, the pigs lavish excess upon themselves to
better serve the workers and prevent the evil capitalist, personified by Farmer
Jones (the overthrown owner of the farm) from returning and “exploiting” the
animals.

No one is a better example of this mindset than Barack
Obama.  His sense of entitlement stems not only from a deep-seated belief in
socialist theory and an overweening sense of superiority, but also as a man
obsessed with his skin color and payback for his perception of Western
colonialism (as detailed in his autobiography Dreams from My Father).
He is determined to exact a measure of personal revenge by “transforming
America” and taking full advantage of all the perquisites of
office.

Of the world’s major democracies, only the United
States merges the functions of the titular head of state and the leader of
government into one office.  Barack Obama, however, views himself as the head of
state only, and as he has no concept of what leadership is — he cannot be
bothered with the day-to-day responsibility of governance.  He delegates those
responsibilities to other hardcore doctrinaire fellow travelers toiling in the
background, many of whom are answerable to no one, as Barack Obama cares not
what they do as long as the socialist agenda is advanced.

As head of state, President Obama can concentrate on
state dinners, White House receptions, golf, overseas travel, exotic vacations,
backslapping other like-minded politicians, union leaders, crony capitalists,
Hollywood celebrities and the super-wealthy, and endless campaigning in order to
continue deceiving the electorate.

The presidency of the United States to Mr. Obama is
nothing more than a stage upon which he, in his convoluted sense of destiny, can
act as head of state for the world.  He is much too busy enjoying the trappings
of royalty, despite his oft-declared disdain for that class, to be bothered
about the dismal future of the United States.  His future and political agenda
are the only things that matter.

Socialism/Marxism has always failed and will never
succeed.  The leaders who espouse these governing philosophies will inevitably
succumb to the major pitfalls of human nature: envy, greed, and
self-aggrandizement.  However, the end result of these failings will fall most
heavily on the everyday people whose standard of living will be severely
degraded and, taken to the extreme, their society beset by violence and
revolution.

The American people need to understand that when a
politician stands before them, asking for their vote while extolling the virtues
of massive central government, promising cradle to grave security, and claiming
that he or she understands their pain and is on their side against the “evil”
capitalists, their only real interest is themselves.

 

New Word For The Day – “Dhimmitude” “What Does It Mean” ?

 

Obama used it in the health care bill.

Now isn’t this interesting? It was used in the health care law.

Every day there’s another revelation of what Obama is doing to our country.

Dhimmitude — I had never heard the word until now. Type it into Google and start reading. Pretty interesting. It’s on page 107 of the healthcare bill. I looked this up on Google and yep, it exists.. It is a REAL word.

Word of the Day: Dhimmitude

Dhimmitude is the Muslim system of controlling non-Muslim populations conquered through jihad. Specifically, it is the TAXING of non-Muslims in exchange for tolerating their presence AND as a coercive means of converting conquered remnants to Islam.

Obama Care allows the establishment of Dhimmitude and Sharia Muslim diktat in the United States . Folks, this is exclusively an Islamic concept under Sharia Law. So exclusive they had to make up an English word to define the concept. Why would our government start interjecting Sharia Law concepts into new broad and sweeping legislation like health care that would control the US population? ….Anyone?Muslims are specifically exempted from the government mandate to purchase insurance, and also from the penalty tax for being uninsured. Islam considers insurance to be “gambling”, “risk-taking”, and “usury” and is thus banned. Muslims are specifically granted exemption based on this.

How convenient. So a Christian would have crippling IRS liens placed against all of their assets, including real estate, cattle, and even accounts receivables, and will face hard prison time because they refuse to buy insurance or pay the penalty tax. Meanwhile, Louis Farrakhan and all other US Muslims will have no such penalty and will have 100% of their health needs paid for by the de facto government insurance. Non-Muslims paying a tax to subsidize Muslims. This is Sharia Law definition of.. Dhimmitude. This is not a Western Civilization concept.

Dhimmit has two purposes: To enrich Muslims AND to drive conversions to Islam.

I recommend sending this post to your contacts. This is desperately important and people need to know about it — quickly!

This really is happening in your country. A fraction at a time.

Wake up America ! They’re coming in the back door.

To check it out on Snopes click here: Health Insurance Exemptions.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/exemptions.asp

 

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.” -Ronald Reagan

 

Obama: Birth Certificate A VERY, VERY INTERESTING. READ.

Obama: Birth
Certificate

 

A VERY, VERY
INTERESTING. READ.

 

I have never felt
this idiot was ever born here & he never should have been elected.

He should not be
President since he never grew up in the United States.

What follows should
be considered since they are inconsistent with the “Birth
Certificate”…..

It was brought to
light that back in 1961 people of color were called ‘Negroes.’ So how can

this ‘birth
certificate’ state he is ‘African-American’ when the term wasn’t even used back
then??

This isn’t over! This
is interesting!

.

.

Here is a comment
from a reader to George Ure at UrbanSurvival.com : “As you all know,
Donald

Trump made a big deal
about Obama’s birth certificate.

.

.

Recently, the White House released Obama’s birth certificate. I will tell you
right now that I had never

given this
“birther” issue any credit. I watched the hype and the
“crazies” come out. I completely dismissed

the entire ordeal
altogether.

.

.

In fact, it was not until the White House released the birth certificate that
it had gained my attention. I am

the studious sort of
guy, and I have plenty of time on my hands. So, I took a close look at this
document.

.

.

While I would have thought that this issue would have been closed for good
(and, got the crazies to

crawl back into their
holes), I found two extremely strange inconsistencies that merit some
attention.

.

.

First of all, the birth certificate that the White House released lists Obama’s
birth as August 4, 1961.

It also lists Barack
Hussein Obama as his father. No big deal, right? At the time of Obama’s birth,
it

also shows that his
father is aged 25 years old, and that Obama’s father was born in ” Kenya ,
East Africa “.

.

.

This wouldn’t seem like anything of concern, except the fact that Kenya did not
even exist until 1963,

two whole years after
Obama’s birth, and 27 years after his father’s birth. How could Obama’s father

have been born in a
country that did not yet exist?

.

.

Up and until Kenya was formed in 1963, it was known as the “British East
Africa Protectorate”.

But, this is not the
only thing that I found that just does not jive. The other item that I looked
into was the

hospital that Obama
was born in. On the birth certificate released by the White House, the listed

place of birth is
“Kapi’olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital”.

.

.

This cannot be,
because the hospital(s) in question in 1961 were called “Kaui Keolani
Children’s Hospital”

and “Kapi’olani
Maternity Home,” respectively.

.

.

The name did not change to Kapi’olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital
until 1978, when these two

hospitals merged. How
can this particular name of the hospital be on a birth certificate dated 1961
if this

name had not yet been
applied to it until 1978?

.

.

Go ahead, look it up. I am not talking crazy talk, these are the facts. Like I
said, I thought that this

was a non-issue until
the actual certificate was released.

.

.

Now that it has been released, of course I had to look into it. I have found
these issues, now I know that

something is up. If
you doubt me, just look at the following resources:

.

.

Sure as hell, the hospital part is true, as you can read about the 1978 merger
here.

http://www.kapiolani.org/women-and-children/about-us/default.aspx

Post-colonial history (from Wikipedia)

.

.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Kenya

.

.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenya

.

.

The first direct elections for Africans to the Legislative Council took place
in 1957.

Despite British hopes of handing power to “moderate” African rivals,
it was the Kenya African National

 

Union (KANU) of Jomo
Kenyatta that formed a government shortly before Kenya became independent

on 12 December 1963,
on the same day forming the first Constitution of Kenya.

 



Obama Cuts Controversial Muslims from White House Iftar Guest List

Neil Munro,The Daily Caller

The White House’s published guest list for this year’s Ramadan Iftar dinner
was much shorter than previous years’ roster. It excluded the names of several controversial advocates who have
attended the event in the past,including some who The Daily Caller can
confirm did attend on Wednesday night.

“It was a squeaky clean list,” said Durriya Badani,director of the
U.S.-Islamic World Forum,an annual event organized by the Brookings
Institution’s Saban Center and the Qatari government. The guests on the
published list are “not controversial at all,” said Badani,whose name is on the
list the White House provided to reporters.

“It was a lot more low-key … It was a more intimate event this year,” said
Haris Tarin,the Washington director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council,whose
invitation was kept off the published list. “I have no idea why they didn’t
publish [MPAC’s invite] … I’m going to learn about that a little bit more,” he
told The Daily Caller.

Mohamed Magid also attended but did not appear on the White
House’s publish list. Magid is imam of the All Dulles Area Muslim Society mosque in Northern
Virginia
and the current president of the Islamic Society of North America.
Along with MPAC,Magid’s two organizations have drawn criticism from a loose
network of online critics who claim they are sympathetic to Islamist groups.

Whether intentional or not,the shorter list limited the risk of a political
embarrassment for the White House because it downplayed the attendance of
several ideological
Islamist groups
,including MPAC

Read more.