CAIR

Newt Gingrich: Ban Shariah in America [with VIDEO]

By Robert Spencer

Just before his stunning victory in the South Carolina primary, Newt Gingrich drew the ire of the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the deceptive Islamic supremacist group that bamboozles many with its pose as a neutral civil rights organization.  Gingrich, fumed a CAIR spokesman, was "one of the nation's worst promoters of anti-Muslim bigotry."  How did Gingrich earn this dubious honor?  By telling the truth about Islamic law, and making clear his determination to resist it.

 

It all started last Tuesday, when Gingrich took a question about whether he would ever endorse a Muslim for President.  "It would depend,” Gingrich answered, “entirely on whether they would commit in public to give up Sharia,” the Islamic legal code that mandates stonings, amputations, and restrictions on the freedom of speech and freedom of conscience, and institutionalized discrimination against women and non-Muslims.

"A truly modern person who happened to worship Allah would not be a threat,” Gingrich continued, but “a person who belonged to any kind of belief in Sharia, any effort to impose it on the rest of us, would be a mortal threat."   He even came out in favor of a federal law banning the use of Sharia in American courtrooms.

Gingrich also displayed an admirable grasp of the realities of Sharia, noting that the “rising Islamization of Turkey has been accompanied by a 1,400% increase in women being killed,” and pointing out other negative manifestations of Sharia:  “The application of Sharia in places like Iran … churches being burned in Nigeria and Egypt, and … the decline of Christians in Iraq from a million, 200 thousand, when the Americans arrived, to about 500,000 today.”

Gingrich concluded:  "I think the time has come for us to have an honest conversation about Islamic radicalism.  I don't think we should be intimidated by our political elites, and I don't think we should be intimidated by universities who have been accepting money from the Saudis and who, therefore, now have people who are apologists for the very people who want to kill us."

This isn’t the first time Gingrich has challenged politically correct pieties so directly, and spoken so forthrightly about the realities of Islamic law.  In August 2010, Gingrich made a point that our political elites of both the Left and the Right have still largely failed to grasp:  “This is not a war on terrorism.  Terrorism is an activity. This is a struggle with radical Islamists in both their militant and their stealth form. … One of the things I am going to suggest today is a federal law, which says no court anywhere in the United States under any circumstance is allowed to consider Sharia as a replacement for American law.”

In response to his statements last week, CAIR, which has several of its former officials imprisoned for various terror-related activities, thundered that Gingrich's “outdated political ideas look backward to a time when Catholics and Jews were vilified and their faiths called a threat."

There is just one problem with this:  Catholic and Jewish immigrants to the U.S. never had a political and social system that they considered superior to the American model.  Catholic and Jewish organizations were never working to undermine the American system in the manner of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is dedicated, in its own words, to “eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house.”

Gingrich would be foolish to ignore that threat or bow to CAIR’s demands to ascribe concern about it to “bigotry.”  CAIR characterized Sharia as teaching “marital fidelity, generous charity and a thirst for knowledge," but left out the unpleasant bits.  Anyone who wants to see what Sharia is like can look to the states where it is implemented, such as Saudi Arabia and Iran.  Western apologists for Sharia claim that it is so multiform that it has no particular character that anyone can point to.  In reality, wherever and whenever Sharia has been implemented, historically and today, it has looked pretty much the same, and has contained elements absolutely inimical to Western notions of freedom and human rights.

Newt Gingrich is one of the few major politicians to acknowledge that the problem America faces today from Islamic jihadists is not simply one of terrorism, but of a larger attempt to insinuate elements of Sharia into American society and to assert the principle that where Sharia and American law conflict, it is American law that must give way.  Gingrich is determined not to allow this principle to advance.  Bravo.

This article originally appear in Jihad Watch.

Tue, October 21, 2014 Video: Father Helps ISIS Militants Stone Daughter as per Sharia

Islamic State militant standing next to the father of the woman about to be stoned.

Islamic State militant standing next to the father of the woman about to be stoned.

Islamic State militants in Syria stoned to death a young woman whom they had accused of committing adultery. The woman's father zealously took an active part in the stoning.

The stoning took place in the eastern part of the Hama province. A gruesome video of the execution was published by one of the Islamic State's media outlets (see video below).

The video shows the victim’s father standing next an Islamic State member while facing his daughter. Using a pleasant, gentle tone, the militant explains to the woman that she is being punished for the crime of adultery.

The Islamic State member then asks the father if he’s willing to forgive his daughter. The father refuses adamantly. Turning to his daughter he adds, “I’m not your father.”

As the stoning begins, the image is blurred by the Islamic State’s video editor, however the act of the stoning can still be seen.

Towards the end of the video, music -- added by the Islamic State’s editors – accompanies the scene of the father hurling, at point blank range, one stone after another at his daughter’s head.

Warning, very graphic, disturbing images

 

To learn more about the Islamic State and its brutal system of sharia-based governance see Clarion Project's Factsheet: The Islamic State (ISIS, ISIL) 

 

 

 

Sun, October 19, 2014 America's "Most Influential Muslim" Endorses Sharia Law

Sheikh Hamza Yusuf

Sheikh Hamza Yusuf

by: 
Ryan Mauro

This year’s issue of The Muslim 500 names Sheikh Hamza Yusuf as the most influential Muslim-American. He is often portrayed as a moderate, but he recently endorsed Sharia governance and heads an Islamist college in California with extremist faculty.

Yusuf is ranked as the 35th most influential Muslim in the world by the publication. He is described as the “leading Islamic authority” in America. He is the current president and a senior faculty member of Zaytuna College in California.

He and 17 other Muslim-American leaders signed a letter condemning the tactics of the Islamic State terrorist group and offering theological rebuttals. It is a letter that earned them tremendous positive publicity by news outlets that didn’t notice that the letter endorsed the resurrection of the Caliphate and Sharia governance, specifically its brutal hudud punishments.

Hudud punishments are fixed in the Qu’ran and Hadith and are unquestionably obligatory in Islamic Law,” point 16 of the letter states.

It also used vague language that could justify other acts of terrorism, such as attacks by Hamas on Israel. The condemnation of the Islamic State’s targeting of American journalists contains an exception that approves of jihad against reporters they view as dishonest.

In a interview, Yusuf mourned “what happened in the 19th century with the abdication of Islamic Law and the usurpation of its place by Western legal systems.” He also accused the U.S. of trying to “unite the world” and criticized the “dominant world order, which is a capitalistic, Western world order.”

In 1996, he proudly displayed his anti-Americanism saying:

“[America] is a country that has little to be proud of in its past and less to be proud of in the present. I am a citizen of this country not by choice but by birth. I reside in this country not by choice but by conviction in attempting to spread the message of Islam in this country. I became Muslim in part because I did not believe the false gods of this society, whether we call them Jesus or democracy or the Bill of Rights.”

Yusuf’s rhetoric has become more moderate since 9/11. One month after the attacks, he said Muslims are treated better in the U.S. than most Muslim countries and that he “regret[s] in the past being silent about what I have heard in Islamic discourse and being part of that with my own anger.” He later lamented having been “infected” by anti-Semitism. He had called Judaism a “most racist religion” in 1995.

Yusuf is in a position to spread these extreme views to the next generation with his frequent speaking engagement and role as president of Zaytuna College, which is led by radicals. The other two main figures at the college are Zaid Shakir and Hatem Bazian, chairman of the American Muslims for Palestine.

Shakir advocates sharia over the U.S. Constitution. The New York Times reported the in 2006 that “he said he still hoped that one day the United States would be a Muslim country ruled by Islamic law.” He also defames the U.S. military, justifies killing U.S. soldiers and preaches to students that Hezbollah’s bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Lebanon was not an act of terrorism.

Bazian also endorsed the letter that condemned the Islamic State terrorist group but endorsed sharia rule and the rebuilding of a caliphate. In 2004, he told Muslims to follow in the footsteps of the “uprising in Iraq” against the U.S. government and military and “intifada in Palestine” and begin an “intifada in this country that change[s] fundamentally the political dynamics in here.”

Yusuf’s close collaboration with Shakir and Bazian casts doubt on the notion that he’s fully rejected his radical past. He stood with the two at a 2012 lecture at Zaytuna College and did not disagree with the anti-American conspiracy theories promoted by Bazian.

Bazian taught that the “military-industrial complex” is behind the “Islamophobic production industry” in order to get Americans to approve of killing Muslims:

“Those who are working on Islamophobia, they believe that the more hatred we have of Muslims in here [America], the more that we have reflexive hatred of Muslims abroad, thus authorizing or making the need for military action and the death and destruction more palatable to us without having to think we are actually killing humans,” Bazian said.

In fact, Yusuf indirectly endorsed Islamist blasphemy laws in America as would be required under sharia governance. At the same vent, Yusuf argued for limitations on free speech, saying anti-Muslim hatred is a “present and imminent danger.”

The Muslim 500’s most influential U.S. resident is Fethullah Gulen, ranked as the 14th most influential Muslim in the world. He is based in Pennsylvania and is an enemy of Turkey's Islamist government. He fled to the U.S. in 1999 because the then-secular government of Turkey accused him of plotting its overthrow.

It is difficult to judge Gulen’s extremism. On the one hand, his charter school network has been subjected to significant scrutiny and has been investigated by the FBI. The concerns about the school are related to operational issues and potential corruption; not Islamist extremism.

A May 2012 60 Minutes investigation concluded that his U.S. network “lacks transparency” and “its funding, hierarchy and ambitions remain hidden.”

The most concerning fact about Gulen is a quote aired on Turkish television in 1999. He was recorded preaching:

“You must move in the arteries of the system without anyone noticing your existence until you reach all the power centers … If they [Muslim allies] do something prematurely, the world will crush our heads … you must wait until such time as you have gotten all the state power, until you have brought to your side all the power of the Constitutional institutions in Turkey.”

He emphasized that his listeners must not share what he has told them:

“Now, I have expressed my feelings and thoughts to you all in confidence … trusting your loyalty and secrecy. I know that when you leave here, [just] as you discard your empty juice boxes, you must discard the thoughts and the feelings that I expressed here.”

It is unclear if Gulen considers himself an Islamist or not. One article on his website states he is an “example of liberal Islamist thinking,” but later in the article it says he opposes the very basis of the Islamist ideology. It says, “Gülen does not favor the state applying Islamic law, the Shari'a.”

Elsewhere on his website, Gulen’s "rejection of Islamism" is touted. Gulen considers himself a moderate competitor to the Islamism of Turkish President Erdogan (then prime minister) and compares Erdogan to the Iranian regime.

Amazingly, an article on Gulen’s website even condemns “Erdogan’s creeping Islamist agenda” and “top-down imposition of Islamist values.”

“[Gulen is] vehemently opposed to the use and abuse of Islam as a political ideology and party philosophy while the latter [Erdogan] sees the religion as an instrument to channel votes and to consolidate his ranks among supporters,” it says.

The Muslim 500’s judgment is a reflection of the leadership problem within the Muslim-American community. Yusuf and his Zaytuna College are no Osama Bin Ladens, but they are not progressive Islamic reformers, either.

This is an ideological battle against Islamism. The solution isn’t lifting up a lighter shade of Islamism; it’s promoting the George Washingtons and Thomas Jeffersons of the Muslim world who reject anti-American propaganda and sharia governance.

 

Ryan Mauro is ClarionProject.org’s national security analyst, a fellow with Clarion Project and an adjunct professor of homeland security. Mauro has made over 1,000 media appearances and is frequently featured on Fox news. He has a Bachelor's degree in Intelligence Studies and a Master's degree in political science from American Military University. 

Did CIA Meet With CAIR to Purge Anti-Muslim Training Material? It’s Classified

Submitted by Emily on Sun, 2014-10-19 06:17

URL: 
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2014/10/cia-meet-cair-purge-anti-muslim-training-material-classified/

Fri, October 17, 2014 CAIR, ISNA Praise Radical, Further Exposing Their Own Extremism

Dr. Ali Mazrui, an Islamic extremist. lauded by CAIR and ISNA

Dr. Ali Mazrui, an Islamic extremist. lauded by CAIR and ISNA

by: 
Ryan Mauro

The Council on American-Islamic Relations and the Islamic Society of North America, two supposedly “moderate” groups identified by the U.S. Justice Department as Muslim Brotherhood entities, are mourning radical Islamic preacher Dr. Ali Mazrui in light of his passing on October 12. Their statements point to his deep involvement in their organizations.

 

Dr. Ali Mazrui's Extremist Ideology

In 2007, Mazrui preached that the U.S. “empire” is a threat to Islam and Muslims must retaliate politically, economically and violently. A reporter at his lecture paraphrased him as saying:

“The U.S. today is an empire with no counter power as once offered by the U.S.S.R.. He enumerated four ways this empire can be minimized: reduce dependency on the U.S., as the Europeans are doing; make Americans pay the price when they misuse their power, as in oil embargos or the insurgency in Iraq; rely on the effect of countervailing powers, such as China and India; and—Mazrui’s preferred solution—have American democracy control the empire.” [emphasis mine]

The line is bold is an explicit endorsement of attacks on U.S. soldiers in Iraq.

The reporter summarized his comments on the 9/11 attacks as, “Turning to the Sept. 11, 2001 assaults on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, Dr. Mazrui said the targets were economic and military—no religious symbol was attacked.”

The write-up gives the impression that Mazrui legitimized the 9/11 attacks, but it is uncertain without an exact quote. 

In 2004, he reportedly was a guest speaker for an Al-Qaeda-linked organization in South Africa named the International Center for the Propagation of Islam. Its founder had personal contact with Osama Bin Laden.

According to his Binghamton University obituary, Mazrui was on the board of directors of the American Muslim Council led by Abdurrahman Alamoudi. When speaking privately, Alamoudi preached extremism such as “destroy America” and advocated deception. When speaking publicly, Alamoudi condemned terrorism and positioned himself as a moderate.

Alamoudi was a public supporter of Hamas and Hezbollah. In 2004, Alamoudi pled guilty to terrorism-related charges. He was secretly fundraising for Al-Qaeda and was involved in a secret Libyan regime plot to work with Al-Qaeda terrorists to kill the king of Saudi Arabia. Alamoudi later admitted that he was a member of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.

According to the obituary, Mazrui was president of the Association of Muslim Social Scientists. A 1991 U.S. Muslim Brotherhood memo identifies the group as one of its fronts. The memo says the goal of this overall network is to wage a “kind of grand jihad…in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.”

Mazrui’s Association of Muslim Social Scientists once had a General Secretary who was a spokesman for Al-Muhajiroun, an Al-Qaeda affiliate, named Kamran Bokhari. He arranged speaking engagements for the extremely radical Anjem Choudhary, who is currently an open supporter of Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State.

The Association that Mazrui once led was also very closely linked to the International Institute of Islamic Thought, another identified Muslim Brotherhood front with a history of extremism. It was also the subject of a terrorism-financing investigation after the 9/11 attacks.

In 2006, Mazrui spoke at a spoke at a fundraiser for the legal defense of Sami al-Arian, a convicted Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist. He said that al-Arian was innocent and a “victim of prejudice and of popular ill will.” Even if Mazrui genuinely believed al-Arian hadn’t done anything illegal, al-Arian’s recorded extremist comments like “Death to Israel” were known. And yet Mazrui continued to embrace him.

Mazrui was associated with the Muslims of the Americas, the North American branch of an anti-American and anti-Semitic militant group based in Pakistan named Jamaat ul-Fuqra. A dozen U.S. and Canadian Muslim groups have endorsed the Clarion Project’s initiative to get ul-Fuqra designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

In 2011, Mazrui spoke for the group’s interfaith front, the United Muslim Christian Forum. Its website claimed that the 9/11 attacks were a Jewish conspiracy.

Mazrui frequently preached about an international Jewish/Zionist conspiracy against Islam using anti-Semitic themes that like are modernized claims of the nefarious Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

In 2002, Mazrui spoke at the 2002 convention of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, a group with Muslim Brotherhood origins.

He preached:

“There is also suspicion that some members of the Bush administration in collusion with Israel are more than ready to plunge the Middle East into turmoil in the hope that the final outcome would be to the territorial advantage of Israel and the strategic advantage of the United States. All this is part of the emerging external sadism of the United States, a readiness to hurt others abroad."

In 2007, MPAC promoted an event with “acclaimed scholar” Mazrui with an interfaith group called the Abrahamic Faiths Peacemaking Initiative. MPAC has not issued a statement reacting to Mazrui’s death.

In 2002, he wrote an article arguing that Israel is a “threat to American democracy.” He depicted suicide bombers and terrorists like Al-Qaeda and Hamas essentially as freedom fighters against Western oppression.

He said that Israel shouldn’t have been created in 1948 and compared it to Nazi Germany for pursing a “final solution for the Palestinian problem:”

“Israeli neo-Nazism reversed the scale of genetic values favored by German Nazis. Both forms of extremism exaggerated the impact of the Jewish factor. The Nazis thought that the Jewish impact was negative. The Israeli extremists erred the other way… As for the trend towards militarization, Israel has indeed become the most efficient war machine since Nazi Germany.”

When Hillary Clinton rejected American Islamist radicals during her Senate campaign in 2000, Mazrui attributed it to “pressure from pro-Israeli anti-Muslim New Yorkers.”

Mazrui claims he was interrogated by the Joint Terrorism Task Force, Department of Homeland Security and immigration and customs officers for seven hours in 2003 about whether he had links to terrorism. He was detained at Miami International Airport on the way back from Trinidad and Tobago.

Based on the information here, it’s easy to see why the U.S. government was so concerned and it is probable that it had classified intelligence that is still not publicly available.

 

Dr. Mazrui's Troubling Ties to “Moderate” CAIR and ISNA

In CAIR’s October 13 statement, Executive Director Nihad Awad (who recently publicly endorsed sharia governance) said, “Dr. Mazrui was a force in helping shape many American Muslim institutions, including as a member of CAIR’s board of advisors. His wisdom and scholarship will be missed.”

Likewise, CAIR National Board Chair Roula Allouch called him “a key intellectual bridge-builder in North America and worldwide.” The statement said that Mazrui spoke at CAIR events.

ISNA’s October 14 statement includes praise from ISNA President Azhar Azeez who, like Awad, recently endorsed sharia governance. Azeez described him as a “towering intellectual and academic who contributed greatly to Islamic and African studies.”

Sayyid Syeed, ISNA’s National Director of the Office of Interfaith and Community Alliances, was recorded in 2006 saying, “Our job is to change the Constitution of America.” His statement on Mazrui’s death acknowledges that ISNA birthed other Brotherhood-linked groups with extremist histories, including the International Institute of Islamic Thought:

“When Dr. Mazrui took the Chair in SUNY Binghamton, we invited him to Washington DC and introduced him to the work of ISNA and its various offshoots like AMSS [Association of Muslim Social Scientists], IIIT, MSA [Muslim Students Association], etc.

I spent the day with him in familiarizing with our work. He very much appreciated the accomplishments and then made himself available to address our various events and write for [ISNA] and other publications…ISNA provided him a stage and a vibrant forum” [emphasis mine].

Similarly, Asad Ba-Yunus, a member of ISNA’s board of directors, said, “Dr. Ali Mazrui was my professor for four classes, mentor, and friend to my late father and myself.” His father was the first president of ISNA.

The Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, also praised Mazrui and said he “will always be remembered with appreciation.” The Turkish government, led by the AK Party, is a sponsor of Islamist terrorists and radicals.

CAIR, ISNA and the Turkish government aren’t just mourning the death of someone they knew personally. They are endorsing him as a teacher and upholding him as an example for Muslims. Their statements do not put any distance between Mazrui’s long history of radicalism and their own views.

His views were not hidden, yet these “moderates” repeatedly upheld him and gave him a platform to spread his extremism. Even today, they boast of doing so. These are not the actions of true Muslim moderates.

U.S., Canada's RCMP Team Up with Islamists

Submitted by Emily on Mon, 2014-10-13 11:30

URL: 
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4768/us-canada-islamists-nccm

Mon, October 13, 2014 ISIS Points to Sharia Law to Justify Slavery of Women

From the fourth edition of Dabiq Magazine

From the fourth edition of Dabiq Magazine

by: 
Meira Svirsky

In the latest edition of Dabiq, the Islamic State’s slick, English magazine, the group offers a theological justification for capturing "infidel" women to be used as sex slaves. The brutal group is holding thousands of Yazidi women and girls and subjecting them to horrific violent, sexual abuse.

In an article titled, “The Revival of Slavery Before the Hour” (“Hour” referring to “Judgment Day”), the magazine concludes that since the Yazidi religion pre-dates Islam, its followers are to be dealt with according to the laws of the mushrik (polytheists). The article explains:

“Accordingly, the Islamic State dealt with this group as the majority of fuqaha [experts in Islamic jurisprudence] have indicated … Unlike the Jews and Christians, there was no room for the jizyah payment. Also, their women could be enslaved unlike female apostates who the majority of fuqaha say cannot be enslaved and can only be given an ultimatum to repent or face the sword.”

The magazine goes on to explain what happened when Islamic State fighters captured the Sinjar region of Iraq, which was inhabited by the ancient population of the Yazidis:

“After capture, the Yazidi women and children were then divided according to the Shari’ah amongst the fighters of the Islamic State who participated in the Sinjar operations, after one fifth of the slaves were transferred to the Islamic State’s authority to be divided as khums [the obligatory tithe of one-fifth of all war spoils that jihadi fighters must pay to the caliph].”

The article proudly announces the revival of the sharia institution of slavery of infidels, saying, “This large-scale enslavement of mushrik families is probably the first since the abandonment of this Sharia’ah law. The only other known case – albeit much smaller – is that of the enslavement of Christian women and children in the Philippines and Nigeria by the mujahidin [jihadis] there.”

The article reminds its readers that the legality of slavery is established in sharia (Islamic) law, saying, “Before Shaytan [Satan] reveals his doubts to the weak-minded and weak hearted, one should remember that enslaving the families of the kuffar [infidels] and taking their women as concubines is a firmly established aspect of the Shari’ah that if one were to deny or mock, he would be denying or mocking the verses of the Qur’an and the narration of the Prophet … and thereby apostatizing from Islam.”

Indeed, the Quran condones and justifies slavery in a number of verses, specifically in the context of war booty and concubines. Hundreds of the Hadiths (saying of the Islamic prophet Mohammed) deal with the jurisprudence of Islamic slaves. Both indicate the institution's clear sanction by sharia law.

Although 126 contemporary Islamist leaders and scholars recently signed a letter denouncing the actions of the Islamic State, the letter unfortunately endorses the Islamic State’s goals of rebuilding the caliphate, establishing sharia law and instituting the brutal hudud [punishments for the most severe crimes].

The letter, which was addressed to the self-declared caliph of the Islamic State, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, was signed and presented in Washington by Nihad Awad, executive director and founder of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).

The criticism of the Islamic State by the scholars that signed the letter is that the terrorist group is not “following the correct procedures that ensure justice and mercy.”

However, endorsing sharia law, point 5 of the letter states, “What is meant by ‘practical jurisprudence’ is the process of applying Shari’ah rulings and dealing with them according to the realities and circumstances that people are living under.”

The letter continues, “Practical jurisprudence [fiqh al-waq’i] considers the texts that are applicable to peoples realities at a particular time, and the obligations that can be postponed until they are able to be met or delayed based on their capabilities.”

Far from distancing themselves from the implementation of sharia law by the Islamic State, the above statements are an endorsement of the Islamist doctrine of "gradualism." This is an incremental strategy for establishing sharia governance, supporting jihad and advancing the Islamist cause.

Point 16 of the letter states, “Hudud punishments are fixed in the Qu’ran and Hadith and are unquestionably obligatory in Islamic Law.”

Point 22 of the letter states, “There is agreement (ittifaq) among scholars that a caliphate is an obligation upon the Ummah. The Ummah has lacked a caliphate since 1924 CE. However, a new caliphate requires consensus from Muslims and not just from those in a small corner of the world.”

Thus, it is clear that the signatories of the letter, while purporting to be “moderate,” endorse the principles of the Islamic State and other jihadists but criticize their implementation.

Just as the West has been firm in rejecting the objectives of the Islamic State, it should not be swayed by the Islamic State’s contemporary counterparts who equally endorse Islamic extremism through the implementation of sharia law -- however gradual.

Click to see the complete Islamic State (ISIS) Magazine: Dabiq - Issue 4

For more information on the Islamic State, see Clarion Project's Fact Sheet: The Islamic State (ISIS, ISIL)

 

 

 

 

Meira Svirsky is the editor of ClarionProject.org

Sun, October 5, 2014 Ex-CAIR Official & Code Pink Leader At Iran Hate Conference

Still taken from the PressTV coverage of the conference.

Still taken from the PressTV coverage of the conference.

by: 
Elliot Friedland

The Islamic Republic of Iran is hosting its 2nd International New Horizon Independent Conference, to propogate conspiracy theories contending that Zionists control the United States government. The three day conference, held in Tehran, began on the 29th of September.

It brought anti-war activists and conspiracy theorists from Europe and America to Iran in order to support Iranian state sponsored propaganda against Jews, Israel and the West. According to Iran's state owned media outlet Press TV some of the topics of the conference are: "The Islamic Awakening movement, the role of Zionist lobbies in the European and US crises, introducing international anti-Zionist and anti-imperialist figures, and Islamic resistance against the Zionist regime."

One of the recurring themes at the conference was that Israel and the Mossad had orchestrated the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The accusation that Jews control various governments and the media is a longstanding anti-Semitic trope dating back centuries, shown best by the credence given to the classic Russian anti-Semitic forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Those speaking at the conference included Medea Benjamin, leader of the radical women's anti-war group Code Pink. It has a long history of extreme activism and support for dubious causes such as Iran's theocracy, Hamas, Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro. She travelled to Fallujah in 2004 and gave $600,000 in cash and medical supplies to the families of insurgents fighting against American forces. The insurgents were then known as Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) but the organization has since gone through several name changes and is now known  as the Islamic State. Code Pink was recently honored by the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) with an award for 'community organization of the year.'

Nor should we be surprised that CAIR would award Code Pink in this manner. Another attendee at the conference was Cyrus McGoldrick, who was formerly the advocacy directory in the New York branch of CAIR. While he was in that position he routinely appeared on Iran's state-owned PressTV to criticize America. When angry mobs attacked American embassies worldwide after the release of a film called "The Innocence of Muslims," McGoldrick rationalized the violence, saying "People have had enough of what is seen by them, what looks to them like America's war on Islam." 'The Innocence of Muslims' was a privately produced, low-budget film released only online which was highly critical of the founder of Islam Muhammed. 

On McGoldrick's Twitter account he recently asked who is more dangerous, Barack Obama or ISIS?

The support for radical views expressed by former CAIR leaders such as McGoldrick fits into a pattern. In the past, the founder of CAIR, Omar Ahmed, remarked "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."

Other attendees included Wayne Madsen, a noted 9/11 conspiracy theorist and anti-Semite, Dieudonne M'bala M'bala, the anti-semitic French comedian whose 'quenelle' gesture which resembles a reverse Nazi salute sparked a heated debate about the limits of free speech. Mark Siljander, a discredited former US congressman (R-MI), also attended. According to the Anti-Defamation League Siljander "was found guilty in 2010 of two fed­eral charges relat­ing to his ties to an Islamic char­ity alleged to have funded ter­ror­ist groups."

ADL National Director Abraham Fox say "A disturbing new element in this anti-Jewish gathering is the appearance on the guest list of a few high-visibility US anti-war and anti-Israel activists who claim their positions are not motivated by anti-Semitism."

This conference marked as radical everyone present. Supposedly progressive anti-war activists are further tarred by their association with Iran's violent theocracy, which at the time of writing looks set to hang Reyhanneh Jabbari who killed in self-defense a man who was trying to rape her. For its part, Iran further damaged its attempts to appear moderate, as its association with known anti-Semites and conspiracy theorists makes it nigh on impossible for the regime to claim that it is not fundamentally anti-Semitic.

See a full list of the speakers and agenda at the 2nd International New Horizon Independent Conference.

For more information on the Iranian regime and its long record of anti-Semitism, minority persecution and human rights abuses, see our factsheet: Human Rights in Iran

Tue, September 30, 2014 CAIR Gives Award to Extremist Pro-Hamas Group 'Code Pink'

Code Pink leader Medea Benjamin (L) chants as she and other demonstrators are escorted out of the hearing room by U.S. Capitol police officers at the request of Senate Intellgence Committee Chairman Senator Dianne Feinstein. Code Pink protestors repeatedly interrupted Deputy National Security Adviser John Brennan testifying before a hearing on his nomination to be the Director of the CIA. (Photo: © Reuters)

Code Pink leader Medea Benjamin (L) chants as she and other demonstrators are escorted out of the hearing room by U.S. Capitol police officers at the request of Senate Intellgence Committee Chairman Senator Dianne Feinstein. Code Pink protestors repeatedly interrupted Deputy National Security Adviser John Brennan testifying before a hearing on his nomination to be the Director of the CIA. (Photo: © Reuters)

by: 
Meira Svirsky

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) awarded the extremist group “Code Pink,” the “Community Organization of the Year” award at its 20th Annual Banquet September 27.

The choice was not surprising, considering that the two groups share many of the same goals. Code Pink, which ironically bills itself as a grassroots organization of “women working for peace,” has a history of  supporting Hamas and the brutal Iranian regime as well as being anti-American.

CAIR, for its part, is an entity of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood, according to the U.S. Justice Department. More specifically, as confirmed by Muslim Brotherhood documents, CAIR is part of the Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee, a secret body that was established to push the agenda of Hamas and the overall Islamist cause.

Code Pink, known for its theatrical and outrageous street protests, was originally established in 2002 to agitate for an end to American military involvement in Iraq. The group made its first trip to Iraq in 2003, at which time Code Pink leader Jodie Evans praised the government of Saddam Hussein for providing “a good education and health care system, food for everyone.” At the same time, Evans accused America of “destroy[ing] any form of infrastructure that could have held the country together.” Evans also observed, “What's cool about the resistance is that the Iraqis don't back down."

Two years later, Code Pink helped that “resistance.” Evans and fellow Code Pink leader Medea Benjamin, travelled to Iraq as part of delegation of “peace groups” and delivered $600,000 in cash and medical supplies to the families of insurgents fighting against American forces in Fallujah.

Code Pink activities supporting terrorists did not end in Iraq. In 2006, the organization’s leaders travelled to Venezuela to meet with Hugo Chavez, that country’s brutal and murderous dictator. After the trip, Evans blogged, “He was a doll. Generous, open, passionate, excited, stimulated by the requests and happy to be planning with us.” 

Fellow Code Pink leader Benjamin was also enamored with Cuban dictator Fidel Castro. Benjamin , who lived in Cuba for a time said life in Cuba was so idyllic that it “made it seem like I died and went to heaven,” (even though she was deported for writing an article published in a communist newspaper that the government disapproved of).

In 2008, Code Pink leaders met with then-Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in New York City. Following that meeting, Benjamin and Evans accepted an invitation by Ahmadinejad to visit Iran as his guests. Again, the two had nothing but praise for Iran’s leaders, which ironically coincided with the Iranian regime’s hanging of Fatemeh Haghighatpajou, who was put to death for defending her daughter from a rapist.

At the Democratic National Convention in 2008, Code Pink demonstrated for “Peace with Iran.” Code Pink demonstrators maintained that Iran had fulfilled all of their obligations. “They are doing what they can. They’ve already had the inspectors they need,” a Code Pink demonstrator maintained.

“Iran isn’t threatening anyone. They haven’t threatened another country in over 260 years,” said another.

This is despite the fact that then-president Ahmadinejad vowed at the "World Without Zionism" conference in 2005 (as well as numerous other times) that "his eminency Imam Khomeini ... said that the occupation regime of Qods [Israel] must be wiped off from the map of the world, and with the help of the Almighty, we shall soon experience a world without America and Zionism, notwithstanding those who doubt."

When asked if peace takes two partners, another Code Pink demonstrator replied, “Not with the United States being the biggest bully on the planet.”

“Not only that, it’s not our job to worry about a bunch of mullahs threatening people,” said yet another Code Pink protester.

The next year, Code Pink led an international delegation to Gaza, where they delivered tens of thousands of dollars in “humanitarian aid” and were feted at a five-star hotel owned by Hamas.

In 2013, Code Pink, still billing themselves as a pro-peace women’s group, held a demonstration in conjunction with the Interfaith Peace-Builders in Washington, D.C. Code Pink demonstrators screamed on the streets of Washington, D.C., calling for a new, violent uprising against Israel, “Long live the intifada... intifada, intifada!"  (In the previous intifada, over 1,000 civilians were killed in shootings and suicide bombing on Israeli streets, buses, cafes and hotels.) 

The same year, Code Pink took part in a protest in Yemen against U.S. drone attacks on terrorists. The protest was in conjunction with the Islamic organization, al Karama, whose founder and president, Abdul Rahman al-Naimi, was listed by the Treasury Department as a "specially designated global terrorist." Al-Naimi is suspected of funneling $600,000 to al Qaeda in Syria. 

Most recently, Code Pink led protest against Israel for defending themselves from a barrage of 3,621 rockets and mortars fired by Hamas into Israeli population areas after Hamas militants kidnapped and killed three Israeli teenagers.

At the protest, Code Pink leader Benjamin said, “I think it is horrible that the Israeli state does not value the lives of Palestinian people.”

Code Pink’s history of activism for the Islamist cause dovetails with CAIR’s. In 2007, the Justice Department branded CAIR an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation, another U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity found guilty of financing Hamas. The designation was upheld by a federal judge in 2009. The FBI subsequently ended its use of CAIR as an outreach partner, citing evidence linking it to Hamas.

In yet another terrorism trial in 2007, federal prosecutors stated in a court filing:

“From its founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists … the conspirators agreed to use deception to conceal from the American public their connections to terrorists.”

The ongoing extremism of CAIR is evident in its suspicious money transfers, use of Islamist radicals for fundraisingdefense of the Jamaat ul-Fuqra terrorist group and the statements of its chapter leaders. CAIR officials recently questioned whether to honor U.S. soldiers on Memorial Day, compared the U.S. military to the Taliban and criticized American nationalism.

Even though CAIR’s history paints a clear picture of the extremist nature of the organization, its public support for a group like Code Pink exposes its agenda for all to see.

It’s time for the public and government officials to wake up to the fact that CAIR is not the “Islamic civil liberties group,” it purports to be

Meira Svirsky is the editor of ClarionProject.org

Syndicate content