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.

Wed, December 10, 2014 Possible GOP Presidential Candidate Endorsed CAIR

Former Maryland Governor and possible 2016 GOP presidential candidate Bob Ehrlich endorsed CAIR in 2005. He has yet to reverse this endorsement.

Former Maryland Governor and possible 2016 GOP presidential candidate Bob Ehrlich endorsed CAIR in 2005. He has yet to reverse this endorsement.

Ryan Mauro

Former Maryland Governor Bob Ehrlich is considering a run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016. He endorsed the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) during his term in 2005.

Ehrlich served as Maryland’s governor from 2003 to 2007.  He lost twice to a likely Democratic presidential candidate in 2016, Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, who has his own weak record on Islamism.

The CAIR website still proudly showcases Ehrlich’s endorsement, even though the author pointed out the endorsement in an article written in March 2012.

“I’m glad that you have established such a strong voice in the community and that you are working to maintain a strong sense of cultural and economic identity,” he is quoted as saying in December 2005.

CAIR was labeled an unindicted co-conspirator by the U.S. Justice Department in 2007 during the trial of the Holy Land Foundation, a Muslim Brotherhood front group found guilty of financing Hamas.

The U.S. government specifically stated that CAIR is an “entity” of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee. This Committee was established by the Brotherhood to covertly support the Hamas and overall Islamist agenda.

The FBI wiretapped a secret Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas meeting in Philadelphia in 1993 that included two of CAIR’s founders and its current executive director. The meeting organizers, including CAIR co-founder Omar Ahmad, were recorded discussing how to use deception to influence American opinion and policy.

“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,” said federal prosecutors in a court filing in another case.

Ehrlich’s endorsement of CAIR came before the organization’s designation as an unindicted co-conspirator, but its radical record was well-established by December 2005.

“All Governor Ehrlich had to do was look up CAIR on Google. He could have read nearly a dozen congressional testimonies I delivered in the 1990s through 2005 that specifically cited CAIR as a front group with hundreds of self-authenticating footnotes,” notes Investigative Project on Terrorism executive director Steve Emerson when the endorsement was first noticed.

Most recently, CAIR endorsed a letter condemning the Islamic State terrorist group but endorsed sharia law and the resurrection of an Islamic caliphate.

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) also recently banned CAIR as a terrorist group. It defended the decision by accusing CAIR of inciting and financing terrorism. A senior UAE official stated that CAIR is an affiliate of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Ehrlich has visited New Hampshire, which holds the first Republican presidential primary, twice since September and is due to return again. He began raising his national profile last year by touring in support of his book, America: Hope for Change, which lays out his policy vision for 2016.

Ehrlich is considered a long-shot for the Republican presidential nomination and his name has yet to be included in polls. However, even a loss will increase his national influence and could result in a high-level appointment.

Political candidates cannot credibly boast of their national security credentials after endorsing a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity and terrorism-financing co-conspirator. Not only did Ehrlich do that, but his quote has remained on CAIR’s website more than two years since he was criticized for it.

Voters need to hold candidates’ feet to the fire and require that they understand Islamism and how its proponents operate in America.


Ryan Mauro is’s national security analyst, a fellow with Clarion Project and an adjunct professor of homeland security. Mauro is frequently interviewed on top-tier television and radio.

Sun, December 7, 2014 Spiritual Head of Muslim Brotherhood Wanted by Interpol

Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi

Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi

A “red alert” has been issued by Interpol, the international police agency, for the arrest of Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi.  The alert was sent out at the request of the Egyptian judiciary who has brought charges against the 88-year old imam for “agreement, incitement and assistance to commit intentional murder, helping the prisoners to escape, arson, vandalism and theft.”

Interpol said it is planning to issue red alerts to its 190 member states for 41 other Muslim Brotherhood associates.

Chief of the Egyptian Police Interpol Gamal Abdel Bary said that issuing arrest warrants for Brotherhood fugitives is an “important change in the international community’s view of the banned group members.”

In mid-November, the United Arab Emirates joined Egypt and Saudi Arabia in banning the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group. The UAE banned 81 other organizations as terror groups as well, including many Brotherhood affiliates, including the American-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim American Society (MAS).

Senior UAE officials stated that CAIR, MAS and other Muslim groups in the West that are linked to the Muslim Brotherhood promote extremism and incite and finance terrorism.

The charges against Qaradawi, who is currently chairman of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, stem from his alleged involvement in a mass jail break that occurred during the 2011 Egyptian uprising against then President Hosni Mubarak. An Egyptian court held the Muslim Brotherhood -- as well as Hamas and Hezbollah, two foreign terrorist organizations -- responsible for the escape of thousands of prisoners who an Egyptian judge called “a danger to society.”

A total of 11,000 inmates escaped during a well-planned operation that saw prison walls demolished with enormous earth-moving vehicles, followed by trucks and SUVs moving in with mounted machine guns.

Former Islamist president and Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohammed Morsi was freed in the attack as well as many other Muslim Brotherhood leaders. Egypt accused Hamas fighters of participating in the attack, saying that the militants crossed into Egyptian territory from Gaza a number of days before the attack to join forces with local militias which were also involved. Hezbollah fighters were said to have crossed into Egypt the day before the attack.

One month after Morsi was ousted by the Egyptian people and the military, Qaradawi posted a video where he called on all the Muslims of the world to come to Egypt and wage jihad with their lives in order to return the Muslim Brotherhood to power.

Qaradawi called on anyone and everyone — businessmen, journalists from all around the world, specifically mentioning Indonesia, Malaysia, Nigeria, Senegal, Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, Somalia, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Tunisia, Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority, and Jordan – to become shuhada, “martyrs” who sacrifice their lives for the cause of jihad

Qaradawi, who was born in Egypt, was stripped of his citizenship by former Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser. He was arrested four times in Egypt, once in 1949, under the rule of King Farouk, and three times during Nasser’s presidency. In the early 1960s, he fled to Qatar, where he eventually became a citizen. From Qatar, he broadcasts a popular TV program on the Al Jazeera network, “Shariah and Life,” which garners 60 million viewers worldwide.

He is banned from entering both the U.S. and the U.K due to his extremism, including issuing fatwas supporting suicide bombings against Israeli civilians and supporting the killing of Jewish fetuses, calling on Muslims to perpetrate a second holocaust against Jews and expressing of his desire to kill Jews personally.

Qaradawi returned to Egypt after the ouster of Mubarak, making a triumphant appearance in Egypt in Tahrir Square , where he led Friday prayers on February 18, 2011 during the assent of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Qaradawi founded the website IslamOnline and currently serves as its leading religious scholar. 

The following video is a compilation of Qaradawi's extremist rhetoric:

Wed, December 3, 2014 White House Label of Brotherhood as Non-Violent Patently False

Christian Copts protest the killing of their brethren by Muslim Brotherhood supporters after former President Mohammed Morsi took over office in Egypt. Morsi represented the Brotherhood's

Christian Copts protest the killing of their brethren by Muslim Brotherhood supporters after former President Mohammed Morsi took over office in Egypt. Morsi represented the Brotherhood's "Freedom and Justice" party. (Photo: © Reuters)

Ryan Mauro

The White House has rejected a request to label the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group, describing the group as non-violent. The statement is not only at odds with known facts; it’s at odds with statements made by the White House only one year ago.

The White House statement came in response to a petition with 200,000 signatures citing the Brotherhood’s history of violence and how its preachers, particularly Sayyid Qutb, have bred multitudes of terrorists. Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates recently banned the Brotherhood as a terrorist group.

“We have not seen credible evidence that the Muslim Brotherhood has renounced its decades-long commitment to non-violence,” the White House said.

Yet, on July 8, 2013, the White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said, “We also condemn the explicit calls to violence made by the Muslim Brotherhood.”


The Alleged Brotherhood Rejection of Violence

Firstly, the White House and many Western officials are misinterpreting an alleged repudiation of violence by the Muslim Brotherhood after the execution of Brotherhood ideologue Sayyid Qutb in 1966.

The reason for the use of the word “alleged” is because there is no Muslim Brotherhood manifesto of unequivocal non-violence anywhere to be found. For all the talk of this momentous change, the Brotherhood has never produced  an authoritative declaration explaining this supposed ideological moderation.

The only cited text is a book with a translated title of “Preachers, Not Judges” or “Missionaries, Not Judges.” Sources differ as to whether it was published in 1969 or 1977, and it is said to have been written by the Muslim Brotherhood’s General Guide, Hasan al-Hudaybi, as he sat in an Egyptian prison.

The book is marked as the “moment” the Brotherhood transformed from a militant group to a non-violent educational group. It is often described as a formal rebuttal to the teachings of Sayyid Qutb.

However, top experts have concluded that the text was not even written by Al-Hudaybi, nor is there any evidence that it was written or endorsed by the Brotherhood.

One such expert is Dr. Barbara Zollner, Director of Islamic Studies at Birbeck College, University of London. Zollner wrote her doctoral thesis on the text; she also wrote a book about Al-Hudaybi.

“Overall, my argument is that Preachers, Not Judges was not written by Hassan al-Hudaybi, and secondly, it is not written as a response to Sayyid Qutb,” she says.

Zollner theorizes that the book is a product of the Egyptian government and Al-Azhar University based on the accounts of Egyptian officials and Brotherhood leaders at the time.

In fact, the book doesn’t even mention Qutb or call on Muslims to discard his preaching. Far from casting Qutb aside, the Brotherhood still exalts him and hasn’t lifted a finger to promote this alleged Al-Hudaybi text. Al-Hudaybi himself never promoted it.

On the contrary. “Qutb’s Signposts remains a standard part of the organization’s introductory membership curriculum … while Preachers, Not Judges has not been reprinted in Egypt for more than three decades and hasn’t appeared in print anywhere in the Arabic world since 1985,” explains Patrick Poole.

If this book were so seminal, the Brotherhood would at least have translated it into English and disseminated it. But, it has not, even though the Brotherhood has a frequently updated English-language website and Twitter handle.

One thing the book does is to rebut the Muslim doctrine of takfirism, a practice where Muslims declare another Muslim as an apostate without a trial or proof of treason. As can be seen historically and today, Takfirism leads to Muslim-on-Muslim violence because it enables Muslim extremists to unilaterally judge a co-religionist’s faith and essentially sentence him or her to death.

The Brotherhood and its apologists will counter that this analysis is proof that the Brotherhood proclaims non-violence today.

“The Muslim Brotherhood is committed to peaceful opposition action. It rejects all forms of violence,” it said in September.

The context of this quote is important. It was said by the Foreign Affairs Secretary of the Brotherhood’s political wing in Egypt, the Freedom and Justice Party, about  Egypt and only about Egypt.


A “Non-Violent” Group That Supports Violence Outside of Egypt

Western governments fail to understand that this stance is limited only to Egypt and is in accordance with the Brotherhood doctrine of "gradualism;" a pragmatic strategy of incremental change during periods of weakness.

Contrary to the White House’s statement, the Brotherhood does not rule out violence or terrorism entirely. In fact, it actively encourages violence in places outside of Egypt.

Tellingly, the Brotherhood’s Palestinian wing, Hamas, is officially designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the United States.

Hamas’ charter states in Part 1, Article 2 that it is “one of the wings of the Muslim Brothers in Palestine. The Muslim Brotherhood Movement is a world organization, the largest Islamic Movement in the modern era.”

In 2006, senior Brotherhood leader Essam El-Erian said, “Hamas is part of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

In 2011, Hamas officially changed its name to include, “a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood—Palestine.” The following year, a video appeared showing Hamas leaders, including Gaza Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, declaring allegiance to the Brotherhood and specifically to its jihad.

Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood have never denied their affiliation, nor have they ever condemned each other or severed ties. It is an indisputable affiliation. Former Egyptian President Morsi was actually the main liaison between Hamas and the Egyptian Brotherhood before getting into power.

The Muslim Brotherhood overtly endorses the violent destruction of Israel, suicide bombings and terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians. This fact also has never been disputed by the Brotherhood.

These facts not only discredit the White House’s position that the Brotherhood is non-violent, they discredits the White House’s position that the Brotherhood is not a terrorist group.

Brotherhood apologists argue that the group does not provide material support to Hamas. Moreover, ideological support does not qualify one as a terrorist. These arguments are false on two accounts:

Firstly, the Brotherhood and Hamas are one, by their own admissions. This isn’t a discussion about two separate entities. Secondly, material support has occurred.

In November 2008, the U.S. Treasury Department designated a network of charities called the Union of Good because they were “created by Hamas leadership to transfer funds to the terrorist organization.”

The board of directors has dozens of prestigious Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas members. According to the Israeli intelligence officials, the Union of Good is “the umbrella organization for Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated Islamic charity funds.”

The Union of Good is led by Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradawi, the Muslim Brotherhood’s extremist spiritual leader. He was twice asked to serve as the Brotherhood’s Supreme Guide, once in 1976 and again in 2004.

Qaradawi said he had to decline because it “might constrain my actions, even if this is the Muslim Brotherhood under whose umbrella I grew and which I so defended." The Brotherhood, in return, hailed him as “one of the Muslim Brotherhood’s spiritual leaders in the world.”

The Muslim Brotherhood’s American branch also materially supported Hamas. The U.S. government successfully prosecuted a Brotherhood front in Texas named the Holy Land Foundation for financing Hamas.

The Justice Department proved that the Holy Land Foundation was an entity of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee. The leader of the Palestine Committee until 1992, Mousa Abu Marzouk, is now the Deputy Chairman of Hamas’ Political Bureau.


A “Non-Violent” Group with Declared Violent Intentions

The Muslim Brotherhood has openly declared its intention to directly engage in violence and has boasted of its direct material assistance to Hamas.

In 2006, the Brotherhood’s Supreme Guide Mohammed Mahdi Akef publicly declared his willingness to “send immediately 10,000 mujahideen [warriors] to fight the Zionists alongside Hezbollah.”

In 2008, Akef even expressed his intention for the Muslim Brotherhood to directly fight the U.S. military and Israel. He said, “Now, if we are permitted, we will send fighters to oppose occupation—whether of Iraq or Palestine.”

In 2009, Akef said, “We have been effectively supporting our Palestinian brothers, especially since the Israeli attacks on Gaza.”

Multiple proofs exist that show that the Muslim Brotherhood has endorsed violence and even participated in violence since the organization’s supposed repudiation of violence in the 1970. For example, the Brotherhood:

  • Led an uprising against the Syrian regime from 1972 to 1982;
  •  Played a major role in fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989;
  •  Endorsed violence in Bosnia in the 1990s, with Supreme Guide Akef recalling how he sent money to the front;
  • Endorsed violence in Afghanistan and Iraq against U.S. and international forces;
  • Endorsed violence in Chechnya against Russian forces;
  • Said in 2010, that Muslims must fight “the Muslim’s real enemies, not only Israel but also the United States. Waging jihad against both of these infidels is a commandment of Allah that cannot be disregarded” (Supreme Guide Muhammad Badi);
  • Initially endorsed the Islamic State’s (ISIS) takeover of large parts of Iraq as a “popular revolution”;
  • Was involved in the current Syrian and Libyan civil wars, including issuing a fatwa to kill then-dictator of Libya Muammar Gaddafi.


Muslim Brotherhood: “Moderate” Because It Only Supports Al-Qaeda Sometimes

Both the Bush Administration and Obama Administration too often mistook the Brotherhood’s condemnations of the 9/11 attacks and some acts of terrorism as a condemnation of all acts of terrorism and violence.

The best example of this misunderstanding is the Brotherhood’s stance on Al-Qaeda.

The Brotherhood’s condemnation of 9/11 and Al-Qaeda has led some officials, such as Director of the Office of National Intelligence James Clapper, to see the Brotherhood as a “moderate” adversary of Al-Qaeda. The Brotherhood itself uses disagreements with Al-Qaeda to claim it is a “centrist,” “moderate,” “peaceful,” and “democratic” organization.

In 2008, the Brotherhood’s Supreme Guide Akef said his group was not linked to Al-Qaeda but endorses its actions “against the occupier and not against the people.”

“When Bin Laden fights the occupier then he is a mujahid, when he attacks the innocent and citizens then this is rejected,” Akef said.

The Brotherhood shortly thereafter emphasized its criticism of Al-Qaeda is not a declaration of non-violence, especially against U.S. troops, saying, “The Muslim Brotherhood stands with the resistance, especially in Palestine and Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries … the principle of resisting the occupiers is the natural right of all peoples and all laws and consistent with norms and international laws.”

After U.S. forces killed Osama Bin Laden in 2011, the Brotherhood condemned the operation as an “assassination” and honored Bin Laden as a “sheikh.” It reiterated its support for “legitimate resistance against foreign occupation of any country,” specifically identifying the U.S., Israel, European Union and NATO as occupiers in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Brotherhood’s religious leadership issued a fatwa in 2004 specifically authorizing the killing of U.S. soldiers in Iraq. Astonishingly, President Obama named one of those leaders, Sheikh Abdullah Bin Bayyah, as an example for Muslims to follow in condemning the Islamic State, and invited him to the White House where, on June 13, 2014, Bin Bayyah met with National Security Council members (including senior NSC director Gayle Smith). Bin Bayah is also a Hamas supporter.

The Brotherhood’s endorsements of killing U.S. soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan clearly categorizes it as a violent organization, despite the White House’s assertion.


Muslim Brotherhood’s Deception About Violence

The Muslim Brotherhood’s deceptive use of semantics is well-known. Words such as “democracy,” “terrorism” and “justice,” are redefined by the organization to make it appear moderate. The Brotherhood even manipulates the word “violence” to this end.

In April 2014, Muslim Brotherhood Secretary-General Mahmoud Hussein said, “The Brotherhood, since its establishment, rejects and condemns violence. Members of the group have never resorted to armed struggle except against foreign occupation.”

Meaning, Hussein’s definition of violence excludes “armed struggle…against foreign occupation.”

The author personally experienced the Brotherhood’s deception over the term “violence” in an August 2012 exchange in English on Twittter. The Brotherhood tweeted an article stating, “We do not use violence or force against opponents.”

When challenged, the Brotherhood admitted that attacks on “aggressors and invaders of our lands” are not included in its definition of violence. The group even conceded that it was “not referring only to soldiers.”

One of the clearest examples of the Brotherhood’s deception on the topic of violence can be found in an interview on CNN with former Islamist Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi, from the Brotherhood’s “Freedom and Justice” party. CNN’s host, Elliot Spitzer, asked Morsi, “Will you then, right now, disavow the use of violence against the state of Israel?"

“We do not use violence against anyone. What’s going on [sic] the Palestinian land is resistance…it’s the right of the people to resist imperialism,” he answered.

A study of the Muslim Brotherhood by the think tank Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, found that the texts of Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Brotherhood, were filled with calls for violence. The study cites Fereydoun Hoveyda, former Iranian ambassador to the United Nations, as writing:

“While training terrorists and directing murders, Sheikh Hassan denied involvement in the assassinations and attacks, using what Shiite clerics called ketman (holy dissimulation). Indeed, deceiving infidels was admitted by all Muslims, and Shiites even extended the dissimulation to other Muslims when the security of their ‘cause’ was at stake.”

Lying for the sake of jihad is also permissible according to the Reliance of the Traveler, an authoritative book on sharia law translated and endorsed by the International Institute of Islamic Thought and Fiqh Council of North America, two U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entities.

“Lying is sometimes permissible for a given interest … When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible … and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory,” according to Reliance of the Traveler (section R8.2).

The CEO of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Holy Land Foundation and his colleagues were recorded by the FBI extensively discussing using misleading semantics. The leader was heard emphasizing over and over, “War is deception!”

In a 2007 court filing in a terrorism prosecution, federal prosecutors state:

“From its founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR [Council on American-Islamic Relations] 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.”


Possible MB Violence Inside Egypt

Given the Muslim Brotherhood’s history of deception, violence and advocacy of violence, it is highly questionable whether the Brotherhood even is telling the truth when it claims to be non-violent inside Egypt.

An Egyptian commission concluded that the Brotherhood provoked the Egyptian security forces into violent clashes and committed violence of its own. This is supported by rhetoric from Brotherhood leaders and supporters, eyewitness testimony and videos.

The Brotherhood’s statements in English about the violence in Egypt contradict its Arabic statements that called on Muslims to protest the Egyptian government and to die for the Muslim Brotherhood cause.

The Egyptian media has reported on recorded conversations allegedly between Morsi and the brother of Al-Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahiri regarding covert cooperation in violent jihad.

Brotherhood opponents also claim that the Brotherhood has links to Ansar al-Maqdis, the Egyptian affiliate of the Islamic State (ISIS) that is publicly critical of the Brotherhood. While president, Morsi released many imprisoned Islamist terrorists, substantiating the reports of these secret deals.

The Egyptian government has announced the arrests of Hamas terrorists in Egypt on multiple occasions who were planning attacks, but Hamas claims it has no members in the country.

The Brotherhood may condemn terrorist attacks on Egyptian forces and churches, but it is certainly aware that its incendiary rhetoric inevitably leads to that outcome. It is not a surprise when Christians are attacked after the Brotherhood accuses the church of declaring war on Islam and Muslims.

At the very least, the Brotherhood is guilty of instigating violence.



The Muslim Brotherhood’s support for violence is a fact that is very easy to establish. There is no nuanced grey area where the White House can defend its statement. It’s patently false.

Either the White House made a conscious decision to deceive the public (even though it knew it’d get caught) or the decision-making process in the federal government is so dysfunctional that policy-makers are left ignorant of basic facts.

Neither scenario paints an encouraging picture. Our top officials are in dire need of briefings about the Muslim Brotherhood and its Islamist ideology and strategies.


Ryan Mauro is’s national security analyst, a fellow with Clarion Project and an adjunct professor of homeland security. Mauro is frequently interviewed on top-tier television and radio.

Thu, November 27, 2014 Islamists Exploit Ferguson Riots to Promote 'Resistance' in U.S.

A tweet from an Islamic State militant

A tweet from an Islamic State militant

Ryan Mauro

The Islamic State (known by the acronyms of IS, ISIS or ISIL) is exploiting the ongoing violence in Ferguson, Missouri over a grand jury’s decision not to indict a police officer for shooting and killing an 18-year old African-American.

The Islamic State members are taking to social media to encourage encouraging rioters to murder and behead police and political figures. One high-profile Islamic State operative said the group would send fighters to Ferguson if the rioters pledge allegiance to its caliph. In a hand-written note, the operative said:

“We hear you and we will help you if you accept Islam and reject corrupt man-made laws like democracy and pledge your allegiance to Caliph Abu Bakr… and then we will shed our blood for you, and send you soldiers that don’t sleep, whose drink is blood and their play is carnage!”

Many of the tweets by the Islamic State supporters and members describe the shooting death of Michael Brown as a terrorist attack and equate the police officers to U.S. and Israeli military forces. The objective is to make the rioters identify with jihadists as if their struggles are one in spite of religious differences.

The Islamic State is aggressively using hashtags related to the Ferguson crisis and arguing that the instability is proof that the U.S. and democracies overall are inherently oppressive. Sharia governance is advertised as a superior system where blacks will not be victimized by racism.

The Islamic State is also trying to reach this audience by citing instances of anti-Muslim and anti-black bigotry and responding with bigotry of their own against whites. The KKK’s involvement and approval of violence in Ferguson, for example, plays right into the hands of the Islamic State.

Below are some of the tweets:

One tweet about Ferguson mocked the U.S. proposal to arm moderate Syrian rebels against the Islamic State:

One even featured Mr. Burns from “The Simpsons” cartoon television show:


American Islamists Incorporate Ferguson Into Their Narrative

Other Islamist groups are also exploiting the mayhem in Ferguson to advance their adversarial views of the U.S. government and police.

Most frighteningly, he reportedly told African-Americans to rise up against the U.S. government as the Palestinians have risen up against Israel. In August, he justified the terrorism of Hamas against Israel and compared it to the struggle of blacks in America.

In front of 2,000 attendees in Maryland, Farrakhan happily proclaimed, “They know an explosion is going to come.” The reaction was not shock or a worried silence. It was cheers.

Islamists with softer tones like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) are also using the Ferguson situation to increase their influence.

CAIR was recently designated as a terrorist group by the United Arab Emirates. The U.S. Justice Department listed it as an entity of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee; a secret body established to support Hamas. In addition, CAIR was labeled an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of another U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity, the Holy Land Foundation, for financing Hamas. It was the largest terror-funding trial in U.S. history.

Zahra Billoo, the director of CAIR’s San Francisco Bay Area chapter, is citing the grand jury’s decision against indicting Officer Darren Wilson as part of a “tyranny” that must be challenged with “resistance.”

One of Billoo's messages is that American police raids against criminal suspects are equivalent to U.S. military raids on overseas terrorists; both being equally deplorable.

The Ferguson crisis must be understood as the product of a mindset that views the U.S. government and law enforcement as so predatory that violence or even revolution is justifiable. Islamist activism contributes to this destructive view.

The Islamists create an environment of exaggerated victimhood where it is believed that innocent Muslims are being systematically targeted by a U.S. government “war on Islam.”

Shibly is leading CAIR’s campaign to stop FBI meetings with mosque leaders to ask for counter-terrorism information, claiming that the FBI has nefarious intentions. The FBI says it is part of “normal outreach” done with various communities.

Islamic extremism doesn’t just promote Islamic violence and hostile views. Its anti-American themes can do the same among non-Muslims too.


Ryan Mauro is’s national security analyst, a fellow with Clarion Project and an adjunct professor of homeland security. Mauro is frequently interviewed on top-tier television and radio.


Wed, November 26, 2014 UAE Doubles Down on Designation of CAIR as Terrorists

CAIR executive director Nihad Awad on CNN

CAIR executive director Nihad Awad on CNN

Ryan Mauro

Despite heavy pressure and negative media coverage, the United Arab Emirates is standing by its decision to designate the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Muslim American Society (MAS) and other Islamist organizations as terrorist groups.

Senior UAE officials have responded to the criticism by restating that CAIR, MAS and other Muslim groups in the West are linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, promote extremism, and incite and finance terrorism.

The UAE banned CAIR and MAS along with approximately 80 other organizations, including the Muslim Brotherhood itself. CAIR and MAS are both U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entities.

By calling out European and American affiliates of the Brotherhood, the UAE is trying to bring attention to the Islamists’ influence in and danger to the West.

“[The list is] a clear message to the world about the UAE’s stance against terrorism, extremism and fanaticism, focusing on and putting a cordon around all subversive entities that seek to undermine the security and stability of the state and seeks to protect the community from extremist ideology,” a top UAE official said.

The objective is “to cut off access to all forms of material and moral support for terrorism, to drain its resources, to prevent the incitement of terrorist crimes, to prevent the praising of terrorism and to work to stop the spreading of such crimes or any encouragement of the committing of them.”

In an televised interview, UAE Foreign Affairs Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al-Nahyan was asked about the specific designations of CAIR and MAS as terrorists.

“We cannot accept incitement or [terror] funding when we look at some of these organizations. For many countries, the definition of terror is that you have to carry a weapon and terrorize people. For us, it’s far beyond that. We cannot tolerate even the smallest and tiniest amount of terrorism,” he answered.

CAIR proved the UAE’s point earlier this month when its San Francisco Bay Area chapter held a 20th anniversary fundraising banquet that honored convicted Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist Sami Al-Arian with a “Promoting Justice Award.”

CAIR continues to claim that Al-Arian was unjustly tried, despite the overwhelming evidence against him and his conviction in court. However, CAIR cannot deny is that Al-Arian's radical rhetoric is on record. CAIR is upholding an Islamist extremist with a subversive agenda.

UAE State Foreign Affairs Minister Anwar Gargash implied that CAIR, MAS and other U.S. and European groups banned by his country are part of a pro-Muslim Brotherhood lobby.

“The noise (by) some Western organizations over the UAE’s terrorism list originates in groups that are linked to the Muslim Brotherhood and many of them work on incitement and creating an environment of extremism,” Gargash tweeted.

He also tweeted on November 20 that the supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood "wear a cloak of democracy and liberalism.”

Gargash defended the UAE’s terrorism-designation process by saying listed groups may defend themselves in the court system if they wish. The possibility of delisting, however, is only “available to the organizations whose approach has changed.”

The UAE’s designation stems from new anti-terror legislation enacted by the Emirates last summer. Article 33 of the legislation mandates an annual review of the list. A banned group is also free to file an appeal. If the initial appeal is refused, the group may file a second appeal within 60 days. If the court does not respond to the initial appeal after 60 days, the defendant may also file a second appeal.

In multiple tweets, Gargash argued that the UAE provides a better model for moderation and prosperity in the region than the Brotherhood, even going so far as to distribute a newspaper column by Thomas Friedman arguing that Dubai sparked the Arab Spring by being the “Manhattan of the Arab world.”

Gargash complimented the article and called out those in the West who “do not see the devastating effects of extremism in the Arab world.”

The designation of CAIR by a Muslim Arab country puts the organization in a difficult spot. CAIR cannot attack the UAE as bigoted Islamophobes, as is its usual strategy with its critics. Moreover, CAIR previously enjoyed friendly relations with the UAE and has received major donations from them.

As CAIR-Florida official Nezar Hamze acknowledged, “[CAIR Executive Director] Nihad [Awad] has had a long relationship with the UAE and other Middle Eastern countries because they travel quite a bit and they talk.”

Even though CAIR runs an alleged scheme to hide foreign donors, its 2007 tax filing shows donations of approximately $220,000 from the UAE Embassy in Washington D.C.; $100,000 from the National Bank of Fujairah in the UAE; $100,000 from the Red Crescent in Abu Dhabi and $45,000 from Bin Hammodah Properties Co. in Abu Dhabi. That’s close to $465,000 from UAE sources in one year alone.

Egypt and Saudi Arabia have also banned the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group. The Egyptian government praised the UAE’s list, specifically singling out its designation of the Brotherhood.

Jordan says it will not ban the Brotherhood, but it did arrest a senior Brotherhood official Zaki Bani Arshid for responding to the UAE’s list by describing the UAE’s government as “the first sponsor of terrorism.”

Meanwhile, CAIR is forcefully denying any links to terrorism or extremism and spinning the U.S. State Department’s statement that the U.S. does not consider CAIR terrorists into a complete vindication.

Yet when Awad was pressed about CAIR’s Muslim Brotherhood links on CNN, even though he responded with a denial, Awad defended the Muslim Brotherhood:

“We have never been linked to the Muslim Brotherhood. We are not. We are an independent American organization …the Muslim Brotherhood, speaking of the Muslim Brotherhood, is not a terrorist organization. It is widely recognized as a popular movement in the Middle East and the Muslim world and CAIR is not a Muslim Brotherhood organization.”

When CNN anchor Alisyn Camerota pointed out the Brotherhood’s history of violence, Awad falsely claimed that the Brotherhood has renounced violence and described the organization as the “largest social opposition to the dictatorial regimes.”

Awad finished by repeating his claim that CAIR is a moderate civil liberties group and that his group “is not linked to any domestic or international organizations.”

However, Awad’s claims contradict the determinations of federal prosecutors, the Justice Department, the FBI, federal judges, countless terrorism experts and the Muslim Brotherhood’s own internal documents.

In a television debate with the author, a CAIR spokesperson denied the existence of U.S. government documents and quotes by federal prosecutors about CAIR’s connections to the Brotherhood, even as they were shown on camera, read aloud and publicly available on the internet.

The UAE recognizes that extremist ideas cause extremist behaviors. It cannot afford to take half-measures in a region as dangerous as the Middle East.

Two messages are being sent to the U.S. and Europe by the UAE:

First, the West’s overlooking of the Islamist ideology and focusing on its byproduct, terrorism, is like a doctor treating symptoms instead of the disease. As eloquently stated by former FBI agent Nathan Garrett in the film Grand Deception, “We’re not talking about a gun. We’re talking about the man holding the gun?”

Secondly, Muslim Brotherhood front groups in the West are successfully presenting themselves as moderates while shutting down criticism of Islamism.

For the UAE, the backlash from the pro-Brotherhood lobby in the U.S. only reinforces the necessity of what it has done.

The UAE wants the West to wake up, but it isn’t going to sit around waiting for that to happen.


For a more information on CAIR and their extremist connections, click here

For more information about MAS, click here.


Watch interview with CAIR head who tries to deny his organization's proven ties to Muslim Brotherhood

Tue, November 25, 2014 CAIR in Damage Control Mode After Terrorist Designation

Federal officers outside the largest Islamic charity in America, the Holyland Foundation. The foundation's officers were convicted in the largest terror-funding case in U.S. history for funnelling money to . CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the case.

Federal officers outside the largest Islamic charity in America, the Holyland Foundation. The foundation's officers were convicted in the largest terror-funding case in U.S. history for funnelling money to . CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the case.

Ryan Mauro

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is happily distributing a video of a U.S. State Department spokesman saying that the U.S. government does not consider CAIR and the Muslim American Society to be terrorists, as the United Arab Emirates  has just done.

The State Department’s comment is not a vindication; it’s old news. The State Department reiterated what we already know: The U.S. government hasn’t labeled them as terrorist groups, just as it hasn’t labeled the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group (as the UAE, Egypt and Saudi Arabia have done).

However, the U.S. government has acknowledged their Muslim Brotherhood linkages. Here’s what the State Department said:

“The United States does not consider these two U.S. groups to be terrorist organizations, but we are seeking more information from the government of the UAE about why that designation was done by them and their background, what their information is.”

That’s not exactly a passionate defense of CAIR and MAS. It’s a statement of fact. It does not deny that these groups are linked to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, nor is it an endorsement of their supposed moderation.

The State Department’s comments also do not reflect the entirety of how the U.S. government views CAIR and MAS.

From 2006 to 2008, the FBI monitored the email account of Nihad Awad, CAIR’s Executive-Director and co-founder. 

In 2007, the U.S. Justice Department designated CAIR as an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation, a charity that financed Hamas. The Justice Department specifically listed CAIR as an entity of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee; its section devoted to covertly assisting Hamas.

In another 2007 court case, federal prosecutors said, “MAS was founded as the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.”

That court filing also said:  “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.”

In 2008, the FBI changed its policy to officially bar field offices from using CAIR as an outreach partner.

In April 2009, the FBI Office of Congressional Affairs said, “Until we can resolve whether there continues to be a relationship between CAIR or its executives with Hamas, the FBI does not view CAIR as an appropriate liaison partner.”

In 2009, Judge Solis upheld the designation of CAIR as an unindicted co-conspirator, but also ruled that its designation should not have been made public. Yet, he found that the U.S. government provided “ample evidence” linking CAIR to the Holy Land Foundation and Hamas to justify the designation.

In 2013, the Justice Department said the FBI ended its use of CAIR as an outreach partner “to ensure that the FBI is not supporting individuals who support extremist or terrorist ideologies.”

This single-sentence response by the State Department is not a summary of the U.S. government’s assessment of CAIR and MAS. It is an reiteration of the obvious fact that these groups are allowed to operate and have not been prosecuted.

When you look at the entirety of the U.S. government’s statements about CAIR and MAS, what you find is confirmation of what these groups deny: That they are Islamists with Muslim Brotherhood origins.


Ryan Mauro is’s national security analyst, a fellow with Clarion Project and an adjunct professor of homeland security. Mauro is frequently interviewed on top-tier television and radio.

Colonel Richard Kemp - Sharia tortures people, it executes people

"Violent Islamic Jihad is the most ambitious imperial project that the world has seen for many, many years – an attempt to reesstablish a caliphate which brings the sharia law across large parts of the world.

And the sharia law, let's not forget what it does. It tortures people, it executes people, it cuts people's hands off, it subordinates women, it  deprives women of rights. It deprives women of education."

- Colonel Richard Kemp
Former commander of British forces in Afghanistan

Syndicate content