Apostasy, Human Rights, and Rifqa Bary

ACT! For America sent out an e-newsletter on September 21. The e-newsletter is congruent with ACT! For America’s “Stop Shariah Now” campaign in America.

The information highlights a print version of an Andrew Bostom article published on September 21 in the American Thinker. ACT then proceeds to tell its readers to pay attention to the ACT highlighted areas of Bostom’s article.

Go ACT! For America! Read the highlighted version at SlantRight or go to the American Thinker to read the original the way Bostom published it.

JRH 9/23/09
*******************
Apostasy, Human Rights, and Rifqa Bary

ACT! For America E-newsletter
Sent: September 21, 2009 11:32:52 AM

Andrew Bostom’s commentary below on the Islamic view of apostasy is revealing for several reasons.

First, it raises the obvious question: How can shariah Islamic law ever be regarded as compatible with Western pluralistic representative government?

Second, the highlighted sections reveal what all 57 Muslim states consider to be the appropriate relationship between shariah Islamic law and the state. There should be no misunderstanding: the Muslim states of the Organization of the Islamic Conference maintain that “human rights” are defined solely within the context of shariah law.

And third, for those in America, including those in government and law enforcement, who don’t understand why Rifqa Bary is afraid that her father will in fact have her killed for converting to Christianity, as Bostom notes, “shame” on them for ignoring this this context. It’s not as if this information is hidden from view or difficult to find.

Last week ACT! for America launched its “Stop Shariah Now!” project. To find out more about shariah law, log on to:

STOP SHARIAH NOW
++++++++++++++++++

Apostasy and the Islamic Nations


By Andrew G. Bostom
September 21, 2009
American Thinker

The 1990 Cairo Declaration, or so-called "Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Islam", was drafted and subsequently ratified by all the Muslim member nations of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). Now a 57 state collective which includes every Islamic nation on earth, the OIC, currently headed by Turkey's Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, thus represents the entire Muslim umma (or global community of individual Muslims), and is the largest single voting bloc in the United Nations (UN).

Both the preamble and concluding articles (24 and 25) make plain that the OIC's Cairo Declaration is designed to supersede Western conceptions of human rights as enunciated, for example, in the US Bill of Rights, and the UN's 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The opening of the preamble to the Cairo Declaration repeats a Koranic injunction affirming Islamic supremacism, (Koran 3:110; "You are the best nation ever brought forth to men...you believe in Allah"), and states,

"Reaffirming the civilizing and historical role of the Islamic Ummah which Allah made the best nation..."

The preamble continues,

"Believing that fundamental rights and universal freedoms in Islam are an integral part of the Islamic religion and that no one as a matter of principle has the right to suspend them in whole or in part or violate or ignore them in as much as they are binding divine commandments, which are contained in the Revealed Books of God and were sent through the last of His Prophets to complete the preceding divine messages thereby making their observance an act of worship and their neglect or violation an abominable sin, and accordingly every person is individually responsible -- and the Ummah collectively responsible -- for their safeguard."

In its concluding articles 24 and 25, the Cairo Declaration maintains, [article 24], "All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'a"; and [article 25] "The Islamic Shari'a is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification to any of the articles of this Declaration."

These statements capture the indelible influence of the Islamic religious law Shari'a -- the Cairo Declaration claiming supremacy based on "divine revelation," which renders sacred and permanent the notion of inequality between the community of Allah, and the infidels. Thus we can see clearly the differences between the Cairo Declaration, which sanctions the gross inequalities inherent in the Shari'a, and its Western human rights counterparts (the US Bill of Rights; the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights), which do not refer to any specific religion or to the superiority of any group over another, and stress the absolute equality of all human beings.

Enshrined in the First Amendment of the US Bill of Rights is the guarantee that laws may not be made that interfere with religion "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.". Absent the right to freedom of thought, or conscience, other rights such as the right to freedom of speech are rendered meaningless. US Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Cardozo reasoned elegantly in Palko v. Connecticut (1937) that,

"Freedom of thought... is the matrix, the indispensable condition, of nearly every other form of freedom. With rare aberrations a pervasive recognition of this truth can be traced in our history, political and legal."

This principle of freedom of conscience is also upheld in article 18 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which further makes explicit the fundamental right to change one's religion,

"Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

The gravely negative implications of the OIC's Shari'a-based Cairo Declaration are most apparent in its transparent rejection of freedom of conscience in Article 10, which proclaims:

"Islam is the religion of unspoiled nature. It is prohibited to exercise any form of compulsion on man or to exploit his poverty or ignorance in order to convert him to another religion, or to atheism."

Ominously, articles 19 and 22 reiterate a principle stated elsewhere throughout the document, which clearly applies to the "punishment" of so-called "apostates" from Islam:

"[19d] There shall be no crime or punishment except as provided for in the Shari'a."

"[22a] Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shari'a.

[22b] Everyone shall have the right to advocate what is right, and propagate what is good, and warn against what is wrong and evil according to the norms of Islamic Shari'a.

[22c] Information is a vital necessity to society. It may not be exploited or misused in such a way as may violate sanctities and the dignity of Prophets, undermine moral and ethical values or disintegrate, corrupt or harm society or weaken its faith.".

Punishment by death for apostasy from Islam is firmly rooted in Islam's foundational texts -- both the Koran (verses such as , 4:89, and their classical exegesis by renowned Koranic commentators such as Qurtubi, Baydawi, Ibn Kathir, and Suyuti) and the hadith (i.e., collections of the putative words and deeds of the Muslim prophet Muhammad, as compiled by pious Muslim transmitters), as well as the sacred Islamic Law (the Shari'a). For example, Muhammad is reported to have said "Kill him who changes his religion," in hadith collections of both Bukhari and Abu Dawud. There is also a consensus by all four schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence (i.e., Maliki, Hanbali, Hanafi, and Shafi'i), as well as Shi'ite jurists, that apostates from Islam must be put to death. Averroes (d. 1198), the renowned philosopher and scholar of the natural sciences, who was also an important Maliki jurist, provided this typical Muslim legal opinion on the punishment for apostasy:

"An apostate...is to be executed by agreement in the case of a man, because of the words of the Prophet, ‘Slay those who change their din [religion]'...Asking the apostate to repent was stipulated as a condition...prior to his execution."

The contemporary (i.e., 1991) Al-Azhar (Cairo) Islamic Research Academy endorsed manual of Islamic Law, 'Umdat al-Salik (pp. 595-96) states:

"Leaving Islam is the ugliest form of unbelief (kufr) and the worst.... When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostasizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed. In such a case, it is obligatory...to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed."

This doctrinal and historical legitimacy of Shari'a-mandated killing of apostates from Islam is affirmed by Heffening in his scholarly review for the authoritative, mainstream academic reference work, the Encyclopedia of Islam:

"In Fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) , there is unanimity that the male apostate must be put to death...A woman, on the other hand, is imprisoned...until she again adopts Islam, ..[or] she also is put to death." [Heffening, W. "Murtadd." Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Edited by: P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs.]

As noted by historian David Littman, writing in early 1999, Adama Dieng, then a prominent Muslim Senegalese jurist, alerted the international community to the Cairo Declaration's profoundly dangerous impact. Dieng, speaking for the International Commission of Jurists and the Paris-based International Federation of Human Rights at the Commission on Human Rights in February, 1992, decried the Cairo Declaration, which under the rubric of Shari'a, deliberately restricted certain fundamental freedoms and rights -- most notably, freedom of conscience. He also argued that the Cairo Declaration introduced "in the name of defense of human rights," unacceptable discrimination against non-Muslims and women, while sanctioning the legitimacy of heinous practices -- Shari'a-compliant punishments (from corporal punishments, to mutilation, and stoning) -- "which attack the integrity and dignity of the human being."

Pew Survey data published just this past August 13, 2009 reflect, starkly, the depth and prevalence of popular support among the Muslim masses for these hideous views -- sanctioned by their theo-political Islamic leadership within the OIC -- and antithetical to our foundational Western freedoms. Specifically, the Pew findings reveal that among Pakistani Muslims, there is

"...broad support for harsh punishments: 78% favor death for [apostates] those who leave Islam; 80% favor whippings and cutting off hands for crimes like theft and robbery; and 83% favor stoning adulterers."

These hard data provide a clear, irrefragable global context for any rational, objective consideration of the ongoing plight of apostates from Islam, such as 17 year-old, Rifqa Bary.

Shame on all those in our government, law enforcement, and chattering classes who willfully ignore this context.

________________________

Apostasy, Human Rights, and Rifqa Bary
ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.
__________________________

Apostasy and the Islamic Nations
© American Thinker 2009

SlantRight Editor: Some links were repetitive and were withdrawn.

Fjordman: The Twin Myths of Eurabia

A few days ago ACT! For America sent out one of their timely e-newsletters which was quite long. Its length inspired me to read it later. It turns out this was the day I did so.

ACT! For America found an older Fjordman essay entitled, “The Twin Myths of Eurabia.” The reason ACT has brought attention to the essay is to provide an understanding of the real Islam. In essence the facts starkly contradict Western Leftist and Muslim politically correct revisionist historians. One example of revisionism is the attempt to paint a picture of the Muslim conquest of the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal) as a time of civilized, tolerant and enlightened Muslim rule in a period which Europe was in the early stages of its uncultured Dark Ages.

The only things that are correct about this revisionist history are that Europe was indeed in the Dark Ages and Islamic culture was more learned academically (although lacking in originality).

The real truth that is left out by revisionist historians is that the Muslim version of Iberia known as Al-Andalusia was not a pleasant time for Christians and Jews. The typical Islamic treatment to non-Muslims of humiliation, forced conversion, pillaging, slave raids, sex-slave concubinage and violent death was the norm. Tolerance and peace for dhimmis was the exception rather than the rule.

JRH 9/5/09

****************************************

Here is the intro from the ACT e-newsletter sent out September 2, 2009:

The Twin Myths of Eurabia

The article below is longer than we typically send out, but it is so important to the understanding of what we are facing that we are making an exception and emailing it to you. The article exposes the myth of the “tolerance” that Muslims extended to “infidels” during the Islamic occupation of Spain. It also exposes the myth that the Islamic culture in the Middle Ages was superior to that of non-Muslim cultures, by documenting how Islamic imperialism reaped the benefits of cultures such as the Greeks and Byzantine Empire, but offered little in the way of innovation or renaissance. Why is this important to us today? It’s well-worth reading the article below to learn the answer.

[SlantRight Editor: The ACT e-newsletter posted most but not all the Fjordman article. Here is “The Twin Myths of Eurabia” from the Brussels Journal]

CAIR and Islamic Supremacism

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is attempting to squelch free speech again. The very CAIR listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial which resulted in convictions for illegally sending money to the Islamic terrorist organization known as Hamas.

The simple version of CAIR’s anti-free speech perfidy goes like this:

CAIR provided a taxpayer supported seminar at a Public Library in San Diego, CA. The item of note was to vilify respected authors and anti-Islamist activists for not being knowledgeable about Islam; hence should NOT BE READ. Some of the people CAIR told its audience in matter of fact are considered experts or experienced the intolerance inherent within Islam. In many cases: intolerance equals death threats.

Anyway ACT! For America San Diego chapter leader Mike Hayutin attended the seminar given by CAIR San Diego leader Edward (listed as Edgar on blog) Hopida. Hayutin was horrified by the lack of balance in Hopida’s presentation on Islam. So Hayutin contacted the San Diego Public Library to provide another view on Islam.

Here is an excerpt from an article sent to me in an email alert from ACT! For America:

Having attended Hopida’s presentation, San Diego ACT chapter leader Mike Hayutin took it upon himself to offer a counter argument. He approached the San Diego Public Library Director Deborah Barrow and requested the same time and sponsorship to speak of radical Islam. Unlike Hopida, Hayutin was not on a payroll and invested his own time and resources to exercise his belief in balanced representation. The request was initially reluctantly received by Director Barrow, who had likely perceived CAIR as a civil rights group and was unaware of the controversy surrounding them. However, considerable community pressure and a call from the mayor’s office facilitated Hayutin’s request. Hayutin was finally granted his opportunity to present a two hour presentation on radical elements in Islam. His appearance however was not appreciated by CAIR, which filed a complaint letter and submitted a one-sided press release on their disapproval of Mr. Hayutin’s presentation, as well as his association with ACT, which Hopida labeled as peddling stereotypes by labeling Islam as incompatible with the West. … (From article: “Caliphate or Republic”)

Hayutin received resistance from the Library Director who no doubt felt the victimhood pressure from CAIR. Nonetheless, the rare political involvement by a mayor (usually public officials bow to the CAIR schpeel) and Community pressure Hayutin received his day. Note though the Public Library did not pick up the tab as it did for Hopida’s CAIR chapter.

Here is ACT! For America’s introduction to “Caliphate or Republic”:

The observations by Shireen Qudosi below reveal great insight into the competing value systems of Islamists and those of us in the West. Qudosi writes about the recent “dust-up” in San Diego between ACT! For America’s San Diego chapter and CAIR-San Diego (Council on American-Islamic Relations). In a nutshell:

CAIR did a presentation at the public library; ACT! for America’s local chapter asked for and was granted equal time to do a presentation; CAIR then tried to prevent ACT! for America’s local chapter from doing the presentation, and when that failed, demanded ACT! for America include a Muslim representative to provide “equal time” in the ACT! for America presentation.

Pass this along to people you know so they can see for themselves what it is we are up against. Encourage them to log on to http://www.actforamerica.org/ and sign up for our email alerts.

JRH 8/4/09

*****************
I found this Edgar Hopida profile on Cair Watch:

Public Relations Director of CAIR-San Diego


According to Hopida, CAIR’s founding by the Islamic Association for Palestine and Hamas’s Mousa Abu Marzook, CAIR’s relationship with persons that went to prison on terror-related charges, and the statement of CAIR’s former National Chairman about his wanting Islam to become dominant in America – well documented facts – are all “urban legends.” (Hopida guests on Rodger Hedgecock Radio Show, KOGO 600AM, June 26, 2007)

Hopida commenting on two books cited as being vehemently anti-Israel: “Recently, well respected figures in our country have critically questioned our policy towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Professors Mearsheimer and Walt presented a well documented academic paper on the negative influence of the Israeli Lobby on our Middle East policy and former President Jimmy Carter’s new book on the mistakes of Israel and US policy and how to move forward, are the more notable of those critics.” (The Official Blog of Edgar Hopida, ‘Israel/Palestine Conflict: US Debate is way overdue,’ March 15, 2007) About Mearsheimer and Walt’s anti-Israel screed Hopida writes, “This book is critical research that is long overdue and impossible to ignore... The Israel lobby is a must book to read if one wants to understand exactly what is going on and where your tax dollars are going.” (Amazon.com, Customer Reviews, ‘A well researched book on the Israel Lobby and its affects on U.S, Foreign Policy,’ September 6, 2007)

Hopida referred to Norman Finkelstein’s anti-Semitic book, The Holocaust Industry, where he states that Jews use the Holocaust as an “ideological weapon” to perpetrate a “specious victimhood,” as an “excellent work.” (Amazon.com, Customer Reviews, ‘Excellent work that was praised by the undisputed Dean of Holocaust Studies,’ June 4, 2007)

About Paul Findley’s book, Silent No More, which lauds convicted terrorist Abdurahman Alamoudi and alleged neo-Nazi William Baker, Hopida writes: “As an American Muslim, this book is a much needed resource for Muslims and Non Muslims in seeing the truth behind the constructed anti-Islam/anti-Muslim hysteria prevalent in America and the West.” (Amazon.com, Customer Reviews, ‘Anti-Muslim Hysteria destroyed in this book!’ Jan 13 2002)

Hopida mocking two Israeli initiatives towards peace with the Palestinians: “Camp David accord which was touted as the 'generous offer' was in fact no offer at all other than accepting the reality that the settlements were there to stay and Arafat had to accept it... Sharon’s 'big sacrifice' of dismantling all the settlements in Gaza in 2004 was in fact a smoke screen in building up the so called 'security fence' which is deemed illegal in international law and condemned by just about every human rights organization, and the expansion of settlements in West Bank.” (The Official Blog of Edgar Hopida, ‘Israel/Palestine Conflict: US Debate is way overdue,’ March 15, 2007)

“If the Israel lobby continues to set the tone of US foreign policy, it will only create more resentment and terrorism.” (Edgar Hopida, Amazon.com, Customer Reviews, ‘A well researched book on the Israel Lobby and its affects on U.S, Foreign Policy,’ September 6, 2007)

As the Vice President of the Muslim Student Union (MSU) at San Diego State University (SDSU), Hopida attended a rally equating Zionism with racism, where he stated, “What does the U.S. vote for? (It) votes for Israel. (It) has interests in Israel. That is kind of absurd to have them mediate [in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process], because they are going to lean towards Israel. They think Muslims are a bunch of war-mongers.” (Zack Smith, The Daily Aztec, ‘Muslim Students Protest Crisis in the Middle East,’ October 26, 2000)

“Edgar Hopida, seemingly oblivious of the 9/11 massacre, wrote a rebuttal... to my column... in which I quoted several of the Quran's mandates for Muslims to kill non-believers. Mr. Hopida did not deny the mandates of his religion... Instead, he asserted that Muslims, except for 'a few misguided individuals or fringe groups,' don't act on the Quranic mandates... Ultimately, disingenuous letters from Mr. Hopida doing his disinformation job for CAIR is not our biggest problem. Our real problem is disinformation about Islamacists and what they are doing.” (Larry Stirling, San Diego Daily Transcript, "It’s Islamofaciasts that have no place in San Diego," July 12, 2006)

Muslim-Americans who are NOT Moderate

John R. Houk
© July 7, 2009

In the USA there are Muslim organizations which if you believe their own hype are of the so-called moderate Islamic bent; however these Muslim-American organizations nearly all have a connection overtly or covertly to an Islamic terrorist organization. In most cases the Muslim terrorists represent the various Arabs that call themselves Palestinians. Also there is a connection to Ikhwan better known as the Muslim Brotherhood in the English speaking world.

Let’s see if I can think of some these Muslim-American organizations that claim to represent mainstream (moderate) Islam in America.

The top dog (or so self-proclaimed) of these organization is the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). CAIR has been directly tied to the evil Arab-Palestinian organization known as Hamas. Hamas is on the State Department Terror Watch List. CAIR was implicated with an association with Hamas as an unindicted co-conspirator in successful prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation (HLF).

The Muslim American Society (MAS [Large PDF file]) is vitally connected to the international Salafist organization known as the Muslim Brotherhood (MB). The MB has a Wahhabi outlook about Islam which is strongly advocated by Terrorist organizations like Al-Qaeda and Hamas.

The Muslim Student Association (MSA) is also part of the MB agenda to Islamize the globe by infiltration or by jihad. The MSA is the largest student Muslim organization in the North American continent.

The Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) initially was founded as an organization to be a bridge between Christians and Jews in America attempting to emphasize that Islam’s core values are compatible with American values. Once Israel became embroiled with Arab-Palestinian terrorism of the Second Intifada MPAC became very recalcitrant toward Jews and Israel in particular. MPAC’s position is that Israel is a terrorist State and terrorist groups such as Hezbollah are freedom fighters. Hence MPAC’s is officially moderate Islam yet the organization supports and celebrates the terrorist activities of Arabs that call themselves Palestinians. (Interesting tidbit on MPAC)

The Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) is a huge ideological supporter to Islamist speakers with ties to Muslim terrorists like the Pakistan’s Jamaat e-Islami (Interesting tidbit on Jamaat e-Islami).

The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) is largely funded by Saudi Wahhabi interests and has close ties to Arab-Palestinian terrorists (e.g. Palestinian Islamic Jihad). ISNA is an offshoot from the MSA. ISNA is thought to hold up to 80% or more of the mortgages of American Mosques; ergo those Mosques are required to teach and preach (or whatever Muslims call exhortation of their faith) the radical Saudi Wahhabi message of puritanical Islam practiced by Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. Also ISNA is heavily influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood. ISNA is noted for bringing in pro-Jihad (i.e. the violent “lesser” Jihad), anti-Western, Anti-Israel (and anti-Jewish), and anti-American speakers to well funded speaking engagements in America.

In an e-newsletter received on July 6 from ACT! For America there is a report that anti-Islamist Dave Gaubatz was ejected from one of ISNA’s large meetings recently. According to ACT! For America Gaubatz was in no way being disruptive. Gaubatz was collecting information that ISNA officials obviously did not want non-Muslim America (i.e. we kafir) to be aware of. Then ACT! For America proceeded to include in the e-newsletter some information on the ISNA 46th annual convention in which evangelical Pastor Rick Warren is to participate as a symbol of interfaith dialogue.

Warren must not have read up on the fact that the puritanical form of Wahhabi Islam promoted by ISNA would relegate him to a dhimmi in a Muslim dominated society. Warren’s symbolism then is an example of interfaith stupidity rather than interfaith toleration.

Here is the ACT! For America e-newsletter:

JRH 7/7/09
***********************
ISNA's annual convention 'illuminating'

ACT! For America
Sent: 7/6/09

ISNA, the Islamic Society of North America, has been in the news a lot the past few days, hosting its annual convention in Washington, D.C.

As the Investigative Project on Terrorism report below notes:

“The Investigative Project on Terrorism reviewed recent ISNA conference activity and found a host of examples of radical ideology that belies its moderate image.”

What’s more, according to a report in WorldNetDaily, during the July 3rd ISNA convention in D.C., ISNA “chose to eject by force an American investigating Islamist radicalism in the U.S.”

There is no evidence from the report that ISNA’s motivation for ejecting Gaubatz was due to him causing a disruption. Gaubatz was there to gather information, just as he has done for projects such as the “Mapping Sharia” project, in which Gaubatz has entered numerous mosques around the country to examine and analyze the materials the mosques distribute.

If ISNA is truly a voice for moderation, why would it fear someone like Gaubatz? Indeed, wouldn’t ISNA want to showcase its moderation for someone like Gaubatz?

_________________________

ISNA's Reform Hasn't Shed It of Radical Ideologues

IPT News
July 2, 2009

The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) hooked a big fish for its 46th convention starting Friday in Washington, D.C. when evangelical Pastor Rick Warren agreed to appear.

But ISNA wanted a bigger star – President Barack Obama. There's been no public response from the White House to ISNA's invitation. But the conference is expected to feature a significant government presence, in the form of sponsored-informational booths and speakers from the Departments of State, Justice, Homeland Security and others.

The Justice Department's Civil Rights Division is also seeking volunteers to work at an information table during the conference.

On the surface, it's understandable why government agencies would want to line up for a spot at the three-day convention. It is expected to draw thousands to the nation's capital and is far and away the largest gathering of Muslim Americans.

ISNA's documented history with the Muslim Brotherhood – an 80-year-old Egyptian movement that seeks to spread Shariah, or Islamic law, far and wide – and the troubling association many of its current leaders hold should give these agencies pause about what message their participation endorses.

Much of ISNA's history was concisely reported by an Indianapolis television station in 2003. The two-part WTHR report can be viewed here.

Beyond the high-profile outsiders like Warren, the 2009 ISNA conference offers representatives from Muslim Brotherhood front groups and others who buck American law enforcement efforts to curtail terrorist financing. One group, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has been deemed persona non-grata by the FBI due to its Hamas ties.

Competing assessments of the government's posture toward ISNA have emerged in the past week. A widely-circulated email from a knowledgeable source claimed that the FBI had pegged ISNA as its official outreach partner to the American Muslim community and relayed that information in a meeting with ISNA Vice President Mohamed Magid.

The IPT spoke with an FBI source who confirmed that a meeting did take place at FBI headquarters. The FBI's embrace of ISNA came over the objections of case agents and supervisors investigating Muslim Brotherhood activity in the U.S., the source said.

The next day, FBI spokesman John Miller denied any relationship with ISNA had been cemented and called the email's claims "factually inaccurate and generally misleading." Magid did meet with an FBI official, Miller said, but that's because he has long been an FBI liaison through his role as head of the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS) Center.

To be clear, it is not likely that the FBI would have a memorandum declaring ISNA the official Muslim partner of federal law enforcement. Magid may be a long-time FBI liaison, but he still wears two hats when he meets with law enforcement – the ADAMS Center and ISNA.

The Investigative Project on Terrorism reviewed recent ISNA conference activity and found a host of examples of radical ideology that belies its moderate image. It also details ISNA's foundation by U.S. members of the Muslim Brotherhood, some of whom remain active in ISNA today, and extremist connections by other active ISNA leaders. You can read that report here.

ISNA remains an unindicted co-conspirator in the Hamas-financing prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), which ended with guilty verdicts on 108 counts last November and lengthy prison terms for HLF leaders in May.

HLF is included among "individuals/entities who are and/or were members of the US Muslim Brotherhood." ISNA petitioned the court to be removed from the list a year ago, but no ruling has been made.

Trial evidence showed accounts held by ISNA and its subsidiary, the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), were used to funnel money to HLF and, ultimately, to Hamas. ISNA officials claim the organization has moved beyond its Muslim Brotherhood roots to evolve into a more mainstream American organization. That strategy has been successful, as this Associated Press preview of the ISNA convention shows.

Brotherhood Roots

ISNA's leadership ranks include a number of people who date back to the group's foundation by Muslim Brotherhood members. The organization grew out of the Muslim Students Association (MSA), which also was founded by Brotherhood members.

One of those founders, Muzammil Siddiqi was a co-founder of ISNA in 1981 and served two terms as ISNA's president from 1997-2001. He still serves on the ISNA governing board.

Likewise, Sayyid M. Syeed was a founding ISNA board member and served as secretary-general, and now heads ISNA's Center for Interfaith and Community Outreach in Washington, D.C.

A third ISNA founder, Iqbal Unus, serves on the board of directors today. He also held the title of Acting Secretary General for ISNA in January 1984 after serving at the General Secretariat since January 1977 for MSA, and later ISNA.

Siddiqi, Syeed and Unus all are scheduled to speak during ISNA's 46th annual convention.

So are two ISNA leaders who were not a part of the founding group, but nonetheless have extensive and troubling connections to terror supporters. Jamal Badawi is a member at large on ISNA's Board of Directors. Badawi was individually listed in the HLF trial as an unindicted co-conspirator for his role as a fund raiser for the defunct charity.

His number appears in a telephone book of U.S.-based Muslim Brotherhood members that was admitted into evidence in the original HLF prosecution, which ended in a mistrial in November 2007. FBI agent Lara Burns testified that this phone book was found at the home of Ismail Elbarrasse, a former assistant to Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook

Finally, Louay Safi directs the ISNA Leadership Development Center. He has a history of close relations with U.S. fronts for Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. He served on the board of advisory editors for the Middle East Affairs Journal, which was published by the United Association for Studies and Research (UASR). Its editor, Ahmed Yousef, is the spokesman for deposed Hamas Prime Minister Ismael Haniyeh. The UASR was founded by Hamas political leader Mousa Abu Marzook and was part of a Muslim Brotherhood-created Hamas support network in the U.S.

He also worked as research director at the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) in Herndon, VA. The IIIT has been under investigation for terror financing, including at least $50,000 sent to a think-tank run by Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) board member Sami Al-Arian. The think tank employed at least four members of the PIJ governing board in the early 1990s. No charges have been filed in the IIIT investigation.

Conferences Still Feature Extreme Rhetoric

A review of recent ISNA conferences further raises the question of how far the organization's reformation really has come. During the 2008 conference, speakers rationalized Hamas terrorism and revised history.

For example, Hatem Bazian, a professor of Near East Studies at the University of California-Berkeley, rewrote history to say violent Palestinian opposition to Israel started after the 1967 war:

"The violence is not a genetic motivation or genetically defined in the Palestinians. The Palestinians don't wake up in the morning and think yeah, I'm inclined towards violence. The Palestinians when they woke up they see that they're land has been taken from underneath them, that they have to go through five or six checkpoints before they get to school, that they are no longer able to use the hospital, that they are seeing a new settlement being built every other day, and they wake up in the morning and see that it's a land grab day, all these factors, including the diminishing return of the so called peace."

In that same panel, Palestinian Jamal Dajani moderated the discussion and echoed Bazian's false history:

"That is Palestinians are sick and tired of dialogue. I mean they've been listening to dialogue for six decades. It is great to have people from different places and come and interfere and put themselves between the occupier and the victim, and Palestinians listening to promises, and they see their future disappear right in front of their eyes."

In fact, Palestinians have rejected dialogue since Israel's creation in 1948. The PLO agreed to renounce terror and joined in President Clinton's peace efforts in the early 1990s, resulting in Palestinian autonomy in the West Bank and Gaza. The refusal of Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad to recognize that agreement, and the wave of terrorist attacks they launched in the agreement's wake, doomed the U.S.-led peace effort.

Similarly, during the 2008 ISNA annual convention in Columbus, Ohio, Rick Hannis, a Christian and member of the Christian Peacemakers Team, a group founded by Quakers and Mennonites with a stated purpose of working toward "nonviolent alternative to war," spoke. He described the "amazing work" Hamas does in West Bank education and health care and supposedly non-violent leaders of that organization:

"Now, most people only know about the militant part of Hamas. They don't know about the education or healthcare issued in the West Bank part. It really does amazing work."

"If there is a suicide bombing or something their militant wing has done, often Hamas leaders who promote non violence, will be assassinated, and then, of course, it is put in the paper that Hamas did this violent act-Hamas leader was assassinated as if that was an [unintelligible]. The people that know this leader, they are disenfranchised even more."

During ISNA's 2006 convention, Kamran Memon, an attorney from Muslims for a Safe America, asked the audience to raise their hands if they believed Al Qaeda committed the 9/11 attacks. In response to their raised hands, he helped rationalize Al Qaeda's actions by discussing how America's foreign policy helped to infuriate Muslims around the world.

"Some Muslims in the Muslim world decided that they were just not going to take it anymore. They were angry at our ongoing support from their enemies, so they began to attack American targets to pressure our government to change its foreign policy. They attacked American targets in 1992 in Somalia; in 1993 in New York; in 1995 and 1996 in Saudi Arabia; 1998 in Tanzania and Kenya; and 2000 in Yemen. But the U.S. government did not change its foreign policy, so those Muslims who decided that they weren't going to take it anymore attacked America on September 11.

...They are also angry at us because they look at us, the elder generations, and they see us sitting on our hands not doing anything serious to alleviate the suffering of Muslims in the Muslim world. And when they get that angry, then they do things, like if you believe that Muslims did it, they do things like the London bombings in July 2005; because they see no other way to change American foreign policy other than violence."

The list of conference panels this year does include some important issues, including one on domestic violence in the Muslim community, an emerging issue that gained added urgency earlier this year.

Such positive moves are offset, however, by the presence of speakers from other Muslim Brotherhood-tied groups including the Muslim American Society (MAS) and CAIR.

CAIR is taking advantage of the crowds expected in Washington to host an open house.

It is important to note that if the FBI in any way is increasing its outreach with ISNA, it likely replaces work CAIR previously did. The Bureau has made it clear that CAIR and its national leaders had "a connection" to Hamas, and it is unclear whether that connection remains. Until that is resolved, "the FBI does not view CAIR as an appropriate liaison partner."

ISNA apparently does not share that concern. It also endorses the canard that law enforcement action to cut off terror financing by U.S.-based charities like HLF creates "a chilling effect on Muslim charitable giving in accordance with the Islamic faith."

It has condemned terrorist plots, like the one to bomb New York synagogues and to try shooting down a military plane that was broken up by law enforcement in May. And President Ingrid Mattson has called for the Muslim community to be more assertive in confronting radical elements and "vague accusations of conspiracies, and exaggerated protests of attempts to ensure security to be used as excuses for violating the rights of women, non-Muslims and others."

However, that admirable charge is undermined by her organization's embrace of CAIR, MAS and similar groups. Agha Saeed of the American Muslim Task Force, is scheduled to speak on a panel on "Culture and Politics: Strategies of Self-Empowerment." Saeed is chairman of the group, which has spent most of 2009 advocating a Muslim boycott of the FBI. The reason? FBI investigators have sent informants into mosques to pursue information on terror suspects. That's how the New York bombing plot was broken up.

CAIR and MAS are among the groups signing on to the Taskforce's proposed boycott.

If government representatives are going to speak to the ISNA conference, they shouldn't offer simple platitudes about getting along. They should challenge ISNA and its audience to be a true partner in the fight against terror by confronting extremist ideologies in their own communities, at their own conferences. That might generate real change.

To read the IPT's new report on ISNA's recent radical activity, click here.
_____________________

Muslim-Americans who are NOT Moderate
John R. Houk
© July 7, 2009
_________________________

ISNA's annual convention 'illuminating'
ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.
_________________________

ISNA's Reform Hasn't Shed It of Radical Ideologues
© 2009 The Investigative Project on Terrorism

Qur'an quotes every woman must see

Here is a message from ACT! For America pertaining to a new grassroots campaign to expose the evils of sharia law that is many American-Muslim groups is promoting. Following message is an article attached to bring home the idea that sharia law is evil.

JRH 6/10/09
******************************
Qur'an quotes every woman must see

ACT! For America email
Email sent: June 10, 2009 9:35 AM

In the very near future we will begin the launch of our 2009 “Stop Shariah Now” campaign. This will be an integrated grassroots, lobbying and public relations effort designed to raise public awareness and push for public policies that expose Shariah law and its infiltration into the United States.

Shariah Islamic law is infiltrating America through vehicles such as Shariah compliant finance products offered by major financial institutions, including UBS, AIG, Citibank and HSBC. It has been reported to us that members of the Muslim Students Association in southern California have been seen chanting their demands for Shariah law during public demonstrations. We have also seen reports that estimate between 50,000 and 100,000 Muslims in America are practicing polygamy, a practice allowed under Shariah law.

Recently, a report surfaced on the internet that Lisa Ashton, a flight attendant with British Midland Airways, was fired for refusing to wear a traditional Islamic robe and walk behind male colleagues while in public in Saudi Arabia. This is the consequence of Shariah law in a society and a Western nation’s effort to bend over backwards to accommodate it.

The next time you hear someone claim that Islam affords equal rights and protections to women, pull out the “Top 10” list below. You might want to add that in one of the hadith (the sayings and traditions of Mohammed), Mohammed claimed he was given a look into hell and saw that it was filled mostly with women because they were ungrateful to their husbands (Sahih Bukhari 2,18,61).

Then ACT! For America posted this article found on Infidels Are Cool.

Combating the EMP Threat, Part One

Brigitte Gabriel follows up on Guy Rogers two part revelation on the potential harm of an EMP attack on the USA. Gabriel focuses on Obama’s cuts in defense areas that make America a prime target for such an EMP attack.

JRH 5/7/09

Is This the Greatest Threat to America? Part 1 & 2

ACT! For America has sent two e-news letters that is a clarion call to prepare from an Islamic terrorist attack or Islamic rogue nation attack by simply detonating a nuclear device of some kind over America’s atmosphere. Currently I believe it would be difficult for an Islamic terrorist group to detonate a nuclear device but impossible, particularly if it was a homicidal suicide attack. On the other hand rogue nations Iran and North Korea definitely have the missile capability at the very least from a disguised naval vessel.

SlantRight.com has the two ACT! For America e-newsletters that you should read in order to mobilize for action on a grassroots level.

JRH 5/2/09
******************************

Is This the Greatest Threat to America? Part 1 & 2

By Guy Rodgers
Executive Director
ACT! For America
Source: Email

Part 1
April 30, 2009

This may be one of the most important emails we have ever sent out. Please make the time to read this one as well as part two tomorrow. When you do, you’ll understand why.

The ACT! For America mission is an ambitious one – to combat the threat of radical Islam to America in whatever forms that threat may take. This is why we focus on everything from combating terrorism to resisting cultural jihad. If we successfully prevent terrorism, but fail to prevent the subversion of our society resulting from cultural or stealth jihad, we have not successfully stopped the threat of radical Islam. If we prevent the assault of stealth jihad, but are successfully targeted by major terrorist acts, we have also been unsuccessful in stopping the threat of radical Islam.

This is why the threat of radical Islam is so serious.

And the threat of an Islamist regime or terrorist organization attacking us with an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack, triggered by a nuclear detonation above our atmosphere, may well be the most serious threat of all.

Over the past several months we have sent out several emails reporting on this threat, how an EMP attack could knock out much of our power grid, as well as our communications infrastructure, transportation, banking and finance – in short, every infrastructure dependent on electrical power and electronics.

The potential devastation is so great that even some of our members have emailed us with questions asking “could this possibly happen?”

The answer, unfortunately, and frighteningly, is yes. This is not Guy Rodgers talking, or ACT! For America. This is the conclusion of the national Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack.

The members of this commission are a “who’s who” in aerospace, communications, energy, defense, and nuclear weapons fields. One year ago this little-known Commission released a report of its findings on the impact of an EMP attack on our national infrastructures (http://empcommission.org/).

In the Preface of this 2008 report we read:

"A single EMP attack may seriously degrade or shut down a large part of the electric power grid in the geographic area of EMP exposure effective instantaneously.”

In Chapter Two we read:

“…the cascading effects from even one or two relatively small weapons exploded in optimum location in space at present would almost certainly shut down an entire interconnected electrical power system, perhaps affecting as much as 70% or possibly more of the United States, all in an instant…” (p. 19).

Imagine a collapse of 70% or more of our nation’s electrical grid. Imagine that this collapse didn’t last for a few days, such as occurs after a blackout or a storm, but lasted for weeks – even months. Imagine life without any electrical power for weeks, even months.

I have lived through the aftermath of a hurricane, where electricity was knocked out for days. If you’ve never experienced something like this, it’s hard to appreciate how much everything we do is dependent on electricity. It’s more than the lights going out and the air conditioning not working.

You can’t refrigerate food. Unless you have a natural gas or propane grill (or a lot of charcoal), you can’t cook food. The water supply is unreliable at best. You can’t get gasoline to run your car. You can’t get money from an ATM. You can’t get health care or buy a prescription. Telecommunications are severely limited. You might be able to make a cell phone call but it’s unlikely you could make a landline phone call. Unless you have a battery-operated radio, you can’t get news or information. If the weather is cold you won’t have heat. If the weather is hot you swelter.

Those of us who have lived through this knew that help was on the way. That, in time, electricity trucks from outside our area would roll in to help restore power. That emergency food supplies would soon be shipped in.

What would happen to us if there was no one “outside our area” who could come with help? What would happen to is if we were forced to live without electricity, not for days, but for months? And not just us, but the vast majority of people throughout the country?

This is not mere speculation, hyperbole or sci-fi fantasy.

The implications of this are, candidly, terrifying – and, I agree, almost unimaginable. It will not be necessary for an enemy of ours to launch numerous nuclear weapons at us in order to destroy or at least seriously cripple us. As the Commission report notes, the explosion of “one or two relatively small weapons” could shut down most of the nation’s power grid.

Such an electrical failure would impact and disrupt everything in our society. Who would police our streets to prevent lawlessness like we saw in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina? What would you do when you ran out of food and water? Who could come to help us when virtually everyone in the country was suffering the same fate? Who would defend us from an invasion by a foreign army – and how would our government even know such an army was coming?

It is difficult to imagine or describe the chaos that would ensue, but as the Commission’s report notes, it is likely millions and millions of people would die if the power outage was not solved in a short period of time. Picture scenes from the worst apocalyptic film you can think of.

In other words, a country like Iran, with only a few nuclear weapons strategically launched for optimum effect, would send us hurtling back to the early 18th century – but without the ability those in the 18th century had to manage their lives without electricity.

The threat of EMP is not new. According to a publication of EMPACT (EMP Awareness Coordination Task Force), in 1999 a Russian committee chairman made this chilling statement to a delegation of the U.S. House of Representatives Armed Services Committee:

“Hypothetically, if Russia really wanted to hurt the United States…Russia could…detonate a single nuclear warhead at high-altitude over the United States. The resulting electromagnetic pulse would massively disrupt U.S. communications and computer systems, shutting down everything.”

More ominously, the EMPACT publication opened with a description of what appears to be an actual instance of an EMP attack caused by a nuclear weapon detonation:

“In 1962, deep in a cold war with the Soviet Union, the United States conducted 'Starfish Prime,' a nuclear weapon test over a remote region of the Pacific Ocean. The test was successful, with one unexpected result: Fifteen hundred kilometers away in Hawaii streetlights burned out, TV sets and radios failed and power lines fused.”

North Korea continues to conduct missile launches and develop nuclear weapons. We know that North Korea is assisting Iran in its drive to develop nuclear weapons AND the missile technology with which to launch them, and that Iran has joined North Korea in conducting missile launches to test its technology. The signs couldn’t be clearer.


We also know that many of the leaders of Iran believe that worldwide chaos must occur to set the stage for the reappearance of the 12th Imam. As Iranian President Ahmadinejad proclaimed in a speech in 2005: “Our revolution’s main mission is to pave the way for the reappearance of the 12th Imam, the Mahdi.” It is difficult to envision a more effective way to create massive chaos – in America, in Israel, and in Europe – than through the strategic launch and detonation of a small number of nuclear weapons that trigger an EMP attack.

Americans must awaken to the reality of the threat of an EMP attack before it’s too late to prevent it from happening. Perhaps such an EMP attack wouldn’t occur after the detonation of a high-altitude nuke. Perhaps. Are you willing to go about your daily life in the hope that it won’t? In the chance that it won’t?

We’re not. That’s why ACT! For America is developing a plan to mobilize Americans to action this year. As the Commission report states, it’s not too late to prevent this from happening, but there are actions America must take sooner rather than later to head off an EMP-triggered apocalypse.

We cannot dismiss this threat and we must not succumb to fear. We as a nation can effectively prepare to prevent the threat, if we have the will to act.

Tomorrow [SlantRight Editor: Actually Below], in Part Two of this special series, I will examine more closely how our enemies perceive the possibility of an EMP attack against us, and what they are doing to make it a reality. I urge you to forward this email and the one tomorrow to everyone you know.

_____________________________

Part 2
April 1, 2009

EMP.

Electromagnetic pulse. The potential devastation that could be caused by an EMP attack triggered by a nuclear detonation above our country may well be the most serious threat we face from radical Islamists bent on destroying or subjugating us.

As I noted in yesterday’s email, the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack (http://empcommission.org/) reported one year ago:

“…the cascading effects from even one or two relatively small weapons exploded in optimum location in space at present would almost certainly shut down an entire interconnected electrical power system, perhaps affecting as much as 70% or possibly more of the United States, all in an instant…”

(If you missed yesterday’s email, I urge you to read it before you read this Part Two. It’s that important. Click here to find it in our email archives).

The Commission’s report stated it plainly – America is at genuine risk from an EMP attack triggered by just one or two nuclear weapons detonated above our atmosphere.

It is almost impossible to imagine an America without electric power, paralyzed for weeks, even months. In such a scenario, all other infrastructures – communications, transportation, food and water, finance, law enforcement, government – would be crippled. Life as we know it would no longer exist. According to the Commission report, millions and millions of Americans would die.

I know this sounds hard to believe, but model simulations, coupled with a history of real-life events that are similar to a premeditated EMP attack, led the Commission to draw the dire conclusions it did.

We have been warned.

Do our enemies understand our vulnerability to an EMP attack? According to Senate testimony given four years ago, an Iranian military journal had already addressed the issue of an EMP attack against the West:

“Once you confuse the enemy communications network…you will, in effect, disrupt all the affairs of that country. If the world’s industrial countries fail to devise effective ways to defend themselves against dangerous electronic assaults then they will disintegrate within a few years.” (EMPACT publication, Global Single Point Failure: The EMP Threat).

As the EMPACT publication points out, among our enemies the Iranian Islamist government, with the assistance of North Korea, has been conducting missile tests whose objective appears to be to simulate an EMP attack. In other words, as Iran marches inexorably toward the acquisition of nuclear weapons, its leaders know about the potential devastation from an EMP attack, they are planning and preparing for it, and they understand that it would only take a few – or even one – strategically deployed nukes to trigger an EMP attack that would cripple America.

Once Iran has nuclear weapons capability, it is not hard at all to envision a scenario in which they hide such a weapon, and a mobile missile launcher, in the belly of a cargo ship. Then, after sailing the ship to the coastal waters of our eastern seaboard, they launch the missile(s) into the atmosphere over America.

The successful detonation of one or more such missiles could create an EMP that, as the EMP Commission stated, would have the potential for “unprecedented cascading failures of our major infrastructures” – such as our electrical power grid.

This is not science fiction. This threat is very, very real. And because the scope of the threat is so enormous (the Commission estimates 70% or more of our power grid could be destroyed), we simply cannot afford to ignore it. To ignore this threat would be like playing Russian roulette with a loaded gun capable of killing tens of millions of people and destroying our way of life.

After reviewing various reports and discussing this issue with experts in the field, we in the leadership of ACT! For America have determined that we must take action this year to ensure that America is prepared to deal with the threat of an EMP attack. With some intelligence estimates predicting Iran will have enough enriched plutonium in less than two years to produce a nuclear warhead, there is no time for delay.

The good news is there are actions we as a country can take to fend off this threat. We do not need to look on helplessly as enemies of America, such as the mullahs in Iran, plot our destruction.

What is missing is the sufficient political will in Washington to take the actions necessary.

It is for this reason that ACT! For America has prepared a multi-pronged action plan that will need every bit of grassroots support we can muster. Next week we will lay out for you the actions we propose to take this year that will, hopefully, persuade the Obama administration and the Congress to do what is necessary to prevent the unthinkable from happening.

In closing, I urge you, I exhort you, to please take this threat seriously. We must not succumb to fear, but we must also not dismiss this as an imagined threat or a fantasy threat or a hyped-up threat. I know it’s tempting to think that something as devastating as the destruction of our electricity and other infrastructures simply couldn’t happen. Surely, the government is doing everything it can to protect us from this, right?

Unfortunately, no.

The ACT! For America motto is “rising in defense of our security, our liberty, and our values.” I can’t think of a threat from radical Islam where this motto is more appropriate than protecting ourselves against the threat of an EMP attack.

We can do this. We must do this. We will do this.
________________________________

Guy Rodgers is Executive Director of ACT! For America

ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.

UN council votes to criminalize 'defamation' of Islam

Here is an ACT! For America email alert showing that Islam is making a notorious effort to dhimmify the globe. By “dhimmify” I mean the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is wielding its oil and U.N. membership to make it illegal to criticize the Theo-political religious cult known as Islam (and which I prefer to call by its founder ergo Mohammedanism).

Of the forty-seven member U.N. Human Rights (totalitarian) Council a majority of nations actually voted to criminalize criticism of Mohammedanism. I am guessing the thirteen members that abstained mostly did so out of the oil fear/Islamic terrorist connection. At least most of the Western nations stood by Free Speech. Eleven Western nations stood up for Free Speech.

So of the forty-seven member council 23 voted to criminalize criticism of Mohammedanism and 24 members did NOT vote for the criminalization of criticism of Mohammedanism.

JRH 3/30/09
***************************************
UN council votes to criminalize 'defamation' of Islam

ACT! For America
Email Sent: March 30, 2009 11:12:24 AM

It’s been brewing for some time. Muslim countries have been pressing for a United Nations Human Rights Council resolution calling on nations around the world to pass laws criminalizing the alleged “defamation” of religion – specifically Islam.

This week the Council passed the resolution.

The good news is that Western nations and over 100 faith groups opposed this resolution. The bad news is that efforts by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) have paid off in getting such a resolution passed – and we can count on the OIC to continue its global campaign to criminalize free speech that allegedly “defames” Islam.

This is not the only tactic the OIC is pursuing in this regard. At last year’s OIC conference, the conference supported efforts to look for legal strategies to fight back against the alleged “defamation” of Islam. Translation: lawsuits around the world funded by petrodollars.

Islamic groups attack law enforcement

The duplicity of victimhood is getting way out of hand by so-called Muslim-Rights organizations in America.

The FBI arrests a brother-in-law of a Barack Hussein Obama body guard on terrorist related charges and the entire (terrorist connected) American-Muslim groups fail to denounce the issues related to terrorism. Rather the American Muslim groups castigate the FBI for planting a paid informant in a Mosque.

Wake-up Americans to the Mohammedan Agenda for America: as in Europe, American Mohammedans will begin to demand (did you read me? I SAID DEMAND) separate laws to accommodate the Mohammedan religion above the law of the land. (The added rant was free :-))

Here is the information as related in an ACT! For America Email.

JRH 3/6/09

Johnson: Catherine Martin Forges Ahead

Here is an awesome article sent to me by Gary H. Johnson pertaining to the Islamic Saudi Academy (ISA) of Fairfax County, Virginia.

This is one of those typical cases of the failure of the Mainstream Media and the U.S. government failing to alert Americans about the radical Islam being taught and financed by Saudi Arabia on American soil.

The ISA is a breeding ground for home grown radical Islamic terrorists on American soil.

Read Gary H. Johnson’s essay which should leave you shocked about what I call a growing Fifth Column of anti-Americanism within the borders of the United States of America.

JRH 2/10/09

Islam in America’s Classrooms

Yes friends I have received another pertinent email from Act for America. This email is notifying the email list about a combined project between a local chapter of Act for America – Mission Viejo, CA and United American Committee.

The report is about the stealth entrance of the teaching of Islam in California’s public schools; thus essentially in America’s classrooms. The report is entitled “Islam in America’s Classrooms History or Propaganda?”

Here is the Act for America email introduction:

JRH 2/7/09
******************************************
Islam in America’s Classrooms: History or Propaganda?

Brigitte Gabriel
Email Sent: February 6, 2009 2:18:55 PM

I’m delighted to announce that the Mission Viejo (California) chapter of ACT! for America, in partnership with the United American Committee, have just completed a concise, well-documented, readable report on how Islam is being presented in our public schools.

This is a great service to all of us, and an exciting testimony to what is happening in the ACT! for America citizen action network. I am so proud of our chapter leaders and what they are doing!

This is a report you absolutely must read!

In this report you’ll learn how the violent history of Islam is being whitewashed in our public schools…how the claims of Islam are presented as facts…and how students are required to participate in activities such as memorizing verses from the Qur’an. I discuss this in detail and give examples of schools across America in my book They Must Be Stopped.

Click here to view or print out the report.

In addition to reading the report yourself, please forward this message to everyone you know who would be concerned about what’s being taught in our schools.

I want to thank and commend the ACT! for America Mission Viejo Chapter and the United American Committee for a job well-done.

Always devoted,

Brigitte Gabriel
http://www.actforamerica.org/

CAIR Strikes Back

Not long ago I posted an Act for America alert pertaining to the FBI cutting off the advisory role of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

Act for America has sent a related alert about CAIR attempting to strike back by obfuscating CAIR’s relationship with Hamas. As should be expected they are pulling the “I am the poor victim of Islamophobic racism.”

Here is the Act for America email alert sent February 5, 2009 1:22:19 PM:

CAIR Strikes Back

Dear John, In the past seven days, evidence surfaced that the FBI was cutting off its primary contacts with CAIR (the Council on American-Islamic Relations), after CAIR refused to address FBI questions about CAIR’s relationship to Hamas (a designated terrorist organization).

Then, five members of Congress sent a letter to other members of Congress entitled “Beware of CAIR,” citing the evidence that the FBI had severed ties with CAIR.

CAIR has responded in its predictable fashion – attack the messengers. The commentary below, from the website of SANE (Society of Americans for National Existence), includes the response letter that CAIR sent to Congresswoman Sue Myrick, co-chair of the House Anti-Terrorism Caucus. One line in CAIR’s letter is telling:

“If enduring these baseless attacks from you is part of God’s price for freedom, we embrace them.”

Playing the victim, or in this case, the martyr, is a common tactic among Islamists. In CAIR’s world, any critique or criticism of it, no matter how reasoned or documented, is anti-Muslim bigotry. For CAIR to claim that allegations against it are “baseless” is, well, baseless.

Why would the FBI finally make the decision it did to sever ties with CAIR if there was no basis for doing so? Why would the Justice Department list CAIR as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing trial if there was no basis for doing so? Why would an FBI agent, testifying under oath during that trial, label CAIR as a front organization for Islamist extremism if there was no basis for saying so?

The answer is they wouldn’t.

JRH 2/5/09