 Does Islamist party Hizb-ut-Tahrir pose a threat to Western society? The answer may well be yes -- but that doesn't mean it should be banned. In recent weeks, Britain's Labour government and the Conservative opposition have been embroiled in a feud about, of all things, Islam -- or, more precisely, an Islamist organization called Hizb-ut-Tahrir (Arabic for "The Party of Liberation").
Tory leader David Cameron has been assailing Gordon Brown's government for allegedly funneling taxpayer money to two Hizb-supported schools where students are being exposed to Islamist ideology.
The education minister insists that the schools in question have nothing to do with the group. The issue is particularly tricky because many Britons, within government and out, have repeatedly called for Hizb-ut-Tahrir to be banned altogether. Their ranks included, at one point a few years ago, then-Prime Minister Tony Blair. It hasn't happened yet, though, for reasons that will be touched upon below. One thing is for sure: We can all expect to hear more about Hizb-ut-Tahrir (HT) in the years to come. Founded 56 years ago in Jordanian-controlled Jerusalem, the party is estimated by some experts to have 1 million members around the world. A lot of them are now in jail. HT is banned outright in a number of countries, ranging from harsh dictatorships like Uzbekistan and Syria through countries like Pakistan, Syria, Jordan, Turkey, and Bangladesh, to Western European democracies including Germany and Denmark. Yet the group persists, and in some respects -- judging by the vast amount of literature it continues to produce, on paper, and myriad websites -- it seems to be thriving. The party recently made headlines in the United States when it was revealed that one of President Barack Obama's religious advisors, Muslim polling expert Dalia Mogahed, had participated in a Hizb-ut-Tahrir-sponsored TV broadcast. (She subsequently said that she'd been unaware of the show's affiliation.) The party has undoubtedly been helped, over the years, by the clarity of its ultimate aim: the creation of a modern-day caliphate, an Islamic state that would bring together all the countries of the Islamic world.
Unlike al Qaeda, though, which professes comparable goals, Hizb-ut-Tahrir emphasizes political action rather than force, arguing that Muslims have to be "enlightened" through education, propaganda, and political agitation until they fully understand the need to seize the reins of power in their own countries and unite the ummah, the global community of believers.
According to one of the group's myriad pamphlets: "[I]f the Islamic Ummah were to rise as an Islamic Ummah, she would be more than capable of rescuing the world from the evil forces that control it, suppress it, and make it experience all kinds of misery, humiliation, and slavery." It's this openly revolutionary aim that has gotten the party into trouble in many of the more authoritarian countries where it has run afoul of officialdom. Yet even though it claims to profess non violent means, the party has still managed to get into trouble in more liberal societies for the extreme intolerance of some of its views.
The party became verboten in Germany, for example, after it shared a platform with neo-Nazis. HT officials insist that they are anti-Zionist rather than anti-Semitic -- though several studies of the group's literature have shown that the distinction doesn't always hold up.
The group was proscribed in Denmark after, among other things, distributing pamphlets urging Muslims to "kill [Jews] wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out." When I first came across the group's pamphlets in Central Asia in 2001, for example, I was struck by their references to the dictator of Uzbekistan, Islam Karimov, whom they ritually denounced as "the Jew Karimov." (He has no Jewish background whatsoever, as it happens.) One of the party's pamphlets stresses that Muslims who elect to leave the faith automatically face the death penalty -- a stricture that would be hard to reconcile with democratic freedoms if they dared to put it into practice. Another source of concern is the group's role as a "conveyor belt," radicalizing members who then go on to participate in overtly violent actions. Its prominent members in Britain have included Omar Bakri Muhammad, founder of the group Al Muhajiroun, which gained notoriety for praising the 9/11 hijackers and harbored adherents who would later be implemented in terrorist attacks.
When British intelligence officials searched the home of Omar Sharif, the Briton who attempted to blow himself up in a Tel Aviv bar in 2003, they found a cache of Hizb-ut-Tahrir literature.
British journalist Shiv Malik claims that at least two major al Qaeda figures, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, originally had ties with the group. More at Foreign Policy 
 We must not let these propaganda films go unchallenged. We Must NOT be SILENT! Unity Productions, the co-producer of this documentary, at first look seemed to be the typical ‘progressive’, building-bridges liberals promoting Islam. However, after the screening, with a bit of research there were a few surprises. The New York screening on November 10, 2009, was at the Scholastic Auditorium ( described on-line as “combining corporate design and (and corporate sponsors) style with a touch of schoolhouse whimsy…” So now we have the venue, but the title, “Inside Islam:What a billion Muslims Really Think”, was really all we needed to lure us downtown, to the wrong address thanks to the ticket agency, but in the company of other lost-patrons we managed to find our way to the screening . Thought this was going to be a quick evening, in and out, just another documentary promoting Islam (that misunderstood Religion of Peace). The synopsis: Inside Islam: What a Billion Muslims Really Think, a new documentary film from Unity Productions Foundation, explores the expertly gathered opinions of Muslims around the globe as revealed in the world’s first major opinion poll, conducted by Gallup, the preeminent polling organization.
Some thoughts we had regarding the film as well as statements made at the talkback : The Gallup poll said no one they interviewed used the Quran as a reason for 9-11. Terrorists hate us for our Freedom. Frustrated because they have no power only fear. Hate us because we meddle. They just want a Democracy. Unrelated to religion. Dislike that we treat them like children (referring to Iraq) When 9-11 happened Bloomberg’s Commissioner, Fatima Shama, and the female narrator in the film, Dalia Mogahed said they were so fearful the perpetrators might be Muslim. Dahlia, also happens to promote Sharia (…says it’s misunderstood) John Esposito had a lot of face time as well (director of Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal center for Muslim-Christian understanding at Georgetown University.) Fatima Shama was so thankful for Bloomberg’s administration and the diversity; the tolerance; his good example. Shama also quoted Obama (who had been at Ft. Hood that day) “No faith justifies these murderous and craven acts; no just and loving God looks upon them with favor” . This of course brought self-congratulatory applause from the audience (which was white, Jewish, western-dressed Muslims, a few hijabs and blacks.) It seemed at a glance like more of the black women were in hijab compared to the others. Vets and PTS were mentioned…of course….related to Ft. Hood. Stress of war… LOTS of children through out the film. Always in prayer groups (a circle) reading happily the Quran KKK, IRA, McVeigh…always get mentioned as examples of all religions and countries have terrorists M.E.C.C.A. is an outreach organization in midtown Manhattan for Christian to Muslim converts (oh, my) Change the Story, Intersections, something called 20,000 dialogues were all about talktalktalking. We can make peace happen if we would just talk. Talking means we would learn there is no reason to fear Muslims or Islam. The review of the screening in Chicago was actually critical BTW, the talk-back had implied they would be taking questions from the audience. That was so NOT on their agenda. An hour of tedious patting on the back from the producer and the director, Rob Gardner (Cities of Light: The Rise and Fall of Islamic Spain, Egypt: Quest for Immortality) on making this important film and then after about 15 minutes of let’s pretend that we’re finally taking questions (NOPE) back to long-winded speeches from the panelists. After about 80 minutes of this, we’d heard enough. Here’s some info on the panelists: Keynote Speaker Alex Kronemer, Executive Producer & Co-Founder of UPF (bio)
The bio makes no mention of the fact that he’s a Muslim convert (which he goes in to detail here) but he made no mention of this during the talk-back.
Panelists - Rev. Robert Chase - Intersections International and Change the Story.net Intersections, is a new justice-based global initiative of the Collegiate Church of New York. Previously, Chase served as Director of Communication for the 1.2 million member United Church of Christ. (an apologist for Christianity) - Shamil Idriss – Soliya has merged with the UN–established Alliance of Civilizations Media Fund. Soliya on the Middle East Our mission remains the same using new media technologies to foster cross-cultural understanding and the thousands of young alumni and volunteers who give life to our programs in 25 countries. Mr. Idriss served as Executive Director of the Alliance of Civilizations Media Fund which merged with Soliya in 2009.On video re the Alliance of Civilizations:
In 2005 he was appointed by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan as Deputy Director of the Alliance of Civilizations. He served on the Steering Committee of the World Economic Forum’s Council of 100 Leaders and as COO of Search for Common Ground, a global conflict resolution organization. He is a member of the WEF’s Young Global Leaders and of the ASMA Society’s Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow. - Fatima Shama - Mayor Bloomberg’s Office of Immigrant Affairs. As Commissioner of the Mayor’s Office of Immigrant Affairs, Commissioner Shama currently serves as Senior Education Policy Advisor in the Mayor’s Office, where she previously served as the Health Literacy and Language Access Coordinator. Born in the Bronx to immigrant parents – her mother is Brazilian and her late father was “Palestinian” – (as she spoke….she was all about The Hair…no hijab for this one) - Moderator – Zeba Iqbal - Muslim Public Affairs Council NYC. She is the Vice-Chair of CAMP International (Council for the Advancement of Muslim Professionals). Additionally, she was the conference manager for CAMP’s 2008 and 2009 conferences. Found this interesting article she wrote about being Muslim and unmarried here>> Click after click on the computer took us through the sponsors, the producers, the speakers (the film) and revealed a web of organizations deeply embedded in our schools and colleges. Ft. Hood has exposed, again, how seriously this indoctrination (this one-sided propaganda) has corrupted our schools, our libraries, our media and our military.
And just this week Columbia and Princeton have reinforced this one-sided non-critical revisionist view of the Islamic World History by refusing outright and shamelessly canceling last-minute the appearance of an “unapproved” speaker, Nonie Darwish. Her list of ‘dangerous’ speakers includes(amongst many others) Geert Wilders, David Horowitz and Robert Spencer , who was assaulted this week while speaking at NYU.
(For the latest outrageous cancellations and assaults of these reputable and respected critics of Islam, go here> ) This screening and its sponsors’ have reinforced how critical our timing is with this relentless RE-’education’ of the West the doors to transparency are creeping shut. And those present at this screening are a microcosm of the machine that is responsible. We must not cease to expose Islam and to challenge these Islamic Revisionist lies.
Their man is in the White House so they confidently intimidate with accusations of hate-speech. Sadly, this censorship combined with our own self-censorship has gone deadly as the murders at Ft. Hood have revealed.
They own the message, for now, but we must NOT relent. Look for this film. It’ll be on PBS in February and probably in our schools and our libraries. FIGHT BACK . The books , their speakers and the films must be challenged. Demand the right to be heard. Our future depends on it. Much more at the Silent Majority H/T: David F.
 By Cinnamon Stillwell As reported last week by Campus Watch, Dalia Mogahed, appointee to President Obama’s Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, executive director and senior analyst of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies, and co-author, along with Georgetown University’s John Esposito, of Who Speaks for Islam?: What a Billion Muslims Really Think, appeared (by phone) earlier this month on the UK-based Islam Channel television program “Muslimah Dilemma” (view here and read the complete transcript here.) Ibtihal Bsis, the show’s host, is a member of the Islamist group Hizb ut Tahrir; Mogahed’s fellow guest, Nazreen Nawaz, is the group’s national women’s media representative. Given these affiliations, it’s no surprise that the discussion included such extremist fare as the promotion of sharia law for—of all things—protecting women’s rights, condemnation for secular pluralistic democracy, and the revival of a mythical caliphate as the answer to the Muslim world’s woes. Read more ...Source: FPMH/T: C.S. Dalia Mogahed
Latest recipient of the Distinguished Islamofascist Award
 by Supna ZaidiI have always viewed push-up bras as false advertising, but does wearing one deserve a whipping because of their "deceptive" and "un-Islamic" nature? I don't know, but the controlling Islamist Shabaab party of Somalia seems to think so. And if our bras are not at issue, it's some other part of our bodies. Apparently, women should simply not participate in public life and if they try, they should be marginalized with one misogynist application of Islamic law after another. Otherwise, if you believe Islamists in Muslim-majority countries, free will would transform Muslim women into western ones. Not real American women, for example, who are busy working, raising families, but the one-dimensional women portrayed on shows like "Melrose Place" and Hooter ads on American highways. Such simplification was reinforced rather than combated on an Oct. 4, 2009, Islamic news show by Dalia Mogahed, President Obama's appointee to his Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. She made no effort to separate herself from extremist positions offered by fellow guests like a representative from Hizb-ut-Tahrir, or the Islamic Liberation Party.
HT members want Islamic law applied globally, and agitate for it with conferences like, "The Fall of Capitalism, the Rise of Islam" presented in Chicago a few months ago. Mogahed's failure to defend secular democracies as societies where the law protects an individual's right to be as orthodox or as "liberal," "progressive," or "cultural" as they choose makes sense considering her contribution to a controversial study, "Who Speaks for Islam? What a Billion Muslims Really Think." The study defines Shariah as "the rule of law," including ethics and morals. Such a loose interpretation justifies her radio show comment that "the majority of women around the world associate Shariah with 'gender justice.' " She added that "the perception of Shariah and portrayal of Shariah has been oversimplified even among Muslims." Oversimplified? That is ironic considering Mogahed's definition of Shariah. What ethics? Whose morals, and whose law legitimizes Shariah? If I took a poll of all Americans today defining Islamic law simply as "living ethically and morally," I guarantee that 100 percent would want to live under it. This is because each person would insert his or her unique understanding of right and wrong, just as the Saudi, Iranian and Somali Islamists do. Muslims who do not want to live under Islamic law are not oversimplifying. Rather, they are accepting that Mogahed's vapid description bears no resemblance to Islamic law in practice. Reformers like Asma Jahangir, a Muslim human rights activist and lawyer in Pakistan know. Jahangir regularly defends men and women against discriminatory laws and cultural mores in the name of Islam. She is also one of many men and women in Pakistan fighting to have the misogynistic religious Hudood laws repealed. Mogahed sounds a lot more like Abu Tayyeb, one of the Taliban kidnappers of New York Times journalist David Rohde. The kidnapper claimed "the Taliban treated women better than Americans did ... women in the United States were forced to wear revealing clothes and define themselves solely as sex objects. The Taliban protected women's honor by not allowing them to appear in public with their faces unveiled." Promiscuity and "male disrespect for women" are not the definitive traits that govern relations between men and women in the West, just as abuse of women, child brides, female genital mutilation, honor killings, and denial of equal opportunities for women are not the only way women live in Muslim-majority countries. But those are realities that Islamists do not wish to address, preferring to defend their egos on radio shows like the one in which Mogahed participated. Obama will only make progress when he chooses to appoint spokespeople who do not pander to current global anti-Americanism by abandoning universal human rights, but show that they can be proud practitioners of their faith in a society that defends everyone irrespective of faith. Source: Middle East Forum H/T: Solstice Witch
 Today we have yet another terror-related arrest of a Muslim, Tarek Mehanna, who was plotting jihad terror attacks against U.S. shopping malls. But Americans are told to never link that to Islamic teachings. Committed Muslims insist that Islam is misunderstood by the West. Sensitivity training to Islam is forced upon U.S. government employees and teachers. They are told that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism, implying that if they believe their eyes, ears and common sense, then they must be Islamophobes. Muslim propaganda is cleverly wrapped in illogical strategies to get the Westerners confused about their own perceptions of Islam. For centuries Muslims lived with unchallenged, warped logic regarding their religion.
Instead of examining non-Muslim fear of Muslim violence and oppression encouraged by Muslim scriptures, Muslims are trained to regard such complaints as an attack Islam itself. I have no doubt in my mind that when Dalia Mogahed, White House advisor on Islamic issues, really means it when says that Sharia is misunderstood. Like her, early in my life as a Muslim, I believed the same. That is how we were trained to accept our destiny under Sharia which turned us into robots ruled by fear, intimidation and warped logic. Women are told they have been liberated by Islam because pre-Islamic society used to kill new born girls. Islam stopped that. We were told that before Islam came, men could marry an unlimited amount of women and slave girls. Then Islam came and limited the number to 4. We were told that women were not able to hold property before Islam. Then Islam came and gave us that right and the right not to share our property even with our husbands. The absence of community property between husband and wife in Islam is sold as a benefit when it really is the result of polygamy, where women have to protect their inheritance from being shared by other wives and by a husband who does not want to share his wealth. “What a great deal,” we Muslim women thought. Day in and day out we had to thank Allah for Islam that stopped our murder at birth. We had to thank Allah for being supported by husbands in a society that crippled us and did not allow us to get out of the house without our husband’s permission. Just as Muslim women are indoctrinated into believing that Islam saved them from murder at birth, Muslims are trying to convince the West that they too have nothing to fear from Islam.
Thus we see the sensitivity training of Westerners who are expected to never blame Muslim teachings for terrorism. Westerners deep fear of being called racist has been transferred to fear of being called an Islamophobe.
Thus, if the definition of Jihad in Muslim scriptures states that Jihad means “to war with non-Muslims to establish the religion,” the West should not misunderstand the word ‘war’ to be aggression. If Muslim scriptures clearly state that an apostate must be killed immediately and their killers will not be punished, then we must not take the word ‘kill’ at face value. If Muslim scriptures say that women are deficient in intellect and religion and must not be trusted, we should not take that seriously. Thus connecting Muslim commandments to kill and war with Islamic terror and violence is an act of Islamophobia that must be punished as a hate crime. We are still told that the West simply misunderstands Islam. Even after constant and persistent acts of Muslim terror against the West, we are told with deep sincerity, not to be afraid of Islam even if Muslims are holding the Qur’an in one hand and decapitating non-Muslims with another. The message of Islam to kill kafirs and apostates is so unreal and unimaginable to the Western mind that some Westerners actually are convinced it can’t be true and that no religion can openly advocate such violence and stay respected by the international community. It must be us, in the West, who do not understand Islam because the alternative is unimaginable. But the unimaginable has survived and thrived for 1400 years and it is still going strong with full force with the support of petro-dollars and facilitated by Western do-gooders. Editor’s note: To get he whole story on the reality of Sharia, buy Nonie Darwish’s new book, Cruel and Usual Punishment. Source: FPM
 By Cinnamon Stillwell In thinking about women’s rights, sharia law, or Islamic law, doesn’t typically come to mind. Yet, according to a survey conducted by Dalia Mogahed, executive director and senior analyst of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies and appointee to President Obama’s Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, the two are closely intertwined. Her survey alleges that a majority of Muslim women believe sharia law should either be the primary source or one source of legislation in their countries, while viewing Western personal freedoms as harmful to women. The survey’s findings appear in the book, Who Speaks for Islam?: What a Billion Muslims Really Think, co-authored by Mogahed and John Esposito, Georgetown University professor and founding director of the Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, named for its Saudi royal benefactor. While Esposito is well-known as one of the foremost academic apologists for radical Islam, Mogahed is making her name as a shill for sharia law. Mogahed employs the Gallup poll, which has been criticized by knowledgeable authorities as misleading and unscientific, to portray sharia law as what Muslims women want. Read more ...Source: FPM
 The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) announced on Friday that none other than Jesse "Shakedown" Jackson will be headlining their annual banquet next Saturday. He will be sharing the stage with 1993 World Trade Center bombing unindicted co-conspirator Siraj Wahhaj. It would sure be unfortunate if Shakedown Jesse and his CAIR conspirators were met with some kind of protest outside the Marriott Crystal Gateway in Arlington, Virginia next Saturday, October 24th at 7pm where the banquet is being held (just a block away from the Crystal City Metro Station): No doubt CAIR put down considerable cash to bring Shakedown Jesse to town after four members of Congress demanded an investigation this week in response to the release of a new explosive expose, Muslim Mafia, by Dave Gaubatz and Paul Sperry. No doubt that's what prompted Obama Muslim adviser Dalia Mogahed (who we reported on last week) to back out of the banquet at the last minute. As Daniel Pipes explains, this new book is based on 12,000 internal CAIR documents secretly obtained through an undercover investigation and destroys the prevailing myths about the Hamas front group, which was itself and its founders named unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism finance trial last year (continued below the fold): Claim 1: According to Ibrahim Hooper, the organization's communications director, "CAIR has some 50,000 members." Fact: An internal memo prepared in June 2007 for a staff meeting reports that the organization had precisely 5,133 members, about one-tenth Hooper's exaggerated number. Claim 2: CAIR is a "grass-roots organization" that depends financially on its members. Fact: According to an internal 2002 board meeting report, the organization received $33,000 in dues and $1,071,000 in donations. In other words, under 3 percent of its income derives from membership dues. Claim 3: CAIR receives "no support from any overseas group or government." Fact: Gaubatz and Sperry report that 60 percent of CAIR's income derives from two dozen donors, most of whom live outside the United States. Specifically: $978,000 from the ruler of Dubai in 2002 in exchange for controlling interest in its headquarters property on New Jersey Avenue, a $500,000 gift from Saudi prince al-Waleed bin Talal and $112,000 in 2007 from Saudi prince Abdullah bin Mosa'ad, at least $300,000 from the Saudi-based Organization of the Islamic Conference, $250,000 from the Islamic Development Bank, and at least $17,000 from the American office of the Saudi-based International Islamic Relief Organization. Claim 4: CAIR is an independent, domestic human rights group "similar to a Muslim NAACP." Fact: In a desperate search for funding, CAIR has offered its services to forward the commercial interests of foreign firms. This came to light in the aftermath of Dubai Ports World's failed effort to purchase six U.S. harbors in 2006 due to security fears. In response, CAIR's chairman traveled to Dubai and suggested to businessmen there: "Do not think about your contributions [to CAIR] as donations. Think about it from the perspective of rate of return. The investment of $50 million will give you billions of dollars in return for fifty years." Source and thanks to The Jawa report H/T: Weasel Zippers
 Yes, all that hand-chopping and stoning really isn't all that bad, if you look at it from the right perspective. Dalia Mogahed, you may recall, along with John Esposito cooked the data from a global survey of Muslim attitudes in order to increase the number of Muslim "moderates" -- classifying people as "moderate" who hate America, want to impose Sharia, and support suicide bombing. " Barack Obama adviser says Sharia Law is misunderstood," by Andrew Gilligan and Alex Spillius in the Telegraph, October 8 President Barack Obama's adviser on Muslim affairs, Dalia Mogahed, has provoked controversy by appearing on a British television show hosted by a member of an extremist group to talk about Sharia Law.
Miss Mogahed, appointed to the President's Council on Faith-Based and Neighbourhood Partnerships, said the Western view of Sharia was "oversimplified" and the majority of women around the world associate it with "gender justice". Here's some gender justice straight out of the Koran. The Koran likens a woman to a field (tilth), to be used by a man as he wills: "Your women are a tilth for you (to cultivate) so go to your tilth as ye will" (2:223). The Koran also declares that a woman's testimony is worth half that of a man: "Get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her" (2:282). It allows men to marry up to four wives, and have sex with slave girls also: "If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice" (4:3). It rules that a son's inheritance should be twice the size of that of a daughter: "Allah (thus) directs you as regards your children's (inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females" (4:11). Worst of all, the Koran tells husbands to beat their disobedient wives: "Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them" (4:34). Read more here ... Source: JihadWatch Dalia Mogahed
Latest recipients of the Distinguished Islamofascist Award
Islam Online, the Internet news portal associated with global Muslim Brotherhood leader Youssef Qaradawi, has interviewed Dalia Mogahed, one of two U.S. Muslims recently appointed to the President’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. In the interview, Ms. Mogahed repeats claims often made by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood. When asked how she saw her role as “an adviser on Islam,” for example, Ms. Mogahed replied: “I would not say I am an advisor on Islam. I would say that it is my role to convey the facts about what Muslims think and feel. I see my role as offering the voices of the silenced majority of Muslims in America and around the world to the council so that our deliberations are informed by their ideas and wisdom. I believe that I was chosen because the administration cares about what Muslims think and wants to listen.” Positing various plots and conspiracies to “silence” U.S. Muslims is a standard tactic of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood. Read more ...Source: The Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily ReportDalia Mogahed
Latest recipients of the Distinguished Islamofascist Award
 The appointment of one of John Esposito’s protégé to Obama’s advisory council is further evident of the increasing role of Esposito in the Obama administration. The White House has announced that one of two Muslim members appointed to the President’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships is Dalia Mogahed, a protege of John Esposito, perhaps the best known academic supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood and with strong ties to Saudi Arabia. The Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships was formerly known as the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives and is part of the Executive Office of the President of the United States . Ms. Mogahed, who was born in Egypt and lived in the U.S. since the age of 5, is the executive director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies and the co-author of a book with Dr. Esposito suggesting that majority of the world’s Muslims support some form of democracy. Dr. Esposito is also a member of the Gallup Center along with Ahmed Younis, previously a National Director for the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), part of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood. In 2003, Ms. Mogahed was identified in 2003 as the Outreach Coordinator for the Islamic Center of Pittsburgh (ICP) whose co-founder recently lost a DOE security clearance and whose Imam will probably be deported on immigration violations. Ms. Mogahed is the daughter of Elsayed Mogahed, an Egyptian immigrant who is a former engineering scientist at the University of Wisconsin and director of the Islamic Center of Madison (ICM). The website of the ICM links mainly to U.S. Muslim Brotherhood organizations and Souheil Ghannouchi, the President of the Muslim American Society (MAS), was ICM Imam and President for several years. The MAS is part of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood and closest to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. Read more ... Source: Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily ReportDalia Mogahed
Latest recipients of the Distinguished Islamofascist Award
 |
|
|
Copyright Muslims Against Sharia 2008. All rights reserved.
E-mail: info AT ReformIslam.org
|
|
|
Does Islamist party Hizb-ut-Tahrir pose a threat to Western society? The answer may well be yes -- but that doesn't mean it should be banned. 
Posts
