 The enemy of my enemy is my friend, as they say.
The Center for Security Policy has discovered that something called the “Interests Section of Iran” has donated to the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a group accused of supporting Sunni Hamas and discriminating against Shiites according to some of its former staff. Frank Gaffney explains: Even more concerning, was the presence of the “Interests Section of Iran” – a country that does not have an embassy in the U.S., since the countries have long cut off diplomatic relations. The “Interests Section of Iran” is the de facto diplomatic representation of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the United States. And therefore any gifts from the “Interests Section” to CAIR – say, a donation to a fundraiser – would constitute a gift from the government of Iran. The link also includes videotape of Ahmed Bedier, former director of CAIR’s branch in Tampa, thanking the “Interests Section of Iran” and other donors.
The CAIR brochure also thanks the embassies of Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. You’ve got to hand it to CAIR. It’s not an easy task pulling together so many foreign supporters, including those who hate each other, to support your cause.
Now, that’s reaching across the aisle. They just need to work on that part about lying about receiving foreign government support. Source: World Threats 
 By Frank J Gaffney Jr. “Dead girl walking.” That’s how Florida anti-Shariah activist Tom Trento of the Florida Security Council described Rifqa Bary. Bary is a 17-year-old girl who fled to Florida to escape an abusive Muslim family in Ohio out of fear that she would be killed by her father or brother. Unless Florida’s governor, Charlie Crist, intervenes, a state judge in Orlando is expected on Friday afternoon to force Rifqa to return to Ohio — and almost certain death. Rifqa has ample reason to fear such a fate. She has been repeatedly and savagely beaten by family members in the past. Reportedly, this petite young high school cheerleader lost vision in an eye following one such attack by her brother. Worse yet, Rifqa had converted to Christianity. “Apostasy” is a capital offense under the theo-political-legal program authoritative Islam calls Shariah. Pamela Geller, who has extensively documented this case at her marvelous Atlas Shrugs blog (www.AtlasShrugs2000.com), quotes the girl as saying: [My father] took [a] laptop and waved it in the air and he was about to beat me with it, and he said 'If you have this Jesus in your heart, you’re dead to me. You’re not my daughter.' And I refused to speak but he said. 'I will kill you. Tell me the truth.' In these words, bad words, cuss words. So I knew that I had to get away." Read more ... Source: NewsMax
 A school that is explicitly proselytizing Islam according to the Wahhabi House of Saud seeks expansion in Fairfax County, Virginia. The hearing is tonight.Frank Gaffney, Jr. At this writing, the Board of Supervisors of Fairfax County, Virginia are poised to make a momentous decision. After a hearing tonight, the Supervisors could well accede to demands by the House of Saud to change the name of their jurisdiction to Faisal County, in recognition of the contributions the late Saudi king and the virulent strain of Islam promoted by his government in Northern Virginia and elsewhere. Just kidding. No, for the moment at least, the Saudis are only seeking that the supervisors approve the use of a fraction of the county as a Wahhabi beachhead in America. They want a prime piece of undeveloped real estate to effect a sizeable expansion of the kingdom's school here known as the Islamic Saudi Academy (ISA) so as to enable it to enroll 1,200 students. Never mind that this school has become notorious in recent years for the association of a number of its faculty and students with terrorism. As David Stokes has documented in an excellent article posted over the weekend at Townhall.com, the perpetrators have run the gamut from those implicated in plots to assassinate a sitting president of the United States, to casing the structural supports for a major bridge to trying to smuggle a butcher's knife aboard an airplane. Read more ... Source: FSMIslamic Saudi Academy
Latest recipient of the Distinguished Islamofascist Award
Deciphering Obama in Cairo
Center for Security Policy Jun 05, 2009 By Frank Gaffney, Jr. By and large, President Obama's address yesterday in Cairo has been well received in both the so-called "Muslim world" and by other audiences. Nobody may be happier with it, though, than the Muslim Brotherhood - the global organization that seeks to impose authoritative Islam's theo-political-legal program known as "Shariah" through stealthy means where violence ones are not practicable. Egyptian Muslim Brothers were prominent among the guests in the audience at Cairo University and Brotherhood-associated organizations in America, like the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), have rapturously endorsed the speech.
The Brotherhood has ample reason for its delight. Accordingly, Americans who love freedom - whether or not they recognize the threat Shariah represents to it - have abundant cause for concern about "The Speech," and what it portends for U.S. policy and interests.
Right out of the box, Mr. Obama mischaracterized what is causing a "time of tension between the United States and Muslims around the world." He attributed the problem first and foremost to "violent extremists [who] have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Muslims." The President never mentioned - not even once - a central reality: The minority in question, including the Muslim Brotherhood, subscribes to the authoritative writings, teachings, traditions and institutions of their faith, namely Shariah. It is the fact that their practice is thus grounded that makes them, whatever their numbers (the exact percentage is a matter of considerable debate), to use Mr. Obama euphemistic term, "potent."
Instead, the President's address characterized the problem as a "cycle of suspicion and discord," a turn of phrase redolent of the moral equivalence so evident in the Mideast peace process with it "cycle of violence." There was not one reference to terrorism, let alone Islamic terrorism. Indeed, any connection between the two is treated as evidence of some popular delusion. "The attacks of September 11, 2001 and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights. This has bred more fear and mistrust."
Then there was this uplifting, but ultimately meaningless, blather: "So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity."
More often than not, the President portrayed Muslims as the Brotherhood always does: as victims of crimes perpetrated by the West against them - from colonialism to manipulation by Cold War superpowers to the menace of "modernity and globalization that led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam." Again, no mention of the hostility towards the infidel West ingrained in "the traditions of Islam." This fits with the meme of the Shariah-adherent, but not the facts.
Here's the irony: Even as President Obama professed his determination to "speak the truth," he perpetrated a fraud. He falsely portrayed what amounts to authoritative Islam, namely Shariah Islam, as something that is "not exclusive," that "overlaps" and "need not be in competition" with "America. Actually, Shariah is, by its very nature, a program that obliges its adherents to demand submission of all others, Muslims (especially secular and apostate ones) and non-Muslims, alike.
This exclusiveness (read, Islamic supremacism) applies most especially with respect to democratic nations like America, nations founded in the alternative and highly competitive belief that men, not God, should make laws. Ditto nations that stand in the way of the establishment of the Caliphate, the global theocracy that Shariah dictates must impose its medieval agenda worldwide. In practice, Shariah is the very antithesis of Mr. Obama's stated goal of "progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings." Its "justice" can only be considered by civilized societies to be a kind of codified barbarism.
At least as troubling are what amount to instances of presidential dawa, the Arabic term for Islamic proselytization. For example, Mr. Obama referred four times in his speech to "the Holy Koran." It seems unimaginable that he ever would ever use the adjective to describe the Bible or the Book of Mormon.
Then, the man now happy to call himself Barack Hussein Obama (in contrast to his attitude during the campaign) boasts of having "known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed." An interesting choice of words that, "first revealed." Not "established," "founded" or "invented." The President is, after all, a careful writer, so he must have deliberately eschewed verbs that reflect man's role, in favor of the theological version of events promoted by Islam. Thus, Mr. Obama has gone beyond the kind of "respectful language" he has pledged to use towards Islam. He is employing what amounts to code - bespeaking the kind of submissive attitude Islam demands of all, believers and non-believers alike.
Elsewhere in the speech, Mr. Obama actually declared that "I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear." Note that, although he referred in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian-Arab conflict to "vile stereotypes" of Jews, he did not describe it as "part of his responsibility as President" to counter anti-Semitic representations.
Unremarked was the fact that such incitement is daily fare served up by the state media controlled by his host in Egypt, President Hosni Mubarak, by the Palestinian Authority's Mahmoud Abbas and by every other despot in the region with whom Mr. Obama seeks to "engage." Worse yet, no mention was made of the fact that some of those "vile stereotypes" - notably, that Jews are "descendants of apes and pigs" - are to be found in "the Holy Koran," itself.
Perhaps the most stunning bit of dawa of all was a phrase the President employed that, on its face, denies the divinity of Jesus - something surprising from a self-described committed Christian. In connection with his discussion of the "situation between Israelis, Palestinians and Arabs," Mr. Obama said, "...When Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed (peace be upon them) joined in prayer."
Muslims use the term "peace be upon them" to ask for blessings on deceased holy men. In other words, its use construes all three in the way Islam does - as dead prophets - a treatment wholly at odds with the teachings of Christianity which, of course, holds Jesus as the immortal Son of God.
If Mr. Obama were genuinely ignorant about Islam, such a statement might be ascribed to nothing more than a sop to "interfaith dialogue." For a man who now pridefully boasts of his intimate familiarity with Muslims and their faith, it raises troubling questions about his own religious beliefs. At the very least, it conveys a strongly discordant message to "the Muslim world" about a fundamental tenet of the faith he professes.
Finally, what are we to make of Mr. Obama statements about America and Islam? Since he took office, the President has engaged repeatedly in the sort of hyping of Muslims and their role in the United States that is standard Muslim Brotherhood fare. In his inaugural address, he described our nation as one of "Christians, Muslims and Jews." Shortly thereafter, he further reversed the demographic ordering of these populations by size in his first broadcast interview (with the Saudi-owned al-Arabiya network), calling America a country of "Muslims, Christians and Jews."
Yesterday in Cairo, the President declared that "Islam has always been a part of America's story." Now, to be sure, Muslims, like peoples of other faiths, have made contributions to U.S. history. But they have generally done so in the same way others have, namely as Americans - not as some separate community, but as part of the "E pluribus unum" (out of many, one) that Mr. Obama properly extolled in The Speech.
Unfortunately, a pattern is being established whereby President Obama routinely exaggerates the Muslim character of America. For example, at Cairo University, he claimed there are nearly seven million Muslims in this country - a falsehood promoted by the Muslim Brotherhood and its friends - when the actual number is well-less than half that. Shortly before The Speech, in an interview with a French network, Mr. Obama said, "If you actually took the number of Muslims Americans, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world."
Incredible as these statements may seem, even more astounding is their implication for those who adhere to Shariah. The President's remarks about America as a Muslim nation would give rise to its treatment by them as part of dar al-Islam, the world of Islam, as opposed to dar al-harb (i.e., the non-Muslim world).
Were the former to be the case, Shariah requires faithful Muslims to rid the United States of infidel control or occupation. And we know from last year's successful prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation - a so-called "charity" engaged in money-laundering for one of the Muslim Brotherhood's terrorist operations, Hamas - that such an agenda tracks precisely with the Brothers' mission here: "To destroy Western civilization from within America, by its own miserable hand."
This reality makes one of Mr. Obama's promises in Cairo especially chilling. Near the end of his address, the President expressed concern that religious freedom in the United States was being impinged by "rules on charitable giving [that] have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation." He went on to pledge: "That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat."
Let us be clear: Muslim charities have run into difficulty with "the rules" because they have been convicted in federal court of using the Muslim obligation to perform zakat (tithing to charity) to funnel money to terrorists. At this writing, it is unclear precisely what Mr. Obama has in mind with respect to this commitment to "ensure [Muslims] can fulfill zakat." But you can bet that the Brotherhood will try to translate it into the release of their imprisoned operatives and new latitude to raise money for their Shariah-promoting, and therefore seditious, activities in America.
I could go on, but you get the point. The Speech contained a number of statements about the laudable qualities of America, the need for freedom in the Muslim world, about women's rights and the desirability of peace. But its preponderant and much more important message was one that could have been crafted by the Muslim Brotherhood: America has a president who is, wittingly or not, advancing the Brotherhood's agenda of masking the true nature of Shariah and encouraging the West's submission to it.
Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. is President of the Center for Security Policy in Washington. An abbreviated version of this article appeared in Newsmax, June 5, 2009. Source: http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/p18084.xml
On Monday, February 10, the Fox News Strategy Room presented an hour-long panel discussion on the 'stealth jihad' called Terror From Within. The Center's Frank Gaffney appeared alongside noted Shariah expert Robert Spencer (Stealth Jihad), Nonie Darwish (Now they Call Me Infidel; Why I Renounced Jihad for America, Israel and the War on Terror), and Tarek Fatah (Chasing A Mirage). The host was Heather Nauert. The panel discusses Shariah Compliant Finance, Muslim Brotherhood front-groups, Lawfare and other issues. More ...Source: FNC H/T: Jihad Watch
 By Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. The Securities and Exchange Commission has had a very bad couple of months. As a result of its successive oversight failures and selective enforcement of the nation's securities laws and regulations, so have the nation's financial sector, economy and taxpayers. Unfortunately, there is reason to believe that the SEC has another - and potentially even more problematic - "shoe" about to drop. First, there were the successive meltdowns of publicly traded financial corporations for which the SEC must bear some measure of responsibility. As the Associated Press put it, the agency's own "inspector general determined that the agency's monitoring of the five biggest Wall Street firms, which included Bear Stearns, was lacking." Everyone also recalls Warren Buffet's warning that derivatives such as subprime mortgage securities were "financial products of mass destruction." Then came last week's revelations by the SEC's chairman, former California Rep. Christopher Cox, that the agency had repeatedly had "credible and specific allegations" brought to its attention "since at least 1999" concerning the self-confessed shyster-financier Bernard Madoff. Had the staff of the SEC (which included an attorney married to Mr. Madoff's niece) not persistently looked the other way, these warnings should have been sufficient to prevent what ultimately became a ruinous $50 billion Ponzi scheme. The next fiasco for the Securities and Exchange Commission may prove to be its systematic failure to address the insinuation into the U.S. capital markets of financial products that, by their reckoning, do not conform to American securities laws and regulations. These products have come to be known collectively as Shariah-Compliant Finance (SCF) and further threaten what is left of the integrity of our free market system. Worse yet, they - and the theo-political-legal doctrine, Shariah, from which they spring - pose a real threat to our society and form of government, as well. Read more ...Source: The Washington TimesSEC
Latest recipient of The Dhimmi Award
Senator Barack Obama became President-elect on the uplifting, if inexact, slogan, "Yes, we can." This week, there is growing evidence that people who have in mind doing away with the presidency of the United States – and all other aspects of our secular, democratic and constitutional form of government – are similarly convinced of their inevitable success. Judging by the sheer audacity of their agenda, "Yes, they can" would appear an apt description of the prospects for the Saudis and other champions of the totalitarian program they call Shariah.In the run-up to an emergency summit outgoing President George Bush has called to address the now-global financial crisis, the oil-rich Islamists of the Persian Gulf led by Saudi Arabia have not only established that their petrodollars are indispensable to any solution. They also seem to have secured the Bush Administration's acquiescence to the sinister strings attached to any bail-out of the West in which they might participate. Read more ...Source: Center for Security PolicyH/T: Jihad Watch
By Frank J. Gaffney Jr. The U.S. Treasury Department is submitting to Shariah - the seditious religio-political-legal code authoritative Islam seeks to impose worldwide under a global theocracy. As reported in this space last week, Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Robert Kimmitt set the stage with his recent visit to Saudi Arabia and other oil-rich Persian Gulf states. His stated purpose was to promote the recycling of petrodollars in the form of foreign investment here. Evidently, the price demanded by his hosts is that the U.S. government get with the Islamist financial program. While in Riyadh, Mr. Kimmitt announced: "The U.S. government is currently studying the salient features of Islamic banking to ascertain how far it could be useful in fighting the ongoing world economic crisis." "Islamic banking" is a euphemism for a practice better known as "Shariah-Compliant Finance (SFC)." And it turns out that this week the Treasury will be taking officials from various federal agencies literally to school on SFC. Read more ...Source: The Washington Times
 An undercover survey of more than 100 mosques and Islamic schools in America has exposed widespread radicalism, including the alarming finding that 3 in 4 Islamic centers are hotbeds of anti-Western extremism, WND has learned. The Mapping Sharia in America Project, sponsored by the Washington-based Center for Security Policy, has trained former counterintelligence and counterterrorism agents from the FBI, CIA and U.S. military, who are skilled in Arabic and Urdu, to conduct undercover reconnaissance at some 2,300 mosques and Islamic centers and schools across the country. "So far of 100 mapped, 75 should be on a watchlist," an official familiar with the project said. Many of the Islamic centers are operating under the auspices of the Saudi Arabian government and U.S. front groups for the radical Muslim Brotherhood based in Egypt. Frank Gaffney, a former Pentagon official who runs the Center for Security Policy, says the results of the survey have not yet been published. But he confirmed that "the vast majority" are inciting insurrection and jihad through sermons by Saudi-trained imams and anti-Western literature, videos and textbooks. Read more ...Source: WNDH/T: Shariah Finance Watch
 By Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. and Alex Alexiev
The Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) – an organization identified as a California-based Muslim Brotherhood front – convened a press conference today in Los Angeles with a senior representative of local law enforcement and members of other faiths. The stated purpose is to unveil a new “united front” initiative called the “Coalition for Renewing American Democracy” which MPAC has apparently conjured up in order to inveigh against “Obsession,” a documentary film that powerfully, and authoritatively, dissects radical Islam’s war against the West. Shortly after its 2005 premiere, the film won awards at three top international film festivals.
The problem for the Muslim Brotherhood is that millions of copies of “Obsession” have been distributed around the United States in recent weeks in national magazines, to several hundred college campuses, at both political conventions, and in local newspapers. As a result, many millions of Americans have had an opportunity to be educated about the ambitions of those who adhere to the Islamic political and legal system known as “Shariah” – namely, the realization through “jihad” of a world-wide and brutally repressive Islamic theocracy.
“Obsession” utilizes actual footage of radical Islamist rallies and calls to violent jihad against America, along with interviews of Muslim and non-Muslim experts on radical Islamism. It captures unabashed exhortations to violence and murder aimed at Americans, Jews and other Westerners that are shocking in their savagery, even to those familiar with the nature of contemporary Islamofascism; they tend to leave an even more lasting impression on those that are not. Source: FrontPage Magazine
 By Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. Last week, Barack Obama's campaign was burned yet again for its dalliance with Islamists - those who embrace Islam's repressive theo-political-legal code known as Shariah and who are working for its triumph in the West in general and the United States in particular. The episode is but the latest indication that the Democratic candidate hopes to win the White House by relying, in part, on the Jihadist vote. NBC reported Thursday that the Obama campaign's latest radical "Muslim outreach coordinator," Mouha Husaini, met last month in one of Washington's Northern Virginia suburbs - the heart of what has been dubbed the "Wahhabi Corridor" - with her predecessor, Mazen Asbahi (who had to resign this summer due to his own associations with Shariah). Even more problematic was the presence at the Springfield event of two prominent Muslim Brotherhood operatives: Mahdi Bray of the Muslim American Society (MAS) and Nihad Awad of the Council of American Islamic Relations (CAIR). As I pointed out in a debate on Tuesday, with a man associated with both organizations and arguably the Bush Administration's senior Muslim official, Suhail Khan, the Brotherhood is an instrument the Islamists have been using to foster a Fifth Column in America. Its stated purpose in this country is to "destroy Western civilization from within." According to NBC, even other attendees expressed concern that the Obama campaign was reaching out to such "politically radioactive" individuals as Bray and Awad. Read more ...Source: The Washington Times
 Frank J. Gaffney Jr.By Frank J. Gaffney Jr. Shortly before John McCain and Barack Obama, as the Car Guys would say, wasted a perfectly good hour-and-a-half of America’s time in a largely uninformative town hall meeting, a really interesting debate about the most important issue of our time took place near Baltimore. Sponsored by a local educational organization called The Harbor League, I had at last an opportunity to confront publicly and directly one of the most senior and controversial Muslim officials in the Bush Administration: the Assistant to the Secretary of Transportation for Policy, Suhail Khan. Readers of these pages will recall my previous writings about Khan and his patron, conservative activist Grover Norquist. In these articles, I carefully documented Khan’s personal ties to Wahhabi mosques in California and a variety of organizations identified by the Department of Justice as Muslim Brotherhood front organizations and, in some cases, as un-indicted co-conspirators in a terrorism financing conspiracy. I also reported on the role Norquist has played before and during the George W. Bush administration in facilitating Islamist influence operations involving – at key points, with Suhail Khan’s help at the White House Office of Public Liaison – the likes of now-convicted terrorist-supporters like Abdurahman Alamoudi and Sami al-Arian. Khan serves on the board of the Islamic Free Market Institute, the organization Alamoudi helped Norquist establish a decade ago in his Americans for Tax Reform offices, apparently for the purpose of credentialing Islamists as conservatives, promoting their agenda in Washington and placing their friends in government jobs. Read more ...Source: FrontPage MagazineSuhail Khan
Latest recipient of the Distinguished Islamofascist Award
 By Frank Gaffney The question on Wall Street in the wake of the latest meltdowns in the U.S. financial sector is "Who's next?" The more important issue is not which of the major banks or investment firms will follow Lehman Brothers into bankruptcy or Merrill Lynch into fire sale. Rather, the question should be "What's next?" After all, the problem afflicting so much of the U.S. capital markets - and, therefore, those around the world - is not one of individual corporations hitting a rough patch and requiring bail-outs from the federal government or the private sector. It is, instead, the result of a reckless disregard for sound investing practices in the unscrupulous pursuit of profit. In a word, the last "what" was "subprime." As we all know by now, the practice of building financial houses of cards on various investment instruments based in nontransparent and problematic subprime mortgage-backed securities was a formula for disaster. It induced firms that not only should have known better but are required to behave better to perform unconscionably. In the process, they violated industry standards and government regulations with respect to transparency, disclosure, due diligence, good governance and accountability. Tragically, in the process of leaping out of the scalding subprime frying pan, Wall Street is heading directly into a fire that promises, if anything, to be more devastating than the present disaster. Incredibly, it bears all the hallmarks of subprime with respect to a lack of transparency, a systematic failure to disclose and an utter absence of due diligence, good governance and accountability. The next "what" is called Shariah-Compliant Finance (SCF). Read more ...Source: The Washington TimesH/T: Shariah Finance Watch
 By Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. Democratic presidential candidate Barak Obama's appearance before a large evangelical congregation in Orange County over the weekend underscored an evident imperative of his campaign: Emphasize his Christian faith and put to rest insistent rumors that he secretly adheres to the Islamic creed of his father and youth. The effort to minimize any grounds for fearing Obama has an abiding, if covert, attachment to Islam has prompted him to risk offending Muslims in order to avoid off-message controversies and photo ops. It is, therefore, curious in the extreme that he is giving a prominent role at next week's Democratic convention to a leader of an organization identified by the Department of Justice as a Muslim Brotherhood front organization and an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorism financing conspiracy. Dr. Ingrid Mattson is the president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), an organization created by the radical, Saudi- financed Muslim Students Association. She will represent the Muslim community at the first-ever interfaith prayer service at a Democratic nominating convention. Now, we know from the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) trial that ISNA is one of many Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated groups operating in America. We also know from a Brotherhood document entered into evidence in that case (which is currently being retried after the first prosecution resulted in a mistrial) that, " The work [of Brotherhood members] in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within, and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions." The question is why would Barak Obama's campaign - which has prevented Muslim women wearing headcoverings from being in the background of photographs with the candidate and which recently fired a Muslim-outreach coordinator who had ties to another unindicted HLF co-conspirator - allow itself to be put in such company? Read more ...Source: Jewish World Review
Libel tourism, "hate speech" & political freedom With essays by: Roger Kimball, 1; Stanley Kurtz, 5; Robert Spencer, 16; Andrew C. McCarthy, 23; & Mark Steyn, 32 Responses from: Rachel Ehrenfeld, Brooke Goldstein, Ezra Levant, Ibn Warraq, Steven Emerson, Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., Claudia Rosett, Robert H. Bork, Daniel Kornstein & John J. Walsh The lamps are going outBy Mark Steyn It’s an honor to be here, with so many people I greatly admire, including Rachel Ehrenfeld, and my comrade-in-arms from our struggle up north, Ezra Levant. I feel like giving a version of the Churchill speech in Fulton, Missouri, about how a Maple Curtain has descended across the forty-ninth parallel. It’s not quite that bad-yet-but if you do see a couple of guys bust into the Princeton Club in red coats on a dog sled, it’s the Royal Canadian Mounted Police snatch team, so just let Ezra and me know and we can get a two-minute head start down Fifth Avenue. Read more ...Source: The New Criterion
 By Frank J. Gaffney Jr. Try a little thought experiment. What would have happened in this country during the Cold War if the Soviet Union successfully neutralized anti-communists opposed to the Kremlin's plans for world domination? Of course, Moscow strove to discredit those in America and elsewhere who opposed its totalitarian agenda — especially after Sen. Joseph McCarthy's excesses made it fashionable to vilify patriots by accusing them of believing communists were "under every bed." But what if the USSR and its ideological soul-mates in places like China, North Korea, Cuba, Eastern Europe and parts of Africa had been able to criminalize efforts to oppose their quest for the triumph of world communism? What if it had been an internationally prosecutable offense even to talk about the dangers inherent in communist rule and the need to resist it? The short answer is that history might very well have come out differently. Had courageous anti-communists been unable accurately and forcefully to describe the nature of that time's enemy — and to work against the danger posed by its repressive, seditious program, the Cold War might well have been lost. Read more ...Source: Jewish World Review
 By Frank J. Gaffney Jr. The United States is in mortal danger from a false friend: the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The peril emanates from the totalitarian legal-religious-military-political code the Saudis call Shariah and their assiduous efforts to impose it worldwide. The danger is enormously exacerbated by the almost-complete failure of American officials at every level of government to acknowledge, let alone act to prevent, the Saudis' true agenda. Three examples are instructive: --A recent expose by New York Times reporter Philip Shenon of congressional and independent investigations of the murderous Sept. 11, 2001, attacks describes evidence of financial, logistical and other material support by Saudi government personnel to the perpetrators of those acts of terrorism. In "The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation," Mr. Shenon suggests the Bush White House, the FBI and, not least, Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar went to considerable lengths to suppress such evidence. Read more ...Source: The Washington Times
By Frank J. Gaffney Jr. Jimmy Carter's pathetic need for political rehabilitation following a presidency widely regarded as one of the worst in American history is once again making news. He reportedly will meet this week with Khaled Mashaal, Syrian-based leader of the Muslim Brotherhood's Palestinian arm, Hamas - an internationally recognized terrorist organization. Mr. Carter maintains this is no big deal since he has met with Hamas officials before. Indeed, in keeping with his Carter Center's self-appointed status as global election monitor, the former president did officiate in January 2006 when the Brotherhood's terrorists defeated those of Fatah led by Yasser Arafat's longtime crony, Mahmoud Abbas. In point of fact, it seems there is scarcely a serious bad actor on the planet with whom Jimmy Carter has not met. He is a serial tyrant-enabler, the very personification of Rodney King's risible appeal, "Can't we all get along?" Mr. Carter has come to epitomize the notion that "dialogue" is always in order, no matter how odious or dangerous the interlocutor - or the extent to which they or their agendas will benefit from such interactions. Read more ...Source: The Washington Times
 |
|
|
Copyright Muslims Against Sharia 2008. All rights reserved.
E-mail: info AT ReformIslam.org
|
|
|
The enemy of my enemy is my friend, as they say.
Posts
