Tag Archives: Sharia

Al-Shabaab and the Battle for Somalia

On June 8th, al-Shabaab fighters attacked a military base in Puntland, a semi-autonomous region in Somalia. The jihadist group claims to have killed 61 in the assault though Somali officials put the death toll at 38. Witnesses say that al-Shabaab beheaded civilians during the attack.

The attack comes on the heels of Somali authorities’ recent decision to sentence five al-Shabaab members to death. The men were arrested in April after being caught with explosives in Bosaso, a city in Puntland.

Al-Shabaab is an al-Qaeda-linked group that aims to overthrow the Somali government and impose Sharia Law. Its emir, Ahmad Umar, is the successor to Ahmed Abdi Godane, who was killed in 2014 by a U.S. air strike.

Translated to “the Youth” in Arabic,  al-Shabaab emerged out of the Islamic Courts Union (ICU) in 2006 when Ethiopian forces invaded Somalia and drove out the ICU from Mogadishu. Designated as a U.S. foreign terrorist organization in 2008, al-Shabaab has an estimated 7,000-9,000 fighters and dominates numerous rural areas in Somalia.

Al-Shabaab also conducts attacks on neighboring countries including Uganda and Kenya. Its recent May attack in Kenya killed 8 people.

Part of the reason for al-Shabaab’s past success in Somalia relates to the country’s underdeveloped and corrupt state. Drought, famine, lack of education, economic decline, and government struggles are just some of the current issues facing the nation.

Al-Shabaab’s ability to issue monetary funds to the poor and offer high salaries to potential recruits also help it gain and maintain support.

The group raises funds through local and foreign sources. Locally, it imposes business protection fees, sells ivory, and trades commodities that are difficult to trace funds back to. Internationally, it receives funding from like-minded terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda and other groups.

It has also been known to forcibly recruit children and/or provide clothing and shelter to the underprivileged youth for their loyalty. Somalia’s low school enrollment rates – roughly 40% – leave children further vulnerable to this recruitment.

Al-Shabaab vies with the Islamic State (IS) for influence in Somalia, though IS has not established a substantive of presence in the country. In April 2016, IS claimed its first terrorist attack in the region. Around the same time as the attack, it also released propaganda videos in hopes of recruiting al-Shabaab members. But this effort has had little success. Ahmad Umar deters IS recruitment with his continued vehement allegiance to al-Qaeda and warning that al-Shabaab deserters will be killed.

Though IS’s presence seems to be waning in the area, it recently claimed responsibility for the May 23 suicide bombing in Somalia suggesting that it is still in the battle against al-Shabaab for the country. It is logical that IS wants to continue pursuing Somalia. With its coastline that intersects popular shipping lanes, the country’s location is certainly convenient.

In the past few years, al-Shabaab has lost much of its Somali territories; however, it continues to fight the UN-backed government and the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM), and still remains to be a potent presence in the country. As seen by the Thursday attacks, al-Shabaab retains the ability to mobilize and execute successful attacks.

After the June 8 rampage, recently elected President Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed declared that Somalia’s army is in “hot pursuit” of al-Shabaab and will show the group “no mercy.” On numerous occasions, Mohamed has said he believes Somalia can conquer the Islamist group within two years.

To do so, Mohamed wants Somali troops to be better-equipped and urges the lifting of the UN’s arms embargo on Somalia that is set to last until November 2017. Even if the UN were to lift the embargo, Mohamed would still face challenges in halting al-Shabaab’s plan to establish Sharia and gain more territorial control in Somalia.

Though al-Shabaab’s loss of territory in the region points to its contraction, its organizational structure allows it to maintain a steady presence. Al-Shabaab is decentralized meaning there are many networks existent within the group that function to some extent independently. With this structure, it can easily adapt and function to volatility, making it a difficult target to eliminate.

Indiana: Muslims enraged by billboard telling truth about Muhammad

Originally posted at Jihad Watch:

Rep. Andre Carson “said he believes the billboard is untrue and that the billboard’s author takes Islamic text and history out of context ‘just like al-Qaeda, ISIS and the Klan do to religious texts to justify their bigotry.’”

“Untrue” is not the same thing as “out of context,” and of course the latter is the tried-and-true dodge of Islamic supremacists when presented with uncomfortable passages of the Qur’an and Sunnah. Notice also Carson’s invocation of “al-Qaeda, ISIS and the Klan.” Two are international jihad terror organizations that have mounted murderous jihad attacks all over the world and continue to be global threats. The other is a tiny organization of nuts that would get no notice at all were it not for its usefulness to the Leftist establishment. Carson is trying to give the impression that, as we hear so often, every religion has its “extremists,” and so Islamic jihad terrorism really isn’t all that unusual.

“Faryal Khatri, a spokeswoman for the Indianapolis-based Islamic Society of North America, said not only is the billboard not true, it is hurtful to her as a practicing Muslim. To Khatri, the most disappointing aspect of the sign is that it could incite hate crimes toward Muslims or people perceived to be Muslim.”

This also is a tired, overused Islamic supremacist tactic: claim that any counterterror effort, and any truthful examination of the motivating ideology behind jihad terror, will lead to innocent Muslims being attacked, and must therefore be curtailed. If this demand were always heeded, nothing would or could be done against jihad terrorists, for fear of inciting violence against peaceful Muslims, and the jihadis could advance unopposed and unimpeded.

Now: are the billboard’s claims really untrue?

1. Married 6-year-old: Few aspects of Islam that contradict Western laws and principles of human rights are more abundantly attested in Islamic law than the permissibility of child marriage. Islamic tradition records that Muhammad’s favorite wife, Aisha, was six when Muhammad wedded her and nine when he consummated the marriage: “The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death)” (Sahih Bukhari 7.62.88).

Another tradition has Aisha herself recount the scene: “The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, ‘Best wishes and Allah’s Blessing and a good luck.’ Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. (Sahih Bukhari 5.58.234). Muhammad was at this time fifty-four years old.

2. Slave owner & dealer: the Qur’an has Allah telling Muhammad that he has given him girls as sex slaves: “Prophet, We have made lawful to you the wives to whom you have granted dowries and the slave girls whom God has given you as booty.” (Qur’an 33:50)Muhammad bought slaves: “Jabir (Allah be pleased with him) reported: There came a slave and pledged allegiance to Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) on migration; he (the Holy Prophet) did not know that he was a slave. Then there came his master and demanded him back, whereupon Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: Sell him to me. And he bought him for two black slaves, and he did not afterwards take allegiance from anyone until he had asked him whether he was a slave (or a free man).” (Muslim 3901)Muhammad took female Infidel captives as slaves: “Narrated Anas: The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer near Khaibar when it was still dark and then said, ‘Allahu-Akbar! Khaibar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a (hostile) nation (to fight), then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned.’ Then the inhabitants of Khaibar came out running on the roads. The Prophet had their warriors killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives. Safiya was amongst the captives. She first came in the share of Dahya Alkali but later on she belonged to the Prophet. The Prophet made her manumission as her ‘Mahr.’” (Bukhari 5.59.512) Mahr is bride price: Muhammad freed her and married her. But he didn’t do this to all his slaves:Muhammad owned slaves: “Narrated Anas bin Malik: Allah’s Apostle was on a journey and he had a black slave called Anjasha, and he was driving the camels (very fast, and there were women riding on those camels). Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Waihaka (May Allah be merciful to you), O Anjasha! Drive slowly (the camels) with the glass vessels (women)!’” (Sahih Bukhari 8.73.182) There is no mention of Muhammad’s freeing Anjasha.

3. Rapist: “The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: (Sura 4:24) ‘And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess.’” (Sunan Abu Dawud 2150; see also Sahih Muslim 3433)”O Allah’s Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?” The Prophet said, “Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence.” (Sahih Bukhari 34:432)“I drove them along until I brought them to Abu Bakr who bestowed that girl upon me as a prize. So we arrived in Medina. I had not yet disrobed her when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) met me in the street and said: ‘Give me that girl.’” (Sahih Muslim 4345)

4. Beheaded 600 Jews in one day: Muhammad’s first biographer, Ibn Ishaq, recounts that Muhammad entrusted the fate of the tribe to the Muslim warrior Sa’d bin Mu’adh, who decreed: “I give the judgment that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as captives.” Muhammad exclaimed: “O Sa’d! You have judged among them with the judgment of the King Allah.” According to Ibn Ishaq, “The apostle went out to the market of Medina (which is still its market today) and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for [the men of the Qurayzah] and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches.” Ibn Ishaq puts the number of those massacred at “600 or 700 in all, though some put the figure as high as 800 or 900.” (Ibn Ishaq 464) Ibn Sa’d says “they were between six hundred and seven hundred in number.” (Ibn Sa’d, vol. II, 93).

5. 13 wives, 11 at a time: “Narrated Qatada: Anas bin Malik said, ‘The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number.’ I asked Anas, ‘Had the Prophet the strength for it?’ Anas replied, ‘We used to say that the Prophet was given the strength of thirty (men).’ And Sa’id said on the authority of Qatada that Anas had told him about nine wives only (not eleven).” (Sahih Bukhari 1.5.268)

6. Tortured and killed unbelievers: “When Muhammad saw Hamzah he said, ‘If Allah gives me victory over the Quraysh at any time, I shall mutilate thirty of their men!’ When the Muslims saw the rage of the Prophet they said, ‘By Allah, if we are victorious over them, we shall mutilate them in a way which no Arab has ever mutilated anybody.” (Al-Tabari, vol. 7, p. 133; cf. Ibn Ishaq 387)

“Anas reported: Eight men of the tribe of ‘Ukl came to Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and swore allegiance to him on Islam, but found the climate of that land uncongenial to their health and thus they became sick, and they made complaint of that to Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: Why don’t you go to (the fold) of our camels along with our shepherd, and make use of their milk and urine. They said: Yes. They set out and drank their (camels’) milk and urine and regained their health. They killed the shepherd and drove away the camels. This (news) reached Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and he sent them on their track and they were caught and brought to him (the Holy Prophet). He commanded about them, and (thus) their hands and feet were cut off and their eyes were gouged and then they were thrown in the sun, until they died.” (Sahih Muslim 4131)

Muhammad, according to Islamic tradition, didn’t just justify torture. He ordered it: “Kinana b. al-Rabi`, who had the custody of the treasure of B. al-Nadir, was brought to the apostle who asked him about it. He denied that he knew where it was. A Jew came (T. was brought) to the apostle and said that he had seen Kinana going round a certain ruin every morning early. When the apostle said to Kinana, ‘Do you know that if we find you have it I shall kill you?’ he said Yes. The apostle gave orders that the ruin was to be excavated and some of the treasure was found. When he asked him about the rest he refused to produce it, so the apostle gave orders to al-Zubayr b. al-Awwam, ‘Torture him until you extract what he has,’ so he kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead. Then the apostle delivered him to Muhammad b. Maslama and he struck off his head, in revenge for his brother Mahmud.” (Ibn Ishaq 515).

Note also the photo that the Indianapolis Star ran of the billboard. Apparently they weren’t capable of taking a clear photo that would enable people to read the text of the billboard easily. Or could it be that they didn’t want people to be able to read it easily, or be accused of “Islamophobia” by spreading this material in reporting on it?

“Muslims ‘outraged’ by billboard that insults prophet Mohammed,” by Fatima Hussein and Justin L. Mack, Indianapolis Star, June 6, 2017:

INDIANAPOLIS — An anti-Muslim billboard disparaging the prophet Mohammed that can be seen from an Indiana highway on the east side of Indianapolis is drawing concern from local Muslims.

Now, Islamic leaders in Indianapolis are challenging those responsible for what they say are offensive and untrue statements to stand by their words, shed their anonymity and explain their motivations.

“It is a horrible billboard. I’m outraged by it, but saddened at the same time … and I would like to know who is behind it,” said Rima Shahid, executive director of the Muslim Alliance of Indiana. “It seems very cowardly to me. If you have some kind of stance, you should want to stand up next to your statement. I didn’t think there was any room for hate in our city. This billboard tells me otherwise.

“This kind of rhetoric just furthers division in our state and makes a neighbor question a neighbor, just like I am today.”

Shahid said the billboard, which she saw on southbound Interstate 465, was brought to her attention Friday by an anonymous tipster.

The all black billboard has a headline of “The Perfect Man.” Underneath are six bullet points to describe that man. These points include “married a 6-year-old,” “slave owner & dealer” and “13 wives, 11 at one time.”

At the bottom of the billboard in yellow sits the words “Educate Truthophobes.” A search of Truthophobes online leads to multiple anti-Muslim groups, specifically an Australian group with similar messaging.

U.S. Rep. Andre Carson, D-Indianapolis, said he believes the billboard is untrue and that the billboard’s author takes Islamic text and history out of context “just like al-Qaeda, ISIS and the Klan do to religious texts to justify their bigotry.”

Faryal Khatri, a spokeswoman for the Indianapolis-based Islamic Society of North America, said not only is the billboard not true, it is hurtful to her as a practicing Muslim.

To Khatri, the most disappointing aspect of the sign is that it could incite hate crimes toward Muslims or people perceived to be Muslim….

Stop Importing Jihadists- A Policy Prescription

The danger posed by the Global Jihad is immediate and deadly and our government should take all possible precautions to keep Americans safe. The Center for Security Policy (CSP) released the Secure Freedom Strategy to Defeat the Global Jihad Movement to provide an approach that uses all aspects of U.S. power to stop this growing danger to our way of life. There are many facets to the threat, but one of the most compelling is the entry to this country of Sharia Supremacists who work to place their totalitarian ideology above any man-made law including the U.S. Constitution.

The existing immigration laws provide ample authority to ban sharia-adherent individuals under exclusions for totalitarian ideology and the President should provide guidance to the responsible agencies to do so. CSP has produced a white paper detailing the rationale and legal basis for this policy in the following white paper:

Stop Importing Jihadists: Making Sharia-Supremacism a Bar to Immigration and Naturalization

Stop Importing Jihadists- Executive Summary

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                                     27 June 2016      

NEW POLL FINDS AMERICANS WANT TO STOP IMPORTING JIHADISTS, CENTER OFFERS PLAN FOR ACCOMPLISHING THAT SECURITY GOAL

Washington, D.C.: A new poll suggests that large majorities of Americans agree with the common sense proposition that we should stop importing jihadists. A murderous attack in Orlando heightened concern that we already have too many here.

A public opinion survey conducted this month by Opinion Savvy found that 71% of respondents support “identifying foreign supporters of Sharia law prior to their admission to the United States.” Of those favoring such identification, 80% believe Sharia-supremacists should not be admitted into the country.

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump put this issue on the political map last year by calling for a temporary pause in admissions of Muslims until a way can be found to determine whether they are potential terrorists. He cited troubling findings of a 2015 poll of U.S. Muslims conducted for the Center for Security Policy. Twenty-five percent of respondents believed “violence against Americans here in the United States could be justified as part of the global jihad” and fifty-one percent believed “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed by [Islam’s totalitarian] Sharia” code, rather than the Constitution.

In recent days, Mr. Trump has mused publicly about how to differentiate between would-be Muslim immigrants who pose a threat and those who do not. He has suggested applying his proposed restriction to all would-be immigrants from certain countries tied to terrorism.

One of Mr. Trump’s top advisors, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, however, argues that defining test should instead be adherence to Sharia. On Fox News Sunday, Speaker Gingrich said: “I would apply a test for Sharia and a test for loyalty to ISIS rather than geographic test, because we’re fighting people all over the world who are dangerous to us. So, it’s hard to say which countries really are the Islamic terrorist countries.”

In an appearance last Thursday on Fox News, Center Executive Vice President Jim Hanson made a similar point:

It would be smart right now to pause immigration from jihadist controlled or influenced areas and take a look at whether or not letting anyone who is Sharia adherent Muslim— which is a totalitarian ideology not the religion — has any business coming in this country ever. We can ban totalitarian ideologues from entry with existing laws. And it’s probably  time to do that and stop bringing in more jihadists into the United States….

…The Sharia adherence is the important thing. It’s not all Muslims. There are plenty of Muslims willing to live in peace. But the ones who follow Sharia, which is a large number, it’s a third to half worldwide, have no way to follow the Constitution because they’re required to place that above any man-made law. So they’re not going assimilate. It’s not a question of their parents or internet or ISIS or anything. That’s what they taught and that is what they follow. That leads them to jihad and leads to dead bodies. We got to stop it.

The Center for Security Policy released today a white paper describing how such a filter could be applied and statutory changes that would facilitate its implementation:

“Stop Importing Jihadists: Making Sharia-Supremacism a Bar to Immigration and Naturalization.”

It calls on presidential contenders, candidates for other offices, elected officials and citizens of this country to evaluate and implement this important paper’s recommendations.

For more information contact:                                                                                               

Alex Vanness

vanness@securefreedom.org

‘See No Sharia’: FBI Releases Censored Transcript of Orlando Jihadi’s Islamic State Pledge

The FBI released today a partial transcript of the Orlando shooter’s mid-massacre calls to 911. It was sanitized to conform to the Obama party line: The attack has no connection to the Islamic State or, for that matter, to Islam.

As Attorney General Loretta Lynch Lynch put it: “What we’re not going to do is further proclaim this man’s pledges of allegiance to terrorist groups, and further his propaganda.”

So, transcribed evidence that “this man,” Omar Mateen, swore loyalty to ISIS, shouted “allahu akhbar” as he killed his victims, or otherwise embraced the totalitarian, homophobic doctrine adherents like him call “sharia” is not going to be made public. This will facilitate the narrative actively promoted over the past week (notably, on part of what Ben Rhodes called Team Obama’s “echo chamber“) to the effect that Mateen: had “behavioral problems”; engaged in “domestic violence”; was into controlling, as well as abusing, his first and second wives; and had “problems with his sexuality,” including “a latent attraction to men.”

The trouble is, those attributes are present in much of the teaching and practice of sharia-compliant Islam. If you are a law enforcement agency like the FBI and you are not allowed to know anything about Islam or sharia or jihad, then all you have is behavior that is deeply problematic. Predicting it, let alone stopping it before it happens, becomes virtually impossible.

What makes such behavior so singularly dangerous is if millions of people engage in it because they believe it is Allah’s will and their obligation. Those charged with protecting us are left wholly ill-prepared to do their jobs if they cannot identify, let alone take into account, what is fostering and impelling those people to murder large numbers of homosexuals, or Jews, or Christians, or apostates or other innocents.

In other words, when President Obama makes it impermissible – and, as a practical matter, a career-ending offense (see, for example, DHS whistleblower Philip Haney, and his new book See Something, Say Nothing) – for police, military personnel, intelligence and homeland security officers to look for and factor into their work Islamic supremacism, you have a formula for a lot more Fort Hoods, San Bernardinos and Orlandos. (For more on how this has worked in practice, download for free at www.SecureFreedom.org the new book by Clare Lopez and me entitled See No Sharia: ‘Countering Violent Extremism’ and the Disarming of America’s First Lines of Defense.)

The President and his apologists would have us believe that only by exercising such self-restraint can we avoid empowering the inexplicably motivated “violent extremists.” They insist that, were we to declare our enemies are, instead, part of a global jihad movement, and that its wellspring is sharia, we would legitimate their claim to religious authority and bring on a clash of civilizations.

Unfortunately, the jihadists know that their supremacist conduct has religious legitimacy. So do the authorities of their faith.  And so do many of the Muslims who do not embrace or want to live under sharia – let alone impose it on the rest of us.

As with Obama’s insistence that he could unilaterally end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, declaring that “we are not, and never will be, at war with Islam” does not alter the indisputable fact that those Muslims who follow its sharia strictures are and – unless defeated, deterred or destroyed – always will be at war with us.

If America persists in its “see no sharia” approach, not only will we surely be caught flatfooted as this country and our allies are subjected to many more, and far worse, jihadist attacks. We will have invited them.

That’s right. When jihadists perceive us to be capitulating – whether we call our accommodations “political correctness,” “multiculturalism” or “diversity sensitivity” – they view it as “submission.” And according to the Koran, the appropriate response for the believer is to make the infidel “feel subdued.” That can only translate into more violence aimed at achieving our complete and irreversible subordination to their permanent supremacy.

Americans are entitled to the full transcript of the Mateen 911 calls – and to an immediate termination of Obama’s “see no sharia” approach. In its place we urgently need the adoption of a robust, fact-driven counterterrorism policy, one that actually has a chance of keeping us safe.

Officials Reveal America’s National Security Controlled by the Jihadists

Two former U.S. government officials made explosive revelations on national radio this past Friday including the charge the U.S. government is a “tool” for the jihadi movement here, and that the driving force behind America’s domestic counter-terrorism strategies and our foreign policy is the Muslim Brotherhood (MB).

UTT2

President Obama with Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas leader (Islamic Society of North America) Imam Mohamed Magid of the ADAMS Center in Sterling, Virginia

The exchange took place on the Sean Hannity radio program between the host, Philip Haney (former DHS law enforcement officer with Customs and Border Protection) and Richard Higgins (a former leader inside the Department of Defense who managed programs at the Combating Terrorism and Technical Support Office (CTTSO) and Irregular Warfare Section).

Both Mr. Haney and Mr. Higgins revealed there is a massive Muslim Brotherhood movement in the United States, and made clear the MB’s influence is so significant they control how the issue of terrorism is discussed and how it is handled at the national security level.

huma

Hillary Clinton and closest aide Huma Abedin, who is an operative for the MB Movement

When asked about language being scrubbed from the U.S. government Mr. Higgins responded by saying, “What (leaders in the US government) are actually scrubbing is any references to the Islamic doctrine that would allow us to define who is or who is not actually one of our enemies.”

He went on to say, “When you look at the deliberate decision-making process of the United States government as it relates to radical Islam, that deliberate decision-making process is controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood.  And the way they control it is by prohibiting US national security personnel from ever developing an understanding to the level where Phil (Haney) had it.”

magid_mcdonough

MB/Hamas Leader Imam Magid with the President’s Chief of Staff and Former Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough

More precisely Mr. Higgins said, “To bring it back to the point earlier about the United States being put to work fulfilling the objectives of the Brotherhood:  the Brotherhood was killed en masse by Saddam Hussein – we removed him.  Qaddafi killed the Muslim Brotherhood – we removed him. We asked Mubarak to go. We are their instrument because they control our deliberate decision-making process.”

UTT has written about the willful surrender to our enemies by American leaders here, here, and here.

elibiary

Former DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano swearing in MB Leader Mohamed Elibiary to the DHS Advisory Committee

With regard to the Marxist/Socialist collaboration with the Muslim Brotherhood – as UTT has detailed via the Black Lives Matter/Hamas relationship – Mr. Higgins warned, “Every time one of these attacks happens in the United States, you see the Left in unison with the Muslim Brotherhood immediately respond with direct attacks on the First and Second Amendments.  That is not by accident, and we are going to continue to see that.”

Philip Haney’s story is devastating to hear because he publicly states he was ordered by DHS supervisors to remove the names of terrorists and terrorist organizations from DHS databases which he inputted through the course of investigations he was conducting.

This is a violation of the law.  The names removed included several known Muslim Brotherhood organizations in the U.S.

His story can be found here or here, and his powerful new book See Something, Say Nothing is now available.

Mr. Haney reiterated what UTT has been teaching and publishing for years:  “The gravitational force of the Global Islamic Movement is not radicalization, the gravitational force of the Global Islamic Movement is the implementation of sharia Law.”

It’s all about sharia.

Both Mr. Higgins and Mr. Haney made it clear the jihadi threat to America must be addressed immediately or we will suffer significant consequences for our inaction and for allowing our leaders to surrender their duties to our enemies.

Philip Haney said it best when he articulated, “This is the first and foremost obligation of the U.S. government:  to protect it’s citizens from a threat, both foreign and domestic.  And I can also tell you that if we don’t address it voluntarily with courage and conviction now, we’re going to be addressing it involuntarily, and we are going to be at a much greater disadvantage than we already are right now.”

The full audio for the show can be found HERE and the discussion with Mr. Haney and Mr. Higgins begins at approximately minute 14.

Ramadan Jihad Massacre at Orlando Gay Club

“First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people,” goes the jihad rallying cry. This year’s warning came first, as it always does, from an Islamic terror spokesman, the Islamic State’s Abu Muhammad al-Adnani. On 21 May 2016, he released a statement entitled, “That They Live by Proof,” that called for Ramadan attacks against “kuffar everywhere,” but specifically called on Muslims to target “civilians…[in] America and its allies of the Jews, Crusaders…and against all of Your enemies.”

Ramadan began on 6 June this year and runs until 6 July. The first to be attacked were in Israel, on 8 June, at the Sarona Market, an upscale food and retail center in central Tel Aviv. Two gunmen killed at least three and injured another five before being captured by police and taken into custody. That the next target was a gay nightclub in Orlando, FL should have surprised no one. Homosexuality is a capital punishment crime under Islamic Law (shariah). This is why the Islamic State is seen throwing gays off the tops of tall buildings—they believe they are obeying the will of Allah. Within Islam, there is broad consensus among authoritative scholars, based on widely-cited hadiths, about the obligation to impose the death penalty on gays. Further, mainstream Islamic doctrine obligates Muslims to take personal responsibility for the enforcement of shariah in the doctrine of “enjoin the good, forbid the evil” that derives directly from the Qur’an.

As if any more warning were needed, the United West warned in April 2016 about the Hussein Islamic Center in Sanford, FL that invited one Sheikh Farrokh Sekaleshfar, to speak during the 2016 month of Ramadan. Sekaleshfar, a Shi’ite cleric, has posted a number of his earlier lectures online. In one of them, from 30 December 2013, he spoke explicitly about the shariah obligation to impose the death sentence on homosexuals: “Death is the sentence. We know there’s nothing to be embarrassed about this, death is the sentence … We have to have that compassion for people, with homosexuals, it’s the same, out of compassion, let’s get rid of them now.” Please note that as a scholar of Shi’ite jurisprudence, Sekaleshfar cites here to the exact same shariah that holds homosexuality to be a capital crime in the Sunni schools of jurisprudence.

The Muslim killer at the Pulse night club in Orlando, FL has been identified as Omar Mir Seddique Mateen, an American citizen born in New York of Afghan immigrant parents. He was married for a time, but his ex-wife said he became increasingly abusive and beat her (indeed, as commanded in Qur’anic verse 4:34). Some years ago, Mateen made the pilgrimage to Mecca known as the umrah, which takes place at other times of the year from the hajj. He is reported to have made a 911 call before the attack, in which he pledged bayat to the Islamic State. He also is reported by eyewitnesses to have been yelling “Allahu Akbar,” as indeed required for an Islamic jihad attack. The Islamic State subsequently claimed responsibility for the attack via its Amaq News Agency while jihadis celebrated on social media. In other words, in every respect, Mateen seems to have been a devout, practicing, shariah-adherent Muslim, possibly connected in some way, formal or otherwise, to the Islamic State.

Unfortunately, the FBI didn’t seem to understand any of that when it questioned Mateen in 2013 and again in 2014 because of reports he’d been associated with Islamic terrorists, including one who carried out a suicide bombing in Syria. According to media reporting, the FBI even opened an investigation into Mateen but later closed it when they failed to understand the indicators and warnings his profile should have presented to them. As now-retired Department of Homeland Security (DHS) whistleblower Philip Haney has tried so hard to warn, because of the Great Purge throughout the ranks of U.S. national security agencies, officers like him were forbidden to pursue Islamic terror leads or learn or use accurate language to describe jihad or shariah as motivating ideologies for Islamic terror. In his new book, “See Something, Say Nothing: A Homeland Security Officer Exposes the Government’s Submission to Jihad,” Haney explains how the Muslim Brotherhood’s penetration of U.S. defenses and successful influence operations have effectively neutered U.S. law enforcement efforts against jihadis like the San Bernardino shooters or Mateen. In place of evidence-based investigations, the Obama administration willingly worked with Muslim Brotherhood advisors to implement the ‘Countering Violent Extremism’ policy that explicitly avoids anything that would connect Islamic doctrine, law or scriptures to Islamic terror. As Muslim Brotherhood front groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) or the Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPAC) begin to step forward in coming days, as they already have begun to do, ostensibly to condemn the Orlando Jihad Massacre, they too, must be held to account to repudiate the explicit elements of Islamic doctrine that hold homosexuality to be a death sentence crime.

On a final and very disturbing note, Mateen has now been identified as having been an employee of a Florida-based security firm, G4S, that, according to Judicial Watch, has a DHS contract to transport illegal aliens from the Mexican border inland to resettlement throughout the U.S. He worked for G4S since 2007 and was currently employed at the time of this shooting.

The Orlando Ramadan Jihad Massacre is the largest mass shooting ever to take place on U.S. soil. Before there is another or possibly worse attack, U.S. national security leadership must face up to the reality of the Islamic jihad assault that has been launched against us. A new national security strategy must be written and implemented that identifies the enemy threat doctrine as Islamic Law – shariah – and takes immediate, pro-active steps to counter its jihadist, supremacist elements and deny them any further ability to operate in the United States.

Ikhwan in America: An Oral History of the Muslim Brotherhood in Their Own Words

Ikhwan_in_America

CENTER RELEASES ACCOUNT BY TOP MUSLIM BROTHER OF HIS ORGANIZATION’S PLANS AND PREPARATIONS FOR JIHAD IN AMERICA

The Center for Security Policy is proud to announce the second release in its Archival Series, Ikhwan in America: An Oral History of the Muslim Brotherhood in their Own Words.

Like the first volume in this series, The Explanatory Memorandum: From the Archives of the Muslim Brotherhood in America, this new volume provides context for the needed, far deeper understanding of the true nature of the Muslim Brotherhood (known as the Ikhwan in Arabic). It does so by making accessible an original source document – along with an evaluation of its ideological, historical and organizational significance to equip our countrymen and women, and their elected representatives, to make informed decisions about one of the most serious threats facing our country: the Islamic supremacist enemies within.

“Ikhwan in America” was the title given an early 1980s lecture about the Muslim Brotherhood by a man who was at the time one of the organization’s most prominent leaders: the chief masul (“guide”) of its executive office, Zaid Naman (a.k.a. Zeid Noman). The audience were participants in a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood camp in Missouri.

The audio of the lecture was found, translated and transcribed by the FBI. It was discovered in 2004 during a search of the home of another U.S. Muslim Brotherhood leader, Ismail Elbarasse. At the time it was raided, Elbarasse’s property held what amounted to the archives of the Brotherhood in North America..

Many of those documents, including The Explanatory Memorandum, only became available to the public when they were entered into evidence in support of the government’s 2007-2008 case against the Holy Land Foundation (HLF). The HLF was a Muslim Brotherhood front that masqueraded as a charitable organization. In fact, it engaged in, anFirefoxScreenSnapz081d was convicted of, material support for a designated terrorist organization, Hamas.

Among the many pieces of evidence made available by the government in the Holy Land trial, Naman’s lecture carries special significance since it represents a first-hand account, in the words of one of the Brotherhood’s top leaders, of the Ikhwan’s history and stealthy “civilization jihad” in this country.

Naman covers both the organization’s highs and lows here, from the early successes in establishing the Muslim Students Association and Islamic centers throughout the country, to struggles and infighting that finally led to the forging of a more united U.S. Muslim Brotherhood with its counterparts from many other countries.

The Center for Security Policy’s President Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. said upon the publication of Ikhwan in America:

The production of this transcription of Zaid Naman’s authoritative account of the Muslim Brotherhood in our country is especially timely. After all, it coincides with the consideration by the U.S. Congress of legislation calling for the Brotherhood’s designation as a terrorist organization for its role in fomenting jihadist violence.

Naman’s lecture explicitly discusses the Brotherhood’s equipping its members to engage in so called “Special Work,” meaning armed violence, and training its members in the use of firearms for that purpose – statements directly at odds with the Brotherhood professed commitment to nonviolence. It should be required reading for every legislator and other official with the sworn duty to protect our nation and its Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

BOOK RELEASE: See No Sharia: ‘Countering Violent Extremism’ and the Disarming of America’s First Line of Defense

Press Release

13 April 2016

SEE NO SHARIA: HOW OUR FIRST LINES OF DEFENSE HAVE BEEN DISARMED

(Washington, D.C.): For much of the past fifteen years, the United States government has failed to understand, let alone decisively defeat, the enemy that, under the banner of its al Qaeda franchise, murderously attacked our country on September 11, 2001. The reason why that has been so – notwithstanding the bravery and skill of our men and women in uniform and the expenditure of hundreds of billions of dollars – has been unclear to most Americans, including some in government. Until now.

With the publication by the Center for Security Policy of a new book by two of its leaders, President Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. and Vice President Clare Lopez, See No Sharia: “Countering Violent Extremism” and the Disarming of America’s First Lines of Defense, the case has been forcefully made that this sorry state of affairs is a product of a sustained and highly successful influence operation by Islamic supremacists. Under both Republican and Democratic administrations, Islamists in general and the Muslim Brotherhood in particular have gained access to and considerable sway over policymakers in the White House, the FBI and the Departments of State, Justice, Defense and Homeland Security.

See No Sharia describes the trajectory that has flowed from such penetration and subversion. It traces how fact-based counterterrorism and law enforcement have inexorably been supplanted by an approach defined by accommodations demanded by Islamists – purged lexicons and training programs, limitations on surveillance, case-making and rules of engagement and above all, eschewing anything that gives “offense” to Muslims.

see_no_sharia_thumb

In addition to showing the perils associated with such policies and practices as America faces the growing threat of global jihad and its animating doctrine of sharia, this book provides specific recommendations as to how to restore our first lines of defense – the FBI and other law enforcement, the Department of Homeland Security, the military and the intelligence community – whose effective service is needed today more than ever.

Frank Gaffney noted,

“Americans expect government officials to fulfill their oaths of office by protecting the Constitution, the Republic it established and its people from all enemies, foreign and domestic. The vast majority of our public servants yearn to do their duty. Yet, as See No Sharia makes plain, for at least a decade and a half, they have been obliged to conform to policies that greatly diminish their chances for success. We simply cannot afford to disarm those in our first lines of defense against Islamic supremacism and its jihad – both the violent kind and the stealthy sort the Muslim Brotherhood calls ‘civilization jihad.’”

Clare Lopez added,

“As a career intelligence professional, the extent to which our policymaking apparatus has been penetrated and subverted by Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist operatives is deeply problematic. This book is meant to expose their handiwork – and to impel the urgently needed and long-overdue policy course-correction.”

The Center for Security Policy is proud to present this monograph as the latest in its Civilization Jihad Reader Series. See No Sharia: “Countering Violent Extremism” and the Disarming of America’s First Lines of Defense is available for purchase in Kindle and paperback format at Amazon.com. As with all of the other volumes in this Readers Series, this one can also be downloaded for free at www.SecureFreedom.org.

– 30 –

For further information on the threats shariah poses to our foundational liberal democratic values, see more titles from the Center for Security Policy’s Civilization Jihad Reader Series at http://c4secpol.wpengine.com/civilization-jihad-reader-series/

Buy “See No Sharia: ‘Countering Violent Extremism’ and the Disarming of America’s First Line of Defense” in paperback or Kindle format on Amazon.

A PDF of the newly released monograph is embedded below:

See_No_Sharia_Final