America's Islamist Fifth Column

By Deborah Weiss
Published by the American Security Council Foundation

The Muslim Brotherhood, a radical Islamist organization which originated in Egypt, has tentacles that reach around the globe. Its agenda is to establish worldwide sharia (Islamic) law. Because its tactics are largely non-violent and incremental, it operates under the radar and often goes unnoticed. Its plans are long term, but its adherents are patient. And make no mistake about it, it’s making inroads.


Now, evidence has surfaced demonstrating that the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) is at the nucleus of Muslim Brotherhood front activity in the United States. A recently published book titled, “Muslim Mafia”, written by former investigator and counterterrorism expert David Gaubatz and Paul Sperry (author of “Infiltration”,) reveals the shocking details of the undercover operation conducted by Gaubatz’s son.



After having assumed the role of an Islamic convert and winning the confidence of CAIR’s leadership, twenty-nine year old Chris Gaubatz aka David Marshall attained an internship at CAIR’s national headquarters where he gained access to private meetings and top secret records. He was assigned to shred boxes of documents, but instead brought them home for further examination. There, he discovered persuasive evidence that CAIR, ISNA and NAIT are part of the Muslim Brotherhood network.



Drawn from thousands of memos, emails and faxes, Muslim Mafia demonstrates that CAIR:



• supports organizations with terrorist ties (indeed the Justice Department designated CAIR, ISNA and NAIT as unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation trial, where several defendants were found guilty of funneling money to Hamas);

• overtly claims to cooperate with the FBI, but covertly advises Muslims to remain silent when questioned, thus obstructing investigations;

• builds unilateral “bridges” to law enforcement, the interfaith community and political circles in order to obtain information and cement relationships to provide itself with credence and possibly shield itself from investigation;

• is funded by foreign donors; and

• lobbies congress in possible violation to its IRS tax-exempt status and other US laws.



CAIR’s goals are:



• to support Palestinian terrorists;

• to eliminate aid to Israel;

• to abolish restrictions on immigration from high-risk Muslim countries;

• to desensitize Americans to creeping sharia;

• to dismantle America’s counterterrorism tools; and

• to infiltrate America’s government, corporate, media and academic institutions to gradually Islamize America.



In pursuit of these goals, CAIR’s primary arsenal is deceit. Though it purports to be mainstream, in reality, CAIR is a Muslim extremist organization. Abusing America’s freedom of religion and non-disclosure laws inherent in its non-profit status, CAIR conceals its donor base and operates to influence American policy by targeting key congressional committees including the Judiciary Committee, the Committee on Homeland Security, and the Intelligence Committee.



Taking advantage of America’s tolerant and trusting nature, CAIR uses public relations, propaganda and lies to convince the FBI, law enforcement and the public that it is nothing more than a well-meaning American-Muslim civil rights organization. Yet, Muslim Mafia tells a different story. It provides examples of how CAIR applies the tactics of pressure, persuasion, false claims of discrimination, economic boycotts and veiled threats to attain sway.



Unfortunately, political correctness has formed an unholy alliance with Islamism. Consequently, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies hired CAIR on the tax-payers’ dime to provide “sensitivity training” to its agents. There, agents learned how to handle terrorism suspects in a non-offensive manner. Instead of investigating organizations with terrorist ties, government and interfaith outreach efforts to CAIR and its affiliates had the effect of legitimizing America’s sworn enemies. Further, some FBI field agents protested that higher ups provided CAIR with advance notice of FBI raids to Islamist organizations, rendering the raids useless.



Fortunately, the FBI recently cut ties with CAIR. Additionally, the book Muslim Mafia has inspired some Congressmen to demand an investigation of CAIR. This is a commendable first step, but much more needs to be done. The FBI still collaborates with ISNA. Other law enforcement agencies still work with CAIR. Moreover, several congressmen accept campaign donations from CAIR leaders, speak at CAIR banquets, and work with CAIR on legislative initiatives.



Sadly, CAIR and its Muslim Brotherhood sister organizations are having an impact. For example, Alamoudi, once head of the Muslim American Society, started the Muslim Chaplain program at the Pentagon, all-the-while raising money for Al-Qaeda. Though Alamoudi now sits in jail, the program he commenced, which provides the Pentagon’s seal of approval to radical imams continues to this day.



Radicals have also been successful in pushing to have terrorists tried in civilian courts rather than military tribunals (Khalid Sheikh Mohammed), strong-arming corporations to remove from the market products that have allegedly offensive designs (Nike, Burger King, and others), and penalizing those in the media who are critical of radical Islam (Michael Graham WMAL was fired, and CAIR is suing Michael Savage). These are just a few examples of the myriad of successes enjoyed by non-violent Islamist organizations.



The next targets are the Treasury Department and Wall Street, where Islamists are advocating sharia-compliant financing. Sharia compliant instruments are prohibited from dealing with alcohol, pork and any business dealings with Israel. Disputes are resolved by sheiks who are expert in sharia law, rather than by the SEC. If successful, sharia compliant financing will result in the creation of a parallel financial system that lacks government accountability and contradicts American values. Worse, sharia compliant financing requires that a portion of earnings are donated to “Islamic charities” many of which are questionable. Despite this, the Treasury Department offered its first course titled “Islamic Banking 101” earlier this year.



Eight years after September 11, 2001, Americans and those they elected are still largely uninformed or misinformed as to the nature of her enemy in the War on Terror. We are fighting those who adhere to an ideology that is intolerant and anathema to freedom. Terrorism is not the cause of the problem; it is merely a symptom. The media, government officials, the intelligence community and the public had better wake up from their slumber before it is too late. It would behoove politicians of all stripes to set aside political correctness and learn the enemy’s playbook instead of refusing to read it. It is imperative to understand our enemy’s ideological and theological motivations if we are to successfully achieve a strategy to defeat him. Once we have a proper understanding of the threat and put ourselves on proper war footing, we can prevent tragedies such as the murders at Fort Hood and Binghamton University. We will understand the perils of trying the likes of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a civilian court and refrain from making such grave errors. It is not un-American to protect ourselves from supremacist totalitarian ideologies, even when they cloak themselves in the name of religion. On the contrary, countering the efforts of CAIR and its Muslim Brotherhood network is the only way America can ultimately secure her freedom. Buy Muslim Mafia and become informed. You won’t regret it. America’s freedom and national security are at stake.

Read more ...

A Demand for Respect

A demand for 'Respect'
Islamic Conference fosters drive for Shariah
Article originally published in The Washington Times
October 30, 2009
By Deborah Weiss

The secretary-general of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) recently delivered a little-reported speech at the United States Institute of Peace. In it he demanded that the United States give the Muslim world "respect." But precisely what does he mean by that?


The OIC comprises 57 states with Muslim majorities, and is expected to expand to 60 states. It is the second-largest nongovernmental organization, surpassed only by the United Nations. It is without exception the most powerful Muslim organization in the world, often voting as a bloc on international issues.

In his claim to power, Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Insanoglu enjoys expansive authority to speak on behalf of the OIC, conferred to him by the OIC charter. He boasts of speaking as the voice of the Muslim world, representing 1.5 billion Muslims. "We have an edge on all Islamic movements, and enjoy respect from all of them" he noted.

Indeed, according to Mr. Insanoglu, the push for Shariah (Islamic) courts was a movement nobody paid much attention to originally. It was he who brought those pushing for this change into the fold, and now they are making great strides. Proud to credit himself with this accomplishment, Mr. Insanoglu boasted that Sheikh Sharif, the former head of the Shariah courts movement, is now president of Somalia and is supported by both the OIC and the United States.

In a mild-mannered voice, Mr. Insanoglu observed that we are moving toward a global world order. He believes a shift in power is inevitable within 10 years.

He asserted that the "root causes" of the conflict between the United States and the Muslim world are threefold. First, the Muslim world is disenchanted with America because of its support for Israel and because of Israel's "apartheid" policies and the resulting "indignities" Palestinians must endure. Second, when the United States withdrew from Afghanistan after the Soviet Union left, Muslims felt abandoned. Third, Muslims opposed the war in Iraq, and are angry because of subsequent Iraqi deaths and the abuse of Abu Ghraib prisoners.

Clearly laying out the "preconditions" for good U.S.-Muslim relations, Mr. Insanoglu demanded that these three "problems" be addressed "properly." Additionally, America must stop "infringing on the activities of the Muslim world" and change its mindset to stop perceiving Islam negatively. After all, the OIC can be a threat to the United States or a conciliatory force. The choice is in America's hands.

Mr. Insanoglu insisted that America and the OIC have more "mutual interests" than not. To demonstrate this point, he noted OIC's collaboration with the United States to combat malaria in Africa, and its interest in alleviating poverty and homelessness in indigenous lands.

Mr. Insanoglu is optimistic about improving OIC-U.S. relations. It was step in the right direction when President Bush proclaimed his respect for the Muslim faith and apologized for any bias against Muslims. It further helped that he appointed an envoy to the Muslim world. After all, the OIC welcomes any envoy - so long as he is Muslim - and has the ear of the president.

Now that President Obama sits in office, the OIC is especially hopeful. "The Cairo speech was historical, and addressed the Muslim world for the first time in a positive way." Mr. Insanoglu applauded Mr. Obama's good intentions. He hopes the intentions transform into policies, which will then lead to programs, making "the president's and the Muslim world's dream a reality." He looks forward to a new partnership with America and believes Mr. Obama's Cairo speech echoed the same sentiment.

A specific dream that Mr. Insanoglu says he shares with the president is that of a nuclear-free world. He emphasized that there should be "only one yardstick" in coping with problem countries that refuse to rid themselves of nuclear weapons.

Israel should not be allowed to have nuclear weapons, while other countries are requested to forgo theirs. If Iran has nuclear weapons, it should be honest about it.

But, Mr. Insanoglu was quick to add that "we shouldn't repeat the same type of mistake that we made with Iraq," when reports of weapons of mass destruction turned out to be erroneous. We must act slowly and cautiously with regard to Iran. In fact, the head of Iran's nuclear program is "a very intelligent, decent guy." Mr. Insanoglu knows this because the program head was formerly the secretary's assistant general of science and technology at the OIC for four years.

During the question-and-answer period, Mr. Insanoglu was challenged regarding the OIC's track record and positions on human rights and free speech. He argued that the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights, which restricted human rights to conform with Shariah law (in effect negating these rights), was "a long time ago." He suggested the audience review the OIC's new charter and its 10-year plan.

I did just that. Though the language has changed, the goals are similar. The OIC's documents indicate that it seeks increased power, Islamist supremacy, the denigration of Israel, restrictions on free speech, and the whitewashing of any connection of Islam to terrorism. The "joint efforts" are to boost the Muslim world only. There is no hint that the OIC intends to treat Christians and Jews who are persecuted by Muslims, as sudden equals.

The burden of attaining a "positive relationship" rests entirely in the hands of Western dhimmis who naively think capitulation will make their enemies like them more. And that, dear friends, constitutes the "respect" that the OIC demands.

Deborah Weiss is a lawyer and a columnist for FrontPage Magazine and American Thinker. She also gives speeches and seminars on the legal instruments used by radicals to stifle free speech. To schedule a seminar, contact info@Vigilancenow.org

Read more ...