Trump Touches Politically Incorrect Nerve


Ban Muslim Immigration

By John R. Houk

© December 11, 2015

Donald Trump is taking all kinds of flak for saying we should ban Muslims coming to the USA until we figure out “… what the hell is going on?”

VIDEO: Donald Trump on Muslims (C-SPAN)

 

Posted by C-SPAN

Published on Dec 8, 2015

Donald Trump statement on Muslims. Watch the full campaign rally here in South Carolina here: http://cs.pn/1N9jJFI

I expected America’s Left (i.e. Democrats) and Muslim Apologists to go apoplectic against Trumps call for a ban on Muslims coming to America. I was a little taken back by the hysteria of Republicans and Conservatives that joined the American Left.

Since the original Trump call it is becoming clearer he is modifying his Muslim moratorium to Muslim immigrants which makes more sense than a total ban of other Muslims coming to visit as tourists, businessmen or diplomatic political figures. Geopolitically banning ALL Muslims would be financial and political nightmare. On the other hand banning Muslim immigrants until we figure out what the hell we are going to do about separating American-hating Muslims from Muslims willing to assimilate to the American culture upholding the U.S. Constitution as the law of the land.

Check out some of the GOP/Conservatives condemning Trump for a temporary stoppage of Muslim immigration – again – until we figure out what the hell is going on:

Nearly every fellow Republican candidate — with the notable exception of Ted Cruz — issued strongly-worded denunciations. Jeb Bush even wondered if Trump was a plant in the service of Hillary Clinton. (RELATED: Trump’s Republican Rivals Slam His Muslim Moratorium Proposal)

The focal point of House Speaker Paul Ryan‘s Tuesday press conference was excoriating the front-runner’s proposal and stating how it wasn’t conservative and wasn’t what the Republican Party was about. (RELATED: Paul Ryan Condemns Trump’s Muslim Moratorium Proposal: ‘This Is Not Conservatism’)

Arguably, the most shocking denouncer of all was Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus — the party official most concerned with keeping Trump in the GOP fold. Priebus condemned the proposal as against “our American values” and said he in no way agreed with it.

The least shocking element incensed by the proposed Muslim ban were the majority of conservative media outlets and figureheads who’ve long made it known that they disdain the real estate mogul. Their attacks were just a bit more intense this time around. (The GOP Establishment Is In For A Shock Over Trump’s Muslim Moratorium; By Scott Greer; Daily Caller; 12/9/15 12:20 AM)

My personal stand on the theopolitical religion of Islam definitely is not a politically correct one. In my selected readings of the Quran, Hadith and Sira shows Islam is virulently against Christianity and Judaism. In the case of Christianity Islam condemns the centrality of Christian faith in denying Jesus Christ is the Son of God; died on the Cross, buried in a tomb and after three days arose from the dead in a Holy Resurrection now dwelling at the right hand of the Father continuously interceding for Believers in Christ Jesus. This Islamic DENIAL makes Islam an antichrist religion. Ergo I have no problem with Trump’s original statement before clarification was added.

Other religious faiths may disagree with Christian beliefs but that is a matter of choice and I am not bothered by that choice. Faith in Christ is a choice also. The difference between other non-Muslim religions and Islam is that none of them specifically pinpoint Christianity as a lie that should be dealt with in this life before death. In Islam a lack of submission to Islamic Supremacy is a death sentence politically, culturally or both in Muslim dominated lands. Europe is now experiencing this Muslim intolerance in Muslim dominated conclaves that are no-go zones.

A recent Facebook post by Rev. Franklin Graham is a voice crying in the wilderness in support of Donald Trump’s ideas about Muslim immigration to the USA:

For some time I have been saying that Muslim immigration into the United States should be stopped until we can properly vet them or until the war with Islam is over. Donald J. Trump has been criticized by some for saying something similar. The new Speaker of the House Paul Ryan said yesterday that he disagrees—saying that “such views are not what this party stands for and more importantly it’s not what this country stands for.” Politicians in Washington seem to be totally disconnected with reality.

Research shows that there are 2.75 million Muslims living in the U.S. According to a poll commissioned by the Center for Security Policy, 51% of Muslims living in America believe “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to sharia” (Islamic law) instead of the U.S. Constitution. 29% agree that violence against those who insult Mohammad is acceptable, and 25% agree that violence against America can be justified as part of global jihad. Among males under the age of 45, that number rises to 36%. And 29% of males under 45 believe that violence against America is justified in order to make Sharia the law of the land. This is frightening.

Our politicians are not listening to the truth—my prayer is that God will open their eyes. This affects our security and the future of our nation. If you agree, email your Congressman or Senator today, and SHARE this with others (be sure to copy & paste this text when sharing). [Franklin Graham; Facebook; 12/9/15 7:52am]

Rev. Graham included a link to “Priebus, Ryan and McConnell rip Trump anti-Muslim proposal – CNNPolitics.com” which undoubtedly highlights the Communist News Network’s … err, I mean … CNN’s view of Trump’s call to ban Muslim immigration.

Yeah just in case I was not clear – BAN Muslim Immigration!

Below Bob Unruh adds some detail to Rev. Graham’s and Trump’s thoughts on Muslim immigration to the USA.

See Also:

Is Trump right about halting Muslim immigration?By Bobby Eberle; GOP USA – The Loft; 12/9/15 7:13 am

DONALD J. TRUMP STATEMENT ON PREVENTING MUSLIM IMMIGRATION Donald J. Trump Press Release; 12/7/15

Voters Like Trump’s Proposed Muslim BanRasmussen Reports; 12/10/15

Why Franklin Graham says Donald Trump is right about stopping Muslim immigration By Sarah Larimer; Washington Post; 12/10/15 [WaPo adds “Evangelical” discontent over Graham’s agreement with Trump.]

JRH 12/11/15

Please Support NCCR

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

Franklin Graham: 144,000 American Muslims not ‘peaceful’

Endorses Trump’s closed border plan: ‘Our politicians need to realize the dangers’

 

By BOB UNRUH

December 10, 2015

WND

Franklin Graham, who heads the Samaritan’s Purse organization as well as the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, has endorsed GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump’s idea of halting Muslim immigration into the United States, at least temporarily.

He warns there’s a good reason: some 144,000 Muslims already in the United States “who openly say without hesitation that violence in the name of Islam is justified!”

Graham’s comments have been posted over the last 24 hours on his Facebook page, where he noted the mantra from “political leaders and world experts” that “the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful people.”

“Some have suggested that as many as 99 percent fall into this category. Well, we don’t have to guess or estimate; the Pew Research Center has released extensive research on how Muslims in the U.S. self-identify on questions of violence – and the conclusions are frightening.”

Graham cited the 1.8 million Muslim adults in the United States.

“Pew Research released that eight percent of adult Muslims in the U.S. said that suicide bombings and other forms of violence in the name of Islam are ‘sometimes’ or ‘often’ justified. Think about it – that’s 144,000 Muslims who openly say without hesitation that violence in the name of Islam is justified!

“That’s not ‘peaceful’ and that’s not a small number – it’s about the size of the entire population of Syracuse, New York!” he wrote.

“House of War: Islam’s Jihad Against the World” conveys what the West needs to know about Islam and the violent, expansionary ideology that seeks the subjugation and destruction of other faiths, cultures and systems of government

“I’m 100 percent sure of this – our nation and our politicians need to realize the dangers of allowing people into this country that are not properly vetted.”

Earlier he wrote, in endorsing Trump’s idea, that the simple fact a part of America’s Muslim population believes the Constitution should be ruled by Shariah is a concern.

“For some time I have been saying that Muslim immigration into the United States should be stopped until we can properly vet them or until the war with Islam is over,” he wrote.

“Research shows that there are 2.75 million Muslims living in the U.S. According to a poll commissioned by the Center for Security Policy, 51 percent of Muslims living in America believe ‘Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to Shariah’ [Islamic law] instead of the U.S. Constitution.”

He continued, “Twenty-nine percent agree that violence against those who insult Mohammad is acceptable, and 25 percent agree that violence against America can be justified as part of global jihad. … This is frightening.”

Trump had called for a halt to Muslim immigration into the U.S. until those in Washington can figure out what to do regarding Islamist terror, especially that inside the U.S. His comments came in the aftermath of the Islamic terror attack in California where a radicalized husband and wife shot and killed 14 and wounded another 21 at a county Christmas party.

Trump has made it clear he is not insulting a religion, but addressing a security concern.

The result of Trump’s comments is that he’s gotten more popular in polls and the Washington Times reported now nearly two-thirds of “likely Republican primary voters support Donald Trump’s plan to bar Muslims from the United States.”

That report cited a Bloomberg Politics poll showed 65 percent of likely Republican voters approved of the Muslim ban, compared to 22 percent who opposed it and 13 percent who didn’t know.

WND had reported on the Pew results just this week. [A]nd the report explained that with only 1 percent of the nation’s population, Muslims managed to account for half of all the nation’s terror attacks following the 9/11 terror attacks.

Mark Krikorian, chief of the Center for Immigration Studies, explained, “That means Muslims in the United States are about 5,000 percent more likely to commit terrorist attacks than non-Muslims.”

The Pew results also suggested a political reason for a Democrat White House to be pursuing hundreds of thousands of such immigrants to bring to the U.S.

Pew found that 70 percent of Muslims in the U.S. vote Democratic, while only 11 percent vote Republican.

“House of War: Islam’s Jihad Against the World” conveys what the West needs to know about Islam and the violent, expansionary ideology that seeks the subjugation and destruction of other faiths, cultures and systems of government

__________________________

Trump Touches Politically Incorrect Nerve

Ban Muslim Immigration

By John R. Houk

© December 11, 2015

_______________

Franklin Graham: 144,000 American Muslims not ‘peaceful’

 

© Copyright 1997-2015. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.

Secure American Culture


John R. Houk

© November 22, 2015

The Media Research Center (MRC) sent an email which I presume is a paid ad for the theme is the Secure Freedom survey which I believe was initially began in September 2015. The MRC alert email was sent on November 20, 2015. Secure Freedom is a project of Center for Security Policy (CSP) which is led by Frank Gaffney.

Since the MRC email is probably a paid ad I suspect the original goal was to lead readers to the Secure Freedom contribution webpage. I mention this only because I am not reposting the email as a part of the Secure Freedom fund raising project, but rather to promote support for what has been dubbed American Laws for American Courts (ALAC).

The function of ALAC is a constitutional method to ensure the supremacy of Constitutional Law over foreign laws from foreign lands. The aim is at Islam’s Sharia Law which is a rule of law observed by Muslims and many Muslim nations which is absolutely contrary to the rule of law embodied in the U.S. Constitution.

An ALAC website provides a very brief summary on its How ALAC Works page:

… (T)he American Laws for American Courts model legislation works to safeguard our individual constitutional liberties against the infiltration and creep of foreign legal systems, such as Shariah law.

As you will read in another ALAC website page – WHY AMERICAN LAWS FOR AMERICAN COURTS? – You will realize nearly zero Federal ALAC statutes are a part of America’s national rule of law because there are none. However you will discover that each State in the Union has the legal constitutional authority to pass laws guaranteeing that foreign laws DO NOT override the U.S. Constitution or the constitutional law of our American union of sovereign states.

Here’s the excerpt:

American constitutional rights must be preserved in order to preserve unique American values of liberty and freedom. State legislatures have a vital role to play in preserving those constitutional rights and American values of liberty and freedom.

America has unique values of liberty which do not exist in foreign legal systems, particularly Shariah Law. Included among, but not limited to, those values and rights are:

o Freedom of Religion

o Freedom of Speech

o Freedom of the Press

o Due Process

o Right to Privacy

o Right to Keep and Bear Arms

Civil and Criminal Law Serve as the Bedrock for American Values: We are a nation of laws.

Unfortunately, increasingly, foreign laws and legal doctrines, including Shariah law principles, are finding their way into US court cases.

Reviews of state laws provide extensive evidence that foreign laws and legal doctrines are introduced into US state court cases, including, notably, Islamic law known as Shariah, which is used in family courts and other courts in dozens of foreign Muslim-majority nations.

These foreign laws, frequently at odds with U.S. constitutional principles of equal protection and due process, typically enter the American court system through:

o Comity (mutual respect of each country’s legal system)

o Choice of law issues and

o Choice of forum or venue

Granting comity to a foreign judgment is a matter of state law, and most state and federal courts will grant comity unless the recognition of the foreign judgment would violate some important public policy of the state. This doctrine, the “Void as against Public Policy Rule,” has a long and pedigreed history.

Unfortunately, because state legislatures have generally not been explicit about what their public policy is relative to foreign laws, including as an example, Shariah, the courts and the parties litigating in those courts are left to their own devices – first to know what Shariah is, and second, to understand that granting comity to a Shariah judgment may be at odds with our state and federal constitutional principles in the specific matters at issue.

The goal of the American Laws for American Courts Act is a clear and unequivocal application of what should be the goal of all state courts: No U.S. citizen or resident should be denied the liberties, rights, and privileges guaranteed in our constitutional republic.

American Laws for American Courts is needed especially to READ ENTIRETY especially the sample legislation near the end

I live in the state of Oklahoma. Our state passed a pre-ALAC law by a people’s initiative that specifically targeted Sharia principles as incompatible with American laws. You probably won’t be surprised that a local Oklahoma chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) found a Federal Judge to rule that the State passed a law by a 70% margin of the voters as unconstitutional. Oklahoma was prepared for CAIR though, the state passed an ALAC version law on April 9, 2013 which was nearly three years after Oklahoma voters overwhelmingly passed an anti-Sharia law in 2010. The State House was 85 for and 7 against while the State Senate was 40 for and a mere 3 against.

Nine American States have successfully passed an ALAC version of legislation:

Nine states—Alabama, Arizona, Louisiana, Kansas, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Dakota and Tennessee—have enacted legislation regarding the application of foreign or religious law in state courts. Eight states did so via the legislature, and Alabama enacted a measure in 2013 to change the constitution. That measure was approved by the voters in 2014. Mississippi passed legislation in 2015. (STATE RESOURCES ON THE PROHIBITION OF THE USE OF FOREIGN OR RELIGIOUS LAW IN STATE COURTS; National Conference of State Legislatures; 4/13/2015)

Twenty American States have pending legislation of a version of ALAC:

Twenty states have introduced legislation in 2015 to restrict the use of foreign law in state courts, and Mississippi has enacted legislation on the topic in 2015. Currently eight states have laws prohibiting the use of foreign laws in state courts. For more information on those laws, please see NCSL’s resources on “Laws Regarding the Use of Foreign Law in State Courts.

2015 LEGISLATION … READ THE REST (2015 FOREIGN LAW LEGISLATION; National Conference of State Legislatures; 10/15/2015)

If you have been paying attention to the news lately you are aware of ISIS butchery in Syria/Iraq, ISIS terrorism on a Russian airliner, ISIS terrorism in Paris and al Qaeda related terrorism in Mali in West Africa. Immigration issues in Europe are beginning to be connected to Islamic terrorism. Also you should be aware that President Barack Hussein Obama has allowed a lot of Muslims termed as refugees who have already made the trek to ISIS. AND NOW Obama is forcing America to take on thousands of Muslim refugees from Syria – the Mordor of ISIS.

According to a 11/17/15 Newsmax story, Obama plans to bring Syrian refugees to the USA is highly skewed to 96% Muslims. ONLY about 3% are Christians. “Since 1991, it is estimated that over 100,000 Somali refugees have resettled to the United States.” These are some of the first Muslim refugees/immigrants to demonstrate a penchant for what politically correct pundits call radical Islam. So how does Barack Hussein Obama think that the paradigm of bringing Muslims from a radicalized area like Syria will be any different?

The Muslim-friendly Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies (ACRPS) polled 900 Syrian refugees spread around Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan in 2014 and found that 13% had a favorable opinion about ISIS (11/1/15 Clarion Project story by Ryan Mauro). Before the ISIS attack on November 13 in Paris, Obama announced in September a plan to bring 10,000 Syrian refugees in 2016. That means statistically over 1,000 may be supportive of Radical Islam. That is 1,000 potential future Islamic terrorists.

Check out this Obama idiocy:

That means that roughly 18 percent of Syria’s estimated 4 million refugees are Christians. So why have only less than 3 percent of the 2,184 Syrian refugees resettled in the United States from 2011 until now been Christians? (Why Are There Only 53 Christians Among America’s 2,184 Syrian Refugees? Morgan Lee; Christianity Today; 11/20/15)

At least 32 States are rejecting Obama Syrian refugee plan. This in spite of most Left Stream Media throwing support behind Obama’s resettlement program y propaganda by using Leftist social justice guilt on Americans that welcoming immigrants is part and parcel of American values as a melting pot.

Look at America’s history from colonial days through nationhood: From where do an overwhelming majority of our melting pot Americans come from? That would be some form of Christianity (Protestant, Catholic or Eastern Rite). And the minority of non-Christian immigrants: All conformed to Western ideals embodied in the U.S. Constitution via assimilation.

Do Muslims assimilate? MOST do not. Especially the less educated refugee type of Muslims devoted to Islamic Sharia Law.

So is it actually a travesty of American values if most Americans reject the concept of accommodating Muslim refugees? I say it is more of a travesty to bring non-conforming Muslims into an American culture that stands for everything Islam IS NOT.

VIDEO: Obama: Call for only Christian refugees “offensive and contrary to American values” (2:50 mark)

 

Published by CBS News

Nov 18, 2015

During a press conference in Manila, President Obama chastises the GOP and their ensuing rhetoric over Syrian refugees as a “potent recruitment tool for ISIL”

Obama and his Leftist cadres have a closer affinity to self-destructive Leftist values than toward traditional American values.

Thank God Almighty for the Governors that know the difference between Leftist values and American values.

Map of States not wanting Syrian Refugees

Just like the existence of sanctuary cities as safe havens for illegal immigrants, there are American cities promoting the acceptance of Syrian Refugees even in States against refugee accommodation.

Map- Mayors favoring Syrian Refugees

As long as a Leftist agenda is successful in bringing counter-culture Muslims to America, Americans must protect and ensure that our American Constitutional Liberties are protected from Multicultural concepts of accommodating Muslims who desire Sharia even though it is contrary to the U.S. Constitution.

JRH 11/22/15

Please Support NCCR

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

Shariah or the U.S. Constitution?

Sent by Media Research Center

By Frank Gaffney – Secure Freedom

Sent: 11/20/2015 6:45 AM

Below is a special message from Secure Freedom. The support provided by these occasional messages allows us to provide, at no cost to you, these vital updates. Please note that the following message reflects the opinions and representations of Secure Freedom alone, and not necessarily the opinion or editorial positions of the Media Research Center. (MRC)

Should Islam’s Supremacist Shariah Be Allowed to Transform America?

Fellow American,

Your answers are urgently needed on our National Citizen Opinion Survey about the growing foothold Islamic supremacists and their agenda for dominating the world known as Shariah are achieving in America.

Photo Sharia Law in USA

Alarmingly, those who believe Islam and its repressive anti-Constitutional Shariah must rule the whole world, are making serious inroads in towns and cities right here in America – sometimes with our own tax dollars!

What’s more, the followers of Islam’s Shariah are not simply believers in a “religion.” Instead, they are waging jihad (holy war) – in one form or another – to force the whole world to submit to their dictates, non-Muslim and Muslim alike . . .

. . . even coercing or forcing what we would consider to be “the good Muslims” to join them in conforming to Shariah.

And with illegal and legal Muslim immigration in America growing at record rates, Shariah-adherent immigrants are challenging the Judeo-Christian foundation of our U.S. Constitution, our culture and values – often in ways unknown to most Americans.

Worse yet, Islamic leaders are cleverly using our own 1st Amendment rights to establish and defend so-called “Islamic Centers” here in our country, that in reality are Shariah-adherent mosques that advance “Jihad” against America . . .

. . . often providing safe-havens for terrorist recruitment and indoctrination in their quest for world dominance and power.

That’s why it’s so vital for you to sign and return your National Citizen Opinion Survey in support of keeping U.S. courts and government agencies from enabling Shariah law to take hold here.

Whether or not this problem has affected your area yet, just think about this:

o An undercover investigation found that a staggering 80% of Islamic mosques or “cultural centers” in America are under the influence of the Shariah-promoting Saudi (Wahabbist) wing of Islam. Under Shariah, gender and religion determine specific “rights” in ways at odds with our Constitutional ones.

o And Shariah promotes “jihad” . . . violence and terrorism against all Islamic “non-believers.”

And unless thousands of freedom-loving citizens like you share their views with key community leaders and our legislators to stop the creeping political influence of supremacist Islam and Shariah in America, all we need to do is look to Europe to see where our country is headed.

Great Britain now has 85 Shariah courts. In Germany, Shariah law has been used to defend a husband’s right to beat his wife and practice polygamy. France has overhauled its domestic tax laws to accommodate “Islamic Finance.”

Just think about what is already happening in America:

Secure Freedom has identified 146 U.S. court cases in which an attempt was made to use Shariah to decide the dispute. In one in five instances, the judge agreed. We expect those numbers to grow. And recently, a group of Muslims in northern Texas tried to establish the first official “Islamic tribunal” to dispense Shariah law in the United States.

How can this be happening in our country?

It’s because of a clever technique used by a particularly dangerous Islamic supremacist group, the Muslim Brotherhood. They call it “civilization jihad,” a term that describes how the Brotherhood is aiming at, in their words, “eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within.”

Here are some of the ways the civilization jihadist leaders are stealthily trying to take us down:

o Islamists are placing Muslim Brothers into positions as advisors to and, in some cases as employees of, our government – placements that facilitate their insidious influence operations.

o Islamists seek to prevent our free speech – particularly the kind that might allow us to understand and effectively counteract their secretive assaults on our country and its institutions.

o Islamists are trying to use the “Common Core” curriculum – our children’s textbooks – to promote Islamic supremacism in our academic institutions.

o Islamists are working to insinuate Shariah into U.S. courts and establish their own parallel “Islamic tribunals” to subvert our rule of law and Constitution.

o Islamists are using our immigration system – especially our refugee resettlement program – to engage in what the Islamic supremacists call the hijra, a Muslim colonization of America.

o Islamists enlist leaders of other faiths through so-called “interfaith dialogue” to obscure and enable what is fundamentally a subversive political, not a legitimate religious, agenda. And,

o Islamists use what is known as “Shariah-Compliant Finance” to penetrate and coopt our capitalist system.

While the Europeans are further down the tubes than we are at the moment, I think you’ll agree there is reason to believe we are catching up. For example:

o Many national food chains are selling unmarked Shariah-compliant “Halal” meat (the animal is ritually-slaughtered by a Muslim who sacrifices it to Allah), unbeknownst to most Americans who are buying and consuming it.

o Our own U.S. Treasury Dept. has hosted in its headquarters a course called “Islam Finance 101” to promote Shariah-compliant financial activities. And today, most of our major banks and financial institutions – including one-time government-owned and taxpayer-funded AIG – offer “Shariah-Compliant” products that are overseen by Muslim “scholars” to ensure they comply with Islamic law.

o Some public and taxpayer-funded university gyms are now providing separate hours for male and female swimming . . . to comply with Shariah laws for Islamic followers.

o Several years ago, at a Tyson’s chicken processing plant in Tennessee, the American Labor Day holiday was REPLACED with an Islamic religious holiday. A public outcry forced the company to reverse that decision, but it did so by making accommodations for both holidays.

o A New Jersey judge denied a protective order to a Moroccan-American woman being systematically beaten and tortured by her Muslim husband on the grounds that he was just practicing his faith according to Shariah. And in Virginia, an Islamic school operating under Shariah not only ignored the reports by a little girl that she was being molested by her father, but the principal sent her home for him to “handle it”.

o A Muslim father murdered his two daughters in Houston a few years ago in an act known as “honor killing” for dating American boys. Others are having their girls’ genitals mutilated – yes, here in the United States.

So you can see why it is so critical to the future of America to participate in this unprecedented national effort. We must shine the light of day on how supremacist Islam and Shariah are gaining ground. And we must get millions of our fellow citizens behind our effort to prevent Shariah from taking hold here and to counter the jihad of all kinds in America.

So I hope you will do your part by answering and submitting your National Citizen Opinion Survey and join in our fight to push back on the Islamic supremacists and their Shariah agenda.

I am emailing you and a few other key people in your area who I thought would be most likely to help us stop this growing threat.

My name is Frank Gaffney. I am the founder and President of Secure Freedom (also known as the Center for Security Policy). For twenty-seven years, we have forged partnerships between elected and other government officials, past and present military leaders, experts and citizens like you to safeguard our U.S. national security against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Since before the attacks by jihadists on 9/11, we have been investigating and challenging Islamic supremacism, and the growing influence of Sharia in America.

Perhaps you’ve seen me as a guest on Fox News and other media outlets warning about Shariah. They call me or a member of my staff when they need an expert on how Islamic supremacism, its Shariah program and jihad are becoming problems for Americans, not just somewhere else, but here at home, as well.

Make no mistake. These threats will destroy America from within – unless we stop them.

That’s why we’ve launched a major national educational campaign to expose millions of Americans to the truth and mobilize them to turn this crisis around now . . . before it’s too late.

We hold strategic briefings and training programs for key community leaders, legislators, law enforcement and military personnel, pastors and others to warn them about the dangers of civilization jihad, as well as the violent kind, right here in our own country. We also equip these partners with strategies for defeating the jihadists.

We have modeled our strategic approach after the one my old boss, President Reagan, used to defeat the last totalitarian ideology that tried to take us down: Soviet communism. We call it the Secure Freedom Strategy.

If you would like to know what we are recommending to bring all instruments of national power to bear against today’s ideological counterpart to communism, Shariah, you can check out this strategy for free at act.SecureFreedom.org.

And if you want to learn more about the how the Muslim Brotherhood’s “civilization jihadist” techniques in our country, visit our free, online course at MuslimBrotherhoodinAmerica.com or download for free our publications at SecureFreedom.org.

You may have also heard me discuss this issue on my nationally syndicated show, Secure Freedom Radio. You can also catch our podcasts at any time at SecureFreedom.org.

I am anxious to see your response to the National Citizen Opinion Survey because I suspect it will confirm my experience . . .

. . . when Americans are exposed to the facts – without “politically correct,” but factually wrong, statements from our government or media lies and distortions – they will join in taking the steps needed NOW to help prevent Islamic supremacism from securing an ever-larger foothold here, and ensure that every person residing in this country, no matter their religious, ethnic or cultural background, lives by America’s Constitutional rule of law.

So, can I count on you to take just a few minutes right now to give me your opinions on the National Citizen Opinion Survey and help us show our leaders how powerfully the American people want us to counter jihad? I pray you will do so.

That’s because, incredible as it may seem – like many of their constituents – an awful lot of local, state and even federal legislators and officials are unaware of the progress being made by Islamic supremacists determined first to insinuate, then to impose, Shariah in our country. That’s why Secure Freedom must not only educate the public, but also our representatives, about the necessity of preventing this impending national crisis.

But we have a major obstacle facing us.

Muslim Brotherhood-associated organizations like the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) are trying to suppress the sort of information we need to get out. Their influence operations against our government, media and elites – in which they call truth-tellers “Islamophobes,” “racists” and “bigots” – all-too-often succeed in enforcing Shariah blasphemy restrictions on free expression.

This is all the more outrageous since, in a speech, a former Chairman of CAIR proclaimed:

“Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth”.

Chilling words indeed!

The rise of the barbaric Islamic State (ISIS) and the resurgence of al Qaeda and its affiliates have begun to arouse many of our countrymen and women to the ever-expanding forces of Shariah-adherent Muslims and the clear and present danger their violent jihad increasingly poses to our homeland and citizens.

Now we need to ensure that our fellow Americans are aware as well of the other principal form of jihad – the Muslim Brotherhood’s civilization jihad.

With your help and the help of others today, I feel confident that we can effectively counter these stealthy Islamic supremacists and the agenda they share with the violent jihadists: imposing Shariah on America.

Currently, Secure Freedom’s “Counter Jihad Campaign” is working on 4 principal fronts. For our efforts to succeed we must:

1) Contact and educate at least 3 million key Americans like yourself, by exposing them to information about the Islamists’ insidious threat to America.

We want to do that by sharing with them informational letters and getting feedback in our National Citizens Opinion Survey. Funds permitting, we want to distribute our free mini-book with highlights of Shariah, The Threat to America – It contains all you need to know about Islamic supremacism and what its practitioners have in mind for you. Our goal is to do this within the next 60 days.

Then, we must communicate to state, local and federal leaders the results of our Survey to ensure there are, at a minimum, no more jihadists or additional jihadist mosques and organizations allowed to operate in this country and to begin effectively countering those already here.

2) Take out newspaper and radio advertisements, use the Internet – even produce TV ads – to expose the truth about Shariah to tens of millions of citizens and create even more public pressure to defeat jihad.

3) Ramp up our ongoing work to foster among key groups – law enforcement, veterans and other military personnel, pastors and community leaders – awareness of and what to do about the insidious, and growing, Islamic supremacist movement.

Such folks have, after all, an urgent need to know of this danger since in many cases, their towns, cities or states are being systematically subjected to the Islamists’ civilization jihad, colonization or other subversive operations.

4) And I must continue holding one-on-one strategy sessions with Members of Congress, presidential candidates, leading folks in the media and other influential figures in our effort to encourage the necessary course-correction for our country. We have to educate them about the true nature of Shariah and the imperative of preventing it from subverting our Constitution and way of life.

Simply put, Shariah is anti-Constitutional and incompatible with the rule of law in a republic such as ours.

That’s because our Constitution guarantees that every individual citizen is “endowed by our Creator” with an identical set of rights, no matter their gender or religion. But if the Islamic supremacists succeed in hiding their true agenda and the progress they are making towards realizing it, they will continue to erode our freedom of speech and other rights and continue to subvert our country.

By engaging our legislators, enlisting our community leaders and educating millions of concerned Americans around the county with information kits and critical alerts, I believe this is a battle we can win. But not without help like yours and others who we are asking to give us a hand.

And our first and most critical step is to get my email and this National Citizen Opinion Survey to at least 3 million like-minded citizens starting within the next 60 days. And that’s where your assistance is sorely needed.

Yes, we have our work cut out for us, but please know that the Secure Freedom team has the unique expertise needed for us to succeed on this critical task.

But because Secure Freedom is a non-profit organization, our funds are very limited. We must ensure that our financial resources are used to the greatest possible effect.

And today I was only able to afford to contact you and others who I felt would be most likely to help us.

In fact, you are among the first citizens to receive Secure Freedom’s National Citizen Opinion Survey on Islamic supremacism in America.

It was important to me that you be one of the first to be invited to help with this campaign. Along with your answers to our Survey today, will you also include a generous donation to our effort – $20 or $25, or even $50, $100, $200 or more if you can possibly afford it? Even $15 would be a blessing.

I know in these hard economic times, many people are tightening their belts and making financial contributions wisely. But an investment in the work of Secure Freedom is one of the wisest contributions you can make, as it is truly unique and urgently needed.

If you and I do not make the effort NOW to stop the Islamic supremacists and their jihad and Shariah from gaining more ground, I shudder to think what America will look like just a few short years from now – and how it will afflict our children and grandchildren.

Perhaps this problem has not directly affected you or your community, yet. But I can assure you, with Muslim immigration at record rates and the success of the Islamists’ civilization jihad, it soon will.

So please join us in working to counter jihad and secure freedom by completing the National Citizen Opinion Survey – a critical first step in helping us protect our Constitution and our country in these difficult and increasingly dangerous times.

With heartfelt thanks for your help,

Frank Gaffney
Founder and President, Secure Freedom

P.S. Remember, too many Americans are unaware of the tremendous inroads being achieved by the Islamic supremacists’ global effort to bring Shariah to towns and cities right here in America – often with our very own tax dollars and, in some cases, with the help of the United Nations.

They don’t yet know what you now do: Shariah makes Islam into much more than a “religion.” It is nothing less than a truly global political and military offensive against America and the West. With thousands of mosques in America advancing this program here via stealthy forms of jihad as well, occasionally, as violent ones, we must act now!

It’s vital for you to complete the National Citizen Opinion Survey right away to help us create the massive public pressure needed to counter this jihad and keep Shariah from subverting our Constitution and rights in our courts, media, churches, financial sector and government.

So, please let me hear back from you today. And I hope you’ll be as generous as you can to help us fund this unprecedented national educational and advocacy campaign. Thank you.

_____________________

Secure American Culture

John R. Houk

© November 22, 2015

_____________________

Shariah or the U.S. Constitution?

Secure Freedom

1901 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 201
Washington, DC 20006, (202) 835-9077

As a 501c3 tax-exempt organization, we are able to do our part to keep America safe by educating citizens and members of Congress on vital matters of national security. All gifts to Secure Freedom are therefore tax-deductible. Thank you for helping to secure freedom in America!

Retired Four-Star Admiral Says The Unsayable About…


Admiral James “Ace” Lyons

Admiral James “Ace” Lyons
 
The Noisy Room blog picks up on the influential remarks of retired Four Star Admiral James “Ace” Lyons pertaining to strategy on confronting the Islamic threat of ISIS (I am learning to call these nuts DAESH). Admiral Lyons made his observations as a part of a panel at the Center for Security Policy’sDefeat Jihad Summit.
 
Here is some info on the good Admiral:
 
Admiral James A. “Ace” Lyons, Jr. (U.S. Navy, Ret.), is President/CEO of LION Associates LLC. As an Officer of the U.S. Navy for thirty-six years, most recently as Commander in Chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, the largest single military command in the world, Admiral Lyons’ initiatives contributed directly to the economic stability and humanitarian understanding in the Pacific and Indian Ocean regions and brought the U.S. Navy Fleet back to China. He also served as Senior U.S. Military Representative to the United Nations. As the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations from 1983–1985, he was principal advisor on all Joint Chiefs of Staff matters and was the father of the Navy Red Cell, an anti-terrorism group comprised of Navy Seals he established in response to the Marine Barracks bombing in Beirut. Admiral Lyons was also Commander of the U.S. Second Fleet and Commander of the NATO Striking Fleet, which were the principal fleets for implementing the Maritime Strategy. As Fleet Commander he managed a budget of over $5 billion and controlled a force of 250,000 personnel. He is a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy and has received post graduate degrees from the U.S. Naval War College and the U.S. National Defense University. (Adm. James “Ace” Lyons; Shariah – The Threat to America)
 
JRH 2/17/15

Please Support NCCR

***************************
Retired Four-Star Admiral Says The Unsayable About Islam And President Obama’s Foreign Policy Strategy
 
By Benjamin Weingarten (TheBlaze)
Posted on February 16, 2015 1:28 pm by TMH
 
Recently we reported on retired Lt. Gen. and former DIA Chief Mike Flynn’s devastating criticism of the terms of President Obama’s Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) against ISIS.
 
Another prominent retired member of America’s armed forces who has emerged as an outspoken opponent of the Obama administration’s foreign policy is four-star admiral James “Ace” Lyons.
 
During the Center for Security Policy’s recent Defeat Jihad Summit, the naval officer of 36 years, who served most recently as the Commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, made some simply astounding comments about Islam and President Obama’s foreign policy strategy:
 
 
Lyons’ remarks followed a scathing critique of the bipartisan failure of U.S. leaders to deal with the threat of Islamic supremacism, dating back to President Carter.
 
The Defeat Jihad Summit, held on February 11, was intended to serve as a corrective for the Obama administration’s forthcoming Countering Violent Extremism summit.
 
The event included prominent counterjihadists such as Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders and dozens of others.
 
You can watch full video of the conference here.
 
VIDEO: Defeat Jihad Summit [6:11:22]
 
 
Published by securefreedom
Published on (Streamed live) Feb 11, 2015
 
This invitation-only event will be conducted in a roundtable discussion format involving some 35 distinguished counter-jihadists. Among the eminent participants will be: Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, Representatives Steven King and Mike Pompeo, Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders, Danish free speech advocate Lars Hedegaard and Britain’s Lord Malcolm Pearson.
 
________________________________
© 2015 NoisyRoom.net

U.S. Flag Officers: Keep Gitmo Open – Don’t Surrender Gitmo to Cuba


Keep Gitmo Open 2

The Center for Security Policy (CSP) sent an email press release to my email and probably their mailing list.

 

JRH 2/12/15

Please Support NCCR

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

U.S. Flag Officers: Keep Gitmo Open – Don’t Surrender Gitmo to Cuba (Summarized title by Editor)

 

Sent by Ben Lerner

Sent: February 12, 2015

Center for Security Policy

 

RETIRED FLAG OFFICERS, NATIONAL SECURITY EXPERTS ADVISE AGAINST TRANSFER OF GITMO DETAINEES AND SURRENDER OF GITMO TO GOVERNMENT OF CUBA

 

(Washington, DC): Today, dozens of distinguished retired senior military officers and national security experts signed a letter to President Obama, organized by the Center for Security Policy, urging him to keep the detention/interrogation facility at Guantanamo Bay open, and to refrain from transferring – either to foreign countries or to the United States – jihadist detainees currently held there.  The letter also cautions President Obama against acceding to the demands of the Castro regime that the [Guantanamo Bay Naval Base] itself be surrendered to the government of Cuba.

 

With respect to the detainees held at Gitmo, the letter underscores the extent to which transferring detainees out of Gitmo, either to foreign countries or to the United States, poses serious national security risks.  The letter states in part:

 

“The statistics concerning the recidivism rates of former Gitmo detainees should be cause for you to suspend indefinitely all overseas detainee transfers.  According to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, approximately thirty percent of detainees who have been transferred out of Gitmo since detainee operations were first established there – under the previous administration as well as your own – have either been confirmed as having reengaged on the battlefield, or are suspected of having done so.  The actual number could well be considerably higher.

 

“…While U.S. law prohibits the transfer of Gitmo detainees to the United States, or the construction/modification of facilities within the United States for that purpose, your former State Department envoy for Guantanamo closure, Cliff Sloan, has indicated to the media that your strategy is eventually to make the case to Congress that the “small core” that may remain after further foreign transfers take place should be transferred into the United States for detention.  We believe that such a transfer into the United States would be unacceptable on both the domestic security and legal grounds.

 

The letter goes on to explain the strategic value of the [Guantanamo Bay Naval Base], and the importance of maintaining U.S. control over that installation from a military and geostrategic perspective.  The letter states in part: 

 

“Quite apart from its use over the past thirteen years for detainee operations, Gitmo has served a vital security role for American interests in the Western Hemisphere since its establishment in 1903, and continues to do so.  Notably, that installation provides critical logistical support to ships and aircraft involved in counter-narcotics operations in the Caribbean, and also support for contingency operations in the region.” 

 

“Even worse than the loss of this facility to our forces would be the prospect that its surrender to the Cuban government may well presage Guantanamo Bay becoming an important power-projection base in the Western Hemisphere for other, hostile powers (e.g., Russia, China or Iran).  We recall that, in 2007, Ecuadoran President Rafael Correa shortly before he informed the United States that the agreement allowing the U.S. Air Force to use the Manta air base for counter-narcotics operations would not be renewed – offered the use of that base to China.  (Manta has subsequently become a conduit for the very drug-trafficking to this country that it once did so much to disrupt.)” 

 

Among of the signatories of the letter were:

 

·         Gen. Carl Stiner, USA (Ret.)

 

·         Adm. Jerry Johnson, USN (Ret.)

 

·         Lt. Gen. David Deptula, USAF (Ret.)

 

·         Hon. Michael B. Mukasey, Former Attorney General of the United States

 

·         Hon. Pete Hoekstra, Former Member of Congress; Former Chairman, House Permanent  Select Committee on Intelligence

 

·         Hon. Kenneth E. deGraffenreid, Former Deputy National Counterintelligence Executive

 

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., President and CEO of the Center for Security Policy, stated:

 

“The individuals who have signed this letter urging President Obama to change course on his disastrous agenda to close down the detention/interrogation facility at Guantanamo Bay, deserve the nation’s gratitude for having stepped up, yet again, in defense of the national security of the United States.  It is also most welcome that the signatories of this letter recognize the geostrategic necessity of keeping Guantanamo Bay under American control, rather than surrendering it to the Castro regime, which would most assuredly use that base against the interests of the United States, and invite others to do the same.  President Obama should heed the advice of these distinguished warriors and national security professionals and keep Gitmo open, operational and in American hands.”

 

The full text of the letter, with signatures, can be found below.

 

-30-

 

#####

 

12 February, 2015

 

President Barack Obama

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Ave, NW

Washington, D.C. 20500

 

Dear Mr. President:

 

As you are well aware, the Department of Defense has, since shortly after September 11, 2001, detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba dangerous individuals the U.S. government has designated as unlawful enemy combatants.  Yet, shortly after you took office in January of 2009, you issued an Executive Order mandating the closure of the detention/interrogation facilities at that installation (popularly known as Gitmo.) 

 

In the intervening period, you have transferred a number of those detainees to foreign countries, particularly during the past several months.  You also reiterated in your 2015 State of the Union address your intention to close Gitmo and appear intent on removing from that secure facility the unlawful enemy combatants jihadists that have been officially described as “the worst of the worst” – still confined there.

 

Meanwhile, public reports indicate that the Castro regime has demanded that the United States surrender Gitmo as part of any arrangement for normalization of relations between the United States and Cuba.  As you have made a priority of achieving such a restoration of ties, you may feel tempted to accede to this demand.

 

Our past experience as military, intelligence, law enforcement and security policy professionals leads us to believe that the continued transfer of detainees out of Gitmo to foreign countries, and potentially into the United States, threatens national security and public safety.  This is particularly true given events of recent weeks, during which we have seen a resurgence of al Qaeda, Islamic State and other jihadist organizations eager to deploy operatives both abroad and, if possible, here at home to carry out attacks against the West. 

 

The statistics concerning the recidivism rates of former Gitmo detainees should be cause for you to suspend indefinitely all overseas detainee transfers.  According to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, approximately thirty percent of detainees who have been transferred out of Gitmo since detainee operations were first established there – under the previous administration as well as your own – have either been confirmed as having reengaged on the battlefield, or are suspected of having done so.  The actual number could well be considerably higher.

 

Some of the former Gitmo detainees who have definitely resumed their jihad include: Abu Sufian bin Qumu, now the leader of a group that participated in the attacks on our facilities in Benghazi; Ibrahim al-Rubaysh, now a senior leader of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula; and Mazin Salih Musaid al-Alawi al-Awfi, also a senior leader of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. There are press reports that at least one of the Taliban commanders exchanged for Sergeant Bo Bergdahl has already returned to the fight.  Such individuals pose a direct threat to our military and diplomatic personnel overseas, as well as to our civilian population domestically.

 

While U.S. law prohibits the transfer of Gitmo detainees to the United States, or the construction/modification of facilities within the United States for that purpose, your former State Department envoy for Guantanamo closure, Cliff Sloan, has indicated to the media that your strategy is eventually to make the case to Congress that the “small core” that may remain after further foreign transfers take place should be transferred into the United States for detention.  We believe that such a transfer into the United States would be unacceptable on both the domestic security and legal grounds.

 

For example, the transfer of detainees to U.S. prisons or military bases would turn those facilities – and the nearby civilian populations – into high-probability terrorist targets. In addition, convicted terrorists are known to have plotted or facilitated attacks while incarcerated in our penal institutions.  For example, Sayyid Nosair helped plan the first World Trade Center bombing from a U.S. prison.  And Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman (a.k.a. the Blind Sheikh) ran the al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya terrorist organization from a U.S. prison. 

 

Moreover, once inside the prison system, detainees will be better positioned to argue that prison security practices violate their rights and need to be altered.  That was the case when shoe-bomber Richard Reid asserted the Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) interfered with his free exercise of religion.  The Department of Justice chose in response to lift the SAMs at Supermax.

 

Furthermore, once on U.S. soil, detainees will argue that they are entitled, by virtue of their physical presence here, to a range of constitutional protections that can only, they will argue, be realized in our defendant-friendly civilian criminal court system.  At least, some federal judges can be expected to entertain such a contention.

 

Given the circumstances surrounding the capture of these detainees – often on foreign battlefields – civilian prosecutors will likely be forced to choose between revealing classified evidence to secure a conviction, and dropping charges.  Such a scenario begs the question of what we will have to do with detainees who, once here in the U.S., cannot be tried and cannot be sent overseas.  The options at that point will be either to detain these terrorists inside the U.S. indefinitely, without trial and possibly in the face of court orders dismissing their cases, or release them here.      

 

Additionally, proponents of closing detention operations at Gitmo often argue that the facility’s existence is a “recruiting tool” for terrorists. This ignores the fact that the United States was repeatedly attacked by terrorists during the decades prior to the commencement of detainee operations at Gitmo, including on September 11, 2001.  To suggest that Gitmo fuels terrorism ignores history and the reality that the terrorism of greatest concern today is, and has long been, driven by jihadist ideology.  Gitmo does not fuel global jihad; rather, it is global jihad that necessitates Gitmo. 

 

That said, there is some truth to the idea that Gitmo has symbolic value to our enemies: It is certain that they would, quite properly, consider its closure a signal victory in their determined effort to demonstrate our submission and enlist new recruits to their cause.

 

It is also our professional judgment that surrendering to the Castro regime control of the U.S. naval facility at Guantanamo Bay, with its deep water port and airfield, would be a strategic mistake of the first order.

 

Quite apart from its use over the past thirteen years for detainee operations, Gitmo has served a vital security role for American interests in the Western Hemisphere since its establishment in 1903, and continues to do so.  Notably, that installation provides critical logistical support to ships and aircraft involved in counter-narcotics operations in the Caribbean, and also support for contingency operations in the region. 

 

Even worse than the loss of this facility to our forces would be the prospect that its surrender to the Cuban government may well presage Guantanamo Bay becoming an important power-projection base in the Western Hemisphere for other, hostile powers (e.g., Russia, China or Iran).  We recall that, in 2007, Ecuadoran President Rafael Correa shortly before he informed the United States that the agreement allowing the U.S. Air Force to use the Manta air base for counter-narcotics operations would not be renewed – offered the use of that base to China.  (Manta has subsequently become a conduit for the very drug-trafficking to this country that it once did so much to disrupt.) 

 

The Castro regime is already making its ports, airfields, intelligence collection and other facilities available to our actual or potential foes. There is little doubt in our view that the Cuban government would be inclined toward similar arrangements with China or others with respect to Gitmo.  It would be a serious dereliction of duty were our government to facilitate such a fundamental transformation of our strategic posture in the Caribbean.

 

For these reasons, we believe that there should be no further transfers of unlawful enemy combatants currently held at Gitmo – either to other nations or to any locale in the United States or its territories – for the duration of hostilities.

 

We further strongly recommend that the Department of Defense and other federal agencies refrain from spending any funds to accomplish the closure of Guantanamo Bay  or the transfer of detainees abroad or to the United States, and that the United States reject Cuban government demands that this vital strategic facility be transferred to the latter’s control.

 

Sincerely,

 

Army

Gen. Carl Stiner, USA (Ret.)

Lt. Gen. Edward G. Anderson III, USA (Ret.)

Maj. Gen. John R. D. Cleland, USA (Ret.)

Maj. Gen. Vincent E. Falter, USA (Ret.)

Maj. Gen. Alvin W. Jones, USA (Ret.)

Maj. Gen. H. Douglas Robertson, USA (Ret.)

Maj. Gen. George R. Robertson, USA (Ret.)

Maj. Gen. Duane Stubbs, USA (Ret.)

Maj. Gen. Mel Thrash, USA (Ret.)

Brig. Gen. Dale F. Andres, USA (Ret.)

Brig. Gen. Terence M. Henry, USA (Ret.)

Brig. Gen. Darryl Powell, USA (Ret.)

Brig. Gen. Richard D. Read, USA (Ret.)

Brig. Gen. Warren A. Todd, USA (Ret.)

 

Navy

Adm. Jerry Johnson, USN (Ret.)

Adm. James A. Lyons, USN (Ret.)

Vice Adm. Edward S. Briggs, USN (Ret.)

Vice Adm. Robert Monroe, USN (Ret.)

Rear Adm. Lawrence Burkhardt, USN (Ret.)

Rear Adm. Robert H. Gormley, USN (Ret.)

Rear Adm. Robert McClinton, USN (Ret.)

Rear Adm. E. S. (Skip) McGinley, II, USN (Ret.)

Rear Adm. Don. G. Primeau, USN (Ret.)

Rear Adm. Hugh Scott, USN (Ret.)

Rear Adm. H. Denny Wisely, USN (Ret.)

 

Air Force

Lt. Gen. David Deptula, USAF (Ret.)

Lt. Gen. Thomas G. McInerney, USAF (Ret.)

Lt. Gen. E.G. “Buck” Shuler, Jr., USAF (Ret.)

Maj. Gen. Henry Canterbury, USAF (Ret.)

Maj. Gen. Bentley B. Rayburn, USAF (Ret.)

 

Marine Corps

Maj. Gen. Richard M. Cooke, USMC (Ret.)

Maj. Gen. J.D. Lynch, USMC (Ret.)

BGen. William A. Bloomer, USMC (Ret.)

BGen. James M. Mead, USMC (Ret.)

BGen. Michael I. Neil, USMCR (Ret.)
BGen. W.H.J. Tiernan, USMC (Ret.)

BGen. William Weise, USMC (Ret.)

 

State Defense Forces

Maj. Gen. John Bianchi, CSMR (Ret.)

 

National Security

Hon. Michael B. Mukasey, Former Attorney General of the United States 

Hon. Pete Hoekstra, Former Member of Congress; Former Chairman, House Permanent  Select Committee on Intelligence

Hon. Tidal McCoy, Former Acting Secretary of the Air Force 

Hon. Kenneth E. deGraffenreid, Former Deputy National Counterintelligence Executive

José R. Cárdenas, Former Acting Assistant Administrator for Latin America and the Caribbean, U.S. Agency for International Development; Former Staff Member, National Security Council

Daniel J. Gallington, Former Special Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Policy; Former General Counsel, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence

Andrew C. McCarthy, Former Chief Assistant United States Attorney

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., Former Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy

Elaine Donnelly, 1992 Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Services

 

 

cc: Members of the Senate Armed Services Committee

     Members of the House Armed Services Committee 

____________________________

About the Center for Security Policy

 

The Center for Security Policy is a non-profit, non-partisan national security organization that specializes in identifying policies, actions, and resource needs that are vital to American security and then ensures that such issues are the subject of both focused, principled examination and effective action by recognized policy experts, appropriate officials, opinion leaders, and the general public. For more information visit www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org

 

It’s Time For The ‘Secure Freedom’ Strategy


Frank Gaffney, JR. holding Secure Freedom Strategy Report


Frank Gaffney and a group of like-minded individuals he identifies as the Tiger Team with the Center for Security Policy (CSP) have developed a strategy to keep America secure. Below is the cross post.
 
JRH 1/20/15

Please Support NCCR

************************
It’s Time For The ‘Secure Freedom’ Strategy
 
January 16, 2015
 
A hard reality is finally sinking in across America: for a long time now – actually, for more than thirty-five years – the United States has been at war with an enemy sworn to its destruction.
 
It did not seek enmity or hostilities with them. Both are the product of forces that long predated the establishment of this country, to say nothing of its adoption toward the end of the 20th Century of certain policies towards the Middle East or other regions.
 
The enemy is the Global Jihad Movement. And it is inspired, guided, and enabled by the Islamic supremacist doctrine its adherents call shariah.
 
For much of this period, the U.S. government has pursued various approaches to the threats posed by that enemy – including selective military engagements, benign neglect, willful blindness, and outright appeasement. They have all shared one common denominator: They ignore the aforementioned realities and, as a practical matter, have exacerbated them.
 
Yet, no one has advanced a more reality-based, more practical and more effective way to counter, let alone defeat, this ideologically driven enemy.
 
Until now.
 
At the National Press Club at noon on January 16th, an ad hoc group of highly skilled national security professionals will unveil an alternative plan of action that has been proven effective in protecting us against relentlessly aggressive totalitarian ideologues in the one environment that matters: the real world. The resulting approach, called the “Secure Freedom Strategy,” is modeled after the one President Ronald Reagan successfully employed to take down Soviet communism and the Evil Empire it spawned.
 
The “Secure Freedom Strategy” offers a detailed prescription for a clear-eyed understanding of the enemy we confront and actionable steps for vanquishing it. Its key components include:
 
Understanding the Enemy’s Threat Doctrine: Having conclusively demonstrated that Sun Tse’s admonition that you can’t defeat an enemy you don’t know still operates, the United States must now abandon past practice by adopting a realistic understanding of the enemy and its doctrine. That requires, in particular, clarity concerning shariah, the jihad it impels, and the various ways in which such warfare is being waged against us.
 
The Tiger Team makes clear that its use of the term shariah is informed by the practice of Islamic law by the recognized authorities of the faith since at least the 10th Century. (It is noteworthy that, when Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi complained publicly and courageously about the jihadist character of contemporary Islam, he did not berate so-called “radical extremists” of al Qaeda or Islamic State. Rather, he took to task the leading imams in Sunni Islam’s equivalent of the Vatican, al-Azhar University.) Such use of the term shariah, therefore, does not refer to an idiosyncratic, personal, or purely pietistic observance of Islamic law which may or may not conform to the entirety of established Islamic doctrine.
 
The jihadism of shariah is being advanced by both violent techniques and by means other than terrorism. We must, accordingly, be prepared to deal kinetically where necessary with the perpetrators of violent jihad. But it is also imperative that we contend no less effectively with what the Muslim Brotherhood calls “civilization jihad” – its stealthy, subversive effort to “destroy Western civilization from within…by [our own] hands.”
 
Establishing Our Objective: Next, the United States must enunciate a national commitment to – using a phrase President Reagan employed as the object of NSDD 75 – “contain and over time reverse” shariah-driven Islamic supremacism, including establishment of the Caliphate. The rising tide of shariah and various efforts to impose it here and abroad make abundantly clear an unalterable fact: America and, indeed, Western civilization cannot coexist with the Global Jihad Movement.
 
Reestablishing “Peace Through Strength”: Just as President Reagan did in his day, the contemporary hollowing out of the U.S. military must be reversed as a matter of the utmost priority. The perception of American weakness only reinforces our shariah-adherent enemies’ conviction that the time has come for intensifying jihad operations. It is also emboldening other adversaries, including Russia, China and North Korea. As the United States is not confronting simply terrorist organizations, or even their state-sponsors, but prospectively “peer competitors,” the rebuilding of American military power must be balanced across the spectrum of nuclear, missile defense, conventional and special operations forces. We must also continue to develop asymmetric capabilities (e.g., in space and cyber space) while correcting our most egregious vulnerabilities to these enemies’ asymmetric attacks (notably, electromagnetic pulse, cyberwarfare, counter-space, economic/financial warfare, smuggled weapons of mass destruction, etc.)
 
Counter-Ideological Warfare: As in the Cold War, America’s ability to challenge and neutralize its enemies’ animating ideology is at least as important as the task of countering their kinetic threats. Once we are clear about the nature and centrality of the shariah doctrine to the existential danger we currently face, the need for a serious and effective counter-ideological strategy becomes self-evident. Putting such a strategy into practice will require, first and foremost, identifying the Muslim Brotherhood for the explicitly jihadist organization it has always been and is now.
 
Continuing to treat its operatives and organizations (overt and covert) in America and overseas as “partners” because we are told they “eschew violence” is a formula for our incremental destruction. Wherever and as soon as possible, these foes should be neutralized as political forces. At a minimum, they must be denied access to U.S. government agencies, funds, arms and, via television cable packages, American household subscribers.
 
Intelligence Operations: We must take a page from the playbook developed during the Reagan administration by then-Director of Central Intelligence William Casey and use covert means wherever possible to counter, divide and undermine our enemies. To the traditional intelligence techniques should be added aggressive use of psychological operations, cyberwarfare and, where necessary, clandestine and special operations.
 
Economic Warfighting: As with the Reagan NSDD 75 plan, there must be a central economic/financial warfighting component to a new American strategy for defeating our time’s existential enemies. This component would include: constricting the principal source of revenues for the jihad – vast petrodollar transfers from Western nations to OPEC states; reversing the present practice of accommodating and even encouraging shariah finance, a technique employed by civilization jihadists to penetrate and subvert our capitalist system: and exposing shariah-inspired sovereign wealth funds as instruments of financial jihad.
 
Cyber Warfighting: Cyberspace is the new battlefield of asymmetric warfare where attacks across domains and technologies by the Global Jihad enemy, as well as peer adversaries, must be countered with 21st Century capabilities drawn from the best and brightest in the civilian, intelligence and military worlds.
 
Were these and similar policy priorities articulated by the Tiger Team to be adopted and executed appropriately, it should be possible to effect the necessary second step: the adoption by the nation of a true warfooting, a state of national commitment that will bring to bear the popular vigilance and support that will make it possible for the Secure Freedom Strategy to be fully executed.
 
If we are to have a prayer of bequeathing, as President Reagan put it, to our children and children’s children an America that is free – and not one that has submitted to the jihadists and shariah – we must get about the business of securing freedom in a strategic and time-tested way.
 
And we must begin to do it now.
++++++
Center launches ‘Secure Freedom Strategy’ For Victory Over Global Jihad Movement
 
January 16, 2015
 
 
Launch Materials (PDF format):
 
·         Secure Freedom Strategy v1.0
 
·         Press Release
 
·        Highlights
 
·         Executive Summary
 
·         FAQs
 
Tommy Waller: “Civilization Jihad is here”:
 
Tommy Waller, Director of State Outreach, Center for Security Policy and Major, U.S. Marine Corps (whose remarks were made in his personal capacity and as a member of the Center staff), discussed matters of information dominance and civilization jihad at the launch of the Center’s new “Secure Freedom Strategy” to combat jihad.
++++++++++++++++++++++
Combating Terrorism
 
JANUARY 16, 2015
 
C-SPAN Link to 1 hour 30 minute video:
 
_______________________
Frank Gaffney, Jr.
 
Frank Gaffney is the Founder and President of the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C. Under Mr. Gaffney’s leadership, the Center has been nationally and internationally recognized as a resource for timely, informed and penetrating analyses of foreign and defense policy matters. Mr. Gaffney formerly acted as the Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy during the Reagan Administration, following four years of service as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Forces and Arms Control Policy. Previously, he was a professional staff member on the Senate Armed Services Committee under the chairmanship of the late Senator John Tower, and a national security legislative aide to the late Senator Henry M. Jackson.
 
CSP Content: Copyright © 1988-2015 Center for Security Policy | All Rights Reserved
 
 
________________________
Combating Terrorism
 
© 2015 National Cable Satellite Corporation
 
 

What’s really behind the Benghazi cover-up?


Demand Benghazi Truth

Intro: What’s really behind the Benghazi cover-up?

John R. Houk

© May 31, 2013

 

I received an email from Liberty Counsel Action authored by Mat Staver asking that his readers demand greater scrutiny pertaining to the details of Benghazigate and who knew what about the before, during and after of the four deaths that occurred at the diplomatic mission in Benghazi Libya.

 

Staver points to the questions being asked by Frank Gaffney, Jr. of the Center for Security Policy (CSP). The questions are pointed and are simple to answer for a government that has nothing to hide.

 

There is more to this email than Staver providing the relevant questions that deserve an answer. Staver provides a link in which you can place your name to a Liberty Counsel Action fax which will cost you some bucks to send. Personally I don’t have the cash to do that but I would if I did so think about it.

 

If you are like me there is a petition you can participate in that is free at TheTeaParty.net. Without placing my name on there more than once like a Leftist would do I cannot remember if there is first a money option then a free option relating to the petition calling Congress to take action on Benghazigate. I do remember there is a free option though. To sign that petition can go this TheTeaParty.net petition link or you can click the banner I have at SlantRight 2.0.

 

Benghazigate Summary

 

In the mean time please take the time to read the Mat Staver email which I have below.

 

JRH 5/31/13

Please Support NCCR

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

What’s really behind the Benghazi cover-up?

 

By Mathew Staver

Sent: May 30, 2013 at 8:53 AM

Sent from Liberty Counsel Action

 

From the Desk of:

Mat Staver

 

While Congress is in a “constituency work period” away from Washington, there is an uprising of organizations calling for our congressional leaders to start asking the right questions on Benghazi. 

 

Congress must create a Select Committee to FULLY investigate the Benghazi attacks – moving beyond the already obtained evidence that the Obama administration lied to the American people and sought to cover up the truth about the attack that killed four Americans and injured many more.

 

The truth about the events leading up to, during, and following the attacks must also be exposed. Please see my very important message below – Mat.

 

John,

 

What were President Obama and his administration hiding while attempting to deceive the American people about the attacks on Benghazi?

 

It is unrealistic to believe that the edited talking points were contrived solely to protect the political careers of the President, Hillary Clinton, General Petraeus, or State Department bureaucrats. 

 

Now, over 8 months later, there are still far more questions than answers. This is an epic foreign policy and national security failure – masked with an obvious cover-up and unbridled deception.

 

Yet even more disturbing is the fact that those lies may have been created to conceal something much larger and far more sinister. 

 

++One highly respected policy expert’s view on Benghazi.

 

Frank J. Gaffney Jr., former Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Reagan and now President of the Center for Security Policy, is one of the foremost experts on foreign policy in the Middle East.

 

Frank Gaffney and his organization have been good friends of Liberty Counsel Action and have collaborated with us on several important issues over the last several years.  But we have never before been faced with anything in the troubling presidency of Barack Obama as massively significant as the Benghazi scandal.

 

Gaffney poses very disturbing questions about Benghazi-gate.  These questions could seem tainted by “conspiracy theory” thinking, but coming from a seasoned, credentialed defense expert of Frank Gaffney’s caliber, they add great credence to the probability that this is one of the most insidious cover-ups in American history.

 

Here are just a few of his questions and assessments…

 

o   “What role did the Obama administration’s assiduous cultivation of relations with Islamists play in the creation of the State Department’s so-called special mission facility in Benghazi?

 

o   What was the true purpose of that facility, and who was assigned to staff it, with what roles?

 

o   Why did it take so long for Benghazi survivors to be made available to congressional investigators of the Benghazi-gate affair?

 

o   What caused U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens to consider it necessary to be at that facility, which he had formally complained was dangerously insecure, especially on September 11, a day that al Qaeda has long sought to make open-season on Americans?

 

o   Specifically, what was the urgency of Stevens’ last official act, an evening meeting with the Turkish consul general?

 

o   Were the special mission facility and the nearby CIA annex involved in a covert operation to collect small arms, surface-to-air missiles, or other weapons?

 

o   Were any of those weapons being secretly made available — directly or indirectly — to the Syrian opposition, a group known to include al Qaeda elements?

 

o   If weapons secured in Libya for this purpose were transferred to the so-called Syrian rebels, was there a presidential finding authorizing such activities? In that case, had any congressional leaders been duly notified?

 

o   The public record suggests that Mr. Obama and then-Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton were inexplicably disengaged from the time they learned of the attack until their joint appearance the next morning in the Rose Garden. Where were they during that period and what were they doing?

 

The Center for Security Policy, like liberty Counsel Action, is calling for a Select Committee to be established by Congress – as are 153 House Republicans, Members of the Senate, the families of the Americans murdered, the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, Special OPS OPSEC, an association of retired Special Operations officials, along with a number of other patriotic organizations.  

 

We are demanding action from congressional leadership! A Select Committee must be empowered to ask all of the right questions – the events leading up to the attack – the actions taken during – and the post-event deception of the American people.

 

Please join with me today in putting additional pressure on Congress to FULLY investigate the Libya massacre!

 

We are faxing our Senators, Representatives, and other key officials today demanding that Members of Congress empower a Select Committee – as proposed by Representative Frank Wolf (R-VA) in H. Res 36 – and now endorsed by over 150 Members of the House.

 

I urge you to take a minute right now to further participate in this important campaign. Click here to send your immediate faxes to Congress:

 

www.lcaction.cc/1667/offer.asp

 

++This investigation must be consolidated, empowered, and formalized!

 

There are at least four House committees investigating the attacks – all operating within the scope of their limited authority. We are demanding a Select Committee with the needed authority!

 

I believe Benghazi-gate will blow wide open in spite of the Obama/Clinton wish that it would just go away – if Congress investigates it with the full empowerment of a Select Committee. 

 

Liberty Counsel Action’s Fax Barrage strategy has been extremely effective in “holding our elected leaders’ feet to the fire” and forcing Congress to see that the American people will not stand for an arrogant dismissal of public opinion!

 

Please, click here now to fax Congress and call for a complete bipartisan investigation into the Libya massacre and the cover-up crafted by the Obama administration:

 

www.lcaction.cc/1667/offer.asp

 

Even if you have already sent a round of faxes, we must relentlessly barrage our senators, representatives, and other key members of Congress demanding that they do the right thing – and ask the right questions.

 

Enemies of America’s best interests in these events must be exposed.  U.S. government officials, irrespective of the seniority of their positions, must be held accountable!

 

Please click here now to send your faxes to Congress:  

 

www.lcaction.cc/1667/offer.asp

 

Again, thank you for taking action with us on this critical issue!   

 

God bless you,

Mathew Staver, Chairman

Liberty Counsel Action

 

P.S. I believe we are just beginning to see the extent to which our President and senior government officials have united in a massive cover-up of the events in Benghazi.  PLEASE fax Congress right away, even if you have already done so. Together, let’s hold anyone responsible fully accountable!

______________________

Intro: What’s really behind the Benghazi cover-up?

John R. Houk

© May 31, 2013

______________________

What’s really behind the Benghazi cover-up?

 

+ + Comments? Questions?

http://www.lcaction.cc/email.asp?ind=10

Liberty Counsel Action is a 501(c)4 organization. Gifts are not tax deductible. For full notice including notices for individual states, go here.

http://www.lcaction.cc/r.asp?U=266510&CID=667&RID=39285484

 

ABOUT Liberty Counsel

 

ABOUT Liberty Counsel Action

Fed Judge Blasts CAIR in “Muslim Mafia” Case


LooneyTunesCAIR_01

 

The CAIR/Muslim Mafia litigation is a classic example of Lawfare/Legal Jihad utilized by Muslims in an attempt to silence those exposing the dark side of Islam. The book “Muslim Mafia – Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America” exposes the nefarious agenda of CAIR with its connection to both the Muslim Brotherhood and the Islamic terrorist organization Hamas. Since CAIR attempts to bill itself as Muslim human rights organization in America the truth tarnishes their reputation and credibility.

 

Here we are in 2013 and this litigation initiated by CAIR circa 2009 is still going on. Finally though there appears to be light at the end of the tunnel for the authors of the Muslim Mafia because the Federal Judge adjudicating the lawsuit has delivered a legal defeat to CAIR by ruling against an extension on the ludicrous continuation of needless discovery by the CAIR legal team. Creeping Sharia has the story.

 

JRH 2/14/13

Please Support NCCR

 

Muslim Mafia bk jacket

 

Huma Abedin’s Mother exposed by CSP


Hillary Clinton & Saleha S. Mahmood Abedin

John R. Houk

© July 22, 2012

 

The Leftist Mainstream Media (MSM) – sometimes recognized as the lamestream media – in collusion with Muslim apologists have attacked Rep. Michele Bachmann and four other Congressmen have been attacked as bigoted Islamophobes for demanding an investigation to Muslim Brotherhood infiltration in the U.S. government.

 

Although I don’t have an irrational fear of Muslims as connoted by the epithet of Islamophobe, I like to think I wear the Islamophobe badge proudly. Islamophobia could better be defined as a rational caution relating to the agenda of Radical Islam to force an international Caliphate on the world that if they are sane will have nothing to do with the anti-Liberty principles inherent within Sharia Law.

 

As such Radical Islamic proponents view that there are two enemies to be destroyed; i.e. the little Satan Israel and the great Satan America.

 

Now that Egyptian voters have elected a Muslim Brotherhood (MB) candidate to be President of Egypt, the MB is now or should be recognized as a transnational organization that government National Security interests should be focusing on. Somewhat in the same way (hopefully) there is a National Security watch on Iran.

 

The MB is big on the concept that the USA is the big Satan that must be destroyed by infiltrating America to create the environment that will allow Islam to overcome the U.S. Constitution. You Need to READ:

 

§  The Muslim Brotherhood “Project”

 

§  The Muslim Brotherhood “Project” (Continued) – “The Project” Translated

 

§  MB General Strategic Goal for the Group In North America (The English Translation after the original Arabic)

 

So when U.S. Congressmen recognize there are individuals with ties to the MB or an MB affiliate in the U.S. government and desire an investigation then that is NOT bigotry! Rather an investigation is awareness that something is afoot that endangers the U.S. Constitution of which every government employee up to and including the Office of President of the United States is sworn to uphold. If there are people in government that have sworn to uphold the Constitution OR at the very least work in a government Office sworn to uphold the Constitution yet desire the Constitution’s demise, then those people need to be excised from government responsibility at the very least. If there is an “at most” a criminal investigation must occur to discover if our nation has been harmed internally.

 

I am glad that the Center for Security Policy (CSP) has put together an exposé of Huma Abedin’s mother Saleha S. Mahmood Abedin. Huma Abedin is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s close aide. That means she has access to Classified materials that her MB mother might be interested in acquiring. That would not be good for America. Below is the CSP email sent to highlight a free PDF document entitled “Ties that Bind? THE VIEWS AND AGENDA OF HUMA ABEDIN’ S IS LAMI S T MOTHER”.  

 

JRH 7/22/12

Please Support NCCR

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

Center Report Reveals Radical Islamist Agenda of Senior State Department Official Huma Abedin’s Mother

 

Sent by Center for Security Policy

Sent: Jul 22, 2012 at 11:33 AM

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

 

For more information and to schedule an interview, contact

David Reaboi dreaboi@securefreedom.org (202) 431-1948

 

WASHINGTON, D.C.:  A book published and translated by the mother of Obama administration State Department Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin provides fresh evidence that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s closest aide has deeply problematic foreign associations that could, in violation of departmental guidelines, “create… a heightened risk of foreign exploitation, inducement, manipulation, pressure, or coercion.”

 

In light of the escalating controversy over the role being played in U.S. security policy-making by Ms. Abedin and others with personal and/or professional ties to the Muslim Brotherhood (see Part 8 of the Center for Security Policy’s online curriculum at MuslimBrotherhoodinAmerica.com), the revelations contained in a new Center report– Ties That Bind? The Views and Agenda of Huma Abedin’s Islamist Mother— could not be more timely, or important.

 

The Center’s report excerpts and analyzes relevant passages from a book published and translated by Saleha S. Mahmood Abedin called Women in Islam: A Discourse in Rights and Obligations by Fatima Umar Naseef. Naseef is a past head of the “women’s section” and professor of shariah at King Abdulaziz University in Jeddah, where Dr. Abedin is also on the faculty.  The book was published in 1999, the same year Dr. Abedin founded Dar Al Hekma, a university for women also in Jeddah, that Secretary Clinton visited and spoke admiringly of with Huma Abedin in February 2010.  [See Remarks on that occasion by Mrs. Clinton, including her comment that Huma holds a “very sensitive and important position” in her department, and those by her hosts.]

 

Excerpts from Women in Islam in Ties That Bind? The Views and Agenda of Huma Abedin’s Islamist Mother include Islamic shariah justifications for the following:

 

§  Stoning for Adultery when Married; Lashing for Adultery when Unmarried

 

§  No Death Penalty for the Murder of an Apostate

 

§  Freedom of Expression Curtailed to What Benefits Islam

 

§  Women’s Right to Participate in Armed Jihad

 

§  Social Interaction Between the Sexes is Forbidden

 

§  Women Have No Right to Abstain from Sex with their Husbands

 

§  A Woman Should Not Let Anyone Into the House Unless Approved by Her Husband

 

§  Female Genital Mutilation is Allowed

 

§  Man-Made Laws “Enslave Women”

 

The organization responsible for the publication of Women in Islam was the International Islamic Committee for Woman & Child (IICWC), chaired at the time by Dr. Abedin.  IICWC misleadingly describes itself as “an international organization of concerned women who are committed to improving the condition of women and children around the world.”  In fact, like the Muslim Brotherhood, the Muslim World League (MWL) and other Islamist organizations with which it is associated, the IICWC is committed to eviscerating the rights of women and children by imposing everywhere shariah, a code that denies them fundamental – and, in the United States, constitutional – liberties.

 

Specifically, the book published by Dr. Abedin wholeheartedly affirms: limits on women’s free expression; the permissibility of stoning as a punishment for adultery, killing of apostates and female genital mutilation; the contention that “man-made laws” enslave women; and more.  It also endorses women’s right to fight in armed jihad.  Women in Islam is available online and sold at the Institute for Muslim Minority Affairs, an Islamist organization co-founded by Huma Abedin’s mother and her late father, Dr. Syed Zainul Abedin.

 

On July 21, former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy posted an essay at National Review Online that should be required reading for everyone commenting on the request by five Members of Congress led by Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota for Inspector General investigations of Muslim Brotherhood influence operations within the U.S. government.  In it, he observed that the Institute for Muslim Minority Affairs “was backed by the Muslim World League. As the Hudson Institute’s Zeyno Baran relates, the MWL was started by the Saudi government in 1962 ‘with Brotherhood members in key leadership positions.’ It has served as the principal vehicle for the propagation of Islamic supremacism by the Saudis and the Brotherhood.”

 

Mr. McCarthy notes that:

 

The five House conservatives… are asking questions that adults responsible for national security should feel obliged to ask: In light of Ms. Abedin’s family history, is she someone who ought to have a security clearance, particularly one that would give her access to top-secret information about the Brotherhood? Is she, furthermore, someone who may be sympathetic to aspects of the Brotherhood’s agenda, such that Americans ought to be concerned that she is helping shape American foreign policy?

 

Andrew McCarthy, who successfully prosecuted the Blind Sheikh, Omar Abdul Rahman – a convicted terrorist and clerical inspiration for jihadists worldwide, whose release from federal prison at the insistence of Muslim Brother and Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi has been the subject of discussions within and enabled by Mrs. Clinton’s State Department – goes on to observe that:

 

The State Department is particularly wary when it comes to the category of ‘foreign influence‘ – yes, it is a significant enough concern to warrant its own extensive category in background investigations. No criminal behavior need be shown to deny a security clearance; access to classified information is not a right, and reasonable fear of “divided loyalties” is more than sufficient for a clearance to be denied. The [Department’s own security] guidelines probe ties to foreign countries and organizations because hostile elements could “target United States citizens to obtain protected information” or could be “associated with a risk of terrorism.” Note: The Brotherhood checks both these boxes.

 

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., President of the Center for Security Policy, said upon the release of the Center’s new report, Ties That Bind? The Views and Agenda of Huma Abedin’s Islamist Mother:

 

In the interest of informing the debate about the need to investigate Huma Abedin’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and its agenda, and those of others shaping policy in the Obama administration, the Center for Security Policy offers in Ties That Bind? further cause for such an investigation.  That includes, for instance, evidence of Dr. Saleha Abedin’s personal involvement with the International Islamic Committee on Woman and Child’s affiliated organization, the International Islamic Council for Da’wah and Relief (IICDR). The IICDR was banned in Israel in 2008 for its collaboration with Muslim Brotherhood cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi’s Union for Good in the funding of the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist organization, Hamas. In the United States, the Union for Good was designated a terrorist entity in late 2008.

 

This further documentation of Dr. Abedin’s positions on shariah law, her leadership of the IICWC and its affiliation with a designated terrorist entity such as the IICDR makes plain that a thorough investigation is fully justified regarding her daughter’s access to classified information and policy-influencing role.  In particular, in connection with the latter, Ties That Bind powerfully reinforces the Center’s earlier warning that the IICWC is currently advocating for the repeal of Egypt’s Mubarak-era prohibitions on female genital mutilation, child marriage, and marital rape, on the grounds that such prohibitions run counter to shariah. Americans want no part of such an agenda. They should they have no reason for concern that senior officials in their government are stealthily encouraging it.

 

DOWNLOAD THE REPORT

__________________________

Huma Abedin’s Mother exposed by CSP

John R. Houk

© July 22, 2012

_________________________

Center Report Reveals Radical Islamist Agenda of Senior State Department Official Huma Abedin’s Mother

 

About the Center for Security Policy

 

The Center for Security Policy is a non-profit, non-partisan national security organization that specializes in identifying policies, actions, and resource needs that are vital to American security and then ensures that such issues are the subject of both focused, principled examination and effective action by recognized policy experts, appropriate officials, opinion leaders, and the general public.