Friday, July 14, 2017

Hatem Bazian: Terrorist Professor, Hamas Promoter - Front Page Magazine




by Front Page Magazine


"At least part of the project that we are engaged in, is to rewrite history that we are concerned about."




Is Hatem Bazian the most dangerous professor in the USA? Nablus-born Bazian, is notorious for calling for intifada [violent uprising] in the United States.

He is the founder of the radical organizations Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and American Muslims for Palestine (AMP). He is a serial pusher of conspiracies, and has a "project" to re-write history. More worryingly, he is largely responsible for the wave of anti-Semitic incitement across North American campuses.

For more info about Bazian, go to this link at the indispensable Canary Mission website. The Canary Mission database was created to document people and groups that are promoting hatred of the U.S., Israel and the Jewish people, particularly on college campuses in North America.You can also learn more about Bazian, SJP and AMP at their comprehensive profile pages at the Freedom Center's Discover the Networks resource site.




Front Page Magazine

Source: Frontpagemag.com

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

A New “Arab Spring” in the Persian Gulf? - Dr. Edy Cohen




by Dr. Edy Cohen

The winds of war blowing between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, as well as Iranian subversion, are destabilizing the Persian Gulf principalities.



Arab Spring image by D.I.Y. Music (Acetic Ascetic) via Flickr Creative Commons
BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 527, July 13, 2017

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The winds of war blowing between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, as well as Iranian subversion, are destabilizing the Persian Gulf principalities. To make matters worse, the economic situation, which has worsened in recent years because of ill-advised decisions, is stoking fears of popular uprisings and widespread disturbances. These internal crises could lead to a new “Arab Spring” in which some of the Gulf monarchies might fall. The main winner would be Tehran, for which the current crisis, along with the boycott imposed on Qatar, has opened a path to a takeover of Bahrain – and Iran has already, in effect, taken over Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut, and Sana’a.   

The Saudi economy has seen an unprecedented deterioration in recent years. The continued decline of oil prices in world markets, the massive assistance to Egypt since the July 2013 takeover by Abdel Fattah Sisi, the cost of funding the coalition fighting the Houthis and their Iranian patrons in Yemen, and of course the considerable aid extended to the Syrian rebels have wreaked havoc on Riyadh’s public treasury and the ruling monarchy’s personal wealth.

As a result, Riyadh has had to slash 900 riyals (about $300) from military and civil servant salaries as part of a major cutback in the public sector, including the abolition of salary increments and bonuses. Recently, the authorities have also had to hike taxes on cigarettes and energy drinks to the tune of 100% of the cost of the product, after having imposed new taxes in June. One sign of the crisis reflecting its severity is a new toll that will go into effect in April 2018 on roads in the Riyadh area and on crossings into neighboring Arab states.

Aside from affecting its own residents, Saudi Arabia’s economic situation also stands to affect other Gulf countries and particularly Bahrain, which is suffering its own deep crisis as Tehran arms and funds Shiite organizations aimed at destabilizing it.

The Iranians have been exploiting Riyadh’s and Bahrain’s difficulties to the hilt. Not long ago, the Saudis thwarted an attack near the holy sites of Mecca. The Iranian subversion could escalate to the point of seeking to destabilize the kingdom (as it is doing in Bahrain) by activating armed militias within its territory.

Shiite Iran is also helping Qatar, which, according to the (Saudi) plan, should by now have been begging for the lifting of the boycott. Tehran is thereby driving a wedge between the Arab Gulf principalities and bolstering its own status as the region’s hegemonic power. It has been sending Qatar tons of food and raw materials daily by sea, and these goods have flooded the emirate’s markets and shopping centers.

There is, however, no free lunch. Tehran is now regarded as having rescued Qatar, and the principality will have to reward it for this. Iranian aid has already weakened the Sunni political-military coalition that was supposed to contend with Tehran’s expansionary ambitions. For example, Qatar has pulled out of the anti-Houthi coalition in Yemen.

The state of affairs in the Persian Gulf is extremely delicate. The fall of one principality would probably lead to the fall of others. The Gulf is undergoing one of the most difficult economic crises in its history, one that could destabilize some of the monarchies. Angry demonstrations and riots against rising prices, new taxes, and mounting unemployment, similar to those that occurred in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, and Syria in 2010 and 2011 – the ultimate nightmare of any Arab leader – are entirely plausible.

Moreover, the Qatar crisis is not over. The principality has strongly rebuffed the twelve Saudi conditions for lifting the blockade and normalizing relations with the foursome (Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain). Those conditions include downgrading Qatar’s diplomatic ties with Tehran; ensuring that forces of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps leave the emirate; shutting Turkish military bases in Qatar; severing Doha’s ties with the Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah, al-Qaeda, and ISIS while ceasing to fund them; handing over terrorists residing in Qatar to the foursome; closing the Al Jazeera network; and paying compensation.

The failure of the attempt to isolate Qatar and subjugate it to the foursome’s demands has stirred fears of a Saudi military intervention there. Iran, however, has scored many points with the Arabs thanks to its support for the emirate. This is part of a long-term strategic game in which Iran first seeks to win Arab states’ sympathy and then arms and activates subversive groups in the Gulf.

Tehran is striving to curtail American and Saudi influence in the Gulf, take over the Islamic world in general, and seize the Gulf’s natural resources and holy places via its erstwhile proxies, the Yemeni Houthis positioned along the Saudi border.

If Tehran’s plan succeeds, the Persian Gulf will be effectively divided between it and Russia, a highly undesirable development for Israel. The Gulf crisis is wholly unrelated to Israel, but Jerusalem must closely monitor what is happening there.

The current situation is ostensibly good for the US. Tensions create the perfect setting for exporting weapons and military equipment, as President Trump promised he would do during his Riyadh visit. Yet instead of seeking profits, however substantial, Washington would be better off working to enhance stability in the region, lest it plunge into a new “Arab Spring.”

View PDF
BESA Center Perspectives Papers are published through the generosity of the Greg Rosshandler Family


Dr. Edy Cohen is author of the book The Holocaust in the Eyes of Mahmoud Abbas (Hebrew).

Source: https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/arab-spring-persian-gulf/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Proven: PA payments motivate terrorism - Bentzy Fox




by Bentzy Fox

'I decided to commit murder - and then my family will get money and will live comfortably.'



Terrorist shooting gun
Terrorist shooting gun
Thinkstock
Palestinian terrorist Khaled Rajoub admitted under interrogation that his primary motivation to attempt a terror attack was to get his family compensation from the Palestinian Authority (PA).

The PA awards thousands of dollars monthly to a killed terrorist’s family, in accordance with the effectiveness of the attack and size of his family. Had he been killed, he would have secured his family a lifetime PA allowance.

According to the Palestinian Media Watch (PMW), the exact amount of compensation would come out to 2,800 NIS/month ($800): 1,400 NIS base pay, 400 NIS for his wife, and 200 NIS for each of his 5 children. While the PA’s payments to terrorists is well known, the direct correlation between the payments and the motivation for terror attacks has not been proven outright, prior to the terrorist’s admission.

Israel released segments of the police interrogation of Khaled Rajoub:

Rajoub: "I've accumulated large debts... if my son wants a shekel, I have nothing to give him... I decided to do something serious, such as committing murder, something in which I will both kill and die, and then my family will get money and will live comfortably... If I'm not able to kill soldiers, I'll try settlers, guards - in other words any Israeli target - the important thing is that I will die and they will kill me, so that my children will receive a [PA] allowance and live happily"
PA payments to terror families account for a whopping 8% of the entire PA budget. The EU, America, and some other Arab states provide hundreds of millions of dollars every year in foreign aid due to the PA’s economic woes. The US senate is currently debating halting all funding until these payments stop under an initiative called the Taylor Force act. This initiative is named after U.S. citizen Taylor Force, who was killed on the March 9, 2015 terror attack in Jaffa, Israel.

For more information about the police interrogation of Rajoub, click here.


Bentzy Fox

Source: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/232410

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Iran regime change is in the making - Heshmat Alavi




by Heshmat Alavi

“Iran must be free. The dictatorship must be destroyed. Containment is appeasement, and appeasement is surrender. The only practical goal is to support a movement to free Iran" - Newt Gingrich

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson stressed in a recent Congressional hearing that the U.S. should literally “work towards support of those elements inside Iran that would lead to a peaceful transition of that government,” signaling the overhaul needed in Washington’s Iran policy.

From Tehran’s point of view this was, of course, a completely unpleasant surprise, as the Trump administration unexpectedly placed its weight behind those seeking true and democratic change.

Considering escalating public dissent and growing rifts in Iran’s senior hierarchy, the international community should brace for a major impact in developments centered on Iran.

Before and after the May 19th presidential “election,” Iran’s powder keg society witnessed a major outbreak of protests, especially by investors placing their savings in institutions linked to the state and/or the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC).

The vast network associated with the Iranian opposition People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK) has for a year now focused its widespread effort inside the country on raising awareness, especially amongst the younger generation, about the true nature of this regime’s 38-year report card.

One very troubling dossier was the summer 1988 massacre of over 30,000 political prisoners in dozens of prisons throughout Iran. Perpetrators of that horrendous purging enjoy high rank in today’s regime. Mostafa Pour-Mohammadi is ironically the minister of justice in President Hassan Rouhani’s cabinet.

Conservative cleric Ebrahim Raisi, known to be the favored candidate of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in the May race, along with being groomed to succeed the ill Khamenei in the regime’s ultimate leadership post. Both Pour-Mohammadi and Raisi were leading members of the four-man “Death Commission” presiding over the mass executions.

Activities and revelations made by the PMOI/MEK network inside Iran exposed those involved in the 1988 massacre. This turn of events placed Khamenei before a major decision of enforcing his candidate as president and risking a major uprising even more powerful than that of 2009, or succumb to another term of Rouhani as his regime’s president.

Rest assured that despite promising to realize freedoms, Rouhani in his second term neither bears the intention nor will to realize anything even remotely similar to reforms.

Parallel to these developments are unprecedented divides amongst senior officials in Tehran. On a number of occasions Khamenei and his faction have indirectly issued threats against Rouhani, even comparing his fate to that of the Iranian regime’s first president back in the 1980s, who was impeached.

When IRGC Quds Force chief Qassem Soleimani lashed out at those targeting the Guards, it was considered by many to be aimed at Rouhani.

“In the Islamic Republic, we’re all responsible towards martyrs, society, religion and our country. The biggest betrayal is to cast doubt toward the foundations of this system… none today must weaken the corps,” he said recently.

This is most probably a reference to Rouhani’s recent remarks against the IRGC through the elections process and after presidential campaign.

This dangerous dispute will also leave Khamenei incapable of grooming any successor to his throne or managing a smooth transitional process, set to become deadly for the mullahs’ already unclear future.

Couple all these dilemmas on Khamenei’s table with the growing turmoil in the Middle East as ISIS’ days are numbered. Attention among the international community is focusing on post-ISIS circumstances and the Trump administration is receiving further calls to weigh options blacklisting the IRGC as a foreign terrorist organization, and ultimately seeking regime change through supporting the Iranian opposition.

“Iran must be free. The dictatorship must be destroyed. Containment is appeasement, and appeasement is surrender. The only practical goal is to support a movement to free Iran. Any other goal will leave a dictatorship finding ways to get around any agreement and to lie about everything,” said Newt Gingrich, former speaker of the House of Representatives, at a recent Iranian opposition rally near Paris. Gingrich is known for his very close relations with President Trump.

Such an initiative also enjoys vast regional support, voiced also recently by a prominent Saudi figure.

“The Iranian people are the first victims of [the mullahs’] dictatorship,” said former Saudi intelligence chief Turki Faisal. “Your effort in challenging this regime is legitimate and your resistance for the liberation of the Iranian people of all ethnicities, including Arabs, Kurds, Baluchis, Turks and Fars of the mullahs’ evil, as [Iranian opposition leader Maryam] Rajavi said, is a legitimate struggle.”

Even a brief glance at ongoing developments emerging domestically and abroad for Iran, provides convincing evidence that regime change is absolutely in the making in Tehran.

Heshmat Alavi

Source: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/07/iran_regime_change_is_in_the_making.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

A red line for Jordan - Nadav Shragai




by Nadav Shragai

Over the past several years, Jordan has repeatedly besmirched Israel with falsehoods and libelous allegations, resulting in a growing number of anti-Israeli U.N. resolutions.

Is Israel treating Jordan with kid gloves? Does Israel cut the Hashemite Kingdom too much slack even though Amman is now spearheading anti-Israel efforts on the world stage, alongside the Palestinians? 

Jordan's Minister of State for Media Affairs Mohammad Al Momani recently boasted that the kingdom was the driving force behind UNESCO's decision to declare Hebron's old city an endangered Palestinian world heritage site. Over the past several years, Jordan has repeatedly besmirched Israel with falsehoods and libelous allegations, resulting in a growing number of anti-Israeli U.N. resolutions. 

Jordanian diplomats' main focus is Jerusalem, and particularly the Temple Mount: Jordanian media regularly reports ludicrous claims about Israel's alleged actions at the site, including the libelous assertion that Israeli encroachment is threatening the Al-Aqsa mosque. Even the preposterous claim that Israel is allowing settlers to "conquer" the site and alter the status quo has become prevalent in the Jordanian media. 

And yet, Israel has let the Jordanian behavior slide. After all, there are economic, security and economic considerations at stake that Israel does not want to jeopardize. But above all, the "handle-with-care" approach is meant to ensure the monarchy's stability. The unofficial explanation for this posture is that Israel needs Jordan. But while this may be true, Jordan needs Israel as well. In the grand scheme of things, both countries need the other. For obvious reasons, I cannot go into details on the exact nature of the ties. 

To ensure that this special relationship thrives, Israel has been willing to make concessions on the Temple Mount. Over the last several years, Jordan has become a de-facto administrator of the site. In 2014, Jordan and Israel struck an agreement on how the site was to be governed. This agreement, made possible through U.S. mediation, all but made Jordan's presence on the mount official. Jordan also has a written agreement with the Palestinian Authority that makes the kingdom the representative of the Palestinian interests in the city until a Palestinian state is established, with Jerusalem as its capital. But Jordan's agreements with Israel and the Palestinians are often incompatible with one another, and this is clear on the world stage, where Jordan is determined to prove its anti-Israeli chops as a means of obtaining a Palestinian stamp of approval.

Perhaps this is good time to remind the Jordanians of the dubious "tolerance" they exhibited during their 19-year occupation of Judea and Samaria between 1948 and 1967. For example, they chose to blatantly violate their written pledge to allow Jews to visit holy sites beyond the border, including the Western Wall and Rachel's Tomb. Under their watch, tens of thousands of Jewish graves on Jerusalem's Mount of Olives were vandalized or demolished to make room for rudimentary toilets, trails and stairs. Dozens of synagogues and yeshivot were destroyed as well during that period, to ensure that the city's Jewish heritage was erased. Jordan also destroyed the cemetery in Hebron, where the victims of the 1929 Jewish massacre were buried, and used it to grow vegetables, with bones occasionally appearing among the crops. The famous Avraham Avinu Synagogue in Hebron was turned into a public bathroom and a goat pen. Meanwhile, Jordanians took over the yeshivot and synagogues in the two Jewish quarters -- in Hebron and in Jerusalem -- and turned them into homes.
There is nothing wrong with reminding people of Jordan's actions, and Israel should not be reluctant to employ this tactic. Israel also has every right to arrest the administrators on the Temple Mount whenever they incite to violence. The Israel Police has justifiably done so and the officers should have our support. 

A red line must be drawn when it comes to the Jordanian-led efforts on the Temple Mount, to make it clear that the site is under Israeli sovereignty and must be subject to Israeli laws. Israel should also drive home the message that under Israeli control, the Muslims and Christians in the city can worship freely and that the religious freedom they enjoy is a world apart from what the Jordanians allowed. 


Nadav Shragai

Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=19419

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal's CAIR Ally Posts al-Qaida Leader's Video - John Rossomando




by John Rossomando

"Resisting the occupation is NOT terrorism it is a legitimate right of defending one self from your land from real terrorists i.e. IDF," Dhaouadi wrote.


U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal with CAIR-Connecticut's Mongi Dhaouadi
A board member with the Council on American Islamic Relations' (CAIR) Connecticut chapter reposted a video by a designated al-Qaida terrorist on his Facebook page last month and says Palestinian attacks against Israel aren't terrorist acts. Nonetheless, U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., considers Mongi Dhaouadi his go-to guy on Muslim issues and has worked with him closely for the past six years. This relationship is particularly curious considering Blumenthal's strong statements of support for Israel.

Dhaouadi is a man of contradictions. On one hand, he says that Islam and terror do not mix.

"These terrorist groups don't represent our faith, do not represent our community. And so we want to make that clear to everyone who keeps saying that we don't hear enough from the Muslim community. We say it and we say it over and over again," Dhaouadi said in November 2015.

On the other, Dhaouadi reposted a pro-Qatar video on his Facebook page last month by Abdul Majeed Al-Zindani, a specially designated terrorist and former Osama bin Laden loyalist.

A 2004 Treasury Department statement calls Al-Zindani one of bin Laden's "spiritual leaders." He also helped buy arms for al-Qaida and other terrorists. Al-Zindani also appears on the United Nations list of specially designated terrorists.

He also served on the board of Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi's Hamas-funding operation known as the Union of Good, the Treasury Department said in a 2008 press release labeling it a terrorist operation. Al-Zindani's al-Qaida connection persists; the Treasury Department noted in 2013 that he provides "religious guidance in support of [al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula] operations."

Anwar al-Awlaki taught at Iman University in Sana'a, Yemen, an institution founded and run by Al-Zindani. Prosecutors in 2005 described Iman University as "a 'nest for terrorism' that exports and propagates terrorism."

In the video Dhaouadi posted on Facebook, Al-Zindani thanked Qatar for supporting Al-Jazeera and for giving refuge to people who had been kicked out of their home countries – a likely reference to the terrorists harbored by the Gulf emirate.

That might be appealing to Dhaouadi, who has issued extreme anti-Israel statements.

After Saudi Arabia demanded that Qatar sever ties with Hamas last month, Dhaouadi accused the Saudis of "doing the bidding for the apartheid state of Israel. Selling out the Palestinian cause in the open."

Palestinian attacks on Israelis, he has said, are not terrorist acts.

"Resisting the occupation is NOT terrorism it is a legitimate right of defending one self from your land from real terrorists i.e. IDF," Dhaouadi wrote.

Blumenthal has condemned Palestinian terrorist attacks against Israelis.

Dhaouadi's support for the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel also stands at odds with Blumenthal's stated support for Israel.

Blumenthal issued a Dec. 22 statement condemning a U.N. resolution calling Israel's West Bank settlements illegal.

"Support for Israel on this issue has been and will continue to be strongly bipartisan. Consistent with past policy, this Administration must now veto this most recent misguided and one-sided attempt backed by the Palestinian Authority to isolate Israel and weaken the peace process," Blumenthal wrote.

Blumenthal also strongly supports U.S. aid to the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), while Dhaouadi calls the IDF a "criminal force."

"My name is Mongi Dhaouadi and I #SupportGaza because it is time we break-open Israel's concentration camps and end the occupation," Dhaouadi wrote in a July 2014 Facebook post.

Dhaouadi and Blumenthal's Long Relationship

Blumenthal and Dhaouadi's public relationship dates to 2011 when the senator spoke at CAIR Connecticut's fundraising banquet. Dhaouadi was the chapter's executive director.

Dhaouadi is not the only radical at CAIR Connecticut. In 2006, board member and chapter founder Badr Malik defended riots against the Danish cartoon of Islam's prophet Muhammad.

"It's not an overreaction in my opinion. Because it's just like anti-Semitism is wrong, you don't put down a religion just because you are not of that religion. It's not supposed to be happening. Making fun of religion, making a joke of a prophet just to provoke people's emotion, it's not right. It's basically bashing a religion," Malik said.

Fellow Connecticut board member Eman Beshtawii supports the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement and rejects Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state.

"If you support Israel's 'right to exist as a Jewish state' in a country whose indigenous Palestinian people today form half the population, then you ... must come to terms with the inevitability of massacres," Beshtawii wrote in a 2014 Facebook post.

Blumenthal joined a rogue's gallery of Islamic extremists on the program at the 2011 banquet. That included Imam Siraj Wahhaj, who testified in defense of 1993 World Trade Center bombing mastermind Omar Abdel Rahman, and Ahmed Bedier, a former CAIR Tampa executive who described Israel as a "terror [state]."

"I want to thank you for your friendship, for your support, for giving me the honor of being your United States senator; I am the United States senator for every single person in this room. I work for you," Blumenthal told the CAIR audience.

He also attended Dhaouadi's April 2013 lecture on compassion in Islam and CAIR Connecticut's 9th annual banquet with Dhaouadi in December 2013. The banquet speaker's list also included Wahhaj and CAIR Florida Executive Director Hassan Shibly, a radical who defended Hizballah and opposes FBI sting operations.

Last October, Blumenthal spoke at CAIR Connecticut's 13th annual banquet with radical Islamist Linda Sarsour.

That month, Blumenthal also participated in a joint press conference with Dhaouadi and announced a plan to bring Syrian refugees into the U.S. quicker. A month later, Blumenthal again stood with Dhaouadi and CAIR Connecticut at his state's capitol on Nov. 21 calling for stronger hate crimes laws.

Dhaouadi, like other CAIR leaders, has a history of promoting hate crimes that turn out to be false. He labeled the brutal 2012 murder of Iraqi Muslim refugee Shaima Alawadi outside San Diego a hate crime.
"She was found dead two weeks ago in her home, beaten, with a note sitting next to her that says, 'Go back home terrorist,' 'Go back home terrorist,'" Dhaouadi said. "I don't know about you, but I have two daughters who wear the head scarf and they walk down the streets and they attend the public schools in New London."
Her husband was later convicted of the crime.

Several weeks after the hate crimes press conference, Blumenthal attended a forum on the subject at the Islamic Center of Connecticut in Windsor with Dhaouadi. During this CAIR-sponsored event, Blumenthal promised to "vigorously question" Attorney General nominee Jeff Sessions.

Blumenthal held a joint press conference with Dhaouadi in February to protest President Trump's proposed travel ban.

"We urge the president, abandon the Muslim ban. Abandon the religious test," Blumenthal said.

Dhaouadi's recent pro-terrorist Facebook posts are only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to his terrorist sympathies. They wouldn't be terribly difficult for Blumenthal's staffers to discover.

Dhaouadi also works for the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID), a group linked to Tunisia's branch of the Muslim Brotherhood movement, the Ennahda Party.

He supports Ennahda Party founder Rached Ghannouchi, a member of the International Muslim Brotherhood's Guidance Bureau. Dhaouadi's Facebook timeline includes numerous posts featuring images of Ghannouchi or news about the cleric.

An October 2015 Facebook post shows Dhaouadi escorting Ghannouchi through the streets of Washington, D.C. Ghannouchi spoke three days earlier at an event in New York sponsored by CSID, founded by former Ennahda member Radwan Masmoudi. Dhaouadi also attended Ennahda's congress in Tunisia in May 2016.

A Guantanamo Bay detainee report notes that Ennahda attempted to link up with other radical groups including al-Qaida during Ghannouchi's exile in the United Kingdom in the 1990s. More recently, Ghannouchi met in August 2011 with Ansar al-Shariah founder Seif Allah Ben Hassine, better known as Abu Iyadh – a former bin Laden ally sanctioned by the U.S. after 9/11. Abu Iyadh was responsible for al-Qaida's assassination of Northern Alliance leader Ahmed Shah Masood two days before the 9/11 attacks.

Ghannouchi encouraged Tunisian Muslims to wage jihad in Syria against the Assad regime in 2014; Tunisians account for the largest contingent of foreign fighters in the country's civil war.

Additionally, Ghannouchi's name appears in the phone book of Youssef Nada, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood controlled Al-Taqwa Bank, which U.S. Treasury officials described as an al-Qaida and Hamas funding source.

Ghannouchi also maintains close ties with Hamas leaders such as Khaled Meshaal and has repeatedly called for Israel's destruction. He called for the "destruction of the Jews" at a December 1990 conference in Tehran at which he also called for jihad against America.

Ghannouchi still supports terrorism against Israeli Jews; he gave a stirring endorsement of the Palestinian knife jihad, calling it a "historic opportunity to support this Intifada, support the Palestinians, and liberate Jerusalem" in a 2015 article published by Quds Press.

Pot Meet Kettle

Blumenthal castigated Attorney General Jeff Sessions for his association with Center for Security Policy founder, president and CEO Frank Gaffney and David Horowitz Freedom Center founder and CEO David Horowitz during Sessions' January confirmation hearing.

Blumenthal wanted Sessions to disavow having called Horowitz "a man I admire."

Blumenthal likewise asked Sessions to disavow the support that Gaffney and the Center for Security Policy gave him when they gave him an award in August 2015.

"Senator Blumenthal ... has trouble distinguishing America's defenders from her enemies," Horowitz told the Investigative Project on Terrorism in an email.

Gaffney likewise slammed Blumenthal.

"He is so willfully blind, and so evidently under the influence of Muslim Brotherhood operatives that he is both evidently clueless about the threat they represent here in the United States, and he compounds it by castigating people who understand it far better than he does," Gaffney said.

Blumenthal's office did not respond to requests for comment.

His alliance with Dhaouadi is curious, given his grandstanding on Gaffney and Horowitz. If it's bad for Sessions to like people with controversial positions, why is it okay for Blumenthal?


John Rossomando

Source: https://www.investigativeproject.org/6412/richard-blumenthal-cair-ally-posts-al-qaida

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Poisoning the Minds of America's Schoolchildren - Discover the Networks




by Discover the Networks

How is such a Program allowed a foothold in any American community?


For the past 30 years, a Philadelphia-based organization called Need in Deed (NID) has been training elementary and middle-school teachers “to use the classroom to prepare young people for civic responsibility and service to others.” And how, exactly, does NID do this? By training its teachers to engage students in long-term “service projects” whose objective is to: (a) inculcate youngsters with the notion that America is an oppressive wasteland where nonwhite minorities, women, homosexuals, the poor, and even the natural environment are routinely exploited and abused; and (b) turn children into budding political activists and community organizers who seek to fundamentally transform that deeply flawed society.

For example, in one NID project at Grover Washington Jr. Middle School in Philadelphia, eighth-grade students explored “some of the discriminatory housing forces – practices like redlining, steering, predatory lending and ethnic intimidation – that have influenced the[ir] city’s racial and economic segregation” over the years. As part of their instruction, these students watched an ABC Nightline segment titled “Race in America,” which examined the case of a black family that had fearfully fled their new home in a mostly white section of Philadelphia after neighbors harassed them with racial epithets and threatening letters. After watching the video, the students were asked to express, in writing, their outrage over how the black family had been mistreated.


As part of that same NID project, Princeton sociologist Doug Massey, author of American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of an Underclass – a book claiming that black urban poverty is largely a result of massive discrimination in U.S. cities – addressed the students personally. In a subsequent lesson, the youngsters watched a documentary titled Race: The Power of an Illusion, which, in the words of its producer, “reveals how our social institutions 'make' race by disproportionately channeling resources, power, status and wealth to white people.”

Another NID project – designed to introduce young people to purportedly heroic women who have battled the forces of “racism, homophobia, [and] sexism” – required the pupils to read the Kate Schatz book Rad American Women A-Z. The women who are profiled and lionized in Schatz's book are almost all leftists, and in some cases Marxists or political revolutionaries. Among them:

In 2011, an NID-affiliated teacher in West Philadelphia led her class in a project focusing on the correlation between gun violence and the Second Amendment right to bear arms. The lessons and activities associated with this project were heavily weighted against gun-ownership rights, and in favor of gun control. Most notably, the project solicited a considerable amount of input from Physicians for Social Responsibility, an organization that has worked to shut down gun manufacturing businesses, and to make gun manufacturers legally liable for crimes committed with the weapons they produce.

Another NID-affiliated teacher led his students in a project examining the problem of wrongful convictions in criminal court, and promoting the notion that the American criminal-justice system is replete with race-based discrimination and inequity. As part of this project, the students met with a representative from Pennsylvania’s Innocence Project, whose mission – which is likewise founded on the premise of a racist justice system – is to “free the staggering number of innocent people who remain incarcerated.”


Yet another leading concern of NID is the issue of immigration policy. In one third-grade class earlier this year, an NID teacher led her students in a project examining “the physiological and psychological effects of stress” associated with “the current political climate around immigrants and immigration.” “Half of my students,” the teacher said, “were kept home from school to observe 'A Day Without Immigrants'” – a reference to a May 1, 2017 action in which enormous numbers of Latino immigrants, activists, and workers took the day off from their jobs and marched in the streets of dozens of American cities, in what organizers characterized as a response to President Donald Trump's supposedly anti-immigration agendas.


At present, NID consists of approximately 140 member teachers in 60 schools throughout the city of Philadelphia. It is through the efforts of such individuals and such organizations, that an entire generation of young people is being indoctrinated in the corrosive, anti-American, anti-capitalist mindset of the hard Left.


Discover the Networks

Source: http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/267252/poisoning-minds-americas-schoolchildren-discover-networks

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

The Islamic View of "Feminism" - Nonie Darwish




by Nonie Darwish

Muslim activist and Women's March organizer, Linda Sarsour, has helpfully exposed a side of Islam that is pro-Sharia and pro-jihad

  • What the West needs to know is that in the Muslim world, jihad is considered more important than women, family happiness and life itself. If we are told, as Linda Sarsour said, that Islam stands for peace and justice, what we are not told is that "peace" in Islam will come only after the whole world has converted to Islam, and that "justice" means law under Sharia: whatever is inside Sharia is "justice;" whatever is not in Sharia is not "justice."
  • Rebelling against Sharia is, sadly, for the Muslim woman, unthinkable. How can a healthy and normal feminist movement develop under an Islamic legal system that can flog, stone and behead women? That is why Sarsour's jihadist kind of feminism is no heroic kind of feminism but the only feminism a Muslim woman can practice that will give her a degree of respect, acceptance, and even preferential treatment over other women. In Islam, that is the only kind of feminism allowed to develop.
Muslim activist and Women's March organizer, Linda Sarsour, has helpfully exposed a side of Islam that is pro-Sharia and pro-jihad:
"I hope that ... when we stand up to those who oppress our communities, that Allah accepts from us that as a form of jihad, that we are struggling against tyrants and rulers not only abroad in the Middle East or on the other side of the world, but here in these United States of America, where you have fascists and white supremacists and Islamophobes reigning in the White House."
Although Sarsour later protested that the word jihad literally means "struggle" or that "our beloved prophet ... said... 'A word of truth in front of a tyrant ruler or leader, that is the best form of jihad,'" that is not what the word jihad means in general parlance to anyone you might ask in the Middle East. The people there know only too well that if they even tried to speak a "word of truth" to someone in power, that could possibly be the last word they would ever utter.

The word jihad is not a matter of left or right or liberal or conservative, except when it being manipulated to repackage and sell as something warm, fuzzy and non-threatening to trusting people in the West.

In Sarsour's world, women who do this are called feminists, but, in reality, they are as dangerous to women's rights, the peace of a nation and stability of its government as male jihadists.

At a recent Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) convention, Sarsour urged fellow Muslims, in an openly racist speech, to wage jihad against the "fascist" and "white supremacist" White House, be perpetually outraged, and not to assimilate. She mentioned 9/11 not as a terrorist event waged by Muslims against Americans, but as a day that triggered victimization and Islamophobia against Muslims by America.

Americans got upset just because they were murdered? As the saying goes: "It all started when he hit me back."

Even though Sarsour later claimed her use of the word "jihad" meant non-violent dissent, that is not what the word is taken to mean in any Muslim country. There, it means only one thing: war in the service of Islam. In addition, her speech did not sound peaceful. It clearly sounded more like a call for an Islamic uprising against the White House.


Linda Sarsour's recent speech calling to wage jihad against the "fascist" and "white supremacist" White House did not sound peaceful. It clearly sounded more like a call for an Islamic uprising. Pictured: Sarsour at the Women's March on Washington, on January 21, 2017. (Photo by Theo Wargo/Getty Images)

Sarsour apparently identifies as a feminist. Sarsour's kind of feminism, however, embraces the most oppressive legal system, especially for women: Islamic religious law, Sharia. Sarsour's feminism is supposedly for empowering women, but it twists logic in a way similar to how Muslim preachers do when they claim that beating one's wife is a husband's way of honoring her.

Pro-Sharia feminism is a perverted kind of feminism that could not care less about the well-being of oppressed Muslim women. Sarsour's logic concerning women does not differ much from that of Suad Saleh, an Egyptian female Islamic cleric, who recently justified on Egyptian TV the doctrine of intentional humiliation and rape of captured women in Islam. Saleh said, "One of the purposes of raping captured enemy women and young girls was to humiliate and disgrace them and that is permissible under Islamic law." There was not even a peep in Egypt's civil society about such a statement.

Here is an Australian Muslim woman calling beatings by husbands a "blessing from Allah".

Muslim feminists seem to think that they must defend Sharia and "Allah" before any other consideration -- including women. Musdah Mulia, a Muslim professor, who also claims to be a feminist, maintains that Islam is a religion of equality. She has said, "blame Muslims, not Islam, for gender inequity." Muslim anthropologist Ziba Mir-Mosseini has argued "The problem [for women in Islam] has never been with the text (the Koran), but with the context." That means, presumably, that the problem is everyone's fault except for the sources themselves: Islam, the Koran and Sharia.

The reason Islamic feminism has been perverted is because over centuries it had to conform to Islamic law, Sharia, which regulates to a fare-thee-well all behavior of women, men and children. Many Muslims, however, seem to be in denial that the main goal of Sharia is to promote life under the bondage of Sharia as good and healthy. Sharia therefore becomes a convoluted way of coercing people to adapt to tyranny.

In London, for instance, devout Muslim women, while wearing a full black niqab, are seen carrying signs protesting British law, supporting Sharia and threatening Europe with another Holocaust and another 9/11. Here in America, the angry mother of the Tsarnaev brothers, responsible for the Boston Marathon bombing, instead of apologizing for what her sons did in a country that welcomed them, warned that "America will pay." These are the kind of women that Arab TV places on pedestals. The message to Muslim women is that this is the only kind of feminism Islamic society will tolerate.

"Muslim feminism" is essentially the feminine form of jihad: women defend Sharia, promote jihad, and even emulate the Islamic "virtue and vice police" against other women.

Strong and assertive women do exist in Islam, but to stay strong and respected they have to sell women who want to escape the tyranny of Sharia. Because of the tremendous pressure from life under Sharia, Muslim women have developed a warped form of feminism: a kind of coping mechanism like a "Stockholm Syndrome," where the captive believes that if he is nice to his captors they might treat him better. Like kidnap victims trying to merge with the thinking of their kidnappers in order to survive, women in the Islamic world have learned to defend Sharia and be protective of Islam's reputation as priority number one. That is what Linda Sarsour is advocating today as "feminism."

If such Muslim feminists truly cared about women, why are they not dedicating their work and effort against the rape and oppression of Yazidi, Christian and women of other sects who are being abused and tortured by Muslim men not only in the Middle East but also in Europe? The only women who are coming to the rescue of women being raped in the Middle East are Western women -- unfortunately not Muslim "feminists."

Most hijab-wearing Muslim women tell Western audiences that they are not oppressed and are proud of their "protection" under the hijab or the niqab.

What the West needs to know is that in the Muslim world, jihad is considered more important than women, family happiness and life itself. If we are told, as Sarsour said, that Islam stands for peace and justice, what we are not told is that "peace" in Islam will come only after the whole world has converted to Islam, and that "justice" means law under Sharia: whatever is inside Sharia is "justice;" whatever is not in Sharia is not "justice."

The cruelty of life under Sharia produces two kinds of women: the aggressive and proud, and the doormats. The aggressive Muslim "feminists" often turn their aggression not on the cruel system, but on weak women who are victims of Sharia -- because it is so much easier to turn on the weak than to take on a system that has the power to harm, jail or kill you; and they hope to be praised and rewarded for supporting the system that abuses them.

The system, at its origins, was designed to please men -- promising them anything and everything if they sacrificed their life on earth and their earthly wife and family for jihad. In such a system women, life, liberty and pursuit of happiness had to be sacrificed:
"But perhaps you hate a thing and it is good for you; and perhaps you love a thing and it is bad for you. And Allah Knows, while you know not." (Surah Al-Baqarah [2:216] - Quran)
What Islam wants is for men to kill the enemies of Allah and get killed to expand Islam and then presumably go to paradise. Women's welfare has therefore become an inconvenience to Sharia to say the least.

Strong Muslim women know what they should do if they are to enjoy a certain level of power and respect in Islamic society. They must never defy Sharia, but embrace it. The rewards for compliant Muslim women may explain why most of the Muslim college professors sent by Saudi Arabia to teach Americans never criticize Sharia but claim it to be harmless and even liberating.

An Islamic "Sarsour style" of feminism has to be Sharia-compliant in the "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" mode. Such women have a high degree of tolerance for domestic violence and oppression of other women whom they can regard as "dissolute" or "bad." After being indoctrinated under such a cruel legal system, Muslim feminists end up taking pride in conforming to Sharia while condemning the supposedly "bad" women who do not conform. Whatever unpleasant acts might happen to these other women, according to many Muslim "feminists," those women brought it on themselves by not accepting Sharia.

Centuries of sacrificing family happiness for jihad have taught Muslim women that they are an inconvenience to men who supposedly would prefer to be doing jihad. Thus the "wise" Muslim woman molds herself and others to fit into Islam's priorities. Islam calls any woman who rebels "nashiz" ("rebellious"), a derogatory term. Under Sharia, a husband could lock up his nashiz wife at home for life and get three other wives and enjoy his life while she is locked up.

Rebelling against Sharia is, sadly, for the Muslim woman, unthinkable. That is why during the "Arab Spring," not one Muslim woman carried a sign against the oppression of Sharia in Egypt's Tahrir Square. How can a healthy and normal feminist movement develop under an Islamic legal system that can flog, stone and behead women?

That is why Linda Sarsour's jihadist kind of feminism is no heroic kind of feminism, but the only feminism a Muslim woman can practice that will give her a degree of respect, acceptance, and even preferential treatment over other women. In Islam, that is the only kind of feminism allowed to develop.

This Islamic oppressive view of women is now creeping into Western cultural views of feminism. Recently, USA Today celebrated the hijab as symbol of feminism.

It is important that this brand of "pride in bondage" kind of feminism that people such as Linda Sarsour are trying to "sell" not be "bought" by the good-hearted, but insufficiently informed people in the West.


Nonie Darwish, born and raised in Egypt, is the author of "Wholly Different; Why I chose Biblical Values Over Islamic Values"

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10669/islamic-feminism-sarsour

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.