Kuhner: The Islamist in the White House

The Islamist in the White House

Times247

by: Jeffrey T. Kuhner

Thursday, July 26, 2012

The Muslim Brotherhood is on the rise. The Islamist group is spreading across the Middle East. The question is whether it has infiltrated the Obama administration, especially the State Department. Led by Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, a band of House Republican conservatives is investigating the reach of the Muslim Brotherhood. For this, they are being vilified not just by the liberal media, but by the GOP establishment. Our ruling class refuses to confront the reality of radical Islam.

In particular, Washington’s elites are circling the wagons around Huma Abedin, a top adviser to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Ms. Abedin is a classic Beltway insider. For years, she has served as a close aide to Ms. Clinton. Ms. Abedin is also married to disgraced former Rep. Anthony Weiner, New York Democrat. She is widely known on Capitol Hill — including among Republicans. She is a life-long liberal apparatchik, an ambitious political climber who has done favors for both parties. This is why when Ms. Bachmann — along with four other members of Congress — wrote a letter to the State Department’s Office of Inspector General asking if a proper background check was conducted prior to Ms. Abedin’s appointment, the stalwart conservative was excoriated. Liberals are calling Ms. Bachmann “Joseph McCarthy with lipstick.” House Speaker John Boehner and Sen. John McCain have denounced her as “irresponsible” and “reckless.”

Ms. Bachmann’s alleged crime? In her letter, she asked whether Foggy Bottom investigated Ms. Abedin’s family ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. That’s right. The secretary of state’s closest adviser has extensive, well-documented familial connections to an anti-American, anti-Semitic terrorist group. Ms. Abedin’s late father was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, her mother belonged to the Muslim Sisterhood, and her brother is part of a Muslim organization with strong links to the terror group. In short, Ms. Abedin comes from a virulently pro-Islamist family. It is only common sense and basic patriotism to examine if she poses a national security threat.

Moreover, Ms. Bachmann has never — not once — accused Ms. Abedin of being a secret member of the Muslim Brotherhood or demanded that her high-level security clearance be revoked. The Minnesota Republican has only raised a simple question: Did the State Department’s OIG look into Ms. Abedin’s sordid family background and what were the conclusions? Why has Ms. Abedin been given top security clearance dealing with sensitive, classified information regarding the Muslim Brotherhood? She is in a position to have access to key documents that could be shared with America’s mortal enemies. Senior government officials are regularly denied security clearances for numerous reasons — family connections being one of them. It poses a conflict of interest. For asking these questions, Ms. Bachmann is being admonished by the GOP. Messrs. Boehner and McCain should be ashamed of themselves.

The Huma Abedin case is eerily similar to a previous, infamous scandal involving a senior foreign policy adviser: Alger Hiss. As Jeffrey Lord in the American Spectator rightly points out, Hiss was a successful New Deal lawyer who rose through the State Department’s ranks. A prominent liberal, Hiss was a widely respected pillar of the foreign policy establishment. He was also a traitor and a secret agent of the Soviet Union. In 1944, he was a key adviser to President Franklin D. Roosevelt at the Yalta Conference. It was at Yalta where FDR sold out Eastern Europe to Soviet dictator Josef Stalin. Hiss was eventually exposed as a Soviet spy — with the help of Richard Nixon, then a California congressman. Mr. Lord argues that Nixon endured unparalleled vitriol from liberal Democrats and Beltway Republicans. The establishment GOP was blind to the seminal issue of communists infiltrating the American government.

Today, in a similar manner, our elites are appeasing Islamic radicals. Several years ago, the Muslim Brotherhood was designated a terrorist organization. There has been, however, a policy sea change under the Obama administration. Led by the State Department, it has actively aided and abetted the Brotherhood’s ascendency to power. President Obama withdrew support for a longtime U.S. ally, former Egyptian strongman Hosni Mubarak. The Muslim Brotherhood has been the big winner. Egypt’s new president, Mohammed Morsi, is a former Brotherhood member. At an election rally earlier this year, Mr. Morsi addressed tens of thousands of Brotherhood supporters who chanted that a “million martyrs will descend upon Jerusalem.” The Brotherhood’s goal is to forge an Islamist Egypt. It seeks to cleanse the country of its Coptic Christians. It also calls for the destruction of Israel. The Sinai region has become a jihadist haven.

Moreover, the Obama administration is intervening in Syria’s civil war. Ms. Clinton has called for Syrian dictator Bashar Assad to step down. The CIA is secretly arming and funding the anti-Assad rebels. Mr. Assad presides over an odious, brutal regime. Yet, what threatens to replace him will be even worse. The opposition is dominated by jihadists and the Muslim Brotherhood. The rebels want to erect a Sunni Muslim theocracy. Their aim is to exterminate the Alawite Shiite minority and expel Syria’s Christians. Mr. Assad’s downfall would mark another major victory for the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Arab Spring is thus becoming the Islamist Winter. Instead of denouncing this dangerous trend, the administration has welcomed it. Mr. Morsi has even been invited to visit Mr. Obama in the White House this fall. Think about it: An avowed anti-American Jew-hater, who calls for a global Islamic caliphate, will be given the red carpet treatment.

Hence, the Muslim Brotherhood has gone from pariah to close Obama ally. It has been sanitized and rehabilitated. Ms. Bachmann is right to ask: What role — if any — has Ms. Abedin played in this sordid betrayal of America’s interests? The GOP, the press and every patriot should stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the brave Ms. Bachmann and demand answers.

Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a columnist at The Washington Times and president of the Edmund Burke Institute.

SOURCE: http://times247.com/articles/25the-islamist-in-the-white-house6.

New York’s new mosque fight

Thursday, Jul 26, 2012 12:30 PM EDT

SALON.com

New York’s new mosque fight
Far from ground zero, a new mosque in Brooklyn faces angry opposition, including familiar faces like Pam Geller

By Alex Seitz-Wald

Developer Ahmed Allowey wanted to build a modest house of prayer on a vacant lot in Sheepshead Bay, Brooklyn. For years, growing numbers of Muslims had been immigrating to the neighborhood and lacked a nearby mosque. Allowey’s plan was hatched over five years ago, but construction at 2812 Voorhies Avenue is still not complete, thanks to vociferous opposition from local residents backed by opportunistic politicians.

Just last week, Republican state Sen. David Storobin, who represents nearby Brighton Beach, fired off a letter to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg claiming the mosque “may pose a danger to public safety.” He explained to the Brooklyn Daily that his “opposition isn’t to who is building it, but to what is being built.” The main group fighting the mosque, Bay People Inc., praised Storobin’s letter. “He understands the needs of his neighbors. He’s strongly against this construction,” a spokesperson told the Daily.

For years, Bay People has fought the mosque by any means possible. On their website, they say their primary concerns are quotidian: parking, traffic and noise. But further down the list, some other concerns emerge. They argue that the Muslim American Society, which has backed Allowey, a local businessman, is “associated with the [Muslim] Brotherhood, sharing ideology, goals, leaders and members. We are sure you are aware of the Brotherhood’s fundamentalist views, as well as its anti-American, anti-Semitic and World dominance ideas.” Elsewhere they note that “residents are mostly of Italian/Russian/Jewish/Irish descent and will not benefit from having a mosque and a Muslim community center.”

In the summer of 2010, as anti-mosques activists from across the country descended on Manhattan to protest the Park 51 Islamic center near ground zero, Sheepshead Bay saw its own vocal protests. “If they build a mosque there, I’m going to bomb the mosque … I will give them a lot of trouble. They’re not going to stay here alive,” one outraged resident resident was quoted by the Brooklyn Paper as saying at a large demonstration. “New York is not Islamabad. Do not forget 9-11!” screamed another protester quoted by the paper. In June of that year, 50 mosque opponents turned out to protest the annual Children of Abraham Peace Walk, which brings together Jews, Muslims and Christians in a show of unity.

Blogger Pam Geller, who led the fight against the Park 51 center, spoke at a protest against the mosque in March of 2011, along with Robert Spencer, a prominent blogger behind the JihadWatch website. On her blog, Atlas Shrugged, Geller has written numerous posts against the “Sheepshead Bay Mega Mosque,” as she calls it (it’s three stories tall on a single-family home lot). She’s also called it the “Muslim Brotherhood” mosque.

In January of 2010, opponents went to the Sheepshead Bay/Plumb Beach Civic Association meeting seeking the board’s support to halt the project. “Though initial statements from the mosque’s opponents emphasized potential traffic, parking and noise problems as the cause for their concern, racist undertones began to bubble to the surface of the debate,” the blog Sheepshead Bites reported at the time. Members of the civic association balked at the mostly Eastern European immigrant protesters worrying about the changing character of the neighborhood. “I liked this neighborhood when I could leave my house barefoot and walk on the beach,” said Civic Association secretary Barbara Berardelli. “When [Eastern Europeans] moved here, I couldn’t do that. I didn’t like you. But ultimately it’s not about your preference, it’s about being a good neighbor and realizing they have rights too.”

Since then, the mosque site has been visited with protesters wielding signs about how mosques teach jihad and graffiti reminding everyone that Osama bin Laden is dead. Opponents have lost numerous appeals to city zoning officials, which eventually ended up in Kings County Supreme Court last fall, but the political opposition remains. Storobin is hardly the first politician to team up with mosque opponents, despite their questionable rhetoric. Brooklyn borough president Markowitz sent a letter to Bloomberg expressing the Bay Peoples’ concerns. U.S. Rep. Bob Turner, a Republican who replaced Anthony Weiner and ran on an anti-“ground zero mosque” platform, has met with members of the group and asked city zoning officials to stop the mosque. Even Democratic City Councilman Lew Fidler tentatively got onboard. “I understand they’re uncomfortable. Our emotions are so high and our concerns for safety are so real, but to suggest that any mosque that is going to be built is a haven for terrorism or a pulpit for hate before they even build the foundation is simply just over the top,” he told the New York Daily News.

SOURCE:http://www.salon.com/2012/07/26/new_yorks_new_mosque_fight/

Ellison Challenges Bachmann: Put Up or Shut Up

Ellison Challenges Bachmann: Put Up or Shut Up
Posted: 07/14/2012 11:05 am

by James Zogby
President, Arab American Institute; author, 'Arab Voices'

A few weeks back, the sensation-seeking Representative Michele Bachmann did her best imitation of the late Senator Joseph McCarthy. She and four of her Congressional colleagues released letters they had collectively sent to the Inspectors General of the Departments of State, Justice, Defense, and Homeland Security, and the Office of the Directorate of National Intelligence calling on them to investigate whether "influence operations conducted by individuals and organizations associated with the Muslim Brotherhood" have "had an impact on the federal government's national security policies."

Warning of "determined efforts by the Muslim Brotherhood to penetrate and subvert the American government as part of its 'civilizational jihad'" the representatives wanted the Inspectors General to identify the Muslims who were influencing U.S. policy.

In making these charges, Bachmann and her cohorts were relying on the work of a Washington-based group the Center for Security Policy -- a notorious player in the anti-Muslim industry that has been working for several years to smear Muslim American groups. The head of the Center served as one of Bachmann's advisers during her ill-fated run for the presidency and the only source cited in the Congressional letters was the Center's "training program," "The Muslim Brotherhood in America: The Enemy Within."

The evidence the Representatives present to back up their ominous warnings is, at best, slight -- in some cases, creating a "straw man" out of a single reed of straw. For example, Representative Gohmert points accusingly to the fact that "this administration continues to bow down before groups associated with the goal of 'destroying Western civilization from within'" -- by which he means that the Administration apologized to Muslims in the Qur'an-burning incident in Afghanistan. This, he suggests, must be due to the administration's "continued meetings" with Muslim groups, which has blinded them to the threat these Muslims pose to our "ability to protect ourselves."

In other instances the evidence reads more like a "six degrees of separation game." Using this trick, Bachmann and the Center point accusing fingers at some Muslims who serve in the administration. Among those who were singled out by name is Huma Abedin, Deputy Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Hilary Clinton.

In the case of Abedin, the game goes from absurd, to downright bizarre. Her father and mother are Muslim and her father taught at a Muslim university in Saudi Arabia, and so they must be... (fill in the blank). In one article inspired by the Center's work that appeared in the Washington Times, a right-wing newspaper, questions are asked as to whether Abedin "had been groomed to access movers and shakers to advance the cause of Islam in America." The article goes on to question whether Abedin's marriage to a Jewish Member of Congress was but a clever ruse designed to further this "Islamist agenda." The evidence? Since Abedin is a Muslim why else would her family have approved of her marrying a non-Muslim? And, after all, she works for Clinton and Obama, who share, the article says, the "socialist agenda, which includes domination of the U.S. by a Muslim-ruled world!"

What is so intriguing about the conspiracy-minded is how their rhetorical charges and the gravity of the threat they see continues to grow each time they speak. Not to disappoint, Bachmann's paranoia gives evidence of this trait. In a recent interview in which she discussed her effort, she explained, "it appears that there has been deep penetration in the halls of our United States government by the Muslim Brotherhood... it appears that there are individuals associated with the Muslim Brotherhood who have very sensitive positions in our Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security... I am calling [for an investigation] to see who these people are and what access they have to our information."

As outrageous as all this behavior may be, the letters and the charges generated very little media attention, but that doesn't mean that they can be dismissed, for two main reasons: the five, though all a bit loony, hold positions of influence on key Congressional committees; and despite the fact that the source of the "evidence" cited in the Congressional letters is the pernicious Muslim-bashing Center for Security Policy "witch hunts," if left unchecked it can ruin lives and damage reputations.

Let's look first at the five Members of Congress who signed the letters: Representatives Bachmann, Tom Rooney, and Lynn Westmoreland all sit on the Select Committee on Intelligence, while Representatives Trent Franks and Louis Gohmert are members of the Judiciary Committee. With the exception of Bachmann, all hold leadership positions, either within their respective committees or in the House Republican caucus.

As an example of the potential this group might have to influence policy, this week the powerful Chairman of the House Select Committee on Intelligence, Mike Rogers, speaking on a radio program hosted by the head of the Center, called Bachman's campaign to "root out" Muslims "very important" noting that she is "taking the lead" on this issue.

As was the case during the McCarthy era, "witch-hunts" have victims and not only in jobs lost and careers ruined. Equally troubling is the distress that campaigns of this sort can bring to those not named, but who live in fear that their religion or their ethnicity will be the reason that they will be held in suspicion, denied a position, or held back from advancement. And as I know from bitter personal experience, it can result in entire communities being shunned by officials who fear being attacked for associating with a group that has been smeared as "dangerous." Because there is a scarcity of courageous leaders in Washington, all too often the "witch hunts" will fester, taking a terrible toll before being challenged and defeated.

It is for this reason that I am so thankful that the wise voters of Minnesota's 5th Congressional District sent Keith Ellison to Congress. He is smart, picking his fights carefully. He is principled and courageous, venturing forth on matters that others tend to shy away from. And his wise counsel and thoughtful approach to issues has earned him the respect of his colleagues.

Ellison demonstrated his leadership this week when he directly challenged the sensation-seeking, Islamophobic Representative Michele Bachmann. In a stern letter to Bachmann and company, Ellison asks that she provide his "office with a full accounting of the sources you used to make the serious allegations against the individuals and organizations in your letters. If there is not credible, substantial evidence for your allegations, I sincerely hope you will publicly clear their names."

source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-zogby/ellison-challenges-bachma_b_1673266.html

Secrets of the Muslim bathroom

Monday, Jul 9, 2012 09:00 PM EDT
Secrets of the Muslim bathroom
The lota has torn apart relationships and embarrassed first-generation kids like me. So what is it? Let me explain
By Wajahat Ali
SALON.com

In America, Muslims must think like Jason Bourne, practicing our rituals with clandestine skill to avoid awkward confrontations. For instance, it’s not easy to find creative space to pray while providing logical explanations to those who find you in mid-prostration. “I’m doing Arabic tai chi,” you might say when someone sees you crouched in a stall at the Gap. “It’s an … Eastern thing.”

Or, what if you get caught doing the pre-prayer ablution, wudu, that requires Muslims to wash their hands and feet five times a day? “Uh, my foot is in the office restroom sink because I couldn’t pay my water bill,” you might say. “Rough economy, you know?”

Added to this list is the “lota,” which is used in Muslim communities, including most South Asian populations, to aid in cleansing rituals. The lota is a magical chalice for our peoples – it’s a traditional hand-held vessel that contains water to assist in our bathroom “activities.” Using a baseball lineup analogy, toilet paper and moist wipes are a “leadoff” hitter, but the lota functions as the “clean-up hitter,” the player with the power to bring all the players to home plate.

But the lota can be confusing to Americans. Not long ago, an American Muslim family was detained at the airport and interviewed by the FBI. They had aroused suspicion by “lingering” near the airplane bathroom and asking for a “cup” to perform a “religious custom dictating cleanliness.”

I can certainly sympathize. I have confused many co-workers with my creeping “stealth lota jihad.” At my former law job, I once used a venti Starbucks cup as a temporary, emergency lota. I thoroughly washed the caramel frap residue and filled it to the brim with tap water.

“Hey Waj,” I heard just as I was about to enter the stall and liberate myself. It was my boss. “Whatcha’ got there?”

“Oh, this? Just, uh, was thirsty,” I replied. We stared at each other for several, uncomfortable seconds. “Yup – thirsty.”

And then I proceeded to drink the water.

But the lota shouldn’t be such cause for embarrassment. It has always existed — right under our very noses and bottoms. For Muslims, it is the homely girlfriend we adore but are ashamed to date in public. We keep it hidden out of self-loathing and fear. As America’s unofficial ambassador of “Eastern Toilet Etiquette, ” however, I say it’s time to explain a few things.

The origin of the lota

Muslims follow the traditions of their Prophet Muhammad, who performed istinja, the act of washing the private parts with water after committing najis, which is the “filth” we commonly refer to as the numbers “1” and “2.” Paper and certain rocks can also be used to facilitate the process, but water is the preferred accomplice.

Furthermore, Islam requires this specific “act” to be performed by the left hand, which is synonymous in South Asia for being the hand that is used only for “other things.” It is recommended for Muslims to perform most actions, including eating, with their right hand.

Naturally, I happen to be the left-handed minority within a minority. As such, I have been treated by most fellow Muslims like a circus freak, leper or the local chaiwallah possessed by the local toilet jinn. This adds to my lifetime of traumatic “South Paw” episodes, including having perpetual pen smudges on my left hand and being seen as mentally challenged throughout elementary school due to my inability to use right-handed scissors.

At a recent South Asian Muslim wedding, I made the fatal mistake of taking biryani from the buffet tray with my left hand. With the visual acuity of an intolerant, bigoted eagle, my aunt spotted the alleged criminal act and loudly admonished me in front of my peers: “You took food with the left hand?! We don’t eat with the left hand – only the right hand. The left hand is used for … ‘other things.’”

Lotas come in all shapes and sizes

Many individuals are selective and take tremendous pride in their lota of choice. Personally, I ascribe to the “bigger is better” lota philosophy. During my UC Berkeley college days, my roommate and I purchased one from Wal-Mart that we named “Excalibur.” Wielding this five-pound behemoth watering jug required strength, discipline and skill. Each time we successfully used this intimidating instrument, we felt like we had just unsheathed the famed, Arthurian sword from the stone. It was our scatological light saber and a daily reminder of our virility and manhood.

Traditionally, the lota resembled a tea pot or an exotic genie lamp with a large spout made of brass or copper. Due to an urbanized, Western lifestyle, however, the once-limited definition of what could be classified as a lota has evolved and expanded. Plastic watering jugs are the new, preferred instrument of posterior purification in America. Some Muslims and South Asians believe in keeping their lotas hand-held and within reach, often times affixing them to the wall as manual bidets.

Traditionalists insist that the only lota that can properly perform its intended duty is the copper or brass vessel commonly found in Pakistan and India. They use poetic, romantic language to adulate this criterion lota and refuse to use any other instrument, similar to seniors who reject CDs and insist that “everything sounds better on vinyl.”

However, most agree that no respectable adult should dishonor their namesake by using plastic cups from fast food restaurants as lotas in their homes. It reeks of laziness and a lack of civility; a person who cannot even bother to invest time in purchasing a proper lota is probably unreliable and unsatisfactory in other areas of their life. Sadly, a few families and especially ignorant, young, single folk continue this shameful practice.

Growing up with the lota

The lota extracts a tremendous toll on one’s emotional well-being during adolescence. In fact, I never knew what “streaky underwear” meant until college. I used to nod my head, laugh and pretend I knew what my friends were talking about, just like when they mentioned “pork chops,” “meat loaf,” “cardigans,” “wearing shoes in the home” and “keggers.” When visiting friends’ homes and doing the deed, I frantically searched their bathrooms for the lota that would sadly never come.

Once, during high school, my non–South Asian friend visited and asked to use the restroom. Upon emerging, he asked,

“Dude, why is there a flower vase next to your toilet and clear water on the floor?” My smoking gun was a cracked, plastic watering jug sitting next to the toilet. The leaky lota betrayed me!

“Um, uh, we, uh, water our plants. That’s why,” I sheepishly replied.

“Dude, there are no plants in the bathroom,” he responded.

“Right, good observation. Let me order you a pizza now. Any toppings you want.” I bribed him with cheese-y goodness, but our relationship was forever strained.

Love in the time of the lota

Not all practicing Muslims use a lota. This lack of lota use significantly affects budding relationships and plays heavily in the dating game. Lota users are often like gullible teenage girls blinded by passion and the naïve hope that they can “change” the non-lota user after marriage. For South Asians who fall in love with non–South Asians, they plot the “perfect” moment to unleash their lota secret.

“Bro, once she falls in love with me, that’s when I’m busting out the ‘lota conversation.’ I’ll wait until she’s emotionally invested, and that’s when I’ll tell her — ‘I lied. I don’t use the jug to wash my feet. It’s to wash my ass.’ She’ll forgive me, try it out, and realize it’s amazing,” assured an overly confident friend of mine about his impending lota blitzkrieg. The couple broke up shortly thereafter.

Recently, a friend of mine refused to consider a hot, smart, eligible woman as a potential partner purely based on the missing lota in her apartment bathroom.

“Bro, she doesn’t have a lota. I’ve used her bathroom. It’s not there.”

“Maybe it was hidden behind the toilet? Some people keep it in the cabinet under the sink,” I replied, giving her the benefit of the doubt.

“No, bro. I checked. Nothing. Not even a plastic cup. I can’t be with a woman who doesn’t use lota. That says a lot about a woman’s personality, right? And plus you can’t teach a woman how to use a lota – not at this age. How am I going to bring it up in conversation? Hey, so do you want kids? How many? Oh, by the way do you use lota? I can’t force her.”

“Indeed, there is no compulsion in lota,” I replied solemnly.

However, there have been exceptions to the rule. My roommate in law school was a white Army recruit from Marin who converted to Islam in college. He almost tearfully recalled how the virginal lota experience remains one of his top 10 best memories. He left the commode with spirits soaring and a zealous desire to proselytize the brilliance of using lota.

To quote his words: “Once you wash that crack, you never go back.”

Instead of fearing the lota, we as a society should tolerate and embrace the diversity of booty-cleansing techniques that are now available to us. Americans eventually accepted hummus and Bollywood music. Could the lota could be next? Regardless, it’s time to put an end to the self-loathing and fear and let the lota proudly step out of the water closet.

Wajahat Ali is a playwright, attorney, journalist and essayist. His award winning play"The Domestic Crusaders," was published by McSweeney's in 2011. He is the lead author of "Fear Inc., Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America." He is currently writing a pilot with Dave Eggers about an American Muslim cop from the Bay Area. He is co-editor of the anthology "All American: 45 American Men on Being Muslim", which published in June 2012.

Dutch lawmaker brings his crusade against Islam to conservative confab

Dutch lawmaker brings his crusade against Islam to conservative confab
7/6/2012
By Ernest Luning
The Colorado Statesman

Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders brought his crusade against the Islamic religion to Denver last weekend, warning an audience at the Western Conservative Summit that Europe and the United States are vulnerable to an insidious takeover by what he termed a “dangerous, totalitarian ideology” masquerading as a religion.

“If we do not stop the Islamization, we will lose everything: our identity, our culture, our democratic constitutional state, our freedom, and our civilization,” Wilders told an audience of roughly 1,000 gathered in the main ballroom at the downtown Hyatt Regency Denver on Saturday. The annual summit, in its third year, is sponsored by the Lakewood-based Colorado Christian University’s Centennial Institute and had an estimated 1,300 attendees over three days.

While the reaction to Wilders was mixed — he received repeated standing ovations during his 45-minute talk, but perhaps a third of the audience members remained planted in their seats throughout — one Colorado lawmaker said Americans should take the Islamic threat seriously and consider prohibiting the construction of mosques in the state.

Former Senate President John Andrews and Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders take a question from the audience following a speech by Wilders at the Western Conservative Summit on June 30 at the Hyatt Regency Denver. Andrews directs Colorado Christian University’s Centennial Institute, which sponsored the conference.

Wilders, the founder and head of the far-right Party for Freedom, now the third-largest political party in the Netherlands, has lived under constant guard since 2004 and is the author of the recently published “Marked for Death: Islam’s War Against the West and Me.”

He has been targeted “for criticizing Islam,” he told the avid crowd after describing some of the security measures required to protect him and his wife.

“My view, in a nutshell, is that Islam, rather than a religion, is predominantly a totalitarian ideology striving for world dominance,” he said. “I believe that Islam and freedom are incompatible.”

CCU president and former U.S. Sen. Bill Armstrong launched the summit on Friday by proclaiming it open to members of all faiths.

“Of course, those of us at CCU are followers of Jesus, but in the room tonight are men and women of not only the New Testament but the Old Testament, and of other religious and philosophical traditions as well. You’re all welcome, we’re delighted you’re here,” Armstrong said.

But by the time Wilders commanded the same stage the next afternoon, the welcome mat might have been less firmly in place for at least one religion.

Former Senate President John Andrews, who heads CCU’s Centennial Institute, didn’t mince words when he introduced Wilders and another speaker known for his opposition to Islam.

Saturday afternoon’s topic, Andrews said, would be “the existential threat to the United States of America posed by Islam.”

Pausing for a moment to let his words sink in, he continued. “I didn’t say ‘radical Islam,’ I didn’t say ‘extremism.’ After you hear from Frank Gaffney and our friend from across the Atlantic, Geert Wilders, you’ll know why I just say ‘the threat of Islam.’”

For his part, Wilders emphasized what he described as a distinction between followers of Islam and the religion itself.

“I do not have a problem with Muslims,” Wilders said during his address. “There are many moderate Muslims. I always make a distinction between the people and the ideology. There are indeed many moderate Muslims. But believe me, there is no such thing as a moderate Islam — there is only one Islam, and that is a dangerous, totalitarian ideology that is intolerant, that is violent, that should not be tolerated by us but that should be contained.”

Wilders warned against opening the door to Sharia law — based on traditional Islamic principles — in Western courtrooms but added that it was already too late to keep Islam and its influences out of the country entirely.

“Your country is facing a stealth jihad, an Islamic attempt to introduce Sharia law bit by bit by bit,” he said.

In order to keep the United States from succumbing, Wilders said, politicians have to ignore what he promised would be derision from the liberal media and other quarters and firmly deliver strong medicine. First, he said, Americans have to stop putting up with “multiculturalism,” even as free-speech proponents cry foul. In addition, he said American courtrooms must bar Sharia law and “stop the immigration from Islamic countries.”

Most critically, he said, “We should forbid the construction of new mosques. There is enough Islam in the West already.”

State Sen. Kevin Grantham, R-Cañon City, said it’s worth paying attention to Wilders and the alarms he was raising.

“It’s warranted in this country,” Grantham told The Colorado Statesman minutes after Wilders finished his speech. “We already see the beginnings of that movement here in a smaller fashion, but it’s the same thing as it was in Europe just within the last couple decades, and we see where Europe’s at right now. So the warning is very real, and we should take heed and watch where we’re heading in this country.”

Grantham said he agreed with the distinction Wilders made between the Islamic religion and its adherents.

“If we look at the philosophical underpinnings of what is called Islam, (it’s) very fair how he treats that. Now, there’s some Muslims, obviously, like Mr. Wilders said, that we would call moderate. But the philosophical underpinnings of that system, of that culture of Islam — those are very serious problems and they are antithetical to the American way.”

Regarding Wilders’ suggestion that Western governments ban construction of new mosques, Grantham said it was worth considering.

“You know, we’d have to hear more on that, because, as he said, mosques are not churches like we would think of churches,” Grantham said. “They think of mosques more as a foothold into a society, as a foothold into a community, more in the cultural and in the nationalistic sense. Our churches — we don’t feel that way, they’re places of worship, and mosques are simply not that, and we need to take that into account when approving construction of those.”

State Sen. Kevin Lundberg, R-Berthoud, who last week won the GOP nomination for the Second Congressional District seat, had a more skeptical reaction than his Senate colleague.

Wilders, he said, “showed some concern for some issues that have happened in this country, and there are some issues we need to be aware of here, but I’m not ready to endorse what he said.”

Asked whether he shared concerns raised during Wilders’ talk about a proposed mosque in Larimer County, Lundberg shook his head and quoted the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

“I think immediately of ‘Congress shall make no law …’ and that sounds pretty close to that, doesn’t it?” he said.

A moment later, Lundberg elaborated on his reaction to Wilders’ proposals.

“We’re a free society, and there are risks with freedom,” Lundberg said. “In my mind, we need to give every citizen the opportunity to succeed or fail on their merits, and there are limits we have to put in place for certain public safety issues, but I am much more a stronger defender of the First Amendment than I am of immediately restricting people because of a perceived concern.”

Former Reagan administration official Frank Gaffney — something of a pariah in right-wing circles since he began accusing anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist of helping radical Muslims infiltrate the conservative movement — riled up the crowd immediately before Wilders spoke with a preview of a 10-hour video series called “The Muslim Brotherhood in America.” The series charges that a cabal of Muslims is staging a stealthy conquest of the United States by pretending to be moderate while ascending the rungs of power.

Gaffney called on conservatives at the summit to boycott the American Conservative Union’s regional Conservative Political Action Conference — known as CPAC — set to take place in Denver on Oct. 4, the day after the first presidential debate at the University of Denver, unless the organization renounces its association with individuals Gaffney claims have ties with the Muslim Brotherhood.

Former radio talk-show host and Denver attorney Craig Silverman introduced Wilders, but first told the crowd that he stood before them “in all humility to you conservatives for confession and forgiveness,” and admitted that he voted for Obama in 2008. Silverman said he has since seen the error of his ways.

“I thought Barack Hussein Obama was ideally situated to speak simple truths to the Islamic world,” Silverman said, adding that instead, the president “wouldn’t do it, he did not do it, and he will not do it.”

Saying he feared for America’s safety and for the very survival of Israel, Silverman declared that he has read few books in recent years that affected him as profoundly as Wilders’ memoir.

“Geert Wilders is a great man,” Silverman said. “He refuses to be intimidated. He is a profile in courage.”

— Ernest@coloradostatesman.com

SOURCE: http://www.coloradostatesman.com/content/993597-dutch-lawmaker-brings-his-crusade-against-islam-conservative-confab

San Diego man stranded after told on no-fly list

Jul 3, 6:25 PM EDT
San Diego man stranded after told on no-fly list

By JULIE WATSON
Associated Press

SAN DIEGO (AP) -- A U.S. citizen of Somali descent who has been stranded in Bahrain for two weeks after being told his name appears on the U.S. government's no-fly list said Tuesday that he does not understand why he has been tagged as a suspected terrorist and is talking to U.S. lawyers.

The San Diego chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, held a press conference Tuesday to draw attention to the case of 20-year-old Ali Ahmed, who was denied entry into Kenya two weeks ago and then flown to Bahrain.

The Associated Press later called Ahmed in Bahrain.

Ahmed said he was told by the U.S. Embassy in Bahrain that he has been cleared to go home, but when he went to the airport Monday, he was blocked from boarding again. Ahmed said he stayed at a hotel at first. He now has been staying with a man contacted by family friends and is running low on money.

The San Diego man said he does not know why he would be on the federal list that includes thousands of known or suspected terrorists.

He came to the United States at the age of 7 with his family, who moved from Kenya after fleeing Somalia's civil war. This was his first trip out of the United States since then.

Ahmed said he went to Saudi Arabia initially to make a pilgrimage to Mecca. He then flew to Kenya to meet his father whom he had not seen in 14 years after being separated by the war.

He also planned to meet his fiancé for an arranged marriage. He said a Kenyan agent told Ahmed he was on the no-fly list. Officials told him that again in Bahrain, where he contacted the U.S. embassy.

Ahmed said embassy officials told him Tuesday to book a flight for Sunday to the U.S.

"I hope I'm able to come home Sunday," he said. "The embassy, they told me they don't know why this happened, and their job is to get me home, and they're not going to deal with why I'm on the no-fly list."

FBI officials said they do not discuss such cases. They said the process for including someone on the no-fly list is a multi-agency, multi-tiered process and anyone on it must meet specific criteria in accordance with existing legislation and the submitting agency's policies to protect privacy rights and civil liberties. The FBI said the U.S. Privacy Act bars its officials from disclosing the names on the list, nor will the U.S. government confirm or deny whether an individual is on the watch list.

The FBI said in a statement that "disclosure of such information could be harmful to our nation's security." It also said anyone who feels they have been wrongly put on the list or misidentified can contact the Department of Homeland Security's Traveler Redress Inquiry Program at http://www.dhs.gov/files/programs/gc-1169676919316.shtm .

In defending the secrecy of the no-fly list in the past, the FBI has said it needs to protect sensitive investigations and to avoid giving terrorists clues for avoiding detection.

Ahmed said he has been talking to U.S. lawyers to see what actions he can take to clear his name.

CAIR has written a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asking her to intervene in Ahmed's case.

As a U.S. citizen, Ahmed should be allowed to return to the United States and sort out his situation otherwise it violates his due process rights, said CAIR's Executive Director Hanif Mohebi. He said there have been several cases like Ahmed's.

A U.S. appeals court last month agreed to hear arguments in a lawsuit filed by 15 men who say their rights were violated because they are on the government's no-fly list. Some are outside the country and unable to return. They are asking the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to order their removal from the list or be given an explanation as to why they were put on it.

The plaintiffs include the imam of an Oregon mosque and a U.S. Marine veteran who is the son of a Palestinian immigrant.

"We truly need to revisit that list and figure out how do we clean it up so it is effective and it keeps our security without jeopardizing our civil rights," Mohebi said.

SEAL training range won't show woman as target

SEAL training range won't show woman as target

By Kate Wiltrout
The Virginian-Pilot
© June 30, 2012

The Navy will not use a target depicting a Muslim woman holding a gun at a new training range for SEALs in Virginia Beach.

The announcement came hours after the Council on American-Islamic Relations asked the Pentagon to remove the target. A picture of the cardboard target, which shows a woman in a headscarf holding a pistol, was published in The Virginian-Pilot on Tuesday. The image shows verses of the Quran hanging on the wall behind the woman, which also generated criticism from the group.

Nihad Awad, executive director of the Washington-based council, said in the letter to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta dated Friday that the target "is offensive and sends a negative and counterproductive message to trainees and to the Muslim-majority nations to which they may be deployed."

Panetta's press office did not respond to a request for comment. Late Friday, Lt. David Lloyd, a spokesman for Naval Special Warfare Group 2, said the materials in question would not be used on the close quarters combat training range, which was dedicated Monday at Joint Expeditionary Base Fort Story.

"We have removed this particular target and Arabic writing in question from the range in the near term, and will explore other options for future training," Lloyd said.

Naval Special Warfare Group Two, which oversees SEAL teams 2, 4, 8 and 10 at Joint Expeditionary Base LIttle Creek, has not yet put the $11.5 million facility to use.

The 26,500-square-foot building contains 52 interconnected spaces, including mock-ups of markets, a hospital, schools, a bank, a bus depot and two mosques. It will allow small groups of SEALs to practice enemy engagement at close range.

Many of the details were taken from actual raids over the past decade, Capt. Tim Szymanski, the commodore of Naval Special Warfare Group 2, said during a tour of the facility Monday.

Szymanski said SEALs must differentiate in a split second between civilian bystanders and potential enemies, and noted other cardboard cut-outs on the range would show people holding animals, not weapons.

Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the Islamic group, said it's important that military units not be trained to see Muslims as enemies, even if they are fighting in Afghanistan or other Muslim-majority nations.

"There are all kinds of people all over the world trying to do us harm. Why would you use this particular image in training people how to kill?" Hooper asked. "It creates the impression, we believe, in subtle and not-so-subtle ways, that you should view Muslim women in headscarves with hostility and suspicion."

The council also spoke out in recent months against an instructor at the Joint Forces Staff College in Norfolk who taught a course on Islamic radicalism that referred to the war on terror as a war against Islam.

The course was halted after a military officer who was a student complained. The instructor, an Army officer, was relieved of his teaching duties. A broader review of training across the military related to Islam found no other problems.

Kate Wiltrout, 757-446-2629, kate.wiltrout@pilotonline.com

SOURCE: http://hamptonroads.com.nyud.net/2012/06/seal-training-range-wont-show-woman-target