How the Muslim Brotherhood Infiltrated the GOP

Pages: 1 2

And so what they immediately set about doing, with Grover’s help and Suhail Khan’s — and Karl Rove’s, I’m sure — was helping the President understand that he needed to be a little bit more sensitive, so he didn’t drive all of these — I mean, it comes back in a way to the conversation we just had — that we don’t want to drive these Muslims into the arms of the terrorists.  So we’re going to say nice things about their faith, and we’re going to make them feel better about us.  And then they’ll be with us, and then everything will be okay, kind of.  We’ll just be able to focus on the enemy, which is just al-Qaeda, or just terror.  Right?

Okay.  I don’t want to get unduly long on this, because I know you’ve got other things to do.  But let me just run through a couple more items in this bill of particulars to flesh this out for you — couple more on Suhail.  What did he do?  Well, it turned out shortly after 9/11 — after he helped finagle getting Muzammil Siddiqi into the ecumenical session and up to the White House, and so on — somebody [tipped] the powers that be — Grover accused me of being it, but it wasn’t, because I didn’t know at the time — that his father and mother were top Muslim Brotherhood figures.  And I guess somebody had the sense to say, in the Bush White House, you know, maybe he shouldn’t really be here.

So what did they do?  They moved him to the Office of Transportation, the Office of the Secretary of Transportation, initially under Norm Mineta; subsequently under Mary Peters — in which role, as the Assistant for Policy, ultimately, he would’ve had access to classified information about this sort of thing, and an at least top-secret clearance.  Now, there are some who will point out that if you got a clearance, there can’t really be any problem with him.

Want to tell you — this is a quick story, but it’s instructive. I mentioned Mike Waller, colleague of mine.  He’s currently a professor at the Institute of World Politics, John Lenczowski’s organization — terrific outfit in Washington, DC.  They train mostly sort of junior mid-level people who want to advance in the national security space, on [states craft] and the techniques involved.

One of them was a young woman who was working for a contractor, who was processing background investigations for security clearances.  And Mike told me that this young woman came to him in tears recently.  Because she had been directed by her superiors to up the quota of approvals that she was doing from seven per day to 20 per day.

Now admittedly, that kind of rubberstamping, at least as far as I know, wasn’t taking place in Suhail Khan’s day.  But I can assure you, having been through this process myself, you had a White House pressure to get a guy quickly installed, so there wouldn’t be any trouble moving him out of the White House.  And they’re going to move him into a top political appointment in the Transportation Department.  I mean, how serious can that be in terms of security, right?  I mean, forget about that ports and rails and stuff.  But you know, kind of a backwater.

So I think this guy got the light treatment.  And after all, what were they worrying about?  The place was crawling with Muslim Brothers by then.  That was going to be a disqualifier?  Okay.  You get the point.

While he was working for the Transportation Department, Grover Norquist gets him put on the board of the American Conservative Union — which Grover’s also on, by the way — which means that they get to control a lot of what happens at CPAC, Conservative Political Action Conference, including keeping people like yours truly off the agenda.  I was delighted that Andy McCarthy made the cut last year and did a superb job on Sharia.  But there’s been a systematic effort over the past few years to have Suhail Khan deciding who can talk about national security at CPAC.

Oh, by the way, our host — if you haven’t seen it, you’ve got — leave the space to go look at David Horowitz’s speech at CPAC last year on this very subject.  It’s absolutely fantastic.

I’ve introduced you to Abdul Rahman Al-Amoudi.  This is Mahbub Khan, father of Suhail.  I’m going to risk fate by trying to hear this audio one more time.  Because I think you’ll find this instructive as well.  This is Abdul Rahman Al-Amoudi at another of these Muslim Brotherhood front meetings, talking about the Khans.

(Video played)

Okay.  So this is not Frank Gaffney telling you Suhail Khan is deeply involved with the Muslim Brotherhood.  This is an al-Qaeda financier, now a man convicted of terrorism, deeply involved and established to be such in the courts of law.

Again, I know I’m probably straining your patience with this, but I just want to make sure you get this.  Because this is really the crux of the issue.

Anyway, this is what Suhail said.  This is what Suhail Khan said.

Unidentified Audience Member: (Inaudible — microphone inaccessible)

Frank Gaffney: Yeah.

Unidentified Audience Member: — what you’re saying, like you’re squeezing it in, like this is unimportant.

Frank Gaffney: This is not unimportant.

Unidentified Audience Member: Yeah, I know it’s important.

(Video played)

Frank Gaffney: Okay.  Let me just cut to the chase.  You’ve just heard him say that his parents were not Muslim Brothers; these are not Muslim Brotherhood groups.  Well — and they’ve not been proved as such.  Actually, the US government, as I mentioned, in the Holy Land Foundation trial, introduced evidence, uncontested in that trial, saying they were.  A trial judge rejected three of their efforts to be delisted, and an appellate panel of three federal judges said he was right.

So my question to you, ladies and gentlemen, is — if Khan is lying about stuff that is demonstrably wrong, what else might he be lying about?  Which brings us to –

Unidentified Audience Member: Mr. Gaffney, what was that CNN –

Frank Gaffney: That was on the margins of CPAC this year.  Because we got into some fisticuffs over it.

I won’t bore you with this, or this.  I’ll just show you this quickly.  To come back to Grover — in addition to what I’ve shown you in terms of getting people in positions to influence and undermine our community, three other things — building the infrastructure for influence operations, promoting candidates, and otherwise advancing the agenda.

On the infrastructure — this is a quote from the group that Grover and Suhail bring to CPAC — Muslims for America.  As best I can tell, it’s a two-person operation run out of Colorado.  But it’s pretty much sort of Muslim Brotherhood-lite.  And they say, quote — We have partnered with the Americans for Tax Reform organization who are looking for Muslim leaders state by state to participate in their monthly meetings — in these state-level meetings, which are sort of [minimi] operations Grover’s spun off from the one in Washington.  Why?  Because they serve as political hotbeds for creating relations with political leaders and Muslims.  Okay?  Influence operation.  Think influence operation.

One of the guys who I would argue fits this bill is a fellow by the name of David Ramadan.  Together with Samah Norquist, Grover’s Muslim wife; and four other Muslims, David, the first in the list, signed a letter basically denouncing conservatives who opposed the Ground Zero mosque back in August of [2000].  Grover encouraged him to run for a State House of Delegates seat in Virginia in this last cycle.

Shortly before the election, Ken Timmerman, many of you may know, identified his father-in-law by his first marriage — and by the way, there’s no evidence that it ever stopped being his marriage — was linked as a major-general in Lebanese intelligence to Syria, Iran and Hezbollah.  As Ken points out in his article, knowing a lot about the Middle East as he does, you don’t get to be married into the family of a major-general in Lebanese intelligence if you’re not, you know, with the program.  Certainly not a moderate Muslim, let alone a Christian.

Unidentified sources of foreign wealth also — the question occurs, what’s he done with it?  Well, he’s given a bunch of it to some of these kinds of people.  I don’t know if you recognize them, but I would argue they’re among the most promising new generation of Republican leaders in the country — Eric Cantor and Governor Bob McDonnell of Virginia.

This fellow you may not know of — Ken Cuccinelli, another one.  Virginia Attorney General.  All of these guys have received campaign contributions from David Ramadan, all of them endorsed him.  Cuccinelli, worse yet — when Ramadan was sued, after he won the primary by 240 votes, by five residents of his district — who believed he did not live in the district and therefore would be ineligible for being its representative — Ken Cuccinelli, the morning of the trial, endorsed him.  And lo and behold, two commonwealth attorneys show up at the trial to quash a subpoena, sought by the plaintiffs, of the state police who had investigated whether this guy actually lived in the district or not.  In the absence of that information, the judge ruled he did represent the district and could serve.  He just won by 50 votes.

So, moving right along — I won’t belabor this point, except to say that on the agenda, I would be willing to bet you there is not a person in this meeting — not just in this room, but in this meeting — who would agree with any of his positions on these sorts of issues.  Mentioned the Ground Zero mosque, closing Gitmo, Jay Streets, Agenda for Israel, repealing the Patriot Act.  You’ve heard about secret evidence, the candidates business.   How about these — bringing Khalid Shaikh Mohammed to trial in New York City?  Oh, the inclusion bit — I can show you that.  But bringing the Nation of Islam into the conservative movement.  How’s that for an idea?

He is leading the fight, as we speak, to get Republicans to join him in cutting defense, massively.  He thinks it should be the bill payer — anything but taxes — and of course cashing in on our presence in Iraq and Afghanistan, and leaving our borders open.

This is interesting.  A couple of months back, the fellow we had at breakfast came to his Wednesday meeting and got — well, to put a fine point on it — lynched by Suhail Khan and some of Grover’s other minions over Cain’s very, I think, sensible position that you can’t entrust the Bench or your Cabinet to people who embrace Sharia.  Because they can’t, as we’ve talked about, support the Constitution of the United States.

How about this?  American Laws for American Courts.  As you may know, this is kind of a problem.  Because the enemy is trying, as part of its stealth jihad, to bring Sharia into our courts.  We’ve just done a study of this — 50 cases in which somebody, a plaintiff or defendant, try to get Sharia used to adjudicate the matter.  In 27 out of those 50 cases, in 23 different states, the court at either the trial or the appellate level upheld the use of Sharia to dispose of the matter — the most notorious of which you may have heard of, probably, in New Jersey.  A Moroccan American woman came to the court asking for a restraining order on her husband because he was systematically raping and torturing her.  And the judge said he could find no evidence of criminal intent, because he was just practicing his rights under Sharia.  Overturned on appeal, but still this is happening.

So a number of us have worked to get this kind of American Laws for American Courts enacted at state level.  Grover has now taken it upon himself to lead the fight against it — back in July getting some Jewish friends of his to come in and say — we won’t be able to practice our faith, which is complete rubbish.

How about this?  The end of September, he brought into that Center Right Coalition these notable conservatives to argue against American Laws for American Courts.  You know, most people I tell that to — most people say — American laws for American — why would you need law to do that?  Of course.  Well, foreign law is being insinuated into our courts — not just Sharia, but particularly.

Then, on October 2nd, shortly after that meeting, he went to Dearborn, Michigan to attend the Red-Green Axis’s National Leadership Conference, in the company of the likes of John Conyers and Keith Ellison, a host of Muslim Brothers, his friends from the ACLU, and George Soros’s Center for American Progress.  There’s now a report, by the way, that he’s now meeting with these people to teach them how to run fundraising operations.  I don’t know, folks, but this is kind of a problem.

Let me just give you — if I can again make this work, and I really appreciate your patience — but you need to hear this in his own words.  And I hope you will be able to.  This is Grover speaking at that National Leadership Conference.

(Video played)

Well, I don’t know if you could hear that.  But he was sort of breaking up in making that closing comment.

Okay, last slide or two, here you go — how does he respond to all of this?  I’ve laid out a lot; you’ve been patient — how does he react?  Well, it’s basically shooting the messenger.  And here it is in his own words.

(Video played)

It is sad and silly.  Okay.

Just to wrap up –

Unidentified Audience Member: Frank, what about [conversation with] Rick Perry?

Frank Gaffney: This is a good question, let me come back to it.

Is this a classic influence operation?  I suggest to you it is, in all of these respects.  This is the bottom line.  This is bad, and getting worse.  And I often ask myself at moments like this, what would he do?  Well, we know what he would do.  Because you see him here in 1947 in front of the House Un-American Activities Committee, testifying about communists in his industry, at considerable risk to himself and his family and his career.

So anyway, I really appreciate you taking all this aboard.  This is a hard problem.  We as a community have not come to grips with this.  As a result, it has metastasized, this cancer.  I hope that this conversation will equip you to be part of the steps that are necessary to rectify it.  And I really appreciate again you hearing this out.

(Applause)

I’m happy to stick around.  You all have something else to do.  And I’ve got a book — did I mention the book is for sale — yes.  Anyway, I’ll do that, too.  But let’s take a few questions, if you want to stay.

Unidentified Audience Member: (Inaudible — microphone inaccessible)

Frank Gaffney: Rick Perry.

Unidentified Audience Member: Yeah.

Frank Gaffney: Rick Perry is one of the candidates for President, and indeed, candidates for most other offices, and indeed incumbents, with whom Grover Norquist has a relationship.  How close a relationship?  You get differing opinions.  I happen to have been at a meeting with Mrs. Perry, in which she jokingly — I think, but nonetheless, jokingly — said that if asked any questions, she was going to have Grover answer them.  I took that badly.  But I think there is a relationship there.  I think that’s more worrying, frankly, than his relationship with the Emadis, for example.

But there’s a — Grover has, as you saw yourself, used his access to people through the tax drill to gain access to them on other agenda items.  And I think that’s worrying.

Yes, ma’am?

Unidentified Audience Member: I’ve been following this [for G Tours].  And I wanted to know if you have any idea how this sort of started (inaudible — microphone inaccessible).

Frank Gaffney: Yeah.  This question always comes up, and I always say I don’t know his motivations.  It is indisputably the case that this started before his wife turned up.  It started, as far as I can tell, back in 1999.  And I don’t think she came into the picture until 2002 or ’03 or so.

Look, if I had to make a guess, my guess is that it’s like a lot of things in Washington — it was about money.  I think it was about building up a base, an infrastructure, power.  I know for a fact that several other people were involved in sort of getting this thing going — you may have heard of them — in addition to Karl Rove, who was looking for a constituency that we were told — I think I said this at lunch — that was roughly as loyal, and certainly as well-heeled, as Jews have traditionally been for the Democratic Party.

And Jack Abramoff, interestingly enough — Jack was at the time a very successful super-lobbyist.  But he was also a Republican political operative.  He and Rove and Norquist went back to College Republican days together.  And Jack actually told one of my colleagues, who immediately told me, that he had helped cook this thing up as a kind of trifecta.

Remember Khaled Saffuri, Abdul Rahmad Al-Amoudi’s right-hand man who became the Muslim outreach coordinator for the Bush Campaign and executive director of the Islamic Free Market Institute?  Well, in his spare time, he was also going to consult with Jack Abramoff’s lobbying operation to facilitate his access to the Saudis and others in the Oil Patch, which was not going to be a very easy thing for Jack to do by himself, given that he was, A, an orthodox Jew; and B, a supporter of Israel.  But having a guy like Saffuri opening doors and lubricating things, I think, helped.

So you have those kinds of motivations.  I think this thing — truthfully, I think this thing started as nothing more than, you know, [the annality in] corruption and, you know, political operations.

The problem, as far as I’m concerned, is when I personally started raising an alarm with these people about the problem, they went into denial and character assassination.  I mean, that’s the real irony — him complaining about character assassination.  He has called me a racist, a bigot, a hater, and otherwise, you know, as you see, condemned me.

So anyway — yes, sir?

Unidentified Audience Member: (Inaudible — microphone inaccessible)

Frank Gaffney: Under the laws, as they are currently written, if they are engaged in this kind of nonviolent or pre-violent jihadist activity, they don’t qualify.  One of the things that we’ve been encouraging is a revision of that, so that they could be listed as an enemy influence operation, or in some form, clearly in a pre-violent kind of mode.

Unidentified Audience Member: (Inaudible — microphone inaccessible)

Frank Gaffney: Well, it’s a good question.  There are those who will tell you that the Bush Administration was never going to bring them to trial.  There are others who believe, as I do, that they envisioned getting the low-hanging fruit, who were the five people that they had a very strong case on, who they subsequently got convictions on.  And once you had that, then you turn and you get into these other guys.

But let’s face it — as you’ve seen, the Bush Administration was going to be deeply embarrassed if they starting rolling up these Brotherhood folks.  So I don’t know.  What I can tell you is that the Obama Administration has said there will be no further prosecutions of those unindicted coconspirators.

Unidentified Audience Member: (Inaudible — microphone inaccessible)

Frank Gaffney: I don’t think so.  Most of what I have heard him say about this is just simply denying that there’s anything to it.  In fact, in the Wall Street Journal, there was a front-page story, back in 2003, I think.  And right under the paragraph in which I said more or less what you’ve just heard — that there’s an influence operation being run against the Bush White House — he said there’s nothing — there’s no there there.  And I think that remains his position, far as I know.

Yes, ma’am?

Unidentified Audience Member: (Inaudible — microphone inaccessible)

Frank Gaffney: Oh, of course.  Of course.

Unidentified Audience Member: (Inaudible — microphone inaccessible)

Frank Gaffney: There’s Bob McDonnell, the governor of Virginia.  There’s Eric Cantor, the House Majority leader.  And there’s Ken Cuccinelli, the attorney general of Virginia.

Unidentified Audience Member: And I was wondering, if Huma Weiner (inaudible) assistant to Hillary, Secretary of State (inaudible).

Frank Gaffney: No.  Huma Abedin, she goes by, is Anthony Weiner’s wife.  She is now the Deputy Chief of Staff to the Secretary of State. I think that’s one example, just one of many, many examples, where you can see how the Bush precedent, and influence operations run against them, set the predicate for a group that, you know — the President on down came into office with a much, much more, you know, passionate interest in bringing these people in and listening only to them.

So the problem is — as you’ve heard once or twice, I suspect — this administration often, when it gets into some difficulty, pointing to the Bush Administration.  And here, they can.

But Huma Abedin — just a quick other story — Huma Abedin and Hillary went to Egypt recently to embrace the Muslim Brotherhood.  And while they did that — or rather, in the process of doing that, they went to Huma Abedin’s mother’s university, where, as part of the proud mother thing, Hillary told Huma’s mother that she, Huma, had a very important and sensitive position in her office.

Huma Abedin’s mother is a top Muslim Sister.  He brother is a top Muslim Brother in Egypt.  This is, in short, a problem, I think.

Unidentified Audience Member: Why doesn’t it come into question?  I don’t get it.  What is the point?  (Inaudible) talk (inaudible) so openly, and it doesn’t get challenged.

Frank Gaffney: Well, it doesn’t get challenged because if what you have just seen is that I’m a nutter, that I’m a crackbat, and that nobody should pay any attention to me, then why does anybody need to do anything about it?  I can’t tell you how many conversations, how many meetings, how many letters, how many briefings I have given, to find people absolutely determined not to hear any of this.

Unidentified Audience Member: (Inaudible — microphone inaccessible)

Frank Gaffney: I’m not going to go there, ma’am.

(Laughter)

I have no idea what the relationship is with these two folks, but I’ve got to believe it’s complicated, to say the least.

(Laughter)

Yes, ma’am?

Unidentified Audience Member: I’ve got a couple things.  One is that Weiner’s wife (inaudible) normal, you know, Muslim tradition would be considered (inaudible).  So [there are] obviously [plans] (inaudible) Egypt, and they would kill her for marrying a Jewish man.  Okay, that’s number one.

Number two, (inaudible) and I had the pleasure (inaudible).

Frank Gaffney: Good for you.

Unidentified Audience Member: It was like watching a train wreck.  I saw all that evidence presented.  I saw the videos.  I heard the testimony from those people, but they don’t tell you their names (inaudible) that manifesto (inaudible) 13 pages (inaudible).  I e-mailed it to everyone, as well as that FBI [connect-the-dots] thing (inaudible).  It’s just amazing that people don’t get (inaudible) chilling.  What [he] didn’t touch on was a video that was put together by that man (inaudible) whose house was it that –

Frank Gaffney: Elbarasse’s house?

Unidentified Audience Member: Yeah.  Oh, my God, that (inaudible).  And this man bought this house in Virginia, and [his family] bought it from whoever this guy was –

Frank Gaffney: Ismael Elbarasse’s.

Unidentified Audience Member: Okay.  And so (inaudible) gardening [with] tobacco and uncovers video tape.  So apparently, there was all this video and all this evidence, including cell phones they tried to burn in the grill.  He tells his neighbor, who works for the NSA. The NSA shows up, and he lets them through the house.  They pull out all this evidence, and they put the video back together.

So the video showed — and then they showed all the translation of where this was exactly what they planned to do.  (Inaudible) like watching a train wreck.  It was — (inaudible) horrible.  But it was so [chilling] –

Frank Gaffney: We appreciate your service to your country, ma’am.

Unidentified Audience Member: (Inaudible) take your eyes off of it.  It was the most riveting thing I have ever seen in my entire life.

Frank Gaffney: I’m so grateful to you for saying that.  Because I’ve not heard anybody, who was actually sitting through it, give that kind of testimony.

Unidentified Audience Member: (Inaudible).

Frank Gaffney: Yeah.

Unidentified Audience Member: But I’m telling you, (inaudible).

Frank Gaffney: Well, that’s — again, I just want to impress upon you — don’t take my word for this.  This is documented, this is demonstrated in court, this has been affirmed by judges and so on.  And that’s what’s so chilling about this.  When people tell you, as you just have seen, that there’s nothing there, that it’s all silly, or people are making this up, or it’s all old news, and the Washington Post looked into it — they’re engaged in what, under Sharia, is called taqiyya.  It is not only permissible to lie for the faith; it is obligatory.

So this is part of what makes this so complicated.  And it goes back to the question that these guys were wrestling with.  You know, how do you know who’s a good Muslim and who’s a bad Muslim?  How do you know whether you can trust them or not?

Well, in my estimation — and Andy mentioned the study that one of our colleagues did on this mosque business, when she said 80 percent of the mosques that were investigated undercover by our friends were found to be, A, Sharia-compliant; and B, promoting jihad.  Well, one of the giveaways is, if you see they’re on the Sharia program, it’s assuredly the case they’re a problem.  And that goes for Sharia finance as well.

Yes, ma’am?

Unidentified Audience Member: (Inaudible — microphone inaccessible)

Frank Gaffney: No, David Ramadan.  Imad David Ramadan.

Unidentified Audience Member: (Inaudible — microphone inaccessible)

Frank Gaffney: I don’t think Heritage as an institution did.  Because like mine, it’s a, you know, not-for-profit, nonpartisan organization and [can't].  But Ed Meese did.  And I talked with Ed about this.  And he was very defensive, and very angry, actually.  I mean, the truth of the matter is most people –

Unidentified Audience Member: (Inaudible) after you.

Frank Gaffney: I beg your pardon?

Unidentified Audience Member: I was listening to it on the radio –

Frank Gaffney: Yeah.

Unidentified Audience Member: — (inaudible) –

Frank Gaffney: No, he came on to slam me.  I have the greatest of admiration for Ed Meese.  I think most of us do.  This was a case, as you often find, in which there’s a personal relationship.

Unidentified Audience Member: (Inaudible — microphone inaccessible)

Frank Gaffney: I have.  I have briefly talked to Cantor.  I have talked with Cuccinelli a couple of times, not in connection with this.  I did talk briefly with Ken, very briefly, about this as a problem.  And I have not spoken to Cuccinelli about the micro, but I did talk to him about the macro.

Unidentified Audience Member: (Inaudible — microphone inaccessible)

Frank Gaffney: I’ve not spoken to McDonnell about it.

Unidentified Audience Member: (Inaudible — microphone inaccessible)

Frank Gaffney: We probably should stop.  Because you really do have to go, so you can buy my book.  Right?  I hope you will.

By the way, the appendix to it has this memorandum in its entirety.  So if for no other reason, take a look at it for that.  And if you don’t want to buy it tonight, that’s okay, you can download it for free at shariathethreat.com.

Thank you again, very much, for coming on no notice, and staying with it.

(Applause)

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Pages: 1 2

  • jacob

    And to think I had KARL ROWEin a different concept until I read this article, which I
    believe to be absolutely true.

    So by the grace of our stupid POLITICAL CORRECTNESS, we have been digging
    our grave and that of our country with bulldozers as, according with what is listed
    in this article, the whole BUSH administration was infected with this disease and
    more so, the present one….

    Are the people of my party as stupid as to still keep GROVER NORQUIST calling
    any shots there ????…or are they waiting to kick him and his sidekick out for the
    same kind of proof as that of the Roman Code for adultery ?????
    Because by then it might be too damned late….

  • StephenD

    But even Wolf is too easy. I'd say make a blanket appeal with full page adds or TV clips to tell the world about folks like Norquist and Rove. I think the cause is worth it. Perhaps folks like Rove were duped and can be brought back around. Norquist is done. Maybe we can expose them all and shore up the walls. I don't believe for a minute the fight is lost. We haven't yet begun.

  • tanstaafl

    Time to clean house. I wonder if there is enough room at Gitmo…..

  • BLJ

    This article really ticks me off. Not the content, but the fact that the MB is winning the war against us and with the help of useful idiots.

    I have said this before and I will say it again. I do not trust ANY MUSLIMS. They are all the enemy as far as I am concerned.

  • Questions

    Remember, Newt Gingrich is a close friend of Grover — you might say, a useful idiot.

  • Moshe Pupick

    M., 12/12/11 common era

    Barack Husein Obama must not be allowed to have a second term as President. He is a stealth front for The Moslem Brotherhood. The fact that some of his best friends include David Axelrod and Rahm Emmanuel should be of no comfort to American Jewish Democrats. The MB was a close ally of Nazi Germany during WW2. The Obama Administration has created a de facto reverse Bill of Attainder regarding all things Moslem. Europe has learned the hard way not to tolerate all forms of "diversity." Let's Americans stand up and be counted against the evil stealth jihad around us. That's not a phobia; it's a very rational fear.

  • Peg

    We truly do need to vote them all out and get a new government in place. Then start weeding out all the pultoctats. Sorry to say if you tell someone the truth you are generally not believed. Carl Rove was a bit of a surprise. Anthony Weiner's wife was not a surprise. The minute I learned she was muslim and what her job was that I knew to be very telling. Which just means the brotherhood has its tentacles in many places we know not. We must find them and stop them if we want to preserve this country for our children and grandchildren. SPEAK UP AND SPEAK UP OFTEN. What ever you say must be backed up by solid references. Also did you notice that many of the people that have turned against America have muslim wives. The planning that has gone into this is just amazing. Add to that Lenin was right about there being many useful idiots. I hope all office holders that are true Americans will heed the warning.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    I've been saying that the Bush administration was one of the most incompetent administrations ever in history for years on this site because they were totally infiltrated by Muslims and extremely incompetent as a result, and I've been getting dinged by other posters for years because of it. Hell, I still get dinged all the time to this day when I condemn the Bush administration for their gross incompetence.

    Indeed, imagine after the 9/11 jihad attacks, had the Bush administration instead of proclaiming Islam to be a Religion of Peace being hijacked by a tiny minority of extremists and using the 9/11 jihad attacks as a crisis to justify the greatest expansion in the size, scope, and power of the federal government since the Great Depression like a Dhimmicrat on steroids, while usurping our heretofore constitutionally protected rights and freedoms at the same time, had outlawed Islam and banned and reversed mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage instead.

    Not only would all those innocent Americans that were killed in domestic violent jihad attacks since 9/11 like the Fort Hood Massacre still be alive and well today, but the country wouldn’t be teetering on the brink of bankruptcy like it is today, as it literally cost the taxpayers hundreds of billions dollars annually just to fund all off those useless massive boondoggles that the Bush administration created in the name of protecting the homeland, and never mind the fact that other than creating a false sense of security so that the Bush administration could further increase mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage, the truth is the homeland is actually more vulnerable to jihad attacks today than even before 9/11.

    In any event, today we are contemplating massive cuts to the federal budget, massively increasing taxes, and implementing severe draconian cuts to our military, all to continue accommodating mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage.

    Indeed, considering all the budget negotiations between Republicans and Dhimmicrats that have all utterly failed, how many Republicans and Dhimmicrats in congress have you heard suggest that we outlaw Islam and ban and reverse mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage so that we can roll back all the massive federal boondoggles that were created during the previous Bush administration as a way to get our financial house back in order?

    I mean zero Muslims living in America would yield zero possibility of jihad attacks. Thus, the extremely intrusive Patriot Act, the massive and totally useless Department of Homeland Security, the very invasive TSA, and the totally incompetent and gargantuan National Intelligence Directorate could all be rolled back, and the savings used to get our financial house back in order.

    Indeed, what other immigrant groups migrating to America cost hundreds of billions of dollars annually just to accommodate other than Muslims with all of their excess baggage? Meanwhile, what do they have to contribute to America other than Sharia, Jihad, honor killings, misogyny, backwardness, barbarianism, Islamic Supremacism, incessant demands for more and more Sharia, victimhood, skyrocketing crime rates, halal food, persecution of homosexuals, Jews, and indeed all non-Muslim unbelievers, etc., etc., etc., that makes all of the hundreds of billions of dollars we expend annually just to accommodate them worth it?

    Not to mention, can anyone point to just one country anywhere in the world where mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage didn't over time turn into an unmitigated disaster, and never mind the fact that Muslims never ever migrate to the West or anywhere else for that matter to assimilate and integrate, but instead to eventually subjugate and dominate via the eventual imposition of Sharia for the purpose of stealth demographic conquest to make Islam supreme.

    You know it looks to me like the Republican Party and the Dhimmicrat Party are just two sides of the same Leftwing coin, and never mind the fact that the Left is totally in bed with Islam.

    • Kevin Stroup

      You know it looks to me like the Republican Party and the Dhimmicrat Party are just two sides of the same Leftwing coin, and never mind the fact that the Left is totally in bed with Islam. "

      My brother and I have been saying this for over 10 years. The Republicans merely argue that they would run socialism better than the Democrats do. How friggin pathetic can you be? I never trust a politician. I have not known of one yet who was not corrupt.

  • Indioviejo

    Col. Allen West is the answer. We need more people like him in higher office. In the mean time, please keep up the good fight for all good Americans.

  • Shayaan Matin

    It's just, lol.. This article is so ridiculously discriminatory, so shallow in it's thinking..so hateful in it's core. It assumes that a 1/5th, oh yes fellow Americans, that is how many muslims there are, are evil in it's root core and all are determined to get sharia law ( which is the big bad evil) into practice globally and kill the other 5.5 billion in the world. It then engages into a theory that basically consists of pointing at anyone remotely linked with muslims and then calling them evil.

    Seems like I'm at a sort of a KKK summit here. Funnily enough Muslims knew nothing about all of the extremist, must establish global caliphate stuff until the last, what, 15-20 years of its near 1600 year history? As for the bloodiness of muslims, well, this is really funny, considering there's Hitler, who basically had an identical theory except with white christian aryans.. so are christians bloody evil and hell bent of global destruction? the crusades, and what about all the historical bloodshed in the old testament? This selective 'muslims are evil' thing gets ridiculous

    A little more for you guys.. just in case you guys don't watch, a little over 400000 thousand CIVILIANS have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, surely.. I mean, you can kill little kids in the streets right?

    Please, to all of you I request to research more, be more open in your views and do not indulge yourselves in the same radicalism that you claim the muslims all are or which hitler had thought of the jews. In the end the world is just people acting and reacting and most actions cause reactions.. and it's rarely ever anything other than human nature to fight and be violent, and in the end, every argument has two sides.

    Keep studying, keep loving, and one day maybe the entire world can sit at a table of tolerance rather than intolerance

  • TopAssistant

    In case you do not know our enemy it is the Muslim Brotherhood in America. It has completely infiltrated the Democrat Party and now they have gotten into the RINO Republican Party. This is why we cannot get a hearing in the House or Senate on the Muslim Brotherhood plan they wrote to destroy America.
    Please go online to Amazon and for only $5.00, you can buy the Muslim Brotherhood’s plan to destroy America: An Explanatory Memorandum: From the Archives of the Muslim Brotherhood in America (Center for Security Policy Archival Series) [Paperback] Mohamed Akram (Author), David Reaboi (Author), Frank J Gaffney Jr (Preface)
    OR, you can view it online a: http://www.theoakinitiative.org/pdfs/teamb/15-Shariah-The-Threat-to-America-Team-B-Report-Web-285-308.pdf
    To view a PowerPoint that shows how fast the Muslim brotherhood in America has traveled since it stated at the Champaign Campus, University of Illinois in the early 1960s go to Citizens for National Security (CFNS) website and look below “Task Force Updates” and link to “Muslim Brotherhood Full CFNS Report” and read: “Homegrown Jihad in the USA – Muslim Brotherhood’s Deliberate, Premeditated Plan Now Reaching Maturity©” outlining the movement of our enemy throughout the United States since 1962.
    Why hasn’t our government ever produced such a document? https://cfns.us/files/HomegrownJihadintheUSA-Final.pdf
    We need the House and Senate to conduct basic research on an issue before making decisions. We need to get them reviewing the Muslim Brotherhood in America – A 10-part Course. Please go to YouTube and watch the one (1) minute trailer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQbxmw00XAQ
    While you are on Amazon please buy SHARIAH: THE THREAT TO AMERICA AN EXERCISE IN COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS REPORT OF TEAM ‘B’ II http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/upload/wysiwyg/article%20pdfs/Shariah%20- %20The%20Threat%20to%20America%20(Team%20B%20Report)%2009142010.pdf
    Please get involved and ask your politicians if they are concerned about our National/Homeland Security and the preservation of our Constitution.
    Is the Muslim Brotherhood in America our friend or foe? Please provide me with link(s) to support you views.
    I asked RINOs Sen. Burr (RINO-NC), Sen. Blunt (R-MO), Rep. Ellmers (R-NC) and Rep. Hartzler (R-MO) this question and they will not respond!

  • Questions

    I'm proud to call him my congressman, too.