A Disturbing Event: The American Conservative Union Embraces an Islamist

Pages: 1 2

Correction: The original post of this article mistakenly cited the Washington Post for the story on Mahboob Khan and Ayman Zawahiri. The correct citation and link is the San Francisco Chronicle.

The conservative movement appears to be at a crossroads in its approach to the threat of Islamic supremacism—not only abroad but at home. Does the emergence of the Muslim Brotherhood as the dominant force of the “Arab Spring” bode ill for America? Or is the Brotherhood merely another “political actor” as the Obama administration would have us believe? Is Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s Deputy Chief of Staff, a potential security risk worth investigating, as Representative Michele Bachmann and four conservative congressmen have suggested? Or is the mere raising of this question a witch-hunt, as Senator John McCain and Speaker John Boehner and numerous Democrats maintain?

A few months ago, these questions reached another flashpoint in an unlikely setting. The incident took place at an irregular board meeting of the American Conservative Union, an organization usually intent on keeping wobbly Republicans honest. The rump group in attendance — several key board members told Frontpage they were not even aware the meeting had been called – voted “unanimously” to dismiss long-standing accusations against two ACU board members. The accusations had been made by Center for Security Policy head, Frank Gaffney. Their focus was on the activities of Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan, two prominent ACU board members, whom Gaffney claims are influential agents of Islamist agendas. The ACU’s dismissal of Gaffney’s claims was contained in a memo written by attorney Cleta Mitchell, who called them “reprehensible” — terms no less damning than McCain’s slap down of Michele Bachmann.

Frank Gaffney is a former defense official in the Reagan administration and first made these claims public in 2003 in an article, “A Troubling Influence,” which was published on this site. In introducing the article, Frontpage editor David Horowitz acknowledged that Norquist had played an important role in the conservative movement, but also described Gaffney’s claims as “the most disturbing that we at frontpagemag.com have ever published.” He further characterized them as “the most complete documentation extant of Grover Norquist’s activities in behalf of the Islamist Fifth Column.”

The Frontpage article documented Norquist’s links to supporters of Hamas and other Islamist organizations dedicated to “destroying the American civilization from within” in the words of a Muslim Brotherhood document, and its Israeli ally. These figures included Abdurahman Alamoudi—who is currently serving a lengthy sentence for his involvement in a terrorist plot—and Sami Al-Arian, who was the finance head of Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), a terrorist organization responsible for over a hundred suicide bombings in the Middle East. Before Alamoudi and Al-Arian were arrested, Norquist and Khan served as key facilitators between them and the Bush White House. Now that both have been convicted of terrorist activities, there can no longer be any doubt that they were working on behalf of America’s terrorist enemies.

Among the Norquist-sponsored initiatives furthering the Islamist agenda, according to Gaffney, was his effort to abolish the use of classified national defense intelligence evidence in terrorism cases. Islamist organizations and Norquist himself typically refer to this as “secret” evidence and suggest that the use of it offends the Constitution. But as former U.S. attorney Andrew McCarthy explains, the cases in which it is normally used are immigration proceedings, not criminal prosecutions. Unlike American citizens, aliens do not have the right to be in the United States in the first place, and should not be able to force disclosure of the nation’s defense secrets as the price tag for demanding that they leave. Sami Al-Arian was the prime-mover of the “secret evidence” campaign, which he launched to protect his brother-in-law, a member of his terror network, from a pending deportation.

In addition, Gaffney charges, Norquist used his own organization, Americans for Tax Reform, to circulate and promote a letter from Republican Muslims attacking conservatives opposed to the controversial “Ground Zero Mosque.” He also campaigned to protect the Iranian regime from sanctions, from its domestic opposition, and from military action against its nuclear program – all the while demanding draconian cuts in U.S. defense spending.

The other subject of Gaffney’s concerns is Suhail Khan, a Norquist protégé with longstanding personal and professional ties to a variety of Islamist movements. Khan’s father, the late Mahboob Khan, was a prominent member of the Muslim Brotherhood and one of the founders, in the 1960s, of the Muslim Students Association, the cornerstone of the Brotherhood’s American infrastructure. As Daniel Greenfield documents in his pamphlet, Muslim Hate Groups on Campus, the Muslim Students Association has been instrumental in indoctrinating young Muslims in Islamist ideology, and has an alarming legacy of senior members – Anwar Awlaki most prominent among them – graduating to positions of prominence in al Qaeda and other terrorist networks. In the 1980s, Mahboob Khan was instrumental in creating an MSA spinoff, the Islamic Society of North America or ISNA. ISNA became so deeply enmeshed in the funding of Hamas that it was named by federal prosecutors as an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation. [For more information on how the Muslim Brotherhood has targeted the United States for subversion, see Robert Spencer’s pamphlet, Muslim Brotherhood in America.]

Suhail Khan’s mother, Malika Khan, was a close partner in her late husband’s work, and is a long-time leader of another Brotherhood front, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), which was created out of the Brotherhood’s Hamas-support network. Its parent organization was also an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial. Malika Khan currently serves on the Executive Committee of CAIR’s San Francisco chapter, which distinguished itself in 2011 by promoting a conference that urged Muslims not to co-operate with FBI investigations.

These familial activities are not incidental because Suhail has publicly embraced his parents’ “legacy,” and done so before Brotherhood audiences. Despite this background and thanks to Grover Norquist’s patronage, Suhail was able to gain access to the Bush 2000 campaign, and was then appointed to a position in the Bush administration. According to Gaffney, while working at the White House, Khan helped craft and disseminate deceptive notions such as “Islam means peace,” al Qaeda “hijacked” Islam, and jihad is only a “personal struggle,” never a holy war against infidels.

In 2001, Khan appeared on a platform with about-to-be-convicted terrorist and top Muslim Brotherhood figure, Abdurahman Alamoudi. The setting was an American Muslim Council conference in Washington. Alamoudi is the founder of the Council, and once explained to a Brotherhood audience: “I think, if we are outside this country, we can say ‘O Allah, destroy America.” But once we are here, our mission in this country is to change it….”

A video tape of the 2001 event shows Alamoudi heaping praise on Suhail and his father (see here from 5:38 on).  At the time, Khan was serving as the Muslim gatekeeper in the White House Office of Public Liaison, a role he used to afford access to Muslim Brotherhood guests. Introducing him, Alamoudi expressed the hope that Khan was preparing for higher office:

We have with us a dear brother, a pioneer, somebody who really started political activism in the Muslim community …. When it was a taboo for the Muslim community, no doubt about it. When Suhail Khan started not too many people were aware that we had to do something….Some of you saw him today in the White House, but inshallah soon you will see him in better places in the White House, inshallah. Maybe sometime as vicepresident soon, inshallah. Allahu Akbar!

The terrorist, Alamoudi, also had praise for Suhail’s father:

Suhail Khan is the son of a dear, dear brother who was a pioneer of Islam work himself. Many of you know his late father … who was part of all kinds of work … Suhail inherited from his father not only being a Muslim and a Muslim activist, but also being a Muslim political activist. [emphasis added]

After effusively thanking Alamoudi for these words, Suhail said: “Many of you, of course, knew my father. He was someone who dedicated his life to the community and I’ve always felt that I have to work in the same – those footsteps.”

The footsteps of Mahboob Khan have been traced to some un-reassuring places. Shortly after 9/11, the San Francisco Chronicle reported that Mahboob Khan had played host to Ayman Zawahiri, second in command to Osama bin Laden, who had entered the U.S. in the mid-nineties to obtain funds and recruits for al Qaeda. One of his stops was at the al-Noor Mosque in California, a mosque founded by Mahboob Khan.

After 9/11, Suhail Khan had to give up his role at the White House as a result of the fallout from his Brotherhood associations. Yet with the support of Norquist, he managed to land on his feet and was given a political appointment in the Office of the Secretary of Transportation.

Aside from Khan’s multiple Islamist connections, Gaffney charges he has also been actively engaged in agendas championed by the Brotherhood, including trying to undo the statute making material support for terror a crime. That law was put into place in part because large sums of zakat—Islamic “charity” monies – were regularly going to fund the terrorist activities of Hamas and al Qaeda.

Is there validity, then, to Gaffney’s charges? In discussing Gaffney’s original article, David Horowitz told me:

What disturbed me most—and ultimately persuaded me that Frank was on to something—was the fact that Grover didn’t respond to Gaffney’s charges although I invited him to do so in Frontpage. Then when I caught up with Grover at a CPAC conference, and said he really needed to answer the charges, he brushed me off saying he didn’t have time – he was ‘too busy with the revolution,’ were the words he used, a reference to his conservative crusades. Then I spoke to Suhail, who had called me to complain about the claims Frank had made about his father. In this conversation, Suhail flat out denied them, saying his father was only a member of the mosque rather than its founder, and that he couldn’t remember an event with Zawahiri. When I asked Frank for his sources for these claims, he sent me the [San Francisco Chronicle] article, which described Mahboob Khan’s role in founding the mosque and hosting Zawahiri. I sent this to Suhail for a reply, but never heard from him again. That made me realize there was something to be concerned about.

Khan was not so reticent – or in such denial — about his father’s Muslim Brotherhood activities when he appeared before audiences of the faithful, however. At a 1999 conference of the Islamic Society of North America, Suhail told those in attendance:

It is a special honor for me to be here before you today because I am always reminded of the legacy of my father, Dr. Mahboob Khan, an early founder of the Muslim Students Association in the mid-nineties and an active member of the organization through its growth and development in the Islamic Society of North America.

Despite these disturbing manifestations of Khan’s allegiances, Norquist sponsored Suhail to become a member of the board of the American Conservative Union in 2010. At this point, Gaffney’s concerns intensified. With Grover’s help, the Muslim Brotherhood was infiltrating the very heart of the conservative movement. By this time, however, Gaffney’s access to the ACU’s audiences was restricted. Because of his charges against Norquist, a very powerful member of the ACU Board, Gaffney had long since been barred from speaking at its annual CPAC gathering. But Horowitz, who was not a Washington insider like Gaffney, was a different story, and he was invited to keynote the 2011 CPAC conference. Horowitz used the occasion to address the issues raised by Norquist’s activities and Khan’s presence on the ACU Board, and to put them in historical context:

Over the last ten years, the influence of the Brotherhood has spread throughout our government. There is nothing new in this sad reality. In 1938, Whittaker Chambers attempted to warn President Roosevelt that one of his White House advisers, Alger Hiss, was a Soviet agent. When Roosevelt was given Chambers’ information, he laughed and disregarded it. Alger Hiss remained as the president’s adviser until the House Un-American Activities Committee flushed him out…. 

Frank Gaffney has been the courageous bringer of the bad news about Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan to the board of the American Conservative Union. Many good conservatives on the board have refused to believe the evidence of Suhail Khan’s Brotherhood allegiances and agendas. They are of the opinion that Suhail’s public appearances with Alamoudi and the Muslim Brotherhood fronts took place a decade ago, and that he doesn’t promote violent agendas. I understand this. My parents were Communists in the heyday of Stalin. The Party’s slogan was not “Bring on the dictatorship of the Proletariat” or “Revolution Now.” But that is what they believed. The slogan of the Communist Party was “Peace, Jobs and Democracy.”

The ACU’s response to Horowitz’s remarks was to withdraw his invitation to speak at CPAC events, although he had been a regular speaker over many years.

Earlier this year, Gaffney and his organization put together a ten-part video course called “The Muslim Brotherhood in America: The Enemy Within.” Featured in the course were the roles played by Norquist (Parts 3-7) and Khan (Part 4) in promoting and enabling Brotherhood influence operations. The Khan segment includes a clip (starting at 4:28) from the speech that Khan gave at a 1999 ISNA conference. In the speech, Khan embraces the well-known Muslim Brotherhood ethos:

The earliest defenders of Islam would defend [against] their more numerous and better equipped oppressors, because the early Muslims loved death—dying for the sake of Allah Almighty—more than the oppressors of Muslims love life.   This must be the case when we are fighting life’s other battles [i.e., politics].  What are our oppressors going to do with people like us? We are prepared to give our lives for the cause of Islam.  I have pledged my life’s work, inspired by my dear father’s shining legacy, and inspired further by my mother’s loving protection and support, to work for the ummah.

This is classic jihadist rhetoric. (“We love death, the U.S. loves life; that is the big difference between us,” explained Osama bin Laden in one of his fatwas.) In effect, Khan praised history’s earliest jihadists, portraying them as “defenders” and their victims as “oppressors,” just as al Qaeda does in its present-day fatwas. Khan used the same language that glorifies “martyrdom” (or suicide-attacks) on behalf of Islam. (“Death in the service of Allah is our highest aspiration” is part of the Muslim Brotherhood motto.) Khan then praised his father’s Muslim Brotherhood “legacy,” and pledged his life’s work to the Muslim umma, which translated means the “Islamic nation.”

Pages: 1 2

  • Chezwick

    Raymond Ibrahim does us a great service in keeping this issue alive. The battle for the soul of the Republican Party is essentially a microcosm for the battle of the soul of America. How can conservatives possibly save America from our enemies if the party of conservatives is doing the bidding of our enemies?

    The only satisfactory outcome is that Grover Norquist becomes so radio-active that he's completely marginalized…..and consigned to the political wilderness.


      Agreed. This is Ibrahim's most important article to date. Norquist, Khan, and their confederates must be made unwelcome in the Conservative movement and in the Republican Party.

    • Andy

      For the health of the nation, people like Norquist and Khan should be eliminated one way or another. A fatwa or contract or one way ticket to Pakistan.

    • Questions

      Did anyone see "60 Minutes" last evening? They did a whole segment on Grover, though it focused only on the tax-pledge issue and reactions by GOP congressmen to it.

    • MaryS, CA

      The Muslim Brotherhood, C.A.I.R., ISNA and all the others have completely infiltrated the Democratic Party and they will do so to the Republican party as well if we are not vigilant. Grover Norquist I would trust as far as I could my dog to catch a opposom and he doesn't do that very well, in fact not at all. Grover is married to a Muslim and what would you expect. Obviously Grover doesn't know the word "Taquiya". Shame on Grover, he would betray his country for a skirt…. MaryS, CA

  • Burned Out

    This is a very disturbing article and truly exposes an ugly rift in the Conservative Party. I had read about this matter before, bits and pieces anyway, but Mr. Ibrahim's presentation here seems ironclad. Is Norquist that powerful, that stalwart conservatives like Tea Party darling Cleta Mitchell must sell out, and for a person with such obvious Islamist ties like Khan? With "conservatives" like these, who needs liberals! Welcome to reality, people: it's no longer about leftist vs rightists, or liberals vs conservatives. They're all the same crap — SELLOUTS!

  • C.R.

    I've known for a long time Grover Norquist was not the good conservative many so called conservatives claim him to be!

    When asked what his believed he said it was too personal to speak of.

    He is married to a devout Muslim–which means Grover Norquist had to at least fain a profession of faith in Islam–Grover Norquist is a Muslim–and as such an enemy of American [of human] liberty–Islam and American liberty are not compatible–wherever Islam is embraced it oppresses the people!

  • Gerald

    "Islamophobia is a term actually invented by the Muslim Brotherhood to silence its critics." It is quite possible that the term Islamophobia may not have been invented by the Muslim Brotherhood at all but by a Jew Richard Stone in Britain.
    The details are here. http://islamversuseurope.blogspot.com.es/2011/12/


      Islamofascismphobia is a rational response to 9/11.

  • Paul B.

    Thank you for this expose. This has risen to the level where Norquist and friends must answer the charges, or be removed from their positions of influence. The thought of this going on within the bowels of the conservative movement is chilling.

    • WildJew

      I wonder if anyone is interested, who made up this CPAC rump group that voted “unanimously” to dismiss long-standing accusations against Muslim Brotherhood activists Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan.

  • Ar'nun

    I think this story says it all. Batton down the hatches, stock up on food, water, and guns and ammo. The most unfortunate part of the larger story is that the Muslim Brotherhood has been in the US and carrying out this diabolical plan for decades and unfortunately, like with cancer, these things need to be caught early. Well this tumor seems to have matastisaized and is inoperable. They have infiltrated not only the Seccretary of State, but I believe the POTUS himself is a member. Someone should look into the rich Saudi roomate Obama had at Occidental. I have a feeling he will come back as being affiliated too.

    So then we see in this article, not only is one side of the political spectrum in deep, but now the right as well. Norquist is not just an activist, he is the money for the right, which means many will be hesitant in object to him. And if were just Norquist. McCain visited Egypt and Libya during the height of the Arab Spring. Whils standing in front of several protest signs that depicted Shwatzstikas, Netanyahu with a Hitler moustache, and one that read "Death to Israel" McCain said he saw no evidenc of an anti-Semetic overtone to the Arab Spring.


      In Obama's case, it's not so much that he's an agent of the brotherhood or even a Muslim as that he acts like one. I doubt Obama is a devout Muslim any more that a devout Christian – the only God he worships is power. But because he sympathizes unduly with Muslim third-world nations, he ends up doing the Brotherhood's bidding – quite possibly with the assistance of Houma Abedin in the State Department.

  • rbla

    The gravediggers of the Republic are not present only on the left. Long before Grover took up his championship of Islam he helped thwart any reasonable immigration reform that would have been an obstacle to the third-worlding of America. That in itself should have had him ostracized by so-called conservatives.

  • Demetrius M

    Just as the article mentions, it would seem that this is part of the 5th column strategy. Islamic money bought and influenced the democrats and now they are working on the second and more difficult challenge, conservatives.
    The sooner people see Islam as an ideology and not a religion, the sooner we can upend their goals of either heavy influence over our government or a complete takeover.

  • WildJew

    Raymond wrote: "A few months ago, these questions reached another flashpoint in an unlikely setting. The incident took place at an irregular board meeting of the American Conservative Union, an organization usually intent on keeping wobbly Republicans honest. The rump group in attendance — several key board members told Frontpage they were not even aware the meeting had been called – voted “unanimously” to dismiss long-standing accusations against two ACU board members…."

    I would like to know who made up this rump group. Who was and was not in attendance?

  • WildJew

    Raymond wrote: I tried to interview Mitchell, but she declined to comment, saying by email “I am precluded from talking to anyone about this because of the confidentiality provisions of the boards on which I serve which have been dealing with Frank Gaffney issues.”

    Cleta Mitchell ducked. What a shock.

  • WildJew

    Republican platform committee defends two-state solution language
    By Daniel Treiman · August 22, 2012

    The Republican Party's platform committee resisted efforts to strip out language expressing support for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — i.e., a Muslim-enemy state in Israel's heartland.

    Buzzfeed reports:

    The draft platform, written by the Romney campaign and committee aides states, "We envision two democratic states," which drew fire from several members of the platform committee.

    Three separate amendments to the draft platform were offered and shot down after Sen. Jim Talent, a Romney surrogate who is tasked with ensuring the platform document is in line with Romney's policy proposals, objected to each.

    Minnesota delegate Kevin Erickson offered two of the amendments, which would have removed the line, replacing it with tough language on terrorism.

    Erickson said he didn't want to pressure the Israeli government by specifying the conditions of an ultimate peace…

  • SuicidePrevention

    Interesting article. What is the relationship between Grover's goals of ending Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, Department of Energy, Department of Education, EPA and his other apparent goal of furthering the spread of Islam? Does he believe the former would enable the later? Would it? Or are all these goals secondary and in service of some primary but undeclared motivation? Maybe he is just nursing some childhood humiliation and his hidden motivations shouldn't matter to us. We must judge for ourselves what the proper role of government is and what marginal tax rates should be, and what immigration policies should be. Grover should be exposed and then ignored.

  • jemaasjr

    I wonder if they are bought off in some way, or do they really mean it? A lot of what we call conservatives are really just business guys who want to get on in life and seldom look at the big picture. Mostly they are not pushing any particular cultural notions. Well, you know, the go along get along RINO's.

  • Dado7

    I've never heard of Cleta Mitchell before reading Raymond's article. I took the time to read her memorandum denouncing Frank's claims. For someone who is supposed to be a top conservative lawyer, the memo reads like a junior high rebuttal to someone who's been teasing her friends. Frank, et al, please keep up the great work you are doing and do not be deterred by these fools.

    • Estani2

      Exactly – I can't believe that was supposed to be a 'serious' rebuttal from a respected lawyer in the conservative movement. All it is is a bunch of exclamations and categorical statements that address nothing in particular. What a joke!
      Kudos to Mr. Raymond Ibrahim and his allies! More please.

  • Anonymous

    Norquist and Khan are extremely well connected with the Islamists of America. Anyone near them in DC knows this to be true. This proves that the current ACU board is in bed with the enemy — for they all know of Norquist's coziness with the Islamists, and yet they look the other way. Shame on them. America's conservative party needs new leadership – and fast!

  • marios

    "The Muslim Brotherhood…must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religious.”- Mohamed Akram.
    “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America.”
    May 22, 1991
    It was said 20 years ago and they were working on it all those years.
    Romney is real friend of Israel and long time friend Israel PM Netanyahu. I remember that he banned that time Iran PM Rafsanjani to come for speech to ultra-liberal financed by sallafits Saudi Arabia Harvard University. Romney said that enemies of US and Israel never would step on Massachusetts ground till he was governor at least. G-d help him to be elected next Pres and survive our country (and Israel).

  • ShawmutI

    And, "Li'l Grover" grew up in one the wealthiest town in the country, Weston, MA. His wife is evidently Muslim. And I once heard his mother tout the point (at meeting of former intelligence officers {Something she and daddy tied themselves in to their dotage}) that an "in-law" was part of Assad's government. (DUH?)
    I tend to think of Gover as a mere venal, social climber than conservative (Arte` Americaine).

    • Kufar Dawg

      Gaffney used to think that Grover was merely corrupt, but now I believe he thinks Grover has become a card carrying member of the ROP.

  • Michael

    Only naive/ idiots don't believe in conspiracy now! M.Bros infiltrate government,both parties and Libs media.

  • traeh

    Wow. Ibrahim has written a great article. He knows the difference between strong evidence and not-so-strong, and he brings some strong stuff to the fore in this piece. The result is that his article is very persuasive, whereas some other articles on the same side of this issue can leave one feeling, "well, yeah, it sounds bad, but maybe that's not the whole picture." Ibrahim's article proves there is very legitimate reason for being very worried about Khan and Norquist.

    I very much appreciate Ibrahim's obvious efforts to get at the truth and be objective.

  • traeh

    One thing about this issue I'm not sure people understand. There's a large grain of truth in the claims from the other side that there is no special nefarious group operating with a special conspiracy. The fact is that "Islamist" beliefs and sentiments of one sort or another are so thoroughly a part of global and local Islam that virtually all Muslim leaders — even liberal ones — almost unavoidably have associations with Islamists. So maybe Gafney need not put too much of an emphasis on some special conspiratorial group like the Muslim Brotherhood, or Al Qaeda, or the Taliban — all of these are just various phases and leading edges of establishment Islam, vanguards of global mainstream Islam. So Suhail and Grover are not necessarily engaged in some special conspiracy. It's just a case of Islam doing its thing, trying to spread itself. In their own minds, Suhail and Gaffney are perhaps just being "discreet," as they know Islam is not mainstream or popular in America. The difference I'm pointing to between conspiracy and merely being "discreet" is in this particular case not big, but it's not entirely insignificant either. I do think Gaffney and others are right to call out Suhail and Grover on their Islamist links — but realistically, if we exclude from important government posts any Muslim with Islamist links of one sort or another. perhaps there will be almost zero Muslims in such posts. But that's not our problem — that's Muslims' problem for choosing to remain part of a religion with serious totalitarian political ambitions that are quite mainstream in global Islam.

    We see Huma Abedin, according to Ray Ibrahim, being for ten years part of an Islamist organization prior to working with Hillary, and I don't doubt it. So why then did Hillary Clinton take Huma on board? Isn't it possible that Clinton and many other politicians have decided that it's virtually impossible to find a socially active, public Muslim who does not have ties and links to "Islamist" groups? And perhaps Hillary then concludes something like this:'

    "If you are a Muslim, and you don't want to abandon all society with other Muslims, you inevitably end up connected to groups and individuals with some serious Islamist involvement. And non-Islamist Muslims can't do much about that as things are now, nor can we expect non-Islamist Muslims to immediately abandon Islamic organizations and Islamic culture and society. Muslims, like others, need the support of family. So we have to try to pluck from out of those Islamist-riddled organizations the Muslims working in them who are not Islamist, and who are only in the Islamist groups because there are few alternatives if a Muslim wants sometimes to be among people of his/her own background.

    • traeh

      Addendum to my comment above — I can imagine Hillary thinking as I described — but that's not how I think.

      • Kufar Dawg

        The Clintons have made tens of millions of dollars in business dealings w/islamofascist petrostates. While the amoral and apathetic might not call that bribery, people of more character might.

  • Schlomotion

    Mr. Ibrahim references David Horowitz referencing Frank Gaffney. This gives the appearance of independent verification, but all these men work together in the same media outlet, so really, it's no verification at all, especially when the media outlet pays another guy who wants to extort money from Suhail Khan in order to stop libeling him.

    This quote is interesting:

    "What disturbed me most—and ultimately persuaded me that Frank was on to something—was the fact that Grover didn’t respond to Gaffney’s charges although I invited him to do so in Frontpage. Then when I caught up with Grover at a CPAC conference, and said he really needed to answer the charges, he brushed me off saying he didn’t have time"

    In other words, if a politician doesn't appear on Frontpage to answer the charges they made against him and thereby prove his innocence, the self-appointed Lieutenant Governor and Witchcraft Tribunal Magistrate takes it as evidence of guilt and calls for more hearings. This is a political and moral pestilence.

    • Kufar Dawg

      LOL, we know Grover by who he associates with and the agenda he pushes Farid.

  • Rose Johnson

    Well, isn't this an eye opener! Aside from forwarding this story onto my friends, what then? Evil is just everywhere!

  • jewdog

    Sure, Norquist is a conservative, just like Hitler was. It's the paleo-right marrying Christian antisemitism with Islamic supremacism. A few more guys like Norquist and I will vote for Obama.

  • oogenhand

    If they love death so much, why do they whine when they are killed?

    • Ron Edge

      It's because Westerners, in general, deplore Genocide: The Holocaust truly repelled Europeans and truly shocked Americans. Even, or especially, when faced with fellow-Citizens who, essentially, state: "Either kill me or give up your Freedoms" the West falters and attempt some-sort of accommodation(s) which will placate their enemy(ies) while relieving them of the slaughter which MUST accompany a, in this case, "Jihad-free" America.

      The Islamist(s) know this very well and, so, their death(s) and their loud cries of "Western failure" in this regard play upon our fears of the-more-to-come, if we are to retain our Freedom, and we give-way a little bit more. Thus, a sort of 'two-fer' is accomplished by the Islamists.

      This crap works best on Liberals. For us Conservatives?

      Pay-off the Economic 0.01% who'll buy up our Right-wing Political Elite and you're good-to-go!!

      As Ibraham's article points out with such clarity.

      • oogenhand

        I have always been strongly convinced that abortion kills babies. Nevertheless, due to teenage hormones I became pro-choice/anti-life, still convinced that abortion kills. Combined with a lowered empathy due to Asperger's Syndrome, I am not really impressed by crybabies. Nevertheless, the Islamists do have learned the lessons of the Holocaust, and fear, at some level, eradication. Paradoxically, by promising to take their women, you allay that fear. As I am not a Christian, I have no real problem with polygamy. But well then, why not become Islamist? Polygamy is a pyramid scheme, and the Islamist pyramid is far too large already.

  • eib

    Islam is profane.
    Mohammed is a false prophet.
    It is obvious that Norquist was a godless, indecent man before.
    He and all like him are people without faith, guided only by fear. And so they find it easy to submit.
    They are traitors to their history, their culture and to this country.

  • JP Knight

    I know Cleta Mitchell. There is no more solid, patriotic conservative in the USA. She is honorable and ethical and a woman of integrity.

    • anonymous

      That does not address anything in this article. This article gives evidence, and your response is to evoke her moral character? talk about reverse ad hominem .

    • Ron Edge

      "I know Cleta Mitchell. There is no more solid, patriotic conservative in the USA. She is honorable and ethical and a woman of integrity. "

      Great gal, alright!! AND….

      Completely out-of-line, totally wrong and subverted in some manner.

  • Asher

    They will never get any more donations from true Conservatives!

  • Asher

    So in other words the ACU has prevented the destruction of Iran's nuclear sites…and what is the big idea of this, to allow them to get nuclear weapons and take out American and Israel… Republican muslims…these people are not Republicans, they have invaded the party of weak kneed RINOS!

  • https://www.facebook.com/delta.mike.161 Delta Mike

    When asked if he had converted to Islam, Mr. Norquist wouldn't answer. This is surprising, in that he could always claim the necessity of "Taqiyya" to lie about it. But his marriage to a Muslim woman is blessed and accepted in the Muslim community, as is Obama praying with Muslims in the White House.

    Islamic Doctrine forbids marriage to or praying with "polytheists". It is considered "shirk" a grievous sin. It is hard not to conclude both the President and Mr. Norquist now are loyal to "The Ummah", NOT the Kafir United States.

  • MarcyFleming

    As a secular Jew (Mom's side) who also had the benefit of sixteen years of classical Roman Catholic education,
    grade 1 through university, I find this deliberate attempt here at Front Page to whip up the rankest form of anti-Muslim and anti-Arab bigotry disgusting in the extreme.
    David Horowitz has found it extremely profitable to push Jewish paranoia buttons despite all the increasing collateral damage that this promotes. It sure beats living in a cramped Berkeley apartment writing his ONE scholarly book, The Free World Colossus. David did the world by recycling D. F. Fleming's two volume work into a readable format for the intelligent reader and I say this despite disagreeing with Fleming's (no relation) massive Soviet apologia. It's always better to understand one's opponents than to caricature them as is routinely done here at Front Page.
    Funny, when I lived in Tel Aviv for two years there was more debate and freedom of discussion on Palestine than we have here. Apparently a great many loudmouth American chickenhawks, both Jewish and Gentile, are willing to prolong the conflict to the last Israeli.
    The attacks on Clinton's aide are rubbish as even the GOP hawks have recognized. Neoconservatism has nothing to do with the limited government concept best exemplified by Isabel Paterson in The God Of The Machine and Robert A. Taft in A foreign Policy For America.
    You folks are starting to read like the nutcases at Atlas Shruggs and the Ayn Rand Institute, both of which disgrace Rand's great philosophy of Objectivism. We had one good candidate this year, Ron Paul.
    Now you will see Obama reelected despite a terrible record, particularly at home.
    Your readers might benefit from ARI Watch. Great foreign policy essays.

  • dannyjeffrey44

    The above information was quite helpful in making my point… http://www.freedomrings1776.com/2013/03/divided-b