TORONTOÂ -Â Last week, on Michael Coren’s Agenda show on Sun News TV, Steve Emerson discussed realities of Islam in America in a way that is seldom heard, but is hard to dispute.
Michael Coren with Steve Emerson: Jihad In America
Coren, himself, seemed somewhat shaken by his guest’s knowledge and warnings about the future. Not many speak with Emerson’s authority.
According to Emerson, something like 95% of the mosques and Muslim organizations in America, are dominated or influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the largest Islamist party and extends throughout the world with links to terrorism and jihadism.
Started in Egypt in 1928, the MB began as politically activist involved in Islamic charities. Its slogan “Islam is the Solution” viewed Sharia law as the basis of society. Although it preached peace and non-violence, the Brotherhood has been linked with terror and assassinations. It has been banned in some countries (Syria, for one, Russia for another), but its tentacles are everywhere.
Emerson is Executive Director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, and is arguably America’s most knowledgeable expert on terrorism and Islamic extremism. His books and TV documentary Terrorists Among Us(itls) (updated after 9/11), stress that while most Muslims are moderate, Islamic extremism (or radicalism, or jihadism), are America’s greatest threat — not only to Jews, Christians and democratic institutions, but to moderate Muslims who resist the call to wage holy war.
Emerson has long been on jihadist death lists.
During the Coren interview, he noted that Canada has largely escaped â€” or resisted â€“ Islamic extremism. That is, the pervasive influence of radical Islam has not achieved the same traction in Canada as it has in the U.S., Britain and Europe.
Perhaps that is because Muslim numbers here are not as great as elsewhere. Then again, perhaps it is because life in Canada is more balanced and accommodating than other places.
Or perhaps Islamic extremists don’t have the same support here â€“ especially when we have moderate Muslims with the courage to stand up, like Tarek Fatah founder or the Muslim Canadian Congress, and Farzana Hassan who (among other things) opposed the idea of a $100 million, 13-storey Islamic Centre and mosque near the site of New York’s Ground Zero.
Would that the Canadian media and politicians were as resolute as Fatah and Hassan and other quieter Muslim voices of restraint and sanity.
Emerson’s books, documentaries and research have put him in the bullseye of jihadists. He routinely testifies before Congressional and intelligence committees. Even the New York Times(itls) defers to him as an expert of Islam activities in America, despite preferring to avoid apocalypse thinking when it comes to Islamic extremism.
Emerson rarely pulls punches.
He thinks U.S. President Obama is more sympathetic to Islam than he should be, and notes that when he assumed office, Obama’s first goal was to build bridges to the Islamic world. Fair enough, but he says Obama has never, not once, used the phrase or condemned “radical Islam.”
Obama’s gestures towards Islam (witness his speech of conciliation in Cairo, prior to the “Arab Spring” rebellion and ousting of Hosin Murbarak) have largely been unproductive, and reduced America’s influence.
I first came across Emerson at the time of the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Centre, which the Clinton administration insisted on treating as a domestic crime and not as an international terrorist incident.
With some difficulty, I got Emerson’s phone number and we talked about the 1993 World Trade bombing. He was reasonable and factual, with none of the paranoid fixations that conspiracy buffs often have regarding their convictions. He was adamant that downplaying the 1993 World Trade Centre bombing was wrong, and a guarantee that something similar would happen again â€” as it did on 9/11.
Emerson is basically a journalist, having worked for U.S. News and World Report(itls) and CNN as an investigative correspondent, concentrating on security and terrorism. He’s also been an investigator for the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Some 20 years ago, Emerson discovered that what was being discussed and preached in mosques was contrary to the benign faÃ§ade that was displayed to the public.
His watershed 1994 documentary, Terrorists Among Us(itls), provoked the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) to call it “a wild theory about an Islamic terrorist network in America.” The FBI wasn’t so dismissive, and informed Emerson that a militant Muslim group in South Africa was intent on sending a hit-team to assassinate him.
In 1996, Emerson testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that something called the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) was the prime fund-raising body in the U.S. for Hamas. Eleven years later, in 2007, charges were laid against the Holy Land Foundation for funding Hamas and terrorist organizations.
Then, in 2009, the founders of HLF were given life sentences for directing $12 million to Hamas.
Richard Clarke, former boss of counter-terrorism for the U.S. National Security Council, has called Emerson “the Paul Revere of terrorism.” Not a bad description. Some newspapers in the Arab world have accused, or blamed Emerson for “Islamaphobia” they think infects the West.
In response, Emerson’s documentary, Terrorist Among Us(itls) (available from amazon.com) points out that as a faith, Islam condemns acts of terrorism. It’s Islamic extremists who wage jihadist war who are as great a threat to moderate Muslims as they are to those they regard as infidels (i.e. Western countries).
One hopes Michael Coren and Sun TV have Steve Emerson on again â€“ Canada needs periodic doses of realism.
It’s unlikely the CBC would give Emerson a platform. It prefers CAIR.
CAIR’s Campaign Against the Truth
Posted ByÂ Joseph KleinÂ On November 21, 2011 Frontpagemag
The Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated Council on American-Islamic Relations (“CAIR”) is continuing its relentless pressure on federal and local elected officials to suppress the truth about the radical Islamist agenda and the dangers posed by homegrown jihadists.
The latest example is CAIR’s campaign, announced on November 15th, 2011, in which fifteen of its chapters nationwide have filed 87 separate public records requests regarding alleged “Islamophobic” training of local, state and national law enforcement personnel. CAIR said it was seeking information about state-level programs that may have used federal taxpayer dollars to fund what it called “anti-Muslim trainers.”
CAIR as usual is turning the truth on its head. It accuses its opponents of the very hate speech that is CAIR’s own normal lingo.
CAIR’s Los Angeles California branch issued a press release regarding the alleged Islamophobic training that it is seeking to de-fund. The Communications Manager of CAIR’s Los Angeles, California branch is Munira Syeda, whose name appears on the press release. She evidently believes in freedom of speech for her organization’s point of view, but not for contrary points of view.
For example, Syeda defended the actions of a group apparently belonging to the radical Muslim Student Union, who were found guilty of disrupting a speech given by Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren. Ambassador Oren was speaking about U.S.-Israel relations in February 2010 at the University of California, Irvine when the instigators stood up in succession, shouting epithets such as “killers” and asking, “How many Palestinians did you kill?” They persisted in their loud heckling, despite calls to behave from campus officials. This was not about exercising the right of free speech. The Muslim students would have had an opportunity to ask pointed questions or make their statements during the Q&A session that was scheduled to follow the speech. It was about disruptive conduct aimed at censoring others’ right to freely speak, listen and exchange ideas, in violation of California law.
The CAIR Communications Manager supported this “heckler’s veto” when used to shout down attempts by representatives and supporters of Israel to communicate. But she has no problem trying to quash peaceful, non-disruptive protests against Islamist events where violent jihadist sympathizers are speaking.
For instance, Syeda condemned a rally protesting an Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) fundraiser held at the Yorba Linda City Council Community Center in Orange County, California last February. One of the speakers at the ICNA fundraiser was an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center attack, Siraj Wahhaj, who was once quoted as saying to an audience of Muslims in New Jersey, “[T]ake my word, if 6-8 million Muslims unite in America, the country will come to us.” He has also reportedly talked in the past about violent jihad, complete with references to arming black ex-cons in the inner cities with Uzis. Another speaker, MalikÂ Ali, had been captured at one point on video inciting Muslim university students with these words: “They [Jews] know this is a new day. … What do we do? Might be another 9/11.”
There was good reason for some members of the Orange County community to be upset by the prospect of such hatemongers speaking in their city council community center. But they did nothing to interfere with the speeches. According toÂ The Orange County Register, many in the crowd of protesters waved U.S. flags and carried signs saying, “God Bless America” and “No Sharia Law.” A small number of protesters stood about fifty yards from the community center entrance. They booed, yelled “go home” and chanted “no Sharia law” as attendees entered the building. Among their signs were ones that said “ICNA supports Hamas and Hezbollah.” Nobody was reported to have actually entered the community center and disrupt any of the speeches, as the Muslim students had done during Israeli Ambassador Oren’s speech.
One of the most vociferous of the protesters was Councilwoman and Republican Party Vice Chair Deborah Pauly, who was particularly upset with the two violent jihadist sympathizers on the ICNA guest speaker list. She told protesters rallying outside of the Islamic Circle of North America fundraiser: “Let me tell you what’s going on over there right now â€“ make no bones about it â€“ that is pure, unadulterated evil. … I know quite a few Marines who would be very happy to help these terrorists to an early meeting in paradise.”
Strong, even offensive, words â€“ yes. But they were delivered outside the event being protested and involved no heckling of ICNA speakers inside the hall.
Nevertheless, CAIR-LA and other Islamist groups sought to have the councilwoman officially censored by the city council for simply expressing her opinion. Other than conceding that some of the speakers at the ICNA fundraiser were “controversial,” the CAIR-LA Communications Manager Munira Syeda reserved her criticism for the protesters.
CAIR wants a veto against politicians and their supporters who dare to strongly, but peacefully, protest a radical Islamist event outside of the event venue. At the same time, CAIR defends the anti-Israel Muslim Student Union hecklers’ veto, exercised inside the event venue by interfering with the Israeli ambassador’s right to deliver his speech to an audience that wanted to hear what he had to say without rude interruptions.
This same double standard underlies CAIR’s campaign to block federal and local elected officials from incorporating into their law enforcement training programs the truth about the radical Islamist agenda and the dangers posed by homegrown jihadists. CAIR is looking for a veto over who should be allowed to train law enforcement personnel and what should be taught. It wants no expert critics of Islamists and their anti-American agenda to participate in training programs that are supposed to educate law enforcement personnel about the ideological source of some of the real security dangers they are facing. CAIR is particularly afraid of someone like Nonie Darwish, who grew up in a strict Muslim home in Egypt and lived the first thirty years of her life under the yoke of sharia law.
The Obama administration and local enforcement agencies are succumbing to the Islamists’ pressure. Indeed, instead of learning the truth, law enforcement personnel are beginning to be spoon-fed the Islamists’ propaganda. For example, in Tulsa, Oklahoma recently, a police officer was punished for refusing to attend a mandatory Muslim prayer session that was supposed to help him understand Islam!
Here is a better suggestion for helping law enforcement personnel to learn about Islamic ideology, which goes beyond exposing them to Muslim religious prayers and other faith rituals. How about, as a start, requiring law enforcement personnel to familiarize themselves with the member handbook of the Islamic Circle of North America â€“ the Islamist group which had invited violent jihadist sympathizers to speak at its California fundraiser?
The handbook proves the critics’ case, but perhaps its illustration of the Islamists’ supremacist caliphate message would be far more believable if communicated directly to the law enforcement personnel by the communications manager of CAIR’s Los Angeles, California branch herself, Munira Syeda. CAIR would have a much more difficult time dismissing, with its usual kill-the-messenger accusations of Islamophobia, what its own communications manager reads directly from the handbook.
Here are a few excerpts from the ICNA handbook to help her get started:
“The Islamic Circle of North America is…an organizationÂ struggling towards Iqamat-ad-Deen in this land… a national Islamic movement”
“‘Islamic movement’ is the term used for that organized and collective effortÂ waged toÂ establish Al-Islam in its complete form in all aspects of life.(Emphasis added)
“The following are some characteristics of the Islamic movement as we learnÂ about it from the model of the Prophet Mohammad.
1) This movement is based onÂ the ideology of Islam. It considers humanityÂ as one family based upon our common parents and common Creator.Â Therefore, it addresses all human beings, regardless of their race, color,Â national origin, language, culture, ethnicity or economic status. It wants everyoneÂ to succeed before Allah. Its message is, ‘Oh Mankind, submit to yourÂ Lord who created you’ (2:21).Â (Emphasis added)
2) It considers disobedience to Allah as the root cause of all human problems.Â Moreover,Â it believes that obedience to Allah is the only solution for allhuman ills. Until the human being submits to Allah’s Guidance, there can beÂ no true peace in our lives. (Emphasis added)
3)Â It believes that human beings are overburdened under the obedience ofÂ other human beings and their oppressive systems. It is only the obedienceof Allah that will set everyone free…“Â (Emphasis added
Wherever the Islamic movement succeeds to establish true Islamic society, they will form coalition and alliances. This will lead to theÂ unity of the Ummah and towards the establishment of the KhilafahÂ [the Caliphate].” (Emphasis added)
In addition to a reading from the Islamic Circle of North America handbook, the law enforcement training programs could include an expert in Islamic law such as Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi, a CAIR and ICNA favorite who also was invited to the White House by President George W. Bush in the days following 9/11.
Dr. Siddiqi is the former president of the Islamic Society of North America, the Saudi-funded organization that is used by the Muslim World League to finance and exercise control over most of the mosques in the United States. Dr. Siddiqi is currently the chairman of the executive council of the Fiqh Council of North America, an association of Muslims who interpret Islamic law on the North American continent.
What better expert is there to speak about sharia law and the Islamist ideology than Dr. Siddiqi? Apparently, the Chief of the Los Angeles Police Department thinks so, since he is planning a law enforcement “education” program at the Islamic Center with Siddiqi.
But this can only work if Dr. Siddiqi goes beyond the feel good rhetoric of inter-faith harmony that he likes to use when addressing Western audiences. He has to explain how the nice-sounding resolution passed this September by his Fiqh Council claiming that there is “no inherent conflict between the normative values of Islam and the US Constitution and Bill of Rights” (at least “so long as there is no conflict with Muslims’ obligation for obedience” to Allah) squares with some of his teachings about the rule of Allah over all aspects of our lives, Islamist notions of tolerance and supremacism, and the need to implement sharia law everywhere.
All this learned Islamic scholar has to do is elaborate on past statements attributed to him, such as the following:
- “We must not forget that Allah’s rules have to be established in all lands, and all our efforts should lead to that direction.”
- “Our work, school, athletics activity, family life, economics, politics everything must be according to Allah’s Rules.”
- “It is true that Islam stands for the sovereignty of Allah the Almighty and Allah’s rules are not limited to the acts of worship, they also include social, economic and political matters.”
- “Tolerance according to Islam does not mean that we believe that all religions are the same. It does not mean that we do not believe in the supremacy of Islam over other faiths and ideologies.”
- “Once more people accept Islam, insha’allah, this will lead to the implementation of Sharia in all areas.”
Of course, the last thing CAIR would want to do is persuade Dr. Siddiqi to own up to his own real beliefs as part of educating law enforcement personnel about Islamist ideology, or to recommend the inclusion of documents such as the ICNA handbook as part of the training curriculum. Instead, it cries Islamophobia in its relentless campaign to suppress the truth.
It is time that the spotlight is focused on CAIR itself and other Islamist groups which are pulling out all stops to impede effective law enforcement training and replace it with false, self-serving propaganda.