White House Warns Republicans On Border Security

The White House has a warning to Republican senators who want to add on tougher border security language to the immigration bill: don't mess with the path to citizenship.

Republicans like Sen. Marco Rubio have said that the border security language in the bill he helped write aren't strict enough to pass through Congress. An effort is underway to strengthen the border security provisions on the Senate floor. But President Obama likely will not accept changes that impede a pathway to citizenship, according to Cecilia Muñoz, the White House's immigration point person.

"Any amendment, which in the name of border enforcement actually undercuts or eliminates a pathway to citizenship, strikes at the heart of what the Gang of Eight agreed to and what the president put forward in his principles," Muñoz, director of the White House domestic policy council, said at a briefing for Hispanic media outlets on Thursday.

Muñoz's comments are a warning to Republicans as the bill moves to the Senate floor next week.

Texas Sen. John Cornyn (R) is expected to propose an amendment that essentially rewrites the entire border enforcement section of the bill. His amendment would require that the federal government achieve certain border security goals -- such as 100 percent monitoring of all border sectors and a 90 percent apprehension rate of illegal crossers -- before immigrants legalized immigrants can apply for permanent residency.

The bill as written requires that a plan to accomplish those goals on the border be implemented, before immigrants can adjust their status. But immigrants wouldn't be blocked from seeking permanent legal status after a 10-year wait, even if all of the border metrics are not achieved.

Cornyn has drawn the ire of liberal groups who questioned his willingness to vote yes on the bill, even if his amendment is adopted. But even Rubio, one of the bill's eight authors, has said that he would vote no on the bill unless the border language is strengthened. Rubio has reportedly worked with Cornyn on the amendment.

Muñoz would not comment on the Cornyn amendment specifically. Instead called the existing Gang of Eight bill the "strongest bill with respect to immigration enforcement, certainly in recent memory, possibly ever" and noted that the border language was already strengthened in the Senate Judiciary Committee. She said the White House is open to further debate on border issues, but ultimately, wants a bill that strikes a compromise between security and legalization.

"We know there are some hot-button issues in this debate," she said. "The Senate floor is going to be another test of whether all eight of those members want to get to an agreement."

Despite these thorny issues, Muñoz expressed hope that the Senate can pass its bill before the July 4th recess. And even though immigration could face an even more difficult path in the House, she said the White House wants the lower chamber to act before Congress breaks in August.

Source

The new immigration bill grants amnesty, full welfare benefits, and benefits to Illegals from Obamacare immediately, but does not even begin to secure the border.  Perhaps we should secure the border then think very hard for a few years (One or two decades would do.) about granting amnesty to anyone.

This Couldn't Happen Here, Could It?

 

ACT for America

How Political Correctness Is Transforming British Education

by Soeren Kern
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.

In Cheshire, two students at the Alsager High School were punished by their teacher for refusing to pray to Allah as part of their religious education class.

In Scotland, 30 non-Muslim children from the Parkview Primary School recently were required to visit the Bait ur Rehman Ahmadiyya mosque in the Yorkhill district of Glasgow (videos here and here). At the mosque, the children were instructed to recite the shahada, the Muslim declaration of faith which states: "There is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his messenger." Muslims are also demanding that Islamic preachers be sent to every school in Scotland to teach children about Islam, ostensibly in an effort to end negative attitudes about Muslims.

British schools are increasingly dropping the Jewish Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending Muslim pupils, according to a report entitled, Teaching Emotive and Controversial History, commissioned by the Department for Education and Skills.

British teachers are also reluctant to discuss the medieval Crusades, in which Christians fought Muslim armies for control of Jerusalem: lessons often contradict what is taught in local mosques.

In an effort to counter "Islamophobia" in British schools, teachers now are required to teach "key Muslim contributions such as Algebra and the number zero" in math and science courses, even though the concept of zero originated in India.

In the East London district of Tower Hamlets, four Muslims were recently jailed for attacking a local white teacher who gave religious studies lessons to Muslim girls; and 85 out of 90 schools have implemented "no pork" policies.

Schools across Britain are, in fact, increasingly banning pork from lunch menus to avoid offending Muslim students. Hundreds of schools have adopted a "no pork" policy, according to a recent report by the London-based Daily Telegraph.

The culinary restrictions join a long list of politically correct changes that gradually are bringing hundreds of British primary and secondary education into conformity with Islamic Sharia law.

The London Borough of Haringey, a heavily Muslim district in North London, is the latest school district to switch to a menu that is fully halal (religiously permissible for Muslims).

The Haringey Town Council recently issued "best practice" advice to all schools in its area to "ban all pork products in order to cater for the needs of staff and pupils who are not permitted contact with these for religious reasons."

Local politicians have criticized the new policy as pandering to Muslims, and local farmers, who have pointed out that all schools in Britain already offer vegetarian options, have accused school administrators of depriving non-Muslim children of a choice.

Following an outcry from non-Muslim parents, the town council removed the guidance from its website, although the new policy remains in place.

At the Cypress Junior School, in Croydon, south London, school administrators announced in the school newsletter dated June 1, 2012 that the school has opted for a pork-free menu "as a result of pupil and parental feedback."

The announcement states: "Whilst beef, chicken, turkey and fish will all feature, as well as the daily vegetarian and jacket potato or pasta option, the sausages served will now be chicken rather than pork."

In Luton, an industrial city some 50 kilometers (30 miles) north of London where more than 15% of the population is now Muslim, 23 out of 57 schools have banned pork.

In the City of Bradford, a borough of West Yorkshire in Northern England where there are now twice as many practicing Muslims that there are practicing Anglicans, 24 out of 160 schools have eliminated pork from their menus. In Newham (East London), 25 out of 75 schools have banned pork.

Other pork-free schools include Cranford Park Primary School in Hayes (Middlesex), and Dog Kennel Hill Primary in East Dulwich (South London).

The Borough of Harrow in northwest London was among the first in Britain to encourage halal menus. In 2010, Harrow Council announced plans to ban pork in the borough's 52 state primary schools, following a switch by ten secondary schools to offer halal-only menus.

According to the UK-based National Pig Association, which represents commercial pork producers, "It is disappointing that schools cannot be sufficiently organized to give children a choice of meat. Sausages and roast pork are staples of a British diet and children enjoy eating them. If products can be labeled with warnings that they contain nuts and vegetarian dishes can be made and kept separate from meat dishes, [we] don't see why the same can't apply to pork."

Lunch menus are not the only area in which "cultural sensitivity" is escalating in British schools.

In West Yorkshire, the Park Road Junior Infant and Nursery School in Batley has banned stories featuring pigs, including "The Three Little Pigs," in case they offend Muslim children.

In Nottingham, the Greenwood Primary School cancelled a Christmas nativity play; it interfered with the Muslim festival of Eid al-Adha. In Scarborough, the Yorkshire Coast College removed the words Christmas and Easter from their calendar not to offend Muslims.

Also in Cheshire, a 14-year-old Roman Catholic girl who attends Ellesmere Port Catholic High School was branded a truant by teachers for refusing to dress like a Muslim and visit a mosque.

In Stoke-on-Trent, schools have been ordered to rearrange exams, cancel swimming lessons and stop sex education during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. In Norwich, the Knowland Grove Community First School has axed the traditional Christmas play to "look at some of the other great cultural festivals of the world."

Meanwhile, the politically correct ban on pigs in Britain also extends to toys for children. A toy farm set called Happy Land Goosefeather Farm recently removed pigs in order to avoid offending Muslims.

The pig removal came to public attention after a British mother bought the toy as a present for her daughter's first birthday. Although the set contained a model of a cow, sheep, chicken, horse and dog, there was no pig, despite there being a sty and a button which generated an "oink" sound.

After the mother complained, the Early Learning Centre (ELC), which manufactures the toy, responded: "Previously the pig was part of the Goosefeather Farm. However due to customer feedback and religious reasons this is no longer part of the farm."

After a public outcry, however, ELC later reversed its decision: "We recognize that pigs are familiar farm animals, especially for our UK customers. We have taken the decision to reinstate the pig and to no longer sell the set in international markets where it might create an issue."

*********************************************************************************

 Can this happen here in the US?  You bet it could.  And is starting to.  A North Carolina Teacher (Name is withheld by the school system.) verbally abused a student who challenged her view of politics.  CAIR has already challenged 295 school districts to promote Islam in Washington State.  Other states to follow.  Already  CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood have transformed US textbooks to show a favorable view of Islam and a negative view of every other faith.

Every time a school, a district, a Board of Education kowtows to the demands of CAIR, every other group, religious or atheist are discriminated against.  When given the opportunity to set up a Madrassa in NY City (Paid for by the US taxpayer [Where is the ACLU?].)  While it was open, it developed the reputation of being the worst performing school in the city and the most violent in the city.  So much for "The Religion of Peace".

I am not advocating that all Muslims in the United States demand these changes.  Actually most Muslims have immigrated to the US to get away from the insane laws called Shar'ia.  And so must we.  We must demand that NO religious law ever be enforced in this nation.  A simple idea.  That in our law, a full wall of separation be placed between local, state, and national laws and ANY religious law.  Once and for all time!

ACTION ALERT: CONTACT CONGRESS TODAY!!!!!

Senators Joe Lieberman (CT) and Susan Collins (ME), Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee have included very important language in S. 1546, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Reauthorization Act of 2011.

Specifically, their language designates an official within DHS to “coordinate efforts to counter violent extremism in the United States, particularly the ideology that gives rise to Islamist terrorism….”

Bringing governmental focus to bear on the ideology driving Islamic terrorism is something we have been working hard to achieve. It’s what Guy Rodgers, ACT! for America Executive Director, addresses in his “Connect the Dots” presentation that is part of our “Unmasking the Enemy Among Us” resource.

The Lieberman/Collins language is significant forward movement by the U.S. Congress to finally define the threat. It is critical that we show them that we are behind them 150%!!!

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee will be considering this legislation tomorrow, Wednesday, September 21^st.

Surprise, surprise! CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, has sent out an alert urging people to contact the committee and express their opposition. We know you’re shocked to learn this. WE MUST SEND A LOUDER, STRONGER MESSAGE THAN CAIR!

Please take a moment NOW to call the Committee to let them know that you wholeheartedly SUPPORT the language of Section 213: Countering Homegrown Terrorism contained in S. 1546—and forward this Alert on to everyone you know!

The phone numbers of the Senate House Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee are as follows:

Majority (Democrats)		202-224-2627
Minority (Republicans)		202-224-4751

It is CRITICAL that the Committee hears from those that support the language—which we know are a MAJORITY of Americans.

PLEASE CALL TODAY! THANK YOU!

REMEMBER, YOUR VOICE COUNTS!

IF EACH OF US DOES JUST A LITTLE, TOGETHER WE CAN
ACCOMPLISH A LOT!

Shining A Light On Shar'ia Creep

Did CAIR over play their hand when they were able to convince an Clinton-era appointed Dhimmi Judge to temporarily block the new Oklahoma State Constitutional Amendment prohibiting the Shar'ia Law from being used to decide a court case.

Islamofascism: The Council on American-Islamic Relations may wish it never sued to overturn an Oklahoma ban on Shariah law. Now the entire nation will get to see it and other Islamists' true anti-American colors.

CAIR is thumping its chest over persuading a Clinton-appointed federal judge to temporarily block Oklahoma from enacting a state constitutional amendment that prohibits state courts from considering Islamic law when deciding cases. Fully 70% of Oklahoma voters passed the landmark measure.

But CAIR has ignited a legal firestorm that will likely rage all the way to the Supreme Court. Thanks to CAIR's latest bit of lawfare, Americans will get to hear a long overdue debate not just about the constitutionality of such bans on Shariah law but about the constitutionality of Shariah law itself.

This is not a debate CAIR wants to have, since it ultimately will have to defend the indefensible. It claims in a press release that Shariah law is "a dynamic legal framework" derived from Islamic scripture "and analytical reasoning."

In fact, there's nothing reasoned about it. It's a medieval legal code that administers cruel and unusual punishments such as stonings, amputations and honor killings. Think the Taliban.

Shariah can be seen in action this week with Pakistan's death sentence on a Christian woman for blasphemy. Between 1986 and 2009, at least 974 people have been charged for defiling the Quran or insulting the Muslim Prophet Muhammad.

CAIR, which thinks free speech is a one-way street, is working with the Organization of the Islamic Conference on an international blasphemy law that would criminalize "Islamophobia," according to the book, "Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America."

Shariah also permits wife-beating, something CAIR also knows about. Its sister organization, the Islamic Society of North America, condones it in its fatwas (or religious rulings) for Muslim Americans. More, CAIR distributes a book, "The Meaning of the Holy Quran," which authorizes men to hit their wives.

CAIR says it's just a "civil rights advocacy group." But the Justice Department says it's a front group for Hamas and its parent, the radical Muslim Brotherhood, a worldwide jihadist movement that has a secret plan to impose Shariah law on the U.S.

"From its founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists," said Assistant U.S. Attorney Gordon Kromberg in a recent court filing.

U.S. prosecutors in 2007 named CAIR an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal scheme led by the Holy Land Foundation to funnel millions to Hamas suicide bombers and their families.

"CAIR has been identified by the government at trial as a participant in an ongoing and ultimately unlawful conspiracy to support a designated terrorist organization, a conspiracy from which CAIR never withdrew," said Assistant U.S. Attorney Jim Jacks, who recently won an award from Attorney General Eric Holder for convicting the Holy Land terrorists.

Federal courts found "ample evidence" linking CAIR to the conspiracy and are expected to unseal the dossier in coming weeks.

The Holy Land revelations prompted the FBI to sever ties with CAIR until it can demonstrate it's not a terror front. "Until we can resolve whether there continues to be a connection between CAIR or its executives and Hamas, the FBI does not view CAIR as an appropriate liaison partner," advised Assistant FBI Director Richard Powers in a 2009 letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

CAIR's leaders don't want a ban on Shariah law, because they have a secret agenda to institutionalize Shariah law in America.

"I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future," CAIR Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper let it slip out to a Minneapolis Star-Tribune reporter in 1993, before CAIR was formed.

CAIR's founding chairman, Omar Ahmad, wants Shariah law to replace the Constitution. "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant," he told a Muslim audience in Fremont, Calif., in 1998. "The Quran should be the highest authority in America."

CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad is an Islamic supremacist who thinks Muslims should run Washington: "Who better can lead America than Muslims?"

Islamizing America also happens to be the agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood — the radical, Cairo-based outlaw group the government says CAIR is fronting for. The founding archives of its U.S. branch, seized in an FBI raid and introduced as evidence in the Holy Land trial, reveal a "strategic goal" of "eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house ... so that Allah's religion is made victorious over all other religions." The Brotherhood calls its plan a "grand jihad."

CAIR argues in its suit that "the Shariah ban's purpose is to stigmatize, denigrate and segregate plaintiff's faith in the public's mind as something foreign and to be feared."

No, the goal is to make sure no Oklahoma judge considers Shariah law in rulings on domestic violence, family law, probate, free speech, contracts and other matters, as judges have in other states, to a wider degree in Canada and now on a routine basis in Britain. The ban is to prevent courts from legitimizing a religious legal system antithetical to the U.S. Constitution in the areas of freedom of speech, equality and humane punishment, among other bedrock Western principles.

Thanks to CAIR's lawsuit, all this can now be aired out for the public.

Don't Call It Jihad!

From Act For America.

Last year, President Obama bowed to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and made a speech in Cairo largely blaming America for our “strained” relations with the Muslim world.

This year his administration berates Israel, accusing it of obstructing the peace process while Hamas continues to deny Israel’s right to exist.

He extends constitutional rights to foreign terrorists, including reading them their Miranda rights.

He announces that the U.S. will not retaliate with nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear country—even if that country hits us with a devastating biological or chemical weapons attack.

Now he bans characterizations such as “jihad” and “Islamic extremism” from our national security strategy (see article below, highlights added).

Feel safer now?

Obama Bans Islam, Jihad From National Security Strategy Document

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/07/obama-bans-islam-jihad-national-security-strategy-document/

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama's advisers will remove religious terms such as "Islamic extremism" from the central document outlining the U.S. national security strategy and will use the rewritten document to emphasize that the United States does not view Muslim nations through the lens of terror, counterterrorism officials said.

The change is a significant shift in the National Security Strategy, a document that previously outlined the Bush Doctrine of preventative war and currently states: "The struggle against militant Islamic radicalism is the great ideological conflict of the early years of the 21st century."

The officials described the changes on condition of anonymity because the document still was being written, and the White House would not discuss it. But rewriting the strategy document will be the latest example of Obama putting his stamp on U.S. foreign policy, like his promises to dismantle nuclear weapons and limit the situations in which they can be used.

The revisions are part of a larger effort about which the White House talks openly, one that seeks to change not just how the United States talks to Muslim nations, but also what it talks to them about, from health care and science to business startups and education.

That shift away from terrorism has been building for a year, since Obama went to Cairo, Egypt, and promised a "new beginning" in the relationship between the United States and the Muslim world. The White House believes the previous administration based that relationship entirely on fighting terror and winning the war of ideas.

"You take a country where the overwhelming majority are not going to become terrorists, and you go in and say, 'We're building you a hospital so you don't become terrorists.' That doesn't make much sense," said National Security Council staffer Pradeep Ramamurthy.

Ramamurthy runs the administration's Global Engagement Directorate, a four-person National Security Council team that Obama launched last May with little fanfare and a vague mission to use diplomacy and outreach "in pursuit of a host of national security objectives."

Since then, the division has not only helped change the vocabulary of fighting terror but also has shaped the way the country invests in Muslim businesses, studies global warming, supports scientific research and combats polio.

Before diplomats go abroad, they hear from the Ramamurthy or his deputy, Jenny Urizar. When officials from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration returned from Indonesia, the NSC got a rundown about research opportunities on global warming.

Ramamurthy maintains a database of interviews conducted by 50 U.S. embassies worldwide. And business leaders from more than 40 countries head to Washington this month for an "entrepreneurship summit" for Muslim businesses.

"Do you want to think about the U.S. as the nation that fights terrorism or the nation you want to do business with?" Ramamurthy said.

To deliver that message, Obama's speechwriters have taken inspiration from an unlikely source: former President Ronald Reagan. Visiting communist China in 1984, Reagan spoke to Fudan University in Shanghai about education, space exploration and scientific research.

He discussed freedom and liberty. He never mentioned communism or democracy.

"They didn't look up to the U.S. because we hated communism," said Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes, Obama's foreign policy speechwriter.

Like Reagan in China, Obama in Cairo made only passing references to terrorism. Instead he focused on cooperation. He announced the United States would team up to fight polio with the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, a multinational body based in Saudi Arabia.

The United States and the OIC had worked together before, but never with that focus.

"President Obama saw it as an opportunity to say, 'We work on things far beyond the war on terrorism,"' said World Health Organization spokeswoman Sona Bari.

Polio is endemic in three Muslim countries -- Nigeria, Pakistan and Afghanistan -- but some Muslim leaders have been suspicious of vaccination efforts, which they believed to be part of a CIA sterilization campaign. Last year, the OIC and religious scholars at the International Islamic Fiqh Academy issued a fatwa, or religious decree, that parents should have their children vaccinated.

"We're probably entering into a whole new level of engagement between the OIC and the polio program because of the stimulus coming from the U.S. government," said Michael Galway, who works on polio eradication for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

The Centers for Disease Control also began working more closely with local Islamic leaders in northern Nigeria, a network that had been overlooked for years, said John Fitzsimmons, the deputy director of the CDC's immunization division.

Though health officials are reluctant to assign credit to any one action, new polio cases in Nigeria fell from 83 during the first quarter of last year to just one so far this year, Fitzsimmons said.

Public opinion polls also showed consistent improvement in U.S. sentiment within the Muslim world last year, although the viewpoints are still overwhelmingly negative, however.

Obama did not invent Muslim outreach. President George W. Bush gave the White House its first Quran, hosted its first Iftar dinner to celebrate Ramadan, and loudly stated support for Muslim democracies like Turkey.

But the Bush administration struggled with its rhetoric. Muslims criticized him for describing the war against terror as a "crusade" and labeling the invasion of Afghanistan "Operation Infinite Justice" -- words that were seen as religious. He regularly identified America's enemy as "Islamic extremists" and "radical jihadists."

Karen Hughes, a Bush confidant who served as his top diplomat to the Muslim world in his second term, urged the White House to stop.

"I did recommend that, in my judgment, it's unfortunate because of the way it's heard. We ought to avoid the language of religion," Hughes said. "Whenever they hear 'Islamic extremism, Islamic jihad, Islamic fundamentalism,' they perceive it as a sort of an attack on their faith. That's the world view Osama bin Laden wants them to have."

Hughes and Juan Zarate, Bush's former deputy national security adviser, said Obama's efforts build on groundwork from Bush's second term, when some of the rhetoric softened. But by then, Zarate said, it was overshadowed by the Guantanamo Bay detention center, the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison and a prolonged Iraq war.

"In some ways, it didn't matter what the president did or said. People weren't going to be listening to him in the way we wanted them to," Zarate said. "The difference is, President Obama had a fresh start."

Obama's foreign policy posture is not without political risk. Even as Obama steps up airstrikes on terrorists abroad, he has proven vulnerable to Republican criticism on security issues at home, such as the failed Christmas Day airline bombing and the announced-then-withdrawn plan to prosecute 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in New York.

Peter Feaver, a Duke University political scientist and former Bush adviser, is skeptical of Obama's engagement effort. It "doesn't appear to have created much in the way of strategic benefit" in the Middle East peace process or in negotiations over Iran's nuclear ambitions, he said.

Obama runs the political risk of seeming to adopt politically correct rhetoric abroad while appearing tone deaf on national security issues at home, Feaver said.

The White House dismisses such criticism. In June, Obama will travel to Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim country, and is expected to revisit many of the themes of his Cairo speech.

"This is the long-range direction we need to go in," Ramamurthy said.

Do you feel safer now that the Messiah-in-Chief has declared from the Riverside (sorry there are no mountains in Washington DC!) that there is no more jihad, all Islamic Terrorists Extremists are gone!

Hosanna In The Highest!  Proclaim it through out the land!

Yes our Messiah has proclaimed it so we must fall in line, march in step and sing his praises.

And pray to the Almighty for deliverance from this evil!

Burkas And Political Correctness

From ACT for America

Burkas don't belong in western societies.

Calgary Herald
March 1, 2010
by Mansoor Ladha

Two burka-wearing bank robbers held up a post office near Paris in early February, using a handgun concealed beneath the face-covering Islamic-style full veil.

Believing them to be Muslim women, staff allowed the burka-clad pair through the security double doors of the banking branch of the postal office. Once inside, the robbers flipped back their burkas and pulled out a gun. They made off with $6,615 Cdn.

What's most amazing about this incident is that the Taliban, or other terrorist groups, don't more frequently disguise themselves as women in burkas, as this would be the perfect disguise for them. Dress up as women in burkas, mingle with the crowd, plant your bomb at the designated site and vanish. How simple. No one would see your face anyway.

And therein lies the problem with allowing people to cover their faces in western and free societies.

I don't blame the French for being jittery about the burka and for proposing a law that seeks a ban on wearing the burka in all public places.

Under the proposed law, refusing to take off a face covering could lead to a fine of $1,090.

The proposal means that a woman seeking unemployment benefits or other state aid, for instance, would walk away empty-handed if she refused to uncover her face. She would also be denied entrance to the local town hall, the bus, the Metro, university classrooms, hospitals or post offices.

Among France's five million Muslims, only a fraction of them -- 1,900 -- wear burkas.

It is believed among them are those who are more traditionalist and very staunch in their fundamental beliefs.

They are generally the less educated and less progressively minded. For example, there were reports in France of confrontations in hospital settings in which a husband refused to allow his wife to be treated by a male doctor.

What on Earth are people like that doing living in France?

The French government is so adamant about enforcing the burka legislation that recently they denied citizenship to a foreign national who forced his wife to wear the full Islamic veil.

I venture to suggest that this indicates to me that there is a need to educate the Muslim population in France and inform them that society has moved into the 21st century.

The beliefs that they hold are no longer valid in modern societies. They have to move ahead to live according to the laws, practices and rules of the country of their adoption.

One cannot be a guest or new citizen in a country and expect not to abide by their rules.

Immigrants should not expect to live the way they lived in their own countries.

If they want to live in a modern and democratic state like France, then they have to accept that modern countries treat their men and women under equality of law; and that subservient views will have no place in modern societies.

No one is dictating to Muslim women what to wear or not to wear. The issue is that the clothing that these women are wearing hides their faces and hence their identity, which causes problems. This is the crux of the matter.

On the other side of the coin, we also have decency laws whereby the same countries, which believe in equality of men and women, would not allow women to parade topless on their streets or would arrest men for indecent exposure.

The onus also lies on the Muslim leadership in France to educate their congregations that burkas have nothing to do with Islam and that even the Qur'an does not say that one has to wear burkas.

Imams and mullahs should launch an aggressive campaign in mosques to greatly help alleviate the problem and assist the French authorities to solve the problem.

A time has also come when the state should ensure that Muslim women have access to educational facilities, even on a part-time basis.

The more education they have, the more broad-minded they will become and hence there will be fewer tendencies on their part to wear the burka. Education means progress.

The burka comes from the Middle East and if people want to wear it, they should go live where it is accepted.

As a wise man once said, "if I had two children, one a boy and one a girl and if I had the means to educate only one of them, I would educate the girl because when you educate the girl, you educate a family."

As the saying goes, when in Rome, do as the Romans do.

Well, my Muslim brethren, as the French are saying, when in France do as the French want you to do!

Mansoor Ladha is a freelance journalist and author living in Calgary.

Why is it that one segment of society can impose their religious laws on the majority of the nation?  Take the store chain of Abercrombie and Fitch.

Clothing giant Abercrombie & Fitch is not exactly known for its modesty, as evidenced by sexy catalogs featuring models in barely-there clothing. Now the company is being sued for allegedly denying a teenager the right to wear a religious headcovering.

A Muslim teenager hoping to work at one of the company's childrens clothing stores says she was told during an interview that her head scarf, known as a hijab, would violate Abercrombie & Fitch's strict but secretive "Look Policy," which governs everything from dress to the length of one's fingernails.

Read the rest here.

Stores have a right to set up a dress code that fits with their idea of customer type. Full head coverings do not work with the soft porn look that Abercrombie and Fitch project to the public.  This could be on the lines of WTF.

ACT for America is fighting for sanity in this world of PC.  A world in which a radical Muslim doctor, spouting Islamic hatred and treason cannot be fired because of his beliefs, even though he is an officer in the US Army.  So when he opens fire on his fellow soldiers (killing 13, wounding 30), the military won't call it Islamic Terrorism, Jihad or any other designations that place the blame squarely on Islam.  No the victims are blamed for the cause of this massacre.

Or why 80 year old women are stripped searched at the airport, shoes must be removed, no bottles of drinks,shampoo, toothpaste, etc... can be brought aboard a plane, yet a Muslim man paying cash for his flight, with no baggage can bring a bomb on board hidden in his underware.

It is insanity. And ACT for America agrees:



Pass this video along.  Don't be silent.  Let your voice be heard.  Political Correctness will kill us all!

Remembering a Fallen Soldier…

From ACT for America

This moved me so much that I just had to share it with you.

Remembering What We Are Up Against and Why We Must – and Will – Prevail

by Brigitte Gabriel

I don’t believe I’ve ever written a letter quite like this to you before. Indeed, it is difficult to write this without tears welling up in my eyes.

It started as a rainy Friday morning in late August. I was flying from my presentation in Springfield, Missouri, to my next destination connecting through Atlanta. Little did I know that what I was about to experience that day was going to shake me to the depth of my soul, inflame my passion for our country (I didn't think it was possible to be more passionate) and remind me why ACT! for America is so important to our security and the future of America.

I looked out my window at gloomy Atlanta as the plane took off, closed my eyes and pictured home and my loving family meeting me at the airport with open arms, smiles and kisses, waiting to whisk me off to Outback Steak House for dinner as planned.

It was a quiet, uneventful flight. No beverage service. No announcements from the captain — until we landed at our final destination:

"Welcome to "......." . Ladies and Gentleman we have a special request to ask of you. We are carrying on this plane today a fallen soldier brought home from Afghanistan. His body is accompanied by Sgt. "......". Please kindly allow Sgt. "...." to deplane first so he can do his job in escorting the body below. We will leave the seat belt sign on until the body has been taken off the plane. Then when the seat belt sign is turned off, you can deplane."

The plane continued slowly down the runway as the captain’s shocking announcement reverberated among the passengers. As we taxied closer to our gate, tears began to flow as we saw a police car, a military hearse, and a team of Marines standing in formation waiting to carry the body.

And the saddest scene of all — his family, wife and children, all lined up against the wall waiting for him.

Burning tears were flowing down my face as my heart sank into utter pain and agony at such a sight. We always hear about this on the news and feel sad but to experience it in person is completely different.

We pulled up to our gate and Sgt. "...." stood up in all his gloriously decorated uniform, opened up the overhead compartment carrying a folded American flag and a back pack, and started walking out of the plane amid the clapping and tears of all of us on board.

No one in the plane even touched their cell phone. People were transfixed, staring out the window, sharing our respect and sorrow. At that moment we were not Democrats, Republicans or Independents. We were Americans soberly watching one of our own come home in a coffin draped with an American flag.

As they removed the body from the plane, two men holding his wife started walking towards the plane as the wife covered her face and began sobbing. She was followed by her children. The Marines walked in formation and carried his body to the hearse.

We started getting out of our seats and deplaning without a word from anyone except the sounds of crying coming from different people looking out the window as they walked out of the plane.

As I entered the airport, people were standing in lines and rows facing the window watching all this.

Some men were saluting the body. We all stood next to each other, honoring this soldier until his body was finally in the hearse and he was driven off the tarmac.

It was the most sobering, heartbreaking, and patriotic scene. As I cried for the following few hours sitting with my family at home eating Chinese take-out for dinner (I just wasn’t up to going out for dinner), I was reminded of why we need to continually remind Americans that we are at war.

Our men and women are fighting and dying overseas to protect America from an enemy who is not only fighting us across the globe but also advancing here at home.

Just because we have not been successfully attacked at home doesn't mean our enemy has forgotten about us. Their tactics have become more sophisticated. They not only wish to attack us militarily, they are moving at full speed in the advance of their cultural Jihad invading America.

Islamic foot-washing basins in airports; Shariah finance being introduced by American banks; college campuses designating Islamic prayer rooms for Muslims only; Islamic compounds practicing Shariah law springing up across America; public schools using our tax dollars to indoctrinate American students into Islam; demands by Muslim parents that their children be provided private prayer rooms in their public schools; Muslim workers demanding special workplace accommodations no other religious person would ask for; and the list goes on.

As history demonstrates, only organized resistance will stop this. Unopposed by organized resistance, the advance of cultural Jihad in Europe has proceeded to the point that many think a full-blown “Eurabia” is inevitable and irreversible.

And even if we win the war against Islamic terrorism, but lose the struggle against cultural Jihad here at home, we may protect our safety but lose our liberties and our way of life. I just don’t believe this young man who fell on the field of battle would consider that a victory.

“Freedom” is not just freedom from the physical harm our Islamist enemies want to inflict on us. It is freedom from the tyranny and oppression of shariah Islamic law and the supremacist political ideology our enemies are determined to impose upon us.

So, just as that soldier was on the front lines of this war overseas, we are on the “front lines” here at home. That soldier was part of the “organized resistance” in Afghanistan. We are part of the “organized resistance” here in America.

We cannot afford to fail in our military missions overseas. Failure would embolden and empower Islamists throughout the world.

We also cannot afford to fail here at home.

This is why I appeal to you to take heart and help me continue building ACT! for America. We are the only nationwide organized resistance to this threat. As I said, we are the front lines here at home.

Our families, our communities and our nation are depending on us, even though many do not yet realize it.

For instance, two years ago ACT helped pass the bill in Congress that protects every citizen from lawsuits when they report suspicious activity in public places.

How many Americans know this happened? Very few. Yet they are now protected from lawsuits, which means America is safer as a result.

I know there are other issues right now, such as health care and the economy, that are dominating the attention of the American people. And I understand why that is.

But for those of us, you and me, who grasp the seriousness of the threat of radical Islam, we must continue to do everything we can to make sure that the reason 9/11 occurred is not forgotten. That the reason we are fighting in Afghanistan is not forgotten.

We must continue to push forward, to inform, organize, and ring the alarm bells, even when it feels like a lot of people aren’t paying attention right now or don’t seem to “get it.”

Because there are many good Americans out there ready to respond to our message, if we can only get it to them.

Because we are the modern “Paul Revere's,” the messengers who are warning America even when a lot of America is preoccupied with other matters. It is estimated that over 2/3 of the colonists either were loyal to Britain or were indifferent to the political struggles the colonies were experiencing in 1776.

Yet, through the leadership and sacrifice of the remaining colonists, independence was declared and Britain was defeated.

How I wish I could be standing in your presence this very moment, to grasp your hands, look into your eyes, and say “be encouraged!”

We will win this struggle against radical Islam. It won’t be tomorrow, or next year, but we will, in time, prevail — so long as good, patriotic Americans like you do not lose hope and keep taking action.

We are winning victories, and we will continue to win more – and bigger – victories, so long as good, patriotic Americans like you do not lose hope and keep taking action.

Let’s remember how far we have come together. In less than two years we have built the largest grassroots organization in America dedicated to combating the threat of radical Islam, with 62,000 members and 315 local chapters.

Be encouraged!

I want to close with this. Last week, when Guy Rodgers and I were at the EMP conference in Niagara, NY, the president of a national security organization sat down with us and thanked us profusely for what ACT! for America is doing and has already accomplished.

I wish you could have seen his face and heard his words. This is a man who has served at high levels of government and been around Washington politics for decades.

His message to us – and ultimately to you – was that ACT! for America is KEY to all our efforts to defeat radical Islam. He has watched us grow, witnessed our activism, and rejoiced for our victories.

So I’ll say it again. Be encouraged!

Always devoted,

We must remain vigilant against those who would impose their religious laws and customs upon us. The idea of Multiculturalism and Political Correctness must be cut short. No one faith or culture should be given special treatment in this nation. Each faith, each culture must be equally treated, equally accomodated. Thus the statis quo is assured for all.

Let each of us rejoice in the Freedoms this nation has given to us, and continue to fight against the Islamination of America.

One way multiculturalism

From ACT For America

‘The Muslim World’
One-way multiculturalism.

By Mark Steyn

As recently as last summer, General Motors filing for bankruptcy would have been the biggest news story of the week. But it’s not such a very great step from the unthinkable to the inevitable, and by the time it actually happened the market barely noticed and the media were focused on the president’s “address to the Muslim world.” As it happens, these two stories are the same story: snapshots, at home and abroad, of the hyperpower in eclipse. It’s a long time since anyone touted GM as the emblematic brand of America — What’s good for GM is good for America, etc. In fact, it’s more emblematic than ever: Like General Motors, the U.S. government spends more than it makes, and has airily committed itself to ever more unsustainable levels of benefits. GM has about 95,000 workers but provides health benefits to a million people: It’s not a business enterprise, but a vast welfare plan with a tiny loss-making commercial sector. As GM goes, so goes America?

But who cares? Overseas, the coolest president in history was giving a speech. Or, as the official press release headlined it on the State Department website, “President Obama Speaks to the Muslim World from Cairo.”

Let’s pause right there: It’s interesting how easily the words “the Muslim world” roll off the tongues of liberal secular progressives who’d choke on any equivalent reference to “the Christian world.” When such hyper-alert policemen of the perimeter between church and state endorse the former but not the latter, they’re implicitly acknowledging that Islam is not merely a faith but a political project, too. There is an “Organization of the Islamic Conference,” which is already the largest single voting bloc at the U.N. and is still adding new members. Imagine if someone proposed an “Organization of the Christian Conference” that would hold summits attended by prime ministers and presidents, and vote as a bloc in transnational bodies. But, of course, there is no “Christian world”: Europe is largely post-Christian and, as President Obama bizarrely asserted to a European interviewer last week, America is “one of the largest Muslim countries in the world.” Perhaps we’re eligible for membership in the OIC.

I suppose the benign interpretation is that, as head of state of the last superpower, Obama is indulging in a little harmless condescension. In his Cairo speech, he congratulated Muslims on inventing algebra and quoted approvingly one of the less bloodcurdling sections of the Koran. As socio-historical scholarship goes, I found myself recalling that moment in the long twilight of the Habsburg Empire when Crown Prince Rudolph and his mistress were found dead at the royal hunting lodge at Mayerling — either a double suicide, or something even more sinister. Happily, in the Broadway musical version, instead of being found dead, the star-crossed lovers emigrate to America and settle down on a farm in Pennsylvania. Recently, my old comrade Stephen Fry gave an amusing lecture at the Royal Geographical Society in London on the popular Americanism “When life hands you lemons, make lemonade” — or, if something’s bitter and hard to swallow, add sugar and sell it. That’s what the president did with Islam: He added sugar and sold it.

The speech nevertheless impressed many conservatives, including Rich Lowry, my esteemed editor at National Review, “esteemed editor” being the sort of thing one says before booting the boss in the crotch. Rich thought that the president succeeded in his principal task: “Fundamentally, Obama's goal was to tell the Muslim world, ‘We respect and value you, your religion and your civilization, and only ask that you don’t hate us and murder us in return.’” But those terms are too narrow. You don’t have to murder a guy if he preemptively surrenders. And you don’t even have to hate him if you’re too busy despising him. The savvier Muslim potentates have no desire to be sitting in a smelly cave in the Hindu Kush sharing a latrine with a dozen halfwitted goatherds while plotting how to blow up the Empire State Building. Nevertheless, they share key goals with the cave dwellers — including the wish to expand the boundaries of “the Muslim world” and (as in the anti-blasphemy push at the U.N.) to place Islam, globally, beyond criticism. The non-terrorist advance of Islam is a significant challenge to western notions of liberty and pluralism.

Once Obama moved on from the more generalized Islamoschmoozing to the details, the subtext — the absence of American will — became explicit. He used the cover of multilateralism and moral equivalence to communicate, consistently, American weakness: “No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons.” Perhaps by “no single nation” he means the “global community” should pick and choose, which means the U.N. Security Council, which means the Big Five, which means that Russia and China will pursue their own murky interests and that, in the absence of American leadership, Britain and France will reach their accommodations with a nuclear Iran, a nuclear North Korea, and any other psycho-state minded to join them.

On the other hand, a “single nation” certainly has the right to tell another nation anything it wants if that nation happens to be the Zionist Entity: As Hillary Clinton just instructed Israel re its West Bank communities, there has to be “a stop to settlements — not some settlements, not outposts, not natural-growth exceptions.” No “natural growth”? You mean, if you and the missus have a kid, you’ve got to talk gran’ma into moving out? To Tel Aviv, or Brooklyn, or wherever? At a stroke, the administration has endorsed "the Muslim world's" view of those non-Muslims who happen to find themselves within what it regards as lands belonging to Islam: The Jewish and Christian communities are free to stand still or shrink, but not to grow. Would Obama be comfortable mandating “no natural growth” to Israel’s million-and-a-half Muslims? No. But the administration has embraced the “the Muslim world”’s commitment to one-way multiculturalism, whereby Islam expands in the west but Christianity and Judaism shrivel remorselessly in the Middle East.

And so it goes. Like General Motors, America is “too big to fail.” So it won’t, not immediately. It will linger on in a twilight existence sclerotic and ineffectual, declining unto a kind of societal dementia, unable to keep pace with what’s happening and with an ever more tenuous grip on its own past, but able on occasion to throw out impressive words albeit strung together without much meaning: empower, peace, justice, prosperity — just to take one windy gust from the president’s Cairo speech.

There’s better phrase-making in the current issue of Foreign Affairs, in a coinage of Leslie Gelb, president emeritus of the Committee on Foreign Relations. The president emeritus is a sober, judicious paragon of torpidly conventional wisdom. Nevertheless, musing on American decline, he writes, “The country's economy, infrastructure, public schools, and political system have been allowed to deteriorate. The result has been diminished economic strength, a less vital democracy, and a mediocrity of spirit.” That last is the one to watch: A great power can survive a lot of things, but not “a mediocrity of spirit.” A wealthy nation living on the accumulated cultural capital of a glorious past can dodge its rendezvous with fate, but only for a while. That sound you heard in Cairo is the tingy ping of a hollow superpower.

Barack Obama is just another Dhimmi Carter. Carter tried to run a foreign policy based on human rights, and lack-luster leadership. The results of Carter's mismanagement was an Islamic Iran, Mugabe in Zimbabwe, and the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan. Not a very good record for the man.

Obama is failing to convince our "Allies" to lend a hand. He has insulted Great Britain, France and Germany to the point that these government will not offer to help the US in our endeavors. Recently the German government refused point blank to house Gitmo detainees, to increase their troop levels in Afghanistan, and is even pulling out of Afghanistan.

The common people of Europe love Obama, that is until they actually listen to him. Then they see him as just another leftist politician. Just like the kind that they are starting to get rid of.

The Muslim world is pleased with Obama. To them he is just another useful idiot that they will use to their advantage.

Israelis see him for what he is. And they are turning against this smooth talking con-man from Chicago. If Obama thinks that bringing down the Netanyahu government will bring a government more to the left, he is smoking some funny pipe weed. Israel is turning hard to the right with each edict the Obama regime issues to Israel. New elections just might give him a real headache with the election of not Netanyahu but a much more extremist like Avigdor Lieberman.

And it would serve him right!

How Islam was introduced into our elementary schools.

The Clinton and Islam Partnership
Evidence of Negotiations using America’s Public School Children

Much of this post researched and confirmed by Wes Vernon of NewsMax , Paul Sperry of WND and now Bob Unruh 10/19/06
Sources thoroughly provided

Abdurahman Alamoudi, President of the American Muslim Council, supporter of Hamas, Hezbollah and accused of ties with Osama bin Laden, helped develop "Religious Expression in Public School" which was launched by Clinton in 1995. These "Presidential Guidelines" greatly impact public schools today. Nadine Strossen, President of the ACLU, refers to these guidelines as the authority to support the ACLU’s lawsuits restricting Christmas celebrations and removing Nativity scenes from public schools. Meanwhile all practices of Islam are encouraged.

School districts are pressured to utilize these dubious guidelines, which Clinton sold to America as "issued by 35 religious groups," including the American Muslim Council/Alamoudi/suspected terrorist.

Read more here.

BRAVE NEW SCHOOLS
Terror suspect contributed to school 'religion guidelines'
Issued by Clinton, rules let students pray to Allah, but banish Christmas

Posted: October 19, 2006
By Bob Unruh
© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com

A man arrested as a terror suspect for allegedly trying to transport $340,000 from a group tied to Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, and who reputedly had connections to Osama bin Laden, helped write the "Religious Expression in Public Schools" guidelines issued by President Clinton during his tenure in office.

And that could explain why students at a California school were told as part of their required classes they would become Muslims and pray to Allah – and a federal judge approved that, and why an Oregon school this year is delivering similar lessons to its students, as WND has reported.

Abdurahman Alamoudi, who was president of the American Muslim Council and a supporter of Hamas and Hezbollah, worked with President Clinton and the American Civil Liberties Union when the guidelines, launched by Clinton in 1995, were being developed, according to reports.

Read more here.

ABDURAHMAN ALAMOUDI SENTENCED TO JAIL IN TERRORISM FINANCING CASE

Article from the United States Department of Justice dated October 15, 2004 about the sentencing of Abdurahman Alamoudi to 23 years in jail.

Aldurahman M. Alamoudi, a naturalized U.S. citizen who was born in Eritrea, was sentenced to 276 months in jail by District Judge Claude M. Hilton in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia, this morning. On July 30, 2004, Alamoudi pleaded guilty to three federal offenses: one count of violating the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which imposes terrorism-related sanctions prohibiting unlicensed travel to and commerce with Libya; one count of false statements made in his application for naturalization; and a tax offense involving a long-term scheme to conceal from the IRS his financial transactions with Libya and his foreign bank accounts and to omit material information from the tax returns filed by his charities.

As part of a plea agreement, Alamoudi agreed to cooperate fully and truthfully in any and all investigations, including an ongoing investigation into a plot to assassinate an ally in the war against terrorism. Under the terms of that plea agreement, Alamoudi also agreed that he should be sentenced under the terrorism provision of the federal sentencing guidelines, and he agreed to forfeit all proceeds from his illegal dealings with Libya, which total at least $910,000, including $340,000 seized from him in the United Kingdom.

How Islam infiltrated our universities:

The Muslim Students Association and the Jihad Network
By FrontPage Magazine
FrontPageMagazine.com
Thursday, May 08, 2008

The following essay, adapted from the Introduction to this booklet, shows how, as early as the 1980s, operatives from the Muslim Brotherhood, parent group for al Qaeda and Hamas, formulated a blueprint for a "jihadist process" that would ultimately sabotage the "miserable house" of the United States. These Muslim Brotherhood operatives saw that the work of undermining the U.S. could be best accomplished by the use of front groups such as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim Students Association. But while CAIR was designed to work in the legal-cultural realm, posturing as another of the minority rights groups functioning in the public square, the MSA's role was to be restricted to college campuses, where it would advance the cause of radical Islam and lead the effort to stigmatize Israel.

Over the next several days, Front Page will publish profiles of individual chapters of the MSA on a variety of campuses around the country, showing how specifically they achieve the broad goals of the organization. – The Editors

As revealed in documents seized by the FBI and entered as evidence in a Texas court, the Muslim Students Association is a legacy project of the Muslim Brotherhood.[1] The Brotherhood is an organization formed by a Hitler-admiring Muslim named Hasan al-Bannain Egypt in 1928.[2] It was designed to function as the spearpoint of the Islamo-fascist movement and its crusade against the West.

The Brotherhood spawned al-Qaeda and Hamas.[3] Its doctrines make up the core of the terrorist jihad conducted by organizations such as Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Hamas and the government of Iran.[4] Its agendas have been clear since its creation: infiltration, subversion and global terror with world conquest as the goal.

…To establish one Islamic state of united Islamic countries, one nation under one leadership whose mission will be to reinforce adherence to the law of Allah...and the strengthening of the Islamic presence in the world arena....The goal...is the establishment of a world Islamic state.[5]

The first target was the “near enemy” – the Arab states that al-Banna and his followers felt had betrayed Islam. The United States – the “far enemy” – would not become a specific focus of the Brotherhood until many years later.

The organization’s aspirations for world dominion seemed like a fantasy until the Iranian revolution of 1979. But that event showed the jihadists that they could conquer and govern a state and use it as a base for Islamic revolution elsewhere. There was no doubt who the enemy was. The Iranian leader Ayatollah Khomeni coined the phrase “Great Satan” and “Little Satan” to demonize the United States and Israel and mark them for destruction.

“Destroying Western Civilization From Within”

A formal plan for targeting America was devised three years after the Iranian revolution, in 1982.[6]. The plan was summarized in a 1991 memorandum written by Mohamed Akram, an operative of the Muslim Brotherhood. “The process of settlement” of Muslims in America, Akram explained, “is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process.’” This means that members of the 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 God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”[7]

This memo surfaced in a Texas courtroom in the fall of 2007 after prosecutors introduced it as evidence in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation, once the largest Islamic charity in the United States.[8] The HLF was charged with funneling charitable donations to the jihad terrorists of the Islamic Resistance Movement, or Hamas, a Brotherhood organization that now controls the Gaza Strip. But the implications of this document go far beyond the Holy Land Foundation.

It is actually a blueprint for the subversion of American society, and the eventual imposition of Islamic law in the United States. This would mean an institutionalized oppression of women, homosexuals, and religious minorities; the end of freedom of speech and the freedom of conscience; and the replacement of democracy by theocracy.

U.S. authorities had been keeping an eye on Brotherhood operatives even before the memo surfaced. In 2001, U.S. officials accused Youssef Nada, a member of the organization, of funding terrorism.[9] Two years later, American investigators described Soliman Biheiri, a businessman in Virginia, as the Brotherhood’s U.S. “financial toehold.”

Surveying the Islamic organizations that existed in the U.S. in 1991, Mohamed Akram declared in his memo: “The big challenge that is ahead of us is how to turn these seeds or ‘scattered’ elements into comprehensive, stable, ‘settled’ organizations that are connected with our Movement and which fly in our orbit and take orders from our guidance.”

At the end of the document, Akram provided “a list of our organizations and the organizations of our friends” – apparently, those whom he believed were likewise dedicated to this great project of sabotaging the “miserable house” of American society. Surveying all these groups filled him with enthusiasm: “Imagine if they all march according to one plan!!!”[10]

Akram contemplated a network of many overlapping groups, with personnel that move from one to the other and hold positions in different organizations simultaneously—an arrangement that resembles the Communist Party’s creation of interlocking front groups during the Cold War and complicates the task of understanding and tracking the pattern of their activities.

The organizations Akram saw as advancing the Islamo-Fascist movement in America included, among many others, the Islamic Society of North America, the North American Islamic Trust, the Islamic Circle of North America, the International Institute for Islamic Thought, and the Islamic Association for Palestine – from which came the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) three years later. But perhaps the most important of these groups in terms of the long term infiltration and conquest the Brotherhood envisioned was The Muslim Students Association (MSA).

The Stealth Jihad of the MSA

Established in January 1963 at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, the Muslim Students Association of the United States and Canada, or MSA (also known as MSA National) currently has chapters on nearly 600 college campuses across North America.)[11] The relationship between MSA National and the individual university chapters is not a fixed hierarchy, but rather a loose connection. Thus the policies and views of the national organization may differ from those of some of the local chapters.) Stating that its mission is “to serve the best interest of Islam and Muslims in the United States and Canada so as to enable them to practice Islam as a complete way of life,”MSA is by far the most influential Islamic student organization in North America.[12]

Founded by members of the Muslim Brotherhood, MSA was named in Mohammed Akram’s 1991 memorandum as one of the Brotherhood’s likeminded “organizations of our friends” who shared the common goal of destroying America and turning it into a Muslim nation. These “friends” were described by the Brotherhood as groups that could help teach Muslims “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 ... so that ... God’s religion Islam is made victorious over all other religions.”[13]

From its inception, MSA had close links with the extremist Muslim World League, whose chapters’ websites have featured not only Osama bin Laden’s propaganda, but also publicity-recruiting campaigns for Wahhabi involvement with the Chechen insurgents in Russia. According to author and Islam expert Stephen Schwartz, MSA is a key lobbying organization for the Wahhabi sect of Islam.[14]

MSA solicited donations for the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, whose assets the U.S. government seized in December 2001 because that organization was giving financial support to the terrorist group Hamas. MSA also has strong ties to the World Assembly of Muslim Youth.[15]

Charging that U.S. foreign policy is driven by militaristic imperialism, MSA steadfastly opposes the American military incursions into both Afghanistan and Iraq.[16] The organization also follows the Arab propaganda line in the Middle East conflict and has condemned the anti-terrorist security fence that Israel has built in the West Bank as an illegal “apartheid wall” that violates the civil and human rights of Palestinians.

An influential member of the International ANSWER steering committee, MSA maintains a large presence at ANSWER-sponsored anti-war demonstrations.[17] The pro-North Korea, pro-Saddam Hussein ANSWER is a front organization of the Marxist-Leninist Workers World Party.[18]

Local chapters of MSA signed a February 20, 2002 document, composed by the radical group Refuse & Resist (a creation of the Revolutionary Communist Party’s) condemning military tribunals and the detention of immigrants apprehended in connection with post-9/11 terrorism investigations.[19] The document read, in part: “They the U.S. government are coming for the Arab, Muslim and South Asian immigrants. … The recent ‘disappearances,’ indefinite detention, the round-ups, the secret military tribunals, the denial of legal representation, evidence kept a secret from the accused, the denial of any due process for Arab, Muslim, South Asians and others, have chilling similarities to a police state.”[20]

MSA has strongly opposed the Patriot Act, which it describes as an “infamous” piece of legislation. The organization’s chapters across the United States have similarly denounced virtually every other national security initiative implemented by the U.S. government since the 9/11 attacks.

MSA chose not to endorse or participate in the May 14, 2005 “Free Muslims March Against Terror,” an event whose stated purpose was to “send a message to the terrorists and extremists that their days are numbered ... and to send a message to the people of the Middle East, the Muslim world and all people who seek freedom, democracy and peaceful coexistence that we support them.”[21]

But while it is possible to understand its political orientation from some of the positions it has taken on large national issues, the Muslim Students Association comes into sharper focus in the actions of the individual chapters that do its work every day on campuses across America. The following analysis of 18 separate campus chapters of MSA will make this clear.

To read "The MSA at UCLA," click here.

To read "The MSA at Berkeley," click here.

To read "The Muslim Student Union at UC Irvine," click here.

To read "The MSA at Brown," click here.

To read "The MSA at Columbia," click here.

To read "The MSA at Michigan State," click here.

To read "The MSA at Ohio State," click here.

To read "The MSA at Penn State," click here.

To read "The MSA at Queensborough Community College," click here.

To read "The MSA at Temple," click here.

To read "The MSA at UC Santa Barbara," click here.

To read "The MSA at U Penn," click here.

To read "The MSA at Wisconsin," click here.

To read "The MSA at Virginia Commonwealth University," click here.

To read "Harvard Islamic Society," click here.

To read "Johns Hopkins University Muslim Association," click here.

To read "The MSA at George Washington University," click here.

We are told by our leaders that Islam is the Religion of Peace, that we have nothing to fear and that our way of life is secure. Just ask the people of Great Britain if they feel safe and their way of life is secure.

We are in a war for our very way of life. For our rights and liberties. And the government that is suppose to protect and guarantee these rights are doing everything in their power to take them away.