Doc's Talk: The State Department's Poor Choices of Muslim Outreach Emissaries

Saturday, August 28, 2010

The State Department's Poor Choices of Muslim Outreach Emissaries

IPT News
http://www.investigativeproject.org/2140/the-state-departments-poor-choices-of-muslim

A terrorist plot to assassinate a prince, justification of suicide bombings using the Qur'an, and apologetics for the use of terrorist violence. Chances are, none of these brought "outreach" or "bridge-building" to mind. Yet, take the State Department's pick of individuals sent abroad to reach out to the international Muslim community, and this is what you get. The ongoing Middle East tour by Imam Feisal Rauf, the man behind the "Ground Zero Mosque," generated controversy because its $16,000 cost is financed by the State Department. As the IPT reported Monday, Rauf has said that the U.S. "has more Muslim blood on its hands than al Qaida has on its hand of innocent non Muslims." Rauf once noted that grievances don't justify acts of terrorism, but backpedaled, saying "How do you tell the people whose homes have been destroyed, whose lives have been destroyed, that this does not justify your actions of terrorism?"

Assistant Secretary of State P.J. Crowley explained in a briefing that the purpose of Rauf's current trip is to promote "international dialogue" and to "help people overseas understand the role that religion plays in our society." Rauf also made two trips in 2007 and one to Egypt earlier this year on behalf of the U.S. In an interview with IslamOnline, Rauf talked about his February 2010 trip which was described as a "tour to build bridges."

The State Department's record of choosing emissaries for such missions is spotty at best. Its courting of Abdurahman Alamoudi provides the most embarrassing example. According to documents obtained via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the State Department spent more than $40,000 dollars sending Alamoudi overseas between 1992 until 2001 as the face of American Muslims.

Not long afterwards, the U.S. government found that Alamoudi was working with two al Qaida linked individuals plotting to assassinate then-Saudi Prince Abdullah. Officials in the United Kingdom seized $340,000 from him when they stopped him at Heathrow Airport. In 2004, Alamoudi pleaded guilty to several charges related to this plot and was sentenced to 23 years in prison. U.S. Attorney Paul J. McNulty called Alamoudi's sentencing a "clear victory in the war against terrorism."

"Terrorists need money to operate, and the defendant was caught in the act of financing their deadly schemes," McNulty said.

After Alamoudi's 2005 sentencing, the U.S. Department of the Treasury designated the Movement for Islamic Reform in Arabia (MIRA) for its support of al Qaida. According to a government press release, the State Department's man, Alamoudi, had given $1 million to the U.K.-based Saudi organization.

Similarly, from the end of 2003 to the beginning of 2007, the State Department issued many grants for events featuring Imam Yahya Hendi across Africa, Europe and South Asia. Hendi spoke on various topics such as "Muslim Life in the U.S." and "Muslims in American Politics." In 2006, Hendi spoke on "Strengthening Moderate Islamic Voices in a Western [Society]," the FOIA records show.

In 2003, the same year Hendi was sent on his first trip abroad, he testified as a character witness on behalf of now convicted Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) supporter Sami Al-Arian. During questioning Hendi was asked whether suicide bombing operations are sanctioned by the Koran. Hendi answered, "Yes."

Likewise, just last month, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Michigan Executive Director Dawud Walid made his second trip to Bamako, Mali as part of a program funded by a State Department grant intended to lead to "sustained interaction" between the U.S. and Mali. CAIR was born out of the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), a Hamas support arm in the United States, and was listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation Hamas financing case which ended in all guilty verdicts in November of 2008.

In testimony, FBI agent Lara Burns cast CAIR as a front for Hamas. The FBI cut off communication with the group in 2008, citing HLF evidence that tied CAIR to Hamas.

While Walid made some positive comments about the U.S., he also used the trip as an opportunity to cast a shadow of suspicion around law enforcement and the FBI. Walid told his audience that "[s]ince the tragedy of September 11, 2001 American Muslims have been subjected to increased discrimination from racial and religious profiling by law enforcement."

Walid also made sure to criticize the shooting of Luqman Abdullah, a Detroit imam who was killed in an FBI raid last year after agents say he fired the first shots. At the Malian conference, Walid said that Abdullah was killed "during a raid by law enforcement agencies based upon an investigation of his mosque, which ended up proving no links to terrorism or treason." However, a criminal complaint places Abdullah as a "highly placed leader of a nationwide radical fundamentalist Sunni group" which aims to establish an Islamic state in America. It also noted that Abdullah preached offensive jihad and violence against law enforcement.

In a June 2007 khutbah, Walid responded to a survey which indicated that some Muslim American youth support suicide bombings. Rather than condemning those responses, Walid said:

"They're referring directly to what is going on overseas and the resistance and suicide bombings going on in Palestine, they're not talking about doing this here in America they're talking about overseas particularly in Palestine. But let me say this to you and to remind myself. Just because the people who oppress Muslims take certain means and do certain things that are totally unacceptable in our religion, and we feel like we have no other choice but to defend ourselves and this may be the only choice."

Other government travel has included people whose organizations are affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, an Egyptian-based movement that seeks to spread Islamic law throughout the world. Among them was current Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) President Zahid H. Bukhari - at a total cost to the taxpayers of over $60,000. From 2004-2007 Bukhari traveled to India, Pakistan, Portugal, Latvia, Russia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina, speaking on topics from "Black Muslim Roots in America" to "The Emergence and Development of Islamic Civilization." ICNA's ideology is based on that of Jamaat-e-Islami, a group which calls for an Islamist revolution and Islamic state in Pakistan. An introductory pamphlet for ICNA in the U.S. describes a similar goal, "to achieve the pleasure of Allah through the establishment of the Islamic system in this land."

The FOIA records also show that Mohamed Magid, Vice President of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), traveled to the Middle East in November of 2007 through the Citizen Exchange Program (CEP). That program is run by the Bureau of Education and Cultural Affairs of the U.S. State Department. Magid was an adviser for the Sterling Charitable Gift Fund, which was raided by the U.S. as part of the SAAR Network, a network of groups suspected of terrorist connections. A government affidavit stated that the Sterling Charitable Gift Fund was used for money laundering and terrorist financing.

In addition, Magid has downplayed the Darfur genocide, arguing during a 2004 Georgetown University forum that a fraction of the reported 50,000 people killed actually died:

"I think somebody made a mistake and put a zero, they had no problem. But what happened in this issue here, things escalated and people called it genocide. There is a fight, people have been displaced, people lost their homes and they need help but at the same time I want to say there is some kind of exaggeration of the some of the problems."

Like CAIR, ISNA was an unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF prosecution. It was listed among "entities who are and/or were members of the US Muslim Brotherhood."

Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) Executive Director Salam al-Marayati, who has called Hizbollah's violence "legitimate resistance," accepted an invitation from the State Department to travel to Europe in January 2010 to speak about religious freedom and free speech. Al-Marayati's organization has a long history of defending designated terrorist organizations and their supporters, opposing U.S. counterterrorism efforts, and espousing anti-Semitic rhetoric.

In addition to sponsoring trips abroad, the State Department has also coordinated meetings between American Muslim Brotherhood groups and several delegations coming to the U.S. Through the State Department's International Visitor Leadership Program (IVLP), at least six delegations visited CAIR from 2002-2007. In another instance, the State Department's IVLP program sponsored a visit by a Palestinian news crew in July of 2009 to the Brotherhood-affiliated Muslim American Society (MAS), in order to conduct interviews and discussions for a documentary to improve the attitudes of Palestinians toward U.S. policies and Americans.

The U.S. could find better candidates to travel abroad to represent U.S. Muslims. Contacting individuals with a black and white view on terrorism- that it is inexcusable in any form and should not be written off - would be a nice start.

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk