New Jersey: Top fed, state, county and local LEO’s meet with Islamic dawah group

This is to New Jersey what Obama’s failed, Muslim Brotherhood-run terror program is at a federal level. via Annual American Muslim Union brunch an opportunity for dialogue, bridge building – h/t Gary

As part of an ongoing outreach program, a few weeks ago New Jersey State Attorney General John Hoffman met with local Muslim leaders and discussed a controversial court ruling that angered many members of that community.

A federal district court judge in February had dismissed a civil rights lawsuit brought by eight Muslims over the New York Police Department’s secret surveillance of mosques and members of Islam in North Jersey, a case known as Hassan vs. City of New York.

Hoffman described some of the back and forth at the meeting on the court’s ruling when he addressed the American Muslim Union’s 17th Annual Brunch Sunday at Glenpointe Marriott in Teaneck.

“It was a very difficult discussion, a very emotional discussion, and a very charged discussion,” Hoffman said. “There were a lot of people angry over the decision.”

Nonetheless, the Attorney General’s Office – and its Muslim Outreach Committee — and New Jersey Islamic leaders weren’t sidestepping the tough issues, Hoffman said. They were having a direct dialog, were communicating and were building trust, Hoffman told the 400 attendees at the AMU event.

This year top federal, state, county and local law enforcement officials once again turned out in force for the brunch held by the AMU, a Paterson-based grass-roots organization led by President Mohamed Younes.

In the future, which of these LEO is going to question any of the Muslims or related groups he had lunch with at the mosque?

Part of the AMU’s mission is to educate the public about the Islam faith and build bridges with government agencies and elected officials.

Also known as Dawah – with the goal of converting non-Muslims to Islam.

Trust between law enforcement and Muslim Americans has been sorely tested since 9/11, with Islam groups objecting to what they consider illegal racial profiling.

What race is Islam?

U.S. Sen. Cory Booker also addressed the gathering, whose goal during the past few years has been to encourage North Jersey Muslims to vote and get involved in politics, to put up and elect candidates that will represent their community.

This year’s Sunday activities were special because about six months ago Younes asked Bergen County Prosecutor John Molinelli to organize a private meeting before the brunch between North Jersey county prosecutors and local Muslim leaders.

There were about 30 people at that meeting, including not only Molinelli but Passaic County Prosecutor Camelia Valdes, Morris County Acting Prosecutor Fredric Knapp, Union County Acting Prosecutor Grace Park and Essex County First Assistant Prosecutor Robert Laurino, Molinelli said. Many of them brought their chiefs of detectives, he added, all to help lay the groundwork for a relationship with Muslims.

“It can’t be a reactive thing,” Molinelli said. “You can’t wait for a crisis.”

At the actual brunch one speaker, New Jersey Director of Homeland Security and Preparedness Edward Dickson, said that his office had formed its own outreach initiative, the Interfaith Advisory Council, to build bridges with Muslim, Jewish, Sikh and Coptic Orthodox groups.

Only Jewish, Sikh and Coptic groups are no threat. The only religious threat is from Islam.

The article goes on for a quite a while. You won’t find such detail on the hundreds of crimes or rampant corruption occurring daily in Jersey – including crimes committed by Muslims. But this infiltration and propaganda…this is worthy. Creeping Sharia has shown repeatedly that the crisis has already begun in New Jersey:

PS: It started when Chris Christie was US attorney and has only ramped up under his “leadership,” including the fraud: Chris Christie appoints Islamist convicted of credit card fraud to Muslim outreach committee.

Islamists Behind Obama’s Terrorism Doctrine

Or lack thereof. An excerpt from Rich Swier’s An Analysis of President Obama’s Terrorism Doctrine: “Countering Violent Extremism Strategy” – highlights just how far gone things are under Obama. Some of these folks had already infiltrated the oval office during previous administrations.

On August 3, 2011 President Obama released the National Strategy on Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism. The strategy, now known as the Obama Doctrine, was based upon the Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) study group findings and recommendation developed in 2010 by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The CVE has become the blueprint for both domestic and foreign policy when dealing with terrorism. The Obama Doctrine redefined “terrorism” as “violent extremism”.

Who developed the Obama Doctrine?

The Obama Doctrine is based in large part upon the 2010 findings and recommendations of a Department of Homeland Security’s Advisory Council. The twenty member advisory council is unique in its composition, with eight members who are Islamists, three representing large Islamic communities and one openly supportive of Islam.

Islamist members included: Nimco Ahmed, Policy Aide, Vice-President of the Minneapolis City Council, Omar Alomari Community Engagement Officer, Ohio Homeland Security, Asli Bali Acting Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law, Mohamed Elibiary President and CEO, The Freedom and Justice Foundation, Amin Kosseim Deputy Inspector, New York City Police Department, Imam Mohamed Magid Executive Director, All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS Center), Asim Rehman President, Muslim Bar Association of New York and Dalia Mogahed Senior Analyst and Executive Director, Gallup Center for Muslim Studies

Members from predominantly Islamist communities included: Michael Downing Deputy Chief, Commanding Officer, Counter Terrorism and Criminal Intelligence Bureau, Los Angeles Police Department and Ronald Haddad Chief of Police, Dearborn Police Department. Richard Cohen President and CEO, Southern Poverty Law Center, was a pro-Islamist council member. Pro-Islamist subject matter experts advising the council included: Arif Alikhan Assistant Secretary, Policy Development, DHS and Laurie Wood, Analyst, Southern Poverty Law Center/Instructor, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center.

Read it all for more details on the named individuals, many from Muslim Brotherhood entities. More info on most can be found by using the search box (upper right) as well.

A few links on sharia-abetting LEO’s Michael Downing and Ron Haddad.

If that’s not enough, here’s what Egyptian magazine Rose El-Youssef reported: Muslim Brotherhood Infiltrates Obama Administration:

Alikhan is a founder of the World Islamic Organization, which the magazine identifies as a Brotherhood “subsidiary.” It suggests that Alikhan was responsible for the “file of Islamic states” in the White House and that he provides the direct link between the Obama administration and the Arab Spring revolutions of 2011.

Elibiary, who has endorsed the ideas of radical Muslim Brotherhood luminary Sayyid Qutb, may have leaked secret materials contained in Department of Homeland Security databases, according to the magazine. He, however, denies having any connection with the Brotherhood.

Elibiary also played a role in defining the Obama administration’s counterterrorism strategy, and the magazine asserts that Elibiary wrote the speech Obama gave when he told former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to leave power but offers no source or evidence for the claim.

Magid heads ISNA, which was founded by Brotherhood members, was appointed by Obama in 2011 as an adviser to the Department of Homeland Security. The magazine says that has also given speeches and conferences on American Middle East policy at the State Department and offered advice to the FBI.

Islam’s contribution to America: Snipers, Black Hawks, F-16′s, lockdowns & mass spying at Super Bowl

via Super Bowl Snipers – My9 New Jersey. h/t Drudge

East Rutherford, New Jersey (My9NJ) – Along with excited and eager fans, SWAT teams and Snipers will be attending Super Bowl XLVIII. The reason for such high precautions is because the Super Bowl is a level one national security event.

Former FBI agent Jonathan Gilliam explains how snipers work in coordination with SWAT teams to give the fans and players ultimate safety.

“If you have an active shooter or you have anyone who may have a bomb. Snipers have a better angle then anyone who is on the ground to actually hit that target. It’s an entire team that communicates. You have individuals who are at high altitudes inside the arena and then you have individuals that are on the ground moving in and around the crowd,” he explained.

via No-fly zone over MetLife Stadium

The skies above and around MetLife Stadium will be in a no-fly zone on Super Bowl Sunday.

The first level of defense will be provided by Black Hawk helicopters with U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The unarmed helos will serve as the eyes in the sky.

Customs & Border protection will fly Black Hawks over the Super Bowl in New Jersey but can’t protect our borders from Mexico?

And if a hostile aircraft enters restricted air space near MetLife stadium, New Jersey Air National Guard F-16s based in Atlantic City will be scrambled.

More fear-mongering and martial law-like activities: Attack on mass transit seen as top Super Bowl security risk

Security screening will start at train stations, where fans will not be able to board stadium-bound trains or buses without tickets to the game, officials said.

Or without passing through a security checkpoint manned by TSA agents.

The stadium is located about 10 miles west of New York City, the site of the September 11, 2001, attacks. It has been locked down all week, and authorities are scanning all vehicles that go in, a practice that will continue on game day, officials said.

Bratton noted that New York police were using extensive intelligence-gathering operations developed since the World Trade Center attack to watch for possible threats.

At an undisclosed location near the stadium, officials from some 100 security agencies are monitoring feeds related to security concerns 24 hours a day, Fuentes said.

Tom Nolan, chairman of the criminal justice department at the State University of New York in Plattsburgh. “You have to accept some degree of risk and you have to accept a new level of intrusion into your privacy.”

We should never accept any level of intrusion that is neither legal nor Constitutional and certainly not from totalitarian authorities who are afraid to even utter the words Islam or jihad. The Tom Nolan’s are the real Islamophobes and the military industrial complex and psychopaths who profit from it maximize this fear to submit us all.

That said, there is a desperation in the air, Obama and team have promised “action” so beware a false flag to further strip Americans of their rights.


Thanks to Islam, purses, seat cushions, coolers banned from NFL games

Thanks to Islam, Kentucky Derby a virtual police state

All major league ballparks will require metal detector screening by 2015 season

Pakistani Muslim Agrees: Muslim Immigration a Bad Idea

An interesting post via

By Patrick Cleburne

A blogger associated with the Pakistani newspaper The Express Tribune has published an impressively honest comment on Europe’s reaction to the North African refugee threat: Muslim immigrants: A cold shoulder for a bad reputation by Aarish Jamil April 16 2011

After a clear summary of the reluctance of Italy’s EU partners to take a portion of the recent influx, he concludes

“I feel that as Muslims, we have ourselves to blame for being so corrupt and deceiving that no one wants to give us refuge, even during dire situations.

Muslim communities in European countries have always had a huge share in illegal activities. Another important factor for reluctance is the burden that immigrants can be on the economy. More people are losing jobs in these countries and it will be difficult for the government to provide a means of income for everyone.

Let’s face it, as Pakistanis, we are not ready to take in Afghan immigrants because of the worsening law and order situation and the impact that an influx would have on our economy.

We can’t blame the Europeans for sharing the same concerns.”

In other words, he sympathizes with the reasons The Australian’s Foreign Editor Greg Sheridan publicly called for a halt to Muslim immigration into his country.

As I write this, most of the comments appear to have been posted by Pakistanis. Generally they are remarkably approving. A particularly interesting one was posted by “Hassan”

“Muslim immigration story follows a familiar pattern and it is really eye-opening.

First muslims, mostly labourers, electricians and plumbers and other manual workers, land in as immigrants. They all live in a mohalla together. They keep to themselves, not mingling with the people of the host country. Other country men think, ‘hey, they are harmless people minding their own business’. So far, good.

Now, the number of people in mohalla swell up and there is a need for a mosque. Government thinks, ‘hey, they are harmless people, let’s allot some land and let them have their prayer rooms. They mind their own business, they have strange customs these nice immigrants’ !! So far, so good.

Now, the numbers swell up more, as the mosque means more immigrations. Mullahs, his relatives, more collateral immigration from other muslim countries. Segregated schools, more teachers, more doctors and engineers. People now want halal food and they hate the food of their host country. Government says, ‘hey, they are harmless guys, so let them have halal food, what the heck’ !!

Halal food means more immigration from other muslim countries. The number of faithful swells up and now there is demand for more mosques and more land. Government says, ‘hmmm, they looked harmless before, so why not’…they allot land or sell land for more mosques.

More mosques, mean more mullahs and more collateral immigration and the numbers are much more. Now the faithful don’t like the people of host country wandering near their mohalla in haraam dresses. Whatever the host countrymen do, it is disrespectful of the religious practices. The faithful object to their women, object to their songs and dances and their culture, and object to their history and object to their education.

Now that the immigration have achieved the critical mass, they now vehemently object to the very way of life in the host country that attracted them in the first place.

At this point, immigrants step up their demands: ‘we don’t like the laws of your country, so can we have our own shariah please?”

Government of the host country wakes up, and now tells the immigrants; ‘hey, we allowed you in because we took pity on you, you can’t do this to us.’

But, alas, it is too late. Now the Ummah steps in.
Ummah says, ‘If you do or say anything against our community, you should be prepared for the consequences !!’

Government of the host country is concerned but it can’t show its face of fear. But the countrymen are scared. And if they say anything about why they are scared, they run the risk of being called Racist or Islamaphobist etc…So they’re forced to take a stand.

The stand of telling the immigrants, hey, this is where we draw the line….I guess France is at this point now…”

Europe and Australia are well along in this process. Already Somalis make it relevant to America. And the Treason Lobby…

Note: This was written in 2011.

In 2014, the Treason Lobby are Republican elected officials who are planning to grant amnesty and citizenship to 30 million illegal aliens and increase (Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, et al) so-called legal immigration, as well as the New DHS Chief who says Illegals Have Earned Citizenship.

The American people are smart enough to know that immigration is not a priority (enforcement is however) and rank it near the bottom, even in left-leaning NBC polling.


FOIA: State Dept Waived U.S. Airport Inspections for Muslim Brotherhood


via IPT Exclusive: Records Prove MB Delegates Skipped Airport Inspections

Newly released records confirm a 2012 Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) report that the State Department cleared the way for a visiting delegation of Muslim Brotherhood officials to enter the country without undergoing routine inspection by U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents.

The April 2012 visit came before the Muslim Brotherhood’s candidate was elected Egypt’s president, although the Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) had won a plurality of seats in parliamentary elections. The expedited entry is known as a “port courtesy” normally reserved for high-ranking visiting government officials and dignitaries.

The records, marked “sensitive but unclassified,” were obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. They offer few details. The State Department released a one-page document labeled “Compiled References to MB Delegation Arrival and Departure” containing four separate communications between March 30 and April 16, 2012 about the Brotherhood delegation. It is not clear who wrote them or who received them.

“In the coming days, we’re going to write down a list of procedures for dealing with MB visits to the United States,” an April 16, 2012 entry says.

A March 30 communication offers help dealing with “FJP Delegation and POE [port of entry] Courtesies: Please let the desk know over the weekend if you’d like our help submitting to DHS the ‘Special Alerts,’ which are used to request that travelers not be pulled into secondary [inspection] upon arrival at a point of entry.”

But one member of the Brotherhood delegation, which met with U.S. academic and senior government officials, had been linked to a child pornography investigation in the United States years earlier. Under normal circumstances, he likely would have been subjected to extra scrutiny.

The records released do not address that issue. They do, however, report that “The MB/FJP delegation’s scheduler reported that their arrival at JFK on Saturday went very smoothly.”

And the official in question, Abdul Mawgoud Dardery, traveled separately and was escorted through security checks in Minneapolis and New York’s John F. Kennedy Airport “In response to a request from the MB … We did not hear anything further from the MB so we assume to departure went smoothly,” the records show.

In addition, the Muslim Brotherhood has open connections with Hamas, the Palestinian terrorist group which was created to be the Brotherhood’s Palestinian jihadist wing. That fact would have made a secondary inspection for the delegation a natural, if not for the State Department’s instructions.

A U.S. official familiar with immigration procedures told the IPT in 2012 that the exemption for the Brotherhood delegation was “extraordinary.”

Full report at The Investigative Project on Terrorism.

Flashback,  Creeping Sharia 2009: Obama embracing and legitimizing the Muslim Brotherhood

High-ranking Defense Dept officials pressured to fire anti-Muslim Brotherhood people

According to these excerpts from By Prof. Barry Rubin. h/t Counter Jihad

via You Still Don’t Understand Islamism, Do You?

Around 2007, I gave a lecture at the Defense Department. One of the attendees presented a scenario suggesting that the “problem of Islam” was not political but a problem of verbiage.

There was a secret debate happening in the Defense Department and the CIA in which some people thought that all Muslims were a problem, some believed that only al-Qa’ida was a problem, and still others thought the Muslim Brotherhood was a problem.

The main problem, however, was that all Islamism was a political threat, but it was the second position that eventually won over the Obama administration. Take note of this, since 2009, if you wanted to build your career and win policy debates, only al-Qa’ida was a problem. The Muslim Brotherhood was not a threat; after all, it did not participate in September 11. This view was well known in policy circles, but it was easy to mistake this growing hegemony as temporary.

Actually, it only got worse.

A Muslim Foreign Service officer recounted how some U.S. officials were trying to persuade the powers that be that al-Qa’ida was split from the Muslim Brotherhood. Imagine how horrified he was. Still other officials told me that there was heavy pressure and there were well-financed lobbyists trying to force officials into the idea that al-Qa’ida was the only problem. Some high-ranking defense department officials–for example, one on the secretary of defense’s level–were pressured to fire anti-Muslim Brotherhood people. I know of at least five such incidences.

For example, I was asked to participate in a contract and co-direct a project for the federal government, and my paper was to be on the idea that all Islamists posed a threat. To my surprise, I was told that my paper was rejected. Shocked, I asked to speak to the two co-contractors on the telephone. Isn’t it true, I said on the phone, that I was to have co-direction of this project? The response was yes it was, nevertheless, a more junior member of the press could not prevail. By the way, this co-director, who likely became interested in the Middle East in large part because of me, was very rude. I then told him that though the project had originally been my idea, I was going to walk away from it and not demand compensation.

In another incident, a high-ranking CIA official posited a paper that the Muslim Brotherhood was not a threat, only al-Qa’ida was, and U.S. policy should therefore depend on the Brotherhood.

In another case, a U.S. official made a statement at a public function that neither Hizballah nor Hamas posed a threat to U.S. interests.

By 2013, this sprouted in a few people’s arguments that Iran could be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. The theoretical situation to government officials was thus clear: If you wanted to make some money in Washington, you would have to toe the line that the Muslim Brotherhood was not a threat. If sanctions ended against the Muslim Brotherhood or Islamists, including Iran, this could also lead to trillions of dollars in potential trade deals.

Jihad in America: The Grand Deception – Part 2

Video via Sun News. Why hasn’t CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC or Fox shown it? Or PBS – who aired the original two decades ago?

Part I

*As we’ve seen before with the likes of Glen Beck, Clarion and others, it looks like the maker’s of the film (Steve Emerson) are more concerned with selling DVD’s than informing American citizens of any threat.

Muslim DHS adviser claims US “an Islamic country with an Islamically compliant constitution”


Taunting Americans with no fear that DHS might rein him in or drop him. Obama’s got his back.  h/t Jihad Watch who notes:

This recalls Obama saying: “If you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we’d be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world.”

Anyone still want to claim we aren’t being infiltrated and that Muslims living in the U.S. want sharia law?

This guy should be in jail for accessing and leaking classified information and interfering in an election.

After Benghazi attack, Obama to let Libyans come to US, train for ‘Flight Operations,’ ‘Nuclear-Related Fields’

via DHS Plan: Let Libyans Train Here for ‘Flight Operations,’ ‘Nuclear-Related Fields’ | CNS News.

A draft regulation by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) would lift a 30-year-ban on Libyan nationals coming to the United States to work or train in “aviation maintenance, flight operations, or nuclear-related fields.”

The 11-page proposed rule was obtained by Reps. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) and Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah).

In a statement on his congressional website, Rep. Chaffetz said that the draft final regulation could take effect without prior notice and comment. The congressmen say the prohibition was put in place in the 1980s after the wave of terrorist incidents involving Libyans.

“The administration justifies lifting this ban by claiming that the United States’ relationship with Libya has been ‘normalized,’” the statement said.

But the congressmen also say, “the terror threat continues and numerous news reports document recent terror-related stories coming from Libya. And just over a year ago the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was attacked, which resulted in the death of four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens.”

The draft regulation is currently entitled, “Rescinding Suspension of Enrollment for Certain F and M Nonimmigrant Students from Libya and Third Country Nationals Acting on Behalf of Libyan Entities.”

In its summary, the proposed rule states: “The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is amending its regulations by rescinding the regulatory provisions promulgated in 1983 that terminated the nonimmigrant status and barred the granting of certain immigration benefits to Libyan nationals and foreign nationals acting on behalf of Libyan entities who are engaging in or seeking to obtain studies or training in aviation maintenance, flight operations, or nuclear-related fields.”

“The United States and the Government of Libya have normalized their relationship and most of the restrictions and sanctions imposed by the United States and the United Nations toward Libya have been lifted,” the rule reads. “Therefore, DHS, after consultation with the Department of State and the Department of Defense, is rescinding the restrictions that deny nonimmigrant status and benefits to a specific group of Libyan nationals.”

A House Judiciary Committee source said the document is an “internal draft regulation” and is not final yet, and was obtained by Reps. Chaffetz and Goodlatte. It is not known yet when DHS, formerly headed by Secretary Janet Napolitano — and now awaiting a new leader — will officially issue the regulation.

Libyan nationals who want to come to America to study aviation or nuclear science would have to undergo the “Visas Mantis” security clearance, reads the regulation, and be subject to Transportation Security Administration (TSA) security-threat assessments.

Goodlatte, in a statement on Chaffetz’s website, said, “Just over a year ago, four Americans were killed in the pre-planned terrorist attacks on the American Consulate in Benghazi.  We still haven’t gotten to the bottom of the Benghazi terrorist attacks and continue to face additional terrorist threats from Libya, yet the Obama Administration is preparing to lift a longstanding ban that protects Americans and our interests.”

Chaffetz said, “It is unbelievable that this administration would again put Americans in harm’s way by lifting a decades old security ban on a country that has become a hotbed of terrorist activity. We must work with the Libyans to build mutual trust that ensures safety and prosperity for both countries to enjoy.”

Judicial Watch, a government watchdog organization based in Washington, D.C., commented, “It’s incomprehensible that the U.S. government is even considering reversing the longstanding policy banning Libyans from working or training in areas so crucial to national security.”

According to the 9/11 Commission Report, 4 of the 19 terrorists who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks received flight training at U.S. flight schools. Those terrorists were Hani Hanjour, Ziad Jarah, Mohammed Atta and Marwan al Shehhi.

Inquiries by telephone and e-mail from to DHS for comment were not answered before this story was published.

How the Terrorists Get In

In light of today’s earlier post, via How the Terrorists Get In | Center for Immigration Studies.

By Steven A. Camarota

In the wake of September 11, some observers have emphasized the mismanagement of temporary visas, such as those issued to students and tourists, because all of the 19 hijackers were originally allowed into the country on temporary visas. Others have argued that there is a problem with illegal immigration, because at least three of the hijackers – four if Zacarias Moussaoui, who the U.S. government claims was the intended twentieth hijacker, is included – had overstayed their visas and were illegal aliens at the time of the attacks. But in fact the danger cannot be isolated to one type of immigration. Foreign-born Islamic terrorists have used almost every conceivable means of entering the country over the last decade. They have come as students, tourists, and business visitors. They have also been lawful permanent residents (LPRs) and naturalized U.S. citizens. They have sneaked across the border illegally, arrived as stowaways on ships, used false passports, or been granted amnesty. Terrorists have even exploited America’s humanitarian tradition of welcoming those seeking asylum. At the time they committed their crimes, 16 of the 48 terrorists considered in this analysis were on temporary visas (primarily tourist visas); another 17 were lawful permanent residents or naturalized U.S. citizens; 12 were illegal aliens; and 3 of the 48 had applications for asylum pending.

Even some government officials have mistakenly singled out one type of immigration as the source of the problem. During testimony before the immigration subcommittee in the Senate shortly after the September attacks, INS commissioner James Ziglar stated, “Immigrants are not terrorists…. The people that we are talking about, the hijackers, they weren’t immigrants. They were nonimmigrants.” While it is certainly true that the September 11 hijackers entered the country using nonimmigrant visas (also called temporary visas), the commissioner is incorrect if his comments were meant to indicate that permanent residents are not a source of terrorism. In fact, prior to September 11, most foreign terrorists were LPRs or nationalized U.S. citizens. Excluding the hijackers, more than half (17 out of 28) of the foreign-born Islamic terrorists in the last decade were persons living legally in the United States as permanent residents or as naturalized citizens.

Indeed, some of the worst foreign terrorists have been naturalized citizens. For example, El Sayyid Nosair, who assassinated Rabbi Meir Kahane in 1990, was one of the first militant Islamic terrorists to strike in the United States. A naturalized U.S. citizen, he was later convicted as a member of the larger conspiracy to bomb landmarks around New York City. Nidal Ayyad, a chemical engineer who provided the explosive expertise for the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993, was also a naturalized U.S. citizen. So too were Egyptian-born Ali Mohammed, who is widely regarded as having written al Qaeda’s terrorist handbook, and Khalid Abu al Dahab, who has been described as “a one-man communications hub” for shuttling money and fake passports to terrorists around the world from his California apartment.

Lawful permanent residents (also known as green-card holders) have also played an integral role in terrorism. In all, 11 LPRs have been convicted or pled guilty to terrorist activities. These include Mahmud Abouhalima, one of the leaders of the first World Trade Center bombing, who became a legal resident after falsely claiming to be an agricultural worker, allowing him to qualify for a green card as part of the 1986 amnesty. Another LPR was Mohammed Saleh, who provided the money and the fuel oil needed to create the bombs for the massive terrorist plot targeting landmarks around New York City in the summer of 1993. The ringleader of this plot, Siddig Ibrahim Siddig Ali, was also a legal permanent resident.

The nation’s humanitarian tradition of offering refuge to those fleeing persecution has also been exploited by a number of terrorists. Three of them had asylum claims pending when they committed their crimes. Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman used an asylum application to prevent his deportation to Egypt after all other means of remaining in the country had failed. Rahman inspired both the first World Trade Center attack and the plot to bomb New York City landmarks. Moreover, he is widely considered to be one of the spiritual leaders whose ideas helped to found al Qaeda. Mir Aimal Kansi, who murdered two CIA employees in 1993, and Ramzi Yousef, who was sentenced to death for masterminding the first attack on the World Trade Center, both had applications for political asylum pending.

While most foreign-born terrorists were in the country legally, either as temporary visitors, lawful permanent residents, or naturalized citizens, illegal aliens have also taken part in almost every major terrorist attack on American soil, including the first attack on the World Trade Center, the Millennium plot, the plot to bomb the Brooklyn subway system, and the attacks of September 11. Of the 48 Islamic terrorists in the last decade, 12 were in the country illegally when they committed their crimes. (It may also be more accurate to include asylum applicants in the category of illegal aliens, because all of the three terrorists discussed above had no legal basis for being in the United States and were awaiting the outcome of the asylum process.) Altogether, 19 foreign terrorists over the last decade were either illegal aliens at the time they engaged in terrorism or had lived in the United States illegally for an extended period before they committed their crimes.

How did all these terrorists get into the country? The plain fact is that they exploited weaknesses in nearly every part of the U.S. immigration system, from its visa-processing operations overseas, to control of the border and ports of entry, to green-card issuance. An examination of these problems reveals inadequate vetting of visa applicants, lack of cooperation among U.S. agencies and between the United States and foreign governments, failure to adequately police the borders, and a complete lack of interior enforcement.

In a very real sense, Foreign Service officers are America’s other border patrol. It is they who determine, in most cases, who is allowed into the country. Of the 48 terrorists considered here, 41 had at some point been approved for a visa by an American consulate overseas. Though we cannot expect that in every case the visa-processing system will quickly identify the terrorist applicant and prevent him from getting a visa, the fact that so many terrorists made it through certainly suggests that there are significant problems in the system.

That was excerpted from an article written in September 2002. Not much has changed since, in fact, “We have become an approval machine,” says U.S. immigration services union president.

Pressure from the Obama administration to rubber-stamp citizenship applicants and the failure of the Department of Homeland Security to properly train personnel and give them the tools to vet those applications have jeopardized U.S. national security, federal law enforcement officials and a Homeland Security union leader told TheBlaze.

More from CIS: Keeping Terror Out: Immigration Policy and Asymmetric Warfare

Our enemies have repeatedly exercised this option of inserting terrorists by exploiting weaknesses in our immigration system. A Center for Immigration Studies analysis of the immigration histories of the 48 foreign-born Al-Qaeda operatives who committed crimes in the United States from 1993 to 2001 (including the 9/11 hijackers) found that nearly every element of the immigration system has been penetrated by the enemy.2 Of the 48, one-third were here on various temporary visas, another third were legal residents or naturalized citizens, one-fourth were illegal aliens, and the remainder had pending asylum applications. Nearly half of the total had, at some point or another, violated existing immigration laws.

Supporters of loose borders deny that inadequate immigration control is a problem, usually pointing to flawed intelligence as the most important shortcoming that needs to be addressed. Mary Ryan, for example, former head of the State Department’s Bureau of Consular Affairs (which issues visas), testified in January 2004 before the 9/11 Commission that

“Even under the best immigration controls, most of the September 11 terrorists would still be admitted to the United States today . . . because they had no criminal records, or known terrorist connections, and had not been identified by intelligence methods for special scrutiny.”

But this turns out to be untrue, both for the hijackers and for earlier Al-Qaeda operatives in the United States. A normal level of visa scrutiny, for instance, would have excluded almost all the hijackers. Investigative reporter Joel Mowbray acquired copies of 15 of the 19 hijackers’ visa applications (the other four were destroyed – yes, destroyed – by the State Department), and every one of the half-dozen current and former consular officers he consulted said every application should have been rejected on its face.3 Every application was incomplete or contained patently inadequate or absurd answers.

Even if the applications had been properly prepared, many of the hijackers, including Mohammed Atta and several others, were young, single, and had little income – precisely the kind of person likely to overstay his visa and become an illegal alien, and thus the kind of applicant who should be rejected. And, conveniently, those least likely to overstay their visas – older people with close family, property, and other commitments in their home countries – are also the very people least likely to commit suicide attacks.

9/11 was not the only terrorist plot to benefit from lax enforcement of ordinary immigration controls – every major Al-Qaeda attack or conspiracy in the United States has involved at least one terrorist who violated immigration law. Gazi Ibrahim Abu Mezer, for example, who was part of the plot to bomb the Brooklyn subway, was actually caught three times by the Border Patrol trying to sneak in from Canada. The third time the Canadians would not take him back. What did we do? Because of a lack of detention space, he was simply released into the country and told to show up for his deportation hearing. After all, with so many millions of illegal aliens here already, how much harm could one more do?

Another example is Mohammed Salameh, who rented the truck in the first World Trade Center bombing. He should never have been granted a visa in the first place. When he applied for a tourist visa he was young, single, and had no income and, in the event, did indeed end up remaining illegally. And when his application for a green card under the 1986 illegal-alien amnesty was rejected, there was (and remains today) no way to detain and remove rejected green-card applicants, so he simply remained living and working in the United States, none the worse for wear. The same was true of Hesham Mohamed Hadayet, who murdered two people at the El Al counter at Los Angeles International Airport on July 4, 2002 – he was a visa overstayer whose asylum claim was rejected. Yet with no mechanism to remove him, he remained and, with his wife, continued to apply for the visa lottery until she won and procured green cards for both of them.

Ordinary immigration enforcement actually has kept out several terrorists that we know of. A vigilant inspector in Washington State stopped Ahmed Ressam because of nervous behavior, and a search of his car uncovered a trunk full of explosives, apparently intended for an attack on Los Angeles International Airport. Ramzi Binalshibh, one of the candidates for the label of “20th hijacker,” was rejected four times for a visa, not because of concerns about terrorism but rather, according to a U.S. embassy source, “for the most ordinary of reasons, the same reasons most people are refused.” That is, he was thought likely to overstay his visa and become an illegal alien. And Mohamed Al-Qahtani, another one of the “20th hijacker” candidates, was turned away by an airport inspector in Orlando because he had no return ticket and no hotel reservations, and he refused to identify the friend who was supposed to help him on his trip.

Circa 2004. Again, if anything has changed, it’s been for the worse and the worst is yet to come. Full amnesty for illegals and essentially – open borders.

DHS Muslim advisor supports convicted terrorist fundraiser

via Charles C. Johnson of The Daily Caller

A senior advisor to the Department of Homeland Security is an old friend of  an activist who was convicted in 2008 of financing the terrorist organization Hamas.

In an interview with The Daily Caller, Mohamed Elibiary, a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council, reiterated claims he made this summer that former Holy Land Foundation president and CEO Shukri Abu Baker is innocent and a victim of political persecution.

Elibiary, who in his position on the council has regular access to classified information, also said the United States insults Muslim dignity and compared the Muslim Brotherhood to American evangelicals.

Elibiary confirmed to journalist Ryan Mauro of the ClarionProject in August that he is a longtime friend of Baker. Mauro’s interview can be read at the Center for Security Policy.

Baker and four other officials of the closed Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development were convicted of using the charity to finance Hamas in 2008. It was the largest terrorism financing trial in U.S. history. Federal prosecutors described the Foundation, which was closed by the U.S. government in 2001, as an entity of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.

The Muslim activist has never disguised his support for Muslim Brotherhood extremism. In a 2006 letter to the Morning News, he defended the fanatically anti-American early Brotherhood leader and theorist Sayyid Qutb, stating, “I’d recommend everyone read Qutb, but read him with an eye to improving America not just to be jealous with malice in our hearts.”

“If you ever wondered why the Obama Administration believes that the Muslim Brotherhood is a moderate force for good and partners with known U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entities, this interview with Mr. Elibiary helps us find an answer,” Mauro said.

Mauro writes that Elibiary was instrumental in promoting DHS’s guidelines “Countering Violent Extremism Dos and Don’ts,” which Mauro says “essentially prevent law enforcement from learning about the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood or being trained in its doctrine.”

Read it all and take the time to read the paper linked below.

Ryan Mauro: A Window on the Muslim Brotherhood in America: An Annotated Interview with DHS Advisor Mohamed Elibiary | Center for Security Policy Occasional Paper Series | October 1, 2013  (PDF 37 pages, 457KB)

So, again it’s worth asking, Why isn’t this Muslim tax scofflaw who leaked DHS documents under investigation?

FBI’s rogue L.A. field office has a Muslim mole

via FBI’s rogue L.A. field office has Muslim mole.

The FBI field office that defied clear and direct orders from Washington headquarters to “cease contact” with a terrorist front group at the same time allowed a Muslim agent investigated for compromising a major terrorism case to remain on the squad, WND has learned.

After the FBI banned the Council on American-Islamic Relations from its counterterror outreach programs in response to evidence the group fronts for the Muslim Brotherhood and its Palestinian terrorist branch Hamas, the FBI’s Los Angeles field office liaisoned with CAIR in violation of official policy, according to a just-released report by the Justice Department’s inspector general.

Several directives sent from FBI headquarters required all of the bureau’s field offices to “cease contact with CAIR as an organization,” yet the L.A. office refused to comply with the command and even sent out an internal email advising personnel to ignore it.

GOP Rep. Frank Wolf, whose House judiciary subcommittee oversees the FBI’s budget, wants officials there fired.

“This is insubordinate behavior,” Wolf wrote the FBI director. “The findings in this report suggest the FBI may have a systemic problem.”

In fact, that same rogue L.A. field office happens to employ Muslim agents sympathetic to CAIR – including an Egyptian-American agent investigated for allegedly compromising a national counterterror probe that involved cells in Los Angeles, New York and Boston.

The Muslim FBI agent in Los Angeles allegedly tipped off the ringleader of a Pakistani-based terror cell that the local Joint Terrorism Task Force had it under surveillance for more than two years.

According to law enforcement officials attached to the multi-agency JTTF in Los Angeles, the “dirty” agent was a family friend of the counterterrorism target, who trained dozens of young Muslim men for jihad at his mosque in the Los Angeles suburbs while arranging for more advanced training for the jihadists at Taliban-run camps in Pakistan.

Allegedly, the agent not only alerted the suspect to “trash covers” performed outside his home by investigators, but also identified surveillance vehicles for him.

Despite compromising this and other investigations and betraying fellow law enforcement officers, the agent was allowed to stay on the job following a bureau reprimand.

CAIR, whose leaders and founders have been tied to Hamas, have enjoyed untold access to this same Los Angeles office, even as CAIR remains an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terror finance case in U.S. history.

The recent Los Angeles scandal, which was first reported in the bestselling book, “Muslim Mafia,” is similar to an internal security breach that took place a few years ago at the Fairfax County, Va., Police Department, which is a key member of the Washington-based JTTF.

Former FCPD Sgt. Mohammad Weiss Rasool tipped off a Muslim suspect under investigation for terrorism about FBI surveillance. He illegally searched a federal police database to ID the unmarked cars tailing his Muslim friend. He also alerted him to a planned raid on his house. The suspect, in turn, destroyed incriminating evidence as agents moved in.

Rasool was CAIR’s representative on the police force. As he was spying for the enemy and obstructing federal investigations, he met privately with CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad at CAIR’s headquarters in Washington, according to “Muslim Mafia.”

In 2008, Rasool was convicted of breaching the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database at least 15 times to alert fellow Muslims under surveillance.

“He was their plant,” a FCPD official said. “We were convinced he was recruited by the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Another Egyptian-born FBI agent and suspected Muslim Brotherhood “plant” – Gamal Abdel-Hafiz – aided a Muslim Brotherhood leader suspected of terrorism. Not long after 9/11, Abdel-Hafiz was investigated for refusing to secretly record now-convicted terrorist Sami al-Arian during the FBI’s case against him.

What’s become of this rogue Muslim agent?

Abdel-Hafiz is still on the job, though he’s been transferred from Washington to the Dallas field office. Remarkably, his new role in the bureau includes recruiting other agents and Arabic linguists at conferences held by known Muslim Brotherhood front groups, including the Islamic Society of North America and the Muslim Students Association.

Muslim DHS Adviser Defends Use of Muslim Brotherhood Icon on Twitter Profile

Obama approved this appointment and is allowing Elibiary to taunt Americans on a daily basis. When will Congress do their *&#ing jobs? via

An adviser to the Department of Homeland Security — who was recently promoted — is defending his use of the controversial “R4BIA” four-finger salute symbol associated with the Muslim Brotherhood as decor on his Twitter profile, a choice that elicited criticism on Sunday on the social media site and from one Israeli blog.

Mohamed Elibiary, one of 28 members of the Homeland Security Advisory Council, insists the symbol is “bigger than” the Muslim Brotherhood and that to him it means “Freedom4All.” In his Twitter profile, Elibiary describes himself as not only associated with Homeland Security but also as a “proud American” who “hearts” Egypt.

The yellow symbol gained notoriety after Egyptian security forces raided two Muslim Brotherhood sit-ins in August, killing hundreds. The larger Cairo sit-in supporting ousted Islamist President Mohammed Morsi took place at Rabaa al-Adawiya Square. Rabaa in Arabic means fourth, hence four fingers and the number “4” planted between the English letters representing the symbol brandished as a tribute to those killed.

One website reportedly set up by Turkish Muslim activists describes the essence of the R4BIA icon as symbolizing more than the Muslim Brotherhood. It’s described as a “symbol of freedom” but also promotes the “return of Muslims to world stage.” It supports “justice for everyone against rotten Western values,” “a pure martyrdom,” “unification of Islamic World,” “the end of capitalists,” and “the end of Zionists.”

“R4BIA is a smiling martyrdom,” says the site.

The call for an “end” to Zionists irked Brian of London of the Israellycool website who writes, “Remember that hand signal for the new global Islamist revolution to take over the world and put an end to all Zionists? Not and end to Zionism, an end to the actual Zionists. That would be me and my friends and family here in Israel.”

Of Elibiary using the symbol on his Twitter profile, Brian blogged on Sunday, “Yup, the US DHS, charged with protecting America from the terrorists. Mr Elibiary is an advisor to the DHS. Well Mohamed is now proudly displaying the R4BIA symbol on his Twitter profile icon. That’s a bit of a shock. Or maybe not.”

Elibiary noticed the criticism and wrote on Twitter, “Some Israelis feeling upset w/ my #R4BIA twibon. Relax, it has nothing 2do w/ y’all & this acct personal only not USG”

But another user Tweeted (expletive warning):


Elibiary retweeted some of the criticism being lodged against him:

@ You are the proof our President has capitulated to Islamist extremism. Proof Islam has infiltrated senior US government.

David Deryl Downey

Elibiary insists he’s not a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. He also maintains that even if a person supports the Muslim Brotherhood, he can also be a “proud American.” In his profile photo, the U.S. flag is to his right while the R4BIA icon is inserted to his lower left. Elibiary writes:

@ Even if it were true, “support MB”, how would that be irreconcilable with being a “proud American”?

Mohamed Elibiary
@ No, not member. I disagree with analysis that views MB as terrorist so some Islamophobes lump me in with MB & bloggers just repeat.


Mohamed Elibiary

Elibiary was in the news two years ago when he was accused of leaking confidential documents from the Texas Department of Public Safety to the media in an alleged effort to show the so-called “Islamophobia” of agencies operating under Texas Governor Rick Perry.

Former Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano swore in Elibiary to her advisory council while she was still serving in that position.

Last month, he announced via Twitter that he had been promoted by the Department of Homeland Security. “I’m honored to be reappointed to Secretary’s Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC) and promoted to Sr. Fellow position,” he wrote.

In an interview with Glenn Beck on TheBlaze TV in mid-September, Frank Gaffney, founder and president of the Center for Security Policy, said Elibiary “makes clear his affinity for the Muslim Brotherhood. He makes clear it is his purpose to stop the prosecution of people in connection with material support for terrorism.”

“He’s on the wrong side and that’s not something I believe we need informing our Homeland Security Department,” Gaffney added.

(H/T: Brian of London/Israellycool)

The very same DHS adviser: Persecuted Christians incited Muslims.

Texas: Muslim B’hood supporter who illegally accessed classified database gets DHS promotion

That’s the Dept. of Homeland Security. via BARE NAKED ISLAM & BizPacReview

A controversial Homeland Security advisor who was recently promoted to senior fellow is a self-declared Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood and Mohamed Morsi supporter. Elibiary, who was appointed to the Department of Homeland Security Advisory Council by then-Secretary Janet Napolitano in 2010, tweeted Thursday that his appointment was renewed and his position elevated.

Mohamed Elibiary @MohamedElibiary


Elibiary’s tenure on the advisory council created controversy almost from the start. About a year after his appointment, PJ Media reported that he used his new federal security clearance to download information on the Texas Department of Public Safety and sell it to left-leaning media outlets as proof of Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s “Islamophobia.”

The media didn’t bite; the proof existed only in Elibiary’s mind.


Napolitano, DHS Still Silent on Mohamed Elibiary – now she’s gone & he is promoted…smell a rat?

DHS Gave Secret Clearance to Islamist now Accused of Leaking Classified Data

Muslim accused of leaking documents was ONLY adviser DHS gave access to sensitive law enforcement database

Why isn’t Muslim tax scofflaw who leaked DHS documents under investigation?


The FBI and the Muslim Brotherhood

…or via FrontPage Magazine.

A recent report in [added: pro-sharia] Mother Jones magazine has given the lie to FBI Director Robert Mueller’s defense of his agency’s failure to take any action against Nidal Hasan, despite intercepting a series of emails between the mass murderer and terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki, beginning as early as 2008. Appearing on CBS News last Thursday, Mueller was asked if his agency “dropped the ball.” ”No, I think, given the context of the discussions and the situation that the agents and the analysts were looking at, they took appropriate steps,” he responded.

Mueller’s statements are shocking in light of the mountain of evidence showing FBI dereliction of duty, which is now finally getting the media attention it deserves. On the other hand, Mueller’s remarks make perfect sense given the Obama administration’s long and disturbing track record of allowing Islamists to shape U.S. national security policy, including at the FBI. Mueller himself has been Obama’s point man in that effort.

Recall that in 2012, the FBI eliminated 876 pages and 392 presentations from its counterterrorism training manuals. At the time, FBI spokesman Christopher Allen said that the Bureau found some of the material to be inaccurate, too broad or, in some cases, offensive, because it allegedly characterized Muslims as prone to violence and/or terrorism. Four criteria were used in the purge, including the politically incorrect metrics of “poor taste” and “stereotyping.” Former Congressman Allen West (R-FL) made a stir at the time for characterizing the purge as “cultural suicide” that was influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood and its associated groups.

Unfortunately, West was exactly right. On February 16, 2012 the Washington Post revealed that the FBI met with a coalition of Muslim groups eight days earlier to consider a proposal that “a coalition of Muslim and interfaith groups … establish a committee of experts to review materials used in FBI anti-terrorism training.” Those meeting with Mueller included the Muslim Brotherhood front groups the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), despite its listing by the Justice Department as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation terrorism-funding trial, and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC). MPAC’s president, Salam al-Marayati, had previously written an LA Times column threatening the FBI with non-cooperation from the Muslim community if the FBI didn’t apologize to Americans Muslims and establish a proper vetting process along with an inter-agency task force to conduct an independent review of the training material.

Despite these revelations, the Obama administration has stonewalled investigation into FBI “guidelines” on Islam curricula, forcing the government watchdog group Judicial Watch to sue both the FBI and the DOJ for their failure to honor Freedom of Information Act requests. But remarkably, the FBI has continued to push the envelope. In late 2012, the Bureau released a new document online called “Guiding Principles: Touchstone Document on Training.” The document contains a disturbing clause instructing agents that “mere association with organizations that demonstrate both legitimate (advocacy) and illicit (violent extremism) objectives should not automatically result in a determination that the associated individual is acting in furtherance of the organization’s illicit objective(s).” In other words, even those who may be involved with a terrorist group’s “charity arm,” which many groups have as a funding mechanism and as a means of cover, cannot be assumed to be supporting terrorism and must be given the benefit of the doubt.

In June of 2013, investigative journalist Patrick Poole revealed how far the Obama administration has taken its warped philosophy. In “Blind to Terror: The U.S. Government’s Disastrous Muslim Outreach Efforts and the Impact on U.S. Policy,” Poole extensively chronicles the administration’s effort to take some of the same groups it has called terrorists in federal court and turn them into “outreach partners.”  Poole further cites the disturbing number of “leaders of American Islamic organizations that partner with the U.S. government” who later transitioned into officials for Muslim Brotherhood fronts.

Even many people under active federal investigation for terrorist activities were simultaneously meeting with government officials to help formulate U.S. policy (long before the Foot Hood massacre took place). According to Poole, this was part of “a full scale campaign of political correctness waged inside the [FBI] and throughout the U.S. government … against any attempt to link jihadi terrorism with anything remotely connected to Islam of any variety.”

Immediately after the [Ft. Hood] incident, generals rushed to the press to lecture the public about the horrors of letting “diversity” become an unnecessary “casualty” of the shooting. The military’s reaction to the carnage was every bit as PC-infused as the missteps that allowed the shooting to occur in the first place. This is no coincidence, but an expression of the culture of fear and insanity carefully nurtured by the Obama administration and its terrorist “outreach partners.” Diversity will not be the last casualty of this misguided program.

Read it all and if anyone doubts Mueller’s dhimmitude then review the video and pictures in this previous post FBI Director Unaware Boston Mosque Founded by al Qaeda Funder (video).


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 33,678 other followers

%d bloggers like this: