Tag Archives: Hillary Clinton & her mobbed up Muslim Brotherhood terror associates

MALIK OBAMA’S SUDANESE TENTACLES: ENSNARING OBAMA, HILL/BILL & HUMA ABEDIN TOO. THE NOOSE IS TIGHTENING. Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

Posted on by
10

Due to the incontrovertible linkage between Malik Obama (you know whose half bro’ he is…) and the Muslim Brotherhood, Omar al-Bashir, Sudan’s Islamist dictator, its butcher, is more than a “person of interest”. Consequently, it is a strategic imperative to link the following policy paper, as it serves as the first underpinning for today’s commentary thesis and a geo-strategic clarion call. The Sudan is hardly given the attention it deserves, either by the media or western leadership, and its negligence is a grave act of malfeasance.

Flesh out the facts from within, in so doing, acquaint yourselves with the Sudan’s importance, delineating the central role it plays in the Islamic thrust towards a global caliphate: the fungible definition of “who is a terrorist”. It invariably leads to the support of Islamists in Syria, Sudan & elsewhere: when politics/ideology trump all. 

Mind you, this paper was written at the behest of Dr. Martin Sherman’s strategic policy center (Israel’s foremost strategic policy expert) due to the geo-political importance the Sudan holds for Islamic hegemony within the entire region. It’s a holding station for the international organization of the Muslim Brotherhood. 

As a result, the war raging in the Sudan between the Islamists in the north and the Black Christians in the south dare not be underestimated. It must be understood – its entire strategic scope – for what it is. Rest assured, Barack HUSSEIN Obama is in the thick of Omar al-Bashir’s end game, and Malik Obama is his/their major point man.     

As to the Islamist-in-Chief’s direct fingerprints, here too he is exposed via a list of MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD MAFIA OPERATIVES INSIDE AMERICA. Not only that, his BFF in the Mid East, Turkey’s Islamist leader, Erdogan, is part of the Brotherhood’s international committee, just as Sudan’s dictator is! Never mind that Erdogan is on the ropes within his own country for many reasons (beyond the scope of this analysis), if necessary, he will find safe haven elsewhere to continue his Brotherhood’s global ambitions. The above are all fellow travelers and their ultimate plans will eventually come full circle.

Yes, Brotherhood links are found in so many places they can fill a book. Really. Yet, who has the time to tackle such an endeavor, even though requests have been made in this direction for such a project. Significantly, their tentacles lead straight back to the Islamist-in-Chief and his half bro’. What a treacherous duo.

Most ominously, internalize what his reaction, re Egypt’s General el-Sisi’s designation of the Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, reveals. It tells us all we need to know: Obama Rejects Muslim Brotherhood’s “Terrorist” Designation !

More spilling of the (Brotherhood) beans…

Brotherhood Insider bolsters case against Malik Obama

by  on January 7, 2014
By Walid Shoebat and Ben BarrackHis name is Tharwat El-Kherbawy and there was a time when he was on the inside of Muslim Brotherhood’s leadership in Egypt. After being expelled from the Brotherhood in 2002, he has been very open about what goes on inside the group. In a lengthy 2012 interview that, in hindsight has shown to be very prescient, El-Kherbawy explained how the ideology of the group had transformed since he joined in 1985.Tharwat El-Kherbawy: Brotherhood Insider.Tharwat El-Kherbawy: Brotherhood Insider.Via Egypt Daily News:

The syllabus in my time used to be rather moderate, which was at odds with the Salafi way of thinking. Then Salafi educational ideas were introduced to the Brotherhood. The Wahhabi way of thinking has become very prominent inside the group.

Nearly one year later, Al-Rakoba printed El-Kherbawy’s analysis of the relationship between the (wahhabist) Muslim Brotherhood and the government of Sudan (translated):

“Kherbawi said that the Muslim Brotherhood in Sudan, led by the ruling al-Bashir ofSudan has turned to the Brotherhood’s interest and not the interest of Sudanese.He also revealed that Omar al-Bashir is member of the International Organization of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Before continuing with El-Kherbawy’s shocking insights, let’s take a look at the Obama family in Kenya. Malik Obama, half-brother to U.S. President Barack Obama, works as a prominent figure within the Islamic Da’wa Organization (IDO), headquartered in Sudan. There are photos of him at the same 2010 leadership conference led by al-Bashir, which can be found here. Barack Obama’s cousin Musa Ismail Obama and uncle Sayyid Obama are tied directly to the most virulent wahhabist schools in Saudi Arabia. During an interview with al-Jazeera, Musa admitted to sending Kenyan students to those schools. There are also several photos of Musa and Sayyid at one of those schools (Umm Al Qura University).

These linkages would seemingly confirm that at least three members of the Obama family are themselves wahhabists who share the ideals of the Muslim Brotherhood. We also know that Barack and Malik are quite close; Malik’s foundation was granted expeditious, retroactive, and illegal tax-exempt status from none other than Lois Lerner in 2011, which would make her an accessory to terror funding.

Now, back to Kherbawi… In July of last year, he stated on video that the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood intends to use its connections with Sudan to pass through and create a government in exile.

These disclosures could help to explain why the claims in complaint 1761, filed by Dr. Sadek Ebeidwith Egypt’s Attorney General, Hisham Barakat, were backed up by the former head of Egypt’s Constitutional Court Tahani al-Jebali. This complaint hasn’t only caught the attention of Barakat, it is being taken far more seriously than initially thought.

When viewed through the lens of Kherbawi’s claims, such concerns are more easily understood. There are also curious instances of anecdotal evidence that would seem to support Kherbawi’s charge that Sudan would be a safe haven for Brotherhood figures. Egypt’s former Prime Minister under Mursi was arrested attempting to flee there.

Via the BBC:

Egyptian police have arrested the former prime minister who served under ousted President Mohammed Morsi.

The interior ministry said Hisham Qandil was caught in a mountainous area with smugglers trying to flee to Sudan.

It’s worth noting that Kherbawi made his claims about Sudan being home to a Muslim Brotherhood government “in exile” several months before Qandil was caught trying to go there.

Just last month, in a report filed an Arabic newspaper, Kherbawi emphasized that while “Sudan is a holding station for the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt and Tunisia…”, the Brotherhood is not managing its forces in Egypt from Sudan.

Via Mobtrada, Kherbawi is quoted as saying (translated):

“This is a fact, International Organization of the Muslim Brotherhood is managing the situation in Egypt, and I do not think it manages Egypt from Sudan, because a state that has Brotherhood also has a desk for international regulations, and the Muslim Brotherhood when they fall in crises, they formed a committee to manage the crisis through Mahmoud Ezzat. The committee includes Rashid Ghannouchi and bin Hammam Saeed and others, and there are persons who have advisory roles, such as Turkey’s Prime Minister Erdogan. Therefore, Sudan is a (holding) station that supports the international organization from which the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt operated.”

The Prime Minister of Turkey is an adviser to the Muslim Brotherhood’s International Organization?

Oh, so?

This is corroborated, at least in part, by events in November of last year, when Turkey’s ambassador to Egypt – Huseyin Avni Botsali – was expelled from Cairo and sent back to Turkey. Al-Watan reported, via Hurriyet, that the reason for Botsali’s expulsion had to do with his using diplomatic immunity to funnel Brotherhood assets out of Egypt.

This too, could help explain why Egypt’s current government recently froze the assets of hundreds of Muslim Brotherhood figures, allegedly including those of former Clinton Foundation employee,Gehad El-Haddad. Concerns that Brotherhood money could leave Egypt for the sole purpose of strengthening the Brotherhood outside of Egypt seem to be well-founded.

As an aside, our readers are quite familiar with our assertion that the Brotherhood’s resurgence will one day manifest itself with the resurrection of the Ottoman Empire, which was based in Turkey. In fact, doing so was an inherent goal of the Brotherhood’s founders. Erdogan was dealt a significant blow when Mursi was overthrown, so much so that he shed tears over it on national television; he is not about to accept defeat; he can be expected to double his efforts.

While claims and accusations in the Middle East are very often exaggerated, the much less dramatic source of those exaggerations can be quite legitimate. For example, the Obama administration’s policy with respect to the Muslim Brotherhood generally – in Egypt specifically – has obviously been supportive of the group. That the Obama administration supports the Brotherhood is an idea that long ago embedded itself into Egypt’s public consciousness. Therefore, it’s easy to understand why the most clandestine arm of any U.S. Administration – the CIA – would be identified as the entity that helped to make it happen.

Evidence suggests these Egyptian protesters are right.

Evidence suggests these Egyptian protesters are right.

There has been significant speculative buzz on the streets in Egypt that Mursi is an agent of the CIA.Mursi’s English is not very good and comes across as not being very intelligent. Some point to this fact while raising questions about his ability to earn a Ph.D. in Engineering from U.S.C. In an article at the Canada Free Press, Egyptian journalist Ali Al Sharnoby wrote:

Morsi sent a message through his prison visitors to the CIA saying: How could America and its security institutes abandon me, while I served them sincerely and cooperated with them during the last period to prevent conflicts in the Middle East?

Robert Stacy McCain went in the other direction shortly after Mursi’s ouster, making the argument that the CIA played an active role in facilitating the collapse of the Mursi regime.

Let’s consider two Executive Branch entities that were at the center of the controversy over the Benghazi attacks – the CIA and the State Department. When the talking points – and the demonstrably false video narrative – began to harm the administration, it was the CIA – not State – that had to take the fall. Even CIA Director David Petraeus was forced to resign one day after Obama’s re-election when details of an extra-marital affair were made public. Evidence is overwhelming that the Justice Department had known about the affair for months in advance (Exhibit X of our “Ironclad” report).

Then CIA Director not comfortable with Benghazi talking points.

Then CIA Director not comfortable with Benghazi talking points.

The irony was that it was Petraeus who seemed the most uncomfortable with those talking points (Exhibit W of our “Ironclad” report), not his State Department counterpart, Hillary Clinton; she was protected aggressively by the administration. She even was able to appoint the leaders of a board tasked with investigating the very State Department she headed, with very predictable results.

One thing can be said with relative confidence; the CIA provided cover for and was blamed by the administration for providing faulty intelligence due to the ‘fog of war’ in order to protect the State Department after claims about the role of an anti-Muhammad video proved bogus.

However, if anything, recently uncovered evidence suggests that if Mursi was an agent for anyone,the Clintons themselves would be quite high on the list.

Last month, another complaint (No. 18337) was filed with the office of Egypt’s Attorney General, alleging that Mursi’s wife – Naglaa Mahmoud – claimed that her and her husband were recruited by the Clintons in the 1980′s, when they were in the U.S. Claims attributed to Mahmoud included charges that her and Hillary are extremely close. This claim is bolstered by the fact that Saleha Abedin – one of Mahmoud’s colleagues inside the Muslim Sisterhood – is the mother of Hillary’s longtime and very close adviser, Huma Abedin.

Arabic newspaper Al-Bawabh reports that while in the U.S., Mursi worked as a translator for the Islamic Center in California (ICC), which was co-founded by Maher Hathout, who also served asPresident of the ICC.

Mursi and Mahmoud around the time they were 'recruited' by the Clintons?

Mursi and Mahmoud around the time they were ‘recruited’ by the Clintons?

During Clinton’s presidency, the Clintons were very active in reaching out to Muslim Brotherhood groups in the U.S. In fact, Hathout also founded the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC). Hathout is identified as a supporter of Wahhabism, the same strain of Islam Kherbawi says the Muslim Brotherhood has adopted. In 1996, Hillary became the first wife of a sitting president to address U.S. Islamic groups outside of the White House. Where did she choose to break such ground?

At the Islamic Center of Southern California, a group for which Hathout was an official spokesman. He also spoke and praised Hillary at this meeting.

Via the L.A. Times (h/t Ryan Mauro):

The importance U.S. Muslims attached to Clinton’s appearance was apparent in the effusive introduction given her by Maher Hathout, spokesman for the Islamic Center of Southern California and one of the nation’s preeminent Islamic leaders.

“When our country becomes what we dream and when our society becomes warmer and more inclusive . . . it will be written in history in letters of light that the first first lady who took a major step to greet, include and to communicate with Muslims is First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton,” Hathout declared, drawing loud applause.

When did a younger Bill and Hillary befriend the younger Mursi and Mahmoud?

When did a younger Bill and Hillary befriend the younger Mursi and Mahmoud?

Let’s get back to Kherbawy’s interview from November of 2012…

El-Kherbawy explained that despite losing the spot as the Muslim Brotherhood’s presidential candidate (to Mohammed Mursi), Khairat el-Shater viewed himself as the real power broker.

Via Egypt Daily News, El-Kherbawy said:

El-Shater harped on about his economic potential and how with Al-Nahda project he can help revive the Egyptian economy as if saying “I will be the real president.” Before the election he said to the FJP paper that “from the first day Morsy wins, I will be the sole person responsible for the economic projects in Egypt.” He was promoting himself as the person behind Morsy’s success.

This squares with information we have published independently in the past. After the Muslim Brotherhood was ousted from power last summer, the Obama administration – State Department in particular – seemed to take specific interest in El-Shater’s release. Remember, it is former Clinton Foundation employee Gehad El-Haddad who was El-Shater’s Deputy Chief of Staff. He helpedbroker a meeting between Deputy Secretary of State Bill Burns and the jailed El-Shater last August.

El-Haddad himself was arrested in September.

Regardless of the veracity of claims by Kherbawi – that Mursi is an agent of the CIA – there may be more evidence that he is an agent of Bill and Hillary Clinton, if not a close collaborator as Mahmoud seems to suggest.

According to a trusted Arabic source of ours, Kherbawi appeared on Egyptian television this past January 5th and gave his firsthand account about Sudan’s Omar al-Bashir (translated):

“In 1992, after al-Bashir became president of Sudan, he visited Egypt. I was asked to bring him in person to meet with Mr. Hamid Abou elNasr, the Muslim Brotherhood’s supreme leader in Egypt.

Hamed Abou elNasr told al-Bashir:

‘Ya Bashir elkhair’ The man who is the first to bring the good tidings, through you the Muslim Brother has become the rulers in Sudan.

El Bashir answered:

“God willing we will rule the world in your life time & mine.”

In summation, the brother of the U.S. Commander-in-chief works with and for a man in al-Bashir, who seeks to internationalize the Muslim Brotherhood. That Barack Obama does not know this is absurd. That he has not disclosed it publicly is indicting; that his IRS has aided and abetted Malik is damning.

So is the cover-up of Hillary Clinton’s culpability.

As to the part played by Hill (Bill too) and her co-conspirator (“gal pal”) Huma Abedin, and their absolute nexus to Obama’s Muslim Brotherhood Mafia, well, the following prima facie evidence should (as a starter) serve to set the record straight:

Exhibit Number One: BENGHAZIGATE’s updates link them even further to Morsi’s Brotherhood Mafia, regardless that Morsi (and associates) is currently in the dock. Indeed, their trails to MALIK OBAMA render them up to their necks. Their eyeballs too. The trials in Egypt will drag them in even further. Can’t wait.

Exhibit Number Two: HILLARY CLINTON & her mobbed up Muslim Brotherhood terror associates are inexorably tied, politically and business-wise. Treasonous. 

Malik Obama, Barack HUSSEIN, Hill/Huma and all their assorted associates – deeply implicated!

 

SHARIAH LAW MANDATES ISLAMIC WARFARE ON A MAIN TARGET:THE SILENCING OF THE WEST. HILLARY CLINTON, OBAMA INC. LEND SUPPORT! Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

Posted on by
9

Commentary found at – http://islamexposedonline.com/

————————————————————————————————–

Western audiences must internalize and FULLY understand the tactics utilized through Islamic warfare – by Sunni and Shia alike – as they seek to grab global domination. Today’s commentary, as a “green alert”, is neither scare-mongering nor pie-in-the-sky dreaming by avowed Islamists. FAR from it.

Their efforts engage many pressure points, but those which must remain our TOP priority revolve around a two-tiered jihadi prong: stealth on the one hand and frontal on the other. The underpinnings cited herein are all part and parcel of Shariah Law. Non-negotiable. Immutable. Set in Allah-stone.

The most insidious of all are those which fly “below the radar”, hence, the “stealth” appellation.  The Muslim Brotherhood developed a brilliant psychological tactic – one which is repeatedly referenced at this site.“Islamophobia” is a strategy used by Islamists and their propagandists, as western enablers act as shields for Islamic supremacists! 

The reason for the term’s coinage is its visceral imagery, as if to IMMEDIATELY tar those who DARE to question Islam’s underpinnings as“phobics”, demonstrating that they are the problem, not Islam.  As if they are “racists” of the highest magnitude and that is that. As if to scream there is no “there there”; that those who step out of line are doing so due to their own fevered imaginations, as such, they are the ones in need of “re-education” camps. Really. That’s their modus operandi.

POLITICS OF “ISLAMOPHOBIA”

The term “Islamophobia” was invented and promoted in the early 1990s by theInternational Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT), a front group of the Muslim Brotherhood. Former IIIT member Abdur-Rahman Muhammad — who was with that organization when the word was formally created, and who has since rejected IIIT’s ideology — now reveals the original intent behind the concept of Islamophobia: “This loathsome term is nothing more than a thought-terminating cliche conceived in the bowels of Muslim think tanks for the purpose of beating down critics.” In short, in its very origins, “Islamophobia” was a term designed as a weapon to advance a totalitarian cause by stigmatizing critics and silencing them. 

This plan was an outgrowth of the Muslim Brotherhood’s “General Strategic Goal for North America,” by which the organization aimed to wage “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.” To implement this plan, the Brotherhood enlisted the help of 29 likeminded “organizations of our friends” (one of which was IIIT), whose task would be to depict themselves as civil-rights groups speaking out on behalf of a Muslim American population that was allegedly besieged by outsiders who harbored an illogical, unfounded fear of them — i.e., by a society replete with “Islamophobia.”

Although the term was coined in the early 1990s, “Islamophobia” did not become the focus of an active Brotherhood campaign until after 9/11. Since that time, Islamist lobby organizations (including the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR) and Muslim civil-rights activists have regularly accused the American people, American institutions, law-enforcement authorities, and the U.S. government of harboring a deep and potentially violent prejudice against Muslims. The accusers charge that as a result of this “Islamophobia,” Muslims are disproportionately targeted by perpetrators of hate crimes and acts of discrimination.

But FBI data on hate crimes show that the foregoing accusers are wholly incorrect. The incidence of anti-Muslim abuses nationwide has actually declined since September 2001. 

And herein belies the crux of the danger, as Obama Inc., including front-line players like Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin work assiduously to impose restrictions on criticism of Islam, all the while stomping on America’s (the west’s) underpinning of free speech! YES, Hillary Clinton & her mobbed up Muslim Brotherhood terror associates: INEXORABLY tied. Politically AND business-wise. Treasonous.

Their targeted assaults incredibly bore into every powerful recess of American influence (and beyond), not even eschewing spiritual cornerstones as “no go” zones:“red/leftists” merge forces with “green/Islamists”, in a frontal attack against free speech and Rabbis (Priests too) used as bait. How dare they? Is nothing off limits? Is nothing holy, other than their jihad for Allah? In any case, for the visually inclined, this should bring the danger home – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YsdbhIbZoc.

But if the above isn’t enraging enough, understand that a HUGE and concerted effort is continually waged through a powerful Islamic entity at the UN, and Hill is front and center egging them on! Other American leaders (some in the open, some behind the scenes) are working for the same result – the castration of free speech!

Powerful Islamist Org. Ramps Up War on Free Speech in West

The primary objective of the OIC is to pressure Western countries into passing laws that would ban ‘negative stereotyping of Islam.’
BY SOEREN KERN

December 12, 2013

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (left) participated in and supported the 'Istanbul Process.Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (left) participated in and supported the ‘Istanbul Process.”
  • The Organization of Islamic Cooperation, an influential bloc of 57 Muslim countries, has released the latest edition of its annual “Islamophobia” report.

The “Sixth OIC Observatory Report on Islamophobia: October 2012-September 2013” is a 94-page document purporting to “offer a comprehensive picture of Islamophobia, as it exists mainly in contemporary Western societies.”

The primary objective of the OIC—headquartered in Saudi Arabia and funded by dozens of Muslim countries that systematically persecute Christians and Jews—has long been to pressure Western countries into passing laws that would ban “negative stereotyping of Islam.”

In this context, the OIC’s annual Islamophobia report—an integral part of a sustained effort to prove the existence of a “culture of intolerance of Islam and Muslims” in the West—is in essence a lobbying tool to pressure Western governments to outlaw all forms of “Islamophobia,” a nebulous concept invented by the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1990s.

The OIC report comprises five main chapters and several annexes aimed at documenting “incidents of slandering and demeaning Muslims and their sacred symbols including attacks on mosques, verbal abuses and physical attacks against adherents of Islam, mainly due to their cultural traits.”

But the common thread that binds the entire document together is the OIC’s repeated insistence that the main culprit responsible for “the institutionalization of Islamophobia” in Western countries is freedom of speech, which the OIC claims has “contributed enormously to snowball Islamophobia and manipulate the mindset of ordinary Western people to develop a ‘phobia’ of Islam and Muslims.”

According to the OIC, freedom of expression is shielding “the perpetrators of Islamophobia, who seek to propagate irrational fear and intolerance of Islam, [who] have time and again aroused unwarranted tension, suspicion and unrest in societies by slandering the Islamic faith through gross distortions and misrepresentations and by encroaching on and denigrating the religious sentiments of Muslims.”

Chapter 1 of the report deals with “Islamophobia, Intolerance and Discrimination against Muslims,” and purports to reveal the “unabated rise of Islamophobia in Western countries, thereby exacerbating tensions at all levels and constituting additional obstacles to the diversity and multicultural fabrics of the societies.”

According to the OIC, freedom of speech is to blame for the “perpetuation of Islamophobia,” which:

“…has become increasingly widespread, which, in turn, has caused an increase in the actual number of hate crimes committed against Muslims. These crimes range from the usual verbal abuse and discrimination, particularly in the fields of education and employment, to other acts of violence and vandalism, including physical assaults, attacks on Islamic centers and the desecration of mosques and cemeteries.”

“In this context, acceptance of various forms of intolerance, including hate speech and the propagation of negative stereotypes against Islam and Muslims in some western countries contribute towards proliferation of intolerant societies. This process is further supported by… the exploitation of freedom of expression and perpetuation of an ideological context advocating an inescapable conflict of civilizations.”

Another factor favoring “the climate of intolerance” is:

“…the negative role played by major media outlets who not only propagate stereotypes and misperceptions about Islam, but also undermine and usually keep shadowed any meaningful instance of individuals or groups speaking out against intolerance, including advocacy of religious hatred and violence. This biased approach of the media has helped drawing an emphatically demonized, sometimes dehumanized, image of Muslims in the minds of a certain class of people which is predisposed to xenophobic feelings due to the increasingly dire economic situation, or the simply to the irrational fear of the other.”

Chapter 2 of the report deals with “Manifestations of Islamophobia in the West.” According to the OIC:

“The number of Islamophobic incidents continues to rise in the US, as a result of anti-Muslim propaganda. It is particularly alarming that anti-Muslim sentiments are taking deeper roots infiltrating further in the educational system. Notable among several other worrying trends/cases are: the initiatives taken by a leading and powerful US legislator [US Representative Peter King] to convene special Congressional Hearings on Radicalization of Islam in the US… In the same vein, the Republican Party in the recent 2013 [sic] US Presidential elections also used the anti-Islam card as a strategy.”

“With regard to Islamophobic trends in Europe, various reports and polls have revealed growing misperception vis-à-vis Islam and Muslims. Among the most common and recurring… are the ideas that Muslims are inclined to violence including revenge and retaliation; that Islam is an inherently expansionist religion, which strives for political influence, and whose followers are obsessed with proselytizing others, and more generally that Islam deprives women of their rights and encourages religious fanaticism and radicalism. According to the same polls, only a minor portion of the public tends to see Islam in a more positive light, as being a religion of peace that preaches love for neighbors, charity, openness and tolerance… Muslims who live in xenophobic environments are more exposed to daily stress and other forms of moral prejudice.”

The OIC concludes that “journalists and media organizations have a responsibility to avoid promoting rhetoric of hate by acting as a platform for its widespread dissemination.”

Chapter 3 of the OIC report highlights “Some Positive Developments” in terms of initiatives and other steps and positions taken to combat Islamophobia, including:

“…the condemnation of anti-Muslim hate speech by various quarters, including non-Muslim religious leaders; the barring from entry of certain Islamophobes to a number of countries where they intended to take part in anti-Muslim rallies or deliver inflammatory lectures; the recognition of Muslim holidays and other strict sanctions taken against acts of manifest religious intolerance. It was noted with satisfaction that a number of international organizations, including UNSECO, the OSCE and the Council of Europe, have recognized the danger posed by Islamophobia and have taken concrete steps to combat it, notably by laying down Guidelines for Educators on Countering Intolerance and Discrimination against Muslims.”

Chapter 4 of the report, “OIC Initiatives and Activities to Counter Islamophobia,” focused on the OIC’s ongoing efforts to promote the so-called Istanbul Process, an aggressive effort by Muslim countries to make it an international crime to criticize Islam. The explicit aim of the Istanbul Process is to enshrine in international law a global ban on all critical scrutiny of Islam and Islamic Sharia law.

In recent years, the OIC has been engaged in a determined diplomatic offensive to persuade Western democracies to implement United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) Resolution 16/18, which calls on all countries to combat “intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization of… religion and belief.” (Analysis of the OIC’s war on free speech can be found here and here.)

Resolution 16/18, which was adopted at HRC headquarters in Geneva in March 2011 (with the support of the Obama Administration)—together with the OIC-sponsored Resolution 66/167, which was quietly approved by the 193-member UN General Assembly on December 19, 2011—is widely viewed as marking a significant step forward in OIC efforts to advance the international legal concept of defaming Islam.

Chapter 5 of the OIC report provides a set of conclusions and recommendations, which call on Western governments, international organizations and non-state actors to:

“Take all necessary measures within their power and legal/jurisdictional systems to ensure a safe environment free from Islamophobic harassment… by strictly enforcing applicable hate crime and discrimination laws;

“Create, whenever necessary, specialized bodies and initiatives in order to combat Islamophobia… based on internationally recognized human rights principles and standards;

“Combat Islamophobic hate crimes, which can be fuelled by Islamophobic hate speech in the media and on the Internet;

“Take all necessary measures to ensure that the media refrains from serving as a platform for the dissemination of hate speech… by associating extremism and terrorism to Islam and Muslims… and presents the true positive nature of Islam.

“Implement provisions of UNHRC Resolution 16/18 through the Istanbul Process mechanism as it offers a positive platform for debate, exchange of best practices and maintaining of a common and unified stance.”

The report states that “the OIC and the Member States should not be complacent in underscoring the fact that our present day world is gradually being driven towards the dangerous precipices of growing intolerance of religious and cultural diversity. This is the clear and present danger that the OIC has been consistent in warning the international community against. The sooner the phenomenon of Islamophobia is addressed, the better it is for ensuring peaceful coexistence of the present as well for the future generations to come.”

The report concludes with the transcript of a speech by OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, in which he thanks American and European political leaders for their help (here and here) in advancing his efforts to restrict free speech in the West.

“The Istanbul Process initiated with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Catherine Ashton … must be carried forward … the Istanbul Process must also be seen as a poster child of OIC-US-EU cooperation …” Ihsanoglu said.

Most significantly, the so called “liberal” left set are in the forefront of censuring free speech, all in the name of protecting a made up out of whole cloth phobia! 

YES, even as the first Black (though a half breed) POTUS is the most powerful man in the west, they still would have us believe that conservative folks, aka“knuckledraggers”, and rational anti-Islamists are simply incapable of ferreting out this and that. Hence, strictures muzzling speech are for our own good. In fact, AG Holder already assembled said omerta: ALERT : Radical-in-Chief Obama tasks (il)legally-bent (AG) Holder to “criminalize” Islamic speech via thuggish UN dictates!

Never and never. They can all go to hell – and back.

Alas, as they hold aloft “civil rights” as the sine qua non for PC behavior, they behave like fascists and worse.

Now, few understand this subject like Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld, as they attempted to silence her hither and yon trough a tactic called “lawfare”, but they lost!

In her book, “Funding Evil”, Dr. Ehrenfeld alleged that Saudi billionaire Khalid bin Mahfouz had financed al Qaeda through his bank and charitable organization. Mahfouz denied the allegations. Dr. Ehrenfeld, a U.S. citizen based in New York, had not written or marketed her book internationally and refused to acknowledge the jurisdiction of the British court over her case. Her refusal resulted in the British Court awarding a default judgment against her.

Represented by her attorney, Daniel Kornstein,[5] Dr. Ehrenfeld pre-emptively countersued Mahfouz in New York to obtain a declaration that the judgment would not be enforced in the United States and that her book was not defamatory under United States defamation law. When the New York courts ruled that they lacked personal jurisdiction over Mahfouz, the New York State legislature took immediate action and unanimously passed the Libel Terrorism Protection Act[6] (also known as “Rachel’s Law”). Rachel’s Law was signed into law on April-29-2008. The law “offers New Yorkers greater protection against libel judgments in countries whose laws are inconsistent with the freedom of speech granted by the United States Constitution.”[7]

As of July 2010, six other states have passed analogs to Rachel’s Law: Illinois,[8] Florida,[9] California,[10] Tennessee,[11] Maryland,[12] and Utah.[13] A federal bill based on Rachel’s Law was passed unanimously out of the Judiciary Committee and has since then been approved by both Houses of Congress. President Obama signed the bill into law on 10 August 2010. The bill, S. 3518, the titled Securing and Protecting our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage Act (Speech Act),[14] includes several measures aimed at closing loopholes in First Amendment protections for free speech. The act bars enforcement of foreign libel judgments that do not meet with American constitutional standards of due process and First Amendment protections. The burden of proof is also placed on the party suing for enforcement. The party suing to prevent enforcement may also sue the libel plaintiff for a declaration that the foreign libel judgment is “repugnant” to American constitutional law, and is entitled to attorney’s fees for resultant legal proceedings. The new federal law, and the existing seven state laws that predate it, do not, however, protect American persons who exercise First Amendment freedoms but who then travel abroad and then become subject to physical application of foreign libel laws and judgments. Many countries, for example, Thailand, maintain laws that cite jurisdiction over speech exercised outside their countries and which mandate punishment for libel inside the foreign plaintiff’s country even though the speech may have occurred outside. Extraterritorial jurisdiction over First Amendment rights has not been the focus of attention in international legal jurisprudence or focus in the diplomatic community.

Dr. Ehrenfeld’s efforts at libel law reform in the United States inspired the Libel Reform Campaign[15] an NGO campaign with over 55,000 supporters. The British government has published a draft defamation bill, The Defamation Act [2013] which comes into action later this year. .[16]

BEATING back Islamic warfare, through the silencing of all dissent, is a major linchpin to beating back Shariah Law ! One and the same.

NOT on our watch…kadima…קדימה…as we continue to expose the facts at Islam Exposed Online.