Israel Smacks Down Syria & Russia;ADVANCED Russian Hardware Destroyed.Assists America Too.What’s The Calculus?Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

{re-blogged at Islam Exposed}

{re-blogged at Jews Down Under}

MANY have heard about the IAF’s lighting strikes into Syria, especially over the last few years. As always, they are not for nothing, irrespective of the whining from assorted (near and far) foes. Guaranteed, they are not training exercises to prove their mettle. That ship has sailed. In fact, the only air force that can compete with the IAF (at times, beat) is the USAF. {blogger’s note: this site is pro-American and pro-Israeli, make no mistake…but, bear in mind, there are various “sore loser” explanations in the link below}

“How badly did the United States Air Force Get Beaten By The Israeli Air Force During Red-Flag Exercises Or War-Games Exercises (that were not classified)?”

SO with the above understanding in mind, readers must recognize that nations are operating, as they should, in their own national interests. But it is equally intrinsic to realize when it is prudent to work together and when to go it alone, even parting company with an ally. This is a lesson PM Netanyahu too often shuns. In fact, the 2014 summer-long fiery war with Hamas should become EXHIBIT NUMBER ONE; it demonstrated that tying Israel’s strings to Obama Inc. evinced incalculable knock-on effects. The full blown evaluation can be found within the following interview. A relevant excerpt sets the tone:

Adina Kutnicki: Wolff, before we review the dangers associated with the newly-formed Muslim-American party, it must be reiterated: traditional American allies are caught up in a horrifying spider’s web through their association with the Obama administration. Poisonous.

Illustrative of said entangling, one has to internalize when it is in a nation’s best interests to align with a “best friend” and when prudence demands a “trial” separation, at least for the time being.

Basically, PM Netanyahu, MIT smartie that he is, hasn’t figured out this seemingly simple calculus. Along this trajectory, through his joined-at-the-hip actions with Barack HUSSEIN Obama (don’t be distracted by their public tussles – as media grabbing as they are – that’s not where the action/collusion is) Israel now finds herself “involved” with Sunni jihadists, the likes of which include Al Qaeda, Al Nusra and ISIS! Yup.

Trenchantly, there is a “quiet” war being fought on the Syrian side of Israel’s northern Golan border to capture key sites. It may very well blow up Israel’s Golan front. Currently, the struggle is between Assad’s henchmen and the aforementioned Sunni jihadists. These are the same “rebels” whom Obama Inc. has “surreptitiously” armed, ever since the administration entered into an absolutely illegal war in Libya. Its (hidden) basis was to arm Sunni terrorists to take over the region for the Muslim Brotherhood! Full circle.

Resultant, instead of PM Netanyahu opting out of choosing between one Islamic devil over another (Assad’s forces are inseparable from Iran’s proxy pawns), thereby, reacting to whichever side illegally fires from Syria into Israel with resolute IDF firepower, Israel is now – like it or not – aiding those who abet Hamas. Ditto, Assad/Iran have been doing likewise.

Assuredly, there are times when NOT choosing sides makes the most strategic sense. However, this is definitely not the case with the Kurdish issue. Alas, it was a relief that PM Netanyahu publicly stated his support for Kurdish independence from Iraq. As is said, even a broken clock can be right once in a while.

Stipulated, sans a scintilla of a doubt, under PM Netanyahu’s missteps, the dangers to Israel have never been greater….

IN this regard, this week’s Israeli airstrike into Syria wielded a two-edge sword; a dual track. Yes, as critical as this investigative journalist is of PM Netanyahu’s penchant for spinelessness, this go around he exerted proper hyper-muscle and secured Israel’s national interests – finally.

High-ranking American military sources revealed Monday, Dec. 8, that Israel’s air strikes near Damascus the day before wiped out newly-arrived Russian hardware including missiles that were dispatched post haste to help Syria and Hizballah frustrate a US plan for a no-fly zone over northern Syria.

The advanced weapons were sent over, as DEBKAfile reported exclusively Sunday, after Russian President Vladimir Putin learned that the Obama administration and the Erdogan government were close to a final draft on a joint effort to activate a no-fly zone that would bar Syrian air force traffic over northern Syria.

The Kremlin has repeatedly warned – of late in strong messages through back channels – that the establishment of a no-fly or buffer zone in any part of Syria would be treated as direct American intervention in the Syria war and result in Russian military intervention for defending the Assad regime.
According to the US-Turkish draft, American warplanes would be allowed to take off from the Turkish airbase of Incirlik in the south for operations against Syrian warplanes, assault helicopters or drones entering the no-go zone. Thus far, Ankara has only permitted US surveillance aircraft and drones the use of Incirlik for tracking the movements of Islamic State fighters in northern Syria.
The Obama administration was long deterred from implementing a no-fly zone plan by the wish to avoid riling Moscow or facing the hazards of Syria’s world-class air defense system.

But Washington was recently won over to the plan by a tacit deal with Damascus for American jets to be allowed entry to help Kurdish fighters defend their northern Syrian enclave of Kobani against capture by al Qaeda’s IS invaders.

However, the US administration turned down a Turkish demand to extend the no-fly zone from their border as far as Aleppo, Syria’s largest city, over which Syrian army forces are battling rebels and advancing slowly into the town.
The no-fly zone planned by US strategists would be narrow – between a kilometer and half a kilometer deep inside Syria. However Moscow is standing fast against any such plan and objects to US planes making free of Syrian airspace, a freedom they are now afforded over Kobani.
To drive this point home, the Russians delivered a supply of advanced anti-air missiles and radar, whose use by the Syrian army and transfer to Hizballah in Lebanon were thwarted by the Israeli air strikes Sunday.

Moscow reacted swiftly and angrily with a Note to the United Nations Monday accusing Israel of “aggressive action” and demanding “that such attacks should not happen again… Moscow is deeply worried by this dangerous development, the circumstances of which demand an explanation.”

The Assad regime has held back from reacting to past Israeli air raids for preventing advanced weaponry from reaching Hizballah. This time, spokesmen in Damascus warned that their government’s response would be clandestine and cause Israel “unimaginable harm.”

EXTRAPOLATING further – and despite the warning that Syria’s response would be clandestine and cause Israel “unimaginable harm” – the fact of the matter is that they never cease plotting to exert “unimaginable harm”. Israel is, as is said, damned if it does and damned if it doesn’t. But never mind. Its PRIMARY vested interest (by striking Syria, the transit route to Lebanon’s Hezbollah) is to ALWAYS keep advanced anti-missile hardware out of Hezbollah’s hands. In essence, these air strikes (and other clandestine operations) frustrate Iran’s proxy arm from causing grave damage to Israel. Significantly, said pre-emptive actions should be a no-brainer, even for Israel’s appeasement-oriented political leaders. Not only that, they are manifestly legal under international law, despite Russia’s (and Syria’s) shrill pronouncements before the U.N.’s anti-Israel gaggle of kleptocrats.

AS detailed by this site‘s close and valued contact, Professor Louis Rene Beres, in his joint analysis with U.S. Admiral Leon “Bud” Edney & General Thomas G. McInerney at Oxford’s University Press, anticipatory self-defense is codified:

Enter international law. Designed, inter alia, to ensure the survival of states in a persistently anarchic world – a world originally fashioned after the Thirty Years War and the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 – this law includes the “inherent” right of national self-defense. Such right may be exercised not only after an attack has already been suffered, but, sometimes, also, in advance of an expected attack.

What can now be done, lawfully, about relentless Iranian nuclear weapons development?  Do individual states, especially those in greatest prospective danger from any expressions of Iranian nuclear aggression, have a legal right to strike first defensively? In short, could such a preemption ever be permissible under international law?

For the United States, preemption remains a part of codified American military doctrine. But is this national doctrine necessarily consistent with the legal and complex international expectations of anticipatory self-defense?

To begin, international law derives from multiple authoritative sources, including international custom. Although written law of the UN Charter (treaty law) reserves the right of self-defense only to those states that have already suffered an attack (Article 51), equally valid customary law still permits a first use of force if the particular danger posed is “instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means and no moment for deliberation.” Stemming from an 1837 event in jurisprudential history known as the Caroline, which concerned the unsuccessful rebellion in Upper Canada against British rule, this doctrine builds purposefully upon a seventeenth-century formulation of Hugo Grotius.

Self-defense, says the classical Dutch scholar in, The Law of War and Peace (1625), may be permitted “not only after an attack has already been suffered, but also in advance, where the deed may be anticipated.”  In his later text of 1758, The Right of Self-Protection and the Effects of Sovereignty and Independence of Nations, Swiss jurist Emmerich de Vattel affirmed: “A nation has the right to resist the injury another seeks to inflict upon it, and to use force and every other just means of resistance against the aggressor.”

Article 51 of the UN Charter, limiting self-defense to circumstances following an attack, does not override the customary right of anticipatory self-defense.  Interestingly, especially for Americans, the works of Grotius and Vattel were favorite readings of Thomas Jefferson, who relied  heavily upon them for crafting the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America.

We should also recall Article VI of the US Constitution, and assorted US Supreme Court decisions. These proclaim, straightforwardly, that international law is necessarily part of the law of the United States.

The Caroline notes an implicit distinction between preventive war (which is never legal), and preemptive war. The latter is not permitted merely to protect oneself against an emerging threat, but only when the danger posed is “instant” and “overwhelming.” Using such a literal framework, it could first appear doubtful that the United States may now construct a persuasive legal argument for preemption against Iran. This would be the case even if the planned American defense operation were carefully limited to exclusively nuclear military targets.

Nonetheless, we live in very different times. Grotius, Vattel and those later jurists who were focused on the Caroline could never have anticipated the genuinely existential risks soon to be posed by a nuclear Iran.  Understandably, the permissibility of anticipatory self-defense is far greater in the nuclear age than in prior centuries. Today, after all, it is easy to imagine, simply waiting impotently to suffer an enemy nuclear attack could be entirely irrational. Even suicidal.

A  special danger is posed by terrorist group surrogates. If not prevented from receiving nuclear weapons or fissile materials from patron states, such proxies (e.g., Hezbollah, Hamas, al-Qaeda) could inflict enormous harms upon targets that would be out of range of nuclear-tipped missiles.

The United States is not the only country at risk from Iranian nuclear weapons. Israel is at greater risk. There is, however, a long and respected international legal tradition that Great Powers have proportionately great responsibilities. This would suggest, from a management of world power standpoint, that America must remain ever-mindful of a potential nuclear threat to other, far smaller states.

MOREOVER, the international precepts outlined above are doubly applicable for distinct genocidal foes. Thus, how many times, how many ways, do Israel’s foes have to declare: it is their intent to destroy her, before pre-emption (against Iran, its proxy arms or others) becomes the only nation-saving option? Ten….50….100…

NOT to be lost in the discussion, this week’s  strike assisted the U.S. military in its quest to block Russia from imposing a “no-fly” zone over Syrian airspace, and all that it entails. Resultant, it became a win-win to strike.

CONCOMITANTLY, Israel’s leaders must steer clear of Obama Inc.’s “relationship” with ISIS and its attendant terror arms, thus, knowing when to “part company”!

 

 

Repubs In Bed With Islamic Terror Groups:Michigan’s Guv Latest To Submit.What’s Going On? Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

TOP hydra for Islamic terror in North America, Islamic Society of North America, a 501 (3) (c) too! Yes, taxpayers are helping to fund terror!

BY any authoritative qualifier, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) is the Capo di tutti of the Brotherhood Mafia. In essence, it is TOP terror dog. Moreover, it is joined-at-the-hip with CAIR, the notorious Brotherhood propaganda arm which the fearless Brooke Goldstein decimated on FOX News. Essentially, she stripped them naked. She proved, one hundred percent, CAIR operates DEEP inside America’s power centers, in the quest to stealthily install Shariah law to “sabotage the miserable house from within”.

Written sometime in 1987 but not formally published until May 22, 1991, Akram’s 18-page document listed the Brotherhood’s 29 like-minded “organizations of our friends” that shared the common goal of dismantling American institutions and turning the U.S. into a Muslim nation. These “friends” were identified by Akram and the Brotherhood as groups that could help convince Muslims “that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands … so that … God’s religion [Islam] is made victorious over all other religions.”

Them’s fighting words. War-like.

The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) is the largest and most influential Muslim advocacy group in the United States. Its annual conference draws tens of thousands of people and, in 2009, was honored with a speech by Valerie Jarrett, a top advisor to President Barack Obama.

President Ingrid Mattson is Director of the Macdonald Center for the Study of Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations at the Hartford Seminary and active in interfaith dialogue.

ISNA has a troubling history, however, and its leadership ranks beyond Mattson include people who date back to the group’s foundation by Muslim Brotherhood members. The organization grew out of the Muslim Students Association (MSA), which also was founded by Brotherhood members.

The Brotherhood is an 80-year-old Egyptian movement that seeks to spread Shariah, or Islamic law, far and wide.

Federal prosecutors included ISNA on a list of unindicted co-conspirators in the Hamas-financing prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF). ISNA is listed among “individuals/entities who are and/or were members of the US Muslim Brotherhood.” The trial ended with guilty verdicts on 108 counts in November 2008.

Its conferences have featured rhetoric in support of terrorist groups and other radicalism. This continued at the 2009 convention, where panelists expressed extreme anti-Semitism and support for the terrorist group Hizballah.

AS such, anything that smacks of Brotherhood infiltration and penetration, whatever acronyms they operate under, rest assured, will have no relief from this site. For that matter, neither will their willful collaborators, whether Demsters or Repubs.

READERS may, or may not, recall previous Repub sell-outs, but no matter.

Recall One:

REPUBS and their dangerous liaisons have been duly exposed and this was just one, out of several, such Brotherhood collaboration:

The trial, which begins on February 16th, will determine if Muslim Brotherhood Deputy Khairat Al-Shater and ousted Egyptian President Mohammed Mursi will be convicted. Much of the case rests on their dealings with Aleiba, who sent emails in his capacity as a U.S. embassy employee. One of those emails, originated on June 6, 2012 – prior to Mohammed Mursi’s election – implicates a Republican U.S. Congressman.

Rep. David Dreier (R-CA) – The email was sent to al-Shater. On June 10th, Aleiba – using an official U.S. State Department email address – forwarded that same email to al-Shater again with additional information. Al-Shater then forwarded the email to what appears to be Mursi adviser Essam el-Haddad (eelhaddad@gmail.com). It is important to note that el-Haddad was an adviser to Mursi anddocuments we published last month showed that he was in secret meetings with representatives of Sudan’s Islamic Da’wa Organization (IDO). Essam’s son – Gehad el-Haddad – has a history that includes five years as an employee of the Clintons. Aleiba Email, Pg. 1 

Dirtbags – Dreier and the Brotherhood Mafia.

Recall Two:

INDUBITABLY, Congressional Demsters and RINOS are in bed with Islamists, many of whom serve in the top echelons of Obama’s administration.

Recall Three:

AND a laundry list of others, including top Repub Chairman Mike Rogers, are duly infected! Yes, his Benghazigate betrayal, even as he currently opines about ISIS and its dangers to the homeland…as if he had no hand in their empowerment! More than a day late and a dollar short!

MOVING right along…

Republican Governor of Michigan Rick Snyder will be giving the opening remarks for the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) conference on Friday, August 29. ISNA has Muslim Brotherhoodorigins and a lineup of Islamist speakers. Former President Carter is the keynote speaker.

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) and former U.S. ambassador to Syria Robert Ford are also slated to speak.

In 2007, the Justice Department designated ISNA as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism-financing trial in American history and listed the group as a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity. The prosecuted organization, the Holy Land Foundation, was found guilty and “operated from within” ISNA, according to a 2009 ruling by a federal judge.

The Clarion Project has reached out to Governor Snyder’s office for comment and will post any response here if a comment is forthcoming.

 A 1991 U.S. Muslim Brotherhood memo explicitly identifies ISNA and its various components among its fronts. The memo states the Brotherhood network’s “work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.” Another Brotherhood document from 1988 states ISNA is part of its “apparatus.”

A Clarion Project analysis in March showed that ISNA’s religious leadership is mostly extremist. For example, Imam Muhammad Qatanani sits on ISNA’s fiqh (or sharia) council. Qatanani’s deportation is sought by the Department of Homeland Security because of his links to Hamas.

Sayyid Syeed, former ISNA Secretary-General and current national director of its Office of Interfaith and Community Alliances, was videotaped in 2006 declaring, “Our job is to change the constitution of America.” Syeed’s interfaith ties have resulted in Bishop Elizabeth Eaton, leader of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, to also speak.

Governor Snyder and former President Carter are just another example of ISNA’s influence on both political parties in the U.S. ISNA and other American Islamists were also embraced by the Bush Administration following the September 11, 2001 attacks. Last year, President Obama delivered a videotaped address for ISNA’s convention, praising the group despite that event’s extremist lecturers.

Political leaders that embrace ISNA are given the impression that it is the leader of the Muslim-American community. However, a 2011 Gallup poll found that only 4% of Muslim-American males and 7% of females see ISNA as the group that “most represents their interests.”

Tariq Ramadan, the grandson of the Muslim Brotherhood’s founder and the son of a top Brotherhood leader in Europe canceledhis appearance and publicly admonished ISNA for being too soft in its approach. ISNA publicly replied. 

The extremist records of the convention’s speakers were covered in our previous article about the event. For your convenience, we have reposted them below along with speakers that have been added recently (including speakers for the Muslim Students Association convention that is happening within the ISNA event):

Imam Siraj Wahhaj, whose history of extremist and anti-American incitement is too long to review. For example, in 1992, he said, “If only Muslims were clever politically, they could take over the United States and replace its constitutional government with aCaliphate. If we were united and strong, we’d elect our own emir and give allegiance to him. Take my word, if eight million Muslims unite in America, the country will come to us.”

His rhetoric became more cautious after the 9/11 attacks. In 2011, he preached, “The trap we fall into is having a premature discussion about Sharia when we are not there yet.” In November, the New York Police Department disclosed frightening information about his mosque’s activity to defend its intelligence-gathering practices.

Zaid Shakir, an imam with a history of radicalism and a founder ofZaytuna College. Last year, Shakir preached that the U.S. Constitution is inferior to sharia because it grants equality to Muslims and non-Muslims. His writings depict the U.S. military in the worst of ways and the New York Times reported in 2006 that “he said he still hoped that one day the United States will be ruled by Islamic law.”

Hatem Bazian, a founder of Zaytuna College and chairman ofAmerican Muslims for Palestine.  Bazian teaches students that U.S. policy is driven by an “Islamophobic production industry” created by the military-industrial complex to provoke wars against Muslims. In 2004, he called for an intifada in America to “change fundamentally the political dynamics here” modeled after the “uprising” against U.S. troops in Iraq.

Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). Like ISNA, CAIR was branded an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation. During the trial, the Justice Department said CAIR is an entity of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee, a secret body set up to support Hamas. A 1994 Muslim Brotherhood Palestine Committee meeting agenda organized a discussion to “future suggestions to develop the work of” CAIR.

Awad publicly supported the terrorist group Hamas as far back as 1994 and referred to Hamas as well as Hezbollah as “liberation movements” in an Arabic interview with Al-Jazeera in 2004. The FBImonitored his emails from 2006 to 2008.

Corey Saylor, national legislative director of CAIR. In The Third Jihad, he is seen awkwardly dodging a question about whether CAIR condemns Hamas and Hezbollah.

Dawud Walid, the executive director of the Michigan chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).  He most recentlydisparaged Independence Day and questioned whether fallen U.S. soldiers should be honored on Memorial Day. He has also expressed support of the Muslim Brotherhood and vilifies the U.S. government.

Zahra Billoo, the executive director of the San Francisco Bay Area chapter of CAIR. She joined Walid in questioning Memorial Day anddefaming the U.S. military. She’s also defended the terrorism of Hamas against Israel.

Billoo will be speaking about the work of the youth activists. The ISNA program bills her as one of the “most remarkable young Muslim leaders and activists who are elevating Muslim American culture in the new millennium.”

Jamal Badawi, formerly listed on ISNA’s website as a member of its Board of Directors. Badawi is personally listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land trial and is a founder of the Muslim American Society, another U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity. His name is listed as a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood official in an internal document from 1992.

Badawi’s history includes endorsing suicide bombings and “combative jihad” and praising Hamas as “martyrs.” He is also close to Brotherhood spiritual leader Yousef al-Qaradawi.

Muzzamil Siddiqui, a founder of ISNA and its president from 1997 to 2000. He preaches that Muslims must institute sharia using astrategy of gradualism. He said in 1996:

“[Muslims] should participate in the [U.S. political] system to safeguard our interest and try to bring gradual change for the right cause … We must not forget that Allah’s rules have to be established in all lands, and all our efforts should lead to that direction.”

Siddiqi was more specific in a 2001 speech, where he said thatsharia’s penal system must also be eventually established:

“The criminal law of the sharia is not practiced here, and it is not even required for Muslims to practice the criminal law in a non-Islamic state…Once more people accept Islam, insha’allah[God willing], this will lead to the implementation of sharia in all areas.”

Hassan Qazwini, imam of the Islamic Center of America in Michigan. The mosque has had Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam as a guest speaker. Qazwini has boasted that Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, a spiritual leader of Hezbollah, “considered me his son” and the two met whenever he traveled to Lebanon. Qazwini’s mosque held a memorial service for him when Fadlallah died in 2010.

Ihsan Bagby, the executive director of the Kentucky chapter of CAIR. He was also a national board member for CAIR from 1995 to 2013. Bagby is also the General-Secretary of the radical Muslim Alliance in North America, which is led by Wahhaj.

A 1991 publication quoted him as saying, “Ultimately, we [Muslims] can never be full citizens of this country … because there is no way we can be fully committed to the institutions and ideologies of this country.”

Linda Sarsour, executive director of the Arab-American Association of New York. The organization lists a Muslim Brotherhood entity in Qatar as one of its main supporters.

In 2004, she told a reporter that the American authorities had also questioned her and that her Palestinian husband, Maher Judh, was threatened with deportation after living in the U.S. for seven years.

In the same interview, she identified two men in an Arabic newspaper that were telling Muslims to die in jihad against Israel. One was her cousin who has spent 25 years in prison in Israel; another was a family friend sentenced to 99 years. She added that her brother-in-law was also serving a 12-year sentence for being a member of Hamas.

The NYPD opened a “terrorism enterprise investigation” on Sarsour’s organization and tried to get an informant on its board. Her group’s president, Dr. Ahmad Jaber, used to be the president of the Dawood Mosque, also known as the Islamic Mission of America, which was also the subject of a “terrorism enterprise investigation.”

Sarsour regularly claims that Islamic terror plots are “manufactured” by the U.S. government.

Salam al-Marayati, president of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, a group founded by Muslim Brotherhood supporters. In 1999, al-Marayati said Hezbollah’s attacks on Israeli soldiers qualify as “legitimate resistance.” The group has suggested the Brotherhood as a moderate alternative to Al-Qaeda. It has become less extreme over the years and congratulated the Egyptian people when President Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood’s candidate, was overthrown.

Waleed Basyouni, a leader of the extremist Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America and vice president of the Al-Maghrib Institute. He recently preached that Hamas is not a terrorist group.

Saffet Catovic, former New York representative of Benevolence International, a charity shut down for its involvement with Al-Qaeda. In 1992, he spoke at an Islamic Association for Palestine conference, a pro-Hamas front for the Muslim Brotherhood. He stated in his address that the “long-range” goal is resurrecting the Islamic caliphate. He also spoke at a military-themed “Jihad Camp” in 2001.

Ghulam Nabi Fai, executive director of the Kashmiri American Center. He has admitted to acting as a spy and agent of influence for Pakistani intelligence. He has close ties to ISNA leaders.

Iqbal Unus, the headquarters director of the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity in Virginia that had its offices raided by federal agents in 2002. IIIT was embraced by former Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi when he ran Egypt for the Muslim Brotherhood. Unus’home was alsosearched.

Unus is also a former secretary-general of ISNA and president of theMuslim Students Association.

Yaqub Mirza, an instructor for IIIT’s education division and co-founder of IIIT. He met with former Egyptian President and Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohammed Morsi, in 2012. He is an associate of senior Muslim Brother Yousef al-Nada.

A 1988 FBI document states that Mirza has been “previously characterized as” a  member and leader “of the IKHWAN [Muslim Brotherhood].”

Suhaib Webb, the imam of the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center. His mosque is run by the Muslim American Society, which federal prosecutors say was “founded as the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.”

The Center’s parent organization, the Islamic Society of Boston, hassignificant Muslim Brotherhood ties and was attended by the Boston bombers. There is video of Webb preaching that homosexuals are cursed.

Yasir Qadhi, a Salafist preacher from the Al-Maghrib Institute. Hesays that “Allah destroys this [American] version of capitalism” and that the U.S. economic system enslaves millions. He also preaches against man-made law and in favor of sharia law. There is adisturbing audio from him justifying the persecution of Christians and Jews under an Islamic State.

Jihad Saleh, the government affairs representative for Islamic Relief USA(IRUSA), a group with Muslim Brotherhood ties. In 2006, Israel arrested its Gaza director for financing Hamas. The Israeli government reportedly banned IRUSA’s parent organization in July because of his links to Hamas, but it says it still operates.

Ingrid Mattson, a former president of ISNA. She is on the Council of Scholars of IIIT. Zaid Shakir’s website has an endorsement of his theology from Mattson.

Imam Mohamed Magid, ISNA president and executive director of the All Dulles Area Muslim Society Center, which had its offices raided as part of a terrorism-financing investigation in 2002.

In 2004, Magid reacted to the U.S. government’s investigation into U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entities, including the Holy Land Foundation, by accusing elements of the U.S. government of being “intent on dismantling Muslim organizations and bringing them down.”

REPUB Governor Rick Snyder, not unlike his fellow betrayers, is pandering and prostrating before ISNA – as mentioned, the Capo di tutti – in order to make sure that Michigan’s explosive Muslim/Islamist population stays on his side, since he announced his plans for a second-term on January 30, 2014. His “due” date at the helm is about to expire on November 2, 2014. Naked vote trolling. 

THE proof of Islamists taking over America, and the attendant submission to Allah by American leaders – Demsters and Repubs alike – couldn’t be any clearer. Any more dangerous.

In a surprise weekend vote, the city council of Dearborn, Michigan voted 4-3 to became the first US city to officially implement all aspects of Sharia Law.  The tough new law, slated to go into effect January 1st, addresses secular law including crime, politics and economics as well as personal matters such as sexual intercourse, fasting, prayer, diet and hygiene.

The new law could see citizens stoned for adultery or having a limb amputated for theft. Lesser offenses, such as drinking alcohol or abortion, could result in flogging and/or caning. In addition, the law imposes harsh laws with regards to women and allows for child marriage.

Some in town seem to welcome the new legislation while others have denounced the move as “abhorrent”, a threat to freedom and incompatible with the Constitution.  When asked by National Report about the need for such a law, local resident Jeremy Ahmed stated:

“It is because of our need that Allah the Almighty, in all his generosity, has created laws for us, so that we can utilize them to obtain justice. We hope to see other cities taking this action in the face of the governments inaction of passing such legislation”.