Nonsense. There is no such thing as "radical" or "moderate" Muslims. Only Muslims who believe in Islam and follow the Koran. And the person Islam teaches is the perfect human being: the terrorist Mohammed, a murdering, raping pedophile. B
Radical Islamic Networks in America By Jamie <outbind://84/authors.aspx?GUID=88fb73c8-df72-4b9c-97f7-3cfb6de25bb1> Glazov FrontPageMagazine.com | Tuesday, January 13, 2009 http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=CF856F5A-8C03-4148-802E- 3F9C64E0D3BE Frontpage Interview's guest today is Ryan Mauro, the founder of WorldThreats.com <http://www.worldthreats.com/> . He is currently a national security researcher for the Christian Action Network and a researcher for the Reform Party of Syria. He is also a published author, speaker, and frequent guest on radio and TV programs. He can be contacted at [email protected]. FP: Ryan Mauro, welcome to Frontpage Interview. Mauro: Thank you. FP: I'd like to talk to you today about radical Islamic networks that exist in the U.S. Tell us about them. Mauro: Many Americans seem to think the War on Terror is a synonym for "War on Al-Qaeda," but Al-Qaeda is just one small, dying portion of the entire radical Islamic movement that seeks to enslave the Muslim community to its ideology and attack the United States. Al-Qaeda, Hamas, and virtually every terrorist organization has its roots in the Muslim Brotherhood, which can be said to be the "mother" that gave birth to today's terrorists. FP: Tell us about the Muslim Brotherhood and how it mothered terrorist groups in the U.S. Mauro: The group is radical Islamic in nature and has worldwide goals, as repeatedly stated in its internal documents. It worked with the Nazis during World War Two. Armed with Saudi oil money, the group began creating a vast array of front organizations in the United States in the 1960s. Members of these groups then formed other ones, usually managed by the same individuals, creating an impressive infrastructure of interlocked groups that work as one-all funded by the Saudis, all refusing to condemn Hamas and Hezbollah by name, and all closely following the plan of the Muslim Brotherhood. They condemn "extremism," "oppression," and "terrorism" to try to appear moderate, artfully using terms that are rendered meaningless by their vagueness. Unfortunately, many Americans seem to think all extremists are as straight-forward in their rhetoric and objectives as Al-Qaeda, when in reality, Al-Qaeda is the exception, not the rule. These groups falsely portray themselves as the representatives of the Muslim community, having used their Saudi funding and international connections to become prominent and the people that news organizations go to for commentary on current events. They use the freedoms available in the West to organize, fund, and do all the extremist activity they can short of actually committing violence inside the U.S., although sometimes members of this group are found participating in that as well. One other network that deserves to be mentioned is that of Jamaat al-Fuqra. This is a Pakistan-based terrorist group run by Sheikh Mubarak Gilani, a blatantly anti-Semitic extremist who does us the favor of not hiding his true colors. In 1979, he began creating large compounds in the U.S., using the front group he established called "The Muslims of America." It's uncontestable that this is a front-one compound at Red House, Virginia even named a street after Sheikh Gilani, and a video obtained by the Christian Action Network shows Gilani personally engaged in terrorist training, where he instructs those interested in receiving training to contact his group through the various compounds he made in the U.S. Although a number of members of this group have committed terrorism or other criminal acts, it is still not listed as a terrorist group. The Christian Action Network is releasing a new documentary about this group called "Homegrown Jihad: Terrorist Camps Around U.S.," which can be pre-ordered at ChristianAction.org. The film is premiering on February 11 at Landmark Theater in Washington DC at 7:30 PM, and it is free to attend. FP: Tell us about more groups and if the federal government is aware of them. Mauro: Well, the government should be aware of them, since several of them have been consulted by various government agencies and sometimes have been used for "sensitivity training" of FBI personnel and law enforcement. But let me first state that not all members of the following groups are extremists, but it is clear the leadership is not moderate, and the groups were founded by, and part of, Muslim Brotherhood. Luckily, the Holy Land Foundation case proves the government is aware of this group's links to the Muslim Brotherhood and helps us to identify many of them, although there are too many to name and discuss here. The Holy Land Foundation was shut down by the government for financing Hamas, and its officials have been found guilty. Using the foundation's own documents, the government showed that HLF was set up by the Muslim Brotherhood as part of a "Palestine Committee" to support Hamas and to spread awareness about what they called "the savagery of the Jews." The memo said that among the members of the Palestine Committee were the heads of the Islamic Association of Palestine, a group that was shut down for supporting Hamas. Top officials from IAP also founded the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). The FBI wiretapped a meeting of Hamas members and supporters in Philadelphia in 1993 where two of the future founders of CAIR discussed how to disguise their agenda by sounding moderate and non-threatening. They said they needed to form a new political activist group, and CAIR was born the following year. From this information, and a lot more, the federal government listed CAIR and the Islamic Society of North America as "unindicted co-conspirators" in the terrorism financing trial, a label which they are currently contesting. The government has confirmed that the Muslim American Society was "founded as the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States" and it is the one most obviously connected to the group. Their Executive-Director, Mahdi Bray, visited Egypt in February 2008 to express his support for Muslim Brotherhood. Bray also once was the political director for the Muslim Public Affairs Council. The government, FBI memos and internal Muslim Brotherhood documents have specifically identified the International Institute for Islamic Thought, Muslim Students Association, Islamic Circle of North America, Islamic Society of North America, Muslim Students Association, and North American Islamic Trust as Muslim Brotherhood groups, among many others. It is worthy to note that these groups have not been kind to their moderate Muslim competitors who more accurately represent America's Muslims. Several CAIR officials have been served with a summons by counter-terrorism expert Dave Gaubatz and his associates due to allegations from clients, including Muslims, that the organization had engaged in fraud and racketeering. CAIR has also rallied against anti-extremist conferences organized by the Free Muslims Coalition and American-Islamic Congress, for example. No wonder CAIR has lost 90% of its membership since 2001. If people want more information on these groups or the Muslim Brotherhood in general, I have an archive on my website, WorldThreats.com. They can click on "Muslim Brotherhood" on the left or use the search box to look up more specific information, where I document the group's activities inside the U.S. and internationally. The Investigative Project on Terrorism has an extremely exhaustive database on the networks in the U.S. as well that I highly recommend. FP: How extensive has the Saudi and Muslim Brotherhood effort in the U.S. been? Mauro: It's so large and impressive that any attempt to accurately describe it sounds like conspiracy theory or alarmist propaganda, but there is overwhelming documentation of these networks. Government officials frequently meet with members of Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated groups, and the influence these groups have is incredible, with the case of Stephen Coughlin being a perfect example. Coughlin, a Pentagon analyst and expert on these networks, warned against the government's embrace of these groups. Coughlin's contract was not renewed shortly after he voiced his concerns, provoking the wrath of Hesham Islam, a special assistant to Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England , who was affiliated with the Islamic Circle of North America and helped develop a relationship between the Pentagon and the group. Mr. Islam, it should be mentioned, had high security clearances and reportedly sat in on top-secret meetings at the Pentagon. He left the Pentagon after a report surfaced that he was putting together meetings with members of the Syrian branch of Muslim Brotherhood and suspicions were raised about the accuracy of his biography. Another story should be mentioned. Abdul-Rahman al-Amoudi, who now sits in jail for doing illegal business with Libya where he met with officials involved in a terrorist plot, had met with Presidents Clinton and George W. Bush and many senior government officials. For the most part, he was able to pass himself off as a moderate, except for his public outburst declaring support for Hamas and Hezbollah. Unfortunately, by the time he ended up in jail he had already helped set up the Muslim chaplain program for the Pentagon, as well as the Muslim chaplain program for our prisons. Several groups part of the Muslim Brotherhood and/or funded by Saudi Arabia were involved in these programs. It should come as no surprise that several investigators have discovered a large amount of extremist literature in prison libraries, and that many of the members of the Jamaat al-Fuqra compounds in America have criminal records. The Saudis also finance and control many Islamic institutions in the U.S. Some studies have indicated that up to 80% of mosques in the U.S. are funded by the Saudis and possess extremist literature, and many of the imams have been trained in Saudi Arabia. Of course, this doesn't mean that 80% of Muslims in the U.S. are extremist-the actual percentage of American Muslims following Wahhabism or some extremist form of Islam is small, and Muslims have often been the ones to provide information on extremist activity. Even so, we cannot deny the depth of Saudi influence in the Islamic infrastructure of America, which was achieved through spending a tremendous amount of their money from oil sales. The Saudis have spent at least $80 billion, probably more, promoting Wahhabism and radical Islam around the world. One Saudi paper in 2002, seven years ago, said that the Saudis had funded and/or built over 1500 mosques and 210 Islamic centers in "the non-Islamic world." The effort is staggering, and with that type of money being put behind it, it shouldn't be shocking that Saudi-backed groups in the U.S. are stealing the microphone from moderate groups like the Islamic Supreme Council of America, the Free Muslim Coalition, the American-Islamic Forum for Democracy, and the American-Islamic Congress-all of whom have been verbally attacked by Muslim Brotherhood's affiliates. FP: So why do we keep hearing that the Saudis are our allies and that they are fighting Al-Qaeda? How do you respond to that? Mauro: Again, this comes from the narrow definition of what an ally is. Being an ally against terrorism is more than fighting Al-Qaeda. The majority of terrorists continue to be Saudis. The vast majority of terrorist fronts, especially in the U.S., are Saudi-funded. The vast majority of extremist literature and preaching comes from Saudi Arabia. This isn't a coincidence. And they can not be trusted to change their ways-after repeated promises to reform their education system, the Hudson Institute found that Saudi textbooks had not been cleansed of extremism in a report titled "2008 Update: Saudi Arabia's Curriculum of Intolerance." The Saudis were previously caught lying about their reforms in 2006 by Freedom House, and even after being caught the first time, they continued to lie. Keep in mind, the only reason Saudi Arabia is fighting Al-Qaeda within its borders is because the terrorist group began actively targeting the Royal Family in 2003. Prior to that, very few observers would say Saudi Arabia was a partner in fighting the group. By promoting radical Islam, though, the Saudis still create the pool from which Al-Qaeda recruits come from, and again, Al-Qaeda is just one small part of the enemy. Look at the Mumbai attacks. One of Lashkar-e-Taiba's schools was funded by the Saudis, and that's almost certainly the tip of the iceberg. The lengths to which some people go to buy the line that the Saudis are a true ally boggles my mind. I gave a presentation on this topic at a community college recently, where one individual sought to correct me by noting the Saudis' efforts to "rehabilitate" jailed terrorists into peace-loving citizens. Obviously, he did not piece together that the Saudi imams involved are going to be Wahhabist since that's the official religion of the country, so how "moderate" are the prisoners when they come out of this process? FP: So what are the Saudis' objectives and what is the U.S. doing about it? Mauro: The Wahhabists and Royal Family are joined at the hip, and in some ways, have fused together. Much of the Royal Family is Wahhabist or at least sympathetic to radical Islam. Keep in mind, the two forces joined together in a tight alliance long ago in order to conquer rival tribes and establish the modern state of Saudi Arabia. Although the Royal Family's lifestyle is often criticized for its immorality, the Wahhabists pretty much control the religious establishment and aren't going to jeopardize that by taking on the government. Wahhabism is the state religion of Saudi Arabia and as such, Saudi assistance to Islamic networks is done with the goal of promoting that ideology and organizations friendly to their worldview. The Saudi Royal Family doesn't only do this because of their partnership with the Wahhabists. Their promotion of radical Islam creates a dependency upon Saudi Arabia by such forces; forces which would otherwise try to overthrow the Royal Family with everything they had. In addition, promoting extremism internally allows for the typical scapegoats, the Jews, the Americans, etc., to be blamed for all of the country's societal ills and the Royal Family's failure at governance. Virtually any domestic problem is attributed to the corrupting influence of the U.S. and/or Israel, thereby debunking the notion that extremism is a response to Western aggression-our very immoral way of existence, which in their view causes our sin to spread among Muslims like a plague, is what they want to get rid of, not just our foreign policy. It can be argued that U.S. foreign policy has provoked anti-Americanism, but we must not confuse anger at America with the extremist religious and political ideology our enemy possesses. There are several reasons the U.S. isn't taking on the Saudis. The most obvious one is oil, as the U.S. is so dependent upon the Saudis for its economic well-being. The U.S. also fears that should the Royal Family fall, even more extremist forces will come to power. Finally, a staggering amount of people working in government, whether it's in Congress, the Intelligence Community, State Department, or whatever, have received or will receive some sort of money from the Saudis. Maybe they'll join a company that does extensive business with the Royal Family, or they'll join a lobbying firm funded by the Saudis. Prince Bandar, the former Saudi ambassador to the U.S., once said "If the reputation then builds that the Saudis take care of friends when they leave office, you'd be surprised how much better friends you have coming into office." Former CIA case officer Bob Baer describes the system as a retirement plan for government officials. Some may work with the Saudis genuinely seeing them as a good partner, but there can be little doubt that the prospect of getting rich is luring people into the Saudis' arms. I feel I must also mention that there is a pervasive tendency among some academics and government personnel to view instability as always being a bad thing. It makes sense. Pushing for change can result in unintended consequences, and promoting democracy can be messy. Many favor the predictable, simple policy of coddling tyrannical people rather than trusting the Arab people, who in their opinion simply don't have values that treasure freedom, human rights, and democracy. I disagree. I see subtle beneath-the-surface signs of a movement for women's rights and liberalization, and I think we need to try to strengthen this force, so that one day we can stop choosing between embracing the Royal Family or taking them on and risking an even more extreme takeover of this critical country. FP: Your recommendation for the incoming Obama administration in terms of how to tackle these networks? Mauro: The first thing the Obama administration can do is outlaw donations from Saudi Arabia by passing legislation that bans the funding of non-profit groups from countries without religious freedom. If the Saudi funding dries up, watch these Muslim Brotherhood affiliates reduce and ultimately collapse, and watch moderate Muslim groups rise up. As goes Saudi funding, so goes Muslim Brotherhood. The second piece of legislation I'd suggest passing is banning government agencies from working with groups labeled as unindicted co-conspirators. Several of the top Muslim Brotherhood groups have been given such a label as part of the federal government's case against the Holy Land Foundation, which was found guilty of covertly financing Hamas. Some of the most prominent groups, like the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Islamic Society of North America, and the North American Islamic Trust were given that title. With such legislation, those groups' involvement with the FBI, law enforcement, State Department, or any other part of the government, would end. And the government could then work with organizations like the American-Islamic Congress or American-Islamic Forum on Democracy which truly represent the Muslim community, and help elevate them. And of course, we need to try to build a legal case to add Jamaat al-Fuqra to the list of the State Department's terrorist organizations so we can get rid of these compounds in America The tape of Gilani specifically saying the compounds were meant to train Muslims in tactics of warfare clearly indicates their original purpose, even if some argue they aren't engaged in terrorism on American soil any more like they did in the 1980s. They are, at the very least, radical Islamic compounds whose members often engage in large amounts of criminal activity. We need to look at legal options to either shut them down or make it as difficult as possible for them to operate. As for Saudi Arabia, the U.S. needs to pressure the country to liberalize and break the extremist information blockade. It's time to allow for freedom of press and religion in that country to allow for democratic, tolerant alternatives to grow rather than be silenced and marginalized. The U.S. also must, simply must, end its dependence upon foreign oil. Look around the world: Venezuela, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia - their power directly correlates to oil sales. Oil independence isn't only an economic imperative, it's a strategic imperative. Oil independence is the game-changer not just in the War on Terror, but in shaping America's future. It will dramatically help our economy at a time when we really need it, and simultaneously strengthens America and weakens every single one of our adversaries. After World War Two, it was the atomic bomb that made us dominant. Today, it is energy independence. FP: Ryan Mauro, thank you for joining Frontpage Interview. Mauro: Thank you Jamie. (F)AIR USE NOTICE: All original content and/or articles and graphics in this message are copyrighted, unless specifically noted otherwise. All rights to these copyrighted items are reserved. Articles and graphics have been placed within for educational and discussion purposes only, in compliance with "Fair Use" criteria established in Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976. The principle of "Fair Use" was established as law by Section 107 of The Copyright Act of 1976. "Fair Use" legally eliminates the need to obtain permission or pay royalties for the use of previously copyrighted materials if the purposes of display include "criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research." Section 107 establishes four criteria for determining whether the use of a work in any particular case qualifies as a "fair use". A work used does not necessarily have to satisfy all four criteria to qualify as an instance of "fair use". Rather, "fair use" is determined by the overall extent to which the cited work does or does not substantially satisfy the criteria in their totality. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: <http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml THIS DOCUMENT MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. COPYING AND DISSEMINATION IS PROHIBITED WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNERS. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ -------------------------- Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [email protected]. -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor [email protected] http://www.intellnet.org Post message: [email protected] Subscribe: [email protected] Unsubscribe: [email protected] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[email protected] mailto:[email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
