The Project – Muslim Brotherhood Documents Date Back to 1982 and Obama Refuses to Release Them to Congress!

Glenn Beck recently produced a two-part documentary titled ‘The Project’.  He specifically asked Patrick Poole and other panel members whether or not our government has released any of the documents seized in the 1991 ‘Holy Land Foundation’ raid.  He was told the only item they have seen from the huge cache of documents was an FBI synopsis (smuggled by an FBI agent) . “Perhaps the most ironic point to note is that defendants in the Holy Land Foundation trial had access to these documents as part of the discovery process, yet when members of the House Judiciary Committee on oversight called on U.S. Attorney General to furnish them with the same, their attempts were stonewalled.” The panel also think the documents either have been or will be destroyed.

“To note, the Holy Land Foundation was found guilty in 2008 of providing $12 million in funding to Hamas. Named as un-indicted co-conspirators in the trial were the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), both of which have documented ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.”

If you missed the series, I recommend you check out the following:

The Project’ Part I — All Totalitarian Ideologies Are Threat to U.S.

TheBlazeTV Unveils ‘The Project’ Part II: Civilization Jihad

In March I posted the following and feel this is a good time to share the damning information once again.  I think you will find The Project eerily similar to the 1982 documents found in the Swiss raid.

The following was sent to me by a friend via the Swissdefenceleague.  Switzerland is undergoing a transformation similar to that in the UK.  Muslim and Islamic factions are trying to take over the government and even want to replace the Swiss national flag.  The following document, found written in French, was sent through Google translator.  Note the date of  “The Project” (A Global Strategy for Islamic Policy) – 12/01/1982!  This is eerily similar to ”An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America” which was written in May 1991 and discovered during the Holy Land Foundation Trial.

In November 2001, European police were investing the luxurious villa of an Islamic bank on the banks of a Swiss lake. They discovered a document kept secret for nearly twenty years: the “Project”. This text, known only to a handful of specialists, describes the clandestine strategy which aims to “establish the kingdom of God on Earth”. All means are good in this world conquest: infiltration of society, propaganda, alliance with the fighters of the Holy War … The “Project” shows a section of hidden history of Islam in the West.

Inspired by the radical ideas of the Muslim Brotherhood, his followers have built in Europe and America a network of mosques, religious centers, charitable institutions pursuing the same goal: to create an ideal society based on the Koran, expand the sphere of Islam and to end the hegemony of Western civilization to the world. Conducted over several months in Europe and the United States, this survey raises important issues for the future of our societies: the Islamists who are really “moderates” who claim to represent Muslims in the West? What ideas do they spread, and with what methods? Rich in exclusive revelations, this book provides specific answers, informed, troubling.

By watching the news, we are able to see the “Project” takes place substantially as planned. Except that people are much more aware than they were the dangers of Islamism and they will abort the “Project”.

The “Project”

The name of Allah the merciful merciful,

12/01/1982

Towards a Global Strategy for Islamic Policy

(Starting points, items, procedures and missions)

This report presents an overview of an international strategy for Islamic policy. According to its guidelines, and in accordance therewith, the Islamic political authorities are developed in different regions. This is, first, to define the starting points of this policy and to articulate the components of each starting point and the most important procedures related to each starting point, we finally suggest some missions, as an example only, may Allah protect us. Below, the main starting points of this policy:

1. Know the terrain and adopt a scientific methodology for planning and implementation.

2. Get serious in work.

3. Reconcile international engagement and local flexibility.

4. Reconcile political engagement and the need to avoid isolation on the one hand, continuing education and institutional work of generations on the other.

5. Work to establish the Islamic state, along with progressive efforts to control local power centers through institutional work.

6. Work with loyalty alongside Islamic groups and institutions in various fields by agreeing on common ground in order to “cooperate on areas of agreement and to set aside areas of disagreement.”

7. Accept the principle of temporary cooperation between Islamic movements and national movements in general areas and areas of agreement such as the fight against colonialism, preaching and the Jewish state without having to form alliances. This requires, however, limited contacts between certain leaders, case by case, as these contacts do not violate the law. However, they do not pledge allegiance or trust them, knowing that the Islamic movement must be the cause of the initiatives and orientations taken.

8. Mastering the art of the possible, a provisional perspective, without abusing the basic principles, knowing that the teachings of Allah are all applicable. Must order the blâmable1 and forbidding, while giving a documented opinion. But we should not seek a confrontation with our adversaries, locally or globally, which would be disproportionate and could lead to attacks against the dawa2 or his disciples.

9. Continuously build the strength of the worldwide Islamic dawa and support movements engaged in jihad in the Muslim world, to varying degrees and as much as possible.

10. Helping monitoring systems many and varied, in many places, to gather information and adopt an informed and effective communication, able to serve the global Islamic movement. Indeed, surveillance, policy decisions and effective communication are complementary.

11. Adopt the Palestinian cause on a global Islamic, on a political level and through jihad because it is the keystone of the renaissance of the Arab world today.

12. Learn to use self-criticism and permanent evaluation of worldwide Islamic policy and its objectives, its content and its procedures to improve. It is a duty and a necessity according to the precepts of Sharia.

[1] Concept cited in the Koran, became one of the central aims of the brotherhood: it was also translated as “good order and hunt down the evil.”

[2] Dawa: literally means, call, invocation, exhortation, prayer. The term here refers to the work of the Brothers to propagate Islam.

The first starting point is to know and adopt a scientific methodology for planning and implementation.

Elements:

Know the factors influential in the world, be they Islamic forces, opposing forces or neutral forces.

Use the scientific and technological means for planning, organization, implementation and monitoring.

Procedures:

Establish observatories to gather information, store it for all purposes, be used as appropriate based on modern technology.

Create centers of study and research and produce studies on the political dimension of the Islamic movement.

Suggested tasks:

Draw a map of the doctrines in the world to have a global vision of the world a hundred years to the present and analyze the current situation in light of this configuration taking into account the changes and provided befallen.

Draw a map of the doctrines of the Muslim world.

Draw a map of Islamic movements in the Muslim world.

To study political science and various fields in successive Islamic, which more particularly on current events.

Make a scientific study that draws up the history of contemporary Islamic movements and use.

The second starting point: Be serious about the work

Elements:

Clarity of the main objectives of the dawa in the eyes of all temporary and clarity of purpose to harness the energies and channel them and guide them.

Efforts are sufficient workers in the service of Islam and combine these efforts into a single objective.

Is sufficient time.

Spend the money wisely.

Procedures:

Harnessing the energies of workers in the service of dawa, each at his level (the criterion of effectiveness is that everyone should set about the task he is booked).

Mobilize the maximum amount of followers and leaders.

Raise money efficiently, control expenses and invest in the public interest.

Suggested tasks:

Conduct a survey of the workers of Islam (the right man in the right place).

Establish schedules with the schedules of workers and specialists and use these efforts appropriately and timely (adequate effort at the right time).

Commitment of economic institutions adequate to support the cause financially.

The third point of departure: Reconciling international commitment and local flexibility.

Elements:

Define the general guidelines that everyone must follow.

Leave a margin so that there is sufficient flexibility for local issues that do not oppose the general lines of the Islamic political world.

Procedures:

The Movement, worldwide, defines the areas and issues of general Islamic requiring the commitment of all according to previously defined priorities.

Local management defines the local issues that are within its powers, according to the principle of flexibility and according to priorities defined in advance.

Suggested tasks:

Commitment to an Islamic world total liberation of Palestine and the creation of a Muslim state, mission rests with the world.

Establish a dialogue with local people working for the cause in the political world of the Movement. This is the local management to define the contours of this dialogue.

The fourth point of departure: Reconciling political commitment and need to avoid isolation on the one hand, continuing education and institutional work of generations on the other.

Elements:

Political freedom in each country depending on local conditions, without participating in a process of decision making that is contrary to the texts of the Shariah.

Invite everyone to participate in parliamentary councils, municipal, union and other institutions whose boards are chosen by the people in the interest of Islam and Muslims.

Continue to educate individuals and generations and to ensure the training of specialists in various fields according to a previously studied.

Build social, economic, scientific and in the health field and enter the field of social services to be in contact with the people and to serve him through Islamic institutions.

Procedures:

Study the different political environments and the likelihood of success in each country.

Plan missions of specialized studies that look at the few areas such as communication, history of Islam, etc..

Do feasibility studies covering various institutions and create according to priorities established in each country.

Suggested tasks:

To study on experiences of Islamic political and learn from it.

Islamic political advise on pressing issues.

Support of important local issues in an Islamic issues such as workers, unions, etc..

Create a number of economic institutions, social and in the field of health and education, according to the means available to serve the people within an Islamic framework.

The fifth point of departure: Work to establish the Islamic state, along with progressive efforts to control local power centers through institutional work.

Elements:

Channel thought, education and work to establish an Islamic government on earth.

Influence of local power centers and global service of Islam.

Procedures:

Prepare a scientific study on the feasibility of establishing the rule of Allah throughout the world according to established priorities.

To study the local power centers, and global opportunities of placing them under influence.

Conduct a study on modern concepts of support for Islamic dawa and Islamic law, particularly on the influential men in the state and country.

Suggested tasks:

Write an Islamic Constitution in light of efforts to date.

Write Islamic laws, civil, etc..

Choose a location and put it in the forefront of our priorities in order to establish an Islamic power and concentrating all our efforts.

Work in various influential institutions and use them in the service of Islam.

Use the work of specialized Islamic institutions, economic, social, etc..

The sixth point of departure: Working with loyalty to the service groups and Islamic institutions in various fields by agreeing on common ground in order to “cooperate on areas of agreement and set aside areas of disagreement.”

Elements:

Islamic coordinate work in one direction to allow it to lay the foundations for growth of Muslim society and dedicate the power of Allah on earth.

Each work according to his abilities in the field he chooses, and that mastery is important is loyalty and coordination of efforts.

Procedures:

Studying the reality of Islamic movements, assess the experience to begin a collaboration between them.

Avoid creating new Islamic movements in a country that already has not even a movement, serious and comprehensive.

Suggested tasks:

Coordinate the work of all those working for Islam, in each country, and establish a quality contact with them, whether individuals or groups.

Reduce the differences that exist between workers of Islam and seek to resolve conflicts according to sharia.

The seventh point of departure:

Accept the principle of temporary cooperation between Islamic movements and national movements in general areas and areas of agreement such as the fight against colonialism, preaching and the Jewish state without having to form alliances. This requires, however, limited contacts between certain leaders, case by case, as these contacts do not violate Sharia. However, they do not pledge allegiance or trust them, knowing that the Islamic movement must be the cause of the initiatives and orientations taken.

Elements:

Combine efforts against the forces of evil supreme under the principle that we must “fight evil with a lesser evil.”

Circumscribe the bases together leaders or a limited number of individuals to maximize profit and minimize any inconvenience.

Work in this context to achieve the objectives previously defined by the dawa.

Procedures:

Do a study to assess the areas that have been a mutual aid between Islamic movements and other movements and learn from it.

Study areas that can be coordinated with the other and define the contours.

Studying the thinking and plans of other movements.

Suggested tasks:

Each country should explore opportunities in the future, strengthen internal collaboration.

The eighth point of departure:

Mastering the art of the possible, a provisional perspective, without abusing the basic principles, knowing that the teachings of Allah are all applicable. Must order the proper and forbidding the wrong, while giving a documented opinion. But we should not seek a confrontation with our adversaries, locally or globally, which would be disproportionate and could lead to attacks against the dawa or its disciples.

Elements:

Evaluate the education of individuals and not resort to overly typical modern education does not match the reality, which lacks flexibility and can have serious consequences such as the confrontation between individuals to a single note or a simple failure.

Giving a documented opinion and scientific form of speeches, news releases or books that deal with important events that saw our Ummah. (Tr. Muslim community).

Prevent the movement faces major confrontations that might encourage his opponents to give him a fatal blow.

Procedures:

Conduct a study to evaluate the experiences of Islamic movements in order to avoid fatal errors.

Changing methods of educating people so that they are both copies and they are realistic and true to the principles, while granting sufficient flexibility to enable to face reality.

Suggested tasks:

Changing the orientation programs for enthusiasts and conduct an awareness on the basis of past experience.

Prepare individuals in ways educational modernization.

The ninth point of departure:

Continuously build the strength of the Islamic dawa and support movements engaged in jihad in the Muslim world, to varying degrees and as much as possible.

Elements:

Protect the dawa with the force necessary to ensure safety at the local and global.

Contact while engaged in jihad movement anywhere on the planet, and with Muslim minorities, and building bridges, as necessary, to support and establish collaboration.

Keep jihad alive in the Ummah.

Procedures:

Build an autonomous security force to protect the dawa and its disciples locally and globally.

To study movements engaged in jihad in the Muslim world and among Muslim minorities to know them better.

Suggested tasks:

Building bridges between movements engaged in jihad in the Muslim world and among Muslim minorities, and support them as much as possible, as part of a collaboration.

The tenth point of departure:

Helping monitoring systems many and varied, in many places, to gather information and adopt an informed and effective communication, able to serve the global Islamic movement. Indeed, surveillance, policy decisions and effective communication are complementary.

Elements:

Political decisions to gather important information and accurate.

Disseminating Islamic politics to make it widely and effectively covered by media.

Procedures:

Create a modern monitoring system, through advanced technology (which may complement the observatory suggested).

Create a media center effectively and seriously.

Suggested tasks:

Warning Muslims about the dangers that threaten them and international plots fomented against them.

Give an opinion on current issues and future issues.

The eleventh point of departure:

Adopt the Palestinian cause on a global Islamic, on a political level and through jihad because it is the cornerstone of the rebirth of the Arab world today.

Elements:

Give notice, under an Islamic Perspective, on all subjects, solutions, problems concerning the Palestinian issue based on the precepts of Islam.

Prepare the community of believers for jihad for the liberation of Palestine. We can lead the Ummah in achieving the purposes of the Islamic movement especially if the victory is back, Allah willing.

Create the nucleus of jihad in Palestine, however modest it and feed it to keep this flame that illuminates the only path to liberation of Palestine, and for the Palestinian cause remains alive until the release.

Procedures:

Raise enough funds to continue the jihad.

Do a survey on the situation of Muslims and the enemy in occupied Palestine.

Suggested tasks:

Conduct studies of the Jews, enemies of Muslims, and oppression inflicted by these enemies to our brothers in occupied Palestine, in addition to preaching and publications.

Fight against the sentiment of capitulation among the Ummah, to refuse defeatist solutions, and show that conciliation with the Jews would undermine our movement and its history.

Do comparative studies between the Crusades and Israel, and victory will be on the side of Islam.

Create cells of jihad in Palestine, to support them they cover all of occupied Palestine.

Link between the mujahideen in Palestine and those found in Muslim lands.

Maintaining a sense of resentment against Jews and refuse all coexistence.

The twelfth point of departure:

Learn to use self-criticism and permanent evaluation of worldwide Islamic policy and its objectives, its content, its procedures to improve. It is a duty and a necessity according to the precepts of Islamic Sharia.

Elements:

Make a constructive self-criticism to avoid pitfalls.

Conduct an ongoing assessment on a scientific basis that allows to build policies.

Improve Islamic policies taking advantage of past experiences must be a clear objective and critical.

Procedures:

Assess current practices and take advantage of past experiences.

Ask officials in the various countries and to individuals in each country to give their opinions on the directions, methods and results.

Suggested Missions:

Produce an official document of the Islamic political world.

Sensitize countries, officials and individuals with this policy.

Begin to implement this policy, to annually evaluate and improve it if necessary.

(This should send a chill up your spine – the movement is global and determined at any cost!)

FBI still refused access to Benghazi – Why? Instead of answering questions, Obama admin creating them…

It has been more than two weeks since the terrorist attack in Benghazi and the FBI is still unable to access the US Consulate. Why? There was inadequate or no security to protect Ambassador Stevens and other Americans. Why? The White House lied about the murders being an act of terrorism. Why?  And why is the FBI being denied access to the crime scene?  Instead of answering questions, the Obama administration is creating them.

The Obama administration has continually lied to us.  They have either outright lied or withheld information on the Ft. Hood shooting, the Arkansas recruiting center shooting, the shameless security leaks, Fast and Furious,  and now the Benghazi massacre.  Nixon was forced to resign for lying to us – so should Obama!  If he won’t resign (which we know the narcissist would never do), he needs to be fired – before he destroys us all.

In a CNN interview Former Bush advisor Fran Townsend tells us:

“They had difficulty, and we understand there was some bureaucratic infighting between the FBI and Justice Department on the one hand, and the State Department on the other, and so it took them longer than they would have liked to get into country. They’ve now gotten there. But they still are unable to get permission to go to Benghazi.”

FBI agents have made a request through the U.S. State Department for the crime scene to be secured, Townsend said, but that has not happened.

“The senior law enforcement official I spoke to said, ‘If we get there now, it’s not clear that it will be of any use to us,’” Townsend said.

The FBI team has conducted interviews of State Department and U.S. government personnel who were in Libya at the time of the attack, Townsend said, but the FBI’s request to directly question individuals who Libyan authorities have in custody was denied.

 

And this from Hot Air:

Former CIA analyst Bob Baer also thinks the Libyans are being uncooperative, and says he can’t remember a case where the FBI’s been barred from the scene of an attack since Iran 1979. Why the Libyan government would refuse to let the feds in to look around, I have no idea, but it’s highly suspicious given that they’re potentially risking U.S. foreign aid by refusing the request. The alternative explanation, that they want to let the feds in but simply can’t reliably secure the area with so many militias running around, is actually worse because it underscores just how perilous the situation was for Chris Stevens and the consulate without a serious American security detail. That’s what ABC says is happening: Benghazi’s just too dangerous for a U.S. government agency to be picking through the rubble, even though CNN and other media have found ways to gain access to the site. And yet, apparently, Stevens’s superiors decided he’d be better off with less security, not more. Huh.

The coverup continues – worse than Watergate?  You decide – in November!  Your security, and that of your family and country depend on it.

Obama Falsely Blames Bush for Fast and Furious

The blame game continues!  Yesterday President Obama blamed former president George Bush for the current “Fast and Furious”  government gun-running scandal during a town hall meeting hosted by Univision at  the University of Miami in Coral Gables, Florida.  We have four dead embassy officials and a dead border patrol agent – and Obama is still blaming a video and George Bush!!!

 

 

According to the Digital Journal:

“I think it’s important for us to understand that the “Fast and Furious” program  was a field-initiated program begun under the previous administration,” the  president said. “When Eric Holder found out about it, he discontinued it. We assigned a inspector general to do a thorough report that was just issued,  confirming that in fact Eric Holder did not know about this, that he took prompt action and the people who did initiate this were held accountable,” said Mr. Obama.

 The “Fast and Furious” program was  actually started in October 2009, nine months after Obama came to office,  according to an ABC  OTUS News report.
 

While similar but more successful  programs involving ATF agents were conducted during the Bush administration they  were completely separate operations, not part of the Obama administration’s  “field-initiated program,” as Obama told the crowd. Also, there were no  Americans killed in such a program under Bush.

 After the president’s falsehood was  pointed out, White House officials did not respond to a request for comment  by media.
 
Regarding Obama’s embattled Attorney  General a White  House spokesman said inside investigators “concluded that although Attorney  General Holder was notified immediately of (Border Patrol) Agent (Brian) Terry’s  shooting and death, he was not told about the connection between the firearms  found at the scene of the shooting and Operation “Fast and Furious.”
 

We determined that Attorney General  Holder did not learn of that fact until sometime in 2011, after he received Sen.  Grassley’s January 27 letter. Senior Department officials were aware of this  significant and troubling information by December 17, 2010, but did not believe  the information was sufficiently important to alert the Attorney General about  it or to make any further inquiry regarding this development.”

Although Attorney General Eric Holder feels he has been exonerated by the recent Inspector General’s report, ABC News feels otherwise:

 …this was not entirely an exoneration of the Justice Department run by Mr. Holder. “We found it troubling that a case of this magnitude, and one that affected Mexico so significantly was not directly briefed to the Attorney General,” the report stated.

In addition to specific disciplinary measures, the Inspector General “made six recommendations designed to increase the Department’s involvement in and oversight of ATF operations, improve coordination among the Department’s law enforcement components, and enhance the Department’s wiretap application review and authorization process. The OIG intends to closely monitor the department’s progress in implementing these recommendations.”

Read the Inspector General’s report HERE.

Will Voter Fraud Win Election for Obama? 723,620 invalid voter registrations in CA; 30,000 dead on NC rolls; 182,000 who may not be eligible in FL

Many voters I have spoken to recently have expressed concerns regarding the upcoming election.  Although I have met quite a few people who voted for Obama in 2008 and are either supporting Romney or will not vote this year, many still fear the outcome in November.  Not because of those legally voting, but because of voter fraud, absentee balloting, provisional balloting, and the voting zombies who desert the cemeteries each year to cast their ballots.

A good example is the Democratic National Convention…..if you watched the video you know they did not receive the necessary 2/3 votes required to pass the resolution.  I don’t think they even received half of the required votes!  If you missed it you can watch it here.

Although some states have successfully passed voter ID laws, others are being sued by our friends at the Justice Department who claim the move is ‘racist’.  Funny how these same ‘victims’ can come up with a photo ID to get into the DNC!  I think every eligible citizen should have a voter ID card, not just a photo ID.  Virginia has a ‘Motor Voter’ law which allows you to register to vote when you apply for a driver’s license.  Just because you have a driver’s license doesn’t mean you are eligible to vote!  One of the 9/11 hijackers, Mohammed Atta, had a Virginia driver’s license!  Felons are able to obtain driver’s licenses, as are illegal immigrants.  As important as elections are, we need to preserve the legitimacy of our voting process and rights.

As seen below, there are too many instances of voter fraud to ignore the problem!  If Barack Obama wins in November, it will most certainly be due to voter fraud.

While Attorney General Eric Holder and NAACP President Benjamin Jealous lash out at new state laws requiring photo ID for voting, an NAACP executive sits in prison, sentenced for carrying out a massive voter fraud scheme. In April 2011, a Tunica County, Miss., jury convicted NAACP official Lessadolla Sowers on 10 counts of fraudulently casting absentee ballots. Sowers received a five-year prison term for each of the 10 counts.  Sowers was found guilty of voting in the names of Carrie Collins, Walter Howard, Sheena Shelton, Alberta Pickett, Draper Cotton and Eddie Davis. She was also convicted of voting in the names of four dead persons: James L. Young, Dora Price, Dorothy Harris, and David Ross. In the trial, a forensic scientist testified that Sowers’s DNA was found on the inner seals of five envelopes containing absentee ballots.

A local Florida station found an innovative way to check for voter fraud: jury excusal forms. NBC2 compiled a list of jury excusals based on not being a citizen of the United States and compared it to a list of registered voters in two counties. They discovered almost 100 illegally registered voters, many of whom had voted multiple times. “I vote every year,” one woman told NBC2, despite the fact that she is not a US citizen. The woman had told the court that she couldn’t serve on a jury because she wasn’t a US citizen, but she doesn’t seem to have a problem voting like one. Based on the NBC2 investigation, local election offices say they’ll now request a copy of every jury excusal form where residents say they can’t serve because they’re not a citizen.  This should be mandatory in every state!

Before Its News reports:

California’s database shows 723,620 voter registrations, which are invalid due to missing birth date. CA elections code 2150, 2152 stipulate that an affidavit from an elector has to contain a valid birth date, valid country of origin, a Social Security number, drivers license or a number assigned to the voter if there is no Social Security number or Drivers License number. Aside from some 700,000 registrations without a birth date, there were over half a million registrations without a country of origin. Additionally, employees of offices of several registrars admitted that in some cases, where the databases did not contain a birth date, they simply created one, assigned a birth date such as 01.01.1850 or 01.01.1900. Consequently, thousands more potentially invalid registrations are contained in the databases, where data shows individuals, who are 150 years old and 200 years old still voting.

North Carolina News Network provided the following information:

Some county election boards across North Carolina are not doing a very good job of removing dead voters from their rolls, according to a group that keeps track of the statistics.  …..they found the names of 30,000 dead North Carolina voters who are still on voter rolls across the state.

From Letting Freedom Ring:

Federal authorities are demanding that Florida halt its push to remove ineligible voters from the voter rolls. In a move that comes just months before the state could play a pivotal role  in the 2012 presidential election, the U.S. Department of Justice contends that the state is violating federal law in its effort to identify and remove  ineligible voters. Florida, at the urging of Republican Gov. Rick Scott, began looking for non-U.S. citizens on its voter rolls last year. An initial search turned up as  many as 182,000 registered voters who may not be U.S. citizens.

Some other examples include:

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) – A Democratic state legislator from east Arkansas, his father and two campaign workers pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit election fraud after federal prosecutors said the lawmaker’s campaign bribed absentee voters and destroyed ballots in a special election last year. Read more here.

Prosecutors in South Bend, Ind., filed charges against four St. Joseph County Democratic officials and deputies as part of a multiple-felony case involving the alleged forging of Democratic presidential primary petitions in the 2008 election, which put then-candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton on the Indiana ballot.  Read more here.

November 1, 2011 – 8 were arrested for absentee voter fraud in Madison County, Florida. The case began when the Florida’s Division of Elections notified FDLE and FBI that “an extraordinarily disproportionate amount of absentee votes,” had been cast in the District 1 school board race. The eight suspects were arrested on November 1, 2011.  Read more here.

7 Democrats Arrested in New York for actual Voter Fraud via Absentee Ballots – 4 Plead Guilty while the other 3 opt for a trial. The group forged signatures on applications for absentee ballots and on the ballots themselves in a 2009 primary of the Working Families Party, which was affiliated with now-defunct community group ACORN. Voters whose signatures were forged expressed outrage to Fox. “I feel extremely violated,” said Brian Suozzo. In November 2009, Democratic operative Anthony DeFiglio told New York State police investigators that faking absentee ballots was a commonplace and accepted practice in political circles, all intended to swing an election. Read more here.

12 Democrats have been Charged in Georgia for Absentee Ballot Voter Fraud – Case in point: November 23, 2011 – 12 people have been charged in Georgia for voter fraud as they used absentee ballots to skew an in election in Georgia. The 12 people charged are ALL with the Democrat Party. The defendants include some workers in the voter registrar’s office and some school board members.  Read more here.

FOUR Wake County, North Carolina, Democrats have admitted to voter fraud charges, according to local news reports. Kierra Fontae Leache, Shelia Romona Hodges and Brandon Earl Mclean each admitted to casting two ballots in recent elections. Local reports indicate all three voted for President Barack Obama twice in 2008.   Read more here.

These are not the only instances and we need to be alert, informed and proactive. We must all do we can to stop and/or report abuses of voter fraud.  If you know of other cases, please feel free to share them.

Related articles

The Amazing Presidential Power-Grab (And Disregard for Rule of Law – He Makes Up His Own)

By Kyle Stone via The American Thinker

With  little consternation or lasting opposition, the Obama administration has  dramatically usurped congressional power at the expense of popular will and the rule of law.  Numerous dastardly bureaucratic coups — motivated by the  president’s progressive and political agenda — have amazingly failed to  engender a serious response.

What  began as a trickle of presidential power-grabs has turned into a cascade of  executive roguery.  A list of them is worth some review and  reflection:

  •   In June 2012, President Obama circumvented Congress’s refusal to pass the DREAM  Act by instituting a portion of it on his own. Through executive order, the  administration has directed federal officers to no longer deport large swathes  of younger illegal immigrants, with an inclusive  net that could impact over a million. Conservative sage Charles Krauthammer summed  it up pithily: “This is out-and-out lawlessness. You had a clip of the president  himself say[ing] months ago, ‘I cannot do this on my own because there are laws  on the books.’ Well, I have news for the president — the  laws remain on the books. They haven’t changed.”
  •   Earlier this month, the Obama administration quietly stripped away a central  component of the 1996 bipartisan welfare reform act — the lynchpin work  requirements — passed by a Republican Congress and signed into law by President  Clinton. The regulations allow states to  substitute education programs as “work” for their residents to enjoy welfare  benefits. Self-described “neo-liberal” pundit Mickey Kaus reacted  to the “surprising (and possibly illegal) attempt to grant waivers of the work  requirements” as follows:

A  great deal of effort was put into defining what qualified as work, and making  sure that work actually meant work and not the various BS activities (including  BS training activities) the welfare bureaucracies often preferred to substitute  for work[.] … To the extent the administration’s action erodes the actual and  perceived toughness of the work requirements, which it does, it sends the  opposite and wrong signal.

In  effect, the administration is taking the teeth out of the reform.  So long  as states believe that new methods might achieve employment goals in the long run, the feds can approve the  changes, and those not working can enjoy sustained welfare benefits.  All  this without consulting those charged with actually making  law.

  •   The so-called Affordable Care Act (ACA) is one mammoth legislative concession to  executive-branch lawmaking. The Act is hardly a law at all, but rather a series  of directives and mandates, providing the secretary of HHS (i.e., the Obama  administration) immeasurable power in implementing the Act’s policy aims. One  example from earlier this year is the HHS religious mandate, requiring employers  to include abortion-inducing drugs, sterilization, and contraception in their  employee health insurance. The regulation  applies to religious institutions like Catholic hospitals, schools, and  charities — regardless of whether these institutions object to such services on  moral grounds. Want to find the portion of the 2,700-page bill that deals with  this issue? Good luck. It’s not there.
  •   Less publicized examples are numerous. The Wall Street Journal‘s  Kimberly Strassel, in a recent superb  column, outlined a laundry list a few weeks ago:

o   The president opposes a federal law  criminalizing medical marijuana.  No problem — he merely instructed his  Justice Department not to prosecute violators.

o   He disapproves of the federal Defense  of Marriage Act.  No need to work with Congress on repealing it — he  merely stopped defending it in court.

o   With no love for the federal No Child  Left Behind Act, he ordered his Education Department to issue waivers “that are  patently inconsistent with the statute.”

o   Congress falls  short of passing cap-and-trade?  The administration had the Environmental  Protection Agency enforce something similar though unilateral  regulations.

o   Congress demurred in taking up “net  neutrality” internet regulations, so the president’s Federal Communications  Commission did it instead.

This  list could go on.

When  presidents past overstepped constitutional or statutory boundaries, the Fourth  Estate would lecture on “imperial” presidencies.  For President Obama,  however, the media’s progressive core prompts compliments of bravery and  perseverance, while journalistic duty turns a blind eye to procedural  lawlessness.  One wonders what their reaction would have been had President  George W. Bush and his administration acted similarly.

Politically  combatting this lawlessness is difficult, as a public debate about procedural  malfeasance invariably morphs into disputes of the substantive policy itself.   Attempts to highlight procedural strong-arming are blurred by political  attacks — “wars” on women, immigrants, the poor, and the like.  It may  also be said by political strategists that when one argues about procedure, he  has already lost the policy debate.

Political  challenges, however, are no excuse for allowing this administration to peel away  constitutional checks and balances.  A coordinated effort by conservative  and Republican (big “R” and small) causes must be brought to bear to inform the  voting public on these knavish executive end-runs.  John Adam famously  warned that our Constitution sought “a government of laws and not of men.”   Process matters.  Our constitutional framework depends on  it.

Kyle  Stone is a practicing attorney in Chicago, co-chair of Maverick  PAC Chicago, and board member for the Chicago Young  Republicans.  He can be reached at  kyle.evan.stone@gmail.com.

Read more at The American Thinker

“The Vetting: Obama, Radical Islam and the Soros Connection” – Chilling Videos and Transcripts

This will be the most important election of my lifetime and we need to get it right this time!  I truly believe that, as a nation, we failed to vet Barack Obama the first time around. Our friend, Andrew Breitbart, unsuccessfully tried to vet the man and was astonished that we failed to perceive the threat Obama posed to our country.

 A national conference sponsored by America’s Survival, Inc. was held on July 19, 2012 at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.  The conference, titled ‘The Vetting: Obama, Radical Islam and the Soros Connection’,  introduced several experts who presented very thorough and compelling discussions on Obama and his Marxist-Communist-Islamist connections. Topics included: Obama’s communist mentor, Frank Marshall Davis; Obama’s Saudi connection; Muslim communism; the Marxist-Islamist nexus; communist exploitation of blacks; Soros funding of Marxist groups; the dangers of foreign propaganda channels like Al-Jazeera and Russia Today; and the War on Cops.

The following excerpts and videos are from the proceedings of that conference.  Each one is a lesson in itself and I hope you take the time to watch each and every one of them.  They are ominous and at times chilling – which makes you wonder how we, as a nation, failed to connect the dots.

There is a brief excerpt of the speaker’s speech following the video with a link to the full pdf file.  You can view the conference and donate to America’s Survival at www.LeninandSharia.com.

Conference organizer Cliff Kincaid, a veteran journalist, author, and media critic, serves as President of America’s Survival, Inc. and director of the Accuracy in Media Center for Investigative Journalism. He released the 600-page FBI file on Barack Obama’s communist mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, in 2008, and has called on Congress to re-establish committees examining internal security problems in the U.S. Cliff introduces the conference and concludes it.

Cliff Kinkcaid:

It is time for the shocking truth about America’s internal security crisis, which starts at the top, to be presented to the American people. Our conference today fulfills the late Andrew Breitbart’s promise to finally “vet” the president. Our featured speaker, Paul Kengor, has written a book, The Communist. Frank Marshall Davis: The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor, which is a major contribution to understanding our president and his policies. Four years after we helped break this story, it is time to tell it.

CARL is how the FBI used to conduct background tests. CARL stands for character, associates, reputation, and loyalty — except the FBI was not required to investigate Obama’s background. We will. A conservative attorney who has been probing into the backgrounds of Obama and his associates tells the story of attending a speech by Republican Rudolph Giuliani in 2011 and asking the former New York City mayor if he had ever considered the possibility that Obama was a mole. “What? A mole? God, I hope not,” was the response.

 Such a suggestion may strike some as preposterous. But Frank Chapman, a communist activist who attended meetings of the Soviet front World Peace Council, used the term “mole” to describe Obama. He said Obama’s political success in the 2008 Democratic presidential primaries was “a dialectical leap ushering in a qualitatively new era of struggle.” He went on, “Marx once compared revolutionary struggle with the work of the mole, who sometimes burrows so far beneath the ground that he leaves no trace of his movement on the surface. This is the old revolutionary ‘mole,’ not only showing his traces on the surface but also breaking through.” The Communist Party USA backs Obama to the hilt.     Read more here.

Joel Gilbert is the president of Highway 61 Entertainment in Los Angeles. He is a contributing editor for the national security and foreign policy website familysecuritymatters.org, and has appeared frequently as a foreign policy analyst on national radio shows. He speaks about his film, “Dreams from My Real Father: A Story of Reds and Deception.”

Joel Gilbert:

Why does it matter who Barak Obama’s father really is?

It matters because Barack Obama sold himself to America as the multi-cultural ideal, a man who stood above politics. His father was a goat herder from Kenya, so he would bring people together, so the story went. As a result, the public perceived Barack Obama as a nice man with an inspiring family story.

However, as shown in Dreams from My Real Father, Barack Obama in fact has a deeply disturbing family background, which he intentionally hid, in order to obscure a Marxist political foundation. While voters will overlook some fudging by politicians, promoting a false family background to hide a Marxist agenda irreconcilable with American values is a totally unacceptable manipulation of the electorate.

At age 18, Barack Obama admittedly arrived at Occidental College a committed revolutionary Marxist. Based on Obama’s own accounts, there can be no doubt that Frank Marshall Davis, a Communist Party USA Propagandist, and former Soviet Agent, indoctrinated Obama with a Marxist world view during his formative years. This is a known phenomenon amongst the radical left, referred to as “Red Diaper Babies” or “hand-me-down Marxism.”  Much of the leadership of the SDS and Weather Underground were children of Communist Party USA members, including Katherine Boudin, Jeff Jones, and many more. David Axelrod is also a “Red Diaper Baby”, his mother was a Red journalist.

The Journalist’s Creed

Obama’s election was not a sudden political phenomenon. It was the culmination of an American socialist movement that Frank Marshall Davis nurtured in Chicago and Hawaii, and has been quietly infiltrating the US economy, universities, and media for decades.

CLICK HERE TO GO TO THE DREAMS FROM MY REAL FATHER WEBSITE

As I speak today, here at the National Press Club in Washington DC, what strikes me as most disturbing is that any one of the hundreds of American journalists in this building could win the Pulitzer Prize, just by writing about the evidence presented in Dreams from My Real Father.

So today, here at the National Press Club, a great American Institution, I would like to recall the Journalist’s Creed. The Journalist’s Creed is a code of ethics for the profession of Journalism. It is posted on the wall in the lobby of this building in bronze. It was written by Walter Williams in 1906, when he founded the Missouri School of Journalism. The Journalist’s Creed stipulates:

1)  That journalists must be public trustees with the full measure of responsibility to the public

2)  That accuracy and fairness are fundamental to good journalism

3)  That a single standard of truth must prevail for all

4)  That suppression of the news is indefensible

5)  And that journalism must be independent, unbiased by personal opinion, and always unafraid.     To read more click here.

Trevor Loudon broke the story about Obama’s childhood mentor being Communist Party member Frank Marshall Davis. He was also the first to disclose the facts concerning Obama White House official Van Jones’s communist background. He presents his report, The Pro-Soviet Agent of Influence Who Gave Barack Obama His First Job in Politics.

Trevor Loudon:

“This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.” This is what President Barack Obama privately told Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, at the Nuclear Security Summit in Seoul, South Korea, on March 26, 2012. Medvedev replied, “I understand you. I transmit this information to Vladimir [Putin], and I stand with you.”

Vladimir Putin was not the only person Obama’s “private message” was transmitted to. Their conversation was recorded and broadcast live via an open microphone and camera.

Consider Obama’s policies – the New START Treaty, the acceptance of Russian surveillance flights over the U.S., Russian troops training in Colorado, and “flexibility” over missile defense. Over the last four years President Obama seems to be doing everything he can to make Moscow happy. Could all this be mere naïveté, or a genuine, if misguided, willingness to build bridges to America’s long-time adversary? Or could President Obama’s political outlook actually coincidence (sic) more with Russian interests than America’s?    

After Obama’s “hot mike” incident with Medvedev, Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney rightly re-affirmed that Russia is the United States’ “number one geo-political foe.” Despite all this, the mainstream media treat President Obama’s apparent Russophilia as of no consequence.

President Obama has associated all his life with supporters of the international communist movement. One was his boyhood mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, an advocate of “Red Russia” and long-time member of the Communist Party USA. Likewise Obama’s political mentor and personal physician in Chicago, Quentin Young, was also involved with the Communist Party, and even tried to enter North Vietnam during the Vietnam War to give moral support to communist forces then killing his own countrymen.

Obama’s Chicago friends and colleagues, former Weather underground terrorists, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, have long supported international communism though their connections to the Marxist regimes in Cuba and Venezuela. As Larry Grathwohl reports and the evidence shows, the Soviet KGB and the Cuban DGI were also involved with the Weather Underground in a significant way. But the individual in Obama’s life most closely tied to the Soviet/Russian component of international communism was undoubtedly former Illinois State Senator Alice Palmer.

Though it eventually turned sour, the Palmer/Obama relationship was crucial to the aspiring politician’s career. It would be fair to say that Alice Palmer gave Barack Obama his first job in politics – she provided the first rung in the ladder to Obama’s eventual rise to the Oval Office. Barack Obama and Alice Palmer were both involved, circa 1993, in Progressive Chicago, an affiliate of the New Party, which in turn was formed by members of ACORN, SEIU, Democratic Socialists of America, and the Soviet and Cuban-affiliated Institute for Policy Studies, as a vehicle to move the Democratic Party to the left.

In 1995, South Side Chicago politics was upset by scandal. Local Congressman Mel Reynolds was facing charges of sexual assault of a sixteen-year-old campaign volunteer, eventually resigning his seat. The vacancy interested several politicians, including State Senator Alice Palmer, who prepared to enter the Congressional race. Shortly after this she employed Barack Obama as her chief of Staff. An organization, Friends of Alice Palmer, was formed to run her campaign and included in its leadership (since jailed) property developer Tony Rezko and Barack Obama. It also included three activists who were later proved to be members of the Democratic Socialists of America – Timuel Black, future Congressman Danny Davis and Betty Willhoite. Black and Davis are close personal friends of Barack Obama to this day, while Willhoite endorsed Progressives for Obama in 2008.

In exchange for his help on her congressional campaign, Alice Palmer promised Obama support in winning her Illinois State Senate seat. In 1995, State Senator Palmer introduced Obama at a gathering in the Hyde Park home of former Weather Underground terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. ”I can remember being one of a small group of people who came to Bill Ayers’ house to learn that Alice Palmer was stepping down from the senate and running for Congress,” said Obama’s friend and physician Dr. Quentin Young, of the informal gathering at the home of Ayers and Dohrn. “Palmer identified [Obama] as her successor.”

However when Palmer was badly beaten in the Democratic primaries, she decided to stick with her State Senate seat. Obama refused to step down, to make way for Palmer’s return. Despite mediation attempts by Timuel Black and others, Obama dug his heels in, causing a relationship rift that has not healed to this day. Obama went on to win the seat unopposed, after he knocked Palmer and his other rivals off the ballot, by successfully challenging the legitimacy of their nominating signatures.

Obama’s political ascendancy had begun.  In 2008, Alice Palmer supported Hillary Clinton in her bid to win the Democratic presidential nomination.  Alice Palmer’s Background – Who is the woman who gave the President his start in politics?   To read more click here.

Larry Grathwohl is the former FBI informant who infiltrated the Weather Underground. He testified before several federal Grand Juries, the U.S. Senate, and at the Mark Felt/Ed Miller FBI trail. He wrote the 1976 book, Bringing Down America, and now works with America’s Survival, Inc. to re-establish Congressional committees to investigate internal security problems. He presents his report, White Reds Exploiting Blacks: The Weather Underground, Barack Obama, and the Fundamental Transformation of the United States.

Larry Grathwohl:

I am in a unique position to know Barack Obama’s associates. I worked with Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn in the Weather Underground as an informant for the FBI. I never heard of Obama during my time in the movement, although I understand Joel Gilbert has developed information that Obama was active with a Weather Underground support group, the May 19th Communist Organization, in New York. That does not surprise me. Obama has associated with communists all of his life, from Frank Marshall Davis in Hawaii to Alice Palmer, Bill Ayers, and Bernardine Dohrn in Chicago. This is a pattern of associations that should have disqualified him from the presidency.

After I left the Weather Underground and testified against Ayers and Dohrn for their involvement in a murder plot that killed Police Sergeant Brian V. McDonnell, they surfaced in Chicago helping Obama launch his political career. Like true communists, who have been manipulating black Americans since shortly after the Russian revolution, Ayers and Dohrn would have seen revolutionary potential in Obama. He was, in the words of communist operative Frank Chapman, a “revolutionary mole.” Perhaps that term was meant to be more than a figure of speech.

You see, Obama was a different kind of Democrat – one that would work with the communists. He and Danny K. Davis, his old friend and current Congressman from Chicago, were “New Party” Democrats, working to take over the Democratic Party from within. That is how Frank Marshall Davis worked in Hawaii to take over the NAACP and the Democratic Party.  These are the tactics of infiltration now being practiced in a different way by the Muslim Brotherhood and its front organizations.   To read more click here.

Konstantin Preobrazhensky is a former KGB officer and intelligence expert who fled to the U.S. in 2003 and received political asylum in March 2006. His activities have made him an enemy of the KGB and Russian President Vladimir Putin. His books, KGB Amidst Russian Emigration, and KGB/FSB’s New Trojan Horse, published in the U.S. in 2007 and 2008, have opened the eyes of Russian émigré on current KGB activities among them. He presents his paper, Communists and Muslims: The Hidden Hand of the KGB.

Konstantin Preobrazhensky:

The communists have considered Islam their ally from the very beginning, because in the early 20th century, Islam was the religion of the “oppressed people.” Support of Islam was considered a part of Russian-based anticolonialism. It is very significant that Vladimir Lenin in December 1917 addressed his second message, delivered just after coming to power, to the “Toiling Muslims of Russia and East.” So they considered Muslims a reservoir of people for the world communist revolution.

According to Ben Fowkes and Bulent Gokay,”Lenin was very concerned with Asia, and as hopes of revolution in the West faded after the war with Poland in October 1920 he turned his attention to the colonies of the Western powers. In them he saw a way of using bourgeois nationalist revolutions to deprive imperialist powers of the raw materials and markets that he believed to be necessary for their survival.” 

Interestingly, Stalin, who was then the People’s Commissar for Nationalities, also signed this public message delivered by Lenin to Russian Muslims. It said: All of you whose mosques and prayer houses used to be destroyed, and whose beliefs and customs were trodden underfoot by the Tsars and oppressors of Russia! From today, your beliefs, customs, your national and cultural institutions are free and inviolate. Organize your national life freely and without hindrance. You are entitled to this. Know that your rights, like the rights of all peoples of Russia, are protected by the whole might of the Revolution and itsagencies, the Soviets workers, soldiers’, and peasants’ deputies.

Support, then, this Revolution and its sovereign Government. Comrades! Brothers! Let us march towards an honest and democratic peace. On our banners is inscribed the freedom of all oppressed peoples.”  Muslims have heard Lenin’s call. Many of them in the Russian Empire took an active part in the Communist Revolution. In some cities they formed Muslim Military-Revolutionary Committees. These Committees were engaged in overthrowing so-called Muslim- exploiting classes, the bourgeoisie and landlords associated with the old imperial regime. For example, in 1918 the Bashkir’s Muslim Military Revolutionary Committee arrested the local bourgeoisie Bashkir government.   To read more click here.

Professor Paul Kengor of Grove City College is the executive director of its Center for Vision and Values. His latest book is THE COMMUNIST. Frank Marshall Davis: The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor. Kengor examines the communist writings of Davis and his influence over Obama.

Ryan Mauro is the national security analyst for RadicalIslam.org, the website of the Clarion Fund, the organization that produced the films, “Obsession,” “The Third Jihad,” and “Iranium.” An adjunct online professor of terrorism and homeland security, he has a Bachelor’s degree in Intelligence Studies and a Master’s degree in Political Science from American Military University. He is an expert on the dangers posed by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Jeremy Segal blogs at http://www.rebelpundit.com and is a disciple of the late Andrew
Breitbart. He produced the video of Rep. Danny K. Davis being honored by the
People’s World at the Communist Party U.S.A.’s headquarters in Chicago for a
lifetime of “inspiring leadership.” Rep. Davis is an old friend of Barack
Obama’s.

Cliff Kincaid concludes the conference:

Huma Abedin: Assistant Editor of Islamist Journal (How did she obtain a Security Clearance?)

By Kasey Jachim

How are members of the Muslim Brotherhood, with links to terrorist organizations, able to obtain security clearances?  I used to work for the Department of Defense as an adjudicator for personnel security clearances.  In the 80’s and 90’s the main questions regarding ties to ‘terrorists’ usually centered around foreign nationals (USSR) and sometimes the KKK and Neo-Nazis (would you conspire to take up arms against the US government?).  I only had a few cases regarding ‘loyalty’ issues and they were not of a serious nature.  Then came Desert Storm.

I remember the surge in temporary security requests for those working on Desert Storm – some of those requesting them were volunteers who had families in Iraq.  Even then I was told not to question their loyalty to the US – after all they had sworn allegiance to serve and protect didn’t they?  Evidently our government officials have never heard of Taquiya!

In today’s political climate I can only imagine how hard the job of the adjudicator has become.  Is it politically correct to request further investigation if someone has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood?  Hamas?  Hezbollah?  I think we all know the answer to that one and I fear the worst!  So then, how did Huma Abedin obtain a security clearance?

Huma Abedin: Assistant Editor of Islamist Journal

By Ryan Mauro via Radical Islam

Rep. Michele Bachmann and four other members of Congress are getting dumped on by members of both political parties for their letter requesting information about the influence of Muslim Brotherhood-tied groups and individuals in the U.S. government. The case of Huma Abedein, Deputy Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Clinton, has gotten almost all of the attention but their question about her is legitimate: Was her family’s close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood taken into account when granting her a security clearance?

The potential security concerns mentioned in the State Department’s published guidelines include:

  • “contact with a foreign family member… if that contact creates a heightened risk of foreign exploitation, inducement, manipulation, pressure or coercion.”
  • “connections to a foreign person, group, government, or country that create a potential conflict of interest between the individual’s obligation to protect sensitive information or technology and the individual’s desire to help a foreign person, group, or country by providing that information.
  • “performing or attempting to perform duties, or otherwise acting, so as to serve the interests of a foreign person, group, organization or government in conflict with the national security interest.”

Keep those criteria in mind as you consider the backgrounds of three of Abedin’s relatives.

Her mother, Dr. Saleha Abedin, is a member of the Muslim Sisterhood, the Brotherhood’s female counterpart. She serves in the Bureau with the wife of Mohammed Morsi, Egypt’s new Brotherhood president.

She is also a member of the Muslim World League, which terrorism expert Andrew McCarthy describes as “the Muslim Brotherhood’s principal vehicle for the international propagation of Islamic supremacist ideology.” The organization she leads, the International Islamic Committee for Woman and Child, is part of the Muslim World League.

Her organization is not a moderate group that mistakenly got involved with the Muslim World League. Its charter is written by Brotherhood leaders including Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradawi, an open supporter of Hamas. It is therefore unsurprising that the organization wants to get rid of laws against marital rape, permit marriage below the age of 18 and institute other elements of Sharia Law. She is also a board member of the International Islamic Council for Dawa and Relief (which the group she leads is part of), a group banned in Israel because it belongs to Qaradawi’s Union of Good, a network of “charities” set up to fund Hamas. The U.S. froze the Union of Good’s assets in November 2008.

If you have any remaining doubt that Dr. Saleha Abedin subscribes to Islamist ideology, look at a book she translated and published by her organization in 1999 titled, “Women in Islam.” It says that man-made laws enslave women, which is an undeniable call for Sharia Law. It calls for legislation based on Sharia Law, such as stoning adulterers and eliminating the death penalty for those who kill apostates. The Center for Security Policy has a 28-page analysis of it.

Huma Abedin’s late father, Dr. Syed Abedin, was also intimately involved with Islamists. He led the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs based in Saudi Arabia. It is backed by the Muslim World League and is an entity of the World Assembly of Muslim Youth, a very extreme Islamist group. The Institute also published Mrs. Abedin’s book. Huma herself was an assisstant editor of the Institute’s journal as far back as 1996 and as recently as 2008, which means she was there when it published her mother’s extremist book. This screenshot from September 2008 shows that Huma, her mother and brother were all simultaneously editors of the journal.

Huma Abedin’s brother, Hassan, had a fellowship with the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies, an entity that is very cozy with the Muslim Brotherhood, at the same exact time as Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradawi served on the board.

One close associate of the Abedin family is Abdullah Omar Naseef. He is the former Secretary-General of the Muslim World League. He founded the Rabita Trust, which had its assets frozen  by the U.S. government in October 2001 for its support of terrorist groups.

Huma’s father met Naseef when he was a visiting professor at King Abdul Aziz University, where Naseef was the dean. There are mixed reports about whether Naseef or Huma’s father originally created the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs, but it was clearly a joint endeavor and was backed by Naseef’s Muslim World League. Huma, her mother and her brother have worked for the IMMA’s journal.

Naseef’s Rabita Trust has been renamed as Rabita al-Alam al-Islami. Huma’s mother is a member of it. Naseef and Huma’s mother are also on the Presidency Staff Council of the International Islamic Council for Dawa and Relief together under the leadership of Qaradawi. Naseef was also on the board of the Oxford Centre for Islamic States alongside Qaradawi when Hassan Abedin had a fellowship there. Naseef remains the chairman of the board.

All of these ties are extensively documented and detailed by the Center for Security Policy, Andrew McCarthy, Nonie Darwish and former Islamist Walid Shoebat, who just wrote a 38-page paper on the topic. Top Republican leaders have harshly condemned the questions asked by Bachmann and her colleagues. Speaker of the House John Boehner, Rep. Jeff Flake, Sen. Scott Brown and Sen. Lindsey Graham (who now talks positively about the Brotherhood) all joined in. Sen. Marco Rubio went beyond the issue of Huma Abedin and said he didn’t believe the information in the letters altogether. But the most vocal attacker is Sen. John McCain:

“[the letters have] few unspecified and unsubstantiated associations of members of Huma’s family, none of which have been shown to harm or threaten the United States in any way. These attacks on Huma have no logic, no basis and no merit. And they need to stop now,” McCain demanded.

The main criticism of Bachmann and her colleagues is that this is, in the words of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), “a six degrees of separation drinking game.” That’s a perception that the Brotherhood’s modus operandi creates.

For example, imagine you want to write about a mosque run by the Muslim Brotherhood through its affiliate, the North American Islamic Trust. You must prove that the mosque is owned by the Trust. You must then explain that the Trust is part of the Islamic Society of North America and that group is part of the Muslim Brotherhood. To someone unfamiliar with the Brotherhood, it can easily appear like an argument based on faulty guilt-by-association and multiple degrees of separation.

I was on Thom Hartmann’s radio show debating this topic and he dismissed the concerns because the security clearance vetting process is supposed to address them. In Part 4 of the MuslimBrotherhoodinAmerica.com course, Dr. J. Michael Waller explains two problems with the process today, partially because of the overwhelming amount of security checks that must be performed and daily quota requirements.

First, the reviewing personnel are focusing almost exclusively on evidence of illegal activity, such as that found in criminal records. Most Muslim Brotherhood operatives are going to avoid committing crimes. Secondly, the Muslim Brotherhood is a hostile foreign entity. During the Cold War, membership in the Communist Party meant that you were considered to be under the “operational control of a foreign entity.” The Muslim Brotherhood is not treated that way today.

The ridicule and outright dismissal of the letters’ overall concern about the Muslim Brotherhood-tied groups and individuals working with the U.S. government is more unsettling than the attacks on the specific Huma Abedin issue. The Muslim Brotherhood’s own documents state that it seeks to influence U.S. government proxy via front groups. Brotherhood operatives have claimed success in infiltrating the government as far back as 1988.

The letters’ concern about Brotherhood influence operations may sound like a fantasy, but such operations are to be expected. Foreign governments, companies, special interest groups, lobbyists and activists all try to influence the government. Why should we expect the Brotherhood to act any differently?

Huma Abedin isn’t being accused of being a terrorist or Brotherhood operative. She may very well be an anti-Islamist Muslim that has rejected the views of her family. If that is the case, she should tell her story and educate Americans about what she has learned about Islamism from her family members’ activities.

Read more here.

San Diego Newspaper Rates Obama as Worst President – EVER

Via Union Tribune San Diego

Editor’s note: It’s a presidential election year, so we thought we’d weigh in with our list of the five worst presidents.  We start with, yes, the current incumbent. See our other choices at U-T Opinion online.

(Kasey’s note:  We all know Carter is second, check out the other three!)

He took office at a time when the U.S. economy was on its worst slide in 75 years, but pushed policies using borrowed money that were more meant to preserve government jobs than broadly help the private sector where the great majority of Americans work, ensuring the jobs crisis continued.

He railed against the heavy spending and big deficits of his predecessor, but blithely backed budgets that had triple the deficits ever seen in American history.

He promised a smart, sweeping overhaul of the U.S. health care system, but ended up giving us a Byzantine mess promoted to the public with myths: that offering subsidized care to tens of millions of people would save money; that people would keep their own doctors; that access to care wouldn’t change; and that rationing would never happen.

He promised a more sophisticated approach to the economy than that of his predecessor, but had so little common sense that his health law actually gave businesses a big financial incentive to discontinue providing health insurance to their employees.

He offered hosannas to genius entrepreneurs like Steve Jobs in his prepared remarks, but when speaking off the cuff betrayed his faculty-lounge view of the world, saying of businesspeople, “if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own.”

He swore to bring overdue oversight and honest accounting to the corporate world, but made flagrantly dishonest claims about General Motors paying back its government loans that would have triggered a criminal fraud investigation in the private sector.

He promised to set a high new standard for ethics in the White House, but used a baffling claim of executive privilege to shield his embattled attorney general from the repercussions of a cover-up involving the death of a federal law enforcement officer.

He denounced his predecessor for permitting harsh interrogation tactics with suspected terrorists, but once in office somehow concluded that a better, more moral approach would just be to use drones to assassinate such suspects without getting any information from them.

He presented himself as a shrewd student of Washington politics, but once in office displayed a counterproductive standoffishness to many Democratic lawmakers eager to embrace him, never developing the broad range of personal relationships that often mark a successful presidency.

He ran as a unifying force who would bring in a new era of civility and racial healing to Washington, but once in office embraced ugly, Chicago-style political hardball that saw nothing wrong with his supporters’ loathsome practice of depicting opposition to his policies as being driven by racism.

He constantly offered praise for the wisdom and insights of the American public, but reacted to the broad discontent over Obamacare, high unemployment and vast deficits by saying it was a failure of his administration to properly explain its glorious record to a confused populace – not a predictable reaction to his struggles and ineffectiveness.

And in December 2011 – at a time in which one-quarter of American adults who wanted full-time work couldn’t find it, after a year in which the federal deficit was a staggering $1.3 trillion – here was what Barack Obama had to say for himself in a CBS interview: “I would put our legislative and foreign policy accomplishments in our first two years against any president, with the possible exceptions of Johnson, FDR and Lincoln.”

Unbelievable. If self-reverence were a crime, our current president would be facing a life sentence. For the good of America, let’s pray we have someone else in charge of the federal government come Jan. 20, 2013.

H/T Nice Deb

 

Rep. Keith Ellison Rewrites History on his Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR Ties

Via PJMedia

The most recent salvo in the kerfuffle between Minnesota congressmen Michele Bachmann and Keith Ellison finds Ellison attacking Bachmann for her statements made on Glenn Beck’s radio program on Thursday, where she said:

GLENN:  Okay.  So when you wrote this letter, then Keith Ellison comes out.  And Keith Ellison is ‑‑ he has a record of being the Mafia hitman.

CONGRESSWOMAN BACHMANN:  Well, he has a long record of being associated with CAIR and with the Muslim Brotherhood. CAIR is an unindicted co‑conspirator, as stated in the large terrorist financing case that we’ve had in the United States of America and so he came out and essentially wanted to shut down the inspectors general from even looking into any of the questions that we were asking. So he wanted to shut it down.  In response I wrote another letter back to Keith Ellison, a 16‑page letter which I would encourage all of your listeners to go and read this letter. It’s what I call a bulletproof letter. I have 59 footnotes with one example after another of the penetration of the Muslim Brotherhood into the federal government…

In response, Ellison told the Huffington Post:

“I am not now, nor have I ever been, associated with the Muslim Brotherhood,” he said with a laugh.

In fact, it is his denial that is laughable.

But this weekend Ellison doubled-down on his denial, telling Politico:

I support American institutions. I don’t know enough about [the Muslim Brotherhood]. What I know about them is that in Egypt, one of their candidates has ascended to the presidency. I’ve never met that person. But I do think the United States should have a foreign policy where we talk to foreign leaders of all kinds. But no, I don’t have any, I don’t have any Muslim Brotherhood connections that she’s talking about.

According to Ellison’s impeccable logic, since he hasn’t met Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood leader and new Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi, therefore he has no knowledge of the Muslim Brotherhood.

But a mountain of evidence of his contacts with and support of Muslim Brotherhood front groups – identified as such by the U.S. government – shows that the Muslim Brotherhood definitely knows who he is.

Rewind to 2008, when Keith Ellison went on a 16-day hajj trip to Saudi Arabia paid for by the Muslim American Society (MAS) to the tune of $13,500.

As Scott Johnson at Powerline noted at the time that Ellison had conflicting stories about who paid for the trip:

The Star Tribune first reported on Ellison’s hajj in two puff pieces by Mitch Anderson this past December. Anderson first reported the statement of Ellison spokesman Rick Jauert that Ellison had paid for the trip himself. When Anderson returned to the story, he got such deep stuff from Ellison as this: “This is just me trying to be the best person I can be.” In the second story Anderson also reported that the MAS Minnesota paid for Ellison’s trip to Mecca, though Anderson didn’t pause to note the discrepancy between his two stories on this point.

As Fox News reported on the MAS sponsorship of Ellison’s trip, Ellison returned the favor to his benefactors by speaking at the 2007 and 2008 MAS-Minnesota conventions.

But who is MAS?

Fortunately, federal prosecutors cleared up the matter back in December 2007 when they said in a court filing in the federal appeal of convicted terror operative Sabri Benkahla (page 58, footnote 13):

MAS was founded as the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.

As support for that statement, the federal prosecutors cited a September 2004 investigative report by the Chicago Tribune, which chronicles the efforts by the international Muslim Brotherhood to create Islamic states worldwide including the U.S.

The group identified by the Chicago Tribune as the main organization operating today on behalf of the Muslim Brotherhood was MAS:

In recent years, the U.S. Brotherhood operated under the name Muslim American Society, according to documents and interviews. One of the nation’s major Islamic groups, it was incorporated in Illinois in 1993 after a contentious debate among Brotherhood members.

So in 2004 – four years before Ellison’s MAS-financed trip to Saudi Arabia – MAS had been identified in the establishment media as a front for the Muslim Brotherhood.

And in case there was any confusion on Ellison’s part, federal prosecutors addressed the issue again in December 2007 – one year before Ellison’s MAS hajj trip – saying that MAS was “the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.”

That alone should prompt an apology by Ellison to Bachmann.

As the late Billy Mays would say, but wait, there’s more.

Another group that Ellison has a longtime association with is the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), going back at least as far as his 2006 campaign when he was first elected to Congress.

As Joel Mowbray reported in the Washington Times during that campaign, CAIR raised tens of thousands of dollars in bundled donations for Ellison’s election war chest and held CAIR fundraisers specifically for Ellison’s campaign.

Since that time, Ellison has reciprocated CAIR’s support by appearing at a number of fundraisers on the group’s behalf.

For example, immediately after his election Ellison gave this videotaped address to the CAIR national fundraiser on November 18, 2006:

The following year Ellison spoke on behalf of the CAIR-Los Angeles chapter:

And lest Ellison and his backers claim this is old news, here’s an advertisement for a CAIR-Los Angeles fundraiser where Ellison was the keynote speaker in May 2011:

Please note that this CAIR fundraiser was co-sponsored by none other than MAS.

So who is CAIR?

Again, federal prosecutors and the federal courts have sufficiently cleared up the matter.

In the same December 2007 federal appeals court filing by federal prosecutors in the Benkahla case that identified MAS as “the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America,” they also stated with respect to CAIR (page 58, footnote 13):

Moreover, from its founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists.

So according to the federal government, CAIR was not only founded by the Muslim Brotherhood, but it was founded to help support terrorists. (Bet you won’t read that in the Huffington Post.)

Earlier than that, in June 2007, federal prosecutors named CAIR as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial — the largest terrorism financing trial in American history. In naming CAIR in the case, it identified the group as among “the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee and/or its organizations.” (page 5, no. 11)

The Justice Department gave some context to CAIR’s creation and role in the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee when it responded to motions filed by Islamic groups seeking to have their names removed from the unindicted co-conspirator list.

Federal prosecutors said in their response (page 13):

The U.S.-Muslim Brotherhood created the U.S. Palestine Committee, which documents reflect was initially comprised of three organizations: The OLF (HLF), the IAP, and the UASR. CAIR was later added to these organizations… The mandate of these organizations, per the International Muslim Brotherhood, was to support HAMAS…

During that trial in September 2008, FBI Special Agent Lara Burns testified in federal court that CAIR was a front for the terrorist group Hamas.

As a result of the convictions in that case, and the trial evidence submitted by federal prosecutors in the case, the FBI announced in January 2009 that it was severing all ties to CAIR.

In response to that announcement, New York Sen. Charles Schumer joined Arizona Sen. John Kyl and Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn in a letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller asserting the ban on contact with CAIR “should be government-wide policy”:

And in a federal court decision unsealed in November 2010 by Judge Jorge Solis, who presided over the Holy Land Foundation trial, he dedicated six pages to outlining the “ample evidence” connecting CAIR and other Islamic organizations to the Muslim Brotherhood Palestine Committee’s conspiracy to support Hamas (pp. 14-15):

What’s remarkable about all the trial evidence and court decisions regarding MAS and CAIR is that Keith Ellison would be aware of it since Bachmann included this information along with links to all of the relevant documents in her 16-page July 13th letter to the congressman, which he derided last week as “16 pages of nothing.” (The Huffington Post and the rest of the establishment media could have informed themselves as well if they had also read her letter.)

But before leaving the issue of Ellison’s relationship to CAIR, it should be observed that the first Muslim congressman has run into conflicts with his own congressional colleagues over CAIR.

In addition to Sen. Schumer’s aforementioned plea to make the FBI’s ban on contact with CAIR “government-wide policy,” other Democrats have made public statements critical of the organization. In a September 2003 hearing, Sen. Dick Durbin described CAIR as “unusual in its extreme rhetoric and its association with groups that are suspect.” (page 21):

However, I have noted previously Durbin’s apparent change of heart.

In 2006, California Sen. Barbara Boxer rescinded an award to a local CAIR chapter, which she called a mistake, expressing her concerns after she heard from law enforcement officials that CAIR “gives aid to international terrorist groups.”

Will Ellison be consistent and attack his fellow Democratic colleagues as “malicious and bigoted” as he has Bachmann for making the same assessment of CAIR?

And when Ellison appeared at a September 2009 CAIR-Arizona fundraiser, three members of the Arizona congressional delegation, supported by the Arizona-based American Islamic Forum for Democracy, sent a letter calling on the Minnesota congressman to reconsider his appearance in light of CAIR’s extensive documented ties to extremism and terrorism (somebody better tell John McCain to get his delegation in line). Ellison appeared anyway.

Without the slightest tinge of irony, Ellison said at that CAIR-AZ fundraiser that “I would never associate myself with anyone even soft on terrorism.”

But go back to the August 2006 fundraiser sponsored by CAIR. According to the Washington Post, Ellison’s CAIR campaign fundraiser was headed by none other than CAIR co-founder and executive director Nihad Awad. Awad also bundled contributions on behalf of Ellison’s campaign.

So who is Nihad Awad?

According to Justice Department, Awad is a longtime Hamas operative. Multiple statements made by federal prosecutors identify Awad as one of the attendees at a 1993 meeting of US Muslim Brotherhood Palestine Committee leaders in Philadelphia that was wiretapped by the FBI under a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant. The topic of discussion during that 1993 meeting was how to help Hamas by working in the U.S. to help sabotage the Oslo peace accords.

In April 2011, I broke the story here at PJ Media that the Holder Justice Department had scuttled the pending indictment of Omar Ahmad as part of the second round of Holy Land Foundation prosecutions. AG Holder admitted later that week that Ahmad’s prosecution had been dropped.

A government exhibit in the Holy Land Foundation case identifies both Nihad Awad and CAIR co-founder Omar Ahmad at the 1993 Philadelphia Hamas meeting:

And during the Holy Land Foundation case, one of the trial exhibits submitted to the court by federal prosecutors was a list of Muslim Brotherhood Palestine Committee members, which includes Nihad Awad (page 4, no. 32):

So in contradiction to Ellison, he not only associates with individuals soft on terrorism, he’ll freely associate with those who are hard on terrorism.

Speaking of which, as the Weekly Standard has reported, in February 2000 Ellison delivered a speech at a fundraiser for former Symbionese Liberation Army member Kathleen Soliah (aka Sarah Jane Olson), who was arrested in June 1999 for the attempted pipe bomb murder of LAPD officers in 1975. During that same speech Ellison spoke favorably of cop killers Mumia Abu-Jamal and Assata Shakur.

In October 2001, Ellison’s pal Soliah pled guilty to two counts of possessing explosives with intent to murder.

So in the case of both Nihad Awad and his friend Kathleen Soliah, Keith Ellison had no problem associating with individuals soft and hard on terrorism.

Finally, Keith Ellison has some serious chutzpah to attack anyone as “malicious and bigoted” considering his history as the former local Minneapolis spokesman for the rabidly anti-Semitic Nation of Islam.

Among the many lowlights of Ellison’s pre-congressional career was a statement he gave during a meeting of the Minnesota Initiative Against Racism, where he defended “the truth” of the claim that “Jews are the most racist white people.” Lovely.

So before the media parrots his heated accusations of Michele Bachmann’s supposed “bigotry,” perhaps Keith Ellison needs to be measured by his own standards.

And color me skeptical of his claim that because he hasn’t met Egyptian president and Muslim Brotherhood party leader Mohammed Morsi, he has no knowledge of the Muslim Brotherhood.

That, however, brings up the the following question: if he really doesn’t know who the Muslim Brotherhood is, how can he attack Michele Bachmann for trying to bring him up to speed?

Read more here.

Obama’s spectacular failure – The Jihadists still want to kill us!

By Caroline Glick via Townhall

Two weeks ago, in an unofficial inauguration ceremony at Tahrir Square in Cairo, Egypt’s new Muslim Brotherhood President Mohamed Mursi took off his mask of moderation. Before a crowd of scores of thousands, Mursi pledged to work for the release from US federal prison of Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman.

According to The New York Times’ account of his speech, Mursi said, “I see signs [being held by members of the crowd] for Omar Abdel-Rahman and detainees’ pictures. It is my duty and I will make all efforts to have them free, including Omar Abdel-Rahman.”

Otherwise known as the blind sheikh, Abdel Rahman was the mastermind of the jihadist cell in New Jersey that perpetrated the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. His cell also murdered Rabbi Meir Kahane in New York in 1990. They plotted the assassination of then-president Hosni Mubarak. They intended to bomb New York landmarks including the Lincoln and Holland tunnels and the UN headquarters.

Rahman was the leader of Gama’a al-Islamia – the Islamic Group, responsible, among other things for the assassination of Anwar Sadat in 1981. A renowned Sunni religious authority, Rahman wrote the fatwa, or Islamic ruling, permitting Sadat’s murder in retribution for his signing the peace treaty with Israel. The Islamic group is listed by the State Department as a specially designated terrorist organization.

After his conviction in connection with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, Abdel-Rahman issued another fatwa calling for jihad against the US. After the September 11, 2001, attacks, Osama bin Laden cited Abdel-Rahman’s fatwa as the religious justification for them.

By calling for Abdel-Rahman’s release, Mursi has aligned himself and his government with the US’s worst enemies. By calling for Abdel-Rahman’s release during his unofficial inauguration ceremony, Mursi signaled that he cares more about winning the acclaim of the most violent, America-hating jihadists in the world than with cultivating good relations with America.

And in response to Mursi’s supreme act of unfriendliness, US President Barack Obama invited Mursi to visit him at the White House.

Mursi is not the only Abdel Rahman supporter to enjoy the warm hospitality of the White House.

His personal terror organization has also been the recipient of administration largesse. Despite the fact that federal law makes it a felony to assist members of specially designated terrorist organizations, last month the State Department invited group member Hani Nour Eldin, a newly elected member of the Islamist-dominated Egyptian parliament, to visit the US and meet with senior US officials at the White House and the State Department, as part of a delegation of Egyptian parliamentarians.

State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland refused to provide any explanation for the administration’s decision to break federal law in order to host Eldin in Washington. Nuland simply claimed, “We have an interest in engaging a broad cross-section of Egyptians who are seeking to peacefully shape Egypt’s future. The goal of this delegation… was to have consultations both with think tanks but also with government folks, with a broad spectrum representing all the colors of Egyptian politics.”

MURSI IS not the only Arab leader who embraces terrorists only to be embraced by the US government. In a seemingly unrelated matter, this week it was reported that in an attempt to satisfy the Obama administration’s urgent desire to renew negotiations between the Palestinians and Israel, and to satisfy the Palestinians’ insatiable desire to celebrate terrorists, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu offered to release 124 Palestinian terrorist murderers from Israeli prisons in exchange for a meeting with Palestinian Authority Chairman and Fatah chief Mahmoud Abbas.

Alas, Abbas refused. He didn’t think Netanyahu’s offer was generous enough.

And how did the Obama administration respond to Abbas’s demand for the mass release of terrorists and his continued refusal to resume negotiations with Israel?

By attacking Israel.

The proximate cause of the Obama administration’s most recent assault on Israel is the publication of the legal opinion of a panel of expert Israeli jurists regarding the legality of Israeli communities beyond the 1949 armistice lines. Netanyahu commissioned the panel, led by retired Supreme Court justice Edmond Levy, to investigate the international legal status of these towns and villages and to provide the government with guidance relating to future construction of Israeli communities beyond the armistice lines.

The committee’s findings, published this week, concluded that under international law, these communities are completely legal.

There is nothing remotely revolutionary about this finding. This has been Israel’s position since 1967, and arguably since 1922.

The international legal basis for the establishment of the Jewish state in 1948 was the 1922 League of Nations Mandate for Palestine. That document gave the Jewish people the legal right to sovereignty over Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem, as well as all the land Israel took control over during the 1948- 49 War of Independence.

Not only did the Mandate give the Jewish people the legal right to the areas, it enjoined the British Mandatory authorities to “facilitate… close settlement by Jews on the land, including state lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.”

So not only was Jewish settlement not prohibited. It was required.

Although this has been Israel’s position all along, Netanyahu apparently felt the need to have its legitimacy renewed in light of the all-out assault against Israel’s legal rights led by the Palestinians, and joined enthusiastically by the Obama administration.

In a previous attempt to appease Obama’s rapacious appetite for Israeli concessions, Netanyahu temporarily abrogated Israel’s legal rights by banning Jews from exercising their property rights in Judea and Samaria for 10 months in 2010. All the legal opinion published this week does is restate what Israel’s position has always been.

Whereas the Obama administration opted to embrace Mursi even as he embraces Abdel-Rahman, the Obama administration vociferously condemned Israel for having the nerve to ask a panel of senior jurists to opine about its rights. In a press briefing, State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell banged the rhetorical hammer.

As he put it, “The US position on settlements is clear. Obviously, we’ve seen the reports that an Israeli government-appointed panel has recommended legalizing dozens of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, but we do not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity, and we oppose any effort to legalize settlement outposts.”

In short then, for the Obama administration, it is all well and fine for the newly elected president of what was until two years ago the US’s most important Arab ally to embrace a terror mastermind indirectly responsible for the murder of nearly 3,000 Americans. It is okay to invite members of jihadist terror groups to come to Washington and meet with senior US officials in a US taxpayer- funded trip. It is even okay for the head of a would-be-state that the US is trying to create to embrace every single Palestinian terrorist, including those who have murdered Americans. But for Israel’s elected government to ask an expert panel to determine whether Israel is acting in accordance with international law in permitting Jews to live on land the Palestinians insist must be Jew-free is an affront.

THE DISPARITY between the administration’s treatment of the Mursi government on the one hand and the Netanyahu government on the other places the nature of its Middle East policy in stark relief.

Obama came into office with a theory on which he based his Middle East policy. His theory was that jihadists hate America because the US supports Israel. By placing what Obama referred to as “daylight” between the US and Israel, he believed he would convince the jihadists to put aside their hatred of America.

Obama has implemented this policy for three and a half years. And its record of spectacular failure is unbroken.

Obama’s failure is exposed in all its dangerous consequence by a simple fact. Since he entered office, the Americans have dispensed with far fewer jihadists than they have empowered.

Since January 2009, the Muslim world has become vastly more radicalized. No Islamist government in power in 2009 has been overthrown. But several key states – first and foremost Egypt – that were led by pro-Western, US-allied governments when Obama entered office are now ruled by Islamists.

It is true that the election results in Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco and elsewhere are not Obama’s fault. But they still expose the wrongness of his policy. Obama’s policy of putting daylight between the US and Israel, and supporting the Muslim Brotherhood against US allies like Mubarak, involves being bad to America’s friends and good to America’s enemies. This policy cannot help but strengthen your enemies against yourself and your friends.

Rather than contend with the bitter consequences of his policy, Obama and his surrogates have opted to simply deny the dangerous reality he has engendered through his actions. Even worse they have come up with explanations for maintaining this policy despite its flagrant failure.

Nowhere was this effort more obvious than in a made-to-order New York Times analysis this week titled, “As Islamists gain influence, Washington reassesses who its friends are.”

The analysis embraces the notion that it is possible and reasonable to appease the likes of Mursi and his America-hating jihadist supporters and coalition partners. It quotes Michele Dunne from the Atlantic Council who claimed that on the one hand, if the Muslim Brotherhood and its radical comrades are allowed to take over Egypt, their entry into mainstream politics should reduce the terrorism threat. On the other hand, she warned, “If Islamist groups like the Brotherhood lose faith in democracy, that’s when there could be dire consequences.”

In other words, the analysis argues that the US should respond to the ascent of its enemies by pretending its enemies are its friends.

Aside from its jaw-dropping irresponsibility, this bit of intellectual sophistry requires a complete denial of reality. The Taliban were in power in Afghanistan in 2001. Their political power didn’t stop them from cooperating with al-Qaida. Hamas has been in charge of Gaza since 2007. That hasn’t stopped it from carrying out terrorism against Israel. The mullahs have been in charge of Iran from 33 years. That hasn’t stopped them from serving as the largest terrorism sponsors in the world. Hezbollah has been involved in mainstream politics in Lebanon since 2000 and it has remained one of the most active terrorist organizations in the world.

And so on and so forth.

Back in the 1980s, the Reagan administration happily cooperated with the precursors of al-Qaida in America’s covert war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. It never occurred to the Americans then that the same people working with them to overthrow the Soviets would one day follow the lead of the blind sheikh and attack America.

Unlike the mujahadin in Afghanistan, the Muslim Brotherhood has never fought a common foe with the Americans. The US is supporting it for nothing – while seeking to win its support by turning on America’s most stable allies.

Can there be any doubt that this policy will end badly?

Read more here.