The New York Times continues recklessly to careen down a dangerous slippery slope, shilling for the most radical and extreme ideology on the planet, and advances the slow-motion coup of the Muslim Brotherhood in America. You can almost feel their orgiastic glee at having replaced their beloved Walter Duranty's cause of traitorous stalinism with this year's model, traitorous stealth jihad.
The Leftist media has taken sides in this war against America, and now the New York Times, with its typical anti-American bent, is rubbing its hooves in glee at the prospect of hog-tying American law enforcement in the war on jihad.
I have spent years studying the evidence demonstrating that the Council on American-Islamic Relations (“CAIR”) is a terrorist organization operating as a front group for Hamas and its affiliated organizations. I have consulted with FBI agents, CIA agents, local law enforcement officers, and attorneys who specialize in national security law. All of these consultations confirm that CAIR was begun as a Hamas front group to carry out the Muslim Brotherhood’s anti-American agenda.
Much, but not all of this evidence, was documented in United States v. Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development et al., 3:04-cr-00240-P (N.D. Texas) (“HLF”). I have personally invested hundreds of hours reading written documented evidence and listening to audio-taped evidence that had been introduced at the trial.
The evidence shows that CAIR is a criminal terrorist organization. This conclusion is shared by the United States government. The Department of Justice named CAIR in the federal criminal trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, which concluded with multiple guilty verdicts, as an unindicted co-conspirator in a massive conspiracy to fundraise for, and otherwise pursue, the terrorist agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Palestine Committee, a public relations and fund raising arm of Hamas in the United States. See generally HLF. Specifically, CAIR was named as one of the organizations formed by the defendants and co-conspirators to create the appearance of legality in the effort to raise funds and public support for Hamas and its jihad abroad. As the evidence in the HLF trial demonstrated, these plans were part of the 1993 Philadelphia planning meeting carried out by Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas operatives, a meeting which the FBI secretly recorded pursuant to a lawful court order, the entire transcript of which was introduced into the record at the HLF trial. Two of the key participants at this Muslim Brotherhood-Hamas planning meeting were Omar Ahmad and Nihad Awad. Ahmad co-founded CAIR, along with CAIR’s executive director Awad, in 1994 soon after this meeting. Ahmad served as CAIR’s chairman of the board until 2005 and Awad still serves as CAIR’s executive director.
Further, the federal prosecutors successfully resisted every effort by CAIR to have the public designation of CAIR as an “unindicted co-conspirator” removed from the court record and concluded as follows in its brief to the court:
Indeed, CAIR’s request to strike its name from the government’s co-conspirator’s list is moot, since its conspiratorial relationship with the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) was confirmed by testimony and documentary evidence admitted at trial prior to the date CAIR even filed its brief.
- After the convictions, CAIR and another co-conspirator filed motions to have their names stricken from the co-conspirator list. The trial judge refused based on the fact that the evidence fully supported this co-conspirator designation. (Filed as Doc. No. 1356 in HLF; see also Ex. B to the Declaration of John Stemberger filed in support of Defendant’s opposition to Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.)
- A key piece of evidence introduced at the HLF trial and linked to the Muslim Brotherhood-Palestine Committee-Hamas conspiracy was a “planning memo” which describes the purpose of the “legal” organizations, such as CAIR, that the Muslim Brotherhood sought to establish in the United States:
The process of settlement is a “Civilization-Jihadist Process” with all the word means. The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.
- In addition, the FBI has publicly stated that it will have no formal or official contacts with CAIR precisely because of the evidence that linked CAIR and its senior management to Hamas and its purposes. Finally, in response to a letter from Congresswoman Sue Myrick, a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the U.S. Department of Justice recently wrote in relevant part: (above)
 See, e.g., the NEFA Foundation website which provides detailed links and context for the court documents in both the first HLF trial (ended in mistrial) and the second trial (ended in guilty verdicts) at http://www.nefafoundation.org/hlfdocs.html; see, specifically, the Government’s Second Supplemental Trial Brief at p. 30 Available on line at
http://www.nefafoundation.org/miscellaneous/FeaturedDocs/US_v_HLF_SecondSuppTrialBrief.pdf; see also Congresswoman Sue Myrick’s official website at
http://myrick.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=22&parentid=21§iontree=21,22&itemid=418. (Congresswoman Myrick serves on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence).
 See government’s List of Unindicted Co-conspirators and/or Joint Venturers here: http://www.nefafoundation.org/miscellaneous/HLF/US_v_HLF_Unindicted_Coconspirators.pdf.
 Court documents for the second trial available at:
 The transcript is available from the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas, website (see link in note 15 above) in 18 parts as Government Exhibits “Philly Meeting,” Nos. 1-18 and posted under the documents introduced into evidence on Sept. 29, 2008.
 See a true and correct copy of the Philly Meeting Summary Chart introduced into evidence at the HLF trial, attached hereto as Ex. C. Ahmad (aka Omar Yehia) was named, along with CAIR, as an unindicted co-conspirators in the HLF trial.
 Government’s Memorandum in Opposition to CAIR’s Motion for Leave to File a Brief Amicus Curiae Instanter and Amicus Brief in support of the Unindicted Co-Conspirators’ First and Fifth Amendment Rights at pp. 2-3. Available on line at:
 Available on line at
 For a hypertext link to a copy of an FBI letter memorializing this formal distancing, see this article at The Investigative Project on Terror, at:
New York Times takes up Hamas-linked CAIR's cause of trying to force the FBI to stop telling the truth about Islam Jihadwatch
This morning the New York Times has picked up on the effort by the hard Left and Islamic supremacist groups to intimidate the FBI into abandoning all attempts to teach the truth about Islam and jihad, which I wrote about at length yesterday here. The agenda of Hamas-linked CAIR is obvious in their outrage over FBI training materials: they want the Feds to stop teaching the truth about Islam, and to supply agents only with a whitewashed, misleading picture that will leave them woefully ill-equipped to understand or deal adequately with jihad terror plotting in the U.S. The Leftist media, including now the New York Times, with its usual suicidal short-sightedness and fashionable anti-anti-terror stance, has eagerly signed on to this campaign.
Here is one section from the Times' piece on this today: "F.B.I. Chided for Training That Was Critical of Islam," by Erica Goode in the New York Times, September 16:
The agency was also criticized last year for inviting Robert Spencer, an anti-Muslim blogger, to speak to a joint terrorism task force.
“This isn’t a revelation to us,” said Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, an advocacy group in Washington. “We’ve been dealing with this issue for quite some time now.”
He added, “There’s a problem with the use of anti-Islamic trainers and Islamophobic materials.”
I wrote this to Erica Goode:
I am not "anti-Muslim," as I have stated many times. It is not "anti-Muslim" to stand for human rights for all people, including Muslims, and to defend the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and equality of rights for women, all of which are denied under traditional forms of Sharia. Nor am I merely a blogger, but the author of 10 books, two of which were New York Times bestsellers. Nor is CAIR simply a neutral Muslim advocacy group, but a Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood-linked group with many former officials convicted of terror plotting. I hope next time you write about this you will attempt at least some semblance of objective journalism, but I have no high hopes.
Like Spencer Ackerman, Erica Goode makes no attempt to determine whether or not the material in the FBI training is true or accurate. She just takes for granted that it must be false (I show that it is true here), and assumes also that Hamas-linked CAIR and the ADC are the honest brokers in this controversy. It is typical, but no less excusable for that.
Ackerman is a proud tool and dangerous useful idiot. Dangerous because other useful idiots pick up the meme and run with it.
The FBI came under fire again Wednesday from hard-Left journalist Spencer Ackerman in Wired, who has been conducting a campaign for some time to get the bureau to purge its terrorism training seminars of any hint of the truth about the global jihad and Islamic supremacism.
Ackerman reported with breathless self-righteous indignation that “the FBI is teaching its counterterrorism agents that ‘main stream’ [sic] American Muslims are likely to be terrorist sympathizers; that the Prophet Mohammed was a ‘cult leader’; and that the Islamic practice of giving charity is no more than a ‘funding mechanism for combat.’ At the Bureau’s training ground in Quantico, Virginia, agents are shown a chart contending that the more ‘devout’ a Muslim, the more likely he is to be ‘violent.’ Those destructive tendencies cannot be reversed, an FBI instructional presentation adds: ‘Any war against non-believers is justified’ under Muslim law; a ‘moderating process cannot happen if the Koran continues to be regarded as the unalterable word of Allah.’”
Like virtually all Leftist and Islamic supremacist critiques of anti-jihad and anti-terror material, Ackerman’s piece takes for granted that such assertions are false, without bothering to explain how or why. Apparently Ackerman believes that their falsity is so self-evident as to require no demonstration; unfortunately for him, however, no one else has provided any proof of this, either. And there is considerable evidence that what this FBI training material asserts is true.
Are mainstream American Muslims “likely to be terrorist sympathizers”? Certainly all the mainstream Muslim organizations condemn al-Qaeda and 9/11; however, some of the foremost of those organizations, such as the Islamic Society of North America, the Muslim American Society, the Islamic Circle of North America, the Muslim Students Association, and the Council of American-Islamic Relations, and others, have links of various kinds to the jihad terrorist group Hamas and its parent organization, the Muslim Brotherhood, which is dedicated to imposing Islamic law around the world. A mainstream Muslim spokesman in the U.S., the Ground Zero Mosque Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf, refused to condemn Hamas until it became too politically damaging for him not to do so; another, CAIR’s Nihad Awad, openly declared his support for Hamas in 1994. Another mainstream Muslim spokesman in this country, Reza Aslan, has praised another jihad terrorist group, Hizballah, and called on the U.S. to negotiate with Hamas. Other mainstream Muslim spokesmen in the U.S. such as Obama’s ambassador to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Rashad Hussain, and media gadfly Hussein Ibish, have praised and defended the confessed leader of another jihad terror group, Palestinian Islamic Jihad: Sami al-Arian.
Do these men and organizations represent a tiny minority of extremists that actually does not express the opinions of the broad mainstream of Muslims in this country? Maybe, but if so, they simply do not have any counterparts of comparable size or influence who have not expressed sympathy for some form of Islamic terror.
Was Muhammad a “cult leader”? Certainly one definition of a cult is that members are not free to opt out if they choose to do so – and it was Muhammad who enunciated Islam’s notorious death penalty for apostasy by saying, ““Whoever changes his Islamic religion, then kill him.” (Bukhari 9.84.57). Also, there are several celebrated incidents in which Muhammad lashed out violently against his opponents, ordering the murder of several people for the crime of making fun of him — including the poet Abu ‘Afak, who was over one hundred years old, and the poetess ‘Asma bint Marwan. Abu ‘Afak was killed in his sleep, in response to Muhammad’s question, “Who will avenge me on this scoundrel?” Similarly, Muhammad on another occasion cried out, “Will no one rid me of this daughter of Marwan?” One of his followers, ‘Umayr ibn ‘Adi, went to her house that night, where he found her sleeping next to her children. The youngest, a nursing babe, was in her arms. But that didn’t stop ‘Umayr from murdering her and the baby as well. Muhammad commended him: “You have done a great service to Allah and His Messenger, ‘Umayr!” (Ibn Ishaq, 674-676).
Is the “Islamic practice of giving charity” no more than a “‘funding mechanism for combat’”? If not, one wonders why so many Islamic charities in the United States and around the world have been shut down for funding terrorism, including what was once the largest Islamic charity in the United States, the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), as well as the Global Relief Foundation (GRF), the Benevolence International Foundation (BIF), and many others.
Is it true that “the more ‘devout’ a Muslim, the more likely he is to be ‘violent,’” and is it also true that “moderating process cannot happen if the Koran continues to be regarded as the unalterable word of Allah”? While certainly not all devout Muslims are terrorists, virtually all Islamic terrorists are devout Muslims. In recent years, not only Osama bin Laden but also devout Muslims such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, would-be Times Square bomber Feisal Shahzad, Arkansas jihad murderer Abdulhakim Muhammad, and other jihad terror plotters such as Khalid Aldawsari, Baitullah Mehsud, and Roshonara Choudhry, among many others, reference Islamic teachings to justify violence against unbelievers. Just this week, Detroit underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab declared in court that Muslims should only be judged by the Qur’an.
Can “any war against non-believers” really be “‘justified’ under Muslim law”? Majid Khadduri, an Iraqi scholar of Islamic law of international renown. In his book War and Peace in the Law of Islam, which was published in 1955 and remains one of the most lucid and illuminating works on the subject, Khadduri says this about jihad:
The state which is regarded as the instrument for universalizing a certain religion must perforce be an ever expanding state. The Islamic state, whose principal function was to put God’s law into practice, sought to establish Islam as the dominant reigning ideology over the entire world….The jihad was therefore employed as an instrument for both the universalization of religion and the establishment of an imperial world state. (P. 51)
Robert has more here.
Have a tip we should know? Your anonymity is NEVER compromised. Email firstname.lastname@example.org
The Truth Must be Told
Your contribution supports independent journalism
Please take a moment to consider this. Now, more than ever, people are reading Geller Report for news they won't get anywhere else. But advertising revenues have all but disappeared. Google Adsense is the online advertising monopoly and they have banned us. Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have blocked and shadow-banned our accounts. But we won't put up a paywall. Because never has the free world needed independent journalism more.
Everyone who reads our reporting knows the Geller Report covers the news the media won't. We cannot do our ground-breaking report without your support. We must continue to report on the global jihad and the left's war on freedom. Our readers’ contributions make that possible.
Geller Report's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our work is critical in the fight for freedom and because it is your fight, too.
Please contribute here.
Make a monthly commitment to support The Geller Report – choose the option that suits you best.