The Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Watch (GMBDW) reported in October 2007 that current Democratic Vice-Presidential candidate Tim Kaine had a close relationship to the Muslim American Society (MAS), a part of the US Muslim Brotherhood closest to the Egyptian organization. According to a local media article cited in that post:
Democratic Gov. Timothy M. Kaine is far too close to a Muslim group that allegedly has ties to Islamic terrorism and espouses radical views, according to two local delegates. But a group leader says the charges are founded in racism.
Kaine should move to put some distance between his administration and the Falls Church-based Muslim American Society, said Dels. Todd Gilbert, R-Woodstock, and Clifford L. “Clay” Athey Jr., R-Front Royal.
It all started when Kaine appointed Dr. Esam Omeish, the president of the society, to the Virginia Commission on Immigration. Gilbert wrote to Kaine, asking him to reconsider the appointment after seeing online videos of Omeish accusing Israel of genocide against Palestinians and exhorting Muslims to “the jihad way.”
Omeish resigned less than a day later under pressure from Kaine.
But after some investigation, the delegates say the connections between Kaine and MAS appear to be deeper than just one appointment.
Kaine was the keynote speaker at the society’s Freedom Foundation “Standing for Justice Dinner.” He was photographed with leaders of the group, including Imam Mahdi Bray, the executive director of the foundation.
In an online video of a 2000 rally in Washington, Abdurahman al-Amoudi — who would later plead guilty to charges of funneling money from Libya to Saudi militants — took to the podium and declared his support for Hamas and Hezbollah.
Hamas, now the ruling party in the Gaza Strip, started a wave of suicide bombings against Israeli civilians in 1993, according to the nonpartisan Council on Foreign Relations. Hezbollah, which now holds a quasi-state in southern Lebanon, is thought to be behind the 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut that killed 241 servicemen.
“I have been labeled by the media in New York to be a supporter of Hamas. Anybody support this Hamas here?” al-Amoudi says in the video, drawing cheers from the crowd and fist pumps from Bray.
“I wish the added that I am also a supporter of Hezbollah. Anybody supports Hezbollah here?” he asks, drawing more cheers and fist pumps.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Tim-Kaine.jpg351640Wallace Bruschweilerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngWallace Bruschweiler2016-07-24 15:44:572016-07-24 15:58:06We Warned You In 2007 About Tim Kaine: Hillary’s VP Pick and the Muslim Brotherhood
The unnamed man who took hostages in a theater in Germany today had no problem getting a gun, despite Germany’s draconian gun laws. The House Democrats are perpetuating the prevailing willful ignorance about the real threat of jihad terror.
“GOP Congressman to House Democrats during sit-in: ‘Radical Islam killed these people,’” AOL News, June 23, 2016:
Tensions between Democrats and Republicans reached a boiling point , with one Republican lawmaker getting into a shouting match over a sit-in aimed at forcing votes on gun control measures.
Representative Louie Gohmert staging his own protest yelling at the Democrats saying, “We’re talking about radical Islam”. While also proclaiming, “Radical Islam killed these people.”
The Congressman waving his finger at posters featuring photos of the victims of the recent mass shooting in Orlando that left 49 people dead.
Gohmert’s own protests were then drowned out by the Democratics [sic] shouting, “Don’t let terrorists have a gun!”
The Democrats began their sit-in because of the Senate’s rejection of four purposed gun bills. Congressman John Lewis is leading the charge saying Congress has a moral obligation to speak up and speak out to address gun violence….
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/dems-sit-in-e1466769476935.jpg355640Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2016-06-24 08:00:152016-06-24 08:10:19VIDEO: GOP Congressman to House Democrats during sit-in: ‘Radical Islam killed these people’
A new ad by the Democratic National Committee strikes out at Republican presidential candidates for using the term “radical Islam,” saying that using the term is “equating Islam, all Muslims, with terrorists.”
In the ad, the DNC also objects the use of the terms “radical Islamic terrorism,” “radical Muslims” and “radical Islamic jihadists” by Republican presidential candidates, saying, “It’s oversimplifications and it’s wrong.”
The reason why the term “radical Islam” is used is precisely to make the distinction between this type of Islam and Islam itself. (While most of us learned about the purpose of adjectives in grade school grammar classes, it seems that members of the DNC were absent for that class.)
Moreover, the claim that using the term “radical Islam” amounts to indicting “all Muslims” as terrorists is equally absurd.
Insulting the audience further, the ad shows a clip of former Republican President George W. Bush saying, “We do not fight against Islam. We fight against evil” and “The war against terrorism is not a war against Muslims.”
No Republican presidential candidate who has used the term “radical Islam” — much less the majority of the Americans who agree with this use of the term “radical Islam” – intends to indict an entire faith group for the behavior of some of its members.
To wit, in America, the number of hate crimes against Muslims actually decreased during the past year. And in France, a Pew poll suggested the approval ratings of Muslims in France increased in the months after the Charlie Hebdo attack. Significantly, the increased approval rating was manifest in all political strata, from those identifying as left to moderate and right. (French people saying they held “favorable” or “mostly favorable” attitudes towards Muslims numbered 85, 82 and 65 percent, respectively.)
We have all heard the argument that terrorism has nothing to do with Islam. As recently as November 19, less than a week after Islamist terrorists perpetrated the horrific attacks on Paris, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton tweeted, “Let’s be clear: Islam is not our adversary. Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism.”
Facile platitudes such as these, as well as the blatant distortion that using the term “radical Islam” is equivalent to calling all Muslims terrorists does an extreme disservice to humanity, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, both of whom are in the crosshairs of a fanatical ideology that seeks their destruction.
Just days before the DNC’s ad appeared, King Abdullah of Jordan warned, “We are facing a Third World War against humanity” if the civilized world does not “act fast to tackle” the Islamic State and similar terrorist groups.
What the DNC refuses to admit, King Abdullah stated clearly, “This is a war, as I said repeatedly, within Islam,” noting that over 100,000 Muslims have been murdered by the Islamic State over the past two years (including in “atrocities like-minded groups” have pertetrated in Africa and Asia.)
In a recent landmark speech, UK’s Prime Minister David Cameron called out U.S. President Barack Obama for failing to name Islamist extremism and calling it instead “violent extremism.”
“Barack, you said it and you’re right — every religion has its extremists,” Cameron countered. “But we have to be frank that the biggest problem we have today is the Islamist extremist violence that has given birth to ISIL [ISIS], to al-Shabab, to al-Nusra, al Qaeda and so many other groups.”
In response to Obama’s failure to name the ideology behind current terrorism, Maajid Nawaz, a former Islamist who now is on the forefront of those advocating against this ideology, asks, “What happens if you don’t name the Islamist ideology and distinguish it from Islam?”
Nawaz says what will come back to Muslims is exactly the attitude the DNC is advocating against. “You’re sending out the message to the vast majority of Americans: There’s an ideology you must challenge, but you don’t tell them what it’s called. What are they going to assume? The average American is going to think, ‘Yeah, I’ve got to challenge an ideology — it’s called Islam.’”
Nawaz added, “You’re only going to increase anti-Muslim hatred, increase the hysteria, like ‘he who must not be named’ — the Voldemort effect, I call it — by not naming the ideology. Because the average guy out there is going to assume the president is talking about the religion itself.
“But if you distingiush Islamist extremism and say, ‘Look, Islam’s a religion. We’re not going to tell you whether Islam is good or bad, peaceful or not. We’re not going to define that for you. What we can say is you mustn’t try to impose that on anyone else. If you do, that’s called Islamism, and that’s what we have a problem with.’”
In the long run, failing to name this treacherous enemy will almost certainly mean the battle against it will be lost. In truth, bombs can only destroy people, but they are ineffective against ideology, which can always fourish in newer and younger groups of people.
In his speech, Cameron stated, “Our new approach is about isolating the extremists from everyone else, so that all our Muslim communities can be free from the poison of Islamist extremism.”
Naming “radical Islam” for the ideology it is, is the first step towards fighting this scourge on all civilization as we know it.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Islamic-Democrats-e1448550873302.jpg391640Clarion Projecthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngClarion Project2015-11-26 10:15:282015-11-26 13:01:19VIDEO: Democratic Party TV Ad Objects to Use of Term ‘Radical Islam’
The Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), designated a terror organization by the United Arab Emirates, is in full outrage mode at Republican presidential candidate Scott Walker, trying to intimidate him into speaking less accurately about the nature of the jihad threat. It’s their usual tactic: charging anyone who dares to note the Islamic character of Islamic terrorism with “hatred” and “bigotry.” Usually this works, in our cowed and confused culture, and Hamas-linked CAIR seems to have won at least a partial victory over Walker — we’ll know for sure who won when we see if he ever uses the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism” again.
Aside from Hamas-linked CAIR, that is a stupid phrase anyway. Is there “moderate Islamic terrorism”? If not, then why use the word “radical” at all? Because even Walker, for all his courage in standing up to the forces of politically correct authoritarianism in other contexts, can’t bring himself to use the phrase “Islamic terrorism” straight, without a modifier — he knows the firestorm that would ensue, and so draws back. Now he will probably draw back even farther. And yes, I am well aware that however watery and weaselly the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism” may be, Walker has already distinguished himself as more forthright, honest and courageous than most of his rivals just by using it. Most of them won’t even go that far toward the truth about the jihad threat.
More below. “Muslim advocate: Scott Walker is ‘enabling ISIS’ with ‘radical Islam’ rhetoric,” by Jesse Opoien, The Capital Times, August 29, 2015:
A representative for America’s largest Muslim civil liberties advocacy organization said Gov. Scott Walker is “enabling ISIS” by allowing the terrorist group to co-opt the Islamic religion.
“With this, Scott Walker is actually enabling ISIS by characterizing their acts as being Islamic terrorism,” said Robert McCaw, government affairs manager for the Council on American-Islamic Relations. “He is taking a peaceful religion of 1.6 billion people and misappropriating it to ISIS, allowing them to wrap themselves in the religion’s name and stake a claim to it.”
Here again we see the familiar sleight-of-hand. Hamas-linked CAIR would have us believe that Scott Walker is responsible for allowing the Islamic State “to wrap themselves in the religion’s name and stake a claim to it,” as if no one ever associated ISIS with Islam until Walker started talking about “radical Islamic terrorism.” In reality, people associate the Islamic State with Islam because the Islamic State associates itself with Islam, and nothing Scott Walker says or doesn’t say is going to change that. No young Muslim is going to decide to join the Islamic State because a non-Muslim politician referred to jihadis as “Islamic extremists,” thereby validating them as Islamic. No Muslim looks to non-Muslim authorities to validate what is or isn’t Islamic and who is or isn’t a Muslim. Hamas-linked CAIR’s real objective here is obvious: to intimidate Walker (and everyone else) into never speaking of Islamic terrorists as Muslims. Why? So that American Muslim advocacy groups such as Hamas-linked CAIR will not be called to account for not doing anything to stop jihadist recruitment in mosques in the U.S., and instead opposing counter-terror programs all over the country — after all, those terrorists aren’t Muslims, so the true, peaceful Muslims can’t be expected to do anything about them.
McCaw was referring to Walker’s first foreign policy address as a presidential candidate, delivered on Friday at The Citadel military college in South Carolina, during which he referenced Islamic extremists or radical Islamic terrorism 11 times.
As a presidential candidate, there are plenty of things Walker has pledged to do differently than President Barack Obama. Chief among them is to use the words, “radical Islamic terrorism.”
The Wisconsin governor isn’t the only Republican presidential contender to highlight this difference. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal have also made frequent calls for a commander-in-chief who will declare the problem with forces like ISIS to be radical Islamic terrorism.
Obama has generally refrained from attaching a religious affiliation to terrorist groups like ISIS or Al Qaeda, referring to them as “violent extremists” and “terrorists.”
Addressing a group of foreign ministers in February at the State Department, the president made clear that it’s an intentional choice. He said those groups are “desperate for legitimacy” and should not be granted it.
“All of us have a responsibility to refute the notion that groups like ISIL somehow represent Islam, because that is a falsehood that embraces the terrorist narrative,” he said.
“All of us have a responsibility to refute the notion that groups like ISIL somehow represent Islam” — great. Where are the Muslim refutations of the Islamic State’s understanding of Islam? (There are some, but they’re mostly just exercises in detour and deception). Where are the programs in mosques and Islamic schools in the U.S. to teach young Muslims why they should reject the Islamic State’s view of Islam? There aren’t any. Now, why is that?
The president added that the U.S. is “not at war with Islam, we are at war with those who have perverted Islam.”
Walker’s tone was significantly different in his hawkish foreign policy address, which called for the U.S. to stop being “passive spectators while the world descends into chaos.”
The governor pledged to secure U.S. borders “at any cost,” fight terrorists abroad leaving “all options” on the table, restore the U.S. alliance with Israel and strengthen the defense budget.
He called for increased investment in counterterrorism and surveillance programs, implementing a no-fly zone over Syria, imposing harsh sanctions against Iran and restoring a strong alliance with Israel. He promised once again to terminate the U.S.-Iran nuclear deal on “day one” in the White House.
All of this was tied to an overarching theme of the need to “defeat radical Islamic terrorism.”
“The policy of a Walker administration will be to confront radical Islamic terrorism using the full range of statecraft options. We must give our intelligence professionals the legal and constitutional tools they need to keep us safe,” Walker said.
Jenni Dye, research director for the liberal group One Wisconsin Now, suggested Walker’s message was driven by the conservative Milwaukee-based Bradley Foundation, whose president and CEO Michael Grebe is Walker’s presidential campaign chairman. Grebe also served as chairman for Walker’s two gubernatorial bids and his recall campaign.
The Bradley Foundation was deemed one of the “top eight funders of Islamophobia” based on IRS filings from 2001-2012 in a report by the liberal Center for American Progress. Recipients of Bradley funds noted in the report include the Middle East Forum, David Horowitz Freedom Center and Center for Security Policy.
“The virulent Islamophobia promoted and funded by the Bradley Foundation, run by Scott Walker’s campaign chair, is filling the void that is his foreign policy experience,” Dye said. “Even their millions can’t paper over the fact this guy is dangerously unprepared. His simplistic saber rattling reveals an ignorance of history and a shockingly cavalier attitude about sending the brave men and women of our armed forces into harm’s way.”…
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Robert-McCaw-e1440930238592.jpg370640Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2015-08-30 06:24:062015-08-30 06:31:12Hamas-linked CAIR demands apology from Scott Walker for “enabling ISIS”
