NC Sez: The following is a book written by my friend Mary.  I will be posting her chapters as she sends them to me, so continue to check back.  She is the ex-wife of a muslim and understands what it means to live under that lifestyle.  Notice I said “under” rather than live within that life style.  Living as a Muslim when you grew up as an American and a Christian was not an easy walk for Mary.  Her experience is to our benefit as she educates us on the true nature of the imperialistic political system known as Islam.

###

by Mary Christina Love

Introduction

Victories in Islam are like a Russian doll, with each victory leading to a larger victory, and Islam is exerting increasing influence on Western cultures through immigration, oil economics, cultural exchange, education, political correctness, political contributions, and the threat of terror.

“Walking the Plank: To a Dhimmi Nation” reveals how America has been systematically submitting to Islam for decades as American businessmen and politicians endorse Islamic causes in exchange for oil, money, and power.

Submission to Islam as an attitude of concession, surrender and appeasement towards Islamic demands under coercion and constant fear of reprisal. As a pacifist reaction to aggression, submission to Islam is an attitude of servitude resulting from cowardice, vulnerability, bribery and extortion. It is the state of “dhimmitude,” where a dhimmi is a non-Muslim entity that accepts the conditions of Islamic law and remains safe by peacefully surrendering to Islamic terms.

The book suggests that the world trade center bombings of 1993 and 2001 were designed to further enable Islamic expansion in the United States by destroying evidence of who the world’s real imperialists are, and by giving Muslims permission to feel aggrieved and demand special protection status.

In what may be the largest organized crime ever in history, the author contends that global warming and the recent financial crisis and bailout are part of a profitable scheme, or financial jihad, to transfer trillions of dollars into Islamist Saudi coffers and drive America into generations of dhimmitude.

Most Americans agree that Bush kept us safe from another terrorist attack after September 11, 2001. But just because we are not witnessing violence and death on American soil, we cannot assume that we are safe from jihad. The reality is that violent attacks are not necessary for jihad if other methods achieve the same results.

Those who do not understand jihad and Islamic doctrine tend to attribute the reasons for Islamic grievance to poverty, desperation, and misunderstanding. They often believe that being nice will solve our differences, that cooperation, aid, and commerce will alleviate tense situations, and that everyone just wants harmony and happiness. We believe that if the unsatisfied only had a good income, or an education, or if they do not perceive discrimination, they will be content. This is wishful, delusional thinking. As demonstrated in Saudi Arabia, widespread prosperity does not stop terrorism. It actually enables the spread of Islam via stealth and manipulation that is backed by the threat of terror. The lack of gratitude  from Islamic recipients of aid and cooperation is because Islamists view all concessions as victories for Islam and their due from non-Muslims. What Americans do not understand about Islam is that its victories are like a Russian doll, always followed by a larger one.

After eight years of compromising liberties for security, an agenda to Islamicize America is well underway. Religion, politics, finances, education, oil, culture, and terrorism are inseparable in jihad. September 11, 2001 may be the only large scale act of terror necessary to advance and achieve a takeover.  American are still in denial of something we cannot comprehend and do not wish to know about. The explosion of the World Trade Center on 9/11 caused much more than rubble, the horrible death of 3,000 people, and insurance payouts at the end of corporate money trails. Files and files of evidence went up in a poof of smoke that day. Evidence in those files could have proven a web of extensive financial and political associations through ownership titles, transactions, statements, etc. revealing who the world’s real imperialists are. At the expense of American citizen’s lives and security, half a century of transactions involving Middle Eastern petrodollars vanished.

My insight to Islam began with my marriage to a Moslem who came to America on a student visa pre-9/11. In the late 1970’s to mid 1980’s, I read the Koran at his suggestion and subsequently learned that by persuasion, intimidation, terror, stealth or force, Islam intends to make the whole world submissive to its oppressive ideology. My former husband was not shy about expressing his thoughts on what he believed were American deficiencies and cultural inadequacies. He enlightened me to the fact that Muslim people and Muslim leaders carefully scrutinize our society, our politics, and our presidents, just like the Iranian President Ahmadenijad openly and smugly does today. Our studious and disingenuously friendly Muslim acquaintances appeared on the surface to be quite moderate, however they were serious Muslims who told me that democracy, capitalism and American politics was corrupt to the core, and against the law of God. They spoke of Americans as superficial and greedy. They often said that Islam will rule the world someday because it is the fastest growing religion and a complete way of life. They believed Islam superior over all other religions because it is inclusive of politics, social behavior, economics, and worship.

While scrutinizing and insulting Americans, Muslim students flocked to the United States to attend our universities. I doubted that Islam was so complete if Muslims felt it necessary to leave their countries, which they always presented as nearly a paradise, for a formal education in a non-Muslim country. I wondered why they came here since they regularly belittled our way of life, our holidays, our politics, our financial system, our values, our hygiene, and our manners. In my early twenties, I began to fall prey to this “white guilt” indoctrination. I realized later that those friendships were conditional and hinged solely on my willingness to learn about, practice, and approve of Islam.

During those years, President Jimmy Carter was trying to show Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini what a nice guy he was. It was humiliating to watch CNN and see the Iranian students seize the embassy in Teheran in November 1979, holding the staff hostage until January 1981. Like most of America, this was my introduction to “radical” Islam. It happened early in a marriage that I was determined would work. I would have done anything to help my now X-husband integrate happily into America. I believed the stories of how horrible the Shah was. I began to practice “moderate” Islam and read the Koran.

Though reading the Koran is not required in Islam, by the time I finished reading it, I knew I was not a Muslim, and I knew it would cause a problem for me and my children if I ever stopped practicing it. Hoping it would not mean the end of my marriage, I knew I would eventually have to find the courage to tell my husband, who was becoming more radical every day, that I could not practice Islam any longer. The more I learned and practiced the religion, the more was required of me, including disassociations with friends, family, culture, and values to the extent that I felt like a traitor to myself, my family and my country.

Jimmy Carter continued his weak stance too, persuading the Tehran regime that it could get away with anything. Far from showing Khomeini that the United States disapproved of his comments and activities, the U.S. government pathetic and helpless approach convinced Khomeini and all Muslims that the Islamic revolution was big, strong, and right.

Americans, including myself, should have learned from the hostage situation in Teheran that submissiveness to anti-American radicals does not work. Appeasement did not convince Tehran that America was its friend, only that it was so weak as to make aggression all the more justifiable. Realizing that Ronald Reagan would be tougher, the revolutionary students released the American embassy hostages when Iran was suffering from an Iraqi invasion that Iranians called “The American Imposed War.” They hated Reagan for that war.

I knew that no matter how softly I explained my decision to quit practicing Islam, it would probably mean the end of my marriage. As action and time would later prove, I was correct. The experience was and still is a microcosm of what goes on in politics. The divorce was definitely cruel and unusual by the standards of Western culture. To borrow benign and politically correct words from who was then a future President Bush, it was “not pretty.”

Years later when the twin towers came down, I was not surprised. I remembered warning words from my former husband that “Muslims (not terrorists) will attack America someday if American politicians do not stop promoting democracy throughout the world.”

Americans cannot conceive the difference between the goals of Islam and the goals of a free society. Westerners take freedom and truth for granted, so they cannot imagine a society that does not honor those virtues. The differences between freedom and totalitarianism are indescribable when one has not experienced the alternate. American naïveté makes us dangerously exploitable and predictable. We do not have the agenda or the experience to fully understand true oppression. I found out that Islamic motives are so offensive that describing them is an offensive act in itself–to the extent that it is actually labeled politically incorrect and hate speech. The Islamization of the West warning creates a “kill the messenger” situation.

“Political correctness” supports a political agenda; a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Political correctness does not describe truth, honesty or morality. Rather, it disguises and enables an oppressive agenda against freedom and truth and holds citizens hostage in their own countries. Political correctness toggles a victim into an aggressor and turns free thinkers into silenced, meek and conquered slaves. Virtue, self-respect, truth, reason, creativity, freedom, and dignity are useless in a politically correct atmosphere because they are the very virtues that will expose an oppressive agenda.

Though many free thinkers have been trying to send a warning about Islamofascism, there are still too many in blissful denial. As a result, we have been kowtowing to Islamist demands ever since 9/11.

So how long does it take to get the message that this is an ideological revolution with huge ambitions, an agenda that will use oppression, intimidation, terror, deception, bribery, extortion, and our own love of freedom–just to remove freedom from the American mindscape. This is the duality that aims to force America to submit to a totalitarian ideology behind a veil of religion.

In the name of fairness the 9/11 tragedy was exploited by Muslims to demand special treatment at the expense of valid American concerns. After 9/11, religious and racial profiling gave way to preferential treatment for Muslims over Non-Muslims as they hijacked the opportunity to cry victim.

Between 2001 and 2008, mosque numbers in America increased from around 100 to 2,300, with most of them funded by Saudi sources. On the 2008 anniversary of 9/11, NYPD provided extra security for Islamic mosques.

In 2006, the Department of Homeland Security gave out small amounts of grant money to synagogues and Jewish schools after they received threats from Muslims. A number of mosques, whose anti-semantic and anti-capitalist agenda generates fearful and defensive reactions, then began to help themselves to some of the available grant money.

Even though we have not been physically or violently attacked on American soil since September 11, 2001, we are easily falling for a variety of jihad tactics. The tactics may change but the seditious goal of Islamic jihad is always the same. Muslims in the U.S. are literally using-up American tax dollars and sense of fairness to promote policies that will use-up our Democracy in favor of Islam.

Muslims regularly demand special privileges in the workplace and in schools, labeling those who object as “racists” and “Islamophobes.” Tolerance and fairness has been mis-applied for an ultimate agenda of intolerance for generous, innocent, naive Americans, not the formerly defined terrorists. We have literally tied ourselves helplessly in knots in an effort to be politically correct and to tolerate an ideological supremist agenda that does not ever intend to integrate into our freedom loving, free-thinking American society.

A statement on a Muslim Brotherhood memo entered into evidence in the 2007 Texas based Holy Land Foundation case:

“The Ikhwan (the ‘brothers’) 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 God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”

###

Chapter One

Globalist and Islamist Alliance

Well-coordinated plans will soon give the Federal Government the power to put personal information on all Americans into government databases. The databases will store school records, business records, medical records, financial records, personal activities, and track where we travel in the United States. [1]

In 1966, Columbia University radical professors in New York City, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, studied Saul Alinsky as Hilary Clinton and Barrack Obama later would. The “Cloward-Piven Strategy,” basically calls for the destruction of capitalism in America. By increasing welfare, the subsequent collapse of the economy will allow for the nationalization of many private institutions and an easy implementation of socialism. The Cloward-Piven Strategy was the inspiration for creating ACORN where President Obama worked as a community organizer. Understanding the Cloward-Piven Strategy, the rules of Saul Alinsky, and the cultural Marxist worldview will help to understand what is occurring in America today.

Saul Alinsky was closely allied with the Chicago Mob in the 1930’s. He was a lifelong ally of the Stalin-controlled Communist Party when Stalin was known to have murdered tens of millions of people. Alinsky discovered how to persuade college students and young people that it is more moral to be immoral. In his book, “Rules for Radicals,” Alinsky wrote that a community organizer “ must first rub raw the resentments of the people; fan the latent hostilities to the point of overt expression.”

So how could this happen? One answer is by using a natural enemy–ideological warfare– if you will. With the help of the globalist agenda, anti-Capitalist, anti-Democratic agendas have welcomed the Islamic influence in America as a means to overthrow Democracy in America. As a result, a Saudi-funded Fifth Column has been achieved in America the past ten years. [2]

America’s inability to produce sufficient amounts of oil resulting from the Global Warming Treaty guarantees that trillions of dollars will go to Saudi and Arab states. The inconvenient consequence is that America is held hostage to Islamic fundamentals via energy dependence. The petrodollar exchange will if not already, include financial dependence, political subservience, religious control, educational control, and social consequences, the very definition of dhimmitude.

Chuck Baldwin, who hosts a radio show and writes current events articles explained that both the Republican and the Democrat parties have already succumbed to New World Order ideology and are collaborating to facilitate its creation. Baldwin wrote about Richard Gardner, a Columbia University Professor and Council on Foreign Relations member, in 1974. Gardner’s article titled “The Hard Road to World Order” in a Council on Foreign Relations publication called for:

“…an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece.”

Gardner named the following organizations that would help fulfill that objective: the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), the Law of the Sea Treaty, the World Food Conference, the World Population Conference, and the United Nations.

Other treaties and organizations that will help fulfil this objective are the North American Fair Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), and the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), and the Global Warming Treaty.

Judge Advocate General of the Navy from 1956-1960 and a former member of the Council on Foreign Relations, Rear Admiral Chester Ward, warned the American people about the dangers of globalism involving the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission, by saying:

“The most powerful clique in these elitist groups has one objective—they want to bring about the surrender of the sovereignty and the national independence of the United States. A second clique of international members in the Council on Foreign Relations comprises the Wall Street international bankers and their key agents. Primarily, they want the world banking monopoly from whatever power ends up in the control of global government.”

Ward also said,

“The main purpose of the Council on Foreign Relations is promoting the disarmament of U.S. sovereignty and national independence and submergence into an all powerful, one world government”.

Baldwin’s article also cited two quotes from the Senior President Bush. The first quote from 1991 says:

“My vision of a New World Order foresees a United Nations with a revitalized peacekeeping function.”

And a second quote from 1992:

“It is the sacred principles enshrined in the United Nations charter to which the American people will henceforth pledge their allegiance.”

Sacred? Pledging allegiance to the U.N. is to pledge allegiance to the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) because the OIC  is a group of 57 Muslim majority nations that holds the largest voting bloc in the U.N. In 1990, the OIC adopted the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which overtly dictates that Islam is the only legitimate religion. The Cairo Declaration is bloated with hypocritical vanity and double standards. Pierce with loopholes, it is a manifesto declaring that Islamic Shari’ah Law is the only true source of human rights. Article Two of the declaration shows the ambiguity of the OIC’s Orwellian use of words and its plan for non-Muslims.

“(a) Life is a God-given gift and the right to life is guaranteed to every human being. It is the duty of individuals, societies and states to protect this right from any violation, and it is prohibited to take away life except for a Shari’ah prescribed reason.

(b) It is forbidden to resort to such means as may result in the genocidal annihilation of mankind.

(c) The preservation of human life throughout the term of time willed by God is a duty prescribed by Shari’ah

(d) Safety from bodily harm is a guaranteed right. It is the duty of the state to safeguard it, and it is prohibited to breach it without a Sharia-prescribed reason.”[3]

The OIC and its allied organizations have aggressively engaged in efforts to expand Islamic law in the West. The OIC declaration confirms that the U.N. resolution would adhere to Islamic Shari’ah law, which legalizes discrimination against women and non-Muslims, criminalizes free speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of conscience. Is this why the Pledge of Allegiance is no longer said in American public schools?

Baldwin also wrote that Warren Christopher, the Secretary of State under Bill Clinton, told CNN in 1993:

“We must get the New World Order on track and bring the U.N. into its correct role in regards to the United States.”

New World Order goals are outlined in “The Naked Communist,” a book written in 1958, by Cleon Skousen, a former FBI agent. Many of these goals have already been achieved with the help of Saudi money. Some of the goals follow:

• Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
• Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
• Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind.
• Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
• Gain control of the schools.
• Infiltrate the press.
• Gain control of key positions in radio, television and motion pictures.
• Break down cultural standards of morality.
• Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with social religion.
• Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

The Council on Foreign Relations is at the forefront of promoting the New World Order and  dominate the Federal Reserve and U.S. Presidents. Dignitaries in and out of government who held, or still hold membership in the Council on Foreign Relations. A Council on Foreign Relations member and U.N. spokesman, Walt Rostow phrased:

“It is, therefore, an American interest to see an end to nationhood.”

The Council on Foreign Relation sister organization is the Trilateral Commission. The Trilateral Commission was co-founded by Zbigniew Brzezinski, and David Rockefeller, with Brzezinski calling for:

“Movement toward a larger community of the developed nations . . . through a variety of indirect ties and already developing limitations on national sovereignty.”

The Bilderberg Group was started in 1954 at the Bilderberg Hotel in a small Dutch town called Oosterbeek. The group is reportedly comprised of European prime ministers, American presidents, and the wealthiest CEOs of the world who meet to discuss the economic and political future of humanity. The press has never been allowed to attend the meetings, nor have their statements, which have ramifications on all citizens of the world, ever been released.[4]

Global governance will utilize immigrants like invasive species in an attempt to divide, weaken and destroy a traditional “ecosystem” in ideological warfare to force Americans to submit to global laws and courts. With so many different people, it is impossible to please all of them, so under the guise of multiculturalism, new rules will have to be made when cultures collide. Illegal immigrants from Mexico serve the Cloward –Piven strategy to burden the welfare system.

The invasive influx and outright importation of Muslims, whose totalitarian ideology is openly hostile to free thinking individuals, encourages the Islamic goal of world domination. Yet it has been reported that George Bush II brought more Muslims into America than the combined total of all U.S. presidents, and Obama is expected to continue the exploitive immigration trend. [5]

Republican and Democrat leaders alike have helped to sell out America by laying the foundation for global governance through unethical commerce, immigration, and political practices. In a war of opposing ideologies, Americans of all nationalities are currently the subjects of an ideological invasion that must be understood in order to stop.

[2] Lewis, James; “Barrack Obama and Alinsky’s Rules for Psychopaths,”  September 25, 2008, http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/barack_obama_and_alinskys_rule.html

[3] “Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam,” http://www.oicun.org/articles/54/1/Cairo-Declaration-on-Human-Rights-in-Islam/1.html

[4] Baldwin, Chuck; “More on the New World Order,” January 30, 2009, http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin488.htm

[5] Thorn, Victor;  “Change? Obama Inner Circle Filled With Bilderbergers”, http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/obama_bilderbergers_160.html

###

Chapter Two

The Trap is Set

America is in a highly compromised position of servitude after decades of concessions with the Saudis in order to preserve invested interests and to obtain oil. In order to do business in the Middle East and Saudi Arabia, the United States is compliant to wishes that are both unconstitutional and unhealthy for Americans. Submissiveness to Saudi rules has placed America in a state of dhimmitude, or servitude to Islamic conditions, that extends into the arena of energy, security, policy, education, finance, and religion.

The U.S.-Saudi alliance began as a result of the need for oil and the desire for U.S. corporations to cash in on new business opportunities. Initially well-intended and lucrative, the relationship became compromised when oil companies began to do the bidding of Saudi Arabia. With oil and American company’s interests at stake, the Saudi’s began using oil as a weapon to create a powerful anti-Israel lobbying force in Congress. Saudi political interests have been shamefully imposed on hundreds of thousands of organizations, businesses, politicians, financiers, and educators, to influence American policy and American public opinion. From the beginning of the dubious relationship, ARAMCO officials, the U.S. Department of State, and the Defense Department had pressured the Truman administration not to recognize the new state of Israel because they correctly feared it would anger the Saudis and endanger future American oil company profits.

King Saud needed a new source of revenue in 1933 so he agreed to grant Standard Oil of California exploration rights for oil when he was facing bankruptcy. Since pre-Islamic days, tax dollars collected from pilgrims visiting Mecca provided a major source of revenue, but the number of pilgrims had decreased by 20^th century. Exploration led to discovery of oil in 1936 and the formation of the Arabian-American Oil Company Oil (ARAMCO) before the end of the decade with Texaco, Mobil, and Exxon joining to become a giant multinational oil consortium.

The National Security Council, the Treasury Department, the State Department, and officials of the oil companies, agreed to transfer American oil companies tax payments from the U.S. Treasury directly to the Saudis instead of having to pay foreign aid to the Saudi Kingdom. The Saudis were satisfied with the arrangement, but in the 1970’s the newly formed OPEC countries started exercising more control and demanded assets and partial control in some oil companies.

Successor to the Saudi throne, King Faisal, was increasingly at odds with America over U.S. policy with Israel, and nationalization of the oil companies became a threat when the king demanded that American oil companies actually work to change U.S. policy toward Israel. That policy included extorting the U.S. into trying to force the Israelis out of the territory they had acquired as a result of the Six Day War in 1967 and even out of Jerusalem completely. As foreseen by the Truman Administration, King Faisel warned the president of ARAMCO that American oil companies must prove their loyalty to Saudi Arabia or suffer higher oil prices, and perhaps lose all their investments in Saudi Arabia. So, in order to keep their investments intact American oil companies began hiring lobbyists to influence Congress. “American national interest” then began to reflect Saudi interests and officials began public relations efforts such as lobbying, media projects directed at efforts to improve the Arab image and change America’s opinion regarding Israeli concerns and Israel’s right to exist.

Lobbying involves public relations campaigns at the taxpayer’s expense. Foreign governments contract lobbying firms to get Congress to pass specific bills or to sway opinion for investments in the U.S. that are not always best for Americans. Sometimes lobbying efforts involve enticements to attract American investors out of America and into foreign countries, such as domestic tax hikes achieve. Thousands of lobbyists, lawyers, public relations firms, and political consultants are paid to push the agendas of foreign governments, foreign corporations, and foreign leaders at the American taxpayer’s expense. Lobbyists in turn earn millions of dollars for ostensibly traitorous propaganda efforts.[1]

In 1972 an agreement allowed oil-producing countries to receive 25% of each American oil company’s profits allowing for a gradual transfer of ownership that would reach 51% by 1983. The American oil companies did not realize that loopholes in the agreement would allow the Saudis to demand additional money per barrel in the future.[2]

Oil as a weapon in the struggle against Israel was regularly proposed at Arab Petroleum Congresses. The Six Day War in 1967 led to the 1967 oil embargo in a joint Arab decision to deter support for Israel. Several Middle Eastern countries limited their oil shipments. Some embargoed only the U.S. and the United Kingdom, while others placed a ban on all oil exports. In an effort to define what countries would be included in the embargo, several Arab countries issued a statement with the following two resolutions:

“Arab oil shall be denied to and shall not be allowed to reach directly or indirectly countries committing aggression or participating in aggression on sovereignty of any Arab state or its territories or its territorial waters, particularly the Gulf of Aqaba.”

The Gulf of Aqaba is a large gulf of the Red Sea that shares a coastline with Egypt, Israel, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. The second provision was:

“The involvement of any country, directly or indirectly in armed aggression against Arab states will make assets of its companies and nationals inside the territories of Arab countries subject to the laws of war. This includes the assets of oil companies.” [3]

After the Six Day War in June 1967, Persian Gulf members of The Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) cut oil production by 5% a month until Israeli forces evacuated Arab lands. The Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OAPEC) headquartered in Kuwait, composed solely of Arab Countries including Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, was formed in 1968 to coordinate energy policies specifically for Arab nations with the original intention to control oil as a weapon.

In 1973, Egypt and Syria attempted to over run Israel in the Yom-Kipper War and declared it would no longer ship oil to the United States and other countries that supported Israel. The 1973 oil embargo was a result of America’s decision to resupply Israel militarily. OPEC members subsequently raised world oil prices, but after negotiations at the Washington Oil Summit in March 1974, the embargo was lifted.[4]

Syria and other Arab states put pressure on Saudi Arabia to use their petrodollars against Israel after the price of oil quadrupled in 1973. Previously just $3.00/barrel, some Arab countries were earning $12.7 million dollars an in 1974.[5]

The 1973 oil embargo was the first sign of using oil as a weapon for political gain. From then on, a number of OPEC and OAPEC countries would use their control to renegotiate contracts, particularly with American companies. [6]

Steven Emerson, journalist and former staff member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, wrote an eye-opening book about anti-Israeli activities promoted by prominent Americans in order to get Saudi petrodollars. Emerson, who is now the executive director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism, described in his book “The American House of Saud: The Secret Petrodollar Connection” how Arab petrodollars have been diffused throughout American society with scandalous political consequences. Emerson’s book revealed how American officials in Saudi Arabia and the United States, through political funding, have severely manipulated the political process and the free market to influence American policy in their favor.[7]

Non-oil producing companies involving politicians, lawyers, financiers, the education system, and the media were drawn into a scheme comprised of an influential “petrodollar” class that is far more  powerful today. Emerson’s book revealed how American corporations, business executives, and former government officials became zealous lobbyists to gain wealth from Saudi petrodollar investments,for Saudi political interests in a decades long secret agenda of anti-Semitic goals.[8]
Saudi anti-Semitism is so extreme and controlling that they ban companies doing business with Israel to a “black list.” The blacklist forbids American companies from doing business with  American companies that do business with  Israel.[9]

Saudis enticed and contracted thousands of American business leaders to industrialize and modernize Saudi Arabia with their enormous new wealth. American companies were encouraged to open subsidiaries in Saudi Arabia with offers of free land, suspension of taxes, and interest-free loans. The American businesses included goods manufacturers, defense manufacturers, investors, bankers, contractors, architects, universities and executives. Some of the companies that received mega contracts early on included Litton, Hughes Aircraft, Turner Construction, Holiday Inn, Hyatt, Hilton, Marriot, Sheraton, Westinghouse, Pillsbury, Pan American Airlines, Borden, and General Motors[10]

The Saudis also loaned billions of dollars to leading American companies. As early as the 1970’s Chrysler was indebted to the Saudis for $100 million. IBM was granted a $300 million loan, and AT&T received a loan for $650 million.[11]

The relationship between the Saudis and the Americans was not only one-sided with regards to Israel. It was also biased when it came to religion. Daniel Pipes cited in a Winter-2002/2003 article, “The Scandal of U.S.-Saudi Relations,” an example of political subservience when President George H.W. Bush went to the Persian Gulf region in 1990 at Thanksgiving to visit 400,000 American troops who were protecting the Saudis from an Iraqi invasion. When the Saudi authorities learned of President Bush’s plans to say grace before Thanksgiving dinner, they objected and informed him that Saudi Arabia recognizes only Islam. Bush complied with the Saudi’s and decided to celebrate Thanksgiving on the U.S.S. Durham in international waters.

In April 2002, The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) at Waco complied with Crown Prince Abdullah’s demands while he was travelling across Texas to visit President George W. Bush when Prince Abdullah did not want any females on the ramp or talking to the airplane.

In 1991, the U.S. military had taken the initiative requiring female personnel based in Saudi Arabia to wear Islamic religious attire. When off-base, the American government required the women to ride in the back seat of vehicles driven by men. The highest-ranking female fighter pilot in the U.S. Air Force at the time, Lt. Col. Martha McSally said in 1995:

“I’m able to be in leadership positions and fly combat sorties into enemy territory, yet when I leave the base I hand over the keys to my subordinate men, sit in the back, and put on a Muslim outfit that is very demeaning and humiliating.”

McSally filed a lawsuit in early 2002 citing violation of free speech, the separation of church and state, and gender discrimination. After McSally filed her lawsuit, the Department of Defense changed the clothing requirement and rescinded the policies of sitting in the back of a vehicle and requiring a male escort. However, women are still “strongly encouraged” to follow rules giving “host nation sensitivity” a priority.

“The American House of Saud” revealed that the leading U.S. companies in Saudi Arabia; ExxonMobil, Chevron, Texaco and Boeing did not employ women, at least in the early eighties. At that time, several other U.S. companies, including Citibank, Saks Fifth Avenue, Philip Morris and Procter & Gamble, had women on their payroll, however, following Saudi custom, they worked in separate offices from men. American businessmen say that the companies follow Saudi customs so they will not jeopardize their investments.
The United States does not stand up for freedom of speech, assembly, the right to travel, women’s rights and religious liberties in Saudi Arabia, and these breeches in freedom almost always stem from Islamic laws. For example, Saudi and Islamic laws give Saudi fathers custody of children in divorces, and the State Department even accepts those laws when Saudi fathers abduct children from the United States. The State Department has not made a genuine effort to confront the Saudi authorities over domestic cases, nor made effective efforts to free children who are held against their American families’ wishes. In cases featured at a June 2002 hearing in the House of Representatives and many others, the U.S. government did not stand up for the mothers or the children.

Saudis will not tolerate Christians at prayer. An incident involving American troops in Saudi Arabia in December 1990 describes how formal Christmas services were forbidden on Saudi soil. Christmas trees were not allowed, and American officials were expected to seize and dispose of Christmas decorations and other Christmas symbols. Christmas cards sent to Americans through Saudi post boxes were destroyed and U.S. stamps portraying religious scenes were torn off packages and letters. Labeled “C-word morale services,” all Christmas gatherings were to be undetectable to the Saudis.

Timothy Hunter, a State Department employee during 1992-95 described methods he was told to use to discourage Catholics and Protestants from worshipping while he was based in Saudi Arabia. With Hunter’s communications limited to Catholics, he was told to pretend he did not know of any worship services. Even though there actually were religious services held on Tuesdays referred to as “Tuesday Lectures,” Hunter was to avert the questions as long as possible. He was told to arrange a meeting with any inquisitor who persisted to gain a sense of their credibility. Hunter said that he never actually admitted anyone to the Tuesday Lectures. Non-Catholic Americans were directed to the British Consulate but since the U.K. services were usually full, most of Americans did not attend.

Hunter explained a long-standing procedure of prohibiting Jews from the Kingdom. Though select senior diplomats of Jewish origin were allowed to visit Saudi Arabia on official business, Jewish-American diplomats of low or mid level standing were not permitted to be stationed in the Kingdom. Hunter described that it was the duty of the Foreign Service Director of Personnel to screen all Foreign Service officers who applied for service in Saudi Arabia, denoting Jewish officers’ names with the letter “J.”

Congressional hearings in 1975 exposed the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and its subcontractors of excluding both Jews and Blacks from projects in Saudi Arabia, even though U.S. law states “U.S. companies cannot rely on a country’s customs or local preferences and stereotypes to justify discrimination against U.S. citizens.”
The arrangement was challenged in 1959 when the New York State Supreme Court condemned the practice of asking prospective employees if they were Jews. New York condemned the discrimination by ruling that ARAMCO had conformed to the practice of not hiring Jews in an effort to appease Saudi Arabia:

“. . . our basic documents of freedom are never to be subordinated to immediate business gain…no matter what the King of Saudi Arabia says…” [12]

The New York Court enforced the ruling and told ARAMCO:

“Go elsewhere to serve your Arab master but not in New York State.”

Dynalectron, a firm that hired helicopter pilots headquartered in McLean, Virginia, arranged for its employees to convert to Islam. In another case, a female employee of a hospital service and supply firm in Abu Dhabi sued her employer for firing her because she referred to Israel as “The Holy Land” in a company newsletter she had written.[13]

World Airways, who boasted of having more Hajj pilgrims to Mecca than any other airline in the world, was charged in 1975 for demanding proof from it staff, of church membership, baptism or marriage in churches for traveling to Saudi Arabia.

A man who worked with the Army Corps of Engineers, ARAMCO, and Raytheon Corp, said that mail censors confiscated a photo of his 95-year-old grandmother because the photo disobeyed Saudi laws regarding women.
In 1995, when five Americans were killed in Riyadh, the Saudi Kingdom executed the suspects before the U.S. law enforcement officials could interrogate them. Saudi’s were also uncooperative in the investigation surrounding American troop deaths in the 1996 terrorist attack on Khobar Towers, a housing complex used to house foreign military personnel. When King Faisal held a state dinner for Henry Kissinger in the1970’s, he accusingly informed the Secretary of State that Jews and Communists were working together to undermine the civilized world and that the creation of Israel was a Bolshevik plot to divide America from the Arabs. In order to avoid a confrontation instead of challenging the ridiculous statements, Kissinger took the role of dhimmi by changing the subject and asking the king a question about palace artwork.

Regarding dissatisfaction with U.S. and Israeli alliance, Crown Prince Abdullah wrote to President Bush in August 2001, just prior to 9/11:

“. . . a time comes when peoples and nations part. We are at a crossroads. It is time for the United States and Saudi Arabia to look at their separate interests. Those governments that don’t feel the pulse of the people and respond to it will suffer the fate of the Shah of Iran.”

Abdullah’s plan for solving the Arab-Israeli conflict required that Israel retreat to its 1967 borders, a serious concern to President Bush. In a statement featured in the U.S. press in April 2002, a leading Saudi figure warned that the Kingdom would contemplate joining forces with America’s worst enemies if necessary:

“. . . we move to the right of bin Laden, so be it; to the left of Libya’s ruler Muammar Qaddafi, so be it; or fly to Baghdad and embrace Saddam like a brother, so be it.”

The statement had no apparent effect on U.S. policy. Reports from a following summit indicated that Abdullah gave warning to President Bush that if an agreeable position was not reached regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict the two countries would part ways. [14]

After September 11, 2001, the U.S. government did not reassess policy with, or sue the Kingdom for punitive damages, and Saudi cooperation with American efforts to track down the financing of Al-Qaeda appears to have been useless. Author Daniel Pipes noted that Americans strive to tolerate customs and religions beliefs of other countries, but the lack of reciprocity from the Saudis suggests a payoff.

In “The American House of Saud,” Steve Emerson wrote that a comment by the Saudi ambassador to the United States, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, provided an evocative reason for the one-sided relationship with American politicians:

“If the reputation then builds that the Saudis take care of friends when they leave office”…“you’d be surprised how much better friends you have who are just coming into office.”

A former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Hume Horan, said:

“There have been some people who really do go on the Saudi payroll, and they work as advisers and consultants. Prince Bandar is very good about massaging and promoting relationships like that. Money works wonders, and if you’ve got an awful lot of it, and a royal title-well, it is amusing to see how some Americans liquefy in front of a foreign potentate, just because he’s called a prince.”

The statement explains why American officials will overlook national security, human rights and democratic values regarding Saudi Arabia and Arab states interests.

National Review’s writer, Rod Dreher noted that the number of ex-government officials “who now push a pro-Saudi line is startling.” He wrote:

“. . . no other posting pays such rich dividends once one has left it, provided one is willing to become a public and private advocate of Saudi interests.”[15]

A National Post analysis written by Matt Welch declared:

“. . . former ambassadors have carved out a fine living insulting their own countrymen while shilling for one of the most corrupt regimes on Earth.” [16]

Matt Welch wrote that Americans who have worked with the Saudis in official capacities often remain connected to them when they leave public office. Some of them include former President George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton who have given speeches for cash. Jimmy Carter promotes the Saudi agenda with outspoken anti-Israel sentiment and has received millions of dollars from Arab countries. Walter Cutler, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia, ran the Meridian International Center, an organization that promotes international understanding through education and exchange. Cutler acknowledged that during his 17 years as President for the center, Saudi donors were “very supportive.”

Daniel Pipes and Steve Emerson reveal that the Kingdom has paid off many ex-Washingtonians such as Spiro T. Agnew, Jimmy Carter, Clark Clifford, John B. Connelly, Gerald Ford, William E. Simon, and various former ambassadors. [17]

Hundreds of former congressional representatives such as minority leader Richard Gebhardt, Congressman Thomas Downey, and Bob Dole were paid consultants and lobbyists for Arab countries. Their services included setting up meetings with members of Congress, making travel arrangements, working on media campaigns to promote the Arab image, highlighting countries specifically important to the United States with no regard for human rights. Lobbyists and political consultants regularly manipulate U.S. foreign policy by influencing Congress, the executive branch, and the American public.[18]

Edward Walker, former assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs, President of the Middle East Institute in Washington, which promotes understanding with the Arab world, said Saudi contributions covered $200,000 of the institute’s $1.5 million budget in 2001. Walker’s board chairman then was former senator Wyche Fowler, ambassador to Riyadh in the second Clinton administration.[19]

Robert Gray, a former secretary to the Eisenhower cabinet member opened a public-relations firm in 1981. The country of Turkey paid Gray an annual retainer of $300,000 to use his expertise for military aid in defense issues. Kuwait hired Gray to council them on how to handle press inquiries regarding their purchase of Santa Fe International, an oil drilling firm with a nuclear technology subsidiary. Gray worked to reverse American foreign policy and change public opinion regarding Israel for the Saudis.[20]

After intensive lobbying by private corporations, Jimmy Carter agreed to sell F-15’s to the Saudis, and Reagan sold them AWACs. After Reagan sold the AWACs, Greyhound announced a $90 million contract. Three weeks after the AWAC vote, Westinghouse announced a $130 million contract. According to a memo, Westinghouse had paid the public relations firm, South and Baroff $75,000.[21]

In May 2008 President Bush went to Saudi Arabia and it was reported by the press that the trip was in an effort to ask the Saudis to keep oil prices down and sell us oil. This was at a time when oil process had risen sharply and the reason for the hike still remains unclear. The Saudis did not agree to sell us more oil, and as it turns out, another reason for the trip was that the Saudis wanted to discuss a future nuclear program.[22]

Since 1974, U.S. Presidential administrations have kept strategic Saudi investments in America a secret. Critical information about the nature of investments by Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates is routinely suppressed from the public, the press, and Congress.

According to “The American House of Saud,” the Treasury Department, investment in the U.S. by Middle East oil exporters was $74.6 billion at the end of 1983. Nearly $40 billion of the total was in government securities, such as Treasury bills and bonds. The remainder included $5.1 billion in corporate bonds, $8.6 billion in corporate stock, $6.7 billion in deposits in American banks, $4.3 billion in non-bank liabilities, $4.8 billion in direct investments, and another $5.1 billion in U.S. government debts.

The office of Saudi Arabian Affairs was established in the Treasury Department[23], and the last year that the Treasury Department released deposit statistics on the Middle East oil producing countries was 1982. At that time, their deposits totaled $13.3 billion. Arab deposits were limited at that time to six U.S. banks: Bank of America, Chase Manhattan, Chemical Bank, Citibank, Manufactures Hanover, and Morgan Guaranty.

The U.S. agreed to secrecy and would not disclose Saudi investments when Arab oil producers began accumulating tens of billions of dollars 1974 after the embargo. In an effort to keep Saudi investments a secret, the U.S. agreed to recycle the petrodollars, and not disclose Saudi investments. Inducing Saudis to purchase U.S. Treasuries required confidentiality from then on. The Treasury Department and other federal agencies have not been able to monitor all of the Arab investments in the United States with offshore tax havens that include dummy corporations, laundered money, and Swiss bank accounts. The lack of adequate government controls has enabled billions of Arab surplus funds to enter the U.S. with estimates that were up to $200 billion as early as 1983.

As part of legislative supervision in the mid seventies, the Senate Subcommittee on Multinational Corporations, chaired by Frank Church, began to look into the relationship between expanding international debt, the concentration of petrodollars in American banks, and a compromised American foreign policy. The subcommittee sent questionnaires to 36 major banks asking for a breakdown of deposits from 22 countries including the OPEC nations. Fearing retribution from the Arab depositors, banks refused to comply. In early September 1975, Kuwait’s minister of finance, Abdul Rahman Atiqi warned Senator Charles Percy and Assistant Treasury Secretaries, Chester Cooper and Gerald Parsky that

“Kuwait would definitely pull its funds out of the U.S. Banks if its position was revealed.”

Two years later, the subcommittee released an in-depth study titled “International Debt, the Banks and U.S. Foreign Policy.” The report by Karin Lisakers revealed a shocking picture of the potential foreign advantage wielded over the banks and the American government.

Lisakers’ report warned of a possible “money weapon” regarding the billions in assets in the U.S. held by the oil producers. At least half of the assets were liquid such as Treasury bills and short-term bank deposits, and movement of the funds would be very disruptive to the financial system. The report concluded:

“In the event of another major outbreak of hostilities in the middle East, in which the United States and Saudi Arabia are likely to find themselves on opposite ides, can one be sure that they will continue to act in the best interest of the Western financial system? Saudi Arabia did not hesitate to use the oil weapon against the United States In the last (1973) Mid-East war, despite earlier warm U.S.-Saudi relations. There is no guarantee that next time they won’t wield the money weapon, too.”

Under Ronald Reagan, Congressman Benjamin Rosenthal wanted to declassify documents that he believed would reveal problems associated with OPEC investments. Changes in Arab investment strategies and increased threats to the stability of American financial markets caused Rosenthal to declassify 17 documents provided by the CIA, including three titled, “OPEC: Official Foreign Assets;” “Kuwait and Saudi Arabia: Facing Limits on U.S. Equity Purchases;” “Problems with Growing Arab Wealth;” and “Kuwaiti Investments in the United States.”

The Saudi embassy in Washington cautioned the Reagan administration against disclosing its investments. Rosenthal nevertheless wrote to Reagan that he intended to publish the documents because some of them raised concerns about OPEC investment. After repeated assurance that there was no basis for concern in the recycling of petrodollars and OPEC investments in the United States, Rosenthal insisted that the documents expressed a different view on the type of investment OPEC governments have been making in the recent past. Without the documents, the public was getting a distorted and one-sided Executive Branch view of the nature, extent, and impact of the investments.

Reagan responded that the disclosure would likely “cause grave injury to our foreign relations or would compromise sources and methods of intelligence gathering,” and “the public interest in avoiding such injury outweighs any public interest served by disclosure.”

Despite fierce resistance, Rosenthal was able to get hundreds of heavily censored documents released. Combined with other published accounts the documents provided an idea of Arab investments and the nature of Arab threats against the United States.

At the time, Kuwait had the most real estate investments in the U.S. Other documents revealed that Kuwait had adopted an aggressive investment strategy in the United States, having acquired control of the $2.5 billion oil and drilling company, Santa Fe Industries. Other investments included the Hawaiian Independent Refinery, Inc, the Andover Oil company in Oklahoma, AZL Resources, Inc. in Arizona, the Petra Capital Corporation in New York, and Solid State Technology, Inc. in Massachusetts. The list included hotels, offices, and shopping centers such as Hilton Hotels in Georgia and Baltimore, the Landmark Hotel in Nevada, the Hotel Statler in New York, the Galleria Mall in Texas, the Columbia Plaza Office Building in Washington D.C. and other real estate holdings in over thirty states.

Middle East oil exporters already held $39.9 billion in U.S. Government securities at the end of 1983, with Saudi Arabia the largest shareholder. Initially investing most of its funds in U.S. government securities, Saudi Arabia became a major investor with strategic interests in American corporations. For example, by 1978, Saudi Arabia was the largest holder of Federal National Mortgage Association (FANNIE MAE).

Confidential documents also showed that in the 1980’s Kuwait owned 4% of stock in one hundred ninety-seven leading American corporations. The Kuwait portfolio was managed by Citibank and included large shares of Mc Donald’s, Ralston Purina, Atlantic Richfield, Johnson & Johnson, General Motors, General Mills, Dow Chemical, Eastman Kodak, J.C. Penny, and Proctor & Gamble. [24]

In 1982, the White House received several reports through Europeans and other intermediaries that unless the U.S. restrained Israel, King Fahd was ready to use the money weapon and start pulling Saudi deposits out of American banks, and liquidate holdings in Treasury bills.

By mid-1977, Saudi and Kuwaiti investors were having difficulties placing funds in the stock market without subjection to an SEC 5% disclosure rule that requires public exposure of over 5% purchase of a corporation, while exempting investors with less than 5%. According to one of the CIA-provided documents, by the end of 1983, the level of Saudi and Kuwaiti investments was so high that Major Saudi investments in the U.S. included the investment banking firms of Smith Barney Harris Upham & Co. and Donaldson Lufkin & Jenrette; the security brokerage firm ACLI International; Main Bank of Houston, National Bank of Georgia, Bank of the Commonwealth of Missouri, and Citibank. Other Saudi investments in the U.S. at that time included Coastal and Offshore Plants Systems (aluminum smelting) in North Carolina, Salt Lake International Center in Utah, Sunshine Mining Co. in Texas, RLC Corporation (trucking) in Delaware, Hyatt International Corporation (hotels) in Illinois, Colorado Land and Cattle Company (beef cattle) in Arizona, and real estate in over two dozen states.

In 1983 Rosenthal wrote a bill that was an attempt to ensure that the Congress and American public be adequately informed of the extent of OPEC investment in the United States. The bill did not attract much support in the house of Representatives. The day before it was to be introduced, Rosenthal died after a long battle with cancer. Since then, no other Congressman or Senator has been willing to monitor Arab investment. In early 1984, worldwide Arab assets were estimated to be in excess of $360 billion.

Another organization devoted to ties between the U.S. and the Arab world is the American Arab Affairs Council. Founded in 1981, the Council diplomatic advisory committee consisted of former American ambassadors from Arab countries and was subsidized by large corporations such as Boeing, Hughes Aircraft, and Northrop. The Councils theme was “the interlocking of American economic and political interests in the Arab world.”

The Council has received sponsorship from major corporations and universities for political conferences. One conference had large defense manufacturers, McDonnell Douglas, and General Dynamics as sponsors.[25]

Rachael Ehrenfeld, expert on Shari’ah and terror financing wrote an article in April 2008 titled, “America for Sale,” providing financial information. Her investigation revealed that Bourse Dubai, the world’s first and largest Islamic equity exchange, bought 20 % of the National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations (NASDAQ) in December 2007. NASDAQ, an American stock exchange, has the most trading volume per hour of any stock exchange in the world with approximately 3,200 trading companies. Bourse Dubai has also acquired 28 % of NASDAQ’s London Stock Exchange (LSE), resulting in Gulf nation’s control of nearly 52 % of LSE after Qatar acquired another 24 %.

Ehrenfeld noted that the Abu Dhabi Investment Council (ADIC) purchased the Chrysler Building in New York in 2008. A New York Post article in July of that year revealed the $800 million deal included 90 % of the 77-story tower. The New York Post sources also revealed at the time that the secretive ADIC would soon acquire the Trylons, a pyramid shaped hallmark of American architecture designed by Philip Johnson on NY City’s E. 42nd Street.

Ehrenfeld wrote that Arab states sovereign wealth funds (SWFs) “gobble up prime financial institutions, industries and real estate in the U.S. and the West” leading to increasing political influence. She added that on March 20, 2008, the U.S. Treasury, Abu Dhabi, and Singapore, signed an “Agreement on Principles for Sovereign Wealth Fund Investment.” The next day, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) Board of Directors, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) authorized a Sovereign Wealth Fund work agenda.

According to Ehrenfeld’s article, IMF Monetary and Capital Markets director Jaime Caruana said he expects the planned practices to conform to accountability principles, transparency, and to “cover issues of public governance.” Increasingly influenced by those with power and money, and well concealed from the public, practices are easily transgressed and very clearly, not transparent. Middle Eastern Sovereign Wealth Funds are in reality jihadist tools for imposing a one-world Islamic government.

In 2008, Middle East sovereign wealth funds already held $2 to $3 trillion globally, with expectations of reaching $6 to $10 trillion by around 2012.

An overlooked contradiction is that U.S. laws and World Trade Organization (WTO) regulations require all member nations to allow free trade with each other, while the Middle East sovereign funds require a religious based ban on trade with Israel. Rachael Ehrenfeld pointed out that ignoring the Constitution will inevitably lead to undemocratic, “faith based” and totalitarian dictates should Middle Eastern financial masters succeed with their tools and agenda, setting Islamic conditions on the U.S. as well.[26]

Saudi Arabia and other Islamic nations are buying into American and European capital markets with their petrodollars, acquiring large portions of the U.S. and European capital markets, creating unbalanced influential positions that enable the Islamic political agenda. A 1975 quote from an invitation to economic seminars hosted by visiting Arab officials boasted expectations for 1981 that “three-quarters of the world’s monetary reserves would be under Middle Eastern control.” [27]

The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) nations had achieved two-thirds control of the world’s oil reserves and 35.6% of the world’s oil production by March 2008. OPEC’s ability to control the price of oil is continually threatened with discovery and/or development of large oil reserves in other parts of the world such as the Gulf of Mexico, Russia, and the North Sea, and the Arctic. Concerns that OPEC members would have less accessible oil in the future, speculation mounted that their influence on crude oil prices could someday slip.[28]

As this book proceeds, it will become clear that the Saudis and Arab nations have used oil and financial weight to extort American businesses, the American political system and the American mind. At the time of this writing, 2009, Saudi investments and influence in the U.S., China, and Europe must be truly enormous. While still trying to keep investments secret, the questions arise: Why do the Saudis and Arab investors keep their investments and deposits secret? Were the bombings of the World Trade Centers on both occasions an effort to conceal the true nature of Arab investments? How much of the 2008/2009 Bailout and Stimulus money will go to companies and banks with predominant Saudi and Arab holdings? Are the Saudi’s and Arab states waging financial jihad with the petrodollars we purchase their oil with?

[2] Emerson, Steve; The American House of Saud: The Secret Petrodollar Connection, Chapter 2, pp. 26-35, Franklin Watts Publisher, 1985

[3] 1967 Oil Embargo; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_Oil_Embargo

[4] 1973 Oil Crisis;  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis

[5] Emerson, Steve; The American House of Saud: The Secret Petrodollar Connection, Chapter 4, p. 45, Franklin Watts Publisher, 1985

[6] Yom Kipper War; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom_Kippur_War

[7] Ibid; Chapter 1, p. 18

[8] Emerson, Steve; The American House of Saud: The Secret Petrodollar Connection, Chapter 1, p. 14, Franklin Watts Publisher, 1985

[9] Ibid; Chapter 4, pp. 61-64

[10] Ibid; Chapter 3, pp. 54-55

[11] Ibid; Chapter 3, p.56

[12] Ibid; Chapter 2, p. 25

[13] Ibid; Chapter 4, p. 69

[14] Pipes, Daniel; “The Scandal of U.S.-Saudi Relations, National Interest,” Winter 2002/03 http://www.danielpipes.org/article/995#_ftn30#_ftn3

[15] Dreher, Rod; “Their Men in Riyadh”, National Review, June 17, 2002

[16] Matt Welch, “Shilling for the House of Saud”, The National Post, August 24, 2002

[17] Pipes, Daniel; “The Scandal of U.S. and Saudi Relations,” Winter 2002/2003, http://www.danielpipes.org/article/995

[18] Morris, Dick & McGann, Eileen; Fleeced, Chapter 6, pp 117-132, Harper Collins, New York, NY, 2008

[19] Washington Post, February 11, 2002

[20] Emerson, Steve; The American House of Saud: The Secret Petrodollar Connection, Chapter 17, pp. 337-343, Chapter 11, p. 193, Franklin Watts Publisher, 1985

[21] Ibid; Chapter 10, p. 174, Chapter 11, p. 193

[22] Stearns, Scott; Bush in Saudi Arabia for Nuclear Deal, Voice of America News, May 16, 2008, http://voanews.com/english/archive/2008-05/2008-05-16-voa23.cfm?CFID=72599019&CFTOKEN=57388718

[23] Emerson, Steve; The American House of Saud: The Secret Petrodollar Connection, Chapter  3, p. 47, Franklin Watts Publisher, 1985

[24] Ibid; Chapter 16, p. 315-333

[25] Ibid; Chapter 15, p.293

[26] Ehrenfeld,  Dr. Rachel, &  Lappen, Alyssa A.; “America for Sale, “ Posted 04/01/2008, http://www.actforamerica92253.org/2008/05/23/america-for-sale-a-must-read/

[27] Emerson, Steve; The American House of Saud: The Secret Petrodollar Connection, Chapter 4, p. 60, Franklin Watts Publisher, 1985

[28] OPEC; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OPEC

###

Chapter Three

Islam in American Classrooms

American children are being indoctrinated with anti-Democratic ideologies in American colleges, universities, and K-12 public schools with socialism, communism, and Islam. While parents believe traditional societal values are upheld, some schools are intentionally breaching customary positions of trust by providing a failing quality of education as compared to generations past. The widespread violation of standards infringe on family orientation, political and social identity, and religious persuasion.

Seditious movements fund educational programs in an effort to undermine American values to alienate children from their parents and grandparents, and ultimately replace traditional concepts with those subservient to a new world order. Emerging ideologies that alter the mind of American children are totalitarian allies– Communism and Islam. In full assault on our nation, the ideologies are demeaning our founding fathers and undermining the core of our Democracy through our children.

A September 2008 article titled “Saudi Infiltration into U.S. Education,” written for Israel National News, by Hillel Fendel warns that Saudis are using petrodollars to influence American education beginning in elementary schools. Sarah Stern, who heads the Washington, D.C. based Endowment for Middle East Truth think-tank (EMET) said the Saudis are making use of a clause called “Title VI” to indoctrinate teachers from K-12th grade with anti-American, anti-Israeli standards. Title VI and the loopholes in Bill Clinton’s 1995 Educational Guidelines allow off-campus activists to propagandize teachers and students at the taxpayer expense. Stern noted that:

“The law says you have to have teacher training seminars on campuses, and these have a radical anti-American bent. There is a place in New Mexico called Dar el Islam, a giant 1,300-acre complex that has a mosque, a madrassa [Islamic theological school], a summer camp, a teacher training workshop, and a publishing house that publishes some of the most virulent translations of the Quran, as well as the materials for their teacher-training that are used all over the country – and all stamped with the fancy blue-green-white star emblem of ARAMCO, the state-owned national oil company of Saudi Arabia. They are very, very stealth – I call this the ’soft jihad’ against America.”[1]

Title VI was first legislated in 1958 as a response to the Cold War because it was felt that American children did not know enough about the threat of Communism or the global market. Subsequently, a large amount of taxpayer money was set aside to fund college campus programs for regional studies such as African, Asian, and Middle Eastern studies.

In 1978, Edward Said of Columbia University wrote a book called “Orientialism” which became the prevailing and dominant trend in academia, making a Middle Eastern studies program very indoctrinating.  In the book, Said espoused that only individuals from given regions are qualified to talk or write about that region’s main religion.

Politicians welcomed programs and students from the Middle East when Arab leaders began lavishing generous donations to American educational institutions. In return, they demanded special privileges and the right to influence policy favorable to Islam.

Over the last 30 years, the Saudi royal family has contributed over $70 billion to promote Arab studies that center around Islam and spread anti-American and anti-Israeli propaganda. The Saudis give millions of dollars to American Universities and their motive is clearly stated by the official Saudi English weekly Ain-Al-Yaqeen:

“The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, under the leadership of the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Fahd Ibn Abdul Aziz, has positively shouldered its responsibility, and played a pioneering role in order to raise the banner of Islam all over the globe and raise the Islamic call either inside or outside the Kingdom.” [2]

Donations to universities can be made anonymously so it is impossible to know exactly how much money they receive and from whom. Some institutions receiving millions of dollars in Saudi funds are listed in the table below. Some of the Universities that receive Saudi endowments include Berkeley, Harvard, Columbia University, USC, Duke University, and even Texas A&M, to name only a few. [3]

By no means complete, the list includes known donations where possible.

Rice University accepts Saudi money for an Islamic Studies Chair. Duke University, Syracuse University, American University of Colorado, American University in Washington, D.C., and Howard University have allowed the Saudis to set up research institutes.

The endowments allow professors and so-called intellectuals the ability to promote an Islamic agenda while afforded protection under freedom of speech laws. Title VI allows for the payment of professors salaries. It also supports Saudi student activists that are trained overseas in the summer to learn terrorist tactics, and return in the fall. Thus, more and more anti-American and anti-Israel doctrine is spread, with nothing being done to stop it.[4]

Islamic organizations within American Universities are numerous. Islamic studies programs or research programs within the institutions also support the spread of Islam in America. One fund, named after Osama Bin Laden’s brother, The Bakr M. Binladin Visiting Scholar Fund at Harvard Law School, brings “visiting scholars” to study law at Harvard with the stipulation is that scholars must be citizens of a predominantly Muslim country.

The Saudi Arabian government views Western culture as its enemy, and so uses our universities as propaganda machines and research facilities. It may even use them as terrorist havens, such as The Muslim Student Association (MSA), an organization that encourages involvement in jihad, has established hundreds of chapters on colleges and university campuses across America. The co-founder of al-Qaeda, Wael Jelaidan, is one of several MSA members arrested on terrorist related charges.[5]

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal’s Georgetown University Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, (ACMSU) is just one organization that has been donating millions of dollars for Middle East studies programs. The so-called “gifts” shrewdly promote Islamic indoctrination without condemning Islamic punishments of amputations, stonings, hangings, honor killings, punishments for blasphemy, executions of apostates, persecutions of non-Muslims, sanctioned wife-beatings, female genital mutilations, etc. Rather, ACMSU presents Islam in ways that will appeal to naïve Westerners. Using terms like “Interfaith Dialog” and “Islamic Art,” the pretense of a more “moderate” version of Shari’ah law is really just to get the camel’s nose in the tent, and allow for radicalism once numbers allow. Radical Islam can take years and generations to take root, but once put into practice, it is far from what Americans call moderate.

There are many programs that take advantage of the Title VI Program. The King Fahd Chair for Islamic Shari’ah Studies, the Sultan bin Abdul-Aziz Al-Saud Program in Arab and Islamic Studies, the H.E. Sheikh Ahmed Zaki Yamani Islamic Legal Studies Fund, the King Fahd Chair of Oncology and Pediatrics, and the Bakr M. Binladin Visiting Scholar Fund. Saudi funded educational institutions in the United States give millions of dollars to American Universities to implement their agenda. Brigitte Gabriel, author of “They Must Be Stopped,” and founder of ACT! For America, a national grassroots organization dedicated to spreading the truth about the Islamic agenda, refers to recipient universities as “occupied territories.”

The American Educational Trust (AET), established in 1982 was funded by American businesses and Arab donors. AET can afford to provide speakers to scores of colleges and universities at no charge, reportedly setting up its organization with $1,072,237. [6]

The AET website claims to:

“provide the American public with balanced and accurate information concerning U.S. relations with Middle Eastern states. AET perceives a dearth in knowledge about the Middle East, Arabs, and Muslims, in the U.S., and pursues an educational mission of Interpreting the Middle East for North Americans; Interpreting North America for the Middle East.”

Saudi billionaire friend of Hillary Clinton and advisor on Islamic affairs, Abdurrahman Alamoudi, then President of the American Muslim Council, supporter of Hamas and Hezbollah, sentenced to jail in 2004 for eighteen counts of terrorism related activities and accused of ties with Osama bin Laden, met often with Bill and Hillary Clinton to contribute to Bill Clinton’s Religious Expression in Public Schools education guidelines. As a result of this alliance, funding for Islamic educational materials poured in from Saudi Arabia and Muslim nations.

Launched by Clinton in 1995, these guidelines greatly affect public schools today even though education is not in the federal government’s jurisdiction, but is actually adjudicated to individual states.

In August 1995, Clinton provided every public school district in America with the Religious Expression in Public Schools education guidelines, which included an ambiguous statement of principles for religious expression, and activity in our public schools. Colluding with non-religious groups as well, Clinton removed all former reference to the Bible, Christianity, and the Pledge of Allegiance from our public schools. The Pledge of Allegiance is now unconstitutional because it contains the phrase “one nation under God.”  Nadine Stresses, President of the ACLU, refers to the 1995 guidelines as the authority to support the ACLU’s lawsuits restricting Christmas celebrations and removing Nativity scenes from public schools.

The 1995 guidelines drafted by the American Muslim Council, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and the ACLU’s effective removal of Christianity diminished a cultured sense of American nationalism. Regarding his contribution to the guidelines, the director of the CIE at the time, Shabbir Mansuri, boasted that he was “promoting world cultures” and “waging a bloodless revolution” in America’s classrooms.[7]

The ACLU and the Council of Islamic Education (CIE) helped write Houghton Mifflin textbooks for K-12 American public schools with Islamic beliefs presented as historical fact. Houghton Mifflin collaborates with Microsoft and also publishes college textbooks for MS software programs actively promote multiculturalism, globalism, and political correctness indoctrination in college settings.

Way back in 1995, the Council of Islamic Education warned American scholars and public officials they would be perceived as “islamophobes,” racists, reactionaries, and enemies of Islam if they did not support promotion of Islam in American public schools. Islamic organizations applaud Clinton for helping them achieve the victory of their religious obligation to propagate Islam.

At the end of his term, Bill Clinton addressed Muslim leaders with a Ramadan message. Muslim leaders often ask for public statements, as they would later ask President Bush to humor them with formal public statements on behalf of the Arab vote. The statement that Clinton made is particularly disturbing because it is beyond protocol and good manners. The public message Clinton gave the Muslim leaders contained the unnecessary Islamic story as if it were an undisputed fact:

“As America’s six-million-member Muslim community grows in numbers and prominence, Americans of every religious tradition are learning more about the origins and meaning of Islam. That on ‘the Night of Power,’ the Angel Gabriel appeared to the Prophet Muhammad and revealed to him the first verses of the Koran. That the Koran declares that Ramadan was the month Allah’s words were sent down, and so should be spent in fasting.” -Bill Clinton

It is plausible the statement was a concession an act of obligatory allegiance and loyalty. A leader’s honor and loyalty hinges on public statements and in this case requires endorsing a disputed Islamic doctrine, while alluding to allegiance on behalf of all Americans and American policy and compromising the American education system.

Today, Christian instruction, prayer, and public nativity scenes are outlawed yet Clinton nominee, U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton of San Francisco, approved an interactive program  called “Islam: A Simulation,” for public schools. The program forced California children at Excelsior Elementary School in Byron, California to “learn to become Muslim, recite the Quran, fast for Ramadan and pray Islamic prayers.”[8] In December 2003, the San Francisco court determined the school district did not violate the Constitution and was not indoctrinating students when it required them to adopt Muslim names and pray to the Islamic deity, but was just teaching them about the Muslim religion.[9]

The course was part of a curriculum taught to seventh-graders all over the state which many California schools participated in. California ruled that the state’s public schools must teach Islam in classes. California standards require Islam be taught in 7th grade, Judaism and Christianity is to be taught in 6th grade, and is covered in just two days as opposed to two weeks for Islam. Studying Christianity does not involve role playing and is presented as oppressive.[10]

The simulation forces students to memorize Islamic prayers and recite verses from the Quran. Students adopt Islamic names, and write about their experience as a Muslim at the end of the program. The exercises encouraged students to incorporate Islamic devotional phrases into speeches, and imagine they are on a pilgrimage to Mecca. The program involves state-approved curriculum using state-adopted textbooks that have now been part of the instructional program in California for over a decade. [11]

A textbook adopted by the State of California “Across the Centuries,” published by Houghton Mifflin, prompts students to imagine they are Islamic soldiers and Muslims on a Mecca pilgrimage. Simulations encourage children to use devotional phrases such as “Allahu Akbar,” Arabic for “Allah is greatest,” and to fast during lunch to experience fasting during Ramadan. Yet, Judge Hamilton ruled the program was devoid of “any devotional or religious intent” and was, therefore educational, not religious in nature. [12]

But this is endorsement of Islam with Islamic indoctrination in our public schools under the guise of social studies and history, and at the expense of freedom of religion. Stealth Islamic conversion of our youth, using loopholes in the Education Guidelines is part of a traitorous alliance that enables the Muslim Brotherhood’s resolve to destroy America.

Not only is the alliance shocking, the longer it continues, the more difficult and dangerous it will be to reverse. Victories in Islam are like a Russian doll, setting the stage for subsequently larger victories. Ultimately, when numbers allow, the Islamic penalty for any who try to take away an Islamic achievement is death. The penalty for anyone who converts out of Islam is also death. Therefore, Islamic indoctrination puts non-Muslim children in peril because according to Islamic doctrine and Shari’ah law, one must agree to follow Islam once principles are known whether agreed or not. In the Islamic context, “understanding Islam” is not meant to be interesting information. When Muslims tell non-Muslims about Islam, they are telling them required behavior; i.e.; what to think and how to behave to avoid a backlash and condemnation in the future.

Michigan State University researchers showed the importance of leading students through a logical chain of information to break down pre-existing conceptions “that are deeply held and based on intuitive or naive beliefs about the world.” The study found that acting out lessons makes information stick.

Michigan State researchers developed an experimental middle-school science curriculum, found that science is not just memorized facts and terms, but an information process that is acted out to build a picture and an explanation. One of their key findings was the importance of leading students through a logical chain of evidence, showing them a variety of phenomena that can be explained by the same basic principle, and providing the chance to use the ideas. Researchers found that this procedure is not only essential to making the insights stick, but crucial in breaking down  pre-existing beliefs, noting that science is not just memorized facts and terms, but a process that builds a picture. Findings showed that regardless of the accuracy of a curriculum, action makes the information stick.

A separate article, “The Trouble with Textbooks,” written by Stephen Budiansky in February, 2001 refers to the Michigan State study. In an effort to describe what sticks in a students mind, Budiansky noted that:

“textbooks have always been an easy target for those out to lambaste the state of public education, and that in the area of science and math, many factors are at work in the poor showing of U.S. students, including poor teacher preparation.”

Budiansky also noted the importance of research by George Nelson, a former astronaut who directed a science and mathematics reform initiative of the American Association for the Advancement, called “Science Project 2061.” Noting the importance of textbooks, Nelson wrote:

“textbooks are the de facto curriculum in this country,”

and that:

“textbooks ought to be the easiest things to fix.”

Therefore it can be concluded that the acting out process in “Islam: a Simulation,” did not merely serve to teach history and culturally enlighten, but according to the Michigan State research and Project 2061 research, the information was presented in a manner that is scientifically proven to make the Islamic teachings stick in the minds of the California youth, regardless of accuracy.

According to Budiansky, the study of middle-school science textbooks studied by Project 2061 found that science books examined did not meet the minimum requirements for effectively teaching science. Nelson said that:

“Our students are lugging home heavy texts full of disconnected facts that neither educate nor motivate them.”

In a study conducted by the National Science Teachers Association, 23 percent of middle school teachers reported they have taught subjects in which they had no prior course work. Nelson emphasized that because so many teachers are deficient in math and science skills, they rely disproportionately on the provided texts. [13]

A book titled “The Trouble with Textbooks: Distorting History and Religion,” conducted by president of the Institute for Jewish & Community Research (IJCR), Dr. Gary Tobin, and research associate Dennis Ybarra, details a 5-year joint study noting a significant amount of misinformation in American textbooks and supplemental materials in schools in every state. The study cites offensive passages that present false information and undermine the very foundation of the American educational system.

The IJCR study looked at 28 prominent history, geography and social studies textbooks and concluded that American public school students are being overloaded with Islamic and Middle Eastern indoctrination at the expense of Christianity and Judaism. It found 500 problematic passages about Judaism, Christianity, Islam and the Middle East in widely used textbooks in public schools. The study supported similar assessments that history textbooks throughout the U.S. school system glorify Islam and are critical of Jews and Israel; and disrespectful of Christianity.

Tobin and Ybarra observed that Islam is taught in the books as a matter of fact, while Judaism and Christianity are treated as beliefs. The glossary of the textbook, World History: Continuity and Change, states as undisputed fact that the Koran is the “Holy Book of Islam containing revelations received by Muhammad from God.” The same glossary describes the Ten Commandments as “moral laws Moses claimed to have received from the Hebrew God Yahweh on Mount Sinai.” Likewise, the Islamic empire of the Middle Ages was described as “a time of unqualified glory without blemishes.” Other excerpts  state that Muslims “always tolerated Jews,” “unlike their Christian counterparts.”

Tobin and Ybarra concluded that history and religion are alarmingly distorted in schools in every one of the 50 states. The study describes how the textbook publishing process suffers from lack of competition and expensive development and adapting of textbooks. Major competitors are down from nine to three in less than twenty years, and control the K-12 textbook market today.[14]

The American Textbook Council (ATC), established in 1989 as an independent national research organization to review social studies textbooks and advance the quality of instructional materials in history, worked for two years to review five junior high, and five high school World, and American history texts. The ATC found that the history textbooks used by hundreds of thousands of students in the U.S. public school system blatantly promote Islam. The resulting report, authored by Gilbert T. Sewall, was titled “Islam in the Classroom: What the Textbooks Tell Us.”

The ATC report noted that Islamic organizations are active in curriculum politics and willingly provide misinformation in an effort to expel any critical thought about Islam, without eliminating its agenda. Assisted by partisan scholars and public relations associations many individuals with the power to shape the curriculum are blind to, or openly promote Islamic efforts. The report confirms findings that the texts present “disputed definitions and claims with regard to Islam as established facts.” The report continued:

“Islamic activists use multiculturalism and ready-made American-made political movements, especially those on campus, to advance and justify the makeover of Islam-related textbook content…Particular fault rests with the publishing corporations, boards of directors, and executives who decide what editorial policies their companies will pursue…”

The review examined how history textbooks characterize Islam’s foundations and creeds; what changes and additions have occurred in textbook material written before and after 2001; what textbooks say about terrorism, 9/11, and weapons of mass destruction. It outlines Islamic challenges to global security and asks about looming dangers to the U.S. and the world. The ATC found that deficiencies about Islam in textbooks copyrighted prior to 9/11 persisted and in some cases have grown worse. Errors about Islam in older textbooks had not been corrected even when publishers had having learned of contested facts, and were given time to make corrections.[15]

Instead of making corrections or adjusting contested facts, publishers and editors defend misinformation with omissions profound and intentional. The report said lessons contain “stilted language that seem scripted or borrowed from devotional, not historical, material.”

The book, Medieval to Early Modern Times features a two-page prayer to Allah “the Merciful.”[16]

The textbook, “World Civilizations,” published by Thomson Wadsworth said,

“Excepting the Old Testament’s poetry, the Jews produced very little of note in any of the art forms … There is no record of any important (early) Jewish contributions to the sciences.”

Another book, titled “The World,” published by Scott Foresman, claimed that

“Christianity was started by a young Palestinian named Jesus.”

Historical inaccuracy does all students of religion, history, and social studies a disservice, and further suggests a motive for such bias, such as the endorsement of Islam over other religions. Discoveries in the study include routine negative stereotyping of Jews, Judaism and Israel. Some of the texts accuse the Jews of committing deicide (exterminating a diety such as Allah), and blame Israel for starting wars in the Middle East. The texts describe Jewish writings as “stories,” “legends” and “tales,” and errors are frequent throughout the books that were investigated.

The ATC report noted that several of the textbooks were harshly criticized by parents. In a Sacramento district, a parent whose child was given the text, “History Alive! The Medieval World and Beyond” published by the privately held Teachers Curriculum Institute (TCI), accused the publisher of an extremely pro-Muslim bias.

The students’ parent believed that teaching world history was acceptable, but objected to the teachings of Islam, while not addressing Christian doctrine to the same degree. The same parent said the book has only one page referencing Jews. Most of the information concerning Jews was to convey that the Jews were tortured by Crusaders to force them to convert to Christianity. It did not mention the Holocaust, or Jewish persecution by Arab Muslims for centuries thru today. The book did not give due credit to the Jews for their significant impact on the region or the culture at large, but blamed the Jews for the plagues and problems in the land.

Bert Bower, founder of the Teachers Curriculum Institute (TCI), and an executive for one of the texts reviewed by ATC, told World Net Daily that not only did his company have experts review the book, but the state of California and scholars from all over the world also reviewed it and approved it for use in public schools. One of those worldly experts was Ayad Al-Qazzar, who helped write The Arab World Notebook, a book that will be discussed next.

The ATC report noted that most textbook publishers align their work to a ban on “adverse reflection.” Adverse reflection means that a topic is conceptually at odds with historical and geopolitics. One book asks readers the question, “How did the caliphs who expanded the Muslim Empire treat those they conquered?” The book’s answer: “They treated them with tolerance.” The report said:

“Glossing over the actual physical conquering of some peoples, the book, World History: Medieval and Early Modern Times says people converted to Islam because they were attracted by Islam’s message of equality and hope for salvation.”

Islamic presentation throughout the books is described as “sugar coated,” and the books describe Islam as a “wonderland-of-tolerance often spun like cotton-candy,” where “Hope for salvation” may actually mean “survival”, when history shows that the only escape from death literally was submission to Islam. Westerners erroneously think that submission means conversion. In reality, submission means allowing Islam to reign supreme. The lives of the conquered could then be spared only if they agreed to pay a “jizya” tax and agree to live as second-class citizens known as “dhimmis.”

The books describe the Crusades as “religious wars launched against Muslims by European Christians.” “History Alive! The Medieval World and Beyond” says the Crusaders wore red crosses. The French Templars wore red crosses, but Spaniards, English, German, Italians, and Greeks also fought against the Muslims in the Crusades after Muslims had encroached on their Christian lands for centuries. For centuries leading up to the Crusades, Muslims had sanctified the invasion and pillage of Christian lands murdering and taking the indigenous citizens as slaves. Yet, the books describe the process of Muslim invasion of Christian lands as “building an empire,” and describes Christian attempts to restore those lands as “violent attacks” and “massacres.”

The report also found that the books magnified Christian brutality while ignoring precedent information on Islamic inequality, subjugation, and enslavement, while inaccurately describing Shari’ah religious law, dhimmitude, women’s rights and terrorism. Regarding 9/11, the book “The Modern World” gives an example of such non-committal in reference to 9/11:

“On the morning of September 11, 2001, teams of terrorists hijacked four airplanes on the East Coast. Passengers challenged the hijackers on one flight, which they crashed on the way to its target. But one plane plunged into the Pentagon in Virginia, and two others slammed into the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York…”

The description unconcernedly fails to explain who “they” were, and what they wanted to accomplish. The minimal explanation evades any connection to Islamic terrorism and jihad, and indicates a total lack of understanding and remorse. The ATC report concluded:

“Many political and religious groups try to use the textbook process to their advantage, but the deficiencies in Islam-related lessons are uniquely disturbing. History textbooks present an incomplete and confected view of Islam that misrepresents its foundations and challenges to international security.”[17]

An imam from Turkey, Fethullah Gülen, who considers himself a prophet has a network off hundreds of charter schools in America Gülen is touted as a reformist and advocate for tolerance, a catalyst of “moderate Islam.” He is praised in the United States as an intellectual, scholar, and educator even though his formal education is limited to five years of elementary school.

Gülen has met with Christian clergy, Pope John Paul II, and Jewish rabbis in an effort to promote Islam under the guise of promoting an interfaith dialogue. Islamic doctrine has traditionally tied itself to Christianity and Judaism using common stories between the latter two as a door opener. Gülen has also used the literature of great Sufi thinkers pretending to share in their moderation. Gülen’s movement is called the Fethullah Gülen Community (FGC). The FGC runs hundreds of secondary schools and dozens of universities in 110 countries including charter schools in twenty-four states in the U.S. Gülen’s followers target youth in the eighth through twelfth grades preparing them for careers in law, politics, and education to create the ruling classes of a future Islamist, Turkish state. The FGC also donates money to universities such as Georgetown University.[18]

ACT! For America, a grassroots organization that helps Americans understand the tactics used by Islamists in their world conquest endeavor, issued an exclusive report about the FCG. The report revealed that Gülen is particularly dangerous is his strategic and tactical means to achieve this goal. Not only does Gülen oversee a worldwide network of schools, but his estimated budget of 25 billion dollars also funds businesses, foundations and media outlets. In a 1999 sermon on Turkish television, Gülen described stealth jihad:

“You must move in the arteries of the system without anyone noticing your existence until you reach all the power centers … until the conditions are ripe, they [the followers] must continue like this. If they do something prematurely, the world will crush our heads, and Muslims will suffer everywhere, like in the tragedies in Algeria, like in 1982 [in] Syria … like in the yearly disasters and tragedies in Egypt. The time is not yet right. You must wait for the time when you are complete and conditions are ripe, until we can shoulder the entire world and carry it … You must wait until such time as you have gotten all the state power, until you have brought to your side all the power of the constitutional institutions in Turkey … Until that time, any step taken would be too early—like breaking an egg without waiting the full forty days for it to hatch. It would be like killing the chick inside. The work to be done is [in] confronting the world. Now, I have expressed my feelings and thoughts to you all—in confidence … trusting your loyalty and secrecy. I know that when you leave here—[just] as you discard your empty juice boxes, you must discard the thoughts and the feelings that I expressed here.”

The FCG schools offer recruitment for outside school activities such as summer camps, which recruit members and followers. They advocate “taqiyya,” which is sanctioned as obligatory lying when deception is a means to protect and further Islamic causes. Misleading information and headlines often convey two different messages, one to the indigenous Islamic population and one to the West. This deceptive practice is common in the Islamic world, and has led many in the West, including political leaders and academics, to be misled as to the true intentions of Islamists.

President Obama is pushing to relax requirements for charter schools while Islamic organizations are pushing to expand Charter schools. Not classified as “private” schools, charter schools currently cannot legally endorse or promote a religion.

Funded by Minnesota taxpayers, Tarek ibn Ziyad Academy (TIZA) is a K-8 charter school in Minnesota that operated as an Islamic school for five years before the state finally ruled against it.

TIZA has one campus in Inver Grove Heights and a smaller site in Blaine, has about 430 K-8 students, most of who are Muslim. Founded in 2003, TIZA receives state per-pupil funding. The state education department expected funding to total $4.7 million for the 2008-2009 school year.

With a mosque and the headquarters of the Muslim American Society of Minnesota share the school building, founders Asad Zaman and Hesham Hussein, both leaders of the Muslim American Society of Minnesota, and local imams, opened TIZA for the 2003-2004 school year with Imam Asad Zaman as the principal. TIZA is named after a Muslim warlord, Tarek ibn Ziyad, who invaded Spain from Africa in a bloody battle in the eighth century, marking the beginning of the Muslim conquest of Spain. Upon his arrival in Spain, Tarek ibn Ziyad ordered his Muslim forces to burn their boats:

“Brothers in Islam! We now have the enemy in front of us and the deep sea behind us. We cannot return to our homes, because we have burned our boats. We shall now either defeat the enemy and win or die a coward’s death by drowning in the sea. Who will follow me?”

The soldiers then rushed ahead, crying “Allahu akbar.” To defeat a superior Spanish force.[19] Islamists boast that Muslims ruled the country for hundreds of years afterward so well that Spain became a fountainhead of culture and civilization for the whole continent of Europe.[20]

An initial review of TIZA operations found that the school was nonsectarian, and not in violation of Minnesota law or federal guidelines on constitutionally protected prayer in school. The Minnesota Department of Education maintained that TIZA was not an Islamic or a religious school. The review found that prayer on Monday through Thursday appeared to be voluntary and student led.

In January 2009, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Minnesota filed suit against TIZA, and the Minnesota Department of Education. The ACLU claims that TIZA  received millions of dollars of taxpayer money to support a private religious school, citing that the school receives state per-pupil funding expected to total $4.7 million for 2008-2009 school year.

The state’s ACLU Executive Director, Charles Samuelson, said the school used government aid money to pay rent to holding companies, and then funnel funds to the Muslim American Society of Minnesota and Minnesota Education Trust, which the ACLU says is a non-profit group that promotes Islam. The ACLU claims that a conflict of interest is created because the society and the school were incorporated by the same person, and on the same day, and are really one in the same organization.

Students at TIZA pray Islamic prayers, the cafeteria serves food that is prepared according to Islamic law, and Islamic Studies are held on the campus at the end of the school day. According to a TIZA report, seventy-seven percent of TIZA parents said their main reason for choosing TIZA was for the after-school programs. Yet the Imam-Principal Asad Zaman maintained that TIZA is not a religious school.

For years, Asad Zaman used loopholes in President Bill Clinton’s 1995 Educational Guidelines to teach Islam at TIZA, as will be evident in the unfolding story. The Guidelines were assembled with the help of Hamas and Hezbollah supporter, Abdurrahman Alamoudi, who, prior to his arrest and conviction on terrorism related charges in 2004, was President of the American Muslim Council.

In March 2008, a substitute teacher at TIZA revealed that Islam did play a significant role at TIZA. On the Friday the substitute teacher  arrived at TIZA, and was told that after lunch there would be a “school assembly” in the gym. Prior to the assembly her duties would include taking her fifth-grade students to the restroom to perform what was described as “their ritual washing.”

After their ritual washing, teachers led the children into the gym, where a man dressed in white was preparing to lead a prayer. Beside him was another man prostrated in prayer on a carpet.

The substitute teacher said that the prayer activity was not voluntary. Children were “corralled by adults and required to go to the assembly where prayer occurred.” She also said that the school day included after-school Islamic Studies. She said that assignments written on the blackboard included studying the Koran, and was told that Islamic Studies were held after school and she might have to stay for hall duty.

At the end of the day, her fifth-graders stayed in the classroom. The man who led the prayer in the gym came into the classroom to teach Islamic Studies to the students while the busses waited outside. After the Islamic Studies class was over, the busses took the children home.

The Minnesota Department of Education had not noticed the religious practice during any of their visits. In 2004, the Assistant Commissioner sent two letters to the school inquiring about reported religious activity. When questioned, Imam-Principal Asad Zaman said that prayer in the school was voluntary and student-led, and the department accepted Zaman’s answer without confirmation. [21]

TIZA’s website requested volunteers to help with the Friday prayers. The website advertised a “rigorous Arabic language program” as well as “an environment that fosters your cultural values and heritage.” It explained the school’s efforts to provide students with a:

“…learning environment that recognizes and appreciates the traditions, histories, civilizations and accomplishments of Africa, Asia and the Middle East.”

In an e-mail, Zaman explained the request for volunteers to help with Friday prayers was to ensure that TIZA staff members were not involved in organizing the Friday prayers. However, it is still probable that it was TIZA staff members who planned the website, organized the schedule, and requested the volunteers. It does not change the fact that the prayer services took place in the school building during school hours. According to federal guidelines on prayer in schools, teachers at a public school cannot participate in prayer with students. Zaman admitted that “some” Muslim teachers “probably” attended the prayer session. [22]In the spring, 2008, Minnesota Department of Education began a review, saying that the school must change the way it handles prayer in school and after school busing. Also, under Minnesota State Law, the school was ordered to raise an American flag every day in session. Furthermore, the Department informed TIZA that Minnesota state law requires schools to provide transportation at the end of the normal school day.[23]

Zaman claimed that K-8 school began to receive death and arson threats as a result of media attention, frightening students, so police began patrolling the school. In response to Zaman’s claims and because television reporters went to the school unannounced, TIZA obtained a security system requiring visitors to buzz at the school entrance.

As a result, on Fridays the school began to release teachers and most students at midday. Parent volunteers, or a community member led students who stayed behind in prayer, and those who did not want to pray could read or engage in a quiet activity. From Monday-Thursday, students were given the option of signing up for after school activities including a fee-based Muslim studies course, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, or a free secular program.[24]

While it may seem reasonable to say that students can sit out of the prayer, there is enormous pressure to pray within a group. Students who choose not to pray will be noted and stigmatized, potentially leading to problems at home from religious parents who would then feel shamed. Prayer in school is a form of coercion, and would likely lead to problems for non-praying students, and more lax parents within the larger Muslim community. This same coercion would automatically extend to fasting at Ramadan, when food is probably not even available at Muslim schools, and eating in front of fasting students would be viewed as ‘blasphemous.”

Muslims would have us believe that prayer is mandatory at prescribed times, when in fact it is not. Muslims are allowed to postpone their prayers as long as necessary. If prayer is not convenient at a given time, for reasons such as when in the presence of non-Muslims, or at a workplace, or normal public school, etc., Muslims can postpone them. Prayers can accumulate for days on end, but cannot be done in advance. Of course, it in inconvenient to have to do more prayers later, but children could actually wait to do their afternoon prayers when they are at home.

Concerning young female students is the requirement that women do not pray when they are menstruating. In fact, Muslims believe Allah will reject prayers of women when performed during monthly menstruation. Therefore, whenever a female student sits out of a prayer, everyone will know she is menstruating. In a subtle way then, and a gross violation of privacy, all boys and men in the school will know which girls are menstruating and which ones are not. Furthermore, some students may not want to practice Islam and would prefer to live in a Democratic society without Islamic coercion.

Allegations against TIZA are that the school’s main campus was not originally built as a school, and the lease was not reviewed by either the state Department of Education or the state Department of Administration. Also, there are prayers on the walls of the school entry and teachers have participated in student prayer activities. Samuelson said the school used its website to seek volunteers to lead prayers, and that it requires students and staff to dress in attire that conform to Islamic religion. He also said the school issues a handbook instructing staff to not discuss what goes on at the school.

Federal guidelines do allow students to organize prayer groups in public schools, but teachers and school employees may not compel students to pray or actively participate in student prayer. Samuelson noted that the Minnesota ACLU has sued other public school districts for promoting Christian sects. It has sued cities around the state for violating the separation of church and state clause of the First Amendment, including the city of Duluth for putting a Ten Commandments monument on the city hall lawn. [25]

Saudi-associated organizations hold the mortgages of 70% of America’s mosques. Along with financing comes control over many, if not all, aspects of the mosque. For example, Saudi/Wahhabi authorities are able to influence the selection of their imams, their training, the Korans and other materials they use, their sermons and programs for mosque schools.[26]

Aside from charter schools, another serious concern is Saudi Arabian government run schools. The Saudis run nineteen international schools including The Islamic Saudi Academy (ISA) in northern Virginia. Chaired by the Saudi ambassador to Washington, the school shares the embassy’s employer tax number under the name of the “Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia.” Since 2003, The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) has issued four reports warning that the school’s textbooks contain intolerant language that indoctrinate students with Islamic supremism, polarization, and incitement. The Saudi government agreed to remove disparaging references, but in 2008, passages still clearly pressed readers to commit acts of violence.

According to a June 11, 2008 article by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, a twelfth-grade textbook the school uses defines just cause for killing in the case of:

“…unbelief after belief, adultery, and killing an inviolable believer intentionally.”

Saudi Wahabbi interpretation of Islam identifies Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Shiite Muslims, and Sufi Muslims as major polytheist religions. Another twelfth-grade textbook describes:

“…major polytheism makes blood and wealth permissible,”

Non-Muslims can be exempt from the cruel and unusual punishment if they have certain agreements with the Islamic governments such as American businesses in Saudi Arabia, as described in a ninth-grade textbook:

“It is not permissible to violate the blood, property, or honor of the unbeliever who makes a compact with the Muslims. The blood of the mu’ahid is not permissible unless for a legitimate reason…the mu’ahid is an unbeliever who contracts a treaty with a Muslim providing for the safety of his life, property, and family.”

The implication is that violence against non-Muslims is lawful unless an agreement is effective. Such agreements for loyalty are exemplified by American oil companies operating in Saudi Arabia, financial institutions that provide Shari’ah compliant products, politicians and agents who lobby for Saudi causes such as Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, and Barrack Obama. It is reasonable to conclude that even George W. Bush’s lack of immigration enforcement and open borders was an agreement to keep America safe from attack.

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom has long called for Saudi Arabia to be designated a “country of particular concern,” for systematic violations of religious freedom. Expressing concern over promotion of religious intolerance, and religious-based violence in textbooks used in Saudi Arabia and at Saudi schools abroad, the Commission has urged the U.S. government to press the Saudi government to promote tolerance since 2001. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights bans discrimination and incitement, and specifically provides that education:

“shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups…”

The Declaration specifically provides that:

“The child shall be protected from any form of discrimination on the ground of religion or belief. He shall be brought up in a spirit of understanding, tolerance, friendship among peoples, peace and universal brotherhood, and respect for freedom of religion or belief of others. . .”

It is shocking that high school students in the United States are among those discussing when, and under what circumstances killing non-Muslims is allowed. The U.S. government must ensure that the Saudi government reviews and revises the globally distributed books. The U.S. government should insist that the Saudi government behave as members in good standing of the international community, regardless of the huge amount of world market dollars they may control.[27]

Ayad Al-Qazzar, a Muslim apologist, so called ‘worldly’ expert and frequent speaker in Northern California school districts promoting Islam and Arab causes

helped write a 540 page Arab World Notebook that was distributed to over 10,000 teachers, reaching 25 million students. The Arab World and Islamic Resources (AWAIR) is a proselytizing non-profit organization that conducts teacher workshops and sells supplementary materials to schools in an effort to promote Islam.

The Textbook League in Sausalito, California is a resource for middle school and high-school educators. It lists readings, resources, and so-called lesson plans in a two-version publication aimed at teachers. A 1998 version of their publication says The Arab World Studies Notebook  is published jointly by the Middle East Policy Council (MEPC) and by the Arab World and Islamic Resources and School Services (AWAIR). The editor of the Arab World Notebook is also the director of AWAIR, a woman named Audrey Shabbas.

The MEPC is a pressure group based in Washington, D.C., known prior to 1991 as the Arab American Affairs Council. Its activities include sponsoring teacher workshops to indoctrinate teachers about the Arab World and Islam.

President of the Textbook League, William J. Benneta investigated MEPC’s Web site, and Arab World Studies Notebook. On the Website page with the same name as the notebook, he read a claim about the Arab World Studies Notebook:

“…an updated and enhanced version of the Arab World Studies Notebook (1990), a previous work so highly regarded that educators in California were permitted to purchase it with state funding.”

Bennetta investigated and found the claim false, noting that the Curriculum Framework and Instructional Resources Office (CFIRO) of the California State Department of Education does not appraise content. Therefore, granting approval does not mean that an approved publication is highly regarded. Furthermore, Benneta contacted the administrator of the CFIRO and found that there was no record of ever approving The Arab World Studies Notebook. The Introduction to the Arab World Studies Notebook, states:

“Believing firmly that teachers are the vanguard of change in any society, AWAIR has taken as its mandate, to impact the very resources chosen and used by teachers as well as the training and sensitizing of teachers themselves.”

The phrasing “training and sensitizing” actually means subjecting teachers to heavy bombardment of religious and political propaganda, knowing that they have little to zero prior knowledge on the subject of Islam. Bennetta wrote that:

“The Arab World Studies Notebook is a vehicle for disseminating disinformation, including a multitude of false, distorted or utterly absurd claims that are presented as historical facts. I infer that the Arab World Studies Notebook has three principal purposes: inducing teachers to embrace Islamic religious beliefs; inducing teachers to embrace political views that are favored by the MEPC and AWAIR; and impelling teachers to disseminate those religious beliefs and political views in schools.”

Bennetta noted further that:

“The promotion of Islam in the Arab World Studies Notebook is unrestrained, and the religious-indoctrination material that the Notebook dispenses is virulent. Muslim myths, including myths about how Islam and the Koran originated, are retailed as matters of fact, while legitimate historical appraisals of the origins of Islam and the Koran are excluded. Shabbas wants to turn teachers into agents who, in their classrooms, will present Muslim myths as history,” will endorse Muslim religious claims, and will propagate Islamic fundamentalism.”

A lesson in the Arab World Studies Notebook says that Jesus ‘is an important figure in Islam’ Another lesson plan says that Islam ‘recognizes Jesus.’ It is a fact that Muslims recognize Jesus, yet deny and denounce basic Christian teachings, such as that Jesus was divine and part of the Trinity. Jesus is apparently important enough in Islamic teachings that Muslims are enjoined to not take Christians and Jews as friends (Koran 5:51). They also are enjoined to believe that Christians are perverse (Koran 9:30). And to deny that Jesus was crucified. (Koran 4:157).

Koran passages reject essential Christian beliefs about Jesus, and Muslim propagandists conceal the Koran’s judgment that Christians and Jews are unfit to be accepted by Muslims as allies or friends.

The prevailing belief of Muslims about Jesus is that Christians are wrong in their understanding of Jesus; and that Jesus, who lived before Muhammad,  was actually a Muslim. Yet, Muslim propagandists in America, strive to create the impression that Islam is congenial to, and a logical conclusion to Christianity while routinely and dishonestly exploiting how Jesus is perceived in the Koran and in Muslim culture.

In the Arab World Studies Notebook, unsupported claims about Muslims in the pre-Columbian New World are completely without documentation or support, leading one to speculate the intended audience consists of teachers who in an effort to keep their jobs, and lacking knowledge of history and religion, will advocate what they are told without question.

One ridiculous and unsupported myth in the Arab World Studies Notebook is that Muslims supposedly reached the New World in pre-Columbian times, spreading throughout the Caribbean, Central America, South America and even Canada. According to the myth, by the time Columbus arrived, the New World was full of Muslims. English explorers supposedly met Iroquois and Algonquin chiefs who had names like ‘Abdul-Rahim’ and ‘Abdallah Ibn Malik!’ Shabbas does not cite any sources to support the claims and does not reveal names for the English explorers.

The Arab World Studies Notebook is full of unqualified statements such as the one on page 27 that states, “As is well known, the Qur’an was revealed through the Prophet Muhammad . . .” It does not say how it is well known, or by whom it is well known. In fact, in America, a country where 80% of the population claims to be Christian, it is neither well known nor mainstream. It is however, recognizable to Christians as Islamic-fundamentalist myth.

The Arab World Studies Notebook states, “The Koran is the last link in a chain of revelation going back to time immemorial, even to the very origin of humankind.” Muslims believe the Koran is a miraculous revelation channeled through Muhammad, who was illiterate. Left to memory for centuries, it is not known how many versions of the Koran were written and rewritten before an accepted version was assembled, or who actually wrote them down.

Another myth in the Arab World Studies Notebook is that the Koran condemns wars of “territorial conquest.” No doubt, Muslims would prefer peaceful conquests, however the book says that from the 8th through 13th centuries, Arabian Muslims built a great empire that “extended across North Africa, the Middle East, and Central Asia, from Spain to the borders of China.” It does not say exactly how the conquest took place or acknowledge that thousands of churches, temples, and civilizations were destroyed in the process, or that 270,000,000 non-Muslim lives were lost in nearly 1400 years of violent jihad.[28] [29]

Americans will not tolerate loss of freedom for subversive ends through trickery and deceit. Yet a stealth movement is rapidly seeking to impose objectionable “Shari’ah Law” in place of Democracy and the Constitution.

According to Lebanese born terrorist expert, and founder of ACT! For America, Brigitte Gabriel,

“For the last 16 years, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states … because of the money coming from the oil,  have been pumping millions of dollars into our universities appointing Arab professors who are anti-American, and anti-Israel, have been basically brain-washing our students to believe we (Americans) are the problem.”

“The children, who have been educated in American universities for the last 16 years, have graduated and are now working … not influenced … by our patriotic education as Americans, but they have been influenced by Arab thinking … and hatred based on revenge.”

The evidence of such brainwashing is an attempt to raise our children against us and force them to ultimately live in dhimmitude. Many responsible groups and individuals aware of the treacherous violations of freedom are aware that an attempt to undermine our society is underway. Western free thinkers will never stand for such a breach in conscience and it will be exposed and stopped as historical fact and geopolitical reality  inevitably lead to differences in culture and religion. Forced multiculturalism and political correctness provide fertile ground for hostilities in an attempt to abolish cherished and established standards of the hosting culture, which in this case is America.

[2] Shapiro, Ben; “King Fahd’s Plan to Conquer America,” December 20, 2002, http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/408

[3] Kaplan, Lee; “The Saudi Fifth Colimn  on Our College Campuses,” April 5, 2004, http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=13551

[4] Esposito, John and Algar, Hamid; “The Fifth Column [On Middle East Studies, Title VI, Saudi Funding], The Conservative Jedi Blog, January 23, 2008,  http://conservative-jedi.blogspot.com:80/2008/01/fifth-column.html & http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/4725

[5] Shapiro, Ben;“King Fahd’s Plan to Conquer America,” http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/408

[6] Emerson, Steve; The American House of Saud: The Secret Petrodollar Connection, Chapter 15, p.292, Franklin Watts Publisher, 1985

[7] Richard, Riley W., Secretary of Education; Archived Letter to American Educators, http://www.ed.gov/Speeches/08-1995/religion.html

[8] Schroeder, Jen, “Islam, A Simulation Handout,” http://www.blessedcause.org/islam.htm

[9] Lynne, Dianna; “Islam Studies Spark Hate Mail, Lawsuits,” January 16, 2002 http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26074

[10] “Schoolhouse Shari’ah,” September 24, 2009,  http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=507056

[11] Shroeder, Jen; “How Clinton Sold Our Children to Islam,” June 26, 2004, http://www.blessedcause.org/proof/Clinton%20Abdurahman%20Alamoudi.htm

[12] “Islamic Indoctrination Taken to Supreme Court,” June 9, 2006, http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50562

[13] Budianski, Stephen; “The Trouble With Textbooks,” February 2001, http://www.prism-magazine.org/feb01/html/textbooks.cfm

[14] The Trouble With Textbooks, http://www.troublewithtextbooks.org/

[15] “Islam in the Classroom: What the Textbooks Tell Us,” http://www.historytextbooks.org/islam.htm

[16] Unruh, Bob; “Brave New Schools: History Textbooks Promoting Islam,” May 10, 2008, http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=63872

[17] Sewall, Gilbert T.; “Islam in the Classroom: What the Textbooks Tell Us, American Textbook Council, New York, NY, 2008

[18] Sharon-Krespin, Rachel; “Fethullah Gulen’s Grand Ambition: Turkey’s Islamic Dagger,” Middle East Forum, Winter 2009 , http://www.meforum.org/2045/fethullah-gulens-grand-ambition

[19] Spencer, Robert; “Muslim Elementary School Welcomed in Minnesota,” March 13, 2008, http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=25470#continueA

[20] World Net Daily,  “Imams Promote ‘Our Values’ On Taxpayer Dime,” March 15, 2008, http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=58967

[21] “Teacher Spills Beans About Islamic Classes,” April 9, 2008, http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=61129

[22] Kersten, Katheryn; “Teacher Questions Muslim Practices at Charter School,” May 19, 2008, http://www.startribune.com/local/17406054.html

[23] Tarek ibn Ziyad Press Release,” http://kstp.com/kstpImages/TiZA_Media_Statement.pdf

[24] Lemagie, Sarah; “State Orders Charter School to  Correct Two Areas Tied to Islam,” May 28, 2008, http://www.startribune.com/local/south/19076119.html?page=2&c=y

[25] Furst, Randy and Lemagie, Sarah; “ACLU Files TIZA Lawsuit,” January 22, 2009 http://www.startribune.com/local/east/38034459.html?elr=KArksDyycyUtyycyUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUU

[26] Gaffney, Frank; “A Troubling Influence,” December 9, 2003,  http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/read.aspx?guid=c7cd908b-6d7e-49eb-a0a9-da0a18745a29

[27] June 11, 2008: Saudi Arabia: USCIRF Confirms Material Inciting Violence, Intolerance Remains in Textbooks Used at Saudi Government’s Islamic Saudi Academy, http://www.uscirf.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2206&Itemid=1

[28] Administration; Social Daily News, November 8, 2007I, “Islam: 270,000,000 Million Bodies in 1400 Years,” http://www.socialdailynews.com/2007/11/islam-270-million-bodies-in-1400-years/

[29] Bennetta, William J.; “Arab World Studies Notebook lobs Muslim Propaganda at Teachers,” October 8, 2003, http://www.textbookleague.org/spwich.htm

###

Chapter 4

Financial Jihad in America

Shari’ah-compliant finance plays a significant role in denying the freedoms of Democracy and the integration of Muslim immigrants into Western host countries. Legitimizing and enabling Shari’ah law in the West coerces Muslim individuals and groups to live under Islamic law yet many U.S. banks have opened Shariah compliant financial departments and are catering to an Islamic agenda.
When there were not any Shari’ah-compliant banks in the West, devout Muslims were allowed to use the conventional “infidel” institutions of their Western host countries under the Shari’ah doctrine of “extreme necessity,” but Western banks started catering to Muslim demands and Shari’ah-compliant financial (SCF) departments came into to existence. As SCF institutions become available, Muslims will patronize them exclusively. Allowing the spread of Shari’ah finance in the West and the U.S.,  also pushes Americans toward Shari’ah.[2]

Shari’ah Law is the totalitarian legal system that Islamists believe should govern every aspect of humanity in a global theocracy. Theoretically upon establishment of an Islamic one-world government, Shari’ah would be the basis of all law. Leading Islamic scholars and practitioners explicitly acknowledge Shari’ah financing as complementary to violent jihad, with the main purpose to promote Shari’ah law. For this reason, Islamists see Shari’ah finance as “financial jihad.” Advocates of Islam define the Islamic agenda as a complete socio-political system encompassing both personal and private life that for Americans, would mean the loss of many freedoms we enjoy today.

Sheik Qaradawi, a terrorist banned from entering the United States and Great Britain, who leads international Islamic Finance agencies describes Shari’ah finance as:

“I like to call it Jihad with money, because God has ordered us to fight enemies with our lives and our money.”[3]

Conventional banking has been widespread for years in the Islamic world, however, in the past decade a stricter interpretation of Shari’ah is gaining ground and drives the growth of fundamental no-interest Islamic finance, misleadingly promoted in the West as “ethically and socially responsible.” Ethically and socially responsibility in an Islamic context, it  enables the oppressive governance and bondage of Islamic laws. University of Southern California professor Timur Kuran, who holds the King Faisal Chair in Islamic Thought, concurred “Islamic banking defies the separation between economics and religion.”

Shari’ah requires those who cannot participate in Jihad physically, to support it financially. Driven by power, and to appease radical Islamists who might otherwise overthrow the Saudi regime, members of the Wahhabist Saudi oligarchy willingly fund radical Islamists organizations.

Shari’ah compliant financing (SCF), originally created to be a terrorist tool, seduces proponents who buy in to the hype that interest is always usury. While the Koran prohibits usury, it does not actually prohibit interest, only such rates that border on loan sharking. But given the hypothesis that interest is forbidden, SCF uses terms and features like “fees,” and “zakat,” where fees take the place of interest, and zakat is an Islamic religious tax requiring that alms be given to Islamic charities in compliance with the third pillar of Islam. Ironically or hypocritically, Shari’ah financial funds can be invested in companies that earn a profit from interest or otherwise  un-Islamic activities, as long as the  returns on investment are purified by donating 2.5% to 20% of the annual earnings, with percentages dependent on the source, to charities of Islamic scholarly determination.

This laundering process supposedly purifies the money and makes it socially responsible and clean regardless of its source. Islamic “scholars” on Shari’ah finance boards at the individual organizations determine which charities will receive the donations. The decisions are based on Islamic law and are void of further oversight and no claims or attempts at transparency. SCF non-transparency and “complexity” is what makes them difficult to trace and such excellent terrorist funding tools. Rabidly expanding in the West as a way to cash in on petrodollars, SCF products are counterproductive to human rights as well as Western values. Proponents of  SCF are promoting a seditious agenda with risks of racketeering and  violation of security & anti-trust laws  while enabling consumer fraud.

Not above taking advantage of an established Western market, and with a means to purify the ill-gotten money to aid jihadi efforts, affluent individual Muslims are active investors in U.S. and European financial institutions. European nations like the UK and France, foolishly promote Islamic Shari’ah products with SCF bonds, SCF car insurance, SCF credit cards, and SCF mortgages in an effort to expand product lines.

Wall Street, American financial institutions, and the media know that Sharia banking is a major source of terror funding, but still buy into them. In an April 3, 2008 article titled “Jihad Comes to Wall Street,” Alex Alexiev, The Security Council Vice President wrote that dozens of Western banks promote Shari’ah products today, and described Shari’ah finance:

“… as a massive subversion campaign by radical Islam designed to legitimize Shari’ah in the West, to undermine our markets, and ultimately to imperil our free-enterprise system and national security — all the while exposing banks to financial risks that make the sub-prime fiasco look like a walk in the park.” [4]

The U.S. Treasury Department is aware that SCF institutions have participated in financially supporting terrorism yet on November 6, 2008 the U.S. Treasury Department and the Islamic Finance Project of the Harvard Law School, hosted a forum entitled “Islamic Finance 101.” Presented only two days after the 2008 Presidential Election and in the midst of the 2008 financial crisis, the forum was an effort to train government employees on Shari’ah-compliant finance (SCF). Its purpose was to introduce and educate the Treasury Department staff, U.S. banking regulatory agencies, Congress, Department of Treasury, and other parts of the Executive Branch on Shari’ah finance. According to a press release, the forum was “designed to help inform the policy community about Islamic financial services, which are an increasingly important part of the global financial industry.”

Two SCF banks registered in the Bahamas; Bank Al-Taqwa and Akida Bank, laundered money to terrorists, and were run out of Italy and Switzerland. Bank Al-Taqwa transferred tens of millions of dollars to HAMAS, Al Qaeda, the PLO, and others from 1988 until November 2001, when it was designated a terrorist entity by the U.S. government and the UN.

Al Qaeda was initially funded with approximately $30 million per year, by diversion of the charity money that strategically placed financial facilitators collect from both knowing and unknowing donors. The funds are then diverted to terrorist groups. Both Bank Al-Taqwa and Akida Bank used charities in the U.S., Europe, and the Middle East to funnel money to terrorist groups.[5]

An SCF investment company based in Seacaucus, New Jersey called Bait u Mal al Islami (BMI), promoted itself as an Islamic alternative to conventional investments and solicited funds for real estate development. It was referred to by U.S. federal prosecutors as the “U.S. banker for the Muslim Brotherhood.” In testimony before a U.S. Senate committee, former White House counter terrorism advisor Richard Clarke said that BMI’s financial services were little more than a cover “to conceal terrorist support,” and its investor list “read like a who’s who of designated terrorists and Islamic extremists.” BMI worked closely with the Akida Bank and Bank Al-Taqwa in networking millions of dollars to terrorist groups.

Iran’s largest bank, Bank Melli, was named in the November 2007 edition of The Banker as the largest Shari’ah-compliant bank in the world. It was sanctioned by both the U.S. government and the European Union for its role in financing Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs.

According to terrorist and Shari’ah financing expert, Rachael Ehrenfeld, Sharia’h proponents lure U.S. and Western investors into high-rate sukuk or al-ijara Islamic bonds, which she describes as “some of the most complex ever created,” claiming “alternative” instruments that do not pay or earn interest, however use Western structured finance tools. Ehrenfeld explains in an April 2008 article, “America for Sale,” that Shari’ah instruments convert liquid, traceable cash flows from interest-bearing debt into illiquid assets. Ehrenfeld wrote that the Shari’ah instruments

“…resemble ‘portfolio insurance’ that caused the 1987 crash, and the mortgage-backed bonds behind the 1994 bond-market bust that eviscerated $1 trillion…and then some 10% of the U.S. bond market. Those collapses damaged many huge pension funds, municipalities and institutional investors, and killed off several hedge funds.”[6]

Nearly $33 billion of Islamic bonds were issued in 2007, up from $5.5 billion in 2001 and are already available in the US, Britain and Japan.[7] The sukuk bonds are asset-backed bonds that comply with Shari’ah no interest. Corporate sukuk issuance rose from $0.4 billion in 2000 to $4.5 billion in 2006 according to the International Islamic Financial Market (IIFM). With growth topping 122% in 2006, Islamic finance is not a niche market any longer, but is increasingly becoming a mainstream component of the global banking system.[8]

ACT for America Founder and terrorism expert, Brigitte Gabriel, asks pertinent questions about SCFs such as:

“What will happen to our courts and our laws when our largest financial institutions and our Treasury Department are deeply indebted to SCF compliant money? Do our financial and policy experts believe SCF dollars will come without ultimatums, bribery, and strings? What kind of pressures will eventually be brought to bear on government and financial leaders by those Islamist leaders of Shari’ah-compliant finance who call SCF “jihad with money?”

Gabriel concedes that there is much that the U.S. government can and should do to regulate Shari’ah finance to ensure that it is not promoted in the United States. Citing SCF as seditious, Gabriel warns it is dangerous to the West because it is an effort to legitimize and institutionalize Shari’ah law, advancing a religious and criminal conspiracy with the main purpose of overthrowing the United States Constitution and government in favor of Islamic rule.[9]

An Islamic mortgage is similar to a lease-to-own deal where the bank, not the borrower, buys the house. The borrower makes installment payments to the bank for a number of years, at the end of which time title to the house is obtained.  In this respect, the bank’s profit technically comes from renting the house and its attached fee, not by lending the money.[10]

Borrowers and investors trust the experts who determine the rates and custom terms of the loans. In SCF, the experts are required to be Shari’ah legal and religious authorities, or Islamic “scholars” who oversee qualifications of the investments.

In September 2008, the American public became aware that American International Group (AIG) was falling into a financial black hole. The world’s biggest insurer by market value, AIG launched a Shari’ah compliant Islamic insurance subsidiary on October 1, 2006 in Bahrain called AIG Takaful Enaya in an effort to win a share of an estimated $2.5 billion a year Islamic insurance market that is growing, and began with an initial capital of $15 million.

AIG Takaful Enaya plans were to provide Shari’ah compliant insurance to the world’s 1.2 billion Muslims. AIG Takaful Enaya, headquartered and licensed by the Central Bank of Bahrain, also promotes Shari’ah finance and Shari’ah mutual trusts. AIG Sun America, AIG Financial Services Corp, and other divisions of AIG also have Shari’ah mutual trusts as part of their portfolios. The AIG Takaful insurance coverage listed on the AIG website, www.aigmemsa.com, include personal lines, financial lines, management liability, professional liability, fidelity, accident and health, crisis management, small business solutions, property, energy, casualty, and marine policies

What is outrageous about Islamic insurance is that the Muslim community has traditionally not even had an insurance market. The commercial market necessitates selling the basic concept of insurance to Muslims. Regardless of the disputable demand for Islamic insurance policies, AIG’s promotion strategies include explaining why Shari’ah compliant  insurance should make sense to Muslims, explaining, “that Muslims can feel comfortable buying the AIG Takaful products because they are after all, Shari’ah compliant.”

AIG Takaful Enaya’s initial plans included expansion from the Middle East, to South East Asia in 2007, then to the UK and North America, with expectations of writing premiums of $10 million in the first 18 months.

In November 10, 2008, author Jeffrey Immon wrote an article referencing AIG, titled America Must not Own a Shari’ah based Financial Business. Immon outlined a plan calling on Americans to stop harboring Islamic Supremism through Shari’ah finance in America. On September 16, 2008, the Federal Reserve provided an $85 billion loan to AIG, in exchange for a U.S. Government share of 79.9 percent equity interest in AIG and less than a week later AIG’s Shari’ah-based business announced further expansion. On November 10, 2008, the Federal Reserve announced that it would purchase $40 billion of newly issued AIG preferred shares, “giving taxpayers an ownership stake in the company.”[11]

The AIG expansion announced two months earlier in September, may have come to fruition on December 1, 2008, when Risk Specialties, Inc., a subsidiary of AIG Commercial Insurance, announced a new AIG Takaful Homeowners Policy as

“…the first installment in Lexington Takaful Solutions, a series of Shari’ah-compliant (Takaful) product offerings in the U.S. The newly announced Takaful products are compliant with key Islamic finance tenets and based on the concept of mutual insurance.” [12]

Under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, the Government sanctioned bailout purchase of AIG stock grew to over $160 billion by March 2009, with more promised.

The fact that the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act had just become law, allocating $700 billion to U.S. banks that have Shari’ah divisions and products, calls in the possibility of extortion and massive non-transparency. It is shocking that the Federal Reserve would authorize loans to a company that was in the process of expanding its Shari’ah portfolio at the time. It is both terrifying and telling that that the U.S. Treasury Department would ally itself to SCF activity by hosting an Islamic Finance 101 Forum in the midst of the bailout, only two days after the election.

Speakers at the forum were scheduled to include Neel Kashkari, the newly appointed Assistant Treasury Secretary; Rushdi Siddiqui, the Founder and Director of  the Dow Jones Islamic Market Index Group; Talal DeLorenzo, Shari’ah advisor; and Jamia Uloom, product of a radical jihadist school in Pakistan. It is shocking that Talal DeLorenzo was  the Director of Education at the Islamic Saudi Academy.  The Islamic Saudi Academy is a school that was the focus of report by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom in early 2008, which documented material in the Academy’s textbooks calling for ‘the killing of apostates’ from Islam and the approved killing of ‘polytheists,’ and was allowed to expand in 2009.

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., Founder, President, and CEO of The Center for Security Policy wrote an article two days before the Islamic Finance 101. Gaffney, who was the Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security, and the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Forces and Arms Control Policy during the Reagan administration wrote:

“Regardless of who wins the election, ‘The U.S. Treasury Department is submitting to Shari’ah. That the seditious religio-political-legal code, authoritative Islam, seeks to impose worldwide under a global theocracy.”

Gaffney also wrote:

“Shari’ah-Compliant Finance serves as a leading edge of the spear for those seeking to insinuate Shari’ah into Western societies…Thus far, we in this country may not have reached the point where evidence of this sort of creeping Shari’ah is so manifest. But (the U.S.) Treasury’s accommodation to SCF demonstrates that we are on the same trajectory – the one ordained and demanded by the promoters of Shari’ah, one to which we serially accommodate ourselves at our extreme peril. After all, the object of Shari’ah is the supplanting of our government and Constitution, through violent means if possible and, until then, through stealthy ones.”[13]

Devon Bank on Chicago’s North Side is one of the largest Islamic lenders in the country. According to David Loundy, Devon’s vice president, Devon Bank’s SCFs account for 75% of their mortgage portfolio and makes Shari’ah compliant loans in 36 U.S. states, catering mostly to Pakistani and Middle Eastern immigrants.

In March 2001, Devon Bank announced its plan to begin selling Islamic home financing products to Freddie Mac in an effort to expand opportunities for Muslims in Illinois and nine other states. Freddie Mac, established by Congress in 1970, and a stockholder-owned corporation at that time, announced simultaneously that it had become the first major U.S. mortgage investor to contract the purchase of Islamic mortgages. Based in McLean, Va., Freddie Mac is one of the nations’ largest investors in mortgages and Islamic home financing products. In March 2001, Freddie Mac became the first major U.S. mortgage investor to contract to purchase Islamic homeownership products in conjunction with Chicago’s Devon Bank.[14]

Since 2003, Devon Bank’s Islamic financing programs have enabled Muslims throughout the Chicago area and other states to acquire homes and businesses with Islamic financing. Devon Bank’s services include residential and commercial real estate financing, financing for business equipment and trade goods, stand-by letters of credit and some construction financing.[15]

Minnesota Housing is the first state agency to offer Shari’ah mortgages, with Chicago’s Devon Bank underwriting for a New Markets program targeted at low-to-moderate income families. Hussein Samatar, director of the African Development Center in Minneapolis created the program with the presumption that Islamic financing will grow as more Muslims make their home in the U.S.

Samatar said, “The process (SCF) is different, but the outcome will look the same.” Samatar believes that cooperation with the state of Minnesota is “a nod to the Muslim community’s growing economic power.” [16]

SCFs are described as “flexible” in that they take a borrowers “situation” into account. They can be determined on a monthly or yearly basis, and terms can be “adjusted.” Adjustments and flexibility are not inherently benevolent terms controllable by the borrower, and are not necessarily just about rates. Regardless of wishful thinking, truth is not always self-evident, especially in a religion that advocates “taqiyah”, (taqiyah is a concept that means that is permissible to lie or mislead in an effort to advance Islamic causes). The truth here is that flexibility could refer to a number of things from refinancing fees to coercion into stricter Islamic law.

Subprime rates are comparable to prime rates in that prime rates are the best rates a loaning institution can charge, and subprime rates are less profitable for them. With no interest, SCF fees can fall into the subprime category because they can be either more or less than current market rates, depending on the “situation.” Unsuspecting Westerners do not realize that situations can involve a host of non-financial decisions. For example, the purpose of a loan, the dress of the applicant, and specifically the (apparent) religion of a loan recipient. In a case of “either-or,” it could be argued that “changeable” Shari’ah loan fees could produce a profit, say…if the recipient’s religion presents a “risk.” It is just as logical to deduce that Shari’ah-compliant institutions award zero to very low profit fees for low income Muslims, or others who are obviously Muslims who incidentally adhere to a host of personal requirements such as jewelry, clothing, fingernail and hair cutting guidelines, and are forbidden to drink alcohol or keep pets in their homes.

Because SCF rates are determined individually and beholden to Islamic charities, they are as discriminatory as they are dangerous to the West. Even though one may argue that non-Muslims can obtain Shari’ah loans, remember that terms are “individually” decided. If a non-Muslim wishes, and initially qualifies to get a SCF loan, he must, as part of the future “changeable,” agreement acknowledging that a percentage of his “fees” will fund Islamic charities. He or she will also have a “flexible” fee amount that may be higher than a fee that a Muslim pays.

In an article for The Washington Times on September 16, 2008, Frank Gaffney compared subprime loans with SCFs. Noting the effect that subprime loans had on the 2008 financial crisis, he wrote:

“…they [subprime loans] are therefore an unsound business practice because they have just shown themselves to be inadequate in supporting the U.S. capital market loaning institutions. Basing loans on nontransparent bundles of subprime mortgage-backed securities was a violation of industry standards and government regulations with respect to transparency, disclosure, due diligence, good governance, and accountability.”

Gaffney pointed out that SCF loans “bear all the hallmarks of the subprime market” with “a systematic failure to disclose.” This is exactly what makes them “great tools for terrorist funding.”

David Yerushalmi, a litigator specializing in securities law and an expert on international policy produced a memorandum examining the civil and criminal exposure inherent in SCFs in 2008 and concluded that banks and investment houses offering SCF products may be enabling or engaging in racketeering, antitrust activities, securities fraud, consumer fraud, and material support for terror.

Copies of Yerushalmi’s memorandum were sent to Wall Street firms and leading U.S.commercial banks. The Center for Security Policy sent the memorandum pointing  out the similarities between subprime loans and SCFs. According to Gaffney’s article, only the former Merrill Lynch responded to the memorandum, but only with a note that curtly acknowledged its concern about terrorism.

Gaffney describes SCFs as a tool to overthrow the U.S. Government:

“What makes Shari’ah-Compliant Finance even more dangerous than subprime is that, in its effort to legitimize and institutionalize Shari’ah in America, it is advancing a criminal conspiracy whose purpose is the violent overthrow of the United States Constitution and government in favor of Islamic rule. That would make it sedition” [17]

Gaffney wrote that Alex Alexiev, the Vice President of Center for Security Policy, describes Gulf state’s Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWFs), as “slush funds of the sovereigns… increasingly invested to promote Shari’ah law,” adding to what was in 2008 already estimated to be an $800 billion global industry. According to Alexiev, SCFs are:

“…a deliberate attempt to undermine Western markets and legitimize Shari’ah with practices that ‘imperil our free-enterprise system and national security — all the while exposing banks to financial risks that make the sub-prime fiasco look like a walk in the park.” [18]

Opponents of Shari’ah law believe that transparency and checks and balances are impossible when deference to religious “scholars” is policy. People in democratic nations do not realize they are unintentionally allowing seditious activity by promoting SCF. By not informing consumers and clients of the purpose of SCF, institutions are not providing accurate or transparent information from which a consumer can make a well-informed decision. Thus, it was also misleading for the U.S. Treasury to host a seminar on SCF without revealing its use as a tool in Islamic jihad. Instead of legitimizing Shari’ah in place of democratic constitutional values, the Treasury Department should have created regulations, oversight, and transparency mechanisms to eliminate the threat of Shari’ah compliant finance.

Proponents of Shari’ah finance hope to see it move deeper into mainstream global finance. American opponents maintain that Shari’ah finance is unconstitutional because it promotes a religion, and funds terrorism lacking transparency and credibility. Shari’ah interpretation varies between institutions and regions and is deficient in regulatory oversight.

SCF transactions are backed by a non-financial trade, rendering Shari’ah compliant products  more complex than conventional transactions and lacking the likes of corporate treasury and derivatives products. Also there are a limited number of Islamic scholars to oversee the transactions and financial products for Shari’ah compliant financial products.

With Deutsche Bank, Barclays Capital and BNP Paribas among the world’s top five issuers of sukuk, and the fact that the International Capital Market Association and the International Islamic Financial Market (IIFM)  are planning to develop standard contracts for Islamic instruments,  is telltale of who is controlling global financial infrastructure when global banks are putting their weight behind Islamic finance.[19]

Americans should urge our Senate and House leaders to investigate financial corporations that sell Shari’ah products, and put an end the U.S. ownership of SCF businesses by boycotting Banks that offer them. We should demand that our leaders close all U.S. banks that offer Shari’ah compliant products regardless of standardization, and we should demand the resignation of those in the U.S. government responsible for enabling and purchasing banks that have Shari’ah products and products.

The Center for Secure Policy and The McCormick Foundation have written a pamphlet that has specific steps and recommendations for ending Shari’ah compliant financial products. The pamphlet, “Shariah, Law and ‘Financial Jihad’: How Should America Respond?”  can be downloaded  at the McCormick Foundation Website and the Stop Shariah Now Project Website:

http://www.mccormickfoundation.org/publications/JihadReport.pdf

http://www.stopshariahnow.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=332&

[3] Gabriel, Brigitte; “U.S. Treasury Department to Host Islamic Finance 101 Forum!,” November 1, 2008, http://www.actforamerica.org/index.php/learn/email-archives/494-us-treasury-department-to-host-shariah-compliant-financing-forum

[4] Alexiev, Alex;  “Jihad Comes to Wall Street,” April 3, 2008 http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjBhMTM5MTlmN2YzNzE0MmFkOTg2OGYxNWM2MGNiNTQ=

[5] Roth, John;  Greenburg, Douglas; Wille, Serena; National Commission On Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, “Staff Report to the Commission”

[6] Ehrenfeld,  Dr. Rachel, & Lappen, Alyssa A.; “America for Sale, “ Posted 04/01/2008, http://www.actforamerica92253.org/2008/05/23/america-for-sale-a-must-read/

[7] “Second Islamic Bank in Switzerland,” March 31, 2008, http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout&cid=1203758570498

[8]Watts, Christopher; “Is Islamic Finance at Tipping Point,”  http://www.economist.com/sponsor/qfc/index.cfm?pageid=article104

[9] Gabriel, Brigitte; “What Opportunities Lie Ahead,” http://www.actforamerica.org/index.php/learn/email-archives/570-what-opportunities-lie-ahead-

[10] Morais, Richard C.; “International Investing Guide– Don’t Call it Interest,” July 23, 2009, http://www.sirajcapital.com/international.html

[11] Immon, Jeffrey; “America Must Not Own a Shari’ah-Based Financial Business,” November 10, 2008, http://anti-jihad.org/blog/2008/11/stopShari’ahnow/

[12] “Risk Specialists Companies Announces First Takaful Homeowners Products for U.S.,” December 1, 2008, http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/home/permalink/?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20081201005672&newsLang=en

[13] Gaffney, Frank Jr;  “U.S. Treasury Submits to Shari’ah,” November 5, 2008,  http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.1677/pub_detail.asp

[14]“Devon Bank Freddie Mac Announce Expanding Opportunities for Muslim Homebuyers,” Profitwise: News and Views, Consumer and Community Affairs Division, Consumer and Community Affairs Division

Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago,230 S. LaSalle Street, Chicago, IL 60604-1413 October 2005

[15] http://www.DevonBank.com/Islamic/

[16] Mador, Jessica; “New Islamic Mortgages Now Available in Minnesota,” March 1, 2009, http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/02/28/islamicfinancing/

[17]Gaffney, Frank; “Wall Street: What’ Next,” September 16, 2008, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/sep/16/into-the-fire/

[18] Alexiev, Alex;  “Jihad Comes to Wall Street,” April 3, 2008 http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjBhMTM5MTlmN2YzNzE0MmFkOTg2OGYxNWM2MGNiNTQ=

[19] Watts, Christopher; “Is Islamic Finance at Tipping Point,”  http://www.economist.com/sponsor/qfc/index.cfm?pageid=article104

###

6

Bill Clinton—Islamic Charity

Though he may not have realized the consequences, Bill Clinton has played into Islamist hands like a dream. His participation in establishing global governance may seem noble and grand as well as profitable while his appeasement to globalist Islamists has severely undermined America’s safety, sovereignty and the Constitution. Because Clinton accepted millions of dollars from Islamic sources, it is quite probable that he is considered an Islamic charity by Islamic scholars who make such determinations to advance Islam.

Foreign leaders can surely see that Clinton is easily bribed and seduced. He set a poor example as a leader and compromised the freedom of hundreds of millions of free people. One example is America’s youth, who is now confused as to whether oral sex is really sex. Another example his wittingly or unwittingly betrayal of the Christian Serbs in Bosnia where he helped set up an Islamic government under the guise of humanitarianism and multiculturalism

Bill Clinton studied international affairs at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. as an undergraduate. He worked as an intern for the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, chaired by Senator J. William Fulbright, an Arkansas Democrat Senator. Clinton was a great admirer of Fulbright, who was an outspoken critic of Israel and a leading critic of United States involvement in the Vietnam War.[1]

Clinton’s mentor, William Fulbright, was an experienced observer of Middle Eastern affairs and he developed close connections between Saudi Arabia and U.S. oil companies. After he lost his bid for re-election in 1974, Fulbright became a registered agent for the Saudi Government and engaged in activities on the Saudi behalf in efforts to shift American loyalty from Israel to Saudi Arabia.[2]

During his two terms in office, Clinton made many moves that would promote Arab interests. His collaboration with the since convicted terrorist, Abdurahman Alamoudi, a self-described supporter of Hamas and Hezbollah, founder and an Executive Director for the American Muslim Council (AMC), allowed for hundreds of millions of dollars to come in from the Middle East for a variety of causes including Clinton’s library and Presidential Fund. As Abdurahman Alamoudi donated $15-25 million to Clinton’s funds, he cultivated ties with the Democratic Party, and contributed significant amounts to a variety of its partisans and candidates for years.

Clinton privileged Abdurahman Alamoudi with the position of Islamic Affairs Advisor and Pentagon appointee in charge of choosing and training Muslim chaplains for the U.S. military. Certainly not in the best interest of America, Alamoudi was also a State Department “Goodwill Ambassador” to Muslim nations and helped Clinton write the 1995 “Religious Expression in Public Schools,” a guideline that paved the way for Islamic instruction in the public school system, effectively stopping schools from displaying nativity scenes and saying the pledge of allegiance. Clinton and Alamoudi’s alliance opened the doors for lessons on Islam under the guise of history and social studies as funding for Islamic educational materials poured in from Saudi Arabia and Muslim nations.

While in office, and after leaving his presidential post, Bill Clinton continues to make millions of dollars in speaking fees from Arab sources. To be fair, Dubai has given millions of dollars to both Clinton and G.W. Bush. However, Bill Clinton received $300,000 for a speech in January 2002 in an effort to legitimize Dubai after 9/11. Hilary Clinton’s 2008 tax records showed that for 2007, Bill Clinton made approximately $5 million from foreign countries including Kuwait’s National Bank, with other sources in Canada, Germany, India, Malaysia, Mexico and Portugal, and Hong Kong.[3]

Dubai has been suspended from the U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation insurance programs because of non-compliance with internationally recognized worker rights standards. Tens of thousands of migrant workers from India and Pakistan are reportedly abused in Dubai yet Clinton’s former Secretary of State Madeline Albright, former security advisor Sandy Berger, and Al Gore have attended big events there.[4] Dubai also denies Israelis entrance into the country and does not allow the importation of Israeli goods, or goods with Israeli parts.[5] Under the guise of humanitarianism, Bill Clinton created a Dubai Scholars Program for American students at the American University in Dubai.

While Hillary Clinton loudly opposed the Dubai Ports deal, Bill Clinton gave Dubai advice and recommended the Glover Park Group to represent the country. The Glover Park Group was a group of lobbyists that included top advisers to Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton. The advisors were paid about $100,000 each to help the government-owned Dubai International Capital Corporation in its acquisition of the British engineering firm Doncasters Group Ltd. Glover Park represented companies that Dubai has a stake in.[6] At issue was the sale of port management businesses in six major U.S. seaports to a company based in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and whether such a sale would compromise port security in the U.S.

Taking a stand that it did not pose a significant security threat, Clinton and New York Democrat Senator Charles Schumer hoped to acquire the port operations for the Dubai Company in the ensuing controversial “Dubai Ports Deal.” Glover Park’s contract with Dubai was channeled through the Los Angeles law office of Raj Tanden, a representative of the United Emirate’s royal family in their 2005 acquisition of $1 billion in U.S. real estate holdings. Tanden is the brother of longtime Hillary Clinton policy adviser Neera Tanden who served as a congressional liaison for Bill Clinton before becoming a key Hillary Clinton Senate campaign aide.[7]

President Clinton issued statements promising to find terrorists, but actually pardoned sixteen terrorists convicted of executing one hundred thirty bombings. Clinton shut down investigations of Islamic charities, radically downsized our military, and cut funding for CIA informants. He refused delivery of Osama bin Laden from Sudan, and he repeatedly refused to act on detailed information about both al-Qaeda and Bin Laden between ongoing terrorist bombings that led up to the attack on the World Trade Center in 2001. Robert Baer, a 21-year veteran of the CIA’s Directorate of Operations states:

“Whether it was Osama bin Laden, Yasser Arafat, Iranian terrorism, Saddam Hussein, or any of the other evils that so threaten the world, the Clinton administration seemed determined to sweep them all under the carpet.” [8]

In 1995, the 104^th Congress included a provision that would authorize ANWR exploration but Bill Clinton cast the cloak of environmentalism over ANWR when he vetoed the bill furthermore promising to veto all legislation for ANWR exploration. Alaska’s North Slope once averaged two million barrels of oil per day, representing more than half the oil used on the West Coast. With ANWR off-limits, Alaska’s drilling production declined to less than half their former rate, allowing OPEC and other foreign oil producers to make up the difference. According to a letter signed by conservative leaders and sent to the House and Senate Leadership on March 8, 2006, development of ANWR would:

“… increase proven U.S. crude oil reserves by fifty percent; equivalent to approximately a quarter century of current imports from Saudi Arabia.”[9]

In Alaska, caribou numbers have actually increased under the warmth of pipeline, and scientists contest the accuracy of the global warming theory. If Clinton had not vetoed the legislation fourteen years ago, as much as 1.4 million barrels of oil per day could now be produced in America.

Curtailing the production of domestic oil by placing oil reserves off-limits, is based on an unproven theory. The security threat it imposes on the United States suggests misplaced loyalty because the need for oil places Americans at the mercy of foreign oil producers from countries that resent the Constitution and freedom. The U.S. domestic need for oil combined with homeland security issues raise concerns that global warming might literally be part of an agenda to weaken America’s sovereignty. Trillions of American dollars now go instead to Arab countries allowing them to buy their way into American policy through financial institutions, educational programs, while they finance terror organizations and build mosques around the world. [10]

On September 22, 1997 Bill Clinton made a speech to the Arab dominated U.N. General Assembly describing treaties he had signed as a “web of institutions and arrangements.” He referred to them as “international ground rules for the 21st century.”

As the descriptions suggest, Clinton’s Global Warming Treaty and the NATO Expansion Treaty were designed to bind the United States in a global web of entanglement for the purpose of “binding international commitments to protect the environment.” Clinton urged Americans to support “the emerging international system.”

Clinton played right into Islamist globalization when he supported Muslims in Bosnia. According to a U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee Report, President Clinton funneled weapons and money into Bosnia to prop up the Izetebegovic Muslim government in the country’s capital Sarajevo through the Third World Relief Agency. The Third World Relief Agency had been organized in 1987 by Muslim fundamentalists to cover efforts to import Muslim fundamentalism into Yugoslavia.

The Third World Relief Agency promoted the creation of an Islamic state in Bosnia, promoting a “religious sense among Bosnia’s secular Muslims.” The Muwafaq foundation, founded by Saudi billionaire Khalid bin Mahfouz in 1991 also funded the Muslim Bosnian fighters from 1991-1995. Christians comprised of Catholic Croatians and Eastern Orthodox Serbs were still the majority in Bosnia in 1992 when Bosnia broke away from Yugoslavia.[11]

Bill Clinton lifted the Iranian Arms Embargo solely for shipments of arms and personnel from Iran to the Bosnian Muslims. Throughout most of his administration, beginning in 1993, Clinton knew about the arms smuggling scheme while pretending to be neutral. He also provided additional weapons from America at taxpayer’s expense.

In April 1994, Clinton gave the Muslim-led government of Bosnia additional shipments of weapons from Iran and other Muslim countries at the urging of National Security Council chief Anthony Lake and the U.S. ambassador to Croatia, Peter Galbraith. The Clinton Administration’s policy of aiding delivery of arms to the Bosnian Muslims made it instrumental in a network of international governments and organizations that are pursuing the Islamization of Europe and America under the guise of humanitarian and multicultural diversity.

Iranian Revolutionary Guards entered Bosnia in large numbers from radical Muslim organizations from countries including Malaysia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Turkey. The Iranian intelligence service developed intelligence networks, set up terrorist support systems, and recruited terrorist sleeper cells as agents of influence. The Clinton Administration’s involvement with the Islamic network included inspections of missiles from Iran by U.S. government officials.

The President of Bosnia, Alija Izetbegovic, wrote the radical “Islamic Declaration: A Programme for the Islamization of Muslims and the Muslim Peoples,” which calls for “the Islamic movement” to take power as soon as it could overturn “the existing non-Muslim government . . .and build up a new Islamic one,”  destroying all non-Islamic institutions. Izetbegovic’s book advocated the creation of an international federation of Islamic states.

Alija Izetbegovic’s Islamic Declaration proclaimed that:

“There can be neither peace nor coexistence between the Islamic religion and non-Islamic social institutions.”

A House Republican Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare Report, dated September 1, 1992 confirmed that Alija Izetbegovic intended to establish an Islamic Republic in Bosnia by reporting that:

“At the center of the Iranian system in Europe is Bosnia-Hercegovina’s President, Alija Izetbegovic, . . . who is committed to the establishment of an Islamic Republic in Bosnia-Hercegovina.”

The Task Force report described Izetbegovic’s contacts with Iran and Libya before the Bosnian war began. In 1991, Izetbegovic was noted as a “fundamentalist Muslim” and a member of the “Fedayeen of Islam” organization, an Iranian-based radical group that dates back to the 1930’s. In the late 1960’s, The Fedayeen of Islam recognized Ayatollah Khomeini as their supreme leader, or Imam, while he was still in exile by the late Shah. Izetbegovic stepped-up his efforts to establish Islamic power in Bosnia following Khomeini’s accession to power in 1979, and Izetbegovic openly declared his alliance with Iran. The Iranian regime supported Izetbegovic during his 1996 election campaign with $500,000 in cash.

The Clinton Administration’s policy completely misinterpreted the Bosnian Muslim government of Alija Izetbegovic. Rather than the tolerant, multicultural democratic government it pretended to be, Izetbegovic’s party, the Party of Democratic Action (SDA), was guided by the principles of radical Islam.[12]

Bill Clinton’s ties to the Islamic Republic of Iran were revealed in a commentary written by Dr. Rachael Ehrenfeld on January 5, 2009 for Forbes. Dr. Ehrenfeld is director of the American Center for Democracy and author of “Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop It.”

Ehrenfeld wrote that on Dec. 19, 2008 the Islamic regime contributed between $25,000 and $50,000 to the William J. Clinton Foundation and $30,000 in the fiscal year ending March 2006 through the Iranian owned Alavi Foundation operating in New York.

The President of the Alavi Foundation, Farshid Jahedi, was indicted the very same day in 2008 with obstructing justice by the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York for allegedly destroying documents subpoenaed by a grand jury concerning the relationship of the Alavi Foundation with the Iranian Bank Melli, and ownership of the Manhattan office building, home of the Alavi Foundation at 650 Fifth Avenue.

The Treasury Department had just designated the Alavi Foundation’s partner, New York-based ASSA Corporation, a terrorist entity as a front company created and controlled by Iran’s Bank Melli to funnel money from the United States to Iran. [13]

The Alavi Foundation office building at 650 Fifth Avenue had been constructed and operated in the 1970’s by the late Shah of Iran as a non-profit organization to pursue Iran’s charitable interests in the United States. The building was financed Bank Melli, a state-owned bank in Iran. The Alavi Foundation was first known as The Pahlavi Foundation, and renamed the Mostazafan Foundation when Ayatolah Khomeini rose to power. Later renamed the Alavi Foundation and forming the  “650 Fifth Avenue Company” in 1989 in partnership with Bank Melli but disguising the  bank’s ownership.

In 1995 the Department of Treasury had prohibited exportation of any goods, technology, or services from the United States to Iran, or the Government of Iran without a valid export license from the U.S. Department of Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). According to the Treasury Department, ASSA Corporation provided services to Bank Melli by maintaining the bank’s interest in the 650 Fifth Avenue office building and transferring income from the office to Bank Melli without an OFAC license and alleging money laundering.

Bank Meli has been recognized as a front for transferring money for Iran’s nuclear weapons program, and was designated a terrorist entity on Oct. 25, 2007.

According to Ehrenfeld’s commentary in Forbes, the Alavi Foundation reported $87,899,567 in assets and $3,315, 237 in charity to the IRS in 2007. The foundation had given $365,056  to schools and universities, $328,667 for book publications and distribution, and $262,325 in interest-free loans to schools. It claims to support Shiite educational, religious and cultural programs, while owning and funding several mosques and educational centers in the states of New York, Maryland, Texas and California.

Though the contributions to Clinton were not found to be illegal, accepting money from  Islamists and pretending they are not part of an Islamic agenda allows them to advance in the U.S.[14]

Phyllis Schlafley, political activist, constitutional attorney, and columnist wrote a series of articles about Clinton’s global involvement. Schlafley wrote that Madeleine Albright testified before the Senate of Foreign Relations Committee, admitting that NATO Expansion commits U.S. to defend the borders and the NATO-defined “interests” of Eastern Europe, extending its influence to reach “the Middle East to Central Africa.” The NATO Treaty means that NATO, not Congress, decides when America will go to war. Using U.S. tax dollars to fund the Armed Services as global police officers and global social workers, and burdening the U.S. with one “Bosnia” after another.

The NATO Expansion Treaty abandoned Ronald Reagan’s successful strategy of peace through strength, replacing it with a strategy of entering foreign conflicts under NATO or UN command. It was also against the advice of George Washington “to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world”

The Phyllis Schlafly Report, April 1998 revealed that NATO Expansion was an important part of Clinton’s 1996 campaign in cities with large communities of ethnic voters.

The New York Times wrote, on March 30, 1998, that U.S. weapons contractors spent $51 million lobbying for the NATO Expansion Treaty. Their motivation was to make billions of dollars selling arms and military equipment to the new NATO nations. The weapons manufacturers funneled an additional $32.3 million equally to Republican and Democrat Congressional candidates. In 1996, the U.S. arms industry lobbied a bill through Congress to force American taxpayers to guarantee loans for weapons exports. (New York Times, March 30, 1998)

While in office, Clinton also used his position to take away states rights and private land ownership rights with his proposed Rivers Initiative in his 1997 State of the Union Message. Clinton issued Executive Order 13061 on September 11, 1997. It would have allowed the federal government to take over rivers and their adjacent lands under the American Heritage Rivers Initiative (AHRI). Clinton financed AHRI by diverting funds from 12 federal departments and agencies. Thankfully, Representative Helen Chenoweth (R-ID), subsequently introduced H.R. 1842 to stop Clinton’s Rivers Initiative, and as of 2009, only fourteen rivers are designated American Heritage Rivers. [15]

Under the original initiative, one hundred fourteen rivers would have been included by the year 2000 to institute national land-use planning and zoning over large portions of land along certain U.S. rivers. The plan superseded constitutional state’s jurisdiction, restricting the property rights of private property owners, by putting the adjacent land under the control of federal regulators.

Under the AHRI process, local communities would nominate enough rivers to allow the President to choose the rivers he wanted. The President’s Council on Environmental Quality subsequently makes plans for the future of the chosen rivers and the property alongside it. The Council on Environmental Quality would then appoint an American Heritage Rivers Interagency Committee to make recommendations to the President for the land control, potentially earmarking it for crony pork-barrel connections.

Clinton’s original AHRI would have authorized the appointment of ten river czars, or River Navigators, with and ten more appointed each succeeding year, to be paid a yearly salary of $100,000. Their jobs would be to guide the local citizens through the federal programs.

Opponents of AHRI claimed it violated constitutional and statutory law, imposed federal bureaucracy reducing the influence of states, restricted private property rights, and interfered with private owner and state economic activity. [16]

Clinton did, however issue an executive order to hold up 1.7 million acres of Utah land containing the largest reserve of high-quality coal and minerals in the continental U.S. Known as the Kaiporowitz coalfield, one of the premier coalfields in the United States and perhaps the world, the undeveloped Kaiporowitz coalfield contains approximately sixty-two billion tons of high BTU rating, clean burning, low-sulfur hard coal worth a trillion dollars. According to Dr. Lee Allison, Utah state geologist, the coal is very compliant and burns so cleanly that it exceeds the requirements of the Clean Air Act. Removing the huge natural resource from commercial availability tremendously enhanced the value of the world’s second largest source of environmentally safe coal on the Indonesian island of Kalimantan, which is partly owned by members of Muslim Indonesia’s very successful ethnic Chinese minority, friends of Clinton, the Indonesian Riadys. [17]

Mochtar Riady is an ethnic Chinese who founded the Lippo group. In 1984, the Lippo Group purchased the Bank of Trade in Los Angeles, which became a Lippo Bank subsidiary.[18] The Lippo Bank in L.A. was implicated for giving millions of dollars to Clinton’s presidential campaigns in 1992 and 1996. According to a 1998 Senate Governmental Affairs Committee report, the Lippo Bank in California raised illegal foreign money for the Democratic National Party through Lippo-owned shell companies that were ultimately traced to the greater China region.[19]

Clinton’s Executive Order, EO 13107 on Implementation of Human Rights Treaties was an attempt to bypass the constitutional requirement that U.S. treaties be ratified by the Senate. It set up a framework to obligate the U.S. under UN treaties on human rights. There are several unratified UN human rights treaties that could be imposed under EO 13107.

Implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights refuses to recognize one of the most fundamental American economic rights, the right to own property. This U.N. treaty tries to bind the U.S. to take steps to use all of our resources in order to achieve “full realization” to provide food, clothing and housing for everyone in the world, obligating us “to ensure an equitable distribution of world food supplies in relation to need.”

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child would bring about massive UN interference in family life, education, daycare, health care, and standard of living, setting up a committee of ten “experts.” Because the UN is dominated by Islamic countries, it is likely that such experts will be Islamic “scholars.”

The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) would require us to follow the Arab dominated U.N. dictates about “customs and practices,” “social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women,” “family education,” and even revision of textbooks.

Other Clinton Executive Orders include  EO 12919 of June 3, 1994, entitled National Defense Industrial Resources Preparedness, which asserts plenary and dictatorial authority over citizens, food, transportation, energy, health, contracts, materials and resources to be exercised by the National Security Council and FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). [20]

The Law of the land and Sea Treaty would impose international bureaucracy on commerce, shipping lanes, mineral resources, fishing rights, environmental concerns. President Bill Clinton signed the Law of the land and Sea Treaty in 1994 and sent it to the U.S. Senate, but it has yet to achieve the majority vote for passing.[21] One of the reasons the Law of the land and Sea Treaty is dangerous, is that it will compromise American sovereignty regarding oil.

Hilary Clinton, currently President Obama’s Secretary of State, believes it is a top priority to ratify the UN Law of the Sea Treaty, which will also establish a global tax to gain access to oil, gas, and minerals in the oceans. Russia is claiming ownership of 460,000 square miles of Arctic territory with huge reserves of oil and gas, so the U.S. State Department wants to turn the treaty over to the Arab dominated UN, when documentary evidence exists showing that Americans have legitimate claims to the resources in the Arctic region near Alaska.[22]

Accusations that the Saudi government used charities as front organizations to fund international terrorism are long-standing. They surfaced in the early eighties when U.S. intelligence officials first warned Congress that the Saudis were directly funding terrorist groups.

The Clinton administration stopped a 1995 investigation after Islamic charities were targeted for diverting cash to groups that fund terrorism. The investigations would have exposed Saudi Arabia’s suspected ties to global money-laundering efforts to raise millions of dollars for terrorists.

Four interrelated Islamic foundations, institutes and charities in Virginia with more than a billion dollars in assets donated via the Saudi Arabian government were allowed to continue under a veil of secrecy according to Former federal prosecutor John J. Loftus, a St. Petersburg, Florida lawyer who later filed the Loftus suit in 2002 under the Florida Consumer Protection Act. Loftus accused the Saudi government of diverting cash to terrorists in a massive scheme involving charities in Virginia and Florida. Loftus said:

“If federal agents had been allowed to conduct the investigation they wanted in 1995, they would have made the connection between the Saudi government and those charities.” [23]

After the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, an interagency task force was created to investigate ties between charitable organizations in the United States and terrorist groups abroad. Investigations focused on allegations that tax-exempt and nonprofit charities operating out of the United States from Virginia to Florida contributed millions of dollars to international terrorist groups including the Islamic Jihad and Hamas. The same investigations also revealed that a Pakistani charity that transferred $100,000 to Mohamed Atta, one of the 19 al Qaeda hijackers in the September 11, 2001 attacks, was funded by the Saudi government. That information had helped U.S. officials identify the 19 hijackers, 15 of whom were from Saudi Arabia.

Non-transparency of donations to Bill Clinton by Islamists conceals the extent of Bill Clinton’s involvement in the Islamization of the U.S. That the World Trade Center was destroyed just after Clinton’s administration may have been no coincidence. It could have been an effort to destroy evidence of corrupt business dealings during and prior to Clinton’s administration and keep secret who the world’s real imperialists are.

Bill Clinton’s policies are known to have effected education, financial institutions, environmental regulations and oil production. Clinton’s willingness to accept money from anti-Democratic Islamic sources combined with the non-transparency of Shari’ah financing should be cause for concern because it could be tantamount to treason. It is not surprising that Clinton shut down investigations of Islamic charities.  Under Islamic law Clinton could actually be considered an Islamic charity. Therefore it would not be surprising if examination of Islamic source donations to Clinton reveal bribery and support for terrorism.

[1] Bill Clinton: MSN Encarta, February 16, 2009,http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761564341/Bill_Clinton.html

[2] Emerson, Steve; The American House of Saud: The Secret Petrodollar Connection, Chapter 6, pp. 100-101, Franklin Watts Publisher, 1985

[3] Lee, Matthew; “Bill Clinton Made Millions From Foreign Sources,” January 27, 2009, http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D95VK2BG0&show_article=1

[4] Morris, Dick & McGann, Eileen; Fleeced, Chapter 7, pp 156-157, 2008, Harper Collins, New York, NY

[5] Ibid; Chapter 7, pp 161, 2008

[6] Ibid; Chapter 7, p. 158, 2008, Harper Collins, New York, NY

[7] Thrush, Glenn; “Clinton Aides Had Hand in Dubai Deal,” September 14, 2006,http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/ny-usclin144890633sep14,0,5479619.story

[8] Schroeder, Jen; “How Clinton Sold Our Children to Islam,”http://www.blessedcause.com/clinton.html

[9] Weyrich, Paul M; “Drill ANWR: Realism Over Emotion,” May 23, 2006, http://www.aim.org/guest-column/drill-anwr-realism-over-emotion/#

[10] “OPEC’s Senate Caucus,” June 5, 2006, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/jun/05/20060605-101144-9771r/

[11] tellthechildrenthetruth.com

[12] Craig, Larry; United States Senate Republican Policy Committee Report,“Extended Bosnia Mission Endangers U.S. Troops: Clinton-Approved Iranian Arms Transfers Help Turn Bosnia into Militant Islamic Base,” January 16, 1997,http://rpc.senate.gov/releases/1997/iran.htm

[13] HP-1330,  Treasury Designates Bank Melli Front Company in New York City , December 17, 2008, http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/hp1330.htm

[14] Ehrenfeld, Rachael; Clinton’s Iranian Connection, January 5, 2009,http://www.forbes.com/2009/01/02/alavi-foundation-clinton-oped-cx_re_0105ehrenfeld.html

[15] “American Heritage Rivers,”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Heritage_Rivers

[16] Schlafly Phyllis; “Will America be Caught in Clinton’s Web,” The Phyllis Schlafly Report,  Volume 31, No. 9, April 1998,http://www.eagleforum.org/psr/1998/apr98/psrapr98.html

[17] Bresnahan, David; “Utah’s Protests of U.S. Land Grab Muted,” May 15, 1998,http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=3242

[18] “Campaign Finance Key Player: The Lippo Group,”http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/campfin/players/lippo.htm

[19] “Lippo Bank,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lippo_Banking_Group

[20] Schlafly Phyllis; “Power Grab Through Executive Orders,” The Phyllis Schlafly Report,  Volume 32, No. 10, April 1998,http://www.eagleforum.org/psr/1999/may99/psrmay99.html

[21] Porter, Keith; “Law of the Sea Treaty,” September 7, 2009,

http://usforeignpolicy.about.com/od/unitednations/a/lawofseatreaty.htm

[22] Letter by Cliff Kincaid, President of America’s Survival, Inc,http://usasurvival.org/listmanager/asinews011309.html

[23] Seper, Jerry; “Clinton White House Axed Terror-Fund Probe,” The Washington Times, April 2, 2002,http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/clintoERn.htm

###

“Walking the Plank to a Dhimmi Nation”–Chapter 7

The Bush Dhimmi Doctrine

Many Americans proclaim that President Bush successfully protected America from terrorism after September 11, 2001. Even though terrorists did not attack U.S. soil again after 9/11, Bush’s policy allowed terrorists to infiltrate and harm America with a strategy that is leading to our cultural self-destruction. Bush’s, “war on terror” was based on a premise that defers terrorism to “a few” extremists, not the Islamic doctrine itself. The premise was, and still is, that Islam is somehow reformable after being given a bad reputation.

The Bush dhimmi doctrine endorsed Islam as “peaceful” even though Bush acknowledged that slaughtering and intimidation of non-Muslims had become a global pandemic. This includes good Muslims fighting bad Muslims as in Iraq and Afghanistan. But, to protect the lives of American citizens and keep oil flowing into the U.S., Bush dutifully spoke of a peaceful Islam.[1]

A 2007 article titled “Bush Administration Moves to Legitimize the Muslim Brotherhood,” by William Mayer and Beila Rabinowitz, reported that the Bush Administration’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research hosted a meeting to discuss opening more formal channels to the Islamic “brothers.”[2]

President Bush named Iran, Iraq and North Korea the “Axis of evil” because of the part they played in helping terrorism and ability to obtain weapons of mass destruction. It is interesting that he did not include Saudi Arabia as a part of the Axis of evil even though 9/11 terrorists were Saudis funded by Saudis, and Osama Bin Laden is a Saudi terrorist who is from a prominent Saudi family.

It is telling that Saudi Arabians (supposedly our friends) are mostly Wahabbi-Sunnis, and Iranians (supposedly not our friends) are mostly Shiite. The two countries, close to the same size, compete for power in the Persian Gulf. America has taken sides with the Saudis because they have more oil which we buy from them, and as a result they have acquired enormous strategic investments in the world and in American market and financial system. In other words, they pull the strings and we react. In a visit to Saudi Arabia in May 2008, Bush discussed a civilian nuclear deal with Saudi King Abdullah, reportedly part of an effort to protect the kingdom’s vast oil reserves, pipeline distribution system, and borders, allowing the Saudi’s to join a global initiative to combat nuclear terrorism, enhance the protection of nuclear systems, and improve detection and confiscation of illegally held nuclear material. .[3]

Bill Warner, who runs the online newsletter, “Bulletin of Cultural Annihilation,” wrote about the Bush Islamic Doctrine, defining “dhimmis” as non-Muslims who apologize for Islam, such as the media, willing professors, financiers, preachers, priests, politicians, pundits and rabbis, George Bush, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Barrack Obama.

Dhimmitude effectively disallows the truth of Islamic history, denies the way Islam is presented in the Koran, and denies a Koran based manifesto of Islamic aggression. Attributing Islam to the terror and horrible murders would certainly incited more hate from terrorist murderers and their proponents. In highly promoted interfaith dialogues, religious leaders meet and claim they worship the same god. However, the Christian and Jewish leaders have not actually read the Koran. Without reading it, one cannot claim to know anything about the Koran. Furthermore, merely reading the Koran does not prove that its revelations are from the God of Judaism and Christianity.

Responding to a barbaric Islamic act, a dhimmi will predictably reply that Christians have done bad things, too….and there is violence in the Bible too. A dhimmi will defend a doctrine they know virtually nothing about, saying such as “jihadists are fundamentalist radicals but most Muslims are just like everybody else” and, “I know a Muslim who is nice.” A dhimmi believes that just because he thinks a Muslim is nice to him, then Islam is good. Afraid to challenge a Muslim for fear of being called Islamophobic or unfair, a dhimmi would rather not hear historic evidence if it is uncomfortable. A dhimmi does not initially realize that he is being set up to accept and apppologize for Islam. Believing Islam is peaceful enables stealth jihad through deception, intimidation, policy, and other methods.

The media does not admit the extent that pure Islam is the involved in terror attacks. For example, the 2009 incident in Mumbai, India was motivated by Islam but Muslims were never mentioned.

Real “terror” distracts us from seeing the other terror-less, or “peaceful” forces of jihad. Bill Warner lists sword, pen, tongue and money as the four forms of jihad. The State Department relies on indoctrination through the peaceful methods for the gradual Islamization of America.[4]

President George W. Bush made it clear when he entered office that he opposed efforts to secure our nation’s borders. His guest worker amnesty programs encouraged the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation. While the majority of people who migrate to the United States may simply want a better life and hope to become loyal Americans, there are many others who are motivated with a desire to harm our nation.

Today terrorists can easily penetrate our borders, embed in mainstream society, build compounds, and access weapons of mass destruction that can cause hundreds of thousands of American deaths. The 9/11 Commission staff report on terrorist travel stated it had identified numerous entry and embedding tactics associated with earlier attacks in the United States. The report revealed that prior to September 11, 2001, abuse of the immigration system and a lack of interior immigration enforcement unwittingly worked together to support terrorist activity. The 2000 census estimated 8 million illegal aliens in the United States. Today that number is estimated to be over 13 million, with around 7 million of them in the workforce.[5]

That total includes individuals who entered the United States without proper documentation and those who entered legally but overstayed or violated their visas or terms of entry. The threat of Muslim fundamentalist attacks is not the only price to pay for unsecured borders. Illegal immigration affects education, the economy, health care, the environment, criminal justice and national security. Not withstanding that reports indicate that illegal aliens in the U.S. have a crime rate two and a half times that of legal aliens[6] and account for around 30% of the inmate population in federal correctional institutions.[7]

Americans are losing jobs at an unprecedented rate while illegal immigration reportedly costs taxpayers billions of dollars each year. Because many immigrants are poor, increasing numbers add to the burden of disadvantaged groups. An estimated cost of illegal immigration is approximately $340 billion dollars a year.[8] As an alternative, The National Policy Institute estimates the cost of mass deportation for all of the illegal immigrants would be between $206 and $230 billion.[9]

In 2005, four to five million illegal aliens entered the U.S. at our Southern Borders. The number reportedly includes as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from terrorist countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroin and marijuana, crossed into the U. S from the Southern border.[10]

Due to lack of staff personnel and detention facilities, Islamists and potential terrorists can enter the U.S. legally because applications are not always checked for fraud or potential terror connections. Potential terrorists can also obtain student visas to enter the country and stay indefinitely, knowing the Federal Government will likely never search for them if they overstay their visas. By September 11, 2001, visa’s of three of the 9/11 hijackers had lapsed, thus they were in the country illegally, even though all nineteen had entered legally.

The Bush dhimmi doctrine did not prevent the operation of thirty-five potential terrorist training camps in the U.S. The compounds are believed to be run by Sheik Mubarak Ali Gilani, who is known for allegedly setting up journalist Daniel Pearl in 2002. Daniel Pearl was abducted on the way to meet with Gilani, and eventually beheaded.

Reported in an interview between Sean Hannity of Fox News and Martin Mawyer of Christianaction.Org, Sheik Gilani is reportedly a direct descendant of Mohammed, and his followers believe Gilani speaks for Allah. The interview between Mawyer and Hannity revealed that though the group claims to be peaceful, they appear to have a sinister agenda. A videotape uncovered by the Christian Action Network was titled “The Soldiers of Allah.” It features Sheikh Gilani teaching American followers guerilla warfare tactics such as scaling mountains, subduing enemies, murdering guards, hijacking cars, kidnapping, weapons training, and setting off explosives. Sheik Gilani is reportedly quoted as saying:

“We are fighting to destroy the enemy. We are dealing with evil at its roots and its roots are America.”

Explaining how to kill American Infidels, Gilani reportedly said:

“Act like you are his friend. Then kill him.”

Sheik Gilani’s thirty-five communities extend from New York, to South Carolina, to Seattle, Washington, and Texas. The compounds are owned by a Pakistani based group, Jumaatul-Fuqra, otherwise known as Muslims of America in the U.S. When Mr. Mawyer’s organization investigated, they learned that the group is allowed to continue primarily because they are protected by state constitutions and the U.S. Constitution. Mawyer said that “law enforcement hands are tied in trying to shut these groups down,” even though local field officers believe the group has weapons of mass destruction.[11]

Hezbollah members are known to be raising money in the U.S., and have long been believed to be bringing suite case dirty booms into the U.S. to await further instructions. Across the border, Hezbollah in Mexico is believed to train Mexican drug cartels in gorilla terror tactics. Reportedly, the Mexican drug cartels have adopted the terrorist tactics of kidnappings and beheadings.

Islamic terrorists sell cocaine from Afghanistan to the Mexican drug cartels, and pass profits on to Hezbollah and other Islamic terrorist groups. An anonymous Mexican Army officer said that Hezbollah is believed to be teaching the Mexican drug cartel the art of bomb making. An anonymous U.S. law enforcement official confirmed that forensic evidence ties Hezbollah bomb experts to roadside explosions in Iraq. In Mexico, police stations and government buildings are at risk of the terrorist training designed to combat the Mexican Army, Mexican Police, American Special Forces and DEA agents. News reports have confirmed that effects of the terrorist training are beginning to be seen throughout Mexico and the bordering U.S. states.

Homeland Security has said that Hezbollah members already operating in the U.S. probably have contact with other Hezbollah members in Mexico and around the world.

Mexican deaths linked to organized crime grew historically in 2008. The first one thousand deaths occurred by around April 14; the next one thousand by July 2; reaching 3000 by September 10, and 4000 by October 28. At the end of 2008, 6000 deaths were linked to organized crime.

Texas officials reported that dozens of individuals wounded in the Mexican state of Chihuahua are treated in an El Paso hospital. From Texas to California, drug-related dangers and violence is so high that Mexico is off-limits to U.S. Military personnel. Americans who normally cross the border to travel, shop and conduct business, no longer feel safe in Mexico. [12]

ABC News reported in early February 2009 that Phoenix, Arizona had become the kidnapping capital of America. Phoenix reportedly has more incidents than any other city outside of Mexico City. The Phoenix Police Chief, Andy Anderson said that the transgressions are a result of Mexico’s drug cartels expanding into the U.S. The report revealed that over 370 kidnappings occurred in Phoenix in 2008, with many of them connected to Mexico’s drug cartels as criminal activities have spilled over the U.S.-Mexico border. The report revealed that ransoms not paid promptly result in “horrific cases of chopped-off hands, legs and heads.” [13]

Human trafficking has also become widespread as a result of lax immigration enforcement. The Department of State estimates are that between 18,000 and 20,000 victims are trafficked into the United States each year. Since 2001, more than 20 percent of the human trafficking victims have been found in Texas. [14]

The Bush administration did not hire enough special agents for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or enough Border Patrol agents for years. In a March 2005, a hearing titled “Interior Immigration Enforcement Resources,” before the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, testimony by the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Robert S. Mueller, addressed the urgent border issue:

“In 2004, we learned that operatives had conducted detailed surveillance of financial targets in New York, Washington, D.C., and New Jersey . . . a sobering reminder of the threat we continue to face…There is the threat from covert operatives who may be inside the U.S. who have the intention to facilitate or conduct an attack. I remain very concerned about what we are not seeing. Efforts by extremists to obtain training inside the U.S. is also an ongoing concern.”

Lack of agency funding severely undermines the national objective to not have to fight the war on terror inside America. Testimony at the 2005 hearing stressed that illegal immigrants are often released into the U.S. because sufficient funds to detain and hold them were not allocated in a timely manner, even though Congress had authorized the funds. Without sufficient detention facilities, non-Mexican detainees released on their own recognizance were ordered to appear at deportation hearings weeks later. The number of released illegal immigrants who did not return was in the hundreds per week.

Employer sanctions were abandoned because of inadequate numbers of detention beds and a lack of ICE Agents during the Bush administration. According to information from the Congressional Research Service, in 2004 alone the U.S. Border Patrol released 35,000 detainees described as “other than Mexican” due to a shortage of beds.[15]

The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 authorized 800 new ICE investigators for 2006 through 2010, however, President Bush’s initial budget only requested funding for 143 new ICE investigators for 2006. Lack of funding also led to cancellation of ICE academy training in the latter part of 2005, affecting training for approximately 900 immigration and enforcement employees.

In 2004, Congress provided funding to hire 2,000 new Border Patrol agents with an additional 2,000 new Border Patrol agents for each of the next 4 years, to bring the total to 10,000. Leading to what would become a crisis, Bush and his administration significantly reduced the number of new Border Patrol agents from 2000-2004 to 210.

In 2006, President Bush announced he would hire 6,000 additional Border Patrol agents before he left office. To meet those numbers, agents were hastily hired with reduced training. Though the agency was on its way to meeting the president’s goal before he was ready to leave office in 2008, The National Border Patrol Council criticized a hasty last minute hiring process, with resulting reduced educational requirements, shortened training periods and inadequate screening. The agency’s union president, T.J. Bonner said:

“They want the best and the brightest, but they’re going about it in the wrong way…They’re rolling the dice with our homeland security.”[16]

When the U.S. Homeland Security Department’s Office of the Inspector General conducted 79 investigations into corruption among federal agents along the border in 2007, they found cases had risen from 31 in 2003 to some 200 cases by July 2008.[17]

A justifiable concern is that the hasty hiring process provided for criminals and terrorists to obtain sensitive positions. If the Bush administration had immediately and effectively used all the funds allocated by Congress, the eligibility of new Border Patrol agents might not have become an issue.[18]

Another very serious threat to American’s security is bringing in displaced Muslims from war-torn countries under the guise of “humanitarianism.” For nearly a decade, Bill Clinton and George Bush have systematically imported Muslims, by tens of thousands per year for each group. The Bush administration flew 1,000 Iraqi refugees into America every 30 days in 2008 alone. It is estimated that another 17,000 Iraqis arrived in 2009. These immigrants are comprised of Sunni and Shiite Muslims adversaries that have battled and killed each other for hundreds of years.[19] The 1990 census counted only 2,070 immigrant Somalis in the U.S.[20] Since then, hundreds thousands of Muslim Somali immigrants have also arrived in the United States. The U.S. provides for their immigration, supposedly proving compassion for the disadvantaged Muslims. What is contradictory is that we then bend our policy to accommodate their way of life—which is what they left or fled in the first place. Because accommodation encourages propagation of Islam to the extent of affecting American freedoms and traditions, an agenda beyond compassion is clear.

Seventeen Chinese Muslims terrorists known as Uighurs captured in Afghanistan living at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay since 2002 have admitted to receiving weapon training from the Taliban. Being held pending efforts at resettlement, the Uighurs were cleared for release in 2004, but the Bush administration could not find another country that was willing to accept them. The Chinese call them terrorists and some fear that if they return to China, they will be tortured. Other countries fear reprisal from China if they accept them.

In October 2008, U.S. District Judge Ricardo Urbina, a Bill Clinton appointee, ordered their immediate release into Washington D.C. stating he did not “understand why that would not be a viable option.” Prior to the decision, Justices voted 5-4 to allow Islamic terrorists held in Guantanamo the right to challenge their detention by filing habeas corpus petitions in American federal courts.

Prior to Urbina’s ruling, a Chinese Foreign Ministry representative said that the Uighurs are thought to be members of the East Turkestan Islamic Movement. The group is recognized as a terrorist organization by the U.S. government. And the Bush administration said the Chinese terrorists are a national security threat. The Bush administration, along with millions of Americans, stood against Urbina’s decision. The district court’s ruling could be used as precedent for other Guantanamo Bay detainees including those suspected of planning the 9/11 attacks. This means that if Obama closes Guantanamo, many more Islamic terrorists could end up in the U.S. In fact, now that Obama is president, he wants to move detainees to Michigan, where they could be eligible for a jury of their peers, and where a high percentage of Muslims have settled.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia noted that our nation is at war with radical Islamists, therefore the ruling would make the war more difficult on Americans, and could lead to more American deaths. [21]

So far the release efforts have been unsuccessful because the court lacks authority to direct the government to bring them to the U.S., however the Uighurs no longer have restricted conditions.

A September 2005 report titled “Immigration and Terrorism: Moving Beyond the 9/11 Staff report on Terrorist Travel,” reviewed the immigration histories of 94 terrorists who operated in the United States from the early 1990s through 2004. The report findings show widespread terrorist violations of immigration laws, and describe how terrorists in the country use weaknesses in the system to remain in America.

Fraud is often used to gain entry into the U.S., and to remain in the country. In some instances, terrorists claimed they lack proper travel documents and applied for asylum at their port of entry. Some terrorists acquire various forms of fake identification, including driver’s licenses, birth certificates, Social Security cards, and immigration arrival records. Once in the United States, they can become legal permanent residents, and often marry Americans in sham marriages. Through various means, terrorists can easily become naturalized U.S. citizens.

Terrorists in America understand they can easily embed themselves in U.S. communities and carry out operations related to terrorism and espionage. In addition to physically attacking our nation, terrorists in the U.S. can gather intelligence, establish “safe houses” and generate funds to enable their terrorist organizations to conduct operations around the world. They are able to acquire jobs that provide them with access to critical infrastructure such as federal agencies, airports, seaports, border crossings, nuclear power plants, and military bases. They obtain positions for contractors that work with the federal government and the United States military. They work in our meat and food processing plants. They can also work at water processing plants, enabling access to America’s food and water supply.

The fourteenth Annual Arab International Festival, 2009 drew some 250,000 attendees. Sponsored by the Ford Motor Company, the American Arab Chamber of Commerce, the FBI, the CIA and various branches of the U.S. Armed Forces, the event was a recruiting ground for all branches of the U.S. Military. Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force recruiters promised American citizenship to every Middle-Eastern immigrant who enlisted– under the condition that they were Muslim. “The United States Army” in Arabic script adorned G.I. issued uniforms. The FBI set up a booth to recruit Muslim agents, and the CIA conducted raffles to entice young Islamists.

Muslims were not prohibited from distributing and selling Islamic books and materials at the festival but Christians who dared to attend the festival were prohibited by law from distributing religious materials pursuant to an order prior to the event from U.S. District Judge Nancy Edmonds. Dearborn police kept watch for Christians who might violate the ruling even though Christians have never disrupted the event in the past.

Some of the army recruits were sent to Ft. Hood in Texas where Major Nidal Hasan was stationed.[22]

Major Nidal Hasan, an Army Major serving as a Psychiatrist was one of around 40 Muslims stationed on Ft. Hood, and 15,000 Muslims in the military fired on 43 fellow soldiers, killing 13 as he cried “Allahu Akbar.” Major Hasan, who claimed to be “a Muslim first and an American second,” had previously said that “Muslims should stand up and fight the aggressor,” and “Muslims had a right to attack” yet apologists for Islam dhimmis were quick to claim his murderous action was were not really Islamic.[23]

Hassan completed residency at Walter Reed Army Hospital where his ideology was well known.[24] He had worshipped at the same mosque in 2001 as two of the 9/11 hijackers and once gave a lecture to doctors at Walter Reed saying that non-Muslims should be beheaded and have boiling oil poured down their throats. Colleagues questioned his loyalty but were hesitant to complain because of political correctness.[25]

In May 2007, six men were arrested for plotting to attack Fort Dix with assault weapons. Albanian Muslim immigrants from the Balkans were convicted in December of conspiring to target Fort Dix in the crime inspired by al-Qaida, proving that jihadists do plot inside America. [26] They said their ideology and hatred for America was the motivation for their plot to kill U.S. soldiers. [27] The men were brothers who had lived illegally in the U.S. after they crossed the border through Mexico in 1984.[28]
An American black convert to Islam shot 24 year-old soldier Pvt. William Long, and wounded 18 year-old Pvt. Quinton Ezeagwula. Investigators believed the shooting specifically targeted military personnel, and motivated by political and religious views.[29]

The story of a young woman from Lebanon provides an excellent example of a terrorist infiltrating the FBI and the CIA. Nada Nadim Prouty entered the U.S. on a student visa, which expired in 1988. She overstayed her visa and obtained resident alien status through a fraudulent marriage, which enabled her to successfully gain U.S. citizenship. After becoming a naturalized citizen, she used her fluency in foreign languages to get a job as an FBI special agent. Her FBI position led to a position for the CIA before it was discovered that she had used her security clearance to access database information on Hezbollah. Prouty provided classified information to Hezbollah through her brother-in-law, Talal Chahin.

An investigation revealed that Chahin, who allegedly laundered over $20 million to Hezbollah through his Michigan restaurant chain, had arranged Pouty’s fraudulent marriage. Investigations revealed that Prouty had disclosed the sensitive information to Chahin on three investigations in which he was involved.

Prouty’s family in Lebanon is noted for its involvement with the Syrian National Socialist Party, which has the objective of forming a greater Arab state that will include Lebanon, Syria, Israel, Cypress and part of Turkey. Intelligence sources revealed that Prouty’s cousin, Nidal Al-Aouar, was a terrorist who set roadside car bombs in Lebanon on behalf of Syria after training North Korea and the old USSR. [30]

Roy Bailey, a Detroit field office director for Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, enabled Prouty’s fraudulent activities. Charged in September 2008 with defrauding the federal government, conspiracy to commit bribery, and failing to report a felony, Bailey enabled a wide range of fraudulent activities that included immigration fraud, preferential treatment, and benefits in exchange for gifts and cash from a range of restaurant owners, attorneys, and business owners that included Talal Chahin.[31]

The immigration problem directly affects the rights and lives of individual Americans. Roger Barnett, an Arizona rancher, caught 12,000 illegal immigrants crossing his ranch from 1998-2004. When he caught immigrants crossing his property he turned them over to the border Patrol. A March 2004 incident involving sixteen illegal immigrants led to a civil suit when Mexicans trespassers filed charges against Barnett claiming that their civil rights had been violated. The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDE) represented the group of illegal Mexican immigrants charging that they had endured emotional distress as Mr. Barnett held them at gunpoint and threatened to turn his dog on them. The suit also charged the Sherriff of Cochise County for not stopping Mr. Barnett as he allegedly yelled obscenities at the immigrants and kicked a woman during the incident. Mr. Barnett said that over the years, illegal immigrants had left behind a trail of garbage including used toilet paper, soiled diapers and plastic bottles. He said that they had destroyed his property, broken into his house, torn up water pumps, stolen trucks, and left garbage that led to the death of some of Barnett’s cattle. [32]

Mr. Barnett was a crime victim who was treated as a criminal in efforts to protect his property. The immigrants filed suit against Mr. Barnett for $32,000,000. Barnett’s attorney argued that illegal immigrants do not have the same rights as citizen, but U.S. District Judge John Roll refused to drop the charges.

In February 2008, a civil jury found that Roger Barnett did not violate the civil rights of the trespassers, rejecting their claims of battery and false imprisonment. Mr. Barnett was however ordered to pay $77,804 in damages, of which $60,000 were punitive. Five of the plaintiffs were living in the U.S. with visa applications at the time of the verdict.[33]

Lack of immigration scrutiny and enforcement also affects legal immigrants in tragic circumstances. Legal immigrants who sincerely wish to leave their former countries behind to live in a free, Democratic society, may still be victims of barbaric religious practices when our laws fail to protect them. Examples include Middle Eastern women and children who want to be free of oppressive Islamic laws.

A heartbreaking incident took place in Irving, Texas in early 2008. Amina and Sarah Said were teenage girls who attended American schools and had American friends even though their father resented American laws and culture. When their father, Yaser Said, found out the girls had boyfriends, he shot and killed them in the back of a taxi before he fled the country.[34]

In another deplorable case, Aasiya Hassan, a beautiful Middle Eastern woman was stabbed and decapitated in Orchard Park, New York on February 12, 2009 after she had filed for a divorce and obtained an order of protection from her husband, Muzzammil Hassan. Mr. Hassan was an influential member of the local Muslim community who founded the English speaking Islamic Bridges TV in 2004, reportedly in an effort “to help portray Muslims in a more positive light.”[35]

After arriving in the U.S. at the age of fourteen from Pakistan, Mr. Hassan reportedly graduated magna cum laude in 1996 with an MBA from the University of Rochester in 1996, and went on to become a successful banker in Buffalo, New York. [36]

Hassan had expressed concerns that Hollywood does not portray moderate Muslims accurately. He said “Bridges TV gives American Muslims a voice and will depict them in everyday, real life situations.”[37]

The Bush dhimmi doctrine kept us safe from terrorism because Bush was a good dhimmi. He managed the appearance of having zero tolerance for terrorism, but he did not or could not distinguish between terrorism and jihad, specifically jihad through non-violence. By encouraging Americans to believe that the events of 9/11 were caused by only a few random terrorists, he shifted the real source of terror, the ideology of Islam as it is written in the Koran, to a few crazed lunatics and fringe groups. Believing that Islam is really peaceful is an effective strategy that allows Islam to advance stealthily so American citizens will not notice and therefore not oppose a gradual takeover. It is easier to enforce Islam through dhimmitude even if it is met with some skepticism and reluctance, rather than have to resort to terror. In other words, it is easier if you just hand a thief your pocketbook, however reluctant, rather than fighting and possibly losing your life. You only hand him your pocketbook because you know that if you do not, he will try to kill you.

Also, as long as we allow foreign Muslims to immigrate to America and appease them by accommodating their religious “needs,” and continue to buy oil from the Middle East, we will potentially be a dhimmi nation. We must reclaim our sovereignty by immediately closing the borders, drilling in America, and charging the Middle Easterners for drilling and processing their oil for them.

[2] Rabinowitz, Beila & Mayer, William “Bush Administration Moves To Legitimize The Muslim Brotherhood?,” June 22, 2007, http://www.pipelinenews.org/index.cfm?page=brotherhood62107.htm

[3] Stearns, Scott; “Bush in Saudi Arabia for Nuclear Deal,” May 16, 2008, http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2008-05/2008-05-16-voa23.cfm?CFID=328291575&CFTOKEN=23879274&jsessionid=de301739bcf88ea56c1d3b322c2535541f40

[4] Warner, Bill; http://www.politicalislam.com/blog/the-bush-islamic-doctrine/copyright

[5] “$800 Billion Economic Stimulus and Job Creation Bill Includes No Protections for U.S. Workers,” March 2009 http://www.fairus.org/site/PageNavigator/issues/stimulus_includes_no_protections

[6] http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/12/ldt.01..html

[7] http://transcripts.CNN.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

[8] “The Facts, Just the Facts, Ma’am!,” http://www.federalobserver.com/archive.php?aid=11746

[9] http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/pdf/deportation.pdf

[10] Homeland Security Report, http://tinyurl.com/t9sht

[11] “Frightening Film on U.S. Training Camps,” February 17, 2009, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,494424,00.html

[12] Webster, Michael; “Mexican Drug Cartels and Hezbollah Operating in Mexico and the U.S.,” October 26, 2009, http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/79021

[13] Ross, Brian; Esposito Richard; and Elocker, Asa; “Kidnapping Capital of the U.S.A.,” February 11, 2009, http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6848672&page=1

[14] Texas Association Against Sexual Assault, http://www.taasa.org/trafficking/facts.php

[15]“Interior Immigration Enforcement Resources,” Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims of the Committee on the Judiciary; House of Representatives 109^th Congress, 1^st Session, March 10, 2005, Serial no. 109–5 http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/judiciary/hju99785.000/hju99785_0f.htm

[16] Separ, Jerry; “Border Chief Wins Bonus Despite Criticism,” January 8, 2009, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/08/border-chief-wins-bush-bonus-despite-hits-by-ranks/?page=2

[17] Roebuck, Jeremy; “Border Patrol Union Criticizes Agency’ Hiring, Training Push” July 4, 2008, http://www.themonitor.com/news/border_14082___article.html/agency_training.html

[18] Cutler, Michael; “Bush Opposed all Efforts to Secure Border” January 10, 2009, http://www.newswithviews.com/Cutler/michael144.htm

[19] Wooldridge, Frosty; “Absurd To The Insane: Muslim Immigration Into The USA,” November 24, 2008

[20] http://paa2006.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=61036

[21] Brown, Floyd and Mary Beth; “Judge Rules Terrorist Prisoners Be Released In Nation’s Capital,” Saturday, October 11, 2008
http://townhall.com/columnists/FloydandMaryBethBrown/2008/10/11/judge_rules_terrorist_prisoners_be_released_in_nations_capital

[22] Williams, Dr. Paul; FBI, CIA, Fund Gala Islamic Festval, July 12, 2009, http://thelastcrusade.org/2009/07/12/fbi-cia-fund-gala-islamic-festival/

[23] World Net Daily Staff, “Military Jihadists Fill Every Branch of U.S. Military,” November 6, 2009, http://www.israelunitycoalition.org/news/article.php?id=4744

[24] McCabe, Scott, “Fort Hood Gunman Worked at Walter Reed,” November 9, 2009, http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/nation/Local-psychiatrist-ID_d-as-Fort-Hood-gunman-worked-at-Walter-Reed-8492041-69339237.html

[25] Allen, Nick; “Fort Hood Gunman Had Told Colleagues That Infidels Should Have Their Throats Cut,” November 8, 2009, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6526030/Fort-Hood-gunman-had-told-US-military-colleagues-that-infidels-should-have-their-throats-cut.html

[26] Dela Cruz, Christopher; “Three Convicted in Fort Dix Terror Plot are Sentenced to Life,” April 28, 2009, http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/04/judge_sentences_fort_dix_defen.html

[27] Dela Cruz, Christopher; “Three Convicted in Fort Dix Terror Plot are Sentenced to Life,” April 28, 2009, http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/04/judge_sentences_fort_dix_defen.html

[28] Erminio, Vanessa; “The Fort Dix Terror Plot,” October 23, 2008, http://blog.nj.com/ledgerarchives/2008/10/the_fort_dix_terror_plot.html

[29] CNN; “Suspect Arrested in Arkansas Recruiting Center Shooting,” http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/06/01/arkansas.recruiter.shooting/index.html

[30] Schlussel, Debbie; “Jihad Jane’s Poison Family,” November 20, 2007, http://www.nypost.com/seven/11202007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/jihad_janes_poison_family_955101.htm

[31] Egan, Paul; “Detroit Immigration Official Who Gave Favors Deserves Prison, Prosecutors Say,” March 6, 2009 http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090306/UPDATE/903060427

[32] Seper, Jerry; “Sixteen Illegal’s Sue Arizona Rancher,” February 9, 2009, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/09/16-illegals-sue-arizona-rancher/

[33] Rotstein, Arthur; “Mixed Verdict Over Migrants’ Run-in With Rancher,” February 17, 2009, http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2009Feb17/0,4670,BorderConfrontation,00.html

[34] Spencer, Robert; “Honor Killings in Texas,” January 8, 2008, http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24329

[35] Warner, Gene; “Prominent Orchard Park Man Charged With Beheading His Wife,” February 13, 2009, http://www.buffalonews.com/494/story/578644.html

[36] “Muzzammil Hassan,” Al-Jazeerah, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muzzammil_Hassan

[37] “First American Muslim American Channel Announced by Bridges Network,” http://www.aljazeerah.info/News%20archives/2003%20News%20archives/May%202003%20News/3%20n/First%20American%20Muslim%20Television%20Channel%20Announced%20by%20Bridges%20Network..htm

###

8

Welcome to the White House

Direct relations were established between the White House and the Muslim community under Bill Clinton from 1992-2000, and were strengthened under George W. Bush’s administration from 2000-2008. Bill Clinton was the first to commend Islam in public speeches, and the first to issue invitations to the White House on Islamic holidays such as a yearly dinner celebrating the Islamic fasting month of Ramadan that continued through George W. Bush’s Administration and into the Barrack Obama’s.

The State Department established an Islamic website in 2000, proving that Bill Clinton’s administration was actually sanctioning Islam in the White House while the pledge of allegiance and nativity scenes were being systematically removed from schools and public institutions. Furthermore, the date was prior to 9/11. Madeline Albright formally encouraged Muslims to apply for the Foreign Service as she endorsed the website at the White House hosted Islamic dinner in 2000:

“I am pleased that since last year the State Department has inaugurated a new website entitled Islam in America.” Its purpose is to help people everywhere learn more about the positive force that Islam has become in American life and about the growing role of Muslim Americans as they are there to play a role in ensuring the security, prosperity, and freedom of our land. Equally vital are the international exchange and people-to-people programs we conduct with Muslim-majority nations. These efforts bring distinguished Muslim visitors to our shores to exchange views and promote understanding… We are strongly encouraging young Muslim Americans to apply to the Foreign Service as part of our overall effort to attract talent and promote diversity…”[1]

A 2009 program sponsored by the department called Citizen Exchange Program gives a grant to the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the National Peace Foundation to co-sponsor a citizen exchange project between the U.S. and the Middle East. The ISNA is instrumental in financing and exercising control over most of the mosques in the United States, and is an arm of the Muslim Brotherhood that created Hamas. The program is apparently a one-way exchange, as it is meant to explore Islam, the functions of Islamic institutions in the United States, and the activities of interfaith work. Professionals from Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates will visit the United States, and American professionals will visit the Middle East. [2]

Former Reagan Defense official, and President of the Center for Security Policy, Frank Gaffney Jr., wrote a lengthy article in 2003 describing how Islamists and individuals from the Council of American Islamic Relations (CAIR) were invited into the White House. According to Gaffney, Grover Norquist was a conservative coalition builder against Communism in Central America, Africa and Afghanistan who he knew personally. Norqist formed the Islamic Institute in 1998 as an outreach organization, initially financed by Abdurrahman Alamoudi who was also Bill Clinton’s Islamic Affairs Advisor and financial supporter. Its stated purpose was to cultivate Muslim-Americans and Arab-Americans with conservative family values. Their professed confidence in capitalism made them potential Republican Party allies for the 2000 Presidential election.

Alamoudi, convicted in 2004 on terror financing related charges, cultivated ties with the Democratic Party during the Clinton Administration and donated to its candidates. His donations enabled his access to the White House, leading to oversight of selection, training and certification for Muslim chaplains in the U.S. military. Self described supporter of Hamas and Hezbollah, Alamoudi was the Saudi billionaire who helped Bill Clinton write the 1995 Educational Guidelines that were distributed to American schools across the nation, profoundly effecting what our children learn in school in spite of States sovereignty regarding education. Alamoudi addressed the Annual Convention of the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP) in 1996 with the following statement:

“If we are outside this country we can say ‘Oh, Allah destroy America.’ But once we are here, our mission in this country is to change it.”

Alamoudi was caught on tape complaining that Osama bin Laden had not killed enough Americans in the U.S. embassy bombings in Africa. Alamoudi was also one of Al-Qaida’s top fund-raisers in America, according to the U.S. Treasury Department.[3]

Alamoudi and his business partner, Khalid Mahfouz, founder of terror-tied Muwafaq Foundation, funded a software company in 1994/1995 named Ptech. Ptech was given control of some US top-secret IT programs, and Ptech had redesigned, and ran the FAA system on September 11, 2001.[4] Khalid Mahfouz had previously endeared himself to George W. Bush in the late 1980s with a $25 million bailout of the Harken Energy Company which Bush had financial interest in.[5]

In 1998, Alamoudi wrote two personal checks for $10,000 each to help start Norquist’s Islamic Institute. According to Gaffney, Alamoudi also made payments in 2000 and 2001 totaling $50,000 to a lobbying firm Norquist was associated with.

Alamoudi was arrested and charged in 2004 for engaging in illegal financial transactions with the Libyan government through a charity used by Qadhafi to finance terrorist operations. According to an affidavit filed at the time, Alamoudi admitted to trying to take $340,000 in sequentially numbered $100 bills to Syria, en route to Saudi bank accounts. Alamoudi told authorities in Britain that once the Libyan funds were in the Saudi banks, he could withdraw from them in $10,000 increments to pay the expenses of organizations that he was associated with in the United States. He admitted to undertaking other similar transactions involving amounts of $10,000- $20,000.

In addition to the initial $20,000 from Alamoudi, the Islamic Institute was able to receive funding from other secretly affiliated organizations. The Washington Post described such organizations as a:

“Secretive group of tightly connected Muslim charities, think tanks and businesses based in Northern Virginia used to funnel millions of dollars to terrorists and launder millions more.”

Published tax returns and foundation records later showed that the majority of the Norquist’s Islamic Institute funds came from Arab Persian Gulf states and their U.S. funding system, a number of which were later raided by federal anti-terrorism task forces, such as The Holy Land Foundation in Texas. Shut down in 2007, The Holy Land Foundation was found to have been funding Hamas and terrorist organizations overseas. So the Islamic Institute was effectively an Islamic charity meant to spread Islam.

Norquist, trusted in Washington, was toasted in 2003 at a black-tie dinner for his nationwide initiatives to memorialize Ronald Reagan. Attended by nearly 300 conservative activists and politicians at Washington’s Mayflower Hotel, it was hoped that the event would bring in votes and campaign contributions for Republicans. Most in the audience were unaware that Norquist had been enabling causes of radical Islamists funded by Saudi Arabia during Bush’s Administration.

With untold consequences for the nation, the Director of Norquist’s Islamic Institute, Khaled Saffuri, and deputy to Alamoudi regarding its affairs, enabled Islamists to influence the American military, the prison system, the educational system from K-12 through university level, and the political arena.

A Palestinian by birth, Saffuri reportedly supported families of suicide bombers. He was also active in Muslim-supported operations in Bosnia. Saffuri would later denounce President Bush for shutting down the Holy Land Foundation.

At Norquist’s suggestion in the summer of 1999, Gaffney moved his Center for Security Policy into Norquist’s new office space, which also housed the “Wednesday Group” meetings and the Saffuri-headed Islamic Institute. Gaffney attended the weekly meetings, which Saffuri also attended in the late 1990’s. Though the meetings were supposed to be comprised of conservative activists and libertarians, Gaffney noted that participants rarely, if ever, addressed national security issues.

In 2000, Saffuri was George W. Bush’s presidential campaign National Advisor on Arab and Muslim Affairs in an effort to obtain votes and donations from states with significant Muslim populations. In February 2001, Insight Magazine reported:

“In September 2000, on Karl Rove’s way to the airport to catch his flight back to Texas, Khaled Saffuri, executive director of the Islamic Institute, joined Rove in his car. Saffuri explained to him that the vote of the Arab-American community, which includes both Muslims and Christians, still was up for grabs. The community is prosperous and could be the source of considerable campaign contributions. If Bush would mention in public just a few of the issues that concern Arab-Americans, Saffuri told Rove, he would win their hearts, their minds and their support.”

President Bush held a meeting in Austin on May 1, 2000 with Alamoudi, Saffuri, and some other immoderate Muslims. The National Journal reported on the event:

“It was the summer of 2000, and for George W. Bush, the meeting held the promise of an unusual but important endorsement for his presidential bid. Conservative activist Grover Norquist had persuaded the Republican nominee to sit down with leaders of the Muslim American Political Coordinating Committee, a confederation of four Muslim community groups.”

Gaffney recounted that influential Washington conservatives, would-be politicians, think-tank associates, journalists, and an increasing number of lobbyists attended the Islamic Institute presentations. The topics included the plight of Palestinians under Israeli occupation, the misunderstood Islamist government of Sudan, the supposed innocent process of selecting Muslim chaplains for the armed forces, the so-called honored status of women in the Muslim world. Discussions include efforts to promote Islamic causes and candidates within Republican circles.

A few weeks after 9/11, Gaffney spoke up about the fact that Alamoudi’s American Muslim Council (AMC) was among the groups invited to the White House. Gaffney wrote of his observation that the AMC’s website featured a link called: “Know Your Rights,” which led to a statement urging Muslims not to talk to the FBI. A linked statement was in the name of the National Coalition to Protect Political Freedom (NCPPF). The NCPPF is a legal aid office for terrorists, and an organization which the AMC was a member. The link disappeared and was subsequently denied after Gaffney brought it to Norquist’s attention. While the link was active, the AMC had been scheduled to meet with the President to discuss how Muslims could supposedly help with the war on terror.

Sami al-Arian, a professor at South Florida University, was then president of the NCPPF. He was also Secretary of the worldwide governing council of the terrorist organization, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) who Alamoudi had addressed in 1996 and has been held responsible for suicide-bombings.

Despite al-Arian’s radical Islamist sympathies, the Bush campaign met with him to gain Muslim support in Florida. A photograph of Bush with al-Arian in March 2000 received considerable attention after al-Arian was arrested on forty terrorism-related charges in February 2003 and sentenced to 57 months in prison.

With credit for time served, Al-Arian was supposed to serve the balance of 19 months and then be deported. He was not deported however, because in March 2008 he refused to testify when the Department of Justice issued a subpoena for him to appear before another grand jury. As a result, contempt charges followed in June 2008, and in September 2008 Al-Arian was released from detention on bond and placed under house arrest to await the trial for contempt.[6]

Al-Arian’s arrest in 2003 was made possible by the Patriot Act, enabling U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies to share the wiretaps of Sami al-Arian coordinating Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) operations from his Tampa office.

Recognizing that the Patriot Act was a threat, the Islamists were determined to discredit it and its architect, then Attorney General John Ashcroft. Various Islamic groups together with the ACLU, the pro-Castro National Lawyers Guild and waged a national campaign against the Patriot Act, and Ashcroft left his position early in Bush’s second term.

Norquist was part of the coalition to rescind the Patriot Act and also behind efforts to abolish a section of the 1996 Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act permitting “secret evidence.” With secret evidence, prosecutors can withhold classified information from foreign suspects if authorities have reason to believe the disclosure of such information could compromise the sources and methods through which it was obtained.

Banning secret evidence became an Islamist priority when undisclosed classified information linked Sami al-Arian’s brother-in-law, Mazen al-Najjar, to terrorist activities. In order to keep Islamist financial support, in the second presidential debate with Al Gore, Bush formally pledged that if elected, he would comply and prohibit the use of secret evidence. The pledge complied with Saffuri’s previous suggestion to “mention in public just a few of the issues that concern Arab-Americans.”

Grover Norquist was awarded for being a “champion of the abolishment movement against secret evidence” in July 2001 at an event held by Sami al-Arian called the National Coalition to Protect Political Freedom.

On the morning of September 11, 2001, Islamist groups were reportedly scheduled to meet with President Bush to hear his plan to abolish the secret evidence provision in the Patriot Act. Al-Arian had arranged to participate in the meeting from Florida by telephone. According to his website, his teaching schedule at the University of South Florida would not allow him to be at the White House in person that day.

In February 2003, Sami al-Arian was arrested again, this time charged with being an alleged leader of the Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ) in the United States, and Secretary of the “Shura Council,” a worldwide group governing the PIJ. Al-Arian’s attorneys rested without defense. In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Moody criticized al-Arian for doing nothing to stop terrorist bombings perpetrated by Islamic Jihad saying:

“You lifted not one finger. To the contrary, you laughed when you heard of the bombings…You are a master manipulator. The evidence is clear in this case. You were a leader of the PIJ.” [7]

Sami Al-Arian son, Abdullah, was the subject of national media attention when he was escorted out of the White House event by the Secret Service in June 2001, where al-Arian was one of 150 Muslim-American activists in a White House briefing.

Abdullah’s removal led to a walkout by other attendees at the meeting, who labeled the incident as “racial profiling.” The Deputy Director of the Secret Service issued a written apology to Abdullah, and President Bush personally called Abdullah’s mother to express regret and to promise that nothing like that would happen again.

Probably as a result of Abdullah’s expulsion, the Secret Service was notified that they could provide only physical security possibilities, such as potential assassins. Agents were informed they were not to protect the President from embarrassments such as resulting from meetings with terrorist-apologists, or even from actual terrorists. If unarmed Islamists could find a way to access the President and his subordinates, law enforcement and intelligence professionals understood they could do nothing unless the President’s life was threatened.

In the aftermath of 9/11, Grover Norquist gained access for several individuals and groups as part of Muslim outreach efforts, and established Islamist connections with the Bush administration. A memo dated early in 2001 was an effort to coordinate Muslim and Arab-American public events. Invitees to the White House events were chosen by Norquist’s Islamic Institute.

According to Gaffney, Norquist’s Islamist friends exploited President Bush after 9/11 by sponsoring meetings and hosting White House dinners that only pro-Islamist Muslim-American and Arab-American communities received invitations to, excluding non religious Middle Easterners.

The White House invitation list included key members of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). CAIR’s executive director, Nihad Awad is another self-professed Hamas-supporter and, as will be discussed in a later chapter, harbors a radical agenda. According to Gaffney, The Washington Post featured a photograph of President Bush touring the Washington Islamic Center with Nihad Awad and Khaled Saffuri. As Gaffney put it, the photo was part of a public relations coup that would:

“…exploit the President’s laudable and strategically sensible desire to show that neither he nor the American people would hold all Muslims responsible for the murderous actions of the few.”

Nihad Awad and CAIR continuously opposed Bush’s policies on Homeland Security and the War on Terror. They even sued Attorney General Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Moeller.

The White House invitation list also included Shaykh Hamza Yusuf, who had attended a rally two days prior to 9/11 to support a former AMC executive, Jamil Al-Amin, former Black Panther currently serving a life sentence for killing a policeman. Al-Amin converted to Islam when he was in prison from 1971-1976 for robbery. At the rally Shaykh Yusuf declared,

“This country is facing a terrible fate…This country stands condemned. It stands condemned because of what it did – and lest people forget Europe suffered two world wars after conquering the Muslim lands” [8]

“What it did” implies guilt, but states absolutely nothing. Could it mean that Hitler was working in Islamic interests in WWII? After all, Hitler had Islamic allies in WWII, and he raised an army of 20,000 Bosnian Muslims.[9]

Nevertheless, Gaffney wrote that shortly after 9/11, the FBI went to Yusuf’s house to question him about the attack on the World Trade Center. Yusuf’s wife informed the agents that Yusuf was not home because he was meeting with the President. The FBI checked out her story and found that Yusuf had attended an “inter-religious” meeting in the Oval Office arranged by Suhail Khan as Grover Norquist’s White House stand-in. [10]

In September 2001, Muzammil Siddiqi, the president of the Board of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), was also on the White House invitation list. With deep ties to Saudi Arabia, Siddiqi was previously a top figure in the Muslim World League (MWL), whose American headquarters were raided in March 2002 on suspicion of ties to terrorism during the U.S. government’s Operation Green Quest. [11]He was Chairman of the Religious Affairs Committee of the Muslim Students Association in the U. S. and Canada, and a member of the Fiqh Council, another organization that has been raided. [12]

Siddiqi opposes Muslims serving in the U.S. military or defending the United States. Siddiqi said in an article entitled, “Basic Principles of Involvement in War in Islam,” in 1991.

“Islam will not allow a Muslim to be drafted by non-Muslims to defend concepts, ideologies, and values other than those of Islam…A Muslim shall not defend non-Muslim lands.”

Siddiqi wrote in 1996 of his desire for the United States to become a Muslim country through “gradual change,” and said that Islamic Shari’ah Law should become America’s law.

“Allah’s rules have to be established in all lands, and all our efforts should lead to that direction.”[13]

At the inter-religious prayer service for the 9/11, victims held at the National Cathedral on September 14, 2001, Siddiqi would not condemn terrorism in statements heard worldwide. [14]

Siddiqi was later photographed with President Bush in the Roosevelt Room of the White House as he presented him with a Koran.

The invitation list included Agha Saeed, founder and president of the American Muslim Alliance (AMA). Saeed created the American Muslim Political Coordination Council (AMPCC), an umbrella group to unite the American Muslim Council (AMC), the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC).

Eric Erfan Vickers, a black radical American attorney on the invitation list had converted to the Islam. He was affiliated with several Wahabbi groups before he was the AMC executive director from June 2002 until February 2003. In defense of al-Arian, Vickers declared

“What has happened to professor Arian…is happening to Muslims and people of Middle Eastern descent all over this country. They are being discriminated against.” [15]

In 2003, Vickers wrote to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, requesting the organization look into the U.S. government investigation of Muslim groups with possible terrorist ties, referring to the investigation as “un-American practices by the U.S. government.” He wrote,

“I am writing to request that the United Nations begin an immediate inquiry into the political repression of Muslims and Arabs . . . by the United States government.” [16]

Mahdi Bray, also on the list of what Gaffney described as the “Wahhabi Lobby” was usually as a coordinator for political activism. By mid-October of 2003, Bray had overseen the training of nearly 1,000 Islamic activists.[17] Bray leads several pro-Islamist organizations in America, and is a former member of the radical Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). He hosts a radio talk show that reflects the views of, and is sponsored largely by Wahhabi Saudi Arabia.

In November 2003, some of the above Muslim groups were finally excluded from the White House invitation list dinner, presumably due to the arrests of their associates. Gaffney wrote that the ISNA, CAIR, the Muslim Public Affairs Council, the Muslim Students Association and several other Wahhabi-backed groups and individuals then depreciated the White House events as:

“…the events were nothing more than props shamelessly used by the Bush Administration.”

After the exclusion of the groups, the FBI Director and supervisory agents continued to meet with representatives of the AMC, CAIR and ISNA, even though associates of each had been the object of law enforcement action. The FBI had once allowed the groups to provide sensitivity training to FBI agents in Quantico, Virginia. The “community outreach,” program has allowed Islamists to gain power and influence in America while exploiting their relationships with U.S. Federal agencies. [18]

With less than 3% of America’s population Muslim, there is still an Islamic dinner at the White House every year. More recently there is a USPS stamp and the State Department has a new publication called “Being Muslim in America.” America was not founded on Islam yet the White House officially endorses Islam at the taxpayer’s financial, political, social, and religious expense.

[2] Rabinowitz, Beila & Mayer, William; “State Department Funding ISNA’s Propagation of Islam via Citizen Exchange Program,” April 25, 2008, http://www.militantislammonitor.org/article/id/3442

[3] “Lawsuit’s Claim: CAIR No Longer Even Exists,” November 24, 2008, http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=81925

[4] “The Sheik and the Secretary of State,” National Corruption Index.org, January 12, 200,9 http://forum.thedailyshow.com/tds/board/message?board.id=guest-suggestions&thread.id=557

[5] “Ptech,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptech

[6] Sami Al-Arian; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sami_Al-Arian

[7] “Ex-Professor get 4 Years in South Florida Case,” May 1, 2006 http://news.oneindia.in/2006/05/01/ex-professor-gets-over-4-years-in-florida-jihad-case-1146512148.html

[8] Hanna Rosin and John Mintz, “Muslim Leaders Struggle With Mixed Messages,” Washington Post, October 2, 2001

[9] “Bosnian Muslims Volunteer En Masse Into Nazi SS,”
http://www.srpska-mreza.com/History/ww2/hanjar.html

[10] Jonathan Kaufman, “Islamerican: Meet Hamza Yusuf, ‘Rock Star’ of a Leader Among U.S. Muslims,” The Wall Street Journal, February 15, 2002

[11] “Guest CV: Dr. Muzammil H. Siddiqi,” IslamOnline.net, http://www.islamonline.net/livedialogue/english/Guestcv.asp?hGuestID=uY6w39

[12] “Guest CV: Dr. Muzammil H. Siddiqi,” IslamOnline.net, http://www.islamonline.net/livedialogue/english/Guestcv.asp?hGuestID=uY6w39.

[13] Schlussel, Debbie; Adam’s Gadahn’s Extremist American Imam,” May 28, 2004 http://www.debbieschlussel.com/columns/column052804.shtml

[14] Charles Krauthammer, “The Silent Imams,” Washington Post, November 23, 2001

[15] Segment entitled, “Should FBI Director Robert Mueller deliver the keynote address to the American Muslim Council tomorrow?” Hardball with Chris Matthews, MSNBC, June 27, 2002

[16] “ Eric Erfan Vickers,” A Guide to the Political Left http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=751

[17] “MAS Freedom Near to Reaching Goal of 1,000 Trained Activists,” Freedom Foundation Press Room, October 16, 2003, http://masnet.org/pressroom_release.asp?id=560

[18] Gaffney, Frank; “A Troubling Influence,” December 9, 2003, http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/Read.aspx?GUID=C7CD908B-6D7E-49EB-A0A9-DA0A18745A29