Sydney : Proscribed Muslim Terrorist group, The Muslim Bortherhood's embedded Australian based supporters march in support of Morsi

Protesters march for Morsi

The Sunday Telegraph 
26 Jan 2014
Pg.10

MORE than 100 people marched through Sydney yesterday to condemn the military overthrow of former Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi.
Waving Egyptian and Australian flags and chanting “Yes it’s Sydney but we care,” and “Red,White, Black, I want my Egypt back” in English and Arabic, the protesters marched from Town Hall to the Egyptian consulate on Commonwealth St, Surry Hills.

Omar Elnawsra,* (cardiologist at a major Sydney hospital) from Liverpool, said the group was gathering to show support for the Muslim Brotherhood- affiliated Mr Morsi. “We feel the Mubarak regime is back, just without Mubarak — this is why we’ve come here,” he said.

 Embedded Islamic Terrorist Supporters.

Muslim terror supporters engaged in the usual desecration of the Australian Flag as they blocked Sydney streets. 

Shouldn't the good Doctor Omar Elnawsra, be back in Egypt attending to the needs of those injured by his beloved Muslim Brotherhood along with the rest of these Brave Islamic Fighters who are hiding in Sydney.
Identification + Internment + Repatriation to an Islamic Utopia of their choosing NOW

Whilst the Muslim Brotherhoods President of the United States has been busy financing and facilitating Islamic Terrorism in the Middle East............

Chinese media reports of plans to build a 110,000 ton 'super aircraft carrier' to rival US naval power

Jamie Seidel 
The Daily Telegraph
December 21,2013

CHINA has declared it is building a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier of a size to rival the biggest in United States naval service in the first move of a major new arms race.

Chinese website qianzhan.com cites "top People's Liberation Army" sources as saying the 110,000-ton aircraft carrier should be launched by 2020.

"By that time, China will be able to confront the most advanced US carrier-based fighter jets in high sea," the Chinese-language article reads

The news follows rising tensions in the South and East China Seas where the most recent incident involved a near-collision with a US cruiser shadowing China's first aircraft carrier, the refurbished Liaoning which was purchased from Ukraine.

China's first homegrown aircraft carrier will be a larger version of Liaoning. The first of two such vessels is due to hit the water in 2015.

The design is reportedly based on drawings from the former Soviet Union of a nuclear-powered, 80,000 ton vessel capable of carrying 60 aircraft.

"Despite their lack of experience, Chinese scientific research personnel have the ambition to overcome various difficulties to master lots of new technologies and techniques in building China's own powerful aircraft carrier," the article reads.

Sean Hannity slices and dices Pious Muslim Imam Anjem Choudary

 

 

Technorati Tags: Anjem Choudary,Sean Hannity,Pious Muslim Imam Anjem Choudary,Sharia Law,Islamic Sociopaths Inc.Religion of Peace,Muslim Brotherhood

Australia: Alan Jones interviews Janet Levy on her American Thinker article, The Narrative of Defeat.

 

The Narrative of Defeat

By Janet Levy
American Thinker
May 09, 2010

It is now life-threatening to criticize or mock Islam in the United States of America. The creators of South Park, Viacom, and anyone associated with the production of a recent episode portraying Mohammed in a bear suit would have potentially risked life and limb if they had broadcast the original cartoon sketch. In a manner eerily reminiscent of the Danish cartoon jihad, a Brooklyn-based Muslim group called Revolution Muslim posted a threat to South Park creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker for their "outright insult" to the prophet.

"We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid, and they will probably end up like Theo van Gogh for airing this show," read the post. Theo Van Gogh was the Dutch filmmaker who was murdered by a Dutch-Moroccan Muslim for producing the film Submission, critical of the treatment of women in Islam. Like Salman Rushdie, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Geert Wilders, and targeted infidels before them, life would have been reduced to an unending fielding of threats and the heavily guarded jockeying between safe houses for those associated with South Park if the episode had aired unaltered.

Alan Jones Janet Levy, Radio 2gb Sydney May 14 2010

The incident underscores the unceasing efforts by Islam to silence opposition and criticism in order to advance the establishment of a worldwide caliphate under Shari'ah law. Despite incidents like these, we in the West continue to react to Islam as if it were merely another variety of religious faith. Descriptions of Islam as a "religion of peace" and as "one of the three Abrahamic faiths" proliferate, obfuscating the need for further study and shielding the immutable, intolerant, militant, murderous doctrine from discovery. Although it's been almost nine years since 9/11, the level of knowledge and understanding of Islam is staggeringly low among the general population, let alone those sworn to protect us -- our military and intelligence services. At a time when the Western world should be intimately familiar with the concepts of jihad and dhimmitude, as well as the provisos of Shari'ah law, we are lulled back to sleep with platitudes of peaceful coexistence and shamed with charges of "Islamophobia" if we question the motives, demands, or practices of adherents to the Muslim faith.

Quite illogically -- given the sequence of events from 9/11 forward -- the very act of exhibiting fear or suspicion of Muslims is dubbed a "phobia" -- an irrational fear. This, after nineteen Muslims hijacked planes and flew them into buildings, exacting massive carnage in the name of their god, and afterward, their coreligionists feted the deed. The carnage has continued nonstop since then in other countries. In 2002, Muslim jihadists set off three bombs in Bali, killing over 200 people and wounding 240. In 2004, Islamic practitioners orchestrated a series of coordinated attacks against Madrid's commuter train system,  claiming 200 lives and injuring 1,800. The following year, suicide attacks in London's public transportation system during the morning rush hour resulted in 52 deaths and 700 wounded. In 2008, Muslim terrorists held India's most populous city hostage for three days with a string of more than ten shootings and bombings at a hospital, cinema, college, and Jewish center that left 175 dead and over 300 injured. These are just a few examples among hundreds of recent attacks by Muslims worldwide.

Yet we in America shrink from charges of Islamophobia and fail to acknowledge our righteous apprehension of unthinkable acts of evil in the name of a vengeful and certainly not peaceful god. We allow ourselves to be censured and plead guilty as charged of Islamophobia for scrutinizing the activities of Muslims and placing blame on the canons of Islam. The joy and celebration from Muslims across the world following the mass slaughter and destruction of 9/11 should have put us over the edge and strengthened our resolve to eradicate followers of this deadly belief system. Instead, we exhibit suicidal insanity in our failure and unwillingness to connect the dots of Islam, jihad, and Shari'ah. We dither, apologize to the enemy, and shrink from rightful condemnations of their holy books, their religious practices, and their legal code.

No other religion on earth exists with a holy book dominated by hatred toward non-believers. The Islamic trilogy -- the Koran, the Sira (or biography of Mohammed), and the Hadith (the words and deeds of Mohammed) -- requires jihad, the killing of infidels, as the highest form of devotion to Allah. Islam is a theo-political-legal doctrine whose primary focus is not on the "goodness" of Muslims, but on others -- evildoers who do not share the Islamic belief system. Certainly the Old and New Testaments offer their fair share of brutal passages, but the practices described within those passages haven't been in evidence for centuries. The brutal practices contained within Shari'ah law are practiced today throughout the Muslim and non-Muslim worlds, even in the United States.

Christians suffer through confession and acts of repentance for untoward acts that hurt others. Christians aspire to exemplary kindness and service to their fellow man for the privilege of escaping a hellfire-filled afterlife. Jihadists are awarded a guaranteed place in heaven and the promise of great reward for the holy act of murdering those who don't believe. While Jews practice "tikkun olam" -- repairing the world -- and perform "mitzvoth," or good deeds, devout Muslims pray to Allah for inanimate objects like rocks and trees to alert them to the presence of dastardly Jews. They pray, "O Muslim there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him." Muslim world leaders and clerics routinely call for the death of non-Muslims. Has anyone ever heard a Western prime minister, president, rabbi, or priest call for the annihilation of a country or for the destruction of practitioners of other religions?

The Koran contains over four thousand verses of enmity toward non-believers. Over 63% of the Koran instructs Muslims to hate and avoid any association with non-Muslims. It teaches that non-Muslims should be held in contempt, killed, beheaded, humiliated, raped, enslaved, converted, or forced to pay the jizya or dhimmi tax. Eighty-five percent of the Sira -- the biography of Mohammed, the ideal man or moral icon for Muslims -- has to do with his battles against kuffars, or non-believers. This is a far cry from "Jesus died for your sins." Islamic teachings laud and require lying and deception, "taquiya," to advance the "ummah," or Islamic community. While Jews and Christians honor the Golden Rule, turn the other cheek and practice tolerance and inclusiveness, Muslims learn how to fight the Dar al-Harb, the infidel world of war, and practice the artistry of duplicity not only with impunity, but also with the highest praises from their god.

Let's not lull ourselves into complacency by citing that out of 1.57 billion Muslims worldwide, many are secular or have little knowledge of Islam. Although this may be true, that still leaves, conservatively, 10% to 15% (upwards of 235 million) of devout Muslims or jihadists who fit the description of submissive and intimidated, witting or unwitting enablers. As Mark Steyn astutely observed in America Alone, a "dominant minority" is the sole requirement for global jihad to take hold. In Mumbai, the carnage wreaked was caused by just ten people over three days. Nineteen hijackers were able to commandeer four passenger planes and murder three thousand Americans on 9/11. It doesn't take huge numbers to institute evil. In Nazi Germany, Hitler didn't win popular support in the country, but he pushed through his genocidal agenda as a passive, fearful populace looked on.

In our free society with a tradition of openly criticizing everything, even the sacred, it has now somehow become unacceptable to criticize Islam and the heinous actions of many of its practitioners. Yet it is perfectly acceptable to criticize Christianity, Judaism, or any other religion, for that matter. In 1989, "Piss Christ," an offensive photograph of a plastic crucifix submerged in a container of urine, was prominently displayed at a museum and won a U.S. government-funded award. While members of Congress and clerics condemned the sculpture in the media, the most egregious responses were from a museum patron who attempted to dislodge the photograph from the museum wall and a pair of teenagers who attacked it with a hammer. By comparison, in 2005, when editorial cartoons depicting Mohammed were published in a Danish newspaper, the Muslim world erupted into violence that claimed over one hundred lives and destroyed property worldwide, including four Danish embassies. Instead of reinforcing the Western value of free expression and severely punishing the actions of destructive Muslims, Westerners apologized for giving offense, censored the display of the cartoons, and cautiously monitored any future examination or critique of Islam.

Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna said,  "It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated; to impose its law on all nations and to extend its power to the entire planet." The work of the Muslim Brotherhood in America is "a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah's religion is made victorious over all other religions."

It is now five minutes to midnight in the global jihad that endeavors to destroy us and establish a worldwide caliphate under Shari'ah law. Instead of standing our ground and asserting the supremacy of our values, our fear and submissiveness have taken root to hasten our defeat. Will we wake up and face the enemy head-on before it is too late and all is lost?

 Dangerous Racists

Technorati Tags: South Park,Viacom,Mohammed,taquiya,ummah,Dar al-Harb,Mark Steyn,Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna,Shari'ah law.worldwide caliphate,Koran instructs Muslims to hate,kuffars,Islamophobia,Theo van Gogh,Piss Christ,Revolution Muslim,Salman Rushdie,Ayaan Hirsi Ali,Geert Wilders,Dutch-Moroccan Muslim,Submission,Alan Jones,Janet Levy

Inauguration: The Beast Enters the Gates,Expediting the Grand Jihad Part Two: Engaging the Muslim Brotherhood

Expediting the Grand Jihad Part Two: Engaging the Muslim Brotherhood

by Paul & Phillip D. Collins,
Jan. 19, 2008
Conspiracy Archive

Inauguration: The Beast Enters the Gates

For many, the January 20 Presidential inauguration of Barack Obama is reason for celebration. Obama supporters everywhere believe that the event represents the introduction of the solution to America's deepening crisis. It would break not a few hearts, however, if it was revealed that the enemies of America are going to be in attendance. According to a January 14 Associated Press article, a prayer will be offered at the inauguration by Ingrid Mattson, the first woman president of America's largest Muslim group, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) (Zoll, "Muslim woman, rabbis to pray at inaugural service"). While many Americans may believe that this prayer offering represents a celebration of religious pluralism, the hidden message behind this display, which is only discernible to the power elite and the most astute observer, is that members of the Establishment will continue their torrent love affair with the Muslim Brotherhood. The first installment of this series established the Muslim Brotherhood as a dangerous organization that is partially responsible for spawning al Qaeda. Furthermore, the Brotherhood has a long running, symbiotic relationship with the power elite and the darker factions of the United States government and the intelligence community.

ISNA's connection to the Muslim Brotherhood was revealed during the 2007 Holy Land Foundation (HLF) trial. Before being shut down by the United States government, the HLF was the largest Islamic charity in America. In 2001, evidence began to surface that HLF was a fundraising entity for Hamas, a Muslim Brotherhood offshoot. One of HLF's founders, Mousa Mohammed Abu Marzook, was even a Hamas political leader. This lead to the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Asset Control classifying HLF as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist ("Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons"). During the HLF trial, ISNA was named as an unindicted co-conspirator that was "intimately connected with the HLF and its assigned task of providing financial support to Hamas" (Gerstein, "U.S.: Facts Tie Muslim Groups To Hamas Front Case"). The prosecution also introduced several exhibits into evidence that established ISNA's "intimate relationship" with the Muslim Brotherhood (ibid). In a 1991 internal document written by Mohamed Akram for the Shura Council of the Muslim Brotherhood, HLF appears on a list of Brotherhood "friends" (Akram).

The Muslim Brotherhood is anything but Muslim. The party, which is considered the world's largest and oldest Islamist group, is actually a cult of neo-Gnostic immanentists. The Brotherhood re-conceptualizes the concept of jihad, which actually connotes a personal struggle, as an object of immanent experience. Thus, the spiritual conflict of orthodox Islam is transplanted within the ontological plane of the physical universe. Such an ontological transplantation is a defining feature of all sociopolitical Utopianism, as is evidenced by the myriad of earthly paradises envisioned by revolutionaries throughout history. While the concept of a worldly Heaven circulated under numerous appellations, it was always portrayed as a future that would be instantiated through the efforts of man himself. Historically, such immanentist crusades have resulted in wars, terrorism, and genocide. For instance, the immanentist crusade of Hitlerian fascism attempted to establish a Third Reich through eugenical regimentation. Their ideological kissing cousins, the communists, sought to establish the worker's paradise through the bloody revolution of Marxist dialectic. Neoconservatives, which are the progenies of Trotskyism, have attempted to establish a Pax Americana through the violent imperialism of the so-called "global democratic revolution." In the case of immanentist Muslims, factions like the Sufi Sunnis and Ismaili Shiites wage a jihad within the ontological confines of the visible world in hopes of achieving a universal submission to their perverted version of Islam. Some immanentist Muslims even believe in an immanent parousia, as is evidenced by the disturbing messianic claims of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Given its neo-Gnostic eschatology, the Muslim Brotherhood is merely another incarnation of the immanentist crusade.

The 1991 internal document written by Mohamed Akram for the Shura Council of the Muslim Brotherhood demonstrates the organization's immanentist interpretation of jihad. Entitled "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America," the document states that the Brotherhood's activities in the United States represent "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" (Akram). The Muslim Brotherhood is deadly serious about their neo-Gnostic crusade. In "Ikhwan in America," a document over the Muslim Brotherhood that was released during the HLF trial, Brotherhood members are alleged to have travelled to camps where they engaged in weapons training, which the Brotherhood euphemistically refers to as "Special Work" ("Ikhwan in America"). The document also describes a Brotherhood method known as "Securing the Group," which amounts to little more than counterintelligence operations against the U.S. government (ibid).

The inauguration will not be the first time that Mattson has had an audience with the democratic wing of the Establishment. The ISNA president also spoke during the Interfaith Gathering at the 2008 Democratic National Convention ("Democratic Convention To Highlight Diverse Community of Faith Leaders Working Toward Common Good"). Before the new administration, the Bush White House also had contact with the Brotherhood and its allies. What happened to Obama's promise of change? When it comes to maintaining contact with America's enemies, it seems that Obama's pledge is null and void.
The U.S.-Muslim Engagement Project and the Muslim Brotherhood

Mattson is also a member of the U.S.-Muslim Engagement Project's Leadership Group ("U.S-Muslim Engagement Project: Leadership Group On U.S. Muslim Engagement"). While this organization claims to be creating and advocating a bipartisan strategy of improving relations between the U.S. and Muslim world, the real goal seems to be legitimizing the Muslim Brotherhood and other organizations involved in the neo-Gnostic "grand Jihad." In a document entitled "Changing Course: A New Direction for U.S. Relations with the Muslim World," the U.S.-Muslim Engagement Project promotes the U.S. government forging official ties with the Brotherhood. The document states:

The U.S. must also consider when and how to talk with political movements that have substantial public support and have renounced violence, but are outlawed or restricted by authoritarian governments allied to the U.S. The Muslim Brotherhood parties in Egypt and Jordan are arguably in this category. ("Changing Course: A New Direction for U.S. Relations with the Muslim World")

In order to convince the U.S. government to establish formal channels with the Brotherhood, the party's image must be cleaned up considerably. The U.S.-Muslim Engagement Project is not ignorant of this fact. "Changing Course" presents the Brotherhood as an organization that has abandoned violence and is pursuing more peaceful forms of political expression. The document elaborates:

After a period of violent opposition to the Egyptian government, the Brotherhood has moderated some of its goals and strategies as its candidates have been able to participate, tacitly in parliamentary elections. Other independent Islamist political parties have also begun to organize and compete, but the government continues to limit electoral competition. Given this context, the primary institution goal for the U.S. in Egypt should be to create opportunities for political participation and good governance at the local and national level. (ibid)

"Changing Course" also suggests that the United States' hesitance to fully engage in diplomacy with the Brotherhood bespeaks a frivolity that pervades America's attitude towards the liberalization of Islamic nations:

The U.S. has also sent mixed signals about its willingness to work with nonviolent Islamist parties, notably the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Jordan. This inconsistency reflects a belief shared among many policy makers that there are significant trade-offs between U.S. security interests and our commitment to political reform. Though understandable, these U.S. responses to militants and nonviolent Islamist parties have confirmed the view of many Muslim citizens and mainstream reformers that the U.S. is not serious about political liberalization in Muslim countries. (ibid)

Following these prescriptions would require the United States to abandon sound national security precautions. But placing Americans at risk does not seem to concern the U.S.-Muslim Engagement Project.
Enter Dennis Ross and the Neocons

The U.S.-Muslim Engagement Project is in a position to influence Obama. Dennis Ross, the former Middle East peace envoy under George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton, provides the conduit. Ross is a member of the Leadership Group of the U.S.-Muslim Engagement Project ("U.S.-Muslim Engagement Project: Leadership Group On U.S. Muslim Engagement"). According to an Associated Press report, incoming secretary of state Hilary Clinton will most likely appoint Ross as a special advisor for the Middle East and Iran ("Incoming secretary of state Clinton to name Dennis Ross as top advisor on Mideast, Iran"). If Ross takes the job, he will be in a position to foster closer ties between the U.S. government and the Muslim Brotherhood. The already existing connection between the Brotherhood and the darker factions of our government and intelligence community may become an official and formal relationship that is no longer frowned upon.

If this unholy alliance gains legitimacy, the Muslim Brotherhood may become a weapon for those hawks and neoconservatives that survived the purge that accompanied the election of Obama. Ross is a neoconservative. Two documents confirm this contention. In the first document, entitled "Statement on Post-War Iraq," Ross joined with other neoconservatives in support of military intervention in Iraq ("Statement on Post-War Iraq"). In the second document, entitled "Second Statement on Post-War Iraq," Ross and his fellow neoconservatives supported then British Prime Minister Tony Blair's call for a closer partnership between America and Europe ("Second Statement on Post-War Iraq"). Both documents are part of the Project for the New American Century, a neoconservative plan, and Ross is a signatory on both.

The first installment of this series established that the election of Obama represented a major power shift in Washington away from the neoconservative faction of the power elite towards the Trilateral clique. This shift was accompanied by a dramatic decrease in the likelihood of an invasion of Iran because the trilateralists favor recruiting Iran as an asset of the American Empire. Neoconservative operatives in the new administration such as Ross, however, may be able to revive neoconservative plans to invade Iran.

Ross has even helped prepare a document that proposes invasion as a viable option to dealing with Iran's attempts to procure nuclear weapons. Entitled "Meeting the Challenge: U.S. Policy Toward Iranian Nuclear Development," the document is the product of a bipartisan policy group and names Ross as a contributor ("Meeting the Challenge: U.S. Policy Toward Iranian Nuclear Development"). "Meeting the Challenge" states that there is a "military component" to "deterrence and containment" (ibid). The report suggests that the U.S. government "consider a declaration of automaticity" (ibid). This declaration would state: "In the event Iran or any suspect proxy utilizes nuclear weapons, Iran will be hit with a devastating retaliatory strike" (ibid). A "devastating retaliatory strike" may even employ nuclear weapons. The report states:

A nuclear deterrent strategy would require moving to a declared U.S. stance threatening the potential use of nuclear weapons should Iran ever use a nuclear weapon or allow its proxies to do so. (ibid)

The report goes on to reiterate this "nuclear deterrent strategy" theme:

The U.S. Administration may need to announce that it reserves the right to respond to any attack against itself or its allies with overwhelming force and, perhaps, nuclear weapons. (ibid)

America must be ready to make good on its threats and "must begin to prepare for such a response" (ibid). This means that the U.S. must "construct alliances needed to station U.S. forces in position to confront Iran" (ibid). Gulf Cooperation Council states such as Bahrain, Qatar, UAE, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Oman would be called upon to U.S. military forces to use key military facilities that America has access to under defense pacts formed after the 1991 Gulf War (ibid). But the U.S. must also seek "enhanced access to military facilities in countries East, West and North of Iran" (ibid). Overtures must be made toward states such as Georgia, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Turkey, and Pakistan in order "to gain their approval to host the U.S. forces and support the staff needed for military action" (ibid).

If the neoconservatives are able to sway the new president, invasion may be back on the table as a viable option. In such an event, the government may look to the Muslim Brotherhood to use its considerable influence and political clout in the Middle East to help build the alliance needed to make an invasion successful. The United States might have to use the religious differences between the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran. The Brotherhood is a Sunni organization while Shia Islam is the dominant religion of Iran. These differences could possibly motivate the Brotherhood to work towards a consensus among other Arab states concerning an invasion of Iran.

But the task may not be as easy as it sounds. In its bid to become a regional superpower, Iran has begun working past its religious differences with the Brotherhood in order to forge significant ties with the highly influential political movement. In 1992, Iran and Lebanese proxy, Hezbollah, began building the bridge by giving sanctuary to 415 leaders of Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood's offshoot in the Palestinian Gaza Strip (Baer 172-173). Iran has also forged considerable ties with the Islamic Action Front, the Muslim Brotherhood's branch in Jordan (178). Whatever the outcome of such efforts, one thing is apparent: the government, acting on behalf of various factions of the power elite, is now courting America's enemies. Such treason is intolerable, but will remain a permanent fixture of the Establishment that currently dominates the American political landscape. Only a restoration of the Constitution will change this sorry state of affairs.

Barack Obama and the Muslim Brotherhood

Expediting the Grand Jihad: Barack Obama and the Muslim Brotherhood

by Paul & Phillip D. Collins,
Jan. 11, 2008

As these authors write these words, Israel is conducting a major ground assault in the Gaza Strip. Israeli ground troops and heavy armor have moved deep into the Gaza Strip ("Israeli forces split Gaza in two"). According to the BBC, the move has, in effect, cut the territory in two (ibid). This ground assault followed hot on the heels of Operation Cast Lead, a December 27-28 series of Israeli airstrikes conducted in Gaza in response to Hamas' refusal to renew the truce brokered by Egypt in the summer of 2008


(Khalil, "The already-strained Hamas-Egypt relationship sours"). Hamas had been launching rocket attacks into Israel since December 24, when no less than 70 rockets hit the small Jewish state, and Israel decided to strike back ("Israeli jets hit Hamas target, killing 1").

Doubtless, the conflict between Israel and Hamas is one of the many issues that Obama will have to address when he enters the Oval Office. Is the President-elect sincere in his opposition to the terrorists responsible for the current Middle East crisis? Obama has repeatedly condemned Hamas, calling the group a terrorist organization (Oinounou, "A Hamas problem for Obama?") The President-elect even went as far as to condemn former President Jimmy Carter for meeting with Hamas (ibid). But the words of Ahmed Yousef, a top Hamas
political advisor, during a WABC interview, seem to suggest that Obama's opposition to Hamas may be a mere public relations ploy. During the interview, Yousef stated:

"We don't mind-actually we like Mr. Obama. We hope he will (win) the election and I do believe he is like John Kennedy, great man with great principle, and he has a vision to change America to make it in a position to lead the world community but not with domination and arrogance." (Ibid)

Why would Hamas support an Obama presidency? The answer may lie in a group known as the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Muslim Brotherhood



Hassan al-Banna

According to former CIA operative Robert Baer, Hamas was an offshoot of the Egyptian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood (172). Founded in 1928 by an Egyptian schoolteacher named Hassan al-Banna with the expressed purpose of purifying Islam, the Muslim Brotherhood is anything but a benign Muslim organization (172).

According to Baer, the Brotherhood "is another of the cauldrons from which al Qaeda emerged" (172). Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the architect of the September 11 attacks, joined the Muslim Brotherhood at the age of sixteen and attended the Brotherhood's desert youth camps (Mintz and Farah, "In Search of Friends Among Foes"). Ayman Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden's deputy, was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood's Egyptian branch (ibid). According to Seymour Hersh, the Brotherhood may have even been involved in the September 11 attacks. Hersh states: "Many of the September 11th hijackers had operated out of cells in
Aachen and Hamburg, where Al Qaeda was working with the Brotherhood" ("The Syrian Bet"). The Brotherhood's hatred of the United States was clearly expressed in a 1991 internal memorandum written by Mohamed Akram for the Shura Council of the Muslim Brotherhood. Entitled "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America," the document states that the Brotherhood's activities in the United States represent:

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. (Akram)

Akram's memorandum failed to mention the powerful, white, English-speaking individuals that have given assistance to the Brotherhood's "grand Jihad." The Muslim Brotherhood is not only a radical and dangerous party; it is intimately tied to the power elite. This connection probably had its start prior to World War Two when British travel writer and intelligence agent Freya Stark forged an alliance between the Brotherhood and British intelligence (Dorril 622). Brotherhood collaboration with Western intelligence continued with an alliance between the Brotherhood and the CIA that began around 1955. According to former CIA agent Miles
Copeland, it was around this time that America began looking for the Muslim equivalent of Billy Graham, hoping to use such a charismatic individual to influence the Arab world. When this failed, the Agency began forging ties with the Muslim Brotherhood (Aburish 60-61).

The connection between the Brotherhood and the power elite is perfectly illustrated by the party's audience with the Bush Administration. On June 20, 2007, the Bureau of Intelligence and Research at the State Department hosted a meeting with other intelligence community representatives to discuss the opening of "more formal channels" to the Muslim Brotherhood (Lake, "Bush Weighs Reaching Out to 'Brothers'"). One of the Brotherhood supporters at the June 20 meeting was Robert Leiken (ibid). Robert Leiken, a scholar at the Nixon Center, was commissioned by the National Intelligence Council to put together a paper on the history
of the Muslim Brotherhood earlier in 2007 (ibid). According to administration officials, Leiken's paper to the National Intelligence Council drew the attention of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and senior members of the National Security Council (ibid). George W. Bush even encouraged Tariq al-Hashemi, the leader of the Iraq branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, to form an alliance to oppose Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki (Slavin,

"Iraqi VP says Bush wants coalition to counter al-Sadr").

After his election victory, Barack Obama promised that change was on the way. Will that change include an end to Washington's contact with the Muslim Brotherhood? Unfortunately, there is evidence that the Brotherhood will maintain its audience with Washington circles during the Obama reign.

The Democrats' Answer to Grover Norquist


Mazen Asbahi

When the Obama campaign needed an individual to reach out to the Muslim community, it turned to Chicago lawyer Mazen Asbahi for help (Simpson and Chozick, "Obama's Muslim-Outreach Adviser Resigns"). But Asbahi's connections to the Muslim Brotherhood did more to raise questions than it did to bridge gaps. By August of 2008, Asbahi had resigned from his position as volunteer coordinator for Muslim American affairs for the Obama campaign (ibid).

Asbahi was the democrats' equivalent of GOP/Bush political operative Grover Norquist, meant to court Muslim American voters. And like Norquist, Asbahi had several radical associations that raised eyebrows and set off alarm bells. Eight years before taking up the Obama cause, Asbahi served on the Board of the Allied Asset Advisors (Spencer, "Obama's Muslim Outreach Problem"). Allied Asset Advisors is a subsidiary of the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) (ibid). According to the 1991 internal memorandum authored by Akram for the Muslim Brotherhood, NAIT is part of the network conducting the Brotherhood's "grand jihad" ("An
Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America"). NAIT is also connected to the Holy Land Foundation (HLF), an organization believed to be involved in the financing of Muslim Brotherhood offshoot Hamas (Josh Gerstein, "US: Facts Tie Muslim Groups To Hamas Front Case").

According to the prosecutors in the HLF case, NAIT has an "intimate relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood" (ibid).

When the Wall Street Journal and other media organs began raising questions, Asbahi quickly went to work on damage control. The Chicago lawyer claimed he resigned from Allied Asset Advisors' board immediately after learning about fellow board member Jamal Said's connection to Hamas (Simpson and Chozick, "Obama's Muslim-Outreach Adviser Resigns"). However, Asbahi later admitted that his resignation from the Obama
campaign was purely a "strategic decision," suggesting that the explanation for his involvement in the Allied Asset Advisors was contrived (Spencer, "Obama's Muslim Outreach Problem"). Asbahi's alibi further disintegrated on September 15, 2008 when the former Muslim liaison met with members of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) (ibid). CAIR's parent organization, the Islamic Association for Palestine, is named in Akram's Muslim Brotherhood memorandum as part of the Brotherhood's "grand jihad" network (ibid). Asbahi's resignation did not end the Obama campaign's love affair with the Muslim Brotherhood. Also present at the September 15, 2008 meeting was Asbahi's replacement as the Obama campaign's Muslim
liaison, Minha Husaini (ibid).

Rezko, Othman, and Al Taqwa Antoin "Tony" Rezko

Obama may also connect to the Muslim Brotherhood through his old Chicago mob friends. Antoin "Tony" Rezko, a Syrian-American political fundraiser and Chicago real estate developer provides the bridge. On June 4, 2008, Rezko was found guilty in federal court on 16 corruption charges ("Rezko begins serving time immediately"). It seems that when Rezko wasn't busy helping his friends in the Illinois political scene, such as scandal-embroiled Governor Rod Blagojevich and Obama, he was knee-deep in a kickback scheme that involved taking bribes from companies that desired state contracts (ibid).

Obama owes a lot to his good friend Tony. Rezko began his career as Obama's political godfather in 1995, when two of his food companies contributed $2,000 to Obama's campaign (Novak, "Obama and his Rezko ties"). It was the beginning of a beautiful political friendship. Rezko helped bankroll Obama in five election runs (Fusco, et al., "Obama explains Rezko relationship to Sun-Times"). After some ducking and weaving,

Obama admitted to receiving $250,000 from Rezko's fundraising efforts (ibid). According to the Chicago Sun-Times, this amount was "about $100,000 more than had previously been disclosed and about five times more than Obama conveyed during a November 2006 question-and-answer exchange with the Sun-Times" (ibid). Standing behind Rezko is Talat Othman, a leader in the American Muslim community in Illinois and an extremely successful Arab American businessman. It was Othman who introduced Rezko to former Illinois
governor Jim Edgar and it was Othman who aided Rezko in gaining access to Illinois political circles (Hanania, "Arabs in Chicago discover political clout and controversy"). Rezko was also recognized as "Entrepreneur of the Decade" by Othman's Arab-American Business and Professional Association (ibid).



Othman has a close relationship with M. Yaqub Mirza, a naturalized Pakistani businessman and physicist (Trento 336). Othman and Mirza were co-chairmen of the Islamic Society of North America 2001 Convention (336). The two were also involved in Amana Mutual Funds Trust, an Islamic mutual fund which, according to investigative journalist Joseph Trento, "specializes in investments that are consonant with Islamic beliefs" (336). Othman sits on Amana's board and Mirza served as the mutual fund's chairman (336). M. Yaqub Mirza

On March 20, 2002 a U.S. Treasury task force known as Green Quest raided 14 homes and businesses believed to be involved in terrorism financing that were affiliated with Mirza (Guidera and Simpson, "Agents Raid Properties Affiliated with Chairman of Islamic Fund"). According to Guidera and Simpson, the Green Quest investigators were "most interested in Mr. Mirza's role as an officer in the Saar Foundation, a nonprofit started in the 1970s by members of the Saudi Arabia's al-Rajihi family, which has interest in banking, construction, and real estate" (ibid). Stephen Schwartz identifies the Saar Foundation as the "keystone" to the Mirza-related network ("Wahhabis in the Old Dominion").

The hidden hand of the Muslim Brotherhood can be identified through the Saar Foundation's connection with a shell company known as Al-Taqwa (Schwartz, "Wahhabis in the Old Dominion"). The Al-Taqwa shell game was originally based in Switzerland and had as one of its leading figures a notorious Nazi disciple named Ahmed Huber (ibid). It was an extensive network that included companies based in the Bahamas, Switzerland, and Liechtenstein (Hosenball, "Attacking the Money Machine"). Al Taqwa even had a foothold in the United States until after September 11 when its assets were frozen and its operations were shut down by a U.S. presidential order ("Wahhabis in the Old Dominion"). According to a Newsweek investigation, the Al Taqwa network "was set up in the 1980s by prominent members of the Muslim Brotherhood" ("Attacking the Money Machine"). Al-Taqwa' chairman, Youssef Nada, even admitted to being a member of the Brotherhood for 50 years (ibid).

Apparently, the Green Quest raids made Othman extremely nervous. Two weeks after the raids, Othman and several other Muslim activists met with Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'Neill to protest the raids (Trento 337). Was Othman afraid that the investigation would connect him to the Muslim Brotherhood's plan for a "grand jihad"? Four individuals who were targets of the investigation were affiliated with Amana, the mutual fund where Othman serves as a trustee (337). It is also interesting to note that another Amana board member, Samir Salah, is known to have ran a Caribbean branch of the Muslim Brotherhood's Al-Taqwa network ("Wahhabis in the Old Dominion"). Talat Othman

When Obama tries to downplay his connections to Rezko, is he merely trying to conceal his poor judgement in the realm of campaign finance? The 44th President may be trying to hide a much more disturbing reality from the eyes of the public. That reality is the fact that our own government, in league with the power elite, will continue collaborating with America's enemies. The "grand Jihad" proclaimed by Akram in his 1991 memorandum does not only constitute the Muslim Brotherhood's crusade to destroy Western civilization. It also constitutes the power elites's war on the plebians.
Iran

Obama's Muslim Brotherhood connections may motivate him to go soft on Hamas when it comes time for him to deal with the current Middle East crisis. The Muslim Brotherhood is still very close to its Hamas offshoot.

If the new administration was too supportive of Israel in its efforts to end the terrorist attacks, it could potentially alienate its Muslim Brotherhood connections.Those connections may prove useful when the new administration unveils its plans for Iran.

According to investigative researcher Webster Tarpley, power in Washington has shifted away from the neocon "rogue" faction of the elite to the Trilateral faction that stands behind Obama ("US Policy Shift On

Iran-Iraq Again Shows Brzezinski Rules In Washington"). This faction seeks to redirect the American Empire's hostilities away from Iran and focus them on Russia and China (ibid). Such a plan requires that Iran be transformed into an asset, which means that Tehran's efforts to procure nuclear weapons may even be tolerated, so long as Iran is willing to act as a nuclear proxy of the American Empire (ibid). Iran has long desired to revive the Persian Empire, and Trilateralists such as Carter's former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski believe that they can insure that a revived Persian Empire is merely an extension of the American Empire.

For Obama, diplomacy really means imperial recruitment. The Muslim Brotherhood could provide the bridge in the recruitment process. According to Robert Baer, Iran has substantial ties with Jordan's branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, known as the Islamic Action Front (178). Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood offshoot currently fighting with Israel, is also extremely close to Iran. Iran first began establishing contact with Hamas in 1992, when Israel expelled 415 members of Hamas's leadership as punishment for their involvement in the first intifada, which was a Palestinian uprising against Israeli rule (172). When the exiled leaders crossed the
border into Jordan, they found Hezbollah, a Shi'a paramilitary organization that acts as Iran's Lebanese proxy, waiting for them with open arms (172). Hezbollah provided the Hamas leaders with tents, clothes, and food (172-173). A few days later, an Iranian Revolutionary Guard officer also arrived on the scene to provide assistance to the Hamas leaders (173). Without a doubt, the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran are becoming extremely close as Iran attempts to co-opt every major movement and political party in the region as part of its bid for empire.

The Obama administration may wish to use its connection to the Muslim Brotherhood as a means of establishing diplomatic channels with Iran. But that means the new President may not be as supportive of Israel in its struggle with Hamas. Obama may even pressure Israel to come to the table of diplomacy and establish yet another truce with Hamas. The 1988 Hamas Covenant, however, painfully illustrates why peace overtures on Israel's part would be an act of folly. Article seven of the covenant states:

"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." ("Hamas Covenant 1988")

Article 28 reiterates the document's anti-Jewish theme when it states: "Israel, Judaism, and Jews challenge Islam and Muslim people. 'May the cowards never sleep.'" ("Hamas Covenant 1988"). Obviously, the idea of Israel establishing a truce with a group that adheres to such ideas is unthinkable. It would merely give Hamas an opportunity to lick its wounds and continue to prepare for the day when it hopes to finally wipe Israel from the face of the earth.

These authors believe that history will characterize the Obama administration's attempts at diplomacy with Iran as a lost opportunity. Iran has been a hotbed of radicalism ever since the 1979 Iranian Revolution.

Instead of facilitating Iran's departure from radicalism, Obama and his puppeteers will work to turn the radicals against the American Empire's competitors, such as Russia and China. A chance to move Iran in a moderate direction will slip away as Obama and his Establishment handlers try to employ the country as an asset in their fight for dominance in the New World Order. In the process, Obama will help expedite the Brotherhood's "grand Jihad."