El-Husseini’s promulgation of jihad and Islamic Jew-hatred in pursuit of the destruction of Palestinian Jewry and Israel has reverberated across the ensuing decades.


During a speech yesterday (10/20/15) Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appropriately decried the “apologetics” which have minimized the role played by ex-Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin el-Husseini (1895-1974)—founder of the modern Palestinian Muslim movement—in fomenting genocidal Islamic Jew-hatred. Netanyahu made these simple, irrefragable points,demonstrating how from the 1920s through (in particular) the World War II era,

the father of the Palestinians at that time, with no [Jewish] state and no so-called “occupation,” no territories and no settlements, already sought, through systematic incitement, to annihilate the Jews. Regrettably, Hajj Amin el-Husseini is still a venerated figure in Palestinian society, he appears in study books and is exalted as the father of the nation, and this incitement that began then, incitement to kill Jews, continues.

On June 30, 1922, a joint resolution of both Houses of Congress of the United States unanimously endorsed the “Mandate for Palestine,” confirming the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in the area of Palestine—anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. The Congressional record contains astatement of support from New York Rep. Walter Chandler which includes an observation, about “Turkish and Arab agitators . . . preaching a kind of holy war [jihad] against . . . the Jews” of Palestine. During this same era within Palestine, a strong Arab Muslim irredentist current—epitomized by Hajj Amin el-Husseini—promulgated the forcible restoration of sharia-mandated dhimm­itude for Jews via jihad. Indeed, two years before he orchestrated the murderous anti-Jewish riots of 1920, that is, in 1918, Hajj Amin el-Husseini stated plainly to a Jewish coworker (at the Jerusalem Governorate), I. A. Abbady, “This was and will remain an Arab land . . . the Zionists will be massacred to the last man. . . . Nothing but the sword will decide the future of this country.”

Despite his role in fomenting the1920 pogroms against Palestinian Jews, el-Husseini was pardoned and subsequently appointed mufti of Jerusalem by the British high commissioner, in May 1921, a title he retained, following the Ottoman practice, for the remainder of his life. Throughout his public career, the mufti relied upon traditional Koranic anti-Jewish motifs to arouse the Arab street. For example, during the incitement which led to the 1929 Arab revolt in Palestine, he called for combating and slaughtering “the Jews.” not merely Zionists. In fact, most of the Jewish victims of the 1929 Arab revolt were Jews from the centuries-old dhimmi communities (for example, in Hebron), as opposed to recent settlers identified with the Zionist movement.

The mufti remained unrelenting in his espousal of a virulent, canonical Islamic Jew-hatred as the focal tenet of his ideology, before, during, and in the aftermath of World War II, and the creation of the State of Israel. He was also a committed supporter of global jihad movements, urging a “full struggle” against the Hindus of India (as well as the Jews of Israel) before delegates at the February 1951 World Muslim Congress: “We shall meet next with sword in hand on the soil of either Kashmir or Palestine.” Declassified intelligence documents from 1942, 1947, 1952, and 1954 confirm the mufti’s own Caliphate desires in repeated references from con­texts as diverse as Turkey, Egypt, Jerusalem, and Pakistan, and also include discus­sions of major Islamic conferences dominated by the mufti, which were attended by a broad spectrum of Muslim leaders literally representing the entire Islamic world (including Shia leaders from Iran), that is, in Karachi from February 16–19, 1952, and Jordanian-occupied Jerusalem, December 3–9, 1953.

During 1938, a booklet Muhammad Sabri edited, Islam, Judentum, Bolschewismus (Islam, Jewry, Bolshevism), was published in Berlin by Junker-Duennhaupt [Dünnhaupt]. Sabri’s booklet included Hajj Amin el-Husseini’s 1937 declaration—also deemed by some as a “fatwa” (an Islamic religious ruling)—appealing to the worldwide Muslim umma. El-Husseini’s declaration was extracted and reprinted, separately, by the Nazi regime as Islam und Judentum(Islam and Jewry), and distributed to Muslim SS units in Bosnia, Croatia, and the Soviet Union. As I detailed in a 2103 monograph, which provided, and riveted upon, the first full English translation of el-Husseini’s 1937 “religious edict” (“fatwa’) about the Jews (available here; and as a free pdf here), the former Mufti of Jerusalem exclusively invoked traditionalist Islamic themes, familiar to the Muslim masses, to incite their annihilationist Islamic Jew-hatred. Reiterating foundational Jew-hating motifs from the Koran itself, and embodied by the inflammatory words and murderous actions of Islam’s prophet Muhammad (in the “hadith” or traditions, and earliest piousMuslim biographies of Muhammad), el-Husseini’s traditional Islamic Jew-hatred has remained a staple of contemporary Palestinian Muslim religious discourse, through the present.

Although a complete understanding of el-Husseini’s 1937 arguments requires a careful reading of all the evidence adduced in my original essay, below is the crux of the analysis.

Just before his concluding admonition for a jihad to annihilate the Jewish community of historical Palestine, Hajj Amin el-Husseini recapitulates the dominant thematic narrative, woven together from a myriad of specific, canonical Islamic motifs, throughout the 1937 proclamation:

 [T]he Arabs have learned best how they really are, that is, as they [the Jews] are described in the Koran and in the sacred scriptures… The verses from the Koran and hadith prove to you that the Jews have been the bitterest enemies of Islam and continue to try to destroy it.

What can be readily gleaned from a careful, objective reading of el-Husseini’s proclamation was there were no concrete, substantive references to any non-Islamic sources of antisemitism. This absence of references contrasted starkly with the numerous and specific antisemitic motifs from Islam’s canonical texts—the Koran (consistent with its gloss in authoritative Koranic commentaries), hadith, and sira—which el-Husseini’s declaration invoked continuously, from opening to closing.

A simple enumeration conveyed el-Husseini’s extensive use of references from Islam’s canonical texts: ten explicit references to Koranic motifs (including eleven separate verses quoted directly in the proclamation), with an additional six implicit references; two explicit citations of the sira, and five implicit references; and two major, explicit citations (with quotation) of hadith, accompanied by three additional implicit references to the hadith literature. These citations are complemented by an explicit reference to the great early Muslim scholar al-Tabari (d. 923), and his monumental History.

El-Husseini’s interpretation of the eleven Koranic verses he quotes, directly, comports with their authoritative exegeses, classical, and modern. For example, concluding his litany of Koranic quotations (i.e., 2:109, 59:2, 3:99-102, 5:49, 2:143, 2:144, 4:51, 4:52, & 5:82) appropriately, with Koran 5:82, el-Husseini insists this verse “quite unmistakably characterizes the position of Islam and Judaism.” His assessment is upheld by a continuum of authoritative Koranic exegeses that span over a thousand years, till now. The classical Koranic commentaries on Koran 5:82 by Tabari, Zamakashari (d. 1143), Baydawi (d. 1316), and Ibn Kathir demonstrate a uniformity of opinion regarding the animus of the Jews toward the Muslims, which is repeatedly linked to the curse of Koran 2:61 (i.e., for killing prophets, and transgressing against the will of Allah, repeated at verses including 2:90-91, 3:112, 3:181, and 4:155).

Current Grand Imam of Cairo’s Al-Azhar University, Ahmad Al-Tayeb, is the Sunni Muslim Papal equivalent. During aninterview with Al-Tayeb, which aired on Channel 1, Egyptian TV, October 25, 2013, the Al-Azhar Grand Imam gave abrief explanation of the ongoing relevance of the Koranic verse 5:82 has been invoked—“successfully”—to inspire Muslim hatred of Jews since the advent of Islam:

 A verse in the Koran explains the Muslims’ relations with the Jews and the polytheists. The second part of the verse describes the Muslims’ relations with the Christians, and the third part of the verse explains why the Christians are the closest and most friendly to the Muslims.  This is an historical perspective, which has not changed to this day. See how we suffer today from global Zionism and Judaism, whereas our peaceful coexistence with the Christians has withstood the test of history. Since the inception of Islam 1,400 years ago, we have been suffering from Jewish and Zionist interference in Muslim affairs. This is a cause of great distress for the Muslims. The Koran said it and history has proven it: “You shall find the strongest among men in enmity to the believers to be the Jews and the polytheists.” This is the first part. The second part is: “You shall find the closest in love to the believers to be those who say: ‘We are Christians’.” The third part explains why the Christians are “the closest in love to the believers,” while the Jews and the polytheists are the exact opposite.

The verbatim canonical hadith which chronicle Muhammad’s alleged poisoning by a Khaybar Jewess (referenced here), confirm el-Husseini’s paraphrase of these accounts in his 1937 “fatwa.” Additional confirmation of el-Husseini’s overall narrative regarding Muhammad’s poisoning is provided by the sira accounts of Ibn Ishaq, and Ibn Sa’d. Ibn Ishaq’s report concludes that Muhammad ultimately died from this poisoning episode, and notes his death was considered an act of “martyrdom.” El-Husseini appositely concludes his compendious discourse on Islam’s canonical Jew-hatred with a central motif from Muslim eschatology, as recorded in the hadith—how the destruction of the Jews is requisite for ushering in the messianic times. Here are the canonical hadith el-Husseini accurately renders:

 Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, “The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. “O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.”

Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: “The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.”

Apropos of their longstanding, continuous Islamic relevance, from Muhammad’s utterance (Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 6985) to Palestinian Muslim Movement Founder & Ex-Muft of Jerusalem el-Husseini’s 1937 Fatwa on the Jews, to Hamas’ 1988 Covenant (article 7) to current PA Grand Mufti Muhammad Hussein (in 2012), to a sermon 5-days ago, Oct. 16th in Al Aqsa MosqueALL have repeated a canonical hadith/tradition—literally in this case Muhammad’s own words—that the Jews must be killed to usher in the Messianic age

Despite its minor errors, or deviations, Hajj Amin el-Husseini’s 1937 proclamation demonstrated great fidelity to the canonical Islamic narrativeregarding the Jews. Seminal Western academic studies of how the Jews are depicted in the sira, hadith, and Koran, independently validate el-Husseini’s assessment of these canonical Muslim sources. Moreover, these latter analyses have long been available to the academic community. Two prominent examplesinclude Hartwig Hirschfeld’s detailed mid-1880s analysis of the sira accounts of Muhammad’s interactions with the Jews, and Georges Vajda’s 1937 essay “Juifs et Musulmans selon Le Hadit” (“Jews and Muslims according to the Hadith”)—a magisterial seventy-page analysis, replete with 202 accompanying notes—which remains the definitive study of Jews and their relations with Muhammad and the Muslims, as depicted in the hadith.

Moshe Perlmann, an eminent scholar of Islam’s Medieval era anti-Jewish polemical literature, made this rueful summaryobservation in 1964:

 The Koran, of course became a mine of anti-Jewish passages. The hadith did not lag behind. Popular preachers used and embellished such material.

The numerous salient examples of Islam’s canonical Jew-hatred punctuating Hajj Amin el-Husseini’s 1937 declaration validated Perlmann’s concise overarching assessment of these foundational Islamic sources, and their tragic application across space and time, into the modern era.

El-Husseini’s promulgation of jihad and canonical Islamic Jew-hatred in pursuit of the destruction of Palestinian Jewry, and later, the nascent Jewish State of Israel, has reverberated across the ensuing decades. Consider two complementary fatwas, one written January 5, 1956, by then grand mufti of Egypt, Sheikh Hasan Ma’moun, and another January 9, 1956, signed by the leading members of the Fatwa Committee of Al Azhar University—Sunni Islam’s Vatican—and the major representatives of all four Sunni Islamic schools of jurisprudence. These rulings elaborated the following key initial point: that all of historical Palestine—modern Jordan, Israel, and the disputed territories of Judea and Samaria, as well as Gaza—having been conquered by jihad, was a permanent possession of the global Muslim umma (community), “fay territory”—booty or spoils—to be governed eternally by Islamic law.

 Muslims cannot conclude peace with those Jews who have usurped the ter­ritory of Palestine and attacked its people and their property in any manner which allows the Jews to continue as a state in that sacred Muslim territory.[As] Jews have taken a part of Palestine and there established their non-Islamic government and have also evacuated from that part most of its Muslim inhabitants. . . . Jihad . . . to restore the country to its people . . . is the duty of all Muslims, not just those who can undertake it. And since all Islamic countries constitute the abode of every Muslim, the Jihad is impera­tive for both the Muslims inhabiting the territory attacked, and Muslims everywhere else because even though some sections have not been attacked directly, the attack nevertheless took place on a part of the Muslim territory which is a legitimate residence for any Muslim…Everyone knows that from the early days of Islam to the present day the Jews have been plotting against Islam and Muslims and the Islamic homeland. They do not propose to be content with the attack they made on Palestine and Al Aqsa Mosque, but they plan for the possession of all Islamic territories from the Nile to the Euphrates.

Although free of eschatological references, the January 1956 Al Azhar fatwas’ language and arguments—pronounced from Sunni Islam’s most esteemed religious teaching institution—are otherwise indistinguishable from those employed just over three decades later by Hamas (in its 1988 covenant), revealing the same conjoined motiva­tions of jihad, and conspiratorial Islamic Jew-hatred.

Recent polling data indicate that these traditionalist Islamic views—espoused across a continuum of 75 years by el-Husseini, Al Azhar University, and Hamas—resonate with the Palestinian Muslim population. American pollster Stanley Greenberg performed what was described as an “intensive, face-to-face survey in Arabic of 1,010 Palestinian adults in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.” Asreported in July, 2011 these data revealed that seventy-three percent of Palestinian Muslims agreed with the dictates of the apocalyptic hadith (Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 6985; included in both el-Husseini’s 1937 declaration, and the 1988 Hamas Covenant) calling for the annihilation of the Jews, to bring on the messianic age. Eighty percent supported the destruction of Israel by jihad, and the need to recruit the entire global Muslim community, or “umma” in this quintessential Islamic cause.

Over four decades ago Bat Ye’or published a remarkably insightful analysis of contemporary Islamic Jew-hatred, in particular, its annihilationist predilection. She hypothesized that the rise of Jewish nationalism—Zionism—posed a predictable, if completely unacceptable challenge to the Islamic order—jihad-imposed chronic dhimmitude for Jews—of apocalyptic magnitude.

 The pejorative characteristics of Jews as they are described in Muslim religious texts are applied to modern Jews. Anti-Judaism and anti-Zionism are equivalent—due to the inferior status of Jews in Islam, and because divine will dooms Jews to wandering and misery, the Jewish state appears to Muslims as an unbearable affront and a sin against Allah. Therefore it must be destroyed by Jihad. Here the Pan-Arab and anti-Western theses that consider Israel as an advanced instrument of the West in the Islamic world, come to reinforce religious anti-Judaism.

Bat Ye’or’s 1974 observations were confirmed by the first thorough textual analysis of the entirely Islamic sources utilized in a critically important 1937 pronouncement by Hajj Amin el-Husseini. One can only speculate as to why such an investigation was not conducted decades earlier.





An Italian company called “Hacking Team” has been caught selling surveillance systems to governments including cyber weapons to Sudan.


An Italian company called “Hacking Team” has been caught selling surveillance systems to governments including cyber weapons to Sudan.  Information was stolen from the company, Hacking Team, by hackers.  The firm is Milan based and is listed on Reporters Without Border’s Enemies on the Internet list for its alleged sale of cyber tools to repressive regimes. They have also been stonewalling an investigation from the UN. The firm rejects the statements and says that it has never done business in Sudan. One of the leaked spreadsheets however, marks Russia and Sudan as “not officially” supported.

A July 2012 record shows a 480,000 euro invoice for selling surveillance software to Sudan. The UN arms embargo on Sudan bans the export of “arms and related material” to the country. In 2014, Citizen Lab, identified almost 21 countries that were potential clients of Hacking Team, the list included Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Sudan, Russia, and UAE.

The attack on Hacking Team was carried out by an unknown hackers, who released the 400GB of documents on file sharing website, defaced the company’s twitter account, and replaced the company’s logo to read “Hacked Team.” In the US, agencies using Hacking Team’s tools include the FBI, the DEA, and the Department of Defense.

Earlier in the year, the Obama administration announced the decision to loosen certain sanctions on Sudan’s government. The decision drew criticism, with many stating that the newly allowed sale of communications hardware and software would allow Sudan to gain surveillance on citizens. Following the decision, the State Department released a statement saying that they “believed the tools [would] promote freedom of speech, help Sudanese communicate more easily with each other, and allow them to be more connected digitally to the global community.”

Back in February, Sudanese Foreign Minister, Ali Karti, traveled to the US on unofficial business while attending events in Washington. Around the same time, Ibrahim Ghandour also traveled stateside to meet with the US special envoy to Sudan. After noting that Karti traveled to Charlotte, it was assumed that he had gained a multi entry visa and had a broad range to enter the US. That is significant because before Karti was promoted to Prime Minister, he lead the Popular Defense Force, Sudan’s military which directed the genocides in Darfur, Blue Nile, and Nuba Mountains.  The Obama administration has softened toward Sudanese government since lawyer Ben Fisher, who is a campaign donor to both President Obama and Hilary Clinton, was hired to advise the Sudanese government. Many objected to the visits to the United States, stating that Karti’s presence here did not make sense as it was a reward and not a punishment for the ongoing violence.




Ahmed Mohamed got a photo-op with his genocidal rock star, Omar al Bashir yesterday.  Bashir is known for threatening to crush black Africans like “insects” in South Sudan if they don’t submit to Islam, genocide in Darfur and the Nuba Mountains, crimes against humanity, and as a leading state sponsor of terror rivaled only by …


Ahmed Mohamed got a photo-op with his genocidal rock star, Omar al Bashir yesterday.  Bashir is known for threatening to crush black Africans like “insects” in South Sudan if they don’t submit to Islam, genocide in Darfur and the Nuba Mountains, crimes against humanity, and as a leading state sponsor of terror rivaled only by his most important ally, Iran.

Sudan’s main industries are copying Chinese and Iranian weapons to fuel conflicts in places like C.A.R., the Sinai Peninsula, and Nigeria as well as training thousands of terrorists every year.  Basically, Al Qaeda and Hezbollah had a baby together and his name is Omar Bashir.  If Clock Boy didn’t know how to make a bomb, a couple days with uncle Omar will make him an expert.


For those who don’t understand how Sudanese politics function, watch Seth Rogen and James Franco in The Interview.  Clock Boy’s father is a prop.  There is no real democracy in Sudan and he is not Bashir’s political opponent. Because he makes such appearances for western dupes, he gets to live in a free country in the West where he attempts to give political legitimacy to the Hitler of our generation, Omar Bashir.

“We say that it has turned into a disease, a disease for us and for the South Sudanese citizens. The main goal should be liberation from these insects and to get rid of them once and for all, God willing.” – Omar Bashir 2012

Clock Boy is getting a lot of press.  Bashir should get as much and more for the death and suffering he commands in Blue Nile,Nuba Mountains, Darfour, and the Central African Republic.  Count the Clock Boy stories that miss the fact that the U.S. has refused to meaningfully challenge Sudan on any of these issue and has instead hosted their top diplomats and eased sanctions to help them crush political dissent.




With the frenzy following his son Ahmed’s bringing a suspicious-looking modified clock to high school, Texas-based Islamic political activist Mohammed Elhassan Mohammed finally succeeded in creating something he’s sought for a long time: a national media event that can be used to shine the light on alleged crimes of the United States, from accusations of …


With the frenzy following his son Ahmed’s bringing a suspicious-looking modified clock to high school, Texas-based Islamic political activist Mohammed Elhassan Mohammed finally succeeded in creating something he’s sought for a long time: a national media event that can be used to shine the light on alleged crimes of the United States, from accusations of “Islamophobia” in Irving, Texas, to American complicity in the 9/11 attacks.

Al Qaeda’s attack on September 11, 2001 is recurring topic of discussion on Mohammed’s own Arabic-language National Reform Party Facebook page where—beside photos of his family enjoying their newfound fame—are posted articles, photos and videos featuring both implicit, and explicit claims that the 9/11 attacks were a US-sponsored hoax to launch a war against Islam and Muslims.

While still residing in his Dallas suburb, Mohammed has, nonetheless, repeatedly run for president of Sudan as a candidate identified with his own very small political party, “al-Islah al-Watani,” or National Reform. Until recently, the National Reform Facebook page displayed the same profile picture Mohammed Elhassan Mohammed’s used for his personal Facebook profile picture. Mohammed’s National Reform Party page continues to post the same pictures, videos and articles about Ahmed Mohammed, and the Clock saga, as does Mohammed ElHassan on his personal page.

On September 12th, 2015, his National Reform page shared a photo that featured the smoking World Trade Center towers above text in Arabic describing the events of September 11th as “an American media creation” and calling them, “terrorism American style.” It also blames the U.S. for the events of the Arab Spring, calling it a U.S. plan to “foment reprehensible chaos.”

Facebook Post 1

The text describes the attack on 9/11 as a “miracle” for the United States, because it provided justification for an attack on, “first an Islamic  government, while the second was a mighty Arab state in the Middle East.” The reference is clearly to the U.S. attack on Afghanistan (under the   Taliban) and Iraq.

While the text identified the author as one Asad al-Barari, it’s not immediately clearly why Mohammed Elhassan and his National Reform Party chose to share this image and the post on September 12th, but the posting contains no text attempting to rebut or criticize the post for its statements about America.

Nor is this the only questionable post. As recently as September 28th, the National Reform Party page shared an English language video, with Arabic subtitles, which presents conspiracy theory arguments about the September 2001 attack.


The fifteen-minute video—first posted in September 2013—claims to prove explosives were used in bringing down the World Trade Center, attacks Penn & Teller’s 2005 debunking of 9/11 ‘Truther’ conspiracy theories and, finally, blames “US military officials, television executives and some Israeli and British government officials” for the attacks.

Below is the full translation of the September 12, 2015 post from Facebook:

The Events of September 11th:

There is a saying, “The hater writes them; the fool publishes them; and the idiot believes them.” This applies to the rumors that people both spread and believe; it describes the creation of rumors in all their stages.

Yesterday [Friday, September 11, 2015] was the anniversary observed in the United States of America on what is called “September 11th.” This was the miracle that came to America in the form of terrorism—which offered her the invasion of Islamic countries (headed by Afghanistan and Iraq), which she saw as a great threat—on a golden plate. The first had an Islamic government, while the second was a mighty Arab state in the Middle East.

Without any doubt, the events of September 11th claimed thousands of innocent lives, and violated the basic belief of religions, that civilians should not be harmed in any war. Yet, for its sake, millions of blameless souls have perished—though one state has been spared. One state that exists only on the map.

The events of the Arab Spring, or the despicable chaos that is its true name, were a part of this “September [11th] Strategy,” that the U.S. pursued in sending her armies into Afghanistan and Iraq. The American army destroyed their regular armies, but found that it could not destroy their irregular forces. This is what drove her to foment that reprehensible chaos—an ancient plan to destroy states completely—which was carried out to the letter in all the lands of the Arab Spring. The result was not only thousands of refugees and deaths in every part of the world, but also the huge humiliations that have become the fundamental malaise of the Arabs in everything they do.

Thus [the events of September 11th] are but an American media creation, no matter how some may try to label them as “Islamic terrorism.” They were indeed terrorism, but terrorism American style—terrorism that sweeps away and annihilates whole countries, and not those few buildings in the midst of New York City.

Asad al-Barari




Over the national holiday weekend of Labor Day, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) is assembling for its 52nd Annual Convention from 4-7 September 2015 at the Donald E. Stephens Convention Center in Rosemont, Illinois. The Muslim Brotherhood convention’s theme is “Stories of Resilience: Strengthening the American Muslim Narrative.” Per the program and screenshot …


Over the national holiday weekend of Labor Day, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) is assembling for its 52nd Annual Convention from 4-7 September 2015 at the Donald E. Stephens Convention Center in Rosemont, Illinois. The Muslim Brotherhood convention’s theme is “Stories of Resilience: Strengthening the American Muslim Narrative.” Per the programand screenshot below from the ISNA website, United States Representative Keith Ellison (Democrat, 5th District, MN) is slated to speak at this key gathering of Muslim Brotherhood affiliates, front groups, and leadership on Saturday, 5 September 2015. His topic, “Exploring the Parallels of Islam and the America’s Labor Movement,” offers a glimpse of the U.S. Brotherhood strategy to co-opt oppression and victimization narratives of the civil rights movement and working class in America. Of note, Mr. Ellison has received at least $136,092 in financing from Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated organizations since April 2006 and recently participated in June 2014 as a keynote speaker at the secretive inaugural banquet for the U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO), the first political activist group in this country to be openly associated with the jihadist Muslim Brotherhood.





While journalists are openly mocking those who warn of No-Go Zones operating in Europe, the French military is drawing up urban counter-insurgency plans.


In February of this year the Mayor of France Anne Hidalgo announced that the “City of Lights” would sue the right-leaning cable news channel Fox News for its depiction of so-called “No-Go Zones” in the French capital. That move came after a firestorm of controversy broke out over Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal invoking the term during a discussion of Islamic terrorism and related threats facing Europe at the Henry Jackson Society, a British think tank. Numerous liberal media outlets attempt to portray the existence of such zones, as false, and those who raised concerns about them, like Governor Jindal, as scare-mongers or Islamophobic.

Now, it appears, it is not Paris, but Governor Jindal, who may be owed an apology.

According to a story appearing in the British Telegraph, and Daily Mail, a French intelligence source warns that French security forces are preparing contingency plans for the “reappropriation of national territory”, meaning using force to reestablish control over largely urban areas dominated by predominately Muslim immigrants, some of them heavily armed with weapons flowing in from the Balkans and Libya:

There are a lot of alienated and angry fourth-generation immigrant kids in the suburbs and the prospect of radicalisation is increasingly likely,” the source said.

“The idea that attacks like the one on the train are carried out by individuals acting on their own is not credible. We’re dealing with highly-organised networks of militant Islamists embarked on a campaign of violence and determined to intensify it.”

Kalashnikov automatic rifles — used by the train gunman and Islamist terrorists who killed 17 people in Paris in January — and anti-tank missiles are now obtainable in France. Many were smuggled in from the former Yugoslavia after the Balkan wars in the 1990s. More weapons have come in from Libya, the sources said, adding that organised crime and terrorist groups were working together to procure them.

French intelligence officials go on to say that surveillance capabilities have been stretched to the breaking point and named several cases where only good fortune prevented a large scale casualty attack, and warn that a “French 9/11” may be on the horizon.

Meanwhile, Spanish officials warn that as many as 800 jihadists may be entering Europe disguised among the flow of thousands of illegal migrants streaming across the Mediterranean from Libya, or across Eastern European borders.

Similar sentiments have been expressed in the United States by FBI Director James Comey, who warned of “thousands” of potential Islamic State supporters operating in the United States, overwhelming U.S. law enforcement analysts. The FBI and counterterror officials have likewise warned Congress they have no way to vet the over 2,000 refugees proposed for admission to the United States from Syria.

There is a fundamental disconnect between the seriousness of the threat, and the way it has been addressed by much of the elite media. So while journalists are openly mocking those who warn of No-Go Zones operating in Europe, the French military is drawing up urban counter-insurgency plans. Barrels of ink have been expended discussing the misleadingly described “lone wolves”, treating the terror threat as one posed by unidentifiable social media-obsessed losers; meanwhile French intelligence officials cut to the heart of the matter, the threat is of “highly-organised networks of militant Islamists.”  Yet when offered evidence of such networks behind recent U.S. terror threats, the U.S. press has largely chosen to ignore them.

While France is both geographically closer, and further advanced in its prognosis, the threat to the U.S. is the same. Unless we wish to prepare our own “reappropriation of national territory” plans in coming decades, we should begin to take this threat far more seriously.




Media is reporting that Amnesty International’s Director of Faith and Human Rights  Yasmin Hussein is facing public scrutiny for close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood: A senior employee of Amnesty International has undeclared private links to men alleged to be key players in a secretive network of global Islamists, The Times can reveal. The charity …


Media is reporting that Amnesty International’s Director of Faith and Human Rights  Yasmin Hussein is facing public scrutiny for close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood:

A senior employee of Amnesty International has undeclared private links to men alleged to be key players in a secretive network of global Islamists, The Times can reveal. The charity was unaware that the husband of its director of faith and human rights featured in documents released after a criminal trial at which connections were revealed between British supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood and Arab Islamists accused of plotting to overthrow a Gulf state.

Hussein’s husband Wael Musabbeh’s name appeared among documents submitted during the 2013 U.A.E. trial against suspect Muslim Brotherhood conspirators reportedly engaged in fomenting revolution against the Emirates. Those arrests would kick off a series of confrontations between the U.A.E. and Egypt on the one hand, and Qatar, which backs the Muslim Brotherhood on the other. Subsequently, the U.A.E designated the Brotherhood, and a host of its international affiliates, including those in the United States, as terrorist organizations. Amnesty International weighed in against the U.A.E, repeatedly condemning it for its prosecution of Muslim Brotherhood-linked figures. Amnesty now claims it was unaware Hussein’s husband had a tie to the case because it didn’t know the two were married.  Musabbeh is the director of the Human Relief Foundation (HRF), a UK-based charity and member of the Hamas finance network known as the Union of the Good. Steve Merly in a NEFA Foundation report indicated how HRF had multiple donor organizations linked to the Muslim Brotherhood in the U.S., Ireland, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Yemen.

But Amnesty ought to have known that Hussein was formerly employed with Islamic Relief Worldwide (IRW), itself an Islamic charity with known ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. As the Center for Security Policy has previously reported:

In 1999, the IRW accepted a $50,000 check from Osama Bin Laden. In 2006, Israel arrested its project coordinator in its Gaza office, Iyaz Ali, for funneling money to Hamas. In November 2012, the British Bank UBS closed the IRW’s account and blocked its customers from donating to the charity. In June 2014, Israel officially declared the organization to beillegal and banned it from operating in Israel and the Palestinian territories due to its financing of Hamas. In November 2014, the United Arab Emirates declared the IRW to be a terrorist group.

Amnesty International’s slant towards Pro-Muslim Brotherhood, Pro-Hamas, and even pro-Taliban positions has become increasingly apparent over the years. If the organization hopes to have any chance of restoring credibility it will need to take drastic action to terminate any employees found to be close to the Muslim Brotherhood, and to conduct an audit and review of all of the materials which they wrote or oversaw during their tenure for evidence of bias.

But the organization’s track record of resistance to outside scrutiny suggests that’s unlikely to happen.