Archive for March, 2009


Imad Hamad

March 31, 2009

Imad Hamad is a “former” terrorist. He is head of the local chapter of ADC, a radical proArab group. He continues to make statements in support of terrorist groups. Yet, amazingly and shockingly, the FBI and CIA romance him and embrace him. This is a scandal.

Can every “former” terrorist get a free dinner from the CIA?

CIA, Arab Americans seek to work together


Senior CIA leaders met Wednesday with about 30 Arab-American and Chaldean advocates to discuss ways to improve their relationship.

Held over dinner in a Southfield hotel, the meeting included Scott White, associate deputy director for the Central Intelligence Agency, and about half a dozen other CIA officials, some who attended the meeting said.

Scott talked about misperceptions of the CIA and said he was pleased to meet with local Arab Americans, said Imad Hamad, regional director of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, who attended the dinner.

“It was a constructive meeting,” Hamad said. “We want to be partners and engage in a professional dialogue and relationship.”

Scott sought to dispel the stereotype that the CIA is just a spy agency, saying the agency offers a wide range of job opportunities.

“It removed some of the images people may have from seeing Hollywood movies …. the mystery of it,” said Osama Siblani, publisher of the Arab American News, who also attended the meeting. “They’re trying to reach out and change the perceptions of the CIA in the minds of Arab Americans.”

The meeting also included Chaldean leaders with the Chaldean Federation of America and the Chaldean-American Chamber of Commerce.

Contact NIRAJ WARIKOO at 248-351-2998 or


Cartoon: Obama vs. Wagner

March 31, 2009


Islam Broward County

March 31, 2009
Dear Friends,
Recently, I saw the following ad on buses throughout Broward and Dade Counties. Yesterday, I snapped this shot while I was down in Miami. It brought to mind a couple of Scripture verses which seem fitting.
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.” ——- Matthew 7:15 (NKJV)
“Then many false prophets will rise up and deceive many.” ——— Matthew 24:11 (NKJV)

It also serves to illustrate how one of those deceptions described in the Bible is rushing in to fill a huge spiritual void left by a post Christian culture. This is one reason why CRM exist, so that it does not happen.



Outcry Against U.S. Budget Heard Around Globe

March 31, 2009

Outcry Against U.S. Budget Heard Around Globe

Friday , March 27, 2009


get_a(300,250,”frame1″); ADVERTISEMENT

This is a rush transcript from “Hannity,” March 26, 2009. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SEAN HANNITY, HOST: Mr. President, while you are answering questions about marijuana on the Internet, and your treasury secretary is busy devaluating the dollar, people are suffering both here and abroad. And that is our headline this Thursday night, day number 66 of false hope, loose change, “The World is Watching.”

They are watching as your Cabinet can’t get your policy straight. They’re watching while members of your party dismember your own budget. They’re watching as you continue to push for the greatest expansion of government that this nation has ever seen. And they’re watching, Mr. President, and they don’t necessarily like what they are seeing. Now just ask our first guest tonight.

He is a British member of the European parliament who turned heads when he excoriated Prime Gordon Brown and his economic agenda that is very similar to what is happening right here in our country.


DANIEL HANNAN, MEMBER OF EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT MEMBER: The truth, Prime Minister, is that you have run out of our money. The country as a whole is now in negative equity. Every British child is born owing around 20,000 pounds. Servicing the interest on that debt is going to cost more than educating the child.

Video: Watch Sean’s interview

Now once again today you tried to spread the blame around. You spoke about an international recession, international crisis. We are now running a deficit that touches 10 percent of GDP in almost unbelievable figure.

Now, it’s not that you’re not apologizing. Like everyone else I’ve long accepted that you’re pathologically incapable of accepting responsibility for these things. It’s that you’re carrying on willfully, worsening our situation, wantonly spending what little we have left.

Last year, in the last 12 months, 100,000 private-sector jobs have been lost, and yet, you created 30,000 public sector jobs.

Prime Minister, you cannot carry on forever squeezing the productive bit of the economy in order to fund an unprecedented engorgement of the unproductive bit. You cannot spend your way out of recession or borrow your way out of debt, and when you repeat in that wooden and perfunctory way, that our situation is better than others, that we’re well placed to weather the storm, I have to tell you, you sound like Brezhnev-era apparatchik giving the party line.

You know and we know and you know that we know that it’s nonsense. Everyone knows that Britain is worse off than any other country as we go into these hard times.


HANNITY: And Mr. Hannan, he joins us tonight from London.

Mr. Hannan, thank you for being with us. I got to — do you realize how your message is resonating loudly and clearly in American tonight and how inspired people are by your words?

HANNAN: And you say the nicest things. Listen, I’m happy to come on this show anytime you want me. I’m pretty perplexed by the whole thing. I’m trying to think of, if you could come up with the most boring phrase to enter into a Google search engine, and I thought, speech to the European parliament, so I am completely bowled over by what you said.

HANNITY: Yes, well — look, go over every line. We now are adding, by the year 2019, we’re going to have nearly $900 billions just on interest on the debt with what Obama is spending. He’s spending more than every president from George Washington to George W. Bush in terms of the debt he’s accumulated here.

And as you point out, you can’t spend your way out of recession, borrow your way out of debt. Do you think the world is making a mistake and that we’re really all collectively going to suffer these consequences?

HANNAN: We’re all collectively going to suffer the consequences. I mean it’s not our mistake. The mistake is being made by a small number of political leaders and the small number of their advisers. You know it’s a common sense that when you’re in debt, you spend less. Now anybody except a politician can see that. Anyone can see that in their private life.

You’ve run up too big a debt, you’ve run up too big a mortgage which you try and sort it out, because if you’re either a banker or a politician, you have a different take on these things. Because, of course, it isn’t your money.

You know, that great phrase of Milton Friedman. There’s only two kinds of money in this world, it’s your money and it’s my money, in a way. We’re very careful about the second of those. But of course, for politicians, it’s all your money.

HANNITY: Yes. Anybody but a politician can see that. I think that’s going to go down as one of the all-time classics. Unfortunately, it’s true. You know, one of the things, Mr. Hannan, that we’re debating in America, Barack Obama wants to lay down $634 billions for nationalized health care.

Well, we’ve had nationalized health care in Great Britain, and we’ve had it in France, and we’ve had a single payer in Canada. My question to you is, based on what you said, I would like you to explain to the American people if this is a good idea through this prism.

I read in The Daily Mail last week that the — the your health system, the NHS, literally has a group of people that decided, government bureaucrats, that they were going to give drugs to women with breast cancer and a certain rare form of stomach cancer. The rationing body is what they call it.

Is it a good idea for the U.S. to invest in nationalized health care?

HANNAN: Now, first of all, it’s important that you understand that that’s a true story, and it’s a typical story. It’s not in the newspapers because it’s unusual. We have a rationing body that’s called, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence. It’s known as NICE, N-I-C-E, which, coincidentally, there was an adult novel by C.S. Lewis in the 1940s where the NICE was this kind of Satanic conspiracy.

And in terms of them, align affects, you can sort of see the connection. I mean it’s a terrible thing to put anyone in this situation, any bureaucrat in this situation, of having to make those life and death decisions because they are literally life and death decisions.

HANNITY: So you…

HANNAN: The worse thing is for you as the recipient of health care because you’ve got no control over what you get. There’s no contractual relationship between you and the suppliers, so, you know, if they treat you today or next week or six weeks from now, where it’s too late because your condition has already deteriorated.

HANNITY: So your advice.

HANNAN: … there’s nothing you can do about it. You are expected to queue up with a smile and be grateful for what you have. And it is — it’s the last survivor of the kind of socialist post-war conspiracy. Sorry, socialist post war –- yes, I’m tired. It’s midnight. Socialist post-war consensus…

HANNITY: All right, let me ask you.

HANNAN: … in the U.K.

HANNITY: So your advice to America is to stay away from socialized health care. I think you’re very clear on that. Let me ask you what.

HANNAN: If you — listen, if you get nothing else from what I’m saying this evening, please do not make that mistake. If there are any congressman watching this who think, yes, it might be a bit fair, yes, it’d be a bit sort of cozy, you know, I promise you, it is worse for doctors. It’s worse for patients. It’s worse for taxpayers.

HANNITY: Let me ask you one last quick question here if I can, because, you know, a lot of Europe supported Barack Obama heading into this election. They were — you supported Barack Obama heading into this election. That’s why I found your comments fascinating.

Now, the United States of America — I think it’s embarrassing to get lectured by leaders of France, the European Union, president of Czech Republic, president by China, the communist Chinese, on how to run a better economy.

What has happened in terms of the faith and hope and trust and confidence that Europe once had in the president?

HANNAN: Yes, you know, I — first of all, I think I can trump your story. We have done all of the things that you’ve done wrong. We’ve borrowed more. We’ve spent more. We’ve increased the deficit and we pretended that there’s some clever plan about it. But we’ve done something that you haven’t done yet, which is, we’ve gone for the Zimbabwe option. We started just printing more money.

And I actually saw a newspaper in Zimbabwe saying, you know, the poor old Brits. Look at the mess they are in. You know, that having to do this.

HANNITY: Yes. I think you did.

HANNAN: We may have even got the excuse that we have of — so we are pitied by Mugabe’s Zimbabwe, which I think trumps even your communist.


HANNITY: I’ve got to run.

HANNAN: What made your country great, what made your people strong and prosperous and free.

HANNITY: Capitalism.

HANNAN: … that it was small government right from the beginning, right from the declaration of independence. There was a distrust of the concentration of power and a confidence in the freedom of the individual. And you know, people will always make better decisions for themselves than administrators will make for them.

And if — when you lose that, if you Europeanize yourselves, and under the illusion that it’s kind of, you know, a bit Hitler and a bit miser and you know, you make yourselves more popular in the world, you will throw away what may people actually respect you, not the least because I understand that it was something…

HANNITY: Daniel, I hope and I pray, and I mean this, that our politicians are listening to you tonight. Thank you for what you said. I hope you’ll come back on the program. We appreciate your being with us.

HANNAN: Pleasure to be here, Sean. Thank you.

HANNITY: All right. Thank you. Very inspiring.

Watch “Hannity” weeknights at 9 p.m. ET!


Unseen Enemy

March 30, 2009

Unseen Enemy

By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, March 27, 2009 4:20 PM PT

War On Terror: Besides sending more troops to Afghanistan, President Obama plans to send billions more in aid to Pakistan, despite evidence that our money is used to kill troops in Afghanistan.

Read More: Global War On Terror | Middle East & North Africa

The plan to reward Islamabad with another $15 billion comes as stunning new U.S. intelligence — gathered from electronic surveillance and trusted informants — reveals Pakistan’s spy service has been supporting the Taliban.

And they’ve been doing it with our intelligence, our weapons and our money. In effect, we are funding the Taliban.

Pakistan’s secret war has pushed violence in Afghanistan to its highest level since U.S.-led forces invaded in 2001. U.S. troop deaths in Afghanistan rose 35% in 2008.

Why would Pakistan’s military intelligence destabilize the Afghan government? To limit archenemy India’s influence next door. It’s now confirmed that the Taliban bombed the Indian Embassy in Kabul with help from Pakistani intelligence, the ISI.

The ISI has even shared intelligence with Lashkar-e-Taiba, the al-Qaida subcontractor that recently massacred 160 people in Mumbai. It’s no coincidence that Indian trains and commercial centers and parliament buildings have been attacked since we drove the Taliban out of Afghanistan.

Also confirmed in a detailed New York Times piece quoting several U.S. officials:

• The Taliban’s base of operations is in Quetta, Pakistan, and Taliban chief Mullah Omar is hiding in plain sight there (contrary to repeated denials by Pakistan’s former president).

• Pakistani intelligence is supplying, arming, training and in some cases even escorting Taliban fighters across the border to attack Afghan and U.S. troops.

• The ISI has tipped off the Taliban about U.S. plans for raids on their outposts, and has even shared intelligence with the Taliban about American convoy routes to help them target troops.

• ISI operatives meet regularly with Taliban commanders to discuss whether to intensify or scale back violence before Afghan elections.

This confirms what we’ve been warning for a long time: Islamabad is playing a dangerous double game of stringing us along for more and more cash, while mouthing hollow promises of cooperation in our war on terror.

Islamabad aided the Taliban and al-Qaida before 9/11. What made us think Western money could get it to untangle itself from them?

After 9/11, as outlined in official U.S. demands, Pakistan promised to “stop Pakistani volunteers from going into Afghanistan to join the Taliban” and to “end support for the Taliban.”

It has done neither. And our answer is to rush more aid there, under the misguided notion that we can strengthen Pakistan’s social fabric and democracy and walk it away from decades of Islamic extremism.

Washington still doesn’t understand that in Pakistan, terrorism is a state policy. It’s as true today as it was when the Soviet Union occupied Afghanistan. Only difference is, we’re now on the other side of that treachery. To the ISI, we’re the new Soviet Union.

Obama is right to worry that the Afghan government is in peril of falling to the Islamic militants of the Taliban once again. But sending more troops there without also addressing the problem next door in Pakistan is just kicking the can down the road.

The president must at least put verifiable conditions on any aid we send to Islamabad in the future: Cut off support for militant groups, or we’ll cut off the supply of cash.

Otherwise, we’re just letting terrorism pay — and pay big — while bankrolling our own defeat.


Cartoon: Government Spending?!?

March 30, 2009


Extremists use ‘civil rights’

March 30, 2009

Extremists use ‘civil rights’ group front to push agenda

by Steven Emerson
The Desert Sun (Palm Springs)
March 24, 2009

Note: This article originally appeared March 24 in the Desert Sun.

Earlier this month, I spoke before the World Affairs Council of the Desert on the threat of radical Islam to the West.

My remarks focused on radical Islamic groups, which, posing as “civil rights” groups, try to suppress free speech and intimidate critics by calling them “Islamophobes” and, in some cases, actually threatening and killing such critics. I detailed the history of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the parent organization of terrorist groups such as al-Qaida and Hamas.

I described a secret infrastructure of Muslim Brotherhood groups in the United States who promote their radical agenda through a network of front groups that falsely claimed to be “moderate.” The bottom line: Radical Islamic groups committed a grand deception by anointing themselves “civil rights” groups or “charities” when, in fact, they were secret political, financial or military fronts for terrorists.

An Islamic group’s response

The response published March 18 in The Desert Sun by Hussam Ayloush of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) illustrates this deceit perfectly. Mr. Ayloush fails to mention that his group, CAIR, was created by Hamas supporters in 1994 following a secret meeting in Philadelphia that the FBI wiretapped. Exhibits in the Hamas fundraising trial of the Holy Land Foundation showed that CAIR’s founders were part of the secret Muslim Brotherhood infrastructure that sought, in the MB’s own words, to carry out a “civilization-jihadist process” and to implement a “grand jihad in eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within …”

Nor does Mr. Ayloush mention that the FBI labeled CAIR a “front” group for Hamas or that CAIR was an unindicted co-conspirator in that case. It ended last year with convictions on 108 counts tied to Hamas support. Disturbing evidence linking CAIR to Hamas prompted the FBI to cut off relations with CAIR.

Radical or moderate?

In my talk, I quoted radical Islamist leaders like Sheik Yousef Al-Qaradawi, a Muslim Brotherhood ideological leader, who said that “Islam will conquer the United States” and “reconquer Europe.” Mr. Qaradawi has issued fatwas (religious decrees) calling for the killing of Jews and Americans. Yet CAIR repeatedly champions him as a leading “moderate” Islamic cleric.

That speaks volumes about CAIR’s definition of “moderate.”

Similarly, Mr. Ayloush and CAIR came to the defense of Sheik Wagdy Ghoneim, a radical Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood leader. During a CAIR co-sponsored rally at Brooklyn College in May 1998, Ghoneim led the audience in a song with the lyrics, “No to the Jews, descendants of the apes.” He had made other speeches calling for violent jihad. Immigration violations prompted his arrest in November 2004. He was held without bond based on government “concerns that his past speeches and participation in fundraising activities could be supportive of terrorist organizations.”

Mr. Ayloush argued Ghoneim was a victim of racial profiling: “(T)he whole Muslim community today is under a microscope of scrutiny. Committing a mistake that would invite a slap on the wrist for anyone else could lead to prison or deportation for a Muslim.” More importantly, CAIR has condemned virtually every Islamic terrorist indictment and conviction in the last seven years as “racist” or as “political” inquisitions. And it refuses to label Hamas and Hizbollah as terrorists. At times, CAIR officials have justified the use of suicide bombings.

Hatemongering vs. extremism

Groups like CAIR deny the very existence of radical Islam and blame the problem on “hatemongers.” I am sorry to tell Mr. Ayloush that the primary factor causing an image problem for Islam today is the existence of rampant Islamic terrorism and extremism. CAIR says that the term “Islamic terrorist” is racist and that terrorism has no religion. I wish it he could have convinced the 19 Muslim hijackers on Sept. 11 or the four U.K. Muslims who bombed a London subway in July 2005 or any of those responsible for more than 50,000 attacks carried in the name of Islam. All of these were Islamic terrorists motivated by their particular belief in Islam.

In characteristic projection, Mr. Ayloush accuses me of reciting Nazi-like rhetoric, while CAIR has repeatedly invited a neo-Nazi to be keynote speakers at CAIR conferences. CAIR invited neo-Nazi William Baker to be a major speaker at CAIR events. Baker was chairman of the “Populist Party” — founded by neo-Nazi Willis Carto in 1984, and organized its national convention that year. Carto, a founder of the American Nazi party, also started the Southern California-based Institute for Historical Review, a group whose central purpose was to deny the Holocaust before it was put out of business.

Finally, what does Ayloush say about Islam compared to other religions? At a fundraiser in Anaheim last July, Ayloush praised “Islam…. the true religion, the religion of Islam, so it may prevail over all ideologies, all man-made religions.”

I want to thank Mr. Ayloush for writing his response. He proved the correctness of what I said on March 8.

Steven Emerson is the executive director of Investigative Project on Terrorism. He can be reached through his Web site at

To see the original Desert Sun article, click here.

Related Topics: The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)