One of those testifying is LAPD Deputy Chief Michael Downing, the commander of the LAPD’s
Counterterrorism and Special Operations Bureau.
This is an odd choice for the committee in light
of a video of Chief Downing speaking at a town hall event co-sponsored by his
department at the Islamic Center of Southern California on May 15th. Here’s the
video of Chief Downing’s comments:
Downing’s claims that “we should not demonize the
Muslim Brotherhood” are particularly curious since the leader of the
international Muslim Brotherhood declared war on the United States during a press conference
last October (a transcript of his comments is available at MEMRI). It seems
the Muslim Brotherhood does a good job of demonizing itself.
It is another case entirely when a government
official such as Chief Downing attempts to deflect criticism of the Brotherhood
and openly endorses MB front organizations in the U.S. as partners with law
enforcement. From his remarks at the event it seems that Chief Downing can’t
decide whether the Muslim Brotherhood are extremists on the fringe, or if they
have “changed” over time and should be engaged. He can’t have it both
ways.
As the late Billy Mays would say, “But wait,
there’s more!”
This event was held at the Islamic Center of
Southern California, which was founded by Hassan and Maher Hathout (according to the New York Times), longtime Muslim Brotherhood
operatives from Egypt. In an interview he gave to the Voice of Islam before his
death, Hassan Hathout spoke of “The Man Who Changed My Life,” the man being
Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan Al-Banna. In the interview, Hathout lauds
Al-Banna as his teacher:

Read the full article, here.   Also, you can see the video of the LAPD dhimmi at the
Islamic Center in Los Angeles, here.

This is absolutely outrageous.  The Muslim
Brotherhood is one of the greatest terrorist organizations in the world.  Their
motto is:
- Allah is our objective.
- The Prophet is our leader.
- Qur’an is our law.
- Jihad
is our way.
- Dying in the way of Allah is our
highest hope.

This is a radical Islamist group and the City of Los
Angeles is promoting them.  What is wrong with this picture?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Dave
Koch 2 hours ago

How many more Idiot Law
Enforcement Officer does Cali have , better yet how many in America. We are
being threatened everyday from overseas and here in America by the Muslims. How
many more Americans are going to die right here in America before our Government
and our  Law Enforcement pull their heads out of their backside. I gues to them
9/11  didn’t happen. What the Hell is it going to take before Americans will
open their eyes and wake up to the REALITY to what is going on around this World
and especially here in America.

• 
  ► Reply

  Upload Files

  Attach files (limit: 7MB)

Permalink Reply by Frank
Anthony Rich 2 hours ago

Sounds like the path
France  and England have taken, to get along with everyone. Being politically
correct, they are slowly being overtaken by the muslims. This all fits Obama’s
agenda to dismantle the USA and convert it into a socialistic muslim nation.
Soon we will all be kneeling on a prayer mat or dead………….take your
pick

• 
  ► Reply

  Upload Files

  Attach files (limit: 7MB)

Permalink Reply by Roy
A. Moore 2 hours ago

Knowing that “Socialism and Communism”, are “Blood Brothers”, promoting
“Radical Islamic”, doesn’t supprize me at all.
Supporting the “muslim brotherhood”, is just one more way of controling and

erroding the American belief structure and
eventually destroying our “Constitution”, and the God given rights that are
established within this “Beautiful Document”.”November
2012″. “VOTE THIS DISEASE OUT”!!!!!!
 

• 
  ► Reply

  Upload Files

  Attach files (limit: 7MB)

Permalink Reply by JOHN
DELASAUX 2 hours ago

Prisons are a fertile ground for training Islamic Terrorists.
 
Who fits the best into the Radical Islamisist picture as a worker for Jihad?
A “victim”, of course.
 
And who makes the best “victim”?  A prisoner, of course.
 
The Brotherhood knows where to recruit with the best results  –
prisons.

• 
  ► Reply

  Upload Files

  Attach files (limit: 7MB)

Permalink Reply by msftex
1 hour ago

Muslim
brotherhood buddies are now probably slightly disturbed, as Weiner’s wife , Huma
Abedin , the muslim, deputy chief of staff for Hillary Clinton, whose brother
Hassan, is listed as a fellow and partner with a number of Muslim Brotherhood
members.” Hassan works at the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies (OCIS) at Oxford
University. The Egyptian Al-Azhar University, well-known for a curriculum that
encourages extremism and terrorism, is active in establishing links with OCIS.
Saleha Mahmoud Abedin,Huma’s mother, a professor in Saudi Arabia “belongs to the
Sunni movement’s women’s division known as the Muslim Sisterhood.” During the
recent uprising in Egypt, which resulted in Mubarak’s removal, “a special
women’s unit within the Muslim Brotherhood served as ‘mules’ to deliver messages
and acted as messengers for the terrorist group. ( American Thinker June
19th,2011) Check out the book “Islam and Terrorism” by Mark A. Gabriel who used
to teach at El Azhar. This book gives you an inside view of the cult that likes
to torture those who would convert to Christianity and spread the truth about
Islam . Wake up America!! Nikita Kruschef said America would be taken from the
inside. Is LA immune to this type of infestation? I rekon not !!

Edit DeleteReport

Reply

• 
  ► Reply

  Upload Files

  Attach files (limit: 7MB)

Permalink Reply by Lawrence
Brown 1 hour ago

Its not hard to believe.
Our top law enforcement goon is Holder. We have more problems in this area than
most people will admit to. The muslim brotherhood is already in our
neighborhoods in some capacity. Many in denial are not true americans in my
opinion.

• 
  ► Reply

  Upload Files

  Attach files (limit: 7MB)

Permalink Reply by Pat
Chadwell 1 hour ago

An from what I have read an
heard Holder is a anchor baby from the middle east so that puts him right with
bho…

• 
  ► Reply

  Upload Files

  Attach files (limit: 7MB)

Permalink Reply by Kirby
L. Vickery 1 hour ago

OH!  For goodness sake!!
That can’t happen here.  Can it?  I wonder when their going to step over the
line, start wearing brown shirts, and goose stepping for Obama.

• 
  ► Reply

  Upload Files

  Attach files (limit: 7MB)

Permalink Reply by Dennis
Donner 1 hour ago

http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2011/06/05/mosques-as-barracks-in-america/
Mosques as Barracks in America
Posted By Andrew Bostom On June 5, 2011
^[1]
The Islamic Center of Toledo Mosque and Minarets
Cross-posted at The American Thinker
^[2]
Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan represents the triumphant Janus-faced approach
to the fundamentalist global “Islamic revival.” He and his pious forbears have
now completed dismantling Turkey’s secular experiment, and achieved the
full-throated re-Islamization of Turkish society, an insidious process begun already ^[3] within the decade after Ataturk’s
death, in 1938.  When currying favor with gullible Western audiences, Erdogan
burbles disingenuous ecumenical platitudes about the “Alliance of
Civilizations.” But in reality, this is an Islamization campaign ^[4] promoted by the
Organization of the Islamic Conference, notably Saudi Arabia, which rewarded ^[5] Erdogan, for his role in the Alliance,
specifically, as “services to Islam,” with the “King Faisal International
Prize,” considered the “Nobel prize” of the Arab world. Regardless, Erdogan has
always aroused his Muslim constituencies by brazenly appealing to their
deep-seated jihadist sentiments as he did while mayor of Istanbul, in 1997,
delivering a fiery speech that reminded the masses of these words from the  poem
“The Soldier’s Prayer,” written (in 1912) by Turkish nationalist poet Ziya
Gokalp: The minarets are our bayonets, the domes our helmets, the mosques our
barracksand the faithful our army.
Cited ^[6] appropriately by successful ^[7] opponents of minaret
construction in Switzerland ^[6], such rhetoric should now
resonate uncomfortably in America with the online release
^[8] Monday June 6, 2011 of alarming survey data from a
representative national sample of US mosques.
During August 2007, the New York City Police Department (NYPD) released
“Radicalization in the West — The Homegrown Threat.” This insightful 90-page report ^[9] evaluated the threat that had become
apparent since 9/11/2001, analyzing the roots of recent terror plots in the
United States , from Lackawanna in upstate New York to Portland , Ore. , to Fort
Dix , NJ . Based upon these case-study analyses of individuals arrested for
jihadist activity, the authors concluded ^[9] that the “journey” of radicalization
that produces homegrown jihadists began in so-called “Salafist”
(“fundamentalist” to non-Muslims) mosques characterized by high levels of
Sharia—Islamic Law—adherence. The landmark study just published, “Sharia and
Violence in American Mosques” (Kedar M, Yerushalmi D. The Middle East
Quarterly, Summer 2011, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 59-72) sought to expand
considerably upon the NYPD’s post-hoc, case study approach ^[9]—systematically gathering objective
survey data, with much greater methodological rigor—and address these two a
priori questions: I) Is there a robust association between observable
measures of religious devotion, coupled to Sharia-adherence in US mosques, and
the presence of violence-sanctioning materials at these mosques?; and II) Is
there a robust association between the presence of violence-sanctioning
materials at a mosque, and the advocacy of jihadism by the mosque’s leadership
via recommending the study of these materials, or other manifest behaviors?
Full details of the sampling methodology, extracts of representative jihad ^[10] promoting materials (texts), and specific
Sharia-compliant behaviors recorded, are provided in the accompanying
appendices, reproduced from the full study (which will be available here ^[8] 6/6/11).
In brief, survey data were collected from a nationally representative, random
statistical sample of 100 US mosques, covering 14 states, and the District of
Columbia . This concise overview of the basic data collection
procedures—including a self-critical, honest caveat by the authors about
“completeness” of the available information on US mosque locations—is reproduced
verbatim from the report (p. 68):
A surveyor visited a subject mosque in order: (a) to observe and record 12
Sharia-adherent behaviors of the worshipers and the imam (or lay leader); (b) to
observe whether the mosque contained the selected materials rated as moderate
and severe; (c) to observe whether the mosque contained materials promoting,
praising, or supporting violence or violent jihad; and (d) to observe whether
the mosque contained materials indicating the mosque had invited guest speakers
known to have promoted violent jihad. Thus, the survey only examined the
presence of Sharia-adherent behaviors, the presence of violence positive
materials in mosques, whether an imam would promote the study of
violence-positive materials, and whether a mosque was used as a forum to promote
violent jihad. Since there is no central body to which all mosques belong, it
was difficult to ascertain that the sampling universe list was complete. This
may have introduced bias into the sampling although the authors find no evidence
of any systemic distortions.
The study’s results provide clear—and ominous—affirmative answers to the a
priori questions posed. Sharia-adherence was strongly associated with the
presence of jihad-violence sanctioning materials, and the presence of
jihad-violence sanctioning materials was in turn robustly associated with
advocacy of jihadism by mosque imams—religious leaders. This key summary finding
was highlighted by the authors:
…51 percent of mosques had texts that either advocated the use of violence
in the pursuit of a Shari‘a-based political order or advocated violent jihad as
a duty that should be of paramount importance to a Muslim; 30 percent had only
texts that were moderately supportive of violence like the Tafsir Ibn Kathir and
Fiqh as-Sunna; 19 percent had no violent texts at all. [NOTE: How is this
possible? They ALL have theKoran which promotes violent jihad as a
duty!]
Thus 81% of this statistical sample representative of US mosques were deemed
as moderately (30%) to highly (51%) supportive of promulgating jihad violence to
impose Shari’a.
Additional profoundly troubling findings emerge when the data are explored in
depth beyond these summary observations. For example, only 4.7% of Muslim
worshippers attended mosques where jihadist materials were not provided because
Sharia-compliant mosques promoting jihad were the most heavily attended. The
authors also describe these specific details indicating that the preponderance
of US mosques sanction jihad terrorism and its ultimate goal of a Caliphate ^[10] (i.e., the transnational imposition
of strict Islamic law in current Muslim nations, and ultimately global
imposition of Islamic Law, including in the US), if one includes advocacy
of financial support for this sacralized violence (from pp. 67-69).
The survey found a strong correlation between the presence of severe
violence-promoting literature and mosques featuring written, audio, and video
materials that actually promoted such acts. By promotion of jihad, the study
included literature encouraging worshipers to engage in terrorist activity, to
provide financial support to jihadists, and to promote the establishment of a
caliphate in the United States . These materials also explicitly praised acts of
terror against the West; praised symbols or role models of violent jihad;
promoted the use of force, terror, war, and violence to implement the Sharia;
emphasized the inferiority of non-Muslim life; promoted hatred and intolerance
toward non-Muslims or notional Muslims; and endorsed inflammatory materials with
anti-U.S. views… [O]f the 51 mosques that contained severe materials, 100
percent were led by imams who recommended that worshipers study texts that
promote violence.
[M]osques containing violence positive materials were substantially more
likely to include materials promoting financial support of terror than mosques
that did not contain such texts. A disturbing 98 percent of mosques with severe
texts included materials promoting financial support of terror. Those with only
moderate rated materials on site were not markedly different, with 97 percent
providing such materials. [NOTE: Standard sharia law requires 1/8 of the
money collected to be used to support jihadists fighting "in the cause of
Allah".]
These results were comparable when using other indicators of jihad
promotion. Thus, 98 percent of mosques that contained severe-rated literature
included materials promoting establishing an Islamic caliphate in the United
States as did 97 percent of mosques containing only moderate rated
materials.
These are the hard data that make plain why the “see no
Sharia ^[11] in America ” mindslaughter ^[12] redolent across the political
spectrum amongst our policymaking, academic, and journalistic elites, is so
dangerously delusive.
Indeed such disturbing survey results from a nationally representative sample
of US mosques demonstrate Islam’s doctrinal and behavioral consistency across
nearly 14 centuries, past as prologue to the present. Over 17,000
^[13] jihad terror attacks have been committed by Muslims worldwide
since the cataclysmic acts of jihad terrorism committed against the
United States itself on September 11, 2001. These data should remind us that
there is just one historically relevant meaning of jihad ^[10] despite contemporary apologetics. Jahada,
the root of the word jihad, appears 40 times in the Koran. With 4 exceptions,
all the other 36 usages in the Koran as understood by both the greatest jurists
and scholars of classical Islam (including Abu Yusuf, Averroes, Ibn Khaldun, and
Al Ghazali), and ordinary Muslims—meant and mean, “he fought, warred or waged
war against unbelievers and the like.”
The Muslim prophet Muhammad waged a series of proto-jihad campaigns ^[10] to subdue the Jews, Christians and
pagans of Arabia . Numerous modern day pronouncements by leading Muslim
theologians (see Yusuf Al-Qaradawi’s “The Prophet Muhammad as a Jihad Model,”
2001) confirm that Muhammad remains the major inspiration for jihadism today.
Jihad has been pursued continuously since the 7^th century advent of
Islam, through the present, because it was institutionalized by seminal early
Muslim theologians based on their interpretation of Koranic verses, and long
chapters in the “hadith,” or acts and sayings of Muhammad. Within a century of
Muhammad’s death, violent jihad conquests—achieved by religiously sanctioned
massacre, pillage, enslavement, and deportation—Islamized a vast swath of
territory, extending from modern Pakistan to Portugal . The permanent goal of
jihad is to bring humanity, en bloc, under the jurisdiction of Sharia—a
totalitarian system of religious governance, particularly oppressive to all
non-Muslims, and women.
American Presidents John Quincy Adams and Theodore Roosevelt each possessed a
remarkably clear, uncompromised understanding of the permanent Islamic
institution of jihad war—both its doctrinal basis, and history. Regarding
jihad, Adams states in an 1829-30 essay series ^[14],
…he [Muhammad] declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part
of his religion, against all the rest of mankind…The precept of the Koran is,
perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God.
Roosevelt offered this historical perspective ^[15] in 1916 on the consequences for
Western civilization of succeeding, or failing to repel jihad conquerors:
The civilization of Europe, America, and Australia exists today at all
only because of the victories of civilized man over the enemies of
civilization…[including] those of Charles Martel in the 8th century [over Arab
jihadists] and those of John  Sobieski in the 17th century [over Ottoman Turkish
jihadists]. During the thousand years that included the careers of the Frankish
soldier [Martel] and the Polish king [Sobieski], the Christians of Asia and
Africa proved unable to wage successful war with the Moslem conquerors; and in
consequence Christianity practically vanished from the two continents; and today
nobody can find in them any ‘social values’ whatever, in the sense in which we
use the words, so far as the sphere of Mohammedan influence
[is]…concerned.”
Also writing in 1916, C. Snouck Hurgronje ^[10], the great Dutch
Orientalist, underscored how the jihad doctrine of world conquest, and the
re-creation of a supranational Islamic Caliphate remained a potent force among
the Muslim masses:
…it would be a gross mistake to imagine that the idea of universal
conquest may be considered as obliterated…the canonists and the vulgar still
live in the illusion of the days of Islam’s greatness. The legists continue to
ground their appreciation of every actual political condition on the law of the
holy war, which war ought never be allowed to cease entirely until all mankind
is reduced to the authority of Islam-the heathen by conversion, the adherents of
acknowledged Scripture [i.e., Jews and Christians] by submission.
Hurgronje further noted that although the Muslim rank and file might
acknowledge the improbability of that goal “at present” (circa 1916), they
were,
…comforted and encouraged by the recollection of the lengthy period of
humiliation that the Prophet himself had to suffer before Allah bestowed victory
upon his arms…
Thus even at the nadir of Islam’s political power, during the World War I era
final disintegration of the Ottoman Empire , Hurgronje observed how
…the common people are willingly taught by the canonists and feed their
hope of better days upon the innumerable legends of the olden time and the
equally innumerable apocalyptic prophecies about the future. The political blows
that fall upon Islam make less impression…than the senseless stories about the
power of the Sultan of Stambul [ Istanbul ], that would instantly be revealed if
he were not surrounded by treacherous servants, and the fantastic tidings of the
miracles that Allah works in the Holy Cities of Arabia which are inaccessible to
the unfaithful. The conception of the Khalifate [Caliphate] still exercises a
fascinating influence, regarded in the light of a central point of union against
the unfaithful (i.e., non-Muslims).
Nearly a century later, the preponderance of contemporary mainstream Muslims
from Morocco to Indonesia, apparently share with their murderous, jihad terror
waging co-religionists from al-Qaeda the goal (if not necessarily supporting the
gruesome means) of re-establishing an Islamic Caliphate. Polling data released
April 24, 2007 in a rigorously conducted face-to-face University of Maryland/ WorldPublicOpinion.org
interview survey ^[16] of 4384 Muslims conducted between
December 9, 2006 and February 15, 2007-1000 Moroccans, 1000 Egyptians, 1243
Pakistanis, and 1141 Indonesians-reveal that 65.2% of those
interviewed-almost 2/3, hardly a “fringe minority”—desired this outcome
(i.e., “To unify all Islamic countries into a single Islamic state or
Caliphate”), including 49% of “moderate” Indonesian Muslims. The internal
validity of these data about the present longing for a Caliphate is strongly
suggested by a concordant result: 65.5% of this Muslim sample approved the
proposition “To require a strict [emphasis added] application of Sharia
law in every Islamic country.”
Such Caliphate dreams—to be achieved through jihad conquests—have always been
nurtured in mosques. The authoritative Brill Encyclopedia of Islam entry on
“masdjid,” or mosque, highlights the mosque’s primary socio-political
functions—including holding war councils—since the advent of the first Muslim
polity under Islam’s prophet-warrior and ruler, Muhammad, in Medina:
The mosque was the place where believers assembled for prayer around the
Prophet, where he delivered his addresses, which contained not only appeals for
obedience to God but regulations affecting the social life of the community;
from here he controlled the religious and political community of Islam…From the
Medina mosque was developed the general type of mosque.
It was inherent in the character of Islam, that religion and politics
could not be separated. The same individual was ruler and chief
administrator in the two fields, and the same building, the mosque, was the
center of gravity for both politics and religion.This relationship found
expression in the fact that the mosque was placed in the center of the camp,
while the ruler’s abode was built immediately adjacent to it, as in Medina
.
[W]ar was inseparably associated with early Islam and the mosque was
public meeting place of ruler and people…councils of war were held in the
mosque.
Richard Mitchell’s seminal analysis ^[17] of the contemporary Muslim
Brotherhood—the prototype modern fundamentalist organization—state’s simply,
that from its advent,
Throughout the history of the [Muslim Brotherhood] movement the mosque
continued to be its principal recruiting office.
This doctrinal and historical context explains why the “Sharia and Violence
in American Mosques” study results—while immediate, justifiable cause for
alarm—are unsurprising, even predictable. Moreover the current findings were
augured by a qualitative assessment of US mosques by Sheikh Hisham Kabbani
described in 1999, and the localized Detroit area survey of mosques conducted in
2003.
During a 1999 State Department presentation entitled ^[18] “Islamic Extremism: A Viable Threat to
U.S. National Security” Sufi Sheikh Kabbani, who heads The Islamic Supreme
Council of America, based upon personal visits to mosques across the US,
asserted that 80% were run by “militant,” i.e. fundamentalist clerics.  “The
Detroit Mosque Study: Muslim Views on Policy and Religion,” was conducted by
Ihsan Bagby an Associate Professor  of Islamic Studies at thye University of
Kentucky and a fellow at  the Institute for Social Policy Understanding—a Muslim
organization. Data were gathered during the summer of 2003 and published online
in 2004. These portentous findings were described on page 37 of the report ^[19]:
Mosque participants were asked, whether they agree or disagree with the
statement, “Shari’ah should be the law of the land in Muslim countries?”
Apply Islamic Law in Muslim Lands
Strongly Agree — 59%
Somewhat Agree — 22%
(i.e., collectively = 81%)
Somewhat Disagree — 8%
Strongly Disagree — 3%
Don’t Know — 8%
Such data supposedly reflected the Detroit area Muslims views of “Islamic
countries,” only. But given the intrinsic, universally supremacist nature of
Islam and the  global umma (i.e., as stated in Koran 3:110 ^[20], and the Orwellian-named Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Islam ^[21],
“Ye are the best community that hath been raised up for mankind. Ye enjoin right
conduct and forbid indecency; and ye believe in Allah”), once an area  has a
Muslim majority it is assumed by Muslims that Islamic Law should prevail—hence
the “enclave” phenomenon, even here in the United States.
Publication of the “Sharia and Violence in American Mosques” study provides
irrefragable evidence that the overwhelming majority of American
mosques—consistent with mainstream Islamic doctrine and practice since the
founding of the Muslim creed—are inculcating jihadism with the goal of
implementing Sharia here in America.
Finally, Whittaker Chambers’ autobiographical opus “Witness,” which
chronicles his apostasy from Communism, offers these searing insights that
elucidate how American Muslims could rationalize such seditious
behaviors—consistent with Islamic doctrine—and why this phenomenon remains
largely incomprehensible to American non-Muslims, despite its existential threat
to them.
What went on in the minds of those Americans…that made it possible to
betray their country? Did none of them suffer a crisis of conscience? The
question presupposes that whoever asks it has still failed to grasp that
Communists mean exactly what they have been saying for a hundred years: they
regard any government that is not Communist, including their own, merely as the
political machine of a class whose power they have organized expressly to
overthrow by all means, including violence. Therefore the problem of espionage
never presents itself to them as problem of conscience, but a problem of
operations…
The failure to understand that fact is part of the total failure of the
West to grasp the nature of its enemy, what he wants, what he means to do and
how he will go about doing it. It is part of the failure of the West to
understand that it is at grips with an enemy having no moral viewpoint in common
with itself, that two irreconcilable viewpoints and standards of judgment, two
irreconcilable moralities, proceeding from two irreconcilable readings of man’s
fate and future are involved, and hence their conflict is irrepressible.
Link
^[22] to Jihadist Texts Distributed in Mosques Surveyed
Appendices on Methods ^[23]
 

• 
  ► Reply

  Upload Files

  Attach files (limit: 7MB)