It seems as if the battle cry among those defending radical islam (and is there really any other kind?), has changed, at least for the time being, from “ISLAMOPHOBIA!!!” to “McCARTHYISM!!!”, and all because Michelle Bachmann and four other members of Congress had the unmitigated audacity to ask the state department’s deputy inspector general to look into the matter of a possible national security problem.
Not that problems like this haven’t happened before, because they have. Remember the Camp Chapman attack in 2009 and Mohamed Elibiary, the Homeland Security Advisory Council member leaked classified information? Yes, it has happened, and I for one, would like to know if it has happened, and is still happening, elsewhere.
Elsewhere, in this case, is the state department. Specifically involving Huma Abedin, the aide and close friend of Secretary of State Hilary Clinton. Abedin may have ties to radical islam by way of her family, and Congresswoman Bachman would like this possible breach of national security looked into. Others, such as Senator John McCain, Senator Marco Rubio, Senator Scott Brown and Speaker of the Hosue John Boehner, however, do not want it looked into and have condemned Michelle Bachmann for even suggesting that Huma Abedin could possibly be linked to muslim extremists. But what if Bachmann is right? Can we, as a country take that chance?
If Huma Abedin is innocent, as McCain, Rubio and others insist, then she would have nothing to fear from any examination of her familial ties. In fact, one would think that she would publically welcome it simply to prove her innocence in the public eye and shut Bachmann and the rest up permanently. So far, there have been no comments from Abedin. But again, what if Bachmann is right? A simple look at the facts raise some serious questions as to Abedin’s loyalty to the United States.
Huma Mahmood Abedin was born in Kalamazoo, Michigan in 1976, to Dr. Syed Zainul Abedin and Dr. Saleha Mahmood. When she was two years old, her family moved to Saudi Arabia. She has a brother, Dr. Hassan Abedin. Like her parents, and her brother, Huma Abedin is a practicing muslim, and, in fact, was not only born into islam, but was raised in a fundamentalist islamic environment in a fundamentalist islamic country that strictly enforces sharia law according to Wahhabi interpretation – the strictest interpretation found in all of islam, and enforced by “the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice” (Saudi Arabia’s sharia police, founded during the 1920’s – decades before Huma Abedin was born – and still in power to this day).
Huma Abedin’s father, Dr. Syed Zainul Abedin, founded the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs, an organization supported by the Muslim World League – a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. He was also a member of the Muslim World League in the 1980’s. Huma Abedin’s mother, Dr. Saleha Mahmood is the current director of the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs and a documented member of the Muslim Sisterhood, and auxiliary branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. Dr. Hassan Abedin, Huma’s brother, has been linked to Sheikh Qaradawi – a documented member of the Muslim Brotherhood, and Omar Naseef, former secretary general of the Muslim World League and founder of the Rabita Trust – an organization known for funding terrorists and having ties to al-Qaeda.
To briefly recap, Huma Abedin’s father, mother and brother all have documented ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. This is not to say that Huma Abedin herself has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, but each member of her immediate family does. Is it possible that Huma Abedin may have ties as well? Growing up in a fundamentalist islamic family, in a strict fundamentalist Wahhabi country with Wahhabi teaching ingrained in her from a very early age, one would tend to think that there is at least a possibility.
And then there is the issue of Huma Abedin herself. An admitted muslim, who grew in being ingrained with and influenced by strict Wahhabi teachings, growing up in a Muslim Brotherhood family where she was undoubtedly taught that the Muslim Brotherhood was good and right and of allah, why did she marry a Jew? Not that I have anything against Jews, because I do not. They are God’s chosen people. But I find it interesting that Huma Abedin married Anthony Weiner, the disgraced former congressman, who happens to be Jewish. Yet, muslim women are not permitted to marry Jews. The koran clearly states: “And give not (your daughters) in marriage to Al-Mushrikoon till they believe in allah alone and verily, a believing slave is better than a mushrik, even though he pleases you. Those (Al-mushrikoon) invite you to the fire, but allah invites you to paradise and forgiveness by his leave, and makes his ayaat (i.e. proofs, evidences, etc.) clear to mankind that they may remember.” [al-Baqarah 2:221]
According to koranic scholar Imam al-Tabari, the terms “Al-Mushrikoon” and “Mushrik” refer to any “non-muslim from any other religion, whether from among the Jews or Christians, or any other kaafir religion. It is not permissible for her to marry a Jew, a Christian, a Magian, a communist, an idol-worshipper, etc.” And yet, this is exactly what Huma Abedin did, and what is interesting about this is, her family (brother and mother – her father died in 1993) have not condemned her for violating the koran – the “sacred and holy” words of mohammed. Is her marriage to Anthony Weiner nothing more than taqiyya, the islamic doctrine of deception which states that in a time of war it is permissible to deceive non-muslims? The fact that her family has not condemned her for her marriage to a Jew speaks volumes. Why would they condemn her if she was still a practicing muslim (as she states) who is engaging in taqiyya in order to serve allah? Answer – they wouldn’t. Perhaps this is why they have not condemned her.
As not only an aide to Secretary of State Clinton, but also a close friend and confidant for the past 15 years, Huma Abedin job includes advising Secretary Clinton on politics and policy in the Middle East. Her advice carries great weight and influence on Secretary Clinton, and she has access to highly classified information as a result of both her job and her closeness to Clinton. Has Huma’s advice to Clinton served to influence foreign policy? Of course it has. That’s part of her job description. A more appropriate question would be just how has Huma Abedin’s advice influenced foreign policy? And that is a question that is a bit harder to answer. In fact, unless Secretary Clinton actually states just how Huma’s advice has influenced foreign policy, we may never really know the extent of her influence. However, what we can do is look at the shift in and changes to foreign policy since Huma Abedin and Hilary Clinton have been in the White House. For example:
- The State Department now has representatives in Egypt, who will be responsible for acclimating members of the new ruling party – The Muslim Brotherhood – to working with the United States.
- An announcement was made by Clinton’s State Department, that the Obama administration would be satisfied with the election of a Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt.
- Secretary of State Hilary Clinton personally intervened to ensure entry into the United States for Tariq Ramadan, a controversial and influential member of The Muslim Brotherhood. Ramadan had previously been barred from entering the United States due to his ties to islamic terrorism.
- Secretary of State Hilary Clinton has worked closely with the OIC (Organization of Islamic Coopreration) to silence criticism of islam – in accordance with sharia law.
- Secretary of State Hilary Clinton and the State Department purposely excluded Israel from the “Global Counterterrorism Forum,” a coalition of islamist governments and the United States, whose mission it is to fight terrorism on a global scale. Like The Muslim Brotherhood, the Global Counterterrorism Forum does not recognize the unprovoked attacks on Israel by Hamas to be terrorist actions.
- After The Muslim Brotherhood “won” the parliamentary elections in Egypt (through questionable means), the Obama administration granted $1.5 billion in aid to The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
- In 2011 Secretary of State Hilary Clinton overruled congress and authorized a $147 million aid package to Gaza, which is ruled by Hamas, a terrorist organization and the Palestinian branch of The Muslim Brotherhood.
- The Clinton state department and the Obama administration not only granted a visa and entry permit to a known member of a terrorist organization (Gama’at al Islamia – aligned with al-Qaeda, and involved in the 1993 WTC bombing in New York City), but they also brought in members of The Muslim Brotherhood, all for a meeting in the White House. When the administration was asked why U.S. law was circumvented to allow known terrorists into the United States and into the White House, the administration refused to provide that information.
- Recently, Secretary of State Hilary Clinton visited Egyptian president-elect Mohamed Morsi, a leader in The Muslim Brotherhood. Clinton also used her influence to pressure General Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, head of the Egyptian military to step down and surrender power to Morsi. According to Morsi, one of his top priorities as president will be to pressure the United States to release and return to Egypt, Omar Abdel Rahman – also known as “The Blind Sheikh.” Rahman is currently incarcerated in the United States for his part in master minding the 1993 World Trade Center bombing as well as the murder of JDL founder Meir Kahane and conspiring to simultaneously blow up the Lincoln and Holland tunnels, the U.N. building, the George Washington bridge and U.S. armories. Rahman also urged his followers to bomb as many American military installations as possible – telling them to use the 1983 bombing of the U.S. barracks in Lebanon as a blueprint for terror. The Muslim Brotherhood Supreme Guide, one Mohammed Badie’ has also stated that the Brotherhood’s U.S.-assisted win in Egypt, is a stepping stone to the establishment of a just islamic caliphate, and that the United States is now experiencing the beginning of its end.
In light of Huma Abedin’s association with The Muslim Brotherhood, her strict Wahhabi upbringing, her close relationship with Secretary of State Hilary Clinton and her role as Clinton’s primary advisor on politics and Middle Eastern policy, one must question whether or not any of these incidents were somehow influenced by Huma Abedin. The possibility certainly exists.
In 1991, The Muslim Brotherhood drafted a manifesto entitled “An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America.” Within this document, The Muslim Brotherhood spells out its plan to the establishment of a global islamic state, or caliphate, with the United States as one of its conquered countries. The document lays out the need for a “civilization jihad” as necessary for the conquering of America and Canada and the assimilation of North America into the global islamic state. What is this “Civilization Jihad”? It is simply a jihad against civilization. Our civilization. It includes becoming part of our society, but not for the purpose of assimilation. It is for the express purpose of changing our society so that it becomes slowly acclimated to the idea of a dominant islamic presence. Muslim fundamentalists begin by employing taqiyya and making themselves appear to be members of American society. They begin to purchase businesses and establish islamic neighborhoods around those businesses. They soon have islamic controlled enclaves. In France, Sweden, England and other areas of Europe, these enclaves are known as “No Go” zones, where even law enforcement are reluctant to enter. Sharia is implemented in these areas, and enforced. Dearborn, Michigan is experiencing a growing “No Go” zone of its own with its own Arab-American Chamber of Commerce, Arab police chief, and the 14 block long Arab festival (open to all except Christians – and strictly enforced by local police).
They enter politics – local, state and federal – until such a time as they have become more common than the areas previous residents. In other words, they take over using sheer numbers. Eventually, the only logical conclusion happens, and the area becomes 100% muslim. This is the same tactic employed by islam for centuries. A prime example of this was the islamic conquering of Persia in the 7th century during the establishment of the last islamic caliphate, which lasted until the early 20th century. Once again, history has given us every example, every lesson needed to understand and recognize the potential peril in entertaining islam.
But all of this does not answer the question of Huma Abedin. At least not definitively. Is she a member of The Muslim Brotherhood? Is she using her position a primary advisor on the Middle East to the Secretary of State to assist The Muslim Brotherhood? Or is it all nothing more than coincidence? Is the letter written by Michelle Bachman nothing more than simply “McCarthyism”? (by the way, history has proven that McCarthy was right in his suppositions regarding communist infiltration of our government), or, like McCarthy, are Bachmann’s concerns legitimate? Only time will tell, but, by then it may be too late.
Sources and reference links, as well as recommended reading links and a downloadable copy of this article (in pdf format) are provided for this article on the Independent Realist website (http://independentrealist.weebly.com/).
For more instances of muslim brotherhood influence in American government, as well as inroads radical islam has made in the United States, please read the following:
The following can be downloaded from my website at http://independentrealist.weebly.com/written-by-thomas-paine-2nd.html :
As well as these related documents, which can be downloaded at http://independentrealist.weebly.com/written-by-others.html :