Thursday, February 21, 2013

GOOD BY USA

WE ONCE WAS A GREAT NATION NOW WE ARE INSLAVED
THEY IS NO HOPE IN OUR WORLD
NO ONE IN OUR GOVERMENT WILL STAND UP AND STOP OBAMA FROM DOING THIS TO OUR NATION
I SEE LITTLE HOPE OF ANY ONE EVEN TRY IN TO FIGHT TO GET OUR NATION BACK
GOD HAS ABANNED US
I WILL PRAY THAT OUR END COMES QUICKLY
I WILL PRAY WE WILL SOON LEAVE THIS HELL WE ONCE CALLED HOME
THEY IS  NO HOPE WITH OBAMA AND HIS DHS
THEY WILL KILL US ALL
THERE IS NO LOVE HERE FOR GOD
ALL MEN HAVE TURNED THEY BACKS TO GOD
NOW GOD WILL SHOW HIS JUDGEMENT UP ON THE EARTH
THE RIGHTOUSE WHO BELIEVE JESUS IS LORD WILL BE SAVED
BUT ALL SINNERS WILL GO IN TO THE PIT WITH THE ANITCHRIST AND THE BREAST
I LOVE YOU ALL I HOPED THEY WAS HOPE
AND THAT OUR CONGRESS WOULD HAVE STOP OBAMA
BUT THEY ARE WEAK
THEY IS NOTHING BUT JUDGEMENT
LOVE YOU ALL KISSES CLEO

Egypt Denies U.S. Access To Benghazi Suspect As American’s Foot Obama’s $213 Million Tab Arming Their Muslim Brotherhood Government

Egypt Denies U.S. Access To Benghazi Suspect As American’s Foot Obama’s $213 Million Tab Arming Their Muslim Brotherhood Government

 
 
 
 
 
 
1 Vote

150888_216252805166315_1460303614_nIn recent headlines today while watching FOX NEWS – suffering through the distracting & repetitive coverage of the amputee Olympian ‘Blade Runner’ Oscar Pistorius accused of having shot & killed his girlfriend along with the latest plot twist in that story involving the lead detective in this case facing charges of murder himself, the psycho Jodi Arias, who is now conveniently claiming she doesn’t remember how she killed her boyfriend Travis Alexander (who only died from a gunshot wound to his forehead, 27 stab wounds, & a slit throat – & she can’t remember how she killed him??) – the one news story that stood out to me however was of Egypt reportedly having denied American officials access to an alleged Benghazi suspect they currently have in custody after his being arrested in Cairo.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/21/us-denied-direct-access-to-benghazi-suspect-held-in-egypt/
This would be the 2nd time the United States has been denied access to a suspect overseas connected to the Islamist led terrorist attack of our Libyan Embassy/Safe-House which left our U.S. Ambassador & 3 other Americans slaughtered by radical extremists. The first involved another suspect who had been released by Tunisian authorities back in January on their claims of having insufficient evidence to continue detaining him. Now however, Egypt has a 2nd suspect - Mohammed Abu Jamal Ahmed - & are initially being reported by FOX as denying U.S. Officials direct access to this suspect for questioning.
I find this development outrageous given the fact this President is helping to arm the Muslim Brotherhood controlled Egyptian Government with 200 M1A1 Abrams battle tanks & 20 F-16 fighter jets at a cost to American taxpayers of $213 million. The least then that Egyptian President (or is it Emperor now?) Mohamed Morsi can do is show the United States courtesy by granting U.S. officials access to question Ahmed regarding his role in the events leading up to & during this terrorist attack which left our U.S. Ambassador, a consulate staffer, & 2 former Navy SEAL’s murdered!
As developments stand now, we have 30 American survivors of this attack having been sequestered from questioning by Obama’s State Department.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/12/12/Chaffetz-Benghazi-State-Dept
69659_394150710672976_235289089_nEvery suspect who has managed to be detained abroad so far with known connections (albeit directly or indirectly) to the attack on our Embassy/Safe-House have either been released or our access to them for questioning has been prohibited. Consider too Obama & his Administrations initial deliberate disinformation campaign of their response blaming an irrelevant anti-Muslim video on youtube as being the impetus for this attack & our peoples deaths (when it was known to be a terrorist attack within mere hours following the attack itself). Not to mention too the emerging scandalous details in the many subsequent hearings during the intervening months since. From this then we can sense there are suspect circumstances & dubious motives at work here behind the scenes. Glenn Beck had stated immediately following this attack during his talk radio program of September 17th, 2012, that Ambassador Stevens was embroiled in a gun running operation overseeing the shipment of weapons out of Libya & passing them on through Turkey to jihadist rebels in Syria. Shortly after, on October 19th, 2012, Beck elaborated & expounded on his previous assertion with this more detailed follow up:

http://www.businessinsider.com/us-syria-heavy-weapons-jihadists-2012-10
So as Glenn Beck was saying & the Oct. 19, 2012 Business Insider article by Michael Kelly titled; ‘How US Ambassador Chris Stevens May Have Been Linked To Jihadist Rebels In Syria’, is alleging:
~”In March 2011 Stevens became the official U.S. liaison to the al-Qaeda-linked Libyan opposition, working directly with Abdelhakim Belhadj of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group—a group that has now disbanded, with some fighters reportedly participating in the attack that took Stevens’ life.
In November 2011 The Telegraph reported that Belhadj, acting as head of the Tripoli Military Council, “met with Free Syrian Army [FSA] leaders in Istanbul and on the border with Turkey” in an effort by the new Libyan government to provide money and weapons to the growing insurgency in Syria.
Last month The Times of London reported that a Libyan ship “carrying the largest consignment of weapons for Syria … has docked in Turkey.” The shipment reportedly weighed 400 tons and included SA-7 surface-to-air anti-craft missiles and rocket-propelled grenades.”~ 
Also mentioned is a CIA presence as the article goes on to detail the following information:
~”Furthermore there was a CIA post in Benghazi, located 1.2 miles from the U.S. consulate, used as “a base for, among other things, collecting information on the proliferation of weaponry looted from Libyan government arsenals, including surface-to-air missiles” … and that its security features “were more advanced than those at rented villa where Stevens died.” 
And we know that the CIA has been funneling weapons to the rebels in southern Turkey. The question is whether the CIA has been involved in handing out the heavy weapons from Libya.”~
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/us-syria-heavy-weapons-jihadists-2012-10#ixzz2LZjtVCjh
Now we have with this latest suspect being held in Egypt, whom – apart from his being sought for questioning in his role of the terrorist attack on our Libyan Embassy/Safe-House – also apparently has been accused by authorities in Cairo of transporting weapons from Libya to Egypt. And yet U.S. Officials are being denied direct access to question this man. There is something definitely not right in all of this!
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Benghazi-consulate-Ahmed-arrest/2012/12/08/id/466962
I believe Ambassador Stevens was involved in a gun running operation transporting weapons out of Libya through Turkey, & on to Al Qaeda Jihadist rebels in Syria. This was going on & as far as I’m concerned – & make no mistake about it – Obama knew it! Obama knew & given his involvement of the United States in these Middle East uprisings (bypassing an impotent Congress in the process) which have seen the rise of radical Islamist’s & the spread of Sharia law, that makes him guilty of High Treason!
Obama knows this too!
409369_432080716848441_685437856_n

Obama's Second-Term Agenda: Making Obamacare's Taxes, Spending, and Regulations Permanent

Obama's Second-Term Agenda: Making Obamacare's Taxes, Spending, and Regulations Permanent


WEST PALM BEACH, FL - JULY 19: U.S. President ...
WEST PALM BEACH, FL - JULY 19: U.S. President Barack Obama delivers remarks to seniors at Century Village on July 19, 2012 in West Palm Beach, Florida. (Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife)
On the campaign trail, Mitt Romney has been criticizing President Obama for not proposing an agenda for his second term. “Although President Obama won’t lay out his plan for as second term,” said Romney in Florida last week, “we already know what it will be: a repeat of the last four years.” But in fact, Obama’s second term would look quite different from his first, because it’s in the next four years that Obamacare’s web of new taxes, spending increases, and regulatory mandates will be weaved. Here’s a timeline.
(DISCLOSURE: I am an outside adviser to the Romney campaign on health care issues. The opinions contained herein are mine alone, and do not necessarily correspond to those of the campaign.)
Obamacare was cleverly designed such that its most politically toxic provisions wouldn’t go into effect until after the election. In addition, the Obama administration spent billions of unauthorized taxpayer dollars this year and last so that the impact of its cuts wouldn’t be felt until after the election.
2013: Tax increases and Medicare cuts
Over the next ten years, Obamacare cuts $716 billion from the Medicare program in order to fund its $1.9 trillion in new health spending over the same period. $156 billion of those cuts come from the market-oriented Medicare Advantage program, and those Medicare Advantage cuts start to kick in in 2013. 27 percent of all seniors are enrolled in Medicare Advantage, including 32 percent in Wisconsin and 36 percent in Ohio.

The chief actuary of the Medicare program, Richard Foster, has estimated that these cuts to Medicare Advantage will force more than half of MA enrollees out of the program. “[Obamacare’s] new provisions will…result in less generous benefit packages. We estimate that in 2017, when the MA provisions will be fully phased in, enrollment in MA plans will be lower by about 50 percent (from its projected level of 14.8 million under the prior law to 7.4 million under the new law).”
Those cuts were supposed to kick in during Obama’s first term. But the Department of Health and Human Services decided to illegally spend $8.4 billion of taxpayer money—without Congressional authorization—to prop up the MA program until the 2012 election. Once the election is over, however, the cuts will come.
In addition, a number of Obamacare’s tax increases will come into effect. The law will, among other things, raise taxes on investment income, itemized medical expenses, privately-sponsored retiree prescription-drug coverage, medical devices, and flexible spending accounts.
2014: Individual mandate, new spending, more taxes
2014 is the critical year for Obamacare. It’s the year that the bulk of the law’s provisions go into effect. Notably, it’s the year that the law’s controversial individual mandate goes into effect, requiring most Americans to buy a government-sanctioned health insurance product. But the mandate is too weak, and will incentivize Americans to skip out on insurance and take advantage of Obamacare’s requirement that insurers take them after they’ve already fallen ill.
In addition, 2014 is the year that Obamacare’s employer mandate begins to be enforced. That mandate requires all businesses with 50 or more workers to provide government-approved health insurance to all of their workers, or face steep fines. In reality, the mandate will encourage many employers to stop hiring full-time workers, or drop coverage so that workers can fall under the law’s subsidized exchanges.
2014 is also the year that Obamacare’s gusher of new spending kicks in, through its expansion of the Medicaid program and the institution of federally subsidized health insurance exchanges. Once these two programs are in place, it will become impossible to repeal Obamacare.
In 2014, Obamacare guts the laws related to consumer-driven health plans, by capping deductibles in the small-group market at $2,000 for individuals and $4,000 for families, down from $6,050 and $12,100 today. By forcing insurers to offer lower deductibles, Obamacare will drive premiums upward, making insurance less affordable, and diminishing the utility of health-savings accounts.
Also, in 2014, Obamacare will force insurers covering small businesses and individuals to cover a set of “essential health benefits” defined by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. By forcing all insurers to cover what Washington wants, regardless of cost, insurance will become more expensive.
In addition, the law will impose a tax on health insurance premiums, though labor unions and government-sponsored plans are exempted from the tax. The premium tax is probably the dumbest provision in Obamacare, and that’s saying a lot: insurers will be forced to pass the cost of the tax onto policyholders, making health insurance less affordable and driving government subsidies upward in compensation.
2015-16: More spending and tax increases
If President Obama is reelected, he will preside over significant spending and tax increases during the latter half of his second term. In 2010, the Congressional Budget Office calculated that the ten-year cost of Obamacare, in terms of its spending increases, was $944 billion. In July of 2012, the CBO’s ten-year spending estimate was $1.9 trillion. By 2015, the CBO’s ten-year spending projections are likely to exceed $2.5 trillion.

Our federal debt exceeds $16 trillion today. Under the Congressional Budget Office’s alternative fiscal scenario—its most realistic estimate of future spending and revenue—Obama’s second term will add another $4 trillion to the federal debt, along with the $6 trillion he incurred in his first term. It wasn’t that long ago—2008, in fact—when Senator Obama called George W. Bush “unpatriotic” for racking up $4 trillion in debt during his eight years in office.
2017 and beyond: Bankrupt hospitals; premium hikes; doctor shortages
Richard Foster, the chief actuary of the Medicare program in the Obama administration, estimates that Obamacare’s cuts to Medicare will drive 15 percent of Medicare providers out of business by 2019, and even more in future years. “Absent other changes,” says Foster, “the lower Medicare payment rates would result in negative total facility margins for an estimated 15 percent of hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, and home health agencies by 2019, and this percentage would reach roughly 25 percent in 2030 and 40 percent by 2050.”
Obama adviser Jonathan Gruber, who was heavily involved in designing Obamacare’s insurance regulations, calculates that the law will significantly drive up health insurance premiums in the non-group market: by 2016, premiums will go up by an average of 19 percent in Colorado, and 30 percent in Wisconsin, relative to what they would have been without Obamacare. And that’s the average; due to Obamacare’s community rating provision, premiums for young people will go up even more.
In addition, the law will make it harder for tens of millions of Americans to see their doctors, especially those with government-sponsored health insurance. Just as the baby boomers are retiring, requiring more health care, baby boomer physicians will also be retiring. As a result, even without Obamacare, we’ll have less doctors per capita than we need. On top of that, Obamacare will subsidize increased health-care consumption by $1.9 trillion, without increasing the supply of physicians. Under such a system, patients with government-sponsored insurance, who pay less than private insurers, will move to the back of the line.
So far, the case against Obamacare has been about what the law will do in the future. If President Obama is reelected, the future will be at hand.Obama in '08: Adding $4 Trillion to Debt Is Unpatriotic: http://youtu.be/NBtpoTj6l1o via @youtube

Here Comes The Boom: CMS Slashes Medicare Advantage; 'Disarray For Many Seniors'

Here Comes The Boom: CMS Slashes Medicare Advantage; 'Disarray For Many Seniors'

WASHINGTON - DECEMBER 23:  U.S. President Bara...
WASHINGTON - DECEMBER 23: U.S. President Barack Obama signs the payroll tax bill in the Oval Office December 23, 2011 in Washington, DC. Payroll taxes fund Social Security and Medicare. (Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife)
Though Democrats denied it during the 2012 campaign, Obamacare cut Medicare by $716 billion in order to partially fund $1.9 trillion in new entitlement spending over the next ten years. A big chunk of those Medicare cuts came from the market-oriented Medicare Advantage program. Cleverly, the Obama administration postponed the Medicare Advantage cuts until after the election, so as to persuade seniors that everything would be just fine. But the election is over. On Friday, the administration announced that it would be significantly reducing funding for the popular program. Obama’s proposal, according to one analyst, “would turn almost every plan in the industry unprofitable.”

Democrats have long been hostile to the Medicare Advantage program, which allows seniors to get their Medicare coverage through plans administered by private insurers. Today, more than a quarter of retirees get their coverage through Medicare Advantage, and the program has experienced rapid growth over the past decade. Richard Foster, the recently-retired chief actuary of the Medicare program, has projected that Obamacare’s cuts to Medicare Advantage would force half of its current enrollees to switch back to the old, 1965-vintage Medicare program. Robert Book and James Capretta estimate that this will cost enrollees an average of $3,714 in 2017 alone.
New rates to be ‘enormously disruptive’
The new rates proposed by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, a.k.a. CMS, will have the net effect of reducing payments to Medicare Advantage plans by 7 to 8 percent in 2014, according to Citi managed care analyst Carl McDonald. “This includes the 2.3% reduction in per capita growth rate announced by CMS on Friday, and estimated 2-3% drop as rates move to parity with fee for service…a 1.5% reduction associated with the change in coding intensity adjustment” and the 2% health insurance premium tax. “These negatives are partially offset by an estimated 1% benefit from improved Star quality ratings, re-basing, better risk scores, and fee for service normalization, resulting in an overall decline of 7-8%,” wrote McDonald yesterday in a note to clients.
Because the typical for-profit managed care plan targets profit margins of only 5 percent, and non-profits even less, the net consequence would “turn almost every plan in the industry unprofitable,” according to McDonald, unless CMS changes its proposal. “If implemented, these rates and the program changes CMS is suggesting would be enormously disruptive to Medicare Advantage, likely forcing a number of smaller plans out of the business and creating disarray for many seniors.”
Could CMS bend the rules again?
CMS didn’t issue these rates because they’re mean. Obamacare requires these rate cuts; indeed, as I noted above, they were supposed to have been implemented before the election. “We appreciate that plans are facing several legislatively mandated changes affecting payment for 2014,” CMS’ Jonathan Blum and Paul Spitalnic write in their 199-page report. “We solicit comment on suggestions to address these challenges within the parameters of current law.” The final rates are to be issued on April 1.
CMS is likely to come under pressure to once again postpone the cuts, by engaging in rule-bending or accounting gimmicks. If CMS assumes that Congress passes a “doc fix” by the end of the year, in order to avoid a 25 percent reduction in physician reimbursement rates, plans could benefit from a 4 percent increase in government reimbursements. Understandably, CMS normally doesn’t incorporate the “doc fix” into its calculations unless one has been actually passed by Congress. CMS could also decline to implement a recalibration of its risk adjustment formula, something that would ease the pressure on insurers.
2014 will be the year when reality hits
It’s important to reduce the amount that the government spends on Medicare, and to do so in a way that minimally affects the care that seniors receive. The simplest way to do this is to gradually raise Medicare’s eligibility age by three months each year. Now that we have Obamacare’s insurance exchanges to support lower- to middle-income seniors, it’s not necessary to force Americans to pay taxes in order to subsidize health insurance for wealthy seniors like Warren Buffett and Mitt Romney.
But Obamacare chose a different path, one that will force more Americans into creaky, out-of-date programs like Medicaid and Sixties-era fee-for-service Medicare. The law will dramatically increase the cost of privately-purchased health insurance, something that Obamacare supporters are only now starting to admit.
There will be much more to talk about as the Obama administration issues the rates, regulations, and mandates that the “Affordable Care Act” requires. Stay tuned.
Follow Avik on Facebook and on Twitter at @aviksaroy.

Vast New Spying Program Was Started in Secret on a Bogus Pretext

Vast New Spying Program Was Started in Secret on a Bogus Pretext

By Chris Calabrese, Legislative Counsel, ACLU Washington Legislative Office at 11:25am
The Wall Street Journal today published (alternate link) an in-depth review of a new, relatively unknown program run by the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC). Although we have been warning about the dangers of the program for months, and I testified before Congress about the issue in July, the Journal’s story conveys how controversial the program was even inside the government. It also describes the broad scope of new authority the government is granting itself.
As the Journal reports, under new guidelines issued by the Attorney General back in March,
The rules now allow the little-known National Counterterrorism Center to examine the government files of U.S. citizens for possible criminal behavior, even if there is no reason to suspect them. That is a departure from past practice, which barred the agency from storing information about ordinary Americans unless a person was a terror suspect or related to an investigation.

Now, NCTC can copy entire government databases—flight records, casino-employee lists, the names of Americans hosting foreign-exchange students and many others. The agency has new authority to keep data about innocent U.S. citizens for up to five years, and to analyze it for suspicious patterns of behavior. Previously, both were prohibited.

The changes also allow databases of U.S. civilian information to be given to foreign governments for analysis of their own. In effect, U.S. and foreign governments would be using the information to look for clues that people might commit future crimes.
The program is striking in so many ways. Innocent people can be investigated and their data kept for years. It can be shared with foreign governments. All of this in service of not just terrorism investigations but also investigations of future crimes. In effect, the U.S. government is using information it gathers for its ordinary business to turn its own citizens into the subjects of terrorism investigations.
Meanwhile, all of this is supposed to be against the law. The Privacy Act of 1974 says that information collected by the federal government for one purpose is not supposed to be used for another. However, agencies are attempting to circumvent these rules by publishing boilerplate notices in the Federal Register. Sadly, that practice has become far too common.
Government officials who have a firsthand look at how the program works are stunned by it:
"It's breathtaking" in its scope, said a former senior administration official familiar with the White House debate.
And from Mary Ellen Callahan, then the Chief Privacy Officer at the Department of Homeland Security:
the rules would constitute a "sea change" because, whenever citizens interact with the government, the first question asked will be, are they a terrorist?
Worse, all of this happened in secret, approved by National Security Advisor John Brennan and signed off on by Attorney General Eric Holder. No public debate or comment and suddenly, every citizen can be put under the terrorism microscope.
Ironically, all of these changes to the rules came in response to an attempted attack that had nothing to do with information collection or a U.S. citizen. The government cites the attempted 2009 Christmas bombing by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab as the impetus for the changes. However, as the Journal story makes clear, Abdulmutallab wasn’t a U.S. citizen, and collecting information on him wasn’t a problem. Instead, his own father had identified him to the U.S. government as a potential terrorist. In short, an attack by a known foreign terror suspect was used to justify changes to rules about collecting information on U.S. citizens.
Finally, credit must be given to those who fought the program. It’s clear that DHS, especially the Privacy Officer, Mary Ellen Callahan, and the Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties pushed back hard against this. Nancy Libin, the chief privacy officer at the Department of Justice, also expressed serious reservations and fought an internal battle against the changes. It’s probably not a surprise that none of them are still in government.
If you want to learn more here is a simple guide to the main changes created by the 2012 NCTC guidelines. And here are the Freedom of Information Act documents that we have gathered on NCTC—we will post more as we receive additional records.

ANALYSIS OF MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD'S GENERAL STRATEGIC GOALS FOR NORTH AMERICA MEMORANDUM by Stephen Coughlin September 7, 2007 View the full document Summary: IPT Summary: Stephen Coughlin, a lawyer and U.S. Army Reserve Major, analyzed evidence from the terror-support trial of the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development. It cautioned the Pentagon to be wary of future outreach programs with specific U.S. Islamist organizations after evidence showed they were part of a long-range Muslim Brotherhood plan to subvert "American institutions through outreach, strategic deception and perception management. To undertake outreach with known identified organizations without knowledge of their objectives is to run the extreme risk of strategic manipulation by declared Jihad entities in ways that fulfill stated Muslim Brotherhood objectives as enumerated in the Memorandum." The original document can be found here

ANALYSIS OF MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD'S GENERAL STRATEGIC GOALS FOR NORTH AMERICA MEMORANDUM

 http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/91.pdf

by Stephen Coughlin
September 7, 2007

View the full document
Summary:
IPT Summary: Stephen Coughlin, a lawyer and U.S. Army Reserve Major, analyzed evidence from the terror-support trial of the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development.
It cautioned the Pentagon to be wary of future outreach programs with specific U.S. Islamist organizations after evidence showed they were part of a long-range Muslim Brotherhood plan to subvert "American institutions through outreach, strategic deception and perception management. To undertake outreach with known identified organizations without knowledge of their objectives is to run the extreme risk of strategic manipulation by declared Jihad entities in ways that fulfill stated Muslim Brotherhood objectives as enumerated in the Memorandum."
The original document can be found here

DOD Memo: Saudi Charity Served as Conduit for Arms Shipments into Somalia by U.S. Department of Defense June 29, 2009 View the full document Summary: IPT Summary: A Defense Intelligence memo was discovered on a Federation of American Scientists blog by lawyers for plaintiffs in a major lawsuit that holds Saudi Arabia financially liable for the 9/11 terror attacks. A copy of the document obtained by FAS as part of a Freedom of Information Act in the mid-1980s was provided to the Philadelphia Inquirer by the plaintiffs' lawyers. The heavily redacted memo alleges that the Saudi High Commission for Relief, a well-known Saudi charity, had helped channel military weapons, ammunition, and supplies to Somali National Alliance (SNA) forces in Mogadishu. The charity also received humanitarian supplies from Sudan and Iraq that included military weapons and ammunition, usually hidden in false bottom containers of crates. The document further alleges that an organization called "Hey Tolouyea" or "Hayat al-Ulya," which literally translates to "High Commission" in English, is likely identical to the quasi-governmental committee run by Riyadh governor Prince (Salman) bin Abd al-Azis, responsible for channeling private and public Saudi contributions to various Islamic causes.

DOD Memo: Saudi Charity Served as Conduit for Arms Shipments into Somalia

 http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/274.pdf

by U.S. Department of Defense
June 29, 2009

View the full document
Summary:
IPT Summary: A Defense Intelligence memo was discovered on a Federation of American Scientists blog by lawyers for plaintiffs in a major lawsuit that holds Saudi Arabia financially liable for the 9/11 terror attacks. A copy of the document obtained by FAS as part of a Freedom of Information Act in the mid-1980s was provided to the Philadelphia Inquirer by the plaintiffs' lawyers. The heavily redacted memo alleges that the Saudi High Commission for Relief, a well-known Saudi charity, had helped channel military weapons, ammunition, and supplies to Somali National Alliance (SNA) forces in Mogadishu. The charity also received humanitarian supplies from Sudan and Iraq that included military weapons and ammunition, usually hidden in false bottom containers of crates. The document further alleges that an organization called "Hey Tolouyea" or "Hayat al-Ulya," which literally translates to "High Commission" in English, is likely identical to the quasi-governmental committee run by Riyadh governor Prince (Salman) bin Abd al-Azis, responsible for channeling private and public Saudi contributions to various Islamic causes.
 

Terminology to Define the Terrorists: Recommendations from American Muslims by Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties January 2008 View the full document Summary: A suggested change in terminology for discussions of terrorism by government officials.

Terminology to Define the Terrorists: Recommendations from American Muslims

 http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/126.pdf

by Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties
January 2008

View the full document
Summary:
A suggested change in terminology for discussions of terrorism by government officials.

Mumbai Terror Attacks: Dossier of Evidence by Government of India July 6, 2009 View the full document Summary: The 69-page dossier of evidence linking Pakistan to the Mumbai terror attacks of Nov 26-28, 2008, was handed to Pakistan by the Indian government Jan 5, 2009. The dossier includes transcripts of phone calls made between terrorists and their alleged handlers in Pakistan during the attacks. According to the dossier, the commanders in Pakistan were following events on television and issuing instructions to gunmen to target certain nationalities and religions, maximize casualties, and not to kill Muslims. The commands included orders to cold-bloodedly murder six Jews at the Nariman Chabad House, an orthodox Jewish outreach center in Mumbai. Senior members of Laskar-e-Taiba (LeT), a Pakistan-based terrorist group, are alleged to be involved in the attacks that claimed more than 170 lives. The dossier was originally posted on the online edition of The Hindu.

Mumbai Terror Attacks: Dossier of Evidence

 http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/277.pdf

by Government of India
July 6, 2009

View the full document
Summary:
The 69-page dossier of evidence linking Pakistan to the Mumbai terror attacks of Nov 26-28, 2008, was handed to Pakistan by the Indian government Jan 5, 2009. The dossier includes transcripts of phone calls made between terrorists and their alleged handlers in Pakistan during the attacks. According to the dossier, the commanders in Pakistan were following events on television and issuing instructions to gunmen to target certain nationalities and religions, maximize casualties, and not to kill Muslims. The commands included orders to cold-bloodedly murder six Jews at the Nariman Chabad House, an orthodox Jewish outreach center in Mumbai. Senior members of Laskar-e-Taiba (LeT), a Pakistan-based terrorist group, are alleged to be involved in the attacks that claimed more than 170 lives.
The dossier was originally posted on the online edition of The Hindu.

Documents Showing Awlaki Dined at the Pentagon After 9/11 by FBI (Obtained by FOX News) January 27, 2011 View the full document

Documents Showing Awlaki Dined at the Pentagon After 9/11

 http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/503.pdf

by FBI (Obtained by FOX News)
January 27, 2011

View the full document

Documents Showing Awlaki Dined at the Pentagon After 9/11 by Department of Defense January 27, 2011 View the full document

Documents Showing Awlaki Dined at the Pentagon After 9/11

 http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/504.pdf

by Department of Defense
January 27, 2011

View the full document

Grover Norquist's Relationship Should Give People Pause by Press Release by Rep. Frank Wolf's Office October 5, 2011 View the full document

Grover Norquist's Relationship Should Give People Pause

 http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/679.pdf

by Press Release by Rep. Frank Wolf's Office
October 5, 2011

View the full document

USAID Cancels HLF Registration by USAID September 4, 2000 View the full document Summary: These letters explain USAID's decision to terminate HLF's registration for national security reasons.

USAID Cancels HLF Registration

 http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/42.pdf

by USAID
September 4, 2000

View the full document
Summary:
These letters explain USAID's decision to terminate HLF's registration for national security reasons.

Declassified State Dept. Cable on Bin Laden's Brother-in-Law by State Department January 1994 View the full document

Declassified State Dept. Cable on Bin Laden's Brother-in-Law

 http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/12.pdf

by State Department
January 1994

View the full document

An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America

An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America

 http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/20.pdf

by Mohamed Akram
May 19, 1991

View the full document
Summary:
This May 1991 memo was written by Mohamed Akram, a.k.a. Mohamed Adlouni, for the Shura Council of the Muslim Brotherhood. In the introductory letter, Akram referenced a "long-term plan…approved and adopted" by the Shura Council in 1987 and proposed this memo as a supplement to that plan and requested that the memo be added to the agenda for an upcoming Council meeting. Appended to the document is a list of all Muslim Brotherhood organizations in North America as of 1991.
Notable quotes:
  • Enablement of Islam in North America, meaning: establishing an effective and stable Islamic Movement led by the Muslim Brotherhood which adopts Muslims' causes domestically and globally, and which works to expand the observant Muslim base, aims at unifying and directing Muslims' efforts, presents Islam as a civilization alternative, and supports the global Islamic state, wherever it is.
  • In order for Islam and its Movement to become "a part of the homeland" in which it lives, "stable" in its land, "rooted" in the spirits and minds of its people, "enabled" in the live [sic] of its society and has firmly-established "organizations" on which the Islamic structure is built and with which the testimony of civilization is achieved, the Movement must plan and struggle to obtain "the keys" and the tools of this process in carry [sic] out this grand mission as a "Civilization Jihadist" responsibility which lies on the shoulders of Muslims and – on top of them – the Muslim Brotherhood in this country.
  • The process of settlement is a "Civilization-Jihadist Proecess" with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack. But, would the slackers and the Mujahedeen be equal.

Al Qaeda Manual Found in Manchester (Translation) View the full document Summary: This manual was located by the Manchester, UIC Metropolitan Police during a search of a suspect's home. The manual was found in n computer file described as the "military series" related to the "Declaration of Jihad." The manual was translated into English and was introduced at the embassy bombing trial in New York.

Al Qaeda Manual Found in Manchester (Translation)

View the full document
Summary:
This manual was located by the Manchester, UIC Metropolitan Police during a search of a suspect's home. The manual was found in n computer file described as the "military series" related to the "Declaration of Jihad." The manual was translated into English and was introduced at the embassy bombing trial in New York.
 http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/10.pdf

Islamist Group Tries to Kill Use of "Islamist"

After doing everything it can to ensconce a new word, "Islamophobia," into conversational English, the nation's most visible Islamist group is trying to stop use of a well-established word: Islamist.
Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) national spokesman Ibrahim Hooper released a column urging journalists to "Drop the term 'Islamist.'"
It was added to the latest Associated Press Stylebook – the guide for spelling, punctuation and other rules – that is used by journalists at the smallest community papers and the largest television networks, Hooper wrote. AP defines Islamists as "Those who view the Quran as a political model encompass a wide range of Muslims, from mainstream politicians to militants known as jihadi."
Journalists should ignore that, Hooper argued, because it is used in a negative way, and used by "Islam-bashers" who really hate the faith of Islam but want to cover their tracks. "Yet they fail to explain how a practicing Muslim can be active in the political arena without attracting the label 'Islamist.'"
Plenty of practicing Muslims work bravely in opposition to Islamist ideology. Britain's Quilliam Foundation was started by Muslims who walked away from radical Islamist thought and now counter the arguments Islamists offer.
"Challenging extremism is the duty of all responsible members of society," the foundation's website says. Not least because cultural insularity and extremism are products of the failures of wider society to foster a shared sense of belonging and to advance liberal democratic values. With Islamist extremism in particular, we believe a more self-critical approach must be adopted by Muslims." [Emphasis added]
Hooper may have had the Investigative Project on Terrorism in mind with his comment, as we try to distinguish between the faith of Islam as practiced by individuals, and its application as the foundation for political action and law. When devout Muslims espouse this "separation between mosque and state," Hooper dismisses them as "a mere sock puppet for Islam haters and an enabler of Islamophobia."
Hooper's demand that "Islamist" be removed from the lexicon is ironic, since his bosses seemed more than comfortable placing themselves firmly in the world of "Islamists" back in 1993. CAIR founders Omar Ahmad and Nihad Awad joined two dozen Hamas supporters in Philadelphia for a fall weekend in an urgent meeting called to discuss ways to "derail" the U.S.-brokered Oslo Accords.
The FBI bugged the meeting room. Transcripts entered into evidence during a 2008 Hamas-financing trial show the participants referred to "Islamists" dozens of times. Ahmad helped lead the meeting, helping determine who might attend and calling it to order.
The FBI described the group as Hamas members and supporters. "Hamas' agenda was not only to eliminate Israel," prosecutors wrote, "but also to sabotage the Oslo Accords and to replace the secular PA regime with an Islamist government that would control all of Israel, the West Bank and Gaza."
Awad, who remains CAIR's executive director nearly 20 years later, addressed the meeting about media strategies.
"The fourth goal is becoming open to the media in the U.S. and the Western society to ease the intensity of the campaign and to explain the legality of the opposition led by the Islamists," he said. [Emphasis added]
Ahmad, who served as CAIR chairman emeritus until 2009, also discussed media strategy for Islamists in America.
"The first goal was relating to activism among Muslims and Palestinians but we must broadcast our point of view in U. S. media. There is a very good reason for that which is bringing the voice of the Islamists to the surface, keeping them informed and explaining their positions in order to case the severity of allegations of radicalism and other things," Ahmad said. [Emphasis added] "This will also make our position known to Muslims and sympathizers whom we cannot reach via our media tools."
A speaker identified only as "Akram" told the group opposition to the Oslo deal did not "have anything to do with any living conditions. We have undisputable rights in Palestine as Islamists. They don't change with the changing of the events." Later, he said Islamists were the only ones willing to oppose the agreement publicly.
"We must be clear that we oppose this thing 100% and that we, the Islamists ... different from what is being suggested for Palestinian activism," Akram said. No one disagreed.
Their claim on Palestine was not limited to the West Bank and Gaza, Ahmad said, agreeing it was not a wise strategy to say so publicly.
"We've always demanded the 1948 territories," Ahmad said.
"Yes," an unidentified speaker responded, "but we don't say that publicly. You cannot say it publicly. In front of the Americans..."
"No," Ahmad agreed, "we didn't say that to the Americans."
Nearly 20 years later, Ahmad's organization doesn't want Americans to say the same words he and his colleagues embraced.
"Unfortunately, the term 'Islamist' has become shorthand for 'Muslims we don't like,'" Hooper wrote. "It is currently used in an almost exclusively pejorative context and is often coupled with the term 'extremist,' giving it an even more negative slant."
This is revisionist history. In addition to Hamas supporters, fundraisers for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad used the "Islamist" in laudatory fashion. During a 1989 conference by Sami Al-Arian's Islamic Committee for Palestine, Cleveland Imam Fawaz Damra described heroic battles Islamists waged in sparking the intifada against Israel.
"We acknowledge that Islamists were absent from the arena of jihad for a long while, Damra said. "This is not the time to examine the causes of that absence. But this was their return with an unflagging spirit, determined to do battle and to confront ....an important development. Then occurred the fleeing operation, executed by six mujahideen towards the middle of the fifth month of '87. This was followed by specific operations executed by these youth, one of the most important of which was the killing of the Military Police chief in Gaza. In other words, the events rekindled the spirit of hope and the spirit of self-confidence in the people."
Damra would later describe Al-Arian's committee as "the active arm of the Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine" and urge people to write checks intended for the Jihad to "write it in the name if the Islamic Committee for Palestine, 'ICP' for short."
Evidence also showed that Al-Arian served as secretary on the Palestinian Islamic Jihad's governing board.
CAIR defended both men.
CAIR officials also have supported the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, even as it rammed through a constitution that epitomizes Islamist aspirations and makes religious law the law of the land. The Brotherhood has no problem calling itself Islamist.
If the word is to be used, Hooper wrote, it "should not be used unless a group applies the term to itself." So the Brotherhood can be called "Islamist."
CAIR doesn't use the term itself, not "to the Americans," anyway, but we've offered a tiny sample of the examples of Islamists using the word privately. CAIR's background – the FBI cut off contact with the group in 2008 over questions about "whether there continues to be a connection between CAIR or its executives and HAMAS – should be taken into consideration by anyone entertaining Hooper's request to serve as language cop.
By the way, the AP did remove a related word from the newest Stylebook: Islamophobia.

Cables Show State Department Disregarded Muslim Brotherhood Threat

The Obama administration chose to listen to voices suggesting that Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood was moderate rather than those who warned it would resort to violence if it came to power, cables obtained by the Investigative Project on Terrorism show.
A look at recent headlines involving Egypt's new Islamist-dominated government makes clear the radical, threatening path its leaders are charting, and that those who urged caution in dealings with the Muslim Brotherhood were prophetic. Criticism of President Mohamed Morsi in the media and among opposition groups leads to criminal investigations. Even a comedian is being targeted.
The Muslim Brotherhood, to which Morsi remains closely tied, routinely threatens Israel and issues anti-Semitic statements.
Meanwhile, Islamists rammed through a new constitution which sparked international concern for women's and minority rights. Some analysts say the Brotherhood's actions have pushed Egypt closer to civil war.
The reaction from Washington has been muted at best.
The Obama administration repeatedly ignored and downplayed advance warnings that the Muslim Brotherhood would resort to violent and undemocratic tactics if it came to power, Egyptian opposition leader Michael Meunier tells the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT).
For example, a Sept. 20, 2011 State Department cable obtained by the IPT reports on a Muslim Brotherhood representative telling the U.S. embassy in Cairo that the "MB (Muslim Brotherhood) was not the extremist organization the West feared."
Such assurances have been reflected in comments from Obama administration officials, including the Secretary of State and Director of National Intelligence.
In an April 15, 2010 cable, U.S. Ambassador Anne Patterson reported that Muslim Brotherhood Supreme Guide Mohammed Badie had "reaffirmed the MB was a non-violent" movement.
Director of National Intelligence James Clapper similarly described the Muslim Brotherhood in February 2011 as "largely secular" and said that it "eschewed violence." Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton listed the Brotherhood's alleged commitment to nonviolence as among the reasons the State Department planned to expand its contacts with the group in a June 30, 2011 statement.
In the wake of renewed street protests after Morsi's November decree seizing extrajudicial power, and amid reports of violence and intimidation during last month's constitutional vote, Clinton and other Obama administration officials have issued tepid and general statements about nonviolence and protecting the rights of all Egyptians.
"The future of Egypt's democracy depends on forging a broader consensus behind its new democratic rules and institutions. Many Egyptians have voiced deep concerns about the substance of the constitution and the constitutional process," State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell said in a Dec. 25 press release. "President Morsi, as the democratically elected leader of Egypt, has a special responsibility to move forward in a way that recognizes the urgent need to bridge divisions, build trust, and broaden support for the political process."
Foreign Aid Unaffected
However, the administration has been silent on whether Egypt's march toward theocracy might affect the roughly $2 billion in foreign aid it receives annually from the United States.
U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the outgoing chairwoman of the House Foreign Relations Committee, introduced legislation that would place conditions on foreign aid to Egypt.
"I am extremely concerned that Egypt has moved from one dictatorship to another while leaving democracy in the dust," Ros-Lehtinen told The Hill. "Morsi has actively worked to suppress the voices of dissent and opposition in Egypt while incrementally increasing his own power."
Foreign aid should promote our interests, Ros-Lehtinen added, but the Obama administration remains committed to sending a $450 million emergency aid package without trying to influence Egyptian policy.
In an email to the IPT last week, the State Department defended the package as essential for supporting a "democratic Egypt" and for "defeating extremism."
In contrast, the German government, which may delay plans to forgive up to $316 million in debt because of concerns that Egypt is sliding back into dictatorship.
"There is the danger that the dictatorial system of ousted president (Hosni) Mubarak is returning," German Development Minister Dirk Niebel told the daily Berliner Zeitung.
Leading those concerns are provisions of the newly passed Egyptian Constitution. Liberal groups such as Amnesty International have roundly denounced it as a threat to human rights.
"The new constitution will guide all Egyptian institutions and it should set out the vision for the new Egypt, one based on human rights and the rule of law: a document which is the ultimate guarantor against abuse. The constitution must guarantee the rights of all Egyptians, not just the majority," said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, Amnesty's deputy director for the Middle East and North Africa. "But the approved draft comes nowhere near this. Provisions that purport to protect rights mask new restrictions, including on criticism of religion.
She also noted that the constitution ignores women's aspirations and "blocks the path to equality between men and women."
Minorities Threatened
The Muslim Brotherhood resorted to fear and intimidation tactics throughout the constitutional referendum process, Meunier says. Ten protesters were killed when Morsi used his own militia to attack opponents. Media opponents have been similarly targeted by Morsi's militia and subjected to intimidation. Other opponents reportedly have been taken inside the presidential palace and tortured.
"[Brotherhood officials] are using the same language of Mubarak -- stability. These guys are thugs. It's the same thing," opposition leader Mohamed ElBaradei told Foreign Policy magazine. "At least by what you read, some of the [Brotherhood's] militias are killing some of these guys [in street clashes] – they are using the same tactics. Except they have beards."
Egypt's Coptic Christians, who comprise about 10 percent of the population, face increased discrimination and tens of thousands have already fled Egypt since Hosni Mubarak's February 2011 resignation.
Copts face prospects of the harsh poll tax known as the jizya and increased discrimination once all of the new constitution's provisions are implemented, Meunier says.
He fears that the Islamists intend to use the Copts as scapegoats to provoke a sectarian civil war.
Some Islamists, such as Wagdy Ghoneim, who enjoyed close relations with the Council on American Islamic Relations while he lived in the United States, have issued calls for genocide against the Copts.
"The day Egyptians — and I don't even mean the Muslim Brotherhood or Salafis, regular Egyptians — feel that you are against them, you will be wiped off the face of the earth. I'm warning you now: do not play with fire!" Ghoneim said in a Gatestone Institute report. "I want to remind you that Egypt is a Muslim country.... if you don't like the Muslim Sharia, you have eight countries that have a Cross on their flag [in Europe], so go to them. However, if you want to stay here in Egypt with us, know your place and be respectful."
Egyptian feminists have raised similar concerns over the constitution's effect on women's rights.
"It's a disaster. There isn't a single article in the draft constitution that mentions the rights of women," Egyptian feminist Nihan Abu El Konsam told Deutsche Welle. "We lawyers have made numerous proposals for constitutional articles that would make up for the social and cultural problems in our society and would allow women to finally achieve equal rights. But the Islamists ignored it."
Women suffer discrimination in all areas, especially with regard to income and education, El Konsam said. They also have an unemployment rate four times higher than men, and women also have no protections from domestic abuse.
"When we do go to court, the offender is acquitted," El Konsam said.
Explicit questions about the Muslim Brotherhood's commitment to democracy and its commitment to women's rights and religious freedom for the Copts have been absent in the State Department's public response.
"You cannot leave out half the population and claim that you are committed to democracy," Clinton said in her June 30, 2011 address announcing expanded ties with the Brotherhood.
Spokesman Peter Velasco declined to comment when the IPT asked why the State Department had not issued stronger language against the Egyptian government's role in the violence.
"As we have said in our daily press briefing, we continue to condemn violence of any kind," Velasco said.
Meunier and other opposition leaders charge that the referendum on the constitution was marred by widespread voter fraud, and that certain voters such as the many of the nation's Coptic Christians were deterred from voting.
The allegations were substantiated by Egypt's National Council of Human Rights (NCHR). It received 1,137 complaints of voter irregularities during the referendum process. These included allegations of vote-buying outside of polling stations and a lack of voter lists.
Perception Takes Root
Meunier says he repeatedly warned U.S. embassy officials in meetings over the last few years that the Muslim Brotherhood posed a threat to freedom and democracy in Egypt, but he says his concerns and those of others he knows were dismissed.
Meetings between American officials and the Muslim Brotherhood has created a perception that the U.S. government supports the Brotherhood over other factions, Meunier says.
Another cable dated a July 21, 2011 noted this perception, saying a Muslim Brotherhood opponent had told the embassy that he and others "believed that the U.S. was supporting the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) and wished to see a religious state in Egypt." – something the embassy denied.
A "handful of meetings was hardly evidence of any endorsement or special relationship," with the Brotherhood, the cable said. Any notion the United States supported a Brotherhood-led religious state "is absurd."
But this perception has contributed to a growing anti-American sentiment among Egypt's secular pro-democracy leaders. U.S. Rep. Sue Myrick, R-N.C., the former chairwoman of the intelligence subcommittee on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, believes the State Department has refused to acknowledge the Brotherhood's true nature.
"I do not think they have taken the warnings seriously," Myrick said. "They also don't take it seriously that the Muslim Brotherhood is not democratic."
Cables obtained by the IPT show that other sources made it clear to the State Department that the Muslim Brotherhood was not moderate and that it was being radicalized in the years leading up to Morsi's June election.
One cable dated Oct. 21, 2009 states that Rafik Habib, a Coptic Christian scholar with close ties to Mehdi Akef, the Brotherhood's then-supreme guide, informed a political officer at the embassy that the Muslim Brotherhood was not made up of "moderates."
Habib also served until recently as a member of the Muslim Brotherhood's political wing, the Freedom and Justice Party, and as an aide to Morsi.
"Habib calls the 'left wing' of the MB (Eryan, Fotouh, and to some extent the Deputy Guide Mohammed Habib) pragmatic but cautioned that they should not be viewed as 'moderates,'" U.S. Ambassador to Egypt Margaret Scobey wrote in the Oct. 21, 2009 cable to the office of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. "Their goals are the same as 'conservative' MB's; a religious state where Shariah is applied to all aspects of life."
This section was redacted from the version of the cable obtained by IPT through our request under the Freedom of Information Act, but was retrieved through a search of the Wikileaks database.
The radicalization of the Muslim Brotherhood's younger members, and the rise of more radical Islamists, was noted in several other 2009 cables.
The Salafi influence in Egyptian politics was rising and "younger members of the Brotherhood were becoming increasingly Salafi-oriented," Scobey noted in a Feb. 4, 2009 cable.
Muslim televangelist Moez Massoud told embassy personnel he feared "combination of Salafist ultra-orthodox Islam with MB political activism," Scobey noted in a May 27, 2009 cable.
Massoud's fear reached fruition in October 2011 when the Muslim Brotherhood and radical Salafists announced an alliance to help transform Egypt into an Islamic state.
Other cables show that the State Department knew about the Muslim Brotherhood's theocratic designs in 2007 – well before Mubarak looked vulnerable.
Its desire to impose an Islamic theocracy was noted by the U.S. embassy in a July 11, 2007 cable by then-U.S. Ambassador to Egypt, Francis Ricciardone, observing that the group's political platform sought "to amend laws and make them accordant with Islamic shari'a."
The platform was not simply about setting forth the Muslim Brotherhood's ideas, but "[r]ather, it was conceived of to 'manage the affairs of society and people,'" Ricciardone noted in an Oct. 24, 2007 cable.
That year, Middle East scholar Mohamed Elmenshawy warned that the platform's insistence on the creation of a Council of Islamic Scholars could turn Egypt into Iran.
"Perhaps the most alarming feature of the draft platform is the call to create a Majlis Ulama, or Council of Islamic Scholars, that could end up being elected by Islamic clerics, not through free and fair elections," Elmenshawy wrote in the Christian Science Monitor. "Reminiscent of Iran's Guardian Council, this undemocratically selected body could have the power vested by the state to veto any and all legislation passed by the Egyptian parliament and approved by the president that is not compatible with Islamic Shariah law."
Opposition leaders such as Meunier see similarities to Elmenshawy 's concerns in Article 4 of the recently passed constitution. It requires that Al-Azhar University's senior scholars be consulted on matters pertaining to Islamic law.

The New 'Silk Route;' Weapons to Gaza and Beyond

November's "Pillar of Defense" operation by the Israeli military included a couple of unpleasant surprises for Israeli citizens. For the first time, Palestinian terrorists fired missiles at the country's two population centers, Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, sending residents scurrying for shelter.
For years, Palestinian rocket fire was isolated to smaller cities in southern Israel. Israeli military officials say weapons smuggled into Gaza via the new "Silk Route," a pipeline created and protected by governments including Iran, Sudan and others, made that dramatic new range possible.
In a wide-ranging interview for the Investigative Project on Terrorism, a senior source in the Israeli Defense Force, speaking on condition of anonymity, explained how that smuggling works and what it means.
"You can see how it goes between Iran, northern Sudan, via Egypt. It didn't gradually evolve and develop like the old merchant trail, 'The Silk Route.' It's not something built thousands of years ago. It is something that we believe government officials sat down and decided on. Let me put it this way; in such countries, under such regimes, we don't believe that anything is being done without the permission and knowledge of the local power."
The official, whose assessments are based on his day-to-day experience of combating efforts to supply terror groups in Gaza, said the smuggling of more sophisticated weaponry was facilitated in part by upheaval in North Africa.
"When we are talking about the smuggling of illegal arms into the Gaza Strip" the officer began, "we should focus on a few members of this notorious community; we are talking about Iran, north Sudan, Libya as a state, not a government, and of course, the Sinai Peninsula."
"Libya has become a serious problem since the fall of the Gaddafi regime because it is an open black market" he said. "Unlike Iran and Sudan, there is no government behind what is going on there. There were huge stocks of weapons (some of it western), that are now being offered to the one able to pay the highest price. The Palestinians are taking advantage of that. They will send procurements missions to look for specific items there (in Libya), or sometimes they are taking part in open auctions in Sinai to whoever will pay the most for weapons like SSR's, Anti-Tank Guided Missiles, MANPADs etc."
The flow of arms from Iran to specific groups in Gaza has long been a major concern for Israel and others seeking stability in the region. A Western intelligence report highlighted by Reuters back in September, confirmed a long-held Israeli view, saying "Planes are flying from Iran to Syria via Iraq on an almost daily basis, carrying IRGC (Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps) personnel and tens of tons of weapons to arm the Syrian security forces and militias fighting against the rebels."
"Iran continues to be the major arms supplier to the Palestinian organisations" the officer said. They have been for quite a few years, every year spending many tens of millions of US dollars. Their main transfer route to the Gaza Strip is via north Sudan and Syria, we believe in cooperation with local governments, or at least with the awareness of such governments. The Iranians have used civilian cargo and civilian flights in order to deliver such shipments even without the knowledge of passengers taking seats on such flights."
Israel believes that some of that weaponry found its way to arm Hizballah in South Lebanon, while some also arrived further down the line in Hamas-controlled Gaza. In September, news of the shipments reportedly prompted then-U.S. Sen. John Kerry to threaten to withdraw aid from Iraq, (where the planes sometimes stop in transit and through whose airspace the flights pass), unless such planes were stopped and searched as a matter of routine.
"These were flights that originated in Tehran and went to Damascus, cargo flights or civilian flights with passengers/tourists flying without knowing that in the belly of the plane there are explosives and other such materials" the Israeli officer said. "Right now there are bans against the Iran Air cargo planes and Mahan Air (which are supposed to be civilian companies).These are restrictions led by the U.S. and Europe."
No sooner had the recent Israel/Hamas conflict ended than Iran publicly pledged to re-arm its Gazan militias. The process had been made more difficult following the much publicised destruction of the Yarmouk factory in Sudan in late-October, blown up by a series of missiles strikes attributed by the Sudanese government to the Israeli air force. Sudanese Information Minister Ahmad Bilal Osman told Al Jazeera the day after the attack, "Israel has accused Sudan of sending arms to Hamas. These allegations are not correct."
Intelligence showed that the factory was being used as an assembly point for Iranian Fajr5 missiles and other weaponry shipped to Sudan and subsequently transported through Egypt's Suez Canal. From there it was smuggled into Gaza through the network of tunnels overseen by the Hamas authorities.
A massive increase in the trafficking of missiles from Sudan to Gaza corresponds with Hosni Mubarak's fall in Egypt, and the subsequent rise to power of the Muslim Brotherhood, (the parent organization of Hamas), and its leader, Mohammed Morsi.
Palestinian terrorists have obtained Fajr5 rockets, anti-tank and surface-to-surface missiles and rockets that can travel 40 kilometers.
What differentiates this route from others is the quality of arms coming through. It is what we call 'Equilibrium Breaking Arms,' things that are not that common in the area. Only the participation of governments in the armament process can deliver to Sinai. You don't get coastal missiles like we caught on the Victoria in March 2011 by purchasing them on Ebay. It is something that a government planned will come from a particular ship on its way to Egypt, then on through Sinai which is the bottleneck of all smuggling activities in the Gaza Strip."
The interception of the freighter Victoria was one of three high-profile weapons seizures at sea by Israel during the last decade in which more than 450 tons of weapons were seized. Katyusha rockets, thousands of mortars, F-704 anti-ship missiles, two rocket launchers, two British-made radar systems, and tens of thousands of rounds of ammunition suitable for AK-47 assault rifles, were just part of the haul. Despite those raids, weapons still get through.
"In 2009 Fajr5 rockets entered the Gaza Strip without us knowing about it. We discovered that later on. There is no 100 percent success in this field of business. We are doing our best to see that we are on any movement of such kind, but yes, of course we are never sure we know everything. We cannot allow coastal missiles to enter the Gaza Strip as then all merchant routes will be under threat. We have gas platforms now on the coast of Israel which could potentially be placed in danger by such missiles."
The discovery in recent years of vast quantities of natural gas off the coast of Israel could prove a huge boon to the Israeli economy over the next generation, but the terminals are viewed as a prime target for terrorist attacks and their security is clearly of paramount importance to the Israeli Defence Force and security services.
The other critical issue that the IDF officer touched on is the huge danger posed to both Israel and Egypt by the lawlessness in the Sinai Peninsula and the plethora of weaponry arriving there, much of it from the now dysfunctional Libya. Stopping those weapons from reaching Gaza has not proven to be a priority for Egypt, either.
"They do not want any part of the Palestinian problem on their shoulders. If they stop the tunnel industry they will have to open more border crossings and let more supplies in, and that they don't want to do. But when it comes to Libyan weapons any group can go there [Sinai] to buy, say, anti-tank missiles or MANPAD's."
Egyptian forces did intercept a consignment of U.S.-made anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles smuggled out of Libya in early January, and another again two weeks later. These came at a time when Morsi was desperately trying to convince the U.S. that its offer of billions of dollars of aid and F16 fighters should be honored despite concerns over Morsi's governance.
Last March, former IDF southern command head Yom Tov Samia went on the record on this issue, stating, "Egypt has been playing the same game since 1967: Whenever they want to be the bad guy, they're bad guys, when they want to be the good guys, they're the good guys. This situation has to come to an end. Egypt cannot continue to play the good and the bad guy whenever it's convenient for them."
Open air auctions of lethal weapons are taking place in Sinai, and whoever comes up with the most cash, whoever they are, takes the goods and walks.
"These weapons are then not under the control or 'political wisdom' of Hamas leaders or PIJ leaders. They might well end up under the control of a small group of Al Qaeda who might decide for themselves that they are now going to shoot at an airplane carrying European tourists travelling into Sharm El Sheik (Sinai resort), or shooting at an airplane landing at Aqaba [Jordan]."
Sinai's increasing instability is a concern far beyond Israel, the source emphasized, and already serves as an open market for arms, raw materials and technology flowing into the Gaza Strip.
"There are more and more contacts between Al Qaeda and the small groups in Sinai. Egypt finds it [Sinai] hard to police after years of neglect. As far I know there are a quarter of a million Bedouins that were never governed, that were, and still are discriminated against by local authorities...and they have lately become more and more religious. If at the beginning we saw these tribes supporting terror cells for the sake of money, now we see it becoming more an ideological support, and we see more and more cases that these groups of Al Qaeda-influenced extreme Jihadists are becoming more powerful than the tribes."
"The attack of August 5 that killed 16 Egyptian soldiers has brought home [to Egypt] that the threat is not only against those who don't follow Allah, but also against less religious Muslims."
This unique insight from someone so closely associated with trying to stop lethal weapons from reaching the hands of radical Islamists in the Sinai, paints a picture of a worrying broadening of the disparate groups and the massive danger that weapons from Iran and the barely functioning new Libya pose to the security of Israel and to Arab nations who don't currently espouse wholly radical Islamist views.
"I believe that most people do not understand the threat to targets other than Israel by the open markets of weapons in the Middle East" the intelligence officer concluded. "I don't think that an American, European, or British customer understands the connection between Libyan black markets and his holiday destination in Aqaba or Sharm El Sheik."
Then a final parting thought, (delivered with absolute certainty), and a wake-up call to those who believe that the reach of Islamic terror will not encroach on their daily life the way it does in other parts of the world.
"If they think this is just Israel's problem, or just a Middle East problem, it is not."
Paul Alster is an Israel-based journalist with a special interest in Israeli/Palestinian relations and Middle East politics. He is a regular contributor to FoxNews.com and the Times of Israel, and blogs at www.paulalster.com