Dalia Mogahed: A Muslim George Gallup or Islamist Ideologue?

DALIA MOGAHED Printer Friendly Page
Dalia Mogahed: A Muslim George Gallup or Islamist Ideologue? By IPT News April 15, 2010 Obama’s Faith Adviser Helped Craft ‘Perfect Islamic State’; Project Sought to ‘Implement’ Muslim Caliphate By Aaron Klein July 26, 2011 Does Sharia Law Promote Women’s Rights? By Cinnamon Stillwell October 20, 2009 Sheik Yusuf Al-Qaradawi's Extremist Islamic Site Runs "Exclusive" Interview with Obama's First Female Muslim Appointee By Pamela Geller April 29, 2009 Sign up to get "Featured Profiles" from DTN: Click here to view a sample Profile.		Co-authored, with Professor John Esposito, the 2008 book Who Speaks for Islam?: What a Billion Muslims Really Think Was appointed in 2009 by President Barack Obama to serve on his Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships Stated that the Western view of Sharia is "oversimplified," and that the majority of Muslim women around the world associate Islamic Law with "gender justice" Views the United States as a nation rife with discrimination against Muslims   Born in Cairo, Egypt in 1974, Dalia Mogahed immigrated to the United States with her family at age 5 and later became a naturalized American citizen. She earned an undergraduate degree in chemical engineering from the University of Wisconsin, and then a master's degree in business administration from the University of Pittsburgh. After completing her schooling, Mogahed took a job as a marketing researcher for Procter & Gamble. Today she is a senior analyst and executive director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies, a research center that collects and analyzes data on the views of Muslim populations around the world. She also directs the Muslim-West Facts Initiative, through which Gallup and the Coexist Foundation disseminate the findings of the Gallup World Poll. In her role with Gallup, Mogahed in the mid-2000s led a large-scale survey of Muslims in many nations. She subsequently reported that, according to her research, most Muslims worldwide support democracy and freedom of speech; are just as likely as Americans to reject terrorist attacks on civilians; and rarely (only 7%) embrace political radicalism. These findings served as the informational foundation for Who Speaks for Islam? What a Billion Muslims Really Think—a 2008 book that Mogahed co-authored with Professor John Esposito. In addition, Mogahed's Gallup survey provided key data for Feisal Abdul Rauf's “Shariah Index Project” (SIP), whose objective was to “define, interpret and implement the concept of the Islamic State in modern times.” A May 2008 analysis by Robert Satloff of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, however, exposed Mogahed's statistics as deeply flawed. In a 2007 speech in Aspen, Colorado, Mogahed said that terrorists try "to exploit broadly felt legitimate grievances" in order to gain new recruits. According to the Investigative Project on Terrorism, "She also appeared to suggest that the Muslim Brotherhood might be a peaceful alternative to jihadists." In a 2007 interview on Link Television, Mogahed was asked to comment on the harsh punishments (like stonings, canings, and dismemberment) associated with Sharia Law. She replied that Muslims generally tend to view Sharia as a framework for achieving "a more just society," "protection of human rights," and "rule of law." Mogahed has consistently defended Islamist organizations like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), both of which have ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. At the Religion Newswriters Association's annual conference in Washington, DC in September 2008, she stated that it would be unfair for those groups to be "disenfranchised" because of "misinformation" about their alleged ties to Islamic radicals. "[T]here is a concerted effort to silence, you know, institution-building among Muslims," said Mogahed. "And the way to do it is [to] malign these groups. And it's kind of a witch hunt." At the same September conference, Mogahed stated that "'Islamic terrorism' is really a contradiction in terms" because "terrorism is not Islamic by definition." Dismissing the claims of actual terrorists who candidly cite Islamic scripture as the motivation behind their actions, Mogahed said: "My response to that is, you know, Cuba calls itself a democracy, but that's not what we call it." To even suggest that Islamic doctrines might somehow be related to terrorist activity, she added, was "counterproductive" and a "gift" to terrorists, allowing the latter to be seen as "legitimate" and as "moral freedom fighters." Together with such notables as Feisal Abdul Rauf, former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, and American diplomat Dennis Ross, Mogahed was a leading voice in the Leadership Group on U.S.-Muslim Engagement (LGUSME), which in September 2008 issued a 154-page paper replete with recommendations for improving America's relationship with Muslims globally. A number of those suggestions were eventually adopted by President Barack Obama's administration. Most significantly, the LGUSME paper exhorted the United States to engage opposition parties in Egypt (including the Muslim Brotherhood), and to use intermediaries to engage Hamas—in hopes of moderating the terror group. In early 2009, Mogahed stated that “Muslim concerns over injustice have been largely dismissed by the previous [Bush] administration, leaving a vacuum exploited by extremists.” Further, she recommended that “a senior member of the [Barack Obama] administration go on a ‘listening tour’ of the U.S. and hear what Muslim Americans are concerned over”—most notably, issues like “racial profiling, discriminatory immigration policy, and the erosion of civil liberties.” In April 2009, Mogahed was appointed by President Obama to serve on his Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, making Mogahed the first veiled Muslim woman to serve in the White House. She explained that her duty, in this post, would be “to convey ... to the President and other public officials what it is Muslims want.” Nihad Awad, the pro-Hamas executive director of CAIR, said: "Congratulations to Ms. Mogahed on this well-deserved appointment. Her knowledge and expertise will be an asset to this important council. The American Muslim community can feel confident that she will be a balanced and valuable resource on the vital issues the council must address." Also assigned to the Department of Homeland Security's Advisory Council, Mogahed testified before the U.S. Senate on how the American government could effectively engage with the Muslim community. Further, Mogahed was named to the Department of Homeland Security Working Group on Countering Violent Extremism. In May 2009, Mogahed spoke at the 34th annual conference of the Islamic Council of North America; the event was co-sponsored by the Muslim American Society, which was founded to serve as the Muslim Brotherhood’s formal American franchise. Mogahed claims to have played a significant role in helping to draft the speech that President Obama delivered in Cairo in June 2009. In a July 4, 2009 speech to the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), Mogahed depicted supporters of violent jihad as people who crave freedom and democracy but "believe more than do the mainstream that their society, their faith and their way of life is threatened, militarily threatened and in some ways even culturally threatened by the West." "They're more likely to believe that there is a war against their faith," said Mogahed. "They are also more likely to say that moving toward greater democracy will help Muslims' progress." In early October 2009, Mogahed was interviewed on a British television program hosted by Ibtihal Bsis, a member of the Hizb-ut-Tahrir party, which seeks to facilitate the creation of a worldwide Islamic state governed by Sharia Law. When Bsis and another guest (also a Hizb-ut-Tahrir member) stated that Sharia should be “the source of legislation” for all nations in the world, and repeatedly condemned the “man-made law” and the “lethal cocktail of liberty and capitalism” that exists in Western societies, Mogahed did not dispute any of their assertions. Instead she stated that the Western view of Sharia was “oversimplified,” and that the majority of Muslim women around the world associate Islamic Law with “gender justice.” Also in 2009, Mogahed lamented: “Islamophobia in America is very real. Gallup finds that Muslims are among the most unfavorably viewed groups in the U.S.… This presents a grave danger to America as a whole. The disease of racism, by definition, is a bias in judgment....” In a 2010 interview with The National, an English-language publication based in the United Arab Emirates, Mogahed said that her research indicated that "there is just no correlation between religiosity and violent extremism," and that "the majority of people in the Middle East believe in principles of free speech, free press and a representative government." In April 2010, the Investigative Project on Terrorism reported: "Since joining the White House council, Mogahed has worked quietly to ensure that CAIR and ISNA are active participants in its work. And she has reached out to radical Muslim groups like the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), the Muslim American Society (MAS) and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) as well." That same month, Hudson Istitute fellow Lee Smith, author of The Strong Horse: Power, Politics, and the Clash of Arab, wrote: “Dalia Mogahed may be the most influential person guiding the Obama Administration's Middle East outreach…. Mogahed alone has regular access to the White House, through its Senior Director for Global Engagement, Pradeep Ramamurthy, and through Joshua DuBois at the office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.” In addition to her aforementioned affiliations, Mogahed is also a member of Women in International Security, the Brookings Institution's Crisis in the Middle East Task Force, and the World Economic Forum's Global Agenda Council on the Arab World. She serves on the boards of Freedom House and Soliya, and is a nonresident senior public-policy scholar at the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs (based at the American University of Beirut). In 2010, Arabian Business magazine recognized Mogahed as one of the most influential Arab women in the world, and the Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre included her in its 2009 and 2010 lists of the world's 500 most influential Muslims.

Dalia Mogahed

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Dalia Mogahed

Dalia Mogahed (born 1974) is an American scholar of Egyptian origin. She is the Executive Director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies,^[1] a non-partisan research center that provides data and analysis to reflect the views of Muslims all over the world. She was selected as an advisor by U.S. President Barack Obama on the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.

Contents 1 Early life and education 2 Career and influence 3 Recognition and publications 4 Further reading 5 External links 6 Notes

Early life and education

Dalia was born in Cairo, Egypt and immigrated to the United States at the age of 4. She received her undergraduate degree in chemical engineering with a minor in Arabic from the University of Wisconsin and subsequently received her MBA from the Joseph M. Katz Graduate School of Business at the University of Pittsburgh. Upon graduation, Mogahed joined Procter & Gamble as a marketing products researcher.^[2]

Career and influence

Dalia Mogahed chairs the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies,^[1] which conducts research and statistics on Muslims throughout the world. She was selected as an advisor by U.S. President Barack Obama on the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.
Mogahed was invited to testify before the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations about US engagement with Muslim communities, and was a significant contributor to the Homeland Security Advisory Council's Countering Violent Extremism Working Group. She worked with Madeleine Albright and Dennis Ross on the US-Muslim Engagement Project to produce policy recommendations - many of which were adopted by the administration of President Barack Obama.^[3]
Dalia Mogahed is a board member and a leader in several organizations, including the Crisis in the Middle East Task Force of the Brookings Institution, the Executive Board of Women in International Security (WIIS), the leadership group of the Project on US Engagement with the Global Muslim Community, and the World Economic Forum's Global Agenda Council on the Arab World. She is also a nonresident senior public policy scholar at Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs at the American University of Beirut.^[3][4]
Prior to joining Gallup, Mogahed was the founder and director of a cross-cultural consulting practice in the United States, which offered workshops, training programs, and one-to-one coaching on diversity and cultural understanding. Mogahed's clients included school districts, colleges and universities, law enforcement agencies, and community service organizations, as well as local and national media outlets.^[2]

Recognition and publications

Arabian Business magazine recognized Mogahed in 2010, 2011 and 2012 as one of the most influential Arab women in the world,^[5][6][7] and The Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre included Mogahed in its 2009 and 2010 lists of the 500 most influential Muslims. Ashoka: Innovators for the Public named Mogahed the Arab World's Social Innovator of the Year in 2010, and the University of Wisconsin Alumni Association recognized her with its prestigious Forward Under 40 award for outstanding contributions by a graduate of the University of Wisconsin.
Along with John Esposito, she co-authored the book Who Speaks For Islam?: What a Billion Muslims Really Think,^[8] which is based on six years of research and more than 50,000 interviews representing Muslims in more than 35 predominantly Muslim nations. Accounting for more than 90% of the world's Muslim community, this poll is the largest, most comprehensive study of its kind.^[8] Mogahed later appeared as a commentator in the award-winning, PBS-broadcast documentary Inside Islam: What a Billion Muslims Really Think (2010), which was based on her and Esposito's book and produced by Unity Productions Foundation.
Mogahed's analysis has appeared in The Wall Street Journal, Foreign Policy magazine, the Harvard International Review, the Middle East Policy Journal, and many other academic and popular journals.^[3] She was a participant in the second edition of Dubai Debates, on the topic "After the Arab Awakening: Opportunities and Challenges for a New Arab World".^[9]

Further reading

• Esposito, John L. & Mogahed, Dalia (2007), Who speaks for Islam? What a billion Muslims really think, New York: Gallup Press, ISBN 1-59562-017-6^[8]
• LA Times: Muslim woman's appointment as Obama advisor draws cautious optimism
• The Huffington Post: Cairo's Reaction to Obama's Speech
• The Economist: The United States and Islam
• The Atlantic: Anatomy of a Smear by Jeffrey Goldberg

External links

Dalia Mogahed

Dalia Mogahed is an American scholar of Egyptian origin. She is the Executive Director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies, a non-partisan research center that provides data and analysis to reflect the views of Muslims all over the world. Wikipedia

Born: 1974, Cairo

Education: University of Pittsburgh

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Dalia Mogahed

• Gallup profile
• What Americans Think about Muslims: Engagement over Isolation by Dalia Mogahed
• An Interview With Dalia Mogahed: “Corny as it may sound, I am proof of the American dream”

Notes

1. ^ ^{a b} Gallup Center for Muslim Studies
2. ^ ^{a b} About.com: Dalia Mogahed
3. ^ ^{a b c} Gallup Profile
4. ^ Women In International Security
5. ^ Power 100 2010
6. ^ Most Powerful Women 2011
7. ^ Most Powerful 2012
8. ^ ^{a b c} Amazon Review: Who Speaks For Islam?: What a Billion Muslims Really Think
9. ^ Dubai Debates 2 speakers

Authority control	VIAF: 2273793

FLASHBACK: In 1999, Obama wouldn’t support tougher prosecution for school shooters Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/16/flashback-in-1999-obama-wouldnt-support-tougher-prosecution-for-school-shooters/#ixzz2IIXHJBLD

In 1999, State Senator Barack Obama voted “present” on a bill that would require adult prosecution for discharging a gun in or near a school.
That legislation came as a response to the tragic Columbine High School shooting that year.
SB 759 provided that anyone 15 years of age or older charged with aggravated battery with a weapon in school or within 1,000 feet of a school would be charged as an adult.
It passed the Illinois State Senate in a 52-1 vote, with 5 members voting present — including Obama.
That vote followed a trend for the young lawmaker, whose controversial votes on crime legislation often raised eyebrows.
A Chicago Tribune editorial even accused Obama of being a “gutless sheep” for missing a vote on crime legislation in late 1999.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/16/flashback-in-1999-obama-wouldnt-support-tougher-prosecution-for-school-shooters/#ixzz2IIXEIRoi

Poe on Fast and Furious, Libya scandals: We can’t trust Obama administration ‘on what it says about anything’

Poe on Fast and Furious, Libya scandals: We can’t trust Obama administration ‘on what it says about anything’
Daily Caller
Texas Republican Rep. Ted Poe told The Daily Caller he fears the American people and Congress cannot trust at face value anything President Barack Obama’s administration says.
“The result of all this is we’re getting to the point where the credibility of the administration on what it says about anything is not credible,” Poe said in a phone interview about “Operation: Fast and Furious” and the newly surfacing scandal surrounding the terrorist attacks in Libya. “As we get into what they say, we often find that they are wrong and have misled the American people.”
Like Fast and Furious, Poe said “Libya is yet another example where we can’t trust the information from the administration and that’s unfortunate. Any administration should have credibility with the American public. When it says something, it should actually be accurate information instead of backtracking weeks later after they get caught in their misstatements.”
Poe, a former Texas judge in the Houston area before getting elected to Congress in November 2004, told TheDC that he disagrees with the Obama administration and thinks the courts do have a role in determining whether the president and Attorney General Eric Holder should release Fast and Furious documents. Last Monday, the Department of Justice filed a brief asking the judge to dismiss the lawsuit the House brought against the DOJ via the bipartisan vote to hold Holder in civil contempt of Congress.
If the judge sides with Congress, it will force Holder and Obama to release the Fast and Furious documents they are still hiding from the American people under the president’s assertion of executive privilege. If the judge sides with the administration, Holder and Obama will be allowed to keep hiding the documents.
But the Justice Department does not even want to let the arguments play out in court – the administration is arguing the courts have no place in reviewing this case.
“They do not want this resolved in a court of law,” Poe said. “I don’t think they want the issue resolved at all. The law allows for exactly what has taken place – Eric Holder was held in contempt of Congress because he refused to give Congress documents we are entitled to see. The procedure is now that we go to a court of law and the court of law decides whether we prosecute Eric Holder and actually punish him – the required punishment being that he give us the documents, because the administration doesn’t want those documents turned over and they’ll do anything to keep from having to do that. That’s why they moved for the dismissal.”
“They ought to just argue their case before a court of law, which is supposed to resolve this issue, and see what happens,” Poe added, with a promise to the American people: “We’ll get those documents.”

Obama spiritual adviser Jim Wallis of Sojourners has condemned a pro-Israel ad in the New York subway system-describing jihadists as "savages" -- an ad that has divided NYC and resulted in a high profile arrest of a Muslim activist who spray painted graffiti on one of the ads.

The Rev. Jim Wallis, president and CEO of Sojourners said of the campaign, "When Jesus said, 'Love your neighbor as yourself' he didn't add stipulations. He didn't offer any extra addendums or added qualifiers. Christians around the world need to put that into action as often as we can, especially where we see hatred like this."
"Everyone – regardless of race, religion, or creed – deserves to feel welcomed and safe when riding public transit in America," said Wallis. "With tensions across the world at an all-time high, the Christian community is doing what it can to promote non-violence in their own backyard, and this addition of subway ads to an ongoing billboard campaign only reinforces the Christian call to peace."
The ad in New York that has generated the controversy reads: "In Any War Between the Civilized Man and the Savage, Support the Civilized Man. Support Israel. Defeat Jihad."
The ad campaign posted in New York City was only put up after a federal judge ruled the transit agency's prohibition against such ads were a violation of the First Amendment.
The ruckus began when Mona Eltahawy, who describes herself as a "liberal Muslim," attempted to spray paint over one of the ads before Pamela Hall, a Manhattan mother, tried to intervene and stop Eltahawy.

Follow us

"If you don't want paint, you should get out of my way," Eltahawy said before spraying Hall and shouting a profane comment at her.
Prior to her trip to the Times Square subway station, Eltahawy tweeted: "Meetings done; pink spray paint time. #ProudSavage." She was charged with criminal mischief, making graffiti and possession of a graffiti instrument. Eltahawy was also held overnight in jail.
The controversial ad that is called "demeaning" by some groups was developed and promoted by the American Freedom Defense Initiative and its leaders, Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller.
In an interview in Salon, Geller said she expected some of the ads to be defaced but also noted that hundreds of anti-Israel ads have been posted throughout the country and not one of them was defaced.
"The defacement is a metaphor for the entire national conversation on these issues. Hundreds and hundreds of anti-Israel posters ran all over the country. Not one was defaced," said Geller. "One anti-jihad poster goes up, and it's defaced within an hour, while its creator faces defamation, smears and libel. Mona Eltahawy, a Muslim writer who was herself assaulted in Egypt by people she called 'beasts,' took a can of spray paint to our ad and assaulted a pro-freedom blogger, Pamela Hall, who tried to stop her."
"Islamic supremacists and leftist thugs criminally defaced these ads within an hour. This is a physical manifestation of the way the entire conversation, or lack thereof, always goes: anyone who speaks about jihad and Sharia is attacked, defamed, destroyed -- just like these ads. This is exactly what's happening in the media regarding jihad coverage in general."
Eltahawy, who in previous interviews has referred to herself as an activist, has appeared on MSNBC and CNN to make her case.
But not only are activists defending any attacks or criticism of Islam, on Wednesday Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi rejected America's free speech platform by stating that insults to the Islamic prophet Muhammad cannot be brushed aside.
"The obscenities that I have referred to that were recently released as part of an organized campaign against Islamic sanctities are unacceptable," Morsi said, referring to the YouTube video, "Innocence of Muslims," that the Obama administration tried to blame on the violence in Libya that killed a U.S. ambassador and three others.
The White House was later forced to conclude that the attacks on the embassy compound in Libya were indeed a premeditated attack on the U.S.
"We reject this. We cannot accept it," Morsi said. "We will not allow anyone to do this by word or deed."
Attorneys for the American Freedom Law Center filed the suit on behalf of AFDI and is defending their client's right to purchase the ads.
"In light of the Obama administration's abject weakness in the face of savage attacks against U.S. personnel through coordinated violence directed at American sovereignty embodied by our embassies and consulates in the Muslim Middle East, the court's ruling in favor of our cherished First Amendment right to criticize violence driven by Islam's law of Sharia sends a message to our enemies around the world and here at home: Americans will not be cowed into silence," said David Yerushalmi, AFLC senior legal counsel.

Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/obama-faith-adviser-condemns-pro-israel-ad-in-ny-transit-flap-82315/#jdir9TpirA3O7BGU.99

Prepare for What Is Coming: “There is a Very Present Danger that is Facing Every American”

Mac Slavo August 9th, 2012 SHTFplan.com Comments (377) Read by 35,511 people

 A warning from Charlie McGrath, founder of Wide Awake News:

You are under assault. There is a very present danger that is facing every American citizen who listens to me right now. Every citizen of this planet who listens to me right now. You are under attack.
…
This is an assault on you, the American people. This is an assault on your intelligence and an assault on your freedom.
…
It’s about a complete and total dismantling of a nation, a dismantling of a Constitution, and an implementation of control from on high, [from a] dominant financial authority overtaking this planet.
…
It’s not coincidence that Department of Homeland Security and the government in general is picking up all kinds of riot gear.
It’s because they know the collapse is coming.
They know the engineered collapse that has been papered over and caused 100 million people to be on the government dole, that has caused trillions of dollars of our future wealth being given to a bunch of bankers.
They know the day of reckoning is coming, and when it does they want 30,000 drones in the air, they want thousands of riot-ready police force on the street, and they want you bickering with your neighbor because you voted Romney, or you voted Obama.
Get it through your head, folks. If you dont’t understand it by now – time is running out rapidly. You need to understand. There is no change coming with Romney. There is no change coming in term two with Obama.
They dance to the tune of the same people who have not been prosecuted or brought to justice for destroying this planet’s economy.
There are people dying tonight because of what has happened to this economy on this planet.
 (Sourced via SGT Report ; David Icke)

Mass electronic surveillance systems, tens of thousands of drones, riot police, the training of military assets for domestic policing, and the introduction of legislation and executive orders to  respond to widespread national emergencies through martial law declarations are all pointing to the same thing.

Elements within the government of the United States and the cabals that have been engineering this move towards global governance are keenly aware that the system as it exists today is under extreme strain, and the day of reckoning is coming.

Prepare for it, because it will be like nothing we’ve ever experienced in our lifetimes. As our existing paradigm continues to shift we must understand that it will be plagued with starvation, mass rioting and bloodshed.

As Charlie McGrath notes, there are wars being fought all over the globe right now – and scores of men, women and children are dying daily. Millions of protesters have taken to the streets in recent months on every corner of earth as the world they have come to know collapses around them. Tens of millions of Americans are, like their counterparts in Europe and Asia, struggling just to put food on the table.

If the evidence that is right before your eyes doesn’t convince you that a mass destabilization is taking place in real time, then we don’t know what will.

The government is and has been preparing. So should you.

Time is running out.

CAIR NY wants Muslims to show support for "Lady Al Qaeda" at appeals hearing!

CAIR NY wants Muslims to show support for "Lady Al Qaeda" at appeals hearing!

Can CAIR stoop any lower? 

CAIR New York is encouraging Muslims and their partners on the left to show support for Aafia Siddiqui, who was convicted by a jury of her peers for attempted murder of U.S. agents and military personnel in Afghanistan, at an appeal hearing this Friday!  This woman is also known as "Lady Al Qaeda."  What's more, CAIR's tweet to this info was disguised.   There's nothing about supporting Siddiqui on their website, that I could find.
In 2010, Siddiqui was sentenced to 86 years in prison. She was, allegedly, married to an Al Qaeda operative related to the admitted mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
On last thing, Cyrus McGoldrick the hop-hop Muslim convert who's the director of CAIR New York, tweeted a short while ago:

CAIR, by their own actions and words, do more damage to the image of Muslim in America than just about anyone.  And. Muslims who support them wonder why they have a serious perception problem.
Update 2/7/11:  CAIR NY confirms one of their goal is to dismatled what they claim is a spy program at the New York City Polie Department.
Pictured:  Cyrus McGoldrick
Update 2/8/12:
McGoldrick tells supporters to wear green and that they are there to FREE Siddiqui!

Holder Begs Court to Stop Document Release on Fast and Furious

 340

 4

 8147

 

---

Email Article

Print Article Send a Tip

by Matthew Boyle 17 Jan 2013, 1:16 PM PDT 67 post a comment

Attorney General Eric Holder and his Department of Justice have asked a federal court to indefinitely delay a lawsuit brought by watchdog group Judicial Watch. The lawsuit seeks the enforcement of open records requests relating to Operation Fast and Furious, as required by law.

Judicial Watch had filed, on June 22, 2012, a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking all documents relating to Operation Fast and Furious and “specifically [a]ll records subject to the claim of executive privilege invoked by President Barack Obama on or about June 20, 2012.”
The administration has refused to comply with Judicial Watch’s FOIA request, and in mid-September the group filed a lawsuit challenging Holder’s denial. That lawsuit remains ongoing but within the past week President Barack Obama’s administration filed what’s called a “motion to stay” the suit. Such a motion is something that if granted would delay the lawsuit indefinitely.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said that Holder’s and Obama’s desire to continually hide these Fast and Furious documents is “ironic” now that they’re so gung-ho on gun control. “It is beyond ironic that the Obama administration has initiated an anti-gun violence push as it seeking to keep secret key documents about its very own Fast and Furious gun walking scandal,” Fitton said in a statement. “Getting beyond the Obama administration’s smokescreen, this lawsuit is about a very simple principle: the public’s right to know the full truth about an egregious political scandal that led to the death of at least one American and countless others in Mexico. The American people are sick and tired of the Obama administration trying to rewrite FOIA law to protect this president and his appointees. Americans want answers about Fast and Furious killings and lies.”
The only justification Holder uses to ask the court to indefinitely delay Judicial Watch’s suit is that there’s another lawsuit ongoing for the same documents – one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives. Judicial Watch has filed a brief opposing the DOJ’s motion to stay.
As the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform was voting Holder into contempt of Congress for his refusal to cooperate with congressional investigators by failing to turn over tens of thousands of pages of Fast and Furious documents, Obama asserted the executive privilege over them. The full House of Representatives soon after voted on a bipartisan basis to hold Holder in contempt.
There were two parts of the contempt resolution. Holder was, and still is, in both civil and criminal contempt of Congress. The criminal resolution was forwarded to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Ronald Machen–who works for Holder–for prosecution. Despite being technically required by law to bring forth criminal charges against Holder, under orders from Holder’s Department of Justice Machen chose to ignore the resolution.
The second part of the contempt resolution–civil contempt of Congress–allowed House Republicans to hire legal staff to challenge President Obama’s assertion of the executive privilege. That lawsuit remains ongoing despite Holder’s and the DOJ’s attempt to dismiss it and settle it.
It’s unclear what’s in the documents Obama asserted privilege over, but the president’s use of the extraordinary power appears weak. There are two types of presidential executive privilege: the presidential communications privilege and the deliberative process privilege. Use of the presidential communications privilege would require that the president himself or his senior-most advisers were involved in the discussions.
Since the president and his cabinet-level officials continually claim they had no knowledge of Operation Fast and Furious until early 2011 when the information became public–and Holder claims he didn’t read the briefing documents he was sent that outlined the scandal and how guns were walking while the operation was ongoing–Obama says he’s using the less powerful deliberative process privilege.
The reason why Obama’s assertion of that deliberative process privilege over these documents is weak at best is because the Supreme Court has held that such a privilege assertion is invalidated by even the suspicion of government wrongdoing. Obama, Holder, the Department of Justice, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and virtually everyone else involved in this scandal have admitted that government wrongdoing actually took place in Operation Fast and Furious. 
In Fast and Furious, the ATF “walked” about 2,000 firearms into the hands of the Mexican drug cartels. That means through straw purchasers they allowed sales to happen and didn’t stop the guns from being trafficked even though they had the legal authority to do so and were fully capable of doing so.
Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and hundreds of Mexican citizens–estimates put it around at least 300–were killed with these firearms.

Christie Forms Panel on Firearms and School Safety

After facing sharp criticism for not mentioning gun violence in his State of the State speech, Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey appointed a task force on Thursday to examine gun control measures and school safety, as well as look at some of the underlying problems behind gun violence, including addiction and mental illness.

Enlarge This Image

Mel Evans/Associated Press

Gov. Chris Christie said Thursday that he was open to listening to both sides, but expressed doubt about armed guards at schools.

Follow us on Twitter and like us on Facebook for news and conversation.

On school safety, Mr. Christie, a Republican, said that he did not believe that putting armed guards outside schools was the answer for his state, but that he would be open to all of the ideas that the task force, led by two former state attorneys general, came up with. He has asked for the group to make its recommendations in 60 days.

“Violence in our society has never been solely about firearms, and we would miss an opportunity to better prevent heinous crimes if we didn’t look at the complete picture,” Mr. Christie said at a news conference in Trenton. “If we are truly going to take an honest and candid assessment of violence and public safety, we have to look more deeply at the underlying causes of many acts of violence.

“That means removing the stigma and evaluating issues of mental health, addiction, prevention and treatment services alongside the effectiveness of our firearms laws, enforcement mechanisms and our school safety measures.”

Mr. Christie, a former federal prosecutor, declined to comment on President Obama’s proposal for a federal ban on assault rifles and other measures, saying that he was focusing his efforts inside the state. He noted that the state already has such a ban and limits the rounds of ammunition in a magazine to 15. The president’s proposal recommends 10.

But he did weigh into the controversy over the National Rifle Association’s mentioning Mr. Obama’s children in an advertisement unveiled this week. The advertisement, which heralds the N.R.A.’s proposal to put armed guards at schools, notes that the president’s children are provided with protection by the Secret Service.

Mr. Christie called it “reprehensible” to refer to the children and said that such actions undermined the organization’s credibility and efforts to make its case.

When asked if he was concerned about the organization’s political power as he considered what steps to take in New Jersey to reduce gun violence that could include stricter gun measures, Mr. Christie said, “I don’t worry about the N.R.A.” He added that he was not worried about people who are gun control advocates, either.

“I am willing to listen to all of them,” he said. “As you know, I don’t spend a lot of time worrying.”

In contrast to the swift action by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and lawmakers in New York that led to tighter gun measures this week, Mr. Christie did not mention guns as he laid out his legislative agenda in his speech last week. With the task force, he said, he has decided to take a more “deliberate approach” to address concerns in the aftermath of the shootings in Newtown, Conn., that killed 20 children and 6 adults at an elementary school.

Did Democrats finally find a way to bypass House Republicans?

January 16, 2013, at 12:15 PM

  

21 Comments

• Republican retreat kicks off with a rocky start
• The double-defectors
• Republicans are getting cold feet on their debt ceiling threat

For the second time in two weeks, the House passed legislation by violating the so-called "Hastert rule," which states that any bill brought to a vote on the House floor must be supported by a majority of the majority party.

Republicans have used the Hastert rule consistently since House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) wielded the gavel in the 1990s to effectively limit the power of Democrats.

Last night, the House passed a bill to aid Hurricane Sandy relief efforts by a 241 to 180 vote. But as First Read notes, "the real story is the vote breakdown: Only 49 Republicans voted for the measure — so just 20 percent of the caucus — while a whopping 179 Republicans voted against the measure. By comparison, 192 Democrats voted for the legislation, and just one (Tennessee Congressman Jim Cooper) voted against."

Likewise, the House passed legislation on New Year's Day to avert the "fiscal cliff" by a 257 to 167 vote, with just 85 Republicans joining 172 Democrats to pass the measure.

Dennis Hastert isn't pleased and told Fox News Radio that Republicans are slowly losing control: "Maybe you can do it once, maybe you can do it twice, but when start making deals, when you have to get Democrats to pass the legislation, you are not in power anymore."

It's not going to work with every bill considered in Congress, but for those that are overwhelming supported by the American public — such as hurricane relief and cutting taxes — Democrats may have finally found a way around their biggest obstacle to passing legislation.

Wa State Reps battle UN Agenda 21 with new bills

Map of proposed land restriction by the United Nations

Washington State recently made news after local farmers in association with the Washington State Farm Bureau adopted new policy blocking all aspects of U.N. Agenda 21.
United Nations Agenda 21 is based off of the The Commission on Global Governance's controversial 1995 report entitled "Our Global Neighborhood" that calls for more power to the United Nations in countries affairs, including the United States.
One of the most troubling aspects of this is the United Nations claim that it has the authority to change policy in the United States and even dictate what people can or can't do on their own private property under the supposed guise of environmentalism to the point of restricting massive amounts of land to American citizens.
Residents across the country and in Washington State are attempting to block Agenda 21 by stopping its policies that are often labeled under more friendly names such as "sustainable development", a term coined by the United Nations. Opponents of Agenda 21 point out that they agree on taking better care of the planet but it needs to be left out of the hands of foreign government's, especially when the proposed plans are far beyond anything rational.
Washington Republicans Matt Shea, David Taylor, and Jason Overstreet, a group known for their principled and consistent support of the constitution, sponsored 3 new bills that would halt any foreign encroachment on private property.
The first bill, HB 1164, would prohibit the use of international law to infringe on property rights within the state. Rep Jay Rodne, the primary sponsor of HB 1165, proposses prohibiting the state of Washington and it's political subdivisions from adopting and developing enviromental and developmental policies that would infringe or restrict private property rights without due process. The third bill, HB 1167, would repeal growth management planning requirments already on the books in Washington in chapter 36.70A RCW, a bill that "is the single largest attack on private property rights in Washington State over the last 23 years," says Rep David Taylor.
"We have seen an exceeding number of bills in the Legislature embracing and implementing actions derived from international laws, regulations and policies. The Growth Management Act is a prime example of the state implementing international policies related to 'sustainable development'. In addition, the state has purchase land in North Central Washington with the rational being the protection of important Canadian species. It is incumbent upon us to ensure we are upholding the Constitution and that taxpayer money is being properly spent. I encourage citizens to contact their Legislator and ask them to support House Bills 1164 and 1165," said Rep David Taylor.
People are encouraged to email and call Washington Representatives to ask them to sponsor these bills. A list of Reps and their contact info can be found here:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rosters/Members.aspx?Chamber=H

Citizens File Articles of Impeachment Against Obama

For sedition against the Constitution
Alex Jones
Infowars.com
January 15, 2013

“When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776.

There can no longer be any doubt – the forces of tyranny are running wild across our once great Republic. The time has come for all good men and women to rally to the aid of their country. We have now entered a historic crossroads that will decide the destiny of the United States. Arrogance and corruption has long festered in Washington DC, but the last decade has seen an extreme acceleration of criminal looting and attacks on liberty – every freedom is under sustained assault.

We the People, the rightful masters of this Republic, will either rise up through Congress and the states or we can trade in our birthright of liberty for the chains of a technocratic slavery. Below we list some of the more egregious acts of seditious treason against the Republic of the United States. Anyone who wishes to continue to live in a free country and to pass that birthright on to their children must research this document and then lobby state legislatures and the Congress to do their duty and remove the would-be dictator.

The time has now come for a bill of impeachment to be introduced and debated in Congress. Obama’s crimes are public, and the debate in the House will serve as a court in which to display the tyrannical activities of President Obama and his cohorts. As in the case of Richard Nixon, the exposure of Obama’s crimes may cause him to resign in disgrace. If he does not step down, the full House will then vote to begin the impeachment trial in the US Senate. The time has now come to make your decision – to stand up to evil or get on your knees as a willing slave.

Articles of Impeachment Against Barack Hussein Obama – Filed by Citizen Alexander Emric Jones, January 15, 2013.

- He has clearly communicated his intent to eviscerate the second amendment rights of American citizens by pursuing executive orders to curtail the right to keep and bear arms without congressional authorization and in violation of the second amendment.

Below, Congressman Stockman has pledged to move for impeachment against Obama. I am standing up against Obama right beside him, will you?

“The President’s actions are an existential threat to this nation,” reads a statement by Rep. Steve Stockman. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms is what has kept this nation free and secure for over 200 years. The very purpose of the Second Amendment is to stop the government from disallowing people the means to defend themselves against tyranny. Any proposal to abuse executive power and infringe upon gun rights must be repelled with the stiffest legislative force possible.”

- He has aided America’s enemies, violating his oath, by sending funds to insurgents in Syria who are being commanded by Al-Qaeda terrorists.

- He has violated federal law by overseeing a cover-up surrounding Operation Fast and Furious, the transfer of guns to Mexican drug cartels direct from the federal government.

- He has lied to the American people by overseeing a cover-up of the Benghazi attack which directly led to the deaths of four American citizens. The cover-up has been called “Obama’s Watergate,” yet four months after the incident, no one in the administration has been held accountable.

- He has brazenly undermined the power of Congress by insisting his authority came from the United Nations Security Council prior to the attack on Libya and that Congressional approval was not necessary. “I don’t even have to get to the Constitutional question,” said Obama. This is an act that “constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution,” according to Congressman Walter Jones.

- He has flagrantly violated article 1, section 9, clause 8 of the Constitution by accepting rotating status as chairman of the United Nations Security Council. The clause states, “No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States; and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall without consent of Congress accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”

- He has ignored Congressional rejection of the cybersecurity bill and instead indicated he will pursue an unconstitutional executive order.

- He has signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act which includes provisions that permit the abduction and military detention without trial of U.S. citizens, violating Habeas Corpus. Despite Obama claiming he would not use the provisions to incarcerate U.S. citizens, it was his administration that specifically demanded these powers be included in the final NDAA bill.

- He has enacted universal health care mandates that force Americans to buy health insurance, a clear violation of the Constitution in exceeding congressional power to regulate interstate commerce. Obama has also handed out preferential waivers to corporations friendly to his administration.

- He has declared war on America’s coal industry by promising to bankrupt any company that attempts to build a new coal plant while using unconstitutional EPA regulations to strangle competition, ensuring Americans see their energy costs rise year after year.

- He has violated the Constitution’s Takings and Due Process Clauses when he bullied the secured creditors of automaker Chrysler into accepting 30 cents on the dollar while politically connected labor unions and preferential others received better deals.

- He has violated Article II of the Constitution by using signing statements as part of his executive usurpation of power.

“I will seek to thwart this action by any means necessary, including but not limited to eliminating funding for implementation, defunding the White House, and even filing articles of impeachment.”

Rep. Steve Stockman, Texas.

For these, and other offenses which constitute high crimes and misdemeanors, including perjury of oath, abuse of authority, bribery, intimidation, misuse of assets, failure to supervise, dereliction of duty, conduct unbecoming and refusal to obey a lawful order, we call for the immediate impeachment of Barack H. Obama.
Impeachment Clauses in the Constitution

Similar/Related Articles

1. Obama’s Anti-Second Amendment Executive Orders May Result in Articles of Impeachment
2. Congress Delivered Articles of Impeachment for tyrant Obama
3. Kucinich to Introduce 60 Impeachment Articles if Stymied in House
4. O’Reilly: Obama Could Face Impeachment If He Pardons Illegals
5. The Clear Case for Obama’s Impeachment
6. Texas Congressman Threatens Obama With Impeachment If He Uses Exec. Orders on Guns
7. The Kucinich 9/11-related Articles of Impeachment
8. Resolution Calls for Impeachment if Obama Does Not Seek War Authorization from Congress
9. GOP lawyer drafts Obama impeachment
10. Obama Impeachment 2012
11. Constitutional lawyer drafts Obama impeachment
12. Nancy, Is Impeachment Still Off the Table?