National Security Letters

Of all the dangerous government surveillance powers that were expanded by the USA PATRIOT Act the National Security Letter (NSL) power under 18 U.S.C. § 2709 as expanded by PATRIOT Section 505 is one of the most frightening and invasive. These letters served on communications service providers like phone companies and ISPs allow the FBI to secretly demand data about ordinary American citizens' private communications and Internet activity without any meaningful oversight or prior judicial review. Recipients of NSLs are subject to a gag order that forbids them from ever revealing the letters' existence to their coworkers to their friends or even to their family members much less the public.
The FBI's systemic abuse of this power has been documented both by a Department Of Justice investigation and in documents obtained by EFF through a Freedom of Information Act request.
EFF has fought for years to spread awareness of National Security Letters and add accountability and oversight to the process.
In 2007 EFF filed Freedom of Information Act litigation seeking documentation of National Security Letter misuse by the FBI. Thousands of pages of documents were released over a period of four years leading to repeated revealations of government abuses of power. An EFF report based on these documents led to tough questions for the FBI before Congress. The documents also helped prompt the Senate Judiciary Committee to investigate whether Attorney General Alberto Gonzales lied to Congress.
In 2008 EFF defended the Internet Archive from an inappropriate National Security Letter. Because NSLs come with a gag order most recipients are unable to ever reveal their existence. However with the help of EFF and the ACLU the Internet
Archive fought back and won the right to speak publicly about the letter. As a result it's become one of the few well-documented and publicly-known cases of NSL use.
And in 2013, EFF won a landmark decision in the Northern District of California in which Judge Susan Illston declared one of the statutes unconstitutional in its entirety. EFF's petition, brought on behalf of an unidentified telephone service provider, challenged both the underlying authority to obtain customer records as well as the concurrent gag provision that prevented the recipient from disclosing even that it had receiving an NSL.
EFF has been fighting in Congress for legislative reform of National Security Letters since 2005. In 2009 many hoped that President Obama having run for office promising to reform Bush-era surveillance abuses would work with Congress to curb NSL abuse. Unfortunately the Obama Administration has instead continued to block reform and has even sought to expand NSL powers.

DHS insider: It’s about to get very ugly

Please comment on this article at Canada Free Press

By Douglas J. Hagmann

7 June 2013: Something quite unexpected happened just hours ago, in the dark of night, during a two-day layover in Washington, DC. My son and I are scheduled to take part in a seminar outside of Raleigh, North Carolina this weekend, so we combined our travels to include a side-trip to DC for a business meeting we had previously arranged. It was during this layover that something seemingly ripped from the pages of a spy novel took place.

While I was in the middle of a perfectly good and well needed sleep in the very early hours of this morning, I received a message. I cannot disclose how I received this message, at least not now. The discerning reader will understand why, which, by the way, would make a very interesting story alone. The message was extremely clear and precise. I was to meet my high level DHS insider at a very specific location in Washington, DC at a time when most “normal” people, except third-shift workers are still asleep. And, I was to come alone and make certain that I was not being followed, and I was to leave any cell phone or electronic device behind.

Seriously? I thought, as I was still trying to make sense of it all. Is all this really necessary? Is this really happening? I considered waking my son to accompany me, but opted to follow the instructions to the letter. Besides, I thought, he’s not the most affable middle-of-the-night person. I left a hastily written but detailed note in my hotel room before my departure in the event something happened. I looked at the digital clock on my rental car (my personal car would never survive our long distance trip). It was 3:20 a.m.

The meeting

I felt like I was part of a spy movie set in our nation’s capital. A chill rose up my spine as I waited in the dark of a chilly, misty and foggy pre-dawn morning. I was to meet with my DHS insider source at a time when most of the nation is asleep, at a place I could swear was featured in the movie All the President’s Men. No one and I mean no one knows I’m here, I thought, as I could see one of the most recognizable national landmarks in the distance.

My source appeared out of nowhere, or so it seemed, and handed me a cup of coffee with the astute observation that I looked like I needed it. So tell me, I asked impatiently, why do we have to meet at this time, at this location, and under such specific circumstances? “Because this might be our last meeting,” he stated.

Maybe it was the lack of sleep, the time, the place, or the chill of the misty rain that caused my sense of foreboding. “Explain,” I asked in an almost demanding tone. So he did, without mincing words.

The details

“If anyone thinks that what’s going on right now with all of this surveillance of American citizens is to fight some sort of foreign enemy, they’re delusional. If people think that this ‘scandal’ can’t get any worse, it will, hour by hour, day by day. This has the ability to bring down our national leadership, the administration and other senior elected officials working in collusion with this administration, both Republican and Democrats. People within the NSA, the Department of Justice, and others, they know who they are, need to come forth with the documentation of ‘policy and practice’ in their possession, disclose what they know, fight what’s going on, and just do their job. I have never seen anything like this, ever. The present administration is going after leakers, media sources, anyone and everyone who is even suspected of ‘betrayal.” That’s what they call it, ‘betrayal.’ Can you believe the size of their cahones? This administration considers anyone telling the truth about Benghazi, the IRS, hell, you name the issue, ‘betrayal,’” he said.

“We know all this already,” I stated. He looked at me, giving me a look like I’ve never seen, and actually pushed his finger into my chest. “You don’t know jack,” he said, “this is bigger than you can imagine, bigger than anyone can imagine. This administration is collecting names of sources, whistle blowers and their families, names of media sources and everybody they talk to and have talked to, and they already have a huge list. If you’re not working for MSNBC or CNN, you’re probably on that list. If you are a website owner with a brisk readership and a conservative bent, you’re on that list. It’s a political dissident list, not an enemy threat list,” he stated.

“What’s that exactly mean, being on that list, that is,” I asked, trying to make sense of it all.

“It means that there will be censorship under the color of authority of anyone in the U.S. who is attempting to expose what’s going on in our name. It’s about controlling any damning information from reaching epidemic proportions. It’s damage control to the extreme. It’s about the upcoming censorship of the internet in the name of national security. The plans are already in place. These latest reports about “spying eyes” have turned this administration and others connected to it into something very, very dangerous. They feel cornered and threatened, and I’m hearing about some plans they have to shut down the flow of information that is implicating them of wrongdoing. Time is short,” he stated.

“How are they going to do this? How is it even possible?” I asked.

“First, they intend to use the Justice Department to silence journalists like in the Rosen case, but they won’t stop there. They will use a host of national security policies, laws, letters, whatever to take out the bigger threats,” he stated.

Next, they will use some sort of excuse, an external threat, and I believe it will be a combination of the economic collapse and a Mid-East war that will begin in Syria to throttle the information that is accessible on the Internet. And you know what? People will believe it!”

Based on what I’ve seen, most of which I should not have seen, the DHS is co-ordinating efforts with other federal agencies to begin to threaten American citizens with incarceration for non-compliance. You know the old talk of color coded lists? Well, this is what they will be using. People exposing the truth about Benghazi, killing the U.S. Dollar, even those questioning Obama’s legal status and eligibility to be President are the current targets. And they’ve had five long years to get to this point. The ugly truth is that these policies and practices did not start under Obama, but long before. This is about the killing of our Constitutional Republic. The murder of our country and the stripping of our rights. While many have been preoccupied with one issue, few have seen the bigger issue. This is the ‘end game,’ for all the marbles,” he stated.

More to come

“Please,” pleaded my source, “get this information out while you can. Tell people what I’m saying, that we don’t have much time, that after the latest exposure of spying, Obama, Jarrett, Axelrod, and others, including members of Congress, have put their plans into high gear. This is about the Marxist takeover of America. This is about our country being able to survive another July 4^th holiday. This is about a world war about to break out that will kill millions of people, all because of the agenda of this administration.”

“They are very dangerous and will do anything and everything to stop the onslaught of negative information that’s being reported by the main stream media. But only about one quarter of the real information is being reported. The other three quarters will be the game changer. But first, tell people what I’ve said. Let them know that more will follow but get this information out right now while the internet is still relatively free. Do it today.”

My source provided additional information, but I am abiding by his wish to get this much out. I am writing now to let people know that we are in for seriously dangerous times ahead.  Deadly times. War, and censorship under the color of authority and under the pretext of of national security. It’s about to get a lot uglier. Stay tuned.

Click here to save this article in PDF format

U.S. Government Used Taxpayer Funds to Buy, Sell Weapons During 'Fast and Furious,' Documents Show

Published September 26, 2011

FoxNews.com

• 
  FILE: Jan. 25, 2011: Part of a cache of seized weapons displayed at a news conference in Phoenix. (AP)
  

Not only did U.S. officials approve, allow and assist in the sale of more than 2,000 guns to the Sinaloa cartel -- the federal government used taxpayer money to buy semi-automatic weapons, sold them to criminals and then watched as the guns disappeared.
This disclosure, revealed in documents obtained by Fox News, could undermine the Department of Justice's previous defense that Operation Fast and Furious was a "botched" operation where agents simply "lost track" of weapons as they were transferred from one illegal buyer to another. Instead, it heightens the culpability of the federal government as Mexico, according to sources, has opened two criminal investigations into the operation that flooded their country with illegal weapons.
Operation Fast and Furious began in October 2009. In it, federal agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives encouraged gun stores to sell weapons to an arms smuggling gang, then watched as the guns crossed the border and were used in crimes. Each month, the agency allowed hundreds of guns to go South, despite opposition from some agents.
All told, the gang spent more than $1.25 million for the illegal guns.
In June 2010, however, the ATF dramatically upped the ante, making the U.S. government the actual "seller" of guns.
According to documents obtained by Fox News, Agent John Dodson was ordered to buy six semi-automatic Draco pistols -- two of those were purchased at the Lone Wolf gun store in Peoria, Ariz. An unusual sale, Dodson was sent to the store with a letter of approval from David Voth, an ATF group supervisor.
Dodson then sold the weapons to known illegal buyers, while fellow agents watched from their cars nearby.
This was not a "buy-bust" or a sting operation, where police sell to a buyer and then arrest them immediately afterward. In this case, agents were "ordered" to let the sale go through and follow the weapons to a stash house.
According to sources directly involved in the case, Dodson felt strongly that the weapons should not be abandoned and the stash house should remain under 24-hour surveillance. However, Voth disagreed and ordered the surveillance team to return to the office. Dodson refused, and for six days in the desert heat kept the house under watch, defying direct orders from Voth.
A week later, a second vehicle showed up to transfer the weapons. Dodson called for an interdiction team to move in, make the arrest and seize the weapons. Voth refused and the guns disappeared with no surveillance.
According to a story posted Sunday on a website dedicated to covering Fast and Furious, Voth gave Dodson the assignment to "dirty him up," since Dodson had become the most vocal critic of the operation.
"I think Dodson demanded the letter from Voth to cover both himself and the FFL (Federal Firearm Licensee). He didn't want to be hung out to dry by Voth," a source told the website "Sipsey Street Irregulars."
Subsequent to this undercover operation, sources told Sipsey, "Dodson just about came apart all over them (his supervisors). In a 'screaming match' that was heard throughout the Phoenix office by many employees, Dodson yelled at Voth and Assistant Special Agent in Charge George Gillett, 'Why not just go direct and empty out the (ATF) arms room?" (to the cartels), or words to that effect.'
After the confrontation, ATF managers transferred Dodson to a more menial job. Months later, after the death of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry, Dodson blew the whistle and went public about the federal government's gunrunning operation.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/26/us-government-bought-and-sold-weapons-during-fast-and-furious-documents-show/#ixzz2VfHnKOnl

NewsCheck out http://bcove.me/1ki2a25l

Topics: mexico, police, San Antonio, security, texas, Training

Mexican federal police undergo training in San Antonio

by Kristina De Leon and Jim Forsyth, WOAI, San Antonio, Texas 

3:21 pm on 02/07/2013

Mexican Federal Police are receiving training in San Antonio today, as part of a program designed to allow the FBI to train Mexican law enforcement in tactics to help turn around that country’s bloody drug war, 1200 WOAI radio news reports.
“Some of the scenarios, of course, include a shooting situation and a traffic stop,” said Sandy Gutierrez of the San Antonio Police Department.  The training is taking place at the ‘tactical village’ constructed at the Academy on the far south side to help officers train for urban settings.
“It enhances their tactics, their skills,” Gutierrez said.  “It is also officer safety that we are training them in.”
Mexico’s new President, Enrique Peña Nieto, has promised a new direction for Mexico’s anti drug efforts, following the bloody miltiary crackdown ordered by his predecessor, Felipe Calderon, which left some 60,000 people dead.
Mexico is ordered specially trained police units, like the ones involved in today’s training, to take the lead in the drug war, and to focus more on stopping the violence.  Calderon’s solution, to go after drug ‘kingpins,’ was blamed for much of the bloodshed.
The program, called MALLET, or Mexican American Liaison and Law Enforcement Training, will mainly be conducted by the FBI, with local police assistance.
It does not involve any U.S. law enforcement officials going into Mexico.

QUICKTAKE: US Syria Policy Needs ‘Paradigm Shift’

April 10, 2013 By Carol S. Castiel

As the conflict in Syria continues to escalate, there are increasing calls for the international community to step up its involvement. Ambassador Frederic Hof, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East and the Obama administration’s special advisor for the Syrian transition in 2012, spoke with VOA’s Carol Castiel and Pamela Dockins on Press Conference USA about the need for a “paradigm shift” on the part of those responsible for formulating U.S. policy on Syria. Ambassador Hof urges Washington to support the mainstream Syrian opposition in establishing a legitimate, functioning government on liberated Syrian soil before the situation spirals further out of control.
Following, please find a transcription of select highlights of the interview. You can listen to the full version using the audio player below.
Castiel: You have said that an alternative to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is desperately needed and the U.S. and its partners should support the mainstream opposition in forming a legitimate Syrian government. Do you think Washington is any closer to this policy shift?

Amb. Frederic Hof

Hof: I think this amounts to a very, very difficult decision on the part of the [Obama] administration to move forward and support the establishment of an actual government on Syrian territory; because this government will need support, it will need considerable resources, it may need help with self-defense. These are the kinds of things that would require, I think, a basic, strategic paradigm shift on the part of the U.S.
Castiel: What is the situation on the ground, as you see it, in terms of territory liberated by the rebel opposition?
Hof: Overall, the trend seems to favor the opposition. More and more populated areas are falling to the opposition. There is a pretty solid ring of opposition presence in the suburbs of Damascus for example. The [Assad] regime is still quite capable of winning some tactical successes at this point though successes are occurring with assistance of Iranian and Hezbollah fighters…. The thing that really drives the humanitarian catastrophe is the fact that when the regime loses a populated area to the armed opposition, the next step is for the regime to subject these populated areas to unmerciful assaults from mortars, artillery, aircraft, and even Scud missiles. This is why the continuation of fighting is having such catastrophic effects both inside Syria and in terms of Syria’s neighbors.

“Syria left to the forces of nature is basically on a one-way trip to state failure. And, the implications of that for the people of Syria and the people in the surrounding neighborhood are enormous.” – Ambassador Frederic Hof

Dockins: The opposition Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said March turned out to be the deadliest month of the conflict, to date, with over 6,000 casualties.  What kind of an impact could this escalation of violence have on the Syrian government’s relations with supporters, such as Iran and Russia?
Hof: It appears that from the point of view of Bashar al-Assad, in Syria, the support of Iran and others is critical. The policy objective of the U.S. government remains one of a negotiated political transition in Syria in accordance with the agreement reached by the permanent five members of the United Nations [Security Council] last June in Geneva. From that point forward, Bashar al-Assad has demonstrated no interest at all in that process. And it’s because he apparently thinks – as delusional as it is – that he can pull [off] a military victory here. And one has to assume it is the level of support from Iran and others that leads him to this false, but firmly held, conclusion.
Castiel: Do you really believe that Bashar al-Assad will leave Syria in anything but a body bag?
Hof: I frankly don’t know what to believe. I do think the prospects of a negotiated transition… are very slim, almost nil.

Free Syrian Army fighters pose for a picture on a tank they claim to have captured from Syrian government forces, Homs April 5, 2013. (Reuters)

Castiel: How serious are the disputes between Syrian opposition supporters such as Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia and how detrimental are these disputes to efforts to help the opposition defeat the regime?
Hof: I think the disputes are important, they’re not necessarily debilitating but they’re also inevitable. I think we have to appreciate the fact that Syria is coming out of an induced, political coma of almost 50 years in length. To expect people, all of a sudden, be able to interact politically in ways that are frank and ways that reflect relationships of trust and confidence where for the better part of 50 years people had to look over their shoulders… it’s expecting a little much. I think the most important thing here, the thing that can help the opposition transcend some of these personality conflicts and some of this attention to lesser issues is for this opposition to have a transcendent goal in mind. And that goal, I think, is the establishment of an alternate government on Syrian territory.
Castiel: What do we know about the jihadi influences that have infiltrated the opposition?…. How do you see the role of these jihadi elements and do you think they can eventually be marginalized before they have a much more nefarious impact?
Hof:  I certainly think one of the objectives of U.S. policy should be their marginalization. And that would be accomplished through support of the mainstream military opposition… and by the establishment of a government that would link together [branches of the coalition]. These are all steps that could be taken to try to sideline this phenomenon which still represents a small slice of the Syrian opposition. In a larger sense, they are a gift to the Assad regime because they enable that regime to make a case, specious as it is, to Syrian minorities, that the only thing standing between those minorities and some ludicrous, jihadist regime is Bashar al-Assad. He’s making that case, and these groups are enabling him to make the case.
Castiel: This conflict has spilled over now into borders with Jordan, with Iraq, even Israel, and it’s also exacerbating the sectarian tensions and the so-called Shia-Sunni divide….How dangerous is this conflict insofar as it is exacerbating this divide in the region?
Hof: In terms of regional divides, I’m personally a little bit reluctant to break things down along the lines of Sunni and Shia. I understand that there are plenty of people in the region who see things pretty much through the lens of sectarianism. I kind of resist that myself. But, what I see is an Iranian national interest element at play here. Iran needs Syria for one thing and one thing only and that’s to maintain its bridge to Hezbollah in Lebanon. Hezbollah in Lebanon provides a service of great value to Iran. The reason Hezbollah has so much strategic weaponry in the way of missiles and rockets is to provide Iran with a deterrent force, vis-à-vis Israel. So, this summarizes the Iranian interest in Syria and, to me, it is much more useful to summarize it in those terms than it is in terms of Sunnis and Shia.
Castiel: How do you think the United States’ standing is being affected by [its] very cautious approach to Syria? Will this have a very negative or perhaps a deleterious effect on how the United States is seen as a superpower?
Hof: It is understandable that the president has regarded advice to the effect that he should have a more activist policy in Syria as something that would perhaps lead him down the primrose path into a kind of Iraq-like situation. It’s understandable that he would employ the Iraq analogy. Nevertheless, I think he is discovering that the analogy is not quite accurate, that trying to keep to the side, trying to keep Syria at arm’s length, even though it would seem to be a policy of prudence and caution and conservatism, is actually quite risky because Syria left to the forces of nature is basically on a one-way trip to state failure. And, the implications of that for the people of Syria and for the people in the surrounding neighborhood are enormous.
For more, listen to Frederic Hof’s full interview with Carol Castiel, also featuring VOA’s Pamela Dockins.
Post prepared by VOA Current Affairs intern Natalie Kudrle.

Carol S. Castiel

Carol S. Castiel is director of Current Affairs Programming for the English Division at the Voice of America. She produces and manages three 25-minute current affairs radio/Internet programs, which are broadcast weekly around the world on VOA’s short and medium wave frequencies. She hosts Press Conference USA, a newsmaker interview program, and Encounter, a news analysis show that elicits opposing perspectives on critical foreign or domestic policy issues. She also oversees the production of Issues in the News, a round-up of the week’s top stories by a panel of distinguished Washington-based journalists.

Read more at Middle East Voices: http://middleeastvoices.voanews.com/2013/04/quicktake-us-syria-policy-needs-paradigm-shift-51427/#ixzz2VfFaamjR

OBAMA COMMENTS ON MEXICO DECEPTIVE, SAY LAW OFFICERS

By NWV News Writer Jim Kouri
Posted 1:00 AM Eastern
May 8, 2013
© 2013 NewsWithViews.com

During President Barack Obama's press conference in the White House press room, he was asked by a Latino reporter about both the immigration debate in the U.S. Congress and the U.S.-Mexican "war on drugs." Obama stated he planned to meet with Mexico's new leader, President Enrique Pena Nieto, on his trip to Mexico City to discuss joint police and anti-drug strategies.

But, Obama failed to mention a small problem with his drug cartel-busting plan: Mexico has notified U.S. officials that its federal police and military are terminating the unfettered access it gave to U.S. police and security agencies in fighting drug traffickers and organized crime gangs, characterized by many U.S. law enforcement personnel as narco-terrorists.

"The president’s press conference was jammed with half-truths, evasions and out-and-out misrepresentation, some so stunning that even mainstream reporters took to snarking in their tweets. The tone of condescension was striking," said the Washington Post's Jennifer Rubin.

President Enrique Pena Nieto, who was sworn-into office on Dec. 1, 2012, claims that his government is curtailing the direct sharing of intelligence with U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies in order to attempt diplomatic solutions to the death and violence that has all but destroyed his country.

While President Felipe Calderon was praised by many U.S. police officials repeatedly for increasing cooperation between the Mexico and the United States as he led an intense attack on Mexico's drug cartels, Pena Nieto will probably be heralded by the U.S. left, said a former American narcotics enforcement official.

"In my first conversation with the president he indicated to me that he very much continues to be concerned about how we can work together to deal with transnational drug cartels," said Obama during the afternoon press conference.

"I'm not going to yet judge how this will alter the relationship between the United States and Mexico until I've heard directly from them what exactly they are trying to accomplish," Obama told the Washington press corp in answer to the Latino reporter's question.

Many U.S. police officials have said they are not surprised about Pena Nieto likely changing the relationship between U.S. and Mexican security departments.

"The new Mexican president is as far-left as other Latin American leaders and as far-left on the political spectrum as President Obama. They believe talking and discussing are viable solutions when dealing with thuggish leaders of rogue nations, Islamofascist terrorist groups, and organized crime gangs such as Mexico's cartels," said former drug enforcement and intelligence officer Christopher Colon.

"Under Calderon, the alphabet agencies -- FBI, CIA, DEA, ATF, ICE and border patrol agents -- had almost complete access to units of Mexico's Federal Police, army and navy and worked side by side with those units," Colon noted.

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts! Enter Your E-Mail Address:

But a former NYPD detective says she's not putting much stock in Obama and Nieto discussing crime and terrorism. "In fact, Obama said it himself: a lot of the conversation in Mexico will be on economics," said Det. Iris Aquino. who worked undercover in New York City subway trains and tunnels.

The six-year war against the Mexican narco-terrorists took an estimated 70,000 lives and saw the disappearance of thousands more. But now the Mexican government will do with narcotics what the Obama administration routinely does Islamic terrorism: Pretend it doesn't exist.

© 2013 NWV - All Rights Reserved

Terrorism: The Muslim Brotherhood Terrorism: Table of Contents | Palestinian Terror Groups | Hezbollah The Muslim Brotherhood - also called Muslim Brethren or The Society of the Muslim Brothers (Arabic: جمعية الأخوان المسلمون Jamiat al-Ikhwan al-muslimun) - is an Islamic organization with a political approach to Islam. It was founded in Egypt in 1928 by cleric Hassan al-Banna after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Though many claim the organization decries violence, the Brotherhood is often viewed as the root source of Islamic terrorism. - Ideology & Methodology - Structure - History - Arab Spring Revolution Ideology & Methodology Muslim Brotherhood Logo According to founder al-Banna, “It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated, to impose its law on all nations and to extend its power to the entire planet.”  Therefore, the Muslim Brotherhood opposes secular tendencies of Islamic nations and wants a return to the precepts of the Qur'an. The Brotherhood firmly rejects all notions of Western influences in addition to rejecting extreme Sufism as well. Brotherhood members organize events from prayer meetings to sport clubs for socializing. The organization's motto: “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.” Jihad & Terrorism An important aspect of the Muslim Brotherhood ideology is the sanctioning of jihad such as the 2004 fatwa issued by Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi making it a religious obligation of Muslims to abduct and kill U.S. citizens in Iraq. al-Banna wrote that the Islamic flag must be raised again in the territories once ruled by Islam: "Thus, Andulasia (Spain), Sicily, the Balkans, the Italian coast, as well as the islands of the Mediterranean are all Muslim Meditarranean colonies, and they must return to the embrace of Islam." The Brotherhood is also viewed by many in the Middle East and the West as the root source for Islamic terrorism. In 2005, a former Kuwaiti Minister of Education, Dr. Ahmad al-Rabi', wrote in the Saudi-owned Asharq al-awsat newspaper: "The beginings of all the religious terrrorism that we are witnessing today were int he Muslim Brotherhood's ideology .. all those who worked with bin-Laden and al-Qaida went out under the mandate of the Muslim Brotherhood." Indeed, the Muslim Brotherhood not only condemned the US for killing bin-Laden in May 2011, they also facilitated the growth of al-Qaida. Abdullah Azzam, bin-Laden's mentor, came out of the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood; Ayman al-Zawahiri, bin-Laden's deputy, came from the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood; Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, grew up in the Kuwaiti Muslim Brotherhood. "Liberate Jerusalem" Muslim Brotherhood leaders also urge followers to restore Palestine and rescue Jerusalem.  For example, in July 2012, Brotherhood General Guide Muhammad Badi' stated in a sermon: "Every Muslim must act to save Jerusalem from the usurpers and to [liberate] Palestine from the claws of occupation. This is a personal duty for all Muslims. They must participate in jihad by [donating] money or [sacrificing] their life." In another sermon, Badi' spoke in a similar vein: "How glad the Muslims will be if all Muslim rulers make the Palestinian cause a pivotal matter, and [if] the rulers and subjects rally around it with the single goal of restoring the Al-Aqsa Mosque, saving it from the filth of the Zionists, and enacting Islamic sovereignty over the beloved land of Palestine."  In 2010, al-Badi' issued a similar statement: "Palestine will not be liberated by hopes and prayers, but rather by Jihad and sacrifice." The Muslim Brotherhood is always working to spread its concepts throughout Egypt and the Middle East to gain more followers. They work on almost all social levels including: schools, universities, mosques, politics, and professional offices.  One main strategy of the Brotherhood is to use a grassroots network of social and charitable organizations to expand their membership base, gain trust, and illustrate Islam's relevance in all aspects of life. Structure The Brotherhood has branches in 70 countries and territories, including its main contingents in Egypt, Syria, Gaza, Libya, Tunisia, and Jordan. It also maintains active branches in the United Kingdom, France, and in numerous other European countries as well as in the United States. The Brotherhood claims to have taken part in most pro-Islamic conflicts, from the Arab-Israeli wars and the Algerian War of Independence to recent conflicts in Afghanistan and Kashmir as well as the Arab Spring Revolutions that swept across North Africa. The Egyptian Brotherhood existed as a mostly social organization with underground political and militaristic wings due to fierce oppostion by President Hosni Mubarak.  Following the Egyptian Revolution of 2011, however, the Brotherhood emerged empowered, pulling in a plurarity 36% of votes for the new parliament and having their candidate, Mohamed Morsi, win in the presidential elections. Elsewhere, the Brotherhood is also gaining prominence in the political sphere. For instance, in Tunisia, the Muslim Brotherhood affiliate Ennahda was founded in 1981, banned in 1992 but gained control of the Tunisian government in their recent elections, holding 89 out of 217 seats in the Constituent Assembly, the most of any party.  In Morocco, the Brotherhoods' Justice and Development Party (PJD) won 107 of 395 seats and holds 12 of Morocco’s 31 cabinet positions including Prime Minister. In Jordan, the Muslim Brotherhood political party, Islamic Action Front, is posing a potential challenge to the government. In Syria, the Muslim Brotherhood is taking a leading role in the civil war and is believed to be in a position to take control if Bashar Assad is forced out of the government. History The Muslim Brotherhood began as a social and religious organization in Egypt whose members regarded Islam as a way of life. Many Syrian supporters founded their own branches in Syria, one of which was the Aleppo branch, founded in 1935. The Aleppo branch eventually became the Syrian headquarters of the Brotherhood. The Brotherhood expanded its political involvement as the Party of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hizb al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun. The Brotherhood's founder, al-Banna, was a devout admirer of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime. During the 1930s, the Brotherhood became more political in nature and an officially political group in 1939. Over the years, the organization developed an apparatus through which to provide military training to its followers and to engage in political terrorism against Egyptian Coptic Christians and government officials. In 1942, during World War II, Hassan al-Banna set up more Brotherhood branches in Transjordan and Palestine. The headquarters of the Syrian branch moved to Damascus in 1944. After World War II, Egyptian members took violent action against King Farouk’s government. When the organization was banned in Egypt, hundreds moved to Transjordan. Many also participated in the Arab-Israeli War of 1948-1949. The Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood initially supported Gamal Abd an-Nasser's secular government and cooperated with it, but resisted left-wing influences. A Muslim Brother assassinated Egyptian Prime Minister Mahmud Fahmi Nokrashi on December 28, 1948. The Brotherhood was banned, and al-Banna himself was killed by government agents in Cairo in February 1949. Muslim Brother Abdul Munim Abdul Rauf allegedly tried to kill Nasser on October 26, 1954. The Brotherhood was outlawed again and more than 4,000 of its members were imprisoned, including Sayyid Qutb, who later became the most influential intellectual of the group. He wrote influential books while in prison. More members moved to Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Syria. The organization opposed the alliance Egypt had with the USSR at the time, and opposed the communist influence in Egypt, to the extent that it was reportedly supported by the CIA during the 1960s. Nasser legalized the Brotherhood again in 1964, and released all prisoners. After claiming more assassination attempts against him, he had leaders executed in 1966 and imprisoned most others again. Nasser's successor in Egypt, Anwar Sadat, promised reforms, and that he would implement Shariah. However, Sadat's peace treaty with Israel in 1979 angered the Brotherhood, which led to his assassination in 1981. In the 1950s, Jordanian members supported King Hussein of Jordan against political opposition and against Nasser's attempts to overthrow him. When the King banned political parties in Jordan in 1957, the Brotherhood was exempted. The Syrian branch was the next to be banned when Syria joined Egypt in the United Arab Republic (UAR) in 1958. The Brotherhood went underground. When Syria left the UAR 1961, the Brotherhood won 10 seats in the next elections. However, the Ba’th coup in 1963 forced them underground once more, alongside all the other political groups. The appointment of Hafez al-Assad, an Alawite Muslim, as the Syrian president in 1971 angered the Brotherhood even more because the majority of Muslims do not consider Alawites true Muslims at all. Assad initially tried to placate them, but made very little progress. Assad’s support of Maronites in the Lebanese Civil War made the Brotherhood re-declare its jihad. They began a campaign of strikes and terrorist actions. In 1979, they killed 83 Alawite cadets in the Aleppo artillery school. Assad’s attempts to calm them by changing officials and releasing political prisoners did not help. Eventually the army was used to restore order by force. An assassination attempt against Assad on June 25, 1980, was the last straw. Assad made the Syrian parliament declare Brotherhood membership a capital offense and sent the army against them. In the operation, which lasted until February of 1982, the Syrian army practically wiped out the Brotherhood, killing an unknown but large number of people in the Hama Massacre. The Syrian branch disappeared, and the survivors fled to join Islamic organizations in other countries. The Saudi Arabian branch convinced king Ibn Saud to let them start the Islamic University in Medina in 1961. After the Six-Day War in 1967, the movement as a whole split into moderates and radicals. The latter faction in Syria declared jihad against the Ba'th party leaders. King Hussein allowed the Jordanian branch to give military training to Brotherhood rebels in Jordan. In 1973, the Israeli government allowed local leader Ahmad Yassin to run social, religious and welfare institutions among Palestinian Muslims. In 1983, he was arrested for illegal possession of firearms and sentenced to prison. When he was released 1985, he became more popular then ever. When the first Intifada began in 1987, he became one of the founders of Hamas. In 1984, the Muslim Brotherhood was partially reaccepted in Egypt as a religious organization, but was placed under heavy scrutiny by security forces. It remains a source of friction. In 1989, the Jordanian Brotherhood's political wing, the Islamic Action Front, won 23 out of 80 seats in Jordan's parliament. King Hussein tried to limit their influence by changing the election laws, but in the 1993 elections, they became the largest group in the parliament. They strongly opposed the Jordanian-Israeli Peace Treaty in 1994. In the early days of the Soviet-Afghan war, the Muslim Brotherhood was seen as a constituent part of the Afghan anti-communist opposition. The resistance movement in Afghanistan formed in opposition to the leftist policies of King Zahir Shah. The movement had connections to the Muslim Brotherhood. The Russian government alleges that the Muslim Brotherhood is a key force in the ongoing Chechen revolt. Russian officials accused the Muslim Brotherhood of planning the December 27, 2002 suicide car bombing of the headquarters of the Russian-backed government in Grozny, Chechnya. Though the Muslim Brotherhood is now viewed as a more moderate group than other Islamist organizations operation in the Middle East, such as al-Qaida, and has participated in free elections in countries where they were permitted to, messages delivered by the group's Supreme Guides have made clear the Brotherhood remains committed to militancy. In September 2010, Muhammad Badi’ gave a sermon in which he said, "... the improvement and change that the [Muslim] nation seeks can only be attained through jihad and sacrifice and by raising a jihadi generation that pursues death, just as the enemies pursue life." In an effort to possibly hide their militant Islamit rules from the eyes of Western observers, the Brotherhood removed the organizational by-laws from their main English language website in mid-February 2011. The bylaws, which were still available to Arabic readers, have long been a source of discussion and debate because of the group's stated goal of establishing an Islamic state while uniting Muslims around the world. For example, section E of the bylaws states, "Need to work on establishing the Islamic State, which seeks to effectively implement the provisions of Islam and its teachings." Likewise, Section G reads as follows: "The sincere support for a global cooperation in accordance with the provisions of the Islamic Sharia ... and constructive participation towards building a new basis of human civilization as is ensured by the overall teachings of Islam." Arab Spring Revolution In January 2011, riots broke out on the streets of Cairo and soon the entire country was enveloped in revolution. Quickly termed the Arab Spring, the revolts in Egypt eventually led to the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak and the possibility for democracy to finally take hold in the country. Throughout the first few months of revolution, the Brotherhood kept a suprisingly low profile amongst those protesting in the streets and in Cairo's now famous Tahrir Square, though public opinion polls conducted in the wake of Mubarak stepping down showed that an increasing 75% of Egyptians voiced support in some form for the Brotherhood. Before Mubarak officially removed himself from office, the Brotherhood initally supported Mohamed ElBaradei to lead the opposition forces against the government. Muslim Brotherhood demonstrator, though, referred to people like ElBaradei as "hamir al-thawra," donkeys of the revolution, suggesting they hoped to exploit ElBaradei in order to hijack the Egyptian revolution for their own agenda. In June 2011, the Egyptian official news agency recognized the Muslim Brotherhood as a legitimate party for the first time since it was outlawed by the government in 1954. Recognized as the "Freedom and Justice Party (FJP)," the Brotherhood was given permission to run in parliamentary elections that were scheduled for late 2011. Abdel Moneim Abul Futuh, a senior member of the Brotherhood, announced that he would run for president as an independent in the election to be held after the parliamentary vote, though the Islamist group said they would not field a candidate. In two rounds of parliamentary elections towards the end of 2011, the Brotherhood's FJP managed to beat many expectations of those in the West, and pulled in 36.3% of the general vote. Together with the ultra-conservative Salafi al-Nour Party, which won 28.8% of the votes, Egypt's two leading Islamist parties won about two-thirds of votes for party lists in the second round of polling for a parliament that will help draft a new constitution after decades of autocratic rule. In January 2012, FJP's deputy leader and Brotherhood member Dr. Rashad Bayoumi told Arabic daily al-Hayat in an interview that Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood will not recognize Israel “under any circumstance.” When asked whether it is a requirement for the government in Egypt to recognize Israel, Bayoumi responded by saying: “This is not an option, whatever the circumstances, we do not recognize Israel at all. It’s an occupying criminal enemy.” The deputy leader stressed during the interview that no Muslim Brotherhood members would ever meet with Israelis for negotiations.“I will not allow myself to sit down with criminals.” Though the FJP had previously announced it would not field a candidate for the presidential elections, in March 2012, the Brotherhood's party announced that Khairat El-Shater, an engineer and businessman, would be their official representative. In April, however, the the Supreme Presidential Election Committee officially disqualified El-Shater from candidacy because of prior criminal convictions against him. In response to El-Shater's suspension, the FJP placed Mohamed Morsi as their new candidate in April 2012. Morsi, a lifetime Brotherhood member, has served as media spokesman for the Brotherhood's Guidance Office before taking the position to lead their political party.  In the first round of elections in May 2012, Morsi emerged as one of the top two vote-getters, amassing 24.8% of the vote, and qualified for the final election run-off set to take place the following month. In late June 2012, almost a week after the run-off election between Morsi and secularist candidate Ahmed Shafik, official results confirmed that Morsi had garnered 51.7% of the votes and therefore won the presidency, making him the first ever candidate from an Islamist party to become head-of-state of an Arab country. He also becomes Egypt’s fifth president and the first from outside the military. Sources: Jerusalem Post (January 1, 2012; June 7, 2011); New York Times (June 25, 2012); Leadership Action Network (July 2012); MEMRI (July 23, 2012); The Investigative Project on Terrorism (February 28, 2011); JCPA (February 2, 2011); Israel HaYom, (June 22, 2012); Wikipedia

Back to Top

2013 Amendments to the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States