Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed's Muslim Brotherhood Situation

Abdulrahman Mohamed el-Sayed

Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed really, really does not want to talk about the Muslim Brotherhood and he will attack you with claims of racism if you ask him about it.

When NBC News’ Tom Illamas pressed him on the subject, the Muslim Brotherhood fanboy grew testy, apparently hoping that if he glared hard enough at the question, it would magically disappear. His message seems straightforward enough: trust him, stop asking questions, and please do not look too closely at the company he and his family have allegedly kept.

The problem is that Americans have developed a rather inconvenient habit of wanting to know whether their elected officials have any questionable associations. We already have Ilhan Nur Said Elmi [aka Ilhan Omar] and Rashida Tlaib providing Democrats with more than enough opportunities to explain away radicalism and controversial foreign allegiances. 

The Senate hardly needs another candidate handing voters a fresh stack of uncomfortable questions.

El-Sayed insists that he and his family have no ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization so extreme that it has been banned in five Muslim-majority countries. Unfortunately for him, the story keeps getting more complicated.

According to previous reporting, El-Sayed wrote a letter to the organization when it took power in Egypt. His sister appears to have an affinity for the group, while his mother reportedly worked for a charity with alleged al-Qaeda ties, and his uncle served as its bookkeeper. Perhaps nobody in the family has an official Muslim Brotherhood membership card tucked into a wallet, but when the family scrapbook starts looking like something that might interest a congressional investigative committee, voters are entitled to ask a few questions.

And now, RedState uncovered another reason El-Sayed might prefer to change the subject: a retreat he reportedly attended that has connections to the Muslim Brotherhood.

As RedState reported:

El-Sayed recently appeared defensive when Fox News' Bret Baier asked him a straightforward question posed over and over by the Republican opponent, Mike Rogers, and his campaign, about his background and connections to Islamist radicalism.

On Wednesday, more questions started to surface about his ties to these terror groups and their supporters, with new images circulating on social media reportedly showing Abdul El-Sayed in some questionable company at an overseas private retreat.

The photos, in an X post shared by the Government Accountability Institute's president, Peter Schweizer, appear to show the Democrat socializing with members of organizations with "credible ties" to MB or other "Islamic terror groups" in Colombia in 2022.

If the images show what Schweizer says they show, El-Sayed has a serious explaining problem on his hands. The question is not whether a politician must personally approve every person who happens to occupy the same room. The question is why a candidate who emphatically denies connections to Islamist radicalism seems to keep finding himself in situations that invite scrutiny of those very connections.

And when Fox News asks about it, voters deserve more than an irritated response and an apparent hope that everyone will eventually get bored.

El-Sayed would presumably prefer to spend his campaign discussing health care, economic policy, or whatever other subject he believes will put him in the best light. Instead, he is being asked to explain the people and organizations surrounding him. That is an unfortunate development for a candidate who would probably rather have his biography treated like a sealed court filing.

Michigan voters deserve answers before they cast their ballots on September 3. They should not have to piece together a candidate's associations from photographs, investigative reports, and increasingly uncomfortable interviews.

There is an old rule in politics that if you're explaining, you're losing. 

El-Sayed now has an opportunity to test that theory, although the growing list of questions suggests he may be getting more practice than he wanted.

Republicans should make sure voters understand what is being reported, demand straightforward answers, and turn out at the polls. They should also remind their friends and family members to do the same. Elections have consequences, and the best way to prevent an unwanted candidate from taking office is to vote against him rather than merely complain about him afterward.

Expect more questions about this. El-Sayed has chosen to run for elected office, and that means his public record, associations, and past statements are legitimate subjects of scrutiny. He is entitled to answer those questions as he sees fit. Voters are equally entitled to judge those answers.

If he wants the power of public office, he will have to endure the inconvenience of public accountability. That comes with the job, whether he likes it or not.

I hope you will take the time to click on any of the ads on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything to simply look. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee at any amount if you want to support me directly, but no pressure. And finally, consider subscribing if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and totally worth the cost.

Tweet

Michigan Dem Abdul El-Sayed Discovers That Questions About His Family Are Apparently Out of Bounds

Michigan Senate hopeful Abdul El-Sayed found himself in the uncomfortable position of having to answer questions from NBC News, a development that appeared to catch the Democrat completely off guard as he was expecting powderpuff questions with no followup. 

The subject was about family ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, and El-Sayed responded with the political equivalent of demanding to speak to the manager.

During an interview with NBC News, El-Sayed dismissed questions about his family’s alleged connections to the Islamist organization as “not serious,” attempting to redirect attention toward his Michigan résumé rather than explain social media posts in which his maternal half-sister claimed their family had “long” been involved with the group.

The awkward exchange followed El-Sayed’s earlier denial of any connection to the Muslim Brotherhood, a position that became considerably more complicated after his sister’s old posts resurfaced.

NBC reporter Tom Llamas confronted El-Sayed with several statements posted by his half-sister, Eman Abdelhadi, a University of Chicago professor. In June 2012, Abdelhadi wrote, “My family has long been MB,” referring to the Muslim Brotherhood.

[According to the Council on Foreign Relations, the Brotherhood's central mission is to Islamize society through religious law, values, and morals. Its ideology seeks a political and social order based on Islamic principles and Sharia law.]

In another post, she recalled, “had an amazing talk with my mom about her activism in the Muslim Brotherhood during the early 70s while she was in college.”

Then, in July 2013, she added, “I have had family jailed for being a part of it.”

Those statements raised questions that El-Sayed apparently would have preferred remained buried in the internet’s increasingly inconvenient archives.

Rather than address the substance of the posts, El-Sayed launched into a recitation of his personal history and professional accomplishments, as though serving Michigan’s public health system somehow rendered questions about his family automatically illegitimate. 

Maybe he has something to hide.

“It’s funny to me. I was born in 1984, down the street in Rochester Hills,” he said. “I was raised here in Michigan, went to the University of Michigan, rebuilt the health department in the city, led the health department in this county. And you want to ask me about what was happening in Egypt in 1970? Are you serious?”

Apparently, the relevant question was no longer what his sister had written about their family, but why anyone would dare ask him about it.

Llamas persisted, prompting El-Sayed to offer a denial while acknowledging that he had never discussed the matter with his mother.

“I’m telling you, like, I have no ties. We have no ties,” he said. “I have never had these conversations with my mother. I wasn’t raised by my mother.”

El-Sayed then accused the reporter of “using hearsay evidence from a tweet.”

The candidate’s defense thus rested on a peculiar combination of categorical denial and an admission that he had never actually discussed the subject with the person at the center of the reported family history.

Llamas was not persuaded. He pointed out that El-Sayed had criticized President Donald Trump over “truthfulness” and suggested that voters were entitled to expect the same standard from the Senate candidate.

“So when people ask you a question, they all do expect the truth,” the reporter said.

El-Sayed appeared offended by the implication.

“Do you think, are you insinuating that somehow I was lying?” El-Sayed responded. “And I’m telling you I was not.”

The exchange offered a glimpse of what happens when a politician accustomed to criticizing his opponents discovers that the press occasionally applies the same inconvenient standards to him. Suddenly, the questions are unserious, the evidence is hearsay, and the person asking for clarification is apparently the real problem.

The controversy is not entirely academic. Chapters of the Muslim Brotherhood, including the organization’s Egyptian branch, have been designated as specially designated global terrorist organizations by the United States. Egypt is also the country from which El-Sayed’s parents emigrated.

El-Sayed has previously boasted that he held dual American and Egyptian citizenship, although he now says that claim was based on misinformation.

The social media posts first drew renewed attention after the Washington Free Beacon resurfaced them following El-Sayed’s categorical denial of any links to the Muslim Brotherhood during an appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

President Donald Trump also weighed in on Wednesday, claiming that El-Sayed himself was a member of the organization.

“Abdul, or as I call him Muhammad El-Sayad, he’s a member of the Muslim Brotherhood,” Trump said. “You can’t have a member of the Muslim Brotherhood in Congress, being on one of our security committees.”

The allegation from Trump is separate from the claims attributed to El-Sayed’s half-sister, and the family’s reported history does not, by itself, establish that El-Sayed belongs to the organization.

Nevertheless, a candidate seeking a seat in the United States Senate can reasonably expect questions about statements suggesting possible family connections to a movement with a complicated and consequential history. That is particularly true when the candidate has already made categorical denials about the subject.

El-Sayed is entitled to deny the allegations. He is also entitled to object to the questions. But neither entitlement obliges reporters or voters to pretend that the questions do not exist.

For a party that routinely insists that public figures must answer for their words, actions, associations, and family histories when politically convenient, the sudden discovery that some questions are “not serious” is an interesting development.

Perhaps El-Sayed can explain to voters why the public should accept his assurances without further scrutiny. Dismissing the questions as ridiculous, however, is unlikely to make the questions disappear.

If anything, it makes people wonder why answering them directly seems so difficult.

Hey patriots! Please take time to give a click on the ads on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything just to look. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee at any amount if you want to support me directly, but no pressure. And finally, consider subscribing if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and totally worth the cost.

Tweet

FL Gov. DeSantis officially designates Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR and Antifa as terror groups

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, obviously a Republican, has apparently decided that Florida’s terrorist-designation process needed a little more honesty.

DeSantis officially designated the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and Antifa as terror groups, based on their support and involvement with terrorists. This is creating the awkward possibility that some organizations long treated as perfectly respectable fixtures of American political life might suddenly have to explain why they are being treated like terrorist organizations.

This creates an interesting situation.

If these designations have any teeth, they will raise questions regarding how these organizations, particularly the Hamas-linked CAIR, are regarded nationwide. Will CAIR-Florida have to shut down? CAIR wields enormous influence among clueless and compromised politicians nationwide, as they court Muslim votes.

That could make the next fundraising dinner considerably more interesting.

Will politicians in other states think twice about appearing at Hamas-linked CAIR events since it is designated a terror organization in Florida? Or will they simply continue showing up, smiling for photographs and explaining that they are there to promote "dialogue" while pretending nobody noticed the giant terrorist-designation elephant sitting at the table?

The latter is much more likely.

After all, Washington and state capitals have spent years perfecting the art of discovering that an organization is deeply troubling only after it becomes politically inconvenient to pretend otherwise.

Of course, there is another possibility.

Once DeSantis is out of office and the Democrats are back in charge, watch for them to lift these designations and turn around and designate some patriotic groups as terror organizations.

At that point, Florida may discover that the state's definition of "terrorist" changes rather dramatically depending on which party occupies the governor's mansion.

The real question, however, is what practical difference these designations will make.

A terrorist designation that produces no meaningful consequences is ultimately little more than an official government document informing everyone that something is bad while everyone continues doing exactly what they were doing before.

Still, it is a start.

Florida has at least put the names on the board.

Now we get to see whether anyone is actually willing to enforce the rules.

Hey folks, please take time to give a click on the ads on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything just to look. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee at any amount if you want to support me directly, but no pressure. And finally, consider subscribing if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and totally worth the cost.

Tweet

Abdul El Sayed's Campaign of "Getting Money Out of Politics" Depends Heavily on Father in Law Tied to Muslim Brotherhood Linked Organization

One of the more curious habits of modern politics is the insistence that we ignore patterns which, in any other context, would immediately invite scrutiny. We are told that connections do not matter, associations are merely historical accidents, and family ties become irrelevant precisely when they are politically inconvenient.

That indulgence is now being extended to Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El Sayed. And just because his father-in-law has help fund terrorist organizations is no reason to worry where El Sayed's heart lies.

A review by the Washington Free Beacon found that El Sayed's father in law, Dr. Jukaku Tayeb, is both one of the largest financial backers of the super PAC supporting El Sayed's campaign and a longtime senior figure within the Islamic Society of North America, or ISNA, an organization federal prosecutors identified during the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing case as a public facing component of the Muslim Brotherhood's American network.

Tayeb has contributed $200,000 to the Fighting for Michigan PAC, nearly half of the group's fundraising total through the end of March. This might be considered what is often referred to as financial jihad, as it helps fund jihad causes.

His financial support would already merit attention. His organizational affiliations make the story considerably more significant.

According to ISNA's own publications, Tayeb has served on the organization's 20 member founding committee since at least 2007. Membership on that committee is not ceremonial. Founders are expected to contribute at least $5,000 annually while also supporting the group's Founders Legacy Fund.

Federal prosecutors identified ISNA as an unindicted co-conspirator during the landmark Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terrorism financing prosecution in American history. That case resulted in convictions after prosecutors demonstrated that more than $12 million had been funneled to Hamas through charitable fronts. One of the federal prosecutors, you may recall, was Andy McCarthy, who put the "Blind Sheikh" (Omar Abdel-Rahman) behind bars.

Government filings also identified ISNA as one of several organizations "who are and/or were members of the US Muslim Brotherhood."

This was not a passing allegation or an abandoned theory. This was big guns, or rather sharp swords, to be more precise.

In a 2009 ruling, a federal judge concluded that the Department of Justice had presented "ample evidence" connecting both ISNA and the Council on American Islamic Relations, or CAIR, to Hamas during the litigation.

The court noted that the Holy Land Foundation and ISNA shared banking arrangements and cited evidence showing checks deposited into those accounts were frequently made payable to "the Palestinian Mujahadeen," the original name used by Hamas's military wing.

The ruling also referenced a now well known 1991 memorandum from the Muslim Brotherhood's Shura Council describing its American strategy as "a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions."

These are not the inventions of political opponents. They are findings and evidence introduced during one of the most consequential terrorism financing cases in modern American legal history.

Lorenzo Vidino, director of George Washington University's Program on Extremism, offered little ambiguity regarding ISNA's origins.

"ISNA was historically, no question, an organization created … by the Muslim Brotherhood and fellow travelers from the Indian subcontinent as basically the Islamist organization in America."

He added that Tayeb remained active during years "when they were putting out some really nasty stuff."

"To be on the founding committee, this is the elders of the organization."

Tayeb's involvement did not end there.

IRS records show he served as president of CAIR Michigan from 2005 through 2010 and remains on its board of directors. Like ISNA, CAIR was named as an unindicted co conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation prosecution.

Vidino described the overlap as entirely predictable.

"This is kind of the pattern," he explained. "To some degree, it's a good old boys network. And so, if you're on the board committee in ISNA, chances are you also belong to your local CAIR branch. Chances are you sit on the board of another charity that is part of the network. That's kind of how it works."

Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy argued that these relationships have long been visible.

"It’s been obvious since the 1970s that the Muslim Students Associations and ISNA … have very strong ties to the extreme fringes of the Democratic Party."

Meanwhile, El Sayed campaigns beneath lawn signs declaring that he wants to push "money out of politics."

His rhetoric frequently targets AIPAC, which he accuses of attempting to "buy off government" to "make sure that our money is sent abroad to kill other people."

Yet while condemning outside money, the super PAC sustaining his campaign is heavily financed by his own father in law.

His Democratic opponent, Representative Haley Stevens, highlighted the contradiction during last week's debate.

"He's great at covering up that his father-in-law is running his super PAC that's spending millions of dollars for him," Stevens said. "Abdul, you talk about getting money out of politics and putting money in people's pockets. But who is putting money in yours? What are you hiding?"

The questions do not stop with campaign finance.

El Sayed has repeatedly appeared alongside some of the loudest anti Israel activists on the American left, including Hasan Piker, who has infamously declared that "America deserved 9/11."

One of El Sayed's former campaign staffers, Mariam Odeh, was indicted in June for allegedly participating in what prosecutors described as a coordinated campaign targeting Jewish officials, businesses, and organizations connected to the University of Michigan.

Perhaps most revealing was El Sayed's own recorded guidance to campaign staff following the death of Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

"I also want to remind you guys that there are a lot of people in Dearborn who are sad today," El Sayed said. "So, like, I just don't want to comment on Khamenei at all. Like, I don't think it's worth even touching that."

That is an extraordinary statement for any American politician. One might have expected even a minimal condemnation of a man responsible for decades of repression, terrorism, and regional instability. Instead, electoral sensitivities apparently took precedence over moral clarity.

None of this proves Abdul El Sayed shares every belief of his father in law or every historical position associated with ISNA or CAIR. Guilt by association is an inadequate standard.

But neither can serious political journalism pretend these relationships are meaningless.

When a candidate's principal financial benefactor occupies a senior leadership position in organizations repeatedly scrutinized in one of America's largest terrorism financing investigations, and when that candidate consistently avoids condemning Islamist figures while courting activists sympathetic to them, the public has every right to ask difficult questions.

The remarkable thing is that so many in the political and media establishment seem determined to insist the questions should never be asked.

I want to thank you for following Brain Flushings. Please take time to simply check out the sponsors on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything to do so. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee if you want to support me directly. And finally, don't be afraid to subscribe if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and worth the cost.

Tweet

CAIR & Muslim Brotherhood Money Laundered Taxpayer Dollars To Run Thousands of Muslim Candidates in America

CAIR protest at Jewish seminar in Chicago

Holy moley, folks. The mask is OFF. Fox News just dropped a nuke on CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood, and if you still think this is some fringe "Islamophobia" conspiracy theory after this, you're either brain-dead or on their payroll.

They're not just "community organizing." They’re running THOUSANDS of Muslim candidates for public office across America because that's where the real power is now: city councils, school boards, state legislatures. You take those, you own the country from the ground up.

And how are they bankrolling this stealth jihad? By laundering your taxpayer dollars, of course. "What CAIR did in California that's under investigation, they took money purportedly for Afghan refugees, helped less than 200, took half of that $7 million and put it back in their own organization. They're disclosing only small fractions of their lobbying, which they're then using to finance and support radicals on campus. So they are subverting our academic institutions in line with their Islamist goals."

Always swords or rifles 

Straight-up grift. Seven million in federal cash supposedly for refugees → fewer than 200 actually helped → millions funneled right back into CAIR's war chest to fund campus jihadis and buy politicians. And while the feds are actively investigating this scam in California, they're still getting federal funds. Because nothing says "accountability" like rewarding open fraud.

"They're using hundreds of nonprofits, charities, student groups, professional societies, undermining local government, putting in politicians that are sympathetic to their views or openly acolytes and modifying and changing our democracy. That's happening here in the United States, too. And while CAIR was being investigated in California, it's still receiving federal funds."This is the Muslim Brotherhood playbook on steroids. And they've never hidden it:

"The Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR have long made their goals clear to forcibly impose Sharia law and establish Islam’s mastership of the world."

Remember when anyone pointed this out and we got called bigots? Remember when we showed you their own documents and the media smeared us as 

"hate mongers"? Yeah, about that…

For decades we’ve been screaming from the rooftops while the same people now clutching pearls called us racists. Meanwhile CAIR, an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest Hamas terror-funding case in U.S. history, kept getting invited to the White House, kept getting fawning profiles, kept getting platformed by Democrat politicians who knew exactly who they were.

And just in case you forgot what these ghouls actually believe, here's their own words from the Holy Land Foundation trial:

"…eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions."

That’s not "taken out of context." That's not ancient history. That's the mission statement, straight from the Muslim Brotherhood's internal documents, and CAIR was literally named in them as part of the network.

We told you. We begged you to listen. And instead of gratitude, we got canceled, deplatformed, and demonized by the same media that spent years pretending CAIR was just a "civil rights group."

Enjoy the country you refused to defend, suckers. Because they're not coming for it anymore. They're already inside the gates, and half of them are on your dime.

If you like Brain Flushings and want to Buy Me a Coffee, I would appreciate it, as it supports my work. Obviously, there is no pressure but I certainly wouldn't stop you.

Tweet

Trump Prepares to Designate the Muslim Brotherhood a Terrorist Organisation – At Last, a Dose of Reality

One is almost tempted to say "about time." President Donald Trump has announced his intention to classify the Muslim Brotherhood as a Foreign Terrorist Organisation. "It will be done in the strongest and most powerful terms,” he told Just The News. "Final documents are being drawn." 

The move follows swiftly on the heels of Texas Governor Greg Abbott's designation of both of the Brotherhood and of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as foreign terrorist and transnational criminal organisations. Abbott, who seems to always be one step ahead of the herd, was characteristically blunt: "The Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR have long made their goals clear: to forcibly impose Sharia law and establish Islam's 'mastership of the world.' The actions taken by the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR to support terrorism across the globe and subvert our laws through violence, intimidation, and harassment are unacceptable."

CAIR, predictably, has run whimpering to the courts.

Let us remind ourselves what we are dealing with. Founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, the Brotherhood has never hidden its ultimate ambition: the restoration of the Caliphate and the subjugation of the world to Islamic law. Its Palestinian offshoot, Hamas, states quite openly in its 1988 charter that it is "one of the wings of the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine." 

Hamas, of course, remains dedicated to the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews wherever they may be found. 

In the West, the Brotherhood's various front organizations have perfected the art of sounding almost reasonable. They issue the obligatory condemnations of "terrorism," always carefully worded, always provisional. Yet, as the Foundation for Defense of Democracies noted in a recent brief, such moderation "is almost always born of prudence, not principle." The Brotherhood is merely more patient than al-Qaeda or Islamic State; it prefers the slow, civilizational jihad of infiltration to the fireworks of immediate violence. It hesitates to provoke a host government that might still be useful, and it uses its laws to gain the advantage in their actions.

Also, it places the highest value on remaining free to advance its ideology incrementally, especially in Muslim-majority countries where it can still dream of seizing power by ballot box or bullet.

None of this is conspiracy theory; it is the Brotherhood's own published doctrine. Which brings us to the most damning indictment of all, delivered this week by Dr. Charles Asher Small, founding director of the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy. His institute has just released a 265-page report mapping the Brotherhood's century-long project of "ideological, institutional, and financial penetration into North America."

Dr Small's summary is crystal clear:

This is not simply a political movement but a transnational ideological project that adapts itself to Western systems while working to undermine them. The Brotherhood has learned to use the very freedoms of democracy as tools to erode it from within, exploiting the tolerance and openness of liberal societies as strategic vulnerabilities.

That is the essence of the matter. The Muslim Brotherhood is not misunderstood; it is not moderate; it is not reformable. It is a sophisticated, patient, supremacist movement that regards our open societies not as partners but as prey. For decades, Western governments, terrified of being called "Islamophobic,"  have allowed its operatives to set up shop, buy influence, and groom the next generation, all while pocketing taxpayer funds and lecturing us about tolerance. President Trump's designation, if it is finally enacted with the full force he promises, will be a long-overdue recognition of reality. 

One can only hope it is the beginning, not the end, of a serious reckoning with the civilizational threat posed by Islamist ideologues who smile for the cameras while sharpening the knife behind their backs.

And perhaps we can end the no-go zones, as President Trump says, "all over the place."

If you like Brain Flushings and want to Buy Me a Coffee, I would appreciate it, as it supports my work. Obviously, there is no pressure but I certainly wouldn't stop you.

Tweet

Jordan court dissolves their Muslim Brotherhood

Amman, Jordan -- Jordan's top court has finally dissolved their country's arm of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), a multinational jihadist organization hell-bent on creating a world caliphate where everyone left alive is a Muslim. The reason for the dissolution by Jordan was explained as the MB's failure to "rectify its legal status."

“The Court of Cassation yesterday [Wednesday, July 15] issued a final verdict ruling that the Muslim Brotherhood group is dissolved… for failing to rectify its legal status under Jordanian law,” the official said, requesting anonymity in order to avoid a personal beheading.

The Muslim Brotherhood, founded by Hassan al-Banna in Egypt in 1928, is a pan-Islamic movement with exclusively Muslim-charitable, and political arms.

Jordanian social distancing measures

According to the cowardly BBC, the most recent motto of the terrorist group is: "Islam is the solution." And according to Khalil Yusuf, an academic who did his best to trick us, he claimed the original motto "was traditionally"-- "Believers are but Brothers."

The real motto of the Muslim Brotherhood as per al-Banna and the members who don't want to discuss it is:

"Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."

When they mention dying, by the way, they aren't talking about changing the color of their clothes.

While the MB pretends to be peaceful, they have a long history of doing just the opposite--kind of like Antifa pretending to be anti-fascist. It opposed British rule in Egypt beginning in 1936 and was banned after being accused of violent murders, including the assassination of a Prime Minister. And the murders continued well after the Second World War.

The MB has faced years of pressure, especially in after the 2011 Arab Spring uprisings, and has been outlawed as a “terrorist” group in Egypt and banned in several other countries.

Amman had tolerated the group’s political arm for decades, but since 2014 authorities have considered it illegal, arguing its license was not renewed under a 2014 law on political parties, as a way of appeasing Islamists in the country who support the MB.

In spite of all this, the MB continued to operate, but its relations with the Jordanian state deteriorated further from 2015 when the government authorized an offshoot group, the Muslim Brotherhood Association.

In April 2016, government security services closed the MB’s Amman headquarters along with several regional offices, transferring their ownership to the splinter group in a step the movement denounced as political, but in reality was self-preservation at its core.

The original Brotherhood took the case to court in a bid to retrieve the properties, but the court in its verdict Wednesday ordered it dissolved.

The Brotherhood argues that it had already obtained licenses to operate under previous laws in the 1940s and 1950s — and stressed that it would appeal Wednesday’s ruling.

Sheikh Hamza Mansur, head of the organization’s ruling council, said the group would appeal against Wednesday’s ruling.

“The Muslim Brotherhood… is a model of moderation and an important element in strengthening national unity, so dissolving it is not in the national interest,” he told AFP in a bold lie known in Islam as taqiyya.

The breakaway group — the Muslim Brotherhood Association — aimed to sever ties with the Brotherhood in Egypt, where hundreds of supporters have been killed and thousands detained since the army ousted Islamist president Mohamed Morsi in 2013.

Best guess is that if they don't get their way, things will get violent.


Consider following Brain Flushings, and remember, every time you click on an ad, an angel gets its wings and a liberal sheds a tear.






Tweet

New Clinton emails found--some with classified info end used texts for gov't business

I guess that rag for wiping Hillary's server clean wasn't good enough, nor was BleachBit, as Judicial Watch, the conservative watchdog group, revealed that the FBI released 37 pages of new Clinton emails showing that the former Secretary of State Clinton used her unsecure, non-government, illegal, unauthorized, ridiculously easy to hack email to transmit classified information.

The new emails also show that she, in addition, she used text messages for government business, something that is clearly stupid and irresponsible. The documents, produced to Judicial Watch after a review by the State Department, include 13 new Clinton emails.

According to Judicial Watch, the State Department didn't reveal where the emails were discovered nor why they were not previously provided. They also don't say whether or not more records will be forthcoming.

In February, a Justice Department attorney was not able to tell how and where the FBI found the new trove of Clinton emails--perhaps Huma Abedin knows, but that's not a certainty.

Previously, the State Department claimed they had produced all reasonable Clinton emails, including the ones she withheld or tried to destroy with BleachBit. The department initially said, in 2018, that all responsive emails had been produced, but found additional ones, for the first time early last year.

Can you smell it?

Last November, the State Department first disclosed to the court that the FBI found the latest batch of emails and they were produced due to the intrepid work of Judicial Watch and the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for all of Hillary Clinton's government emails sent on her secret, illegal server, when she served as Secretary of State, as well as all emails by other State Department employees to Clinton regarding her non-"state.gov" email address.

One of the latest uncovered emails dated January 23, 2012 was from former British Prime Minister Tony Blair to Clinton's personal email containing information that was redacted as classified.

Another email containing classified information on August 30, 2011, then-Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs suggested Clinton meet with Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati in Paris to discuss Syria and other issues.

But perhaps the most disturbing one was an email sent on April 10, 2012, where Hillary forwarded an intelligence memo on Egypt's Election campaign that contained information on the Muslim Brotherhood that she received from Sidney Blumenthal, and her then-Deputy Chief of Staff Jacob Sullivan. In the memo, Blumenthal claims to have “Sources with access to the highest levels of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, and Western intelligence and security services.”

There's more but the point is made that Hillary Clinton has been violating the Espionage Act over and over, with no consequences to this day. As it stands now, the FBI recovered about 5,000 of the 33,000 government emails Clinton grabbed and tried to destroy. But the case remains open and she gets to wander the woods ruminating over how the country just cannot admit that she is the real President of the United States of America!


Please consider following this blog, and remember, every time you click on an ad, an angel gets its wings and a terrorist gets his virgins.




Tweet

Court kicks CAIR out of San Diego school district

Nihad Awad, a jihadi

“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.” Muslim Brotherhood motto.

Finally, in a landmark case, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land terror-funding case that pretends to be a civil advocate organization, has been forced out of the San Diego Unified School District.

A lawsuit was brought against the district for partnering with CAIR and allowing the Islamist, Muslim Brotherhood affiliated organization to run a discriminatory, unconstitutional propaganda program in its schools. [Can I get an Allahu akbar!]

The court agreed with this assessment.

The program the Islamists used gave Muslim students special privileges and gave CAIR the power to change the district curriculum to make sure Islam was looked upon more favorably, in spite of its history.

Students and parents were made to watch biased videos, CAIR officials were allowed to teach students and teachers about Islam and students were trained “how to become allies with Muslims students.”

The program began in April 2017 and was based on false evidence that, in the wake of President Donald Trump’s electoral victory, Muslim students were subjected to “Islamophobic” bullying--examples were never given by CAIR and state records indicated there was absolutely no evidence of such bullying in the district’s schools.

The court ruled that the program was unconstitutional as it violated the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause by favoring one religious group over another and mixing government with religion.

Under the terms of the ruling, the school district is required to permanently drop the program and prevented from allowing CAIR to be involved in school activities in the future, stifling their future goal to destroy our "miserable house from within."

Further, school officials must correct the pro-Muslim student bias and disproportionate emphasis on Islamic history in its curriculum, which were both instituted through the program.

The court further gave the following guidelines to the schools:

“Educators should treat each religion with equal respect, with the time and attention spent discussing each religion being proportionate to its impact on history.”  

“Educational material on religious subjects must be neutral and may not be presented in a manner that promotes one religion over another.”  

“Educators or other staff sponsoring guest speakers at District events must ask them not to use their position or influence on students to forward their own religious, political, economic or social views and shall take active steps to neutralize whatever bias has been presented.”  

“Guest speakers from religious organizations are not permitted to present to students on religious topics.”

“This is a tremendous victory, because CAIR intended this plan to be a pilot program for a nationwide rollout,” said Daniel J. Piedra, executive director of the Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund (FCDF), the organization which brought the suit against the school district.

The FCDF said that other school districts similarly affected by CAIR are Seattle Public Schools, Minneapolis Public Schools, Cajon Valley Unified School District and Gilroy Unified School District.

Who are the useful idiots allowing this infiltration and brainwashing into our children's schools?

“This settlement agreement will serve as a warning to politically correct school boards nationwide to think twice about partnering with CAIR,” said Charles LiMandri, chief counsel for FCDF.

LiMandri called the court’s decision a “victory against radical Islamic indoctrination in America’s schools.”

The FBI and the Justice Department have both banned CAIR as an outreach partnerbecause of its Islamist agenda and ties to Hamas and terror funding.


CAIR was listed by the U.S. government as being among “individuals/entities who are/were members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee and/or its organizations.” The Palestine Committee was a secret body set up by the Brotherhood to advance the Brotherhood/Hamas agenda in America.

A secret meeting of the committee held in Philadelphia in 1993 was wiretapped by the FBI. Nihad Awad, co-founder and executive director of CAIR participated in that meeting where members agreed that a new “neutral” entity for influencing U.S. policy and opinion was agreed upon.

Awad founded CAIR the following year and the scumcrumpet is still allowed to be in a country that he hates and hopes to convert us or destroy those who refuse.


Follow Brain Flushings and have a few laughs while you get a conservative viewpoint. Politics is the new NFL without the mindless kneeling and this blog will both inform you and will hopefully entertain you bigly.




Tweet

Aha! Khashoggi was a Qatari asset

It has now floated to the surface, like something you never want to see in your child's kiddy pool, that Jamal Khashoggi (who was murdered at the hands of the Saudis in their consulate in Turkey) was a Qatari asset, most likely being paid and handled by Maggie Mitchell Salem, an executive at the Qatar Foundation International.

Following the disappearance of Khashoggi, the Saudi-born reporter was billed as an unflinching proponent of democracy, a Washington Post journalist who was exposing the myriad and horrible human rights abuses by the government of his native Saudi Arabia.

While this balderdash of a narrative was being spun by Turkey and Qatar (which are both fierce rivals of the Saudis and now know was working behind the scenes in the days after the murder), the Obama-era “echo chamber” was being used by them to undermine the stability of the Saudi government itself.

That “echo chamber,” named as such by Obama’s National Security Council Communications Director and former failed novelist Ben Rhodes, was famously exploited by Rhodes to support both Obama’s engagement with the Iranians (culminating in the crappy Iran nuclear deal) as well as Obama’s shift towards the Sunni Islamists (including Egypt’s former Muslim Brotherhood President Mohammed Morsi) and away from America’s former Sunni allies (most prominently, Saudi Arabia).

Which makes one wonder about Obama's thoughts on Islamic global domination.

“When complete, the successful information operation would depict Khashoggi a heroic martyr to independent journalism and freedom, while Saudi Arabia would be the embodiment of evil and callousness,” writes the Security Studies Group (SSG), an Australian think tank, which added, “It is clear now that, not only was Khashoggi transmogrified in death into a major front in Qatar’s war on its Gulf neighbors; in life, he was Qatar’s asset in that war, as well.”

As SSG noted, “American elites and policymakers have been soft targets for Qatari influence and information operations. Information operations use media and traditional tools of public relations to advance policy interests through narratives.”

This was abundantly apparent in the narrative put forth by the mainstream media shortly after Khashoggi’s death. As details began to emerge about the Khashoggi’s connection to the Muslim Brotherhood and Osama bin Laden (which we now know were important in his work on behalf of Qatar, one of the world’s largest sponsors of the Brotherhood), the media downplayed these facts as conservative conspiracy theories.

“No outlet did more in the service of cementing that symbolism than the Washington Post and its news and editorial staff,” wrote SSG. “Since October, that outlet has functioned unofficially as the most relentless and influential anti-Saudi lobbying shop in the nation’s capital. Indeed, the successful campaign of hagiography spearheaded by The Post prompted Time Magazine to name Khashoggi and other members of the oft fake news media ‘Person of the Year.’”

Propaganda camouflage

They were attempting to make Khashoggi into some kind of Muslim saint; no pun intended.

As details are still surfacing about Khashoggi being a Qatari “agent of influence,” even The Washington Post realized they were vulnerable, and agenda-driven fools.

In a piece obviously written for damage control, The Washington Post revealed, “Text messages between Khashoggi and an executive at Qatar Foundation International show that the executive, Maggie Mitchell Salem, at times shaped the columns he submitted to The Washington Post, proposing topics, drafting material and prodding him to take a harder line against the Saudi government.”

The newspaper also wrote about Khashoggi’s Brotherhood friends in the U.S., including the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror-funding case. They also mentioned his ties with senior officials in the Turkish government, as well as the rumors that documents from wire transfers from Qatar were found at his homes in Turkey and in Virginia.

Yet, in spite of the Washington Post article downplaying these “details,” the article “is crucial because the campaign to lionize Khashoggi and to destroy the US-Saudi relationship was built on the fiction that the Saudis had killed a mere journalist,” notes SSG.

Wow. Talk about fake news and secrecy.

While the brutality of Khashoggi's execution at the hands of the Saudis is horrifying, it should be clearly understood that the Saudi’s viewed Khashoggi essentially as a foreign agent who threatened the very existence of the current regime, and he had to be eliminated.

Indeed, as seen by the chorus of screeching voices and finger-pointing from the political Left who attempted to use the murder to sever U.S.-Saudi relations, end U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia, depose Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman as successor to the kingdom’s throne and force the Saudis to surrender to Iran in Yemen, that assessment was quite on the mark.

“This, of course, was the Qatari policy aim and the conclusion of a successful information operation,” write SSG.

Turkey, of course, skillfully used the events to further position itself as the natural heir to the Sunni Islamic world, and kick Saudi Arabia to the side of the road.

There was a lot more to the story than we initially saw, and whether by accident or baffling brilliance, Trump apparently made the right move not to turn our back on the Saudis.


Hello fellow conservatives. At this time of year when everyone has a hand out for a hand-out, I don't. I simply want you to follow Brain Flushings and check out the ads on this page. It's free, I'm free and you're free to follow me or not. I hope you do.




Tweet

Saudi paper slams new U.S. Muslim congresswomen

Rashida Tlaib dancing with Ocasio-Cortez

Al Arabiya a pro-government, Saudi-owned pan-Arab news organization just released a hit-piece on Somali American Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Palestinian American Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) regarding their close ties to Linda Sarsour, groups linked to the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood, and a camel caravan of others who share the Brotherhood's Islamist political agenda.

But nothing to do with anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism [but I repeat myself] was mentioned.

The news outlet makes its case by demonstrating how the Democratic Party's quest to grab control of Congress "led to an alliance with political Islamist movements . . . pushing Muslim candidates and women activists of immigrant minorities onto the electoral scene."

The Saudi’s mortal-immoral enemy is, of course, Iran. 

There remains anger in Saudi Arabia for former President Obama and his Democratic weasels for pushing Congress out of the way to make room for the controversial Iran nuclear deal, and the U.S. handing billions of dollars into the hands of the ayatollahs which was paramount in helping them foster their nefarious plans for regional hegemony in the Middle East.

But the Saudis have as much animosity toward the Muslim Brotherhood, as it became clear that their quest for power over Middle East governments was beginning to be implemented in the Arab Spring. 

The Muslim Brotherhood also enjoyed undying support by the leftist Obama administration, both in Egypt and by US-linked Brotherhood groups which were considered by Obama's White House as his “top” outreach partners.

Al Arabiya noted that "The common ground between Congresswomen Omar and Tlaib is that both are anti-Trump . . .  especially his foreign policy starting from the sanctions on Iran to the isolation of the Muslim Brotherhood and all movements of political Islam.”

Al Arabiya sees the sponsorship and support received by both Muslim congresswomen-elect as a tactic used by Islamists to infiltrate Congress through the immigrant and Black communities as well as through women’s groups, as represented by their prominent Islamist spokesperson, Linda Sarsour.

Al Arabiya depicts Sarsour as a “Palestinian American activist . . . with roots in Muslim Brotherhood and a member of the Council on American-Islamic Relations [CAIR].” The piece discusses at length Sarsour’s ties to these and other Islamist and terrorists groups and causes.

It's ironic, however, that Saudi Arabia has this or anything to say about the West when they need to get their own house in order first.

Saudi Arabia is ruled by the principles of sharia law. Sharia rules that women are second class citizens and basic human rights are non-existent. Of course, there is no democratic form of government and overall, this system of theocratic rule is similar to that seen in Iran or even in the Muslim Brotherhood's goal of establishing a world caliphate.

The exportation of Saudi Arabia’s Wahhabist theology to mosques and madrassas worldwide has definitely contributed to as much global terrorism as that which has been sponsored by the mullahs running the Islamic Republic of Iran. And the Saudis are even sending tons of money to our colleges in the U.S. in order to gain favor by these institutions.

The important takeaway from this is that our hallowed halls of government are slowly and systematically being transformed into something that is clearly not what the founding fathers ever dreamt of when creating our Constitution and our way of life.

Hello fellow conservatives. At this time of year when everyone has a hand out for a hand out, I don't. I simply want you to follow Brain Flushings and check out the ads on this page. It's free, I'm free and you're free to follow me or not. I hope you do. Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah.


Tweet

Obama let slide huge terror-funding case

If you follow what's going on in the world of Islamic terrorism, you're probably aware of the Holy Land Foundation case--the largest terrorism-financing case in U.S. history. This one with the Obama administration was potentially bigger.
And, if it resulted in prosecutions, there would likely be an incredible domino effect  that would impact a whole host of other Islamist organizations in America and around the world.

But then, near the end of Obama Administration in 2016, the Justice Department declined to prosecute.

Federal agents were stunned and no real reason was given. The investigation into Islamic Relief continued, but the criminal case presented by the three government agencies would not move forward.

Did the administration lack the political will to take on the case, or is there something more sinister involved?

The proverbial fan being hit by excrement from the blowback would have had a huge impact at home and abroad had the case resulted in prosecutions.

Islamic Relief Worldwide, with headquarters in the U.K., has 16 branches including Islamic Relief USA and 26 field offices. 

Islamic Relief Worldwide boasted a $156 million budget in 2016 and its U.S. arm listed $115 million in total revenue. Evidence implies it has gotten even stronger financially and has all the resources it would need to fight back in the press, in the courts, and, to influence voters. Federal investigators would likely have been labeled as Islamophobic.

One of Islamic Relief’s senior officials admitted his organization was founded by Muslim Brotherhood ideologues. Extensive ties to Islamist extremists remain, including those linked to terrorism. The U.S. wing of Islamic Relief overlaps with organizations that the Justice Department has identified as affiliated not only with the Muslim Brotherhood but also Hamas, which is listed by the State Department as a foreign terrorist organization, and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Islamic Relief has received tens of millions of taxpayer dollars from the West, including more than $700,000 from the U.S. government. The State Department even cheered Islamic Relief as a partner in a July 2017 announcement. The charity was advising the U.S. Agency for International Development and State Department at the very same time that Israel banned the group for funding Hamas, saying that Islamic Relief "funnels millions of dollars a year to Hamas institutions.” 

The United Arab Emirates has also banned the self-described charity as a terrorist entity, but here in the U.S., not a single charity has been blacklisted for having links to terrorism since the earliest days of the Obama Administration.

A DHS whistleblower has finally come forward with his story about the purging of important intelligence records, including those related to this Islamist network. We have learned about how the Obama administration allowed Hezbollah’s drug trafficking operation in America “off the hook” for the sake of the nuclear deal with Iran.

Finally, last year, then-Rep. Ron DeSantis wrote legislation to forbid the sending of taxpayer money to Islamic Relief Worldwide. 

DeSantis argued that,  broadly speaking, taxpayer money shouldn’t go to any groups affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. The fact that he had to try putting something like that into law should wake us all up to the depths at which Islamic terror-funding organizations have their claws buried into us and we look the other way.

Congress should investigate Islamic Relief, even if the DOJ won't, to uncover why it received taxpayer money despite its well-documented history of involvement with terrorist groups, and to find out why the Justice Department dropped a criminal case that could have been one of the biggest terrorism-related prosecutions in our history.


Hello fellow conservatives. Please click the "Follow" button in the margin to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, if you would visit the ads on this page it helps the economy grow and it does a world of good for me.



Tweet

Democratic presidential hopefuls who support the jihadi group, CAIR

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is a Hamas-linked group that is like a slow-moving cancerous growth in the United States. Just yesterday a CAIR official named Zahra Billoo mocked Muslims in the U.S. military after praising jihad terrorists.

CAIR has been described by the U.S. Department of Justice as an "entity" of the Muslim Brotherhood and linked to pro-Hamas operations in the United States.

For a more comprehensive understanding of CAIR as it relates to Islamic jihad, there is a book by Ilana Freedman titled "Hamas, CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood".

More to the point, Ryan Mauro of the Clarion Project reveals what some Democratic presidential hopefuls have to say about CAIR. In his article titled: "16 Likely Presidential Candidates Endorse CAIR," he reveals the sentiments that these clueless [or more frightening, not clueless] politicians have expressed about the Islamist organization.

He doesn't just make wild claims about CAIR, he shows that the information can be found in CAIR’s own lists of supporters along with a list of 100 pro-CAIR members of Congress released by the Investigative Project on Terrorism.

Mauro explains that along with CAIR, other Islamist groups use quotes from supporters, from those who are presumed clueless about the long-term goal of CAIR and its sister organizations.

The 16 Democratic hopefuls who have endorsed CAIR and whose endorsement contradicts their self-described liberal and progressive values are:

1.   Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA)
2.   Sen. Cory "Spartacus" Booker (D-NJ)
3.   Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
4.   Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)
5.   Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH)
6.   Former. AG and Obama Wingman Eric Holder
7.   Tom Steyer (Billionaire Democrat)
8.   Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA)
9.   Rep. John Delaney (D- MD)
10. Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH)
11. Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA)
12. Former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley
13. Mayor Peter "Butthead" Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana
14. Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO)
15. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT)
16. Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA)

Mauro reminds us that "exclusion from this list does not mean that the other Democratic presidential aspirants have a clean record when it comes to embracing Islamists." He mentions, for example, that Sen. Bernie Sanders has Linda Sarsour as a close adviser and he has met with a "radical official from CAIR's Florida chapter."

He also mentions the 1.6 percent Native American, Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) stating that "she has participated in events at the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center, resulting in Americans for Peace and Tolerance asking her to cancel her involvement with the center due to its history of radicalism. Warren said she attended because one of her aides, Hamza Abdelgany, attends the mosque and asked her to come."

This is what is known as an attempted "save."

Mauro goes on to discuss some Democrats who oppose CAIR, but I'm not going to give them my time here.

Suffice it to say that CAIR is a danger to the well-being of human beings who don't follow the religion of Islam. The Clarion Project and JihadWatch.org are both fine resources to a better understanding of Islam and the current events of the day in that regard.

Hello fellow conservatives. Please click the "Follow" button in the margin to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, if you would visit the ads on this page it helps the economy grow and it does a world of good for me.




Tweet