Posts

Muslims from Syria caught sneaking across Texas border from Mexico

Border Patrol agents in the Laredo Sector are sounding the alarm after they recently apprehended two Syrian nationals who illegally crossed the border from Mexico into South Texas. The agents say the arrest of the Syrians confirms there is a human smuggling pipeline from countries with connections to terrorism into the U.S.

This is not a new problem. In November 2015, Jihad Watch reported that eight Syrians were caught at the Texas border in Laredo. U.S. Border Patrol Agent Hector Garza stated:

If the cartel-connected smugglers can bring people with good intentions across the border, they can also bring people with bad intentions.

While the so-called “far right” continues to suffer blame for trying to warn Westerners about the global jihad, those who downplay or deny the jihad threat will surely attribute good intentions to these Syrians, as they did in blindly welcoming in anyone and everyone, including jihadists and Islamic State infiltrators, into Europe.

Despite the relentless and ruthless criticism that Trump has received for prioritizing border control, the dangers to North America from illegal immigration continue to mount. Already, about 400 illegals a day are expected to pour into Canada at the Quebec border this summer; they will be resettled in major cities like Toronto.

“Agents Sound Alarm on Syrians Caught Sneaking Across Texas Border,” by Bob Price, Breitbart, May 10, 2018:

Border Patrol agents in the Laredo Sector are sounding the alarm after they recently apprehended two Syrian nationals who illegally crossed the border from Mexico into South Texas. The agents say the arrest of the Syrians confirms there is a human smuggling pipeline from countries with connections to terrorism into the U.S.

“We don’t know the intentions of the two Syrians we caught sneaking across the border into Texas,” U.S. Border Patrol Agent Hector Garza told Breitbart Texas in his capacity as president of the National Border Patrol Council 2455. “What we do know is that if the cartel-connected smugglers can bring people with good intentions across the border, they can also bring people with bad intentions.”

The two Syrian nationals apprehended on May 7, crossed the border in the same part of Laredo as nearly 230 Bangladeshi nationals have been apprehended. Garza explained that all drug and human smuggling in this area is controlled by the Los Zetas cartel.

“Laredo is a prime target for these ruthless smugglers because of our sector’s shortage of manpower and the lack of a physical barrier,” Garza explained in an interview with Breitbart Texas on Thursday. “We have 170 miles of river border with Mexico. Not one mile of that border has a physical barrier. We are wide open for these drug and human smugglers.”…..

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Jihad Watch.

VIDEO: Federal authorities charge Dallas-area Muslim couple with slavery

Why not? Slavery is acceptable in Islam.

The Qur’an has Allah telling Muhammad that he has given him girls as sex slaves: “Prophet, We have made lawful to you the wives to whom you have granted dowries and the slave girls whom God has given you as booty.” (Qur’an 33:50)

Muhammad bought slaves: “Jabir (Allah be pleased with him) reported: There came a slave and pledged allegiance to Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) on migration; he (the Holy Prophet) did not know that he was a slave. Then there came his master and demanded him back, whereupon Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: Sell him to me. And he bought him for two black slaves, and he did not afterwards take allegiance from anyone until he had asked him whether he was a slave (or a free man).” (Muslim 3901)

Muhammad took female Infidel captives as slaves: “Narrated Anas: The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer near Khaibar when it was still dark and then said, ‘Allahu-Akbar! Khaibar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a (hostile) nation (to fight), then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned.’ Then the inhabitants of Khaibar came out running on the roads. The Prophet had their warriors killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives. Safiya was amongst the captives. She first came in the share of Dahya Alkali but later on she belonged to the Prophet. The Prophet made her manumission as her ‘Mahr.’” (Bukhari 5.59.512) Mahr is bride price: Muhammad freed her and married her. But he didn’t do this to all his slaves:

Muhammad owned slaves: “Narrated Anas bin Malik: Allah’s Apostle was on a journey and he had a black slave called Anjasha, and he was driving the camels (very fast, and there were women riding on those camels). Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Waihaka (May Allah be merciful to you), O Anjasha! Drive slowly (the camels) with the glass vessels (women)!’” (Bukhari 8.73.182) There is no mention of Muhammad’s freeing Anjasha.

Denise Cros-Toure and Mohamed Toure

“Son of Guinea’s first president charged with forced labor in Texas,” by Laura Koran and Laura Jarrett, CNN, April 26, 2018 (thanks to Robert):

Washington (CNN)A Texas couple with deep political connections in the West African country of Guinea was charged Thursday with forced labor after a young woman they allegedly enslaved for more than 16 years managed to escape their home in Southlake with help from neighbors.

Mohamed Toure and Denise Cros-Toure, both 57, allegedly brought the victim from Guinea to Texas in 2000, when she was just 5 years old. She has not been named.

They allegedly then forced the girl to do housework and care for their children, subjecting her to emotional and physical abuse, the Department of Justice said in a press release.

“Although the victim was close in age to the children, the defendants denied her access to schooling and the other opportunities afforded to their children,” the department alleges.

The couple originally hail from Guinea, where Mohamed Toure is an influential figure and son of Guinea’s first President, Ahmed Sekou Toure.

The younger Toure was also a leader of the political opposition party in Guinea, although he has no diplomatic immunity or status, according to a source familiar with the matter.

Following his father’s death in 1984, Mohamed Toure was imprisoned along with other members of his family, according to the authors of Historical Dictionary of Guinea. He was later exiled to Morocco and Ivory Coast before settling in Texas with his wife and children.

He later returned to Guinea, where he was named secretary general of his father’s old political party.

Now, Toure and his wife face up to 20 years in prison on the forced labor charge.

“As part of their coercive scheme to compel the victim’s labor, the defendants took her documents and caused her to remain unlawfully in the United States after her visa expired,” the Justice Department alleges in its press release. “They further isolated her from her family and others and emotionally and physically abused her.”

In the criminal complaint against the Toure, the lead investigator alleges that the victim — referred to only as Female Victim 1 or FV-1 — was forced to sleep on the floor for years, and was only taken to see a medical professional once.

The complaint also alleges disturbing incidents of physical abuse by Cros-Toure, who allegedly beat the victim, sometimes with a belt or electrical cord. In one incident, the victim alleged an earring was pulled out of her ear by Cros-Toure with such force that it tore her earlobe, leaving a visible scar….

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in Jihad Watch.

FBI to Judge: Dismiss lawsuit before the public learns details about the ISIS attack in Texas

The Judge could grant dismissal of the lawsuit. So it is pointless to ask about our alleged role in the jihad attack, says the Federal Bureau of Investigation in its own defense, through its mouthpiece, the Department of Justice.

But the FBI failed to state a court rule, statute or “good cause” to prevent all discovery, responds the Plaintiff.

This lawsuit’s allegations are detailed in a previous article on the Geller Report here.1

Arguments concern whether to immediately conduct discovery – interrogatories, requests to produce, depositions, etc. – concurrent with a pending Motion to Dismiss. The following are excerpts of the USA / FBI’s Motion 2 and Memorandum [DM/pg];3 Plaintiff’s Response [PR/pg];4 and the USA / FBI’s Reply [DR/pg].5

USA / FBI’s Motion for Relief

The Motion seeks “to relieve the parties from the reporting requirements set forth in the Court’s order dated January 16, 2018…, to abstain from entering a scheduling order, and for a stay of discovery while the United States’ motion to dismiss … is pending.”

USA / FBI’s Memorandum    

“Plaintiff alleges that he was shot in the leg while working as a security guard at an event called the ‘First Annual Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest’ at the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland, Texas on May 3, 2015 (‘the event’). The shooting occurred when Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi, whom Plaintiff describes as ‘two members of the international terrorist organization ISIS,’ attempted to carry out a mass-shooting at the event.” [DM/1-2]

“[A]s a practical matter, it is especially difficult (and unnecessary) at this juncture for case management deadlines to be set, given that the parties’ briefing on the sovereign immunity issue is not yet complete and it is thus unknown when the issue will be resolved … If the motion [to dismiss] is granted, then the need for a scheduling order will no longer exist. Alternatively, if the motion is denied or granted in part, this Court’s ruling may reduce the number of claims and narrow the scope of discovery.” [DM/4]

“Staying discovery in this action while the motion to dismiss is pending is more than simply appropriate – it is necessary to preserve the United States’ sovereign immunity.” [DM/5]

“A stay of discovery is especially justified here given the nature of the information likely to be sought during discovery by Plaintiff. On its face, the Complaint makes clear that it challenges alleged Government conduct [the FBI] taken during the course of a national security counterterrorism investigation. As such, there is a strong likelihood that much of the information Plaintiff will seek from the FBI is classified and law enforcement sensitive information over which the Government will assert claims of privilege to prevent its disclosure. To be sure, in pending federal criminal proceedings related to the events at issue in this case, the Government continues to protect such information from disclosure.” [DM/6-7]

The counter-terrorism investigation, particularly concerning the jihad attack here, has resulted in criminal proceedings against three defendants: (1) Erick Jamal Hendricks, who will be tried in March, 2018;6 (2) Abdul Khabir Wahid, who will be tried in May, 2018;7 and (3) Abdul Malik Abdul Kareem, who was convicted in February, 2017, but he has a pending appeal.8

Plaintiff’s Response

“The purpose of pre-dismissal discovery is to find factual support for a plaintiff’s argument that the conduct at issue is not discretionary, and thus not covered by the discretionary function exception.” [PR/7, fn1]

“If Congress had intended for a stay on discovery to be imposed anytime Defendant raises the discretionary function exception in a motion to dismiss, then some federal rule [of court procedure] or statute would say so.” [PR/8]

“Given that no Scheduling Conference has even been held, and no discovery requests have even been sent, Defendant’s Motion to Stay is premature–as it cannot yet determine whether it will suffer ‘annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense’ by proceeding as usual. If Defendant receives specific discovery requests that are oppressive or pose an undue burden to respond to–then Defendant can object to those particular requests. Defendant is also free to invoke privilege when any information requested by Plaintiff is subject to privilege. But insisting on a blanket stay of all discovery–when no good cause has been definitively demonstrated–goes too far. Defendant has not met its ‘heavy burden’ and demonstrated good cause to sidestep the general rule in favor of discovery.” [PR/5-6]

“Even if the Court were to find some merit in Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, Plaintiff would likely be allowed an opportunity to amend its pleadings to cure any defects.” [PR/6]

USA / FBI’s Reply

“The burden of going through the painstaking process of reviewing such materials in response to a discovery request is, quite frankly, self-evident. Placing such a burden on the FBI, which already bears a heavy workload dealing with discovery in numerous legal actions throughout the country as well as Congressional requests, is the very sort of intrusion into sovereign immunity that should be avoided until the threshold legal issues are decided.” [DR/2].

U.S. Taxpayers are owed explanations for the FBI’s alleged action or inaction

What do the majority of mass shootings have in common? All levels of government, particularly the FBI, apparently did not “connect the dots” and therefore “dropped the ball” to prevent the attacks.

Hypothetical: Entrapment is not a defense when the perpetrator was predisposed to commit the crime. However, consider: Is an undercover law enforcement officer considered a co-conspirator if his words originatethe crime, and his acts contribute to the crime?

As this Complaint alleges:

“[On] (May 2, 2015), Hendricks and UCE-1 again chatted online about the upcoming Garland event. Hendricks wrote, ‘I wish someone could go to tx and harass them during the night;’ ‘a good solid protest;’ and ‘Unique one man protest.’ After Hendricks explained that he was unable to go because he was on the no-fly list and it was ‘too much driving,’ UCE-1 then volunteered to go. UCE-1 then asked, ‘Just me or any other brothers?’ Hendricks responded, ‘See what you and bro [Simpson] can do,’ and added that Simpson ‘has another brother he knows’ (presumably Soofi). Hendricks then provided ICE-1 with Simpson’s alternate Twitter contact.” [Complaint ¶ 34].

Assume the above is true and consider: But-for the FBI’s undercover agent effectively having “green-lighted” the attack, and offered himself to go and facilitate it, would there have been a jihad attack in Garland, Texas? If not, then Plaintiff – a security guard – would not have been shot, and suffer emotional distress.

President Obama did more than seek to protect Islam as a minority religion in the United States. His words and deeds advocated for, and promoted, Islam.

The Department of Justice, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, are under the Executive branch. The FBI ostensibly has provided briefings to the President. Using every scandal’s inquiry: What did President Obama know, and when did he know it?

Gerald Lostutter is a Florida licensed attorney, college professor, and journalist. He has worked in the print and broadcast media. His comedy can be heard on Central Florida Radio. Scroll down to WDBO-AM 580, and WMEL-AM 920.

1 Joiner v. United States of America, Civil docket: 3:17-cv-02692-M, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Dallas); Filed Oct. 2, 2017. This public record is online as a summary via Justia, and accessible via Pacer. The latter will require the User’s account, and possible costs.

2 Defendant United States of America’s Motion for Relief from Order Requiring a Scheduling Conference and Report and For a Stay of Discovery (01-30-18).

3 Memorandum in Support of Defendant United States of America’s Motion for Relief from Order Requiring a Scheduling Conference and Report and For a Stay of Discovery (01-30-18).

4 Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition to Defendant’s Motion for Relief from Order Requiring a Scheduling Conference and Report and For a Stay of Discovery (02-16-18).

5 Reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendant United States of America’s Motion for Relief from Order Requiring a Scheduling Conference and Report and For a Stay of Discovery (03-01-18).

6 United States of America v. Erick Jamal Hendricks, No. 16-DR-265 (N.D. Oh).

7 United States of America v. Abdul Khabir Wahid, No. 17-CR-360 (D. Az).

8 United States of America v. Abdul Malik abdul Kareem, No. 15-CR-707 (D. Az).

RELATED ARTICLE: Government Lawyers: “Tear Up Texas” Text from Undercover FBI Agent to Jihadi Who Attacked AFDI Garland Event Was “Innocuous”

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Geller Report. Pamela Geller’s shocking new book, “FATWA: HUNTED IN AMERICA” is now available on Amazon. It’s Geller’s tell all, her story – and it’s every story – it’s what happens when you stand for freedom today. Buy it. Now. Here.

James Comey: Not Just Incompetent, But He Placed American Lives at Risk

Also in 2015, two terrorists attempted to kill attendees at an event in Garland, TX hosted by anti-Jihad activist Pamela Geller, at which participants were drawing images of Muhammad, which is considered a sacrilege by Muslims. The terrorists had enough ammunition to kill dozens of people and they did wound one security guard before being shot dead. But the attack could have been prevented because not only did the FBI know the terrorists were planning something but, as 60 Minutes reported, they had an undercover agent working with them who sent an encouraging text to the terrorists three weeks prior to the attack: “Tear up Texas.”

That’s bad enough, but 60 Minutes also revealed that this agent was actually at the location of the terror attack. He was in a car behind the car containing the terrorists but when they opened fire on a security guard, his reaction was to photograph them. He did not intervene. Why not? And why weren’t more FBI agents placed at the event to stop the attack? Or prevent it before it even started? Why did they not even alert Pamela Geller, the organizer of the event? As Geller states, “It’s hard to escape the conclusion that the Obama FBI wanted me and the other speakers at the even dead.” This was a display of incredible incompetence, but neither the FBI nor Comey have ever been forced to explain their actions.

Why did they not even alert Pamela Geller, the organizer of the event? Indeed. Comey should have been fired then.

garland texas isis attack.jpgJAMES COMEY: NOT JUST INCOMPETENT BUT HE PLACED AMERICAN LIVES AT RISK

By Steve Baldwin, American Spectator, May 12, 2017:

A record of political correctness in the war on terror.

FBI Director James Comey was incompetent and as FBI Director, his policies placed the lives of American citizens at risk. An in-depth look at his record as FBI Director reveals an incredible naivety toward the Islamic terror threat and a willingness to appease radical Muslims at the expense of protesting Americans. This piece will not address Comey’s handling of Hillary Clinton’s email scandal or his failure to investigate the obvious illegal pay-for play schemes concocted by the Clinton Foundation.

Nor will it look at his failure to prosecute anyone associated with the IRS’s effort to silence hundreds of political groups during Obama’s reelection or his refusal to come clean about his knowledge of how numerous Americans were “unmasked” for having the audacity of associating with Donald Trump. No, this is just a peek at how the FBI under Comey handled the Islamic terrorist threat. Thanks to a lazy media, the popular image most Americans have of Comey is that he’s a superb administrator, a straight shooting Boy Scout and an Eliot Ness kind of guy who aggressively puts all the bad guys away.

In 2011, in one of the most incredible acts of stupidity ever by the FBI, the agency agreed to purge its counter-terrorism documents of terms, concepts, and statements that a number of Islamic pressure groups objected to. The government watchdog group, Judicial Watch, forced the FBI to release documents about this purge which revealed that the FBI systematically purged some 900 pages and 392 presentations deemed “offensive” to Muslims. This occurred under the previous FBI director Robert Mueller as a result of meeting with Islamic pressure groups such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), both named in 2007 as unindicted co-conspirators in a case involving raising funds for Islamic terrorists.

This purge crippled the FBI’s ability to track terrorists and many believe the loss of this intelligence caused the FBI to miss clues that could have prevented future terrorist attacks. Indeed, Judicial Watch actually called the purge “part of a broader Islamist ‘influence operation’ aimed at our government and Constitution.”

The purged documents including records linking the Muslim Brotherhood to terrorism, probably because the Obama Administration had, by this time, appointed a number of MB sympathizers to key positions and was quietly supporting Muslim Brotherhood political movements in a number of countries such as Egypt and Libya. The purge also deleted all usage of the term “radical Islam,” and any statement that defined “Jihad” as “Holy War,” even though that’s the definition used by Islamic terrorists. Strangely, the FBI also destroyed all documents linking al Qaeda to the 1993 World Trade Center and the 1996 Khobar Towers bombings, despite the fact these are important events in the terrorist timeline.

Judicial Watch also revealed that the purge also “removed references to mosques specifically as a radicalization incubator,” even though every intelligence service in the world knows that mosques are regularly used to plan and organize terror attacks. FBI agents were even told what words they could not use in writing reports on terror threats. Banned words included sharia, jihad, Muslim, Islam, Muslim Brotherhood, enemy, Hamas, Hezbollah and al Qaeda. The FBI was basically more concerned about the feelings of radical Muslims than the security of American citizens.

While the file purging occurred under Bureau head Robert Mueller two years before Comey took the helm, there is no evidence Comey made any effort to restore these files and all evidence indicates that he continued to use this politically correct mindset as he investigated the Jihadist threat in the U.S.A. And it soon became a heavy price to pay.

Indeed, one of the FBI documents obtained by JW titled “Guiding Principles: Touchstone Document on Training” stated that “mere association with organizations that demonstrate both legitimate (advocacy) and illicit (violent extremism) objectives should not automatically result in a determination that the associated individual is acting in furtherance of the organization’s illicit objective(s).”

In other words, the FBI was instructing its agents that if a person is found to be involved with a group that advocates “violent extremism,” they are not to assume the person is involved with violent extremism! This give-the-benefit-of-the-doubt-to-potential-terrorists mindset is what may have caused the FBI to ignore clues that could have stopped the Ft. Hood, Orlando, San Bernardino, and other terrorist attacks even though it had prior knowledge about the Islamic extremist connections of those who carried out those attacks.

Again, while this FBI document was produced pre-Comey, it is clear from the FBI’s performance that he never disavowed the “Guiding Principles” mindset and that they continued to follow the philosophy of appeasing Muslim pressure groups even at the expense of protecting Americans.

Indeed, Comey never broke with any of Director Mueller’s appeasement policies. For example, the FBI under Comey continue to maintain friendly ties with radical Islamic groups, namely the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the group mentioned earlier as a co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding trial. Even though the Justice Department banned the FBI from associating with CAIR, a number of FBI Field offices continued friendly relations with this extremist group. Ultimately, the Justice Department’s Inspector General (IG) investigated the FBI and its final report exposed the Bureau’s friendly interactions with CAIR at its Los Angeles, Chicago, New Haven and Philadelphia field offices.

Congressman Frank Wolf wrote, “Today, the Department’s Inspector General… confirms the blatant disregard of Bureau policy as well as multiple enacted Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations reports with respect to interactions by the FBI with CAIR.” The DOJ IG report even revealed that the director of the Los Angeles FBI office urged his staff to disregard this policy: “Please instruct your folks at this time that they are not to abide by the [directive to have no contact with CAIR] but that their direction in regards to CAIR will come from the LA field office front office.” While this occurred at the very beginning of Comey’s term, there is no evidence that Comey did anything to discourage these contacts.

And it gets worse. Judicial Watch reported that the FBI in 2015 created an interactive website called “Don’t be a Puppet,” for the purpose of preventing “susceptible youth from getting recruited online by terrorists,” but they were pressured by Islamic groups to omit all mention of Islamic terrorism. Comey caved and the site was changed to feature white supremacists, militia groups, religious extremists and so on, even though terrorist acts by such groups are quite rare while Islamic terrorists have committed tens of thousands of terror acts worldwide since 9/11. The only time the website mentions Islam is when it explains that Islamic terrorist groups such as ISIS “do not represent mainstream Islam.”

But the idea that obscure militias and white supremacists pose a threat to the national security in the same way as do Islamic terrorists happens to be a favorite theme of the loony left and Comey seems to have bought into this fantasy. Indeed, in 2015, Comey’s g-men stormed into a meeting of the Republic of Texas, a Texan secessionist movement. At the time of the raid, reported WorldNetDaily, the group “was debating issues of currency, international relations and celebrating the birthday” of one of their members. Sounds threatening. None of these guys were wanted terrorists or had ever engaged in any activity remotely threatening national security. Nevertheless, they were all fingerprinted and had their cell phones seized. If Comey’s FBI is really spending time, money and effort investigating and harassing harmless groups like the Republic of Texas, no wonder the agency missed numerous clues on many high profile Islamic terrorist cases under Comey’s watch. Clearly, they are allocating its resources based on political correctness, not reality.

Before Comey became director, the FBI initiated a policy that actually banned the FBI from conducting surveillance of mosques and instructed agents to “remove their shoes” before entering a mosque (what if they have to chase a suspect?), wait for the worship service to be over before entering, and not allow police dogs to sniff for explosives. The rules do not appear to apply to investigations involving Christian churches. Nor did Comey make any effort to change this policy even though Mosques have repeatedly been implicated in Islamic terror plots worldwide.

Moreover, Comey continued Director Mueller’s practice of heavily recruiting Muslims to be agents with apparently very little vetting. Indeed, the FBI placed recruitment ads in the publications of extremist Islamic groups with the slogan “Today’s FBI. It’s for You.” And it paid off. Indeed, WorldNetDaily broke a story that a Muslim agent working for the Los Angeles FBI field office “tipped off a Muslim suspect under investigation for terrorism about FBI surveillance.”

In years past, such a violation would result in not just the agent being fired, but also being prosecuted. However, this agent was allowed to remain with the FBI with only a reprimand! Moreover, other Muslim FBI agents have been exposed for assisting radical Islamic groups but the only consequence has been a transfer to another FBI office. Congressional investigators should review the FBI’s hiring and vetting polices when it comes to Muslims, because it’s likely Comey may have hired a slew of agents who are more loyal to the Jihad than to the U.S.A. Again, there’s no evidence that Comey did anything to change or reform aggressive hiring policies which actually targeted radical Muslims, not moderates.

But let’s take a look at how Comey’s FBI actually handled a few of the more well known domestic terror cases during his tenure.

In 2015, an Islamic couple from Pakistan murdered 14 people and injured 22 others at an after work Christmas party in San Bernardino. The terrorist couple, Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik, spent time in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and used bomb technology commonly used by al Qaeda. The two jihadists were linked to Tablighi Jamaat, an Islamic extremist sect with a history of supporting terrorism. However, all records related to this particular group were purged from the National Targeting Center database, according to former DHS counter-terror analyst Philip Haney, who stated that “this Administration is more concerned about the civil rights and civil liberties of foreign Islamic groups and foreign nationals than securing the freedom and security of the American public.” NTC’s data is shared with the FBI. Had Comey made any effort to restore these valuable counter-terrorism files, there’s a chance the Bureau could have prevented this attack. But again, there is no record of any push-back by Director Comey to recover counter-terrorism files. Too bad, it would have saved American lives.

Also in 2015, two terrorists attempted to kill attendees at an event in Garland, TX hosted by anti-Jihad activist Pamela Geller, at which participants were drawing images of Muhammad, which is considered a sacrilege by Muslims. The terrorists had enough ammunition to kill dozens of people and they did wound one security guard before being shot dead. But the attack could have been prevented because not only did the FBI know the terrorists were planning something but, as 60 Minutes reported, they had an undercover agent working with them who sent an encouraging text to the terrorists three weeks prior to the attack: “Tear up Texas.”

That’s bad enough, but 60 Minutes also revealed that this agent was actually at the location of the terror attack. He was in a car behind the car containing the terrorists but when they opened fire on a security guard, his reaction was to photograph them. He did not intervene. Why not? And why weren’t more FBI agents placed at the event to stop the attack? Or prevent it before it even started? Why did they not even alert Pamela Geller, the organizer of the event? As Geller states, “It’s hard to escape the conclusion that the Obama FBI wanted me and the other speakers at the even dead.” This was a display of incredible incompetence, but neither the FBI nor Comey have ever been forced to explain their actions.

When Ahmad Kan Rahami set off powerful bombs in Manhattan in 2016, injuring 31 people, it was reported by the New York Times that Rahami’s father had informed the FBI two years previously that “he feared his son was a terrorist.” The FBI investigated and cleared him, even though, as the Times reports, “they never interviewed Mr. Rahami.” Nor did they adequately scrutinize the suspicious trips Rahami made overseas to both Pakistan and Quetta. It is likely those trips were to receive bomb-making training. Why would the FBI not even question him? Is this how the FBI “clears” potential terrorists under James Comey?

In 2016, Omar Mateen, murdered 49 people and injured 53 at an Orlando nightclub. The FBI twice investigated Mateen; one investigation was initiated because Mateen was in contact with a suicide bomber; the 2nd one began because he made threatening comments to co-workers. Both investigations were closed; the later one due to FBI’s belief that Mateen was making terrorist threats only as a reaction to “being marginalized because of his Muslim Faith.”

Yes, the FBI believed that the problem was not Mateen, but rather his “racist” co-workers. The FBI also knew Mateen had traveled to Saudi Arabia in 2011 and that his father posted pro-Taliban videos online. Finally, a gun store owner called the FBI shortly before the attack to report Mateen’s effort to buy body armor and ammunition. But the FBI did nothing. Due to political correctness, the FBI could not or would not connect the dots and 49 people paid the price. Moreover, Mateen attended a radical mosque in Orlando, but since Comey’s FBI refused to investigate terror-supporting mosques, they cut themselves off from finding out any additional information about Mateen. Incredibly, in response to this murderous attack, FBI special agent Ron Hopper announced that “civil rights violations are a priority for the FBI,” referring not to the victims of Mateen, but to anyone who might say anything negative about Muslims. This is not a joke.

Lastly, the FBI under Comey has ignored a large network of domestic terrorist training compounds. In his book, Twilight in America, author and researcher Martin Mawyer documents the existence of at least two dozen compounds in rural areas operated by a terror group known as “Muslims of America (MOA).” MOA’s Islamic name is “Jamaat ul-Fuqra” and its leader is Sheikh Mubarik Ali Shah Gilani, a radical jihadist cleric who mentored the Christmas Day bomber and many other terrorists. He has declared jihad on America and his compounds are clearly involved with training jihadists. Indeed, MOE members were involved with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

Before Obama came to power, the FBI prepared a report about these Islamic warriors: “MOA members have participated in ten murders; one disappearance; three fire bombings and one attempted firebombing and two explosive bombings with one attempted bombing…. the leadership of the MOA extols members to pursue a policy of jihad or holy war against individuals or groups it considers enemies of Islam which Include the U.S. Government.…members of the MOA are encouraged to travel to Pakistan to receive religious and military/terrorist training from Sheikh Gilani.”

 There is little doubt the FBI possesses enough information about MOA’s activities to obtain court warrants to search their compounds or wiretap its phones, but Mawyer says that his sources tell him “the FBI under Comey showed no interest in investigating these compounds.” Mawyer says while a few field agents understand what these camps are really all about, many in the FBI “Think they are just Muslims who want to be left alone.” Sure. Meanwhile, these compounds continue training jihadists unimpeded. Mawyer has spent twenty years researching MOA and its network of compounds but Comey wouldn’t know him from Adam. In any case, the latest chatter from MOA operatives is a fear that Trump will actually close down their compounds. They will miss Comey dearly.

While Comey made quite a media splash informing Americans that the FBI is investigating ISIS-related terrorists in all 50 states, one now has to wonder how many of these investigations are just for show? Or how many cases will the FBI drop for fear of offending Muslims?

If Congress would spend more time investigating the FBI’s competency, rather than phony Russian conspiracy theories, perhaps someday we will have an FBI that’s not driven by political correctness. In the age of terrorism, we need a FBI Director who is fearless and aggressive in investigating Islamic terrorism. Comey has bungled many high profile Islamic terror cases under his watch. Trump did the right thing by firing him and he needs to now hire someone who will ignore political correctness and do what is necessary to keep America safe from Islamic terrorism.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The Geller Report.

FBI role in ISIS attack in Garland, TX is major scandal on Comey’s watch

James Comey has been fired, and not a moment too soon, but questions linger. 60 Minutes ran a feature recently about the FBI’s curious role in the May 2015 Garland jihad attack at a free speech event co-organized by Pamela Geller and me. It was, predictably enough, viciously biased, sloppy, and incomplete, but it was nonetheless illuminating in raising a hard and unanswerable question: did the FBI want Pamela Geller and me dead?

Despite the fact that the jihad attack took place at our event, neither Geller nor I appear, except in one still photo, in the 60 Minutes piece. All they say is that “a self-described free speech advocate named Pamela Geller was holding a provocative contest.”

The contempt fairly leapt from the screen. “A self-described free speech advocate”? Did 60 Minutes mean that Pamela Geller didn’t have the requisite degree in free speech advocacy? Or that she wasn’t really a free speech advocate? What they really mean, of course, is that she is not on the Left, and so cannot be celebrated as a free speech advocate the way the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists, who were all Leftists, can be.

60 Minutes also gave a nod to Sharia blasphemy laws by describing the contest as “provocative.” It was an art exhibit, featuring historical and modern images of Muhammad, some created by Muslims. It was only provocative to Muslims who believe in Islam’s death penalty for blasphemy (and brainwashed dhimmis). Was 60 Minutes implying endorsement of that death penalty? Why, yes. If our event was provocative, the shooters were justifiably provoked.

Meanwhile, CBS gave a lot of space to Usama Shami, the imam of the Islamic Community Center of Phoenix, from which the jihadis came, allowing him to exonerate the mosque of any responsibility for “radicalizing” the jihad attackers. 60 Minutes didn’t mention what Simpson’s friend Courtney Lonergan told the Arizona Republic:

“Simpson would never waver from the teachings he picked up in the mosque and elsewhere….He was one of those guys who would sleep at the mosque. The fact that he felt personally insulted by somebody drawing a picture had to come from the ideological rhetoric coming out of the mosque.”

60 Minutes also doesn’t challenge Shami on his lies right after the attack, when he said that the jihadis were not regular members of the mosque.

Despite all the predictable politically correct whitewashing and appeasement, CBS did a good job of highlighting a curious and still unexplained aspect of the attack: the FBI clearly knew the attack was coming (although it didn’t bother to inform us or our security team), as the FBI agent was right there, following behind the jihadis, whom he had encouraged to “tear up Texas.” But even though they knew the attack was coming, they didn’t have a team in place to stop the jihadis. They had one man there, and one man only. The jihadis were not stopped by FBI agents, but by our own security team. If the jihadis had gotten through our team, they would have killed Pamela Geller and me, and many others. (They would no doubt have loved to kill Geert Wilders, but he left before they arrived.)

The Daily Beast wrote in August 2016 about how this undercover FBI agent encouraged the jihadis. The Beast’s Katie Zavadski wrote:

“Days before an ISIS sympathizer attacked a cartoon contest in Garland, Texas, he received a text from an undercover FBI agent. ‘Tear up Texas,’ the agent messaged Elton Simpson days before he opened fire at the Draw Muhammad event, according to an affidavit (pdf) filed in federal court Thursday.”

This was not entrapment. Simpson and Soofi were determined jihadis who had scouted out other targets. Simpson, along with Soofi and Abdul Malik Abdul Kareem, who supplied weapons to the pair and helped them train, sought information about pipe bombs and plotted to attack the Super Bowl, and planned to go to Syria to join the Islamic State (ISIS), long before anyone told him to “tear up Texas.”

But what was the FBI’s game in telling them to do that? Why didn’t they have a phalanx of agents in place, ready to stop the attack? Or did they want the attack to succeed, so that Barack Obama’s vow that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” would be vividly illustrated, and intimidate any other Americans who might be contemplating defending the freedom of speech into silence?

We twice asked the FBI for an investigation into this matter. They ignored us. Of course. After all, it isn’t as if this happened to someone important, like Linda Sarsour.

James Comey

James Comey

“10 Major FBI Scandals on Comey’s Watch,” Grabien News, May 9, 2017 (thanks to the Geller Report):

News just broke that President Trump is dismissing the director of the FBI, James Comey.

Comey will inevitably be remembered for the controversial role he played in the 2016 presidential election, where his agency conducted surveillance of the Trump campaign as well as investigated the Clinton camp for mishandling classified materials, giving both sides arguments for how the FBI ultimately swayed the vote.

But even before the 2016 campaign, the FBI endured a number of humiliations under Comey’s tenure. Most damning were revelations that the FBI was generally aware of almost every terrorist who successfully struck America over the last eight years.

Here are 10 of Comey’s biggest embarrassments at the FBI:

1. Before he bombed the Boston Marathon, the FBI interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev but let him go. Russia sent the Obama Administration a second warning, but the FBI opted against investigating him again….

3. The FBI had possession of emails sent by Nidal Hasan saying he wanted to kill his fellow soldiers to protect the Taliban — but didn’t intervene, leading many critics to argue the tragedy that resulted in the death of 31 [sic; actually 13] Americans at Fort Hood could have been prevented.

4. During the Obama Administration, the FBI claimed that two private jets were being used primarily for counterterrorism, when in fact they were mostly being used for Eric Holder and Robert Mueller’s business and personal travel….

8. The father of the radical Islamist who detonated a backpack bomb in New York City in 2016 alerted the FBI to his son’s radicalization. The FBI, however, cleared Ahmad Khan Rahami after a brief interview.

9. The FBI also investigated the terrorist who killed 49 people and wounded 53 more at the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, Fla. Despite a more than 10-month investigation of Omar Mateen — during which Mateen admitting lying to agents — the FBI opted against pressing further and closed its case.

10. CBS recently reported that when two terrorists sought to kill Americans attending the “Draw Muhammad” event in Garland, Texas, the FBI not only had an understanding an attack was coming, but actually had an undercover agent traveling with the Islamists, Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi. The FBI has refused to comment on why the agent on the scene did not intervene during the attack.

RELATED ARTICLES:

On day Abbas met Trump, Fatah honored 12 jihadis who murdered 95 people

How not to defend free speech

Did the FBI Want Me and Pamela Geller Dead?

60 Minutes ran a feature Sunday night about the FBI curious role in the May 2015 Garland jihad attack at a free speech event co-organized by Pamela Geller and me. It was, predictably enough, viciously biased, sloppy, and incomplete, but it was nonetheless illuminating in raising a hard and unanswerable question: did the FBI want Pamela Geller and me dead?

Despite the fact that the jihad attack took place at our event, neither Geller nor I appear, except in one still photo, in the 60 Minutes piece. All they say is that “a self-described free speech advocate named Pamela Geller was holding a provocative contest.”

The contempt fairly leapt from the screen. “A self-described free speech advocate”? Did 60 Minutes mean that Pamela Geller didn’t have the requisite degree in free speech advocacy? Or that she wasn’t really a free speech advocate? What they really mean, of course, is that she is not on the Left, and so cannot be celebrated as a free speech advocate the way the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists, who were all Leftists, can be.

60 Minutes also gave a nod to Sharia blasphemy laws by describing the contest as “provocative.” It was an art exhibit, featuring historical and modern images of Muhammad, some created by Muslims. It was only provocative to Muslims who believe in Islam’s death penalty for blasphemy (and brainwashed dhimmis). Was 60 Minutes implying endorsement of that death penalty? Why, yes. If our event was provocative, the shooters were justifiably provoked.

Meanwhile, CBS gave a lot of space to Usama Shami, the imam of the Islamic Community Center of Phoenix, from which the jihadis came, allowing him to exonerate the mosque of any responsibility for “radicalizing” the jihad attackers. 60 Minutes didn’t mention what Simpson’s friend Courtney Lonergan told the Arizona Republic:

“Simpson would never waver from the teachings he picked up in the mosque and elsewhere….He was one of those guys who would sleep at the mosque. The fact that he felt personally insulted by somebody drawing a picture had to come from the ideological rhetoric coming out of the mosque.”

60 Minutes also doesn’t challenge Shami on his lies right after the attack, when he said that the jihadis were not regular members of the mosque.

Despite all the predictable politically correct whitewashing and appeasement, CBS did a good job of highlighting a curious and still unexplained aspect of the attack: the FBI clearly knew the attack was coming (although it didn’t bother to inform us or our security team), as the FBI agent was right there, following behind the jihadis, whom he had encouraged to “tear up Texas.” But even though they knew the attack was coming, they didn’t have a team in place to stop the jihadis. They had one man there, and one man only. The jihadis were not stopped by FBI agents, but by our own security team. If the jihadis had gotten through our team, they would have killed Pamela Geller and me, and many others. (They would no doubt have loved to kill Geert Wilders, but he left before they arrived.)

The Daily Beast wrote in August 2016 about how this undercover FBI agent encouraged the jihadis. The Beast’s Katie Zavadski wrote:

“Days before an ISIS sympathizer attacked a cartoon contest in Garland, Texas, he received a text from an undercover FBI agent. ‘Tear up Texas,’ the agent messaged Elton Simpson days before he opened fire at the Draw Muhammad event, according to an affidavit (pdf) filed in federal court Thursday.”

This was not entrapment. Simpson and Soofi were determined jihadis who had scouted out other targets. Simpson, along with Soofi and Abdul Malik Abdul Kareem, who supplied weapons to the pair and helped them train, sought information about pipe bombs and plotted to attack the Super Bowl, and planned to go to Syria to join the Islamic State (ISIS), long before anyone told him to “tear up Texas.”

But what was the FBI’s game in telling them to do that? Why didn’t they have a phalanx of agents in place, ready to stop the attack? Or did they want the attack to succeed, so that Barack Obama’s vow that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” would be vividly illustrated, and intimidate any other Americans who might be contemplating defending the freedom of speech into silence?

We twice asked the FBI for an investigation into this matter. They have ignored us. Of course. After all, it isn’t as if this happened to someone important, like Linda Sarsour.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Detroit: Convert to Islam plotted jihad massacre in US for the Islamic State, had AK-47s and other weapons

China bans burqas and “abnormal beards” in predominantly Muslim province

Mexican Muslim kidnapped woman because her ‘lifestyle brought shame to the Muslim community’

Normal Juarez Taha apparently was the linchpin of a plot to return this woman to Libya, where should would almost certainly have been the victim of an honor killing.

“Woman accused of kidnapping over shame to Muslims,” by Aaron Martinez, El Paso Times, February 17, 2017:

A woman was arrested after she was accused of kidnapping a woman because her “lifestyle brought shame to the Muslim community and she should return to Libya,” according to court documents.

Normal Juarez Taha, who is described as a “Mexican-Muslim” in court documents, was arrested at about 9:25 p.m. Tuesday by 12 FBI El Paso Division agents without incident at her home in the 200 block of Thunderbird Drive in West El Paso. She is accused of kidnapping the woman, referred to only as AFA in court documents, from the woman’s home earlier in the week.

Taha, 35, is facing one count of kidnapping, which holds a maximum sentence of life in prison. She made her initial appearance in federal court Thursday before U.S. Magistrate Judge Miguel A. Torres….

Taha allegedly kidnapped the woman, whose age has not been released, at about 3 a.m. Monday from her bedroom.

The woman told investigators she knew Taha as “Sister Norma” because she was a family friend.

Taha allegedly entered the woman’s bedroom while she was sleeping and attempted to put tape on her mouth, a criminal complaint states. The woman yelled, but no one in the home heard her.

She was told by Taha to be quiet and that she needed to go with her because she and her family were in danger, the complaint states. Taha told her that she was trying to help her and that she eventually would be reunited with her family.

Taha said that the danger facing the woman and her family was that they were going to be deported and that the woman’s brother would not get the medical assistance he needs, the complaint states.

Taha then walked the woman, who was not wearing shoes, out of the house through the front door and put her in the rear cargo area of a Toyota van, the complaint alleges.

At some point, she was moved to the front of the van and was told to hide underneath the glove compartment area. She was then blindfolded and taken to an area on Montana Avenue in far East El Paso.

The woman told investigators that she was scared for her life because Taha was carrying a black-and-red pistol and that she feared that if she attempted to run away, Taha would shoot her, the complaint states….

Taha later allegedly admitted that she had gone to the woman’s home and made up the story that she and her family were in danger to trick her into coming with her, the complaint states.

She added that the woman’s “lifestyle brought embarrassment to her family and she should be taken to Mexico or Libya.”

Taha allegedly said she did not receive any money for kidnapping her, the complaint states.

She also admitted to mixing muscle relaxant pills and water together in a syringe and injecting the mixture into the victim’s leg to keep her calm, the complaint says….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Denver: Muslim who shot transit guard says he did it for the Islamic State, investigators say he didn’t

Islamic Republic of Iran: Morality police beat, detain 14-year-old girl for wearing ripped jeans

Muslim pleads guilty to mosque arson in another fake ‘hate crime’

At the time the fire was set, it garnered much attention as a “hate crime”:

“The Houston chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations called on authorities to investigate a possible bias motive in the case, citing what it called a ‘recent spike in hate incidents targeting mosques nationwide.’”

But it turns out to have been yet another fake hate crime. Islamic supremacist groups such as the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) want and need hate crimes against Muslims, because they’re the currency they use to buy power and influence in our victimhood-oriented society, and to deflect attention away from jihad terror and onto Muslims as putative victims.

Hamas-linked CAIR, [is a] designated a terror organization by the United Arab Emirates, and other Muslims have on many occasions not hesitated to stoop even to fabricating “hate crimes,” including attacks on mosques. Most notably, in February, a New Jersey Muslim was found guilty of murder that he tried to portray as an “Islamophobic” attack, and in 2014 in California, a Muslim was found guilty of killing his wife, after first blaming her murder on “Islamophobia.”

huston-muslim-fake-hate-crime

Muslim Gary Nathaniel Moore

“Houston man pleads guilty in mosque fire on Christmas Day,” by Brian Rogers, Houston Chronicle, December 9, 2016 (thanks to Mike):

A Houston man was sentenced Friday to four years in prison after pleading guilty to starting a fire at a mosque on Christmas Day.

Gary Nathaniel Moore, 38 of Houston, was arrested last year in connection with a fire at 2 p.m. on Dec. 25 at a storefront mosque in the 1200 block of Wilcrest.

Moore told investigators at the scene that he had attended the mosque for five years, coming five times per day to pray seven days per week, according to court records.

Moore pleaded guilty to arson and using a fire as a deadly weapon, an enhancement which means he will have to serve at least half of the prison time before being eligible for parole….

RELATED ARTICLES:

UK: Muslim singer’s family gets death threats from Muslims for photo of their Christmas tree

Germany: “Almost three quarters of all Algerian immigrants have popped up as suspects” in sex assault cases

Pakistani Muslim arrested for illegally crossing Texas border

“The FBI was in possession of records consisting of photographs and travel records, as well as written accounts from other government agencies, which show that the statements Muhammad made during his interviews by the USBP and the FBI were materially false, fictitious or fraudulent.” Why would Juvaid Muhammad be lying and trying to enter the U.S. illegally? What could possibly be his objective? Is it not legitimate to be concerned that he might be part of a jihad cell? Or would that be “racist” and “Islamophobic”?

US-Mexico_border_fence

“Border Patrol agents arrest Pakistani man,” CBS 4 News, May 17, 2016:

Border Patrol agents arrested a Pakistani man on May 8, when he illegally crossed the Texas-Mexico border.

Agents arrested Javaid Muhammad, who admitted crossing the border illegally, according to the federal criminal complaint against him. Court records don’t specify where Muhammad crossed the border, but the charge against him was filed in the McAllen Division of the Southern District of Texas.

Border Patrol agents interviewed Muhammad and he provided a sworn statement about the journey from Pakistan to Texas.

When FBI agents interviewed Muhammad on May 12, though, he told a different story, according to the criminal complaint.

“The FBI was in possession of records consisting of photographs and travel records, as well as written accounts from other government agencies, which show that the statements Muhammad made during his interviews by the USBP and the FBI were materially false, fictitious or fraudulent,” according to the criminal complaint.

FBI agents confronted Muhammad — who claimed to never have visited Ecuador or Chile — with photographs of his Chilean residence card and Ecuadorian passport.

“Muhammad admitted the statement he provided to the USBP was false, and also admitted to lying to the FBi during his interview,” according to the criminal complaint.

FBI agents charged Muhammad with knowingly and willfully lying to federal agents….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Pakistani with Fake Ecuadorean Passport Enters U.S. via Mexico Multiple Times

John Kerry: Afghanistan one of the “proudest achievements of the Obama administration”

Robert Spencer in FrontPage: Huffington Post Calls on Christians to Recognize Muhammad as a Prophet

Texas: Imam Forced to Resign over Support for Donald Trump’s Muslim Migration Ban

“Why all of a sudden this guy or this girl or that lady open fire and kill 15 people, because American Muslims are not doing their job in the country.” Why is it so rare to hear Muslim leaders in the U.S. say that?

“Local Imam says he was forced to resign because he agrees with Trump on Muslim immigration,” by Haley Bull, KBTV-TV FOX 4, December 11, 2015:

A political conflict is playing out within the walls of the Muslim community in Southeast Texas. A man who was the leader of Muslims in the area said Thursday the conflict has resulted in his ousting.

“Don’t get me involved in any political games in the name of religion. I am not here a political man,” Dr. Nidal Alsayyed said.

But it’s political motivations he said have forced him to resign as Imam. “Sadly, it’s Clinton versus Trump,” he said.

Dr. Al Sayyed told KFDM News he was forced to resign as religious director of the Islamic Society of the Triplex after making comments Monday in which he agrees with Donald Trump’s statements that the U.S. should temporarily stop accepting any new Muslim immigrants into the country.

While the religious leader said he expected the call to resign eventually, he said it was sped up by politics. “I think any future candidates, presidents who do not support the fact that we need to be more safe and more cautious about whom to bring into this country, whether a Muslim or not,” Dr. Alsayyed said.

His comments he said had nothing to do with politics, but the former Imam said Trump’s comments are in line with the Islamic religion. “The text of the holy Qur’an says the loss of one life is equivalent to killing the whole mankind,” he said.

Not really. There is less to the Qur’an passage to which the imam is referring (5:32) than Western leaders and Islamic apologists claim. First, note that it is not a general prohibition of killing — there are big exceptions for those who kill “for a soul or for corruption in the land.” Second, this is not a general command, but one only for the Children of Israel. Third, “many of them, after that … were transgressors” — so all it is really saying is that Allah gave a command to the Children of Israel and they transgressed against it.

Meanwhile, some Islamic authorities interpret this passage in a supremacist manner, as applying only to Muslims: Sa’id bin Jubayr explains: “He who allows himself to shed the blood of a Muslim, is like he who allows shedding the blood of all people. He who forbids shedding the blood of one Muslim, is like he who forbids shedding the blood of all people.”

Also, this verse is followed by v. 33, which specifies the punishment for the corruption and transgressions of the Children of Israel: “Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment.”

Thus this passage is explaining what must be done with Jews who reject Muhammad, not dictating lofty moral principles. Ibn Warraq sums it up: “The supposedly noble sentiments are in fact a warning to Jews. ‘Behave, or else’ is the message. Far from abjuring violence, these verses aggressively point out that anyone opposing the Prophet will be killed, crucified, mutilated, and banished!”

His viewpoint, in part, shifting after lingering questions about the backgrounds of the couple responsible for the mass shooting in San Bernardino.

“But the way it happens when you see this mass shooting and you see some people coming with such a very peaceful background and all of the sudden the intelligences themselves, the agencies are not able to figure out what’s happening, why all of a sudden this guy or this girl or that lady open fire and kill 15 people, because American Muslims are not doing their job in the country.

So we need to stop, we need to stop taking new ones until we fix the existing situation,” Dr. Alsayyed said. The religious leader said there is a problem with some American Muslims seeing a conflict between following their religious beliefs and their patriotism to the U.S., and an issue differentiating the religious community and its political role. He said the two should not mix.

“I came to know this morning from some close contacts and friends over 102 Imams, religious people in Houston, were fired and forced to be basically leave their jobs, leave their mosques only because they did not get along with the political agenda for their board members,” he said. Dr. Alsayyed said he took the position to help young people here understand Islam, and it’s the youth where Islamic leaders should focus their attention….

RELATED ARTICLE: UK: Muslim former Home Office adviser says police tactics “radicalizing” Muslims

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on PamelaGeller.com.