In August 2004, a car was pulled over by a Maryland Transportation Authority Police officer on the Chesapeake Bay Bridge. A woman in the car was filming the bridge, and the officer observed that she was not filming the scenery, but the support structures of the bridge. The man driving the car was Ismail Elbarasse. There was sufficient evidence to get a warrant to search his home. The FBI found a sub-basement in the home that contained the archives of the Muslim Brotherhood in North America. The Muslim Brotherhood planned ‘civilization jihad’ in America–essentially they planned to infiltrate our government and use our freedoms and legal system against us. The eventual goal was to turn America into a Muslim nation with Sharia Law. That goal has not changed. (You can find a synopsis of the Holy Land Foundation Trial–the result of this investigation–at the Center for Security Policy website.) With that in mind, I bring you the following story.
On Friday, Fox News reported that a man in Minnesota charged with trying to join ISIS stated that he wanted to set up an infiltration route for ISIS members from Mexico to America’s southern border. (It’s not like coming across the southern U.S. border actually presents that much of a problem).
The article reports:
Guled Ali Omar told the ISIS members about the route so that it could be used to send members to America to carry out terrorist attacks, prosecutors alleged in a document filed this week.
The document, filed Wednesday, is one of many filed in recent weeks as prosecutors and defense attorneys argue about which evidence should be allowed at the men’s trial, which starts May 9.
The men — Omar, 21; Hamza Naj Ahmed, 21; Mohamed Abdihamid Farah, 22; and Abdirahman Yasin Daud, 22 — have pleaded not guilty to multiple charges, including conspiracy to commit murder outside the U.S. Prosecutors have said they were part of a group of friends in Minnesota’s Somali community who held secret meetings and plotted to join the Islamic State group.
Five other men have pleaded guilty to one count each of conspiracy to support a foreign terrorist organization. A tenth man charged in the case is at-large, believed to be in Syria.
As I said in the opening paragraph of this article, one strategy of the Islamists is to use our legal system against us. This is very obvious in the way this case is being handled.
The article reports:
Last week, Daud’s attorney wrote that, absent any specific evidence that his client threatened the United States, any references to discussions about attacks would be prejudicial. To permit such references, as well as references to the Sept. 11 attacks or exhibits that show violent images of war crimes, “would cause the jurors to decide out of fear and contempt alone,” defense attorney Bruce Nestor wrote.
But prosecutors said audio recordings obtained during the investigation show the defendants spoke multiple times about the possibility of attacks in the U.S. Among them, Omar spoke of establishing a route for fighters, Farah spoke of killing an FBI agent and another man who pleaded guilty talked about shooting a homemade rocket at an airplane.
Prosecutors wrote that they should be allowed to “play for the jury the defendants’ own words, in which they discuss the possibility of returning to attack the United States.” They also said the defendants watched videos and gruesome images, which they also want to play for the jury, and that a blanket ban on mentioning the 2001 attacks is inappropriate, noting that Omar had pictures of the burning World Trade Center towers and Osama bin Laden on his cellphone.
As I said, they are using our legal system against us. I need to mention here that there is not a direct link between ISIS and the Muslim Brotherhood. In fact, I suspect the Muslim Brotherhood is not happy with ISIS–ISIS is exposing what the Quran says about how infidels should be treated. However, both ISIS and the Muslim Brotherhood have the same goal–establishing a worldwide caliphate. The differences are in how to do it and who will run it. The Muslim Brotherhood believes in civilization jihad–infiltrating the government and taking away peoples’ rights quietly without the population realizing what is being done. That is what the term ‘hate speech’ is about. Eventually ‘hate speech’ will become a term used to describe anything negative said about Muslims or Islam. That is also what the term ‘Islamophobia’ is about. There is no such thing. It is a made-up word to make people hesitate before criticizing Islam. Both words are a means of subtle intimidation aimed at undermining American’s First Amendment rights.
We are in danger of losing our country. There are a few things we need to do. First of all, we need to secure our borders so that we know who is coming in and going out of our country. Second of all, we need to put FBI informers in areas where there is a concentration of people who have historically supported terrorism (there have been a number of young men from the Somali community who have left America and joined ISIS). Third, we need to encourage (strongly) people who come to America to assimilate. Previous groups that immigrated here learned the language and became Americans. They kept aspects of their culture–that’s why we have great Italian, Chinese, Greek, etc. restaurants here–but became Americans. If you choose to live here, you need to live as an American–you may continue to follow your customs–not eating pork, not drinking, etc.–but you cannot expect to impose those customs on Americans. You have come here by choice. If you do not like our customs, please go somewhere else.
Finally, we need a President who will control our borders and take seriously his responsibility to protect Americans.