The AP has reported that the Terrorist Supporting Group the Islamic Society of North America ISNA will be represented at the Obama inauguration:
A prayer will be offered at the National Cathedral by Ingrid Mattson, the first woman president of the Islamic Society of North America, according to an official who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to release the information. The Islamic Society, based in Indiana, is the nation’s largest Muslim group.
You may remember that the ISNA, and its financial wing the NAIT, were named as unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation Hamas funding trial.
In May of 2007, the ACLU filed a lawsuit on their behalf to have them removed from the co-conspirator list. To respond to the law suit the FBI on behalf of the Holy Land prosecutors released all of the evidence of the ISNA/NAIT relationship with Muslim Brotherhood. According to the FBI Files released:
Within the organizational structure of NAIT, there have been numerous groups and individuals identified as being a part of a covert network of revolutionaries who have clearly indicated there (sic) support for the Islamic Revolution as advocated by the AYATOLLAH KHOMEINI and his government as well as other fanatical Islamic Shiite fundamentalist leaders in the Middle East. This faction of Muslims have declared war on the United States, Israel and any other country they deem as an enemy of Islam. The common bond between these various organizations is both religious and political with the underlying common goal being to further the holy war. Source IPT New Disclosures Tighten ISNA-Muslim Brotherhood Bonds
To translate the above from FBI-speak to normal English, THEY WANT US TO CONVERT, SUBMIT OR DIE !”
The ISNA has ADMITTED its terrorist ties. In an article entitled ISNA Admits Hamas the Investigative Project on Terrorism reported:
Rather than deny that there is copious evidence tying ISNA and NAIT to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, the brief argues that such evidence is merely dated. In a curious footnote on page 7, the reply states:
Assuming the authenticity of documents’ dates, the most recent documents to mention either ISNA or NAIT are dated 1991, Gov. Exhs. 3-3 and 3-85, but the majority of the documents are older. Almost all of the numerous exhibits that purport to show financial transactions and that contain any mention of ISNA or NAIT are dated 1988 and 1989 (there are two dated 1990), almost a decade before the majority of the overt acts the government alleges in support of its conspiracy charges against the HLF defendants.
So ISNA and NAIT are not saying that the documents tying their organizations to Hamas are “inauthentic,” but that the problem with the evidence is just that it is old. Then, even more curiously, the reply goes on to argue something that the government has not even alleged:
Even if the “evidence” provided some basis for alleging criminality against petitioners, the government’s discussion of it shows the government utterly fails to grasp the singular weight and consequence that an official accusation of criminal conduct carries in our criminal justice system and in our society.
But, of course, the government has not charged ISNA or NAIT with criminal conduct, or the two groups would be indicted in their own right, rather than un-indicted co-conspirators who worked with the Holy Land for Relief and Development (HLF), the defendant and alleged Hamas-front. The reply brief then, as Shakespeare might write, “doth protest too much.”
The government is merely claiming that evidence exists that ISNA and NAIT have sufficient ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood – HLF – that justify the groups’ inclusion on a list of un-indicted co-conspirators, which enables prosecutors to more easily enter into evidence information which shows the scope of HLF’s pro-Hamas operations.
We have chronicled the financial ties between ISNA/NAIT and Hamas several times, including during the first trial against HLF:
Exhibits entered into evidence a few days ago at the HLF trial include an expense voucher from the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), an ISNA subsidiary, made out for $10,000 in the name of Musa Abu Marzook, as well as a check drawn on a NAIT account in the same amount made out to Marzook. Another check for $10,000 on the same account was made out to Marzook’s wife, Nadia Elashi. Another check for $30,000 was made out to the Islamic University of Gaza (and has Shukri Abu Baker/OLF written on the memo line), a school long known to be controlled by HAMAS, and which counted such notables as former HAMAS leader Dr. Abdel Aziz Rantissi and current HAMAS leader Dr. Mahmoud Al-Zahar as professors, and the recently deposed HAMAS Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh is a former dean of the University.
As far as the speaker, Ms Mattson Central Ohioans Against Terror published an interview of hers where she endorsed the teachings of violent Jihadist :
In response to another question, “Please suggest any comprehensive work of Tafseer (Qur’anic commentary) for us Muslim youth,” she said, “There are different kinds of Tafseers…..So far, probably the best work of Tafseer in English is by Maulana Abul A’la Maududi.’”
Here is a selection from the book:
Maududi on jihad (Jihad in Islam, page 9):
“Islam wishes to destroy all States and Governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and programme of Islam regardless of the country or the Nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a State on the basis of its own ideology and programme, regardless of which Nation assumes the role of the standard bearer of Islam or the rule of which nation is undermined in the process of the establishment of an ideological Islamic State. It must be evident to you from this discussion that the objective of Islamic ‘Jihad’ is to eliminate the rule of an un-Islamic system and establish in its stead an Islamic system of State rule. Islam does not intend to confine this revolution to a single State or a few countries; the aim of Islam is to bring about a universal revolution.” Source Central Ohioans Against Terror
With all of this information readily available, why is the President-elect, who will be responsible for protecting us from terrorism,inviting this woman from this organization to be part of his inaugural festivities?