The recent attacks on U.S. diplomatic outposts have pushed the Huma Abedin affair below the fold on most news sites, not that anyone in the mainstream press wanted to discuss it in the first place. Yet this latest spate of orchestrated violence should not only serve as a stark reminder of the Muslim Brotherhood’s long reach and deadly intentions, but also underscores the legitimate concerns regarding Ms. Abedin’s ties to the group and her influence on foreign policy.
Questions: Is it possible that an 18-year-old Huma Abedin could have been sent to America as a sleeper agent for the Brotherhood? Is she a double agent? Who introduced her to the Clintons in 1996? Given Bill Clinton’s penchant for extramarital daliances, was Ms. Abedin installed as a modern-day Mata Hari? This is not as far-fetched as it might seem.
In Part 1 of The State Department’s Muslim Sisterhood, EoV published the findings of some of the foremost experts on the Brotherhood, including a respected former Assistant United States Attorney, a former Muslim Brotherhood member tuned peace activist, plus a small army of serious investigative journalists.
Their collective research and insights have revealed irrefutable evidence of the Brotherhood’s long-term strategy to infiltrate and influence the West, from bogus social charities to the highest offices of government. They’ve also established astonishing links between the Brotherhood and the Abedin family — including Huma — that span nearly 35 years.
It should also be noted that the religious edict of muruna allows Muslims to engage in behavior forbidden by Sharia, as long as it advances the cause of establishing a global Islamic caliphate. In the case of Ms. Abedin, it would allow for her traditionally taboo marriage to a Jewish man, who at the time was a U.S. congressman. Omitting information on an application for a national security position? Fair game. In short, the muruna doctrine condones whatever it takes to get the job done.
A parade of American politicians from both major parties has stepped forward to defend Ms. Abedin’s ‘honor’ and public service record. Republican House Speaker John Boehner made the assertion that “accusations like this being thrown around are pretty dangerous.” We contend that it is far more dangerous to ignore what remain blatant and undisputed facts. Yet it is human nature to do exactly that when faced with unprecedented events; there is simply no point of reference for rationalization. So we dismiss it.
Again, Ms. Abedin has not been accused of any crime, or broken any laws that we know, though it remains to be seen if her Questionnaire for National Security Positions was falsified. Nevertheless, the reemergence of the Muslim Brotherhood as a political force in the Middle East region must be considered in the context of Ms. Abedin’s rise as Mideast advisor to Mrs. Clinton at the Obama State Department.
For now the best we can offer is circumstantial evidence and hypotheses based on those facts, together with the statements, events, and actions of the world’s power elites and the complicit globalists in our own country, most notably Barack Obama and the current Progressive regime. Huma Abedin, whatever her involvement, may be but a footnote in the larger scheme to reorder the power structure of the world, with the Muslim Brotherhood taking a central role in the Middle East.
Let the Backstabbing Begin
Following the assaults on the diplo compounds in Egypt and Libya on September 11th, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s reaction was especially telling; she seemed incredulous, almost indignant. “How could this happen in a country we helped liberate?” she bemoaned. Political translation: “How could they betray us after we put them in power?” Her words appeared to be those of a woman double-crossed.
Maybe Mrs. Clinton was the only one who didn’t get the memo: Globalization is a contact sport. And the Muslim Brotherhood plays by its own rules. (For a graphic reminder, see the video below; this is what happens when you get caught on the wrong side of the Muslim Brotherhood and al Qaeda.)
Virtually every geo-political pundit on the planet had warned publicly during regime change operations (read: Operation Arab Spring) that the U.S. was empowering the Brotherhood via fraudulent elections in Egypt, and arming al Qaeda during the Libyan civil war.
How could Madame Secretary be even remotely surprised? This is the Muslim Brotherhood they chose as their power-sharing partner — and by default, al Qaeda, which serves as the MB’s shock troops. Did Ms. Abedin advise otherwise? Did she provide assurances on behalf of the Brotherhood that everything was under control?
We have since learned that the Obama administration knew the Libyan attack was imminent and yet did nothing to defend the consulate. Why? Was an attack on our foreign missions the plan all along? Was this intended to be yet another manufactured distraction for the American People?
Why did the Obama administration cling desperately to the story that the violence was a ‘spontaneous’ response to the inflammatory Prophet Mohammed film? Did the White House really believe that? Or did they want the American People to believe it? We all know this was never the case, nor the September 11th attack date coincidental.
It also strikes odd that the Muslim Brotherhood publicly urged restraint in the wake of the prophet film flap, going so far as to uncharacteristically recommend that Muslim rioters refrain from burning American flags. This, too, we suspect, was a choreographed charade to make the Brotherhood appear as the ‘moderate Muslim’ voice of reason. The Brotherhood press release read like it was straight from the State Department.
So who’s zooming whom? Did Huma sell Hillary some bad advice to help the Brotherhood to power? Was Hillary using the Brotherhood to expand global governance? Did the Muslim Brotherhood then betray the United States once they had secured power? Or has Barack Obama played us all, including Ms. Abedin?
This may not be as much about Huma as the ummah.
Anti-American Philosophy Becomes Administration Policy
It has been apparent for some time that the Obama administration has gone to extraordinary measures to help the Muslim Brotherhood gain a foothold on power in the Middle East, beginning with the so-called Arab Spring. This destabilization operation was executed under the guise of a “spontaneous uprising” but with a central theme of liberation — the one casus belli for which the American People will readily tolerate U.S. military intervention overseas.
Arab Spring has had all the earmarks of Secretary Clinton’s Conflict and Stabilization Operations. It also bears the ideological hallmark of Barack Hussein Obama.
In Mr. Obama’s eyes, Arab Spring is not about Muslims’ liberation from despotic dictators, but rather the Caliphate’s first steps toward independence from the United States. The president’s bias for Islam has always been on plain view, from the Islamic-inscribed ring he brandishes on his finger to the Muslim mea culpa he offered up in Cairo back in 2009.
His utter disdain for the United States and what he sees as American colonialism is no secret, either, despite all efforts to conceal it. As a Columbia University political science major, Mr. Obama specialized in international relations. Indeed, his student writings on the subject might very well yield the best evidence yet of his remarkably treacherous anti-U.S. mindset.
Consider also that the man from whom the president takes his present name, Barack Obama Senior, was also an ardent anti-colonial Marxist. The president’s surrogate father figure, Frank Marshall Davis, was a Communist Party member whose anti-American views earned him a place on an FBI watch list. His influence on a young ‘Barry Soetoro’ in Hawaii is evident in the president’s own memoirs.
Note that Mr. Davis’ close friend and colleague, Vernon Jarrett, is the father of Valerie Jarrett, Mr. Obama’s most trusted White House advisor and one of the very few people to whom he actually listens. Ms. Jarrett also seems a product of anti-Western, anti-capitalist philosophy.
Ground zero for the president’s twisted anti-colonial crusade is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. His well-known pro-Palestine tilt was on full display in 2003 while attending an Arab American Action Network (AAAN) banquet in Chicago to honor his friend, Dr. Rashid Khalidi, who was departing the area for Columbia University in New York.
A mouthpiece for the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) and outspoken apologist for terror acts, Dr. Khalidi justifies Palestinian suicide bombings as a legitimate response to “racist” Israeli aggression. It’s reported that while toasting Dr. Khalidi at the AAAN event, then-state senator Obama referred to Israeli actions as genocide against the Palestinian people. The LA Times confirms it has in its possession a video of the event, but refuses to release it. (Perhaps because of the mock beheadings reportedly performed by children at this gala?)
Dr. Khalidi’s wife, Mona Khalidi, continues as the longtime AAAN president and once worked for Wafa, the official news agency of the PLO in the late 70s and early 80s. Mr. Obama has denied any relationship existed with the couple, although people familiar with the situation say the families dined together at the Khalidi’s Chicago home. On other occasions, the Khalidis even helped the Obamas with babysitting duties.
In 2001, Mrs. Khalidi’s AAAN was the recipient of a $40,000 grant from Mr. Obama while serving on the board of the Woods Fund with American terrorist and Weathermen founder Bill Ayers. A second cash infusion followed in 2002 for $35,000.
Mr. Obama has also been known to confer with PLO activist-advisor Dr. Edward Said, who for many years was the most prominent spokesperson for the Palestinian cause in the United States. Now deceased, Dr. Said was a longtime member of the Palestinian National Council (PNC), the legislative arm of the PLO. The president’s interest in this man is obvious: A former professor at (where else but) Columbia University, Dr. Said is regarded as a founding figure in the critical field of post-colonialism.
It still remains unknown whether the student sometimes known as Barry Soetoro/Barack Obama ever attended Dr. Said’s classes while at Columbia. What’s painfully transparent, however, is that Columbia, the Mecca of far left academia, takes care of its own. Incidentally, the aforementioned 2003 AAAN “farewell” banquet for Dr. Khalidi was due to his appointment as the new “Edward Said Professor of Modern Arab Studies” at Columbia University. Dr. Said passed away in 2003.
Fast forward: As 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama has taken the opportunity to put his personal prejudices into practice, shunning the Israeli political leadership from the very outset of his term in the White House. The most recent slap at the Jewish nation came late September when he refused to sit down with Benjamin Netanyahu during the United Nations general assembly week. (Obama opted ito visit a TV talk show to drum up support for his reelection bid.) The president did, however, send Secretary Clinton in his place to meet with the Israeli prime minister — with Huma Abedin along for the ride.
You can imagine how non-forthright and non-productive the discussion must have been, with the State Department’s Muslim Sisterhood sitting there entertaining Jewish concerns over Iran’s nuclear saber-rattling and perpetual threat to ‘wipe Israel from the map.’ Looking across that table, Mr. Netanyahu certainly must have thought of Egyptian president and Brotherhood ringleader Mohamed Morsi in Iran a month earlier, commemorating the anniversary of Sayyid Qutb’s execution.
For the record, Sayyid Qutb was a nihilistic Islamist theorist who remains the patron saint of many Muslim Brothers. A leading member of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood throughout the 1950s and 60s, he was put to death by hanging in 1966 at the hands of Abdel Nasser’s secular nationalist Egyptian regime, no doubt a martyr in the Brothers’ eyes.
It is perhaps curious (or perhaps expected) that Mr. Obama would describe the recent Egyptian/Libyan turmoil and assassination of Ambassador Christopher Stevens’ as “bumps in the road” and a “rocky path.” This language is straight out of Mr. Qutb’s most famous work, Milestones, a manifesto of political Islam.
Social Justice for Islam
When examining the influences, motivations, and socio-political worldview of this American president, it’s easy to see the teachings of Mr. Qutb playing a significant role. One should take into account that Mr. Qutb’s prolific writings deal with Islamic advocacy, education, and the inevitable ideological clash of civilizations between Islam and the West. His works abound with the idea of a transnational uumah, the comprehensive application of jihad, and yes, social justice.
This is currently in evidence throughout the world, from the thousands of mosques and madrasas popping up like wild mushrooms to the myriad Islamic networking organizations and charity fronts. Remember that this was the sole intention of the Abedin family’s Institute for Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA) with Abdullah Omar Naseef, the Muslim Brotherhood extremist and al Qaeda financier. (refer to Part 1 of Muslim Sisterhood).
Mr. Qutb regarded Islam as a complete system of morality, justice and [global] governance, whose Sharia laws and principles should be the sole basis of governance and everything else in life. True Islam would transform every aspect of society, eliminating everything non-Muslim. True Muslims could look forward to lives of “poverty, difficulty, frustration, torment and sacrifice.” In other words, do your fair share. Social justice, Islamic style.
He wrote that the real purpose of the Qur’an is as a means to change society, to remove man from the enslavement of other men to the servitude of God.And the way to bring about this freedom was for a revolutionary vanguard to fight jahiliyyah with a twofold approach: preaching, and abolishing the organizations and authorities of the Jahili system by “physical power and Jihad,” which he concluded must be offensive.
Obviously some Muslims have taken that belief to heart — and to their graves.
No honest scholar would disagree that Sayyid Qutb’s influence permeates the Muslim Brotherhood, but also their front line soldiers, most notably al Qaeda. Mr. Qutb’s brother, Muhammad Qutb, carried forward his teachings, helping to create a whole new generation of radicalized Egyptians. One of Muhammad Qutb’s most zealous disciples was Ayman Zawahiri, who pays homage to Qutb in his work Knights under the Prophet’s Banner. Zawahiri became a member of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad and later a mentor of Osama bin Laden. He assumed the mantle of leadership for al Qaeda following bin Laden’s death.
Bin Laden was also personally acquainted with Muhammad Qutb, attending his weekly lectures at King Abdulaziz University. This is the same school where Huma Abedin’s father, Sayed Zaynul Abedin had taught as a visiting professor and originally met Abdullah Naseef. At the time the men formed the IMMA, Dr. Naseef held the position of vice-president at the university.
Remember, too, that Huma Abedin worked with Abdullah Naseef, an indicted al Qaeda financier, for seven years — even serving on the same board together — while also working for Hillary Clinton at the White House and United States Senate. (see Part 1 of Muslim Sisterhood for this back story).
American-born Anwar al-Awlaki, pulverized in a 2011 U.S. drone strike, was another devotee of Qutb’s works, reportedly devouring up to 200 pages a day while jailed in Yemen. This al Qaeda cleric and regional commander was also described by U.S. government officials as a “senior talent recruiter and motivator. In 2001, he served as “chaplain” on the Muslim Students Association (MSA) board of the George Washington University chapter. Huma Abedin had previously served on the same MSA board there. (again, please see Part 1).
What does it all mean? You decide for yourself.
But for all his reelection chest-beating about taking out Osama bin Laden, Mr. Obama’s anti-colonial purview is actually quite similar to that of the Muslim Brotherhood and these al Qaeda chieftains. One might wonder if the president also regards the hits on Mr. bin Laden and Mr. al-Awlaki as merely “bumps in the road” to securing this wider vision of social justice through societal transformation.
Human sacrifice towards the greater good?
Remember that while campaigning n 2008, Mr. Obama promised a fundamental transformation of America, and he and the progressives have certainly tried to deliver. But we believe this self-proclaimed ‘citizen of the world’ (and world-class narcissist) envisions for himself a much larger role in the transformation of the world’s geo-political and socio-economic pecking order.
# # #