The year was 1775; tensions between the American colonies and the British government had come to the breaking point, especially in Massachusetts. The question is, are these American colonies “rebels” or are they “patriots”? The answer depends on which side of the “pond” one happens to live. Language is everything and labels are vitally important; they manipulate one’s emotions and drive a narrative.
So, “Islamophobe” (someone with an irrational fear of Islam) or “anti-Islamofascist” (someone who opposes Islamic fascism), which are you? It depends on which side of liberty one stands.
Let’s take Thomas Jefferson as an example:
Syed Abedin, late father of Hillary Clinton’s top aide—Huma Abedin—was a noted Islamic supremacist. He criticized President Thomas Jefferson for building a U.S. naval force and invading Tripoli during the Barbary Wars against Islamic pirates who were attacking U.S. ships in the early 1800s. Instead, he believed Jefferson should have appeased them by paying their infidel tax. These Islamofascist Muslims demanded the US pay tribute, or jizya, as ransom for the hostages, and for safe passage through the Mediterranean. “The level of tribute amounted to millions in today’s dollars and at one point reached a whopping 10 percent of the US national budget.” According to Syed, “Jefferson was the original Islamophobe.” (The source for these quotes and other great information on the Abedin family can be found here.)
What do you think? Was Thomas Jefferson an anti-Islamofascist, standing for freedom, human rights, and common sense? Or was he an Islamophobe, as suggested by Huma’s father? Language is everything, labels are vitally important, and it depends upon which side of liberty you stand.
“The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree” is an old saying, and mostly true. How would Huma Abedin—Clinton’s top aide—label Thomas Jefferson, our beloved founding father: Anti-Islamofascist or Islamophobe? Having the ear of our potentially next president, one would hope that she stands on the side of liberty; but let’s take a closer a look.
Huma’s mother, Saleha Abedin, is a leading member of The Muslim Brotherhood’s sister organization—The Muslim Sisterhood. After her husband’s death, Saleha took over the editing of the “Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs,” a propaganda magazine of an Islamic institute in Saudi Arabia whose mission is to spread Sharia law in the West. Huma helped her mother to edit this pro-Shariah propaganda tool for thirteen years. Being pro-Shariah, it’s no surprise that this magazine also opposes women’s rights and blames the US for 9/11.
To learn more about Huma’s involvement with this anti-Constitutional Islamic supremacist magazine, read this article called “8 Things to Know About Huma Abedin’s Involvement with an Islamist Journal.”
“In 1999, Saleha translated and edited a book titled ‘Women in Islam: A Discourse in Rights and Obligations’” published by the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs. Written by her Saudi colleague Fatima Naseef, the book explains that the stoning and lashing of adulterers, the killing of apostates, sexual submissiveness and even female genital mutilation are all permissible practices under Sharia law.” It wasn’t just a job for her though, to read more about this project and Saleha Abedin click here. Learn more about Huma’s mother at Discover the Networks.
Huma Abedin grew up in Saudi Arabia from the age of two until she was 18. After being back in the United States for two years, she became Hillary Clinton’s intern at the age of twenty. According to a recent video, she was working for both Hillary and the “Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs” (the family business) for a time. She actually continued to work for this pro-Shariah/anti-American magazine until 2008. Her family business is owned by the Muslim World League which is Saudi Arabia’s global organization which promotes Wahhabi Islam—an extremely violent, radical form of Islam. The Abedin business and Muslim World League even share an office in London.
Other extreme Islamic ties would include her being an executive board member with the Muslim Student’s Association for three years—another Muslim Brotherhood front group. Omar Naseef is yet another tie between Huma and Islamic terrorism. He is not only a founder of the Muslim World League but he helped to create Huma’s family business and also funded Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden.
Huma’s Islamic supremacist ties spread far and wide, and she hasn’t made an effort to distance herself from them. For that matter, there’s another old adage that says, “Birds of a feather flock together.” She and Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton have been flocking together for about two decades now. Let’s see how similar their feathers are.
We laid out earlier how Saudi Arabian money supports/owns Huma’s family business. Clinton’s “family business”—the Clinton Foundation—was given over $25 million from this Islamic nation that gives birth to terrorism. They also funded 20% of Hillary’s election campaign, which if she wins, would give Huma (and her jihadist ties) the ear of the President of the United States.
Both of these women support Shariah law. Huma’s family business’ mission is to spread Sharia law in the West. Hillary’s support of the UN Resolution 16/18 (any speech against Islam is to be considered hate speech and prosecutable), her push for “Trojan horse” Syrian immigration, and anti-Constitutional stances all point to this fact. Two excellent resources to arm yourself with on this topic are books that can be downloaded for free or purchased from the Center for Security Policy. (Jihad Reader #3—The Organization of Islamic Cooperation’s Jihad on Free Speech and Jihad Reader #9—See No Sharia)
Having many ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and editing a magazine that pushes for the globalization of Shariah, one could assume that Huma is not for women’s rights. But, we are not left to assume; she wrote an article in 1996 called, “Women’s Rights Are Islamic Rights,” This piece “argues that single moms, working moms and gay couples with children should not be recognized as families. It also states that more revealing dress ushered in by women’s liberation ‘directly translates into unwanted results of sexual promiscuity and irresponsibility and indirectly promote violence against women.’ In other words, sexually liberated women are just asking to be raped.” To read much more about this click here.
Although Hillary claims to be a champion of women’s rights and states that she desires to make things better for women, her actions—and silence—do not match up with her claims. Huma, in 2010, arranged for Hillary to speak alongside Abedin’s hijab-wearing mother at an all-girls college in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. According to a New York Post article written by Paul Sperry, “At no point in her long visit there, which included a question-and-answer session, did this so-called champion of women’s rights protest the human rights violations Saudi women suffer under the Shariah laws that Abedin’s mother actively promotes. Nothing about the laws barring women from driving or traveling anywhere without male ‘guardians.’” He closed out his article with a question women everywhere should be asking, “If fighting for women’s rights is one of Clinton’s greatest achievements, why has she retained as her closest adviser a woman who gave voice to harsh Islamist critiques of her Beijing platform?” And why remain silent when given an opportunity to speak of liberty to those who are suffering under such oppressive Shariah law? (In a recent interview with Sandy Rios and a close friend of Bill Clinton, this friend claimed that Hillary hates women. To gain better insight on Hillary Clinton, listen to this interview here.)
As we look at the last “feather,” let’s return to Thomas Jefferson: Islamophobe or anti-Islamofascist? It’s obvious that Huma and her family would put Jefferson, and many other founding fathers, into the Islamophobe camp. What about Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton; where would she put Mr. Jefferson? Well, she said that people who want to limit immigration are un-American and called conservatives xenophobes and Islamophobes. It’s pretty clear which camp she would not only throw our founding father, but has thrown most of us into as well.
Language is everything, labels are vitally important, it depends upon which side of liberty you stand on, and they manipulate one’s emotions and drive a narrative.Very often, in the hands of the left, it’s a false narrative with the express goal to drive the liberty-lover to shame and manipulate the socialist-lover to hatred. It’s used as a divisive tool, creating chaos and misdirection, so that they can achieve their mission to destroy liberty, enslave the minds and bodies of the masses, and further the globalization of a one world government in which only the ruling class is free.
As we see the push of Islamofascism around the globe and its increased popularity amongst the political left; as more information comes forward about Hillary Clinton and her top aide, Huma Abedin, with their strong ties to Islamic supremacist countries, thought, and law; we must consider the consequences of allowing our borders to be open and our foundations to be undermined. We must take a closer look at all who occupy such high places of influence within our government.
“An Explanatory Memorandum” is a very short, must read, for every American. Whether one loves liberty or wants a socialist society, this should be read. Patriots, liberals, Christians, atheists, transgender, gay, straight, or apathetic people who mind their own business, all would suffer under the hand of an America that has been overtaken by an Islamic supremacist, Shariah compliant government. It was written by a Muslim Brotherhood operative, explaining their goals and how they would achieve their secret plan to overtake the United States. Readthis document and get it into the hands of all your friends, regardless their belief or stand. It can be downloaded for free here, purchased through the Center for Security Policy, or from us by clicking here. (Cost is $5.50)
Frank Gaffney (Center for Security Policy) has been warning us for years about the dangers of the Muslim Brotherhood in America, the ever-expanding Islamic takeover of our government, and even the ties with Huma Abedin and the Muslim Brotherhood. Do you remember when five members of Congress, led by Rep. Michele Bachmann, urged the State Department’s acting Inspector General to examine Huma Abedin’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and her role in policy-making? Do you remember how Rep. Bachmann was publicly vilified for asking such questions – and got no answers to them? The American people owe Michele Bachmann—and many others—an apology for their vilification and removal from places of influence—just for being truth-tellers.
Frank Gaffney recently said this, describing the progress of Islam and the Brotherhood in our government. “In the Bush years they’re at the table; in the Obama years they’re running the meetings.” I would add that if Hillary wins, “they’ll be running the country.”
What side of liberty does Huma Abedin stand on? What side of liberty does Hillary Clinton stand on? What side of liberty do you stand on?
These are perilous times indeed! Reliance upon God—prayer—is our only hope, but let us not grow weary in walking the walk of faith and fighting the good fight on every front.
Keep informed:
To support our efforts please click here or mail your gift to American Decency Association (ADA), PO Box 202, Fremont, MI 49412.
American Decency Association is a member of the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability.
Call us:
231-924-4050Email us:
info@americandecency.orgWrite us:
American Decency AssociationCopyright 2024 American Decency
