MB INVADING FROM WITHIN

FINANCIAL SERVICES of Rtljrtgmttatibtß

ASSISTANT REPUBLICAN WHIP
20515-2306
TEA PARTY CAUCUS CHAIRWOMAN
ADOPTION CAUCUS CO-CHAIR
HOUSE U.S.-EUROPEAN UNION CAUCUS
July 13, 2012
The Honorable Keith Ellison
1027 Longworth House Office Building
United States House of Representatives
103 CANNON HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON, DC 20515
(202) 225-2331
6043 HUDSON ROAD, SUITE 330

We find this is not only necessary, but beyond timely, considering that departments and agencies of the U.S. Government (including but not limited to, those departments to which these Inspector General letters were sent) have in the past and continue to be advised by organizations and individuals that the U.S. Government itself has identified in federal court as fronts for the international Muslim Brotherhood. That such a widespread assessment has not been performed is troubling and is the basis for genuine concern given the stark contrast between what the U.S. Government says about these Muslim Brotherhood front groups and their continued association with these groups.

1. "Brotherhood operatives" within the US. government may have directly influenced the U.S. intelligence community's assessment of the Muslim Brotherhood, as presented by Director of National Intelligence James Clapper in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on February 1(), 2011. In the letter to the Inspector General of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the reference to the February 10, 2011 testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence is notable in that the Muslim Brotherhood is described by Director Clapper as "largely secular". The fact that he made this statement is not in dispute. We cited his statement at that hearing in its entirety in the Iletter to the ODNI Inspector General. I have to note that both Rep. Westmoreland and I were present at that hearing. Director Clapper was not speaking off the cuff, but was reading from a set of prepared briefing notes which he looked at and apparently referred to in making that statement. His statement was so widely derided that the White House quickly moved to distance themselves from it, and Director Clapper even had to retract his statement.2

Director Clapper's statement was in response to a question by Rep. Sue Myrick about information entered into evidence during the Holy Land Foundation trial — the largest terrorism finance trial in American history — that specifically identified these U.S.-based Muslim Brotherhood front organizations and their commitment to a published agenda to "destroying Western Civilization from within":

According to the FBI and the Department of Justice the Brotherhood is actually inside America and I hold this up because it's from the 2008 Holy Land
Foundation terrorist finance support trial evidence was introduce by prosecutors titled "Explanatory Memorandum." And under a section titled "Understanding the Role of the Muslim Brotherhood in North America, the document says the
Brotherhood is engaged in, and I quote "a civilization Jihadist process with all the word means. The Ikhwan, the Brotherhood must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within." And the last page of the memo lists the names of 29 organizations in the U.S. whom the author, who was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood claims are involved in this so-called "civilization jihad process."

the danger of the Muslim Brotherhood is not just encouraging terrorism through their ideology but also trying to take over governments so everyone has to succumb and live under their ideology.

And in fact, I)irector Clapper at the conclusion of his response to Rep. Myrick's question deferred to FBI Director ![FBI blackmail.jpg]
()to
address the issue of the Muslim Brotherhood in America, to which I)irector Mueller stated:
I can say at the outset that elements of the Muslim Brotherhood both here and overseas have supported terrorism. To the extent that I can provide information, I would be happy to do so in closed session. But it would be difficult to do it in open session.
entirely reasonable to ask exactly how Director Clapper arrived at the conclusion that the Muslim Brotherhood was a "largely secular" organization. It is also important to ask what advisory role that any of these Muslim Brotherhood front organizations had played in the intelligence community's assessment as expressed in the briefing notes that Director Clapper was reading from which stated that the Muslim Brotherhood was a "largely secular" organization.

there has yet to be an assessment of how Director Clapper and the intelligence community got their analysis of the Muslim Brotherhood so inherently flawed, the implications of which we could continue to live with for decades to come.

No better example of the outworking of this intelligence analysis is the statement made during President Obama's 201 1 Super Bowl halftime interview just days before Director Clapper made his statement where he said with respect to the Muslim Brotherhood, "They don't have majority support in Egypt."5 As we now know from the Egyptian parliamentary and presidential elections earlier this year, this analysis by our intelligence community was wrong.6

1. "The mother, brother and deceased father of Huma Abedin, Deputy Chief of
   Staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, are connected to the Muslim
   Brotherhood, and that she, too, by extension, may be working on the organization's behalf."
   In fact, what we wrote was that:
   .the Deputy Chief of Staff, Huma Abedin, has three family members her late father, her mother and her brother — connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations. Her position provides her with routine access to the Secretary and to policy-making.
   That her family members are connected to the Muslim Brotherhood has been reported and referenced widely in the Arab-language media, including Al-Hayai, the Arab Times and Al-Jazeera.7
   A 2002 law review article by Director of the Center for the Study of Islam and ChristianMuslim Relations states with respect to Ms. Abedin's father:
   Professor Syed Z. Abedin took a different approach in dealing with the contemporary challenge to the traditional Islamic views. Trained in social science and being of Indian origin, Professor Abedin was the founder of the Institute of
   Muslim Minority Affairs in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, an institution that had the quiet but active support of the then General Secretary ofthe Muslim World League, Dr. Umar Abdallah Nasif.
   The concerns about the foreign influence of immediate family members is such a concern to the tJ.S. Government that it includes these factors as potentially disqualifying conditions for obtaining a security clearance, which undoubtedly Ms. Abedin has had to obtain to function in her position.
   For us to raise issues about a highly-based U.S. Government official with known immediate family connections to foreign extremist organizations is not a question of singling out Ms. Abedin. In fact, these questions are raised by the U.S. Government of seeking a security clearance.

Given the reasonable assumption that Ms. Abedin has a high-level security clearance, as a member of the House Select Committee on Intelligence I am particularly interested in exactly how, given what we know from the international media about Ms. Abedin's documented family connections with the extremist Muslim Brotherhood, she was able to avoid being disqualified for a security clearance. If these known and documented family ties to the Muslim Brotherhood would not disqualify someone for a security clearance, what specifically is the standard to be disqualified on foreign influence grounds?

1. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation, an international organization of 57 countries to which President George W. Bush created a special envoy position, is "determined to impose shariah worldwide" and undermine the U.S. Constitution.

That President George W. Bush created a position of envoy to the Organization of
Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is, once again, beyond dispute. As noted on the State Department's website, President Bush appointed Sada Cumber to the newly created position on February 27, 2008. 12 President Obama later appointed Rashad Hussain to that same position on February 13, 2010.

Concerns about the OIC's agenda stems from the fact that it makes bona fide claims to being the second largest inter-governmental organization in the world with membership of 56 states and the Palestinian Authority; claims to represent the "collective voice of the Muslim defines it's governing domain as the entire Ummah the Muslim
Community; rests its authority in summits attended by heads of state.

There are other reasons for concern for the OIC's promotion of shariah as part of a global agenda.
The OIC defines human rights strictly in terms of shariah — Islamic law. Promulgated in 1990 on behalf of its Member States, the "Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam" was subsequently served as a legal instrument to the United Nations in 1993. That human rights is derived exclusively from shariah according to the OIC was made explicit in the final two articles of the Declaration where it states in Article 24 that "all the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic shariah" while Article 25 asserts that "the Islamic shariah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration.
The OIC also makes jurisdictional claims over Muslims living in non-Muslim countries, which includes Muslims living in the United States. In the OIC Charter, it states:

The objectives of the Organization of the Islamic Conference shall be: To safeguard the rights, dignity and religious and cultural identity of Muslim communities and minorities in non-Member States; . . .

, the 2010 OIC Observatory Report stated that "Muslim[s] should not be . . . attempted to be assimilated. Accommodation is the best strategy for integration." 19 In other words, Muslims should be allowed to live in non-Muslim states without having to necessarily obey its laws.

The situation is not helped by the fact that when meeting with Muslim entities from within the United States, the OIC tends to meet with groups known to be Muslim Brotherhood front organizations known to be dedicated to "establishing an effective and stable Islamic Movement led by the Muslim Brotherhood which adopts Muslims' causes domestically and globally, and . . . presents a civilization alternative, and supports the global Islamic State wherever it is.
For example, in 2007, the OIC General Secretary, Elmeleddin lhsanoglu, met with Nihad
Awad, President of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) to discuss "cooperation on future projects. In 201022 and then again in 2011, 23 the OIC organized "Islam and Muslims in America" Conferences in Chicago that were promoted by CAIR, with keynote speakers being the OIC General Secretary along with senior leaders of Muslim Brotherhood front groups like ISNA. 24 Both CAIR and ISNA were identified as Muslim Brotherhood entities when designated as unindicted coconspirators in the Holy
Land Foundation case. 25 The Bylaws of the International Muslim Brotherhood state that:

. . .the Muslim Brotherhood is an international Muslim Body, which seeks to establish Allah's law in the land by achieving the spiritual goals of Islam and the true religion .
It goes on to speak of:
"the need to work on establishing the Islamic State, Defend the (Islamic) nation against the internal enemies, . . .

At least on its face, there seems to be an ongoing relationship between a foreign governing entity, the OIC, that claims jurisdiction over Muslims in non-Muslim lands, defines human rights as shariah, and advocates that Muslims not assimilate into the cultures of non-Muslim countries. The ()IC meets with known subversive front groups dedicated to the imposition of Islamic law and the subversion of host nation governments and societies.

Given that the OIC defines human rights as shariah for the Muslim world and CAIR designates itself as a Muslim Civil Rights organization, couldn't this indicate a common commitment to the implementation of shariah law inside the United States just as the Muslim Brotherhood's mission statement attests? There are national security implications to allowing a foreign governing entity to maintain ongoing relationships with domestic front groups. And the evidence of collaboration between the OIC and U.S.-based Muslim Brotherhood front groups needs to be investigated if for no other reason than to rule out what may reasonably appear to be questionable behavior from a national security perspective.

establish the associations of CAIR, ISNA and NAIT with HLF, the Islamic Association for Palestine ("IAP"), and with Hamas.
It should be noted that Article 2 of the Hamas Covenant identifies Hamas as a Muslim
Brotherhood entity while Article 7 calls for the global killing of all .Jews.

OIC, is an attempt at imposing speech standards on non-Muslim countries and cultures including the United States. Such an initiative would undermine American notions of free speech as stated in the First Amendment of the Constitution that we took oaths to support and defend.

Promulgated in 2005 and designated the "Ten Year Programme of Action," the OIC formally recognized Islamic speech standards as being binding on the entire world and formulated a plan to subordinate all speech to Islamic speech standards by "endeavoring to have the United Nations adopt an international resolution to counter Islamophobia, and call upon all States to enact laws to counter it, including deterrent punishments.

, the OIC's
Ten Year Programme of Action to subordinate free speech to Islamic law is quite serious.
Even more distressing is the appearance of the U.S. Department of State participating in a process, called the "Istanbul Process," that seeks implementation of the Ten Year Programme through ratification of United Nations Resolution 16/18. Drafted by Pakistan on behalf of the OIC and written in facially neutral language, the OIC Secretary General acknowledged upon its passage that Resolution 16/18, heavily promoted by the current administration, fulfilled OIC objectives on defamation that , the OIC's
Ten Year Programme of Action to subordinate free speech to Islamic law is quite serious.
Even more distressing is the appearance of the U.S. Department of State participating in a process, called the "Istanbul Process," that seeks implementation of the Ten Year Programme through ratification of United Nations Resolution 16/18. Drafted by Pakistan on behalf of the OIC and written in facially neutral language, the OIC Secretary General acknowledged upon its passage that Resolution 16/18, heavily promoted by the current administration, fulfilled OIC objectives on defamation that, the OIC's
Ten Year Programme of Action to subordinate free speech to Islamic law is quite serious.
Even more distressing is the appearance of the U.S. Department of State participating in a process, called the "Istanbul Process," that seeks implementation of the Ten Year Programme through ratification of United Nations Resolution 16/18. Drafted by Pakistan on behalf of the OIC and written in facially neutral language, the OIC Secretary General acknowledged upon its passage that Resolution 16/18, heavily promoted by the current administration, fulfilled OIC objectives on defamation that the West had up until that time consistently opposed.

When committing to its passage and implementation, Secretary Clinton committed to the OIC Secretary General "to use some old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming" against those who choose not to submit to the new speech requirements.

the OTC's own stated agenda to define universal rights in accordance with shariah, their claims on Muslims living outside of their member countries (including our own), the cooperation and coordination from Islamic groups inside the U.S., and the U.S.
Government's complicity in furthering that agenda by "pressuring and shaming" its own citizens in violation of the U.S. Constitution, raises considerable concerns about tJ.S. sovereignty — concerns that must to be addressed by independent authorities,

1. The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), an umbrella organization of American Muslim groups, is "the largest Muslim Brotherhood front in the United States. "
   ISNA bills itself as "the largest Muslim umbrella organization in the United States and Canada."

In naming ISNA as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial, federal prosecutors identified the group as among "entities who are and/or were members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.

During the trial, the Court entered into evidence a wide array of testimonial and documentary evidence expressly finking ISNA and NAIT to the HLF and its principals; the Islamic Association for Palestine and its principals; the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States and its Palestine Committee, headed by HAMAS official Mousa Abu Marzook; and the greater HAMAS-affiliated conspiracy described in the Government's case-in-chief. See, e.g., Government Exhibits 1-16, 3-1, 3-3, 3-23, 3-49, 3-50, 3-64, 3-85, 3-89, 5-1 through 5-14, 5-23 through 5-26, 5-42, 5-78, 16-59, 16-87, 20-33.
The prosecutors added that ISNA was not distantly related to the Holy Land Foundation's conspiracy to support Hamas, but was intimately tied to it:

The FBI also conducted surveillance of a 1993 meeting of Hamas leaders in Philadelphia, the transcripts of which were entered into evidence during the Holy Land Foundation trial, where the attendees openly discussed using ISNA as an official cover for their activities — thus making it by very definition a "front" organization.

that ISNA denied in a press release at the time of the Holy Land Foundation mistrial in 2007 that it "never was, is not now, affiliated with or influenced by any international organizations including the Muslim Brotherhood. "

And yet, ISNA officials had told the Chicago Tribune exactly the opposite just a few years before:
The Islamic Society of North America, the umbrella group for the Muslim Youth of North America and the Muslim Students Association, says Brotherhood members helped form those groups but that their overall influence has been limited.

The federal judge presiding over the Holy Land Foundation case rejected ISNA's denials and sided with the government prosecutors, ruling in a sealed order (later unsealed by order of the appellate court) that the evidence presented during the trial conclusively demonstrated ISNA's founding and operation as a Muslim Brotherhood front organization, also going into great detail about the evidence presented at trial showing its connection to the Holy Land Foundation's terrorist fundraising

1. The Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) and Muslim Advocates, two civil rights organizations, "exercise influence in ways that align with Muslim Brotherhood agendas. "

has identified MPAC as an entity long and closely associated with the Muslim Brotherhood.

Federal prosecutors entered into evidence U.S. Muslim Brotherhood documents identifying one of the founders and senior advisers to MPAC as operating in support of the group.

, MPAC has affirmatively demonstrated its allegiance to the international
Muslim Brotherhood, hosting events on Capitol Hill for Tunisian Muslim Brotherhood
Al-Nahda party leader Rachid Ghannouchi and members of the Egyptian Muslim
Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party (the latter was abruptly cancelled when news of the event was being investigated by the press).

both groups longtime alliance with the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). During the Holy Land Foundation trial, FBI Agent Lara Burns testified that
CAIR was a front for Hamas and founded by the Muslim Brotherhood's Palestine Committee to support Hamas.

Last October, MPAC and Muslim Advocates joined several identified Muslim
Brotherhood front groups, including CAIR and ISNA, by signing onto joint letters signed by these organizations in calling for the creation of a
"White House" "interagency taskforce" to conduct a "purge" of counterterrorism training materials.

The same day as that letter was sent to the White House, these same organizations met together with Department of Justice Assistant Attorney General of the Civil Rights
Division
Tom Perez in calling for "a legal declaration that U.S. citizens' criticism of Islam constitutes racial discrimination." This call to subvert the First Amendment
should have been challenged by the Department of Justice, but wasn't. That is deeply troubling. Muslim Advocates and MPAC officials are regular speakers at ISNA events, such as Farhana Khera's speech at the 2010 ISNA convention.

demonstrate alignment with the Muslim Brotherhood's agenda, but also the OIC's stated plan to criminalize defamation of Islam. It is reported that MPAC President Salam al-Maray'ati has appeared at OIC events held inside the U.S. in support of the OIC's "Islamophobia" agenda.

Al-Marayati has previously had run-ins with the federal government. In 1999 he was :forced to resign his appointment to the National Commission on Terrorism after his statements in support of terrorist organizations came to light. 52 While he had been appointed by House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, it was Gephardt that withdrew alMarayati 's nomination.

Attempts by the House Judiciary Committee to obtain from the Department of .Justice and the FBI all of the case evidence submitted during the Holy Land Foundation trial and provided to the defense in disclosure have been fruitless. 53
Members of Oversight Committees must know what more these Holy Land Foundation documents contain regarding the U.S. Government's "outreach" partners.
This information has already been turned over to convicted terror supporters and yet the Administration has refused all requests to turn these documents over to members of the U.S. Congress serving on Oversight Committee.

Since we sent the Inspectors General letters requesting further investigation, other shocking incidents have occurred. Chief among these was the decision just a few weeks ago
by the State Department to give a member of an Egyptian designated terrorist group
(which is still listed as such by the State Department's Bureau of Counterterrorism54) a visa to not only enter the country in violation of the federal laws prohibiting material support for terrorism, but to be granted a meeting inside the White House with National Security Council officials.
The terror group member used the opportunity of his White House visit to call
for the release of the imprisoned leader of his organization, the "Blind Sheikh," Omar Abdel Rahman, who is currently serving a life sentence for his role in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and later planned terror plots inside the tJ.S.

Administration prosecutors and investigators have made statements backed up by considerable evidence in court raising serious concerns about many of the Muslim Brotherhood front groups, but the day-to-day operation of these departments and agencies continue "outreach" programs involving these exact same organizations as if the evidence presented in federal court or statements made in search warrant applications doesn't exist.

In light of the information revealed during the Holy Land Foundation trial, the FBI officially cut ties with CAIR because of their activities in support of Hamas. 57
And yet just last month the new White House Director for Community Partnerships admitted that this administration has had "hundreds" of meetings with CAIR in spite of the FBI's stated policy
. 58 It has been reported the White House has worked to conceal these ties (in one case, with ISNA and MPAC).

As members of Congress, we are charged to oversee and hold accountable all government agencies — a charge given to us by the Constitution on behalf of the citizens of the United States. To do anything less is to subvert the oaths we took as members to protect and defend the Constitution. For us to fail to demand action on the part of the Inspectors General on this matter is to fail to uphold the oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States.

                                                   MICHELE BACHMANN

Member of Congress
cc: The Honorable I. Charles McCullough Ill, Inspector General, Office of the
Director of National Intelligence

The Honorable Michael B. Horowitz, Inspector General, U.S. Department of Justice

Ambassador Harold W. Geisel, Deputy Inspector General, U.S. Department of State

Ms. Lynne M. Halbrooks, Acting Inspector General, U.S. Department of Defense

Mr. Charles K. Edwards, Acting Inspector General, U.S. Department of Homeland Security