Center Report Reveals Radical Islamist Views and Agenda of Senior State Department Official Huma Abedin’s Mother

Center for security policy:

 

WASHINGTON, D.C.:  A book published and translated by the mother of Obama administration State Department Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin provides fresh evidence that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s closest aide has deeply problematic foreign associations that could, in violation of departmental guidelines, “create… a heightened risk of foreign exploitation, inducement, manipulation, pressure, or coercion.”

In light of the escalating controversy over the role being played in U.S. security policy-making by Ms. Abedin and others with personal and/or professional ties to the Muslim Brotherhood (see Part 8 of the Center for Security Policy’s online curriculum atMuslimBrotherhoodinAmerica.com), the revelations contained in a new Center report Ties That Bind? The Views and Agenda of Huma Abedin’s Islamist Mother could not be more timely, or important.

The Center’s report excerpts and analyzes relevant passages from a book published and translated by Saleha S. Mahmood Abedin called Women in Islam: A Discourse in Rights and Obligations by Fatima Umar Naseef. Naseef is a past head of the “women’s section” and professor of shariah at King Abdulaziz University in Jeddah, where Dr. Abedin is also on the faculty.  The book was published in 1999, the same year Dr. Abedin founded Dar Al Hekma, a university for women also in Jeddah, that Secretary Clinton visited and spoke admiringly of with Huma Abedin in February 2010.  [See Remarks on that occasion by Mrs. Clinton, including her comment that Huma holds a “very sensitive and important position” in her department, and those by her hosts.]

Excerpts from Women in Islam in Ties That Bind? The Views and Agenda of Huma Abedin’s Islamist Mother include Islamic shariah justifications for the following:

  • Stoning for Adultery when Married; Lashing for Adultery when Unmarried
  • No Death Penalty for the Murder of an Apostate
  • Freedom of Expression Curtailed to What Benefits Islam
  • Women’s Right to Participate in Armed Jihad
  • Social Interaction Between the Sexes is Forbidden
  • Women Have No Right to Abstain from Sex with their Husbands
  • A Woman Should Not Let Anyone Into the House Unless Approved by Her Husband
  • Female Genital Mutilation is Allowed
  • Man-Made Laws “Enslave Women”

The organization responsible for the publication of Women in Islam was the International Islamic Committee for Woman & Child (IICWC), chaired at the time by Dr. Abedin.  IICWC misleadingly describes itself as “an international organization of concerned women who are committed to improving the condition of women and children around the world.”  In fact, like the Muslim Brotherhood, the Muslim World League (MWL) and other Islamist organizations with which it is associated, the IICWC is committed to eviscerating the rights of women and children by imposing everywhere shariah, a code that denies them fundamental – and, in the United States, constitutional – liberties.

 

Specifically, the book published by Dr. Abedin wholeheartedly affirms: limits on women’s free expression; the permissibility of stoning as a punishment for adultery, killing of apostates and female genital mutilation; the contention that “man-made laws” enslave women; and more.  It also endorses women’s right to fight in armed jihad.  Women in Islam is available online and sold at the Institute for Muslim Minority Affairs, an Islamist organization co-founded by Huma Abedin’s mother and her late father, Dr. Syed Zainul Abedin.

 

On July 21, former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy posted an essay at National Review Online that should be required reading for everyone commenting on the request by five Members of Congress led by Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota for Inspector General investigations of Muslim Brotherhood influence operations within the U.S. government.  In it, he observed that the Institute for Muslim Minority Affairs “was backed by the Muslim World League. As the Hudson Institute’s Zeyno Baran relates, the MWL was started by the Saudi government in 1962 ‘with Brotherhood members in key leadership positions.’ It has served as the principal vehicle for the propagation of Islamic supremacism by the Saudis and the Brotherhood.”

 

Mr. McCarthy notes that:

The five House conservatives… are asking questions that adults responsible for national security should feel obliged to ask: In light of Ms. Abedin’s family history, is she someone who ought to have a security clearance, particularly one that would give her access to top-secret information about the Brotherhood? Is she, furthermore, someone who may be sympathetic to aspects of the Brotherhood’s agenda, such that Americans ought to be concerned that she is helping shape American foreign policy?
Andrew McCarthy, who successfully prosecuted the Blind Sheikh, Omar Abdul Rahman – a convicted terrorist and clerical inspiration for jihadists worldwide, whose release from federal prison at the insistence of Muslim Brother and Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi has been the subject of discussions within and enabled by Mrs. Clinton’s State Department – goes on to observe that:
The State Department is particularly wary when it comes to the category of ‘foreign influence‘ – yes, it is a significant enough concern to warrant its own extensive category in background investigations. No criminal behavior need be shown to deny a security clearance; access to classified information is not a right, and reasonable fear of “divided loyalties” is more than sufficient for a clearance to be denied. The [Department’s own security] guidelines probe ties to foreign countries and organizations because hostile elements could “target United States citizens to obtain protected information” or could be “associated with a risk of terrorism.” Note: The Brotherhood checks both these boxes.
Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., President of the Center for Security Policy, said upon the release of the Center’s new report, Ties That Bind? The Views and Agenda of Huma Abedin’s Islamist Mother:
In the interest of informing the debate about the need to investigate Huma Abedin’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and its agenda, and those of others shaping policy in the Obama administration, the Center for Security Policy offers in Ties That Bind? further cause for such an investigation.  That includes, for instance, evidence of Dr. Saleha Abedin’s personal involvement with the International Islamic Committee on Woman and Child’s affiliated organization, the International Islamic Council for Da’wah and Relief (IICDR). The IICDR was banned in Israel in 2008 for its collaboration with Muslim Brotherhood cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi‘s Union for Good in the funding of the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist organization, Hamas. In the United States, the Union for Good was designated a terrorist entity in late 2008.
This further documentation of Dr. Abedin’s positions on shariah law, her leadership of the IICWC and its affiliation with a designated terrorist entity such as the IICDR makes plain that a thorough investigation is fully justified regarding her daughter’s access to classified information and policy-influencing role.  In particular, in connection with the latter, Ties That Bindpowerfully reinforces the Center’s earlier warning that the IICWC is currently advocating for the repeal of Egypt’s Mubarak-era prohibitions on female genital mutilation, child marriage, and marital rape, on the grounds that such prohibitions run counter to shariah. Americans want no part of such an agenda. They should they have no reason for concern that senior officials in their government are stealthily encouraging it.

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

21 Replies to “Center Report Reveals Radical Islamist Views and Agenda of Senior State Department Official Huma Abedin’s Mother”

  1. Huma has been around for a number of years. She was mentioned during Anthony Weiner’s scandal, since she his wife, but she never appeared with him. It is past time she was outed and Hillary’s closeness with the Muslim Brotherhood as well.

  2. No, the views we are concerned about are Huma’s. Huma is deeply involved because in that culture and with Huma’s job, it would be expected that Huma handle the MB position. Hillary is the one who hs been managed.

  3. Huma appear to be a socalled modern moslem woman and most probably is even more dangerous than those hijabi coved head moslem women, in their subtle quest for islamisation. Hillary is too ignroant and should not have employed a foreigner in the White House.

  4. Religious fanatics have no place in government. Michele Bachman is a radical Christian extremist trying to infiltrate politics.

  5. @ Dude I hope that’s sarcasm because if it isn’t you’re on the wrong blog.

    Michelle Bachmann is currently one of the few politicians in America who has the integrity and the courage to ask the questions that should have been asked and answered years ago, unlike the traitor-in-chief who welcomes terrorists right into the White House, promotes the building of foreign barracks on American soil and aids the infiltration of islam into all levels of government & law enforcement..

    There needs to be trials for treason, lots of them and then the gallows or the firing squad.

  6. I can understand why Dude can’t tell the difference between the long white sheets and pointy hats of the KKK and the bloated ball gowns and knit caps of the religious Muslims. They look quite a bit the same and likely smell a lot alike as well.

    But the KKK has been effectively neutered and all those guys in the ball gowns have suspiciously middle eastern names.

  7. European culture only prospered when backward Christianity was pushed aside and replaced by secularism, which ironically was invented by a Muslim, – Averroes.

    You just can’t win this one, guys.

  8. Dude, I think you have succumbed to the red-green propaganda campaign. The more we hate our own history, institutions and Judeo-Christian value systems, the more they rub their hands in glee. We have been divided, and are about to be conquered.

  9. Dude:

    When I first read your post I didn’t read Averroes name. Averroes was a great man I honestly believe if he was able to influence Islam the belief would be on par with any other religion today. But he failed and the evil Al-Ghazali concepts if Islam won.

    Nothing Averroes said means anything today to Islam.

  10. What you cross-worshipping monkeys still don’t get is that I am not a worshipper of anything, I am here to let you know that you are just as backward as Taliban. Keep voting for Bachman and other KKKristians to come to office, and eventually you will go back to public burnings and crucifixions.

  11. Islamic people caused too much misery throughout the world, via their creepy islamisation and their imposed islamic backwardness. The West helped islam to progress but in return got more problems and more backwardness from two-faced islamic people. Islamic people never respect secularism. That is another unpleasant fact.
    European culture had declined due to infiltration and manipulation from manipulative islamic people.

  12. Dude
    The KKK was the militant organization for the democrat party they went out and specifically killed republicans which were often black at the time. White republicans were killed by the KKK as well.

    Remember it was the republicans that were pushing for the first civil rights of 1866 and the democrats that opposed them every step of the way even in the 1960’s.

    your history is really screwed up.

  13. Dude:
    But to cut to the chase. I do understand what you are attempting to say.
    Anyone that oppose another persons ideology is equal the the racists KKK.

    I believe that is what your attempting to say. The problem is this.
    What if the ideology is equal to or worse then the KKK? are you a bad person for opposing the ideology?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*