Transcript of Director Goldstein’s AFA Radio Segment, Discussing The White House Visit of Sheikh Bin Bayyah

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

6/26/13 AFA Today Segment


KM: This next story just drove a dagger through my heart, and I’m fearful that it will not receive the proper amount of attention throughout the country as it should, and that’s why I’ve asked my next guest to join me.  But I want to tell you a little bit about what we’re going to talk about first.  Radical Egyptian cleric Yusef al-Qaradawi is considered so radical that the United States bans him from being able to enter into this country… he’s that bad of a dude, he’s that dangerous, to the United States that we say, you can’t even come here.  He’s considered the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood movement and has called for the killing of Jews and Americans repeatedly.  That history makes this June 13’s White House meeting with Sheikh Abdallah bin Bayyah all the more inexplicable and here to explain who that was, and why it was so inexplicable, is the Director of the Lawfare Project, her name is Brooke Goldstein, and she is an expert on, uh, the use of law, and how in many instances across the world it is being manipulated to advance, uh, the radical, uh, Islamic cause and really the taking of human rights whole-heartedly by groups and countries globally.  Brooke, welcome to AFA Today, we’re glad you’re with us.

BG: Hi, Kevin, thank you so much for having me, and for bringing attention to this meeting.  

KM: I’m so disappointed in the American press that no one is really talking about this, but when I sent you the link, when I texted you the link this morning, you only responded with one word, “yup”, and i knew that in that three letters there was more there than just an acknowledgement.  Why was this assistant, this meeting with this Sheikh, first of all who is he, and what did they hope to accomplish, and why is this a big deal?

BG: Well, first of all, my response was “yup” because it’s no surprise that the White House and senior Obama Administration officials are meeting w/very radical Islamists who are tied to the MB, who are tied to Hamas, who are enemies of the US who are preaching death to Americans, who are advocating for suicide bombings, this is no surprise to me, and what also is not a surprise is that this meeting with Obama officials and with Sheikh Abdallah bin Bayyah was supposedly supposed to be kept secret, and the only reason we know about it is because Bin Bayyah went on his own website and decided to brag about it, that he was advising the White House, and posted pictures of himself in the White House, and it’s also not the first time that he’s visited, and it’s because of the good work of people like Steve Emerson, who goes around translating these websites, that people in the counterterrorism community now know that this meeting took place in, I think it was just last week, correct?

KM: June 13 was the date of the meeting.  

BG: Okay, June 13, exactly.  So who is this Abdallah Bin Bayyah?  Well, you mentioned he’s very closely linked with Yusef al-Qaradawi, who is the radical Muslim preacher who is banned from entering into the United States.  He’s praised the Holocaust, al-Qaradawi, he’s prayed that Allah is going to allow Muslims to commit the next Holocaust against the Jews, he’s legitimized through fatwas the killing of American soldiers in Iraq, and Qaradawi is the president of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, IUMS.  Bin Bayyah is the Vice President of IUMS and he has himself praised Qaradawi and he himself has also supported Hamas, and he has supported the killing of American soldiers, and he has been granted an audience now as we know, for the second time in the White House where he is supposedly advising them on foreign our policy!  I mean, it’s just simply outrageous.  

KM: What does the White House say?  How do they justify the, uh, presence…

BG: This is totally Orwellian, we have a statement from a White House official that was reported by the Daily Collar that the Senior Director for Development and Democracy Gail Smith and members of the National Security staff, quoting now, “met with bin Bayyah to discuss a wide range of issues including poverty, global health efforts and bin Bayyah’s effort to counter the al-Qaeda narrative” as if this is some guy that you go and have a cup of coffee with.  He IS the al-Qaeda narrative.  How are we taking advice from an enemy of the United States on how to defeat the enemies of the United States?  Absolutely outrageous.  This is a guy who’s been working, who’s been pushing to get blasphemy laws at the United Nations to criminalize an international law of blasphemy against Islam, this is a man who works closely with other Muslim Brotherhood fronts like the Islamic Society of North America, which was an unindicted coconspirator in a Hamas funding trial to undermine the United States’ own interest, and the fact that we’re, you know, Gail Smith is making statements as if we’re having cups of coffee with them to discuss interests, and they’re being national security clearance to meet with our officials, while in the meantime, law-abiding Muslim Americans, like Zuhdi Jasser, for example, are consistently denied a meeting at the White House.  It sends a very, very clear message.  We praise our enemies, we’re giving legitimacy to our enemies, we welcome them into the White House, we grant them with the privilege of meeting with the President of the United States, if you announce that you are an enemy of the United States.  It’s ridiculous. 

KM: Brooke Goldstein is who we’re speaking with, she is the Director of the Lawfare Project, and Brooke, you’ve studied this on a lot of different levels, first of all you’re an attorney, a very accomplished attorney, you’ve also made several documentary films, one of which has won an award, tracing the thinking of our enemies and how they utilize and really exploit people in a very unjust way to execute their means and ends.  Given that all of that’s true, what is your perception of how our actual enemies perceive the meeting of June 13 as opposed to the way the average American would see that meeting.

BG: I think they’d perceive it as success.  I think what the Obama Administration has done is turn the United States into the largest supporter, and the most important supporter, of the Muslim Brotherhood, the mother of all terrorist organizations, and this leads us to question, I think rightly so, is our foreign policy being dictated, is it being directed, by agents of the Muslim Brotherhood.  I mean IUMS, which is what al-Qaradawi and bin Bayyah both head up, they’ve gone on record supporting the fall of Egypt’s democratic system and putting in the Muslim Brotherhood there, they were invited, the Muslim Brotherhood was invited by Obama when he went and he did his Cairo speech, and Obama seems to be touting the same policies, recall when he went to Cairo he said, “The future does not belong to those who disdain Islam.”  This is the President of the United States basically parroting a Muslim Brotherhood Islamist defamation of religion stance.  We have the IUMS which supports and has lobbied along with the organization the Islamic Cooperation at the UN, for, like I mentioned before, international law that outlaws the defamation of Islam.  And we have the President of the United States and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton coming and announcing the same thing, the application of UN Human Rights Council resolutions 6 and 18 that attempts to outlaw the defamation of Islam.  We have for example a very interesting question of timing.  We had bin Bayyah come and he was bragging that he’s been advising the White House to support what are called the Syrian rebels but in reality are Islamic jihadis and a couple days later the President announces that he’s going to go provide support for the so-called Syrian rebels.  Who is dictating our foreign policy?  And is it being done in the interests of US national security, or it is it being done to further the goals of the Muslim Brotherhood?  

KM: Some would say, Brooke, in years past, well, the Democrats and Republicans have their disagreements but at the end of the day they’re arm in arm, truly American, in advancing American ideas.  Does that hold up under this administration?  Is it your perspective in observing the behavior of the Obama Administration for these five years, six years, that we have a different type of administration than we ever have before from the standpoint that they’re willing to cozy up to people that wish us direct harm? 

BG: It’s not just cozying up, look at who is in the administration, look at Arif Alikhan, he has been named the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for Policy Development.  Alikhan is the founder of the World Islamic Organization.  It’s a magazine that identifies itself as a Muslim Brotherhood subsidiary.  Look at Rashad Hussain, who is the US Special Enjoy to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.  Look for example at the Imam Mohamed Magid, he’s the President of the Islamic Society of North America, like I said founded by the Muslim Brotherhood.  He was appointed by Obama as an advisor to the Department of Homeland Security!  Look at Eboo Patel, he’s a member of the President’s advisory council on faith-based neighborhood partnerships, I believe is what it’s called, he has a very close relationship with the grandson of the Brotherhood founder Tariq Ramadan and he is a member of the Muslim Student Association, again, which identifies itself as a Brotherhood organization.  This is the administration.  It is not just cozying up with the Muslim Brotherhood, it is inviting the Muslim Brotherhood into the fold, and it calls this Muslim outreach, but in reality we are giving security clearance to people who are, in my opinion, advocating views that are directly against the interests of the United States.  

KM: And, see, this is just what steams me to no end.  We have a world-wide manhunt underway for Edward Snowden as though he is the worst enemy that has ever been thought of to exist against the United States, and yet, we have these elements that you’ve just identified in all of those positions of national security clearance importance that are in there observing things that we’re doing every single day and probably gathering a good deal of information for their own networks, people they wish to be in contact with, outside of their direct day to day work.  It’s really stunning, Brooke, that the media in the United States is not reporting this, it’s stunning that we’re not getting the fourth estate to do its job, to hold the administration accountable and to ask the difficult questions and to say why are we putting these people in positions of power?

BG: And what’s stunning to me also is that when you have good people, like Representative Peter King, when you have good people like Michelle Bachmann, who do push back, who do question for example why we have senior Obama-level administration officials in the state department meeting with people who have designated ties to terrorist organizations, they get called Islamophobic!  The media pushes against Peter King, it pushes against Michelle Bachmann as if they’re the enemies of the United States when in fact we should be supporting their inquiry.  They are democratically elected officials operating in the interests of their constituents and they’re the ones who are being vilified for questioning this.  

KM:  Right.  Now, it’s true, it’s a huge hypocritical double standard, which brings me to the purpose of your work.  The Lawfare Project, people watching AFA today, have not heard of this organization, tell me what its mission is and how you would like people to get involved and get in touch with you.  

BG:  Well, thanks for mentioning it.  The Lawfare Project is a legal think tank and we’re designed to monitor a phenomenon that you mentioned called “lawfare” which is the use of the law as a weapon of war.  And we came into existence because we noticed that anyone who was brave enough to speak publicly and openly, or write, or blog about the threat of Islamist terrorism, anyone who was talking about militant Islam, and its support, and its sources of financing, is now finding themselves on the receiving end of frivolous lawsuits that are designed to intimidate them and to shut them up.   And so we decided to found this organization to provide a mechanism for people who want to exercise their First Amendment right to free speech about these issues of national security issues of public concern can seek legal advice. We’re sort of like a public interest law firm, but not quite, in the sense that we arrange, and we find matchmakers and pro bono and reduced rate counsel or fundraise so that people can defend themselves against frivolous lawsuits.  We also provide a lot of other services, for example if you want to write an article about these issues, and you need a pair of eyes to look it over to determine if there’s anything that’ll open you up to a lawsuit.  We do these things, we do libel review, but we also host a lot of educational seminars, mainly in educational institutions, we also have an arm of the organization called AAINJUL, Attorneys and Academics for International and National Justice Under the Law, we provide free CLE accredited events and we also have a mailing list, and we have a website, we offer one of the only places on the internet where you can go and you can find out about how our legal systems, our western legal systems are being manipulated against our interests.