Through its affiliate, the North American Islamic Trust – a Saudi government-backed organization created to fund Islamist enterprises in North America – the Saudi-subsidized ISNA reportedly holds the mortgages on 50 to 80 percent of all mosques in the U.S. and Canada. Thus the organization can freely exercise ultimate authority over these houses of worship and their teachings.

According to terrorism expert Steven Emerson, ISNA “is a radical group hiding under a false veneer of moderation”; “convenes annual conferences where Islamist militants have been given a platform to incite violence and promote hatred” (for instance, al Qaeda supporter and PLO official Yusuf Al-Qaradhawi was invited to speak at an ISNA conference); has held fundraisers for terrorists (after Hamas leader Mousa Marzook was arrested and eventually deported in 1997, ISNA raised money for his defense); has condemned the U.S. government’s post-9/11 seizure of Hamas’ and Palestinian Islamic Jihad’s financial assets; and publishes a bi-monthly magazine, Islamic Horizons, that “often champions militant Islamist doctrine.”

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6178

PS. Karen Hughes is a freakin’ idiot - she should have been canned years ago.

over my dead fukn body

HLF, incorporated in Chicago (sound familiar?)IL, is the tip of the iceberg.
This is one brave woman who did yeoman’s work to dig up the research and illustrate how Justice and the FBI screwed the pooch.
One incredible book- read it and find out what’s going on, who’re the players and connect the dots.
Amazon has it used/cheap.

Mr. Bashman:

Based on the above sentiment, what is your opinion of Thomas Jefferson’s comment on the passage of Virginia’s bill for the establishment of religious liberty:

The bill for establishing religious freedom, the principles of which had, to a certain degree, been enacted before, I had drawn in all the latitude of reason & right. It still met with opposition; but, with some mutilations in the preamble, it was finally passed; and a singular proposition proved that it’s protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word “Jesus Christ,” so that it should read “a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion.” The insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of it’s protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and infidel of every denomination.
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/jeffauto.htm