Turkish Game Policy Changing the Geopolitical Map of Eastern Mediterranean

By Rami Dabbas

Rami Dabbas is a freelance Journalist and Correspondent of Israel
Today Magazine in 5 languages.

There is a state of anticipation in Europe and the countries of the region due to
the raging conflict in the eastern Mediterranean over gas and oil rights.
The recent escalation between Turkey and Greece, which has
reached a dangerous stage, is fueled by a deeper dispute
over the maritime borders, and a centuries-old historical conflict
between Athens and Ankara.

As usual, Erdogan began to promote inside Turkey that the eastern
Mediterranean conflict is ideological, religious in essence, and that as a
“protector of Muslims,” ​​he must “preserve their wealth in the three
seas,” as he indicated in a speech. This is cause for speculation as to why Erdogan embarked on the path of transforming the Hagia Sophia Museum into a mosque once again, and the sight of the Imam carrying the sword up to the
pulpit seemed a sure call to inflame hatred and revive enmities,
especially with the Greeks.

Erdogan is behaving as if the eastern Mediterranean
countries are his proprietorially, as he seeks to restore them. He
believes that there are divisions in European positions between the
political position led by French President Emmanuel Macron, who
considered the Mediterranean as purely European influence, and the position of NATO, that does not want wars in regions. Britain is closer to neutrality thus far, and as it seeks a final exit from the European Union, it does not bind itself to neither the European Union nor the French position towards Turkey, while everyone agrees that the Turkish moves constitute a danger that
should not be tolerated.

As for the United States, it has lifted the US arms embargo on Greek
Cyprus, which is an indication of Washington’s alignment with the
Greek and Cypriot positions. But the Erdogan regime strives to seize
any opportunity not only to expand in the Mediterranean, but also to
weaken Western institutions, whether the European Union or NATO,
and sow divisions among their members.

Certainly, a comprehensive confrontation between any two NATO
member states seems impossible, and it is not allowed to erupt. Neither
the concerned parties want it nor does the international community.
What Western countries realize is that the Turkish regime is playing
a dangerous game that threatens Europe’s security and geopolitical
influence by weakening the European Union and NATO, and
fueling the division among their members. The Turkish regime is trying
to deal with Western countries in a “divide and conquer” manner, and
believes that it is capable of deepening differences within both the
European Union and NATO, and that by doing so, it will work to
strengthen Turkey and the rise of its star as a regional power. In
addition, Turkey believes that the agreement it concluded with the
Libyan Government of National Accord represents a spearhead to achieve its expansion goals in North Africa and also gather around it all
of its Islamist supporters, not only in Libya, but also in Tunisia and

Therefore, Erdogan crossed all red lines after entering the territorial
waters of Cyprus and Greece, and tampering with the eastern
Mediterranean and Libya, thus threatening European sovereignty. I
think it is time to wave the thick European stick in the face of Turkey,
because it is the only way to stop Erdogan’s ambitions and misdeeds in
the eastern and southern Mediterranean.




Circanada has written a series of articles about Barack Obama and his alleged possible ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Following is an insightful piece by author Leni Friedman Valenta, showing the orchestration of a chain of events, the repercussions of which we continue to see.

Ms Valenta is a graduate of Brandeis University and holds a Masters from the Yale School of Drama in play writing.  Her  articles have appeared with BESA Center for Strategic Studies in Israel, The National Interest, The Aspen Review, The Middle East Quarterly, Kyiv Post,  and others.  She and her husband have a small institute, formerly called the Institute of Post-Communist Studies but presently known as the Valenta Center for Strategic Issues.  The website , which she manages, is Valenta-center.com. 

Canada is no stranger to the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood, a fact we have also written about. A political entity, the Muslim brotherhood is a distinct danger to our democratic freedoms.

By: Leni Friedman Valenta

America is under attack, and sadly the undermining of our Constitution is being conducted with the complicity of beautiful, idealistic Americans, who have been deluded into thinking they are supporting the transformation to a more just society.

After Obama’s crime of trying to take down a sitting president, there has been no outcry from the public, even out of respect for the office, if not the man.  Meanwhile the race card has been so weaponized that even those who know the hidden truth about Obama are afraid to tell it. 

As some Americans have long suspected Obama is an agent of the Muslim Brotherhood [hereafter MB], and there is significant documentation, besides his own actions, to prove it. This is not a “conspiracy theory.” The only conspiracy theory, as the Epoch Times, shows, is Russia-gate, the one manufactured under the guidance of Obama with phony evidence provided by Hillary’s campaign.

The takedown of Mike Flynn. General Flynn was taken down by rogue agents of the FBI because as NSA he would have revealed and quashed the Russia-gate plot, but it goes further than that. On January 4 2016, before FBI agents interviewed Flynn, Obama, revealed to former deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and former FBI head, James Comey that he had possession of all of Flynn’s phone calls with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

Surely Obama was outraged when he learned that Trump’s selected NSA was bent on possibly pursuing U.S. cooperation with Russia against radical Islam in Syria. In the key phone call, Flynn and Kislyak virtually agreed not to escalate mutual embassy withdrawals in response to Obamas sanctions on Russia. But in another little known call, Flynn also indicated to Kislyak that they could soon, “…have a better conversation about where we’re gonna go, uh regarding our relationship”

“Basically,” said Flynn, “… we definitely have a common enemy. You have a problem with it, and we have a problem with it in this country, and we definitely have a problem with it in the Middle East.” They were talking about Russian and U.S. cooperation against radical Islam — which then as now was the last thing Obama wanted.  

Why Flynn was fired from the DIA. Two days after the November 2016 election, Obama warned Trump not to hire Flynn as NSA because of his “mismanagement and temper issues.” Possibly true. In August 2012, Flynn was indeed a problem for Obama, and not just because he objected to the whitewashed language Obama insisted on; calling our enemies “extremists” rather than “radical jihadists,” He also repeatedly asked Obama to put more of his spies in Syria.

As he warned the Senate Armed Services Committee in June 2014, the chaos there would allow ISIS to make a comeback in Iraq and declare an Islamic caliphate. He was right. He was also fired soon after. Neither would Obama bomb ISIS training camps in Iraq, though so advised by U.S. intelligence agencies and begged by the Iraqi government. It was President Trump whose forces in 2019, finally annihilated al Qaeda and ISIS in Iraq and killed their leader al-Baghdadi.

Flynn aleady knew why Obama had not heeded his warnings.  A report issued by Flynn’s DIA in August 2012 has since been obtained and declassified by Judicial Watch. At that time the American public was told and believed that Obama and Secretary of State Hillary were arming “moderate rebels” to fight those seeking to take down Syrian dictator, Bashar al Assad. But as the DIA document confirms, that is not what they were doing. Obama and Hillary were arming al Qaeda and incipient ISIS against Assad.

In 2016, Flynn discussed this DIA memo with Mehdi Hassan of Al Jazeera. Here is part of the transcript:

Mehdi Hasan: …Let me before we move on, just to clarify once more, you are basically saying that even in government at the time, you knew those groups were around. You saw this analysis – and you were arguing against it. But who wasn’t listening?

Michael Flynn: I think the administration.

Mehdi Hasan: So the administration turned a blind eye to your analysis –

Michael Flynn: I don’t know if they turned a blind eye. I think it was a decision. I think it was a wilful decision.

Mehdi Hasan: A wilful decision to go – support an insurgency that had Salafist, al-Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood?

Michael Flynn: [INTERRUPTING] Well, a wilful decision to do what they’re doing, which, which you have to really – you have to really ask the President, what is it that he actually is doing with the, with the policy that is in place, because it is very, very confusing? I’m sitting here today, Mehdi, and I don’t, I can’t tell you exactly what that is, and I’ve been at this for a long time.

Hedging his language carefully, Flynn did know what Obama was doing, and he also likely knew that under Obama, ISIS was even being trained by the U.S. at a facility in Jordan. Judicial Watch has also obtained this evidence. 

Flynn’s interview with Seymour Hersh. In a 2016 virtually banned-in-the-U.S. interview with Flynn, “Military to Military,” Flynn revealed to Pulitzer prize-winning reporter Seymour Hersh what he was really experiencing. “…If the American public saw the intelligence we were producing daily, at the most sensitive level, they would go ballistic!”He also inveighed at the “enormous push back” he got from the Obama administration. “I felt that they did not want to hear the truth.” 

As Hersh also reported, important to Flynn and former Joint Chief Martin Dempsey, was Obama’s 2011 NATO intervention in Libya. There, secular Libyan dictator Moammar Gaddafi, then working with the United States, had been brutally murdered by so called “moderate” rebels armed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The result had been a failed Jihadi state with war torn civilians inundating Europe. 

Obama told Chris Wallace it was “the worst mistake of his presidency.”  Mistake? Why then was Hillary helping to ship arms raided from dead Gadaffi’s stockpile to rebels in Syria? (Christopher Stevens was her go-between to the Libyan rebels collecting these arms.)

Other material declassified by Judicial Watch shows that the Obama administration knew ten days in advancethat the Benghazi consulate where Stevens and other Americans were killed would be attacked, and that al Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood-linked brigades of the Captive Omar Abdul Rahman”(the Blind Sheikh) were involved. Why then was the attack not averted? 

With plenty of time to order help for the consulate, Obama, who had dismissed ISIS “as a terrorist ‘JV team,” went to a fundraiser. But as Flynn warned Congress in 2015, the threat of Islamic extremism had “… reached an unacceptable level…We are at war with violent and extreme Islamists, both Sunni and Shia, and we must accept and face this reality.”

Congress didn’t appreciate Flynn’s “narrative,” but someone else surely had figured things out. In 2015, Russian President Vladimir Putin intervened in Syria to save both Assad and his considerable investments there.  

What is the Muslim Brotherhood?[Hereafter MB]. There is a second document even more revelatory than the DIA one of Obama’s alliance with our our enemies. This is Obama’s 2011 Presidential Directive-11, never fully declassified .

But before we look at this document, please understand the following: Islam is a normal and even beautiful religion for patriotic Muslims who have evolved beyond its 7th century laws. We read some of its tenets in an Albanian mosque. Albania and certain other countries and Muslim groups have come to reject and even ban its deadly political component, Sharia law. 

But the MB is not one of them. Though not as deadly as some of its terrorist offshoots — it allows elections and claims to eschew violence (although in Egypt it didn’t)– its proponents follow the Sharia-prescribed policy of infiltrating another country at every possible level of its civilian life and government, undermining its laws until its numbers are strong enough to overthrow the existing regime. 

It also embraces brutal laws that denigrate women and govern every aspect of human life. Among these are that no religion but Islam can be worshiped and those who do are discriminated against and heavily taxed. 

It has been declared a terrorist organization by Russia, Syria, the Saudis, the UAE, and Egypt.  The largest such group in the world, it has also generated other terrorist groups – al Qaeda and ISIS as well as Hamas, which was “founded as the Palestinian branch of the Brotherhood.”

In 2019, President Trump, urged by El Sisi, tried to have the MB declared a terrorist group in the U.S., but he was narrowly defeated. Reporting on this, The New York Times appeared to minimize the potential impact of the MB in America. 

Presidential Study Directive 11. As the Washington Times wrote in 2015, Obama’s PSD-11 task force confirmed that backing the MB was promoted as a viable movement for the U.S. Government to support throughout North Africa and the Middle East.”

Why? Because the directive essentially, “…came to the bizarre conclusion that the Muslim Brotherhood’s brand of political Islam, combined with its fervent nationalism, could lead to ‘reform and stability’” Thus, American diplomats were ordered “to make contact with top MB leaders.” It gave active support, “to the organization’s drive for power in key nations like Egypt, Libya, Tunisia and Syria, at the 2011 outset of the ‘Arab Spring.” 

Surely this dramatic reversal in U.S. foreign policy was never  approved by Congress.  It has remained largely unknown to the American public despite a large number of groups and newspapers that have been written about it in the past.

The key fact is that Obama’s policy was essentially in diametric opposition to standard U.S. American policy. As American Arabist Raymond Ibrahim has explained, PSD-11, ultimately concluded,“… the United States should shift from its longstanding policy of supporting “stability” in the Middle East and North Africa (that is, support for “stable regimes” even if they were authoritarian), to a policy of backing “moderate” Islamic political movements.” 

Moderate? Hardly. And how wrong that decision was! As William Enghdale of Global Report explained in December 2018, what lay behind the surprise emergence of ISIS across Syria in 2014 was that PSD-11 involved the role of the Muslim Brotherhood in a “..blueprint for the most ambitious and far-ranging series of US-backed regime change across the Islamic Middle East since World War I and the Anglo-French Sykes-Picot agreement,…”

“It was to set off a wave of wars and chaos, of failed states and floods of war refugees unimaginable to the most cynical veteran diplomat, and beyond the belief of most lay persons in the world.”

Although PSD-11 has never been fully declassified, its aims were outlined in 2016 by Peter Hoekstra, the former chair of the U.S. House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in their “Investigative Project on Terrorism.”Some of Obama’s key operatives were also mentioned.  It again underlines that Obama and Clinton pivoted from historical U.S. strategy to a strategy favoring the aims of the MB regardless of the impact on regional stability.”

The Investigative Project’s report also claimed that PSD-11 directly led to U.S. engagement with the MB. Moreover, it concluded that, “U.S. officials did not concern themselves with questions over whether the new power structures[induced by regime change] would become allies or foes, or with intelligence agency warnings about the jihadist chaos such regime change might unleash.”

It is absolutely horrifying to read this report. Was Obama merely naive and foolish? And what did the press know? Certainly, an earlier reporter for the New York Times admitted to supposed knowledge of Obama’s MB connections in 2012 and tried hard to describe them as a good thing — a terror group that supports al Qaeda and ISIS! 

Another New York Times 2011 article also referred to PSD-11, with special emphasis on Egypt. What is important here is that in 2012, both Obama and Hillary backed the narrow election in Egypt of Muslim Brotherhood president Muhammad Morsi.  There followed massive demonstrations by millions of Egyptians bristling under draconian Sharia law, who cheered when El Sisi’s miltiary overthrew Morsi, having found him even worse than El Sisi. Obama then put sanctions on U.S. foreign aid to Egypt. 

The Egyptian’s surely will not welcome further U.S. plans in this direction if Biden is elected. In 2017, the MB was still attacking Coptic (Christian) churches in Egypt and killing Christians as they have elsewhere in the world. To this day, the Egyptians despise Obama. 

It thus becomes understandable why Obama tried to take down Trump as well as Flynn. As the author of of Field of Flight, How We Can Win The Global War Against Radical Islam And Its Allies, Flynn was simply a foe to be destroyed.

Domestic policy; Obama’s true plans for America. But Obama’s efforts have not just been confined to foreign policy. Following prescribed Sharia law, he has also been working hard to Islamize America, with its basic Christian-Judaic ethic.

Consider that on July 21, 2020, Joe Biden declared to Islam activist Linda Sarsour at a Million Muslim Votes summit  “If I have the honor of being president, I will end the Muslim ban on day one. He then accused the Trump Administration of “Islamicphobia” and stated that, “One of the things I think is important, I wish we taught more in our schools about the Islamic faith.”Really? what about Christianity and Judaism? Or other religions? 

As early as 2015 The American Center for Law and Justice, backed up by the million member Act for America (ACT) began speaking of a “nationwide epidemic” and they didn’t mean Covid-19. Parents from California ot Maine contacted ACT — concerned about the teaching of Islam in their local schools.” In 2017, as reported by the Washington Post and other papers, nationwide rallies and marches took place from coast to coast against the teaching of sharia law in the schools and were attacked by the Antifa and other counter protestors.

Biden’s Puppet Master. The religious indoctrination of school children has proceeded under the Machiavellian puppet master, Obama, who is pulling doddering Biden’s strings. Under Obama’s previous watch U.S. taxpayers were being forced to fund “pro-Islamic propaganda”and Biden wants more of it. This is also the sameLinda Sarsour, who upholds disavowal of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people.


The takedown of both Flynn and Trump was part of a larger plan in which the Obama brilliantly tried but failed to create the Manchurian candidate Trump.  He thus helped to craft a hall of mirrors in which America’s own principles of opposing racism and endorsing the American melting pot and multi-culturalism, were weaponized. The race card became the scimitar in which to impale our Constitution and our way of life.

There will likely never be enough conclusive evidence for the left to believe that Obama is an agent of the MB. But questions must be raised. No matter the outcome, the truth must out. Americans deserve to know it before the election because if Trump is defeated, it will be too late. What is clear is that Obama has acted in secrecy and with malicious intent. He did not risk organizing the takedown of Trump and Flynn simply because he didn’t like their politics — but rather because their policies in defense of America and its Constitution disagreed with his own.

Is Qatari Money Funding Terrorism?

download (2)

Qatar allegedly continues to put out billions of dollars in supporting and financing terrorist and extremist operations in Europe. It is reported in international newspapers that Qatar sends its funds through the Qatar Charity Foundation, where they were recently provided with about 71 million euros to be delivered to the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood in Europe under a charitable cover .

It has been stated by various sources the alleged details of Qatar’s plans, with the participation of the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood in Europe and the participation of Doha in establishing more than 90 centers for the terrorist group in various European countries. Reports also revealed the contribution of the Qatar Charity Foundation in financing 140 projects in Europe worth more than 120 million euros, including 47 projects in Italy, 22 projects in France and Spain, and 10 projects in Germany. The British newspaper The Times, confirmed that the Qatari “Al-Rayan” bank in Britain was involved in providing financial services to terrorist organizations in United kingdom.

Another report said that Qatar allegedly spends billions of dollars to penetrate the Western education system to improve the image of the Qatar regime and cover its terrorist operations as part of and propaganda for the benefit of Doha. Lawyers confirmed that it is a violation of US federal laws and requires comprehensive investigations. Qatar’s contributions exceed more than 1.5 billion to fund a range of initiatives in educational institutions at 28 American universities, making it one of the most prolific foreign funders in the American educational system,  raising doubts about the possible hidden objectives of the Qatari government from these suspicious donations.








Click to access zz-2011-qatar-alberta-relations-2011-10.pdf

The Danger of Returning Muslim Foreign Fighters in Europe and their Cooperation with Local Sleeper Cells.

download (1)
Masked gunman run towards a victim of their gun fire outside the French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo’s office, in Paris, Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2015.

by:Rami Dabbas

Europe is awaiting uncommon and unpredictable jihadist threats that are not only linked to specific organizations, but are also based on local extremism originating from within. In addition, European fighters who were in Syria and Iraq later returned to their country of origin. This exacerbates the problem of the  presence of internal and sleeper cells in Europe.

In spite of Islamic State’s defeat in Syria and Iraq, European security officials are feeling rather anxious. The defeat of the terrorist organizations in the Middle East means that imminent future problems will occur in Europe, given the surrender of the European fighters and their return to their homes. The fighters may have been defeated on the battlefield, but they still hold on to their extremism, having acquired invaluable military technical expertise, while in the ranks of militant terrorist groups.

However, 2017 was the year of “home-grown terrorism” in Europe, not the year of the return of foreign fighters. When examining the record of the 16 terrorist attacks that occurred in 2017 in Austria, Finland, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Sweden, we will find that all of their perpetrators were local extremists, not returning fighters. Even the Islamic State claimed responsibility only for seven of these attacks.

And of course, the doubling of the number of unpopular attacks that are not claimed by any particular group, but carried out by individuals without ties to jihadi Islamist organizations underscores the fact that Europe is heading towards a multi-faced, unpredictable jihadist threat, and this is what the major European security services fear.

In this context, the “local” or “home-grown” attackers are those European individuals who have not traveled to Iraq or Syria, but who act on behalf of foreign jihadi Islamist organizations, after they have developed contacts with them online, or feel ideological contact with them. Therefore, since they did not travel to terrorist territory or have physical contact  with these terrorist organizations, this makes the matter more complicated for the security services, in terms of predicting or preventing such attacks.

Indeed, it is a clearly European problem. The majority of the attackers are first-generation immigrants who have lived in Europe for many years or settled in them as second-generation individuals. It is possible that members of the first generation arrived in Europe without terrorist intentions, but later became extremists, like their second generation colleagues.

The (local) attackers are also older than foreign fighters, so the “youth category” component is not a useful as security indicator for European security services. It is also noticeable that many of the attackers have a criminal record.

Attack methods have changed as well, and apart from the Barcelona attack, all 2017 attacks in Europe were individual actions. With the exception of the two failed attacks in Brussels and Paris, the attacks of 2017 were unfamiliar and generally uncomplicated, and this of course is a change from the sophisticated and technologically developed plans that terrorist cells have developed in the past.

What increases the danger of the threats that await Europe are the returning European fighters after the defeat of the Islamic State in the Middle East, including fighters, planners, promoters and recruiting specialists. Of course, the threat of the return of foreign fighters is no less ominous than that of local extremists.

These (European) foreign fighters can recruit and encourage individuals in Europe to work locally, without inciting them to travel to join ISIS. For example, the Marseille striker is believed to have become radicalized by his brother, who fought with ISIS in Syria between 2014 and 2016. More broadly, returnees may become a real threat in the long run, working as extremist agent recruiters starting with prisons,  for example.

The extremist recruitment experts certainly have a wide range of goals, especially since the European Union is home to up to 50,000 “extremist” Muslims. The concern is that extremism continues to grow in many Western European countries. Of course, the “snowball effect” would serve the extremists well when they attract family or friends alongside them, concerning in the absence of adequate treatment for the fertile environment of extremism in Europe. To make matters worse, “mutual extremism” has become a serious problem, which leads to mutual violence by various parties.

Germany Bans Hezbollah

by: Rami Dabbas


How is Germany important to Hezbollah?

In the footsteps of the  United States of America and The United Kingdom, the authorities in Germany recently announced a complete ban on the activities of the Lebanese “Hezbollah” in Germany.  After it revealed a serious intention to take such a step several months ago,  the security in Germany began a campaign to pursue and besiege each of the Militia’s followers on German soil; This places Hezbollah in a real predicament, given their vital dependence on an external network of supporters spread throughout the world.

Institutions and centers

Germany represents one of the countries that has witnessed an extensive spread of Hezbollah institutions, religious centers and associations, and it seeks to mobilize support for it. According to a report published by “Fox News”  based on German intelligence reports issued last year, there are 1050 Hezbollah operatives active in Germany, and that about 30 mosques and cultural centers on German soil have links to Hezbollah.

Hezbollah is facing a real dilemma with increasing pressure on its branches and the pursuit of its working with institutions in the countries of the world; especially those responsible for providing and transporting money. The German Ministry of the Interior indicated that the authorities are investigating mosques and associations linked to “Hezbollah”, on charges related to financial support and propaganda for the Militia in Europe.
The “Fox News” report also revealed intelligence information in Bremen, stating that the “Mustafa Community Center“, controlled by “Hezbollah”, is a major fundraising center for the Militia, and it worked to send funds directly to its headquarters in Beirut.
Hezbollah, by setting up an infrastructure of this size for Hezbollah in Germany, opens wide questions about its tasks; whether at the level of money transfers or prohibited trade, pointing out that there is an intelligence war to reveal what Hezbollah is doing in more than one country in the world, and this has lead to an organized international campaign against the Militia.
Hezbollah has an external operations unit that is trying to find a foothold in all areas vital to the Militia; Either in Latin America or in Europe.

An important step

Canada, the United States, Britain, the Netherlands, Israel, the League of Arab States, and a number of Latin American countries currently  entirely ban the organization of Hezbollah; but the European Union banned only the “military wing” of Hezbollah in 2013, while allowing its “political wing” to operate in Europe.
Hezbollah has always relied on a network connections to the organization, associations, and foundations in many countries of the world; with the aim of mobilizing financing on the one hand, and finding logistical headquarters for its activities on the other hand, with Germany’s recent ban putting them in a predicament.
The German government justified its important move to besiege the Militia; because of its “continuing to demand the annihilation of Israel and the fight against its existence”, in addition to the party’s responsibility for the killing of many people in different regions around the world; among them are hundreds of thousands of Syrians.
Germany is of great importance to the party; it is considered a safe haven for some of its members, and this is what the German Foreign Ministry said, noting that “the party is working to collect donations in Germany and Europe through all the organizations and associations that have close ties with Arab and Islamic countries”.
As the German step is very important, because it opens the way for more countries to follow their example in Europe. In Germany, there are no official institutions that work directly for Hezbollah. This made the tracking task difficult, but the authorities succeeded in confining them and storming them in several German cities after the ban was issued.

MPP Gila Martow deserves an apology from NCCM and Jaffari Centre

On May 21, 2020, Canadian Jewish Record published an article concerning PC MPP Gila Martow’s apology to the Jaffari Islamic Centre for her tweet about CD4HR activist Firas Al Majim. This apology was prompted by NCCM (National Council of Canadian Muslims) a watchdog group against Islamophobia. According to the article, “A Jewish MPP and an Islamic centre in her riding have kissed and made up following two days of pointed verbiage.”

Canadian Jewish Record is a new online publication, the brainchild of Bernie Farber, who is co-founder and publisher, Ron Csillag, co-founder and editor, Zack Babins, associate editor, Josh Tapper, associate editor and Michael Marmer, photo editor.

Did Canadian Jewish Record get it wrong? Should the article perhaps have read “Gila Martow deserves an apology”?

NCCM accused Martow of failing to contact the Islamic Shia Ithna Asheri Jamaat of Toronto (ISIJ) before issuing her statement. “As would have been abundantly clear if MPP Martow had endeavoured to undertake the appropriate diligence that a reasonable person would have expected by actually calling the Jaffari Community Centre, she would have been immediately informed that this video and message was made by someone who had no authorization to do so,” said Mustafa Farooq, CEO of NCCM. Farooq further said, “Putting out a press release without getting all the facts straight – and without even endeavouring to do so – is simply unacceptable.”

The allegation made by NCCM was based on ISIJ’s statement. “We do not know the individual who recorded himself on our premises at the Jaffari Community Centre in the City of Vaughan,” said ISIJ of Toronto Vice President, Shafiq Ebrahim. “The individual came to our premises without our authorization and we did not request nor allow this recording to occur,” he added. 

NCCM believed ISIJ’s statement was reliable. Did NCCM “undertake the appropriate diligence” to verify the ISIJ’s statement about “not knowing” Firas Al-Najim? 

The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs found contradicting accounts. On March 31, 2019 Firas Al Najim published the letter he sent to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. According to this document, Shafiq Ebrahim,the Vice President of the Islamic Shia Ithna-Asheri Jamaat of Toronto, endorsed Firas Al Najim’s letter. 

A few years ago Firas Al Najim issued a statement in which he wrote: “Eid Mubarak… special thanks for all the Hospitality and hardwork in all centers from Al Zahra Center, Imam Ali Center, Al Huda Center, Al Mostafa Center, Masumeen Center, Jaffari Center, Imam Al Mahdi Center…” 

Moreover, On May 19, 2020 Canadian Defenders For Human Rights (CD4HR) issued the following statement:

UNFORTUNATELY @isijoftoronto @JaffariCC Administration have lied & dissociated from our manager @Islamic_HR [Firas Al Najim] out of fear of the #Zionist politician @GilaMartow & the zionist influential bullying network. Al Najim had permission & is embedded in the community. DETAILED RELEASE SOON

Interestingly, in their statement both NCCM and ISIJ referred to Firas Al-Najim as “this individual” failing to mention his name, the organization he runs (CD4HR), his previous highly controversial statements against Israelis, Zionists and Jews let alone failing to condemn his speech in question. They completely ignored that.

It appears that the Canadian Jewish Record chose the wrong headline. MPP Gila Martow deserves an apology from NCCM and ISIJ.

Activist that declined to report on Islamist hate speech blasted by Islamic group

Bernie Farber, President of Antihate.ca Source: youtube screenshot

Bernie Farber, chairman of Canadian Anti-Hate network has been called out by an Islamic group for his allegedly being a “supporter of racist Zionist policies and has repeatedly gone after Canadian-Jewish activists who defend Palestine”

“On December 23, 2019 “United Dawah Organizations of Canada” posted:

Who is Bernie Farber? The Muslim Community in Canada should know who this man is. He’s been trying to build relations with the Muslim community in Canada, but not everyone is familiar with his background and his efforts to undermine the concerns of the Palestinian community in Canada. Farber markets himself as an “anti-racist” and “friend” of Muslims in Canada. However, he is an adamant supporter of racist Zionist policies and has repeatedly gone after Canadian-Jewish activists who defend Palestine.”

This was reported on by The Documentation Project, read the story here.

A previous article concerning the Anti-Hate network was published by Circanada in January with concerns about inconsistency in their reporting on incidents of hate in Canada. Read the story here.

In that article, it was pointed out that CAHN studiously avoided reporting on hate speech  by Islamists in Canada.

The latest article by The Documentation project would lead one to believe that favoritism is not always beneficial when fighting hate.

Sharia courses recognized by the Quebec Bar?

Original story posted February 2019 by Les Manchettes in French. See original here


Michèle Sirois, President of the Women’s Rights in Quebec group , revealed in her testimony before the study committee of Bill 59 that the Canadian Association of Muslim Lawyers (CMLA) is offering courses on the subject of Sharia …

The video that demonstrates the proof has been removed several times from Youtube, here it is again:




^^”CMLA provides training on the following theme: The recognition of the Muslim “Kafala” (sponsorship) in Quebec civil law and Canadian immigration law: state of play and possible solutions.  Training recognized by the Quebec Bar…..”

From their facebook page ‘about’ section:

“The CMLA represents Muslim individuals of all backgrounds who are in the legal profession in Canada.

We exist to interact with and assist Muslim lawyers, law students, the Muslim community, the legal profession and the public at large in various capacities.

Professional Advocacy – The CMLA advocates areas of interest for Muslim lawyers and law students to organizations such as the Law Society of Upper Canada, the Canadian Bar Association and other professional and non-professional organizations, including the various levels of government.

Education – The CMLA is involved in providing education to the Muslim community regarding the Canadian legal system and the common law. We also conduct “in-house” education for CMLA members with respect to various areas of the law. In addition, we endeavour to educate and sensitize the profession to the legal needs of the Muslim community.

Networking – The CMLA acts as a catalyst for networking between Muslim lawyers, with other Muslim professionals, and networking with other organizations to make them aware of our expanding group.

Peer Support – The CMLA provides mentorship to students, assistance with job placement, referrals and general support to our Muslim peers in the legal community.”

According to the CMLA website: “The Muslim Kafala, (sponsorship) which is found in many countries of Islamic law, is not an adoption within the meaning of Quebec civil law but rather a child care, similar to a guardianship. . ”

Ms. Sirois said that children in care under the kafala do not enjoy the same rights as biological or adopted children.

She also reported on Shariah courses at the University of Montreal, and notaries offering Shariah-compliant wills and marriage contracts.

In the United Kingdom, the Law Society had adopted guidelines on sharia-compliant wills that caused an outcry over discriminatory provisions against widows, some orphans and non-Muslims. They were withdrawn, and the Law Society apologized.

Islamism Within


This information was received from an unnamed individual and deserves consideration and further investigation.

Much has been written about Islamists within our government systems. The upcoming election has the highest number of Muslim candidates in Canadian history, and several of these candidates are affiliated with Islamist organizations.

Canada has several members of parliament currently in office who have spoken of their loyalty to sharia and in some cases, there is a  connection with radical entities.

A particularly concerning phenomenon with this election is the number of candidates that are allegedly connected to the Pakistani intelligence unit,  Inter-Services Intelligence or ISI. This unit has been linked to political assassinations, drug smuggling and the smuggling of nuclear components. It has also embraced radical extremism.  It has also been charged with using Islamic militants in a campaign of terror to wrench control of the provinces of Jammu and Kashmir from the Indians.

Canada’s Senator from the Conservative Party Salma Attaullahjan, has troubling and ongoing associations with Pakistan’s intelligence agency, ISI. This intelligence agency is responsible for ongoing terrorist attacks against India, NATO, and the Canadian Armed Forces. Canada’s former Ambassador to Afghanistan and former Conservative Immigration Minister Chris Alexander points to Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism.



Despite these disturbing assertions, Senator  Attaullahjan arranged a meeting between Pakistan’s Ex-Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar, who is said to have direct influence of both the Pakistan Army and ISI, and Canadian Khalistani leader Sukhminder Singh Hansra at Parliament Hill on March 19th, 2019.

Canada’s public safety report clearly states that the ‘Khalistan Movement’ is a threat to Canadian Security, yet Senator Attaullahjan invited the Khalistani leader along with several Khalistanis to parliament on Pakistan Day. Mr. Hansra (Khalistani leader) spoke in his speech about dismembering India. Concerning indeed that Senator AttaullahJan arranged the platform for Mr. Hansra to speak and recorded and promoted his speech.


It is believed by many within the Pakistani community that Senator Salma Attahullahjan, with the help of Ishaq Muhammad, is actively trying to influence candidate acclamation for specific candidates to get ISI linked Pakistanis acclaimed as candidates.

This is the very definition of political entryism by an Islamist group and has the potential to destroy the conservative party and could have significant effects on Canada’s national security.

Ishaq Muhammed is Conservative Party of Canada leader Andrew Scheer’s driver and contact adviser whenever Mr Scheer attends events in the Toronto region. Mr. Muhammed has alleged ties to the Pakistani ISIS. Mr Muhammed publicly berated Liberal MP Omar Alghabra for not contradicting his party’s stance on Islamic and Sikh  terrorism.

Iftikhar Choudhry is acclaimed Conservative candidate for Humber River-Black Creek, Ontario.  Iftikhar has a very basic comprehension of the English language and according to multiple sources within the Pakistani community, he has two cousins and an uncle all working for the Pakistan Interservice Intelligence Agency (ISI). Also, according to sources within the Pakistani community,  Iftikhar Choudhry has appointed his undeclared second wife as a campaign manager. Like many Islamist or Muslim extremists, he has two wives.

Irshad Chuadry, Conservative candidate from Scarborough Centre,  has always been a staunch Liberal supporter, but acting on advisement, he sought the conservative nomination. He is a close ally and friend of Islamist Liberal MP Salma Zahid who allegedly has strong ties to the Muslim brotherhood. She advised him to become a candidate for the Conservative Party. She told Mr Chuadry that the riding would stay in Pakistani control even she loses to him. Irshad Chaudry has a very basic command of the English language.

Zia Choudhry was acclaimed as the Toronto-Danforth Conservative candidate. Zia is linked with Danforth Madinah Mosque, allegedly one of the most extremists mosques in Ontario. The Madinah Mosque is one of the 13 mosques that hosted Saudi Cleric and Islamist Shaikh, Dr. Muhammad Al-Luhaidan, brought in by Islamic Relief Canada. Zia Choudry’s family serves in the Pakistan army and Interservice Intelligence Agency, ISI.

Ms. Nadirah Nzeer was acclaimed as the Conservative candidate in the Toronto Beaches riding. Although it is uncertain how close her ties are to the Pakistani Interservice Intelligence agency, she is allegedly taking donations from local real estate agents with links to the Pakistani Interservice Intelligence agency (ISI). 

Cyma Musarat is the Conservative  candidate for Pickering Uxbridge, Ontario. Ms. Musarat has concerning ties with a Mr. Walied Solimon, who is said to have rented a house on Ms Musarat’s property.  Walied Solimon, Chair of Norton Rose Fulbright lawfirm is alleged to have ties to the Muslim Brotherhood along with his brothers Yousuf and Hany through family connections. Mr. Solimon has allegedly recorded admitting to being affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood during an investigation in Hamilton. He allegedly asked the judge in this case to seal the transcript sighting a procedural loophole. His brother Hany Solimon is on the board of directors of Islamic Relief Canada, an affiliated group of Islamic Relief World Wide listed as a sponsor of terrorism by middle eastern governments.


Ms. Musarat harshly attacked a moderate Muslim activist at a political event in 2018 discussing Islamisation. When the activist asked about how to combat FGM, Ms Musurat  condemned the activist as being Islamophobic despite the activist in question being Muslim herself.

What the above information does is show the firm foot in the door that Islamist ideology has in Canadian politics.  It deserves further investigation.





NCCM Once Again Calling for Resignation of Conservative Candidate


Today, the National Council of Canadian Muslims once again are calling for the dropping of Conservative candidate Ghada Melek.  Below is their statement on a facebook post:

“We appreciate that all people can change. But when candidates express hateful views, apologies have to be directed towards the communities affected, not towards political parties.

That’s why we are continuing to call for Ghada Melek’s resignation.

Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer stated that if a Conservative candidate has made racist or homophobic comments in the past, he will stand by the candidate as long as they apologize and take responsibility for those comments.

But Ghada Melek’s apology doesn’t take responsibility.

“As a Coptic Christian, I know what my family and friends often endured under Morsi and the Brotherhood, and that passion may have got the best of me at times,” she said in a statement. “While these are almost entirely retweets from more than half a decade ago, I do understand how some of them may be offensive, and I do regret that as well as retweeting them…”

While we of course decry any oppression of the Coptic community in Egypt, no candidate for elected government in Canada should promote utter nonsense against the Muslim community on that basis (like when she blamed “Islamists” for the economic crisis in Detroit)

We would be happy to accept Ghada Melek’s apology when it a) clearly denounces anti-Muslim bigotry and Islamophobia and b) commits to meeting folks from diverse backgrounds to learn more.

An apology where Melek states that some of her retweets “may have been offensive” isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on.

We aren’t asking for much. Asking that a person who is apologizing understands the harm caused, and commits to learning more, should be obvious.

If Ghada Melek can’t commit to doing better, she has no place in standing to be a candidate.

When you share the hateful views of the Clarion Project (which was named by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a hate organization) it’s time to demonstrate that you’re willing to grow as a person.

Without a real apology, despite giving Ghada Melek numerous opportunities to engage in such a process, we have no choice but to continue to call on Andrew Scheer, alongside other folks in the Muslim Council of Peel and Imam Ibrahim Hindy, to drop Ghada as a candidate.”

On August 4, Circanda posted a story of the initial concerns of NCCM. We countered that with concerns of our own. Our concerns still stand.

NCCM has had ties with CAIR, an American human rights group whose founder Nihad Awad has voiced support for the terror group Hamas.

“Awad publicly declared “I am in support of the Hamas movement,” during a March 1994 symposium at Barry University”

Although they changed their name from CAIR Canada to NCCM in 2013, no apology was forthcoming for CAIR founder’s  support for Hamas, there was no removing themselves from any association with the parent group.

“We remain the same organization our constituents and partners have come to rely on to represent a broad and diverse spectrum of Canadian Muslims.”