SFR is with Paul Sperry discussing civilization jihad

FRANK GAFFNEY:

Welcome to Secure Freedom Radio. This is Frank Gaffney, your host and guide for what I think of as an intelligence briefing on the war for the free world. And this is going to be a particularly rich intelligence briefing, I think, because we’re going to be speaking with one of the preeminent investigative reporters of our time. He is Paul Sperry, these days, I’m pleased to say, he is associated with us at the counterjihad.com site where he is the editor-in-chief. He is also a columnist for the New York Post, long time editorial and investigative reporter, as I say, with a number of books to his credit. Including two that we’re going to focus on in particular today. First, Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives Have Penetrated Washington. And the second, Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret World That’s Conspiring to Islamise America. Paul Sperry, welcome to Secure Freedom Radio, good to have you back.

PAUL SPERRY:

Hey, great to be visiting with you again, Frank.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

Listen, there’s so much to talk about I hardly know where to begin. But I think I’d like to set the stage for much of what we’ll be talking about in the course of this special hour long edition of Secure Freedom Radio, is the Saudis. The government of Saudi Arabia, the royals, the businesses, the charities, the shariah-adherent Wahhabists and the like, that are, of late, a bit in the news again. Notably, as a result of the release of these so-called twenty-eight, actually twenty-nine pages from a congressional report done after 9-11. You’ve looked at this with your usual, careful eye. Tell us a little bit about what was in those twenty-eight, twenty-nine pages and what we’ve learned from them.

PAUL SPERRY:

Well, the biggest revelation, the biggest takeaway from those pages, that – you know, a lot was leaked, as you know, Frank, a lot obviously leaked before these came out. Some of the information leaked accurately, some not. But, you know, some of this stuff is a little bit known not really by the average American, but it’s been leaked out in the Washington press a little bit, but the biggest takeaway that no one knew was the substantive links between top al-Qaeda leaders, directly, indirectly, to this former Saudi ambassador, Prince Bandar, who left the US about 2005, but he was the ambassador in the run up to the 9-11 attacks and thereafter. And Bandar turns out, he was almost on a speed dial with the number three al-Qaeda leader over in Afghanistan and Pakistan. What happened was the FBI tracked down some numbers that were found from this leader who was captured over there. Abu Zubaydah was his name and he’s now at Gitmo, but they found unlisted numbers for Bandar. And not only his mansion, not only the embassy in DC, but for his private residence in Aspen, Colorado, which just is chilling. And there’s new information that he gave money directly to some of these Saudi intelligence agents who were handling the hijackers as they came into the United States through California.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

Now, when you say he, you’re talking there about Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador to the United States for many years.

PAUL SPERRY:

That’s right. What was leaked from this report was that his wife had given money for medical reasons to another wife of one of the – these intelligence agents in San Diego who were helping the hijackers. But as it turns out, there were tens of thousands of dollars going directly from Bandar’s rich bank account to Saudi intelligence officers here directly handling the hijackers. So that’s new information. So really, the biggest – the most shocking piece of information on the twenty-eight pages is how – how it ties Bandar into the hijackers and the al-Qaeda and the whole 9-11 plot. That is all new and that – that should be investigated because Bandar was never so much as a footnote in the 9-11 Commission Report, which came out after the twenty-eight pages were classified, censored, two years earlier – two or three years earlier in the congressional inquiry report. So there was no follow-up, it seems, on Bandar. From what I understand, he wasn’t even questioned about this and they never pursued those numbers. They, you know, this was so politically sensitive that the field office in Denver just handed it up and said, look, you know, we know this is so radioactive, we’re not going to even touch this anymore.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

Paul Sperry, you have, of course, been studying these issues for decades and writing on them extensively and trying wherever possible to connect the proverbial dots. Let me just ask you pointedly the question that I think would be on the minds of most people listening to you, does what you’ve just described constitute, really, a smoking gun with respect to the involvement of certainly senior Saudi officials, apparently agents as well, in the attacks that killed nearly three thousand Americans on 9-11 in 2001?

PAUL SPERRY:

The twenty-eight pages – two things. One, the twenty-eight pages, there’s no one single piece of information in there that can be considered a smoking gun. But when you take all the data points together, there’s so many of them in there. And, by the way, this is my second point, that these are just summaries of the CIA and the FBI case file reports. This isn’t the raw data. So it could be much worse than we’re seeing in those twenty-eight pages, that’s a summation of the evidence. So but when you take it all together, all the information is so reinforcing and there’s so much of it and there’s so many Saudi officials involved, and then you get to Bandar, and we’ve been told, oh, well, maybe these were some rogue elements within the Saudi government that were operating off on their own. Because, you know, they had some type of affinity or sympathy for bin Laden or whatever. No, this went pretty high up. I mean, this is – it’s the highest level you can go in the United States for the Saudi government, the Saudi embassy, and then you have a Saudi consulate official, a guy named Thumairy, who was heading the Islamic affairs office out of Los Angeles, who was directly involved. So no, this seemed to have been a conspiracy, at least inside the US, to help the hijackers. Whether or not – we don’t have a direct tie, at least not in the material that we’re seeing now in the twenty-eight pages. So keep in mind, too, an aggregate of about three whole pages out of the twenty-nine pages were redacted still. So we have a lot of stuff we still don’t know. And a lot of that stuff does black – black out sections. Whole paragraphs. And lot of it around what we’re talking about, Bandar.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

Yeah. And let’s just recall that Bandar Bush was the nickname that was given to Prince Bandar by, I think, among others, the Bush family which was very close to him and had been for quite some time. And Paul Sperry, one of the other names that appears in this twenty-eight, twenty-nine pages is Turki al-Faisal. Now you rightly point out that most of this dot connecting seems to involve the folks here in the United States, but Turki al-Faisal, who subsequently became the US ambassador, rather the Saudi ambassador to the United States, but he was head of Saudi intelligence during this period, was he not?

PAUL SPERRY:

Yeah. So you have Prince Turki, head of intel. And that was his portfolio for the ministry, for the Saudi government out of Riyadh. He is the – he was the brother-in-law at the time of Bandar. And Bandar’s father, Prince Sultan, was the head of defence and aviation. And so then, you go back to San Diego and you look at these two Saudi intelligence officers who were very key to the conspiracy there, at least with some of the hijackers who attacked the Pentagon, who came in through San Diego and they were set up nicely and, you know, they had a whole advance team for them through the Saudi consulate. Well, these guys were working for cut-outs, companies, you know, shill companies as their cover, as intelligence officers, for the Saudi defence ministry and for aviation.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

Yeah. It certainly sounds, Paul – we have to pause for just a second, we’ll come right back, but it certainly sounds as though there were connections all the way back into Riyadh in the Saudi government itself. Involving it, implicating it in this 9-11 attack at least indirectly. Paul, we have to pause. We’ll be right back with more with Paul Sperry of counterjihad.com right after this.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

We’re back. We’re talking for a full hour, I’m very pleased to say, with Paul Sperry, the editor-in-chief of counterjihad.com. Also a columnist for the New York Post and the author of several really important books, including Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives Have Penetrated Washington and Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamise America. Paul, we’ve been talking about the Saudis, the insights that we had into what appears to have been a role they played in the 9-11 attacks. You were just describing that this is evidence that suggests indirectly ties, using cut-outs, using, well, the tradecraft of espionage, I’d say, to perhaps conceal some of their involvement. But the dots properly connected, it would seem, even in this redacted twenty-nine page document, is pretty damning, is it not?

PAUL SPERRY:

Yeah. I mean, you have two – everybody who, the FBI and the CIA, who were quoted in the reports in this twenty-nine pages, they’re talking about these two Saudi nationals who were in San Diego as intelligence officers. And so they would have worked directly with – through the intelligence ministry, and that’s Prince Turki, that’s his portfolio. And then you have – and that’s the brother-in-law, Bandar. Bandar’s father, at the same time, is Prince Sultan. He’s overseeing the defence and aviation cut-outs that these guys were working for as cut-outs. That’s where they were getting their money, big gobs of money. They didn’t work. Everybody who knew them said they didn’t actually work for these companies and yet they were getting paid a lot of money. Money then was also coming in through the Saudi embassy from Bandar’s personal accounts as well. So, you have really a troika of errors, Prince Sultan, Prince Turki, and Prince Bandar, that are indirectly connected to this 9-11 conspiracy and the hijackers, so –

FRANK GAFFNEY:

And it’s just unbelievable to me that this has not received closer scrutiny, a public debate before now. Paul, your contributions to this at counterjihad.com with an excellent precis of what is in that twenty-nine pages is really appreciated. Paul, you have been, as I’ve indicated, involved for many years in trying to figure out what the nature of this global jihad movement is. Not just historically, but what it’s up to at the moment. How would you characterise the role being played by the government of Saudi Arabia and its nationals in that global jihad at the moment?

PAUL SPERRY:

Well, since we never got to the bottom of their role in 9-11, their – you know, clearly there is a terrorism support network set up, an infrastructure that involves not just the Saudi embassy but the consulate, but also their Saudi-funded mosques. And that really becomes apparent when you read those twenty-nine pages. That the mosques are involved in, you know, money-laundering, terror support, the hijackers went to a lot of – back and forth, bicoastal, to Saud-funded, Saudi-built mosques. And, you know, who are these people, were they all kicked out of the country, were they deported, are they still in place in the embassy and the consulates? Are they still in place in the mosques? We don’t know because no one got to the bottom of what the Saudi role in 9-11 was. And, you know, quite frankly, we need to have another – reopen the 9-11 commission at a minimum, because obviously, they missed a lot. They did not connect the dots when it came to the Saudis if you read that report. And no one has refuted any of this information that’s in the twenty-nine pages. In other words, someone’s come in and said, no, this is totally inaccurate, this bank account, these bank records, these phone records, these are all, you know, garbage. You know, I mean, it’s all there. It just was never pursued or pursued aggressively to get to the next layer.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

And yet there has been some effort made, including, I’m thinking, by the co-chairman of the 9-11 commission, Governor Tom Kean of New Jersey and Lee Hamilton, former congressman, to sort of poo-poo this material in the twenty-eight pages, both historically and more recently. And again, I think this is interesting and important to get sorted, no question about it. But let me just ask you about the present danger, and you’ve mentioned Saudi financing of US mosques, Paul Sperry, would you talk about how that financing takes place and what control over the mosques it translates into for a kingdom that is evidently pretty damned hostile to the United States?

PAUL SPERRY:

Extremely. We haven’t even talked about the immigration jihad that they’re doing, but let me go back to – yeah, let me come back to Hamilton and Kean. Hamilton, at least, has publicly admitted he’s never even read the twenty-eight, the twenty-nine pages. This is before they were declassified. So it sounds like the co-chairman of the 9-11 commission didn’t even know about them. And yet they’re talking – they’re trying to poo-poo them, so they never even personally read them when they had the opportunity back when they were doing that investigation.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

That’s unbelievable. Yeah, especially since they’re making public pronouncements about it or were before their release.

PAUL SPERRY:

I mean, yeah, it’s all very, very strange. Anyway, so on the mosque front, the money comes in – a lot of it comes in through the North American Islamic Trust, it’s a big Saud-funded, it’s basically the bank for the Muslim Brotherhood in America. This is a group that’s based out of Illinois and they are the trustee, they hold the keys to most of the mosques. And almost all of the radical mosques that are factories for jihadists in this country. If you look at some of the worst mosques in this country, like Dar al-Hijrah, the 9-11 hijackers’ mosque just outside of Washington, they are owned and controlled, the deeds are owned by NAIT, N-A-I-T, North American Islamic Trust. And there’s, of course, a lot of other ways, entities to which the money is laundered into these – into the terror support networks in this country.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

And what does the control by NAIT translate into in terms of, say, you know, what’s preached in those mosques, by whom, the curriculums for the various madrassas associated with these mosques and so on, Paul Sperry?

PAUL SPERRY:

Yeah, the control is financial, it’s doctrinal, as you say, and it’s personnel. I mean, they control who gets to be the prayer leaders and who sit on the boards, the trustees, the directors of these mosques. If you look into their background, they’re all Muslim Brotherhood figures, going way back to when they first came into this country under the Muslim Students Association. And, you know, of course, you know this, the forerunner ISNA, and –

FRANK GAFFNEY:

The Islamic Society of North America, right. And Paul, to the extent that these groups, the Islamic Society of North America, the Muslim Students Association, the North American Islamic Trust and the like, have benefited from funding from Saudi Arabia, how is that provided? I keep hearing about something called the Muslim World League. And what role does it play?

PAUL SPERRY:

Yeah, the Muslim World League is actually – is a Saudi government entity. Saudis tried, you know, once they got in trouble and there was a movement to get them designated as a terrorist – a foreign terrorist organisation, there was a lot of lobbying, counter-lobbying by the Saudi lobby, K Street, to try and stop that from happening. And one of the ways they did that was, oh, no, this is just a charity. No, it’s directly controlled in Riyadh by the king.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

And funded, and as I understand it, funded as a line item in the royal budget. Hey, Paul, we have to pause for another second. We’ll come back with more with this Muslim World League and what it says about what the Saudis do and will do if not stopped inside America. That and more with Paul Sperry, the editor-in-chief of counterjihad.com and also a columnist for the New York Post. Right after this.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

We’re having what I call an intelligence briefing of the first order from Paul Sperry, one of the country’s best intelligence and national security reporters, investigative reporters, of our time. He is also an accomplished author, including of two books that we’re focusing on at the moment, Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives Have Penetrated Washington and Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamise America. Paul, we were talking a moment ago about the role that the Saudi government plays, not just historically but as we speak, in funding activities that are supportive of, well, the Muslim Brotherhood and its various front organisations and the toxic brew that they are creating in the guise of what they call civilisation jihad inside the United States, a kind of stealthy jihad. And it’s funded, at least in part, by the government of Saudi Arabia through this so-called Muslim World League. This would seem to be a direct assault on the United States by the kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Am I missing something here?

PAUL SPERRY:

They are financing some subversive activities in this country. And yet we still consider them an ally. It’s outrageous. But the Muslim World League has been tied to al-Qaeda. They propagate jihadi materials to the Islamic schools and the mosques here in the US. They propagate Wahhabism in America. They’re importing a seditious and violent culture, ideology, into this nation to try to turn America into an Islamic state. That is the ultimate goal. And the other thing, the other piece of this that they’re doing, is they’re doing immigration jihad and they’re trying to get as many, first of all, Saudi nationals as they can into our college campuses where they, of course, then can in turn join the Muslim Students Association which is just this jihadist front group and get all these young other Muslims either recruited or convert non-Muslims to this Islamism. I discovered that just through the data that no one’s looked at this, that under Hillary Clinton’s reign there at the State Department, the floodgates were opened for student visas from Saudi Arabia. We really put the kibosh on that after we found out that some of the hijackers got in on student visas. They were rubberstamped through this visa express program we had set up with Saudi Arabia where we didn’t even really do any serious screening in advance, you know, for their application. So we didn’t know who was coming in. So we said, well, okay, let’s stop that. And then we had this dearth in visa issuances, from 2001 till about 2008, 2009. All of a sudden, an inflection point right there, boom, you have this hockey stick that just shoots right up the handle of the hockey stick, if you can envision that, under the Obama regime and under Hillary’s. She’s the one who’s doing this – approving this change in policy. But what’s really alarming about – by the way, over seven hundred thousand new student visas and business visas were for Saudi nationals and rubberstamped under Obama. Seven hundred thousand.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

Just to be clear, what you’re describing is the wholesale reversal, it sounds like, of policies that were quite sensibly adopted after 9-11 to try to restrict the inflow of Saudi nationals, many of them young men, seeking, among other kinds of studies in this country, flight training. Just obviously, in the wake of 9-11, quite sensible. What possible grounds could there have been for undoing those restrictions and admitting, you know, seven hundred thousand folks, including some of those I’ve just described?

PAUL SPERRY:

Well, the official line was, you know, this is good for business. But we don’t know, we can’t track these visa – by the way, these are, this is virtually all young Saudi men. The women don’t get the student visas to come over here to get educated. These are all young Saudi men just like the fifteen hijackers. And –

FRANK GAFFNEY:

Jihadist age, one might say.

PAUL SPERRY:

Jihadist age, they fit the profile. They come over here, we don’t do the NSEERS program anymore where we used to do, you know, marginal tracking of them when they came in to see if they actually went to where they said they were going. And then they actually left when their visas were expired after five years. No, we don’t even do it. We don’t have – we have no idea if they even show up on campus. And they’re just flooding by the tens of thousands, each months coming in on these student visas. But, I mean, this has just replaced, you know, we had this visa express program. Everybody was outraged after 9-11 that we had this program at the State Department. It was shut down. The special relation – the special program with Saudi Arabia, just rubberstamp them, their applicants to come to the US on these visas. Well, we’ve just replaced that. We don’t call it visa express anymore. But now it’s called trusted travellers. So now we’ve – under Hillary and under the Homeland Security Department, we’ve – and almost virtually no American knows this, Saudis are now considered one of the least security risks of any nationality coming into the US. They’re on par now with Canadians.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

That’s simply unbelievable.

PAUL SPERRY:

And French – French and Germans don’t even have, aren’t even in the trusted travellers program. But the Saudis are now. And that happened. And one of the last acts that Hillary did in 2013, when she left, was she signed off on this and had special meetings. The story’s up on counter-jihad. We have the photographs of her with the interior minister of Saudi Arabia coming over here, they’re signing deals on this day that this happened. It’s outrageous and it was never covered.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

And as you say, Paul, the so-called National Security entry-exit registration system, NSEERS, was over the side as well. So essentially we saw this wholesale dismantling of these procedures put into place to try to protect us against the Saudis. And much of it can be tied directly to Hillary Clinton herself. And I just have – I just have to ask you, one of the people whose family benefited massively from the Muslim World League’s support over the years and specifically the patronage of the guy who ran it for a long time, Abdullah Omar Nasseef, is, of course, Huma Abedin, Secretary of State Clinton’s deputy chief of staff for a number of years, her long-time associate, her deputy campaign manager these days. Paul, give us a sense of what Huma Abedin’s family business, the Islamic – excuse me, the Institute for Muslim Minority Affairs, was doing with funding from the Muslim World League from the government of Saudi Arabia. And whether that may bear, in some measure, on what kinds of things she was presumably advising Hillary Clinton to do vis-a-vis the Saudis among other Islamists and Islamic supremacists.

PAUL SPERRY:

Huma Abedin is her closest advisor. Just on her body lady as they describe her, gets her coffee and all this stuff and her favourite Starbucks. She has untold influence over Hillary now and, you know, she’s working on the campaign. And she could end up in the White House in a very senior role. But her father, Syed Abedin, I’m talking a little bit out of school here because I’m not as well-versed in this, but he was recruited by the Saudi official to come, to actually move from, I believe they were in Michigan, Kalamazoo or something, yeah, and to move actually to I believe it was Jeddah, it was either Riyadh or Jeddah, to set up this propaganda organ for the Muslim Brotherhood over there. And, you know, put out all sorts of propaganda for the Saudis and Islamists –

FRANK GAFFNEY:

And specifically, as I understand it, Paul, promote this idea of non-assimilation of Muslim minorities in the West in the interests of incubating essentially the populations that would help turn those non-Muslim nations into, as you said earlier, Muslim majority nations. I mean, this sounds kind of unbelievable, but it’s the long-term project of the Muslim Brotherhood and of the government of Saudi Arabia and we have been one of its targets. Paul, we have to pause for just a moment. We’ll be right back with more on Huma Abedin, her influence, and the kinds of policies that not only have we seen from Hillary Clinton, but that we might under a President Hillary Clinton. Right after this.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

Welcome back. Our guest is Paul Sperry, the editor-in-chief of counterjihad.com and one of the country’s preeminent experts on the threats that we’re facing, both foreign and domestic, from Islamic supremacists, some of whom have managed to, it seems, infiltrate high levels of government. I’m sorry to say not just under this administration, but to some extent under the previous as well. And we were talking about one such individual whose family at the very least has been very deeply involved in Muslim Brotherhood activities. Her mother has been described as a member of the Muslim Sisterhood and the question recurs, Paul Sperry, given what we know of Huma Abedin and her background, give what we know of her family’s deep involvement with and activities on behalf of the Muslim Brotherhood – and it’s not just her father and mother, it’s her brother and sister as well, do you think that this constitutes a security threat, particularly given the kinds of policies that I presume she has been encouraging Hillary Clinton to adopt over the years, not just with respect to, you know, letting Saudis into the country and, you know, the sort of embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood, but not least this campaign that Hillary’s been on to restrict freedom of speech, lest it offend Muslims?

PAUL SPERRY:

Well, she would have the ability to – and she did at State – to promote various individuals into positions of policy at State, these being Muslims or representatives of the Muslim Brotherhood, into positions. And that needs to be investigated. We don’t know enough about that. Some of it’s starting to come out with these emails to see just how much influence she had in terms of, you know, we’re just now finding out that she was the conduit to help, you know, this kind of simony where somebody at the Clinton Foundation would recommend somebody get an appointment within the State Department or some other agency and she was the person that would run that up the flagpole to Hillary. And but also in terms of promoting the agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood, we don’t know how much she’s been involved in that and that needs to be investigated because of her background, not just with her parents, but I believe that, correct me if I’m wrong, that she was actually on staff at this propaganda organ that was published out of Saudi Arabia. She was actually working with her mother as an editor

FRANK GAFFNEY:

Yeah. She was listed as an associate editor as I recall for some twelve years on the masthead of their journal for Muslim minority affairs, exactly right.

PAUL SPERRY:

Yeah, so if you look at some of the propaganda they’ve put out, you know, somebody has to, you know, if she, you know, if it gets to Hillary getting in and she is then appointed to some position where she has to go before congress, that’s the first question people need to ask, do you still believe in this stuff? What was your role? Who were your connections? That is all fair game because, yes, there is a civilisation jihad going on in terms of sabotaging US policy from within, infiltrating the institutions, including the US government agencies. That is all spelled out in the US Muslim Brotherhood’s archives in their founding documents, so what does she know about?

FRANK GAFFNEY:

So Paul, I can’t conceive of her being submitted to the Senate for confirmation. I’m sure that the kind of position that she would get would be one that is not requiring that kind of action by the Senate. You know, the White House chief of staff or deputy chief of staff or something to that effect, which is even scarier, you’re exactly right. But let me ask you about this, Paul, you’ve written, again, in your book Infiltration and also in Muslim Mafia about this conspiracy and there are those who insist that this is not a conspiracy, this is just a conspiracy theory. And that deprecate those of us who are, well, as you say, looking at the evidence from the Muslim Brotherhood’s own archives, notably the explanatory memorandum and the document that, among others, was introduced into evidence in a federal prosecution of a prominent Muslim Brotherhood front, the Holy Land Foundation. How do you respond to people who try to dismiss all of this as, well, just a conspiracy theory?

PAUL SPERRY:

Well, it’s definitely not a theory. It’s a genuine conspiracy and it was mapped out by the US prosecutors for the Department of Justice. And not in just one case, the Holy Land Foundation, but a couple of other cases in Virginia, Northern Virginia. And the evidence is overwhelming. In all the documentation that is there, if anybody wants to go to the Holy Land Foundation, that case, and look up all the case files, you can see the documents, you can see the FBI agents’ testimony, the prosecutors and the conclusions they came to. This is what’s so alarming about this to me, I thought about this the other day, if anybody, you know, even FOX News, any of the cable networks, of course, not even the big three networks, have ever even had one of those documents from that explanatory memo, which is one of the most critical documents in our history, uncovered in an investigation of a suspected terrorist at his home in Annandale, Virginia, they found it in his basement, and he was also a senior member in the US of the Muslim Brotherhood. But anyway, this has not come to light. The average American has never seen this on TV. This – I just realised that, that’s outrageous that this has never been, there’s been no special even done on FOX on these documents. They’re critical documents to understanding what the goal of the bad guys are in this country. These are the terrorists with suits, not the terrorists with the suicide vests, but with the suit vest, as I say. And they’re just as – they’re just as dangerous because they’re the support network for the guys who actually blow themselves up and blow us up.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

This is such a critical point, Paul, and you’ve done, really, incalculably important work in exposing it in your books and in your columns and in your editorials at Investor’s Business Daily and, of course, in what you’re doing these days at counterjihad.com. And I really commend you for it, because I think exposing the danger – in some ways, it’s more dangerous in a society like ours, posed by people who don’t pose an overt threat, but instead are able to, through their smooth talking and their profession of moderation, to get their way into government. And talk just for a moment if you would, we’ll have to pause in a bit, but just a bit about what the infiltration of the United States government by these Muslim Brotherhood operatives has meant in terms of their influence on American policy.

PAUL SPERRY:

Well, I mean, they’ve gotten into – and this is just hard for anybody who’s not versed in all this stuff to get their heads around, but they’ve actually infiltrated security, our security complex, not just more benign institutions, but they’ve actually gotten to the FBI through the translator programs and we’ve actually had at least two Muslim Brotherhood agents become FBI agents. You know, we have so many that have infiltrated the translation, the Arabic translation and Urdu translation programs in the FBI that we have to have constant, you know, espionage investigations and other investigations for mistranslations. We have them in translation programs and also some, actually soldiers, in the Department of Defence. And they’ve, of course, gotten into advisory roles, as you know, in the Department of Homeland Security where they’re shaping policy there and actually trying to get rid of, scrub out all of the references to jihad and Islam in our training materials for FBI and for border patrol and customs agents.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

And then we’ve talked about Huma Abedin and the State Department opening the door to more Saudi nationals and on and on it goes. Paul, we have to pause for one final break. We’ll be right back with more with Paul Sperry of counterjihad.com, the author of Infiltration and Muslim Mafia and more. Straight ahead.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

Welcome back to our final instalment of this important and deep diving conversation about the Muslim Brotherhood, Islamic supremacism more generally, the global jihad, and the fact that it’s here, not just elsewhere, and that it’s being waged against us through stealthy means, subversive, what I think of as pre-violent means as well as the violent ones. Paul Sperry, of course, is one of the country’s preeminent investigative journalists. He’s been covering this and related national security threats extraordinarily ably for decades. He is an author as well as a columnist and now editor-in-chief of counterjihad.com. Let me ask you about one last piece of this, Paul, because it’s been much in evidence of late and that is an influence operation that we’ve seen featured prominently at the Democratic National Convention. A fellow by the name of Khizr Khan. Tell us what you have found in your investigation of Mr. Khan, a gold star father, the father of a fallen and, by all accounts, heroic Muslim soldier that ought to give us all pause, if not more concern.

PAUL SPERRY:

Well, it turns out this Khizr Khan, who the media is trying to glorify as this seasoned lawyer, constitutional expert, you know, with a Harvard law degree, you know, putting Trump and the rest of his supporters into place about immigration policy, well, it turns out he’s not an expert on constitutional law. He’s an expert on shariah law. And he’s had a number of papers that have been cited over and over on Islamic law. He appears to be quite the scholar on the subject. But in terms of his credentials and his academic pedigree, they’re not what the media’s been putting out there. It’s – as it turns out, he hasn’t even actually practiced law. And he got his formal law training from a tiny college in Pakistan that’s run, the chancellor there is an anti-Semitic 9-11 denier who believes crazy conspiracy stuff. So it’s no telling what Khan was taught over in this so-called law school over there in Lahore, Pakistan. But it’s just outrageous stuff to see what – what they believe over there. And this is where he got his stuff. And then it turns out also that at Harvard he didn’t get – actually get his JD, his law degree there. He got a masters and his masters’ thesis focused on Pakistan and other third world Muslim countries. So, I mean, to say that this guy’s just this big American lawyer trained in constitutional law is just nothing but hype. He’s been shilling for Hillary, too. I mean, that’s his job. He’s shilling for Hillary.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

We’ve seen on a couple of occasions now him brandishing the US Constitution and even choking up over his attachment to it and characterising what he’s been doing, both at the DNC and in the endless stream of information operations, I guess you’d call them, that he’s been engaged in since. It suggests that he’s not simply been engaged in a kind of flim-flam about his background and his personal record and history, but that this is a fraud of a guy who actually believes, as shariah commands, that it is the supreme law worldwide, not that man-made stuff like the US Constitution. Am I missing something here, Paul Sperry?

PAUL SPERRY:

No, and he actually – I found a book report that he wrote on this book that was a compilation of a number of, really, speeches and addresses by Islamists around the world and it focused on this conference that took place in Kuwait. The chapter that he pulled out, the one that he said was the hallmark of the book, and praised it as, you know, the successful argumentation, convincing argumentation, was by this guy named Allah Brohi, he was the religious minister in Pakistan, implemented a number of, you know, the brutal punishments over there under shariah. And believes that – he actually says in his writings in his chapter that it’s sanctioned, it’s okay to beat your wife. And here, Khan had a chance to say, no, this is not human rights. You don’t have the right to beat your wife or cut off somebody’s head because they’re an apostate or all these other shariah – this medieval, barbaric stuff. He didn’t take that chance. He actually said this is the hallmark of the book. And it was praising this stuff. And yet this guy is supposedly loyal to the constitution, he loves the constitution. It just doesn’t – it doesn’t jibe. The guy obviously has an agenda. And no one’s getting to the bottom of it in the mainstream media because he’s the perfect foil for the whole immigration, you know, controlling, curbing immigration from these hostile Muslim countries that are hotspots for ISIS and so forth. So this is really scandalous. But the media, of course, is in his corner and it’s very, also hard to criticise him because he did have a genuinely heroic son who was a patriot by all accounts, who fought in Iraq as a soldier. But, by the way, the father did try to talk him out of even joining the military, let’s make that clear. Yeah, and that’s not being reported.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

Paul Sperry, you’ve done superb work on this. And I want to commend you for it, not just at counterjihad.com, but also at Breitbart News and elsewhere and I hope you’ll keep it up because this record does need to be exposed and the influence operations that Khizr Khan and his enablers are perpetrating need to be countered. Let me ask you about one other thing, Paul, quickly, over the weekend, as you know, there was another outburst of this Black Lives Matter violence in connection with a police shooting in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Paul, based on your investigating reporting, what do we know about Black Lives Matter and in particular its ties to Islamic supremacists and, of course, anarchists of the occupy stripe more broadly?

PAUL SPERRY:

Well, there is some evidence, circumstantial evidence – it’s hard to investigate the Black Lives Matter because it seems like such a diffuse group. There’s not really a central, you know, they’re not registering as an actual organisation. Although the president has actually put one of their founders in charge of helping reform police departments across the country as part of his presidential task force on policing out of the White House. You’ve probably seen her in some photo-ops standing, sitting right next to the president. She’s got the seat of honour, which is a little disturbing, to say the least. But there are some anecdotal evidence that there’s some solidarity between the jihadi groups and ISIS and actually some merging interests may be possibly, some personnel between the Black Lives Matter movement and ISIS, so you have this – these two very violent groups, homegrown, that could be merging, and the profile of several of the jihadists in America could be changing as we’re seeing. Now I noticed over the last, just the last month, I believe four out of the last five major arrests, ISIS suspects who have been charged with material support for ISIS, are African-American. And see, so we’re starting to see some changes here. We’re seeing more recruitment in the black community by ISIS and they are actually targeting them in their – in some of their papers and some of their videos, they’re actually targeting African-Americans, so law enforcement has to adjust accordingly, politicians have to start getting aware of this, too.

FRANK GAFFNEY:

Amen. As do the rest of us. Paul Sperry, you do more than your fair share to try to keep us all aware of these things. I’m very proud of our association with you and delighted to have you as the editor-in-chief of counterjihad.com. I appreciate your works, books, the innumerable columns and editorials that you’ve written over the years and know that the best is yet to come. Keep up the good work, my friend. Come back to us again, if you would, very soon. I hope the rest of you will do so tomorrow. Same time, same station. Until then, this is Frank Gaffney. Thanks for listening.