Newsletter #68- Freedom Forum Part VI

“What is the Truth About American Muslims? Questions and Answers” is a recent publication of the Interfaith Alliance and the First Amendment Center’s Religious Freedom Education Project directed by Charles Haynes.

Haynes’ write-up about this publication exposes both the hypocrisy with which he champions First Amendment rights and his own ignorance about political Islam and its objectives to bring Sharia law to our country.  Relying on a Soros financed Center for American Progress study to vilify anyone who questions the motives of devotees of political Islam, Haynes says:

 “Enough is enough.  It’s time for voices of reason to counter dangerous and often vicious propaganda with balanced and accurate information about American Muslims.”

Claims of balance and accuracy can only be credible if all the information is provided.  Read the information omitted by the authors of “What is the Truth About American Muslims” at Political Islam,  Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 and then judge for yourself.

Groups endorsing “What is the Truth” publication

This short analysis of 1991 Muslim Brotherhood Memorandum provides a good summary of the Muslim Brotherhood’s goals for the United States.  Groups listed in “What is the Truth” include some that aggressively and proactively work to advance these Muslim Brotherhood’s goals:

Islamic Society of North America (ISNA)

Islamic Networks Group (ING)

Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC)

United Methodist Church (UMC)

ISNA is listed in the Muslim Brotherhood’s 1991 Memorandum among its 29 “like-minded organizations of our friends”.  Newsletter #41 explains ING’s commitment to Muslim Brotherhood objectives.  Charles Haynes is an ING Board member so ING’s support of his work should come as no surprise.

What should concern the Freedom Forum though is that Haynes, one of their First Amendment experts and director of their Newseum and Religious Freedom Education Project has teamed up with Islamists committed to advancing the Muslim Brotherhood’s U.S. agenda.

MPAC likewise cannot dodge its Muslim Brotherhood lineage.

“The United Methodist Church and the Muslim Brotherhood” is explained in Newsletter #55.

Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA)

“What is the Truth” quotes the Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA) to answer question 11 “Have American Muslim leaders spoken out against extremist violence?”

Originally named the “ISNA Fiqh Committee” and listed among the Muslim Brotherhood’s 29 “like-minded organizations of our friends” FCNA members have included Abdurrahman Alamoudi, Taha Jaber Al-Alawani, Sheikh Muhammad al-Hanooti, Muzammil Siddiqui and Jamal Badawi.  Any number of FCNA members have been arrested, deported and named as unindicted co-conspirators in connection with terrorist activities.  All are connected in some manner to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Jamal Badawi founded the Muslim Brotherhood’s Muslim American Society.  He issued a fatwa detailing the conditions under which a husband may beat his wife and was an individually named unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial.

Taha Jaber Al-Alawani, President of the International Institute of Islamic Thought – IIIT was named in the Muslim Brotherhood memo.  Al-Alawani was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the terrorism prosecution against Palestinian Islamic Jihad founder, Sami al-Arian.  In his role as President of both IIIT and FCNA, Al-Alawani validated the English translation of the “Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Sacred Islamic Law”, stating:

“…this translation is a valuable and important work, whether as a textbook for teaching Islamic

jurisprudence to English-speakers, or as a legal reference for use by scholars, educated laymen, and students in this language.”

Provisions in the “Reliance of the Traveller” include:

“the Objectives of Jihad” o9.8 – the caliph wars against Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians if they don’t accept the invitation to Islam or they can pay the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya)

“Giving Zakat to Deserving Recipients” h8.17 (zakat is Islamic charity)- those fighting for Allah who are not employed by the military, ie, “volunteers for jihad” and

h8.24 – zakat cannot be given to a non-Muslim

“Dealing with a rebellious wife” m10.12(4)(c) – a husband may hit his wife to either correct her behavior or to save the family but he may not hit her in such a way as to injure her

“Child Care and Custody” m13.3 – it is unlawful to send Muslim children to Christian schools but not unlawful to sent them to public schools as long as religion isn’t mentioned in a way “that threatens the students’ belief in Islam”

Suggested resources cited by the “What is the Truth” publication

“What is the Truth” names several organizations and suggests that their educational publications and presentations can be used by faith communities, schools, colleges and community groups to learn more about American Muslims.   The named resource groups include:

Unity Production Foundation – see Newlsetter, Part

ING – see above

The Islam Project – pushes UPF materials

Institute for Social Policy & Understanding (ISPU) – ISPU scholars listed on their website many of whom are involved with Muslim Brotherhood organizations include:

-Arsalan Iftikhar – Newsletter #54 details Iftikhar’s personal involvement with Muslim Brotherhood groups

-Muqtedar Khan – named to International Institute on Islamic Thought (IIIT) council of scholars to supervise IIIT’s academic programs; member of Association of Muslim Social Scientists (AMSS) – both organizations named in the 1991 Muslim Brotherhood plan for North America

-Sherman Jackson aka Abdul Hakeem Jackson – former Board member of FCNA, trustee of North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) and Muslim Students Association (MSA), named to IIIT Council of Scholars – all Muslim Brotherhood organizations.


“Muslim Brotherhood” is as much about an ideological plan for the U.S. as it is about individual relationships and the organizations that have come together to work toward these ideological objectives.

Without question Charles Haynes and the Freedom Forum First Amendment Center are doing all they can to help the Muslim Brotherhood in our country achieve its goals – goals that include the negation of the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment.  The question is why?  Is it the money that the Islamists bring? Is Charles Haynes that blinded by politically correct leftist propaganda?  Is it his commitment to the communitarian objectives?  Does he really detest our country that much?


Newsletter #67 – Freedom Forum Part V

In his 2001 forward to “Finding Common Ground”, John Siegenthaler wrote:

“Almost weekly now, U. S. citizens read in newspapers or see on television reports of ‘Muslim terrorist’ threats or attacks aimed at some ‘enemy of Islam.’ The news-media drumbeat has led many of us to the false impression that the Muslim faith is a religion built on a foundation of violence and fanaticism.

Nowhere have most of us been taught about the history of Islam or what Muslims today actually believe. We know little about the vision of Muhammad in 610 that began with the revelations known as the Qur’an, accepted by millions of Muslims throughout the world as the word of Allah or God. We are unaware that it is from this experience that the faith of Islam had its beginning. More than 1300 years later American school children, who read and hear about the growing influence of the Islamic world on our lives, learn very little about the Prophet Muhammad or the religious traditions of Muslims.

If those words had modest meaning in November 1994—and I think they did—they should have bell-ringing resonance since the tragedy that befell the nation that violent Tuesday morning. It no longer is a question of whether schools should teach children about Islam. They must teach them—and about other religions as well. It is a responsibility, a duty.”

Fine, but what students are taught about Islam depends on the goal.  If the goal is to help students develop critical thinking skills, then Siegenthaler and Haynes need to admit that there is more to know about Islam than what the Council on Islamic Education want students to know.  For example, were students to study the Medinan parts of the Quran they would learn how Muhammad’s legacy as a political warrior and the atrocities that he and his followers committed, were considered sacred acts.  This history lesson could really shed some light on the Islam the world is experiencing today.

Charles Haynes in defense of religious liberty

Writing about religious liberty and freedom of conscience, Haynes cites a Pew Forum report that identified Saudi Arabia and Iran as the worst offenders.  Could it possibly be because these countries follow Shariah law?

Haynes says that the U.N. should address this problem by advancing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).  Unfortunately, Haynes ignores the fact that in 1990 the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) member countries replaced the UDHR with the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights.

The OIC represents the 56 Islamic countries that have a permanent delegation to the United Nations and constitute the largest single voting bloc.  The OIC and the Muslim Brotherhood are the two leading proponents of global shariah law. Consistent with this end goal any and all rights recognized in the Cairo Declaration are governed by Shariah law.  Since 1999 in keeping with the Cairo Declaration the OIC has pushed relentlessly for a shariah-compliant global blasphemy law.

In July 2012, with the support of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the OIC surpassed all earlier efforts with the passage of U.N. resolution 16/18– the language and goal of which is to criminalize any criticism of Islam.  (Hillary making up for past Muslim wrongs?)

Even though Haynes and his First Amendment Center colleague, Ken Paulson condemn defamation of religion resolutions, they make no connection between the beliefs and demands of the OIC which represents the world’s majority of Muslims, and the beliefs and demands of Muslims living in the United States.

Does Haynes think that the Quran used in the U.S. is somehow different than the one used in an OIC member country?  Does he think that the Shariah law that drives the demand for a global blasphemy law only applies to Muslims living outside the U.S.?

Seems he does.

Newsletter #66 – Freedom Forum Part IV

What would happen if public schools stopped trying to teach morality and social justice?  What would happen if our public school classrooms became depoliticized?

The Pew Forum and the First Amendment Center ask – “Teaching About Religion in Public Schools: Where do we go from here?”

A conference in 2003 was convened by The Pew Forum and the First Amendment Center to continue the discussion of teaching about religion in public schools.  Haynes co-authored the forward of the conference report. Both “Finding Common Ground” and this report use 9-11 to discuss why religion needs to be taught in public schools:

“In the days following the terrorist-inspired tragedies, students everywhere came to school with questions about what they had seen and heard and read in the news media.  How could a U.S. public school teacher respond to those questions without mentioning religion?  Or without putting in context religious extremism by a small group of fanatics? Or without explaining that the Islamic faith of all but a few extremist Muslims would reject the taking of innocent life – any innocent life anywhere?…” (Finding Common Ground”)

“Educators struggle to teach students about Islam in the wake of the attacks. Schools do not present accurate lessons on Islam, said Warren Nord, a professor of philosophy at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. (He, along with Charles C. Haynes, is the author of Taking Religion Seriously Across the Curriculum.) Nord said Islam is virtually ignored by most history books from its inception up to the late 1970s, when the Ayatollah Khomeini returned to power in Iran and American citizens were held hostage there. “Religion still shapes much of the world’s thinking, yet it is left out of the curriculum,”

Nord said. “We don’t understand Judaism if we filter it through Christianity. The same is true of Islam. It’s a moral notion to take people equally on their own terms. This isn’t easy. We should use primary sources: literature and art.” (“Teaching About Religion in Public Schools: Where Do We Go From Here?”)

As to Nord’s suggestion about using primary sources, why not use the Quran? Or use the Hadith which contains examples from Muhammad’s life which is what Sharia law is based on.

Thanks to the diligence of the Council on Islamic Education (CIE), social studies textbooks no longer ignore Islam although two in-depth studies have exposed the bias and inaccuracy in material that is included.  Anecdotally we hear about more instances where teachers have brought in speakers to provide unvetted and imbalanced information about Islam.  Or as recently happened in Florida, where a CAIR representative spoke to a history class.

In  2010, the Texas State Board of Education raised the issue of how Christianity and Islam are portrayed in public school textbooks.  The Board passed a non-binding resolution stating its intent to send “a strong message” to textbook publishers that the Board would reject future textbooks that were pro-Islamic and biased against Christianity. (

The resolution details concerns related to the influence “increased investment” by Middle Easterners might have with regard to textbook publishers, which in turn, “could encourage biased treatment of religion in the texts used in Texas schools.”  Appendix III of the resolution includes information about a past investment by the Dubai royal family in the Education Media Group, which controls two of the largest U.S. textbook publishing companies.  Appendix I A-C cites specific excerpts from textbooks to support the resolution and Appendix II cites to more comprehensive textbook reviews in this regard.

Citizens for National Security (CAN), a Florida based 501(c)(3), recently issued an extensive report titled “Islam in Florida’s K-12 Textbooks” prepared by their Task Force on Islamic Influence in Florida K-12 Public Schools.  The 29 – page report lists the “flawed” History and Geography textbooks currently in use in Florida public schools and explains in detail the nature of the flaws.  The report can be accessed at

Additionally, ACT for America has prepared a comprehensive review of U.S. textbooks detailing the bias with which they discuss religions, in particular, Islam.  ACT has mailed copies of the executive summary to school boards across the country.

Tennessee will adopt new social studies textbooks in 2014.


When asked recently about how he defines “liberty of conscience”, Haynes replied: “It is the right of each individual to follow his or her conscience, to live according to principles that shape one’s life. For people of faith, liberty of conscience is the freedom to do what they believe God requires.”

Isn’t that what the 9-11 terrorists claimed?  How communitarian of them.


Newsletter #65 – Freedom Forum Part III


Charles Haynes promotes an ideology at odds with the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

Charles Haynes, is a Freedom Forum First Amendment Center expert and the Newseum’s Religious Freedom Education Project director.  Using the banner of the First Amendment’s “freedom of religion”, he actively abets the Islamist agenda both in Tennessee and nationally.

Haynes describes himself as coming from a “background shaped by progressive social views and Christian principles”.  He says he chose to attend Emory University because it was “a hotbed of discussion about God” because one of Emory’s religion professors had declared “God was dead.”  He served in student government, attended Harvard Divinity School, taught middle and high school and then returned to Emory to complete a Ph.D. in theological studies.  He joined the Freedom Forum in 1994.

His work focuses on promoting religious liberty in the public square and in particular, in schools.  One of his books The First Amendment in Schools and Finding Common Ground: A Guide to Religious Liberty in Public Schools was sent in 2000 by then President Clinton to every public school in the U.S.  Haynes believes that student religious expression and practice can be protected in public schools “as long as it does not violate the rights of others.”

In 2008, his Religious Freedom Education Project at the Newseum hosted a symposium for Muslim community leaders to help them better understand how to use the First Amendment to secure religious accommodations in public schools and perhaps later in the workplace.  The Council on Islamic Education (CIE) and the ACLU also participated.  As Haynes said, “The Muslim community is breaking new ground…in how we think about religious freedom….Today, Muslims are at the forefront of a new set of accommodations” to ensure that our public institutions comply with their religious beliefs.

Charles Haynes and “communitarianism”?

Along with his work at the Freedom Forum, Charles Haynes is the religious education expert for the Communitarian Network.

Communitarianism requires that individual liberties give sway to the collective, the community, and urges sacrificing for the common good.  Communitarianism has been described as, ‘community through coercion'”.  Hitler and Stalin are notable communitarians.

Former Harvard Business School professor George Lodge describes communitarianism as “creat[ing] a legitimate basis for the transnational governmental mechanisms required to manage globalization.”

Sounds like the rationale for the U.N.’s Agenda 21 with no more guarantee of our individual liberties supposedly protected by our Constitution.

Communitarianism, religion and public schools

Charles Haynes takes credit for using consensus-building to bring diverse religious and education groups to a communitarian vision of how to teach about religion in public schools.  Originally released in 1994, revised a few times and released again in 2007, Haynes co-authored “Finding Common Ground, A Guide to Religious Liberty in Public School”.  Continuing this theme, Haynes co-authored “Teaching About Religion in National and State Social Studies Standards” with Shabbir Mansuri, and Susan Douglass, founding director and principal researcher respectively of the Council on Islamic Education (see Newsletter #49).

According to Haynes, religion should be taught in public schools to “instill a community-focused sense of morality”.

In “The Relationship of Religion to Moral Education in the Public Schools”, published by the Insititute for Communitarian Policy Studies at George Washington University, Haynes asserts it is the job of public schools to teach morality but only what can be derived from a consensus process:

“There is not a great deal of agreement about what moral education should be. We will argue that ‘moral education’ is an umbrella-term for two quite different tasks. The first is to nurture in children those (consensus) virtues and values that make them good people. But, of course, good people can make bad judgments. The second task of moral education is [to] provide students with the intellectual resources that enable them to make informed and responsible judgments about difficult (and controversial) matters of moral importance. Both are proper and important tasks of schools.”

What this statement means to the communitarian is that first, there is no absolute good or evil.  Good and evil is only that which the community defines and consents to.  Second, students should be taught (ie, use “intellectual resources”) to question religious moral absolutes because morality is simply a matter of relativity to however one chooses to define it.  No Ten Commandments here.

Here’s an example:

“Parents may have primary responsibility to raise children, but this is also problematic. If fundamentalist Christian parents tell their gay child that he or she is going to Hell, the school has some responsibility to expose the child to another point of view.”

Whether called moral equivalence or relativism, this is the same concept that allows for characterizing Hamas terrorists as a “resistance movement” and the jihad murders by Major Nidal Hassan as “workplace violence.”


“Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth” said CAIR’s then chairman Omar Ahmad in 1998.

When asked recently about the diminishment of others’ religious rights as a result of making religious accommodations for Muslims, Haynes replied, that when we stand up for the rights of others today, we are ensuring our own rights tomorrow.

Nice slogan Mr. Haynes but understand this:  kosher to Jews means that they don’t eat pork; halal to Muslims means that nobody eats pork, meaning that to protect the rights of Muslims and their Sharia law means depriving non-Muslims of rights such as freedom of religion and freedom of speech. 

In 2006, Awadh Binhazim, an aggressive Muslim Brotherhood Islamist (see Newsletters 11 & 12), and Vanderbilt Muslim Student Association chaplain featured in the “Losing Our Sons” documentary, was on a First Amendment Center panel discussing the “Mohammed cartoons”.  Binhazim stated that “all Muslims” view the publication of the cartoons as a “provocation.”  He openly supported suppressing free speech saying that Muslims “do not share the value of free speech as it is recognized here”; a statement consistent with Islamic blasphemy laws and current actions by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the Obama administration to criminalize speech that Muslims find offensive.  This is the same Binhazim who in a Vanderbilt MSA forum confirmed Islam’s not-to-be-questioned capital punishment for homosexuality.





Newsletter #64 – Freedom Forum Part II

Note:  if a link does not open a document just copy and repaste the URL into your browser.

The First Amendment Center’s non-profit status has been revoked for failure to file 990s for three years.  Could this be the reason why the reference now is the “Freedom Forum First Amendment Center”?  Whether due to deliberate or forced reorganization, the First Amendment Center (the Center) and the Religious Freedom Education Project (the Project), have expanded their reach by collaborating with organizations such as Unity Productions Foundation, the Council on Islamic Education (CIE) and the Islamic Networks Group (ING).

The Muslim Brotherhood is as much about an ideological plan for the U.S. as it is about individual relationships and the organizations that have come together to work toward these ideological objectives.

Unity Productions Foundation (UPF)

The Freedom Forum’s Newseum and Religious Freedom Education Project director Charles Haynes recently collaborated with UPF to promote the “What is the truth about Islam and Muslims in America?” initiative. More about this initiative will be discussed in Part IV.

Pakistani IT billionaire Safi Qureshey is the founder and Chairman of the UPF Board.  UPF claims that its mission is to “…create peace through the media.”

The public faces of UPF are executive producers and Muslim converts Alex Kronemer and Michael Wolfe.  Kronemer has a “special” connection to Tennessee and Rutherford County; he is married to Lobna Luby Ismail, founder of Connecting Cultures, the organization contracted by the U.S. Department of Justice that trained school personnel from the Rutherford County and Murfreesboro school districts about respecting Islam.

Connecting Culture’s work in Tennessee has been covered extensively by

UPF is part of the U.S. Muslim propaganda campaign and markets its products to mass media such as PBS.  And as with all Muslim propaganda disseminating organizations, UPF also targets teachers.  UPF also promotes the  “20,000 Dialogues” project paired with yet another project titled “Change the Story”, which includes the standard Muslim Brotherhood entourage – ISNA, CAIR and MSA among others.  Each one of these initiatives singly and collectively, deceptively revises and whitewashes facts and history.  Daniel Greenfield has helped peel the onion in this regard here and here.

The First Amendment Center and the Council on Islamic Education (CIE)

In 2000 Charles Haynes on behalf of the First Amendment Center, collaborated with the CIE to publish “Teaching About Religion in National and State Social Studies Standards”.  Newsletter #49 discusses the CIE, its principal researcher Susan Douglass, and how they are transforming what is taught about Islam in U.S. public schools.

According to a 2008 entry posted on The American Muslim website, Safi Qureshey has been a generous funder of CIE:  “Shabbir Mansuri of the Council on Islamic Education, now the Institute on Religion and Public Life, over the course of twenty years, has rewritten the required textbooks on religion for 37 of America’s fifty states, thanks to unlimited funding by America’s first homegrown Muslim billionnaire, Safi Qureshey.”

Saghir Aslam is another Pakistani philanthropist who helped launch and financially support the CIE.  Aslam lays claim to having been instrumental in “helping to launch a number of national American Muslim organizations, including the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC)” and “facilitating the establishment” of CAIR.  The Muslim Observer reported that Aslam is close to the Muslim Brotherhood’s Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), having been authorized at one time to “oversee an ICNA bank account.” Aslam is also one of the founding members of the Islamic Society of Orange County, which in 1981 hired Muzammil Siddiqui to be the Religious Director, a position he still holds.

Saghir Aslam has other things in common with Safi Quereshey.

In addition to both being very wealthy Pakistani philanthropists living in the U.S., both men have supported the growth of Muslim Brotherhood ideology in the U.S.  In addition to their involvement with CIE, both men appear acquainted with Muzammil Siddiqui whose resume is replete with Muslim Brotherhood organizational associations including serving as the president of ISNA for several years and chair of NAIT’s board.  Siddiqui has plenty of examples to his credit to qualify him as a pro-jihad, pro-Sharia, anti-American, hard core Islamist.

While Siddiqui was still president of ISNA[1], Quereshey moderated a 2001 ISNA conference panel.  This was the same conference that hosted al-Qaeda leader Anwar Awlaki and promoted Islamic charities that were shut down due to ties to al-Qaeda.[2]  Aslam was a founding member of the Islamic Society of Orange County which hired Siddiqui to be the Religious Director.

Given the close involvement both personally and financially of principals Quereshey and Aslam with some of the main Muslim Brotherhood organizations, it would not be a stretch to suggest that Quereshey and Aslam’s endeavors are in furtherance of the “grand jihad from within” articulated in the 1991 Muslim Brotherhood memorandum.

Charles Haynes and the Islamic Networks Group (ING)

Added to the First Amendment Center’s collaboration with outside Islamist organizations, Charles Haynes is an ING Board member.  Newsletter #41 explains in greater detail the Muslim Brotherhood organizations which ING claims close relationships and working partnerships.

In August 2012, the Tennessee AMAC signed on as the newest ING affiliate.

[1] ISNA’s founding members included not only members of the Muslim Brotherhood’s MSA, but also Sami al-Arian who was convicted and deported for his leadership of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). See Newsletter #39 regarding the relationship between Sami Al-Arian and Tennessee’s Dr. Ali’s Jerusalem Fund. It was also proven during that Holy Land Foundation terror financing trial that ISNA maintained a fund which raised money for Hamas.

[2] Organizations promoted during the humanitarian relief session at the 2001 conference included, Benevolence International Foundation (first shut down in 1993 in Saudi Arabia over concerns about its ties to al-Qaeda and subsequently banned worldwide by the UN Security Council), Global Relief Foundation (shut down by U.S. government in 2001 for terrorist funding including al-Qaeda), LIFE for Relief and Development (raided by FBI and IRS in 2006. LIFE lists the Jerusalem Fund as a partner organization).

Thought for the day: Allah could never be my God


Allah could never be my God


My God wants me to Love Him, not beat me into submission to be his slave.


Allah could never be my God


My God commands me to treat others as I would want them to treat me.


Allah could never be my God


My God would never reward me for killing anyone even in His name.


Allah could never be my God


My God would only weep if I leave the faith but never condone killing me for it.


Allah could never be my God


My God commands me not to be deceitful for any reason.


Allah could never be my God


I was never born a Muslim and “reversion” is a fiction.


Allah could never be my God


Allah is nothing like my God.


Allah could never be my God


I would never want to be a Muslim.

Newsletter #63 – Tennessee’s Freedom Forum – Part I


Note:  if a link does not open a document just copy and repaste the URL into your browser.


This multi-part report examines the Freedom Forum and some of the “experts” representing the Forum’s programs, in particular Charles Haynes who heads the Religious Freedom Education Project.  The report will also look at the Freedom Forum’s contribution to and endorsement of pro-Islamist media bias typically displayed in The Tennessean and other news sources.

Most importantly, the report will expose the hypocrisy of the Freedom Forum’s commitment to First Amendment freedoms and their unwavering promotion and support for the Islamist agenda in the U.S.

Knowing more about the Freedom Forum, its objectives and its partners is important for several reasons including the fact that they will be expanding their trainings in Tennessee public schools and convening more events like this one.    

The Freedom Forum – the parent organization and its programs

The Freedom Forum is a non-profit foundation “that champions the First Amendment[1] as a cornerstone of democracy.”  It serves as the primary funding source for its three programs – The First Amendment Center and the Diversity Institute, both housed at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, and The Newseum in Washington, D.C..  The Newseum in turn supports the Religious Freedom Education Project directed by Charles Haynes who is also listed on the First Amendment Center’s website as one of its experts.

The First Amendment Center (the Center), was founded by Nashville native and former Tennessean newspaper journalist, editor, publisher and Board chairman, John Siegenthaler.  The Center is a self-ordained voice of authority on First Amendment freedoms including free speech, press, religion, the right to assembly and to petition the government.  Its website lays claim to being “one of the most authoritative sources of news, information and commentary in the nation on First Amendment issues.”

The Center states it is “non-partisan” but as will be shown, this in no way means that the Center is “non-biased.”

While the Freedom Forum initially pursued many goals with a focus on domestic and international free press, investigative journalist Russ Baker revealed a pattern of “self-serving generosity” by the Freedom Forum’s principals that ultimately caused a severe contraction and narrowing of the Freedom Forum’s operations and focus.

Baker alleges that investment ups and downs along with spending excesses of the Freedom Forum’s operators, changed programming priorities to enable Newseum, (described as the Forum’s “jewel”), to proceed.  The Newseum is a museum about journalism, but with the addition of the Religious Freedom Education Project (the Project), it has in reality, become much more.  To some extent, the Project has become a ever-ready abettor of the Islamist agenda in the U.S.

The Freedom Forum – doing their part to redefine our freedoms

The principals, individuals and organizations with whom the Freedom Forum collaborates, follow virtually in lockstep Recommendation 8 in the March 2010 report issued by President Obama’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships dictating “Inter-Religious Cooperation”:

“Utilize the expertise of faith – and community – based organizations to train education and media

professionals on Islam and Muslim communities.”

Out of 11 total recommendations in this report, 3 of them specifically address Muslims, with Islam being the only religion mentioned at all and included under its own heading “Engaging Muslim Communities”.

Perhaps the most ironic statement contained in the Recommendation include:

“….studies have shown what Muslims around the world most want from the West in order to improve relations – to be respected as equals.”

“We believe that citizen education – initiated and implemented by citizens –is the first step to engagement….Where American faith-based and community groups can best contribute is by educating their own constituents.  The majority of Americans say they know little or nothing about Islam.”

Black letter Islamic doctrine is based on the Muslim “believer” and the kaffir “non-believer” each with different rights, – kind of a barrier to “respect as equals” and any education provided to Americans about Islam must parrot the scripts approved by government and media bureaucrats and groups like CAIR; any deviation will be labeled hate speech and evidence of Islamophobia.

Read the report for yourself –


The Muslim Brotherhood and Islamists like Siraj Wahhaj claim “Islam is the solution”.  Wahhaj preaches that the U.S. should and will become an Islamic state because “Islam is better than democracy.”

Regardless of today’s Islamist propaganda, even if marketed under the moniker “American Muslim”, any and all assertions about Islam and/or the Quran being compatible with or having inspired First Amendment freedoms or the founding principles of this country, can never disguise Islam enough to make it the solution for any society that values individual rights and freedoms.


[1] “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”