Tennessee SB180/HBO 935 reads:   Forfeiture of Assets – As introduced, specifies that property used in the course of, intended for use in the course of, derived from, or realized through certain terrorist acts is subject to forfeiture; creates a civil action for damages for a person injured as a result of certain terrorist acts. – Amends TCA Title 38; Title 39; Title 40 and Title 41.

With the current climate of violence throughout the Middle East, and the promise of that violence coming to our own soil, why would anyone oppose additional measures to secure our own safety? Of course Muslim activist Paul Iesa Galloway from the American Center for Outreach sees it differently. According to this NPR article http://nashvillepublicradio.org/post/muslim-group-fears-tennessee-terrorism-bill-could-be-used-seize-houses-worship   Galloway frets there could be guilt by association and mosques could lose everything.  A little nervous Iesa? Would your affiliation with CAIR aka Hamas lead to guilt by association? Or perhaps your relationship with Muslim Brotherhood supporter Mohammed Elibiary would be.  Then it would make sense you’re opposing such legislation.

galloway 2011Paul Iesa Galloway

Another worry of Galloway’s is  “These houses of worship don’t have tightly controlled membership,” he said. “They’re open to anybody to come in and say their prayers and to leave. And unless this bill is worded in a much more specific and tailored way, it’s very catchall

Really? Funny, on the Islamic Center of Nashville’s website under history, it brags how close the community is.

“The Muslims in Nashville are well diverse with ethnic representations mainly from Kurdistan, Somalia, Afghanistan, Palestine, Middle East, North Africa, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Indonesia and United States, and many others from Yemen, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, U.A.E., Oman, Kuwait as well as African countries. Yet, the community is quite cohesive, well organized and closely tied together”. (http://www.icntn.org/index.php/ct-menu-item-3/ct-menu-item-5

So with the Islamic Center of Nashville being so cohesive and closely tied together, seems “anybody” that just stops in would stick out like a sore thumb.  So what is the real reason activists like Galloway oppose any laws that clamp down on terrorist activities?  Makes one wonder.

Perhaps Galloway should take his own advice. From an article on the Ibn Al Hyderabadee in 2006, (https://ibnalhyderabadee.wordpress.com/2006/12/04/alamdar-hamdani-and-iesa-galloway-dealing-with-the-fbi/)  Galloway and Alamdar Hamdani  are speaking about what not to do when contacted by the FBI, but   “Both Iesa and Alamdar mentioned that if you haven’t done anything wrong then you have nothing to worry about.

Pretty simple. SO what is the problem Mr.Galloway?




Cathy Hinners 






I find it interesting the time and energy being wasted on words by the President of the United States, the media and Muslims. In yet another interview, Muslim activist Paul “Iesa” Galloway, the new director for the American Center for Outreach in Nashville whines about the term so many find “offensive”. Islamic Extremism.  In an interview with NPR, Galloway states:

If you’re going to talk about violent extremism and not include homegrown extremism and not include right-wing or racist groups and not include leftist environmental groups, then it really does look like you’re saying violent extremism, in general, is a Muslim thing. And that’s problematic.”

It is a “Muslim” thing, and you’re right, it is problematic.  The Sovereign Citizens aren’t beheading Christians, the KKK isn’t burning them alive, and environmental groups like ALF ( Animal Liberation Front) aren’t demanding Christians convert or die, so what are you talking about?  The vast majority of conflicts occurring in the world today are involving Islam.

What’s odd is Islamists like Galloway don’t seem to be offended when the word Islam precedes a terrorist  organization like the one he aligns himself with, the MUSLIM Brotherhood, or the ISLAMIC Society of North America, or how about the MUSLIM Student Association?  How about the training compounds, the MUSLIMS of America reside at in Dover TN called ISLAMville or better yet Holy ISLAMville in York SC? That’s all ok because it’s used to describe terrorists that have not committed violence…yet.

So it’s acceptable when it’s  used as a guise to appear religious.  Perhaps Galloway and others are right. Perhaps there shouldn’t be descriptives placed before the word Islam. The same Islam practiced around the world. The same doctrine, the same prophet, the same Shahada.  Perhaps it’s just Islam.

Maybe even Galloway’s  close friend Mohammed Elibiary is right,  even he agrees there is no such thing radical Islam, only Islam.  The Islamic State is right, it’s Islam.

elibiary on no such thing as radical islam only islam

Read entire article here :





Cathy Hinners











It didn’t take long for the American Center for Outreaches new director Paul Shelby Galloway (aka Paul Iesa Galloway) to become paranoid like the former director Remziya Suleyman.  A new proposal that would allow the state’s Attorney General to break up “no go” zones has the Nashville Muslim organization in a tizzy, even though the proposal isn’t specific to any groups that would be affected.  Galloway, who hails from Houston TX, has brought the same ideology Suleyman had, as both have relationships with Muslim Brotherhood supporters.

Paul Iesa Galloway


Galloway was the founder of CAIR’s (Council on American Islamic Relations) Houston Chapter, but more disturbing than that, he worked closely with known Muslim Brotherhood ally, Mohammed Elibiary with the Freedom and Justice Foundation.  Elibiary was recently forced to leave his position in U.S Dept. of Homeland Security due to his extreme social media comments and pictures of his support for the Muslim Brotherhood.

out team

Mohammed Elibiary with Muslim Brotherhood logo R4bia


Being so closely associated with someone like Elibiary leaves Galloway little room to be pious yet alone credible. Assuming many things about the proposal for a “no go ” zone,  Galloway states “It could be anti-immigrant. It could be anti-Muslim,” he said. “It seems to be a combination of both.”   Or it could be a legal way to prevent radical groups from taking over territories . Something I’m sure Mr. Galloway would agree with.

Whether Galloway and his ACO like it or not, the facts regarding “no go “zones are accurate. Muslims, in particular immigrants and refugees,  throughout this country have created pockets of cities and towns where their refusal to assimilate is obvious. Unlike immigrant  “little Italy’s” or “China towns” of the past where all people were welcomed and urged to visit, todays Muslim newcomers to America seek to be isolated and different. Whether they like it or not, being isolated creates resentment and the impression of oppression, something youth especially don’t need.

Why is it the Muslim community in Tennessee is so paranoid? Why is protecting America and its citizens construed as hate? Why are those that don’t embrace their ideology bigots?

Why does the Muslim community resist any attempts to rid itself of criminal activity which would include terror organizations hiding within it?

Perhaps Mr. Galloway can answer those questions as they pertain to the proposal  to prevent just that occurring. Perhaps not, since he himself associates with them.

Cathy Hinners



cve picCountering Violent Extremism (CVE) was the topic of a summit held this week by the Obama administration, which was attended by global leaders, as well as state and federal authorities. Their purpose was to “develop community-oriented approaches to counter  hateful extremist ideologies that radicalize, recruit or incite to violence”.  What it should have been was 3 days of how to annihilate  the hateful Islamic ideology  that is slaughtering Christians throughout the Middle East.

While the attendees were busy listening to various speakers avoid discussing the real issue, Islam, the Obama administration was busy implementing special interest divisions and making appointments to head them. One such group  is the US Special Envoy and Coordinator for Strategic Counter-Terrorism Communications, which is to be led by someone not new to the White House , Rashad Hussain.  Hussain was previously the Special Envoy to the  Organization for Islamic Cooperation (OIC).


Hussain is a disturbing choice to run anything regarding counter terrorism, as he has been named by well respected, well known counter terrorism professionals as one of six Muslim Brotherhood supporters in the White House. It’s also alarming as his role within the OIC was to assist in drafting a defamation of religion law, better known as UN Resolution 16/18 ( see resolution under the documents tab)  The resolution calls for many things including “Adopting measures to criminalize incitement to imminent violence based on religion or belief“.     

Hussain’s unsavory connections to the Muslim Brotherhood are numerous ( read more here :   http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2563), but the selection of Hussain, whose specialty is creating laws to suppress speech to a “communications” group is bizarre.

Another distressing appointment that occurred before this summit is Congressman Andre Carson. House Minority leader Nancy Pelosi named the devout Muslim  Congressman  to the House’s Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.  Carson has an amiable relationship with several Muslim Brotherhood front groups such as CAIR ( Council on American Islamic Relations aka Hamas) ISNA ( Islamic Society of North America) and MPAC ( Muslim Public Affairs Council) whose affiliates donated a hefty $34,000 for his political campaigns.  ( read more here: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2552)

So while it may appear the Obama administration is making efforts to combat the root causes of  “violent extremists” by holding summits, creating task forces and divisions within divisions, he in effect is using the opportunity to further strangle America.   This summit was nothing more than smoke and mirrors creating an opportunity for this administration to further position Muslim Brotherhood members within strategic areas which have the ability to exercise influence over everything from National Security to foreign policy.


The Muslim Brotherhood has stated its goal. They don’t need guns, bombs and tanks, they are coming “from within”

What are you going to do about it?


Cathy Hinners





Let’s set this straight. The United Arab Emirates have designated CAIR ( Council on American Islamic Relations)  a terrorist organization. Several others, including Saudi Arabia and Egypt have designated the Muslim Brotherhood. Make no mistake, just because the United States has deliberately failed to follow suit, does not lessen the definition of this designation.  CAIR was formerly the IAP ( Islamic Association of Palestine) which is Hamas.

CAIR calls itself America’s largest Muslim grassroots organization, while America knows it as a co conspirator in Americas largest terrorist funding trial. CAIR was co founded by Nihad Awad, a Palestinian, and Omar Ahmad a Jordanian. CAIR is also known for its hundreds of frivolous lawsuits, successfully tying up our legal system otherwise known as legal jihad or lawfare.

That being said, CAIR has had the audacity to send leaders of the GOP a letter implying they need to embrace the Muslims in America or they ( CAIR) will undoubtedly lose in 2016. One point made in the letter states “ The American Muslim community is well positioned to impact election results in key swing states such as Ohio, Virginia and Florida” . Well positioned?

Again, CAIR advises that by not giving a platform to Islamophobia, holding accountable those candidates that do use their campaigns to foster anti-Muslim sentiment and making a concerted effort to engage Muslim voters, your campaign and the Republican Party will be closer to its presidential aspirations”  Really.

The fact this terrorist organization exists on American soil is bad, the fact this terrorist organization has been empowered by this administration and feels comfortable making statements to this effect, is frightening.

The following is the complete letter.



CAIR Open Letter to 2016 Republican Presidential Candidates: Engage Muslim Voters, Reject Islamophobia

Dear aspiring Republican 2016 presidential candidates:

It is a noble public service and personal sacrifice to campaign for president of the United States. On behalf of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest Muslim civil liberties organization, we provide sincere advice on how to avoid the past mistakes other Republican candidates have made when making remarks about and engaging with the American Muslim community.

The 2012 Republican presidential primaries were marked by a series of anti-Muslim statements made by nearly all candidates. For example, Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich both said that Muslims would be required to take loyalty tests or oaths to serve in their administrations, with Cain saying that he would not require similar oaths from Mormons or Catholics “because there is a greater dangerous part of the Muslim faith than there is in these other religions.”

Not only are loyalty oaths based on a person’s religion un-American, it is a violation of Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, which clearly states that “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

Islamophobic fear mongering during the 2012 campaign did not translate into a nomination for GOP presidential hopefuls Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Tim Pawlenty, Rick Perry, and Rick Santorum. Instead, the eventual Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, was able to distinguish himself from other GOP primary contenders by reaffirming that “people of all faiths are welcome in this country.”

Promoting Islamophobia and false anti-Muslim conspiracies to prove conservative bona fides and attract support from the GOP base in a presidential bid is a failing strategy. As noted in the 2013 Republican National Committee’s post-2012 election autopsy report, Growth & Opportunity Project, “If our Party is not welcoming and inclusive, young people and increasingly other voters will continue to tune us out.”

American Muslims are one of the most racially and ethnically diverse religious groups in the United States, with African-Americans, Arab-Americans, and South Asians each making up roughly a third of the community. Muslims have deep ties to and are actively involved in their respective communities. If Republican candidates want minority voter support, they will have to approach the Muslim community with the same respect shown to any other community.

The Republican Party’s “fight to reclaim America” in 2016 should not include disparaging remarks that question the loyalties of American Muslims or stigmatize Muslims as a group. Making anti-Muslim remarks will not get a campaign the “good” attention it needs to make a run for president. Such remarks do not go unnoticed by watchdogs and turn away independent or undecided voters.

Take for example Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, a potential GOP presidential candidate, who was recently criticized for calling some neighborhoods in European cities Muslim-controlled “no-go zones.” Delivering a foreign policy speech delivered in London, Jindal said, “In the West, non-assimilationist Muslims establish enclaves and carry out as much of Sharia law as they can without regard for the laws of the democratic countries which provided them a new home.”

While Fox News apologized for and retracted one of its guest’s false claims that there are Muslim “no-go zones” in Europe, Jindal’s insistence that such places do in fact exist has been widely reported by his home state’s liberal and conservative leaning newspapers as a bungled play for the conservative base.

Sweeping Republican victories in the midterm election were partly driven by the higher turnout of older, white voters. Younger and minority voters traditionally show up in far greater numbers during presidential elections. A Republican path to the White House in 2016 and beyond will be paved by making greater efforts to appeal to America’s minority communities, including the American Muslim community.

As advised by the Growth & Opportunity Project report, Republican candidates in 2014 made far greater attempts to court Latino voters or at least avoid being antagonistic about the issue of immigration. This strategy paid off in a number of key races in Texas, George, and Kansas where nearly half of Latino voters supported Republican candidates for governor. This was quite an accomplishment considering Latinos had voted two-to-one for Democratic candidates in the previous mid-term elections.

Republican candidates should invest similar resources in courting Muslim voters as they do other minority communities. The American Muslim community is well positioned to impact election results in key swing states such as Ohio, Virginia and Florida.

It is well-known that the majority of the American Muslim vote went to President George W. Bush in the close 2000 election. However, by the 2012 general election, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney only received a single digit percentage of the Muslim vote. This significant drop in Muslim support for the Republican Party can be attributed to unwillingness from Republican candidates to engage with Muslim communities, increased adoption of Islamophobic rhetoric and support for discriminatory legislation that targets foreign law, a dog whistle to the conservative base for “sharia law.”

A poll of registered American Muslim voters conducted by CAIR before the 2014 midterm election found a modest positive shift in Muslim voter support for Republican candidates, reflecting the GOP’s national gains. Close to 20 or more percent (23 percent for Rick Scott in Florida) of Muslims elected Republican candidates for governor in the midterm elections. Republican gains in the Muslim community were attributed to winning over traditionally independent or undecided voters.

While Republicans have overwhelmingly been responsible for pushing anti-Islam prejudice during past elections, four separate incidents in 2014-15 showed that the GOP will, at times, act against Islamophobia. In January, the RNC Executive Committee voted to censure Michigan GOP National Committeeman Dave Agema for his repeated incendiary comments about Muslims and Islam. Continued Republican actions against Islamophobic remarks and acts inside and outside of the party can easily swing Muslim voters with a history of Republican Party support back toward the GOP.

Further Republican gains in the Muslim community are possible if a sincere effort is made. Again, CAIR advises that by not giving a platform to Islamophobia, holding accountable those candidates that do use their campaigns to foster anti-Muslim sentiment and making a concerted effort to engage Muslim voters, your campaign and the Republican Party will be closer to its presidential aspirations.