Obama’s Muslim adviser Dalia Mogahed “is herself an Islamic ideologue who supports Islamic Sharia”

In “Appeasing the Muslim Brotherhood” at FrontPage today, Nonie Darwish exposes his closest Islamic adviser, Dalia Mogahed:

When President Obama spoke to the Muslim world in Cairo last June, a large portion of his guests were leaders and members of the Muslim Brotherhood. The speech was designed to please them more than supporting the reformist movement in Egypt and across the Muslim world.

The Obama administration has hired the first White House Muslim advisor, Dalia Mogahed, who helped with writing Obama’s speech. Mogahed is herself an Islamic ideologue who supports Islamic Sharia and denies any connection between radical Islam and terrorism. Mogahed, who was born in Egypt, has also been a firm defender of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). Both of these US groups are tied to the Muslim Brotherhood.

As an American of Egyptian origin myself, I can tell who is a reformist and who is a radical Muslim sympathizer, and I do not think that Ms. Mogahed’s views are in any way supportive of a reformation in Islam or of its concept of jihad. To the contrary, she denies the existence of any problem with Islamic ideology and she acts in total harmony with the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood. Her excuses are the same old excuses we Egyptians learned day in and day out in defense of Islamic jihad and in blaming others for misunderstanding of Islam. Her answers are always given with total confidence and conviction, as she tells her audience that any violent actions by Muslims have nothing to do with Islam. Never mind that Islamic mosques, education, art and songs all glorify jihad as a holy war for the sake of Allah.

Mogahed brings nothing new to Islamic propaganda but she certainly sounds interesting to Americans who are unfamiliar with this same old Islamic propaganda and who find it hard to question a religion. The truth about Mogahed is that she combines the good old Muslim sheikhs rhetoric with a better presentation that Americans can understand. Sheikhs never take any kind of criticism of Islam and they ridicule those who question Islam with statements like: “Who are you to speak for Islam? Leave the analysis to the experts on Islam.” Mogahed’s logic is very similar and, coincidentally, her book is entitled: “Who Speaks for Islam.” It is a meaningless title showing statistics that are designed to show that Muslims are different and are not all terrorists, which is no news.

Of course among Muslims there are good and bad people, like in any other group. What Mohahed refuses to admit is that reputable critics of Islam have nothing against Muslim people, but they correctly decipher that the problem stems from the ideology of Islam and its scriptures and commandments. What Mogahed refuses to discuss are the actual laws of Sharia, the history of jihad, the ideology and education that produced 9/11, Islamic imperialism, oppression of human rights, women and minorities. Her answers are usually simplistic, such as the argument that Sharia cannot be bad to women because the majority of Muslim women allegedly support Sharia? The bottom line of Mogahed’s propaganda is the same old complaint: that Islam is misunderstood and that Muslim people’s anger and violence is triggered by politics and not by religion. The problem with the West is all a misunderstanding, she argues, and with some education and sensitivity training the West will accept Islam as a religion of peace. Her position in the White House has given her a powerful opportunity to enhance the standing of radical Islamist groups in the eyes of our government instead of the reformists and anti-Sharia Muslims….

Read it all.

Geller: Free Speech Denied In Miami
Obama reaches out to Hamas-linked groups, obfuscates ideology of jihad terrorists
FacebookTwitterLinkedInDiggBlogger PostDeliciousEmailPinterestRedditStumbleUponPrint


  1. Corciovei Toader says

    Hello, hello.
    To whom it my concern.
    Is anybody there who can answer to this question?
    Because so far I couldn’t found somebody who can answer to my question is about Moses and Mohamed.
    The followers of Mohamed claims Moses and Mohamed were prophets of Allah, but who tells the truth from these two prophets because one is against to other?
    In the Holy Book it say Moses wrote to Jewish people that God told to Abraham to bring sacrifice the only son he love Isaac in that time Ishmael were in the in the wilderness with his mother.
    About 600 years after Jesus Mohamed wrote to Arab people that God told to Abraham to bring Ishmael for sacrifice that is why every year the followers of Mohamed sacrifice a lamb in the memory of Ishmael, but Moses didn’t say anything to Jewish people they have to do the same in the memory of Isaac and the followers of Mohamed claim their book came from Heaven.
    There is lot of proofs the Bible is Holy Book, because the Bible was inspired by God and has Ten Commandments from Heaven.
    But how Mohamed book came from Heaven without Ten Commandments?
    Ten Commandments are the base for everything for human kind and that what is very important for people is missed from their book.
    Their book without Ten Commandments, look like a book with fairytale stories.
    My question is, how these two books came from Heaven when each one has different stories and answers and how come these two prophets came from the same God they are against each other, doesn’t matter which son was for sacrifice both of them should have one answer instead there it look like two prophets from two different Gods.
    When I find out who tells the truth that will be the prophet I’ll follow the other one I’ll call false prophet or lair.
    I’ll appreciate if there is somebody to help me with this matter then I may know which prophet I’ll follow.
    I thanks to all of you if there is anybody willing to help me.

  2. says

    Perhaps with a little education and sensitivity training the Muslims will learn to live in harmony with their Christian neighbors?
    …their Jewish neighbors?
    …their Buddhist neighbors?
    …their Hindu neighbors?
    …their gay neighbors?
    …their female neighbors who want to go to school?

  3. says

    I`m so ashamed….. I was one who supported Obama at first, even convinced family relatives to vote for him…

  4. says

    What are we complaining about the Muslim advisers to Obama. We know if the chief is a Muslim, he is going to select Muslim advisers. That is not a surprise !!!

    Do Obama supporters still get it after his performance in the office??? This is the change he was promising but was not the
    change his supporters were looking for.

    I still don’t get these people – they saw his Muslim background, his radical associations, his flimsy record in senate, his church association with anti-US reverend… the list is long. And still these supporters chose to elect him. Go figure

  5. says

    Here’s an article from 2009 that describes what Stephen Schwartz, the Muslim head of the Center for Islamic Pluralism, thinks of Mogahed. Schwartz says she’s a believer in Islamic law, as Darwish says: Meet White House adviser who supports Islamic law:

    She describes her role in the Obama administration as a communicator to the president and other public officials of “what it is Muslims want.”

    But Muslims such as Steven Schwartz, a prominent American convert to Islam and ardent critic of Muslim fundamentalism, contend Dalia Mogahed, a scheduled speaker at the annual fundraiser Saturday in Washington for the controversial Council on American-Islamic Relations, certainly doesn’t speak for them.

    A senior analyst and executive director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies, Mogahed was appointed to President Obama’s Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.

    The Egyptian-born, hijab-clad adviser drew attention earlier this month when she defended Shariah, or Islamic law, on a British television show hosted by a member of an extremist Muslim group, insisting the majority of women around the world associate Shariah with “gender justice.”

    Schwartz, executive director of the Center for Islamic Pluralism, states in a column for the Weekly Standard that according to Mogahed’s view, Muslims are “either fundamentalist or confused.”

    “Their attitudes toward Islamic law are divided, in her terms, only between supposedly wanting Shariah to be the sole source of governance and seeing it as one source of legislation among various canons,” he writes. “But for her, even this distinction is less important than proclaiming the satisfaction of Muslim women with Shariah.”

    As late as Oct. 15, CAIR’s promotion of its 15th annual banquet listed Mogahed as a keynote speaker along with a controversial imam, Siraj Wahhaj, an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing investigation who has been recorded calling for the violent replacement of the U.S. government with a Saudi-style Islamic system.

    But by Friday, days after the release of “Muslim Mafia” – a book citing internal documents obtained in an undercover operation that establish CAIR functions as a political front group for the Egyptian-based Muslim Brotherhood – Mogahed’s name was replaced with civil rights activist Jesse Jackson’s. Mogahed’s assistant says, however, he hasn’t been informed of any changes.

    Schwartz says Mogahed shares the “outlook of Islamists in Egypt, Turkey, Pakistan and other countries threatened by fundamentalist tyranny, in which religious governance is posed as the sole alternative to secular dictatorship.”

    Pointing to her views expressed to a church leader writing in Christian Century magazine, Schwartz says that “while Muslims around the world are increasingly turning toward civil society, Dalia Mogahed offers the retrograde fantasy of Shariah as liberating, even as comparable with the principles of the Declaration of Independence.”

    Schwartz says Mogahed’s defense of Islamic law in the British TV interview as feminist was objectionable because Shariah “is most often employed to oppress women, not to free them from the blandishments of the sinful West.”

    “The Mogahed approach discounts the widespread, moderate Muslim view that Shariah, like other canons of religious law, should apply only to standards for diet, forms of prayer, and other strictly individual or personal options,” contends Schwartz.

    “Such an individual,” he concludes,” is inappropriate as an adviser to the president and can do great harm by providing an American seal of approval to extreme Shariah ideology.

    “We should not be surprised to find that leftists are not the only people with an extreme ideology present in the Obama team,” says Schwartz.

    Mogahed earned a master’s in business at the University of Pittsburgh and worked for Procter & Gamble before teaming with prominent Georgetown professor John L. Esposito on a study called “Who Speaks for Islam? What a Billion Muslims Really Think.”

    Schwartz calls the subtitle of the study, based on Gallup polling, “wildly overreaching.”

    Mogahed says she is “simply a researcher” capable of offering “accurately, and in a representative way, the actual views of Muslims.”

    In an interview with Islam Online in April, Mogahed said she didn’t consider herself an adviser on Islam. Her role in the Obama administration, she explained, is “to convey the facts about what Muslims think and feel.”

    “I see my role as offering the voices of the silenced majority of Muslims in America and around the world to the council so that our deliberations are informed by their ideas and wisdom,” she said. “I believe that I was chosen because the administration cares about what Muslims think and wants to listen.”

    ‘Non-violent destruction’

    Her British TV interview earlier this month was for a London-based discussion program hosted by Ibtihal Bsis, a member of the extremist Hizb ut Tahrir party, the London Telegraph reported.

    Hizb ut Tahrir has declared it wants to help foster the non-violent destruction of Western democracy and the creation of a global Islamic state under Shariah.

    Mogahed, appearing alongside Hizb ut Tahrir’s national women’s officer, Nazreen Nawaz, watched as two members of the radical group made repeated attacks on secular “man-made law” and the West’s “lethal cocktail of liberty and capitalism,” the Telegraph reported.

    The Hizb ut Tahrir members called for Shariah to be “the source of legislation” and said women should not be “permitted to hold a position of leadership in government.”

    Schwartz noted Mogahed didn’t object to anything the Hizb ut Tahrir members said.

    “While television debate between sharply-opposed individuals has become a dominant form of public communication all over the world, Dalia Mogahed made no effort, in her encounter with an extremist advocate, to establish any distance between their views,” he writes in his Weekly Standard column.

  6. says

    Mogahed is herself an Islamic ideologue who supports Islamic Sharia and denies any connection between radical Islam and terrorism.

    Why, that’s simply a fantastic assertion to make.

    *** 8:12 ***

    I shall terrorize the Infidels. So wound their bodies and incapacitate them because they oppose Allah and Mohammed.

    *** 8:39 ***

    So fight them until there is no more disbelief by Infidels and all submit to the religion of Allah alone in the whole world.

    *** 8:7 ***

    Allah wished to confirm the truth by His words: “Wipe the infidels out to the last.”

    But the good Ms. Dalia does have a point: there is no such thing as “radical Islam.” There is only Islam.

  7. says

    After the mass-murdering Islamic Jihad of 9/11, American voters elected a Muslim as President. And now they are reaping what they have sown.

    When did American voters become stupid?

  8. says

    “The problem with the West is all a misunderstanding, she argues, and with some education and sensitivity training the West will accept Islam as a religion of peace.” — headline

    Education and sensitivity training? Otherwise known as BRAINWASHING!

    Stop lying, dalia. We can all see that you’re trying to whitewash the truth by covering up how evil islam truly is. Hey, most of us can read, and we know what the koran says about killing the infidel; so we know that islam is NOT a “religion of peace”. Quite the opposite …

  9. says

    “I see my role as offering the voices of the silenced majority of Muslims in America and around the world to the council so that our deliberations are informed by their ideas and wisdom,” she said. “I believe that I was chosen because the administration cares about what Muslims think and wants to listen”

    So this muslimah is now the official rep of the world Muslims who are supposedly silenced majority. This woman has the ears of our clueless president. We can see her influences on Obama from his ridiculous asinine speech to Muslims in Cairo, to his ignoring of the popular uprising against the monkey dictator of Iran, to opening the treasury to the pakis, to his anti Israeli actions and many more pro Islamic antics. Yes the world Muslims are speaking through this woman and it seems most have no objections to her. Well what else do you expect from a president with no experience and no original thoughts of his own other than what others feed him?

  10. says

    Let us not forget that her surname itself – Mogahed – is simply Mu-Jahid (the ‘g’ and ‘j’ are interchangeable in some words – just as in, for example, the name of the Egyptian Muslim
    ‘scholar’, Ali-Goma or Ali-Juma.




  11. says

    Regarding Traeh’s post…She communicates ” what Muslims want”? Pleeeease- I could care less what they want. NO moderate Islam- it’s a sham and scam to lull us back to sleep. NO compromise or dialogue from me, I’ve had it with the mysogynistic pedophiles. Please take your sack wearin’ women and hoof it back to the wastelands.

  12. says

    What the heck is an Egyptian doing in the White House in the first place, never mind advising on Islam, radical or not. They just don’t get it do they? We don’t want any advice on Islam, we just want them all out of our civilised world. She sounds like a despicable piece of trash and as for saying “of course among Muslims there are good and bad people, like in any other group” – no there aren’t. Muslims are ALL bad, stupid and primitive, and I don’t care if they are sheep herders or doctors – they are all the same deep down. This religion stunts the brain and they are all properly stunted. She should be put on a slow boat back to Egypt accompanied by the White House intruder and his revolting family. All wearing burqas of course.

  13. says

    Lets impeach him now and save us the trouble of voting him out in 2012, Nobama, oh and for being pc and trying to commit fraud and convince real citizen patriots that Sharia is compatible with the United States Constitution, lets add on 100 more lashes if convicted of treason and see how sensitive the liberals are to muslim culture. Enough is Enough lets take our country back, looks like its time for another Crusade.

    Lets elect a Real African American Patriot and hero to the Presidency, Allen West if your out there and read this please don’t stop your political career at the Congress, Go for the White House, I will take PTO from work to Volunteer for you.

    Lets get America back on track, Islam is UnAmerican, Lets get a real sustainable energy plan in place, get our noses out of the MiddleEast and quit treating Iran like anything but an outlaw state.

  14. says

    Relax, dude. “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” You know what to do in November – vote out his minions. Then in 2012 – vote him out!

  15. says

    Echoing tanstaafl, don’t be too hard on yourself. You made a mistake and now realize your mistake. Good for you. Don’t look back too much. Rather, envision a one-term Obama Presidency. And, of course, be sure to talk again to those relatives of yours respecting what to do this November and in 2012.

  16. says

    Don’t be ashamed that you voted for Obama, Salv.
    A lot of people were hypnotized by his charizmatic speeches and rhetoric and his promises of change for the better.
    A lot of people are still supporting him and believe that change is still coming.
    But I think they’ll find that the change they expected and the change they’ll get have two different meanings.

  17. says

    Don’t forget:

    Xie xie, Zhong Hua Renmin Gonghe Guo!

    Gamsa Hamnida, Choson Inmin minchu Guk!

    Shukria, Pakistan!

  18. says

    Of course, champ, I agree with you that this person is whitewashing Islam. But is it intentional or rooted in naivety? So many Muslims fool themselves and sometimes it’s difficult to determine if a Muslim is lying to herself or to others. A close call many times, don’t you think? But what’s not arguable is that, ingenuous or not, Muslims are not contributory to the best that the West has produced. Hope you and yours are well.

  19. says

    American voters were stupid to re-elect this 9/11 POTUS, who:
    – covered up for his ‘family & friends’ in Al-Riyadh.
    – attacked NOT Saudi Arabia, but Saudi Arabis’s enemy, Iraq.
    – made Bandar a Bush.
    – pissed on American voters on 9/17: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_ZoroJdVnA
    – which Wafa Sultan observed: http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52962
    .. but coming back to American voters who voted for Mobarak “God D**N America” Obama, nailed America’s coffin by ignoring patriot Tom Tancredo, R-CO: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Tancredo
    Electing a spoilt, rich, AWOL irresponsbile brat was bad enough. Re-electing him, after the above, was, like you say, stupid.
    But, a good question to ask……..

  20. says

    Wellington, I see your point, I often try to understand what Muslims think and whether or not they lie deliberately or are only so much brainwashed and confused.

    OK, maybe some Muslims are genuinely disturbed by Western societies drawbacks, by freedoms’ drawbacks, like in what Traeh told us:
    “as two members of the radical group made repeated attacks on secular “man-made law” and the West’s “lethal cocktail of liberty and capitalism,” the Telegraph reported.”

    I can even respect such an opinion. What I would not respect is someone having such an opinion but publicly ostensibly supporting both Democracy and Islam.

    So, I ask, if they prefer Shariah law over Democracy, why not honestly and openly say so, everywhere? Like Anjem Choudhary does. That would mean that many Muslims want the Islamic countries to stay forever dictatorial, only more Islamic, and the Democratic countries to become also Islamic. Then we would know where we all stand, then wavering political parties would also be forced to take a pro-democratic, so anti-Islamic stand.

    But now there is so much vagueness, ambiguity, division in Islam. As if Shariah and Democracy are compatible somehow and Islam is harmless to Democracy and Islam is not the biggest obstacle to Democracy in Islamic countries.

    Oh, I wish we would put all Muslims, or all their leaders and organisations and countries for the choice: Pro Democracy or Pro theocracy or dictatorship? And let them sign contracts if they allege that Democracy is not in danger of or being blockaded by Islam.