Kerry, Pro-Centric Mission Centrifuges

Nothing else matters to the White House or to John Kerry than that of coming away with a nuclear deal with Iran as summarized here.

As November 24, the deal expiration dates gets closer, Iran continues to enjoy more red-carpet treatment rolled out by John Kerry and his hand-selected team.

Meanwhile, it is important to know what Iran is really doing while all these talks go on and get extended.

 

Iran began installing two cascades of advanced centrifuges at the Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant (PFEP) at Natanz. As of August 28, 2011, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iran had installed 136 IR-2m centrifuges in cascade 5 and 27 IR-4 centrifuges in cascade 4. Iran started feeding 54 of the 136 IR-2m centrifuges with natural uranium hexafluoride.1  Each of these cascades is designed to contain 164 centrifuges. Iran first told the IAEA in January 2011 that it intended to install these two cascades, and it is unclear why Iran waited nearly eight months before starting to install them.

Installation of the IR-2m centrifuges is now complete. Installation of the IR-4 centrifuges could finish anytime.

The IR-2m and the IR-4 centrifuges have the same length and diameter. They are derived from the Pakistani P2 centrifuge design that A.Q. Khan sold Iran in the 1990s. Iran subsequently modified this design (see figures 1 and 2). The IR-2m rotor is made of two carbon fiber rotor sections or tubes and a maraging steel bellows. The IR-4 has two carbon fiber tubes connected by a carbon fiber bellows, an unusual choice likely reflecting a shortage of maraging steel.  Both centrifuge designs use a top and bottom bearing and a motor taken from the P2 design.

Khan found that the P2 design worked considerably better than the P1 centrifuge, suffering far fewer failures. Similarly, the IR-2m and IR-4 centrifuges are expected to have fewer breakdowns than the IR-1 centrifuges currently at the Natanz Fuel Enrichment Plant that are copies of the P1 centrifuge. However, as is discussed below, these centrifuges may not perform as expected.

 

It must also be understood, however that the talks with Iran should such an agreement be reach, will not be under the title of treaty or agreement such that it would go to Congress to be approved and members of Congress already know this. They are worried to the point that several have introduced legislation to prevent advancement of the Iranian nuclear program and are poised to re-install many sanctions that the Obama administration has suspended. The White House and the State Department are looking for methods to completely excluded allies but most of all our own Congress from the comprehensive details of the nuclear deal and from subsequently voting on accepting or opposing the deal completely. This speaks to the Obama administration having its own exclusive authority. In fact it is so disturbing, even the New York Times spells it out with concerns.

WASHINGTON — No one knows if the Obama administration will manage in the next five weeks to strike what many in the White House consider the most important foreign policy deal of his presidency: an accord with Iran that would forestall its ability to make a nuclear weapon. But the White House has made one significant decision: If agreement is reached, President Obama will do everything in his power to avoid letting Congress vote on it.

But Mr. Obama cannot permanently terminate those sanctions. Only Congress can take that step. And even if Democrats held on to the Senate next month, Mr. Obama’s advisers have concluded they would probably lose such a vote.

“We wouldn’t seek congressional legislation in any comprehensive agreement for years,” one senior official said.

White House officials say Congress should not be surprised by this plan. They point to testimony earlier this year when top negotiators argued that the best way to assure that Iran complies with its obligations is a step-by-step suspension of sanctions — with the implicit understanding that the president could turn them back on as fast as he turned them off.

Nothing on the other side of the horizon is more dangerous than Kerry and his army right now leading the charge to get a pen in the hands of Iran.

 

It is Qatar, Stupid: Part 2

If you live in Houston, the person next to you may be a Qatari either in country for medical care or working for a petroleum company either owned or partially owned by Qatar like Golden Pass Products.

If you live in Chicago, you may have dinner at the Radisson Blu Aqua Hotel, owned by the Qatar Investment Authority. If you live in Washington DC, you may work or live at City Center, a fully owned Qatar real estate development.

If you walk through airports in Houston, Washington DC, New York or Chicago, you will see arrival and departure gates for Qatar Airlines. If your children are in university and want to learn Arabic, they are doing so with foreign language departments paid for in full by Qatar. In other classes, your son or daughter may be sitting next to a Qatari student or your child may have never been accepted to the school of their choice as that place was handed over to a foreign student instead getting in-State tuition. It should be noted that Sheik al Mayassa al Thani was educated both at Duke University and Columbia. He runs the Qatari Foundation that has it’s headquarters at City Center in Washington DC.

If you happen to work at a cargo port or two or more that imports natural gas, you may be employed by Qatar. One reason for terminating the Export Import Bank is due in part that the U.S. invests $2 billion in loan guarantees in a country that has an established wealth within the top world ranking, yet the bank supports operations for natural gas in Qatar that supplies Japan, India and the UK, such that the United Kingdom has enjoyed a $33 billion investment by Qatar that Great Britain received 85% of their natgas from Qatar.

 

Now, the United States has had a relationship with Qatar since the 1990’s and since that time, the al Thani monarchy has toggled their foreign policy relationships for many years, meaning they are manipulating for the sake of moving into a higher regional power.

This toggle/manipulation agenda is described as removing Bashir al Assad from power but yet Qatar works diligently with Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah and the Taliban and Barack Obama has and is deferring all negotiations with those terror groups to the al Thani monarchy.

With a population of just 2.0 million, it should be noted that each resident is way above the norm for wealth and the style of living is so luxurious that up to 20% of those that live in Qatar are foreign nationals.

Qatar maintains a Shura council for day to day domestic policy and law enforcement. Political parties in Qatar are forbidden completely and their own Constitution is thin on substance, checks and balances and protections except for the monarchy ruling family and party.

When it comes to the United States and the ‘defensive’ component, sure America has CENTCOM part two there but another key military asset is al Udeid base that is designed to support efforts in Afghanistan, and this base has been expanded from the original footprint by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Secretary Chuck Hagel just recently extended a joint military cooperation agreement with Qatar for another ten years. At this location, the United States trains the Qatari military paid for by U.S. grants.

 

France is the largest exporter of arms to Qatar and Qatar maintains a large inventory of ‘stinger’ missiles which are sold, traded and smuggled through a black market. There are real questions that need to be answered as to why Qatar has received and bought huge numbers of various and high tech-based military assets for a military that is quite small in scale and without knowing the real outside threat to their sovereignty and safety.

While that U.S. State Department has maintained a very wide, deep and comprehensive list of terror groups, it is well known by the State Department that Qatar has key people that support these terror groups and coordinate donations from outside sources. Due in part to negotiations of the Iranian nuclear program, the Taliban, Gitmo and al Qaeda, Secretary Hillary Clinton and now John Kerry only mention these matters in passing to Qatar just to get it on the record, but otherwise nothing outside a feeble attempt to pinpoint these illicit activities has created any traction as our NSC and State needs Qatar for nefarious objectives as has been noted least of which is the Taliban 5.

The illicit activities include the facts that the Taliban 5 live in ClubMed conditions, Khalid Sheik Mohammed was provided safe haven in Qatar, Khaled Mashaal, the leader of Hamas lives fully protected in Doha and Yusuf al Qaradawi, a very old man, lives in Qatar running the Syrian and Egyptian Islamic jihad. Only recently did Qatar dispel a few Muslim Brotherhood leaders to Syria but they are well protected and other Muslim Brotherhood leadership remains in Qatar with funding continuing as it began during the Arab Spring from the elitists in Qatar. At the core of support for the Muslim Brotherhood objectives in Qatar is Emir Tamin bin Hamad. These objectives include construction projects in Gaza including electrical power plants.

Then in closing there is yet another satellite headquarters for Qatari investments that is located in Switzerland named the al Karana Foundation. This effort is led by Abdelrahman bin Umayer al Nuaymi and is well known to the global banking system(s) while no one dares to either challenge or exam the connections, transactions or causes that mostly will translate to funding going to terror groups that includes al Nusra and the Ennahda Party in Tunisia.

So you see ladies and gentlemen, dollars and terrorism is in fact a global enterprise that occurs even in alleged neutral countries, or are they in fact neutral?

First article on Qatar:  https://founderscode.com/?p=738

 

 

 

 

Dancing with the Soviets, Putin Style

The Parties to this Treaty reaffirm their faith in the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and their desire to live in peace with all peoples and all governments.
They are determined to safeguard the freedom, common heritage and civilisation of their peoples, founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law. They seek to promote stability and well-being in the North Atlantic area.
They are resolved to unite their efforts for collective defence and for the preservation of peace and security. They therefore agree to this North Atlantic Treaty
.

 

Vladimir Putin’s mission is to destroy NATO and he is about to get real help in doing so. Jens Stoltenberg is the new Secretary-General of NATO effective October 1 and that is going to be a problematic for NATO or will it? The Minsk Agreement defines the Putin mission.

With Jens Stoltenberg in leadership at NATO, there are some very disturbing clues that Putin could be getting closer to his long term goals demonstrated by some historical facts and current approaches.

‘The former Norwegian prime minister — the first NATO secretary general from a country bordering Russia — is known for his good relations with President Vladimir Putin and Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev.

During his decade in power, the two countries signed milestone agreements on the delineation of their frontier in the Barents Sea and on visa exemptions for their border populations. An economist by training, the former Labour Party head has never shown any particular fondness for defence or security matters.

But his experience has left him with a strong international network and honed his skills as a cross-border negotiator, both of which could prove essential.’

Here are some facts regarding Stoltenberg that collectively provide some insight to what may be ahead for NATO.

1. Stoltenberg is a manipulator of politics as noted when he chose to be a taxi driver for a day to get a political pulse on the ground, but used paid actors.

2. Stoltenberg has had previous dealings with Russia over border issues regarding the Barents Sea and he compromised.

3. Not only is Stoltenberg an Atheist but he is an Anti-Semite as well.

4. Jens Stoltenberg is inert and is passive when it comes to a drug narcotic policy for Norway, Europe and globally.

5. He is in fact a globalist and did work while at the United Nations as a special envoy promoting ‘climate change missions and financing’, he is a robust supporter of a global tax to solve climate change along with the Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and Barack Obama. Jens also walks in lock-step with Greenpeace.

6. Stoltenberg also endorses and has worked diligently for global vaccinations in cadence with the Gates Foundation. Vaccinations have not proven to be effective or administered as advertised.

7. Perhaps the most disturbing and factual component of Stoltenberg is that he had his own KGB code name “Steklov” bestowed upon him by a close friend of many years as a KGB operative.

Stoltenberg is a member/leader of the Labour Party which is telegraphed as a social democracy but yet has deep ties to Communists International. Camilla, the sister of Jens was a member of the Red Youth, a group of loyal followers of Marxists/Leninists. Stoltenberg protested against the United States during the Vietnam war and caused damage to the U.S. embassy during a demonstration for which he was jailed.

Then we cannot omit his mentor and friend Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany. Merkel speaks fluent Russian and had a membership card in the Free German Youth movement which was managed by the Socialist Party out of East Germany. As the defacto leader of the European Union, Merkel worked to install a full immigrant acceptance policy in Germany for which other European nations would follow. Today that policy has failed with particular regard to Muslims.

Some time ago, it was determined that Merkels’ communications were being tracked by the NSA. Given her history, associations, education, friendships and objectives, it is no wonder that U.S. intelligence agencies want to know her real actions as part of the overall agendas, collusions, and relationships that must be assessed into U.S. domestic analysis and policy.

Countries within Europe will follow Merkel and now especially so with Stoltenberg at the head of NATO. It was Merkel who supported, nominated and worked to install Jens Stoltenberg at the helm of NATO.

While Putin has used soft aggression on Crimea and then terror aggression on Ukraine in an effort to rebuild his version of the Soviet Empire, Ukraine is but one solution to put real pressure on Europe to dance the Waltz with Putin over nothing more than the threat of shuttering oil and gas resources NATO members and Europe requires. The dance partners are many on the world stage.

For an audio version of the future of NATO and Russia being at the core of terrorism, go here.

Look out world this could be the very end of the joint military cooperative of NATO members, it is predicted that more countries will successfully fall under Russia annexation while sanctions against Russia will likely be lifted page by page by the West. Stay warm my friends.

 

 

Illegals, Education and the Poorer Taxpayer

It should be noted that DACA is NOT law, it began with a memo from Baraq Obama to DHS and later to HHS. DACA is for children, in the government definition it includes anyone up to age….31.

In-State Tuition Rates and Financial Aid for DACA Grantees

Talking Points

Background

On June 15, 2012, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) Janet Napolitano issued a memorandum announcing the DHS’s new policy to grant deferred action status to certain classes of childhood arrival illegal aliens.1 On the same day, Director John Morton of ICE issued a memorandum directing all ICE employees to apply the Secretary’s policy. 2 The Morton Memo also detailed the criteria necessary for an illegal alien to qualify for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) program under this policy, which include:

• The illegal alien came to the United States under the age of sixteen;

• The illegal alien is not above the age of thirty;

• The illegal alien has continuously resided in the United States for at least five years preceding the date of the June 15, 2012 Morton memo and is present in the United States on the date of the June 15, 2012 Morton memo;

• The illegal alien is currently in school, has graduated from high school, has obtained a general education development certificate, or is an honorably discharged veteran of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces of the United States;

• The illegal alien has not been convicted of a felony, a significant misdemeanor offense, or multiple misdemeanor offenses; and

• The illegal alien does not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.3

Deferred action on this basis is granted for two years and may be renewed indefinitely or terminated by DHS at any time at the agency’s discretion.

 

 

The definition of citizen has been redefined by the Federal government.

The sovereign borders have been redefined by the Federal government.

The quality of healthcare access has been redefined by the Federal government.

The security of our homeland has been redefined by the Federal government.

The quality of public education has been redefined by the Federal government.

The value of domestic tranquility has been redefined by the Federal government.

The tax-code has been redefined by the Federal government.

The oath of duty to laws has been redefined by the Federal government.

FACT SHEET: Educational Services for Immigrant Children and Those Recently Arrived to the United States

Schools in the United States have always welcomed new immigrant children to their classrooms – according to the most recent data, there were more than 840,000 immigrant students in the United States, and more than 4.6 million English learners. We have begun to receive inquiries regarding educational services for a specific group of immigrant children who have been in the news – children from Central America who have recently crossed the U.S. – Mexico border. This fact sheet provides information to help education leaders better understand the responsibilities of States and local educational agencies (LEAs) in connection with such students, and the existing resources available to help educate all immigrant students – including children who recently arrived in the United States.

____________________________________________________________________________________

 

BACKGROUND

All children in the United States are entitled to equal access to a public elementary and secondary education, regardless of their or their parents’ actual or perceived national origin, citizenship, or immigration status. This includes recently arrived unaccompanied children, who are in immigration proceedings while residing in local communities with a parent, family member, or other appropriate adult sponsor.

Under the law, the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is required to care for unaccompanied children apprehended while crossing the border. While in care at a HHS shelter, such children are not enrolled in local schools but do receive educational services and other care from providers who run HHS shelters.

Recently arrived unaccompanied children are later released from federal custody to an appropriate sponsor – usually a parent, relative, or family friend – who can safely and appropriately care for them while their immigration cases proceed. While residing with a sponsor, these children have a right under federal law to enroll in public elementary and secondary schools in their local communities and to benefit from educational services, as do all children in the U.S.

EXISTING RESOURCES

Existing resources that may be helpful to communities enrolling immigrant children, including newly arrived immigrant children, include:

Services for Educationally Disadvantaged Children (Title I): Title I, Part A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) provides funds to raise the achievement of children who attend high-poverty schools. To the extent that newly arrived immigrant children attend Title I schools, they may be eligible to receive Title I, Part A services. Additional information about Title I, Part A programs is available here.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA): IDEA funds may be used by LEAs to evaluate children of any background who are suspected of having a disability under IDEA. Once a child is found to

be a child with a disability under IDEA, the funds may be used to provide special education and related services to the child consistent with the child’s individualized education program and subject to IDEA’s notice and consent provisions. Additional information about IDEA is available here.

English Language Acquisition Programs: States are required to set aside up to 15 percent of their Title III funds under the ESEA for subgrants to LEAs that have experienced a significant increase in immigrant students. Such funds can be used for a broad range of activities including improving instruction, providing tutoring and intensified instruction, and conducting community participation programs. Such funds may be used to serve newly arrived immigrant children regardless of whether such children are English Learners. Additional information about Title III is available here and here.

McKinney-Vento Act: The McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act delineates educational rights and support for children and youth experiencing homelessness, including guaranteeing immediate access to a free, appropriate public education. Federal law identifies a number of living arrangements such as sharing the housing of others, in which inhabitants would qualify for purposes of the Act. Under McKinney-Vento, school districts must appoint a local liaison to ensure, among other things, that (1) children and youth eligible under McKinney Vento are identified; (2) that they immediately enroll in, and have a full and equal opportunity to succeed in, the schools of the district; and (3) they receive educational services for which they are eligible, and referrals to health care services, dental services, mental health services, and other appropriate services.

Unaccompanied children who are in HHS shelters would not be eligible for McKinney-Vento services, but children who are released to live with a sponsor may be eligible on a case-by-case basis under the law’s broad definition, which includes youth who are living with family members in “doubled-up” housing, i.e., sharing the housing of other persons due to economic hardship or a similar reason. School districts should refer children they believe may qualify to the district’s local liaison for further consideration and a determination of McKinney-Vento eligibility. More information about McKinney-Vento eligibility is available here and more information about the rights and services available under the McKinney-Vento Act is available here.

Migrant Education Programs (MEP): MEP funds are awarded to States under the authority of Title I, Part C of the ESEA. The MEP provides educational and supportive services to children who are migratory agricultural workers or fishers or who move with a parent or guardian who is a migratory agricultural worker or fisher. Newly arrived immigrant children may qualify as eligible migratory children on a case-by-case basis— provided they meet the program requirements and fit the program-specific definition of migratory child. Additional information about migrant education programs is available here.

National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition: This Clearinghouse provides non-monetary assistance in research-based strategies and approaches such as academic language development, and can also share data and models for the creation of Newcomer Centers to serve recently arrived immigrant students and English language learners. Additional information about the Clearinghouse is available here.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Q1. Do States and school districts have an obligation to educate children who arrived to the United States?

A1. Yes. Under Federal law, States and local educational agencies are obligated to provide all children – regardless of immigration status – with equal access to public education at the elementary and secondary level. This includes children such as unaccompanied children who may be involved in immigration proceedings. The U.S. Departments of Education and Justice published a joint guidance letter on this topic that is available here and a fact sheet that is available here.

Q2. Where are unaccompanied children housed while in temporary custody?

A2. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) operates about 150 shelters throughout the nation for unaccompanied children that care for the children until they are released to sponsors, on average within 35 days. A majority of these shelters care for fewer than 50 children. Shelters are operated by non-profit organizations, generally as group homes. HHS pays for and provides all services for the children while they are in care at a shelter. This includes providing food, clothing, education, medical screening, and any needed medical care to the children. The children at these shelters do not attend local public schools, do not integrate into the local community, and remain under staff supervision at all times. Additional information about HHS custody is available here.

Q3. Are children provided with basic education services while in temporary custody at HHS shelters?

A3. Yes. The children are provided with basic education services and activities by HHS grantees. Thus, these children do not enroll in local schools while living in HHS shelters.

Q4. Are children who arrived as unaccompanied children ever enrolled in local schools?

A4. While students are in HHS custody at HHS shelters, they will not be enrolled in the local school systems. When students are released to an appropriate sponsor, typically a parent, relative or family member, or other adult sponsor, while awaiting immigration proceedings, they have a right – just like other children living in their community – to enroll in local schools regardless of their or their parents’ actual or perceived immigration or citizenship status. State laws also require children to attend school up to a certain age. A small number of children in HHS custody are placed in long-term foster care instead of being released to a sponsor. These children do enroll in public school in the community where their foster care is located. Children in all other care settings receive education at an HHS facility.

Q5. Are immunization records available for children who arrived as unaccompanied children to the United States?

A5. While at HHS shelters, the children receive vaccinations. When a child is released from HHS custody to a sponsor, the sponsor is given a copy of the child’s medical and immunization records compiled during their time in custody. If a sponsor does not have a copy of the child’s medical or immunization records, the sponsor can request a new copy from HHS via e-mail at [email protected].

Q6. Are children who arrived as unaccompanied children eligible for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals?

A6. Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or “DACA,” does not apply to children who arrive now or in the future in the United States. To be considered for DACA, individuals must have continually resided in the U.S. since June 2007.

Q7. Do districts have the ability to use Federal education funds to address the needs of unaccompanied children who enroll in the district?

A7. States and LEAs have the ability to use various Federal education funds for this purpose. For example, to the extent that such children attend Title I schools, they may be eligible to receive Title I, Part A services. In addition, as discussed above, States can reserve up to 15% of their Title III formula grants for immigrant subgrants, and if a State has previously reserved a lesser amount, it could increase that amount for next year’s subgrants.

Q8. Is there a place to ask additional questions about immigrant children who enroll in the district?

A8. For help with additional questions regarding resources for unaccompanied children, please call the U.S. Department of Education at 1-800-USA-LEARN or visit answers.ed.gov.

 

Points of Light has Points to Hamas

President George H.W. Bush created a foundation called Points of Light Foundation designed as a charity to support volunteers in several countries. President #41 has very little to do with the foundation since its founding, but it is a non-partisan organization.

Then in 2007, the POL was headed by Michelle Nunn, a democrat who is running for U.S. Senate in Georgia. Michelle’s father, Sam Nunn has been very involved in another lobby group Globe Zero which has a charter to eliminate all global nuclear weapons. A factoid is that the present Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel was also a board member of Globe Zero.

Back to Michelle Nunn, it seems a document was leaked somehow regarding her actions while the Chairman of Points of Light today. Why is this important? Well it seems POL under her chairmanship gave money to Islamic factions that moved money to Hamas.

COME GEORGIA, KNOW YOUR CANDIDATES AND TELL ANOTHER VOTER

Yes….wow is right. For a full summary of this matter of Michelle Nunn go here and the whole 144 page document is included.

Did Dem Senate Candidate Michelle Nunn Help Fund Hamas?

by Daniel Greenfield

‘In 2007 it was being run by Michelle Nunn, a political princess whose father was the Dem Senator from Georgia, and whose daughter now wants to inherit his seat.

Back at Points of Light, Michelle Nunn had transformed Points of Light into a generic social justice enterprise feeding money to a network of allied left-wing groups. Nunn got a $300,000 salary and even groups linked to terrorists got paid… as Eliana Johnson reports.

According to the IRS Form 990s that Points of Light filed in 2008 and 2011, the organization gave a grant of over $33,000 to Islamic Relief USA, a charity that says it strives to alleviate “hunger, illiteracy, and diseases worldwide.” Islamic Relief USA is part of a global network of charities that operate under the umbrella of Islamic Relief Worldwide. Islamic Relief USA says on its website that it is a legally separate entity from its parent organization, but that they share “a common vision, mission, and family identity.”

Islamic Relief Worldwide has ties to Hamas, which the U.S. designates as a terrorist organization. In June, Israel banned the charity from operating in the country because, according to Israeli officials, it was funneling cash to Hamas. In 2006, Israelis arrested Islamic Relief Worldwide’s Gaza coordinator, Ayaz Ali. They said he was working to “transfer funds and assistance to various Hamas institutions and organizations.” Ali admitted to cooperating with local Hamas operatives while working in Jordan and, on his computer, Israeli officials found photographs of “swastikas superimposed on IDF symbols,” and of Nazi officials, Osama bin Laden, and al-Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Islamic Relief USA highlighted the work of Islamic Relief Worldwide in Palestine in its 2012 annual report, in which it talks generally about the work of Islamic Relief charities in the region without drawing a distinction between the branches. The organization has raised eyebrows before. According to a 2012 report, its bank account was closed by UBS and it was “under constant scrutiny by other banks due to nervousness about counterterrorist regulations.” The group’s terror ties extend beyond Hamas, according to a former Israeli intelligence official. He says that Islamic Relief Worldwide’s country director in Palestine, Muneed Abugazaleh, met in April 2012 with Dr. Omar Shalah, a leader of the terror group Islamic Jihad and of the Riyad al-Saleheen Charitable Society, which is affiliated with the group. He is also the brother of Ramadan Shalah, the leader of Islamic Jihad.

Aside from the terrorism issue, what does any of this have to do with POL’s original mission of volunteerism?

Islamic Relief USA is largely oriented toward Muslim conflict zones. It’s raising money currently for Syria and Gaza. Considering that Gaza is run by Hamas, some serious questions need to be asked.’

Ryan Mauro has some more details on the interconnections.

Although IRUSA says it is a “legally separate and independent” affiliate of IRW, the two share leadership and resources. IRUSA transferred $4.8 million, $5.9 million and $9.4 million to IRW in 2007, 2008 and 2009, respectively. IRUSA’s December 31, 2010 financial report states, “The majority of IRUSA’s programs are administered through grants with [IRW],” with a total of nearly $22 million that year alone.

Which essentially means that if you’re funding IRUSA, you’re funding a group linked extensively to terrorists. And not just Hamas.

Just in case you need more on Hamas, his is a video by the son of the founder of Hamas speaking out against Hamas, he is now a Christian. http://t.co/CzM7pHiAgD

Additionally in the document, Michelle Nunn also is coordinating activity to fight back against eh SCOTUS ruling on Citizens United, you know the case that Barack Obama pushed back hard on in his State of the Union Address. It is also at the core of the IRS targeting program.