Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy theories

Closure conflict
My closure conflicted with that of WilyD, so for the record, here's how I would have closed the AfD:

No consensus. After discounting the opinions by Korentop and Jason from nyc, which do not advance a policy-based reason for deletion that I can understand, the only opinions making valid deletion arguments are the ones by Carrite and Alf.laylah.wa.laylah, namely, that the contents are original research and that the topic is not notable. However, they fail to convince the great majority of the remaining opinions, which focus on the fact that the individual parts of the article appear to be sourced. Even though these arguments are relatively weak because they do not (in my opinion) convincingly address the OR and notability issues, the number of the people making them does prevent the arguments for deletion from obtaining the required consensus.  Sandstein  06:39, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Technically Not a Theory - But an Actual Conspiracy (Indictment 1) resulting in 65 Year Jail Sentences
It may be that both parties have made a superficial view of source material: in citing news articles, Walid Shoebat and Michelle Bachmann - but not digging into the first hand sources that they have cited in their respective bibliographies.

Huma Abedin

Shoebat cites, the Annual Report (2004-2008) oft Organization of the Islamic Trust (OIT) at the Oxford Center for Islamic Studies. A trustee of the OIC is none other than the present Global Muslim Brotherhood's Supreme Guide, headquartered in Egypt, Dr. Yusef Al-Qaradawi.(cover page)

Huma Abedin's Brother, Dr Hassan Abedin, is listed (page 7) as a King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Fellow and Development Officer to the Center. Meaning that the leader of the [|Muslim Brotherhood] worked for four years in the same Islamic Center at Oxford. Yusef Al-Qaradawi left Oxford to fill the top rank of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

Before getting a Security Clearance, by a U.S. Department, a candidate must be vetted through the Office of Personal Management (OPM) and the investigative agency (FBI, CIA, DOD, DOS, DOT, OPM) by, first, filling out a Standard Form (SF-86) on OPM's e-QIP database. Information that you must fill out includes:


 * Where have you lived (dates, physical addresses, rent or own status, landlord, someone who knew you, explanations)
 * Where you went to school (dates, curricula, addresses, someone who knew you, explanations)
 * Where did you work (dates, employers, supervisors, coworkers, tasks performed, someone who knew you, explanations)
 * People who know you well (non-family members who have known you at least fifteen years, addresses, dates, explanations)
 * Your spouse and former spouses(status, address of records for marriage, separation, divorce, children, child support)
 * Your relatives and associates (country of birth, country of citizenship, addresses, explanations)
 * Foreign countries you lived (addresses, dates, reasons for traveling, explanations)
 * Foreign relationships (addresses, dates, relationship, affiliations)
 * Foreign activity (contact with a foreign governments)

On a personal note, I had a Top Secret - Sensitive Compartmentalized Information (TS/SCI) Clearance - there is absolutely no way that Huma Adedin could get vetted without political intervention. (ie. a http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA467608)

Representative Michele Bachmann

A review of source Material shows that Representative Michele Bachmann is on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence with Representatives Westmoreland and Rooney - to make such requests for investigations are within the scope of her committee. She (Bachmamm) has made the statement without any recant or claims of misspeaking:

Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (MN-06) issued this statement:

Further, Bachmann cites 59 references in her letter requested by Representative Keith Ellison: among those references are prima facie evidence admitted to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas which is authorized by the Muslim Brotherhood's Sura Council and states:

There is a list of 29 unindicted co-conspirator Muslim Brotherhood Front Groups in that memorandum (page 18)which were funding the terrorist group [|Hamas], the Gaza branch of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Representative Kieth Ellison

Once these groups were labeled "unindicted co-conspirators" in terror financing, they simply changed their names: when this didn't work, they sued in US District Court. One such lawsuit is the former Palestine Committee of the Muslim Brotherhood that changed its name to the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)and tried to be removed from the unindicted co-conspirator status... In the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals for the North District of Texas that motion was denied and CAIR remains on the list of unindicted co-conspirators in material support of terrorism.

Campaign contributions from members of CAIR (From Wikipedia)

During the 2006 election Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and [|James Yee], the former Muslim chaplain at Guantanamo Bay, spoke at an August 25 fundraiser for Ellison.[91][97] Awad and Ellison knew eachother as they attended the University of Minnesota Law School at the same time.[7][98] According to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, Ellison accepted individual contributions from Nihad Awad and another leader of CAIR[not specific enough to verify]; Ellison responded that he had fully disclosed all contributions and asserted that he had "nothing to hide".[99] Ellison stressed that he was supported by individuals, and that the non-profit organization itself did not endorse his candidacy.[100] His Republican opponent in the race, Alan Fine, criticized Ellison for accepting these contributions, asserting that CAIR was "a group that Democrats say has deep ties to terrorism".[101] In response to Ellison's opponents, CAIR leaders Parvez Ahmed and Nihad Awad wrote "We are proud of our personal donations to Ellison's campaign" and derided any 'guilt by association' arguments.[102]

Campaign finance violations

In early 2006, the Minnesota State Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board reprimanded Ellison for unreported campaign contributions, discrepancies in cash balances, and misclassified disbursements during his campaigns for the Minnesota House of Representatives. These transgressions occurred in the years 2002–2004. In 2005, the board opened an investigation, and Ellison was subpoenaed and fined.[103][104] Ellison was repeatedly fined for late filings,[105] was sued twice by the Attorney General of Minnesota, and warned about absent or incomplete disclosures.[91][27][106][107]

I would move clarify that it is not a theory Brett Gasper (talk) 21:20, 11 October 2015 (UTC)