New watchdog and congressional findings are raising questions about federal vetting after HHS awarded nearly $80 million to organizations accused of extremist connections and the State Department selected World Vision to help administer part of a $2 billion global health and humanitarian initiative despite past controversies involving its affiliates and partners.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
Two federal agencies are facing scrutiny over taxpayer-funded grants and humanitarian programs involving organizations that watchdog groups, lawmakers and previous government investigations have linked to terrorism or extremist movements.
The Department of Health and Human Services awarded nearly $80 million to 14 organizations identified by the Middle East Forum as having Islamist or extremist connections, while the State Department recently announced a $2 billion global health and humanitarian initiative involving World Vision, an international charity that has faced separate controversies involving personnel and partner organizations.
The findings do not establish that the federal money itself was transferred to terrorist organizations, and both government agencies and grant recipients have disputed or rejected suggestions that current assistance is being diverted for terrorism.
They do, however, raise questions about how agencies evaluate previous allegations, investigations and organizational relationships when deciding which groups qualify to receive or administer taxpayer-funded programs.
HHS Funding Draws Scrutiny Over Recipient Organizations
The Middle East Forum recently reported that 14 organizations it identified as Islamist, extremist or terror-linked received nearly $80 million from HHS through programs involving refugee resettlement, public health and mosque renovations.
The largest amount identified in the report went to the California chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR-CA.
According to the report, CAIR-CA received $42.2 million to provide legal and social services to Afghan refugees.
CAIR-CA defended its handling of the grants.
“All contributions and grants that CAIR-CA receives are fully reported, accounted for, and used strictly for their intended purposes, subject to rigorous internal and external auditing and reporting. This transparency is why both private and public funders have worked with us and continue to do so,” the organization told Just the News.
“We are proud to serve and defend the rights of American Muslims and immigrants—communities that greatly enrich our nation and contribute to its economic success.”
CAIR has long faced scrutiny from critics over historical relationships involving individuals and organizations connected to Hamas.
National Review previously examined those allegations, including claims involving donations received from or fundraising associated with a group accused of serving as a Hamas front.
CAIR has publicly rejected terrorism for years.
Since 2009, the organization has posted a statement saying: “We unequivocally condemn all acts of terrorism, whether carried out by al-Qa’ida, the Real IRA, FARC, Hamas, ETA, or any other group designated by the U.S. Department of State as a ‘Foreign Terrorist Organization.’”
Critics have also cited a 2004 lawsuit initiated by CAIR that ended in a settlement and statements made by an anti-CAIR organization concerning its alleged terrorist connections.
Federal prosecutors later named CAIR as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in litigation involving an alleged conspiracy to provide financial support to Hamas.
The FBI subsequently restricted formal contacts with CAIR amid unresolved questions over those historical relationships.
The report also said at least seven people associated with CAIR as board members or staff have at various times been arrested, indicted, convicted, pleaded guilty in terrorism-related cases or denied entry into the United States over terrorism concerns.
CAIR did not respond to a Just the News request for comment before publication, according to the source material.
Other organizations identified by the Middle East Forum also received HHS funding.
ICNA Relief, the humanitarian arm of the Islamic Circle of North America, received $10.6 million.
Critics characterize ICNA as the American branch or affiliate of a broader Islamist movement with ideological connections to Jamaat-e-Islami in South Asia.
The Sacramento chapter of the Muslim American Society received $90,000 for a women’s health literacy initiative.
Critics have frequently cited a description contained in federal appeals court records referring to MAS as an “overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.”
The broader Muslim Brotherhood has itself been the subject of extensive political and national-security debate, while views and practices attributed to affiliated movements vary considerably by country and organization.
Dar Al-Hijrah, a Northern Virginia mosque, received $340,000 through HHS sub-grants to promote COVID-19 vaccination, according to the report.
The mosque came under national scrutiny because two of the Sept. 11 hijackers were previously associated with people there and were reportedly helped in finding housing.
Five overseas organizations received a combined $14 million, the Middle East Forum said.
Among them was a polling organization whose leader has been accused of having connections to Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
Another recipient was a West African college that had experienced incidents involving mobs attacking students suspected of being gay. The institution later received funding connected to research involving homosexual Muslim men living with HIV, according to the source material.
The Middle East Forum determined that approximately 87% of the nearly $80 million it identified was approved during the Biden administration.
Gregg Roman, the organization’s executive director, sharply criticized those awards.
“Washington took the most vulnerable people on earth, refugees who fled the Taliban, and delivered them into the hands of the organizations most likely to radicalize them,” Roman said. “That is not compassion. That is a recruitment pipeline built at public expense, and every official who signed these awards owns it.”
World Vision Partnership Revives Earlier Terror-Financing Questions
Separately, the State Department’s decision to include World Vision in a major new humanitarian initiative has revived questions surrounding the charity’s previous dealings in the Middle East and Africa.
The State Department announced earlier this month that faith-based organizations, including World Vision, would participate in distributing $2 billion in global health and humanitarian assistance.
“This historic announcement is the largest allocation of global health foreign assistance to faith-based organizations in over 20 years,” the department said.
“It underscores the Trump Administration’s commitment to partnering with organizations that demonstrate faith in action and have proven their ability to deliver health and humanitarian assistance in the world’s most difficult environments.”
World Vision has nevertheless faced two separate controversies frequently cited by critics.
One involves its operations in Gaza.
An Israeli court convicted a former World Vision Gaza operations manager in 2022 in a case involving allegations that he diverted as much as $50 million to Hamas.
World Vision disputed major elements of the allegations and has challenged conclusions drawn from the prosecution.
A second controversy involved the Islamic Relief Agency, also known as the Islamic Africa Relief Agency and Islamic American Relief Agency.
As the Jewish News Syndicate reported, a Senate Finance Committee investigation in 2019 examined World Vision’s 2014 transfer of a $125,000 USAID-backed sub-grant to the Islamic Relief Agency.
The Treasury Department had sanctioned the organization in 2004 over terrorism-related concerns.
Treasury said at the time that IARA’s international offices had provided financial support to Osama bin Laden and had cooperated with the al-Qaeda leader in raising and distributing additional money.
The department also alleged that IARA worked with an institute controlled by bin Laden that provided assistance to Taliban fighters.
Treasury blocked the organization’s U.S. accounts and assets, along with those of five senior officials.
The Islamic American Relief Agency later ceased operations following a criminal case in the United States.
In 2016, the organization admitted in federal court that it had illegally transferred $1.4 million to Iraq in violation of U.S. sanctions, according to an Associated Press report.
A representative pleaded guilty in Jefferson City, Missouri, to conspiring to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
The organization also pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit money laundering and obstruction of the administration of federal tax laws.
The historical record has prompted criticism inside the Trump administration over the renewed World Vision partnership.
A senior administration official told JNS that “World Vision is severely compromised by ties to Islamist terrorists and a radical left-wing climate change agenda,” questioning why the organization would participate in administering billions of dollars in U.S. assistance.
The State Department strongly rejected the implication that the new program would allow taxpayer money to reach terrorist organizations.
“[A]ny implication that the Trump administration is permitting the diversion of U.S. foreign assistance to organizations with ties to terrorism is baseless,” a State Department spokesman told JNS.
“No administration has held Hamas and other radical Islamist terrorist organizations more accountable than the Trump administration,” the spokesman added.
The combined reports place renewed attention on the federal government’s screening procedures for grants and humanitarian partnerships.
The issue is not simply whether an organization itself appears on a U.S. terrorism list, but how agencies weigh historical relationships, affiliated personnel, past sub-grantees, overseas partners and allegations documented in court proceedings or congressional investigations.
HHS funding identified by the Middle East Forum totaled nearly $80 million, while the State Department’s separate faith-based humanitarian program carries a $2 billion commitment.
Federal officials maintain that current grants and partnerships are subject to oversight and reject assertions that the Trump administration is knowingly financing terrorism.
Critics, however, argue that the histories associated with some recipients and partners demonstrate the need for more stringent vetting before federal money is awarded or distributed.
Original article
Comments