The Center for Security Policy has released it’s Plan for Victory over the Global Jihad Movement. The  plans highlights section states:

The United States is in mortal period from a false friend: the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The peril emanates from the totalitarian legal-religious-military-political code the Saudis call Shariah and their assiduous efforts to impose it worldwide. The danger is enormously exacerbated by the almost-complete failure of American officials at every level of government to acknowledge, let alone act to prevent, the Saudis’ true agenda.

For over thirty-five years, the United States has been at war with enemies sworn to its destruction. It did not seek enmity or hostilities with them. Both are the product of forces that long predated the establishment of this country, to say nothing of its adoption toward the end of the 20th Century of policies towards the Middle East or other regions.

Part of the Plan includes a joint resolution of war against the Global Jihad Movement. Here is the text of that joint resolution:

JOINT RESOLUTION Declaring that a state of war exists between the Global Jihad Movement and the Government and the people of the United States and making provisions to prosecute the same.

Whereas the Global Jihad Movement consists of nations, organizations and movements that seek to wage, or materially enable jihad (warfare) against non-Muslims as well as those Muslims deemed insufficiently adherent to the Islamic faith, for the purpose of imposing a global political order governed by the doctrine of shariah, and administered by a ruling political entity called a caliphate;

Whereas the Global Jihad Movement consists of entities that carry out violent jihad as well as those that seek, through non- or pre-violent means, materially to enable the success of the jihadists by undermining the ability of the United States to challenge and/or counter effectively the triumph of shariah;

Whereas entities waging or materially enabling jihad against the United States and its national security interests include, but are not limited to, the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS); alQa’eda; Hamas; Hizballah; the Islamic Republic of Iran; the Taliban; Boko Haram; al-Shabaab;
Ansar al-Shariah; the Muslim Brotherhood; and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC);

Whereas the ideology of jihad poses a threat to the security and sovereignty of the United States, and therefore requires a comprehensive response from the United States Government in the military, intelligence, law enforcement, political, financial, and informational spheres akin to that authorized by President Ronald Reagan’s National Security Decision Directive 75 with respect to Soviet Communism;

Whereas the embrace by Islamic authorities globally of jihad notwithstanding, millions of Muslims worldwide – including within the United States – seek neither to wage nor materially enable violent jihad, nor wish to have shariah imposed on their communities or others:

Therefore be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

DRAFT AUTHORIZATION OF THE USE OF MILITARY FORCE AND OTHER MEANS AGAINST THE GLOBAL JIHAD MOVEMENT

Joint Resolution

To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces, and other resources of the Government of the United States, against the Global Jihad Movement.

Whereas the Global Jihad Movement consists of nations and organizations that seek to wage, or materially enable, jihad (warfare) against non-Muslims as well as those Muslims deemed insufficiently adherent to the Islamic faith, for the purpose of imposing a global order governed by the doctrine of shariah, and administered by a caliphate;

Whereas the Global Jihad Movement consists of entities that carry out violent jihad as well as those that seek, through non- or pre-violent means, materially to enable the success of the Jihads by undermining the ability of the United States to counter effectively the triumph
of shariah;

Whereas entities waging or materially enabling jihad against the United States and its national security interests include, but are not limited to, the Islamic State in Iraq and alSham (ISIS); al-Qa’eda; Hamas; Hizballah; the Islamic Republic of Iran; the Taliban; Boko Haram; al-Shabaab; Ansar al-Shariah; the Muslim Brotherhood; and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC);

Whereas the ideology of jihad poses a threat to the security and sovereignty of the United States, pledges the overthrow of the Constitution of the United States and therefore requires a comprehensive response from the United States Government in the military, intelligence,
law enforcement, political, financial, and informational spheres akin to that authorized by President Ronald Reagan’s National Security Decision Directive 75 with respect to Soviet Communism;

Whereas the embrace by Islamic authorities globally of jihad notwithstanding, millions of Muslims worldwide – including within the United States – seek neither to wage nor materially to enable violent or non- or pre-violent jihad, nor wish to have shariah imposed on their communities or others;

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This joint resolution may be cited as the “Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against the Global Jihad Movement of 2015.”

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES

• IN GENERAL – The President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations and organizations waging any phase of jihad against the United States or in contravention to the national security of the United States.
• WAR POWERS RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS

1. SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION. – Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.

2. APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS. – Nothing in this Act supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.

SEC. 3. SUPPORT FOR UNITED STATES HOMELAND SECURITY, LAW ENFORCEMENT, FINANCIAL, AND INFORMATIONAL EFFORTS

The Congress of the United States supports the use of federal homeland security, law enforcement, financial, and informational mechanisms against the Global Jihad Movement
to—
• Fully secure all land and maritime borders and ports of entry against illegal entry into the United States by individuals, or agents of organizations or foreign nations,
seeking to carry out Jihad attacks or engage in material support for Jihad activities; • Undertake law enforcement operations within or at the borders of the United States in order to identify and prevent acts of jihad or material support for Jihad activities; • Deny Jihad entities financial revenue, including through the maximum deployment of domestic energy resources and the denial of access to global financial markets;
• Secure information dominance over the Global Jihad Movement through the use of information warfare to undermine the movement and its objectives.

SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF MILITARY CUSTODY FOR INTELLIGENCE GATHERING PURPOSES

The Congress of the United States authorizes that individuals waging or materially enabling jihad on behalf of, or at the instigation of, a Jihad government or entity, who are captured by the United States military abroad, or by federal law enforcement within or at the borders of
the United States, shall be detained initially by the United States armed forces for the purpose of gathering intelligence before any transfer to civilian authorities, and, in the case of foreign nationals, detention until trial by military commission in Guantanamo Bay.

This is simple common sense. By going to Iraq and Syria to join the Islamic State’s jihad, these Muslims have joined an entity that has declared war against the United States. They have committed treason. They have forfeited the rights and privileges of citizenship. But it will be interesting to see who opposes this, and on what grounds.

“Cruz Files Bill to Ban American Islamic State Fighters from Returning to U.S.,” by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, January 23, 2015 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) will file legislation on Friday to ban American citizens who fight alongside the Islamic State (IS) and other terror groups from returning to the United States, where they pose a significant terror threat, according to sources in the senator’s office.

Cruz, who first proposed the legislation last year, seeks to strip those Americans who travel abroad to fight with IS (also known as ISIL or ISIS) of their U.S. citizenship rights and stop them from coming back stateside.

The bill, known as the Expatriate Terrorist Act (E.T.A.), tightens and updates existing regulations by which a U.S. citizen effectively renounces his or her citizenship.

Cruz said that he is filing the bill partly in response to President Obama’s Tuesday State of the Union address, which he described as “detached from reality” on the foreign policy front.

“President Obama’s approach to foreign policy refuses to acknowledge the threats our enemies pose to our national security—it is detached from reality and making the world a more dangerous place,” said Cruz, who also is releasing a new video that takes aim at Obama for misleading the nation about these threats in his annual address.

Cruz said stripping American IS fighters of their citizenship is a step toward securing the country and restoring the country’s image.

“We’ve seen the grave consequence of the Obama-Clinton-Kerry foreign policy unravel with respect to Iran, Russia, and now Yemen,” Cruz said. “These consequences are not confined to faraway lands. They directly threaten America and our allies.”

“That is why this week, I am re-filing the Expatriate Terrorist Act, which prevents Americans who have fought abroad for designated terrorist groups from returning to the United States,” he said. “I look forward to working with senators on both sides of the aisle on this and additional measures to secure our nation and restore America’s leadership in the world.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Hours after stabbings, “moderate” Fatah calls for more jihad

Iran: Tens of thousands protest against Charlie Hebdo and the freedom of speech

Australia: 1,000 Muslims rally against Charlie Hebdo and the freedom of speech

Video: Robert Spencer at AFDI Free Speech Rally, Garland, Texas, January 17, 2015

Any time the mainstream media raises the question of whether there is something violent about Islam, you can be sure that their learned analysts will find it as peaceful as the day is long.

HerePamela Geller skewers yet another example: “CNN’s War Against Truth,” by Pamela Geller,Breitbart, January 21, 2015:

In the wake of daily jihad attacks (thwarted or deadly), CNN clearly is losing control of its narrative that Islam is a religion of peace and Islamic jihad is not Islamic. From the very beginning of its propaganda piece “The War Within Islam,” which aired Monday night, CNN’s agenda was clear.

The show was full of dissembling, dishonesty, and dissimulation from beginning to end. The title itself, “The War Within Islam,” is a lie. Where do we see evidence of a war within Islam? We don’t see millions of Muslims marching against jihad and Sharia. On the contrary, hundreds of thousands of Muslims marched in Chechnya against theCharlie Hebdo cartoons. In Iran, mobs chanted, “Death to France.” In Pakistan, over 10,000 marched and attacked police, and in Niger anti-cartoon mobs torched forty-five churches. They are marching for jihad and for sharia.

The only war is on the truth. “Moderate” Muslims are not arguing with jihadists; instead, they’re arguing with those who oppose jihad, claiming that Islamic jihad is not Islamic. The war is in the Western information battle-space, where CNN and the rest of the mainstream media are busy spinning, twisting, and contorting the narrative. This argument should be taking place in the Muslim world, but it is not — with the notable exception of President el-Sisi in Egypt.

Alisyn Camerota of CNN says, “1.6 billion people around the world practice Islam today, and most Muslims will tell you it’s a peaceful religion. But still, questions persist about whether there is something inherent to Islam that lends itself to extremism.”

CNN described guest Maajid Nawaz as a “former Islamic extremist.” Maajid Nawaz is the founder of the UK’s “counter-extremism think tank,” the Quilliam Foundation, a group that has the ear of the British government and counters “extremism” without ever fully confronting the roots of that extremism in the Qur’an and Muhammad’s example. Nawaz claimed that jihad “comes down to a combination of four factors: a sense of grievance, identity crisis, charismatic recruiters who provide a sense of belonging, an alternative sense of belonging from mainstream society, and the role that ideology plays.” So no Islam here, folks. It is not surprising that Nawaz would focus first on “a sense of grievance”: victimhood is part of jihad. But “identity crisis”? Identity is the one thing that is not in question. The jihadis’ identification with and love for Islam is orgiastic — the more devout, the more Muslim, the more inclined they are to wage jihad.

Where were the critical scholars of Islam and the counter jihad activists on the program? Bobby Ghosh, CNN’s Global Affairs Analyst, was the former TIME magazine World Editor. He was responsible for those two outrageous cover pieces —  “Is America Islamophobic?” and  “Does America Have a Muslim Problem?” — during the Ground Zero mosque controversy. In 2011, Ghosh declared on MSNBC that to a practicing Muslim, burning Koran is much worse than burning the Bible, because the Koran is directly from God, while the Bible isn’t.

CNN devoted a large part of this spectacle of whitewash to what should we should actually call the Islamic jihadists. Bobby Ghosh, CNN’s Global Affairs Analyst, made the salient point that these jihadists are called mujahadeen (holy warriors) in the Muslim world and that there is an acceptance that these people are claiming to fight in the name of Allah. But this was not explored at all despite the fact that a large portion of the special was devoted to what words we should or should not use. It was instructive as it gave viewers an inside peek into how the media twists itself in knots so as not to offend Islam.

Al Jazeera and Huffington Post writers like Ahmed Shihab-Eldin weighed in with their fair share of taqiya (deception to advance Islam), so it can be said that on balance, there was no balance.

One of the featured experts on the Qur’an was Daisy Khan, Executive Director of the American Society for Muslim Advancement, who insisted that there was nothing in the Qur’an that justified any of the violence done in the name of Islam today. She also claimed that blasphemy is not punishable by death.

There is no reference in the Qur’an, uh, which prohibits Muslims from drawing a cartoon or an image of the prophet. Uh, this ruling came from the prophet himself, who was actually concerned about people idolizing him, or worshipping idols. He was surrounded by idol worshippers, and so he told people, do not make any images of anything, any, eh, you know. And it’s similar to what’s in the Ten Commandments, which says do not create ingraven images. So, so really the ruling came from that, then the scholars extended it to saying that we should prohibit all images of all prophets and God. 1,400 years, we have not been creating images of prophets or God… It did not start in the Qur’an. It is a prophetic saying.

Cuomo asked Khan, “And is it taught that you’re supposed to kill people who do it?” Khan replied: “No. It’s actually, the Qur’an actually says that if somebody, you know, mocks your religion, you should go, either walk away from them or dialogue with them.”

Khan doesn’t mention that Muhammad said, “Whoever curses a Prophet, kill him,” and the Qur’an says, “He who obeys the Messenger [that is, Muhammad] has obeyed Allah” (4:80). She doesn’t tell CNN viewers that the Qur’an says, “Those who harm Allah and His Messenger, Allah has cursed them in this world and in the Next, and has prepared for them a humiliating punishment” (33:57). How will they be cursed in this world? By being killed: “Cursed they will be. Wherever they are found, they are seized and all slain” (33: 61).

And as for “prophetic sayings,” Khan doesn’t mention these, recounted at a Muslim website in Britain:

In a sound hadith the Prophet commanded that Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf be killed. He asked, “Who will deal with Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf? He has harmed Allah and His Messenger.” He sent someone to assassinate him without calling him to Islam, in distinction to other idol-worshippers. The cause of that lay in his causing harm to the Prophet. That indicates that the Prophet had him killed for something other than idol-worship. It was for causing harm. Abu Rafi, who used to harm the Messenger of Allah and work against him, was also killed.

Similarly on the Day of the Conquest, he ordered the killing of Ibn Khatal and his two slavegirls who used to sing his curses on the Prophet.

In another hadith about a man who used to curse the Prophet, the Prophet said, “Who will save me from my enemy?” Khalid said, “I will,” so the Prophet sent him out and he killed him.

Saud Anwar, the mayor of South Windsor, Connecticut, answered a question about violence in the Qur’an by saying, “If you look at the Qur’an in the broader sense, 114 times it’s mentioned in the Qur’an that God is the most gracious and most merciful.” Camerota agreed that jihadis had “bastardized” Qur’anic teaching and gently challenged Anwar’s claim by noting that they justified their actions by citing the Qur’anic passage that directs Muslims to “slay the idolaters wherever you find them, arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them” (9:5).

Khan responded to this not by explaining this passage but by saying, “Nothing justifies killing, because in Islam, Islam is a religion of law and there is due process.” When Cuomo cut in, “But it’s a literal interpretation,” Khan pressed on with more nonsense:

It’s a literal interpretation, but it’s also contextual, so it may have happened in a specific incident where the prophet was, was being attacked, so he was given permission to fight those particular people. However, there are rules of engaging people in combat. And the rule is you do not kill non-combatants, you do not kill innocent people, you do not destroy property, you do not commit rape, you do not terrorize people and you do not declare war, without – you actually declare war, you do not do, you know, clandestine type of operations. So they’re breaking all the rules of warfare. And so even though the Qur’an gives permission for self-defense and fighting your enemies, it does not say that you have to take matters into your own hands. And surely you have to follow the rulings that the scholars have established for the last 1,400 years. Imagine if we didn’t have these rulings, we would have had mayhem all these years.

We have had mayhem all these years, but Khan is counting on CNN viewers not knowing Islam’s 1,400-year history of genocide, land appropriations, cultural annihilation, and enslavement. Her claims in this are false or deceptive: Islam does forbid killing innocent people, but many Muslim scholars say no non-Muslim is innocent. Rape is not forbidden when it comes to infidel women captured in battle: the Qur’an explicitly gives Muslim men permission to have sex with their wives and the “captives your right hands possess” – that is, sex slaves captured in jihad warfare (see Qur’an 4:3, 4:24, 23:1-6, 33:50). This Islamic State is following the rulings that Islamic scholars have established for 1,400 years. That’s the problem.

But the clueless Camerota tells Daisy: “So interesting to hear what the Qur’an really says and means rather than what the terrorists claim it does.”

Daisy Khan is a perennial favorite of the media — she is perceived as a modern moderate. And yet in a glowing puff piece in MORE magazine in January 2011, Khan’s mask momentarily slipped:

But not every opinion of the Shura Council or its members reflects Khan’s views. At the council’s October meeting at the Union Theological Seminary in New York, she seemed distracted—texting, reading e-mails, taking cell phone calls—as 18 women sat around a table in an oak-paneled room for nearly 10 hours straight, parsing the Koran in excruciating detail. Then the result of a recent poll of WISE’s members on the subject of female genital cutting was announced. The question was, “Is cutting harmful to women?” Khan was standing when she heard that four women had responded no… “Who are those four?” she asked sharply, and then, seeing the discomfort on several women’s faces, she smiled, rolled her eyes and shrugged.

She shrugged at clitoridectomies (female genital cutting)? As soon as she saw the “discomfort” on the faces of women who had approved of this barbaric practice, she shrugged it off?

This is the Muslim “expert” CNN brings in to explain it all for you. CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS et al never invite scholars critical of Islam or counter jihad activists to educate or elucidate. But no matter how much of this shameless propaganda CNN and the rest of the media pump out, they won’t be able to obscure the grim reality of Islamic jihad. Americans are waking up.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Islamic supremacist Linda Sarsour says of “Islamophobes”: “Their job is to vilify Islam and Muslims”

Nigeria: Boko Haram top dog says, “We killed the people of Baga. We indeed killed them, as our Lord instructed us in His Book.”

UK media coverup: “White power” supermarket attacker is Muslim, wrote “The wrath of Allah is about to come down upon the kaffir”

Spain: Violent Muslim screaming “Allahu Akbar, all you Christians will die!” gets arrested

“Palestinians” celebrate stabbing of Israelis with #IAmAKnife hashtag