National Security Archives - Page 437 of 508

Are Lone Wolf Jihadis Islamikazes?

October 31, 2014/in Commentary, National Security, News, Policy/by Jerry Gordon

There is a debate afoot about what to call Salafist Jihadi perpetrators of such recent spectacular murders that we have graphically seen in Ottawa, Montreal, New York, and Oklahoma. Counterterrorism officials have called them lone wolves to emphasize that they are not affiliated with known foreign sponsors of Islamist terrorism. They may be ‘self-actualized’ by the jihadist doctrinal aspects of their new found faith espoused by Salafist preachers and the social media of terrorist groups Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, and most prominently the Islamic State, formerly ISIS.

According to Dr. Rich Swier, publisher of the eponymous e-Magazine, noted U.S. counter terrorism expert, Patrick Poole has suggested calling them “known wolves”. “Cowboy”, a former CIA covert officer and counterterrorism consultant wrote us after we posted on “The Danger of Lone Wolf Jihadists Among Us,” saying, “we still perpetuate the false myth of Islamic lone wolf terrorists. If the counter-terrorists can’t even get their story straight, how can anyone else?”

That led me to ponder both Poole’s and Cowboy’s remarks. I thought it over and reached out to someone I know in Israel. That is Islamic and Eastern Studies scholar, former Hebrew University professor and author, Raphael Israeli. You may recall our New English Review interview with him about the lecture he gave in January 2012 at B’nai Israel Synagogue in Pensacola, Florida, Islam, Democracy and the Arab Spring: An Interview with Raphael Israeli. He and his wife Margalit were passing through from a trip to New Orleans and we prevailed upon him to set the record straight about Islamic doctrine.

We had first encountered Professor Israeli during a sabbatical term he spent in 2003 at Wesleyan University in Middletown, Connecticut. He was substituting for a member of the faculty Dr. Vera Schwarcz, who, like Israeli, is a specialist in East Asian studies. I encountered Israeli in Schwarz’s office at Wesleyan in the midst of compiling footnotes for his latest book at the time, Islamikaze: Manifestations of Islamic Martyrology. The focus of Islamikaze was on what motivated Muslim suicide bombers in the Middle East and the 19 perpetrators of 9/11. The term Islamikaze was modeled on the Japanese suicide Kamikaze (meaning divine wind) pilots of World War II. They, not unlike the Islamikaze, were motivated by the bushido doctrine of self sacrifice and death without surrender exemplified by the Samurai that was adopted by the Japanese militarists.

These questions raised by counterterrorism consultants about what to call the Salafist Jihadis prompted me to write Professor Israeli in Jerusalem and ask him if these lone wolf jihadis weren’t one and the same as Islamikazes.

Here is Professor Israeli’s response:

Of course they are Islamikaze. Because even if in these cases they acted alone, they must have been indoctrinated and motivated, or shown the example by someone. No lone wolf just gets up in the morning and decides to murder human beings. Besides, Islamikaze has an element of self-sacrifice. A common murderer would do it for personal gain of some sort. Here, in both Canadian and US cases, they committed the murder, being aware of the danger of risking their lives, and they were not deterred.

So, perhaps instead of calling the Salafist perpetrators of Islamic terrorist attacks, lone wolves, Islamikaze may be what they really are. Given these Islamic terrorist developments here in America, this may prompt Professor Israeli and his publisher to update and re-issue, Islamikaze.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

U.S. military ordered to hide identities, change routines to avoid jihad terrorist attacks

October 31, 2014/in Must Read, National Security, News/by Jihad Watch

“Guard what you post on Facebook and Twitter. Do not post anything that links you to the Defense Department. Do not post any opposition to terrorist groups.” Why not “Be aware, prepared, and resolute to defend yourselves, your family and your country”? Why not “Don’t scuttle around in darkness, living your life in fear of these thugs. Stand tall, but be ready at all times”?

“U.S. military ordered to hide identities, change routines to avoid terrorist attacks,” by Rowan Scarborough, Washington Times, October 29, 2014

The agency in charge of protecting the Pentagon has sent out a warning that “ISIL-linked terrorists” want to attack employees and is urging them to change routines and mask their identities.

The Pentagon Force Protection Agency, citing intelligence reports, says members of the Islamic State terrorist group, also known by the acronym ISIL, may use knives, guns or explosives.

“Recent threats, revealed through various intelligence and law enforcement sources, indicate that terrorists, directed or inspired by the Islamic States of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), view members of U.S. military members and law enforcement officers as legitimate targets for attacks,” the agency warns in memo that The Washington Times has obtained….

The alert lists 11 protective steps that require employees to alter their ways of life, including:

⦁ Remove decals and other identifiers from clothing and vehicles.

⦁ Vary travel routes.

⦁ Avoid large gatherings and places where people congregate.

⦁ Guard what you post on Facebook and Twitter.

⦁ Do not post anything that links you to the Defense Department.

⦁ Do not post any opposition to terrorist groups.

Of course! We don’t want to provoke by showing that we actually oppose, now, do we?

RELATED ARTICLES:

CAIR publishes list of American ‘Islamophobes’ — Will it become a ‘hit list’ for Islamic State ‘lone wolves’?

20 to 30 former Guantanamo detainees suspected of joining the Islamic State, other jihad groups

Maryland: Marine dad banned from school after complaining about Islam assignment

Former US Ambassador to Iraq: Obama Administration was warned about rise of the Islamic State, “did almost nothing”

An interview with Bret Stephens: WSJ Foreign Affairs Columnist

October 31, 2014/in Must Read, National Security, News, Policy, Politics/by Rachael Hanna

Bret Stephens. Photo courtesy of the Harvard Political Review.

Bret Stephens is a foreign affairs columnist for The Wall Street Journal and serves as a member of the paper’s editorial board. He won the Pulitzer Prize for commentary in 2013.

Harvard Political Review: You’ve written extensively in defense of Israel. When you write your column, is it with a mind toward persuading your audience or to provide other Israeli supporters with arguments they can use?

Bret Stephens: I’m a supporter of the side that is defending itself, the side that is fighting for principles worth honoring and respecting. It’s not about siding with Israel or some other adversary, it’s about siding with the country that is in the right. It’s not a question of the Packers versus the Cowboys; it’s not an arbitrary choice or dictated by the fact that I am Jewish. It’s the fact that I am arguing for a rational case, and I would like to think that if Israel did something awful I would be critical.

I write my column with two audiences in mind: people who are inclined to agree with me and could use arguments and facts at their finger tips, but I don’t just want to preach to the choir, and I would like to think that readers on the other side of the aisle could say, “I see his point even if I don’t agree, and it forces me to think of smarter ways to argue my point.

HPR: In one of your recent columns you drew a parallel between the actions of the Pakistani government in an offensive against terrorists and the actions of Israel over the summer. In the West, we heard plenty of criticism of Israel and next to nothing about the Pakistani government. Why does this double-standard of reporting exist and what would it take to erase it from the media?

Stephens: It was particularly striking, because you would have thought you were reading about Gaza from the excerpt I quoted about the situation in Pakistan – the civilian evacuations, the airstrikes, and yet it received next to no coverage. People were wholly unaware of this and would never stop to condemn it because of the double standard that has been in place for so many decades. There is a temptation to treat the Jewish state in a way you don’t treat other states; sometimes it’s flat out invidious, but sometimes it’s a backhanded compliment. It’s OK for Pakistan to do that, what do you expect, but Israel is like Western civilization.

But this imposes an impossibly high standard on the country. Ben Rhodes lectures Israel about civilian casualties in comparison to how America handled casualties in Afghanistan. Yet these are not similar situations; Americans were not engaged in city combat in Afghanistan as Israel is in Gaza; and when they did engage in city combat in Fallujah, there were massive civilian causalities, and Americans didn’t drop leaflets warning Iraqis about drone strikes. Rhodes was demanding Israel abide by a standard that even the United States doesn’t abide by.

HPR: How long do you think the current state of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can persist? What will it take to fundamentally change the status quo?

Stephens: Palestinian and Arab political culture needs to change. The conflict is not fundamentally territorial. Israel could vacate every single settlement, and it would find it had not done much to resolve the conflict. They did this in Gaza, retreating behind a largely agreed upon boarder and it produced a lot more violence and war. As long as the Arab world is not reconciled to Israel’s existence, there will be no end to conflict. How long can this persist? Germany in 1938 was xenophobic with a regime that had whipped its people into anti-Semitism. Two decades later, in the West, it was a responsible member of the international community because Germans had been utterly broken and had no choice but to change. The same happened with Japan, which had the original suicide bombers – kamikaze pilots, and now it is a passive country. It could take 10 years or 10,000 years, but you’re not going to accelerate it if you look away from the nature of the problem. If you know what is on Palestinian television, in children books, how they think and speak about Jews, understand that this is the center of the conflict.

HPR: You, along with many others, have been very critical of President Obama’s lack of a coherent foreign policy. Come January 2017, what could a coherent foreign policy look like?

Stephens: The real problem we have today is a very palpable sense that Americans just want to step back from the burdens of global responsibility that we’ve had from the beginning of the Cold War, and so it creates a world in which our adversaries think they can take aggressive steps without American retaliation and our allies are beginning to ask themselves, “What should we do if America is not going to help us?” This is the sort of thing that leads to miscalculations and war.

I urge that we take seriously the idea of America as the world’s police, which is not being the world’s priest, but we can enforce certain basic expectations of global order. When Russia seizes Crimea and invades Ukraine, and we do nothing, we are inviting disorder. If we had armed the Ukrainians quickly, cut Russia out of the financial sector, and helped diminish European dependence on Russian oil, the Russians would have said, “We can’t get away with this because America is serious.” The same goes for our dealings with ISIS and Iran. The next president, whoever it is, needs to understand that being the world’s policeman is the right thing to do for our allies and us. It creates the baseline for long-term prosperity, and it requires the steady, non-utopian application of American power, including military power – but not random intervention – to make it clear to the world that we have our allies’ backs.

HPR: What role do you see yourself playing as a journalist?

Stephens: In giving me this column, this great institution, The Wall Street Journal, has handed me a sword which is 850 words a week to speak the truth as I see it, to call out the bad guys and defend those in need of defending, so there is a moral component to writing this, to take up a pen and be a voice for the sake of great causes and in defense of the right people. It’s a great privilege to be handed this trust.

HPR: What do you see as the media’s role in the landscape of political discourse?

Stephens: There is some great, very courageous journalism being done, and let’s not forget the incredible risks reporters are taking to bring news to readers, so I don’t want to neglect the superb journalism that is out there. But there is also a lot of misinformed, lazy journalism, and that’s a problem because it’s a second rate product and leaves those who read it under the impression that they are well informed, but they haven’t read a fair sense of the story. The industry could do more to attract higher caliber people to the profession and to police against mediocre or polemical or even dishonest journalism.

When I write, I try to make sure I’m not being lazy, that if I’m taking on an argument that I oppose, that I’m giving it its due and that I’m not being unfair to it, and that I’m making my case against it with real honesty and I’m not misrepresenting someone else’s view. All my opinions are my own, and I speak only for myself, but integrity is one standard I think I’ve held up faithfully. I don’t pretend to be an objective journalist, I’m a columnist, but I do try to be honest and fair. Objectivity is to arrive at neutral, even-handed reporting, which can actually distort the truth if each side is not presenting honest views. Honesty is different; it is a truer picture of what is happening than what you might get from an objective source. There’s a lot to be said for honest journalism as opposed to objective journalism.

This interview has been edited and condensed.

Delaware TV gets the hottest U.S. Senate campaign ad: Chris Coons Ebola Zone!

October 30, 2014/in Elections, Healthcare, National Security, News, Policy, Politics, Video/by Dr. Rich Swier

Kevin Wade, Republican for the U.S. Senate in Delaware.

The real battle nationally is for control of the U.S. Senate. Millions are being poured into races to retain or obtain control of that body.

However, there is one key Republican U.S. Senate race that can be a Republican pickup – in Delaware.

Kevin Wade, a self-made business man, believes he can take and put the Delaware U.S. Senate seat solidly in the “R” column.

Historically the Delaware U.S. Senate seat is won with approximately 150,000 total votes. The race will likely hinge on about 8,000 voters changing their voting pattern on the General Election Day. It is projected that the Republican turnout will be 10% higher and 10% lower for the Democrats. That leaves 8,000 voters to be convinced to swing this U.S. Senate Republican on November 4th.

This is the seat formerly held by now Vice President Joe Biden. That alone must have Delaware Republicans energized.

According to Wade, “It is all in reach. I don’t understand the fascination with ‘big state’ races at the national level. My vote in the U.S. Senate would count as much as California’s U.S. Senator. The yield on a donor dollar and volunteer hour is so much higher in this small voting universe in Delaware.”

This political ad may make the difference on a Republican Senate seat pickup in Delaware:

Qatar’s Insidious Influence on the Brookings Institution

October 30, 2014/in Must Read, National Security, News/by ACT For America!

Steve Emerson’s Investigative Project on Terrorism has for years been at the forefront of alerting America to the threat from Jihad. Their latest work is an absolute must-read. In an ongoing investigation, IPT’s investigators have exposed a troubling alliance between Qatar, a foreign country with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda, ISIS and other Jihadists, and an American left-of-center think tank…

Qatar’s Insidious Influence on the Brookings Institution

A Four Part Investigative Series: Brookings Sells Soul to Qatar’s Terror Agenda by Steven Emerson, John Rossomando and Dave Yonkman

IPT News October 28, 2014
Part 1 of a 4-part series.

The Brookings Institution bills itself as “the most influential, most quoted and most trusted think tank in the world,” but should it be?

Brookings’ long-term relationship with the Qatari government – a notorious supporter of terror in the Middle East – casts a dark cloud over such a lofty claim to credibility.

A September New York Times exposé revealed Qatar’s status as the single largest foreign donor to the Brookings Institution. Qatar gave Brookings $14.8 million in 2013, $100,000 in 2012 and $2.9 million in 2011. In 2002, Qatar started subsidizing the Brookings outreach program to the Muslim World which has continues today. Between 2002 and 2010, Brookings never disclosed the annual amount of funds provided by the Government of Qatar.

Sources of funding should not automatically discredit an organization, but critical facts and claims about Brookings should be examined in light of them, starting with a harsh indictment by a former scholar.

The Investigative Project on Terrorism has reviewed the proceedings of 12 annual conferences co-sponsored by Brookings and the government of Qatar comprising more than 125 speeches, interviews, lectures and symposia; a dozen Brookings-based programs that were linked to the Qatari financed outreach to the Muslim world; and analyzed 27 papers sponsored and issued by the Brookings Institution and scholars based in Washington and at the Brookings Doha Center since 2002.

Our review, which will be detailed in a four-part series beginning with this story, finds an organization that routinely hosts Islamists who justify terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians and American troops, who advocate blasphemy laws which would criminalize criticism of Islam, and which never scrutinizes or criticizes the government of Qatar, its largest benefactor.

CAIR publishes list of American ‘Islamophobes’ — Will it become a ‘hit list’ for Islamic State ‘lone wolves’?

October 29, 2014/in Featured, National Security, News/by Dr. Rich Swier

There is a growing concern that converts to Islam in America and Canada are ready, ideologically willing and certainly able to conduct individual attacks against soldiers, police and innocent civilians. This week the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has called for increased security at some federal buildings. The Associated Press reports:

Security will be increased at various federal government buildings in Washington and other major American cities, the Homeland Security Department announced Tuesday in what it described as a “precautionary step.” The move came one week after a gunman in Ottawa fatally shot a soldier as he stood as a ceremonial guard at Ottawa’s National War Memorial, then stormed the Parliament building. Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper called the shooting a terrorist attack.

As Mohammedans wage jihad against U.S. and Canadian citizens, in the name of Allah, the Council of American Islamic Relations (CAIR) has published a list of American individuals and organizations it considers to be “Islamophobic.” The new CAIR website is Islamophobia.org.

The purpose of the CAIR website is, “[T]o monitor and challenge the growing anti-Muslim bigotry in American society. CAIR’s Islamophobia.org site presents detailed profiles of a number of individuals and institutions involved in the American Islamophobia network.” CAIR is characterize by some as a “moderate” Islamic organization. An anonymous quote on the internet states:

A radical Muslim wants to behead you. A moderate Muslim wants a radical Muslim to behead you.

On the list are Floridians Allen West, Guy Rogers, USF Professor Jonathan Matusitz, Dr. Rich Swier, Sam Kharoba and Tom Trento. The Islamic State has called for attacks against the United States targeting those who defame Mohammed. Are these men, women and organizations on the CAIR list designed to evoke the deadly passions of those who have joined the Islamic State in the U.S.?

Question: Will the Islamic State use the CAIR list of Islamophobes to attack these individuals?

Those individuals and organizations listed by CAIR as Islamophobic, with descriptions taken directly from the Islamaphobia.org website, include:

Stop Islamization of Nations logo.

Ali Sina A member of the board of directors of Stop Islamization of Nations, Sina believes, “there is NOTHING good in Islam and that it is all evil.”

Allen West A former Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives. Allen believes, ” Islam does not coexist.”

Anders Gravers A member of the president’s council of Stop Islamization of Nations who also heads Stop Islamization of Europe.

Ann Coulter A conservative commentator who suggested that “we should invade their [Muslim] countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.”

Ashraf Rameleh A member of the board of directors of Stop Islamization of Nations. When speaking about the September 11th attacks he said “they are not terrorists, they are jihad. They are for the Quran.”

Babu Suseelani a member of the board of directors of Stop Islamization of Nations. In 2012 Suseelan told an audience “If we do not kill the bacteria, the bacteria will kill us. Muslims will breed like rats and they will be a majority.”

Bill Maher Bill Maher hosts a political satire program, Real Time with Bill Maher, on HBO. Despite his claim to hold progressive opinions, Maher consistently demonizes and stigmatizes the Muslim community.

Brian Kilmeade A Fox News Channel commentator. In June 2013, Kilmeade told a leader of the English Defence League, an anti-Muslim group known for violent protests, “We got your back.”

Brigitte Gabriel The head of Act for America. Gabriel has said, “America and the West are doomed to failure in this war unless they stand up and identify the real enemy: Islam.”

Bryan Fischer The director of issues analysis at the American Family Association. According to Fischer, “Islam has no fundamental First Amendment claims, for the simple reason that it was not written to protect the religion of Islam.”

Carl Goldberg A member of the Arizona chapter of Act for America. According to an announcement for an October 2013 event, Goldberg can prove that “Islam is not just a religion but also a totalitarian and imperialistic ideology.”

Clare Lopez Lopez is the vice president for issues and analysis at the Center for Security Policy. She also a board member at the Clarion Project. In 2013, Lopez told an audience, “When people in other bona fide religions follow their doctrines they become better people — Buddhists, Hindus, Christians, Jews. When Muslims follow their doctrine, they become jihadists.”

Cliff Kincaid A member of the board of directors of Stop Islamization of Nations. In 2013, the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks hate groups in the United States, listed Kincad among the “30 new activists heading up the radical right.”

Constance Gavras The director of the Illinois chapter of Act for America.

Daniel Pipes The founder and director of the Middle East Forum. Pipes is also connected to the National Review, Clarion Project, and Washington Times. Pipes is the grandfather of Islamophobia in the United States. In 1990 he wrote, “Western European societies are unprepared for the massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and maintaining different standards of hygiene…All immigrants bring exotic customs and attitudes, but Muslim customs are more troublesome than most.”

Dave Agema A former Michigan state legislator, Agema now represents his state as a national committeeman of the Republican National Committee. In early 2014, Agema made anti-Muslim comments on his Facebook account: “Have you ever seen a Muslim do anything that contributes positively to the American way of life?

David Horowitz The founder of the David Horowitz Freedom Center. The Southern Poverty Law Center, a group that tracks hate in the United States, names Horowitz “the godfather of the modern anti-Muslim movement.”

David Yerushalmi A co-founder of the American Freedom Law Center and employee of the Center for Security Policy. Yerushalmi beleives, “Our greatest enemy today is Islam.”

Debbie Anderson The leader of the Minneapolis chapter of ACT for America.

Debbie Robinson A member of the president’s council of Stop Islamization of Nations. Robinson’s Q Society of Australia asserts, “Islam is not just another religion, but also a totalitarian ideology with a global agenda.”

Dorrie O’Brien O’Brien acts as a national mentor for ACT for America. According to O’Brien “Islam…is a poisoned well.”

Frank Gaffney The founder and president of the Center for Security Policy. Gaffney is also connected to the Washington Times, and Clarion Project. Gaffney has advocated renewing the House Un-American Activities Committee, a discredited McCarthy-era congressional committee that President Truman once described as “the most un-American thing in the country today.”

Glenn Beck Beck hosts the Glenn Beck show on the Blaze. In February, 2011, Beck hosted anti-Muslim speaker Joel Richardson on his Fox News program and the two “tied Islam to the Antichrist in the new testament.”

Guy Rodgers The executive director of ACT for America. In 2010, Rodgers “contended that Muslims should be treated differently because their legal system is inherently flawed.”

James Lafferty Originally known for his work with the Virginia Anti-Shariah Taskforce, Lafferty is now with both the American Freedom Defense Initiative and Jihad Watch.

State Rep. John Bennett of Oklahoma (R-Sallisaw) According to Bennett, Islam is “a cancer in our nation that needs to be cut out.”

John Guandolo The founder of Understanding the Threat. Guandolo is a former FBI agent who trains law enforcement officers to believe in conspiracy theories such as his beleif that CIA Director Brennan is a secret Muslim.

Jonathan Matusitz The membership director for the central Florida chapter of Act for America and a professor at the University of Central Florida. Matusitz claims that Muslims “procreate like mushrooms after the rain” and that “the problem is Islam.”

Kamal Saleem A board member of Former Muslims United. In October 2012, Right Wing Watch posted a video of Saleem and noted that in that video, “Saleem alleged that Obama’s top speech writer and Sasha and Malia’s babysitter are both Islamic fundamentalists that are wielding secret power.”

Kevin Carroll A member of the president’s council of Stop Islamization of Nations.

Lauren Green An anchor on the Fox News Channel.

Mano Bakh A key individual with the California group Concerned American Citizens. On its website, the group asserts, “The real source of the devastating 9/11 attack is the Islamic Ideology as prescribed in Quran.”

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) A Minnesota Republican, Bachmann is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives. In June 2012, Bachmann led a group of House Republicans on a series of five letters to federal inspectors alleging that the Muslim Brotherhood was infiltrating the U.S. government. The allegations primarily centered on an aide to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and were soundly rejected by Republican leadership.

Mike Huckabee A host on the Fox News Channel and former governor of Arkansas. Huckabee referred to Islam as the “antithesis of the gospel of Christ.” He also seemed to compare Muslim prayer being allowed in a church to the showing of pornographic films.

Nina Cunningham Cunningham serves on the boards of many anti-Islam organizations, including the Center for Security Policy, the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and also the Clarion Project.

Nonie Darwish A founder of Former Muslims United. Darwish asserts that “Islam should be fought and should be conquered and defeated and annihilated.”

Oskar Freysinger A member of the board of directors of Stop Islamization of Nations. He played a leading role in the movement to ban Islamic minarets in Switzerland.

Pamela Geller The cautic mouthpiece of the U.S. Islamophobia network, Geller believes, “Hitler was inspired by Islam.”She blogs atAtlas Shrugs and is a leader with the American Freedom Defense Initiative, Jihad Watch, and Stop the Islamization of Nations. Note: Geller also heads Stop Islamization of America, but this entity is identified as an AFDI project.

Rep. Peter King (R-.N.Y.) Peter King represents a district centered in New York’s, Long Island. He served as chairman of the U.S. House Homeland Security Committee from 2010-2012. King has maintained that “80%, 85% of the mosques in this country are controlled by Islamic fundamentalists,” and that average Muslims “are loyal,” but “don’t come forward, they don’t tell the police what they know”. Additionally in 2007, Representative King said, “Unfortunately, we have too many mosques in this country.”

Richard Swier Swier is the director of the Sarasota, Fla. chapter of ACT for America. (EDITORS NOTE: Dr. Rich Swier has not been the Director of the Sarasota ACT for America chapter for 8 years.)

Rick Joyner Joyner is the president of the Oak Initiative. He is also the founder/director of Morningstar Ministries and the founder/director of Heritage National Ministries. He has authored more than forty books. His book The Harvest lays out some of his views on Islam: “Islamic terrorists will permeate the West with teams that target Christian organizations and leaders. This is in preparation for an Islamic assault upon the entire world. They will compile computer data on every Christian leader who has any kind of extra-local influence (i.e. newsletters, television or radio outreach).

Robert “Raphael” Shore A member of Clarion Project’s board of directors.

Robert Spencer A prolific member of the U.S. Islamophobia network, Spencer runs the Jihad Watch web site and is also connected with the David Horowitz Freedom Center, the American Freedom Defense Initiative, and Stop Islamization of Nations.Spencer has referred to Islam’s Prophet Muhammad as a “con man. Someone who is knowing [sic] that what he is saying is false, but is fooling his followers.” In the same video he asserts, “From a historical standpoint, it is not even clear that Muhammad existed.”

Roger Ailes Ailes is the president and CEO of Fox News Channel. According to a source who spoke to Rolling Stone, “He has a personal paranoia about people who are Muslim — which is consistent with the ideology of his network.”

Ryan Mauro Mauro is a staff member at the Clarion Project.

Sam Kharoba Kharoba is the founder of the Counter Terrorism Operations Center. He claims to have trained “over 20,000 federal, state and local law enforcement officers. Kharoba has no formal academic degrees in Islamic studies and no experience in law enforcement. His only claim of any qualification is that he has a pre-university level certificate in Arabic culture, but Arabic culture is not Islam; in fact, only 20 percent of the world’s Muslims are Arabs. Upon review, it was found that large sections of Kharoba’s training manual were word-for-word identical to unreliable web-based sources. The investigation found his most common source was Wikipedia.

Scott Saunders Saunders is affilliated with the Virginia Beach, Va. chapter of Act for America.

Shalom Lewis Shalom Lewis is a cleric at the Congregation Etz Chaim synagogue in Marietta, Georgia. Etz Chaim’s website states Lewis “generates a caring warmth”, but his hateful speech about Islam is alarming and barbaric.

Stephanie Reis Reis is the Virginia State Director for Act for America. In 2010, as part of her welcome message for ACT’s Oklahoma chapter, Reis wrote, “The ideology, politics and religion of Islam has one purpose – to bring the world into submission to Islam and under its laws.”

Stephen Coughlin Now a fellow at the Center for Security Policy, Coughlin holds the beleif that belief that Islam “obligates Muslims to use violence in the name of spreading or defending the faith.”

Steven Crowder A Fox News Channel commentator, Crowder alleges “the real problem is the Quran.”

Steven Emerson The founder of the Investigative Project on Terrorism. Upon reviewing a book he wrote, the New York Times determined that Emerson has “an unfamiliarity with the Middle East and a pervasive anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian bias”.

Timothy Wildmon The president of the American Family Association, Wildmon has said, “[Islam] is, in fact, a religion of war, violence, intolerance, and physical persecution of non-Muslims.”

Tommy Robinson A member of the president’s council of Stop Islamization of America. Founder of the English Defence League (EDL), Robinson was jailed in 2013 for “having entered the United States illegally using someone else’s passport” and again in 2014 for mortgage fraud.

Tom Trento Trento is the founder and director of The United West. He believes mosques exist to wage a “cultural jihad” against America.

Usama Dakdok According to the web site of Dakdok’s Straight Way of Grace Ministry one of the group’s goals is to “expose Islam for what it is, and yes it is worse than a cancer, and this can be shown clearly in the reading of the Qur’an and theHadith.”

Wafa Sultan Sultan is connected to both Former Muslims United and Stop Islamization of Nations. She says, “I don`t see any difference between radical Islam and regular Islam…You cannot be American and Muslim at the same time.”

Walid Shoebat The founder of the Forum for Middle East Understanding, Shoebat is the author of “The case for Islamophobia,’ a book published in March 2013. Shoebat’s training and speaking events are promoted using his credentials and his “background” as a former PLO terrorist who converted to Christianity. In 2011, CNN researchers “found no evidence” to support Shoebat’s trademark claim of being a “former PLO terrorist.”

Former Lieutenant General William Boykin A board member of the Oak Initiative. Boykin asserts that “[Islam] should not be protected under the First Amendment,” that there should be “no mosques in America,” that Islam is a “totalitarian way of life,” and that there can be no interfaith dialogue or cooperation between Muslims and Christians.

Zuhdi Jasser Jasser is founder and president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy and a board member of the Clarion Project Under Jasser’s leadership, AIFD is embedded with groups that are dedicated to spreading false information, fear, and distrust of Islam and Muslims.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Rep. Michele Bachmann under 24-hour guard after Islamic State threat

Denver teen Muslimas talked for almost a year with Islamic State jihadis

Islamic State announces beheadings for all who insult Allah

CBC laments that online “Islamophobia” goes unprosecuted

Call it Jihad: ‘Terrorism’ Just Doesn’t Define This Threat

October 29, 2014/in Featured, National Security, News, Policy, Politics/by Clare Lopez

2014’s spate of Islamic terror attacks against Western targets leaves observers grasping for words to describe what’s happening. President Obama doesn’t want to deal with it at all, so after a Muslim convert beheaded a woman in Oklahoma, he thought it appropriate to send the beheader’s mosque (the Islamic Center of Greater Oklahoma City) warm greetings about “shared peace” and “a sense of justice.” (The occasion was the Muslim feast of Eid Ul-Adh, but the timing was awful.) U.S. national security agencies are no help either—under the tutelage of the Muslim Brotherhood, they were purged long ago of any vocabulary useful for dealing with jihad. “Lone wolf” gets a lot of play with the media, but as Michael Ledeen, Andrew McCarthy, and Patrick Poole (here, here, and here) have all pointed out, there’s nothing ‘lone’ about Muslim warriors, self-selected or otherwise, engaging in fard ‘ayn (individual jihad) in obedience to the doctrine of their shared faith.

Nor are these attacks simply “terrorism” in any way that is uniquely descriptive. As Ledeen noted, the Unabomber was a domestic terrorist. The FBI calls the ELF (Earth Liberation Front) terrorist. The Black Liberation Army was accused of murdering more than a dozen police officers in its day. But none of these operates today in obedience to a 1400-year-old ideology that claims a divine commandment to conquer the earth. Nor is any of these other ‘domestic terrorists’ the 21^st century embodiment of a force that already has overrun many powerful civilizations, including the Buddhist, Byzantine, Middle East Christian, Hindu, and Persian ones.

It’s time to call this what it is: Jihad.

Jihad is a unique descriptor: it is motivated solely by one ideology—an Islamic one. It encompasses any and all tactics of war, be they the kinetic violence of terrorism, the stealthy influence operations of the Muslim Brotherhood and Iranian intelligence agencies, or funding, speaking, teaching, and writing. Importantly, the term ‘jihad’ is the one used by its own practitioners—the clerics, scholars, and warriors of Islam. Arguably the most valid qualification of all is that Islamic Law (shariah) defines jihad as “warfare to spread the religion [Islam].” Warfare encompasses many things, though, and not all of them are violent.

Katharine Gorka, President of The Council on Global Security, has an astute new essay entitled “The Flawed Science Behind America’s Counter-Terrorism Strategy” in which she skewers the Obama administration’s misguided policy it calls “Countering Violent Extremism.” She explains how America’s counter-terrorism ‘experts’ have tried haplessly to apply Social Movement Theory to what actually is a totalitarian ideology cloaked loosely in a handful of religious practices. A decade or more of attempting to apply the language of grievance, poverty, and unemployment laid at the door of Western colonialism or secular modernity has achieved little but the neutering of America’s national security defenses. Yet, even this dead-on analysis doesn’t quite get us where we need to be.

Just as Obama’s bland “violent extremism,” deliberately devoid of meaning identifies neither the enemy nor the ideology that animates him, so in its way, ‘terrorism” likewise falls short. For if “terrorist” can and does mean anyone from a nut job like Ted Kaczynsky to assorted tree huggers, neo-Nazi skinheads, as well as Islamic warriors committing atrocities in the name of Allah, then its scope is just too broad to define precisely the paramount threat to global stability in the 21^st century: jihad.

The magnitude of the jihad threat demands its own category. Neither Kaczynsky nor animal and environmental activists nor neo-Nazis could threaten the very existence of our Republic. Certain 20^th century totalitarian ideologies arguably did, though, and that’s why the U.S. marshaled every resource at its disposal to fight them to defeat. Islamic totalitarianism is such an ideology, albeit one that has survived cyclical periods of defeat and resurgence for many centuries. We constrain ourselves both conceptually and legally, however, when the only way to label an act of violence ‘terrorism’ is when it is carried out against civilians for a political purpose and the perpetrator(s) can be tied to a designated terrorist organization, with no consideration for the ideology that so many of them—and others not on such lists—share.

Islamic terror attacks of recent decades typically involved identifiable Islamic terror groups such as al-Qa’eda, Ansar al-Shariah, HAMAS, Hizballah, and the PLO, but were often funded and supported by jihadist nation states such as Iran, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia. As Katharine Gorka described in her white paper, though, the Obama administration’s willfully amorphous term, “violent extremism,” ensured that no enemy threat doctrine called ‘jihad’ that unifies these diverse yet similarly-motivated actors and that actually may threaten the Republic, was ever permitted to be articulated—or confronted.

Now, after the overwhelming post-9/11 Western retaliatory offensives, both al-Qa’eda and more recently, the Islamic State, increasingly have called for acts of ‘individual jihad’ (fard ‘ayn, according to Islamic doctrine). Such attacks by Islamic true believers against armed service members, civilians, and law enforcement officers as well as ordinary citizens duly are proliferating across the West, but the U.S. national security establishment grasps for any term—lone wolf, violent extremist, workplace violence—to avoid saying either ‘terrorism’ or ‘jihadist.’ Granted, as Daniel Pipes noted in his 24 October 2014 essay, “Terrorism Defies Definition,” there are legal consequences under the U.S. Legal Code for “formally certifying an act of violence as terrorist.” But as we see, it’s more than that – and it’s why we need to use “jihad” more often and “terrorism” less.

To properly identify individual jihad attacks is to acknowledge that there is an established ideology behind them that derives its inspiration from Islamic doctrine, law, and scripture. To acknowledge that would mean the threat actually is existential, at a minimum in its objective: universal conquest and enforcement of shariah. Until and unless the entire American citizenry, federal bureaucracy, Intelligence Community, law enforcement, and the U.S. military understand that failing to acknowledge, confront, and defeat the forces of Islamic jihad and shariah indeed do endanger the very existence of our Republic as we know it, and mobilize to meet this challenge, the inexorable advance of shariah will continue. As Pipes notes with some understatement, the current “lack of clarity presents a significant public policy challenge.“

The term “terrorism” will continue to provide useful applications in security categories and lists. But it is much too inclusive and yet restrictive to offer a precise definition of the Islamic threat. The forces of Islamic jihad and shariah are mounting a whole of civilization assault against liberal, modern, representative, secular civil society. Nation states, sub-national terror organizations, transnational alliances, academics and scholars, media conglomerates, networks of mosques and Islamic Centers, so-called ‘charitable foundations’ and their donors, battlefield fighters, and too many individual Muslims are united in a jihad that is not only violent but insidious, inexorable, and sophisticated. Unless we learn to resist in the same way—a whole of civilization way—that list of subjugated civilizations may yet include one more: ours.

FBI Evidence shows CAIR leaders tied to HAMAS

October 29, 2014/in National Security, News, Video/by Defend The Border

We present the FBI “smoking gun” evidence that the Palestine Committee which oversaw and ran the Holy Land Foundation (convicted on 36 counts of providing material support to terrorism, money laundering, conspiracy and tax fraud) organization was founded by Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) and Hamas leader Mousa abu Marzook along with senior executives Nihad Awad and senior officer Omar Ahmad, who also both co-founded the largest Muslim advocacy group in the United States, Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), for the purpose of raising money for the Hamas and to support a media, public relations, and political campaign to ultimately destroy Israel.

EDITORS NOTE: This video with commentary originally appeared on Breitbart TV.

Senior Obama official: Israeli PM Netanyahu is “chickens–t”

October 29, 2014/in Must Read, National Security, News/by Jihad Watch

“The bad thing about him is that he won’t do anything to reach an accommodation with the Palestinians” — that is, give in and surrender to the jihad.

More from the most anti-Israel administration since the founding of the Jewish state: “Senior Obama official: Israeli PM Netanyahu is ‘chickenshit,’” by Kelly Cohen, Washington Examiner, October 28, 2014:

Add another item to the list of insults officials in the Obama administration have lobbed at Benjamin Netanyahu.

A senior Obama administration official recently described the Israeli prime minister as “chickenshit,” according to Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic.

The list also includes descriptions such as “recalcitrant, myopic, reactionary, obtuse, blustering, pompous, and ‘Aspergery,’ ” according to Goldberg.

“The good thing about Netanyahu is that he’s scared to launch wars,” the official told Goldberg, explaining the meaning behind calling the leader of an ally a “chickenshit.”

“The bad thing about him is that he won’t do anything to reach an accommodation with the Palestinians or with the Sunni Arab states,” the official said. “The only thing he’s interested in is protecting himself from political defeat. He’s not [Yitzhak] Rabin, he’s not [Ariel] Sharon, he’s certainly no [Menachem] Begin. He’s got no guts.”

A separate official told Goldberg that the administration believes Netanyahu to be a “coward” on the issue of Iran’s nuclear threat, no longer believing he would ever launch a preemptive strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Obama State Department: “Palestinians” who throw molotov cocktails at Israelis are not terrorists

Philadelphia: Muslim leaders demand arrest and execution of Bangladeshi politician for insulting Muhammad and Islam

Hamas-linked CAIR’s Ibrahim Hooper compares Bill Maher to Grand Dragon of the KKK

Obama State Department: “Palestinians” who throw molotov cocktails at Israelis are not terrorists

October 29, 2014/in Must Read, National Security, News/by Jihad Watch

Of course they’re not terrorists. After all, they’re not “right-wing extremists,” now, are they?

Palestinian youths hurl stones during clashes with Israeli police in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Wadi Joz, September 7.. (photo credit:AMMAR AWAD / REUTERS)

“Obama Admin: Palestinians Who Throw Molotov Cocktails at Israelis Are Not Terrorists,” Washington Free Beacon, October 27, 2014 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

The Obama administration insisted Monday that a Palestinian killed by an IDF while attempting to throw a Molotov cocktail at Israeli civilians is not a terrorist.

The Palestinian, a teenager with U.S. citizenship, was shot Friday and buried wearing a green Hamas headband. The Obama administration said in a statement on Friday that it “expresses its deepest condolences to the family.”

At a State Department briefing today, Associated Press reporter Matt Lee asked spokesperson Jen Psaki whether it is appropriate to offer “deepest condolences” to the family of someone killed while attempting to carry out an attack on civilians.

“There are reports … that [the Palestinian teenager] was throwing Molotov cocktails at cars on a highway, and I’m wondering, if that is the case, would you still have been so speedy in putting out a statement and offering your condolences to the family?” asked Lee. “The argument that is being made by some in Israel is that this kid was essentially a terrorist, and you don’t agree with that, I assume,” Lee continued.

“Correct, we don’t,” Psaki said. Lee then asked whether the fact that the teenager was buried wearing a Hamas headband was “of concern at all.” Psaki replied, “I just don’t have any more on this particular case.”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Analysis: Jerusalem’s ‘silent intifada’ is anything but silent

Guardian’s Brian Whitaker: Most Arab states share Islamic State’s ideology

Hamas-linked CAIR’s Ibrahim Hooper compares Bill Maher to Grand Dragon of the KKK

How Qatari donations turned the Brookings Institution into an apologist for jihad terror

Boston Marathon jihad mass murderer’s friend convicted of lying to the FBI

Five Key Implications if Baghdad Falls to ISIS

October 28, 2014/in Must Read, National Security, News/by ACT For America!

Here is the latest excellent analysis from national security and terrorism expert Patrick Poole. The Obama administration’s failing strategies and tactics to battle ISIS are putting America and the entire world in peril.

5 Key Implications if Baghdad Falls to ISIS

By Patrick Poole

Reports that ISIS has surrounded Baghdad and is quickly closing in on the Baghdad International Airport (armed with MANPADS, no less) are troubling. Baghdad itself has been rocked by a series of VBIED attacks in the past 24 hours by ISIS, indicating that the battle for Baghdad has begun.

The possible fall of Baghdad could be the most significant development in the War on Terror since 9/11. And yet many among the D.C. foreign policy “smart set” were not long ago mocking such a scenario.

So what happens if such a situation comes to pass? Here are five key implications (by no means limited to these) if Baghdad falls to ISIS:

1. ISIS will not be claiming to the be the Islamic State, they will BE the Islamic State

Symbolism doesn’t matter much to your average post-modern Westerner, but it still does in the Islamic world, and the capture of Baghdad will hold enormous value. For 500 years Baghdad was the seat of the Abbasid caliphate, and its fall to ISIS would allow the terrorist group to reclaim that mantle. Such an event will electrify the Middle East and beyond, with many Muslims holding firmly to the belief that the abolition of the Ottoman caliphate in 1924 by Ataturk was one of the key contributing factors in the decline of the Muslim world over the past century. No amount of State Department hashtags or tweets, or pronouncements by Sheikh Barack Obama and Imam John Kerry that there is nothing Islamic about the Islamic State, will be able to negate any claims by ISIS to be the revived caliphate.

2. The Great Reconciliation between jihadist groups will begin

Much of the Obama administration’s anti-ISIS efforts have been trying to leverage other “vetted moderate” groups in Syria against ISIS, with some “smart set” thinkers even advocating engaging “moderate Al-Qaeda” to that end. We are already seeing jihadist groups gravitating towards ISIS, such as the announcement this week by Pakistani Taliban leaders pledging their allegiance to the Islamic State. Other groups of younger jihadis are breaking away from Al-Qaeda franchises in North Africa and defecting to ISIS. Despite bitter rivalries between ISIS and other jihadist groups in Syria, namely Al-Qaeda’s official Syrian affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra, these other groups will be hard-pressed to deny ISIS’ caliphate claims if they do take Baghdad. In that part of the world, nothing succeeds like success. If Baghdad falls, jihadist groups, some of whom have been openly hostile or remained neutral, will quickly align behind ISIS. And the horrid sound coming out of Washington, D.C., will be of foreign policy paradigms imploding.

3. What of U.S. personnel in Iraq?

The US Embassy in Baghdad is the largest embassy on the planet. And afterObama sent 350 more U.S. military personnel to guard the U.S. Embassy last month, there are now more than 1,100 US service members in Baghdad protecting the embassy and the airport. That doesn’t include embassy personnel, American aid workers, and reporters also in Baghdad. ISIS doesn’t have to capture the airport to prevent flights from taking off there (remember Hamas rockets from Gaza prompting the temporary closure of Israel’s Ben Gurion Airport this past summer). If flights can’t get out of Baghdad, how will the State Department and Pentagon evacuate U.S. personnel? An image like the last helicopter out of Saigon would be of considerable propaganda value to ISIS and other jihadist groups. Former CNN reporter Peter Arnett, who witnessed the fall of Saigon in April 1975,raised this possibility back in June. It’s not like the U.S. has prestige to spare internationally, and the fall of Baghdad will mark the beginning of the end of American influence in the Middle East, much like the case in Southest Asia in 1975.

4. If ISIS captures Baghdad, it will be with weapons provided by the U.S. to the Iraqi army and “vetted moderate” Syrian rebel groups

Since their push back into Iraq this summer, ISIS has regularly paraded captured weapons and vehicles that have been provided by the U.S. to the Iraqi army, which rapidly collapsed in the face of the ISIS advance. ISIS has subsequently used these U.S.-provided weapons to repel attacks by Iraqi forces. A report published last month by the UK-based Conflict Armament Research documented the use of U.S.-provided Humvees, armored personnel carriers, and firearms by ISIS. In addition, ISIS has at least 52 U.S.-made M198 howitzers with GPS aiming systems that have a 20 mile range that will undoubtedly be used in their assault on Baghdad. Yesterday, Charles Lister of the Brookings Institute tweeted out recent images of ISIS fighters equipped with M79 Osa anti-tank weapons that had been provided by Saudi Arabia to the “vetted moderate” Free Syrian Army. The potential propaganda value of ISIS capturing Baghdad with U.S. weapons will be enormous.

5. The fall of Baghdad will herald an unparalleled sectarian war in the Middle East and widescale regional instability

The fighting in Syria and Iraq has been part of the regional sectarian competition of Sunni Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states against Shia Iran and its allies in Iraq, the Assad regime in Syria and Hezbollah. ISIS and Sunni Syrian rebel groups have been proxies in this fight. If Baghdad falls to ISIS, it will be all-hands-on-deck across the entire Middle East, with a sectarian war not seen since the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s and sectarian/ethnic cleansing not seen since the Balkan wars. We are already seeing Shiite militias killing Sunnis indiscriminately in Iraq and widespread ethnic and religious cleansing by ISIS in Northern Syria and Iraq. Meanwhile, our NATO ally Turkey is now bombing the same Kurds who are fighting ISIS. Because of these sectarian attacks millions of refugees have already flooded to Syria’s neighboring states, destablizing countries like Lebanon and Jordan. The ISIS push in Anbar province in Iraq has caused 180,000 more to flee,according to the UN. The potential humanitarian disaster from the dislocation of millions in the region could be without parallel.

If, in fact, Baghdad falls to ISIS and the Sunni-Shia sectarian war in Syria and Iraq metastasizes across the Middle East and North Africa, the U.S. will likely find itself an ancillary player. War-weary Americans have no appetite for boots on the ground (fueled in no small measure by the Obama administration’s stoking anti-Iraq war sentiments as part of their political strategy).

And yet one remarkable feature I personally witnessed last month while in Washington, D.C., briefing members of Congress on the proposal to fund more training and weapons for Syrian rebels, is the absence of any acknowledgement by the political and media elite that we lost the Iraq war. The fact is that we left, and ISIS stayed. Our options are increasingly limited in Iraq and the region, and most of those options are horrible options. We don’t even have lesser-of-two-evils options because of our reckless bipartisan foreign policy. The U.S. will also face a dilemma: at the very same time this administration has been sidling up to Iran and trying to strike a deal over its nuclear weapons program, we very well may be faced with calls from our longtime allies in the region, almost all Sunni, for assistance. And then we have Turkey, which, as a NATO partner, we have treaty obligations to honor.

And faced with a nuclear Iran amidst a growing sectarian war, many Sunni countries will start their own crash nuclear programs in response, leading to the regional proliferation of nuclear weapons. No sane person would contend that a nuclear arms race in the Middle East would be a benefit to our own national security (though undoubtedly there will be some D.C. foreign policy “experts” who will dismiss its importance).

The coming days and weeks in the fight for Baghdad are fraught with enormous implications for the U.S. And yet our ability to influence those events is rapidly waning.

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/10/14/5-key-implications-if-baghdad-falls-to-isis/

Patrick Poole is a national security and terrorism correspondent for PJMedia.

The Danger of Lone Wolf Jihadis Among Us

October 28, 2014/in Must Read, National Security, News/by Jerry Gordon

The final weeks of October 2014 were devastating for America. We had lone wolf jihadis in Ottawa and Montreal killing and wounding Canada Forces service personnel. In New York we had a Muslim convert and former U.S. Navy serviceman shot dead in the midst of a deadly hatchet attack on two NYPD officers in Queens. All three appeared to be operating below the radar screen of surveillance inspired by Islamic State jihadist social media imploring Salafist brethren in the West to mount attacks on uniformed military and law enforcement officers. These were so-called ‘citizen jihadists’ wreaking havoc against any means of law enforcement stopping them from their spectacular suicidal missions. There is a coming Detroit federal court trial on November 4, 2014 against a naturalized US citizen, Rasmieh Odeh. She was a member of a Palestinian terror group, who lied on her application about a prior conviction and incarceration in Israel for a 1969 bombing in Jerusalem that killed two university students.

To answer questions about what drives lone wolf Jihadis undertaking such murderous acts, The Lisa Benson Show on Sunday, October 26, 2014 heard from three prominent experts. They noted US terrorism expert Steven Emerson, executive director of Washington, DC-based, The Investigative Project, Ottawa-based David B. Harris Canadian consultant on Islamic terrorism and former official at Canada’s Security and Intelligence Service, and Dr. Michael Welner, founder of the Manhattan based, The Forensic Panel, a noted US Forensic Psychiatrist frequently called as an prosecution witness in mass killing and terrorist cases. Dr. Welner was joined by his mother, a holocaust survivor and trained gerontology nurse who presented her views noting their participation in the recent protest of the Met Opera production of The Death of Klinghoffer. This was more information for our listeners packed into 43 minutes of air time than many two hour cable TV documentaries.

Watch video of Attack on Ottawa Parliament, October 22, 2014.

The Odeh case

On Monday, October 27, 2014 Steve Emerson ‘s IPT released the first in a five part series, “Spinning a Terrorist into a Victim. Rasmieh Odeh a Chicago area Palestinian activist is the subject that report. She was arrested by the FBI for not reporting on her application for US citizenship her incarceration in Israel for her participation in a 1969 bombing by the terrorist group the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). They bombed a supermarket in Jerusalem that killed two Hebrew University students, injuring several others. A second bomb planted at the British consulate did not explode. Odeh was sentenced by an Israeli military court in 1970 to life in prison for her participation in the bombing. Odeh was released in 1979 as part of a group of 76 PFLP terrorist prisoners in exchange for an IDF soldier captured in Lebanon. Odeh came to the US in 1994 from Jordan, settling in Evergreen Park, a suburb of Chicago. She received her US citizenship in 2004. Odeh was arrested on October 22, 2013 under a Federal indictment for not disclosing her prior Israeli conviction, sentencing and incarceration for the PFLP terror bombing. If convicted, Odeh, now 66, may face a 10 year sentence and deportation. Odeh has been vigorously defended by the Council on American Islamic Relations, Students for Justice in Palestine and other so-called human rights groups. Emerson pointed out that Odeh defended her misrepresentations on her application for citizenship on the grounds that she had been tortured while incarcerated in Israel. The IPT team, Emerson said, had interviewed a number of the relatives and friends of the students killed and injured in the PFLP bombing, many now in their 50’s and 60’s.

Canada’s exposure to Islamic terrorism

David B. Harris told about appearing before a US Congressional Committee with Steve Emerson in 1999. He told the Committee had Canada had perhaps the largest number of foreign terrorist groups in the West, surpassed only by the US. That is reflected in the rapid growth of Canada’s Muslim population, a reflection of the ruling governments’ multi-cultural agenda of aiding immigration. This conscious policy is reflected in the following figures he cited. In 1981 Canada had 98,000 Muslim citizens. By 2001, that had risen to about 580,000 and in 2017 projections are that the number will reach 1.4 million. In two decades it is reported that 1 in 13 Canadians will be Muslim and by 2031, 2.9 million Canadians will be Muslim. In 1981, Jews in Canada outnumbered Muslims by two or three to one. In less than sixteen years, Muslims in Canada will outnumber Jews by almost seven to one. Canada’s estimated current Jewish population is 380,000. So we are seeing the result of laws and policies that have brought about a substantial liberalizing of immigration access, over the last three or four decades.

Against the backdrop of the mushrooming Muslim population, Harris cited a 2007 Environics poll showing that approximately 12 percent of Muslims in Canada would be willing to support a plot in Canada to undertake simultaneous mass casualty attacks. That could include bombing and invading certain government and media premises, including the parliament buildings of Canada. That would translate into at least 49,000 Canadians, which should concern reasonable Muslim and non-Muslim Canadians alike.

Referring to the two Canadian lone wolf jihadis, he said that in the case of Martin Couture-Rouleau there is evidence the mosque he attended was frequented by an extremist Imam who cited Shariah law mandating both mutilation and beheading as appropriate punishments for alleged crimes under Sharia. In the instance of the late Michael Zehaf-Bibeau there are indications that he may have been applying for Libyan citizenship to supplant his Canadian passport that was withheld in view of his “high risk traveller” designation. Denial of passports may have been a motivating factor for both of these individuals coupled with the broadcast of ISIS social media calling for attacks on military and law enforcement in Canada.

A fascinating exchange referenced a long term outreach effort by the RCMP to Muslim groups and leaders tied to the Muslim Brotherhood that began in 2005 following the events of 9/11 in the US. On September 29, 2014, two Canadian Muslim groups, Islamic Social Services, Inc. (ISS) and the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM), published a so-called de-radicalization manual, “United Against Terrorism: A Collaborative Effort towards a Secure, Inclusive Canada.” The manual was supposed to be a collaborative effort among the RCMP and the two Canadian Muslim groups. NCCM is the renamed Canadian branch of the Council on American Islamic Relations, a Muslim Brotherhood Front and unindicted co-conspirator in the 2008 Dallas Federal Holy Land Foundation trial. The objective of the 21 page document was to dissuade Canadian Muslim youths from joining Islamists. Instead, the manual suggested that “terrorists were not Jihadists “and Jihad was a “Noble” cause. The RCMP immediately dropped it like the proverbial hot potato calling it “adversarial” and not distributing to its officers.

At the conclusion when prompted by a question on how vulnerable our Northern border is he commented that there are not enough agents to cover likely crossings. As one indication he cited the example of the Millennium plot by an Al Qaeda operative who came to Canada as a refugee and was caught by an inquisitive US border agent. Thus began the unraveling of the Millennium plot, an attempt by al Qaeda using sleeper cells in the US and Canada, to conduct an attack on the Los Angeles International Airport. For more comments about Canada’s Islamist threats, see our August 2012 New English Review interview with him, “A Self-Inflicted Injury: Immigration, Infiltration and Canada’s Growing Islamist Threat.

What motivates the Jihad of Lone Wolves?

Dr. Michael Welner addressed the question of whether there are so-called lone wolves who undertake actions influenced by, yet not part of terrorist groups. His research into mass killing and terrorist cases has evolved a paradigm as to how these should be viewed professionally. First are instances involving attacks directly planned and organized by designated terror groups like, Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas and the Islamic State using specifically trained recruits for these missions. The second are attacks that are undertaken by foreign affiliates of terror group such Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, Al Shabaab and Boko Haram. The third are what he termed “dead enders”, recent converts who are susceptible to undertaking spectacle planned attacks using weapons at their disposal to gain celebrity hood as jihadist terrorists. They may be motivated by doctrinal influences and social media exhortations to demonstrate fealty to their new found faith of Islam committing deadly jihad against innocent unbelievers.

That would explain a host of recent and historic Islamic extremist actions in America. The list would prominently include Maj. Nidal Hassan’s jihad against fellow US Army personnel at Fort Hood, Texas, the killing of US Army Private Andy Long at a Little Rock, Arkansas recruiting office by Muslim convert Carlos Bledsoe (Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad). See our October 2014 New English Review interview with Dr. Welner regarding the Oklahoma beheading by Alton Nolen or Jah’ Keem Israel.

Barbara Welner Comments

Barbara Welner’s appearance on the Lisa Benson show was an inspired emotional moment as a holocaust survivor who ran away from Nazi killer in a Polish ghetto and survived innumerable threats to the life until liberated. Lisa Benson father was honored as a liberator of a Nazi death camps during the last weeks of WWII. Ms. Welner is one of the few persons of her background who has recognized the threat of Islamic Jihadism to both Israel and the Jewish people. See my 2007 Israpundit post, “Moral Clarity from a Holocaust Survivor: Yom Ha Shoah comments of Barbara Welner”. Note this telling comment:

If the Holocaust and the sacrifice of the many millions of innocent lives are to have any meaning for future generations, then our immediate lesson should be to insure our resolve.

I recognize the same intense desire to dehumanize the Jews to utterly destroy them from all quarters of Arab and Muslim life today. The only difference between what I saw from the Nazis is that the Nazis were coy to the outside world about how much they wanted to kill the Jews. The Arabs are quite loudly and vocally advertising how they plan to annihilate Israel.

She recognized that the program provided vital information about a new danger among us here in America. She chastised the Met Opera for conveying a thoughtless production of the Klinghoffer Opera that, as her son said humanized the Palestinian terrorists who killed the defenseless wheelchair bound New York Jew, killing him in cold blood and dumping his body overboard the Italian Cruise vessel, the Achille Lauro. She couldn’t understand why more people in a liberal city like New York with millions of fellow Jews that more people like her son and she didn’t protest the Klinghoffer opera.

Conclusion

What this discussion illustrates is the fatal myopic mindset of counterterrorism agencies in both Canada and the US reflecting prevailing multi-culturalism. In order to secure both countries, a revitalized effort has to be made to understand the threat of Islamic Jihad. Further this may require intrusive community and social media surveillance and targeting of potential jihadists in our midst.

Listen to the October 26, 2014 Lisa Benson Show with Steve Emerson, David B. Harris, Dr. Michael Welner and his mother Barbara.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

Florida: Videos show convert to Islam burning American flag, preaching jihad terror

October 28, 2014/in Must Read, National Security, News/by Jihad Watch

Shelton Thomas Bell. Times-Union file photo

Yet another convert to Islam misunderstands his new religion and gets the crazy idea that it has something to do with violence against unbelievers. Yet another convert to Islam gets the strange notion that he has ceased to be a citizen of his nation, but has instead become its enemy. If only Barack Obama or John Kerry had been around to set him straight.

“Videos depict young Jacksonville terrorist enthusiast burning American flag, preaching jihad,” by Larry Hannan, Florida Times-Union, October 23, 2014:

Like many young men in their late teens, Shelton Thomas Bell had a fondness for shooting video of himself.

But while most show them performing or playing pranks, Bell recorded himself burning an American flag, preaching jihad and repeating sermons given by an American-born Muslim cleric who was killed in a U.S. drone strike.

Thursday those images of a bearded and long-haired Jacksonville resident were played in a Jacksonville courtroom while the 20-year-old, now clean-shaven with closely cropped hair, watched impassively with his lawyer while sitting at a defense table in a red prison uniform and shackles.

Bell previously pleaded guilty to conspiring and attempting to provide material support to terrorists and faces up to 30 years in prison. Prosecutors are asking U.S. District Judge Timothy Corrigan to sentence Bell to 30 years in prison, while defense attorneys are arguing for a more lenient sentence.

Bell generated suspicions at the Islamic Center in Jacksonville after talking with teenagers about jihad and the civil war in Syria. Center attorneys contacted the FBI, and he was arrested on the terrorism charges in July 2013. Prosecutors have said in court documents that immigration authorities in Jordan also alerted the U.S. government to Bell’s actions.

Bell’s plans included traveling to Yemen to join Ansar Al-Sharia, an alias for al-Qaida. Bell and a juvenile who has never been named flew to Jordan in late 2012 in the hopes of crossing over into Yemen and joining the terrorist organization.

But they never crossed the border and ended up being arrested in Jordan after Bell preached jihad at a mosque. The Jordanian authorities sent both men back to America.

In an effort to buttress their claim that Bell was a dangerous terrorist, prosecutors called Special Agent William Berry with the U.S. Customs Joint Terrorism task force to testify for most of Thursday. Berry was one of the lead investigators in the case and has interviewed Bell multiple times, the first time right when Bell returned from Jordan.

During that first interview Bell told him he would continue to pursue violent jihad, Berry said.

Bell was particularly inspired by Anwar al-Awlaki, an Islamic militant and terrorist recruiter who died in Yemen in a 2011 drone strike that became controversial because he was an American citizen.

Bell had downloaded to his computer numerous al-Awlaki videos preaching jihad. Thursday prosecutors showed one of them and then videos of Bell saying similar things.

“The worst thing that can happen to you is death,” Bell says in one video. “And that’s really not that bad.”

Bell speaks repeatedly of the need for Muslims to rise up against the United States and other western powers. The videos also show him firing guns, making amateur bombs and criticizing Muslims who oppose terrorism, calling them “blatant hypocrites.” He and another man also are shown getting ready to vandalize an Arlington church in July 2012. Statues were defaced at Chapel Hills Memory Gardens cemetery, with the head and arms of Jesus cut off.

The video of guns and bombs also show him burning a small American flag while several others cheer.

The second day of Bell’s sentencing hearing will be Friday with both sides calling mental-health experts.

Attorneys for Bell will argue that he never committed any terrorist acts and lacked the funds and contacts to provide much help to a terrorist organization.

“One thing he never did was take up arms against his own countrymen, which, if he were truly interested in more than just the concept of armed jihad, would have been easier to do in Jacksonville than halfway around the world,” said Assistant Federal Public Defender Lisa Call in a sentencing memorandum.

Call is expected to argue that Bell suffers from extreme attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, had substance-abuse issues and grew up in a dysfunctional home….

Oh, that explains it.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Ex-counterterror official: “We don’t have enough FBI agents who understand Islam”

Canada gunman Zehaf-Bibeau threatened to act “in the name of Allah in response to Canadian foreign policy”

UC-Berkeley Muslim students launch campaign to get Bill Maher canceled as speaker at fall commencement

An open letter to Ben Affleck from a woman born and raised in Islam

Salon: Qur’an “backs up jihad, suicide attacks…beheadings,” sex slavery

October 27, 2014/in Must Read, National Security, News/by Jihad Watch

Sunspots? Salon has suddenly discovered that the Qur’an sanctions jihad, suicide attacks, beheadings, and sex slavery, and that Islamic law also allows for female genital mutilation, wife-beating, stoning, etc. — after having excoriated me for years as an “Islamophobe” and a “bigot” for saying just such things. To compound the heresy, they’re publishing this in the context of a takedown of media darling Reza Aslan, whose every pronouncement, no matter how ridiculous, is ordinarily greeted with breathless adulation from media types.

To be sure, the author of this piece, Jeffrey Tayler, makes it more palatable to his Leftist audience by claiming that Jewish and Christian Scriptures contain material that is just as hateful and violent as that which is in the Qur’an — and he doesn’t explain, of course, why we don’t see Jewish or Christian terrorists committing acts of violence and justifying them by reference to their Scriptures. But despite this thoughtless and baseless moral equivalence, casually stated as if it were axiomatic (and it is, in Salon’s circles), this article is still remarkable for what it admits: aspects of Islam that Salon has never, as far as I can recall, acknowledged before.

Has Bill Maher made it safe for Leftists to admit that there is a problem with how jihadis and supremacists use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence and oppression?

“Reza Aslan’s atheism problem: ‘Fundamentalist’ atheists aren’t the issue, apologists for religions are,” by Jeffrey Tayler, Salon, October 25, 2014:

Bill Maher’s recent monologue on “Real Time” about the failure of liberals to speak out about the routine atrocities and violations of human rights carried out in the name of religion in the Muslim world has unleashed a torrent of commentary, much of it from progressives advocating more, not less, tolerance of Islam.

New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, who sided with Ben Affleck against Maher in a follow-up segment a few days later, calls ISIS rebels, in an op-ed, “barbarians” who “give all Islam a bad name,” and asks us to take into account the religion’s diversity, lest we slip into “Islamophobic bigotry.” Fareed Zakaria, in his Washington Post column, cautions us to recall that Islam, Christianity and Judaism once peacefully coexisted, but acknowledges that Islam suffers from a “cancer” – extremism that incites acts of terrorism. This he views, though, as a problem of “Islam today.” (He neglects to point out that in the Muslim-dominated countries where this peaceful coexistence occurred, Christians and Jews suffered humiliating second-rate dhimmi status, unequal legally or socially to Muslims.) Writing on Al Jazeera English, Lana Asfour lauds Affleck for calling out Maher’s “racism” and espies, in the comedian’s treatment of Islam, an “overriding agenda” aimed at justifying the “past, present, and future mistakes” of U.S. foreign policy.

One pundit in particular, though, has busied himself opining on Maher and nonbelievers in general — Reza Aslan, Islam’s most prominent apologist of late. Delivered via multiple media outlets, his remarks, brimming with condescension, tinged with arrogance and laden with implicit insults to thinking people, deserve special scrutiny for one main reason: among well-intentioned liberals who don’t know much about religion, his words carry weight.
advertisement

In a New York Times editorial, Aslan accused Maher and other nonbelievers of “exhibiti[ing] an inability to understand religion outside of its absolutist connotations.” Such folk, in his telling, unjustly “scour holy texts for bits of savagery and point to extreme examples of religious bigotry, of which there are too many, to generalize about the causes of oppression throughout the world.” They fail to grasp, in his view, that “religion is often far more a matter of identity than it is a matter of beliefs and practices.”

Yet Aslan accuses the benighted critics of religion of a far more grievous misapprehension: the assumption that words mean what they actually mean. Here I’ll quote him at length.

“It is a fallacy to believe that people of faith derive their values primarily from their Scriptures. The opposite is true. People of faith insert their values into their scriptures, reading them through the lens of their own cultural, ethnic, nationalistic and even political perspectives. . . . After all, scripture is meaningless without interpretation. The abiding nature of scripture rests not so much in its truth claims as it does in its malleability, its ability to be molded and shaped into whatever form a worshiper requires. . . If you are a violent misogynist, you will find plenty in your scriptures to justify your beliefs. If you are a peaceful, democratic feminist, you will also find justification in the scriptures for your point of view.”

Now we have to stop and ponder what we are being sold here. Aslan is essentially taking a postmodernist, Derrida-esque scalpel to “scripture” and eviscerating it of objective content. This might pass muster in the college classroom these days, but what of all those ISIS warriors unschooled in French semiotic analysis who take their holy book’s admonition to do violence literally? As they rampage and behead their way through Syria and Iraq, ISIS fighters know they have the Koran on their side – a book they believe to be inerrant and immutable, the final Word of God, and not at all “malleable.” Their holy book backs up jihad, suicide attacks (“martyrdom”), beheadings, even taking captive women as sex slaves. This is not surprising; after all, the prophet Muhammad was a warrior who spread Islam by the sword in a dark, turbulent time in history. (Christianity’s propagation had, in contrast, much to do with the Roman emperor Constantine’s fourth-century conversion and subsequent decriminalization of the faith.)

Moreover, the razor-happy butchers of little girls’ clitorises and labia majora, the righteous wife-beaters, the stoners of adulterers, the shariah clerics denying women’s petitions for divorce from abusive husbands and awarding sons twice the inheritance allowed for daughters, all act with sanction from Islamic holy writ. It matters not a whit to the bloodied and battered victims of such savagery which lines from the Hadith or what verses from the Koran ordain the violence and injustice perpetrated against them, but one thing they do know: texts and belief in them have real-life consequences. And we should never forget that ISIS henchmen and executioners explicitly cite their faith in Islam as their motive. Tell that to Derrida – or Aslan….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Canada gunman prepared video confirming it was planned jihad attack

NYC hatchet jihadi searched on Internet for “jihad against police” and for info on last week’s jihad murders in Canada

NYC hatchet attack on cops followed leak of FBI document warning of Islamic State calls to Muslims to attack police

The Ultimate Camping Trip

October 26, 2014/in Must Read, National Security, News/by Tabitha Korol

For a larger view click on the poster.

“May you live in interesting times,” an expression (a curse) that may be traced back to post-World War II England, but is apt today, when times have become all too interesting – chaotic and troubling. We must be reminded of the July 7, 2005 bombings of a bus and three tube trains that killed 52. More recently, May 2013, when a Muslim beheaded a soldier on the streets of London; and September, 2014, when a Muslim sodomized a dog and stabbed two women, beheading one of them; and October, 2014, when Scotland Yard captured four Muslims who admitted their mission to terrorize and decapitate ordinary people on city streets, and another four who were plotting to kill police officers or soldiers on London streets – a total of 218 arrests in the past 12 months alone. Britain identified a “complex web” of 60 Muslim Brotherhood organizations now operating from London, Istanbul, and Doha, Qatar.

In Turkey, in August, Islamists shelled, beheaded, crucified and shot 700 members of the Shaitat tribe because they dared to rise up in their own defense. Over the past week, a recent convert to Islam ran down two Canadian soldiers in a Quebec province, and was shot while preparing to stab a woman police officer. A Canadian soldier was shot and killed by another convert at the National War Memorial in Ottawa; the suspect was killed. A Muslim terrorist ran his car into a crowd in a Jerusalem railroad station, wounding six adults and killing a 3-month-old baby. This was followed by rock-throwing session on a kindergarten and PA leader Mahmoud Abbas’s praise of the killer’s heroics. Two hospital guards at a Philippines hospital were murdered by a Muslim group. A suicide bomber killed another person in Libya, and six young people were executed and then hung, by ISIS, in Iraq.

America surely needs repeated reminding of 9/11, for which Islamist apologists persistently dismiss with a flick of the wrist. Major Hassan’s Allahu Akbar was cast aside with a flimsy “workplace violence” designation, and the stabbing and beheading of an employee at a meat-packing plant in Oklahoma was lost in the media amid all the other excitement of the times, including crimes called “scandals.” But earlier today, a hatchet-wielding, self-inspired terrorist purposely targeted four New York police officers, perhaps in keeping with the new Islamic directive discovered by Scotland Yard.

In fact, the Jihad Report shows Islamic terrorists are responsible for 78 deadly attacks during the week of October 11 – 17, 15 Allah Akbars, 630 dead and 828 critically wounded, bringing the total terror attacks since 9/11 to 24,184 – a number that changes with increasing rapidity.

Walid Shoebat cautions in Why I left Jihad that Muslims have come here for one reason only – to physically act out their hatred for Jews and Christians, until their “enemy is obliterated.” Muslims are attending universities only to infiltrate the student body and train and indoctrinate new jihadists. The extremists win over the moderates with campus events that incite the naïve Americans who have already been taught to accept multiculturalism, moral relativism, and contempt for the West. Spoon-fed Islam as an alternative culture by leftist professors, the students are motivated to collect huge sums of money and support the branches of the Muslim Brotherhood whose missions are to kill Jews, take over Israel, and conquer Western civilization.

Crimes are on the rise in the US, such as the recent stabbing and beheading of an employee at a food distribution center in Oklahoma by an ex-convict, converted to Islam while in prison. When the crimes are reported, they are unconnected to any common denominator, yet there have been kidnappings, assassinations, and arson or firebomb attacks that are attributed to the homegrown Islamic terrorists, Muslims of America (MOA)/Jamaat ul-Fuqra, (aka Soldiers of Allah). Their connection is terrorist communes that are fully established and operational in rural America, Canada, and the Caribbean.

Beginning in 1979, there were attacks on eastern houses of worship – Hare Krishna temples, Iranian (Shi’ite) mosque, an Islamic Cultural Center, an Indian-owned hotel, an Ahmadiyya Center, the Integral Yoga Society and two Vendanta Societies, a Laotian temple, and more. Physicians of Hindu and East Indian origin have been kidnapped and killed, as were mosque leaders.

Tom Gallagher, of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, describes the MOA, specifically, as a “violent, black Muslim extremist sect that acts out jihads against perceived enemies.” The group provides firing ranges and paramilitary and guerilla-warfare training to spread Islam and destroy America through violence. Trained in camps in America, they are sometimes sent to Pakistan to become a new generation of jihadists.

Their activities in Colorado (1989) have included fire breakouts at a power station. Law enforcement officials also discovered a large, well equipped arsenal, documents and photos of the Jewish Community Center and Hare Krishna Temple in Denver; and an illegal collection of checks. Four of five MOAs were arrested. An MOA arsenal was discovered in 1992, with plans for targets in Denver, Tucson, and Los Angeles.

Five MOAs were arrested in New York in the 1990s for conspiracy to bomb a Hindu temple and Indian theater in Toronto, with an expected death count in the thousands. The FBI and local police discovered a cache of weapons to be used across the Canadian border. The NYC Dept. of Investigation uncovered an Islamic compound a year before the World Trade Center attack (arresting some for mixing explosives) and one year later, learned that this had been a training compound for 9/11. Eight men were arrested from another group with a plot to bomb the UN, FBI headquarters, and the Holland and Lincoln tunnels. A gang of ten who were arrested in three New York boroughs for selling illegal weapons was also linked to MOA.

For a larger view click on the map.

Other camps in the network were discovered in South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, California (see map at left), all controlled by the group’s founder, a Pakistani Sufi mystic, Sheikh Syen Mubarik Ali Gilani. Although general reports claim more than 3000 members – many ex-convicts who had been convicted of violent crimes, the cleric and known international terrorist asserts to have as many as 15,000 followers, 35 “villages” in 22 states, ranging from 33 acres in South Carolina to 300 acres in California.

En route to interview Gilani about his follower, shoe-bomber Richard Reid, journalist Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and beheaded because Gilani thought he (Pearl) was a secret service agent. Although Gilani’s original purpose was to recruit mujahedeen to fight the Soviets, Gilani’s ideology is the purification of Islam through violence – meaning, the obliteration of all infidels. And, recruiting American citizens makes it is more difficult to stop their activities. Not only are they protected as citizens by state laws, the US Constitution, and our climate of political correctness, but they formed a legal church, hence a tax-exempt organization. As such, they can conduct banking transactions, launder money; purchase land, buildings, lodging and safehouses, communication equipment, weapons, lethal substances/explosives, all without having to pay taxes or report expenditures or income.

The U.S. State Department has known of these training camps since 1993. FBI Director Robert Mueller admits their existence; special FBI agent Jody Weis declared the homegrown terrorists to be more dangerous than any known group; and Ryan Mauro, national security analyst and political analyst, exposed the camps in the Counter Jihad Report. Sean Hannity (Fox News) reported on the status of these camps in 2009.

Law enforcement officials believe Gilani hides terrorists (as the “Beltway Snipers” were probably hidden during their 23-day shooting spree in Washington D.C.). Christian Action Network (CAN) urges the U.S. to designate Muslims of America a “Foreign Terrorist Organization” (FTO). Sheikh Gilani operates from Lahore, Pakistan, and that connection would make illegal any support to his group, and restrict their funding and expansion. CAN also asks that we contact our political leaders and demand that Muslims of America be placed on the State Department’s Foreign Terrorist Organization watch list and demand that each State and Congress outlaw any Islamic communities, organizations and mosques that preach Jihad against America.

There exists a real and present danger to the survival of our country and our civilization, and a few phone calls might work to protect us. After all, daily life is interesting enough under the best of circumstances.