How Western Media Enable Islamic Terrorism

la-epa-egypt-unrest2-jpg-20130819-450x300Frontpage, by Raymond Ibrahim, December 19, 2014:

If the West is experiencing a rise in the sort of terror attacks that are endemic to the Islamic world—church attacks, sex-slavery and beheadings—it was only natural that the same mainstream media that habitually conceals such atrocities, especially against Christians and other minorities under Islam, would also conceal the reality of jihadi aspirations on Western soil.

As The Commentator reports:

[T]he level of the [media] grovelling after the tragic and deadly saga in Sydney Australia over the last 24 hours has been astounding.

At the time of writing, the lead story on the BBC website is of course about that very tragedy, in which an Islamist fanatic took a random group hostage in a cafe, ultimately killing two of them.

He did this in the name of Islam. But you wouldn’t get that impression if you started to read the BBC’s lead story, which astoundingly managed to avoid mentioning the words Islam, Islamic, Islamist, Muslim, or any derivations thereof for a full 16 paragraphs. The New York Times, which led by calling the terrorist, Man Haron Monis an “armed man”, waited until paragraph 11.

In the Guardian’s main story – whose lead paragraph simply referred to a “gunman” — you had to wait until paragraph 24.

If you’d have blinked, you’d have missed it.

….

In the wider media, reports about Muslim fears of a “backlash” have been all but ubiquitous.

If these are the lengths that Western mainstream media go to dissemble about the Islamic-inspired slaughter of Western peoples, it should now be clear why the ubiquitous Muslim persecution of those unfashionable Christian minorities is also practically unknown by those who follow Western mainstream media.

As with the Sydney attack, media headlines say it all. The 2011 New Year’s Eve Coptic church attack that left 28 dead appeared under vague headlines:“Clashes grow as Egyptians remain angry after attack,” was the New York Times’ headline; and “Christians clash with police in Egypt after attack on churchgoers kills 21” was the Washington Post’s—as if frustrated and harried Christians lashing out against their oppressors is the “big news,” not the unprovoked atrocity itself; as if their angry reaction “evens” everything up.

Similarly, the Los Angeles Times partially told the story of an Egyptian off-duty police officer who, after identifying Copts by their crosses on a train, opened fire on them, killing one, while screaming “Allahu Akbar”—but to exonerate the persecution, as caught by the report’s headline: “Eyewitness claims train attacker did not target Copts, state media say.”

A February 2012 NPR report titled “In Egypt, Christian-Muslim Tension is on the Rise,” while meant to familiarize readers with the situation of Egypt’s Christians, prompts more questions than answers them: “In Egypt, growing tensions between Muslims and Christians have led to sporadic violence [initiated by whom?]. Many Egyptians blame the interreligious strife on hooligans [who?] taking advantage of absent or weak security forces. Others believe it’s because of a deep-seated mistrust between Muslims and the minority Christian community [what are the sources of this “mistrust”?].”

The photo accompanying the story is of angry Christians holding a cross aloft—not Muslims destroying crosses, which is what prompted the former to this display of Christian solidarity.

Blurring the line between victim and oppressor—recall the fear of “anti-Muslim backlashes” whenever a Muslim terrorizes “infidels” in the West—also applies to the media’s reporting on Muslim persecution of Christians.

A February 2012 BBC report on a church attack in Nigeria that left three Christians dead, including a toddler, objectively states the bare bone facts in one sentence.  Then it jumps to apparently the really big news: that “the bombing sparked a riot by Christian youths, with reports that at least two Muslims were killed in the violence. The two men were dragged off their bikes after being stopped at a roadblock set up by the rioters, police said. A row of Muslim-owned shops was also burned…”

The report goes on and on, with an entire section about “very angry” Christians till one confuses victims with persecutors, forgetting what the Christians are “very angry” about in the first place: nonstop terror attacks on their churches and the slaughter of their women and children.

A New York Times report that appeared on December 25, 2011—the day after Boko Haram bombed several churches during Christmas Eve services, leaving some 40 dead—said that such church bombings threaten “to exploit the already frayed relations between Nigeria’s nearly evenly split populations of Christians and Muslims…”  Such an assertion suggests that both Christians and Muslims are equally motivated by religious hostility—even as one seeks in vain for Christian terror organizations that bomb mosques in Nigeria to screams of “Christ is Great!”

Indeed, Boko Haram has torched 185 churches—to say nothing of the countless Christians beheaded—in just the last few months alone.

Continuing to grasp for straws, the same NYT report suggests that the Nigerian government’s “heavy-handed” response to Boko Haram is responsible for its terror, and even manages to invoke another mainstream media favorite: the poverty-causes-terrorism myth.

Whether Muslim mayhem is taking place in the Islamic or Western worlds, the mainstream media shows remarkable consistency in employing an arsenal of semantic games, key phrases, convenient omissions, and moral relativism to portray such violence as a product of anything and everything—political and historical grievances, “Islamophobia,” individual insanity, poverty and ignorance, territorial disputes—not Islam.

As such, Western mainstream media keep Western majorities in the dark about the Islamic threat, here and abroad.  Thus the “MSM” protects and enables the Islamic agenda—irrespective of whether its distortions are a product of intent, political correctness, or sheer stupidity.

Pamela Geller on the The Rick Amato Show, One American News Network, #SydneySeige

Published on Dec 15, 2014 by Pamela Geller

Pamela asks why “a savage jihadist like Sheik Man Haron Monis was out on bail and not behind bars — for life” and why Muslim groups are not instituting programs against jihad recruitment.

Sydney’s Lesson: The Mutant Jihadists are coming

240DD65D00000578-2873855-At_least_13_people_are_being_held_hostage_by_terrorists_who_stor-m-74_1418608624151History News Network, By Walid A. Phares, Dec 15, 2014:

The jihadi hostage taker of Sydney has been mutating from one state of mind to another over the years. He is a citizen of Iran under his original name Manteghi Bourjerdi. There is no information as to why he sought political asylum to Australia in 1996. He either used the process of asylum to enter Australia or he was opposed to the Iranian regime. However, as soon as he was granted asylum and became a legal resident, he engaged in open activism for a radical global jihadi ideology. He focused on an anti-Western, anti-U.S. agenda, launching political attacks on Australia’s policies and on its military. His narrative was global and could fit the goals of any jihadi movement in the world, whether it be Salafi or Khomeinist. Being a Shia, he was originally identified as linked to al Qaeda or ISIS, but being opposed to the Iranian regime, he was not linked to Hezbollah. Then new information appeared—basically from his own web site—that he abandoned the Shia faith and moved to the Sunni faith. He used the narrative of Salafi Sunni jihadists when he announced he abandoned the Shia. He called them “rafida,” a term used by al Qaeda and ISIS.

So what do we make of his case? Academic scholars and experts are puzzled by this man who changed his name to Sheikh M’an (not man) Haroun Mu’nis (not Munis) شيخ مأن هارون مؤنس . He was Shia and he shifted to Sunni, but we do not have a document proving this. What we are dealing with is a concept I advanced in my book Future Jihad (2005): the idea of “mutant jihadists.” Nine years ago I warned that the jihadists could and would mutate from their original state into another more complex, adaptive entity. From Salafi jihadists in al Qaeda, they could move to ISIS—as we saw in Iraq and Syria—or from Muslim Brotherhood to Salafi jihadis—as we saw in Libya. But mutating from a Shia to Sunni jihadist, by converting from one sect to another, is a more complex case. The reality is, however, that the opposite, moving from Sunni to Shia jihadism, is also occurring. Over the past decade, many Arab governments have complained about Iranian efforts to convert Sunni to Shia, but in recent years, Salafi jihadists have also succeeded in converting Shia into their brand of jihadism. Even more complex is the fact that individual jihadists—such as Sheikh Mu’nis—would move from one sphere to another by themselves. Are they helped, assisted, or even funded? Anything is possible in the world of jihadism.
I argued a decade ago that once the global jihadi movement starts to expand, we will see many transformations and mutations. Not every jihadi will look like another, nor will they have to necessarily belong to a particular movement or organization. What links all of them is the common core of jihadism. All jihadists are fighting for a common cause against a common enemy, the infidels. Radical Islamists and jihadists can fight among themselves over who will lead and what the final goal might be, but their global direction is unified against a common enemy. To understand this fundamental reality, one has to understand what can be defined as “global jihadism,” an ideology explained in Future Jihad, an ideology I have been briefing governments, the U.S. Congress, and counterterrorism agencies about for over a decade. 
 Unfortunately, the Obama administration abandoned the identification of the jihadi ideology under pressure from the Islamist lobby, representing the agendas of both the Muslim Brotherhood and the Iranian regime. Since 2009, Washington no longer recognizes nor deals with the jihadi ideology. And Western governments somehow follow this U.S. example. This refusal to identify jihadism explains how and why the United States and many liberal democracies, both in their governments and academia, have been unable to detect the threat, define it, and produce appropriate antidotes. Even advanced think tanks and foundations have been trailing behind in the strategic detection of the jihadi phenomenon.
 The “chocolate shop jihad” in Sydney demonstrates how jihad can mutate and strike from unexpected quarters. But it also demonstrates how weak the intellectual and political establishment is in preempting and countering the threat. All the West now has is law enforcement capacities. And the sad state of affairs has local law enforcement attempting to fix the mistakes committed by national political elites.  
Dr Walid Phares is the Co-Secretary General of the Transatlantic Parliamentary Group on Counter Terrorism TAG and the author of The Lost Spring

Defining Jihad Downward

Screen-Shot-2014-12-12-at-2.44.37-PM-190x142CSP, By Kyle Shideler:

My colleague Adam Savit has already taken the BBC to task for their write up of a recent report on Jihadist violence in the month of November, which neglected to include the murder of Israelis. This led me to drill down deeper into the report by the International Center for the Study of Radicalisation and Political violence. Not only did the report neglect to include Hamas violence in its study of jihadi attacks, but it does so explicitly and intentionally. The report notes:

This definition excludes Shia militant groups such as Hezbollah that justify fighting in the name of jihad but are located outside the Sunni tradition. Indeed, the jihadists of al Qaeda, the Islamic State and like-minded groups regard Hezbollah as ‘apostates’ and have been among the most vociferous opponents of Shia militant groups in places like Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen.

The definition also excludes the Palestinian group Hamas which advocates ‘jihad’ and – unlike Hezbollah – is widely recognized as Sunni. Its religious, social and political doctrine, however, is not Salafist.
Jihadist groups such as al Qaeda have repeatedly condemned Hamas for recognizing man-made laws and becoming involved in democratic elections, while Hamas, in turn, has repressed – and fought against – jihadist groups.

This justification is at best ignorant, and at worst mendacious.

While it is true that Hezbollah is fighting Islamic State and Al Qaeda in Syria, Hezbollah also has a long history of cooperation with Al Qaeda. Are the authors of this report unaware that it was Hezbollah which introduced Al Qaeda to the truck bombing techniques used in the Africa Embassy bombings (a role for which they have been held responsible in court) and that relationships between Iran’s terrorist facilitators the IRGC, Hezbollah and AL Qaeda were forged during the Pan Arab and Islamic Conference held by Sudan in the 1990s? Perhaps they are equally unaware that Hezbollah’s patron, Iran, has been held responsible for its role in 9/11 in federal court, due to its role in facilitating the movement of the hijackers, and that the 9/11 Commission notes the role of Hezbollah’s master terrorist Imad Mugniyeh in assisting the 9/11 attacks? One supposes that given its narrow justification the ICSR would not consider the  Embassy bombings or the 9/11 attacks  “jihadist” violence either.

Then there is the ICSR’s statement on Hamas. Hamas is the wing of the Muslim Brotherhood responsible for engaging in jihad terror against Israel. Hamas is completely open about this connection, having documented it in its original founding charter. Hamas was perhaps best described by leading Hamas representative Ismail Haniyeh who remarked that Hamas is the “jihadi movement of the Brotherhood with a Palestinian face.” From its earliest foundation, The Muslim Brotherhood’s own founder Hasan Al-Banna described his movement as consisting of “a Salafiyya message…”  Prior to founding the Brotherhood Al-Banna was himself a member of the Salafi groups, including the Society for the Prevention of the Forbidden.

Further more, Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sayyid Qutb’s most important work “Milestones”, was a major inspiration for Osama Bin Laden (according to the 9/11 Commission report again) and consists entirely of a discussion regarding how to restore the world to Islam, while using the methods of the early Muslims (i.e. Salaf).  The original founder of the MAK (Afghan Service Bureau) Abdullah Azzam together with Osama Bin Laden, and the author of “In Defense of Muslim Lands” the doctrinal work which best established Jihad as an fard al-ayn (individual obligation), was both a Muslim Brother and a co-founder of Hamas.  Azzam’s picture is still visible in the offices of Hamas today.

Besides Sayyid Qutb and Abdullah Azzam,  other Muslim Brotherhood members have also played a key role in creating the very doctrine of Al Qaeda, such as Abdul Mjid Aziz Al-Zindani, the leading cleric of the Yemeni branch of Muslim Brotherhood, was a close mentor of Osama Bin Laden and a contact of the AQ-linked Ansar al-Islam.  Al-Zindani was also a board member of the specially designated entity the Union of the Good, an organization run by Muslim Brotherhood cleric Yusuf Al Qaradawi, whose primary purpose is to fund Hamas.

The claim by ICSR that Hezbollah and Hamas should be excluded from an accounting of Jihadist violence merely because they (at times) have disagreed with Al Qaeda or other jihadist groups is utterly inane. After all Al Qaeda and ISIS are currently locked in a struggle themselves (see for example this video released today by MEMRI featuring ISIS members interrogating Jabhat al Nusra members and denouncing them as apostates), and Muslim Brotherhood-linked militias in the Syrian civil war fight alongside Al Qaeda, and yet the ICSR can’t quite bring itself to declare that Al Qaeda is not a jihadist group.

Jihad as religiously-obligatory warfare to establish Islamic law remains a concept which extends across both Sunni and Shia sects, and amongst all schools of Islamic law. There is no legitimate justification for excluding these groups, and to do so is to reduce the term “jihad” or “jihadist violence” until it is becomes meaningless. The reality is that Jihadist violence is a threat larger than simply just the “Salafi-jihadi” matrix which some insist on shoving it into.

REVIEW: Angel Rabasa and Cheryl Benard’s ‘EuroJihad’

Militants raising the Islamic State flag at the entrance of an army base in Ninevah Province, Iraq / AP

Militants raising the Islamic State flag at the entrance of an army base in Ninevah Province, Iraq / AP

Washington Free Beacon, By Tom Rogan:

Few political concerns are as troubling as that of European-based jihadism.

With thousands of European citizens now fighting for Salafi-Jihadist groups around the world, a storm of terror is gathering. Western security services fear that once these terrorists return home—and some already have—they may launch domestic attacks. With European Union passports offering easy travel globally, the threat is increasingly borderless.

In EuroJihad, Angel Rabasa, a political scientist at RAND, and Cheryl Benard, head of a Washington D.C.-based research agency, offer a thorough look inside European jihadism. Rich with case studies and supported by extensive statistical analysis, EuroJihad is a serious but accessible piece of research.

What’s immediately striking about EuroJihad is its avoidance of the casual political correctness of many discussions on the contemporary terrorist threat. For example, the authors note that while only a small minority of European Muslims support violent extremism, “even a support level of just 1 percent in a national Muslim community of 3.4 million (Germany) or 1 million (Spain) represents a substantial and potentially dangerous level.” This assessment honestly describes the challenge that a small group of ideologically committed, technically proficient and mobilized individuals pose.

The authors spend much of EuroJihad assessing the backgrounds of different terrorists. They explain that in Britain, most terrorist suspects are young British-Pakistani men isolated from mainstream society. In France, the threat centers with young North African men. And in Germany, the threat spectrum is evolving to include elements of Germany’s large, but traditionally moderate, Turkish expatriate community.

The threat is diverse. The authors reference a German official’s statement that a significant number of European jihadists are middle class individuals who believe they deserve better from society. Other young men, however, are motivated by their desire to find gang-style “street cred” with their friends. Many European jihadists are active on public networking sites such as Facebook, seeking to broadcast what they regard as ‘purposeful courage’. The authors buttress this discussion with various statistical assessments—and their findings are interesting. In the United Kingdom, for example, they find “a substantial gap between education level (the majority had some college education) and employment (only a minority had skilled or professional jobs).” Correspondingly, they note, this education-fulfillment “gap may have created a sense of relative deprivation among members of this population”.

As the authors explain, personal feelings of societal disenchantment can increase the susceptibility of someone to jihadist ideology, which focuses disappointment through the “prism of Islamist narratives of Western oppression of Muslims. These perceptions drive and justify the transition to violence.”EuroJihad also considers the various physical locales—frequently, mosques and prisons—in which European jihadists find networks of direction. The authors explain that the United States, with its opportunity-responsibility centered culture, has largely (but not entirely) found insulation from extremist infection.

Rabasa and Benard also examine the Internet. They note that the Internet provides many “utilities” for jihadists, including recruiting, propaganda, and a nexus for the transmission of technical and physical terrorist training manuals (a major concern for western intelligence services). Perhaps most interestingly, the authors also outline how the Internet has “emancipated female activists by allowing them to communicate with male extremists without violating social and religious precepts.”

The authors rightly pay special attention to the current conflict in Syria and Iraq. They note that for Salafi-Jihadists, there are distinct theological undertones to the geographic locale of the Syrian civil war. Believing themselves embarked on an apocalyptic battle, the Islamic State is strengthened in its aggression and lack of restraint. The authors also explain that where the expansion of al-Qaeda cells in Europe was (at least to some degree) prevented by U.S. special forces campaigns against al-Qaeda in Iraq, the Islamic State’s freedom of operations and its many European recruits pose an extreme near-term threat to the west.

EuroJihad challenges the reader with its dire appraisals of the European terrorist threat, and clarifies that in the short to medium term, European jihadism will continue to pose a major challenge. Nevertheless, pointing to increasing actions by some European governments to require stronger language and social skills from new immigrants, and the evolution of greater outreach and de-radicalization programs, the authors suggest that continental authorities are slowly waking up to the jihadist crisis.

Attack in Grozny, December 4th 2014

05grozny-videoSixteenByNine540CSP, By Sean MacCormac, Dec. 5, 2014:

Thursday, December 4th: Grozny, the capital of Chechnya, was shaken by an early morning terrorist attack when several gunmen seized the Grozny Press House and a school. The attack was an unwelcome surprise to many, given that Chechen President Ramzan Kadyrov had made great strides in keeping jihadists under control in the semi-autonomous Russian republic. Kadyrov noted on his Instagram page that police had encountered several armed men traveling in Grozny via automobile. The incident happened at about 1 AM.

A brief gunfight ensued, resulting in three dead traffic police. This comes in the wake of a suicide bomber detonating himself outside of Grozny City Day on October 6th. Another account of the first encounter with police, broadcast on the television network Dozhd, state that the first firefight occurred outside of the “Heart of Chechenya” mosque.

The gunmen, ten in total, then broke up into two groups, a seven-man group heading to take the Press House while the remaining three went to occupy a secondary school. The school was reported to be empty by the time the gunmen seized it. Military and federal police units were deployed to surround the Press House along with the local police, and the Press House was severely damaged by a fire that started from inside.

After an extended gun battle and standoff at the Press House costing the lives of ten police officers, all seven gunmen at the Press House were confirmed killed.

Russian officials confirm that the terrorists were heavily armed and had at least 24 explosive devices with them. The remaining three gunmen at the school were reported to have all been killed in the gunfight at the school.

Russian law enforcement officials believe that the mastermind of the attack was warlord Aslan Avgazarovich Byutukaev, also known as Emir Khamzat, former right hand man of Doku Umarov, the founder of the Salafi jihad terrorist group, the Caucasus Emirate.

They also suspect that the main aim of the attack may have been to assassinate the Chechen president Ramzan Kadyrov, known for his aggressively anti-Islamist stance, although as of yet no one has officially claimed responsibility of the attack.

It seems possible that the goal of the attack may have been to perform a Beslan-style attack on the 20th Secondary School in Grozny, foiled by the gunmen’s discovery by traffic police. Whatever the case, only the awareness and action of local law enforcement led to the discovery of the terrorist plot before it could be completely carried out. This once again shows the importance of providing local law enforcement with appropriate intelligence and training to recognize jihad terrorist threats.

AN AMERICAN INFIDEL IN ABU DHABI

Screen-Shot-2014-12-04-at-104709-AMpngBreitbart, by DR. PHYLLIS CHESLER:

On December 1st, a figure in a black burqa, armed with an eight-inch knife, entered the upscale Boutik shopping mall located in Reem Island, the neighborhood where most of Abu Dhabi’s 40,000 expatriates live.

The black burqa’ed figure waited for more than an hour in a woman’s toilet—then stabbed the first white blonde infidel American woman who came in to use the facilities six times until she was dead. Then, with the possible help of two other women, the mysterious black burqa’ed figure either smoothly and calmly walked away, or did so in a frenzied fashion (there are conflicting eye witness reports about this). In any event, the killer entered an elevator and disappeared.

 

The victim’s name was Ibolya Ryan. She was a Hungarian-born and Romanian-raised kindergarten teacher and the divorced mother of two 11 year-old twin boys, Adam and Aiden.  Her former husband lives in Colorado. Ryan had described herself in an online profile for a teacher-recruiting company as “Romanian born” and someone who has worked “in four countries over the last 15 years.” Ryan wanted to “experience the Arab world…their culture and daily life.”

Tragically, she has done just that. At a time of fierce Islamic fundamentalist Jihad, Ibolya, a civilian, may have been targeted by Jihadists. On October 29, 2014, the Embassy of the United States Abu Dhabi UAE posted a “message” for U.S. Citizens, especially “Teachers at International Schools.” An anonymous posting on a Jihadist site, which encouraged “attacks against teachers at American and other international schools in the Middle East,” prompted the Embassy to issue a “security warning.” This included the following:

Avoid crowds or large gatherings when traveling in public; Identify safe areas (for example police stations, hospitals) in your area and how to get to them quickly; Tell co-workers or neighbors where you are going and when you intend to return; Minimize your profile while in public; Always carry a cellphone…; Be prepared to postpone or cancel activities for personal safety concerns.

In other words: Live vigilantly, live fearfully, live indoors as much as possible and have as little contact with strangers, especially with Arab Muslim strangers, as possible.

This is no way to live. But that is the point of such terrorist intimidation– namely, to make life unlivable, unbearable, so that the infidel will either convert to Jihadic Islamism or leave Muslim lands.

On the other hand, the UAE is a strong ally of the United States. Every state in the United States exports to the UAE and more than 1000 American firms have an on-the-ground presence. Strategic American and UAE alliances exist in terms of oil, medical, and military equipment and personnel—but most important, perhaps, is the fact that the UAE “was the first country to support the United States at the advent of Desert Storm; the only Arab country to participate with the US in five coalition actions over the last 20 years: Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Bosnia-Kosovo, and the First Gulf War.”

More importantly, the UAE supports and enforces UN sanctions to contain Iranian nuclear weapons capabilities and, since mid-September of this year, “the UAE has flown dozens of missions against ISIL targets.”

The murder of Ibolya Ryan might also have been a targeted message to the governments of both the UAE and the United States, one that hoped to destroy their relationship in terms of the ongoing joint fight against the most barbaric forms of Islamic fundamentalism.

Jihadists wish to intimidate Americans abroad in Muslim countries so that they move back to America. But Jihadists also wish to punish any individual Muslim or Muslim country for daring to work with infidels against Islamic fundamentalists. How this intimidation is handled, both by individuals and by governments, is bound to affect the course of the war between civilization and barbarism.

Also see:

Completely Recasting U.S. National Security Policy For Dealing With Islamic Jihad

06listeningpost-5-jumboRight Side News, by Col. Tom Snodgrass (Ret.) Nov. 17, 2014:

Confusion Due To Faulty Assumptions

Consider the assumptions that underlie the current U.S. National Security Policy toward the Middle East and the wider Islamic world:

1. The Westphalian nation-state concept imposed on the Middle East by the Sykes-Picot Agreement in the aftermath of World War I is still an operative approach to partition peoples and territories into political entities, while ignoring the reality of the culture and history of religious, tribal, and geographical divisions.

2. The Sykes-Picot creation of the state of Iraq can function viably with a combined Shia-Sunni-Kurd government, while the similarly created state of Syria will also be viable with a combination Alawite-Sunni-Shia-Kurd polity functioning together.

3. The territorial sovereignty represented by the Iraq-Syrian border is still valid.

4. The U.S. can maintain simultaneous, balanced, effective alliances with Sunnis, Shiites, Kurds, and the various regional minor sects like Alawites.

5. The Khomeinist-Shia mullah government will negotiate discontinuation of their nuclear weapons development program and additionally will serve as a U.S. partner in maintaining political stability in the area of the Persian Gulf.

6. The Saudi, Egyptian, and Gulf Arab Sunnis will compliantly acquiesce to the new U.S.- Khomeinist-Shia Iranian alliance.

7. The absence of a two state Israel-Palestine solution is the driving force of Middle East instability, and it is the Israelis that are responsible for the impasse.

8. Turkey is a secular ally and is not pursuing a Sunni Islamist agenda.

9. Islamic jihad is not a politico-theocratic, imperialistic doctrine that is the organizing principle of Islam as mandated in the Quran, the Hadith, the Sira, and the Sharia and that those Muslims engaged in jihad are merely an isolated fringe.

The Reality

1. The nation-states created by Sykes-Picot have never functioned as intended and instead have been just geographical cauldrons for life-and-death, religious-tribal warfare for the political power to exploit religious-tribal enemies.

2. The reality of #1 above has been violently the case in Iraq and Syria where tribal-sectarian warfare has been what has masqueraded as “national politics” since their foundings.

3. The Sunni Islamic State has forever erased the Sykes-Picot political boundary between Iraq and Syria restoring cultural-historical, religious-tribal territorial hegemonies.

4. The Islamic world is on the brink of a total sectarian Sunni-Shia war for leadership of the Islamic jihad movement. The U.S. would be insane to get involved on one side or the other because the U.S. loses regardless which sectarians prevail.

5. It defies all sensibility to honestly believe that, after the Khomeinist-Shia mullah government of Iran has sacrificed so much national wealth and endured economically debilitating international sanctions, they will forego acquiring the nuclear means to their Khomeinist-Shia jihadist goals, as well as to regional hegemony over neighboring Sunnis.

6. With the Islamic world is on the brink of a total sectarian Sunni-Shia war and the Iranian mullahs on the verge of becoming a nuclear power, the Saudi, Egyptian, and Gulf Arab Sunnis will not hesitate to follow courses of action that are sectarian-religious and tribal motivated, which inevitably will be at cross purposes with U.S. interests.

7. A two state Israel-Palestine solution can never be achieved because it is written in the Islamic Sharia that once a territory is ruled by Sharia law (as Israel was under the Ottomans), it can never again be under the domination of non-Muslims. Therefore according to Sharia, it is obligatory that Muslims fight jihadist war until the territory is once again under Islamic control (such is the essence of the Hamas founding-purpose charter).

8. The Ataturk secularization of Turkey has failed, and President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his Justice and Development Party (“AKP” in Turkish) have been slowly and deceptively introducing a Sunni Islamist political agenda piecemeal, while changing the Turks’ orientation from secular to Sunni Islamist. The Turks are no longer the reliable Cold War allies they once were.

9. Mohammad clearly stated to Muslims and is quoted in Islamic scripture: “I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer and pay zakat [which is charity only for fellow Muslims, and/or funding for jihad].”  The first part of this condition is the Shahada, or profession of faith in Islam that a non-Muslim must say in converting to Islam. Furthermore, it is clear that violence is sanctioned until the victims embrace Muhammad’s religion. Mohammad was not addressing “the fringe.” He was establishing the overriding dictum for all Muslims to follow.

Change Required

It is small wonder why the Obama Regime’s National Security Policy is in total disarray. The assumptions undergirding it have no relationships with reality. Were the Obama regime to change its assumptions, how could it recast the National Security Policy?

First, it is necessary to recognize that Iraq is already lost influence-wise to Iran. When Obama pulled U.S. troops out in 2011, Iran moved in and we will never again have the influence in Iraq that we had in 2011 (such as it was). That fact is not going to change as long as the Khomeinist-Shia mullah government rules Tehran, and Baghdad and Damascus by proxy. Therefore, we should not live in a fantasyland that “2011 Iraq” can or even should be recreated.

The purpose of President Bush’s war to democratize and nation-build an American ally in the middle of “Jihadistan” was very misguided, but the limited, tenuous ascendancy over the various Islamic forces in Iraq he gained with “the surge” and “Anbar Awakening” was lost when Obama forfeited Iraq to Iran by complete withdrawal of US forces, absolutely removing our political influence/power in Iraq. In Jihadistan, only force commands political power/influence.

Obama is truly a fool not to understand that fact of life in dealing with international affairs. Mao’s dictum that “political power grows out of the barrel of a gun” applies in day-to-day politics throughout the world with the current exceptions of the U.S., Western & parts of Central Europe, Australia, and Japan (and some other isolated polities around the world)! Any fool who denies the veracity of the Maoist political power dictum has no business being in charge of the fate of this nation! The Obama-variety utopian foolishness has prevailed in various forms in Democrat Party foreign policy since the McGovernites captured the Democrat Party in 1972.

A policy that would be in accord with reality would be to withdraw everything but U.S. diplomatic presence, along with the military force to protect it and to evacuate it, from Iraq. Let the Iranians have the lead in fighting the Islamic State, just as the Iranian mullahs have demanded. When the U.S. attacks the Islamic State, it is foolishly entering into the Salafist-Sunni/ Khomeinist-Shia religious-sectarian war. Taking military actions that would benefit Iran by removing the threat of the Islamic State from them makes no sense from the standpoint of U.S. national interests.

Another factor to consider in recasting policy is that the Islamic State is an existential threat to the House of Saud, which it wants to overthrow and replace as the true Salafist guardians of Mecca and Medina. The Islamic State’s physical presence on the borders of Iran and Saudi Arabia poses an existential threat to both regimes. If we remove ourselves as a buffer, they will both be forced to contend with the Islamic State for their own national security reasons.

We should encourage our three enemies — Iran/Islamic State/House of Saud (make no mistake, the Saudis are our covert Wahabbi enemies funding jihadist mosques throughout the world) — to war against each other and expend their resources in the fight. All three are more immediate threats to each other than the Islamic State is to us because of physical proximity. The three cannot coexist bordering each other, and they will have to deal with their immediate enemies before they can effectively concentrate jihad against us.

Once the latest Sunni-Shia battle reaches its conclusion, we should be mentally and physically prepared to fight and destroy the winner, when they emerge as a credible threat, which they will. In the meantime, we should invest in building Kurdistan into an independent, militarily capable separate nation-state that could be “our base of operations” for future activities in Jihadistan. Kurdistan could also serve as a safe-haven for Christians and other persecuted minorities that the Islamic State and the Khomeinist-Shiites target. Also, should the Sunni-Shia sectarian war force U.S. nationals to be evacuated from Iraq, Kurdistan could fulfill the role of first stage evacuation destination and way-station.

The Central Principle Guiding All Policy Changes

We have no “friends” in Syria, Iraq, or Jihadistan in general with the exception of the Israelis and Kurds. The current fighting in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon is a Salafist-Sunni/ Khomeinist-Shia religious-sectarian war — we don’t win regardless which sect prevails. So, we should stay out of it. Our immediate national counter-jihad priorities regarding the Islamic State, Iran, and the entire Jihadistan should be:

  • Aiding our Israeli-Kurdish allies protect themselves
  • Providing humanitarian assistance/protection to religious and racial minorities persecuted by the Salafist-Sunni and Khomeinist-Shia jihadists
  • Preparing to counter either Salafist-Sunni or Khomeinist-Shia jihadists when they expand their operations beyond Jihadistan into Europe and the U.S.
  • Closing our borders and improving our visa/immigration administration, while cancelling further Muslim immigration into the U.S.
  • Increasing our national efforts to become carbon energy independent

Conclusion

Aside, from the great power, geopolitical competition emanating from Russia and China, we must acknowledge that the current international disarray in the world stems from Islamic jihad. Whether the terror and death is committed by jihadist “lone wolves,” the Islamic State, al-Qaeda, al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, al-Qaeda in the Maghreb, al-Nusra, Muslim Brotherhood, al-Shabaab, Boko Haram, Taliban, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, Hezbollah, or al-Quds Force, to name a few of the more well-known Islamic terror organizations, there is no denying that the genesis of the terror is the Quran, be it a Sunni or Shiite putting the Quranic murder mandates into practice. All U.S. National Security Policy decisions must be made with that undeniable fact as a primary consideration.

Col_Thomas_Snodgrass_USAFCol. Thomas Snodgrass, USAF (retired) served over a year in Peshawar, Pakistan, working with Pakistani military intelligence. During his year in Vietnam he daily scheduled 130 U.S. Army and Air Force intelligence collection aircraft. In his final overseas tour he was the U.S. Air Attaché behind the Iron Curtain in Warsaw, Poland. In total, Col. Snodgrass was variously an Intelligence Officer or an International Politico-Military Affairs Officer serving duty tours in seven foreign countries, as well as teaching military history and strategy at the Air War College, US Air Force Academy, and USAF Special Operations School during a thirty-year military career.

Additionally, he was awarded an Air Force scholarship to get a history master’s degree in revolutionary insurgent warfare at the University of Texas, as well as being granted a year’s educational sabbatical to teach and to write about international relations as an Air Force Research Associate in the graduate school at the Center for Advanced International Studies, University of Miami, Florida. Following the Air Force, Col. Snodgrass was an adjunct professor of military history for ten years at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Arizona.

Latest IS Beheading Video: New Levels of Ritual Madness

article-kassig2-1116-413x350Frontpage, by Dawn Perlmutter:

On November 16, 2014 the Islamic State released a 16-minute video that displayed the severed head of 26-year-old former U.S. Army Ranger Peter Kassig. The video was characteristically different than the four previous Islamic State beheading videos of American and British hostages by the man known as Jihadi John. Although there have been many previous videos of mass beheadings by various al Qaeda-linked groups and Islamic State militants, this film is unique in content and quality. The Islamic State is the first terrorist group to film and stage a formalized ritual mass beheading. Shot in high definition, slickly produced and edited with Hollywood precision, 19 jihadists simultaneously behead 19 Syrian air force pilots and military officers in a ceremonial ritual execution.

Prior to the ritual mass murders the first half of the video is the usual propaganda that provides justification for the violence. The video opens with images of a map of the world graphically indicating the Islamic State’s goals of world domination. The title that appears in segments throughout reads “Although the disbelievers dislike it.” The first 4 ½ minutes is a history of the Islamic State with tributes to its fallen leaders beginning with Abu Musab al Zarqawi, the father of modern beheading. There are images of alleged victims of American airstrikes, including dead children to evoke hatred and clips of Islamic State battles to demonstrate that the jihadist militants are the heroic good guys. This is all a prelude to the featured segment.

At exactly 8 minutes, halfway through the video, the Islamic State ritual begins. Syrian military personnel each accompanied by a jihadist militant are marched through the desert, led by Jihadi John. The militants are dressed in camouflage uniforms with black head coverings but their faces are not concealed. The Syrian soldiers are dressed in dark blue. Jihadi John is dressed in his usual black uniform with his face covered. The ritual procession continues with each jihadist taking a black handled knife out of a wooden box that contains the ceremonial weapons. The footage is very dramatic and powerful, zooming in with slow motion visual effects and melodramatic sounds as each blade is taken from the box. The ritual procession continues until the jihadists file into a formal line with nine on each side of Jihad John and their victims on their knees in front of them.

The jihadists hold their knives in their right hand and their victims in their left. The ritual execution begins with a reading of offenses by Jihad John who also has a Syrian soldier in front of him. Jihad John begins the ritual execution by insulting and threatening President Obama:

To Obama, the dog of Rome. Today we are slaughtering the soldiers of Bashar and tomorrow we will be slaughtering your soldiers. And with Allah’s permission we will break this final and last crusade. And the Islamic State will soon, like your puppet David Cameron said, begin to slaughter your people in your streets.

He points the knife at the camera during the threats to America. Then there is silence as the camera pans over the faces of the men who know they are about to suffer a horrible death and the faces of the executioners who are about to pledge their allegiance in sacrificial blood. Dramatic images and sound effects portray the moment as a sacred solemn rite. The camera fades to black and appears with Jihad John signaling with one word for the ritual killing to commence.

The victims are immediately pushed to the ground, the camera keeps fading in and out of black in-between the cutting of throats, with the loud sound of hearts beating in the background. In one of the most inconceivable mass murders ever committed, 19 men are simultaneously beheaded at one time by 19 other men. The camera returns to focus on Jihadi John. Of the four previous videos this is the first time we ever see him actually kill anyone, and it is obvious that he has experience. As he is cutting through the carotid artery the sound of blood hitting the ground is exaggerated adding to the horror. Then the culmination of the ritual killing and the most disturbing act in the entire film occurs when Jihadi John pulls his knife out of the throat of his victim and looks directly at the camera while exposing the partially decapitated neck. The look in Jihadi Johns eyes is chilling; pure, unadulterated feral bloodlust. Then the camera in fast motion displays Jihad John pounce on his victim in a wild animal movement to finish the decapitation. The camera then pans over all of the soldiers completing their beheading and zooms in on a large stream of blood.

The ritual ends with each soldier holding his bloodstained knife standing above his sacrificial victim, whose heads are placed on the center of their backs. The camera then shows the faces of the jihadist executioners, all from different countries, a multicultural mass murder team. They are somber and serious, not laughing or desecrating the bodies, demonstrating how a warrior should behave during and after the kill. Then as the camera slowly pans over images of the beheaded men a voiceover from Islamic State’s leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in Arabic says, “Know that we have armies in Iraq and an army in Sham of hungry lions whose drink is blood and play is carnage.” After viewing the ritual murders that is an apt description.

The next segment, also titled “Although the believers dislike it,” demonstrates how many individuals and groups from around the world have pledged allegiance to the Islamic State.  The final segment at the 14:30 mark opens with the disarticulated head of American Peter Kassig at the feet of Jihadi John. The camera pans up Jihad John’s body and he makes the following statement in English:

This is Peter Edward Kassig, a U.S. citizen of your country. Peter, who fought against the Muslims in Iraq while serving as a soldier under the American army, doesn’t have much to say. His previous cell mates have already spoken on his behalf.’ But we say to you Obama … you claim to have withdrawn from Iraq four years ago. We said to you then that you are liars, that you have not withdrawn and that if you had withdrawn that you would return, even if after some time.’You would return. Here you are. You have not withdrawn. Rather, you hid some of your forces behind your proxies and withdrawn the rest. Your forces will return, greater in number than they were before.’You will return and your proxies will not benefit you.’And we also remind you of the haunting words that our Sheikh Abu Musab al-Zarqawi told you. The spark has been lit here in Iraq and its heat will continue to intensify by Allah’s permission until it burns the crusader army in Dabiq. ‘And here we are, burying the first American crusader in Dabiq. Eagerly awaiting for the remainder of your armies to arrive.

The video ends with the classic image of the jihadist carrying a large Islamic State flag across the land. Dabiq is a highly symbolic location which has historical and religious significance for Islam. The Islamic State has designated the place for the “Final Hour” where Armageddon will begin in an Islamic apocalyptic tradition that designates the West as modern-day Romans. That is why Jihadi John referred to president Obama as the dog of Rome.

This video goes way beyond just propaganda and psychological warfare — it is the documentation of an Islamist ceremonial ritual mass murder. For the jihadist executioners it was an initiation ritual, a somber rite of passage that grants them status and honor as Mujahideen warriors. As a recruitment tool it is a tour de force, a murder masterpiece that will resonate with young men around the world. This video will recruit more soldiers for the Islamic State, incite lone wolves and inspire more beheadings in Western countries than any of the others that preceded it. Unlike the unsophisticated beheading videos that involve laughter and body desecration that diminishes the sanctity of the act, it elevates beheading to a ceremonial rite of purity that distinguishes it from accusations of barbarism.

The video also functions as proof of death of Peter Kassig and proof of life of Jihadi John who reportedly had been injured in a U.S.-led air strike. Significantly there is no new victim displayed at the end of this video as in the prior four. That is because the Islamic State has successfully sent its message. They no longer need to do their own dirty work. They have inspired lone wolves all over the world to continue their beheading tradition. The threat in this video that “tomorrow they will be slaughtering American soldiers” should be taken very seriously. The Islamic State has made good on every threat to murder hostages. This video should be viewed as a preview of what they intend to do. For example, if the Islamic State breaches the American Embassy in Baghdad they are going to make the Fall of Saigon look like a garden party. Instead of Syrian pilots it will be American Marines ritually murdered and filmed.

President Obama’s response was that this incident was “pure evil by a terrorist group.” How large does the Parents of Beheaded Americans Club have to get before President Obama will use the words “Islamic terrorists”? There should be no doubt that these murders are done in the name of Islam and for the honor of the Prophet Muhammad, whom they are emulating. Beheadings are ritual expressions of authentic Islam and the Islamic State has turned them into Hollywood blockbusters.

Highly Decorated Ret. USMC Vet Pays Tribute To Fallen Canadian Soldier

screen_shot_2014-11-05_at_2.30.06_pm

Truth Revolt, by Trey Sanchez:

Retired U.S. Marine and Vietnam veteran Major “Fox” Sinke has been filling the vacancy at the Canadian National War memorial in honor of Cpl. Nathan Cirillo, the soldier who was slain at that very spot in October during a terrorist attack as he guarded the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier.

“That young corporal was a comrade in arms and that’s how I see it,” Maj. Sinke says in a video interview. “And so I’m paying tribute to him as best I can.”

The highly-decorated Marine then gives a stern warning to any would-be terrorists planning another attack:

We are not intimidated. Take your best shot.

“There are those of us who understand what’s happening, and by God, we’re not going to lie down for it,” he added. “Not gonna happen — that’s basically why I’m here. I’m just here to make my own little personal damn statement.”

Sinke explains that he holds dual citizenship in both America and Canada. He was born in Vancouver and his mother was from Colorado:

I’m a North American. That’s how I see it.

He dedicates his tribute saying, “We’re with you. We got your back.”

The website Guardian of Valor, whose sole mission is to “out those who falsely claim Military service and/or claim unauthorized medals or tabs,” checked into the validity of Maj. Sinke’s story. What they found out was astonishing.

This Marine earned five Purple Hearts, amongst many others, during his military career. The website posted his record:


Guardian of Valor notes that Sinke has written several books about his experiences in the Vietnam War. They also mention that he has received several death threats because of his tribute. They quote Army Times:

Sinke said he received at least two phone calls on Tuesday from people who screamed at him in Arabic and then hung up.

‘The only words I recognized were “kill you,” because I’ve heard them before,’ he said.

When Sinke told police about the phone calls, he added, ‘I promise you this: If they come here, they’ll die here.’

Watch the video courtesy of Global News.

The “Explosive Growth” of Jihadism in the Netherlands

Gatestone Institute, by Soeren Kern, November 2, 2014:

“The increasing momentum of Dutch jihadism poses an unprecedented threat to the democratic legal order of the Netherlands.” — Dutch intelligence service, AIVD.

“For adherents unable or unwilling to join the armed struggle in Syria or elsewhere, social media offers a form of involvement that allows them to identify themselves as jihadists… without actually having to fight. After all, the movement also considers ‘dawah’ — preaching the ‘call to Islam” — a form of jihad.” — Dutch intelligence service, AIVD.

“Social media has made it possible for a person to go far more quickly from being a passive recipient of jihadist propaganda messages to a sympathizer and then a supporter… Some are also known to have been involved in atrocities, such as beheading prisoners… social media has changed the structure of the and cohesions of the jihadist movement… it has taken on the characteristics of a swarm (in the group behavior sense).” — Dutch intelligence service, AIVD.

“The jihadist movement can only genuinely be disrupted, in a way that prevents the emergence of new guiding figures and structures, if such efforts [not one-off actions] are maintained over an extended period.” — Dutch intelligence service, AIVD.

“Dutch jihadists are convinced that the caliphate is not some utopian dream but an achievable reality for Syria and other Muslim nations — and even for the Netherlands.” — Dutch intelligence service, AIVD.

The home-grown jihadist movement in the Netherlands is experiencing sudden and explosive growth, according to a new report published by the Dutch intelligence service, AIVD.

The Dutch jihadist movement is not only growing in size and strength, it is also becoming increasingly open and provocative, both online and on the streets, according to the report, which warns that the increasing momentum of Dutch jihadism poses an unprecedented threat to the democratic legal order of the Netherlands.

The 58-page report, entitled “The Transformation of Jihadism in the Netherlands: Swarm Dynamics and New Strength,” provides an in-depth analysis of the various factors underlying the “new dynamism” of the jihadist phenomenon.

According to the AIVD, the Dutch jihadist movement began a process of far-reaching change in late 2010, when several jihadists were prevented from leaving the Netherlands to join fellow jihadists in Pakistan and Somalia.

Their subsequent interactions with Dutch police and judicial authorities prompted the jihadists and other members of their networks to improve their modus operandi, which eventually led to a wholesale internal professionalization of the movement.

At the same time, Dutch jihadists began adopting propaganda methods developed by fellow jihadists in Britain. Inspired by Islam4UK, a now-banned jihadist group founded by the British Islamist firebrand Anjem Choudary, Dutch jihadists launched their own activist movements, namely Sharia4Holland and Behind Bars/Street Dawah (Straat Dawah).

“By making use of activist techniques like demonstrations and leafleting to disseminate provocative jihadist propaganda openly, these groups were able to mobilize some fellow Muslims and attract new recruits,” according to the AIVD. “Many young people, in particular, found a way of venting their jihadist ideals through such activities.”

Social media has added another entirely new dynamic into Dutch jihadism. Beyond allowing far more intensive flows of information and communications between jihadists, both domestically and internationally, social media has also changed the nature of those flows.

Before the emergence of social media, information flowed vertically (hierarchical) from one to many. By contrast, information on social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter flows horizontally (peer-to-peer) from many to many, thus greatly expanding opportunities for interactivity. According to the AIVD:

“Jihadists are constantly influencing one another through social media. Young people undergoing radicalization trawl Facebook in search of like-minded individuals and post jihadist material on their own profiles, thus influencing their own circle of friends. On Twitter, jihadists debate quite openly with each other and with their critics, who often face abuse or worse. They also post photographs of Dutch fighters in Syria on Facebook, which are then shared by members of jihadist communities. Lectures are announced as Facebook events, too, so that potential attendees can see whether people they know will be there as well. The Dutch jihadist world has become simultaneously large, small and fast-moving.”

Social media has also enhanced jihadist recruitment efforts:

“For adherents unable or unwilling to join the armed struggle in Syria or elsewhere, such activity provides another form of involvement that allows them to identify themselves as jihadists. It is their way of being part of ‘Syria,’ or the ‘holy war’ in general, without actually having to fight. After all, the movement also considers ‘dawah’—preaching the ‘call to Islam’—a form of jihad. This parity strengthens the links between those who stay at home to practice dawah and those who leave to fight.

“There is no doubt that the chance of coming into contact with jihadism—particularly on social media—has increased substantially in recent years. Consequently, it has become possible for a person to go far more quickly from being a passive recipient of its propaganda messages to a sympathizer and then a supporter. There is also a real danger that such new ‘online jihadists’ might continue radicalizing to the point where they actually commit acts of violence or leave for a conflict zone. In fact, this is exactly how many of the Dutch fighters now in Syria came to be there. They evolved very quickly from followers at home to front-line jihadists. The AIVD has established that a large proportion of them have been trained in Syria in the use of weapons and have taken part in actual combat. Some are also known to have been involved in atrocities, such as beheading prisoners.”

The Dutch-Turkish jihadist known as Yilmaz, pictured in Syria, has proven adept at the use of social media for jihadist “public relations”.

According to the AIVD, social media has changed the structure and cohesion of the jihadist movement in the Netherlands to such an extent that it has taken on the characteristics of a “swarm” (in the group behavior sense of the word). This means that it is highly decentralized, with numerous individual elements that are largely autonomous. Collectively, however, they maintain their cohesion and direction almost as if a single entity.

“The jihadist swarm may be very dynamic and changeable, but it still knows how to move like one tightly ordered body, despite sometimes seeming capricious and unpredictable,” the report says, adding:

“The upshot of all this is that government attempts to tackle particular jihadist individuals or structures will probably have considerably less effect now upon the movement as a whole than they previously would have done. Particularly when they are one-off actions. The movement can only genuinely be disrupted, in a way that prevents the emergence of new guiding figures and structures, if such efforts are maintained over an extended period.”

In addition to the internal and structural developments that have transformed Dutch jihadism, several contextual factors, both domestic and international, have also contributed to its growth.

Domestically, Dutch Salafism has undergone an important ideological shift.

Salafism is a movement that calls on Muslims to return to the form of Islam that was practiced at its inception. Its adherents reject many of the ideas and customs that have become part of Islamic tradition in subsequent centuries.

Present-day Salafism has three main strands: apolitical, political and jihadi. All three pursue the same ultimate objective: the establishment of a society based solely upon the tenets of “pure” Islam.

Unlike their jihadi counterpart, however, the apolitical and political strands argue that the principal means of reaching this goal should be “dawah,” or the “call to Islam” in the form of preaching and proselytization. By contrast, jihadi Salafism prioritizes the “necessity” of violent jihad.

In recent years, a new group of dawah Salafist preachers has emerged in the Netherlands who are more radical than their predecessors, and who have effectively blurred the lines between dawah Salafism and jihadism. The AIVD explains:

“Theirs is a radical message, which not only promulgates intolerance but also smooths over the ideological differences between dawah Salafism and jihadism in respect of the legitimacy of the ‘holy war.’ These preachers do not consider themselves part of a movement separate from that of the jihadis (a distinction the established dawah Salafists draw far more clearly). And it is they who exert the greatest influence over young people with jihadist tendencies or sympathies.

“Due in part to the emergence of preachers operating outside the established non-violent tradition, dawah Salafism has now become something of a breeding ground for jihadism in the Netherlands.”

Internationally, the conflict in Syria, which began in March 2011, has acted as a catalyst, amplifying the effects of all of the other developments to produce an explosive growth of jihadism in the Netherlands.

According to the AIVD, the large numbers of Dutch jihadists travelling to Syria show that “this particular conflict has significantly reduced the barriers to active participation in jihad.” It adds that the propaganda generated by the conflict is fuelling the growth of an “assertive Dutch jihadism” in which jihadist groups are “deliberately pushing at the boundaries of what is permissible under Dutch law.”

The AIVD concludes with a warning:

“Already, reports of jihadists’ supposed progress in Syria in establishing an Islamic caliphate under Sharia law are having a visible effect in the Netherlands, in that they are further radicalizing backers of that ultimate goal. Emanating primarily from groups like [the Islamic State], such stories convince supporters and sympathizers that the caliphate is not some utopian dream but an achievable reality for Syria and other Muslim nations—and even for the Netherlands.”

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute. He is also Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook and on Twitter.

Ax attacker wanted ‘white people to pay’ for slavery

Zale Thompson Photo: NYPD

Zale Thompson
Photo: NYPD

 

The self-radicalized madman who attacked four rookie Queens cops with a hatchet had more than just ­jihad on his mind — he also wanted to kill white people.

“He wanted white people to pay for all that slavery and all that racism,” the father of slain hatchet loon Zale Thompson, 32, told The Post Saturday. “I think he committed suicide — and he was taking one of y’all with him,” his father, Ralph Thompson, said, speaking through the screen door of the two-story Queens Village house where his unhinged son also once lived.

Asked if “one of y’all” meant white people,” the father said, “Yeah.”

“He just said, ‘They have to pay for all their unfairness,’ ” the father added. “Unfairness for the way they treat black people.”

Zale Thompson, 32, was shot dead on a Jamaica, Queens, sidewalk Thursday after he lunged with a blue-handled hatchet at four rookie cops, striking Officer Joseph Meeker, 24, in the arm and Officer Kenneth Healey, 25, in the back of the head. Both those officers are white, as is the third cop. The fourth cop is a light-skinned Hispanic.

“I didn’t know it would get that serious,” the father said wearily of his son, a Navy veteran described by former friends as “bright” but radically pro-“black power” in his youth and a Muslim convert in recent years.

“I didn’t know he was going to carry on a mission on his own,” added the father.

Unconnected to any terror group or even any mosque, and with no criminal record in New York, Zale Thompson was unknown to law enforcement as a potential threat, police sources said.

But over the last several years, he was quietly becoming an ardent devourer of violent Islamic propaganda, police said.

Video: Devon McCarthy

“This guy spent every waking moment on the Internet,” said one law-enforcement source. Police are looking back as far as five years to see whether anyone else Thompson communicated with is a threat.

“He Googled the words ‘jihad against police,’ ” the source said of Thompson’s more recent activity. “He also looked up [news stories on] the two Canadian attacks” last week, the source added, referring to so-called “lone wolf” jihadist shooting of a ceremonial guard in Ottawa and a fatal attack on a soldier in Quebec.

ISIS extremists have been urging lone-wolf attacks on police and soldiers in Europe and the United States.

Following the attack, police brass on Friday ordered that foot patrols citywide be conducted in pairs.

“Strike their police, security and intelligence members, as well as their treacherous agents,” ISIS spokesman Aub Mohammad al-Adnani posted on Sept. 21. “If you are not able to find an IED or a bullet, then single out the disbelieving American, Frenchman, or any of their allies. Smash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with your car, or throw him down from a high place, or choke him or poison him.”

Read more at New York Post

Gunman in Canada attack prepared video of himself

1414367260283_wps_19_This_image_provided_by_thTORONTO (AP) — A gunman who shot and killed a soldier at Canada’s national war memorial and then stormed Parliament before he was gunned down had prepared a video recording of himself that police say shows he was driven by ideological and political motives, police said Sunday.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Commissioner Bob Paulson said in a statement they have “persuasive evidence that Michael Zehaf-Bibeau’s attack was driven by ideological and political motives.”

A detailed analysis of the video was being conducted and Paulson said they cannot release the video at this time.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has called Wednesday’s shooting a terror attack, and the bloodshed raised fears that Canada is suffering reprisals for joining the U.S.-led air campaign against Islamic State extremists in Iraq and Syria.

Police are investigating Zehaf-Bibeau’s interactions with numerous individuals in the days leading up to the attack and whether they could have contributed or facilitated it.

Paulson said a knife carried by Zehaf-Bibeau was taken from his aunt’s property in Mont Tremblant, Quebec, and they’re looking into how he got the rifle. Paulson called it an old, uncommon gun that police suspect he could have also hidden on the property.

Paulson said investigators also identified where he got his money for the car he bought and his pre-attack activities. He said Zehaf-Bibeau has been employed in the oil fields in Alberta, saved his money and had access to a considerable amount of funds.

“The RCMP is confident we will have an authoritative and detailed account of the shooting, including a complete reconstruction of the heroic actions of those involved, in the weeks to come,” said Paulson, who also said the Ontario Provincial Police will investigate the shooting inside Parliament.

Zehaf-Bibeau, 32, shot to death Cpl. Nathan Cirillo, 24, who was assigned to the honor guard at the national war memorial. Zehaf-Bibeau was eventually gunned down inside Parliament by the sergeant-at-arms of the House of Commons, Kevin Vickers.

The attack in Ottawa came two days after a man described as an “ISIL-inspired terrorist” ran over two soldiers in a parking lot in Quebec, killing one and injuring the other before being shot to death by police. The man had been under surveillance by Canadian authorities, who feared he had jihadist ambitions and seized his passport when he tried to travel to Turkey.

Unlike the attacker in the Quebec case, Zehaf-Bibeau was not being watched by authorities. But Paulson said last week Zehaf-Bibeau, whose father was from Libya, may have lashed out in frustration over delays in getting his passport. Paulson said his mother told police that her son had wanted to go Syria. Susan Bibeau later denied that in a letter published by Postmedia News, saying her son told her he wanted to go to Saudi Arabia where he could study the Qu’ran.

Canada’s Jihad Denial

michael-zehaf-bibeauBy Robert Spencer:

Canada has experienced two murderous jihad terror attacks in the last three days, not long after the Islamic State called for such attacks – but the denial and obfuscation are as thick as ever.

On Monday, Ahmad Rouleau, a convert to Islam, hit two Canadian soldiers with his car, murdering Warrant Officer Patrice Vincent. Then he led police on a high-speed chase, during which he called 911 and explained that he was doing it all “in the name of Allah.” The chase, and Rouleau’s jihad, ended when he flipped his car and then, brandishing a knife, charged police, who shot him dead. One of Rouleau’s close friends said: “It was a terrorist attack and Martin died like he wanted to. That’s what happened….He did this because he wanted to reach paradise and assure paradise for his family. He wanted to be a martyr….The caliphate called all the Muslims on earth to fight. He listened to what they had to say and he did his part here.”

Then on Wednesday, Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, who has been widely reported to be a recent convert to Islam but whose father is a veteran of the jihad in Libya and who has been a Muslim for at least three years, went on a shooting rampage in Ottawa, murdering military reservist Corporal Nathan Cirillo and engaging in a gun battle inside Canada’s Parliament building. Canadian Foreign Minister John Baird said that there was “no evidence at this stage” that Zehaf-Bibeau had connections to any jihad groups, but CNN reported that “according to a U.S. counterterrorism source, Zehaf-Bibeau was connected to Hasibullah Yusufzai through social media. Yusufzai is wanted by Canadian authorities for traveling overseas to fight alongside Islamist fighters in Syria.” And “other radicalized people connected to Zehaf-Bibeau are still believed to be living in Canada, two U.S. law enforcement officials said.”

So Zehaf-Bibeau had connections to at least one jihadist who went to Syria to wage jihad, and Rouleau listened to what the Islamic State was saying, and “did his part” in Canada. What was the Islamic State saying? Late in September, the Islamic State’s spokesman, Abu Muhammad Al-Adnani, urged Muslims to murder non-Muslims in the West. “Rely upon Allah,” he thundered, “and kill him in any manner or way however it may be. Do not ask for anyone’s advice and do not seek anyone’s verdict. Kill the disbeliever whether he is civilian or military, for they have the same ruling.” He also addressed Western non-Muslims: “You will not feel secure even in your bedrooms. You will pay the price when this crusade of yours collapses, and thereafter we will strike you in your homeland, and you will never be able to harm anyone afterwards.”

Al-Adnani told Muslims to murder non-Muslims with any weapon at hand, or anything that could be used as a weapon: “If you are not able to find an IED or a bullet, then single out the disbelieving American, Frenchman, or any of their allies. Smash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with your car, or throw him down from a high place, or choke him, or poison him.” Zehaf-Bibeau found a bullet. Rouleau found a car.

Yet despite the indications that Rouleau and Zehaf-Bibeau were heeding the Islamic State’s call to wage jihad at home by any means possible, the mainstream media was ready before the blood had dried to swing into the usual denial and obfuscation about the motives and goals of their attacks. Before Zehaf-Bibeau’s identity was known, CBC’s Doug Stoffel tweeted: “Amid the speculation in the #OttawaShooting in #Canada, it’s important to remember #ISIS hasn’t shown interest in attacks abroad.” Once Zehaf-Bibeau was identified as the shooter and was known to be a Muslim, ABC News one-upped Stoffel’s flagrantly counter-factual statement with the claim that “authorities in Canada are trying to understand what motivated a gunman to kill a soldier in the country’s capital Wednesday.”

In reality, what motivated him was blazingly obvious, but it was the one thing most Western government officials and all of the mainstream media have determined to ignore, and so the search was one for some other remotely plausible motive that could be sold to a public that is increasingly suspicious of what the government and media elites are telling them. Toronto’s Globe and Mail quoted a friend of Zehaf-Bibeau saying, “I think he must have been mentally ill,” although the only evidence for this that the paper presented was that “his friend frequently talked about the presence of Shaytan in the world – an Arabic term for devils and demons” – in other words, that Zehaf-Bibeau spoke frequently of what are standard beliefs of mainstream Islam.

Read more at Frontpage

*********

Michael Coren – Liberal denial over Islamic terror attacks in Canada

Published on Oct 24, 2014 by AlohaSnackbar01

**********

Ezra Levant – Liberal whitewashing of Islamic terrorism in Canada