Frank Gaffney, Pamela Geller, Prof. Matusitz, Bill Murray- Islamic Doctrine Vs. U.S. National Security

download (3)

 

This is a VERY GOOD panel discussion with an excellent question and answer period. Set aside some time to watch the whole thing. A wide number of issues are discussed.

 

 

Published on Apr 28, 2013

Panel Discussion – Radical Islam and U.S. National Security – Orlando, FL 4/20/2013

Frank Gaffney – Moderator, Pamela Geller, Jonathan Matusitz, and William J. Murray.

The Liberty Counsel at their annual Awakening event brought together the most recognizable names in the country on Islamic Doctrine and Theology together for a panel discussion that will impact every American.

America is still processing the Boston Marathon Jihadi attacks and exactly what happened. The Mainstream press has done a disservice to the American people in they’re reporting of this attack on America. Many would also say the Boston Marathon operation was an act of war.

Frank Gaffney – Former Asst under Secretary of Defense
Pamela Geller – nationally known activist, author, and critic of Islamic docrine.
Dr. Jonathan Matusitz – UCF Professor and expert on Terrorism
William J. Murray – Religious scholar

These four individuals will give you four different perspectives from their unique life experiences on Jihad, Islam, Capitalism, and American exceptionalism.

You will learn that Islam is a political ideology like communism, socialism, totalitarianism, and Nazism. Islam also has a small religious element with set rituals that creates much confusion for the Western mind.

You will learn that in Islam there is No Separation of Mosque and State rendering the ideology incompatible with our secular separation of Faith and State at its basic foundation.

Listen to Gaffney, Geller, Matusitz, and Murray as they will give you an advanced degree on Islamic Doctrine and Theology you will not get anywhere else.

MUSLIMS PROTEST PROF TEACHING ISLAM-TERROR LINK

jonathan-matustiz-340x161By ART MOORE:

A university professor who believes there’s a relationship between terrorism and Islam has been accused of anti-Muslim bigotry by a prominent U.S. Muslim advocacy group that was founded by the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas.

The Florida chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations filed a complaint with the University of Central Florida against Professor Jonathan Matusitz, charging that his communications courses portray Islam in an inaccurate and biased way, the Orlando Sentinel reported.

CAIR – founded in 1993 by members of the Muslim Brotherhood who aspire to replace the U.S. government with an Islamic state – points to a video posted on Youtube of a lecture in a special series on terrorism at UCF in which Matusitz, 36, emphasizes the link between terrorism and Islamic culture.

The professor contends countries should resist the global spread of Islam.

“Why do so many Muslims, relative to other religions, want to kill us?” he asks in the video. “The answer is easy, very easy. It is seven letters –culture.”

Matusitz, who was given an award by his university for outstanding performance, also contends Islam cannot be changed.

“How can you change a movement in which you have 1.5 billion members? It’s impossible,” he says. “We just have to resist it and just elect people who are willing just to resist it and just be true American. That’s the only answer. We’re not going to change Islam.”

Matusitz, according to his bio on the UCF website, came to the U.S. from Belgium in 2000. He earned a Ph.D. from the University of Oklahoma in 2006. He has 95 academic publications and more than 100 conference presentations to his credit and taught at a NATO-affiliated military base in Belgium.

CAIR touts itself as Muslim civil rights group, but federal prosecutors in 2007 named CAIR an unindicted co-conspirator in a plot to fund Hamas, and more than a dozen CAIR leaders have been charged or convicted of terrorism-related crimes.

The Muslim Brotherhood was formed in 1928 in Egypt after the demise of the Ottoman Empire with the aim of resurrecting the Islamic caliphate and helping establish the global rule of Islam, as taught in the Quran.

 

 

Read more at WND

National Defense vs. the Ideology of Jihad

MBUSASealsby Clare M. Lopez:

It is impossible to avoid the conclusion that the deliberate blinding of our homeland security defense capabilities, perpetrated by the Muslim Brotherhood in close cooperation with the witting, willing assistance of our own national security agency leadership , is propelling the U.S. towards catastrophe.

Counterterrorism expert Patrick Poole has compiled a meticulously-documented record of disastrous U.S. policy behavior that is as chilling as it is comprehensive. In “Blind Terror: The U.S. Government’s Muslim Outreach Efforts and the Impact on U.S. Middle East Policy,” published 4 June 2013 in the MERIA Journal, Poole describes the aggressive efforts of successive U.S. administrations dating back at least to the Clinton years to forge conciliatory relationships with American Muslim individuals and groups that are legally, openly on record as known supporters of jihadi terrorism and Islamic shariah law.

While Poole’s superb analysis focuses on the catastrophic results of such policies for U.S. national security and that of our regional friends and allies – policies still unfolding across the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region — an equally catastrophic potential attends to these policies domestically, in the homeland. The methodical blinding of the intelligence community, its seventeen aggregated agencies, and security and law enforcement units across the country is the unavoidable result of this kind of “outreach” to jihadists, who are determined to outlaw consideration of Islamic ideology as a motivating factor for terror attacks. At some point, if allowed to continue, such blinding must necessarily result in the effective neutralization of these front line defenses such that they are incapable of responding in a timely manner to prevent high-casualty terrorist attacks.

U.S. capitulation to the forces of Islamic jihad and shariah was set, perhaps irrevocably, by President George W. Bush in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. Speaking at the Islamic Center of Washington, D.C. on September 12, 2001, where he was flanked by some of the top Muslim Brotherhood representatives in the country, Bush declared: “The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That’s not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace”.

But as Poole’s careful research chronicles, during the Obama administration, the Muslim Brotherhood’s decades-long infiltration campaign of targeting senior policy-making levels of the U.S. government not only accelerated, but arguably reached critical mass. In a stunning sequence of events beginning in late 2011, and at the urging of identifiable affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood, all U.S. government training curriculum that explained the irrefragable connection between Islamic doctrine, law, and scripture and Islamic terrorism was literally purged of such content. Additionally, subject matter experts identified as “enemies” by the administration’s Muslim advisors henceforth were summarily banned from providing truthful training about Islam to U.S. government employees or for U.S. government-funded classes. At the same time, a critical Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) policy based on the so-called “Touchstone” document went into effect that says mere membership in a violent (that is, terrorist) organization that also demonstrates “legitimate (advocacy)…objectives” should not result in a conclusion that members endorse the “illicit objective(s)” of that organization. The Touchstone policy clearly was meant to place the administration’s Muslim Brotherhood advisors beyond the reach of criticism, even when such criticism is based on public court records such as the Holy Land Foundation HAMAS terror funding trial documents and unindicted co-conspirators list. Touchstone effectively immunizes these advisors, these agents of influence for a power openly hostile to this country, Constitution, and society, from the legal and security scrutiny and suspicion to which they otherwise rightly would be subject.

The inescapable effect of this policy is to permit a growing vulnerability to terrorist attack in the American homeland. And not just permit: the Touchstone policy literally ensures circumstances that make such attacks inevitable. National, regional, and local security forces that are not permitted to know the enemy, or understand what motivates that enemy to move from hostile belief to terrorist action, have a diminished chance to pre-empt Islamic terror attacks and are relegated to reliance on hit-or-miss sting and surveillance operations — or post-attack law enforcement investigations in the aftermath of another Boston Marathon bombing. To the extent that the insinuation of the Touchstone policy into U.S. national security strategy was the calculated effort of this country’s jihadist enemies — undetected by those responsible for U.S. counterintelligence — the safety and security of American citizens slip inescapably under the threat of more attacks.

Read more at Gatestone Institute

Walid Phares: We Are At War With Jihadist Ideology

images (16)

Walid Phares:

A film that triggered the “Jihad against Walid Phares”

According to analysts looking at the roots of the CAIR-led and Iranian supported bashing campaign against me in March and in October of 2011, this appearance in the movie “America at Risk” along with other major statements exposing the Muslim Brotherhood and their fronts in the US, was one of the triggers to the attacks. Another trigger was the movie “Iranium.” More to come.

 

At the tenth anniversary of 9/11, Professor Walid Phares comments in the movie “America at Risk: The War with no name”, produced by Newt and Callista Gingrich, were posted in one compilation. As we thank the producers of this powerful film, the excerpts are offered to educate the public at this important benchmark of American history. Professor Phares reminds us that the 9/11 Commission asked why America wasn’t prepared by its academia for the nature of the threat. He explains that the precursors to the Jihadists rose in the 1920′s under the Muslim Brotherhood and the Wahhabis and later on under the Khomeinists. Phares argues that the Jihadists use all means at their disposal: diplomacy, military, and petrodollars when they decide to do so. The US is dealing with strategies developed by the Jihadists worldwide and in the homeland. He explains that the most important counter strategy for the US to develop is to identify the ideology of the Jihadists, without which the conflict cannot be won.

http://www.americaatrisk.com

http://www.walidphares.com

Sebastian Gorka: Counterterrorism and Threat Denial

AmericasIslamistThreat-viDr. Sebastian Gorka (Military Affairs Fellow and Director, National Security Fellows Program, Foundation for Defense of Democracies) addressed the Canter for Security Policy’s Stanton Group on Capitol Hill. The topic of his briefing was “Counterterrorism and Counterintelligence in the Second Obama Administration: Persistence of Threat Denial?”

The Blaze Documentary: “The Project”

project

In 2001, an inconspicuous manifesto now known as “The Project” was recovered during a raid in Switzerland: A manifesto that turned out to be a Muslim road map for infiltrating and defeating the West. Today, files containing evidence from the largest terror financing trial in U.S. history, which include details about “The Project”, are being withheld by the Department of Justice.

In an explosive two-part mini-series, The Blaze documentary unit investigates how the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated the American government and exposes how our nation’s safety is in jeopardy as a result of this dangerous government cover up.

The Project parts 1-2, FULL video:

The Control Factor: Our Struggle to See the True Threat

siegel

Ever wonder how people could be so duped about the true nature of Islam and the threat it poses to Western Civilization? Are you having trouble wrapping your brain around the the level of infiltration that Islamists have been able to achieve in all levels of our government and civil institutions? Well here is the answer. I encourage you to read the whole interview.

By Jamie Glazov:

FrontPage Interview’s guest today is Bill Siegel, a lawyer and business executive. He has been a producer of several documentary films and assists numerous non-profit organizations. He is the author of The Control Factor: Our Struggle to See the True Threat.

Excerpt:

FP: Describe the threat we face in our Islamic enemy. And you talk about the three levels of jihad against us. What are they?

Siegel: Simply stated, our Islamic Enemy seeks the totalitarian domination of Islam throughout the world – Islamic supremacy. It seeks to have the West submit to Islam. Obviously, this does not mean that everybody becomes a Muslim. Islam, in all its varied expressions, permits dhimmis- those Christians, Jews, and some others who are permitted to remain as protected non-Muslims as long as they submit to an inferior status. What is critical is that Shariah (Islamic Law) ultimately rules the world.

Jihad, loosely, is the effort/struggle to see this vision through. The most obvious method of Jihad is through violence; it is the one most familiar to most Westerners and almost all of the Koranic references to Jihad are based in violence.  The Violent Jihad includes al-Qaeda and its offshoots as well as other groups that formed around the globe independent of al-Qaeda. It also obviously includes the violence from Islamic nations such as the Islamic Republic of Iran whose constitution specifies such vision. It also includes, however, various militant groups and training camps here in the US as well as ad hoc efforts of individuals.

Since 9/11, there have been something in excess of 15,000 Violent Jihadic attacks across the globe. However, as terrible as this is, we have a tendency in the West to think that the only dimension of threat we face comes from violence. While the Bush administration helped initiate this thinking, the Obama administration has actively abused it by limiting any discussion of the threat we face to al-Qaeda and some other terrorist groups abroad. As frightening as these groups are, we can get some ease from thinking they are a band of “extremists limited in number, weaponry, sophistication, and means. Stunningly, Hillary Clinton recently estimated that there are only about 50,000 “homicidal” violent extremists around the world who simply have been able to project power much greater than their number should allow. Here the Control Factor makes the threat appear more easily manageable.

Jihad, however, is pursued in other often even more effective ways which I have grouped into three “levels.” A second more insidious level of threat is what the Muslim Brotherhood itself called the “Civilization Jihad.” It is the effort to infiltrate all aspects of our society, peacefully according to our laws, in order to later be in position to sabotage and destroy it from the inside. The Civilization Jihadists have learned the culture and rules of the territories they seek to command and use those rules to maneuver—specifically using our freedoms to destroy our freedoms. They use “lawfare” to seek changes in our laws so as to push Shariah into our society. Your readers should read Daniel Pipes and Brooke Goldstein’s Lawfare Project material and others to fully appreciate how cancerous this activity has become. This includes intimidating in a variety of ways anyone who speaks out against them or Islam and seeking to squelch our treasured broad right to free speech so as to ultimately prevent any criticisms of Islam. Once criticism of Islam is prohibited, little can stop it from cascading throughout the culture.

The Civilization Jihad includes situating such Jihadists in critical positions in the society, in the government, in the legal system, the military, and elsewhere. It includes the control over university programs that distribute propaganda about Islam and Islamic history which then filters down throughout textbooks for even younger students. It includes control over most of the nation’s mosques and local Imams guiding the messages engaged Muslims are receiving. Most troublesome are the Muslim groups (CAIR, ISNA, MSA and others associated and/or joint venture partners with the Muslim Brotherhood) supposedly interested in “outreach” which know how to appear Westernized and interested in the goals of Western Civilization. They have fooled a large part of our authorities and media due in part to their patience and willingness to chip away, one airport prayer room, one frivolous intimidating lawsuit, one Congressman or CIA officer, one mosque, one ruling at a time.

Particularly in the US, given our deep attachment to freedom as well as cultural and psychological tendencies toward diversity, Western guilt and expectations of truthfulness, this effort is devious and difficult to uproot. The Civilization Jihadists present one face to the American public which is completely at odds with their true agenda and how they deal in private. Jamie, you and David and others such as Steve Emerson, Frank Gaffney, Andy McCarthy and others have done so much to uncover this level of Jihad that your readers should be urged to review as much of their work (including Steve’s recent excellent documentary, The Grand Deception, and Frank’s important web video course, The Muslim Brotherhood in America) as possible.

Finally, there is a third level – the International Institutional Jihad. Here the most powerful international institutions such as the UN and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and others seek to push into America from without those changes which are difficult to complete from within. The OIC is the largest Islamic institution in the world. It essentially controls the vote in the UN’s General Assembly and thus explains in part the absurd and abject pro-Islamic, anti-Israel thrust of that organization. This level seeks to use the power of Islamic nations to work from outside the West to force changes within the West. While there are various conflicts between many of the nations, being Islamic majority states, there is a great deal they agree upon which becomes the focus of these efforts. Just as the Obama administration is beginning to cooperate with international efforts to control gun ownership, so has Hillary Clinton’s Istanbul Process become a dangerous step in the effort to restrict speech critical of Islam by norm (or possibly even treaty) when it may not be fully executable by domestic action alone.

I should point out that Stephen Coughlin, the former Pentagon officer who has an important must-see presentation of Islamic Law, uses different names for these same three levels – Jihad, Dawa, and Ummah. Had I seen his work before I wrote my book I would have conformed to his categorizations.

We must learn how powerful language has become on all three levels. Words such as “peace,” “freedom,” ”terrorism,” and phrases such as “human rights” have different meanings for us and for our Islamic Enemy. To oversimplify, “peace” is not something for now but that which comes when all the earth is submitting to Islam. In the context of battles, “peace” is at best a temporary ceasefire. “Freedom” is best understood as having the freedom to fully submit to Islam, not to choose whatever beliefs one desires while respecting the same right in others. We’ve all seen how ”human rights” and “terror” really only apply among Muslims, not to non-Muslims. Our enemy fully understands these differences and uses them at all levels to paralyze us.

Look simply at how the phrase “Israeli-Palestinian conflict” has equalized the two parties, making it all the easier to ascribe features of one to the other and view the problem as a simple-to fix division of assets into statehoods but for personality problems among the leaders. The simple truth is that this is and has always been a one-sided Arab war against Israel as Ruth Wisse and others have described and, as Bibi Netanyahu made clear, the ONLY state truly at issue here has been the State of Israel that the Arabs have refused for over half a century. Nonetheless, the Control Factor hypnotically abuses the mind’s susceptibility to the intricacies of language.

Even the label “Peace Process” has been damaging language. While most focus upon the first word, turning this into a “process” has helped ensure that peace is never obtained. It is more appropriately called the “Extortion Process” because all that results is that violence is used over decades to extract concessions from Israel.

These three levels must be understood for their differences while united by a single goal. While these levels often operate together and assist each other, we must avoid “level confusion” which the Control Factor employs to curtail our fears. If the Obama narrative is swallowed- that the only threat is the Violent Jihad- we will miss the other contamination fomenting within our borders. We must appreciate how these levels work together and even unite with other forces such as the global Leftist movement that you, Jamie, have described so forcefully in United in Hate.

FP: You write about how we like to talk of “Good Muslims” and how we are always on the eternal search for “moderate” Muslims (Khatami, Mousavi, Abbas, etc), while we stress how the “extremists” are the real problem and how “few” they really are. All of this is connected to the Control Factor. Enlighten us.

Siegel: The Control Factor seeks to have us feel in control of the situation. The easiest way to do this is to simply minimize the number of potential enemies. We have been lectured for years about how Islam is a “religion of peace” and that the violence we see (remember that we have already improperly limited the problem to violence) is the product of a small number of “crazies” (remember Hillary Clinton’s 50,000) who have distorted Islam. I call this the “Peaceful Muslim Disclaimer” as virtually everyone in the press and government has been bullied into making some statement of the kind to silence those who will pressure them that they are “Islamophobic” and Islam is being attacked. (These are the Islam hustlers who operate on the same principles that black race hustlers so effectively used to extort concessions over the last six decades or so).

Nobody has done any real work to support this proposition, nor is it clear exactly how it would be tested. My view is that the grammar “Islam is x” is itself problematic because Islam has expressed itself throughout history in a variety of fashions. It is more useful to talk in terms of how seriously engaged with Islam, the Koran and other texts, a Muslim is. What is significant is how Muslims today are using Islam and most of those who are in power either throughout a large territory or within a small community tend toward, if not fully advocate, the very supremacist ideas that we try to tell ourselves are reserved for the few ”extremists.”  Presumably most Germans did not wish to see all Nazi atrocities carried out but in the end they fell in line because they had to. Those our politicians and press call the “extremists” are in one sense more accurately the “good” Muslims who are following their Islamic beliefs dutifully.

Read it all at Front Page

Inside the Ring: Ideological war on terror needed

Washington Times, By Bill Gertz

The U.S. military made impressive gains on  the battlefield and covertly in countering Islamist terrorists since the Sept.  11, 2001, attacks. But the military and  government at large so far have failed to strike the religiously motivated  ideology behind al Qaeda and other Islamic  extremists.

That’s the conclusion of a new book, “Fighting the Ideological War: Winning  Strategies From Communism to Islamism, by a group of specialists urging the U.S. government to apply the lessons of the  Cold War defeat of the Soviet Union to  Islamist terrorism.

One of the authors, irregular warfare specialist Sebastian  L. Gorka, stated that the United States in the past 10 years successfully  degraded al Qaeda’s ability to inflict harm on  the United States. However, he writes,”al Qaeda  has become even more powerful in the domain of ideological warfare and other  indirect forms of attack.”

The problem for the U.S. government is “political correctness” toward Islam that has the prevented accurate  identification of the enemy’s threat doctrine. For example, the Obama  administration’s insistence on calling the Fort  Hood, Texas, terrorist attack by Army Maj.  Nidal M. Hasan “workplace violence” is crippling efforts to strike at the  ideology Mr. Gorka calls “global  jihadism” – defined as both the violent and nonviolent theory and practice of  imposing Islamic supremacy globally.

“Although we have proven our capacity in the last 10 years kinetically to  engage our enemy at the operational and tactical level with unsurpassed  effectiveness, we have not even begun to take the war to al  Qaeda at the strategic level of counter-ideology, to attack it at its heart – the ideology of global jihad,” he states.

Mr. Gorka notes that during the Cold  War, it took several decades to fully understand the Soviet threat before U.S.  diplomat George F. Kennan in 1946 wrote  his “Long Telegram” from Moscow, where he was serving as deputy chief of  mission. The missive became the strategy of containment and led to the eventual  downfall of the communist empire in 1991.

Similarly, Islamic jihadism presents a similar totalitarian threat and must  be countered ideologically. First, the nature of the terrorist threat must be  clearly understood and then defeated with Cold War-style information and  ideological warfare.

The administration has added to the  confusion by refusing to identify the Islamic nature of the current war on  terrorism.

Patrick Sookhdeo, another author and co-editor of the book, stated, “The truth, unpalatable though it may be, is that Islamists and Islamist terrorists are authentically Islamic, emphasizing specific texts and offering literalist interpretations of their sources.”

Some Western governments and analysts have sought to delegitimize terrorists  by incorrectly denying their Islamic roots, he said.

John Lenczowski, a White  House National Security Council specialist on Russia during the Reagan  administration, outlined in detail how Ronald Reagan approved and implemented a  program of “political-ideological warfare” that identified the illegitimacy of  the Soviet system as a strategic vulnerability that was successfully exploited  to defeat the Soviet regime. It included a combination of covert and overt  support for pro-freedom and pro-democracy movements and people.

The final Soviet collapse, Mr.  Lenczowski writes, came from “a confluence of internal crises that were  aggravated by the many ‘straws’ placed on the Soviet ‘camel’s back’ by the Reagan administration.”

Similarly, the authors argue that Islamist supremacy can be defeated  ideologically through programs that reveal the ideology of jihadist groups like al Qaeda and the Muslim  Brotherhood to be copies of earlier totalitarian and fascist ideologies.

The book was published by the McLean-based Westminster Institute and is  available at http://www.westminster-institute.org./

 

The Islamic Threat Doctrine and 9/11/2012

Arab “Spring”

By Alan Kornman

A dark feeling of betrayal and stunned disbelief washed over me as I read the newspaper headline, “Jordanians press for democratic reforms” in the October 6, 2012 Orlando Sentinel.

The Myth of Islamic Democratic Reforms

The mainstream media, U.S. State Department, and President Obama fed us a steady stream of news in 2011 that Egyptian youth were protesting in the streets for an Arab Spring of democratic reforms in Egypt.  Fast forward to 2012 and we learned The Muslim Brotherhood orchestrated the propaganda of democracy in Egypt to get support from the Obama Administration in the ousting of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

While the press was printing gallons of ink reporting the Muslim Brotherhood would pursue democratic reforms in Egypt, Mohammad Morsi was consolidating his political base with the Salafi Islamist fundamentalists, whose objective was to institute a Sunni-led Shariah-compliant Islamic State in Egypt by overthrowing the colonialist dictator and friend of the United States, Hosni Mubarak.

The utopian mantra from the liberal left of democratic reforms blooming in Egypt on a warm and sunny Arab Spring day were proven wrong. Now these same journalists and politicians are falling for the same lie again out of Jordan.

When will our mainstream press learn that Shariah compliant political Islam and our Jeffersonian democracy are not compatible? Understanding the PLO’s failed coup of Jordan in the 1970′s will help you to see what Jordan can expect from the Muslim Brotherhood in 2012-2013.

Black September in Jordan

In September of 1970, the Nobel Peace Prize recipient Yasser Arafat, nephew of Nazi collaborator Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini, tried unsuccessfully to violently overthrow the Kingdom of Jordan from King Hussein.

Arafat’s PLO organization lost over 2,000 Muslim men in the attempted Black September coup of their Jordanian Muslim brothers and were violently expelled from their native Jordan.

History seems to be repeating itself again,  except now The Muslim Brotherhood is making a play to wrestle control of Jordan from the colonialist dictator and friend of the United States, King Abdullah II.

If King Abdullah II tries to appease The Muslim Brotherhood he will find himself either dead or in exile wondering how he lost his throne.  King Abdullah II need look no further than Qaddafi, Mubarak, and Assad to see his future, if he continues on his current path.

Understanding The Islamic Threat Doctrine

Understanding the Islamic Threat Doctrine (click here to read it) is essential in predicting events as they unfold on the ground and anticipating what to expect will happen in the future. Fortunately for the American people, our Islamist adversaries are more than happy to tell us exactly what their doctrine and objectives are.

We will now learn the Islamic Threat Doctrine from a well respected Islamic Jihadist who was tops in his class amongst his Jihadi peers.  Today’s teacher of the doctrine is Sheikh Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi or by his title, “Emir of Al Qaeda in the Country of Two Rivers.”  On June 7, 2006 Mr. Zarqawi was killed when a USAF F-16 dropped two 500 pound guided bombs on his safe house in Baqubah, Iraq prematurely ending his career of violence and butchery to achieve his political objectives.

Shortly before his death, Mr. Zarqawi conducted an in depth interview with the Al-Furican Foundation for Media Production, an entertainment arm of Al-Qaeda. Hidden deep in the interview Mr. Zarqawi explains clearly what the Islamic Threat Doctrine is and its objectives.

These two paragraphs below should change your life forever and how you view the world around you.  Al-Qaeda terrorist Musab Al-Zarqawi says,

“We fight in the way of Allah, until the law of Allah is implemented, and the first step is to expel the enemy, then establish the Islamic state, then we set forth to conquer the lands of Muslims to return them back to us, then after that, we fight the kuffar (disbelievers) until they accept one of the three (conversion, death or dhimmitude).
“I have been sent with the sword, between the hands of the hour”; this is our political agenda.”
“It is necessary to accept the fact that it is an obligation for every Muslim to rush to help each other and it is also very necessary to agree that the houses of Muslims are just one house. The enemies (the disbelieving nations) have imposed boundaries and divided the lands of Muslims to tiny nations — however we do not believe in them and the boundaries of Sax Bacon do not restrict us. We, the Muslims, are one nation and the lands of Islam are one land, we fight for the sake of “there is no god but Allah”.

The Muslim Brotherhood in the Middle East and Northern Africa are “expelling the enemy” and establishing an Islamic State as they did in Egypt.  Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood consider the Muslim colonialist dictators as enemies of Shariah-compliant political Islam.

The Islamic Threat Doctrine Mr. Zarqawi articulated above is being implemented in coordinated steps to achieve their short-term objective of unifying, “Muslims to rush to help each other…and Muslims are of one house.”  The coordinated attacks on 9/11/12 on U.S. interests in the Middle East and Northern Africa was the real warning to America, not the red herring of an internet movie.

When the Islamist enemies of the United States tell you exactly what they want to do and why — believe them. When the soldiers of Allah conducted 20+ coordinated attacks on U.S. interests in the Middle East and Northern Africa on 9/11/2012,  they were telegraphing they can recreate these coordinated attacks at any time of their choosing — in law enforcement circles they call that a clue, as John Guandolo likes to say.

What Our Islamist Enemies Fear Most

The one thing our Islamist adversaries fear most is an American public that understands the basics of The Islamic Threat Doctrine (watch a ten-part video course about it by clicking here). Thomas Jefferson read the Qur’an to fight and defeat the Muslim Barbary Pirates in Tripoli back in 1801. Now you must learn The Islamic Threat Doctrine to understand the Islamists who attacked our embassy in Tripoli on 9/11/2012.

Conclusion

The future of America rests on how many Americans learn The Islamic Threat Doctrine as articulated by Mr. Zarqawi. Then you must teach your friends, family, and community what Mr. Zarqawi and his Islamist ideological brothers consider their definition of Victory.

We, the Muslims, are one nation and the lands of Islam are one land, we fight for the sake of “there is no god but Allah”.

What we believe as Americans and our man made laws is of small concern to our Islamist enemies. The followers of Islam believe “there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger” and that was the message on the black flags that flew above our overrun embassies and consulates when they were attacked on 9/11/2012.
God Bless America and God Bless Our Troops.

Published at Citizen Warrior
Family Security Matters Contributing Editor Alan Kornman is the regional coordinator of The United West — Uniting Western Civilization for Freedom and Liberty. His email is: alan@theunitedwest.org