Recorded at Center for Security Policy’s National Security Group Lunch on Capitol Hill on Thursday, February 5, 2015.
Recorded at Center for Security Policy’s National Security Group Lunch on Capitol Hill on Thursday, February 5, 2015.
UTT, by John Guandolo, Feb. 9, 2015:
The U.S. government continues to label the Islamic terrorists we face as “violent extremists” who commit acts of “workplace violence.” Here at UTT we prefer to live in reality because it is the only place our enemies can be defeated.
The phrase “violent extremism” is a non-sensical term which means nothing, and was brought to the U.S. via the FBI and DHS who were convinced by our British counterparts it identifies those who are willing to support their beliefs with violence. In this light, U.S. military forces and any American willing to defend a just cause can be classified as a “violent extremist.”
Unfortunately, those participating in the global Islamic jihad do not call themselves “extremists.” They call themselves “Jihadis” seeking to impose jihad on the world until the entire world is under Sharia (Islamic Law). American war fighting doctrine states we begin our analysis of any enemy by how that enemy describes itself.
This enemy specifically states they seek to impose Sharia and it is the blueprint for everything it does. Jihad is total warfare. It is Civilization Jihad per the Muslim Brotherhood’s own strategic plan for North America, and the MB’s global strategy. Jihad is warfare that comes at a society in a hundred different ways: political, economic, psychological, spiritual, cultural, societal, and includes violence in the community and on the battlefield.
Sharia is the filter through which this enemy communicates and understands the world. This is why it is crucial that we also use Sharia when we hear our adversaries speak so we can properly understand what the enemy intends. “Terrorism” is killing a Muslim without right. “Human Rights” is the imposition of Sharia (per the Cairo Declaration, a formal document served to the UN by the entire Muslim world via the OIC in 1993). Extremism is when a Muslim exceeds his ability or authority.
Nowhere in the Muslim world do Islamic jihadi organizations call themselves “extremists” – they call themselves “Jihadis.”
At the Muslim Peace Conference in Oslo, Norway in 2013, we see the Muslim Community openly agreeing that the punishments of the Sharia are broadly supported. Fahad Qureshi, the founder of IslamNet, asked the crowd a series of questions. The answers from the entire Muslim audience put this issue right in our face. They specifically state they are in full support of the Sharia, its punishment, and its importance to the Muslim community.
It is arrogant and condescending to believe Muslims do not believe the very thing they say they subscribe to – the very things Islam teaches.
They are not “extremists” – they are jihadis.
TerrorTrends Bulletin, By Christopher Holton, Feb, 3, 2015:
Over the past few months we have heard increasing calls for the Obama administration to “call the enemy what it is” or “identify the enemy by name.”
It is true that you can’t defeat an enemy you don’t identify.
These calls are invariably followed up by naming the enemy. Only the names assigned to our enemies seem to always be wrong. A few of the wrong names:
• Radical Islam
• Islamic extremism
• Radical Islamic extremism
• Islamist extremism
• Radical Islamist extremism
The problem with all these names is that they are names that we in the West have made up to describe our enemies. They don’t use any of them. No member of the Islamic State, Al Qaeda, HAMAS, Hezbollah, Lashkar e Taiba, the Taliban, Boko Haram, Al Shabaab or Abu Sayyef ever refers to himself as “radical” or “extremist.” No where in their communications will you see the modifiers “radical” or “extremist.”
They don’t subscribe to radical Islam or Islamist extremism.
In fact they claim that the basis for what they do is simply Islam. Every Jihadist organization bases its actions on Islamic scripture. Maybe they got it wrong, but seeing as THEY think that have it right, we best understand THEIR version of Islam if we are truly going to understand our enemies.
According to their own words, they are all Islamic Jihadis. That’s what they are and it’s what they call themselves.
We didn’t make up names for the Nazis in World War II. There were no “radical Nazis,” or “Nazi extremists.” There were only Nazis.
Today we have Islamic Jihadis.
And Islamic Jihad has a doctrinal basis in Islam. Which brings me to the next section of this posting.
Ideology or Doctrine?
I am hearing references to “radical” Islamic ideology on the news more and more. I try to avoid the term ideology. Jihad is based on doctrine, not on ideology and Jihad is what we’re confronted with. There IS a difference between doctrine, ideology and theology.
Doctrine is TAUGHT. For instance, Biblical doctrine is defined as those things that are taught from the Holy Bible. Islamic Doctrine is based on the Quran, the Hadith and the Sirah.
Ideology and theology, on the other hand, are man-made disciplines, fields of study. Many people do not see the difference between doctrine and ideology/theology. However, there is a substantial difference in how the two are developed in a practical way and it is important that we make the distinction.
Islamic doctrine is the teaching that comes directly out of the word of allah and is founded on the very words believed by Moslems to be spoken by allah and the life of the prophet Muhammed. To teach doctrine is to begin with full faith in the words of the Quran, the life of Muhammed in the Hadith and Sirah to dig out all that Islam says about a subject, and to organize that material in the way that best agrees with the approach that allah himself makes on the subject.
Ideology, by its nature, puts greater emphasis on systems built by man. In the Islamic context, ideology tends to begin with a man-made system and then goes to Islamic scripture for support, while doctrine begins with the scripture.
This is important because ideology can be explained away as man-made perversions of Islam, whereas, doctrine by its very definition cannot be disowned…
Islamic doctrine is embedded into Muslims from the time they can talk and read.
Jihad is an integral part of Islamic Doctrine. It is not part of some ideology that someone ginned up. It’s been there right from the start.
Make no mistake, Jihad is what is being waged against us, not “terrorism.” And our enemies are Jihadis not terrorists. This is not a war on terrorism. It is a defensive war against Jihad.
UTT, by John Guandolo, Jan. 20, 2015:
If the recent events of the past 14 years have not brought clarity to understanding that the core teachings of Islam is the sole reason the West is facing the warfare we are from so many different directions, then you may be incapable of reasonable and rational thought.
Since two Muslims killed a dozen people at the media outlet Charlie Hebdo in France, Muslims all over the world are holding massive protests…for the victims? No. They are protesting their “outrage” over the cartoons. In a sane society, a group of identifiable people who barbarically brutalize decent society would not be able to globally complain about how cartoons effect their feelings. But they are not ignored for the exact opposite reason intellectually dishonest leaders in Europe and America tell us we should embrace, appease, and empathize with the Islamic world.
They threaten us violence while our leaders tell us to embrace the Muslim community because, as they say, “Islam is a religion of peace.”
Truer words have never been spoken, if you understand that “Peace” in Islam (per Sharia/Islamic Law) occurs when the entire globe is under the rule of Islam and Islamic Law.
As massive crowds of Muslims across the globe call for more violence and killings (read “justice” for those who “slander” the prophet), our leaders tell us we should stop offending the Muslim by publishing cartoons or speaking truth about Islam. Color me reactionary, but I find sawing the heads off of 5 year old children and putting them on spikes for all the world to see just a bit more offensive. Yet I do not see any massive demonstrations around the world against that or for the children who are victims.
It is time for rational and reasonable people to stop giving quarter to those who are psychotically disconnected from reality – i.e. those who believe Islam “doesn’t stand for this (violence).”
* Nearly every Islamic School on the planet, beginning in the first grade, teaches Jihad is a permanent obligation on the Islamic community until the world is under Islamic rule (under Sharia).
* Islamic legal scholars are (and always have been) unanimous in their understanding on the definition of “jihad”; the obligation of jihad; the requirement to establish a global Islamic state (Caliphate) under Sharia (Islamic Law); and that Muslims may never take Jews or Christians as their friends. There is no such thing as a “version” of Islam that teaches something other than that.
* Sharia mandates jihad when the Islamic community has the strength and material ability to wage it. Historically, over the last 1400 years, the Muslim community has waged jihad when they had the strength to do so. In Islam, Mohammed is the “insan al kamil” or the “perfect man.” Mohammed commanded Muslims to “fight and slay the unbelievers” until they (1) convert to Islam, (2) submit to Islam, pay the jizya (non-Muslim poll tax), and “feel themselves subdued,” or (3) be killed. Mohammed waged war on the non-Muslims until they submitted, converted or were killed.
* All published Sharia (Islamic Law) defines “slander” as those who say anything about the prophet or Islam “which a Muslim would dislike.” This is a capital crime in Islam. The truth of the comment is not a part of the discussion in Islamic Law – only that a Muslim “dislikes” it.
The jihadis who took innocent lives in France at Charlie Hebdo, did so in accordance with, not against, Islamic Law.
100% of the Islamic jihadis we face on the battlefield, have committed acts of jihad in Europe or America, or those jihadis we have arrested before they did what they were trying to do all say words to the effect of: “We are jihadis fighting jihad in the cause of Allah in order to impose Sharia and establish the Islamic State.”
All Islamic doctrine backs this statement up – unequivocally.
The jihadis – or “terrorists” – are in complete agreement as to why they are doing what they are doing across the globe. All Islamic jurisprudence supports them and never hasn’t supported them. We are witnessing millions of Muslims protest over cartoons but not over the victims at Charlie Hebdo or Fort Hood or London or Madrid or Mumbai or Boston or anywhere else in the world.
To make this as clear as possible, Al Qaeda has never misquoted Islamic Law in furtherance of what they are doing. Never.
If you had a dinner guest who didn’t follow your rules, was rude and inappropriate with your wife and daughter, and threatened you while eating a dinner you prepared in your house, you would ask him to leave.
The West may want to consider this option for a Muslim population which continues to threaten our lives in bolder and bolder fashion, while demonstrating absolutely no respect for human life, decency, liberty, or reasoned thought.
WND, by Aaron Klein, Jan. 15, 2015:
Two people were killed in a raid on suspected Islamic radicals Thursday in the Belgian town of Verviers, according to local media.
The raid comes three days after WND exclusively reported there are at least 20 sleeper cells with a combined total of 120 to 180 jihadists ready to act in France, Germany and Belgium.
WND further reported two days later that intelligence information collected by European and Arab countries indicates there is a specific threat against Belgium.
Local officials Thursday said two people have been killed in an anti-terror operation in eastern Belgium.
The BBC is quoting a Belgian TV station saying a third person was wounded in the raid in the town of Verviers and that several arrests were made.
The Agence-France Presse news agency quoted a source in the mayor’s office stating “an operation is under way.” Another official said the raid was “jihadist-related.”
According to unconfirmed reports, raids were taking place elsewhere in Belgium.
As WND reported, chatter within jihadist groups combined with intelligence information collected by European and Arab countries indicates the next major terrorist attack may target the Netherlands or Belgium, according to informed Middle Eastern security officials speaking to WND.
The security officials said a joint effort between European and Arab security services has resulted in the drafting of a list of hundreds of names of potential jihadists, mostly European residents, who could be a part of a series of sleeper cells in Europe. There is an effort to track down the locations of the suspects.
The officials said the list also includes more than 100 suspects who are originally from Chechnya as well as foreign suspects from Palestinian camps in Syria and Lebanon, some of whom may currently be in Europe.
On Tuesday, WND reported Algeria’s intelligence services passed information to several European countries indicating there are at least 20 sleeper cells with a combined total of 120 to 180 jihadists ready to act in France, Germany and Belgium.
Many members of the cells were trained in Tunisia, according to an Algerian intelligence report that was shared with WND by a European official. The report was provided to European interior ministers.
The document also deals with the issue of European citizens traveling to Iraq and Syria to join Islamic terrorist organizations. The Algerian report fingers Saudi-financed mosques in Europe as helping to lead the recruitment of European jihadists to fight in Syria and Iraq.
The Algerians identified by name more than 100 clerics in Western Europe as leaders of the recruitment campaign, which the Algerian report says is coordinated with Salafists mostly located in Tunisia, Yemen and Libya.
Earlier this week, French law enforcement officers were directed to carry their weapons at all times “because terror sleeper cells have been activated over the last 24 hours in the country,” according to a French police source who attended a briefing Saturday and spoke to CNN terror analyst Samuel Laurent.
Amedy Coulibaly, the terrorist suspect killed last Friday after holding citizens hostage in a kosher market in Paris, made phone calls about targeting police officers in France, the source told CNN.
Hostages inside the market also reported hearing Coulibaly speaking on the phone about the targeting of police officers in France.
According to reports, the hostages said Coulibaly told them “militants are going to come – there are going to be more and more.”
According to reports, the hostages said Coulibaly told them that “militants are going to come.”
“There are going to be more and more.”
BRUSSELS—Belgian security forces killed two terror suspects with links to Syria in a fierce shootout in the eastern city of Verviers on Thursday and arrested another, foiling a major and imminent attack against police buildings, authorities said.
CSP, by Kyle Shideler, Jan. 12, 2015:
Counter-terrorism experts appear to find themselves befuddled yet again by revelations that while the Kouachi brothers, who massacred twelve at the offices of the Charlie Hebdo Magazine declared themselves operating on behalf of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, and reportedly trained in Yemen for the attack, their apparent partner in jihad, Ahmed Coulibaly issued a video statement recorded some time before the attack, declaring responsibility for the Islamic State (ISIS) and pledging allegiance (bayat) to it’s leader AbuBakr Al-Baghdadi. His common-law wife Hayat Boumeddiene , believed by French intelligence to have played a role in the attack, has apparently fled to Turkey, before making a beeline for the Syrian border, and the would-be Caliphate’s territory.
The Islamic State and Al Qaeda have been at odds with each other since AbuBakr Al-Baghdadi declaration of authority over Al Qaeda activities in both Iraq as well as Syria was rebuffed by AQ leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri.
How is it that these two groups, who are in dispute with one another, manage to work together to carry out a coordinated attack? Firstly, of course, the Kouachi brothers and Ahmed Coulibaly knew each other personally, and had history together, including the older Kouachi spending time in prison with Coulibaly. Obviously this would play a role. But secondly, and importantly, Jihad doctrine emphasizes cooperation, rather than competition, and the goal, of fighting in the cause of Allah (Jihad Fisabillah), as a religious obligation, is viewed as above inter-group rivalries. See for example, Sayyed Imam Al-Sharif (aka Sheikh Abul Qadir Abdul Aziz, a major Al Qaeda ideologue, who would eventually recant in Egyptian prison)’s essay, “Jihad and the effects of intention upon it”, taken from the larger jihadist work “al-‘Umda fi I’dad al-‘Udda (“The Essentials of Making Ready [for Jihad]”) which was taught in Al Qaeda training camps. In it Al-Sharif writes:
“And the Muslim should not train or perform Jihad with the aim of supporting as specific Jam’ah or party, so that if the jihad is with other than his group he abandons it. So this one is not fighting so that the word of Allah will be the highest, rather so that the banner of the party or the Jama’ah will be the highest, and thus is the asabiyyah of Jahiliyyah, about which the Messenger of Allah said, “What is the matter with the call of Jahiliyyah. Abandon it, as it is rotten. And then he said, “whoever is killed beneath a blind banner, becoming angry for the group and fighting for the group, then he is not from my Ummah.”
This concept of fighting for the Ummah representing all Muslims everywhere, is a powerful driver of unity of action, and helps to explain how Islamist terror groups come together to cooperate, even in the face of seemingly insurmountable differences (such as Shia-Iran supporting aggressively anti-Shia Al Qaeda in Iraq, during the insurgency against the U.S.). It’s often illustrated by the hadith, “This Ummah is like one body, if one part is hurt then whole body suffers.”
For Shariah-adherent Muslims who insist on upholding classical interpretations of Islamic blasphemy, the publication of the Charlie Hebdo cartoons “defaming” Mohammed represented an injury to the entire Ummah. As a result the need to cooperate in order to avenge the insult could easily be placed above inter-group rivalries. This is not to say that studying in granular detail the individual personalities and group dynamics among various Jihad organizations is unnecessary or irrelevant. Even jihadists are people and suffer from the same sorts of personal rivalries and disagreements that any organization does. However it is just as important to understand the ideological bonds the act as a force for cooperation, as it is to study disagreements if we wish to have strategic comprehension of those engaged in jihad.
Money Jihad, Jan. 5, 2015:
Russia Today recently interviewed terror finance expert Loretta Napoleoni about the business operations of the Islamic State of Iraq. During the conversation, Napoleoni made some comments that seemed to suggest that ISIS is primarily driven by business imperatives rather than ideology—that governing territory and running a bureaucracy create its own financial demands that consume more and more of the organization’s time. Interviewer Sophie Shevardnadze sought clarification, asking if isn’t the case that ISIS fighters are motivated by their genuine Islamist beliefs rather than profit motives. Napoleoni gave a good and wise answer (transcribed below). Roll tape:
I think the people that are joining this organization today, they are not joining because they want to make money—we’re not talking about mercenaries here, at all—we’re actually talking about people that are lured into joining, who are seducted. We’re talking about true seduction… All of the sudden the message comes from the Islamic State and says, “Come and help us build the new state, come and help us implement the Muslim political utopia,” something that for generations and generations, for centuries the Muslims have tried to establish and they have always failed. So these people are not motivated by money, they are actually motivated by an ideology. But in order to get to this level the Islamic State had to build itself and they did it through finance.
Dec. 18, 2014:
BY RYAN MAURO:
The perpetrator of the jihadist, an Islamist known as Sheikh Man Haron Monis, was shockingly dropped from the country’s terrorist-watch list sometime after 2009. It is unknown why this happened but it may be attributable to the manipulative semantics he used to appear nonthreatening, utilizing a common Islamist strategy.
Haron pledged allegiance to the Islamic State (ISIS) last month, an act that should have immediately resulted in his placement on terror-watch lists and surveillance. Presumably, his website was not being monitored despite his lengthy criminal record, widely known extremism and history of 40 to 50 allegations of sexual indiscretions.
His “moderate” presentation is not nearly as slick as more skilled Islamists like the Muslim Brotherhood, but the language he used can serve as a case study in how Islamists use crafty language to put audiences at ease.
It’s not enough to understand terrorist groups or the Islamist ideology behind them. We have to understand how it is expressed.
For Westerners, terms like “peace,” “terrorism” and “democracy” appear to have a universal meaning. We all understand each other when we use them. Islamists have different definitions of them. When they use these terms, many Westerners incorrectly assume the same concept is being discussed.
The nuances in Islamist language needs to be grasped so we can separate extremist from moderate and detect propaganda and word games.
Haron may have been dropped off Australia’s terrorist-watch list because of this deception or because of a tragic bureaucratic error. The broader lesson is that the West simply isn’t doing a good enough job of identifying threats.
Islamist adversaries are consistently overlooked, downplayed or even treated as partners. The intelligence and policy failures will continue until we understand the ideology we’re up against.
The Aquino administration and his most senior members in the Armed Forces of the Philippines(AFP) are trumpeting the UN report that came out a few days ago by saying, “we told you so.” We responded with an article titled “UN Claims No ISIS Presence in the Philippines – They’re Wrong,” where we laid out the ties between some of the most prominent Islamic State (IS) facilitators and the jihadist groups operating in the Philippines. In this follow up piece we’re going to kick things up a notch with an even deeper look into one of the support nodes we’ve mentioned: The Call and Guidance of Cabuyao Laguna (CGCL) and the individuals connected to it. Now, we can forgive AFP spokesman COL Restituto Padilla for not having all the facts since none of the organizations in the Philippine Security Forces (PSF) like to play nice with one another (sometimes to the point where people are killed due to holding onto information just because an organization can). However, the contents of this article are widely known to all of the senior officials of the Aquino administration. Keep this in the back of your mind as you read this piece. The following is from months of collaboration and research from our Asia Analytical Cell and network of sources in the Philippines – some of which are members of the PSF themselves.
ISIS Study Group claims terrorists’ presence in the Philippines
WE TOLD YOU SO | AFP says UN report of ‘No ISIS in PH’ boosts its claim ever since
The CGCL was established in 2010 by Andrew “Mansur” Gutierrez and Brandon “Khalid” Gorospe. At the time Rajah Suleiman Movement (RSM) Ahmed Santos was 5 yrs removed from his arrest and subsequent move to SICA and Sheik Omar Lavilla had been detained in Bahrain while trying to wire money to his jihadist brethren and extradited to the Philippines 2 yrs prior. This was a period where
many members of the RSM were laying low and contemplating their next move. The man who took over as the operational leader was Dino Amor Rosalejos Pareja aka “Khalil Pareja.” He reflagged RSM into “Jaysh at-Tauhid” (JTD) but in actuality this was still RSM with all the same personalities involved. Before he also found himself detained (again) in 2012, he had launched an initiative to establish alternative venues for bringing in financial and material support were established in anticipation of Lavilla and Santos’ eventual release from prison.
The point man for this endeavor was Gutierrez, who served as the manager of Santos’ legal defense fund and would travel back and forth from Saudi Arabia under the status of an Overseas Foreign Worker (OFW) employed as an Operations Analyst for Advanced Electronics Company Limited. While in Saudi Arabia he collects money and will send it back to the Philippines via Western Union or through trusted associates rotating home. The individuals usually receiving the western union money are two of Santos’ wives, Fatima and Nurain. Our sources in the Philippine National Police – Intelligence Group (PNP-IG) reported to us their suspicions that Nurain is passing
messages to Santos when she visits him in SICA. They also stated women typically aren’t searched and if they are its without the same level of scrutiny as a man would receive. This is likely how last summer’s prison video showing the inmates in Santos’ cellblock pledging allegiance to IS that was later promoted by Robert “Musa” Cerantonio (variant-Ceratonio). Nurain will also pass the money Gutierrez sent to other members of the network, even traveling to the Southern Philippines as she’s done on occasion. Gutierrez’s wife is also a key facilitator in the sense that she would often serve as a caretaker for Santos’ Fi Sabilillah Da’wah Media Foundation (FSDMF) when Fatima and Nurain were running errands or out of town on other business. She would also operate as a handler of money passing funds off from one individual to the next.
Gutierrez and Khalid Gorospe established the CGCL to better facilitate the flow of cash coming into the country from their Middle Eastern benefactors and began using the school for recruiting new members to replenish their ranks. Both Gutierrez and Gorospe would return to the Middle East to serve as OFWs tasked with collecting funds and targeting the OFW population for recruitment. How this works is they would identify the most vulnerable: young men who are alone. In this particular culture family is very important, and as an OFW you’re living thousands of miles away from your loved ones in an alien environment that is increasingly hostile to anyone who isn’t an Arab or Sunni Muslim for that matter. Individuals such as Gutierrez and Gorospe prey on these individuals by offering them the following:
1. RESPECT. This is very important due to how poorly Saudis are known to treat Filipinos – especially Christians.
2. A new, extend “family” of their Muslim brothers. This goes a long way towards feeling a new level of acceptance.
3. Promise of enhanced job prospects in the Middle East and when they return home to the Philippines. Gutierrez and Gorospe have used their links to major financiers and facilitators to get select Balik Reverts jobs.
4. A wife. Yes, there have been several cases where a Balik Revert will be matched up with a woman for marriage (this is how Khalil Pareja got married in case you were wondering).
The most promising recruits (after they’ve been indoctrinated into the militant ideology of the Black Flag movement that is) are identified while studying at one of the affiliated institutions – such as the CGCL – and sent to training camps in the Southern Philippines run by a joint-instructor cadre consisting of Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters (BIFF), Khalifah Islamiyah Mindanao (KIM), Bangsamoro Justice Movement (BJM)/BIFF-SOG and Jemaah Islamiyah (JI).
Breakdown of the radicalization process
Source: The ISIS Study Group
One of his other tasks is to serve as the mouthpiece for the Santos Network to major terror financiers such as former Islamic Studies Call and Guidance (ISCAG) Director Sheik Hamoud Muhammad abd-al Aziz al-Lahim and Saleh Muhammad al-Sanaa. These connections play a big role in Gutierrez’s ability to secure jobs for new recruits. When he’s back in the Philippines, Gutierrez will often make his rounds by visiting ISCAG and the al-Marrif Educational Center (AMEC) to coordinate the distribution of funds to the CGCL and other affiliated schools in the country – all under the guise of “Islamic Dawah Activities.” This money is for proselytizing efforts, facilitating the travel of personnel to Syria and Iraq, even purchasing weapons and IED-making material for their jihadist colleagues in the Southern Philippines. These contacts will even send trusted associates representing their interests in the country to these institutions to pass along funds and guidance – Gutierrez reportedly plays an important role in making the arrangements for these meetings.
We decided to begin putting out more detailed pieces to drive home to the US government and good people of the Philippines that the IS presence in the country is very real, both the US and Aquino administration are both aware of it, but isn’t taking the threat seriously. The Filipino members of our network have expressed a genuine fear of the coming storm, and rightfully so. The Black Flag affiliates in the country aren’t just a threat to Filipino Christians and westerners, they’re also a threat to the average Filipino Muslim who oppose the ideology of death that Baghdadi and his followers practice. PNoy, his cabinet and the senior members of his security forces have been very much aware of everything we covered in this article for quite some time. The million dollar question is why haven’t the PNP conducted a security sweep to detain the key members of the Santos Network who are present in the country after the arrests of Ricardo Ayeras and Andy Valdez? We know this much, the PNP has been watching this network but don’t have the appetite to detain them despite the danger they pose to the civilian population. Unfortunately, they’re only going to be motivated to do something if the leadership is motivated to take action. It all starts at the top – starting with PNoy.
Much more at The ISIS Study Group
Robert Spencer, Faith Goldy and Jerry Agar discuss the hostage taking by Man Haron Monis at a Lindt chocolate shop in Sydney, Australia on Dec 15-16, 2014.
Editor’s note: The following is Part Three a three-part series examining the many parallels between Islam and the mafia following Bill Maher’s recent exclamation that Islam is “the only religion that acts like the mafia, that will f***ing kill you if you say the wrong thing, draw the wrong picture, or write the wrong book.” Click for Part One and for Part Two.
Coercion and Death Threats
Although the novel turned movie, The Godfather, is fictitious, it also captures much of the mafia’s modus operandi. Consider, for example, that most famous of lines—“I’m going to make him an offer he can’t refuse”—spoken by the Godfather to one of his “godsons,” an aspiring actor and singer, who, after being turned down by a studio director for a role that he desperately wanted, turns to his Godfather for aid.
As the movie progresses, we discover that the offer that the director can’t refuse is nothing less than violence and the threat of death: after the Godfather’s messenger to the director asking that the actor be given the role is again rejected, the studio head awakes to find the bloodied and decapitated head of his favorite stallion in bed with him. The godson subsequently gets the movie role.
Throughout the context of the entire Godfather trilogy—and indeed, in the context of the mafia—making someone “an offer they can’t refuse”—comes to mean “do as I say or suffer the consequences,” possibly death.
Compare this to Islam’s threefold choice. On Muhammad’s orders, whenever Islamic jihadis conquer a territory, they are to give the non-Muslim inhabitants three choices: 1) convert to Islam, 2) maintain your own religion (an option technically only available to Christians and Jews) but pay tribute and live as a subdued third-class citizen, a “dhimmi,” or 3) die.
Not only do the primary historical texts written by authoritative Muslims record this aspect of Islam, but to this very day, Islam’s threefold choice is making headlines, most recently at the hands of the Islamic State.
The ‘Protection Racket’
Once the mafia gains a “territory,” one of the primary ways it profits is by collecting “protection money” from the inhabitants. While the protection racket has several faces, one in particular is akin to an Islamic institution: the idea of coercing people in the mafia’s territory to pay money for “protection,” ostensibly from outside forces, when in fact the protection bought is from the mafia itself—that is, extortion money, or pizzo. Potential “clients” who refuse the mafia’s “protection” often have their property vandalized and are routinely threatened and harassed.
Compare pizzo with the Islamic concept of jizya: The word jizya appears in Koran 9:29: “Fight those among the People of the Book [Christians and Jews] who do not believe in Allah nor the Last Day, nor forbid what Allah and his Messenger have forbidden, nor embrace the religion of truth, until they pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued (emphasis added).”
In the hadith, the Messenger of Allah, Muhammad—in our analogy, the “underboss”—regularly calls on Muslims to demand jizya of non-Muslims: “If they refuse to accept Islam,” said the Islamic prophet, “demand from them the jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay jizya, seek Allah’s help and fight them.”
The root meaning of the Arabic word “jizya” is simply to “repay” or “recompense,” basically to “compensate” for something. According to the Hans Wehr Dictionary, the standard Arabic-English dictionary, jizya is something that “takes the place” of something else, or “serves instead.”
Simply put, conquered non-Muslims were to purchase their lives, which were otherwise forfeit to their Muslim conquerors, with money. Instead of taking their lives, they took their money. As one medieval jurist succinctly puts it, “their lives and their possessions are only protected by reason of payment of jizya” (Crucified Again, p. 22).
Interestingly, just as the mafia rationalizes its collection of “protection money” by portraying it as money paid to buy mafia protection against “outsiders”—when, as mentioned, the money/tribute serves only to protect the client from the mafia itself—so too do Islam’s apologists portray the collection of jizya as money meant to buy Muslim protection from outsiders, when in fact the money/jizya buys protection from Muslims themselves.
Conclusion: Mafia—What’s In a Word?
What accounts for all these similarities between Islam and the mafia? It is further telling that the word mafia itself,which means “hostility to the law, boldness,” is believed to be derived from the Arabic slang word, mahya, which in translation means “bragging, boasting, bravado, and swaggering.”
This etymology is a reminder that Sicily, birthplace of the mafia, was under Arab/Islamic domination for over 200 years. Aside from a borrowed etymology, could much of the mafia’s modus operandi also have been borrowed from Islam? Could native Sicilians, over the centuries, have co-opted the techniques of social controls that they had lived under and learned from their former overlords—albeit free from its Islamic trappings?
Either way, when HBO personality Bill Maher recently proclaimed that Islam is “the only religion that acts like the mafia, that will f***ing kill you if you say the wrong thing, draw the wrong picture, or write the wrong book”—he was barely touching the tip of the iceberg of similarities between Islam and the mafia.
Don’t miss Raymond Ibrahim on The Glazov Gang discussing ISIS’s Islamic Inspirations:
Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.