Tag Archives: FrontPage Magazine

Gaubatz: Stop putting the word ‘Radical’ in front of Islam

Posted on by
1

imagescapqspavby Shoebat Foundation:

Conservatives Must Stop Using the Terms ‘Radical Islam and Radical Muslims’
Dave Gaubatz

During my counter-terrorism work I have the great opportunity to speak with Americans who understand Islam and are trying to educate others about the dangers Islam and Sharia create for our beautiful country. There are organizations such as ACT For America and FrontPage Magazine that are doing outstanding work. There are Americans who belong to no organization and they are doing outstanding work. I respect all who are educating Americans.

There is one major error many organizations and well intended people make when discussing Islamic issues. There is hardly a day goes by that I don’t speak with someone who uses the terms ‘Radical Islam and Radical Muslims’. Using these terms causes great harm to our country and the movement by conservatives to show the dangers of Islam. I ask many of the people who use these terms if they believe the Islamic ideology itself is dangerous. Most agree that Islam and Sharia are very dangerous and America’s number one security threat. At the same time some of these people commonly use ‘Radical Islam and Radical Muslims’ in their writings and lectures to the American public. If you truly believe the Islamic ideology is dangerous and harmful to our country and children, you must at once cease from using these terms.

Is it a good thing to be afflicted with Islamophobia? Get the new book from Walid Shoebat, The Case FOR ISLAMOPHOBIA: Jihad by the Word; America’s Final Warning.

Let me explain why. If you say ‘Radical Islam and Radical Muslims’ then you are saying that in reality Islam is peaceful, a good religion, and has its place in American society. You are saying that Islam has been ‘hijacked’ by a few ‘Radical Muslims’ and the Radical Muslims’ are misinterpreting the Islamic ideology that was founded by Prophet Mohammed. Most of us know that the pure and simple Islam is dangerous and we want no part of it to be in America, and we don’t want our children to be led by liberal politicians, journalists, and naive Americans to believe Islam is a good thing for our country. Islam is not good for our country. Islam has been violent and dangerous for over 1400 years and it will always be dangerous. The people you refer to as ‘Radical Muslims’ are not radical. They are simply carrying out the ‘true Islamic ideology as Prophet Mohammed wanted it to be carried out. These people are ‘Pure Muslims’. They are Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbolla, and the numerous other Islamic acronyms. The leaders of such organizations as MSA, ISNA, MANA, and CAIR are Muslim Brotherhood organizations who are practicing the true form of Islam. They are not ‘Radical’, they are ‘Pure Muslims’. These organizations want all Muslims to think and behave as they do. They want all Muslims to practice ‘Pure Islam’.

Many well intended Americans also use the term ‘Moderate Muslims’. In reality a ‘Moderate Muslim’ does not uphold the violent aspects of Sharia law. In accordance to the Islamic ideology these people are Apostates of Islam. You can’t separate one aspect of Sharia from another and be a ‘Pure Muslim’. Even Islamic leaders say exactly what I described above. If you were to attend lectures at Dar Al Hijra Mosque in Fairfax, Va., you would be informed by the Islamic leaders that there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim. One is actually adhering to all aspects of Sharia law and therefor a ‘Pure Muslim’ or they aren’t and are Apostates of Islam. In accordance with Sharia law the penalty for Apostasy is death.

To sum it up: Immediately stop using the terms ‘Radical Islam and Radical Muslims’. Stop legitimizing the Islamic ideology. ‘Radical Muslims and Radical Islam’ are terms brought into America by terrorist loving countries such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE to name a few.

Dave Gaubatz spent 20 years as an active duty USAF (Special Agent/OSI), 3.5 years as a civilian 1811 Federal Agent, trained by the U.S. State Department in Arabic, and was the first U.S. Federal Agent to enter Iraq in 2003. He is also a counterterrorism counterintelligence officer. He is co-author of the book Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America. 
Related articles

Algeria in Jihadi Flames

Posted on by
1

algeria-1_2454515b-450x334By

Emboldened by America’s projection of weakness abroad, Islamists apparently linked to al-Qaeda reportedly continue to hold about 40 foreign hostages including seven Americans seized Wednesday at a natural gas field in Algeria.

At press time, conflicting media reports had been emerging from the region. Some claimed that the hostages have been freed; others, that several hostages have been killed.

The mass kidnapping at a BP (formerly British Petroleum) gas site near the Libyan border, which may very well have been accomplished with U.S.-supplied weapons left over from the ouster of the late Muammar Qaddafi in Libya, seems to be a spillover from a failed French drive to remove Islamist militants from nearby Mali.

According to the Wall Street Journal, France’s target in Mali was Algeria-based Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, or AQIM, which has “claimed responsibility for the Algeria kidnappings, calling it retaliation.”

The northern portion of Mali is important to the Islamofascists because it is one of their recently acquired strongholds that serves as a showcase for the reimposition of Shariah law in the region. It is a beachhead for Islamist world revolution.

Al-Qaeda forces, working with Qaddafi’s former mercenaries, previously took over northern Mali, an area about the size of Texas. Africa, writes FrontPage Magazine’s Daniel Greenfield, is now “to Islamic Colonialism in the 21st Century what it was to European Colonialism in the 19th Century.”

The kidnapping episode also undercuts President Obama’s spurious claim that al-Qaeda is somehow on the run and virtually irrelevant thanks to his policies. During the past election cycle Obama bragged over and over that “al-Qaeda is on the path to defeat and Osama bin Laden is dead.” That path now seems to be long and winding.

Each passing day it becomes increasingly clear that the Obama administration, which spends much of its time apologizing for past U.S. policies, isn’t serious about combating Islamism. The fact that the administration itself is a hotbed of Islamist activity, according to various investigative reports, no doubt has something to do with it.

Read more at Front Page

 

Related articles

‘Defamation of Religion’ Rule Applies to Islam Only

Posted on by
4
Deborah Weiss

Deborah Weiss

by: Ryan Mauro

Deborah Weiss, Esq. is an expert on the defamation of religions U.N. resolutions set forth by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.  She is a frequent contributor to FrontPage Magazine and The Washington Times, and is co-author of the book, Saudi Arabia and the Global Islamic Terrorist Network: America and the West’s Fatal Embrace.” A partial listing of her work can be found at www.vigilancenow.org

The following is RadicalIslam.org National Security Analyst Ryan Mauro’s interview with Deborah Weiss:

Ryan Mauro: What is the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), and what is its end goal?

Deborah Weiss: The OIC is the largest Islamic organization in the world, claiming to represent 1.5 billion Muslims worldwide.  It’s comprised of 56 UN Member States plus the Palestinian Authority.  They tend to vote together as a block in the UN and are arguably the most powerful voting block in the UN as a whole.  They are certainly the most powerful voting bloc in the UN’s Human Rights Council.

Though the OIC holds itself out as a “moderate” organization, it is clear from its own documents and its concepts that it is anything but moderate.  Its long term goal is the worldwide implementation of Sharia law and the supremacy of an Islamic State.

In its immediate activities, it is working to solidify the relationships among Muslim majority countries, to unify the Muslim voice, to support the so-called “Palestinian struggle” and to restrict all speech that is critical of anything related to Muslims or Islam including Islamic terrorism and Islamic persecution of religious minorities.

Mauro:  Tell us about the OIC’s concept of “Combating Defamation of Religions” and its impact.

Deborah Weiss:  “Combating Defamation of Religions” is a concept which gives an idea or religion, in this case Islam, protection from criticism, as opposed to what we have in the American legal system which only gives defamation protections to people.

Additionally, the OIC’s definition of defamation includes anything that sheds a negative light on Islam or Muslims, even if it’s true and even if it’s opinion.  In fact, it goes even further and condemns any free expression that would violate Islamic blasphemy laws even when, and perhaps especially when, expressed by non-Muslims.  So it’s the OIC’s attempt to pressure non-Muslims to comply with Islamic blasphemy codes.  Its target is the West and failure to comply with its demands is deemed “Islamophobic” even when no actual bigotry or prejudice is present.

The impact of putting the concept of combating defamation of religions into effect has numerous consequences and implications.

First, though it’s called “combating defamation of religions,” the OIC interprets and applies it to Islam only without any reciprocity for other religions.  In fact, the concept of protecting Islam from “defamation” is used in many OIC countries to persecute religious minorities.  The concept gives credence to Islamic blasphemy laws, which not only operate to suppress freedom of religion, but also violate human rights.  For example, in Pakistan, Ahmadiyya Muslims believe in a prophet after Mohammad. They generally have a peaceful, egalitarian interpretation of Islam.  Yet, they are considered heretics, and it is not only illegal for them to practice their faith, but it is criminal.  Merely sending out a wedding invitation with an accurate quote from the Koran can land an Ahmadiyya Muslim in jail.

Last, but not least, the implementation of the concept of combating defamation of religions has serious consequences for freedom of speech.  This is the main concern from a Western, and specifically American perspective.  The OIC as well as other Islamist organizations continue to work hard to stifle free speech.  They are constantly placing pressure on Western governments and societies to refrain from saying or dong anything that violates Islamic blasphemy codes, even though they don’t word it this way.

For example, the OIC encourages “hate-speech” laws in Europe that make it illegal to speak negatively about Islam.  And in America, though the government has thus far declined to make such speech illegal, it is enacting policies that discourage such speech even when it’s critical in protecting US national security.

Though not necessarily a direct result of the OIC’s UN resolutions, the implementation of the concept of combating defamation of religions has resulted in America’s recent cleansing of all national security training material for the FBI, Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice and the National Counterterrorism Training Center.  National security and intelligence professionals will still learn about terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaeda, but will be deprived of teachings regarding the underlying[Islamist] ideology, disconnecting the motivation from the terrorist behavior.  This ties one hand behind America’s back in fighting the War on Terror and is very dangerous.

Read more at Radical Islam

Also see ”Making Islamic sense of free speech“ by Harris Zafar, National Spokesperson for Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA, which was published in the Washington Post recently. Can you spot the taqiyya?