‘Sandboxing’ Islam: How to Protect America from Jihad Terrorism

image8 (1)Jihad Watch, AUGUST 21, 2015, BY

Enforcing the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) can give us the legal and tactical edge in countering the threat from Islamic supremacism.

Background

It should be obvious for anyone with eyes to see that Islam — its scriptures, the example of Muhammad, its doctrines, and its overall ideology — is behind the spread of most terrorism and unrest in the world today. 

From the Islamic State (ISIS), Boko Haram, al-Nusra and al-Shabaab, to slightly older groups such as al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and the Muslim Brotherhood, to lesser known jihadi organizations throughout Central Asia, India, Southeast Asia, the Pacific Rim, and China, a survey of terrorist attacks reveals Muslim involvement throughout the entire world.

Here in the United States, we are seeing a dramatic rise in Muslim “lone wolf” jihad terrorist attacks (and, as some have described them, known wolves”). Further, from all points of the compass, we are seeing literally tens of thousands of Muslims flocking to the Middle East to join the Islamic State caliphate and support the jihad with their very lives. 

The scenario gets worse. Some analysts argue that we are seriously underestimating the numbers of Western Muslims joining the Islamic State. 

Here at home, we have a “full blown insurgency.” The FBI has already arrested seventy IS-inspired Muslim terrorists, and has active investigations of IS-inspired jihad plots in all 56 of its field offices. NewsMax reports “the government’s terrorist watch list carries 700,000 to a million names.”

mosques_mapThe Challenge: Jihad-Linked Mosques

This is all indisputable fact. The threat is real and growing. Even worse, the threat is specifically from devout, observant Muslims who attend mosque. Behind every lone-or-known-wolf jihadi and every Islamic State recruit there is a mosque where they are receiving instruction in Islam.

That should give us pause, as four separate studies in recent years show that 80% of mosques in the U.S. teach, preach or advocate for jihad and the imposition of sharia law in America. 

Confirming these mosque studies are proven links between mosques and terrorists.  For example, one of the two Mississippi Muslims recently arrested for trying to join the Islamic State is the son of the imam at the local mosque. Many terror-linked mosques have spawned multiple jihadis. The Phoenix mosque attended by the Garland TX jihadis is notorious for having two other members in federal prison on terrorism-related convictions. Perhaps most infamous is the Islamic Society of Boston, which was attended not only by the Boston Marathon Bombers, but by numerous other jihad-terror-linked Muslims. The list goes on and on.

For many people, especially in our political class and certainly among the 2016 field of presidential candidates, there seems to be no solution to this national security nightmare of terror-linked mosques and known wolf jihadis. To date, there is no coherent, principle-based policy to address Islamic terrorism in the United States. 

The Solution: ‘Sandboxing’ Islam in America

This is where I believe the simple analogy of “Sandboxing” can help us.

You’ve probably heard the term, even if you’re not a computer geek. One tech source offers this definition:

A “sandbox” is a play area for young children: it is supposed to be safe for them (they cannot hurt themselves) and safe from them (it is sand, they cannot break it). In the context of IT security, “sandboxing” means isolating some piece of software in such a way that whatever it does, it will not spread havoc elsewhere.

If we think of America as being, ideally, a safe and free place for its citizens, within which we should be able to live, work, play, and, as the ubiquitous bumper sticker says, “Coexist,” then when it comes to Islam and Muslims, we need a solution analogous to the IT security process of “sandboxing.” We need to isolate malicious jihadi forces, “in such a way that whatever they do, they will not spread havoc elsewhere.”

What would “sandboxing” look like when it comes to Muslims in America? In practice, it could include the following policies:

  • A moratorium — a complete freeze — on Muslim immigration. Senator and presidential candidate Rand Paul expressed a similar policy concept following the Chattanooga jihad murders of five US servicemen, proposing a halt to immigration from Muslim countries with known jihad activity. Going one step further, Franklin Graham wrote at the same time that “We should stop all immigration of Muslims to the U.S. until this threat with Islam has been settled.
  • All mosques must be classified and treated as “agents of foreign power,” in accordance with the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), a U.S. law (22 U.S.C. § 611 et seq.) passed in 1938.

The law presciently allows for application in gray areas such as Islam presents, as it states that any entity with a “political or quasi-political capacity” disclose their relationship with the foreign government and information about related activities and finances. The purpose is to facilitate “evaluation by the government and the American people of the statements and activities of such persons.” [Source]

Islam certainly thinks and behaves like a foreign power, is guided in America by the Muslim Brotherhood, the Saudis and other foreign Islamic groups, and has a definite political dimension. (See also here.)

  • Any and all mosques associated with Muslim terrorists must be investigated, and if found to be advancing jihad doctrine, sharia law, and Islamic supremacism over the United States, they should be prosecuted and closed, in accordance with the FARA act referenced above.
  • Stop all foreign funding of mosques, whether by FARA, new legislation, or executive power. We already know that Saudi Arabia is providing extensive funding to advance its extremist Wahhabi strain of Islam worldwide, including of mosques in America, as is Turkey. There already exist covert lobbying groups for Muslim nations, including Iran.

 These are just some starting points to aid in getting this conversation going. The American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) has an 18-point platform with similar policy proposals which may be considered as well.

We must have hope that, just as illegal immigration has become a major issue in the presidential race, so also we may be successful in elevating public awareness of the clear and present danger from Islam and Muslim jihad terrorists. This is a generational if not century-long struggle ahead of us, and should resonate with voters.

The concept of “sandboxing” is, I believe, the most helpful image in making our case to not only the American people, but also to the political elite and the 2016 candidates. 

We must publicly challenge the Republican presidential candidates to take the initiative, and to fearlessly raise the issue of Islam up to the same level as Immigration. We must demand of them to be bold and daring when it comes to defeating jihad. The defense of our nation, our freedoms, and the lives of our fellow citizens and men-and-women in uniform should be paramount for whoever would be Commander-in-Chief. This issue will be topmost on that person’s desk in the Oval Office from Day One. Better to tackle it now with a strong and visionary policy, than to be knocked back on our heels by a surprise attack in 2017.

Now is the time to put misbehaving Muslims and their terror-linked-mosques on time-out. Islam is at war with us. More and more Muslims are heeding the summons from Islamic State and Al-Qaeda, taking up arms against us in this war, and killing American citizens right here at home. Denying the reality and threat of Islamic jihad is not a valid policy, it is civilizational suicide.

It is time to “sandbox” Islam in America, and use decisive, legal means to counter its threat to our freedoms and our way of life.

_______

Ralph Sidway is an Orthodox Christian researcher and writer, and author of Facing Islam: What the Ancient Church has to say about the Religion of Muhammad. He operates the Facing Islam blog.

Also see:

Beyond Hamas: planned Abbas visit elucidates Iran’s lesser-known ties to PA

Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas speaks to leaders of the now-collapsed Palestinian unity government between his Fatah party and Hamas in Ramallah on June 2, 2014. While Iran has long supported Hamas, the PA's rival, Abbas plans to visit Iran in November. Credit: Issam RImawi/Flash90.

Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas speaks to leaders of the now-collapsed Palestinian unity government between his Fatah party and Hamas in Ramallah on June 2, 2014. While Iran has long supported Hamas, the PA’s rival, Abbas plans to visit Iran in November. Credit: Issam RImawi/Flash90.

JNS.org, By Sean Savage and Alina Dain Sharon, August 13, 2015:

While Iran’s funding of the Palestinian terror group Hamas is well-documented, the Islamic Republic’s relationship with the Palestinian Authority (PA) is less frequently discussed. But that pattern may start to shift upon the recent announcement of PA President Mahmoud Abbas’s planned trip to Iran in November.

Abbas last visited Ira in 2012, when he attended a Non-Aligned Movement summit in Tehran. His upcoming visit, announced by Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Executive Committee member Ahmed Majdalani, comes just weeks after the signing of a nuclear deal between world powers and Iran. Majdalani himself recently visited Tehran and met with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif.

Majdalani said Iran and the PA have agreed to work together on holding an international conference with the goal of bringing about the nuclear disarmament of Israel. (The Jewish state has never confirmed nor denied possessing nuclear weapons.)

“The visit now by a PA emissary, Ahmad Majdalani, is an advance visit and will likely not generate headlines. But Abbas’s visit could be historic. Depending on how it goes, it may be a sign that he has fully gravitated away from diplomacy with Israel if he invests in his ties to the Islamic Republic,” Jonathan Schanzer, vice president for research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies think tank, told J NS.org.

The relationship between Iran and the PA’s precursor, the PLO—which was founded in 1964 and was recognized as the Palestinians’ representative organization following the signing of the Oslo Accords with Israel in 1993—“go back a long time, all the way to the Islamic Revolution,” said Kyle Shideler, director of the Threat Information Office at the Center for Security Policy.

“That said, the PLO-Iran relationship has always been bumpy,” he told JNS.org.

According to the United States Institute of Peace, during Iran’s Shah period, the PLO had close ties with the Iranian opposition and even provided training to dissidents. After the 1979 Iranian Revolution, “PLO forces trained the original Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps on terrorism techniques,” Shideler said. But the PLO would later support Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s.

As a result of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process that resulted in the 1993 Oslo Accords, “ties have been rather horrible between Iran and the PA,” Schanzer said.

“The PA was created as an interim government as part of the Oslo process, which Iran utterly rejected. This is, in part, what drove Iran to embrace Hamas,” he said.

Shideler pointed to a ship called Karine-A as an example of collaboration between the PA and Iran. The ship was captured by the Israel Defense Forces in 2002 in the Red Sea and found to be carrying 50 tons of weaponry supplied by Iran and Hezbollah, and intended to reach PA hands.

But in 2010, then-Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stirred a controversy at a rally in Tehran by saying that year’s re-launched U.S.-brokered peace process between Israel and the Palestinians was going to fail, while criticizing Abbas as an Israeli puppet.

Abbas spokesman Nabil Abu Rudeineh responded by referencing Ahmadinejad’s controversial win in Iran’s 2009 presidential election, saying that “he who does not represent the Iranian people, who forged elections and who suppresses the Iranian people and stole the authority, is not entitled to talk about Palestine, or the president of Palestine.”

Further, Iran’s ties with Hamas have particularly alienated the Islamic Republic from the PA over the years, given the tense Hamas-PA relationship. According to Shideler, the PA even sought to recruit Saudi Arabia, Iran’s chief regional rival nation, to “help in crushing Hamas back in April [2015], effectively offering to bring the Saudi-Iran proxy fight to the [Palestinian] territories. The PA’s bid “seems to have failed, with the Saudi king meeting with Hamas leadership in July,” Shideler told JNS.org.

At the same time, however, the relationship between Hamas and Iran has also been bumpy in recent years. Iran’s ties with Hamas frayed at the beginning of the Syrian civil war in 2011 because Hamas backed—and potentially also trained—Syrian rebels militarily. More recently, Hamas political chief Khaled Mashaal visited Saudi Arabia for a series of high-level meetings. Reports indicate that Iran was outraged by the visit and cancelled a planned visit to Tehran by Mashaal. Additionally, senior Hamas official Moussa Abu Marzouk has said that Hamas’s relationship with Iran is now virtually nonexistent.

Yet Iranian ties with Hamas “are not dead,” Schanzer told JNS.org.

“The Qassam Brigades (Hamas’s armed wing) still maintains close ties [to Iran],” he said. “The disagreement is with the Hamas political types. Iran is likely to exploit how fractured Hamas is, and ultimately find a way back to being a major patron.”

Then there is Islamic Jihad, the other prominent Palestinian terrorist organization in Hamas-ruled Gaza. Iran has “had recent trouble” with Islamic Jihad, which is reportedly almost bankrupt due to Iran pulling its funding for the terror group after the latter announced support for forces opposing the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen, Shideler noted.

But ultimately, Iran has a vested interest in improving its relations with all of the various Palestinian factions in order to “be recognized as the chief leader and architect to resistance to Israel,” Shideler added.

“That may mean they want to work at ending schisms among the Palestinian leadership and reorienting all factions back towards focusing on Israel. This [upcoming visit by Abbas to Iran] may be intended to convince the PA that Iran wants to be the patron of Palestinian resistance at large, and not just of one or two groups,” he said.

While the Israeli Foreign Ministry has not yet released an official reaction to Abbas’s planned Iran visit, ministry spokesman Alon Melchior told JNS.org that the trip is “a bit peculiar.”

“The logic behind this visit is not really clear. Iran is financing their rivals (Hamas and Islamic Jihad) and terrorizing the region,” Melchior said.

But if one thing is certain, it is that the Abbas visit “won’t make the peace process any easier,” added Melchior.

The Iran nuclear deal also factors into Iranian-Palestinian relations because the Islamic Republic wants to use the agreement to solidify its place as a major Middle East power. It might be no coincidence that Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei released anew book titled “Palestine” around the time that the nuclear deal was reached.

Abbas “knows he is driving a wedge between Hamas and Iran” by engaging with the Islamic Republic, but the PA leader’s calculus is “bigger than that,” according to Schanzer.

“He also sees Iran as an emerging regional power after the nuclear deal. He is making sure that he is on the right side of Iran when that happens. Also, Iran is about to come into $100 billion in sanctions relief. The PA is broke. Do the math,” Schanzer said.

The PA might also believe that “better relations with Iran are the only way to keep Hamas at bay, since the gambit with the Saudis seemed to have failed,” added Shideler.

In recent years, beyond its military support for Hamas, Iran has had an increased interest in arming the PA-controlled disputed territories. In a 2014 speech, Khamenei said he believes that “the West Bank should be armed just like Gaza,” according to a translation by the Middle East Media Research Institute.

Shideler believes that while the interests of Iran and the PA might not always align, they do have some common ground.

“Iran is invested in Hamas, and needs Hamas as a proxy to initiate conflicts with Israel… But Iran and the PA can cooperate on diplomatic efforts to publicly embarrass and hamper Israel, such as over the nuclear issue—for example by using the nuclear deal to portray Iran as once again within international consensus on nuclear proliferation and casting Israel as the nuclear rogue,” he said.

Also see:

 

“LONE WOLF” OR JIHADI?

lone-wolf-terrorists1 (1)Center for Security Policy, by Christopher Holton, July 31, 2015:

14 years ago America sent its military heroes overseas to defend us from Jihad.

Today, local police officers and sheriff’s deputies are being tasked with protecting military personnel and installations here in the United States from Jihad.

This is a profound shift in the nature of the war which is, unfortunately, lost on the vast majority of Americans, including our elected and appointed officials.

The global Jihadist insurgency has clearly become embedded in America and it is likely to get worse before it gets better. And the tip of the spear in this phase of the war is not our military. It’s not even the FBI or the bureaucratized counterterrorism apparatus known as the Department of Homeland Security. The tip of the spear is now state and local law enforcement.

Who took down the Chattanooga shooter? It wasn’t the FBI or the Marine Corps. It was the Chattanooga PD.

Who apprehended the Tsarnaev brothers in Boston? It was the Boston police.

Who defended the Draw Mohammad Cartoon event in Garland, Texas by shooting and killing the two heavily armed Jihadis? A traffic cop.

The war has clearly changed and I’m not at all sure that Americans are prepared to deal with it.

The term “lone wolf” has become popular in US counterterrorism vernacular over the past few years in the wake of the repeated acts of Jihad perpetrated inside the United States.

But as counterterrorism expert John Guandolo points out, the term lone wolf does not exist in Islamic doctrine, but individual jihad does:

https://www.understandingthethreat.com/jihad-in-wichita-highlights-the-massive-threat-and-the-ignorance-of-american-leadership/

Much of the media and even our elected officials seem to take comfort when a Jihadi turns out not to have a formal affiliation with a known terrorist organization.

There is no reason for comfort. In fact, the fact that individuals are carrying out acts of jihad is indicative of a “Revolutionary Jihadist Climate” in at least a segment of the Islamic community here in the US. This is a very dangerous situation. It is much more difficult to anticipate and prevent terrorist acts being carried out by individuals on their own initiative, as opposed to attacks carried out by terrorist cells at the direction of leaders of known organizations.

This revolutionary jihadist climate is borne out by the results of the recent poll conducted by The Polling Company for the Center for Security Policy:

  • 29% of the Muslims polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.”
  • 25% believe that violence against Americans here in the United States can be justified as part of the global jihad.
  • 19% of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the United States is justified in order to make shariah the law of the land in this country.

One reason we are seeing the types of attacks we are seeing in the West, such as Chattanooga, Garland, Paris, Ottawa and Sydney is because of specific calls from the Islamic State for such attacks.

Below is an excerpt from a communication released by the Islamic State in September of 2014:

You must strike the soldiers, patrons, and troops of the tawāghīt [those who do not rule by that which Allah has revealed]. Strike their police, security, and intelligence members, as well as their treacherous agents. Destroy their beds. Embitter their lives for them and busy them with themselves. If you can kill a disbelieving American or European – especially the spiteful and filthy French – or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that entered into a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allah, 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. Both of them are disbelievers. Both of them are considered to be waging war (the civilian by belonging to a state waging war against the Muslims). Both of their blood and wealth is legal for you to destroy, for blood does not become illegal or legal to spill by the clothes being worn.

The best thing you can do is to strive to your best and kill any disbeliever, whether he be French, American, or from any of their allies.

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. Do not lack. Do not be contemptible. Let your slogan be, “May I not be saved if the cross worshipper and taghūt (ruler ruling by manmade laws) patron survives.”

If you are unable to do so, then burn his home, car, or business. Or destroy his crops.

If you are unable to do so, then spit in his face. If your self refuses to do so, while your brothers are being bombarded and killed, and while their blood and wealth everywhere is deemed lawful by their enemies, then review your religion.

Unfortunately, individual Muslims are now acting on these types of calls.

It is important to realize, however, that this is not a new phenomenon. Jihadi ideologues have instructed their followers in Jihad as an individual obligation for all Muslims extensively for many years. Here are some examples (after reviewing these quotes, can there be any doubt as to why we are seeing more frequent Jihadi attacks here in the US?):

And ulema [Muslim legal scholars] have throughout history unanimously agreed that the jihad is an individual duty…On that basis, and in compliance with Allah’s order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims: The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies—civilians and military—is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it…We, with Allah’s help, call on every Muslim who believes in Allah and wishes to be rewarded to comply with Allah’s order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it.

                                    Osama Bin Laden

Ayman al-Zawahiri, Amir of the Jihad Group, Egypt

Abu-Yasir Rifa’I Ahmad Taha, Egyptian Islamic Group

Mir Hamzah, Jamiat ul Ulema-e-Pakistan

Fazlur Rahman, Jihad Movement in Bangladesh

23 February 1998

 

Indeed, every person should according to Islam prepare himself/herself for jihad, and every person should eagerly and patiently wait for the day when Allah will call them to show their willingness to sacrifice their lives. We should ask ourselves, is there a quicker way to heaven? Only Islam can save mankind from itself. And jihad on the individual and international scale will be a necessary part of this process of change.

Dr. A.M.A. Fahmy

International Islamic Forum

1949

Jihad is an obligation from Allah on every Muslim and cannot be ignored or evaded.

Hasan al-Banna

Founder of the Muslim Brotherhood

1949

 

The establishment of an Islamic State is obligatory. If that state cannot be established without war, then that becomes an obligation also. So it is obligatory for every Muslim to seriously strive for the return of the caliphate.

Jihad becomes an individual duty in three situations:

  1. First, when two armies meet.
  2. Second, when the infidels descend upon a country.
  3. Third, when the Imam calls upon people to fight.

Know that when jihad is an individual duty, there is no requirement to ask permission of parents to wage jihad.

The Neglected Obligation

Muhammad Al-Salam Faraj

Leader of Jamaat al-Jihad, Egypt

1981

 

The Book commands Muslims to wage their war with the spirit of a religious duty and obligation. This Quranic injunction adds new facets and depths to the concept of a total war. It makes a Muslim citizen answerable both to the state and to Allah in the fulfillment of this divine obligation.

The Quranic Concept of War

Brigadier General S.K. Malik, Pakistani Army

1979

                                   

There is agreement among scholars that when the enemy enters an Islamic land or a land that was once part of the Islamic lands, it is obligatory on the inhabitants of that place to go forth to face the enemy. But if they sit back, or are incapable, lazy, or insufficient in number, the individual obligation spreads to those around them. Then if they also fall short, it goes to those around them, and so on and so on, until the individually obligatory nature of jihad encompasses the whole world. The individually obligatory nature of jihad remains in effect until the lands are purified from the pollution of the disbelievers.

The obligation of jihad today remains an individual obligation on all until the liberation of the last piece of land that was in the hands of Muslims but has been occupied by the disbelievers.

Join the Caravan

Abdullah Yusuf Azzam

“Father of Global Jihad”

Founding member of Al Qaeda

1987

 

Individual jihad has recurred throughout Islamic history. In the time of the Crusades…groups of mujahideen responded to the crisis. Many isolated expeditions and groups carried out the obligation of jihad.

Individual jihad using the method of urban or rural guerilla warfare is the foundation for sapping the enemy and bringing him to a state of collapse and withdrawal. It will pave the way for the desired strategic goal.

What mandates these methods as a strategic opinion is the imbalance of forces between the resistance and the large invading alliance of unbelievers, apostates and hypocrites.

We fight them for the sake of incidents to cause political pressure and psychological collapse, so that they leave our lands. Carrying out a small operation every month against the enemy will have more of an impact on him than a big operation every year or two.

Toward a New Strategy in Resisting the Occupier

Muhammad Khalil al-Hakaymah

Al Qaeda Chief of External Operations

Killed by US air strike in Pakistan in 2008

 

Successful jihad will only happen within an ummah [Islamic nation or community] in which the fighting creed is firmly established and clarified. This must happen in order to attain the “Revolutionary Jihadist Climate” that will spontaneously give rise to instruments of resistance.

Violent jihad is as an individual duty obligatory upon every Muslim. All the ulema have said this…”

The Call to Global Islamic Resistance

Abu Musab al-Suri

Al Qaeda propagandist

Captured in Pakistan 2005

Know Your Enemy: A Primer on Islamic Jihad

how-to-fight-isisNational Review, by Steve King, July 25, 2015:

Islamic jihad has declared war on the United States and all of Western civilization. ISIS has announced its intention to dominate the world and fly its black flag from the White House in continuation of a 1,400-year-old war against us “infidels.”

In the first 100 years after the death of Mohammed (a.d. 632)`, Islamic jihad conquered most of the known world except Western Europe. Christian forces blocked the first century of Islamic conquest at the very bloody Battle of Tours on October 10, 732. Islamic jihad continued to threaten the very existence of Christianity throughout the next millennium. October 7, 1571, marked the destruction of Islamic jihad’s massive fleet by the Holy League fleet in the Aegean Sea.

More than a century later, Islamic jihad, having conquered the Middle East and most of Eastern Europe, had surrounded and besieged the crown jewel of Western Christendom, Vienna. If Vienna fell to Islam, all of Western Europe would be likely to follow. After a two-month siege of Vienna, relief forces from Poland and Germany arrived.

The battle for relief of Vienna began on September 11, 1683, and ended with the rout of the Islamic forces the following day. On September 11, 1697, Prince Eugene caught and routed a large Islamic army and delivered a decisive blow at the Battle of Zenta.

In keeping with the September 11 theme, the British established a mandate for Palestine on September 11, 1922, and at the 1972 Olympic Games in Munich, eleven Israeli athletes were killed on September 11. Millions of Islamists remember the humiliations of September and seek to humiliate the “Great Satan,” the United States. Thus the attacks on the World Trade Towers and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, and on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi on September 11, 2012.

Islamic jihad can be defeated, and it can be done in less time than it took to defeat the USSR in the Cold War. Our strategy, however, must be tailored to the times and circumstances.

Islamic jihad is our enemy. It has declared war on us and will kill us anywhere it can. No American is safe anywhere in the world until this suicidal ideology is defeated. It is not impossible to defeat an ideology. Within a span of half a century, Western civilization has defeated at least four ideologies. Nazism, Italian Fascism, and Japanese imperialism all went down literally in flames in the face of a superior culture. Next in line was the far more stubborn Russian Communism, which struggled through 45 years of cold war before succumbing to liberty and free enterprise. Islamic jihad can be defeated, and it can be done in less time than it took to defeat the USSR in the Cold War. Our strategy, however, must be tailored to the times and circumstances.

CYBER WARFARE: Islamists are not innovative but do have a history of borrowing technology and deploying it against their enemies. ISIS, for example, is using the Internet to inspire, recruit, and direct terrorists around the world. We have the capabilities to scramble their communications and cause them to doubt the sources of instructions. It’s time to launch cyber warfare against them both offensively and defensively and to do so worldwide. They will stop using the Internet only when they no longer trust the communications network. With a smart cyber-warfare system, we can watch them close down their most important recruiting tool.

FINANCIAL WARFARE: If all its resources could be shut off, ISIS would atrophy. The U.S. has a powerful global financial reach, giving us the capability of cutting off almost all funds flowing to ISIS. We need to shut off the flow of exported oil from the ISIS regions and shut off payments going to them. Banks that deal in transactions with Islamic jihad or with their suppliers can be singled out to be the target of special disincentives that raise the transaction costs well above the financial benefit of doing business with jihadists.

EDUCATION: The next and most difficult task is to shut down the elements of their educational system that teach Islamic jihad. Millions of young boys are indoctrinated daily with the ideology of Islamic jihad. The madrassas are a breeding ground for violent jihad and serve to identify and recruit the most zealous. Countering this indoctrination will require a worldwide effort and may well be endless, but it is necessary to make the attempt, because reduction in the teaching of intergenerational hatred is the foundation for a peaceful future.

HUMINT: Human intelligence remains limited in the Islamic world. The Western world had not engaged fully with the Middle East to the extent that our intelligence sources were ready-made or fully developed. Our humint began to change after September 11, 2001, as Americans saw the need to expand our network. We are still making progress, but this administration has demonstrated an unwillingness to gather strategic information. If we are to have success in defeating Islamic jihad, our intelligence community must expand significantly. It is essential to the principle of nosce hostem(know your enemy), which will require time, resources, commitment, and, most of all, leadership.

STRATEGIC ALLIANCES: Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia all have demonstrated a willingness to fight Islamic jihad. Our relationships with these countries have been badly damaged. The U.S. foreign-policy establishment clumsily found a way to be on the wrong side of each Arab Spring event, demonstrating an astonishingly dogmatic fidelity to the Muslim Brotherhood. Our credibility in the region has been badly damaged. Nonetheless, these countries are poised to take on a good share of the fight. First, our relationship with each will need to be restored. Then a strategy will need to be developed with them at the table.

EGYPT: Egypt is key to ultimate global success against Islamic jihad. Al-Azhar University in Cairo is the world’s premier center of Islamic theology. It is where Obama gave his speech to the Muslim world in 2009, and where Egyptian president al-Sisi delivered his own address to the Muslim world. Sisi made clear his opposition to the Muslim Brotherhood, to the imposition of sharia law, and to Islamic jihad. Sisi is positioned to become the modern-day Ataturk, someone who will bridge the gap between East and West. The United States needs to embrace Sisi and coordinate a strategy of diplomacy coupled with the right balance of kinetic activity.

KURDISTAN: The Kurds are loyal allies. At our encouragement, they rose up against Saddam Hussein after Desert Storm. They are likely the largest ethnic group in the world without a country. Millions of Kurds live in Iraq, Syria, Turkey, and Iran. They have for years demonstrated their willingness to defend themselves. We should directly arm the Kurds with all the weapons and supplies they can use and send our special forces to them on the ground. The Kurds will not go into Baghdad or Damascus because they have no civilian population base there to support them. They will push ISIS out of Iraq, with the help of many Sunni Iraqis, and they will provide one jaw of the vise that will crush ISIS. An independent Kurdistan is likely to be the result. A perpetual ally replacing the ISIS caliphate would be strategically priceless.

SYRIA: Assad must go. Syria’s terror-fomenting alliance with Iran will breed ever more violence in the Mideast until a pro-Western government replaces the regime. However, Assad has a certain utility until ISIS is destroyed in Syria. He becomes the other jaw of the vise that, with the Kurds as the other, will crush ISIS. When that day comes, the U.S. may have a commander-in-chief who thinks strategically.

We are dealing with the complexities of a long and difficult history of conflict. Religious friction has been at the heart of conflicts in this region since the time of Mohammed. The conflict between Shia and Sunni is complex enough without the overlay of the history of conflict with Christianity.

Russian-sponsored regimes must be defeated. The wealth of and need for oil fuels the fight. Anti-Semitism, with notable exceptions, dominates the region of the Middle East. We are in an increasingly global conflict as jihadists use Western technology and exploit cultural vulnerabilities to invade through peaceful migration, recruit through the Internet, indoctrinate through their mosques and madrassas, and radicalize and direct Islamic jihad.

We can defeat this ideology because we are a superior civilization. We have the ability to reason, develop new technology, grow our economy, and control the events described above. Islamic jihad has no real capacity to compete. History is on our side. Culture is on our side. Economics are on our side. Military capability is on our side. We lack only a strategy and the will.

— Steve King, of Iowa’s fourth congressional district, is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives.

The War Keeps Coming Home

 

Four Marines — Thomas Sullivan, Skip Wells, David Wyatt, and Carson Holmquist— were identified as of Friday morning. A Navy sailor, Randall Smith, who was hurt in the shooting, died from his injuries on Saturday. http://www.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeednews/here-are-the-victims-of-the-chattanooga-shooting#.mpwENge38

Four Marines — Thomas Sullivan, Skip Wells, David Wyatt, and Carson Holmquist— were identified as of Friday morning. A Navy sailor, Randall Smith, who was hurt in the shooting, died from his injuries on Saturday.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeednews/here-are-the-victims-of-the-chattanooga-shooting#.mpwENge38

By Justin O. Smith:

“The war keeps coming home because we have filled our home with the enemy. It’s time to clean house.” __ Daniel Greenfield

In the rolling hills of east Tennessee, America snapped awake on July 16th around 10:40 am, when the peaceful morning silence was shattered, and Mohammed Youssef Abdulazeez, a Muslim terrorist, opened fire on the Armed Forces Recruitment Center (Old Lee Highway) in Chattanooga, TN, with an AK-47 and several other weapons. Within minutes he traversed the seven miles to the Navy Operational Support Center, and he continued his murderous rampage, that left four brave Marines dead and America angry and grieving.

The Marines murdered that Thursday morning were Gunnery Sergeant Thomas Sullivan, recipient of two Purple Haerts, Lance Cpl Skip Wells, Sgt Carlson Holmquist and Staff Sgt David Wyatt, from Mike Battery, 3rd Battalion, 12th Marines. Several of these men had previously survived multiple tours of duty in both Afghanistan and Iraq and the battles of Fallujah and Abu Ghraib; Navy Petty Officer Randall Smith died early Saturday, leaving behind a wife and three young daughters.

They all had families. They were fathers, husbands and sons, and they were friends.

Carolyn Taylor and Marilyn Hutcheson, both employees of Bingswater Glass across the street from the Navy building on Amnicola Highway, described hearing the gunfire. Taylor said she heard “at least 100” gunshots, while Hutcheson said “it was rapid fire, like pow pow pow pow.” Both women noted the rapid response of the police and SWAT and federal authorities, with guns drawn, and medical emergency teams: How different things might have ended if only those Marines had been armed too.

Ray Mabus, Secretary of Navy, called the shootings “both devastating and senseless.” He added, “While we expect our sailors and Marines to go into harm’s way, and they do so without hesitation, an attack at home, in our community, is insidious and unfathomable,”

Ed Reinhold, FBI Special Agent in Charge, said, “We’re going to do an intense look at him … anybody who is associated with him to determine the cause or reason why he conducted this attack.”

More than an “act of domestic terrorism”, as asserted by U.S. Attorney Bill Killian, a known Muslim appeaser, it’s Islam stupid, for those who still need things spelled out for them. By its very nature, Islam is a radical and extreme ideology _ twisted, perverted, evil and violent _ and Abdulazeez was simply a devout adherent. He was not “radicalized.” He was practicing Islam just as it has been practiced from the days of the Prophet Mohammed, despite the numerous fallacies that suggest Islam is “a religion of peace.”

A founding member of the Islamic Center of Chattanooga, Dr Said Ayhar Sheikh asserts that Abdulazeez only heard messages of peace there. If this was the case, why didn’t he immediately reject the violent jihadists’ so-called “perversion” of Islam?

Abdulazeez was a Kuwaiti born in Jordan with family ties in Nablus in the West Bank, who became a naturalized U.S. citizen; and, while he was not on any terror watch list, his father had been investigated several years ago for giving financial support to Hamas, a terrorist organization. Mohammed Abdulazeez should have been on a watch list however, in light of his trip to Jordan in 2014, when he could have contacted jihadists of the Islamic State (ISIS), who have regularly called for “lone wolf” attacks in the U.S. on military and police, especially during the month of Ramadan (July).

Three days before the attack, SITE Intelligence Group, a terror watchdog, found Abdulazeez had written online that “life is short and bitter” and Muslims should not miss an opportunity to “submit to Allah.” This has now been verified by Fox News.

The Daily Beast focused on Abdulazeez’s post, entitled ‘A Prison for Dunya’ that suggested he was seeking martyrdom, reading in part: “We talk about the Sahaba (disciples) and their lbada (worship) … But did you ever notice that … towards the end of the lives of the Sahaba, almost every one of the Sahaba was a political leader or an army general? Every one of them fought Jihad for the sake of Allah.”

After the attack, ISIS posted this message to Americans: “O American dogs, soon you will see … a fierce conflict … for your destruction, my sword has been sharpened … We have marched by night, to cut and behead … .”

On July 8th, FBI Director James Comey warned a Senate panel about the threat of a terror attack in America, stating, “This is not your grandfather’s Al Qaeda.” He noted that he could not stop ISIS “forever.”

“Lone Wolf”? __ There are hundreds of thousands of “lone wolf” Muslims in America, just like Abdulazeez. Anwar al-Awlawki and Nidal Hassan, who go to school here, sometimes first grade through graduate school, and have resumes that read like ordinary resumes similar to the one Abdulazeez sent to AAON requesting work as an engineer. They take advantage of all the liberty and benefits of our society, while their inner soul is filled with hatred for our society that gives them so much. And they finally reveal themselves through heinous terror, such as Abdulazeez committed; the record is replete with such cases from the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 to the present.

Americans cannot continue allowing more Muslims into the U.S., since it will only ensure the same terroristic turmoil we witness daily in the Middle East and parts of Europe. As our Muslim population grows, we will bear witness to an ever increasing number of assorted terrorist attacks, exponentially broader in scope and size. Let’s hope that Iran doesn’t send along a nuke with an Islamic State or Hamas “immigrant.”

Why are we inviting the world’s terrorists into America, as they praise this recent act of terror?

Americans are allowing the nation to be invaded by Muslims, who do not wish to assimilate  and come from an Islamic culture where terrorism has become a way of life. They come here to change our fundamental culture and our values. They want to conquer and colonize us; that’s not immigration, and that’s precisely why we must deport all non-citizen Muslims and any Muslim with terrorist ties.

Let us do all we can to ensure that we do not lose more Americans to more despicable acts of terrorism. We must cast aside political correctness, profile the Muslim community here and abroad, and adopt a pro-American immigration policy. And wherever we find the terrorists, kill the hell out of them, until they understand that Allah isn’t with them.

How can we make it politically OK to talk about limiting Muslim immigration?

American Thinker, by Newsmachete, July 18, 2015:

Every so often, there is a massacre.  Sometimes the monsters who commit them have names like Dylann Roof, but more often than not they have names like Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez or Nidal Malik Hasan.  Given the fact that the vast majority of people in America are Christian, and only a small minority are Muslim, the preponderance of Muslim mass killers only further highlights the disproportionate number of killers who come from that community.

Let’s be very direct: a substantial minority of Muslims in the world support terrorism and genocide.  That has to be true for organizations like ISIS, the Taliban, Boko Haram, al-Qaeda, al-Shabaab, and so on to exist.  These are large organizations, and they cannot exist without members and supporters, most (but not all) of them from countries in the Middle East.

Does it make sense, then, that we allow immigration of Muslims into the U.S.?  Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez was a Muslim Palestinian immigrant from Kuwait.  Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who bombed the Boston Marathon, was a Muslim immigrant from Kyrgyzstan.

They both killed many people.  And they are not the only ones.  Most Muslims we let into the United States will not become mass murderers.  But the problem is that a substantial minority of them sympathize with mass murderers, and some of those will go on to actually become mass murderers.  And the biggest point to make is that there is often no way for authorities to distinguish between a “conservative religious Muslim” and a “conservative religious Muslim who will commit mass murder.”

Given that, does it not make sense that we should limit immigration of Muslims into America?  If this were World War II, would we admit immigrants from Germany?  If this were the 1950s, would we admit immigrants from Korea, or from North Vietnam in the 1960s?  Of course not.  Because we were at war with them.

Let’s be frank: we are currently at war with a extremely violent and radical minority of the Muslim population of the world.  When they are off the battlefield, they are often impossible to identify.  Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez was not on anyone’s radar.  He seemed like a normal middle-class boy (well, normal except for the marijuana and the use of a “white powdery substance” under his nose that he told the police was caffeine powder).

Given that, why can’t we speak frankly and say, “We don’t know who these killers are in advance.  But quite frequently they are foreign-born Muslims, some of whom we are at war with, or more to the point feel that they are at war with us. Why shouldn’t we have a discussion about limiting their entry into the United States?”

You know, if we had white immigrants from South Africa, and a minority of those were mass-murdering blacks in America, you can bet that immigration would be stopped immediately.  Why should this be any different?

If people can be made to understand that open borders and the importation of Muslim refugees has a part in mass murders, perhaps minds can be changed.  Politicians call dismissively for “better screening,” but how can you really look into the background of thousands of people from a third-world country?  Unless they are already on a terrorist watch list, what the State Department does is basically take them at their word.

If people could be made to realize that this “screening” is a sham, perhaps minds could be changed.

Above all, we have to fight the racism or “Islamophobia” tag.  A phobia, after all, is a fear not based in reality.  But this fear is based on a very real threat.  We take our first steps when each of us speaks out.  The left silences us by making us afraid to talk.  But if enough of us start talking about it, it will create a space that will be acceptable.  That’s what Mark Levin does, making topics acceptable so other hosts can talk about them.  And on a smaller scale, you can do it, too, in your own community with your friends and neighbors.  (Unless you live in New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, or D.C.)

Also see:

TERROR IMMIGRATION TO AMERICA MUST STOP

plpl_2

Frontpage, by Daniel Greenfield, July 16, 2015:

Tennessee is to Muslim refugees as New York is to Muslim hijacked planes. Chattanooga, the site of the latest Muslim terror attack against America, is a “preferred community” for resettlement along with Knoxville and Nashville.

Nashville was designated a “Gateway City” for Iraqis. Hundreds of Somali Muslims were dumped in Shelbyville and the Murfreesboro Mega-Mosque became national news because of its terror ties.

Over the last decade, middle Tennessee’s Muslim population tripled.  The rise of Islam in Tennessee as Muslims from terror zones like Iraq and Somalia flooded its towns and cities brought hate and violence.

In Memphis, Imam Yasir Qadhi was caught on tape calling Jews and Christians filthy and declaring that Muslims can take their lives and property.  Last year the FBI warned of an ISIS threat in Memphis.

This year it was Chattanooga’s turn.

Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez, the son of a Palestinian man and a Kuwaiti woman murderliving in the United States, killed four marines. One of his targets, a recruiting center, was a gun-free zone. Those inside had no way to defend themselves. Their overnment had welcomed in the enemy and left them unarmed and helpless against his Jihad.

Obama refused to use the word “Terrorism”. Hillary Clinton claimed that the attack was “senseless violence.” But there was nothing senseless about it. It was an act of war, one of many, in a conflict that stretches back to the founding of the United States of America.

The Marines first saw action abroad against the Barbary states who informed Thomas Jefferson and John Adams that they were entitled to attack American ships and enslave American sailors because, “it was written in the Koran, that all Nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon whoever they could find and to make Slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

This is the “sense” behind Hillary’s senseless violence.

The last of the Barbary Wars ended on a July, two hundred years ago, with an American victory. Two hundred years later, Marines are murdered by the barbarians we invited into our own country.

As the government began filling it with immigrants from terror zones, Tennessee, the Volunteer State, fought back because it hadn’t volunteered for this.  In 2008, it pulled out of the Federal refugee resettlement program. But the resettlement continued. Tennessee taxpayers suffer and bullets fly.

Three days before the latest terror attack, Muslims in Chattanooga protested in support of Islamberg, a New York outpost set up by Mubarak Ali Gilani, who has said, “We are fighting to destroy the enemy. We are dealing with evil at its roots and its roots are America.”

That is what we are dealing with. Three days before a Muslim terrorist attack, supporters of Muslim terrorism were playing the victim. Their victimhood theater was aided and abetted by the media.

Every time the citizens of Tennessee attempted to stand up to terror immigration and the Murfreesboro Mega-Mosque , they were shouted down, smeared and lied about by the media. A day from now, the media will have shifted the focus of the story from the murdered Marines to local Muslims whining about the backlash. The perpetrators become the victims and the victims become the perpetrators.

It is all but certain that we will hear less about the stories of the heroes who died in Chattanooga  than we did about the Muslims killed in a parking dispute in Chapel Hill. Because Muslim lives matter and Marine lives don’t.

For that matter we will probably hear less about them than we did about the tragic tale of Tahera Ahmad’s opened Diet Coke because Muslim sodas also matter more than dead Marines.

Tennessee has not been allowed to stop the dumping of Muslim settlers in its borders because Muslim immigration matters more than the families of Tennessee. Instead if we do nothing Chattanooga will go on being a “preferred community” for the transformation of the country. More Americans will die and after every terror attack, the media will dig up another Imam complaining how afraid he is of a backlash.

If we really want to stop terrorism, the place to start is at the airport.  Not with TSA groping and scanners, but by ending the constant flood of terror populations into the country. The attacks of September 11 would never have happened if the United States hadn’t gotten into the habit of allowing in Saudis who couldn’t even be bothered to produce plausible paperwork. The World Trade Center bombing would not have happened if we hadn’t gotten into the habit of setting illegal immigrants loose.

The United States of America faces a simple choice. We can fill our towns and cities with populations from terror zones and then act surprised when they kill us, or we can shut the doors on them.

Inviting in the world’s terrorists to live here is not an act of kindness. Both Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood killer, and Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez, the Chattanooga terrorist, were born to Palestinian Arabs. Their background was in a culture where terrorism is so widely accepted that it has become a way of life. The Americans they murdered would be alive today if we had a pro-American immigration policy.

It’s not just the people who send checks to terrorist groups who should be called terrorist supporters. Those who support the migration of terrorists into this country are the biggest terrorist supporters because without them most of the attacks we have experienced would not even be possible.

No war can be won as long as the enemy continues to gain fresh recruits. Every immigrant from a terror zone to this country is a potential terrorist making the War on Terror completely unwinnable.

We can end the bombings and the shootings. We can get rid of the TSA and the NSA. All we need is an immigration policy that puts the safety and security of Americans first.

The terrorist attack in Chattanooga will be swiftly swiped from the media’s digital pages with another story about celebrity misbehavior or a manufactured controversy. But it can become a wake-up call. The dumping of refugees in Tennessee must end. And it’s time for Chattanooga to stop being a preferred community for importing the terror zones of the world to Tennessee.

Every terrorist attack has the potential to wake the sleeping giant against the terrorists and those who have infiltrated them into this country in the name of human rights, humanitarianism and diversity.

The war keeps coming home because we have filled our home with the enemy. It’s time we clean house.

Also see:

Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know

chattanooga-shooter

Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez, left, opened fire at two military facilities in Chattanooga, Tennessee, killing four Marines and wounding three others before he was killed. At right is the recruiting center’s front door, which was pierced by bullets. (Facebook)

Heavy, by Tom Cleary, July 16, 2015:

Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez has been identified by CBS News as the gunman who fatally shot four Marines and wounded a police officer on Thursday in shootings at two military recruiting and training centers in Chattanooga, Tennessee.

Abdulazeez, 24, is also dead.

At least two others were injured, including one in critical condition. The officer is in stable condition. The shootings happened at separate military reserve centers on Lee Highway and Amnicola Highway.

Here’s what we know so far:

1. He Was a Naturalized U.S. Citizen Originally From Kuwait

mohammedabmug1

Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez’s mug shot from an April 2015 arrest for driving under the influence. (Hamilton County Jail via Chattanoogan.com)

NBC News reports that Abdulazeez is a naturalized U.S. citizen originally from Kuwait.

Authorities said the gunman lived in the Chattanooga area recently, but CBS News reports that he was from Phoenix, Arizona. The Associated Press says he lived in Hixson, Tennessee, which is a few miles from Chattanooga.

He was arrested in April for driving under the influence in Hamilton County, Tennessee,according to the Chattanoogan.com.

Police have not yet released a motive for why the gunman targeted the two military facilities and military personnel.

Authorities said he did not work at the military centers. The case is being investigated as possible “domestic terrorism” and the FBI is leading the probe.

CBS News earlier incorrectly reported he was a 41-year-old from Arizona.

2. An ISIS-Affiliated Account Tweeted #Chattanooga Just Before the Shooting Occurred Along With a Warning to Americans

An ISIS-related account tweeted “O American dogs soon YOU will see the wonders,” and used #Chattanooga, at 10:34 a.m., just about the same time police say the shooting began, according to JihadWatch.org.

The tweet is similar to one sent out moments before two ISIS-inspired gunmen opened fire outside the “Draw Muhammad” event in Garland, Texas, in May.

3. He Graduated From the University of Tennessee-Chattanooga in 2012

university-of-tennessee

Abdulazeez graduated from the University of Tennessee-Chattanooga in 2012, according to posts on his mother’s Facebook page and a resume posted on Indeed.com.

CKEUdDdUAAAorqnYearbook photo: Youssuf Abdulazeez wrote between two pictures of himself: ‘My name causes national security alerts. What does yours do?’

Read more

Also see:

JIHADISTS DISGUISED AS REFUGEES

tta_1Frontpage, by Emerson Vermaat, July 10, 2015:

Muslim extremists and jihadists pretend to be asylum seekers and apply for asylum in Europe, according to reports from intelligence and security services since the mid-1990s. The then Dutch Domestic Security Service BVD (now the AIVD) reported in May 1998 that radical Muslims from Tunisian, Egyptian and Algerian terrorist organizations had applied for asylum in the Netherlands. “These asylum seekers can count on the support of local sympathizers.” And in April 2001 the BVD/AIVD warned of “Islamic war veterans” posing as people who “are looking for asylum or illegal migrants who seek refuge in Western countries who will continue the fight or support it.”

In March 1996 a conference about fighting terrorism took place in the Egyptian Sea resort of Sharm al-Sheikh. The Egyptian government was worried about radical Muslims who had been granted asylum in England. Some of them were involved in the preparation of terror attacks. The then British Prime Minister John Major declared shortly after the conference that he would make the rules for granting asylum stricter, but nothing was done.

Omar Bakri Mohammed was an anti-Semitic hate cleric from Syria who successfully applied for asylum in Britain in 1986. He was the founder of al-Muhajiroun, a terrorist organization which was belatedly banned by the British government in 2005. Bakri Mohammed openly praised the 9/11 attacks on the United States. When I met him in North London in 2002, he expressed his deep admiration for al-Qaeda leader “Sheikh” Osama bin Laden.

In the British TV documentary “Sudan – Are They Training Terrorists?” (April, 15 1996), Hassan al-Turabi, a friend of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, was quoted as saying that bin Laden “doesn’t mind going to England.” But the British would never grant him asylum as they were also opposed to his very presence in Sudan. Bin Laden then left Sudan and settled in Afghanistan in May 1996 where his militant Taliban friends were now in control of most this war-torn country.

A number of Syrian immigrants in Spain played a very important role in al-Qaeda. Mustafa Setmarian Nasar was a personal friend of Osama bin Laden and an architect of global jihad. He lived in London between 1994 and 1997. He was in Afghanistan when the Americans occupied that country after the 9/11 attacks. Another Syrian immigrant in Spain was Imad Eddin Barakat Yarkas. He was the leader of al-Qaeda in Spain and was involved in the preparations of the 9/11 attacks.

Not so few former Somali asylum seekers in Europe and the United States joined the ruthless Somali terrorist group al-Shabaab which pledged allegiance to al-Qaeda in 2012. Ismail Musa Ahmed Guled and Lula Ahmed Dahir, for example, committed suicide attacks in Mogadishu in February 2015. They were in possession of Dutch passports.

The Amsterdam based newspaper De Telegraaf reported on May 28, 2015, how Bashir Abu Muaadh arrived in the Netherlands in the early 199Os. This Somali was still a child at the time. Now he is an IS propagandist in Raqqa, the so-called capital of Islamic State. He appears in an IS propaganda video,  together with four other Somali IS-terrorists. Bashir praises the IS-beheading of 21 Coptic Christians on a beach in Libya on February 15, 2015. He also wants al-Shabaab jihadists to join ISIS or IS.

In the middle of February 2015 one of the IS executioners announced from Libya that: “We will conquer Rome, by Allah’s permission.” He pointed in the direction of the Mediterranean Sea with his knife. On more than one occasion did IS threaten to send jihadist fighters disguised as asylum seekers to Europe. Millions of displaced Africans and Muslims want to flee to Europe. In the first six months of 2015 ships have rescued more than 200,000 people who tried to cross the Mediterranean Sea.

The Dutch National Coordinator for Security and Counterterrorism (NCTB) reported on June 29, 2015, that there are clear indications that jihadists tried to recruit asylum seekers who are currently staying in the Netherlands. This abuse of the immigration system must be tackled. “The intelligence and security services are receiving a growing number of indications from the immigration authorities of matters that could affect national security,” the Dutch  Minister of Security and Justice reported to the parliament in The Hague on June 29, 2015. “This is the result of both awareness-raising campaigns and an increase in the number of asylum seekers entering the Netherlands, particularly from Syria.”

Several criminal investigations into efforts to recruit asylum seekers for the jihad began in Holland in the past months.

Fox News reported on May 20, 2015, that a Moroccan man arrested in the Tunisia museum attack “came to Italy on a migrant boat.” Abdelmajid Touil was arrested in Italy after having arrived a month earlier with other migrants on  smuggler’s boat.” “Touil was arrested on a Tunisian arrest warrant at the home of his mother and two brothers in Gaggiano, near Milan, anti-terrorism investigator Brono Megale told reporters.” “He was wanted internationally for co-participating in, planning and executing the March 18 attack on the Brando Museum in Tunis,” Megale said. Twenty-two people were killed,  four of them Italian.”

The Italian police arrested 15 Muslims on suspicion of having thrown 12 Christians overboard, CNNreported on April 19, 2015. Acccording to the Italian police, these Christians were murdered by Muslims from the Ivory Coast, Mali and Senegal before their boat was intercepted by an Italian navy vessel.

There are also many cases of Muslim asylum seekers who harrass women and Christians in asylum centers. Muslim converts to Christianity receive frequent death threats.  Mostafa Talale, an Iranian convert to Christianity, was murdered in the Netherlands in June 2013, either by fellow asylum seekers or by the Iranian security and intelligence service.

Emerson Vermaat is an investigative reporter in the Netherlands specialized in crime and terrorism.

Also see:

Who is Responsible for the Atrocities in the Muslim World?

Nepalese migrant workerGatestone Institute, by Uzay Bulut, June 27, 2015:

  • If colonialism were the main problem, Muslims, too, still are, colonizers — and not particularly “humanitarian” ones, at that.
  • Islamic jihad and Islamic violence; the sanctioning of sex slavery; dehumanization of women; hatred and persecution of non-Muslims have been commonplace in the Islamic world ever since the inception of the religion. Deny everything and blame “the infidel.”
  • But is it America that tells these men to treat their wives or sisters as less than fully human? If we want to criticize the West for what is going on in the Muslim world, we should criticize it for not doing more to stop these atrocities.
  • Trying to whitewash the damage that the Islamic ideology has done to the Muslim world, while putting the blame of Islamic atrocities on the West, will never help Muslims face their own failures and come up with progressive ways to resolve them.

Every time the ISIS, Boko Haram, Iran, or any terrorist group in the Muslim world is discussed, many people tend to hold the West responsible for the devastation and murders they commit. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Blaming the failures in the Muslim world on Western nations is simply bigotry and an attempt to shift the blame and to prevent us from understanding the real root cause of the problem.

When these Islamic terrorist groups abduct women to sell them as sex-slaves or “wives;” conduct mass crucifixions and forced conversions; behead innocent people en masse; try to extinguish religious minorities and demolish irreplaceable archeological sites, the idea that this is the fault of the West is ludicrous, offensive and wrong.

Western states, like many other states, try to protect the security of their citizens. What they essentially need, therefore, are peaceful states as partners with which they can have economic, commercial and diplomatic relations. They do not need genocidal terrorist groups that destroy life, peace and stability in huge swaths across the Muslim world.

Western states also have democratic and humanitarian values, which Islamic states do not. The religious and historical experiences of the Western world and the Islamic world are so enormously different that they ended up having completely different cultures and values.

The West, established on Jewish, Christian and secular values, has created a far more humanitarian, free and democratic culture. Sadly, much of the Muslim world, under Islamic sharia law, has created a misogynistic, violent and totalitarian culture.

This does not mean that the West has been perfect and sinless. The West still commits some appalling crimes: Europe is guilty of paving the way for the slaughter of six million Jews in the Holocaust, and for still not protecting its Jewish communities. Even today, many European states contort logic to recognize Hamas, which openly states that it aims to commit genocide against Jewish people.

The West, however, accepts responsibility for the failures in its own territories: for instance, not being able to protect European women from Muslim rapists. These men have moved to Europe to benefit from the opportunities and privileges there, but instead of showing gratitude to European people and government, they have raped the women there, and tried to impose Islamic sharia law.

If we want to criticize the West for what is going on in the Muslim world, we should criticize it for not doing more to stop these atrocities.

The West, and particularly the U.S., should use all of its power to stop them — especially the genocides committed against Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims in the Muslim world.

We should also criticize the West — and others, such as the United Nations and its distorted Gaza War report — for supporting those who proudly commit terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians, and we should criticize the West for not siding with the state of Israel in the face of genocidal Jew-hatred.

We should criticize the West for letting Islamic anti-Semitism grow in Europe, making lives unbearable for Jews day by day.

We should criticize the West for having accepted without a murmur the Turkish occupation of Northern Cyprus for more than 40 years.

We should also criticize the West for leaving the fate of Kurds, a persecuted and stateless people, to the tender mercies of Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria — and now the Islamic State (ISIS). On June 25, ISIS carried out yet another deadly attack, killing and wounding dozens of people in the Kurdish border town of Kobani, in Syrian Kurdistan.

And we should criticize especially the current U.S. government for not being willing to take serious action to stop ISIS, Boko Haram and other extremist Islamic groups.[1]

The list could go on and on. Moreover, it would not be realistic to claim that these groups or regimes all misunderstand the teachings of their religion in exactly the same way.

It would also not be realistic to claim that the West has created all these hundreds of Islamic terror groups across the Muslim world.

The question, then, is: Who or what does create all these terrorist groups and regimes?

In almost all parts of the Muslim world, systematic discrimination, and even murder, are rampant — especially of women and non-Muslims. Extremist Islamic organizations, however, are not the only offenders. Many Muslim civilians who have no ties with any Islamist group also commit these offenses daily. Jihad (war in the service of Islam) and the subjugation of non-Muslims are deeply rooted in the scriptures and history of Islam.

Ever since the seventh century, Muslim armies have invaded and captured Jewish, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist and Zoroastrian lands; for more than 1400 years since, they have continued their jihad, or Islamic raids, against other religions.

Many people seem to be justifiably shocked by the barbarism of ISIS, but Islamic jihad does not belong just to ISIS. Violent jihad is a centuries-long tradition of Islamic ideology. ISIS is just one jihadist army of Islam. There are many.

All of this is an Islamic issue. The free West has absolutely nothing to do with the creation and preservation of this un-free culture.

Read more 

Uzay Bulut, born and raised a Muslim, is a Turkish journalist based in Ankara.

Pamela Geller getting the message out: “People need to learn about the Jihadic doctrine, not shut people up that are talking about it”

Screen-Shot-2015-06-04-at-9.12.22-AMVIDEO Round 2: Pamela Geller vs. Chris Cuomo:

FULL VIDEO: Pamela Geller on Jake Tapper’s The Lead Discussing the Beheading Plot:

VIDEO: Pamela Geller on Greta Van Susteren, “Investigate the ISB Mosque and the Imam”

Geller: “People need to learn about the Jihadic doctrine, not shut people up that are talking about it”

Pamela Geller, TIME Magazine: A Response to My Critics—This Is a War

Screen-Shot-2015-05-06-at-11.01.54-AMBy Pamela Geller, May 6, 2015:

The cartoon contest was needlessly provocative? No — murdering cartoonists is needlessly provocative.

It was the jihadis, not I, who made the cartoons a flash point. If we surrender on that point and stop drawing Muhammad, we’ve established a precedent of surrendering to violent Sharia enforcement, and once established, we will be made to reinforce it again and again.

Did anyone think these 2 gunmen would have lived quiet lives as peaceable and loyal Americans if we hadn’t held the contest? They would have waged jihad elsewhere, on a less protected target, and killed more people.

“Pamela Geller: A Response to My Critics—This Is a War,”  Time Magazine, May 6, 2015

NEW YORK - AUGUST 3:  Pamela Geller, author of the book The Post-American Presidency and a proponent of the proposed World Trade Center Islamic Center answers emails inside her home on August 3, 2010 in New York City. Mrs. Geller has spoke and written heavily against the center on her blog Atlas Shrugs. (Photo by Jason Andrew/Getty Images)

Some are saying I provoked this attack. But to kowtow to violent intimidation will only encourage more of it.

Sunday in Garland, Texas, a police officer was wounded in a battle that is part of a longstanding war: the war against the freedom of speech. Some people are blaming me for the Garland shooting — so I want to address that here

The shooting happened at my American Freedom Defense Initiative Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest, when two Islamic jihadists armed with rifles and explosives drove up to the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland and attempted to gain entry to our event, which was just ending. We were aware of the risk and spent thousands of dollars on security — and it paid off. The jihadis at our free speech event were not able to achieve their objective of replicating the massacre at the offices of the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine last January — and to go it one better in carnage. They were not able to kill anyone. We provided enormous security, in concert with the superb Garland police department. The men who took the aspiring killers down may have saved hundreds of lives.

And make no mistake: If it weren’t for the free-speech conference, these jihadis would have struck somewhere else — a place where there was less security, like the Lindt cafe in Australia or the Hyper Cacher Kosher supermarket in Paris.

So, why are some people blaming me? They’re saying: “Well, she provoked them! She got what she deserved!” They don’t remember, or care to remember, that as the jihadis were killing the Muhammad cartoonists in Paris, their friend and accomplice was murdering Jews in a nearby kosher supermarket. Were the Jews asking for it? Did they “bait” the jihadis? Were they “provoking” them?

Are the Jews responsible for the Nazis? Are the Christians in the Middle East responsible for being persecuted by Muslims?

Drawing Muhammad offends Islamic jihadists? So does being Jewish. How much accommodation of any kind should we give to murderous savagery? To kowtow to violent intimidation will only encourage more of it.

This is a war.

Now, after the Charlie Hebdo attack, and after the Garland attack, what are we going to do? Are we going to surrender to these monsters?

The attack in Garland showed that everything my colleagues and I have been warning about regarding the threat of jihad, and the ways in which it threatens our liberties, is true. Islamic law, Sharia, with its death penalty for blasphemy, today constitutes a unique threat to the freedom of speech and liberty in general.

Freedom of speech is the foundation of a free society. Without it, a tyrant can wreak havoc unopposed, while his opponents are silenced.

Putting up with being offended is essential in a pluralistic society in which people differ on basic truths. If a group will not stand for being offended without resorting to violence, that group will rule unopposed, while everyone else lives in fear.

Islamic law as it’s interpreted by extremists forbids criticism of Islam, the Quran, and Muhammad. If they cannot be criticized in the United States, we are in effect accepting Islamic law as overriding the freedom of speech. This would establish Muslims as a protected class and prevent honest discussion of how Islamic jihadists use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence.

Some say that “hate speech” should be censored. But what constitutes “hate speech” is a subjective judgment that is unavoidably influenced by the political perspective of the one doing the judging.

Allowing this sort of censorship would mean nothing less civilizational suicide. Many in the media and academic elite assign no blame to an ideology that calls for death to blasphemers — i.e., those who criticize or offend Islam. Instead, they target and blame those who expose this fanaticism. If the cultural elites directed their barbs and attacks at the extremist doctrine of jihad, the world would be a vastly safer place.

You can try to avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. The shootings in Garland, Paris, and Copenhagen targeting defenders of free speech, and the raging jihad across the Middle East, Africa, and Europe, are the disastrous consequences of avoiding reality.

I encourage all Americans to watch the videos of the Garland event and see what Islamic supremacists wish to silence: basic, elemental free speech arguments.

But we are unbowed. Even when the venue was in lockdown and hundreds of attendees were ushered down into the auditorium, the crowd was singing the Star Spangled Banner and G-d Bless America. In the face of fear, they were staunchly and uniquely American.

To learn who rules over you, simply find out whom you cannot criticize. If the international media had run the Danish cartoons back in 2005, none of this could have happened. The jihadis wouldn’t have been able to kill everyone. But by self-censoring, the media gave the jihadis the power they have today.

We must take back our freedom.

Pamela Geller is the President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), publisher of PamelaGeller.com and author of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America and Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance.

***

More videos added! 21 and counting!

Terrorism in Africa: The Imminent Threat to the United States

Ansar al Sharia recruits receive training at a camp near Benghazi.

Ansar al Sharia recruits receive training at a camp near Benghazi.

Long War Journal, April 29, 2015:

Editor’s note: Below is Thomas Joscelyn’s testimony to the House Committee on Homeland Security’s Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence on the threat posed by jihadist groups in Africa. 

In preparing today’s testimony, I reviewed the history of al Qaeda’s plotting against the West. A number of facts demonstrate that al Qaeda’s presence in Africa has been tied to these efforts. For instance, declassified documents recovered in Osama bin Laden’s compound show that he ordered al Qaeda’s branches in Africa to select candidates capable of striking inside the U.S. Bin Laden also ordered al Qaeda’s African branches to coordinate their work with his “external operations” team, which was responsible for plotting attacks against Western interests. Some of al Qaeda’s most senior leaders, including those who have overseen al Qaeda’s planned attacks in the West, have come from Africa. Senior al Qaeda leaders embedded in Shabaab have also trained operatives to attack in Europe. I discuss this evidence in detail in the final section of my written testimony.

Complex tribal, ethnic, and religious dynamics mean that any summary of the situation in Africa will be necessarily incomplete.  However, I will attempt to distill some themes that are important for understanding the rising jihadist threat in the continent. While there are important differences between ISIS and al Qaeda, and the two are at odds with one another in a variety of ways, they are both inherently anti-American and anti-Western. Thus, they constitute a threat to our interests everywhere their jihadists fight.

Since the beginning of the year, the ISIS branch in Libya has repeatedly attacked foreign interests. The group has bombed and/or assaulted with small arms the Algerian, Moroccan, Iranian, South Korean and Spanish embassies in Tripoli. Fortunately, these attacks have caused only a few casualties, as foreign governments pulled most of their diplomatic personnel out of Libya months ago. But these incidents show the organization’s followers are deeply hostile to any foreign presence.

Other ISIS attacks on foreigners in Libya have been more lethal and at least two Americans have been killed by ISIS’ so-called “provinces.” In January, the group’s fighters launched a complex assault on the Corinthia Hotel in Tripoli. Ten people, including David Berry, a former U.S. Marine serving as a security contractor, were killed. In August 2014, jihadists from the ISIS province in the Sinai killed William Henderson, an American petroleum worker.

Some of ISIS’ most gruesome acts in North Africa have come with pointed threats against the West. In February, the jihadists beheaded 21 Egyptian Copts. The propaganda video showing the murders was entitled, “A Message Signed with Blood to the Nation of the Cross.” ISIS explicitly threatened Italy in the video and also made it clear that they would target Christians simply for adhering to a different faith. Earlier this month, ISIS’ branch followed up by killing a large group of Ethiopian Christians.

In March, ISIS claimed responsibility for the massacre at the Bardo National Museum in Tunis. More than 20 people were killed in the assault, which targeted foreign tourists. Citizens of Britain, France, Colombia, Germany, Italy, Japan, Poland, and Spain were among the victims. Although ISIS was quick to lay claim to the museum slayings, the reality is more complicated. The Tunisian government has blamed the Uqba ibn Nafi Brigade, which is part of al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), an official branch of al Qaeda. Based on publicly-available information, it appears that the attackers may have joined ISIS, but the operation itself was planned by the AQIM brigade’s leadership.

Al Qaeda’s international network continues to launch high-profile attacks across the continent. Some of these operations directly target foreigners. Earlier this month, Shabaab, al Qaeda’s official branch in Somalia, killed more than 140 people at the Garissa University College in Kenya. The gunmen reportedly separated out non-Muslims for killing, letting many Muslims go. This shows that the organization, like other parts of al Qaeda, is very concerned about the impact of its violence in the Muslim-majority world. In this respect and others, the Garissa attack was similar to Shabaab’s siege of the Westgate shopping mall in September 2013. More than 60 people were killed, with Shabaab’s gunmen singling out non-Muslims. Shabaab’s attacks in Kenya and other neighboring countries are part of what the UN has identified as the group’s “regional” strategy. Shabaab has undoubtedly suffered setbacks since the height of its power in East Africa, but it still operates a prolific insurgency inside Somalia, while also seeking to expand its capabilities in the surrounding countries. In fact, America’s counterterrorism efforts in East Africa seem to be principally aimed at the part of Shabaab tasked with exporting terrorism throughout the region.

As we’ve seen over the past several years, al Qaeda-affiliated groups in Africa will attack American and Western interests when the opportunity presents itself.  The September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. Mission and Annex in Benghazi and the raid on the U.S. Embassy in Tunis three days later were carried out by al Qaeda-linked groups. The Ansar al Sharia organizations in Libya and Tunisia, both of which are tied to AQIM, were involved in these assaults on America’s diplomatic presence in North Africa. In early 2013, terrorists commanded by Mokhtar Belmokhtar killed dozens of foreign workers during the siege of the In Amenas gas facility in Algeria. Belmokhtar, who is openly loyal to Ayman al Zawahiri, claimed responsibility for operation on behalf of al Qaeda.

There is no doubt, therefore, that both ISIS and al Qaeda pose a threat to Western interests in Africa. Below, I explore current trends within both organizations, highlighting some ways these international networks may threaten Americans both home and abroad. But first, I briefly look at the different strategies ISIS and al Qaeda are employing to build up their networks.

Read more

***

Subcommittee Hearing: Terrorism in Africa: The Imminent Threat to the United States

Witnesses

Dr. J. Peter Pham
Director
Africa Center
Atlantic Council
Witness Statement [PDF]
Witness Truth in Testimony [PDF]

Mr. Thomas Joscelyn
Senior Fellow
Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Witness Statement [PDF]
Witness Truth in Testimony [PDF]

Dr. Daniel Byman
Research Director
Center for Middle East Policy
Center for Security Studies
Brookings Institution
Witness Statement [PDF]
Witness Truth in Testimony [PDF]

Commemorating The Armenian Genocide Centennial

1915

Published on Apr 23, 2015 by Brigitte Gabriel

100 years ago, the first genocide of the 20th century began. On that date, the Islamic Turks commenced their campaign of deportation, murder and starvation against Christian Armenians. As we observe this solemn anniversary, we should remember the repeated failure of the world community to act against genocide, and contemplate what we can do to stop genocide from occurring on our watch.
http://www.actforamerica.org

Also see:

Jihad, Still: “100 Years On, Armenians in the Middle East Are Still On the Run”

Barack Obama speaks to members of congress and guests in the Rose Garden of the White House on Tuesday. The administration revealed that Obama will once again stop short of calling the 1915 massacre of Armenians a genocide. Photograph: Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP

Barack Obama speaks to members of congress and guests in the Rose Garden of the White House on Tuesday. The administration revealed that Obama will once again stop short of calling the 1915 massacre of Armenians a genocide. Photograph: Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP

By Andrew Bostom, April 22, 2015:

From this April 21, 2015, report, “100 Years On, Armenians in the Middle East Are Still On the Run”:

As Armenians this week mark 100 years since the massacres that killed more than one million people, the fear and persecution faced by their ancestors remains alive today. With Syria and Iraq in chaos, Armenians in the Middle East are once again homeless and on the run. “We are having the same destiny as our grandfathers, as our ancestors, we are just like them,” said Annoush Garabadian, a 53-year-old Armenian woman who fled Mosul when ISIL captured the city last June. “We saw everything with our eyes like history was repeating itself.”… Not long after, neighbours sent them a picture showing their old house with ISIL’s logo painted on it. Their house and car now belonged to the so-called “caliphate”, and her son received a threatening phone call from ISIL militants saying if they ever returned, they would be beheaded.

These jihad depredations against today’s Middle Eastern Armenians illustrate an unchanged dynamic I described yesterday (3/21/15) at PJ Media. Such ongoing horrors, as I explained, are Why Congress Must Recognize the Jihad Genocide of the Armenians. The essay opens with a reference to my brief exchange with Fox News’s Sean Hannity, September 12, 2014, embedded just below, and elaborated in the extracts which follow:

During a Fox News Hannity panel appearance on Friday September 12, 2014, I alluded to the 1915-19 jihad genocide of the Armenian, Assyro-Chaldean, andSyrian Orthodox Christian communities of Anatolia, and northern “Mesopotamia,” i.e., modern Iraq, by the last Caliphate—the Ottoman Caliphate.

Notwithstanding the recent horrific spate of atrocities committed against the Christian communities of northern Iraq by the Islamic State (IS) jihadists, the Ottoman jihad ravages were equally barbaric, depraved, and far more extensive. Occurring, primarily between 1915-16 (although continuing through at least 1918), some 1 to 1.5 million Armenian, and 250,000 Assyro-Chaldean and Syrian Orthodox Christians were brutally slaughtered, or starved to death during forced deportations through desert wastelands. The identical gruesome means used by IS to humiliate and massacre its hapless Christian victims, were employed on a scale that was an order of magnitude greater by the Ottoman Muslim Turks, often abetted by local Muslim collaborators (the latter being another phenomenon which also happened during the IS jihad campaign against Iraq’s Christians).

I concluded my brief comments September 12, 2014 by noting, “we are only coming up on the 100th anniversary next year (i.e., 2015) of the Armenian Jihad Genocide.”

That solemn centennial commemoration will take place this Friday, April 24, 2015. Failure to formally recognize the genocidal anti-Christian jihad depredations of the World War I era, and its immediate aftermathpunctuated by the Armenian genocide—is a lingering moral stain on the U.S. body politic.

…The geo-political consequences of this profound ethical and intellectual delinquency—rooted in jihad appeasement, and denial—are once again manifest. Vestigial remnant Eastern Christian populations who barely survived those 20th century jihad depredations, may now face their final liquidation, wrought by contemporary jihadists.

Majority approval of H. Res 154 (the Armenian Genocide Truth and JusticeResolution) would mark a necessary, albeit very limited, first step in rectifying the continued tragic impact of this state of denial

The historical record of the jihad genocide of the Armenians a century ago, through the present day jihadist atrocities against Christian communities in the Middle East, and beyond, demonstrates that ancient Islamic jihad war theorycontinues to be acted upon by Muslims, regularly, across the globe, till now.  What remains is for the Muslim religious and political leaders to acknowledge, and then eliminate this genocidal practice.

A long overdue, mea culpa-based Muslim self-examination will never begin if the non-Muslim, especially Christian, targets of jihad genocide, remain in their own abject state of jihad denial.

U.S. politicians could help facilitate that Muslim re-evaluation process by not only demanding recognition of the Armenian genocide, but further identifying those mass killings as a jihad genocide, specifically

The essay includes background discussions defined by these subheadings: Why The Armenian Genocide Was a Jihad, and April 24th is an Appropriate Commemoration Day; American Witnesses to the Armenian Genocide: Observations from U.S. Diplomats, 1915-1917; and From the Armenian Jihad Genocide to The Holocaust.

Please read the essay in full, here.

***

Also see:

Update: Just came across this!

Uploaded on Jan 30, 2008 by hyebiz

Sen. Barack Obama Discusses Armenian Genocide