Queen Mary Univ: Radicals More Likely to be Well-Off, Educated

ChoudaryBY RYAN MAURO:

A new study by Queen Mary University of London concludes that there is not a strong link between terrorism and poverty, lack of education or mental instability. In fact, terrorists are more likely to be highly educated and financially secure. The survey adds to the mountain of proof that violent radicals, especially Islamist ones, are motivated by an ideology that is not born out of inequality.

The study strikes at the heart of the debate about Islamist terrorism.

One camp sees the root cause as a mixture of inequality, desperation and anger over Western foreign policy. This camp usually legitimizes some of the Islamist causes while condemning their methods. Both Presidents Obama and Bush were influenced by this camp.

While President Bush said that Islamic extremists were opposed to Western freedoms, he also said in 2002, “We fight poverty because hope is an answer to terror.” In 2005, Bush said that alleviating poverty will “strike a blow against the terrorists who feed on anger and resentment.” Like his successor, he did not usually use terms like “Islamist” to identify the ideology.

Similarly, President Obama said in this year’s State of the Union address that U.S. military deployments “may ultimately feed extremism.” In 2008, he said as a candidate that the U.S. needs to convince Hamas and Hezbollah that violence “weakens their legitimate claims.” In January, Secretary of State John Kerry said“this issue of poverty, which in many cases is the root cause of terrorism…”

A great example of this mindset affecting policy is the Obama Administration’s long-delayed decision to label Boko Haram, a Nigerian affiliate of Al-Qaeda, as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. Heincorrectly stated the group is an example of what happens when “countries are not delivering for their people and where there sources of conflict and underlining frustrations that have not been adequately dealt with.”

The Queen Mary University study boosts the standing of the second camp. This one blames the Islamist ideology, arguing that its outlook on the world cultivates those political grievances. After all, the natural response to U.S. troops in Afghanistan (where they protect Muslims) is not to institute Sharia governance, engage in violent jihad and perpetrate human rights abuses. Those are symptoms of Islamism, not anything the West did.

Read more at Clarion Project

How Modernity ‘Radicalizes’ Western Muslims

sharia-450x277By Raymond Ibrahim:

A new Danish statistical study finds that “Muslims [are] 218 percent more criminal in second generation than first.”  While some of these crimes are clearly related to Islam—such as attacks on Muslim apostates to Christianity—others, such as rampant theft of non-Muslims, would appear banal, until one realizes that even robbery and plunder isjustified by Islamic doctrine—as one UK Muslim cleric once clearly said.

The interesting question here is why are second generation Muslims, who are presumably more Westernized than their Muslim parents, also more “radical”?  Lest one dismiss this phenomenon as a product of economics or some other “grievance” against European host nations, the fact is, even in America, where Muslims are much better assimilated than in Europe, they too are turning to “radicalism.”

For example, some time back, Attorney General Eric Holder said that “the threat [of terrorism] has changed … to worrying about people in the United States, American citizens—raised here, born here, and who for whatever reason, have decided that they are going to become radicalized and take up arms against the nation in which they were born.”

Around the same time, Sue Myrick, then a member of Congress, wrote a particularly candid letter on “radicalization” to President Obama:

For many years we lulled ourselves with the idea that radicalization was not happening inside the United Sates. We believed American Muslims were immune to radicalization because, unlike the European counterparts, they are socially and economically well-integrated into society. There had been warnings that these assumptions were false but we paid them no mind. Today there is no doubt that radicalization is taking place inside America. The strikingly accelerated rate of American Muslims arrested for involvement in terrorist activities since May 2009 makes this fact self-evident.

Myrick named several American Muslims as examples of those who, while “embodying the American dream, at least socio-economically,” were still “radicalized,” astutely adding, “The truth is that if grievances were the sole cause of terrorism, we would see daily acts by Americans who have lost their jobs and homes in this economic downturn.”

Quite so. Yet, though Myrick’s observations were limited to the domestic scene, they beg the following, more cosmic, question: If American Muslims, who enjoy Western benefits—including democracy, liberty, prosperity, and freedom of expression—are still being radicalized, why then do we insist that the importation of these same Western benefits to the Muslim world will eliminate its even more indigenous or authentic form of “radicalization”?

After all, the mainstream position evoked by most politicians maintains that all U.S. sacrifices in the Muslim world (Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.) will pay off once Muslims discover how wonderful Western ways are, and happily slough off their “Islamist” veneer, which, as the theory goes, is a product of—you guessed it—a lack of democracy, liberty, prosperity, and freedom of expression.

Yet here are American and European Muslims, immersed in the bounties of the West, and still do they turn to violent jihad. Why think their counterparts, who are born and raised in the Muslim world, where Islam permeates every aspect of life, will respond differently?

In fact, far from eliminating “radicalization,” Western values can actually exacerbate Islamic tendencies—hence why second generation, “Westernized” Muslims are also becoming more “radicalized” than their parents.

Some already known that Western concessions to Islam—in the guise of multiculturalism, “cultural sensitivity,” political correctness, and self-censorship—only bring out the worst of Islam’s “schoolyard bully.” Yet even some of the most prized aspects of Western civilization—personal freedom, rule of law, human dignity—when articulated through an Islamic framework, have the capacity to “radicalize” Muslims.

Read more at Front Page

Younger, Educated and Affluent – The UK’s Terror Sympathizers

Two Americans Arrested for Plans to Join Syrian Jihadists

Syrian rebel fighters

By Ryan Mauro:

Two Americans were arrested in the past few days as the Syrian civil war attracts Western recruits. One sought to join Hezbollah and the other took the side of an Al-Qaeda affiliate, but both believed they were fulfilling a commandment to wage jihad against the infidel.

************

Syrian jihadists have a sophisticated network in America, including those favorable to Al-Qaeda-linked groups. One opposition group linked to the Muslim Brotherhood has received over $12 million in U.S. government assistance.

Another Islamist named Sheikh Osama al-Rifai has used the Syrian Sunrise Foundation to raise over $3.6 million in one tour, bringing him to Florida, Illinois, Texas, Indiana, California and Michigan. His fundraising pitch was that any donor qualifies as a “jihadist for Allah.” One event was held at the influential Mosque Foundation that is part of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood network.

In January, a terrorism-supporting imam named Sheikh Mohammad Rateb al-Nabulsi came to the U.S. to fundraise for Syrian “rebels” in 11 cities with help from a group called the Syrian American Council. One of the fundraisers was held at the Islamic Center of Passaic County in N.J. Other events took place in Florida, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Virginia.

In the 1980s, Afghanistan acted as the incubator for a generation of terrorists. It was the one spot where aspiring jihadists could go to get everything they needed, especially fighting experience. Other Muslims, innocently hoping to stop oppression, became radicalized on the battlefield.

Syria is modern-day equivalent. The civil war could end tomorrow, but the jihad it intensified will go on.

Read more at Clarion Project

Also see:

From Radical to Terrorist: The “Conveyor Belt” to Violent Extremism

East London Mosqueby Samuel Westrop:

The individuals attached to the radicalization of the Woolwich killers were not unabashed advocates of terrorism, but so-called “soft Islamists” – afforded money and responsibility by the government in the vain hope that “non-violent” extremists would temper the more visible consequences of violent extremists. In truth, “moderate” Islamism seems to act as a “conveyor belt” to violent Islamism.

The greatest obstacle remains the failure of government, media and academia to accept that some “moderate” Islamists are frequently the cause, and Adebowale merely the symptom.

The progression from being a radical to being a terrorist has been referred to as the extremism “conveyor belt.” Although the government has acknowledged the fundamental role of so-called “non-violent” or “soft Islamist” extremists in this progression, taxpayers continue to fund extremist groups.

Michael Adebowale, one of the two British jihadists found guilty of murdering soldier Lee Rigby near London’s Woolwich barracks in May 2013, has recently attributed his radicalization to Islamic preacher Sheikh Khalid Yasin.

According to the Daily Mirror newspaper, Adebowale, who refused to give evidence during his trial, stated that he converted to Islam after listening to cleric Sheikh Khalid Yasin’s lectures, which he said taught him “the purpose of life.”

Yasin, an American-born Islamic preacher, claims Christians and Jews are “kuffar” [infidels] and their beliefs are “filth.” Yasin has called for the killing of homosexuals and claims that “Christian groups” have deliberately infected Africans with the AIDS virus. He further adds that the Koran gives men permission to beat women.

Adebowale is not the first violent extremist to name Yasin as his muse. In 2011, Khalid Yasin was invited by three men, later convicted of inciting terrorism, to address a meeting of young Muslims in Manchester.

While Yasin’s views are rejected by many, he is by no means a pariah figure. In February 2011, the BBC interviewed Yasin for a documentary on Dutch politician Geert Wilders. The program introduced the Sheikh as a “moderate” preacher “engaged in de-radicalising youth.”

It seems to be self-proclaimed “moderate” organizations and mosques that are involved in the radicalization of young Muslim men. In May 2013, The Daily Telegraph reported:

[Adebowale's] mother was advised by a neighbour to take him to the head of the Woolwich mosque for spiritual guidance. He was converted to Islam by the head Imam, and taken for weeks of “further training” at a centre near Cambridge. When he returned, however, he was even more “radicalised” and his mother could no longer “get through to him”.

In 2010, a Freedom of Information request revealed that, since 2007, the local Government had provided the very same Woolwich Mosque, also known as the Greenwich Islamic Centre, with a public grant of £62,500, supposedly to counteract violent extremism.

The media’s curious habit of separating extremist preachers from the very terrorists they appear to have inspired has previously been examined; journalists and politicians, however, seem unable to accept that some Islamist groups might say one thing in public but promote a very different thing behind closed doors.

***********

The process of radicalization seems institutionalized within Britain’s leading “moderate” Islamist groups. Until the government chooses seriously to challenge the extremism promoted by these organizations, withdraws all public funding and puts a stop to the inclusion of “non-violent” extremists in the discussion of public policy, the “conveyor belt” will continue to release more and more radicalized youth onto the streets of British cities.

Read more at Gatestone Institute

Mum, I’m fighting for Allah Now

German MuslimsBY AHMAD MANSOUR:

Around 200 young people from Germany have joined the civil war in Syria, but there are thousands more who dream of going down in history as Muslim heroes. “I don’t recognize my son anymore. I don’t know how else I can help apart from breaking off contact with him,” says Mathilde M. on the telephone, sobbing. Her son has become a radical Islamist. He has discarded his German name, and from now on will only answer to a new name of his choosing. In search of help, Mathilde M. has called the Centre for Democratic Culture’s (ZDK) Berlin helpline, “Hayat.”

Organizations like ZDK are encountering an increasing number of cases like this. It is usually the mothers who call; the fathers have often been absent in these families for a long time. Most stories begin in a similar way to that of Mathilde M.’s son. There is a new friend on the scene who invites the boy to come along to the mosque. They listen to presentations about Islam, and soon enough they are praying together. Old friends are written off. Jeans, t-shirts, and baseball caps are swapped for cotton trousers, a long robe, and a small crocheted cap. Music and alcohol are taboo. He no longer shakes hands with his aunt or female cousin. That’s haram, he says, unclean. He has also stopped eating together with the family — he says the same pans have been used to cook pork. There are arguments. The mother finds her son’s new way of life threatening, and the son no longer agrees with the Western lifestyle of his mother and siblings.

These stories, which might sound foreign to the majority of society, are actually all very similar. The parents are unable to cope, and are often deeply hurt to have been rejected in this way. And, of course, they are also concerned for their children. Some parents break off contact; others make desperate attempts to get their children back.

Yet it is often the case that the child has been unhappy and frustrated for years, and in search of some kind of meaning in his or her life. Such children have felt estranged from their families for a long time, but the parents have only just begun to notice this estrangement. From the Islamists, the son, or occasionally the daughter, gets something that he or she has never had from parents, school, or society: attention and recognition. The parents cannot dispute this.

Even so, advisers tell parents to stay in contact with their child. They first encourage parents to determine whether it is a harmless case of their child changing beliefs, or whether radicalized tendencies are behind the behavior. Before they can confront their son or daughter with critical questions, the parents first have to re-establish a sense of trust and an emotional connection. They have to be very patient; they should avoid confrontation on the one hand, but maintain a firm stance on the other. They have to learn to pose open questions, without imposing anything on their child. Ideally, this is done with the help of advice and support from psychologists, social workers, or other professionals in the field.

CONSERVATIVE MUSLIM PARENTS OFTEN RECOGNISE THE SIGNS TOO LATE

Muslim parents call the helpline, too. The difference is that the traditional, conservative families often get in touch with us only when their child has become completely estranged from the family, and they are practicing their faith not only dogmatically, but also in an extremely politicized way. These conservative Muslim families often respond to early indications that their child’s religiousness is getting out of hand with approval and a sense of pride. Their son is adhering to Muslim dietary requirements; their daughter is not only wearing a veil, she is also covering her entire body: “What exemplary children we have!”

Yet the parents are embarrassed, and attempt to solve the problem within the family, or, at most, they place their trust in their Imam. Sometimes this helps for a while, but in many cases it can also be counter-productive since many imams rely too much on the power of their religious authority, and thereby ignore the young people’s completely ordinary desires.

In the worst cases, radicalized young people travel to training camps run by radical Islamists in North Africa, Pakistan, or Afghanistan. According to German security authorities, already over 200 so-called “foreign fighters” from Germany have gone to Syria to join the civil war. Eight of these people are reported to have died there. How has the situation escalated in this way? Why would young people from Germany want to swap the luxury of safety and prosperity for the brutality of war?

Read more at Clarion Project

The Muslim Suicide Convert

By Daniel Greenfield, Jan. 6, 2014:

Both of the suicide bombers who struck in Russia were Muslim converts. They follow a long string of Muslim terrorist converts, including the murderers of British soldier Lee Rigby who were sentenced last month and Terry Lee Loewen who plotted to car bomb the Wichita Mid-Continent Airport that same month.

suicide-bomber-8Muslim converts engage in terrorism at a higher rate than Muslims. It’s gotten so bad that converting to Islam is almost a form of suicide.

The popular theory is that Muslim terrorist groups use converts because they blend in better. But in most Western countries, screening by race is nearly illegal and in even in targeted countries where it isn’t, there are usually many members of Muslim ethnic groups in most major cities.

There are four reasons for the rise of the Muslim Suicide Convert. Muslim converts are gullible, fanatical, suicidal and expendable.

Let’s start with the last one first. Muslims usually come from tribal cultures with extended family groups. Despite its claims of transnationalism and multiculturalism, Islam is an ethnic religion with the descendants of Mohammed elevated over everyone else, the families in the region of his first conquests elevated over other Arabs, Arabs elevated over non-Arabs, Asian Muslims over African Muslims and African Muslims over Western converts to Islam.

A convert to Islam is lowest on the totem pole because he has no family group. In a tribal society, not having a family connection makes you an outsider and expendable. A Muslim who Jihads himself to death creates a hole in the tribal network of arranged cousin marriages, illegal business arrangements and other extended family support structures. A Muslim convert was never part of the network unless he married into it. And even then he can easily be unplugged because he has no common ancestry with them.

In a Muslim country, he can be killed without having to pay blood price. In a Western country, he can be sent off to die without the “tribe” of Pakistanis or Egyptians who built the mosques and hired the Imams who converted him and convinced him to kill non-Muslims being affected by his death.

He is expendable.

Converts are not part of the family networks of the Muslim settlers in their Western diasporas. That makes them useful cannon fodder. If they are captured, the mosque denies all responsibility and blames the internet even though most mosques and Muslim student groups host those same speakers who “radicalize” converts over the internet at their own facilities and events.

Muslim converts are also suicidal.

The act of conversion is a form of death. It destroys the entire cultural and faith background of the individual. It cuts him off from his family, his people and his way of life. Conversion can be constructive, but it should never be forgotten that it is also destructive.

The Muslim convert has been trying to kill himself all his life to some degree, to destroy the essence of what he is to overcome that perceived flaw preventing him from being happy and living a worthwhile life. Islam is his drug and alcohol abuse, his meaningless sex and his cult. It is how he punishes himself hoping to find redemption in self-destruction and meaning in the sacrifice of the self to the first utterly devouring and consuming thing that comes along.

suspectConverts to Islam often discuss feeling empty. They expect Islam to fill the void within them and when it does not, they are told that the failure is theirs.

The Muslim convert finds Islam in a search for fulfillment and then still feeling unfulfilled, seeks out its “purer” forms whose commitment to Jihadist violence is more overt. The violence of their rhetoric and the force of their commitment briefly feel like fulfillment, but then dissatisfaction sets in again. Told to blame himself for this final failure, the Muslim Suicide Convert is encouraged to make his final kamikaze run hoping to find the meaning and fulfillment in the afterlife that evaded him in this life.

Muslim converts have personal problems that they try to treat with Islam the way that sufferers from conventional diseases try to treat their illnesses with phony cures. Muslim clerics promise that Islam will solve the personal problems of non-Muslims and non-Muslim societies, but like so many criminal gurus, they are peddling phony cures that kill the patient.

That is one reason why Muslim converts are fanatical. Another reason is that they have no baseline. Converts plunge into another religion and culture as into deep water.

Muslims have learned to make the necessary compromises with their fanatical religion that make their lives livable. That is why most of them do not go out and blow themselves up; instead they undermine Western societies in slower and steadier ways through demographics, disinformation and political influence.

The Muslim Suicide Convert seeks an uncompromising purity. He rejects the compromises that Muslims have learned to make over the centuries. Seeking the core revelation in a religion of death; he finds that revelation only in death. The truth of Islam is in its killing fields. It preaches war for power and paradise. The Muslim convert who searches for its essence finds a grinning skull in the desert sands and hurries to emulate its terrible example.

Finally, Muslim converts are gullible. The natives of every land have games that they play with tourists, relying on their unfamiliarity with another culture to mislead them and trick them. Muslim converts are strangers in a strange land, slowly learning a foreign way of life and pathetically eager to be accepted by another culture. It is all too easy for Muslim clerics to lead them down the garden path to the suicide bomber’s paradise by offering and withholding affection until they are willing to do anything to belong.

Muslim Suicide Converts are enlisted in a war the way that men have been enlisted in wars throughout the ages with appeals to patriotism, strategic shaming, tales of outrageous atrocities and myths of incredible heroism. The Muslim clerics, like so many military recruiters before them, tailor their pitch to the disposable people who are least likely to question orders and the least likely to be missed.

Muslim recruiters thrive on campus for the same reasons as cult recruiters and leftist academics.

The modern university is a good place to find insecure young people questioning everything that they believe in and unsure of what to do when they have destroyed everything they were and found that their impulse to ridicule and tear down everything does not fulfill the human need for something to believe in. It is where young men and women seeking to find something beyond their limits, experimenting with and becoming someone they are not and feeling inward guilt and loss at the abandonment of their old selves and their old values can be hunted and trapped.

Into this universe of doubt, the Muslim cleric intrudes with his false offer of certainty, with the air of the victim, the badge of the underdog, the mysticism of the east and the romance of the grass, that like the terrorist flags that wave among it, always grows greener on the other side of the world.

Westernized Muslims are urged to recommit to Islam, to steel themselves for the coming conflict between the civilizations of the sword and the microchip, to purge themselves of Western culture, embrace the black flags and atone for their beers they drank, the girls they kissed and the songs they sang with the death screams of sirens and the blood of their non-Muslim friends and neighbors.

The seduction of the non-Muslim runs more slowly but surely. The dissatisfied and unhappy, those trained by a liberal culture contemptuous of its own values and traditions to instinctively value non-Western spirituality over their own “materialistic” and “imperialistic” religions, are lured in.

Read more at Sultan Knish

 

“Ask why so many psychotic and murderous people embrace not peaceful Christianity or pluralistic Hinduism but the colossal abattoir of violence of Islamic fundamentalism.”
- Michael Coren

UK Hate Preacher Choudary Linked to Terror Network

Anjem Choudary 3

British Islamist hate preacher Anjem Choudary and his al-Muhajiroun network has been named as “the single biggest gateway to terrorism in recent British history,” according to a large and significant investigation of the group.

The investigation, conducted by the anti-extremist organization called “Hope Not Hate,” found that Choudary’s network “facilitated or encouraged” close to 80 young Muslims from the UK as well as between 250 and 300 from other locations in Europe to join radical jihadi groups linked to Al Qaeda fighting with rebel forces in Syria.

“While painted by some as a figure of fun, an extremist crackpot whose media stunts are rightly ridiculed, Anjem Choudary has become a serious player on the international Islamist scene,” the report states “Perhaps it is time to start concentrating on his role as a facilitator of terror. Al-Muhajiroun has quite simply been the single biggest gateway to terrorism in recent British history.”

**********

Although Choudary is not specifically mentioned in the following video, this BBC reports follows a young jihadi, from his ideological radicalization in the UK to his joining an Al Qaeda-linked group fighting in Syria:

 

Read more at Clarion Project

Steve Emerson interviewed on Sun News – Canadians leaving for Jihad

SunVideo at IPT:

Brian Lilley: We’ve told you in the past about Canadians joining foreign struggles. We’re talking about the international jihad. Now international media are taking note, Israel National News putting out a report the other day saying on Thursday reports were released that a Canadian citizen described only as Abu Abd Al-Rahman was killed in March in the city of Aleppo. Al-Rahman is one of many Canadian and other foreign jihadists journeying to Syria to join the bloodbath. Do we need to be concerned that our international allies are taking note of the growing jihadi movement in Canada? Steven Emerson is with the Investigative Project on Terrorism, joins us now from our studies in Washington. Mr. Emerson, we’ve been taking note of this global trend. How worried should we be that Israel, the United States other allies might be noticing it as well?

Steve Emerson: Well in Canada with the dubious distinction of your Mayor of Toronto with his exception –

Lilley: [Laughs.] Yeah.

Emerson: – Canada is probably the highest contributor of expatriates. That is Canadian citizens, to jihadist movements around the world, with the exception of the United States. There probably are at least 100 Canadians of Islamic origin or converts that have volunteered for the jihad in Syria over the past two years. And the reason that there is concern is that these jihadists not only acquire training overseas and engage in jihad, but are liable, are likely to become radicalized even more than they have been in terms of going over there when they return back to Canada, as we’ve seen in dozens of terrorist plots that have occurred in the last decade in Canada. As a Canadian intelligence report that was obtained under the Freedom of Information Act recently revealed, there are more terrorists per capita in Canada, Islamic terrorists, than there are any place in the world, with the exception of the United States.

Lilley: See and that part is shocking me, given what I read about in terms of a ghettoization of British culture, in terms of certain areas of London being referred to as Londonstan and the radicalization going on there, I would have thought the U.K. would have been far away ahead of both Canada and the U.S. So this is shocking news, not only to me but lots of other Canadians.

Emerson: Well what’s interesting here, you raise an interesting point, because in London and in other parts of Europe, there really has been a radicalization of the communities to the point where there are no-go areas that are Muslim areas only. And there are Muslim patrols that actually attack anybody who is a Westerner or somebody who is dressed in Western attire. This is something a little bit different than in Canada or the United States where you don’t have the same concentration within the communal structure of the radicals, but you do have a radical cultural ideology that is basically, that is proliferating from community, community, and ends up resulting in either lone-wolf plots, that is Islamic terrorist plots that are not directed from without but come from within, or you end up having people volunteer for jihad overseas, which has been dominating, shouldn’t be dominating, but actually has been proliferating in the last decade, particularly in the last three or four years as new jihad fronts have opened up in Al-Shabaab, you know that’s in Africa -

Lilley: Somalia.

Emerson: – in Somalia, that’s in Yemen, in Syria, in Iraq, even in other areas. Even in Europe you’ve seen Americans or North Americans, that is those with Canadian passports, volunteer to carry out plots with their European compatriots, which is a very troubling developing that only witnessed in the last three or four years.

Lilley: OK, so in Canada we have long had ministers, such as former Immigration Minister Jason Kenney, say we don’t have to be as worried about radicalization as they do in places like Europe, whether it’s Germany or Britain, because we’ve had a more successful integration of disparate communities. Should we be buying that line or does the fact that we are such a large contributor to the jihad put that, make that stand out as a bald-faced lie?

Emerson: Well I wouldn’t say it’s a bald-faced lie. There has indeed been more successful integration coupled with the fact that there’s been less of a concentration of jihadist immigration to North America, including Canada and the United States than let’s say in London or let’s say in Belgium or in Germany or Italy, where almost every week there’s a jihadist plot that’s interrupted. But the corollary of this is that there really is a cultural jihad that has not diminished but rather spread in different communities in Canada, in Toronto, in Montreal, in Ottawa, as well as in different parts of the United States. And you’ve seen that in the increase in number of lone-wolf attacks, these are attacks by Islamists who basically decide they’re gonna carry out jihad in the United States or in Canada for the sake of jihad. And if you look at the numbers, the numbers have been increasing actually in the last one-half decade than decreasing. So I think, look, the bottom line is, to the extent that these plots are interdicted and stopped, you know people don’t feel the threat. As soon as one plot is successful, I can guarantee you, all the complacency in the world will stop immediately in Canada or the United States.

Lilley: Alright, Steve great talking to you as always. The Investigative Project on Terrorism. You can find out more from their website. We’ll chat again soon my friend.

When The Jihad Comes, Whose Side Will You Be On?

munafiqPolitical Islam, by Kenneth Roberts:

There’s good reason to ask this question to ‘nice’ Muslims. It invites Muslims to declare their true values and loyalties: “When jihad comes, whose side will you be on?”

Shoppers at Westgate Mall in Nairobi and Christian students in Nigeria have recently been killed because they had the wrong religion. What will our Muslim neighbors do when the jihadists come to our neighborhood schools, churches and shopping centers in Europe and North America? Will Muslims protect non-Muslim neighbors from death or will they side with the jihadists? A shopping mall jihad has already occurred in the U.S., but it was largely ignored.

You mean, it’s already happened in America?

Yes, an event similar to the Westgate Mall attack occurred on the evening of Feb. 12, 2007. A young Muslim man walked into the Trolley Square Mall in Salt Lake City with a pistol-grip, 12-gauge shotgun and a 38-caliber revolver and opened fire on shoppers, killing five and wounding four others, including a pregnant woman. The death toll at Trolley Square was higher than in the Boston Marathon Bombing, but the killings were misattributed to insanity, rather than jihad.

Will jihadists attack shopping centers across America? Undoubtedly! They will do so because it is the Sunna, the perfect example of Mohammed. In 627 AD, Mohammed beheaded 800 unarmed male civilians in Medina in a single day. He did so in a market.

Islam’s Dual Allegiance

Muslims have two loyalties: religious and political. Americans are loyal only to the constitution. America has no state religion to adhere to. But Islam has both. True Muslims must be loyal to the political act of jihad as well as to the religion of Islam. Islam is a religion as well as a military organization. This is not an opinion, but the decree of Mohammed:

“My brother and I came to the Prophet and I requested him to take the pledge of allegiance from us for migration. He said, “Migration has passed away with its people.” I asked, “For what will you take the pledge of allegiance from us then?” He (Mohammed) said, “I will take (the pledge) for Islam and JIHAD.” – (Bukhari 4,52,208)

Mohammed says allegiance to Islam includes the political act of jihad. Jihad is holy fighting against the Kafirs; it is the personal duty of every Muslim. If a Muslim does not participate in jihad, he will die a ‘hypocrite’ and burn in hell. Mohammed is the authority on Islam.

Why don’t Muslims denounce the terrorists?

Islam is harsh on ‘hypocrites’ (munafiqoon in Arabic). Munafiqs are ‘moderate Muslims’. They give only lip service to Islam. Mohammed wanted to burn the munafiqs to death in their homes for not participating in prayers or jihad.

Nonetheless, participate or not, they must not hinder jihad by thought, word or deed. Islam’s ‘munafiqs’ sit back and look the other way, while jihadists fight the Kafirs and subdue them. When a munafiq helps Kafirs during jihad, he becomes a traitor to Islam; he is considered to be a Kafir at war with Islam, so jihadists may kill him too.

When jihad comes, a munafiq is not neutral. He is on the side of jihad, rather than on the side of Kafirs. A munafiq is silent when the jihadists knock on their non-Muslim neighbor’s door. The reason for this silence is in the Koran (28.86) ‘never be a supporter of the disbelievers’.

Munafiqs can be reactivated in jihad

One of the surprising things about Islam is how non-practicing Muslims often return to active service in jihad. Sometimes it only takes a personal contact or a rousing sermon to turn a non-practicing, ‘moderate’ Muslim into a jihadist. This is similar to the recruitment of young pacifists in time of war. The Tsarnaev brothers were nice, ‘moderate’ Muslims and then they became religious jihadists.

Boston Munafiqs

How did ‘munafiqs’ behave during the Boston Marathon Bombings? When Djokhar Tsarnaev was about to be arrested, he called his non-practicing, ‘secular’ Muslim friends to dispose of incriminating evidence in his dorm room. They eagerly complied. When members of the Tsarnaevs’ mosque were asked about the two brothers, they kept silent about what they knew. When recruited, the munafiqs acted on the side of jihad.

Munafiqs at Westgate Mall, Nairobi

When jihad came to Westgate Mall in Nairobi, there were many munafiqs shopping that day. Did those munafiqs try to convince the jihadists that Islam is a ‘religion of peace’ and to stop the executions and tortures? No, they left hurriedly and let the jihadists do their work of executing unarmed Kafirs in a market. The Westgate jihadists believed they were following Sunna.

The Westgate Mall munafiqs were not neutral. They took the side of jihad by doing nothing to stop it. Their silence gave approval to jihadic terrorism.

Salman Rushdie Fatwa

When a fatwa was declared against writer Salman Rushdie, ordinary British Muslims expressed strong support for blasphemy laws to punish critics of Islam.

The musician known as Cat Stevens was asked if he would go to a demonstration to burn an effigy of the author Salman Rushdie. ”I would have hoped that it’d be the real thing,” he replied.

Furthermore, if Mr. Rushdie turned up at his doorstep looking for help, ”I might ring somebody who might do more damage to him than he would like…I’d try to phone the Ayatollah Khomeini and tell him exactly where this man is.” In his own words, Cat Stevens, aka Yusuf Islam, would take the side of jihad if the opportunity came. ‘Moderate’ Muslims like Yusuf Islam know which side they are on. Not on the side of the Kafir, because jihad is not a ‘peace train’.

Jihad at Broken Hill, Australia, 1915

In 1915, two Kurdish immigrants to Australia read the Sultan’s pamphlet announcing a universal jihad and planned their own self-directed jihad. They waited beside railway tracks and randomly shot Australian civilians on a train on its way to a picnic. Fatalities occurred. They then shot a police constable. It’s similar to the Boston Marathon bombings, when you think about it.

What has changed in 100 years? The doctrine is the same. The weapons are more sophisticated.

Munafiqs of the Armenian Genocide

Edwin Pears recorded this account from a Muslim woman in Turkey:
“Then one night, my husband came home and told me that the padisha (caliph) had sent word that we were to kill all the Christians in our village, and that we would have to kill our (Christian) neighbours. I was very angry, and told him that I did not care who gave such orders; they were wrong. These neighbours had always been kind to us, and if he dared to kill them Allah would pay us out. I tried all I could to stop him, but he killed them — killed them with his own hand.” (Sir Edwin Pears, Turkey and Its People, London: Methuen and Co., 1911, p. 39)

When jihad against Christian subjects of Turkey was declared in 1915, ordinary Muslim village men were led to Friday prayers. Someone read out the Sultan’s summons to jihad and the villagers proceeded to participate in the genocide of Armenians, Assyrian Orthodox and Greek Anatolians, the indigenous peoples of Turkey. Ordinary ‘moderate’ Muslims responded to the call of jihad. Three million people disappeared from the populace within ten years.

Notable Exceptions

There are some noteworthy examples of Muslims who saved lives during jihad. Khaled Abdewahhab of Tunisia was the first Arab to receive a ‘Righteous Gentile’ award from Israel. He had hidden a Jewish family at his country home until liberation came. In 1915, a Turkish doctor ‘married’ four of his Armenian patients to save them from extermination. The uncle of the Tsarnaev brothers denounced his nephews and ordered them to surrender.

So what motivates Muslims when they help Kafirs in trouble? The answer is these ‘moderate’ Muslims are disregarding the Koran (28.86) ‘never be a supporter of the disbelievers’.

We Western people need to reexamine our political correctness. We need to learn the dualistic doctrine of the Kafir that underpins jihad. Otherwise, we will continue to have attacks against Kafir civilians like those at the Westgate Mall, Trolley Square Mall and the Boston Marathon. Muslims who attack civilians are imitating what Mohammed did in Medina in 627 AD.

One of the ways to learn about Islam’s dualism is to ask a Muslim: ‘When jihad comes to our neighborhood, whose side will you be on?’

Britain: Muslim Prison Population Up 200%

Watchtower or Minaret? Manchester prison, with it's minaret-like watchtower at right, houses the murderer Dale Cregan. A Muslim gang is reported to be pressuring Cregan to convert to Islam. (Source: Stemonitis)

Watchtower or Minaret? Manchester prison, with it’s minaret-like watchtower at right, houses the murderer Dale Cregan. A Muslim gang is reported to be pressuring Cregan to convert to Islam. (Source: Stemonitis)

by Soeren Kern:

“Nowadays jails are run mostly by Muslims … It hurts as a Muslim to have someone disrespect my religion. If we deal with him one time, with violence, and show him what time it is, he will never disrespect our religion again … For Muslims, you’d say it’s good, but for non-Muslims, it’s very, very bad.” — Jay, five-time former inmate, quoted by the BBC

The number of Muslim convicts in British prisons has surpassed the 11,000 mark for the first time, according to data included in a new report produced by the British Parliament.

The statistics — from a July 29 House of Commons research report entitled, “Prison Population Statistics” — show that the number of Muslim inmates in England and Wales jumped to 11,248 in 2012, up from 3,681 in 1997. Stated another way, over the past 15 years, the number of Muslims in British prisons has jumped by more than 200%.

The rate of increase of Muslim inmates in British prisons is eight times faster than that of the overall prison population, and the numbers show a clear overrepresentation of Muslim convicts: Muslims, who make up roughly 5% of the British population as a whole, now make up 13% of the British prison population (compared to just 6% in 1997).

The growth in the number of Muslim inmates is fueling fears that British prisons are becoming hotbeds for Islamic radicalization.

Although most of the Muslims in British prisons are immigrants from Asia, the Middle East and North Africa, an increasing number of Muslim inmates are converts to Islam.

According to a research report recently commissioned by the British Ministry of Justice, many non-Muslim inmates in British prisons are being bullied into conversion or are embracing Islam in exchange for promises of protection from physical assault.

The study examines the Islamic “gang culture” inside the Whitemoor Prison in Cambridgeshire, which houses around 500 of the most dangerous prisoners in Britain. Researchers from the Cambridge Institute of Criminology who wrote the report found that more than one third (39%) of the prisoners at Whitemoor are Muslims.

Prisoners told the researchers that they had felt overwhelming pressure to convert. In some instances, they said, Muslim inmates had left Islamic literature in their cells and ordered them to “read this.” In other instances, inmates were promised that if they converted to Islam, they would be safe from physical assault.

The report states that if loners, including sex offenders, converted to Islam, fellow Muslims would defend them; they could thereby gain safety from a large and dominant group. Others used their newly acquired faith as a tool for status in establishing influence.

Non-Muslims and prison officers inside Whitemoor described Islam as an “organized gang” and a “protection racket,” which “glorified terrorist behavior and exploited the fear related to it.”

Prison guards said there were “proper Al-Qaeda” members in the prison who were regarded with “awe” by younger inmates. Some prisoners described Whitemoor as a “recruiting drive for the Taliban” and fertile ground for hatred and a new generation of extremists.

Guards also said they had a policy of “appeasement” towards the powerful and growing Islamic prison population, particularly convicted terrorists who were feared to be recruiting future extremists.

Read more at Gatestone Institute

 

U.S. Arrests 19 Yr-Old Jihadist Convert – This Time We Got Lucky

Qassim al RimiBY CLARE LOPEZ:

A Jacksonville, Florida teen named Shelton Thomas Bell was indicted July 18 on charges of conspiracy and attempt to provide material support to terrorists. Only 19 years old at the time of his arrest, Bell was a convert to Islam who previously had attended the N.E. Florida Islamic Center in Jacksonville before departing in late 2012 on an overseas journey to join the “jihad.”

Somehow, somewhere, Bell seemed to have gotten the idea that jihad was violent armed fighting, and he wanted to link up with a branch of Al-Qaeda in the Arabia Peninsula (AQAP) called Ansar al-Shariah (AAS), which is based in Yemen.

The primary objective of both AQAP and its AAS spin-off is the imposition and enforcement of Islamic (sharia) law. Both AQAP and AAS are on the list of U.S. Foreign Terrorist Organizations , which makes it a crime to provide them material support.

Unfortunately for Bell, his late September 2012 journey to the Middle East began with a stopover in Israel, who promptly refused him entry and put him on a return flight to his previous stopover, in Warsaw, Poland. There, Bell bought a ticket to Amman, Jordan, where things seemed to come apart for him.

According to the indictment, Bell intended to travel to Oman before making his way overland to join Islamic fighters in Yemen; he even bought a plane ticket to Oman. Whether it was an Israeli entry refusal stamp in his passport, or simply Jordanian officials talking with their Israeli counterparts, Bell’s journey to jihad went no further than Amman and he returned to the U.S.

As Randy McDaniels noted in a July 22 WatchDogWire article about the case, Bell was only 17 years old when attended the N.E. Florida Islamic Center; and yet, even at that young age, according to Parvez Ahmed, a Board member and official spokesman for the Islamic Center, Bell already stood out for his “very traditional Islamic clothing,” an obvious signal to his developing Islamic devotion.

The district court indictment further notes that, during 2012, Bell had drawn attention to himself by trying to persuade at least one other Jacksonville juvenile to join him in his journey to jihad. That unnamed juvenile participated in physical fitness and firearms training with Bell and even conducted a practice run with him one night in July 2012 when they “caused significant damage to religious statues at the Chapel Hill Memorial Gardens Cemetery.”

Inept as Bell’s attempts to fight jihad with AAS/AQAP may have been, the key issues here, as McDaniels points out, center rather on who were the influential individuals in Bell’s life that led him to convert to Islam in the first place and then so deeply indoctrinated him with Islamic precepts on jihad that he took such concrete, indictable steps towards joining forces that are implacably hostile to U.S. national security interests.

Did Bell fall under the influence of individuals at the N.E. Florida Islamic Center? Did any of such influences point him in the direction of online internet contacts in the world of jihadist chat rooms?

Read more at The Clarion Project

Homegrown Terrorists, Rebels in Search of a Cause

by Peter A. Olsson
Middle East Quarterly
Summer 2013, pp. 3-10 (view PDF)

The Boston bombing has refocused public attention on a steadily growing phenomenon the Obama administration has been trying to sweep under the carpet: domestic Islamist terrorists whose familiarity with American culture makes them more difficult to detect prior to their acts of terror. By way of preventing similar attacks, therefore, it is necessary not only to monitor terror networks but also to understand the psychodynamics of the creation of “homegrown terrorists” in general, and the appeal of radical Islam to “In-betweeners”—young persons in a transitional phase in one or more key aspects of their lives—in particular.

The Vulnerable “In-betweeners”

Clinical psychologist Margaret Singer’s 1995 Cults in Our Midst spells out this behavioral pattern in some detail, explaining the individual’s vulnerability to seduction by an exploitative cult:

Vulnerable individuals are lonely, in a transition between high school and college, between college and a job or graduate school, traveling away from home, arriving in a new location, recently jilted or divorced, fresh from losing a job, feeling overwhelmed about how things are going, or not knowing what to do next in life. Unsettling personal occurrences are commonplace. At such times, we are all open to persuasion, more suggestible, more willing to take something offered us without thinking there may be strings attached.[1]

Child psychoanalyst Anna Freud long observed that adolescent behavior can range between enthusiasm about community activities to a longing for solitude. Adolescents can be submissive to a chosen leader or defiant of any authority, extremely self-absorbed or materialistic, and simultaneously very idealistic. Additionally, adolescents are struggling with notions of psychosocial control, that is, the ability to delay gratification, regulate emotions, control impulses, and resist peer influence.[2]

 

Adam Gadahn, Azzam the American, achieved notoriety as al-Qaeda’s most prominent English-speaking spokesman. The 25-year-old American was raised in Orange County, California, the son of rock musician Phil Pearlman, who changed the family name to Gadahn and dropped out of society to become a goat farmer when Adam was still a child. During his teens, Adam started to rebel, frequenting a mosque, and became radicalized at fifteen.

 

As with other malignant Pied Pipers, the appeal of Osama bin Laden and radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki has been a unique “fit” for adolescent rebelliousness and search for independent identity. Spiritual and religious sermonizing and discussion have the potential to draw young people toward a perceived idealistic pursuit of social justice or utopian causes embedded in much jihadist propaganda. The exciting study of weapons, military tactics, physical fitness, and bomb-making technology also appeals to young people; they prefer jihadism to their fathers’ mundane and boring vocations. But even if they were inclined to more traditional pursuits, jobs are scarce in most countries because of the global recession.

What would otherwise be normal adolescent rebellion and protest can thus transform into terrorist identification—and actions—through the tutelage of agitators like Awlaki. Particularly vulnerable to incitement are persons in the phase of “prolonged” or “extended” adolescence, who have yet to make the transition from childlike dependence to adult-like independence, and who purposefully shy away from adult responsibilities and refuse outright to act their age.[3]

A Community of “In-Betweeners”

The same psychodynamic traits seen in individuals can also apply to communities or even countries in transition, leaving them vulnerable on a larger scale to terror cult recruitment efforts. This is particularly true for disaffected late adolescent and young adult populations. Afghanistan after the Soviet occupation; Iraq after the defeat of Saddam; politically unsettled Lebanon after the departure of Syrian armed forces; unstable Somalia and Yemen—all are fertile ground for recruitment efforts. The recent Arab upheavals, with their roller-coaster ride between the opening of social and electoral spaces and authoritarian pushback may have also increased the appeal of jihadists.

The al-Qaeda cult is built on an intricate interweaving of jihadist theology that declares a “just cause” for the terror group as posited by self-appointed messiahs like bin Laden or Awlaki who use and twist Muslim teachings to suit their own ends in recruiting and indoctrinating recruits. In addition, many madrassas (traditional Muslim religious schools) can function like prep schools for jihad and its training camps, and some radical Western mosques prey on the “in-betweeners” and provide ideal climates to satisfy the six conditions Singer delineated as effective in putting thought-reform (i.e., brainwashing) processes into action:

  1. Keep the person unaware that there is an agenda to control or change the person. The terrorist training camps use peer-modeling, peer pressure, and the military with weapons and explosives training provided to excitable, angry young men. The radical jihadist incitement is presented as a normal extension of the recruits’ Qur’anic study and memorization.
  2. Control time and the physical environment including contacts and information. Easily accomplished in al-Qaeda’s Yemeni camps where U.S. jihadists are often sent.
  3. Create a sense of fear and dependency. The charismatic leaders hold forth a fantasy of shared grandiose power merged with visions of victorious jihad.
  4. Suppress old behavior and attitudes. Islamists allow no debate or dialectic of discussion.
  5. Instill new behavior and attitudes. Terror groups manipulate by a system of financial and social prestige rewards for the new terrorist identity and ideology which they proffer. Promised rewards from God in Paradise and for families left behind are offered by al-Qaeda.
  6. Put forth a closed system of logic. This is achieved through inculcation of a zero-sum outlook: us versus them, in-group (true believers) versus out-group (infidels).[4]

Pathways of Homegrown Terrorists

The pragmatic “personal pathway model” presented by psychologist Eric Shaw further helps explain the development of homegrown terrorists in combination with the “in-betweener” concept. He has found that terrorists solidify their identity through group cohesion and personal connection instilled in them through shared experiences of harsh treatment, most often received from security forces or in prison. Just as prison can provide a personal connection, spiritual inspiration, and group identity for a future terrorist, so too does al-Qaeda implement a comparable but calculated psycho-inspirational charismatic, mystical indoctrination and group connection in their training camps.

Shaw also found that a telling turning point for future terrorists occurs upon identifying glaring inconsistencies between the political philosophies and beliefs of their parents or their families of origin and their actual impotence in terms of effective social or moral action, and that often (though not always) nascent terrorists are frustrated by their failure to achieve professional or vocational places in society despite being aptly qualified for such posts.[5]

A number of “homegrown terrorists” illustrate the psychological patterns exhibited in the adolescent identity struggles discussed above.

**********

Conclusions

The recruitment of homegrown terrorists involves the charismatic exploitation of young “in-betweeners” by radical imams and friends as well as Internet recruiters. Terror cults use well recognized mind control, thought reform techniques, and social group atmospheres to accomplish their ends, exploiting normal adolescents’ predilection for rebellion coupled with a search for ideals and causes.

The key psychodynamic patterns in homegrown terrorists are: (1) ambivalence toward, or disappointment in, parental figures resulting in “father longing”; (2) ambivalence about women, marriage, and intimacy; (3) prolonged adolescent identity searching with its accompanying crises; and, (4) an ambivalence toward authority, combining a fear or even hatred of authority with a longing for effective authority.

This conflict with authority often results in the “in-betweener” being placed in a setting that exacerbates the problem. Islamist imams, especially those affiliated with the Wahhabi brand of Salafism, regularly seek appointments as chaplains in American prisons and spread their gospel of intolerance among angry prisoners, finding a keen audience among young, incarcerated rebels in search of a cause.[24]

Are there minimally intrusive ways whereby Western intelligence officers can engage in monitoring of groups or individuals that have the potential for recruitment of young people for their dangerous and radical causes? More importantly, can specially trained teachers, diplomats, social workers, and other professionals listen to and engage in dialogue with these vulnerable young persons before they are brainwashed or seek brainwashing as a means of belonging? This, however, is a profoundly difficult and prolonged group therapy task not unlike Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, and treatment of severe character and personality disorders.[25]

Peter A. Olsson is a retired physician-psychiatrist and psychoanalyst. He practiced psychiatry and psychotherapy and taught psychotherapy in Houston for twenty-five years and subsequently in New Hampshire. He is the author of Malignant Pied Pipers of Our Time: A Psychological Study of Destructive Cult Leaders from Rev. Jim Jones to Osama bin Laden(Baltimore: Publish America, 2005) and The Cult Of Osama: Psychoanalyzing Bin Laden and His Magnetism for Muslim Youths (Westport: Praeger Security International of Greenwood Group, 2007).

Read more

Stakelbeck on Terror Show: Jihad in Boston

The Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center

The Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center

On this week’s episode of the Stakelbeck on Terror Show, we’re on the ground in Boston to investigate Muslim Brotherhood activity in local mosques and what drove the Boston Marathon Bombers to carry out their deadly attack.

 

How American Muslims Radicalize

aggBy Karen Lugo:

Mosques become a state within a state, except for the welfare assistance.

If radicalized means self-segregated, embittered, and angry enough to be ambivalent about the mentorship of jihadists, then America needs to pay close attention to neighborhood Islamic centers. There is a nexus between disaffected Muslims and those who graduate to violence, and two studies point to the American mosque. Now that another plot has been executed rather than foiled, there is finally overdue focus on the imams who foment resentment and alienation.

We have allowed mosques to serve as citadels, cutting Muslims off from the democratic society outside. When Muslim marriages are arranged, then officiated and filed within the mosque; when large and small contract disputes are adjudicated by a sheikh; when marriages are ended and custody determined by the imam, and financial disagreements assessed by mosque officials, observant Muslims might as well be living anywhere.

Certainly, the conditions for those that live under tight mosque control do not reflect anything that resembles America.

Constitutional rights and due process protections do not penetrate many sharia-observant mosque domains. After speaking with several Muslim individuals seeking to reassert constitutional rights after summary judgments were rendered, it is apparent that what purports to be Islamic arbitration is really more akin to kindergarten sandlot refereeing. The documents reveal that there was no semblance of legal process expected in arbitration proceedings, no conflict of interest disclosures, and no provision for structural fairness rules.

Even Muslim legal scholar M. Ali Sadiqi, writing for the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America, noted that Muslims would have difficulty bringing internal arbitration standards into conformity with American legal principles, since under sharia inheritance rules women are entitled to only one quarter of the estate — and one eighth if there are children.

In Germany, law enforcement authorities now see the Islamic courts as a competitive “shadow justice system,” and complain that sharia-styled tribunals interfere with the government’s duty to administer both civil and criminal justice.

In Britain, Baroness Cox has been working tirelessly for years to see British law reinstated and sharia jurisdiction reversed. During hearings on her bill, now called the Arbitration and Mediation Services Equality Bill, Baroness Donaghy (Labour Party) called the presumed acquiescence of women to unequal and often cruel treatment as “consensual as rape.” A Muslim woman told Baroness Cox:

I feel betrayed by Britain, I came to this country to get away from all this but the situation is worse here than in my country of origin.

From Britain to the Netherlands, Spain, Denmark, France, Germany, and America, it is possible for Muslims to experience no notable difference between life in the West and the conditions that they fled back in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt, and Iraq. The only mentionable difference: the generous social welfare programs offered in the Western cultures.

When I inquired of a local imam as to how he identified radicalization and whether he was concerned about it, he tellingly pivoted to accusations that the U.S. government does not do enough for immigrant Muslims.

In contrast, Western-oriented American Muslim Dr. Zuhdi Jasser called out clerics who urge adherents to “focus on their own victimization, patronizingly reminding the rest of America not to be ‘racists’ [or] ‘bigots.’”

Islamic society of Boston

Islamic society of Boston

The unquestionably radical nature of the Islamic Society of Boston mosque and its counterpart the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center (called “small one” and “big one” by locals) illustrates the worst of Islamist subversion. Whether the Tsarnaev brothers attended to the degree that the mosque was a key part of their radicalization is unknown, but it could not have been a mitigating influence in their conversion to terrorism. The pedigree of convicted terrorists that have emerged from IBS/IBSCC incubation, the close Muslim Brotherhood connections, the terror group ties, and the criminal convictions of leadership figures lead one to wonder how much more radical activism still seethes within this mosque community.

We also have examples of the poisonous rhetoric purveyed at these two mosques. In just one instance, invited imam Abdullah Farooq was videotaped saying that the Patriot Act “permits [government] to come to your door” and “to come anywhere they want and to come after you anytime.” He went on to urge action in the name of Allah against “oppressors,” by “grabbing on to gun and sword … to step out into this world and do your job.”

A 2004 lesson (active link now disabled) that gave tips on disciplining a wife recommended hanging up a whip in plain sight as a deterrent, but not advocating actual physical punishment unless she really needs it.

Sheikh Ahmed Mansour, an exile from Egypt, said that the ISB mosque “was controlled by fanatics.” He likened the atmosphere to the sharia extremism that he left behind: “I left Egypt to escape the Muslim Brotherhood, but I had found it [at ISB].” When Mansour told Fox News that fiery sermons can spur impressionable young men to violence, even if the speaker doesn’t explicitly advocate it, he was warning America that radicalization comes from the rhetoric that cleverly stops short of illegal incitement to imminent violence.

Read more at PJ Media