Archive for the ‘Obama and Islamic State’ category

Trump’s History-Changing Vow To Eradicate ‘Radical Islamic Terrorism’

January 23, 2017

Trump’s History-Changing Vow To Eradicate ‘Radical Islamic Terrorism’, PJ mediaRobert Spencer, January 23, 2017

trumpandisisPresident Donald Trump after he was sworn in by Justice John Roberts during the Presidential Inauguration ceremony for Donald Trump as the 45th President of the United States held at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC on January 20, 2017. (Photo by Anthony Behar) (Sipa via AP Images)

It is welcome to have that kind of moral clarity back in the White House. President Trump clearly hopes to emulate Reagan by destroying the Islamic State just as Reagan’s actions led to the collapse of the Soviet Union.

That collapse didn’t end Communism, which is alive and well in the Democratic Party and on U.S. university campuses, but it did deal it a significant blow. If Trump ends the Islamic State, it won’t end Islamic jihad, but it will deal it a significant blow. After so many years of ignoring, enabling, explaining away, and blaming itself for jihad, the United States is finally getting back on track.

And not a moment too soon.

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

President Trump first said it during his Inaugural Address:

We will … unite the civilized world against radical Islamic terrorism which we will eradicate completely from the face of the Earth.

The establishment media has been too involved with comparing crowd sizes to take any significant notice, but Trump’s words heralded a change that was momentous — and could make all the difference in our civilizational struggle against the global jihad.

One principal reason why the threat of Islamic jihad that confronts Trump is so large is because his predecessor ignored it, denied its motivating ideology, and allowed it to proliferate. A pivotal yet overlooked action of the Obama administration was its purge of all mention of Islam and jihad from law enforcement counter-terror training materials in 2011 to heed the demand of U.S. Muslim groups and their allies. Since then, the U.S. has failed to identify, confront, and oppose the ideology that has enabled jihadis to behave more boldly and aggressively then ever.

That ideology has spread unchecked in the U.S. in large part because Barack Obama didn’t want law enforcement officials learning about it: that would have been “Islamophobic.”

It is an adage as old as warfare itself: one cannot defeat an enemy that one does not understand. It could be added that one certainly has no chance whatsoever of defeating an enemy that one refuses to understand. Yet Obama’s “Countering Violent Extremism” program pointedly and ostentatiously avoided all mention of Islam and jihad in connection with terrorism. He did this in accord with the claim that investigating and speaking honestly about the beliefs and goals of jihadis would so mortally offend moderate Muslims that they would become “radicalized” and join the jihad themselves.

The whole construct was absurd. Those who advanced the claim, and they were many, never explained why these “moderates” who supposedly rejected violence in the name of Islam as “un-Islamic” would be so enraged by discussion of how others committed violence in the name of Islam that they would be moved to … violence in the name of Islam.

But now the Absurd Administration is gone. A new age of realism is dawning.

Trump has vowed to “eradicate” what he calls “radical Islamic terrorism” “completely from the face of the Earth.” He reiterated this the day after his inauguration, when speaking to the CIA:

We have to get rid of ISIS. We have no choice. Radical Islamic terrorism, and I said it yesterday, has to be eradicated, just off the face of the Earth. This is evil. This is evil … This is a level of evil that we haven’t seen. And you’re going to go do it and you’re going to do a phenomenal job, but we’re going to end it. It’s time. It’s time right now to end it.

Strictly speaking, it isn’t possible within four years, or eight, to eradicate “radical Islamic terrorism” — which is actually orthodox and mainstream in Islam — as long as there are people who believe the Qur’an is the perfect and eternal word of Allah.

There will always be some believers who get the idea that they can please Allah by killing and being killed for him (cf. Qur’an 9:111). However, Trump’s declaration, while hyperbolic, was a welcome indication of his apparent determination to speak honestly about the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat, and to combat it and roll it back.

And to call it “evil,” after eight years of the Obama administration’s moral equivocation and obfuscation, is as refreshing as Ronald Reagan calling the Soviet Union an “evil empire” in the midst of a similar period of equivocation and cowardice.

It is welcome to have that kind of moral clarity back in the White House. President Trump clearly hopes to emulate Reagan by destroying the Islamic State just as Reagan’s actions led to the collapse of the Soviet Union.

That collapse didn’t end Communism, which is alive and well in the Democratic Party and on U.S. university campuses, but it did deal it a significant blow. If Trump ends the Islamic State, it won’t end Islamic jihad, but it will deal it a significant blow. After so many years of ignoring, enabling, explaining away, and blaming itself for jihad, the United States is finally getting back on track.

And not a moment too soon.

Congratulations, President Trump! Now what? Reversing the ostrich complex

January 21, 2017

Congratulations, President Trump! Now what? Reversing the ostrich complex, Jihad Watch

The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government.

trump-oval-office

We, as military officers, have failed to treat linguistics – the war of words – with the level of importance to which it deserves. As summarized in Lawfare: The War Against Free Speech:

“The war against Islamism is as much a war of ideas as it is a physical battle, and therefore the dissemination of information in the free world is paramount. The manipulation of Western court systems, the use of Western “hate speech laws” and other products of political correctness to destroy the very principles that democracies stand for, must be countered.

Unfortunately Islamist lawfare is beginning to limit and control public discussion of Islam, particularly as it pertains to comprehending the threat posed by Islamic terrorist entities. As such, the Islamist lawfare challenge presents a direct and real threat not only to our constitutional rights, but also to our national security.”[184]

Can you imagine a scenario where, during World War II, if Nazis complained to us about our analyzing Mein Kampf or the Enigma machine, we would have stopped?[117] Or where we would have appointed Nazi party members or open supporters and advocates to senior leadership positions within the Executive Branch departments or as special assistants to the President?[118][119] [120] It would have been insane to fight a war that way.

And yet that is exactly what we are doing now with this policy and this administration. Islamic doctrine, as codified in the Qur’an, Hadith, Sira and sharia law, is the Enigma machine with which we can decode the actions and intentions of the threat. But Islamic law prohibits non-Muslims from even purchasing the Qur’an.[121]

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

“ISIL [The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant] is not ‘Islamic.’” – President Barack Obama[1]

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” – Joseph Goebbels[2]

Why does our government recoil “at the notion that we might actually want to scrutinize an ideology that fuels anti-American militarism”?[3] The purge of “Islam,” “jihad,” “sharia,” and other related words from our National Security documents, counter-terrorism training, and intelligence analysis is eerily reminiscent of the warning George Orwell described in his seminal work – 1984.[4] “The purpose of Newspeak was…to make all other modes of thought impossible…by eliminating undesirable words and by stripping such words as remained of unorthodox meaning”[5] This policy is the “Ostrich Complex,” a synonym for Jihad Denial Syndrome (JDS).[6] [7]

Both the Bush and Obama administrations have effectively ascribed to a “see no evil” policy when it comes to Islam.[8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] The problem is that “words convey reality,” and it is our duty as military officers to be connected to reality.[20] Our oath requires us to “…support and defend the Constitution of the United States, against all enemies, foreign and domestic…”.[21] Yet this administration has tasked us to focus on the euphemistic “violent extremists”, which aside from being woefully ambiguous, ignores those who may not meet the narrow definition of violent extremists – yet still meet the broader threshold of being enemies.[*][22]

In 2004, The 9/11 Commission Report identified the enemy as “twofold: al Qaeda, a stateless network of terrorists that struck us on 9/11; and a radical ideological movement in the Islamic world, inspired in part by al Qaeda, which has spawned terrorist groups and violence across the globe.”[23] It went on to note that “ Islamists consider Islam to be as much a religion as an ‘ideology.’”[24] In spite of this, President Obama “and his subordinates, in consultation with advisors from Islamist organizations [like the Muslim Brotherhood], have purged training materials used to instruct national security agents of information deemed to be unflattering of Islam.”[25]

In December 2014 , the Commanding General of a key organization leading the fight against the Islamic State – Special Operations Command Central (SOCCENT) – admitted, “We do not understand the movement, and until we do, we are not going to defeat it. We have not defeated the idea. We do not even understand the idea.”[26] Major General Nagata was speaking of the Islamic State, the rebranded name for al Qaeda in Iraq – an offshoot of what is now called “core al Qaeda.”[27] Regardless, almost a decade and a half after the slaughter of almost 3,000 Americans, this is inexcusable.

Although there are multiple, competing interpretations of Islam, it is beyond the scope of this white paper to attempt to broker the differences, but rather to ensure we are able to address the aggressive, supremacist ideology that constitutes a continuing national security threat based on our enemies own statements claiming legal and theological accuracy and justification for their actions.[28]

“Does concern for multicultural or religious sensibilities justify relinquishing free speech in public discourse and scholarly endeavors?”[29] This report argues in the negative…and that, in fact, such an order to subordinate national security interests and intelligence analysis to anything less than a full and factual analysis constitutes dereliction of duty on behalf of the practitioner and an illegal order on behalf of the party responsible for issuing the order, policy or regulation.[30] [31]

The Problem

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” – George Santayana[32]

“Today there are two great threats facing the survival of the modern liberal West. The first is its exaggerated confidence in the power of reason;the second is its profound underestimation of the forces of fanaticism.” – Lee Harris, The Suicide of Reason[33]

We have faced a totalitarian, supremacist ideology bent on world domination before.[34] Adolf Hitler told us what his goal was in Mein Kampf when it was published in 1926.[35] [36] The problem was, almost no one believed him. And people could not imagine the depths of evil of which the Nazi regime was capable. In fact, the word “genocide” was not invented until 1944.[37] Hitler said to the German people, “‘I offer you struggle, danger and death,’ and as a result a whole nation flung itself at his feet.”[38] Effectively, so too did Muhammad – by his words and actions.[39][40]

Some will find the comparison of Nazi ideology to Islamic ideology offensive. This warrants further exploration. Dr. Bill Warner, Center for Study of Political Islam, has analyzed the anti-Semitism in Mein Kampf (7%), the Meccan Koran (1%), the Medinan Koran (16.9%), Sahih al-Bukhari (8.9%) and the Sira (12%).[41] Overall, the trilogy of Islamic texts averages 9.3% anti-Semitic content – clearly more anti-Semitic than Mein Kampf – especially when total word count is considered. [42] With respect to violence, only 5.6% of the Hebrew Bible is dedicated to violence.[43] By comparison, 9% of the Koran, 21% of the Hadith of Bukhari, and 67% of the Sira are dedicated to violent jihad. [44] The complete Islamic trilogy is 31% dedicated to political violence. [45]

And it’s not just a matter of an academic analysis of the doctrine. Words and declarations precede actions. We effectively ignored al Qaeda’s fatwa that constituted a declaration of war – despite the first World Trade Center Bombing in 1993, the attacks on our embassies in Africa and the deadly attack on the USS Cole – until 9/11.[46]

According to Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law, “The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians…until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax.” It is beyond the scope of this paper to explain the concept of progressive revelation with respect to the Qur’an, but suffice it to say that Qur’an 4:89 “Slay them wherever you find them” remains a commandment from Allah that is fully in effect and applies to all Muslims for all times (as does Qur’an 9:29, and 9:5’s “Sword Verse” for that matter).[47]

“Militant Islam may actually pose an existential threat to the United States. At a minimum, it constitutes a formidable strategic threat.”[48] Despite the onslaught of Islamic inspired terrorism, the Ostrich Complex manifested itself visibly just last week, when the Obama Administration released its final National Security Strategy.[49] The only mention of Islam is to “reject the lie that we are at war with Islam.” [50] There was no mention of the doctrine of jihad or sharia law. Yet a study of Islamic doctrine and the proclamations of the jihadists attacking us, makes it clear that Islam is the justification for those attacks.[51] In the jihadists’ minds, it is clear that they are at war with us.

The problem is: how can you defeat an enemy you cannot name? How can you know and understand an enemy you are prohibited from analyzing? This prohibition subverts the intelligence analysis process and leaves us strategically blind to the enemy.[52]

In 2009, during one of his first major foreign policy speeches overseas, President Obama declared “And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”[53] A review of the U.S. Constitution reveals no such duty.[54] But the President had set the tone and effectively the policy for his administration with respect to Islam when he said those words in 2009. And so doing, we see that “the abuse of political power is fundamentally connected with the sophistic abuse of the word.”[55]

As Josef Pieper warned, “the general public is being reduced to a state where people not only are unable to find out about the truth but also become unable even to search for the truth because they are satisfied with deception and trickery that have determined their convictions, satisfied with a fictitious reality created by design through the abuse of language.”[56] So too is our National Security apparatus is being subverted by this policy.

The problem is partially rooted in a misunderstanding of our own Constitution, which affords religious protections under the First Amendment.[†] This is understandable because “Many people confuse politics and religion.”[57] However, Islam is not just a religion – it is a complete civilizational alternative that includes a legal, political, economic, social and military doctrine known as shariah law.[58] As comprehensively explained in the Muslim Brotherhood’s Explanatory Memorandum, [59] the strategy for subverting the US Constitution to comport with shariah law is a “Civilization-Jihadist Process” which calls for “eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”[60] This makes it clear that although the Muslim Brotherhood varies in ways and means from al Qaeda and the Islamic State, their ends – the end state – remain the same.

Although religion is only a portion of Islam, shariah makes it is impossible to separate Mosque and State in Islam.[61] “The religion of Islam is what a Muslim does to go to paradise and avoid hell. Political Islam determines the treatment of unbelievers and the governance of Muslims.”[62] It is the political focus on non-believers that raises the national security interests. Were the religious and the political not inseparable in Islam, we would remain unconcerned with what we would deem to be the strictly religious aspects of Islam. The scope of the problem is exacerbated by the fact that 61% of the Qur’an, 75% of the Sira and 20% of the Hadith is dedicated to the political. [63] This is why David Yerushalmi argued that “the active and purposeful pursuit of Shariah in the U.S. has implications for the federal criminal law of sedition (notably Title 18, Section 2385 of the U.S. Code),” where Jewish law, Christian dogmas and Catholic canon do not.”[64]

Background

Perhaps the most high profile case of Islamic suppression of free speech (before the attack on Charlie Hebdo)[65] was the fatwa[‡] that constituted a death sentence against Salman Rushdie as a result of his publishing The Satanic Verses.[66] [67] 25 years after the original fatwa was issued calling for his death, it was renewed.[68]

But the Islamic war on free speech dates back to the time of Muhammad himself when in 624 he first started ordering the assassination of poets who mocked him (Al-Nadr bin al-Harith,[69] Uqba bin Abu Muayt,[70] Asma bint Marwan,[71] Abu Afak,[72] Kab bin al-Ashraf,[73] [74] Ibn Sunayna,[75] a one-eyed Bedouin,[76] and one of Abdullah bin Katal’s two singing-girls. [77] [78])[79] For those unfamiliar with Islamic jurisprudence, it warrants pointing out that the first source is the Qur’an, the second is the example of Muhammad – who the Qur’an cites is the model for Muslims to emulate. Hence the significance of these events.

In addition to physical threats of violence, Islam also employs jihad of the pen. As an example, much of the academic aversion to discuss Islam honestly can be attributed to the aggressive tone of Edward Said’s Orientalism that amounts to intellectual terrorism as a result of “spraying charges of racism, imperialism and Eurocentrism from a moral high ground.”[80] [81] If only Ibn Warraq’s seminal Defending the West: A Critique of Edward Said’s Orientalism were as well read in academic circles.[82]

On October 19th, 2011, in order to advance their efforts to silence critical examination of Islam in relation to the threat, a number of Muslim groups sent an open letter to John Brennan, who was then serving as Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism and Deputy National Security Advisor.[83] In it, they accused “the federal government’s use of biased, false and highly offensive training materials about Muslims and Islam” and demanded a purge of the offensive training materials from the FBI, CIA, Homeland Security and the DoD.[84]

That same month, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Homeland Defense Strategy and Force Planning Jose Mayorga formally requested that the Director of the Joint Staff task the “Combatant Commands, Services, National Guard Bureau and Component Commands” to determine the criteria for instructors on “countering violent Islamic extremism.”[85] After that tasking did not have a sufficiently chilling effect on “offensive” counterterrorism training, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey himself signed a letter further reiterating his concern about “ideas, beliefs, and actions that are…disrespectful of the Islamic religion.” And that the review should ensure that programs exhibit “cultural sensitivity, respect for religion and intellectual balance…”[86] [87]

In so doing, Chairman Dempsey violated his own duty to the American Public when he silenced those who would honestly analyze the threat.[88] His actions placed the ideology of multiculturalism over his responsibilities as an officer in the US Military who has sworn an oath of office,[89] despite his duties as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.[90] It appears as if his primary concern was not with American values and security, but rather with not offending the Muslim world. [91]

It is a shame General Dempsey has failed to heed the advice of his predecessor, General Pete Pace, who warned:

“I say you need to get out and read what our enemies have said. Remember Hitler. Remember he wrote Mein Kampf. He said in writing exactly what his plan was, and we collectively ignored that to our great detriment. Now, our enemies have said publicly on film, on the Internet, their goal is to destroy our way of life. No equivocation on their part.”[92] [93]

Or for that matter, General George Washington, who prognosticated, “If the freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”[94]

Bad Actors

Two of the organizations leading the efforts to subvert our ability to even discuss Islam in the context of National Security are the Muslim Brotherhood and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). The United Arab Emirates (UAE) named both the Muslim Brotherhood and the CAIR as designated terrorist organizations.[95] [96] Additionally, CAIR has been extensively linked with Hamas – a U.S. designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO).[97] [98] [99]

The Muslim Brotherhood has been extensively documented as a terrorist organization,[100] [101] and was banned in Egypt in 1948, and is now once again outlawed in Egypt.[102] Additionally, the Muslim Brotherhood has been designated as a terrorist organization by Egypt,[103] [104] Russia, [105] [106] Syria,[107] Saudi Arabia[108] and the United Arab Emirates.[109] [110][111] The 9/11 Commission Report recognized the Muslim Brotherhood as a principle ideological inspiration for al Qaeda.[112]

The actions of these two organizations (Muslim Brotherhood & their front group – CAIR) in particular, I will argue – as Andrew McCarthy did in his conviction against Omar Abdel Rahman (the “Blind Sheik”) – constitutes seditious conspiracy,[§] that is “a confederation to wage war against the United States.”[113] [114]

A Judicial Watch Special Report titled “U.S. Government Purges of Law Enforcement Training Material Deemed ‘Offensive’ to Muslims” extensively documents the history of the purge within the Department of Justice.[115] Which begs the questions as to why the Pentagon is listening to Hamas-linked and designated terrorist organizations?[116]

Can you imagine a scenario where, during World War II, if Nazis complained to us about our analyzing Mein Kampf or the Enigma machine, we would have stopped?[117] Or where we would have appointed Nazi party members or open supporters and advocates to senior leadership positions within the Executive Branch departments or as special assistants to the President?[118][119] [120] It would have been insane to fight a war that way.

And yet that is exactly what we are doing now with this policy and this administration. Islamic doctrine, as codified in the Qur’an, Hadith, Sira and sharia law, is the Enigma machine with which we can decode the actions and intentions of the threat. But Islamic law prohibits non-Muslims from even purchasing the Qur’an.[121]

The reality that Islam currently has over a billion adherents creates a tremendous apprehension about the possibility that these adherents follow an ideology that is rooted in an aggressive, totalitarian, supremacist doctrine bent on world domination. Even if President Obama is correct when he states that “99.9% of Muslims” reject that interpretation of Islam, that still leaves over a million jihadists committed to global Islamic reign.[122] And polls show that number is actually much higher than what the President is portraying.[123] It is that fear [of the possibility that there are over a million people that ascribe to a violent ideology] that allows the lie – of Islam as a religion of peace – to live. As David Horowitz said, “A lie grounded in human desire is too powerful for reason to kill.”[124]

In fact, the size of Islam’s followership is one of the arguments used by Muslim Brotherhood sympathizers simultaneously as both evidence of Islam’s validity and an implied threat.[125] But behind that argument is a logical fallacy – the bandwagon –that holds that an ideology has credence because many people ascribe to it.[126] And more importantly, the size of Islam’s adherents exponentially increases the severity of the danger from the ideology spreading.

As Thomas Paine said, “I prefer peace. But, if there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace.”[127] The problem is, “It is simply delusional to think there is no correlation between what a person believes and how they are likely to act – as delusional as it is to think there is no correlation between Islam’s doctrinal summons to violence and Islamic terrorism.”[128]

Recommendations

“In political warfare, the weapons are words.” – David Horowitz[129]

Ideally, the U.S. Government would reverse the policy to ban the examination of the same Islamic doctrine that our declared enemy says they follow. Recognizing that this administration will not reverse this policy leaves national security professional with a tremendous ethical dilemma. If we are obsessed with political correctness, policies, and promotions, we are negligent in our highest duty: to support and defend American lives.[130]

As Gary Hull discussed in Mohammad: The Banned Images:

“In the battle between open discourse and terrorist intimidation, the immediate philosophic issue is: how does one settle competing claims? Such claims cannot be avoided and are inherent in living in a social setting. … Fundamentally, there are only two methods by which to settle such claims: by reference to persuasion, debate, arguments – i.e. by appealing to reason – or by knives, guns, and bombs – i.e., by reference to the threat or actual initiation of physical force.”[131]

Right now, our options are limited to challenging the status quo or violating our professional oaths, not to mention professional canons. We should continue to conduct personal professional development through extensive reading of both primary Islamic source material, e.g. the Qur’an,[132] Sahih al-Bukhari (specifically Volume 4, Book 56[133] and Volume 9, Appendix III[134]), the Sira,[135] the Reliance of the Traveller,[136] War and Peace in the Law of Islam,[137] The Quranic Concept of War[138] and Freedom of Expression in Islam[139]; secondary source material that predate political correctness, like Moslems: Their Beliefs, Practices, and Politics[140] or shun political correctness, like The Suicide of Reason[141]; books by counter jihadists like Raymond Ibrahim,[142] Robert Spencer,[143] [144] Stephen Coughlin,[145] [146] Frank Gaffney,[147] the Team B2,[148] Walid Phares,[149] and Brigitte Gabriel,[150]; as well as books written by apostates like Ibn Warraq,[151] [152] [153] [154], Ayaan Hirsi Ali,[155] [156] [157] Nonie Darwish,[158] [159][160] and Wafa Sultan.[161]

Others outside the Executive Branch, specifically the Legislative Branch and the press, can continue to press the Administration for information about the actions they are taking and to expose the ill-advised and ill-guided policies being forced on the Executive Branch. In this respect, articles exposing Administration, supported by information gained through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and lawsuits can assist in righting this ship.

Once Chairman Dempsey leaves this summer, we can work towards educating the new Chairman about the nature of the threat – both foreign and domestic – and push to have him rescind or supersede Chairman Dempsey’s purge letter. [162] [163] We can encourage the new Chairman to update professional reading lists to include primary Islamic source materials as well as the politically incorrect books that nonetheless accurately identify, assess, and diagnose the threat. Additionally, we should review and update our policies and training in accordance with the recommendations of the US Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee in accordance with their special report A Ticking Time Bomb[164] regarding the Fort Hood attack, rather than the politically correct report produced for the Federal Bureau of Investigation[165] and the Department of Defense’s report, which only mentions Islam once, and that reference was buried in a footnote.[166] Despite Secretary Gates’ guidance, this has not been done.[167]

Regardless of the results of the Presidential election in 2016, we must push the new administration to designate both the Muslim Brotherhood and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as Foreign Terrorist Organizations. During the Holy Land Foundation trial, Judge Solis directly associated CAIR with a designated terrorist organization.[168] As previously mentioned, this has already been done by Egypt,[169] [170] Russia, [171] [172] Syria,[173] Saudi Arabia[174] and the United Arab Emirates[175] [176] [177] – and we should follow their leads in this case. This may be no easy task depending on who wins the White House, given that CAIR has already started attempting to manipulate the 2016 Republican Presidential candidates publically.[178] [179]

One of the ways to eliminate political correctness from intelligence analysis would be to hold National Security professionals and Intelligence Analysis products to a legal standard. As Andrew McCarthy explains in his book, Willful Blindness:

“Trials have been a priceless elucidation of alarming truths. A trial is a crucible like no other. Political correctness and sloganeering melt away. … [Jurors] have to be told a story that comports with reality, or they won’t convict the person whose fate lies in their hands. A trial is not an exercise in rhetoric or spin. You don’t get to make blithe pronouncements – that terrorism has nothing to do with Islam, that jihadists are a bare fringe distorting the true faith, or that terrorists acted because of poverty, alienation or, needless to say, Israel. You actually have to prove things beyond a reasonable doubt. You have to depict the world as it is, not as we wish it were.”[180]

Finally, we can determine if my political heresy has been the result of some blend of xenophobia and conspiracy theories, or if it is the result of an honest intellectual development that can be replicated and shared throughout the National Security apparatus, and if so, how.[181]

Conclusion

“War is a mere continuation of policy by other means.” – Clausewitz[182]

“Politics is war conducted by other means.” – David Horowitz[183]

We, as military officers, have failed to treat linguistics – the war of words – with the level of importance to which it deserves. As summarized in Lawfare: The War Against Free Speech:

“The war against Islamism is as much a war of ideas as it is a physical battle, and therefore the dissemination of information in the free world is paramount. The manipulation of Western court systems, the use of Western “hate speech laws” and other products of political correctness to destroy the very principles that democracies stand for, must be countered.

Unfortunately Islamist lawfare is beginning to limit and control public discussion of Islam, particularly as it pertains to comprehending the threat posed by Islamic terrorist entities. As such, the Islamist lawfare challenge presents a direct and real threat not only to our constitutional rights, but also to our national security.”[184]

Paraphrasing from Muhammad: the Banned Images:

“We need to re-examine our commitment to free expression. When an institution such as the Executive Branch needs to suppress scholarly work and legitimate intelligence analysis because of the theoretical possibility of violence or the offended feelings of a select group, it grants legitimacy to censorship and casts serious doubts on our commitment to freedom of expression, and more importantly – our commitment to winning this trans-generational war. The failure to defend our right to examine threat doctrine, as promulgated by the enemy, emboldens those who would attack us and undermines our national security. It is time for the Chairman, the President and the Congress to exercise moral and intellectual leadership.”[185]

“The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” [186] Just as “Mein Kampf’s existence denied the free world the excuse of ignorance”,[187] so too does the Qur’an,[188] Sahih al-Bukhari,[189] [190] the Sira[191] and Islamic law[192] itself deny us the excuse of ignorance about the trans-national, trans-generational, totalitarian, supremacist, genocidal threat we face from Islam today.

If we do not study the threat, we won’t be able to accurately distinguish friend from foe and hence, ultimately lose the ability to defeat the enemy. The challenge is finding a way to understand the evil that motivates totalitarians like al Qaeda, the Islamic State, the Muslim Brotherhood and their ilk, while still being able to leverage those Muslim leaders, nations and populations who actively support the United States in this war against supremacist, totalitarian jihadism – from King Abdullah II of Jordan,[193] and President al-Sisi of Egypt,[194] to Malala.[195]

“Mundus vult decipi”[196]

Notes

[*] enemy. (13c) 1. One who opposes or inflicts injury on another; an antagonist. 2. A opposing military force. 3. A state with which another state is at war. — Also termed public enemy. 4. A person possessing the nationality of the state with which one is at war. — Also termed enemy subject. 5. A foreign state that is openly hostile to another whose position is being considered.

Source: Black’s Law Dictionary (9th Ed.)

hostility. (15c) 1. A state of enmity between individuals or nations. 2. An act or series of acts displaying antagonism. 3. (usu. pl.) Acts of war. Source: Joint Publication 1-02 Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms

enemy combatant — In general, a person engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners during an armed conflict.  Also called EC.  Source: DoD Directive 2310.01E

[†] “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Source: U.S. Constitution.

[‡]The author of The Satanic Verses, a text written, edited, and published against Islam, against the Prophet of Islam, and against the Koran, along with all the editors and publishers aware of its contents, are condemned to capital punishment. I call on all valiant Muslims wherever they may be in the world to execute this sentence without delay, so that no one henceforth will dare insult the sacred beliefs of the Muslims.” – Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

Source: http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~owend/I/islam/fatwa.html

[§] Seditious Conspiracy: If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both. Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2384

[1] Obama, Barack. “Statement by the President on ISIL.” The White House. September 10, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/09/10/statement-president-isil-1.

[2] Goebbels, Joseph. “Joseph Goebbels: On the “Big Lie”” Joseph Goebbels On the “Big Lie” Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/goebbelslie.html.

[3] McCarthy, Andrew C. Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad. New York: Encounter Books, 2008. 105.

[4] Orwell, George. Animal Farm and 1984. New York: Harcourt, 2003. 373-385.

[5] Orwell, George. Animal Farm and 1984. New York: Harcourt, 2003. 373.

[6] Rodgers, Guy. “Jihad Denial Syndrome.” TheHill. June 24, 2010. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/homeland-security/105243-jihad-denial-syndrome.

[7] Limbaugh, David. “Obama’s Jihad-denial Syndrome.” WND. September 17, 2012. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/obamas-jihad-denial-syndrome/.

[8] Spencer, Robert. “Is the Pentagon Waking Up?” Jihad Watch. December 14, 2005. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/12/is-the-pentagon-waking-up.

[9] Fitton, Thomas. “U.S. Government Purges of Law Enforcement Training Material Deemed “Offensive” to Muslims.” Judicial Watch. December 5, 2013. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/JWSRGovtPurgeAndActiveMeasures5Dec2013.pdf.

[10] “Words That Work and Words That Don’t: A Guide for Counterterrorism Communication.” Investigative Project on Terrorism. March 14, 2008. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/127.pdf.

[11] Gertz, Bill. “Inside the Ring.” Washington Times. January 4, 2008. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jan/4/inside-the-ring-8-34302/.

[12] “Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole Speaks at the Department’s Conference on Post 9/11 Discrimination.” The US Department of Justice. October 11, 2011. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/deputy-attorney-general-james-m-cole-speaks-department-s-conference-post-911.

[13] “Obama Administration Pulls References to Islam from Terror Training Materials, Official Says.” Yahoo! News. October 21, 2011. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://news.yahoo.com/obama-administration-pulls-references-islam-terror-training-materials-044605689.html.

[14] Lopez, Claire. “Muslim Brotherhood Takes Charge of FBI Counterterrorism Training” ClarionProject.org. April 25, 2012. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/muslim-brotherhood-takes-charge-fbi-counterterrorism-training.

[15] Dempsey, Martin E. “Martin Dempsey’s Letter Calling for Review of Military Education and Training Curriculum.” The New York Times. April 24, 2012. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/04/25/us/Review-of-Military-Education-Training-Curriculum.html.

[16] Poole, Patrick. “A Detailed Look at ‘the Purge’ of U.S. Counter-terrorism Training by the Obama Administration.” The Blaze. March 26, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2014/03/26/a-detailed-look-at-the-purge-of-u-s-counter-terrorism-training-by-the-obama-administration/.

[17] Rusin, David. “Problems in the U.S. Military: Denying Islam’s Role in Terror.” Middle East Forum. Spring 2013. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.meforum.org/3485/us-military-islam.

[18] Cavanugh, Tim. “DHS CRCL CVE Training – Dos and Donts.” Scribd. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.scribd.com/doc/141998997/DHS-CRCL-CVE-Training-Dos-and-Donts.

[19] “Terminology to Define the Terrorists: Recommendations from American Muslims.” Department of Homeland Security. January 1, 2008. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/126.pdf.

[20] Pieper, Josef. Abuse of Language, Abuse of Power. San Francisco, Calif.: Ignatius Press, 1992. 15.

[21] “Oath of Commissioned Officers.” Oath of Commissioned Officers. August 1, 1959. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.army.mil/values/officers.html.

[22] Obama, Barack. “Strategic Implementation Plan for Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism In The United States.” White House. December 1, 2011. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/sip-final.pdf.

[23] Kean, Thomas H. The 9/11 Commission Report. Washington, DC: [National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States], 2004. 363.

[24] Kean, Thomas H. The 9/11 Commission Report. Washington, DC: [National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States], 2004. 562.

[25] McCarthy, Andrew C. “The Articles of Impeachment.” In Faithless Execution: Building the Political Case for Obama’s Impeachment, 152, 223-224. New York: Encounter Books, 2014.

[26] Schmitt, Eric. “In Battle to Defang ISIS, U.S. Targets Its Psychology.” The New York Times. December 28, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/29/us/politics/in-battle-to-defang-isis-us-targets-its-psychology-.html.

[27] Schmitt, Eric. “In Battle to Defang ISIS, U.S. Targets Its Psychology.” The New York Times. December 28, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/29/us/politics/in-battle-to-defang-isis-us-targets-its-psychology-.html.

[28] McCarthy, Andrew C. “The Articles of Impeachment.” In Faithless Execution: Building the Political Case for Obama’s Impeachment, 152, 223-224. New York: Encounter Books, 2014. 221.

[29] Hull, Gary. Muhammad: The “banned” Images. Mesa, Ariz.: Voltaire Press, 2009. 13.

[30] United States Code, Title 10, Subtitle A, Part II, Chapter 47 (The Uniform Code of Military Justice).

[31] (Coughlin, Stephen. Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad. Washington DC: Center for Security Policy, 2015.)

[32] “George Santayana.” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.iep.utm.edu/santayan/.

[33] Harris, Lee. The Suicide of Reason: Radical Islam’s Threat to the Enlightenment. New York: Basic Books, 2007. xxi.

[34] Orwell, George. “Review of Mein Kampf.” Carnegie Council. March 1, 1940. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://worldview.carnegiecouncil.org/archive/worldview/1975/07/2555.html/_res/id=sa_File1/v18_i007-008_a010.pdf.

[35] Hitler, Adolf. Mein Kampf. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1999. xv.

[36] Orwell, George. “Review of Mein Kampf.” Carnegie Council. March 1, 1940. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://worldview.carnegiecouncil.org/archive/worldview/1975/07/2555.html/_res/id=sa_File1/v18_i007-008_a010.pdf.

[37] Hitler, Adolf. Mein Kampf. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1999. xv.

[38] Orwell, George. “Review of Mein Kampf.” Carnegie Council. March 1, 1940. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://worldview.carnegiecouncil.org/archive/worldview/1975/07/2555.html/_res/id=sa_File1/v18_i007-008_a010.pdf.

[39] Al-Bukhari, Imam. “Sahih Al-Bukhari (9 Vol. Set).” Islam Future. November 25, 2012. Accessed February 10, 2015. https://islamfuture.wordpress.com/2012/11/25/sahih-al-bukhari-9-vol-set/.

[40] Al-Bukhari, Imam. “Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 56, Verse 2797.” Future Islam. Accessed February 10, 2015. https://futureislam.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/sahih-al-bukhari-volume-4-ahadith-2738-3648.pdf. 52.

“I would love to be martyred in Allah’s Cause and the come back to life and then get martyred, and then come back to life again and then get martyred.”

[41] Warner, Bill. ”  Anti-Jew Text in Trilogy.” Center for the Study of Political Islam. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.cspipublishing.com/statistical/TrilogyStats/Amt_anti-Jew_Text.html.

[42] Warner, Bill. ”  Anti-Jew Text in Trilogy.” Center for the Study of Political Islam. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.cspipublishing.com/statistical/TrilogyStats/Amt_anti-Jew_Text.html.

[43] Warner, Bill. Factual Persuasion: Changing the Mind of Islam’s Supporters. Center for the Study of Political Islam, 2011. 30-31.

[44] Warner, Bill. Factual Persuasion: Changing the Mind of Islam’s Supporters. Center for the Study of Political Islam, 2011. 30-31.

[45] Warner, Bill. Factual Persuasion: Changing the Mind of Islam’s Supporters. Center for the Study of Political Islam, 2011. 30-31.

[46] “The 9/11 Commission Report.” The 9/11 Commission Report; January 1, 2004. Accessed October 9, 2014. http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf.

[47] Ibn Naqib Al-Misri, Ahmad, and Noah Ha Mim Keller. “Justice: The Objectives of Jihad.” In Reliance of the Traveller: The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law ʻUmdat Al-salik, 599-602. Rev. ed. Beltsville, MD, U.S.A.: Amana Publications, 1999.

[48] McCarthy, Andrew C. Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad. New York: Encounter Books, 2008. 309.

[49] Obama, Barack. “National Security Strategy.” The White House. February 6, 2015. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2015_national_security_strategy_2.pdf.

[50] Obama, Barack. “National Security Strategy.” The White House. February 6, 2015. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2015_national_security_strategy_2.pdf.

[51] Ibrahim, Raymond. The Al Qaeda Reader. New York: Doubleday, 2007.

[52] (Coughlin, Stephen. Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad. Washington DC: Center for Security Policy, 2015.)

[53] Obama, Barack. “Remarks by the President at Cairo University, 6-04-09.” The White House. June 4, 2009. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-cairo-university-6-04-09.

[54] “The Constitution of the United States.” The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. September 17, 1787. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html.

[55] Pieper, Josef. Abuse of Language, Abuse of Power. San Francisco, Calif.: Ignatius Press, 1992. 32.

[56] Pieper, Josef. Abuse of Language, Abuse of Power. San Francisco, Calif.: Ignatius Press, 1992. 34-35.

[57] Horowitz, David. The Art of Political War: And Other Radical Pursuits. Dallas, Tex.: Spence, 2000. 47.

[58] Lopez, Clare. Shariah: The Threat to America : An Exercise in Competitive Analysis. Washington, DC: Center for Security Policy Press, 2010. 2.

[59] Akram, Mohammed. “An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group In North America.” Investigative Project on Terrorism. May 22, 1991. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/case_docs/445.pdf.

[60] Akram, Mohammed. “An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group In North America.” Investigative Project on Terrorism. May 22, 1991. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/case_docs/445.pdf.

[61] Ibn Naqib Al-Misri, Ahmad, and Noah Ha Mim Keller. “Apostacy from Islam.” In Reliance of the Traveller: The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law ʻUmdat Al-salik, 596-598. Rev. ed. Beltsville, MD, U.S.A.: Amana Publications, 1999.

[62] Warner, Bill. Islam 101. Center for the Study of Political Islam, 2008. 13-14.

[63] Warner, Bill. Islam 101. Center for the Study of Political Islam, 2008. 14.

[64] Yerushalmi, David. “Shariah vs. Jewish Law.” FrontPage Magazine. October 10, 2008. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=32710.

[65] “Charlie Hebdo Attack: Three Days of Terror.” BBC News. January 14, 2015. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30708237.

[66] Rushdie, Salman. The Satanic Verses. New York, N.Y.: Viking Penguin, 1989.

[67] Rushdie, Salman. “The Satanic Verses.” Salman Rushdie. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.salman-rushdie.com/blog/the-satanic-verses/.

[68] Graaf, Mia. “Iranian Mullah Revives Death Fatwa against Salman Rushdie over Satanic Verses 25 Years after It Was Issued.” Mail Online. February 16, 2014. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2560683/Iranian-mullah-revives-death-fatwa-against-Salman-Rushdie-Satanic-Verses-25-years-issued.html.

[69] Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1987. 136; 163, 236; 181, 262; 308, 458.

[70] Khan, Muhammad Muhsin. “Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4.” Darussalam. Accessed February 9, 2015. https://futureislam.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/sahih-al-bukhari-volume-4-ahadith-2738-3648.pdf. No. 2934.

[71] Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1987. 675-76; 995-96.

[72] Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1987. 675, 995.

[73] Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1987. 364-369.

[74] Khan, Muhammad Muhsin. “Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 5.” Darussalam. Accessed February 9, 2015. https://futureislam.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/sahih-al-bukhari-volume-5-ahadith-3649-4473.pdf. No. 4037.

[75] Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1987. 369, 534.

[76] Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1987. 674-675.

[77] Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1987. 550-51, 819.

[78] Khan, Muhammad Muhsin. “Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4.” Darussalam. Accessed February 9, 2015. https://futureislam.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/sahih-al-bukhari-volume-4-ahadith-2738-3648.pdf.

No. 3044.

[79] Arlandson, James. “Muhammad’s Dead Poets Society: The Assassination of Satirical Poets in Early Islam.” Answering Islam. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/dead_poets.htm.

[80] Said, Edward W. Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books, 1979.

[81] Warraq, Ibn. Defending the West: A Critique of Edward Said’s Orientalism. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 2007. 18.

[82] Warraq, Ibn. Defending the West: A Critique of Edward Said’s Orientalism. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 2007. 18.

[83] “CAIR Letter to the Honorable John Brennan.” Thomas More. October 19, 2011. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.thomasmore.org/sites/default/files/files/Letter_to_John_Brennan_19_OCT_2011%20(3).pdf.

[84] “CAIR Letter to the Honorable John Brennan.” Thomas More. October 19, 2011. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.thomasmore.org/sites/default/files/files/Letter_to_John_Brennan_19_OCT_2011%20(3).pdf.

[85] Mayorga, Jose S. “Screening Process for Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) Trainers and Speakers.” The Daily Caller. October 11, 2011. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Joint-Staff-Action-Trainers.pdf.

[86] Dempsey, Martin E. “Martin Dempsey’s Letter Calling for Review of Military Education and Training Curriculum.” The New York Times. April 24, 2012. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/04/25/us/Review-of-Military-Education-Training-Curriculum.html.

[87] Spencer, Robert. “Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Orders Military to Purge All Training Material of Truth about Islam.” Jihad Watch. May 3, 2012. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/05/exclusive-senior-us-general-orders.

[88] Hull, Gary. Muhammad: The “banned” Images. Mesa, Ariz.: Voltaire Press, 2009. 7.

[89] “Oath of Commissioned Officers.” Oath of Commissioned Officers. August 1, 1959. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.army.mil/values/officers.html.

[90] “10 U.S. Code § 163 – Role of Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff.” 10 U.S. Code § 163. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/163.

[91] Hull, Gary. Muhammad: The “banned” Images. Mesa, Ariz.: Voltaire Press, 2009. 8.

[92] “Extemporaneous Remarks on Our National Strategy for Victory in Iraq.” Lecture, keynote speech presented at National Defense University from General Peter Pace, USMC, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff, Fort McNair, December 1, 2005.

[93] Coughlin, Stephen. “To Our Great Detriment: Ignoring What Extremists Say About Jihad (with Appendices).” Assyrian International News Agency. July 1, 2007. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.aina.org/reports/iwesaj.pdf.

[94] Hull, Gary. Muhammad: The “banned” Images. Mesa, Ariz.: Voltaire Press, 2009. 10.

[95] “UAE Cabinet Approves List of Designated Terrorist Organisations, Groups.” Emirates News Agency. November 15, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.wam.ae/en/news/emirates-international/1395272478814.html.

[96] Mauro, Ryan. “UAE Doubles Down on Designation of CAIR as Terrorists | Clarion Project.” Clarion Project. November 26, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/uae-doubles-down-designation-cair-terrorists.

[97] “Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).” Discover the Networks. February 9, 2015. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=6176.

[98] “Foreign Terrorist Organizations.” U.S. Department of State. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/other/des/123085.htm.

[99] “5th Circuit Upholds Holy Land Foundation Convictions.” Investigative Project on Terrorism. December 7, 2011. Accessed February 12, 2015. http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/case_docs/1851.pdf.

[100] “Muslim Brotherhood.” Discover the Networks. February 10, 2015. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=6386.

[101] Abdallah, Essam. “Islamist Lobbies’ Washington War on Arab and Muslim Liberals.” The Investigative Project on Terrorism. February 16, 2012. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.investigativeproject.org/3453/islamist-lobbies-washington-war-on-arab.

[102] Fahim, Kareem. “Egypt, Dealing a Blow to the Muslim Brotherhood, Deems It a Terrorist Group.” The New York Times. December 25, 2013. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/26/world/middleeast/egypt-calls-muslim-brotherhood-a-terrorist-group.html?_r=0.

[103] Nasralla, Shadia. “Egypt Designates Muslim Brotherhood as Terrorist Group.” Reuters. December 25, 2013. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/25/us-egypt-explosion-brotherhood-idUSBRE9BO08H20131225.

[104] Abdelaziz, Salma, and Steve Almasy. “Egypt’s Interim Cabinet Officially Labels Muslim Brotherhood a Terrorist Group – CNN.com.” CNN. December 25, 2013. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/25/world/africa/egypt-muslim-brotherhood-terrorism/.

[105] “Отключены или не поддерживаются активные сценарии (JavaScript).” Устаревший или неподдерживаемый веб-обозреватель. February 12, 2003. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://base.consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online.cgi?req=doc;base=EXP;n=257852.

[106] “Russia Names ‘terrorist’ Groups.” BBC News. July 28, 2006. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5223458.stm.

[107] “Assad Says ‘factors Not in Place’ for Syria Peace Talks.” Hurriyet Daily News. October 21, 2013. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/assad-says-factors-not-in-place-for-syria-peace-talks.aspx?pageID=238&nID=56611&NewsCatID=352.

[108] Ajbaili, Mustapha. “Saudi: Muslim Brotherhood a Terrorist Group.” Al Arabiya News. March 7, 2014. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2014/03/07/Saudi-Arabia-declares-Muslim-Brotherhood-terrorist-group.html.

[109] Shahine, Alaa, and Glen Carey. “U.A.E. Supports Saudi Arabia Against Qatar-Backed Brotherhood.” Bloomberg.com. March 9, 2014. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-03-09/u-a-e-supports-saudi-arabia-against-qatar-backed-brotherhood?cmpid=yhoo.

[110] “UAE Cabinet Approves List of Designated Terrorist Organisations, Groups.” Emirates News Agency. November 15, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.wam.ae/en/news/emirates-international/1395272478814.html.

[111] Mauro, Ryan. “UAE Doubles Down on Designation of CAIR as Terrorists | Clarion Project.” Clarion Project. November 26, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/uae-doubles-down-designation-cair-terrorists.

[112] “The 9/11 Commission Report.” The 9/11 Commission Report. p.51; January 1, 2004. Accessed October 9, 2014. http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf.

[113] McCarthy, Andrew C. Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad. New York: Encounter Books, 2008. 272.

[114] Title 18, US Code, Section 2384.

[115] Fitton, Thomas. “U.S. Government Purges of Law Enforcement Training Material Deemed “Offensive” to Muslims.” Judicial Watch. December 5, 2013. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/JWSRGovtPurgeAndActiveMeasures5Dec2013.pdf

[116] Spencer, Robert. “Why Is the Pentagon Listening to Hamas-Linked CAIR?” PJ Media. July 31, 2012. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://pjmedia.com/blog/why-is-the-pentagon-listening-to-hamas-linked-cair/.

[117] Smith, Michael. “Breaking the Enigma Code Was the Easiest Part of the Nazi Puzzle.” The Telegraph. November 15, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/world-war-two/11231608/Breaking-the-Enigma-code-was-the-easiest-part-of-the-Nazi-puzzle.html.

[118] Rossomondo, John. “Egyptian Magazine: Muslim Brotherhood Infiltrates Obama Administration.” The Investigative Project on Terrorism. January 3, 2013. Accessed February 12, 2015. http://www.investigativeproject.org/3869/egyptian-magazine-muslim-brotherhood-infiltrates.

[119] “The Muslim Brotherhood Infiltrates Obama Administration.” FrontPage Magazine. March 28, 2013. Accessed February 12, 2015. http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/frontpagemag-com/the-muslim-brotherhood-infiltrates-obama-administration/.

[120] Henry, Devin. “Bachmann: Investigate the Reach of the Muslim Brotherhood.” MinnPost. July 10, 2012. Accessed February 12, 2015. http://www.minnpost.com/dc-dispatches/2012/07/bachmann-investigate-reach-muslim-brotherhood.

[121] Ibn Naqib Al-Misri, Ahmad, and Noah Ha Mim Keller. “Justice: The Objectives of Jihad.” In Reliance of the Traveller: The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law ʻUmdat Al-salik, 379. Rev. ed. Beltsville, MD, U.S.A.: Amana Publications, 1999.

[122] “Obama: This “Medieval Interpretation Of Islam” Is Rejected By “99.9%” Of Muslims, Not A “Religious War”” CNN. February 1, 2015. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/02/01/obama_this_medieval_interpretation_of_islam_is_rejected_by_999_of_muslims_not_a_religious_war.html.

[123] Secrest, Barry. “Conservative Refocus News.” Stunning Poll Shows Obama’s 99.9 % Figure for Peaceful Muslims Worldwide False. February 6, 2015. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.conservativerefocus.com/blog5.php/2015/02/06/stunning-poll-shows-obama-s-99-9-figure-for-peaceful-muslims-worldwide-false.

[124] Horowitz, David. The Art of Political War: And Other Radical Pursuits. Dallas, Tex.: Spence, 2000. 192.

[125] Enein, Youssef H. Militant Islamist Ideology Understanding the Global Threat. Annapolis, Md.: Naval Institute Press, 2010. 203.

[126] “Your Logical Fallacy Is Bandwagon.” Thou Shalt Not Commit Logical Fallacies. Accessed February 9, 2015. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon.

[127] Paine, Thomas. “The Crisis.” Ushistory.org. December 23, 1776. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.ushistory.org/PAINE/crisis/c-01.htm.

[128] McCarthy, Andrew C. Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad. New York: Encounter Books, 2008. 178.

[129] Horowitz, David. The Art of Political War: And Other Radical Pursuits. Dallas, Tex.: Spence, 2000. 39.

[130] McCarthy, Andrew C. Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad. New York: Encounter Books, 2008. 13.

[131] Hull, Gary. Muhammad: The “banned” Images. Mesa, Ariz.: Voltaire Press, 2009. 9.

[132] Ali, Abdullah Yusuf. The Qurʼan. Elmhurst, N. Y.: Tahrike Tarsile Qurʼan, 2005.

[133] Al-Bukhari, Imam. “Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4.” Future Islam. Accessed February 10, 2015. https://futureislam.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/sahih-al-bukhari-volume-4-ahadith-2738-3648.pdf.

[134] Al-Bukhari, Imam. “Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 9.” Future Islam. Accessed February 10, 2015. https://futureislam.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/sahih-al-bukhari-volume-9-ahadith-6861-7563.pdf.

[135] Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1987.

[136] Ibn Naqib Al-Misri, Ahmad, and Noah Ha Mim Keller. Reliance of the Traveller: The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law ʻUmdat Al-salik. Rev. ed. Beltsville, MD, U.S.A.: Amana Publications, 1999.

[137] Khadduri, Majid. War and Peace in the Law of Islam. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1955.

[138] Malik, S. K. The Quranic Concept of War. Lahore: Wajidalis, 1979.

[139] Kamali, Mohammad Hashim. Freedom of Expression in Islam. Rev. ed. Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1997.

[140] Oussani, Gabriel, and Hilaire Belloc. Moslems: Their Beliefs, Practices, and Politics. Ridgefield, CT: Roger A. McCaffrey Pub., 1936.

[141] Harris, Lee. The Suicide of Reason: Radical Islam’s Threat to the Enlightenment. New York: Basic Books, 2007.

[142] Ibrahim, Raymond. The Al Qaeda Reader. New York: Doubleday, 2007.

[143] Spencer, Robert. The Truth about Muhammad: Founder of the World’s Most Intolerant Religion. Washington, DC: Regnery Pub., 2006.

[144] Spencer, Robert. Stealth Jihad: How Radical Islam Is Subverting America without Guns or Bombs. Washington, DC: Regnery Pub., 2008.

[145] Coughlin, Stephen C. “‘To Our Great Detriment’: Ignoring What Extremists Say About Jihad.” Assyrian International News Agency. July 1, 2007. Accessed February 12, 2015. http://www.aina.org/reports/iwesaj.pdf.

[146] (Coughlin, Stephen. Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad. Washington DC: Center for Security Policy, 2015.)

[147] Gaffney, Frank J. War Footing: 10 Steps America Must Take to Prevail in the War for the Free World. Annapolis, Md.: Naval Institute Press, 2006.

[148] Lopez, Clare. Shariah: The Threat to America: An Exercise in Competitive Analysis. Washington, DC: Center for Security Policy Press, 2010.

[149] Phares, Walid. Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies against America. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.

[150] Gabriel, Brigitte. They Must Be Stopped: Why We Must Defeat Radical Islam and How We Can Do It. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2008.

[151] Warraq, Ibn. Why I Am Not a Muslim. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 1995.

[152] Warraq, Ibn. Which Koran?: Variants, Manuscripts, Linguistics. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2011.

[153] Warraq, Ibn. Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak out. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2003.

[154] Warraq, Ibn. Defending the West: A Critique of Edward Said’s Orientalism. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 2007.

[155] Ali, Ayaan Hirsi. Infidel. New York: Free Press, 2007.

[156] Ali, Ayaan Hirsi. The Caged Virgin: An Emancipation Proclamation for Women and Islam. New York: Free Press, 2006.

[157] Ali, Ayaan Hirsi. Nomad: From Islam to America–a Personal Journey through the Clash of Civilizations. New York: Free Press, 2010.

[158] Darwish, Nonie. Cruel and Usual Punishment. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2008.

[159] Darwish, Nonie. The Devil We Don’t Know: The Dark Side of Revolutions in the Middle East. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley, 2012.

[160] Darwish, Nonie. Now They Call Me Infidel: Why I Renounced Jihad for America, Israel, and the War on Terror. New York, N.Y.: Sentinel, 2006.

[161] Sultan, Wafa. A God Who Hates: The Courageous Woman Who Inflamed the Muslim World Speaks out against the Evils of Islam. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2009.

[162] Dempsey, Martin E. “Martin Dempsey’s Letter Calling for Review of Military Education and Training Curriculum.” The New York Times. April 24, 2012. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/04/25/us/Review-of-Military-Education-Training-Curriculum.html.

[163] Mayorga, Jose S. “Screening Process for Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) Trainers and Speakers.” The Daily Caller. October 11, 2011. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Joint-Staff-Action-Trainers.pdf.

[164] “A Ticking Time Bomb: Counterterrorism Lessons from the U.S. Government’s Failure to Prevent the Fort Hood Attack.” Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. February 1, 2011. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.hsgac.senate.gov//imo/media/doc/Fort_Hood/FortHoodReport.pdf.

[165] Webster, William H. “William H Webster Commission Final Report on FBI Counter Intelligence and the Events at Fort Hood.” Federal Bureau of Investigation. July 19, 2012. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/final-report-of-the-william-h.-webster-commission.

[166] West, Jr., Togo, and Vern Clark. “Protecting the Force: Lessons Learned from Fort Hood.” Department of Defense. January 1, 2010. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.defense.gov/pubs/pdfs/DOD-ProtectingTheForce-Web_Security_HR_13Jan10.pdf.

[167] Gates, Robert. “Final Recommendations of the Ft. Hood Follow On Review.” Investigative Project on Terrorism. August 18, 2010. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/case_docs/1363.pdf.

[168] “US v. Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, Et Al.: The Investigative Project on Terrorism.” The Investigative Project on Terrorism. Accessed February 12, 2015. http://www.investigativeproject.org/case/65.

[169] Nasralla, Shadia. “Egypt Designates Muslim Brotherhood as Terrorist Group.” Reuters. December 25, 2013. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/25/us-egypt-explosion-brotherhood-idUSBRE9BO08H20131225.

[170] Abdelaziz, Salma, and Steve Almasy. “Egypt’s Interim Cabinet Officially Labels Muslim Brotherhood a Terrorist Group – CNN.com.” CNN. December 25, 2013. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/25/world/africa/egypt-muslim-brotherhood-terrorism/.

[171] “Отключены или не поддерживаются активные сценарии (JavaScript).” Устаревший или неподдерживаемый веб-обозреватель. February 12, 2003. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://base.consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online.cgi?req=doc;base=EXP;n=257852.

[172] “Russia Names ‘terrorist’ Groups.” BBC News. July 28, 2006. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5223458.stm.

[173] “Assad Says ‘factors Not in Place’ for Syria Peace Talks.” Hurriyet Daily News. October 21, 2013. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/assad-says-factors-not-in-place-for-syria-peace-talks.aspx?pageID=238&nID=56611&NewsCatID=352.

[174] Ajbaili, Mustapha. “Saudi: Muslim Brotherhood a Terrorist Group.” Al Arabiya News. March 7, 2014. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2014/03/07/Saudi-Arabia-declares-Muslim-Brotherhood-terrorist-group.html.

[175] Shahine, Alaa, and Glen Carey. “U.A.E. Supports Saudi Arabia Against Qatar-Backed Brotherhood.” Bloomberg.com. March 9, 2014. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-03-09/u-a-e-supports-saudi-arabia-against-qatar-backed-brotherhood?cmpid=yhoo.

[176] “UAE Cabinet Approves List of Designated Terrorist Organisations, Groups.” Emirates News Agency. November 15, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.wam.ae/en/news/emirates-international/1395272478814.html.

[177] Mauro, Ryan. “UAE Doubles Down on Designation of CAIR as Terrorists | Clarion Project.” Clarion Project. November 26, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/uae-doubles-down-designation-cair-terrorists.

[178] “CAIR Open Letter to 2016 Republican Presidential Candidates.” Council on American-Islamic Relations. January 26, 2015. Accessed February 11, 2015. https://www.cair.com/images/pdf/Open-Letter-to-2016-Republican-Presidential-Candidates.pdf.

[179] “CAIR Letter Urges GOP Presidential Candidates to Engage Muslim Voters, Reject Islamophobia – CAIR.” Council on American-Islamic Relations. January 26, 2015. Accessed February 11, 2015. https://www.cair.com/press-center/press-releases/12823-cair-urges-gop-presidential-candidates-to-engage-muslim-voters.html.

[180] McCarthy, Andrew C. Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad. New York: Encounter Books, 2008. 314-315.

[181] Horowitz, David. The Art of Political War: And Other Radical Pursuits. Dallas, Tex.: Spence, 2000. 189.

[182] “Clausewitz: War as Politics by Other Means.” Online Library of Liberty. Accessed February 12, 2015. http://oll.libertyfund.org/pages/clausewitz-war-as-politics-by-other-means.

[183] Horowitz, David. The Art of Political War: And Other Radical Pursuits. Dallas, Tex.: Spence, 2000. 53.

[184] Goldstein, Brooke, and Aaron Eitan Meyer. Lawfare: The War against Free Speech ; a First Amendment Guide for Reporting in an Age of Islamist Lawfare. Washington, D.C.: Center for Security Policy, 2011. 153.

[185] Hull, Gary. Muhammad: The “banned” Images. Mesa, Ariz.: Voltaire Press, 2009. 48.

[186] Goebbels, Joseph. “Joseph Goebbels: On the “Big Lie”” Joseph Goebbels On the “Big Lie” Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/goebbelslie.html.

[187] Hitler, Adolf. Mein Kampf. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1999. xxi.

[188] Ali, Abdullah Yusuf. The Qurʼan. Elmhurst, N. Y.: Tahrike Tarsile Qurʼan, 2005.

[189] Al-Bukhari, Imam. “Sahih Al-Bukhari (9 Vol. Set).” Islam Future. November 25, 2012. Accessed February 10, 2015. https://islamfuture.wordpress.com/2012/11/25/sahih-al-bukhari-9-vol-set/.

[190] “Translation of Sahih Muslim.” Center for Muslim-Jewish Engagement. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/muslim/.

[191] Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1987.

[192] Ibn Naqib Al-Misri, Ahmad, and Noah Ha Mim Keller. Reliance of the Traveller: The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law ʻUmdat Al-salik. Rev. ed. Beltsville, MD, U.S.A.: Amana Publications, 1999.

[193] Laub, Karen, and Mohammed Daraghmeh. “King Abdullah II Thrusts Jordan to the Center of War on Islamic State Militant Group.” US News. February 6, 2015. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2015/02/06/jordans-king-thrusts-country-to-center-of-islamic-state-war.

[194] Ibrahim, Raymond. “Egypt’s Sisi: Islamic “Thinking” Is “Antagonizing the Entire World”” Raymond Ibrahim. January 1, 2015. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.raymondibrahim.com/from-the-arab-world/egypts-sisi-islamic-thinking-is-antagonizing-the-entire-world/.

[195] “The Nobel Peace Prize for 2014.” The Nobel Peace Prize 2014. October 10, 2014. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2014/press.html.

[196] Pieper, Josef. Abuse of Language, Abuse of Power. San Francisco, Calif.: Ignatius Press, 1992. 25-26.

ISIS will survive Mosul and Raqqa

November 2, 2016

ISIS will survive Mosul and Raqqa, Israel Hayom, Dr. Ori Goldberg, November 2, 2016

The American administration recently announced that it is planning an offensive to take the city of Raqqa, the Syrian “capital” of Islamic State. The American announcement illustrates the overarching logic behind the current campaign against Islamic State. According to this logic, Islamic State is, in fact, a state. And one state defeats another if it conquers its capital. Such a conquest forces the enemy’s administrative institutions to crumble, along with its remaining forces and defenses, while the conquering country can effectively “take control” of the vanquished country.

Reality, however, does not necessarily abide logic, as we will see when Raqqa is taken, because Islamic State is not a state. Even its expected defeat in Mosul, along with the future downfall of Raqqa, cannot dissolve the “Islamic State,” because it is just one expression, or one phase, of an ongoing struggle. The purpose of this struggle is to prepare the world for the day of judgment, and a ready world is a world that realizes the weakness and fallacy inherent to the human political order.

The state of Islamic State is a mirror intended to demonstrate to the entire world the tenuous nature of the “Arab” states in the Middle East. The role of this state is to rise, and after it has risen to make a laughing stock of the countries around it. It melts away borders and nullifies national identity; it rejects the laws of the state and the international community, and scorns such ideas as “human rights.”

ISIS, however, does not portend to be a complete or sufficient alternative to the Western model or to any other model. The Islamic State is part of a path whose ending is already known — judgment day will come, the final battle will be decided and the Muslims will win. Therefore, when Raqqa falls Islamic State will not simply vanish into thin air. If the tangible Islamic State can no longer fulfil its grand purpose, another means of fulfilling it will be found. When the physical state finally collapses, after much blood is spilled, the citizens who lived under its boot will surely breathe a sigh of relief. The soldiers of the Islamic State will disperse; some will join any of the numerous terrorist groups out there, others will go back home to their worried parents, from Tunisia to Kosovo. The idea of Islamic State, however, will not dissipate in the slightest. Quite the opposite, it can be expected to grow stronger.

The creation of the Islamic State marked a significant escalation for global jihad. Many talked about a caliphate while waging jihad over the years, from the mid-1980s in Afghanistan until today, but no one felt secure enough to implement the idea. Islamic State took the step and was successful, specifically because it never believed that having a state was the end all and be all.

The memory of the Islamic State will encourage new believers, in groups or on their own, to continue undermining the stability and unity in their host countries. Violence will continue to be, to an even higher degree, the most readily accessible and effective way to expand Islamic State’s jihadi doctrine and religious struggle. There is no reason to necessarily expect grandiose terrorist attacks in the style of al-Qaida.

The purpose of Islamic State does not lie in the spectacle, the widespread destruction or in the unfathomable number of casualties. We can, however, expect a dogged response unrestrained by time or distance. The current and soon-to-be martyrdom in Mosul and Raqqa is not the result of loyalty to the state, rather a devotion to the unceasing advance forward, toward the assured end.

Islamic State, a new and deadlier enemy

September 27, 2016

Islamic State, a new and deadlier enemy, The Gorka BriefingSebastian Gorka, PhD, September 26, 2016

isw

An analysis/opinion piece that my wife Katharine and I wrote that was published in the Washington Times:

On the evening of May 2, 2011, America had a chance at closure.

We had lost thousands of our fellow Americans nine years earlier on that beautifully sunny September morning, and thousands more of our citizen-soldiers on the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq.

But now President Obama gave the word: The master jihadi is dead.

In an audacious operation deep within Pakistan, Osama bin Laden had been located. And killed. Al Qaeda would soon be described by the commander in chief, as “on the ropes,” condemned to ever-increasing irrelevance. But this was not the end. There would be no closure for our nation.

A new, deadlier enemy has since emerged. A foe responsible for the carnage of San Bernardino and Orlando, and scores of attacks around the world. Now we are at war with the Islamic State — a threat group that has already claimed responsibility for one of the recent attacks — and its new caliph, Abu Bakr al Baghdadi. Al Qaeda may no longer frighten us, but the Islamic State has dethroned it and is on the march.

We may be in the final stages of a presidential campaign which has polarized opinion on all matters, mundane and significant, but the facts speak for themselves.

According to the National Counterterrorism Center, part of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Islamic State currently has “fully operational” affiliates in 18 nations around the world. Two years ago, the number was seven. Some of these branches are far from Iraq and Syria, including Afghanistan, where numerous Taliban commanders have sworn allegiance to Abu Bakr, and Nigeria, where Boko Haram — one of the deadliest jihadi groups active today — has changed its name to the West Africa Province of the Islamic State. According to the analysts of the SITE Intelligence Group, the totalitarian message of jihadism is so popular around the world that since June 2, outside the war zones of Iraq and Syria, there has been a jihadi attack somewhere around the world every 84 hours.

But does this mean that Americans are in greater danger today than on Sept. 10, 2001? Unfortunately, the answer is a resounding yes, and the empirical data is merciless in its incontrovertibility.

In its latest report titled “Muslim-American Involvement with Violent Extremism,” the University of North Carolina has compiled all the metadata on jihadi plots on U.S. soil since 2001. The trend they describe is an exponential one. The number of successful and intercepted terrorist attacks has grown every year (with an inordinate spike in 2009), and most disturbingly, with 2015 witnessing the greatest number of jihadi plots in America since the Sept. 11 attacks 15 years ago. Jihadism has not been weakened. Not abroad. Not in the States. With the attacks in California, Florida, and now apparently Minnesota, and potentially New York and New Jersey, ISIS has displaced al Qaeda, and it has done so here in America, too, not just in the Middle East or Africa.

In our report “ISIS: The Threat to the United States,” we answer the same question for the Islamic State that the University of North Carolina answered for all jihadists secreted within America.

The facts prove than our new enemy is more prevalent than al Qaeda ever was, with federal and state law enforcement arresting three times as many ISIS supports per month than the average for al Qaeda arrests since 2001. Here are the numbers: Since Abu Bakr declared the new caliphate from the pulpit of the Grand Mosque of Mosul at the end of June 2014, we have killed or interdicted 110 terrorists linked to ISIS, (the last one being two weeks ago in Roanoke, Va). And when one looks at what they were actually doing the picture is grimmest of all.

Just over 40 percent had sworn allegiance to ISIS and were set on leaving the United States to fight for jihad in Iraq and Syria. Just under 20 percent were management-level terrorists, the talent-spotters and recruiters who were facilitating the foreign passage of the “travelers,” as the FBI euphemistically calls them. But a full third of the ISIS suspects, like the San Bernardino killers, and Omar Mateen, the Orlando jihadi, had already decided that they could best serve the new Islamic State not by leaving but by killing infidels here on U.S. soil. This is the reality of life in the West today. Whether it is in California or Florida, or in Brussels, Paris or Nice.

As we start the 16th year of what has turned into our longest war ever, we must radically reassess our strategy for victory. The Islamic State has displaced al Qaeda and it is richer, better at propaganda, and has more fighters than bin Laden ever had.

November represents not only a choice of who the new commander in chief should be, but also what our new strategy to defeat ISIS and the global jihadi movement should be. We owe at least this to the memories of those lost on the beautifully sunny morning 15 years ago.

DHS Provides the Security Islamists Need and Want

September 24, 2016

DHS Provides the Security Islamists Need and Want, Dan Miller’s Blog, September 23, 2016

(The views expressed in this article are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic or its other editors. — DM) 

However, the Department of Homeland Security does not provide the security the rest of us need and want; instead, it does its level best to diminish it. Providing a reasonable level of security would contradict Obama’s view of Islam, Life, the Universe and Everything.

Refugee Fraud

On September 22nd, members of the U.S. Congress made public an internal Department of Homeland Security memo in which it was acknowledged that Refugee fraud is easy to commit and much tougher to detect:

The U.S. has relaxed requirements for refugees to prove they are who they say they are, and at times may rely solely on testimony. That makes it easier for bogus applicants to conspire to get approved, according to the department memo, which was obtained by the House Judiciary and Oversight committees. [Emphasis added.]

“Refugee fraud is easy to commit, yet not easy to investigate,” the undated memo says.

 The memo said there are clear instances where “bad actors … have exploited this program,” gaining a foothold in the U.S. through bogus refugee claims.

The revelation comes just a week after the administration said it was boosting the number of refugees it wants to accept next year to 110,000, up from 85,000 this year. Officials also said they’ll take more Syrians than the 12,000 they’ve accepted so far this year — and they are on pace to resettle as many as 30,000 in 2017. [Emphasis added.]

The President’s decision to increase overall refugee resettlement – and specifically that of Syrian refugees – ignores warnings from his own national security officials that Syrians cannot be adequately vetted to ensure terrorists are not admitted. Revelations about fraud, security gaps, and lack of oversight have demonstrated that the program is creating national security risks,” Reps. Jason Chaffetz and Bob Goodlatte said in a letter to Homeland Security on Thursday. [Emphasis added.]

The Director of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement acknowledged that she had never seen the internal DHS memo. Why not? Isn’t ICE in charge of enforcing “our” immigration laws?

Countering Violent Extremism

The video provided above explains how CVE has been implemented thus far.

The head of DHS’s “countering violent extremism” program acknowledged on the same day, September 22nd, that its thus far year-long-in-the-brewing “strategic plan” for “combatting violent extremism” has not yet been completed.

George Selim, director of the Office of Community Partnerships at DHS, was repeatedly asked by members of the House Homeland Security Thursday why he could not provide a document outlining the organization’s $10 million plans for countering the spread of terrorism.

. . . .

Selim finally admitted the plan is not finished, stating that a finalized version is “nearly ready.”

He added that he didn’t want to give the impression that the organization is without any strategy after being up and running for a year, and stressed that he takes the use of taxpayer dollars seriously.

Congress appropriated $10 million in funding to the Countering Violent Extremism initiative, which can issue grants to nonprofit organizations working in local communities to prevent radicalization. [Emphasis added.]

But when asked by Rep. Barry Loudermilk R-Ga., to provide evidence that the program was not a “black hole” for taxpayers, Selim could only answer that he has seen positive changes “anecodally” and could not provide any metrics for success.

“I can’t sit hear before you today and definitively say that person was going to commit an act of terrorism with a pressure cooker bomb, but we’re developing that prevention framework in a range of cities across the country,” said Selim.

When asked whether any of the funding provided to DHS for its “countering violent extremism” was being given to terror-linked groups, Mr. Selim responded that

there is no blacklist of non-governmental organizations prohibited from applying for federal funding in the government. He did not say whether their current vetting process has ever mistakenly funded groups that jeopardize national security when questioned, but argued there is always room for improvement when a program is in its infancy. [Emphasis added.]

Mr. Selim’s reply was not responsive; there may be no Federal blacklist, but that an NGO is not on one should not authorize DHS to fund it. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is, of course, one of the principal Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood-linked Islamist organizations upon which the “countering violent extremism” farce relies. Secretary Johnson recently delivered an address to the Islamic Society of North America, which is similarly linked. The countering violent extremism farce focuses, not on root problem of preventing Islamist terrorism, but on rooting out “Islamophobia.”

Here’s a video of Dr. Zuhid Jasser’s testimony before Congress on September 22nd

on Identifying the Enemy: Radical Islamist Terror. This hearing examines the threat of radical Islamist terrorism, the importance of identifying the threat for what it is, and ways to defeat it.

A transcript of Dr. Jasser’s testimony is available here

Former Congressman Pete Hoekstra also testified:

According to the blurb beneath the video,

Former Congressman and Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Pete Hoekstra at the Subcommittee on Oversight and Management Efficiency of the House Homeland Security Committee of the U.S. Congress. Congress must ask the Obama administration about PSD-11, which made official the US Government’s outreach to the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist groups. [emphasis added.]

In His efforts to push the narrative that the Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam, Obama has (a) shared His erroneous perception of the Islamic State and (b) tried to suggest that the Islamic State is the only entity which diverges from “true” Islam. His argument as to (a)

is a strawman argument: the real question isn’t whether ISIS “represents” Islam, but whether ISIS is a byproduct of Islam.  And this question can easily be answered by looking not to ISIS but Islam.  One can point to Islamic doctrines that unequivocally justify ISIS behavior; one can point to the whole of Islamic history, nearly 14 centuries of ISIS precedents.

Or, if these two options are deemed too abstract, one can simply point to the fact that everyday Muslims all around the world are behaving just like ISIS. [Emphasis added.]

For example, Muslims—of all races, nationalities, languages, and socio-political and economic circumstances, in Arab, African, Central and East Asian nations—claim the lions’ share of Christian persecution; 41 of the 50 worst nations to be Christian in are Islamic.  In these countries, Muslim individuals, mobs, clerics, politicians, police, soldiers, judges, even family members—none of whom are affiliated with ISIS (other than by religion)—abuse and sometimes slaughter Christians, abduct, enslave and rape their women and children, ban or bomb churches, and kill blasphemers and apostates.

. . . .

Or consider a Pew poll which found that, in 11 countries alone, at least 63 million and as many as 287 million Muslims support ISIS.  Similarly, 81% of respondents to an Arabic language Al Jazeera poll supported the Islamic State. [Emphasis added.]

Do all these hundreds of millions of Muslims support the Islamic State because they’ve been suckered into its “narrative”—or even more silly, because we have—or do they support ISIS because it reflects the same supremacist Islam that they know and practice, one that preaches hate and violence for all infidels, as America’s good friends and allies, the governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar—not ISIS—are on record proclaiming? [Emphasis added.]

It is this phenomenon, that Muslims the world over—and not just this or that terrorist group that “has nothing to do with Islam”—are exhibiting hostility for and terrorizing non-Muslims that the Obama administration and its mainstream media allies are committed to suppressing.  Otherwise the unthinkable could happen: people might connect the dots and understand that ISIS isn’t mangling Islam but rather Islam is mangling the minds of Muslims all over the world. [Emphasis added.]

Hence why White House spokesman Josh Earnest can adamantly dismiss 14 centuries of Islamic history, doctrine, and behavior that mirrors ISIS: “That is mythology. That is falsehood. That is not true.” Hence why U.S. media coverage for one dead gorilla was six times greater than media coverage for 21 Christians whose heads were carved off for refusing to recant their faith.

As to (b),

The powers-that-be prefer that the debate—the “narrative”—be restricted to ISIS, so that the group appears as an aberration to Islam.  Acknowledging that untold millions of Muslims are engaged in similar behavior leads to a much more troubling narrative with vast implications. [Emphasis added.]

Conclusions

obamaatun

Obama has what one might wish were a unique world view. However, as Obama has not yet discovered, wishing that something were true does not make it true. He elucidated His world view in His recent address to the United Nations.

U.S. President Barack Obama sang his swan song this week at the United Nations, and seemed baffled by the stubborn refusal of the world to reform itself in his image and on his say-so. [Emphasis added.]

How can there still be “deep fault lines in the international order,” Obama wondered aloud, with “societies filled with uncertainty and unease and strife?”

Shouldn’t his identity as a man “made up of flesh and blood and traditions and cultures and faiths from a lot of different parts of the world” have served as a shining and irresistible example of blended global peace? How can it be that, after eight years of his visionary leadership, peoples everywhere aren’t marching to his tune of self-declared superior “moral imagination”? [Emphasis added.]

It is indeed a “paradox,” Obama declared.

In his preachy, philosophical and snooty address to the U.N. General Assembly on Wednesday, Obama expressed deep disappointment with the world. Alas, it seems peoples and nations are just not sophisticated enough to comprehend his sage sermonizing, smart enough to follow his enlightened example, or deep enough to understand his perfect policies. [Emphasis added.]

Why does the world not snap to order as he imperiously wishes and drool in his presence?

. . . .

The words “enemy, “threat” or “adversary” do not appear even once in Obama’s 5,600-word address. They are not part of his lexicon, nor are concepts like “victory” for the West or “beating” the bad guys. He won’t even names foes, such as “radical Islam” or “Islamist terror.”

All this high-minded intellectualizing, self-doubt and equivocation leave the U.S. with little ability to actually drive towards a more ordered world and provide a modicum of global security.

Instead, we have only Obama’s “belief” that Russia’s imperialist moves in Ukraine and Syria, China’s power grabs in Asia, and Iran’s hegemonic trouble-making in the Middle East (and by inference, Israel’s settlement policies in Judea and Samaria) will “ultimately backfire.”

Obama has many such unsubstantiated and illusory “beliefs.” It is very important for him to tell us what he “believes,” and he does so repeatedly. Clearly, he believes in the overwhelming potency of his own beliefs, despite the global security collapse. In fact, the U.N. speech reads like chapter one of the expected Obama memoirs, which surely will be filled with more inane “beliefs” and other ostentation. [Emphasis added.]

Fortunately, Obama will soon leave the presidency.

It falls to Congress and the next president to redirect U.S. policy and hopefully base it less on whimsical, wayward beliefs and more on a hard-nosed, forceful reassertion of Western interests.

Unfortunately, Hillary shares many of not most of Obama’s delusions.

Fortunately, Trump does not and seems to have a pretty good chance of becoming our President.

Gorka: The war is real and the war is here

August 18, 2016

Gorka: The war is real and the war is here, Fox News via YouTube, August 17, 2016

House Task Force: ISIS Intel Reports Altered to Skew Success of U.S.-Led Campaign

August 10, 2016

House Task Force: ISIS Intel Reports Altered to Skew Success of U.S.-Led Campaign, Washington Free Beacon, August 10, 2016

FILE - In this Monday, June 17, 2013 file photo, U.S. special operations forces watch a rehearsal by special operations forces from Iraq, Jordan, and Lebanon as part of Eager Lion, a multinational military exercise in Zarqa, Jordan. The government-owned Al-Rai newspaper says a Jordanian policeman opened fire on American contractors at a police training center, killing two and injuring three. (AP Photo/Maya Alleruzzo, File)

FILE – In this Monday, June 17, 2013 file photo, U.S. special operations forces watch a rehearsal by special operations forces from Iraq, Jordan, and Lebanon as part of Eager Lion, a multinational military exercise in Zarqa, Jordan.

The U.S. military’s Central Command distorted intelligence reports to make the American-led campaign against the Islamic State and al Qaeda appear more successful than it actually was, a House Republican task force found.

Officials familiar with the task force’s findings told the Daily Beast that the roughly 10-page report, which is expected to be publicly released by the end of next week, will confirm earlier complaints from lower level analysts at the Defense Intelligence Agency that Centcom higher-ups had doctored intelligence.

Leaders of Centcom’s intelligence directorate also pressured their subordinates to downplay the threat of ISIS in military reports, the officials said.

The task force, which included members of the House Armed Services and Intelligence committees and the Defense Appropriations subcommittee, was formed after more than 50 intelligence analysts filed a formal complaint accusing senior Centcom officials of inappropriately altering their reports on ISIS and al Qaeda’s branch in Syria.

The complaint, sent to the Pentagon’s inspector general, said senior officials had created a “Stalinist” work environment where subordinates felt “bullied” into drawing conclusions unsubstantiated by facts.

President Obama unwittingly repeated some of the altered intelligence during briefings, the Daily Beast reported. When the initial Centcom complaint came to light last year, Defense Secretary Ash Carter demanded that military officials provide “unvarnished intelligence.”

The report does not contain decisive evidence that senior Obama administration officials had ordered alterations to the ISIS and al Qaeda intelligence.

One official familiar with the House task force’s findings said that while the investigation was “ongoing,” the report “substantiates” claims from lower-level Centcom employees.