Posted tagged ‘Islamic terror groups’

Mission accomplished in Syria

April 12, 2017

Mission accomplished in Syria, Israel Hayom, Clifford D. May. April 12, 2017

(Accomplished or just begun? — DM)

Congress should send Trump the legislation it is now considering, seeking to impose new sanctions on Iran in reprisal for its continuing support of terrorists, its missile tests and its maintenance of more than 35,000 troops in Syria, including its own, those of its Lebanese proxy, Hezbollah, and Shiite fighters recruited from Iraq and Afghanistan. Suspending Iran’s deal with Boeing/Airbus would be useful, too. Only the willfully credulous believe that Iran’s theocrats won’t use such aircraft for illicit military purposes.

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

If you’re still unsure about whether U.S. President Donald Trump did the right thing when he launched 59 cruise missiles at Syria’s Shayrat Air Base last week, consider the alternative.

He knew that Syrian dictator Bashar Assad had yet again used chemical weapons to murder Syrian civilians, women and children prominent among them. He knew that Iran and Russia had enabled this atrocity, as they have many others. He knew he had two choices.

He could shrug, instruct his U.N. ambassador to deliver a tearful speech calling on the “international community” to do something, and then go play a round of golf. Or he could demonstrate that the United States still has the power and the grit to stand up to tyrants and terrorists, thereby beginning to re-establish America’s deterrent capability.

In other words, this was what Sun Tzu and Carl von Clausewitz would call a no-brainer. (Well, loosely translated.) A mission was accomplished. Do harder missions lie ahead? Yes, of course. But I suspect Defense Secretary James Mattis and National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster have made that abundantly clear to the new president.

We now know for certain that Russia failed to live up to its 2013 commitment to ensure that Assad surrendered all his illegal chemical weapons under the deal it brokered. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson acerbically questioned whether that was the result of complicity or incompetence or whether Russia allowed itself to be duped by Assad.

The strike ordered by President Trump was not “unbelievably small” — then-Secretary of State John Kerry’s description of the punishment then-President Barack Obama decided not to impose in response to Assad’s earlier use of chemical weapons. It was big enough to make clear that American diplomats are again carrying big sticks. (For Obama to insist that diplomacy and force are alternatives was patently absurd.)

Conveniently, Trump was dining with Chinese President Xi Jinping when the strikes occurred. It’s fair to speculate that Xi is today thinking harder about American requests to rein in Kim Jong Un, the North Korean dictator whose drive to acquire nuclear-tipped missiles that can reach the American mainland has become what Tillerson called an “imminent” threat.

Having passed his first major national security test, Trump is now obliged to demonstrate firmness and consistency. What plans might the Pentagon have on the shelf to respond to further provocations? The next round of Tomahawk missiles could permanently ground Assad’s air force. That would make it easier to then establish no-fly zones. If such measures do not alter the calculations of Assad and his Iranian and Russian patrons, consideration could be given to leveling his defense, intelligence and command-and-control centers as well.

Another idea under discussion: setting up safe havens, or, to use a better term, “self-protection zones,” for those fleeing the Syrian regime and various jihadist forces, Sunni and Shiite alike. Israel and Jordan could help the inhabitants of such areas adjacent to their borders defend themselves. The Saudis, Emiratis and Bahrainis could contribute to the cost. Might this lead to the partition of Syria? Most likely, but it’s difficult to imagine a “political solution” that would not include such readjustments.

All this, while useful and perhaps even necessary, should be seen as insufficient. Syria is a major humanitarian catastrophe but only one piece in a much larger geopolitical puzzle. Sooner rather than later, the Trump administration needs to develop what Obama refused to contemplate: a comprehensive and coherent strategy to counter the belligerent, imperialist and supremacist forces that have emerged from the Middle East and are now spreading like weeds around the world.

The Islamic State group will of course need to be driven off the lands on which it has attempted to establish a caliphate. After that, its terrorists will have to be hunted, along with those of al-Qaida, wherever they hide (e.g., Egypt where, over the weekend, they bombed two Coptic Christian churches).

But — and this is crucial — accomplishing these missions must not serve to further empower Iran’s jihadist rulers, who dream of establishing an expanding imamate, the Shiite version of a caliphate.

Most immediately, Congress should send Trump the legislation it is now considering, seeking to impose new sanctions on Iran in reprisal for its continuing support of terrorists, its missile tests and its maintenance of more than 35,000 troops in Syria, including its own, those of its Lebanese proxy, Hezbollah, and Shiite fighters recruited from Iraq and Afghanistan. Suspending Iran’s deal with Boeing/Airbus would be useful, too. Only the willfully credulous believe that Iran’s theocrats won’t use such aircraft for illicit military purposes.

That the United States cannot solve all the world’s problems was one of Trump’s campaign themes. But the implication is not necessarily, as some of his supporters hoped, that he would turn a blind eye to all atrocities and threats not already within America’s borders.

In the last century, most Americans recognized, in some cases with enormous reluctance, that there was no good alternative to doing whatever was necessary to rout the Nazis and communists, enemies whose goal was to kill off the democratic experiment.

In this century, jihadists and Islamists harbor the same ambition. We can attempt to appease them. We can try to make ourselves inoffensive to them. We can keep our hand extended, hoping that in time they will unclench their fists. Or we can decide instead to plan for a long war that will end with the defeat of these latest enemies of America and the rest of the civilized world. If Trump has grasped that within his first 100 days, he’s not off to such a bad start.

Time to Call Iran’s Revolutionary Guards What They Are: Terrorists

March 10, 2017

Time to Call Iran’s Revolutionary Guards What They Are: Terrorists, American ThinkerReza Shafiee, March 10, 2017

What is missing in all the talks and arguments made in Washington as to what is an effective remedy to counter the mullahs in Iran is the role of Iranian people. Iran is boiling with popular discontent, now. According to Brigadier General Hossein Ashtari, the Iranian regime’s chief of police: “On average 20 to 30 protest gatherings take place around the country by citizens who have lost their life savings to the banks,” These citizens are mainly retired with very limited savings and were scammed out of their lifetime savings by various government-owned financial institutions.  Such protests are but a drop in the ocean when we add the teachers, nurses, factory workers, and an army of college graduates with no prospects of finding decent jobs to the discontent. This amounts to tens of thousands of people, in large numbers of gatherings each year. According to a BBC report, more than 11 million or Iran’s 83 million people are unemployed in the country.

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

Ever since signs emerged that Trump administration is considering a long-overdue classification of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organization, the ruling mullahs have gone to work. They put into place a well-known strategy of intimidation and deception aboard, coupled with an absolute iron fist at home. They do this because they know the value of controlling a terrorist organization. The problem is in the harm it means for everyone else.

In the past, the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khomeini, would brandish the former by reminding Western governments that if they chose to cross Tehran then they must be prepared to pay dearly. But that was decades ago. One fact is undisputable now: The Iranian regime has long passed its prime revolutionary and glory days when Khomeini rode in on the tides of millions who were sadly unaware of what was to come. In those days, people tasted a short-lived period of high expectations, at the time wildly called “spring of freedom.”

At the same time, hostage-taking by IRGC’s protégés, such as nascent Lebanese Hezbollah, of foreign nationals, preferably Americans, was routine. The ayatollahs were behind it even though it often took place in Lebanon. After each kidnapping, IRGC’s proteges then engaged hostages’ governments in a lengthy and humiliating process of hostage negotiations and sometimes hostage swaps in the 1980s.

Today the IRGC has made it much more convenient to reach the same ends by taking the hostages among dual citizens who take the risk of traveling to Iran. Case in point was hostages released just after Iranian regime struck the nuclear deal with the U.S. and five other world powers. IRGC’s deputy chief, Brigadier General Hossein Nejat, in a speech in Bushehr (south of Iran), said: “The Iranian-American journalist of the Washington Post, Jason Rezaian, who had formed an espionage network was identified and arrested by the IRGC.”

Hossein Nejat stated: “The former Secretary of State, John Kerry with his intelligence forces urged the Iranian Foreign Minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif to release Jason Rezaian. Consequently, the U.S. government in return paid 1 billion and 400 million dollars ransom to Iran for the release of Jason Rezaian.”

Other IRGC officials, on different occasions after the hostages were released, have bragged that the Obama administration released Iranian prisoners in the United States and on top of that paid a hefty sum as ransom money.

In past few weeks, despite attempts by regime officials, such as Zarif, to keep a low profile while anxiously monitoring Donald Trump’s every move, IRGC is actively scheming. It raised the prize on Salman Rushdie’s head, showcased and glorified old terrorists such as Anis-Alnaghash on state-run television and openly threatened the U.S.

CNC News revealed on Feb. 28 that an IRGC strategist, Hassan Abbasi renewed threats that the force has planned to unleash terror cells on U.S. soil. He has elaborated plans to sabotage nuclear plants in the United States among other things. Ironically, at the same time, IRGC has claimed that it is fighting terrorism in neighboring countries.

Javad Zarif has recently said: “the world at large agrees that the IRGC has extended the utmost support for neighboring countries in their fight against terrorism.”

Zarif seemingly refers to IRGC’s destructive and brutal role in Syria and is trying to sell it as constrictive. According to IRGC’s own figures, more than 1,000 members of its rank and file have been killed in cities around the war-torn country.  Many were veteran IRGC officers. The Iranian regime claims that it has only an advisory role in Syria, however it has recruited and dispatched thousands of Afghani and Pakistani nationals to Syrian fronts. Not one has fought ISIS.

On March 2, Brigadier General Ismail Ghaani, who is deputy Quds Force commander, speaking in the northeastern city of Mashhad, told a group from the Fatemiyoun Division, an offshoot of the force fighting in Syria: “Fatemiyoun proved that it is a capable force ready to operate not only in Syria but anywhere else on the planet when Islam requires it.” Fatemiyoun was formed of Afghani recruits, along with its sibling organization Zenabiyoun Division of Pakistanis.

The Iranian regime today makes it no secret that it is heavily involved in Syria and Iraq. It sugarcoats its involvement with the illusion that IRGC and its armed wing, the Quds Force, are fighting ISIS. But it’s not true. After almost six years of involvement in the bloody civil war in Syria, it is out in the open that the regime has no quarrel with ISIS. Former Secretary of State John Kerry said in an interview with Fox News: “Assad facilitated the release of 1,500 prisoners, parallel to 1,000 by Maliki in Iraq, leading to the foundation of ISIS.”  Former U.S. ambassador to Iraq, James Jeffrey, said that Americans knew what Prime Minister Maliki was up to, but chose not to take any action.

It is also a hard fact that Maliki was in every way a puppet of the Iranian regime. He was trained by the IRGC and fought alongside its forces during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war.

What is missing in all the talks and arguments made in Washington as to what is an effective remedy to counter the mullahs in Iran is the role of Iranian people. Iran is boiling with popular discontent, now. According to Brigadier General Hossein Ashtari, the Iranian regime’s chief of police: “On average 20 to 30 protest gatherings take place around the country by citizens who have lost their life savings to the banks,” These citizens are mainly retired with very limited savings and were scammed out of their lifetime savings by various government-owned financial institutions.  Such protests are but a drop in the ocean when we add the teachers, nurses, factory workers, and an army of college graduates with no prospects of finding decent jobs to the discontent. This amounts to tens of thousands of people, in large numbers of gatherings each year. According to a BBC report, more than 11 million or Iran’s 83 million people are unemployed in the country.

When it comes to Iran, the decision-makers in Washington have two options: One is to follow the status quo and tolerate a regime which is the number one state sponsor of terrorism in the world, a stirrer of sectarian violence in the region, and engaged in two wars in Iraq and Syria. It’s a nation that secretly supplies weapons to Yemen’s Houthis which has also cost American servicemen’s lives. If the Trump administration chooses this option, it will make the same mistakes the Obama administration made.

The other, and better, option is to stand with Iranian people and their resistance, to let them shape their own future. All they asked of U.S. in 2009 was for the U.S. to stand with them. At the time, they chanted: “Obama are you with us or with them.” They clearly hoped the U.S. would not placate mullahs with concessions, nor turn a blind eye to regime’s terrorism.

One such good signal in the right direction would be to designate IRGC as a terrorist organization.  In light of all it has done and its growing strength, in designating the IRGC as a terrorist group, we are doing ourselves a favor.

Reza Shafiee is a member of Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) 

In Russia, hunkering down over Flynn affair

February 14, 2017

In Russia, hunkering down over Flynn affair, American ThinkerMonica Showalter, February 14, 2017

(Russia has become disenchanted with Iran and wants to have better ties with America, particularly in fighting terrorism. Please see, Pro-Kremlin Pravda.ru: ‘ Iran Is Becoming A Major Problem, First And Foremost For Russia’s Interests’. What’s wrong with having strong ties with Russia in areas where our interests coincide?– DM)

The political backbiting behind the sudden ouster of retired general Michael T. Flynn from the National Security Council is worth watching.

So is the reaction from Russia.  Kicking Flynn out as a security risk – complete with unsubstantiated claims of his supposed vulnerability to Russian blackmail – seems to be a calculated move to trash President Trump’s effort to improve relations with Russia to fight terrorists.  It has a look of the Cold War status quo reasserting itself.

For Russia, which is tired of constant conflict with the West, it’s a huge disappointment.  The initial response has been to lash out.  Back in Moscow, one Russian politician was not pleased:

“The resignation of Michael Flynn was probably the speediest for a national security advisor in all history. But the target is not Flynn, but rather relations with Russia,” Senator Aleksey Pushkov tweeted.

Russians like that, with domestic constituencies, have no reason not to tell it like it is.  Higher up, the response from the Kremlin has been to hunker down into a defensive crouch.  State-owned RT News reports that rather than swing back as the Russian politician did, Russia at the federal state level is suddenly going quiet.  The hilariously peppery, out-there Twitter site of Russia’s London embassy has flatlined, with only a couple of sarcastic recent tweets about Russian hackers – nothing about Flynn.  And up until now, they’ve commented about what they want to comment about, not just London-related doings.  According to RT News, Russia’s foreign ministry now says it considers the Flynn affair none of its business and plans to say nothing about it.

Foreign Policy reports the same strategic retreat. In its latest analysis, its writers, one of whom is Eastern European, pointed out that Trump and his interest in improving ties with Russia are immensely popular in Russia, with even the dissidents wild about Trump.  Such a broad sentiment means high hopes – and likely a lot of disappointment as the Washington status quo reasserts itself.  It also should give domestic political cover for the Putin government to swing back and defend the right of its ambassador to talk to Flynn.  Because if you can’t talk to the ambassador, whom can you talk to?  Yet the Kremlin is showing every sign of pulling back as it finds itself playing the unwanted role of the bogeyman in the Trump-CIA-Justice Department infighting.

A Russian media source I talked to inside Russia just now cautiously says she really, truly hopes the situation will be resolved amicably.  On background, of course, speaking only for herself.  That’s pretty funny behavior, as it shouldn’t be that hard to go on the record to express such a pablummy statement.

Meanwhile, a gander at the untranslated Russian pages of TASS, the state government news agency, which chiefly serves to keep the Kremlin informed, quite unlike RT, which seeks to influence the West, shows that the story – of this magnitude, with Russia at the center of the action – was last night covered from its New York, not its Washington, office.  It seems as though they didn’t want to risk or perhaps sacrifice their longtime correspondents in the capital by having them ask questions about the matter that involves their ambassador.  As Obama showed in his last weeks in office, anyone can be thrown out for “espionage” with no evidence to back it these days.  To make peace with the CIA, Trump’s hand could be forced.  And once again, they will be the bogeyman.

The whole thing is disturbing to me because it represents a wasted opportunity to forge better ties with Russia.  Should it really be “poison” for Russians and Americans to talk to each other and say what we think?  Why is it so taboo to talk freely with them?  Flynn was ousted for that, and now the Russians are exhibiting their old paranoid behaviors and avoiding talk, too, probably with good reason.

With that the case, it signals that Russia being held hostage by the establishment, and it knows it, and it’s all because the Beltway can’t quite get control of Trump.

 

ISIS Terrorists Tapping Organized Crime to Infiltrate Europe

February 11, 2017

ISIS Terrorists Tapping Organized Crime to Infiltrate Europe, Investigative Project on Terrorism, February 10, 2017

With the help of organized criminal elements, Islamic State terrorists reportedly are buying legitimate British passports that can evade security detection from security authorities, the Daily Beast reports.

An Italian intelligence investigation into the Camorra mafia discovered an advertisement on the deep web that linked to a Naples firm capable of producing sophisticated biometric passports.

“We are selling original UK Passports made with your info/picture. Also, your info will get entered into the official passport database,” the advertisement reads. “So its (sic) possible to travel with our passports. How do we do it? Trade secret! Information on how to send us your info and picture will be given after purchase! You can even enter the UK/EU with our passports, we can just add a stamp for the country you are in.”

Other investigations also shed light onto the broader ties between terrorists and European criminal organizations, including in the smuggling of weapons and forged documents.

Last year Italian authorities arrested an Iraqi man in Naples for facilitating weapons and document transfers to the Islamic State.

“Naples has been, for many years, a central logistics base for the Middle East,” prosecutor Franco Roberti told the Daily Beast last year, adding that “the Camorra (mafia) is also active in the world of jihadist terrorism that passes through Naples.”

Terrorists are diversifying their funding sources through various criminal means to underwrite their violent and nefarious activities. The criminal-terrorism nexus manifests itself in several ways: mainly in the form of cooperation between terrorist groups and organized criminal elements, and crimes by terrorists which are conducted to finance their own operations. Terrorists’ reliance in counterfeiting in particular has attracted more attention recently with the rise of Islamic State networks in Europe and other parts of the world.

Lacking a formal state sponsor, and facing setbacks in Syria and Iraq, the Islamic State may start to depend more on criminal relationships to fuel their operations and to infiltrate terrorists into Western for the purposes of carrying out attacks abroad.

Texas Officials Warn of ISIS Threat to U.S.-Mexican Border

January 27, 2017

Texas Officials Warn of ISIS Threat to U.S.-Mexican Border, Investigative Project on Terrorism, John Rossomando, January 26, 2017

A report by the Texas Department of Public Safety raises concerns about ISIS terrorists using the Mexican border both to enter and leave the country. It noted that at least 13 aspiring terrorists have tried to cross into Mexico, or considered trying, since 2012.

Most of those cases involved people who knew they were on the federal no-fly list but wanted to travel to join terrorists, the report said. Sneaking across the southern border “presents an opportunity for increasing numbers of aspiring foreign terrorist fighters to evade US interdiction efforts such as the No-Fly List.”

The most recent example happened in October. Texas authorities arrested two Milwaukee men near San Angelo, Texas on the way to the Mexican border. Jason Ludke, 35, and Yosvany Padilla-Conde, 30, wanted to go to Mexico, obtain fraudulent travel documents and travel to join ISIS in Syria or Iraq.

In another instance in April 2015, seven Somali men from Minnesota tried to cross from San Diego into Mexico in an effort to get to Syria and fight for ISIS.

Texas resident Bilal Hamed Abood, an Iraq-born naturalized U.S. citizen, successfully used the border in 2013 to travel to Syria, where he fought for a Syrian rebel group. The FBI arrested Abood for lying about his initial travel to Syria when he tried to come home through the Dallas-Fort Worth airport. Abood claimed he fought for a faction that was not prohibited under U.S. law. However, FBI agents search his computer and found that he took an oath of allegiance to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

Texas authorities voiced concern in 2014 about ISIS social media threats to use the Mexican border to enter the United States.

In a criminal complaint filed last year, alleged ISIS supporter Erick Jamal Hendricks claimed to have had contact with an ISIS supporter known as “Abu Harb.” “Abu Harb” told Hendricks that he was in Dallas and that the “Islamic State had brothers in Mexico.”

Previously, government officials warned about threats to the U.S. border posed by other terrorist groups including Al-Shabaab and Hizballah.

President Trump touted the ISIS threat as a reason for building his wall along the Mexican border during the campaign. He signed an executive order Wednesday calling for the wall’s construction, but funding sources are not yet clear.

They Teach Our Children, Advise Our Government, And Support Jihad

January 27, 2017

They Teach Our Children, Advise Our Government, And Support Jihad, Investigative Project on Terrorism, Abigail R. Esman, January 27, 2017

1957

Esposito seems to want to aim his work beyond the ivory towers. He has spoken on Islam to the State Department, the FBI, the CIA, Homeland Security and other government offices.

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

Since the rise of ISIS as an Islamic extremist group, and certainly since its leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, declared the official creation of the caliphate, researchers and intelligence groups worldwide have noted its popularity with Muslim women, even in the West. Unlike other terrorist groups, ISIS has pointedly recruited women. And many women have, on their own, found the promise of life in the Islamic State particularly appealing.

Along the way, researchers and intelligence agencies have argued that the Muslim women who join ISIS, especially those who travel to Syria from the West, take active roles in ISIS’s jihad. While they are largely barred from fighting on the battlefield, women have enrolled in the al-Khansaa brigade, the women’s moral police force which enforces strict codes of dress and public behavior. Al-Khansaa officers regularly arrest and beat women who violate sharia-based modesty laws or who appear in public without a male companion. Other women raise their sons to be jihadists, or bring their children with them from the West in the hopes that they, too, will grow up to support the Islamic State and its jihad.

Now a young Dutch researcher, Aysha Navest, has come out with a different theory based on interviews she held with over 22 women now living in the caliphate. Navest, who is affiliated with the University of Amsterdam (UvA), says she knows several of those women. They reveal a very different portrait of the so-called “ISIS brides:” girls who are not recruited for jihad, but who willingly and eagerly make the perilous trip to Syria, where they live peaceful, happy lives as homemakers, mothers, and wives. Her findings appeared last April in the journal Anthropology Today, a peer-reviewed publication of the Royal Anthropological Institute.

There is just one problem: Aysha Navest allegedly also recruits women for the Islamic State.

This is the conclusion of journalists at the Dutch national daily NRC Handelsblad, who matched Navest’s birthdate, hometown, children’s first names and other identifying details with those of “Ought-Aisha,” a woman posting messages on the Dutch-Muslim website Marokko.nl. And according to “Ought-Aisha” (or “Sister Aisha”), life in the Islamic State is simply grand. In various posts, she has praised suicide bombers, honored Osama bin Laden, and insisted that jihadists will find rewards in Paradise. Additionally, the NRC reports, in Facebook posts she has referred to Shiites and apostates as “people who rape our women, torture our men, and kill our children.”

Unsurprisingly, the NRC’s findings put renewed focus on Navest’s reports and the nature of her research, which was performed under the tutelage of two well-known UvA professors – anthropologist Martijn de Koning and Modern Islamic Culture professor Annelies Moors. Both De Koning and Moors now admit that Navest’s subjects were interviewed anonymously, largely via WhatsApp, and that she did not share the women’s names even with them – a departure from standard research practices that call for transparency. Even so, according to Elsevier, they stand behind her research.

Others, however, voice considerable skepticism. The Dutch intelligence agency AIVD dismissed Navest’s report from the outset, noting that her conclusions stood in stark conflict not only with their own, but with other studies by UvA scholars. The UvA has now called for an independent investigation into Navest’s background and the reliability of her work.

Even fellow academics have been scathingly critical. In his column for Elsevier, Leiden University Professor of Jurisprudence Afshin Ellian observed that as a result of Navest’s online postings, “in normal situations, she would end up in prison for incitement to violence and hate with terrorist intentions.” Instead, the conclusions of her “research” showing that women do not join directly in jihad but simply enjoy idyllic lives as wives and mothers in the Caliphate, represent “the manner in which she pursues her own jihad: by pulling a smokescreen before the eyes of the unbelievers.”

But the situation also exposes a larger problem within academia internationally. In many institutions, subjectivity clouds social research, while students’ minds are too-frequently shaped by anti-democratic, anti-Western, and – worse – truth-challenged ideologues. For example, at UvA, De Koning has long been accused of sympathizing with Islamic extremists. Among other things, he co-authored a book describing Salafism as a “utopian idealism.”

Likewise, at Kent State University, the FBI is reportedly investigating history professor Julio Pino for ties to the Islamic State. A Muslim convert, Pino has made provocative comments on campus and in university-based newspapers, including shouting “Death to Israel” during a lecture by a former Israeli diplomat. In a letter to a campus publication, he declared “jihad until victory!” On Facebook, Pino once described Osama bin Laden as “the greatest.” He also posted a photograph of himself in front of the U.S. Capitol Building, adding the caption “I come to bury D.C., not to praise it,” Fox News reports.

Kent State officials say they “distanced” themselves from Professor Pino, whose tenured position poses legal challenges to dismissing him from the faculty.

In contrast, at nearby Oberlin, Assistant Professor Joy Karega’s Facebook posts calling ISIS an arm of American and Israeli intelligence agencies and blaming Israel for the attacks of 9/11 were enough to get her fired from her job teaching Rhetoric and Composition. As the industry newspaper Inside Higher Ed reported, despite initially defending her right to academic freedom, Oberlin officials ultimately determined that, “Beyond concerns about anti-Semitism, which fit into larger complaints about escalating anti-Jewish rhetoric on campus, Karega’s case has raised questions about whether academic freedom covers statements that have no basis in fact.”

Then there is John Esposito, Georgetown University’s professor of Religion and International Affairs and Islamic Studies. An extensive Investigative Project on Terrorism investigation into Esposito’s activities found that he has used his position to “defend radical Islam and promote its ideology- including defending terrorist organizations and those who support them, advocating for Islamist regimes, praising radical Islamists and their apologists, and downplaying the threat of Islamist violence.” He refuses to condemn Hamas and, according to the report, “remains a close friend and defender of Palestinian Islamic Jihad board member Sami Al-Arian.”

Al-Arian ran the PIJ’s “active arm” in America while working as a University of South Florida professor.

Like Navesh, Esposito seems to want to aim his work beyond the ivory towers. He has spoken on Islam to the State Department, the FBI, the CIA, Homeland Security and other government offices. Similarly, Navesh hoped that her “research” would help shape policy in the Netherlands, encouraging courts to issue lighter sentences on women who returned home from the Islamic State. After all, they hadn’t engaged in terrorism. They’d only lived in domestic bliss abroad. Where’s the crime in that?

None, of course, if it were true. But it is not.

There is nothing new, of course, in respected journals publishing flawed research by people who aim to shape public policy or opinion – the infamous and now-debunked Andrew Wakefield study that claimed to link autism to vaccines is a prime example. But such examples only underscore the challenges, and the need to investigate better the accuracy of scholarly reports as well as the integrity of those who write them. Islamic jihad, after all, is not just about destroying our lives, but about destroying our culture. In the face of the “smokescreens” of that jihad, intellectual vigilance will be our strongest shield.

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.