 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| Police and Terrorism |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
American Intifada
by Daniel Pipes
National Post
June 19, 2007
by Daniel Pipes
National Post
June 19, 2007
In Canada, Aly Hindy of the Salaheddin Islamic Centre in
Toronto threatened Public Safety Minister Anne McLellan about
the government "terrorizing" Muslims. "If you try to cross the line
I can't guarantee what is going to happen. Our young people,
we can't control." When police remarked, "This is a kind of
threat," Hindy replied, "Yes, but it's for the good of this country."
Another important sign came in May 2007, when a Pew
Research Center study found that 13% of U.S. Muslim
respondents believe that "suicide bombing and other forms of
violence against civilian targets are justified in order to defend
Islam from its enemies" and 5% expressed a favourable view of
al-Qaeda.
Over a quarter century of largely ignored Islamist violence in
the United States complemented these statements. The first
murder took place in July 1980, when an American convert to
Islam assassinated an Iranian dissident in the Washington, D.C.
area. Other incidents included an Egyptian freethinker killed in
Tucson, Ariz.; Meir Kahane killed in New York; an Egyptian
Islamist killed in New York; and two CIA staffers killed outside
agency headquarters in Langley, Va.
The first attempted mass attack took place in February 1993,
when a truck bomb blew up under New York's World Trade
Center — killing six people, but failing in the terrorists' objective
of toppling one tower upon the other. Commentators judged
this a wake-up call but Americans promptly hit the snooze
button. Killings continued apace, still provoking little interest,
such as the shooting of an Orthodox Jewish boy on the
Brooklyn Bridge and a Danish tourist atop the Empire State
building. Law enforcement successfully foiled the blind sheik's
"Day of Terror" in 1993, intended to kill thousands in New York
City, as well as smaller rampages in southern Florida and
southern California.
Then came the 9/11 attacks and 3,000 dead, but that atrocity
heightened fears more than it prompted effective
countermeasures. Islamist terrorism continued apace within the
United States, for the most part generally dismissed as the
result of "mental imbalance," "work stress," "marital problems,"
or "road rage." Even in cases attended by huge publicity,
seemingly any reason was proffered other than devotion to
Islamist ideology. A Los Angeles Times analysis of the Beltway
Snipers killing spree of October 2002, for example, mentioned
John Muhammad's "stormy relationship" with his family, his
"stark realization" of loss and regret, his perceived sense of
abuse as an American Muslim post-9/11, his desire to "exert
control" over others, his relationship with his junior partner, and
his trying to make a quick buck – anything, in short, but jihad.
The absence of large-scale terrorism prompted analysts smugly
to conclude that law enforcement had prevailed; or that the
Islamists had opted for non-violent means.
It thus came as a great surprise in June 2008 when 51 bombs
went off within a few hours in each of the 50 states plus the
District of Columbia, killing over 800 people in schools, stores,
and subways. Such displays of terrorist prowess had taken
place before but in remote places – 500 bombs in one day in
Bangladesh in 2005, 50 in a day in south Thailand in 2006 –
and the outside world had paid them little heed.
As in the Bangladeshi case, identical leaflets appeared near
each of the bombings. Signed by Jihadis for Justice, a hitherto
unknown group, the flyers called for replacing the Constitution
with the Koran and bringing the country's foreign policy in line
with Tehran's. Plagiarizing Hamas, Jihadis for Justice justified
murder on the grounds that Muslim rule would benefit Jews and
Christians: "When we talk about the mission of the restoration
of Islam to its natural place [of world rule], we [are] calling for
justice, and for goodness, and for world love… so that the
Christians will live in peace, and that even the Jews will live in
peace and security."
Building on the precedent of pro-Hamas and pro-Hezbollah
demonstrations in mid-2006, Islamists and far-leftists brazenly
supported the American intifada, punctuating their glorification
of its "martyrs" with Ayatollah Khomeini's "Death to America"
slogan. These messages echoed on Canadian campuses,
especially Concordia University in Montreal and York in Toronto.
Just as the 7/7 bombings had revealed in Great Britain, Islamist
sleepers in substantial numbers lived quietly and unobtrusively
in the United States. The violence became daily, ubiquitous,
endemic, and routine, occurring in rural towns, upscale
suburbs, and metropolitan centres, targeting private houses,
restaurants, university buildings, gas stations, and electricity
grids. As its frequency increased, terrorists became less
cautious, leading to many arrests and bulging prisons. Some
terrorists avoided this ignominious fate by engaging in suicide
attacks, usually accompanied by boastful Internet videos. In all,
roughly 100,000 incidents meant an average 10,000 deaths
and many times more injuries each year.
Jihadis for Justice laid siege to Capitol Hill and the White House,
inspired by three prior terrorist assaults on symbols of
sovereignty: the attack on Trinidad's Red House in 1990, on
India's Parliament House in 2001, and the failed plot to storm
Ottawa's Parliament Hill in 2006. Despite massive security in
Washington, sniper attacks picked off some legislators and
presidential aides. Jihadis for Justice relied on Iranian and
Saudi patronage but no U.S. retaliation followed because,
before acting, President Obama required proofs that would
pass muster in a U.S. court of law, something the intelligence
agencies could not provide.
As in other countries – Israel offering the most obvious
comparison – major changes in American life followed.
Whoever wished to enter supermarkets, bus stations, malls, or
campuses had to produce identification, show his bags and
perhaps submit to a search of his person. Cars routinely
underwent inspections at road blocks. As airline passengers
had to arrive four hours before flight time to run the gauntlet of
security questions about their travels, airports emptied and
airline companies went bankrupt. Local public transportation
went through similar upheavals, as commuters took up bicycling
rather than submit to interrogations and near-strip searches on
their way to work. Telecommuting finally took off.
Anti-Muslim sentiments hardened, turning a once-fringe opinion
into a powerful political movement. Those arguing for the critical
importance of moderate Muslims found their ideas widely
rejected. The "No Muslims – No Terrorism" slogan that was
quickly shunted aside after surfacing in 2003 became the
rallying cry of the newly-formed Anti-Jihad League whose
branches quickly blanketed the country, helping citizens protect
themselves. Talk about bombing Mecca and Medina, hitherto
marginal, was now seriously discussed though ultimately
rejected, by the Pentagon.
The old politically-correct bromides collapsed. Recognizing that
only Muslims engage in Islamist violence, the past practice of
treating the entire U.S. population equally quickly fell into
disfavour, replaced by a focus on the 1% that is Muslim. The
American Civil Liberties Union protested this as discrimination
and the Council on American-Islamic Relations decried it as a
war on Islam and Muslims, but to no avail, as it was shut down
on terrorism charges.
Drawing on the example of the Danish imams going
international in 2005 with the Muhammad cartoons, American
Muslim delegations travelled abroad to publicize their
complaints, arousing vast emotional support by presenting
themselves as an innocent but brutalized community. Majority
Muslim states unanimously condemned Washington for
"Islamophobia" and the U.N. General Assembly passed nearly
weekly resolutions condemning U.S. practices, with only
Australia, Israel, and Micronesia reliably voting with the Obama
administration.
Toronto threatened Public Safety Minister Anne McLellan about
the government "terrorizing" Muslims. "If you try to cross the line
I can't guarantee what is going to happen. Our young people,
we can't control." When police remarked, "This is a kind of
threat," Hindy replied, "Yes, but it's for the good of this country."
Another important sign came in May 2007, when a Pew
Research Center study found that 13% of U.S. Muslim
respondents believe that "suicide bombing and other forms of
violence against civilian targets are justified in order to defend
Islam from its enemies" and 5% expressed a favourable view of
al-Qaeda.
Over a quarter century of largely ignored Islamist violence in
the United States complemented these statements. The first
murder took place in July 1980, when an American convert to
Islam assassinated an Iranian dissident in the Washington, D.C.
area. Other incidents included an Egyptian freethinker killed in
Tucson, Ariz.; Meir Kahane killed in New York; an Egyptian
Islamist killed in New York; and two CIA staffers killed outside
agency headquarters in Langley, Va.
The first attempted mass attack took place in February 1993,
when a truck bomb blew up under New York's World Trade
Center — killing six people, but failing in the terrorists' objective
of toppling one tower upon the other. Commentators judged
this a wake-up call but Americans promptly hit the snooze
button. Killings continued apace, still provoking little interest,
such as the shooting of an Orthodox Jewish boy on the
Brooklyn Bridge and a Danish tourist atop the Empire State
building. Law enforcement successfully foiled the blind sheik's
"Day of Terror" in 1993, intended to kill thousands in New York
City, as well as smaller rampages in southern Florida and
southern California.
Then came the 9/11 attacks and 3,000 dead, but that atrocity
heightened fears more than it prompted effective
countermeasures. Islamist terrorism continued apace within the
United States, for the most part generally dismissed as the
result of "mental imbalance," "work stress," "marital problems,"
or "road rage." Even in cases attended by huge publicity,
seemingly any reason was proffered other than devotion to
Islamist ideology. A Los Angeles Times analysis of the Beltway
Snipers killing spree of October 2002, for example, mentioned
John Muhammad's "stormy relationship" with his family, his
"stark realization" of loss and regret, his perceived sense of
abuse as an American Muslim post-9/11, his desire to "exert
control" over others, his relationship with his junior partner, and
his trying to make a quick buck – anything, in short, but jihad.
The absence of large-scale terrorism prompted analysts smugly
to conclude that law enforcement had prevailed; or that the
Islamists had opted for non-violent means.
It thus came as a great surprise in June 2008 when 51 bombs
went off within a few hours in each of the 50 states plus the
District of Columbia, killing over 800 people in schools, stores,
and subways. Such displays of terrorist prowess had taken
place before but in remote places – 500 bombs in one day in
Bangladesh in 2005, 50 in a day in south Thailand in 2006 –
and the outside world had paid them little heed.
As in the Bangladeshi case, identical leaflets appeared near
each of the bombings. Signed by Jihadis for Justice, a hitherto
unknown group, the flyers called for replacing the Constitution
with the Koran and bringing the country's foreign policy in line
with Tehran's. Plagiarizing Hamas, Jihadis for Justice justified
murder on the grounds that Muslim rule would benefit Jews and
Christians: "When we talk about the mission of the restoration
of Islam to its natural place [of world rule], we [are] calling for
justice, and for goodness, and for world love… so that the
Christians will live in peace, and that even the Jews will live in
peace and security."
Building on the precedent of pro-Hamas and pro-Hezbollah
demonstrations in mid-2006, Islamists and far-leftists brazenly
supported the American intifada, punctuating their glorification
of its "martyrs" with Ayatollah Khomeini's "Death to America"
slogan. These messages echoed on Canadian campuses,
especially Concordia University in Montreal and York in Toronto.
Just as the 7/7 bombings had revealed in Great Britain, Islamist
sleepers in substantial numbers lived quietly and unobtrusively
in the United States. The violence became daily, ubiquitous,
endemic, and routine, occurring in rural towns, upscale
suburbs, and metropolitan centres, targeting private houses,
restaurants, university buildings, gas stations, and electricity
grids. As its frequency increased, terrorists became less
cautious, leading to many arrests and bulging prisons. Some
terrorists avoided this ignominious fate by engaging in suicide
attacks, usually accompanied by boastful Internet videos. In all,
roughly 100,000 incidents meant an average 10,000 deaths
and many times more injuries each year.
Jihadis for Justice laid siege to Capitol Hill and the White House,
inspired by three prior terrorist assaults on symbols of
sovereignty: the attack on Trinidad's Red House in 1990, on
India's Parliament House in 2001, and the failed plot to storm
Ottawa's Parliament Hill in 2006. Despite massive security in
Washington, sniper attacks picked off some legislators and
presidential aides. Jihadis for Justice relied on Iranian and
Saudi patronage but no U.S. retaliation followed because,
before acting, President Obama required proofs that would
pass muster in a U.S. court of law, something the intelligence
agencies could not provide.
As in other countries – Israel offering the most obvious
comparison – major changes in American life followed.
Whoever wished to enter supermarkets, bus stations, malls, or
campuses had to produce identification, show his bags and
perhaps submit to a search of his person. Cars routinely
underwent inspections at road blocks. As airline passengers
had to arrive four hours before flight time to run the gauntlet of
security questions about their travels, airports emptied and
airline companies went bankrupt. Local public transportation
went through similar upheavals, as commuters took up bicycling
rather than submit to interrogations and near-strip searches on
their way to work. Telecommuting finally took off.
Anti-Muslim sentiments hardened, turning a once-fringe opinion
into a powerful political movement. Those arguing for the critical
importance of moderate Muslims found their ideas widely
rejected. The "No Muslims – No Terrorism" slogan that was
quickly shunted aside after surfacing in 2003 became the
rallying cry of the newly-formed Anti-Jihad League whose
branches quickly blanketed the country, helping citizens protect
themselves. Talk about bombing Mecca and Medina, hitherto
marginal, was now seriously discussed though ultimately
rejected, by the Pentagon.
The old politically-correct bromides collapsed. Recognizing that
only Muslims engage in Islamist violence, the past practice of
treating the entire U.S. population equally quickly fell into
disfavour, replaced by a focus on the 1% that is Muslim. The
American Civil Liberties Union protested this as discrimination
and the Council on American-Islamic Relations decried it as a
war on Islam and Muslims, but to no avail, as it was shut down
on terrorism charges.
Drawing on the example of the Danish imams going
international in 2005 with the Muhammad cartoons, American
Muslim delegations travelled abroad to publicize their
complaints, arousing vast emotional support by presenting
themselves as an innocent but brutalized community. Majority
Muslim states unanimously condemned Washington for
"Islamophobia" and the U.N. General Assembly passed nearly
weekly resolutions condemning U.S. practices, with only
Australia, Israel, and Micronesia reliably voting with the Obama
administration.
| Reprinted with permission |
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
| Copyright © 2006 - 2008 - Barry M. Baker - CareerPoliceOfficer.com |
| Disclaimer |
| CareerPoliceOfficer.com is not responsible for the contents of any linked site or any link contained in a linked site, or any changes or updates to such sites. Links are provided only as a convenience, and the inclusion of any link does not imply endorsement by this site. |
Terrorist TV: The Bad,
The Ugly, The Boring,
And The Stupid
By: Rachel Marsden
Iran has just launched Press TV, its
24-hour English language satellite
news channel to counter what Iranian
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
calls western "propaganda."
So I've decided this week to take my
own romp through the Islamic world,
to counter Press TV propaganda.
Infidels like legs: Want to win hearts
and minds, Press TV? Lose the hijab.
Infidels don't dig it. Neither,
apparently, do a lot of Muslim
radicals. Ask any counter-terror
agent about the disproportionate
time spent following suspects to
casinos and strip clubs rather than
mosques.
Boring videos: The latest
hour-and-a-half worth of video from
the al-Qaida Lecture Series has its
number two man, Ayman al-Zawahiri,
giving "sleeper" cells a whole new
meaning.
Here's a typical line: "The stage
preceding victory is normally, in the
history of nations, the stage in which
there is most seen an increase in
conspiracies, plots and inciting of
discord in an attempt by the enemy,
who has begun to see his defeat
approach, to push back and delay
the defeat as much as he can."
How about talking in soundbites? And
for lessons on punching up the talk
of conspiracy and western defeat,
check out the Democrats on CSPAN.
"Brown" nosing: New British Prime
Minister Gordon Brown says he
doesn't want to associate the word
"Muslim" with the recent terrorist
activity in his country. No word yet on
whether it's still alright to offend the
medical profession by calling them
"doctors."
If only Gordon Brown had been
around during World War II to erase
"Nazis" from the lexicon, they'd have
traded their jackboots for flip-flops.
Given that they were foreign-trained
doctors, how about kick-starting that
debate on western countries
recognizing foreign credentials?
And he's a liar, too: According to
CNN, a British Anglican cleric working
in Baghdad said of a man he met in
Jordan believed by authorities to be
al-Qaida linked: "It was amazing,
really. They were meeting to talk
about peace and he didn't say
anything about peace."
Well maybe that's because in his
world, "peace" means blowing stuff
up?
Terrorist catfight: Palestinian terrorist
groups Hamas and Fatah are at each
other's throats again, fighting over
who has the bigger Jimmy in the
Gaza Strip. Hamas is even calling
Fatah officials gay, which,
incidentally, is how I knew I won an
argument when I was in Grade 2.
The last time the two groups had a
propaganda dustup was when Hamas
TV aired terrorist mouse, Farfur, a
Mickey Mouse doppelganger, and
Fatah argued it was a bit much.
Please.
The only significant difference
between these groups would be the
brand of backpack they put the bomb
in. Incidentally, Farfur was recently
killed for his "land" by a Jew. I don't
think the two groups will be fighting
over an alternate ending for the DVD
version.
Sarkozy needs to go for another jog:
French President Nicolas Sarkozy
carved out some time to support an
idiotic "goodwill" gesture by Israel's
unelected acting PM Ehud Olmert,
who wants to kiss up to Palestinian
President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah
posse by releasing 250 Fatah
terrorists. Sure, Fatah likes to kill
Hamas (good), but they also like to
blow up buses (bad).
Hey Sarko, pretend it's a fight
between two sharks on Animal
Planet. Grab the popcorn, put on a
Streisand CD, and let the terrorists
go at each other.
Educating the world on the subtle
nuances between Mideast terrorists
is Jimmy Carter's job.
PUBLISHED: TORONTO SUN (July
8/07)
COPYRIGHT 2007 RACHEL
MARSDEN
The Ugly, The Boring,
And The Stupid
By: Rachel Marsden
Iran has just launched Press TV, its
24-hour English language satellite
news channel to counter what Iranian
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
calls western "propaganda."
So I've decided this week to take my
own romp through the Islamic world,
to counter Press TV propaganda.
Infidels like legs: Want to win hearts
and minds, Press TV? Lose the hijab.
Infidels don't dig it. Neither,
apparently, do a lot of Muslim
radicals. Ask any counter-terror
agent about the disproportionate
time spent following suspects to
casinos and strip clubs rather than
mosques.
Boring videos: The latest
hour-and-a-half worth of video from
the al-Qaida Lecture Series has its
number two man, Ayman al-Zawahiri,
giving "sleeper" cells a whole new
meaning.
Here's a typical line: "The stage
preceding victory is normally, in the
history of nations, the stage in which
there is most seen an increase in
conspiracies, plots and inciting of
discord in an attempt by the enemy,
who has begun to see his defeat
approach, to push back and delay
the defeat as much as he can."
How about talking in soundbites? And
for lessons on punching up the talk
of conspiracy and western defeat,
check out the Democrats on CSPAN.
"Brown" nosing: New British Prime
Minister Gordon Brown says he
doesn't want to associate the word
"Muslim" with the recent terrorist
activity in his country. No word yet on
whether it's still alright to offend the
medical profession by calling them
"doctors."
If only Gordon Brown had been
around during World War II to erase
"Nazis" from the lexicon, they'd have
traded their jackboots for flip-flops.
Given that they were foreign-trained
doctors, how about kick-starting that
debate on western countries
recognizing foreign credentials?
And he's a liar, too: According to
CNN, a British Anglican cleric working
in Baghdad said of a man he met in
Jordan believed by authorities to be
al-Qaida linked: "It was amazing,
really. They were meeting to talk
about peace and he didn't say
anything about peace."
Well maybe that's because in his
world, "peace" means blowing stuff
up?
Terrorist catfight: Palestinian terrorist
groups Hamas and Fatah are at each
other's throats again, fighting over
who has the bigger Jimmy in the
Gaza Strip. Hamas is even calling
Fatah officials gay, which,
incidentally, is how I knew I won an
argument when I was in Grade 2.
The last time the two groups had a
propaganda dustup was when Hamas
TV aired terrorist mouse, Farfur, a
Mickey Mouse doppelganger, and
Fatah argued it was a bit much.
Please.
The only significant difference
between these groups would be the
brand of backpack they put the bomb
in. Incidentally, Farfur was recently
killed for his "land" by a Jew. I don't
think the two groups will be fighting
over an alternate ending for the DVD
version.
Sarkozy needs to go for another jog:
French President Nicolas Sarkozy
carved out some time to support an
idiotic "goodwill" gesture by Israel's
unelected acting PM Ehud Olmert,
who wants to kiss up to Palestinian
President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah
posse by releasing 250 Fatah
terrorists. Sure, Fatah likes to kill
Hamas (good), but they also like to
blow up buses (bad).
Hey Sarko, pretend it's a fight
between two sharks on Animal
Planet. Grab the popcorn, put on a
Streisand CD, and let the terrorists
go at each other.
Educating the world on the subtle
nuances between Mideast terrorists
is Jimmy Carter's job.
PUBLISHED: TORONTO SUN (July
8/07)
COPYRIGHT 2007 RACHEL
MARSDEN
| Reprinted with permission |
Note to the reader: All quotations contained in this article and all references to events before
June 2007 are genuine. All references to future events are, obviously, fictional. The sentences in
square brackets did not appear in the print version.
In retrospect, there were plenty of hints about the war that so abruptly broke out on June 19, 2008.
First, there were the overt verbal threats. Hatem Bazian, senior lecturer of Islamic Studies at the University of
California-Berkeley, announced to a rally in April 2004 that the time had come for mass violence, an intifada,
in the United States. "We're sitting here and watching the world pass by, people being bombed [by U.S.
forces], and it's about time that we have an intifada in this country that change fundamentally the political
dynamics in here."
June 2007 are genuine. All references to future events are, obviously, fictional. The sentences in
square brackets did not appear in the print version.
In retrospect, there were plenty of hints about the war that so abruptly broke out on June 19, 2008.
First, there were the overt verbal threats. Hatem Bazian, senior lecturer of Islamic Studies at the University of
California-Berkeley, announced to a rally in April 2004 that the time had come for mass violence, an intifada,
in the United States. "We're sitting here and watching the world pass by, people being bombed [by U.S.
forces], and it's about time that we have an intifada in this country that change fundamentally the political
dynamics in here."
Pre-intifada, terrorists such as Ahmed Ressam and Ghazi Ibrahim Abu Mezer exploited Canada's less
stringent security environment as a base from which to attack the United States, a pattern that now
continued. Repeated closings and crossing delays of the border with Canada followed, harming the
Canadian economy and provoking widespread resentment.
Several factors prompted an outflow of Muslims: a new emphasis on expelling illegals from Muslim countries,
Muslim immigrants voluntarily repatriating, and groups of African-American converts moving to Liberia.
Ironically, the intifada also led to a surge in conversions to Islam throughout the Western world, just as had
happened post-9/11. Muslim visitors from abroad found entry into the country difficult. For example, the idea
first floated in early 2007 to require visas only of Britons with Pakistani origins was applied in late 2008,
intensely annoying Europeans.
Just as a Norwegian grocery store chain urged the boycott of Israeli products in 2002, so did it initiate the
2009 international anti-U.S. economic boycott. What began by marking American products with a
red-white-blue sticker ended by dropping them all together. "Mecca Cola," "Beurger King," and Barbie doll
replacements Fulla and Razanne, all created years before the American intifada began, were now joined by
other Muslim replacements for their better-known U.S. equivalents. Inspired by the success of Ülker, a
Turkish corporation long associated with Islamist causes, to replace Coca-Cola with its Cola Turka, other
Islamist-affiliated companies commercially exploited anti-American sentiments. Rumblings of an Arab oil
boycott along the lines of 1973-74 led to a surge in the price of energy, causing an economic recession, but
structural changes in the oil market made such an effort too difficult to sustain.
Then, almost as suddenly as it had started, the terrorist campaign ended in June 2012. A combination of
draconian security measures, beefed-up intelligence capabilities, and a relentless focus on the pool of
Islamist suspects led to a severe drop-off in terrorist capabilities. Battered by the experience, American
Islamists realized the error of their tactics and decided to forego violence. Like their counterparts in Egypt,
Syria, and Algeria, they took up lawful means and worked henceforth within the system.
A Reuters description of developments in Algeria in 2006 foreshadowed the Islamist evolution in the United
States: "Algeria's Islamists are making a modest political comeback after failing to win with the bullet what
they once sought with the ballot. [With an armed insurrection long in decline, most Islamists these days want
to work in the political mainstream, using peaceful means to build Islamic rule in the oil exporting nation. It is
an approach that is winning them powerful friends."
Azzedine Layachi of St. John's University further explained about Algeria that "The Islamist movement tried to
challenge the state head on and it failed miserably. But Islamist sentiment has not been defeated. On the
contrary, Islamists are now part and parcel of the political and cultural scene."]
The ending of the four-year American intifada signalled, as in Algeria, the opening of a political battle over
the country's future. Would the Constitution of 1787 remain in place, or would it be complemented or perhaps
replaced by the Koran and the Shariah?
stringent security environment as a base from which to attack the United States, a pattern that now
continued. Repeated closings and crossing delays of the border with Canada followed, harming the
Canadian economy and provoking widespread resentment.
Several factors prompted an outflow of Muslims: a new emphasis on expelling illegals from Muslim countries,
Muslim immigrants voluntarily repatriating, and groups of African-American converts moving to Liberia.
Ironically, the intifada also led to a surge in conversions to Islam throughout the Western world, just as had
happened post-9/11. Muslim visitors from abroad found entry into the country difficult. For example, the idea
first floated in early 2007 to require visas only of Britons with Pakistani origins was applied in late 2008,
intensely annoying Europeans.
Just as a Norwegian grocery store chain urged the boycott of Israeli products in 2002, so did it initiate the
2009 international anti-U.S. economic boycott. What began by marking American products with a
red-white-blue sticker ended by dropping them all together. "Mecca Cola," "Beurger King," and Barbie doll
replacements Fulla and Razanne, all created years before the American intifada began, were now joined by
other Muslim replacements for their better-known U.S. equivalents. Inspired by the success of Ülker, a
Turkish corporation long associated with Islamist causes, to replace Coca-Cola with its Cola Turka, other
Islamist-affiliated companies commercially exploited anti-American sentiments. Rumblings of an Arab oil
boycott along the lines of 1973-74 led to a surge in the price of energy, causing an economic recession, but
structural changes in the oil market made such an effort too difficult to sustain.
Then, almost as suddenly as it had started, the terrorist campaign ended in June 2012. A combination of
draconian security measures, beefed-up intelligence capabilities, and a relentless focus on the pool of
Islamist suspects led to a severe drop-off in terrorist capabilities. Battered by the experience, American
Islamists realized the error of their tactics and decided to forego violence. Like their counterparts in Egypt,
Syria, and Algeria, they took up lawful means and worked henceforth within the system.
A Reuters description of developments in Algeria in 2006 foreshadowed the Islamist evolution in the United
States: "Algeria's Islamists are making a modest political comeback after failing to win with the bullet what
they once sought with the ballot. [With an armed insurrection long in decline, most Islamists these days want
to work in the political mainstream, using peaceful means to build Islamic rule in the oil exporting nation. It is
an approach that is winning them powerful friends."
Azzedine Layachi of St. John's University further explained about Algeria that "The Islamist movement tried to
challenge the state head on and it failed miserably. But Islamist sentiment has not been defeated. On the
contrary, Islamists are now part and parcel of the political and cultural scene."]
The ending of the four-year American intifada signalled, as in Algeria, the opening of a political battle over
the country's future. Would the Constitution of 1787 remain in place, or would it be complemented or perhaps
replaced by the Koran and the Shariah?
trace the origin, history, and evolution of the ideas of al-Qaeda founders Ayman al-Zawahiri and Osama bin
Laden.
This extraordinary collection of the key texts of the al-Qaeda movement—including incendiary materials never
before translated into English—lays bare the minds, motives, messages, and ultimate goals of an enemy bent
on total victory. Al-Qaeda’s chilling ideology calls for a relentless jihad against non-Muslim "infidels,"
repudiates democracy in favor of Islamic law, stresses the importance of martyrdom, and mocks the notion of
"moderate" Islam.
Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of these works is how grounded they are in the traditional sources of
Islamic theology: the Koran and the teachings of the Prophet. The founders of al-Qaeda use these sources as
powerful weapons of persuasion, reminding followers (and would-be recruits) that Muhammad and his warriors
spread Islam through the power of the sword and that the Koran is not merely allegory or history but literal
truth that commands all Muslims to action.
In addition to laying bare al-Qaeda’s ultimate motives, The Al Qaeda Reader includes the organization’s
propagandist speeches, which are directed primarily at Americans, Europeans, and Iraqis. Here, al-Qaeda’s
many "official" accusations against the West are meticulously delineated, from standard complaints such as
the Palestinian issue and Iraq to wholly unexpected ones concerning the U.S.’s exploitation of women and the
environment.
Taken together, the Theology and Propaganda sections of this volume reveal the most comprehensive picture
of al-Qaeda to date. They also highlight the double-speak of bin Laden and Zawahiri, who often say one thing to
Muslims in their religious treatises ("We must hate and fight the West because Islam commands it") and
another in their propaganda directed at the West ("The West is the aggressor and we are fighting back merely
in self-defense").
Westerners from across the political spectrum will be fascinated and enlightened by The Al Qaeda Reader’s
insights into the nature of Islamic texts and the ways in which al-Qaeda has used these texts to manufacture
hatred against our civilization and our way of life.
Laden.
This extraordinary collection of the key texts of the al-Qaeda movement—including incendiary materials never
before translated into English—lays bare the minds, motives, messages, and ultimate goals of an enemy bent
on total victory. Al-Qaeda’s chilling ideology calls for a relentless jihad against non-Muslim "infidels,"
repudiates democracy in favor of Islamic law, stresses the importance of martyrdom, and mocks the notion of
"moderate" Islam.
Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of these works is how grounded they are in the traditional sources of
Islamic theology: the Koran and the teachings of the Prophet. The founders of al-Qaeda use these sources as
powerful weapons of persuasion, reminding followers (and would-be recruits) that Muhammad and his warriors
spread Islam through the power of the sword and that the Koran is not merely allegory or history but literal
truth that commands all Muslims to action.
In addition to laying bare al-Qaeda’s ultimate motives, The Al Qaeda Reader includes the organization’s
propagandist speeches, which are directed primarily at Americans, Europeans, and Iraqis. Here, al-Qaeda’s
many "official" accusations against the West are meticulously delineated, from standard complaints such as
the Palestinian issue and Iraq to wholly unexpected ones concerning the U.S.’s exploitation of women and the
environment.
Taken together, the Theology and Propaganda sections of this volume reveal the most comprehensive picture
of al-Qaeda to date. They also highlight the double-speak of bin Laden and Zawahiri, who often say one thing to
Muslims in their religious treatises ("We must hate and fight the West because Islam commands it") and
another in their propaganda directed at the West ("The West is the aggressor and we are fighting back merely
in self-defense").
Westerners from across the political spectrum will be fascinated and enlightened by The Al Qaeda Reader’s
insights into the nature of Islamic texts and the ways in which al-Qaeda has used these texts to manufacture
hatred against our civilization and our way of life.
The Al Qaeda Reader (Hardcover) by Raymond Ibrahim
The global war on terror is not just a military conflict but a war of ideas.
Indeed it is in some respects primarily an ideological struggle. Yet it is a
war we cannot win without a broader understanding of al-Qaeda's goals
and motives.
What do our enemies believe? What motivates their war against the
West? What is their vision of the ideal Islamic society? Surprisingly,
more than five years after 9/11, there is very little understanding of these
questions.
Despite our tendency to dismiss Islamic extremism as profoundly
irrational, al-Qaeda is not without a coherent body of beliefs. Like other
totalitarian movements, the movement’s leaders have rationalized their
brutality in a number of published treatises. Now, for the first time, The
Al Qaeda Reader gathers together the essential texts and documents that
Indeed it is in some respects primarily an ideological struggle. Yet it is a
war we cannot win without a broader understanding of al-Qaeda's goals
and motives.
What do our enemies believe? What motivates their war against the
West? What is their vision of the ideal Islamic society? Surprisingly,
more than five years after 9/11, there is very little understanding of these
questions.
Despite our tendency to dismiss Islamic extremism as profoundly
irrational, al-Qaeda is not without a coherent body of beliefs. Like other
totalitarian movements, the movement’s leaders have rationalized their
brutality in a number of published treatises. Now, for the first time, The
Al Qaeda Reader gathers together the essential texts and documents that
Thirty years of law
enforcement in Miami,
Florida, including
sixteen years working
homicide, gives
Marshall Frank a huge
reservoir from which
to draw insights into
the problems facing
America today. After
retiring from the
Miami-Dade P.D. in
1990, Frank went on to
become a writer, now
with eight published
books, five fiction and
three non-fiction. His
book "Militant Islam In
America" was
published after an
exhaustive research
study about the
inroads that radicals
are making within the
borders of the U.S. He
is currently working on
a non-fiction book
about the abominable
criminal justice
system. Book listings,
prices and availability
can be accessed at his
web site:
www.marshallfrank.com
enforcement in Miami,
Florida, including
sixteen years working
homicide, gives
Marshall Frank a huge
reservoir from which
to draw insights into
the problems facing
America today. After
retiring from the
Miami-Dade P.D. in
1990, Frank went on to
become a writer, now
with eight published
books, five fiction and
three non-fiction. His
book "Militant Islam In
America" was
published after an
exhaustive research
study about the
inroads that radicals
are making within the
borders of the U.S. He
is currently working on
a non-fiction book
about the abominable
criminal justice
system. Book listings,
prices and availability
can be accessed at his
web site:
www.marshallfrank.com
Militant Islam in America
In concise, no-frills style, “Militant Islam In America” unveils
disturbing revelations about the surreptitious invasion of the
United States by Wahhabi Islamic forces from the Middle East
hell-bent on replacing the Constitution by the Quran. Deftly
researched, powerfully written and politically incorrect, the
author summarizes the bottom line: Under the unwatchful eye
of the U.S. government, the non-peaceful side of Islam is
using money, political influence and the protection of our Bill
disturbing revelations about the surreptitious invasion of the
United States by Wahhabi Islamic forces from the Middle East
hell-bent on replacing the Constitution by the Quran. Deftly
researched, powerfully written and politically incorrect, the
author summarizes the bottom line: Under the unwatchful eye
of the U.S. government, the non-peaceful side of Islam is
using money, political influence and the protection of our Bill
of Rights to conquer and create the Islamic Republic Of America before the end of
this century.
this century.
| WAR ON TERROR: A MISNOMER |
| by Marshall Frank |
November 18, 2007
“Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become
dominant. The Quran should be the highest authority in America.”
— Omar M. Ahmad, founder of CAIR (Council On American-Islamic
Relations)
There is no such thing as a “War on Terror.”
Promulgated by media, journalists or politicians, this worn-out cliche` has
been used so many thousands of times in the last six years that Americans
are inured by utter repetition. As intelligent Americans, we fail to question
what is being omitted.
Terror is a method. Terror is an emotion. We can’t be at war against a method
and an emotion.
We will never win any war until we are prepared to identify the enemy. We
don’t do that. Neither does the media, or the government.
That works very good — for our enemy. That’s the way they want it. We play
right into their hands helping our enemies perpetuate the propaganda
machine that points the fingers of blame in every direction but the right
direction for fear of being politically incorrect. We are at war against a cliche`.
dominant. The Quran should be the highest authority in America.”
— Omar M. Ahmad, founder of CAIR (Council On American-Islamic
Relations)
There is no such thing as a “War on Terror.”
Promulgated by media, journalists or politicians, this worn-out cliche` has
been used so many thousands of times in the last six years that Americans
are inured by utter repetition. As intelligent Americans, we fail to question
what is being omitted.
Terror is a method. Terror is an emotion. We can’t be at war against a method
and an emotion.
We will never win any war until we are prepared to identify the enemy. We
don’t do that. Neither does the media, or the government.
That works very good — for our enemy. That’s the way they want it. We play
right into their hands helping our enemies perpetuate the propaganda
machine that points the fingers of blame in every direction but the right
direction for fear of being politically incorrect. We are at war against a cliche`.
On September 11, 2001, our nation was invaded by a foreign enemy who was willing to die for the joy of
killing us. It was the first time in nearly two hundred years that our mainland was under attack, killing three
thousand of our citizens. It was clearly a declaration of war. In 1941, we identified the Japanese Imperialists
as our enemy. We identified Nazi Germany as our enemy. In southeast Asia, North Viet Nam . There was no
ambiguity — then.
In 2001, we were not attacked by “Terror.” We were attacked by radical Islamists who represent a powerful
and well financed enemy that is duty bound to convert our beloved country into an Islamic republic by the
end of the century. And while our armies fight in foreign lands, our enemies are rooting in within the borders
of America to not only perpetuate acts of terror, but to infiltrate our educational facilities, our government
institutions, our neighborhoods, our prisons and our infrastructure in general. “Terror” is but one means by
which they aim to carry out jihad.
In doing this, the enemy makes good use of the First Amendment as a tool for carrying out their goals,
exploiting the freedoms of speech and religion which will cease to exist if and when they have their way. And
when that ever happens, all the progress made by women in America will take an about face. Jews,
Christians and infidels in general will be relegated to dhimmitude status, or killed, and the constitution will be
become a mere blip in a history book somewhere.
In truth, radical Islam is a fascist ideology that masquerades as a religion to suit their purpose. While they
exploit religious freedoms, they proliferate Wahhabi financed mosques and other radical Islamic centers
which serve as a Trojan Horse, surreptitiously plotting the demise of America. Bear in mind, in nations where
radical Islam rules, there is no freedom of religion. There won’t be here, either.
One only has to examine the enormous inroads they have made here in the last twenty years. We can only
imagine what the next twenty will hold.
This enemy is the same radical Islam that bombed the World Trade Center in 1993. They are the same who
murdered seventeen of our soldiers aboard the U.S.S. Cole in 2000, and who bombed our Kenya and
Tanzania embassies in 1997 killing 223 people, who bombed our Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1983 killing
241 servicemen, who murdered 191 people in Madrid in 1994, and another 52 in London in 1995. Bali,
Sudan, Algiers, Somalia, Chechnya, the carnage goes on. They are the same radical Islamics that partnered
with Hitler in WW II to eradicate the world of Jewish people, long before Israel existed. They are the same who
were commanded by Muhammad to spread Islam throughout the world.
It’s time for America to declare our true enemy. The free world is not at war against terror. We are at war
against Radical Islam. The sooner our government owns up to that realism, the sooner we will begin to make
inroads.
Yes, the majority of Muslims throughout the world are peace loving people who do not subscribe to these
tenets. Even if the radicals — and their supporters — represent one-tenth of the world of Islam, we face a
formidable enemy of at least 150 million people, with nuclear materials at their doorstep and an unlimited
ocean of oil money belching from the mid-east.
Nazism in the 1930’s was a mere pimple compared to the foe we will be facing down the road. At least we
could see them.
In 1932, they called people like me, and like CNN’s Glen Beck, authors Brigitte Gabriel and Paul Sperry, mid-
east scholar Daniel Pipes and others, “fear mongers.” Those fear mongers were dismissed, but they were
right. Adopting the pacifist approach, Europe turned a blind eye until they reached the slippery slope. By
then, it was too late. The momentum was in full force. And 50 million people went to their graves.
Michele Malkin called political correctness, “The handmaiden for terror.” More correctly, it is the handmaiden
for radical Islam, here and abroad.
In researching my book, “Militant Islam In America,” I was shocked to learn the scope of our enemy’s
resources, their wicked goals, their vast organization, strategies and sheer numbers that are destined to
grow. The government knows about this, so does the media. But very few are telling you. The focus of our
government is ten thousand miles on the other side of the world as the Trojan Horse grows more ominous
every day.
Radical Islamists are organized in more than seventy nations world wide, including many in Europe. And they
are here.
The Los Angeles Police Department recently formed a plan to map Muslim neighborhoods in order to identify
and monitor the actions of radicals among them. That’s what good police agencies do, pinpoint locations of
potential criminals and track them.
When extremist Muslim organizations, such as CAIR, protested, local politicos caved in to the hue and cry.
Intimidation continues to succeed and political correctness continues to offer sanctuary to our enemy.
This is but one of hundreds of examples, too many to list, in which America is succumbing to and inevitable
horror which our children, and their children will be left to deal with.
This coming election, I will cast my vote for whatever candidate who is not afraid to clearly identify the enemy.
For if the enemy ever has their way, all the other issues in debate won’t matter any more.
Come to think of it…when was the last time someone like Wolf Blitzer asked the question:
“As president, what will you do to stem the rising tide of radical Islam inside the United States?” It’s probably
the most important question regarding the future of America, but it’s never asked.
I’m not holding my breath.
killing us. It was the first time in nearly two hundred years that our mainland was under attack, killing three
thousand of our citizens. It was clearly a declaration of war. In 1941, we identified the Japanese Imperialists
as our enemy. We identified Nazi Germany as our enemy. In southeast Asia, North Viet Nam . There was no
ambiguity — then.
In 2001, we were not attacked by “Terror.” We were attacked by radical Islamists who represent a powerful
and well financed enemy that is duty bound to convert our beloved country into an Islamic republic by the
end of the century. And while our armies fight in foreign lands, our enemies are rooting in within the borders
of America to not only perpetuate acts of terror, but to infiltrate our educational facilities, our government
institutions, our neighborhoods, our prisons and our infrastructure in general. “Terror” is but one means by
which they aim to carry out jihad.
In doing this, the enemy makes good use of the First Amendment as a tool for carrying out their goals,
exploiting the freedoms of speech and religion which will cease to exist if and when they have their way. And
when that ever happens, all the progress made by women in America will take an about face. Jews,
Christians and infidels in general will be relegated to dhimmitude status, or killed, and the constitution will be
become a mere blip in a history book somewhere.
In truth, radical Islam is a fascist ideology that masquerades as a religion to suit their purpose. While they
exploit religious freedoms, they proliferate Wahhabi financed mosques and other radical Islamic centers
which serve as a Trojan Horse, surreptitiously plotting the demise of America. Bear in mind, in nations where
radical Islam rules, there is no freedom of religion. There won’t be here, either.
One only has to examine the enormous inroads they have made here in the last twenty years. We can only
imagine what the next twenty will hold.
This enemy is the same radical Islam that bombed the World Trade Center in 1993. They are the same who
murdered seventeen of our soldiers aboard the U.S.S. Cole in 2000, and who bombed our Kenya and
Tanzania embassies in 1997 killing 223 people, who bombed our Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1983 killing
241 servicemen, who murdered 191 people in Madrid in 1994, and another 52 in London in 1995. Bali,
Sudan, Algiers, Somalia, Chechnya, the carnage goes on. They are the same radical Islamics that partnered
with Hitler in WW II to eradicate the world of Jewish people, long before Israel existed. They are the same who
were commanded by Muhammad to spread Islam throughout the world.
It’s time for America to declare our true enemy. The free world is not at war against terror. We are at war
against Radical Islam. The sooner our government owns up to that realism, the sooner we will begin to make
inroads.
Yes, the majority of Muslims throughout the world are peace loving people who do not subscribe to these
tenets. Even if the radicals — and their supporters — represent one-tenth of the world of Islam, we face a
formidable enemy of at least 150 million people, with nuclear materials at their doorstep and an unlimited
ocean of oil money belching from the mid-east.
Nazism in the 1930’s was a mere pimple compared to the foe we will be facing down the road. At least we
could see them.
In 1932, they called people like me, and like CNN’s Glen Beck, authors Brigitte Gabriel and Paul Sperry, mid-
east scholar Daniel Pipes and others, “fear mongers.” Those fear mongers were dismissed, but they were
right. Adopting the pacifist approach, Europe turned a blind eye until they reached the slippery slope. By
then, it was too late. The momentum was in full force. And 50 million people went to their graves.
Michele Malkin called political correctness, “The handmaiden for terror.” More correctly, it is the handmaiden
for radical Islam, here and abroad.
In researching my book, “Militant Islam In America,” I was shocked to learn the scope of our enemy’s
resources, their wicked goals, their vast organization, strategies and sheer numbers that are destined to
grow. The government knows about this, so does the media. But very few are telling you. The focus of our
government is ten thousand miles on the other side of the world as the Trojan Horse grows more ominous
every day.
Radical Islamists are organized in more than seventy nations world wide, including many in Europe. And they
are here.
The Los Angeles Police Department recently formed a plan to map Muslim neighborhoods in order to identify
and monitor the actions of radicals among them. That’s what good police agencies do, pinpoint locations of
potential criminals and track them.
When extremist Muslim organizations, such as CAIR, protested, local politicos caved in to the hue and cry.
Intimidation continues to succeed and political correctness continues to offer sanctuary to our enemy.
This is but one of hundreds of examples, too many to list, in which America is succumbing to and inevitable
horror which our children, and their children will be left to deal with.
This coming election, I will cast my vote for whatever candidate who is not afraid to clearly identify the enemy.
For if the enemy ever has their way, all the other issues in debate won’t matter any more.
Come to think of it…when was the last time someone like Wolf Blitzer asked the question:
“As president, what will you do to stem the rising tide of radical Islam inside the United States?” It’s probably
the most important question regarding the future of America, but it’s never asked.
I’m not holding my breath.