The Invisible War And Our Enemies

[Warrior-Mentor]

The Invisible War And Our Enemies
The Untold Story Of Terrorists And Radical Islamists In Our Own Backyard
HERB DENENBERG, For The Bulletin
August 10, 2009

A worldwide group of terrorists and other enemies of America are dedicated to destroying this nation, our Constitution and our way of life. But because of the biased, dishonest and fraudulent mainstream media, many Americans are unaware of this existential threat. Due to the journalistic malfeasance of the mainstream media our enemies are invisible to us. Of course, the Obama administration’s political correctness is also reinforcing the media’s minimization of the threat of radical Islam.

I can demonstrate the theme of this column with the work of Steven Emerson, one of the world’s leading authorities on terrorism, who heads one of the world’s leading investigators of terrorism, the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT). Some believe the IPT is actually ahead of the CIA in evaluating the threat of radical Islam and other terrorist groups.

Emerson continues to publish investigations on the dangers we face that should have been front-page news across the country, but were censored out by such publications as the New York Times, the Philadelphia Inquirer, and other mainstream outlets which seem to be among the best friends of terrorists and other enemies of America. They are eager to publicize any slight misstep of our armed forces, but are reluctant to warn us of the threat coming from radical Islam and terrorists. Like our president, they seem to hate America. Here are some of the details of Emerson’s latest investigations:

The American Library Association On The Side Of Terror

One of the most disturbing developments involves professional associations, colleges, universities and other important institutions that seem to be more sympathetic to the enemies of America than to America.

The latest incident involves the American Library Association, the largest and leading library association in the U.S. The ALA had planned a panel discussion entitled “Perspectives on Islam: Beyond the Stereotyping” at its annual convention. One of the invited speakers was Robert Spencer, author of eight books on Islam and jihad, and along with Emerson, one of the giants in contributing to the understanding of terrorism and radical Islam (or what some call Islamofascism). All of the books of Spencer and Emerson should be must reading for Americans.

But when the Council on Islamic Relations (CAIR) spearheaded an attempt to silence Spencer, because it doesn’t like his ideas critical of CAIR, terrorism and Islamofascism, the ALA quickly buckled. CAIR had pressured all the other panelists to withdraw, and Spencer was the only one left standing. But instead of replacing the other panelists or letting Spencer speak by himself, the ALA simply cancelled the panel.

Emerson notes the multiple ironies in this scenario. The ALA holds an annual banned books week to celebrate “the freedom to express one’s opinions even if their opinion might be considered unorthodox or unpopular.” Nonetheless, ALA cancelled the panel rather than replacing the vacated slot or letting Spencer go on alone. There’s another delicious irony: The CAIR official who complained about Spencer said he offers “grotesque viewpoints that lie well outside the bounds of reason and civilized debate.” But that CAIR official is the one who offers such grotesque viewpoints. He is someone who can’t bring himself to condemn two leading terrorist groups, Hamas and Hezbollah; he minimizes the Holocaust; and he claims the Jews control the media, a classic anti-Semitic ploy.

Emerson notes this is only “the latest in a series of successful efforts to silence viewpoints considered offensive to, or critical of, radical Islam.”

The ALA is in the pathetic and disgraceful position of being unwilling to listen to Spencer, one of the leading authorities on radical Islam, and yields to the views of CAIR, which Emerson describes as follows: “In its frenzy to placate CAIR, the ALA does not seem to have taken any notice of the fact that CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case, whose operatives have repeatedly refused to denounce Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist groups. Several of its former officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror. Several of its other officials have made Islamic supremacist statements. CAIR was also involved in the ‘Flying Imams’ intimidation suit against the passengers who reported their suspicious behavior.”

So here the ALA, which should stand for freedom of speech, has become a symbol of censorship and obedience to America-hating terrorists. Emerson writes, “And so they have set yet another precedent in which a group with numerous ties to terrorists and Islamist organizations determines what Americans will learn about Islam, jihad, and the terror threat. What’s the point of having principles if they are so easily tossed aside in the name of political correctness.” The ALA is obviously unprincipled, and that’s why librarians should drop their ALA membership.

Dem. Congressmen Serve As Puppets Of Radical Islam

If the ALA’s sellout to radical Islam isn’t bad enough, consider another Emerson investigation, which identified seven House Democrats willing to c arry Islamists’ water.

Emerson’s investigation found that the seven Democrats sent a letter to Attorney General Holder that clearly mouths the specific language and complaints of some radical Islamist groups. Emerson found the complaints “include the use of convicted felons as informants in mosques, alleged religious profiling of Somali Muslims in Minnesota and elsewhere and allegations that the FBI is working with foreign governments to question American citizens who are terror suspects.”

The seven Congressmen who signed the letter include four from California: Loretta Sanchez, Adam Schiff, Mike Honda and Lois Capps. There are two from Ohio: Mary Jo Kilroy and Dennis Kucinich, and one from Virginia, James Moran.

Many of the groups the Congressmen want Holder to meet with to resolve the “grievances” have radical histories and agendas. Emerson gives examples: “The Muslim Public Affairs Council argues that Hezbollah should not be a designated terrorist organization.” Another of the groups is CAIR, which Emerson notes was included on a list of unindicted co-conspirators in the prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, considered the nation’s largest terrorism-finance case. Emerson reports FBI case Agent Lara Burns labeled CAIR a front group for Hamas during sworn testimony last fall. Many of the Congressmen signing the letter have a history of supporting CAIR.

Anti-Christian, Anti-Semetic Propaganda On Display At Caliphate Conference In Illinois

In July, a pro-jihadist group met openly in Chicago. It is surprisingly open about its desire to re-establish an Islamic Caliphate. At the meeting, the group, Hizb ut-Tahrir, also had literature showing the group views Christians and Jews as untrustworthy enemies of God.

Consider some of the other views of this pro-jihadist group. It condemns interfaith “outreach initiatives.” One of the publications distributed at the Chicago meeting states, Muslims “are not to sit and talk about common things between Islam and the corrupted teachings of Christianity and Judaism.” It also quotes Koranic verses such as this one: “O Believers, do not take the Jews nor the Christians as your friends.” It believes in the death penalty for Muslims who leave the faith.

Emerson concludes the article on Hizb ut-Tahrir with this warning: “The literature [distributed at the Chicago meeting] shows that Hizb ut-Tahrir envisions a very dark future for anyone — Christian, Jew or Muslim — who fails to adhere to its vision of Islamist dominance.”

Perhaps the message of the meeting and of radical Islam came into focus with this exchange between an imam and a member of the audience:

Audience member: “Would you get rid of the Constitution for Shariah [Muslim law], yes or no?”

Imam: “Over the Muslim world? Yes, it would be gone.”

Audience member: “And so if the Unit ed States was a Muslim world, the Constitution would be gone?’

Imam: “If the United States was in the Muslim world, the Muslims who are here would be calling and happy to see the Shariah applied, yes we would.”

Audience member: “And the Constitution gone. That’s all.”

Imam: Yes, as Muslims they would be long gone.”

When you read the work of Emerson and his organization, The Investigative Project on Terrorism, you realize that radical Islam is out to destroy our way of life, our Constitution, and our national existence. But the mainstream media seems indifferent to the threat. Consequently the threat of radical Islam is almost invisible to most of the media and even the administration. We better wake up, and one way to do that is start spending time on the Web site of Emerson’s Investigative Project on Terrorism: www.investigativeproject.org.

American survival is at stake. And whether America survives depends on whether we listen to people like Emerson and Spencer or to the biased dishonest and fraudulent mainstream media.

Herb Denenberg can be reached at advocate@thebulletin.us.

http://thebulletin.us/articles/2009/...0183816661.txt

[akv]

“American survival is at stake. And whether America survives depends on whether we listen to people like Emerson and Spencer or to the biased dishonest and fraudulent mainstream media.”

Warrior-Mentor,

Sir, I agree with the gist of the Denenburg article you referenced above, but respectfully question the final conclusion. Military history has taught us America has survived far greater challenges in the past, a bloody civil war, the fascists in the 40’s, and the communists during the Cold War. I believe it is actually radical Islam’s survival at stake. Folks here in the past have referenced the relative success of Turkey, a modern secular state, and NATO ally, if not for this example it would simply be “ Islam’s survival at stake”. I believe the fundamental flaw of Islam is inability to answer the question what’s in it for the women? Once again, I cite the value of studying military history as General George S. Patton, made the following observation in a letter to his wife back during the North African campaign,

“It seems to me a certainty that the fatalistic teachings of Mohammed and the utter degradation of the Arab women are the outstanding causes for the arrested development of the Arab. He is exactly as he was around the year 700, while we have been developing.”

I believe a society’s values and future are most influenced by the hand that rocks the cradle, and that the freedom for all law abiding citizens is the mark of civilization, Even if you believe theirs is an entirely different culture, if half the population has a Hobbesian existence forced upon them, and then gains exposure to the fact women in the western world can remain Muslim, and still go to school, become doctors, own property, whatever, the gig will eventually be up, nature does not tolerate stagnation. Other than brutal coercion I don’t understand what incentive Jihad holds for a female martyr, does she get a free pass to fleet week? Seriously though, UBL’s stated reason for hating America is our trespassing on Saudi soil during Desert Storm, (let’s ignore the fact we were there to protect them from a hostile Muslim state). I believe it was more dangerous for Islam for Saudi women to see the freedoms afforded to coalition service women. I believe this is their Achilles heel. In Pete Blaber’s recent book he mentioned a Taliban chieftain who offered to identify al Qaeda positions in Afghanistan for a number of reasons, one of which was his little girl; he wanted her to go to school. While the Taliban has good reason to fear the martial prowess of an A-Team, it is the coed school left in their wake which will prove fatal to radical Islam. I definitely believe America faces a threat and needs to keep the pressure on, I believe we have overcome greater threats, and will prevail here in time. Radical Islam’s actions are consistent with those of a desperate wounded animal, why else would you provoke a sleeping tiger? Islam’s current manifestation will eventually have to adapt with civilization like any other religion, like the Turk’s example or risk the evolutionary extinction experienced by the pagan religions of old.

[The Reaper]

akv:

Have you really looked at Turkey lately?

You might want to before making those sweeping generalizations.

TR

[akv]

Reaper,

It was not my intent to make sweeping generalizations, nor did I mean to imply Turkey was perfect in any way. My experience was limited to Istanbul for 10 days in mid 2007. I have never been to Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan, so my perceptions there are only what I've read. Though an ancient city, aside from the calls to prayer sounding from the mosques at regular intervals, reminding you of the majority faith, you could easily be in many a European city. There are little boys and girls in school. Young people watching music videos, disco's and bars. Women can vote, drive, wear dresses and shorts and own businesses. I saw ancient Christian churches, and bought a chess set from a nice Jewish store in the Grand Bazaar. The doctor in the adjacent clinic was a woman. As I said before I have never been to Afghanistan, but I do do not believe women there are afforded anywhere near these freedoms. So thus I respectfully do not believe these are sweeping generalizations. I know the Liberal party lost the last election and there has always been a more radical undercurrent present. I believe Turkey has the defining characteristics of a modern secular state, and their example would terrify the Taliban.

[Pete]

I wonder how the Revised Hadith project concluded?

It was big news around Mar 2008 but faded away by Apr 2008.

Not heard much about it since.

[Ambush Master]

I still say that the "Radical Islamists" are those that WANT to get along with us!!!

Later
Martin

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by Ambush Master

I still say that the "Radical Islamists" are those that WANT to get along with us!!!

Later
Martin

I like that, bet we see it used on Fox News soon.....

[Richard]

I still say that the "Radical Islamists" are those that WANT to get along with us!!!

Those are the norm around here where I live - I'm surrounded by radicals?!!??

And so it goes...

Richard's $.02

[Warrior-Mentor]

Originally Posted by akv

“American survival is at stake. And whether America survives depends on whether we listen to people like Emerson and Spencer or to the biased dishonest and fraudulent mainstream media.”

The author is absolutely correct. I can’t show the references here [not ready for public disclosure yet], but I’ve seen the legal brief exposing the agenda behind the Society for “Professional” Journalism’s lack of professionalism.

Originally Posted by akv

I believe it is actually radical Islam’s survival at stake.

What you believe is irrelevant. “Neville Chamberlain believed he had achieved peace in our time.” It’s what reality is and what they believe that matters.

Originally Posted by akv

I believe the fundamental flaw of Islam is inability to answer the question what’s in it for the women?

True, but women in so many islamic societies are suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.

Originally Posted by akv

I believe a society’s values and future are most influenced by the hand that rocks the cradle, and that the freedom for all law abiding citizens is the mark of civilization, Even if you believe theirs is an entirely different culture, if half the population has a Hobbesian existence forced upon them, and then gains exposure to the fact women in the western world can remain Muslim, and still go to school, become doctors, own property, whatever, the gig will eventually be up, nature does not tolerate stagnation.

I’m going to give you a homework assignment here.
Get “Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law.”
What does it say about Women working? (Hint read page 569-570, section n9.131)

Originally Posted by akv

Other than brutal coercion I don’t understand what incentive Jihad holds for a female martyr?

You don’t need to understand. They do.
This is about what they believe. This isn’t about Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.
This isn’t about hearts and minds. This is about Souls.

Originally Posted by akv

Seriously though, UBL’s stated reason for hating America is our trespassing on Saudi soil during Desert Storm, (let’s ignore the fact we were there to protect them from a hostile Muslim state).

UBL’s stated reason to whom? There’s a BIG difference between what UBL says to Muslims and what he says to Non-Muslims. Get a copy of “The Al-Qaeda Reader.” Read the introduction and the Foreword.

There’s two general types of statements coming out of UBL and Zawahiri:

1. Formal Theology. By MUSLIMS for MUSLIMS. This stuff (with a few exceptions) doesn’t get translated and broadcast by the news. It lists the real reasons WHY they do what they do.

2. Popular Propaganda. By MUSLIMS for NON-MUSLIMS. Sent to the West. This is the stuff that gets translated and sent out on the news channels. This regurgitates bile critiques of the West – much of it from the West itself.

“These texts serve as a wake-up call to
an often naïve and therapeutic West that believes
enemies are to be understood rather than destroyed,
and their threats explained away as empty rhetoric
rather than braced for as bitter truth.”
- The Al Qaeda Reader (page XXXII)

Originally Posted by akv

I believe it was more dangerous for Islam for Saudi women to see the freedoms afforded to coalition service women. I believe this is their Achilles heel. In Pete Blaber’s recent book he mentioned a Taliban chieftain who offered to identify al Qaeda positions in Afghanistan for a number of reasons, one of which was his little girl; he wanted her to go to school. While the Taliban has good reason to fear the martial prowess of an A-Team, it is the coed school left in their wake which will prove fatal to radical Islam.

Originally Posted by akv

I definitely believe America faces a threat and needs to keep the pressure on, I believe we have overcome greater threats, and will prevail here in time.

We will see. The current strategy isn’t going to get us where we need to be 100 or 1,000 years from now…

Originally Posted by akv

Radical Islam’s actions are consistent with those of a desperate wounded animal, why else would you provoke a sleeping tiger?

Their actions are those of someone who has gained confidence with the fall of a super-power.
They are the actions of someone who believes they can win.

Originally Posted by akv

Islam’s current manifestation will eventually have to adapt with civilization like any other religion, like the Turk’s example or risk the evolutionary extinction experienced by the pagan religions of old.

There CANNOT be a reformation in islam. Anyone who tells you that there can be is either ignorant of the facts or lying. To reform islam is to admit that there is something wrong with it. Since the Koran is the word of Allah, and Allah cannot be wrong, it can’t change.

Read “Reliance of the Traveller” Section a1.1

and

Section b6.1 “Muslims … are in agreement that we have arrived at all the rulings of sacred law through evidence that is either of unquestionably established transmission (from Allah) or probabilistically established transmission.”

and

Section b7.0 throughb7.3 about Scholarly Consensus. Once “…the ruling agreed upon is an authoritative part of sacred law that is obligatory obligatory to obey and not lawful to disobey. Nor can mujtahids (Islamic scholars) of a succeeding era make the thing and object of new itjihad (legal ruling), because the ruling on it, verified by scholarly consensus, is an ABSOLUTE legal ruling which does not admit of being contravened or annulled.”

[akv]

Warrior-Mentor,

Thank You Sir, I appreciate your insights, and have ordered the books you recommended. ( Amazon.com can be deadly).

[Warrior-Mentor]

You got it.

It takes time to put together a researched response. Glad you're willing to follow through.

Expanding on the emphasis on target audience:

By MUSLIMS for MUSLIMS. By islamic law, there is information Muslims are REQUIRED to know. ("Reliance of the Traveller," section a4.0 Personally Obligatory Knowledge)

By MUSLIMS for NON-MUSLIMS. By islamic law, there is information you are ALLOWED to know. (r8.1)

This is why islamic countries have worked so hard (and ultimately succeeded) in banning any discussion of islam in the "United Nations."

WATCH HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ji-qdC5zYd4



.

[Richard]

There CANNOT be a reformation in islam. Anyone who tells you that there can be is either ignorant of the facts or lying. To reform islam is to admit that there is something wrong with it. Since the Koran is the word of Allah, and Allah cannot be wrong, it can’t change.

Why not?

Didn't the collective writings of the NT reform the original message of the OT?

And isn't it the collective interpolations in the Haddith and Sunnah which reformed the original message of the Koran through their interpretations of what was written and said?

Why couldn't it happen yet again if it was seen as GOD's {Allah's} will?

Richard's $.02

[Warrior-Mentor]

Originally Posted by Richard

Why not?

Didn't the collective writings of the NT reform the original message of the OT?

And isn't it the collective interpolations in the Haddith and Sunnah which reformed the original message of the Koran through their interpretations of what was written and said?

Why couldn't it happen yet again if it was seen as GOD's {Allah's} will?

Richard's $.02

You're not even in the right religion here.

Please re-read the sections previously cited.

There's a verse in the Koran:

"This day have I perfected your religion for you,
completed my favour upon you,
and have chosen for you
Islam as your religion."
- (Sura 5:3)

It isn't allowed to change.*



________
* See also "Reliance of the Traveller," Sections x174, x382(a)

[Richard]

It isn't allowed to change.*

But it has - through interpolation over time by learned Islamic scholars - so why not again? Or is that just your learned opinion?

Richard's $.02

[Warrior-Mentor]

Originally Posted by Richard

But it has previously through interpolation by scholars - why not now? Or is that just your learned opinion?

Richard's $.02

The scholars are not changing the religion. They are making rulings on things that didn't have an exisiting itjihad. And no ruling can abrogate a previous ruling.

This is unlike the verses of the Koran, which can abrogate because of the concept of progressive revelation.

And no more prophets means no more revelations.