Is ‘Islam’ At War with Us?

[Warrior-Mentor]

Is ‘Islam’ At War with Us?
Frank Gaffney, Jr.
August 11, 2009

Last week, John Brennan, the assistant to the President for homeland security and counterterrorism, approvingly recalled a key point in the speech Mr. Obama delivered in Cairo in June: "America is not and never will be at war with Islam." Unfortunately, that statement ignores the fact that the decision as to whether the United States is at war with anybody is not entirely up to our leadership or people.

The real question is: Is “Islam” at war with us?

It is certainly true that hundreds of millions of Muslims the world over are not seeking to wage war against the United States, or other non-Muslim states. America has, as Mr. Brennan noted in his remarks before the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) on Thursday, a powerful interest in not making all those who practice Islam into our enemies.

Yet, it would be a grave mistake to construe the problem we face as John Brennan proceeded to do in his speech at CSIS: "We are at war with al Qaeda which attacked us on 9/11 and killed 3,000 people. We are at war with its violent extremist allies who seek to carry on al-Qaida's murderous agenda." He described that agenda as seeking "to replace sovereign nations with a global caliphate."

Unfortunately, that is the stated goal of all those who adhere to what authoritative Islam calls Shariah – a number that includes many millions of people the world over. Mr. Brennan's speech made no reference to this wellspring of Jihadism.

Of course, not all those who embrace Shariah are prepared to use terror against us. Shariah requires though that if its adherents do not actually engage in violent Jihad, they must support it through financial or other means. After all, according to Shariah, the purpose of jihad is to bring about the triumph of Islam over the entire world. Shariah commands that the faithful must use violence where possible to advance that objective, and non-violent means where not.

By failing to recognize this justification and catalyst for the threat we face, Mr. Obama and his administration effectively foreclose the possibility of countering it effectively. Worse yet, in their understandable desire not to give gratuitous offense to Muslims, the U.S. government has repeatedly deferred to those who are most easily and most vocally offended.

Specifically, the latter – notably, the putatively non-violent, but virulently Islamist Muslim Brotherhood and its myriad front organizations - have come to dictate what our officials can and cannot say about the danger posed not just by al Qaeda and its "violent extremist allies," but by all those who embrace the teachings, traditions, institutions and dictates of what authoritative Islam defines as "mainstream:" Shariah.

This practice effectively disenfranchises American Muslims who reject this Shariah program – precisely the sorts of people we should most want to empower. Last week, I discussed this problem on our talk radio program with someone who is trying to do something about it: Rep. Sue Myrick of North Carolina.

As it happens, Ms. Myrick's district is not far from where Daniel Patrick Boyd and other alleged "homegrown" Jihadists were reportedly plotting attacks abroad, and possibly here. What is more, the financial sector so prominent in the Charlotte community she represents is also a prime target of one of the most insidious forms of what author Robert Spencer calls "stealth" Jihad: Shariah-compliant finance.

Congresswoman Myrick, a co-founder of the House Anti-Terror Caucus, recently convened a meeting to afford "moderate" Muslims an opportunity to interact with representatives of various federal law enforcement and other agencies responsible for securing this country.

According to Ms. Myrick, some of the officials seemed to be discovering for the first time that there are practitioners of Islam who do not embrace the seditious tenets of Shariah – and who were extremely concerned about the government's almost exclusive reliance on those who do.

Fortunately, decisions in federal court in recent weeks may produce some urgently needed policy course-corrections. Judge Laurence Zatkoff in the Eastern District of Michigan recently cleared the way for accelerated and wide-ranging discovery in connection with a suit brought by a Michigan Iraq war veteran, Kevin Murray, against the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve. Mr. Murray is challenging on constitutional separation of church-and-state grounds the practice of a U.S. government-owned company, the insurance conglomerate AIG, promoting Shariah-compliant products.

It seems likely that the depositions that will now be taken by Mr. Murray's legal team – securities litigator and Shariah expert David Yerushalmi and attorneys at the Thomas More Law Center, led by its director Richard Thompson – will shed important light on the federal government's understanding of authoritative Islam's seditious program. It may also reveal the extent to which U.S. officials have, with their failure to comprehend the true nature of the threat we face, acted, either wittingly or unwittingly, in ways that have enabled it to metastasize further.

Whether through the revelations of this law suit or through the work of influential legislators like Sue Myrick*, the time has come to recognize that:
even if we insist we are not at war with Islam,
the authorities of Islam are at war with us.

Only by so doing can we connect with and empower our natural allies in this war – Muslims who want to enjoy liberty in a Shariah-free America. And only by so doing, do we have a chance of prevailing.
__________________________________________________ __
* Listen to my interviews with Rep. Myrick and Sen. John Cornyn.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org...pub_detail.asp

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributor Frank J. Gaffney Jr. is president of the Center for Security Policy and a columnist for The Washington Times.

[Warrior-Mentor]

The Invisible War And Our Enemies
The Untold Story Of Terrorists And Radical Islamists In Our Own Backyard
By HERB DENENBERG, 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.

(continued)

[Saoirse]

According to Ms. Myrick, some of the officials seemed to be discovering for the first time that there are practitioners of Islam who do not embrace the seditious tenets of Shariah – and who were extremely concerned about the government's almost exclusive reliance on those who do.

This worries me in that it seems more like excuse making and apologist "Ooohhh, I didn't know thaaaat!" Maybe they are "discovering" these people but those people aren't exactly speaking out against the seditiousness or the jihad or AQ....nor will they ever....because they know what will be served up to them.

Fortunately, decisions in federal court in recent weeks may produce some urgently needed policy course-corrections. Judge Laurence Zatkoff in the Eastern District of Michigan recently cleared the way for accelerated and wide-ranging discovery in connection with a suit brought by a Michigan Iraq war veteran, Kevin Murray, against the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve. Mr. Murray is challenging on constitutional separation of church-and-state grounds the practice of a U.S. government-owned company, the insurance conglomerate AIG, promoting Shariah-compliant products.

I doubt this type of lawsuit will ever be entertained if sharia becomes prevalent in our country and system! But kudos to Murray for this...I wish him all the luck and I really hope he wins. Though, I have to admit, I am NOT optimistic at his chances given the apologists we have in our current regime and chancelor!

WM, I appreciate your postings, keep them up. PLEASE!

[Warrior-Mentor]

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 United 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