Posts Tagged ‘Jihad’


DOJ: Department Of Jihad?

February 26, 2010

DOJ: Department Of Jihad?

Investor’s Business Daily | 25 Feb. 10

War On Terror: The Justice Department employs nine lawyers previously involved in the defense of terrorist detainees. This is a colossal conflict of interest. Just whose side are they on?

From the dropping of a voter-intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party to the decision to try 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Muhammed in a civilian court within blocks of where the World Trade Center once stood, the actions and attitudes of the Justice Department and Attorney General Eric Holder toward the thugs and terrorists who threaten us has grown curiouser and curiouser.

We may now have a clue as to why. Last November, Sen. Charles Grassley, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, asked the Justice Department how many of its lawyers had defended terrorist detainees over whom the department holds sway.

Grassley knew from earlier press reports of two such lawyers who worked on behalf of detainees at the liberal organization Human Rights Watch. He wanted to know how many more there were. Last Friday, Holder answered nine.

“To the best of our knowledge, during their employment prior to joining the government, only five of the lawyers who serve as political appointees in those components represented detainees,” Holder said in a letter dated Feb. 18. “Four others contributed to amicus briefs in detainee-related cases involved in advocacy on behalf of detainees.”

So the decision to Mirandize the Christmas bomber, Umar Abdulmutallab, and to quickly get him lawyered up was made by a department populated by leftist lawyers who believe terror is a law enforcement matter and who have tried to get off those actively trying to kill us.

We still have no official answer to what the Justice Department would do if Osama bin Laden were captured.

“It’s like they’re bringing al-Qaida lawyers inside the Department of Justice,” said Debra Burlingame, whose brother was the pilot of the plane driven by terrorists into the Pentagon, following KSM’s plan.

We still have not been told all the lawyers’ names. Like the detainees they represented, presumably they have the right to remain silent. So much for transparency.

Lawyers in private practice are free to choose their clients and their reasons for defending them. But these lawyers are in the employ of the American people and have the task of prosecuting those who try to kill them. Some chose to defend enemies who are making war on America. We have a right to know who they are, who their clients were and why they defended them.

As Michelle Malkin reports, Holder is a former partner at Covington & Burling, a law firm that contributed more than 3,000 hours to detainee litigation in 2007 alone. The firm has worked on behalf of a dozen Yemenite detainees who are seeking civilian trials on American soil.

Holder played a central role in the granting of clemency to 16 FALN terrorists in 1999, when he worked for the Clinton Justice Department. The terrorists claimed responsibility for more than 130 bombings and incendiary attacks in the U.S. and Puerto Rico from 1974 to 1983, killing six and wounding scores.

As deputy attorney general, Holder was responsible for signing off on all clemency matters forwarded to the president. In this case, he recommended that clemency be granted despite vehement opposition from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Bureau of Prisons and his own Justice Department.

We are reminded of the case of Lynne Stewart, attorney for Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, the “blind sheikh” who was the architect of the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993. She was later found guilty of charges she had illegally “facilitated and concealed communications” between Rahman and his fellow terrorists.

We wonder if she could have found a job in the Holder Justice Department.



February 4, 2010

Bare Warning

IBD| 4 Feb. 2010

Homeland Security: When it comes to foul balls, a “heads up!” is no big deal. But when the government warns of imminent and “certain” attack by al-Qaida, complacency is not an option.

A chilling spectacle just took place before the Senate Intelligence Committee. Panel Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., asked, “What is the likelihood of another terrorist-attempted attack on the U.S. homeland in the next three to six months, high or low?”

And one by one, Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair, CIA Director Leon Panetta and FBI Director Robert Mueller all agreed an attack was “certain.”

But log onto the Department of Homeland Security’s Web site and all seems fairly calm. The first news item listed says, “Secretary Napolitano Announces More than $23 Million in Recovery Act Funding for Fire Station Construction Grants.” And three of the other four news items on the main page tout the ways the department’s $56.3 billion fiscal year 2011 budget request would be spent.

You have to look for the fine print and click a couple of times to find out the nation’s terror alert condition — yellow or “elevated,” like during most of the time since 9/11.

But if an attack is “certain” as the U.S. intelligence community tells us (but only after being asked by a senator), then shouldn’t there be a bit more urgency than this?

Far from scrambling to stave off sure and impending disaster, this administration is bragging that its ill-advised policies haven’t yet done harm.

We shouldn’t be releasing anyone in our custody who could end up returning to terrorist activities, but White House counterterrorism chief John O. Brennan was touting “significant improvements to the detainee review process” for Gitmo prisoners in a Monday letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

Even if the recidivism rate is zero among the dozens of POWs that have been released, as Brennan reports, we saw on Christmas Day that it only takes one terrorist to kill hundreds. This is exactly what would have happened over the skies near Detroit had a little luck and a lot of guts from passengers not been on our side.

The administration boasts that Undiebomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab is now “cooperating” — as if they didn’t blow the chance for a treasure trove of lifesaving information from him about al-Qaida’s structure and future plots by reading him his Miranda rights, getting him a lawyer, and allowing him to clam up less than an hour after being detained.

The president’s answer to legitimate unease about homeland security is to ask the concerned to “put aside the schoolyard taunts about who’s tough.”

Last April, the president visited CIA headquarters to boost morale. “Speaking before some of the very intelligence officers he had publicly accused of complicity in torture,” as Bush White House chief speechwriter Marc Thiessen writes in his new book defending the CIA’s enhanced interrogation, “Courting Disaster,” President Obama admitted to them that under his new policies, “you’ve got a harder job.”

“The president has, by his own admission, forced the CIA to operate with one hand tied behind its back” — Obama’s own analogy — and “made the agency’s job of protecting us from terror harder,” adds Thiessen.

At the risk of being accused of a schoolyard taunt, does the certainty of another attack have anything to do with one of America’s hands being tied?


Jihad in Haiti

February 1, 2010

Islamic Relief USA and the Islamic Circle of North America, both groups tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, which is dedicated in its own words to “eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within,” are operating in Haiti — ostensibly working in relief efforts, but no doubt doing a good bit of dawah on the side. Creeping Sharia has the story (thanks to herr Oyal) – source:


A Study in Muslim Doctrine: Nidal Hasan and Fort Hood

November 24, 2009

Nidal Hasan and Fort Hood: A Study in Muslim Doctrine

by Raymond Ibrahim
Pajamas Media
November 18, 2009

One of the difficulties in discussing Islam’s more troubling doctrines is that they have an anachronistic, even otherworldly, feel to them; that is, unless actively and openly upheld by Muslims, non-Muslims, particularly of the Western variety, tend to see them as abstract theory, not standard practice for today. In fact, some Westerners have difficulties acknowledging even those problematic doctrines that are openly upheld by Muslims — such as jihad. How much more when the doctrines in question are subtle, or stealthy, in nature?

Enter Nidal Malik Hasan, the psychiatrist, U.S. Army major, and “observant Muslim who prayed daily,” who recently went on a shooting rampage at Fort Hood, killing thirteen Americans (including a pregnant woman). While the media wonders in exasperation why he did it, offering the same old tired and trite reasons — he was “picked on,” he was “mentally unbalanced” — the fact is his behavior comports well with certain Islamic doctrines. As such, it behooves Americans to take a moment and familiarize themselves with the esotericisms of Islam.

Note: Any number of ulema (Muslim scholars) have expounded the following doctrines. However, since jihadi icon and theoretician Ayman Zawahiri, al-Qaeda’s number two, has also addressed many of these doctrines in his treatises, including by quoting several authoritative ulema, I will primarily rely on excerpts from The Al Qaeda Reader (AQR), for those readers who wish to source, and read in context, the following quotes in one volume.

Wala’ wa Bara’

Perhaps best translated as “loyalty and enmity,” this doctrine requires Muslims to maintain absolute loyalty to Islam and one another, while disavowing, even hating (e.g., Koran 60:4), all things un-Islamic — including persons (a.k.a. “infidels”). This theme has ample support in the Koran, hadith, and rulings of the ulema, that is, usul al-fiqh (roots of Muslim jurisprudence). In fact, Zawahiri has written a fifty-page treatise entitled “Loyalty and Enmity” (AQR, p. 63-115).

One of the many Koranic verses on which he relies warns Muslims against “taking the Jews and Christians as friends and allies … whoever among you takes them for friends and allies, he is surely one of them” (Koran 5:51), i.e., he becomes an infidel. The plain meaning of this verse alone — other verses, such as 3:28, 4:144, and 6:40 follow this theme — and its implications for today can hardly be clearer. According to one of the most authoritative Muslim exegetes, al-Tabari (838-923), Koran 5:51 means that the Muslim who “allies with them [non-Muslims] and enables them against the believers, that same one is a member of their faith and community” (AQR, p. 71).

Sheikh al-Islam, Ibn Taymiyya (1263-1328), takes the concept of loyalty one step further when he tells Muslims that they are “obligated to befriend a believer — even if he is oppressive and violent towards you and must be hostile to the infidel, even if he is liberal and kind to you” (AQR, p. 84).

In ways, Hasan’s life was a testimony to loyalty and enmity. According to his colleague, Dr. Finnell, Hasan “was very vocal about the war, very upfront about being a Muslim first and an American second.” If his being “vocal about the war” is not enough to demonstrate unwavering loyalty to Islam, his insistence that he is first and foremost a Muslim is. Other evidence indicates that the primary factor that threw him “over the edge” was that he was being deployed to a Muslim country (Afghanistan) — his “worst nightmare.”

According to a fellow Muslim convenience store owner who often spoke with Hasan, the thought that he might injure or kill Muslims “weighed heavily on him.” Hasan also counseled a fellow Muslim not to join the U.S. Army, since “Muslims shouldn’t kill Muslims,” again, showing where his loyalty lies. Tabari’s exegesis comes to mind: the Muslim who “allies with them [non-Muslims] and enables them against the believers, that same one is a member of their faith and community,” i.e., he too becomes an infidel (AQR, p. 71).

Another source who spoke with Hasan notes that “in the Koran, you’re not supposed to have alliances with Jews or Christian or others, and if you are killed in the military fighting against Muslims, you will go to hell.”

At any rate, surely none of this should come as a surprise. In April 2005, another Muslim serving in the U.S. Army, Hasan Akbar, was convicted of murder for killing two American soldiers and wounding fourteen in a grenade attack in Kuwait. According to the AP, “he launched the attack because he was concerned U.S. troops would kill fellow Muslims in Iraq.”


This doctrine, which revolves around deceiving the infidel, is pivotal to upholding loyalty and enmity wherever and whenever Muslim minorities live among non-Muslim majorities. In fact, the Koran’s primary justification for deception is in the context of loyalty: “Let believers [Muslims] not take for friends and allies infidels [non-Muslims] instead of believers. Whoever does this shall have no relationship left with God — unless you but guard yourselves against them, taking precautions” (Koran 3:28). In other words, when necessary, Muslims are permitted to feign friendship and loyalty to non-Muslims, or, in the words of Abu Darda, a pious companion of Muhammad, “We grin to the faces of some peoples, while our hearts curse them” (AQR, p. 73). Taqiyya’s importance for upholding loyalty and enmity is evidenced by the fact that, just three pages into his treatise, Zawahiri has an entire section called “The Difference Between Befriending and Dissembling.” There he shows that, while sincere friendship with non-Muslims is forbidden, insincere friendship — whenever beneficial to Muslims — is not.

Again, Zawahiri quotes that standard reference, Tabari, who explains Koran 3:28 as follows: “Only when you are in their [non-Muslims’] power, fearing for yourselves, are you to demonstrate friendship for them with your tongues, while harboring hostility toward them. But do not join them in the particulars of their infidelities, and do not aid them through any action against a Muslim” (AQR, p. 74).

And therein lies the limit of taqiyya: when the deceit, the charade begins to endanger the lives of fellow Muslims — whom, as we have seen, deserve first loyalty — it is forbidden. As Zawahiri concludes, the Muslim may pretend, so long as he does “not undertake any initiative to support them [non-Muslims], commit sin, or enable [them] through any deed or killing or fighting against Muslims” (AQR, p. 75).

Again, we are reminded that the “moment of truth” for Hasan, who seems to have led something of a double life — American major and psychiatrist by day, financial supporter of jihadi groups and associate of terrorists by night — is the fact that he was being deployed to Afghanistan, i.e., he would have been aiding non-Muslim Americans against fellow Muslims (remember, he was “a Muslim first and an American second”). He tried to prevent this, getting a lawyer, to no avail. Thus, since he had taken deceit to its doctrinal limit and was now being placed in a position where he would have to actually demonstrate his loyalty to Americans against Muslims, it appears he decided to take it to the next level (see doctrine below).

Incidentally, we also find that “he [Hasan] was going to be kind of the caretaker for [American] Muslim soldiers. Sometimes Muslim soldiers have a rift between what they’re doing and their faith,” according to Major Khalid Shabazz, an Army Muslim chaplain. “That person who is a leader needs to quell some of those fears and help them through that process.”

This all sounds well and good, but what, precisely, does it mean? If, as we have seen, Islam clearly forbids Muslims from aiding infidels against fellow Muslims, and if being in the U.S. Army requires American Muslims to fight non-American Muslims now and again, how was Hasan — or any other observant Muslim — going to “quell some of those fears and help through that process”? How, if not by merely instructing them in the centuries-old arts of taqiyya?


Amongst learned infidels, jihad is the most recognized and notorious of all Muslim doctrines. Literally meaning to “struggle” or “strive,” jihad can take on any form, though its most native and praiseworthy expression revolves around fighting, and killing, the infidel enemy — even if it costs the Muslim fighter (the mujahid) his life: “Let those who would exchange the life of this world for the Hereafter fight in the path of Allah; whoever fights in the path of Allah — whether he dies or triumphs — we shall richly reward him” (Koran 4:74). And “Allah has purchased from the faithful their lives and possessions, and in return has promised them the Garden. They will fight in the path of Allah, killing and being killed” (Koran 9:111).

The hadith also has its fair share of anecdotes advocating the “one-man jihad.” Zawahiri’s treatise, “Jihad, Martyrdom, and the Killing of Innocents,” (AQR p. 137-171), spends much time justifying the desperate solo jihad — otherwise known as the “martyrdom operation” — including by offering the following hadith: “A Muslim asked Muhammad, O Messenger of Allah! If I plunge myself into the ranks of the idolaters and fight till I am killed — what then, to heaven? He [Muhammad] said yes. So the man plunged himself into the ranks of the idolaters, fighting till he was slain” (AQR, p. 153).

The learned ulema agree. According to al-Qurtubi (d. 1273), “There is no wrong for a man to singlehandedly attack a mighty army — if he seeks martyrdom — provided he has the fortitude.” Others indicate that one of the reasons making the one-man jihad permissible is that it serves to “terrify the foe” (AQR, p. 155).

And there it is: When all else failed, when Hasan’s forthcoming deployment into Muslim land forced him to expose where his true loyalty (wala’) lies, pretense (taqiyya) gave way to full-blown struggle (jihad). Hasan, who sacrificed many years to become a psychiatrist and a U.S. Army major, in the clear words of the Koran “exchange[d] the life of this world for the Hereafter.” Evidence also indicates that he believed “martyrdom operations” were not only valid but laudable acts of courage, writing “YOUR INTENTION IS THE MAIN ISSUE” (capitals in original). Zawahiri puts it more articulately: “The deciding factor is … the intention.” Is the mujahid killing himself “to service Islam [laudable martyrdom], or is it out of depression and despair [forbidden suicide]?” (AQR, p. 157).

(Unfortunately and, no doubt, much to Hasan’s chagrin, infidel medics ensured his failure to achieve martyrdom.)

The greatest proof that, at least in his own mind, Hasan was waging a jihad is the fact that he utilized that immemorial jihadi war cry — Allahu Akbar! — which has served to terrify the infidel denizens of the world for centuries. Here’s an example from Muslim history (circa the early 8th century): “The [non-Muslim] inhabitants of eastern Anatolia were filled with terror the likes of which they had never experienced before. All they saw were Muslims in their midst screaming ‘Allahu Akbar!’ Allah planted terror in their hearts. … The [non-Muslim] men were crucified over the course of 24 km” (from Tarikh al-Rusul wa al-Muluk).

Indeed, while the takbir (the formal term for “Allahu Akbar”) can be used in various contexts, it is by far primarily used in a jihadi context, past and present. Nearly 1,400 years ago, Muhammad and the early Muslims cried “Allahu Akbar” immediately before attacking their infidel neighbors; eight years before the Fort Hood massacre, Mohamed Atta cried “Allahu Akbar” immediately before crashing a hijacked plane into one of the Twin Towers on 9/11. Even Bukhari, the most authoritative hadith compiler, has an entire chapter titled “The Recitation of Takbir [i.e., Allahu Akbar] in War.”

Yet confusion abides. An AP report writes: “As if going off to war, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan cleaned out his apartment, gave leftover frozen broccoli to one neighbor, and called another to thank him for his friendship — common courtesies and routines of the departing soldier. Instead, authorities say, he went on the killing spree that left thirteen people at Fort Hood, Texas, dead.” Contrary to the tone of this excerpt, Hasan’s actions were far from contradictory. After all, he was “going off to war.”

Wala’ wa bara, taqiyya, and jihad all help explain Hasan’s actions. Even so, other lesser-known aspects of Islam lend their support to the view that he was acting from an Islamist framework.


Several people who encountered Hasan before, and even during, the time he went a-jihading note that he evinced an almost unnatural amount of calmness — certainly for one getting ready to go on a killing spree. No doubt, many will point to this as a sign that he was suffering from some sort of schizophrenic episode.

Yet the fact remains: according to jihadi lore, a feeling of tranquility and calmness is supposed to descend on the mujahid, especially during the most stressful moments of combat (see Koran 9:26 for confirmation). This is known as sakina (calmness, tranquility). Osama bin Laden himself often describes his experience of sakina during the Afghan-Soviet war: “Once I was only thirty meters away from the Russians and they were trying to capture me. I was under bombardment, but I was so peaceful in my heart that I fell asleep. Before a battle, Allah sends us sequina [sakina] — tranquility.” Of course, whether Hasan experienced “true” sakina, or whether he was merely affecting to himself, is irrelevant. Rather, the point here is that, once again, that which appears inexplicable or indicative of “mental instability” can be explained through an Islamic paradigm.


According to Sharia law, Muslims are not permitted to voluntarily reside in non-Muslim nations, such as America, except under certain circumstances. One of these is if the Muslim is actively engaged in da’wa, that is, proselytizing; another is if he fights in the path of Allah, jihad. Both serve the same purpose: empowering Islam by numbers and territory, respectively. Merely living in infidel territory out of choice, however, because it offers a “better life,” is forbidden. (To get an idea of how serious a matter it is for Muslims to reside in non-Muslims nations, see some online fatwas.)

Accordingly, we find that the observant Hasan, prior to his jihadi spree, was engaged in da’wa for years. In fact, he aggressively pursued it to the point that he was reprimanded by the authorities. Nor did he cease trying to proselytize — that is, trying to validate his living with infidels — until the day before he went on his rampage, when he gave his neighbor a copy of the Koran. Of course, many Westerners will project their notions of proselytism onto Hasan and see only a God-fearing man “altruistically” concerned for the souls of others. Unfortunately, even the business card he included with his Koran gifts is indicative of violence, as it stealthily introduces him as a “soldier of Allah.” Moreover, the “altruistic” interpretation fails to take into account the sort of legalism observant Muslims such as Hasan often adhere to: if he literally believed he was “exchanging this life for the Hereafter,” he most likely also believed that he had to justify his voluntary dwelling with infidels, hence the da’wa.

* * *

Soon following the Fort Hood massacre, FBI agent Brad Garrett explained Hasan’s behavior as follows: “It’s one of those things that he obviously went to kill a lot of people [jihad] and commit suicide [martyrdom]. Maybe in his own mind that he’s saving future lives [Muslim loyalty].” Read with the bracketed concepts I supplied, Hasan’s actions become logical and consistent — again, from an doctrinal point of view, that is, from a point of view the West, especially its leaders, are loath to explore and alacritous to ignore.

For example, “U.S. Rep. Andre Carson, an Indiana Democrat who is one of two Muslims serving in Congress, cautioned against focusing on the alleged shooter’s religion [and thus its doctrines] and instead said the discussion should be about mental health issues.”


U.S. Congressional Representative Andre Carson, Indiana Democrat – (one of the two Muslims in the U.S. Congress) – may have explained a lot more then he intended to when he said the discussion about Nidal Milak Hasan “should be about mental health issues” – Most of us already know that this is the only option.

Killing spree of 14 deaths and 30 wounded.

So, real Muslims are either crazy or they are just acting out their religious obligations.

Flagrant obfuscations aside, the facts remain: loyalty to Muslims and enmity for infidels (wala’ wa bara’), a secretive double life (taqiyya), violence in the name of Allah (jihad) — all these can easily explain Hasan’s violent rampage in Fort Hood.

The ultimate lesson? So long as Muslim doctrines are downplayed in the West, so long will warning signs, even concrete intelligence, be ignored, so long will such seemingly inexplicable incidents occur, so long will the media continue grasping for straws and Americans be “completely blindsided,” so long will “Muslim grievance” be the default answer, so long will appeasement and concessions (domestically and internationally) be the only solution, so long will jihadis and Islamists grow emboldened and contemptuous, expecting more. Ad infinitum.

Conversely, if the Fort Hood massacre causes Americans to begin taking Islam’s doctrines more seriously, the thirteen slain, while dying tragically, will not have died in vain.

Originally published at: and

Raymond Ibrahim is the associate director of the Middle East Forum and the author of The Al Qaeda Reader, translations of religious texts and propaganda

Related Topics: Muslims in the United States, Radical Islam, TerrorismRaymond Ibrahim receive the latest by email: subscribe to the free mef mailing list This text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.


Khalid Sheikh Mohammed: Justice Denied

November 16, 2009

Justice Denied

IBD: 16 Nov. 2009

In this March 1, 2003 file picture, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is seen shortly after his capture during a raid in Pakistan. Attorney General Eric Holder...In this March 1, 2003 file picture, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is seen shortly after his capture during a raid in Pakistan. Attorney General Eric Holder.

War On Terror: Eric Holder’s move to try the 9/11 masterminds in Manhattan makes it official: This administration has reverted to pre-9/11 “crime” fighting.

Amid all the talk during the attorney general’s surreal press conference of the “crime” committed eight years ago, the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon wasn’t even mentioned.

Lest anyone forget, the military headquarters of the United States was attacked that day along with the Twin Towers.

An entire wedge of the Ring was gutted when the Saudi hijackers slammed American Airlines Flight 77 into it. Nearly 200 military personnel were killed, along with the passengers and crew of the hijacked jet.

The jet was a weapon used to attack the very center of our military. That was not a “crime,” as some say. It was an act of war.

And 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, along with the four other al-Qaida terrorist co-conspirators Holder wants to try, are no mere criminals. They are enemy combatants — and should be treated as such.

Yet this administration has adopted the same crime-centered mentality as the last Democratic administration. The one that treated al-Qaida’s first World Trade Center bombing as a “crime.” And al-Qaida’s attack on the U.S. embassies in Africa as a “crime.” And even al-Qaida’s attack on the USS Cole as a “crime.”

All were prosecuted in U.S. courts. A lot of good that did.

While President Bill Clinton was busy preparing indictments against the terrorists, al-Qaida was already plotting its next move. It hit the Pentagon just nine months after Clinton and his crime-fighters left office.

Maddeningly, this administration is repeating the Clinton administration’s mistake.

KSM and the other terrorists, er, “defendants” aren’t even U.S. citizens. They don’t deserve all the rights afforded citizens in our civilian court system. They shouldn’t be allowed to use our courts as a platform to promulgate their ideology of hate. Which they will, sure as Osama bin Laden is smiling right now.

This will only serve to inspire more homegrown terrorists — and stab at the hearts of the relatives of 9/11 victims.

Holder clucked that the “trials will be open to the public and the world.” And they will turn into circuses, playing right into the hands of the enemy.

These trials will drag on for years, perhaps even decades, as defense lawyers file endless motions and appeals. Meanwhile, valuable intelligence about interrogation techniques and other methods we’ve used against al-Qaida will be revealed to the enemy during trial discovery.

This move to a civilian court makes no sense at all, except viewed through a political prism. Maybe the White House wants to make its Jan. 22 deadline to close Gitmo. Or maybe it’s keen to publicly differentiate itself from the previous administration, which was considerably tougher on terrorists.

Either way, it’s an unwise move. It will only remind people how much America has shrunk in the last nine months.


Fort Hood: Jihad’s 5th Column

November 9, 2009

Jihad’s 5th Column

IBD: 9 Nov. 09

Hasan: Invisible with PC blinders on? APHasan: Invisible with PC blinders on? AP


War On Terror: The Fort Hood terrorist is being portrayed as an “anomaly,” an “aberration,” a “lone wolf.” Sadly, he’s just one of many examples of jihadist traitors in the ranks of the military.

Together they form a dangerous Fifth Column, and the Pentagon — thanks to institutionalized political correctness — is doing next to nothing to root them out .

Instead, brass are actively recruiting Muslim soldiers — whose ranks have swelled to more than 15,000 — and catering to their faith by erecting mosques even at Marine headquarters in Quantico, Va. More, they’re hiring Muslim chaplains endorsed by radical Islamic front groups, who convert and radicalize soldiers.

In the wake of the worst domestic military-base massacre in U.S. history, this is an outrage to say the least. And the PC blinders explain how Fort Hood commanders could have failed so horrifically in protecting their force from the internal threat there.

The terrorist suspect, an Islamic fanatic, penetrated deep into the Army’s officer corps before gunning down, execution-style, more than 40 of his fellow soldiers. Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan allegedly killed 13 at the Texas post, which boasts some 40 Muslims.

Witnesses say he shouted “Allahu Akbar” — Allah is great! — before opening fire in a crowded building where troops were sitting ducks, waiting to deploy to Iraq and Afghanistan, both wars that Hasan angrily opposed. “Muslims should stand up and fight the aggressor,” he reportedly said earlier this year, referring to the U.S. — the country he swore to protect.

During the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, another devout Muslim in the Army had a similar conflict. Sgt. Hasan Akbar also resorted to violence, fragging 17 fellow soldiers, killing two. Why? He opposed the killing of fellow Muslims. “You guys are coming into our countries, and you’re going to rape our women and kill our children,” he was overheard by soldiers who survived the grenade attack as saying.

Clearly, his loyalties lay elsewhere. And he’s hardly alone:

Navy Signalman Hassan Abujihaad last year was convicted of tipping off al-Qaida to battle group movements in the Persian Gulf, including disclosing classified documents detailing the group’s vulnerability to terror attack.

• Army reservist Jeffrey Battle in 2003 pleaded guilty to conspiring to wage war against the U.S., confessing he enlisted “to receive military training to use against America.”

• Army reservist Semi Osman in 2002 was arrested for providing material support to al-Qaida and pleaded guilty to weapons charges after agreeing to testify against other terror suspects.

• Marine Abdul Raheem al-Arshad Ali trained at a suspected al-Qaida camp and was charged with selling a semi-automatic handgun to Osman.

• Army Sgt. Ali Mohamed trained Green Berets at Fort Bragg’s elite special warfare school before stealing military secrets for al-Qaida and helping plan bombings at three U.S. embassies in 1998.

• Army Spec. Ryan Anderson in 2004 was convicted of leaking military intelligence to al-Qaida terrorists, including sensitive information about the vulnerabilities of armored Humvees.

• Army sniper John Muhammad was put on death row after fatally shooting 10 in the nation’s capital a year after 9/11.

While good and decent Muslim soldiers have served admirably, the list of those who have put their allegiance to Islam above country is long, and this is by no means an exhaustive accounting.

The Pentagon must do a better job of vetting such recruits. And it must do a better job of force protection — starting with beefing up its counterspying operations — before more intelligence is compromised and more soldiers are lost.


Introspection, Not Rationalization, Needed in Wake of Fort Hood Slaughter

November 6, 2009

Introspection, Not Rationalization, Needed in Wake of Fort Hood Slaughter

IPT News
November 6, 2009

A picture of Nidal Malik Hasan is emerging from the slaughter he carried out Thursday during a ceremony at a Fort Hood readiness center, leaving 13 people dead and another 30 wounded.

Born in Virginia, sent to medical school by the U.S. Army, the psychiatrist was chastised for proselytizing to his patients about Islam. Asked his nationality, he didn’t identify himself as an American but as a Palestinian. He appeared pleased by the shooting death of a Little Rock Army recruiter in June and reportedly was heard saying “maybe people should strap bombs on themselves and go to Times Square.”

In the fateful moment before he opened fire on his unarmed victims, he shouted “Allahu Akhbar.”

With each new disclosure, some media outlets and organized Islamist groups increasingly are trying to deflect attention away from Hasan’s religious motivation. In a statement condemning the attack, the Muslim American Society’s Freedom Foundation referenced past shootings by soldiers on their bases and cited the suicide rate at Fort Hood.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) issued a statement once the killer’s name was known condemning the attack and saying “No religious or political ideology could ever justify or excuse such wanton and indiscriminate violence.”

The condemnations are welcome and appropriate if not the only thing that could be done in response to the tragedy. As we have noted previously, such unequivocal statements are much harder to come by when arrests are made before the killings can be carried out or when the killers share the Islamists’ ideology.

Arab-American Anti Discrimination Committee President Mary Rose Oakar issued a statement calling the Hasan attack “absolutely deplorable.” But she also emphasized that the violence “has nothing to do with any religion, race, ethnicity, or national origin.”

Friday morning, CAIR national spokesman Ibrahim Hooper told radio interviewer John Hockenberry that Hasan’s motivation remains unknown:

“He could have just snapped from some kind of stress. The thing is when these things happen and the guy’s name is John Smith nobody says well what about his religious beliefs? But when it is a Muslim sounding name that automatically comes into it.”

Contrast that with blogger Shahed Amanullah’s willingness to address the matter with courage and honesty lacking among the American Muslim community’s self-anointed national spokesmen:

“Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, was reportedly troubled by his impending deployment to Iraq. Mental instability and depression has resulted in violence within the armed forces before. But unless Hasan left an explicit message to that effect, a religiously-inspired political act of violence is, much as we’d be unwilling to admit it, entirely plausible. With that in mind, Muslims will have to ask themselves some difficult questions as to why there are still those among us who continue to find justification for acts such as this in their faith.”

Hasan’s murderous rampage is just the latest in a string of attempts to murder American soldiers at home. It’s a point Daniel Pipes made in 2003 after Hasan Akbar, a sergeant in the 101st Airborne Division, rolled a grenade into a tent holding his fellow soldiers on the eve of the invasion of Iraq. Akbar was found legally sane, convicted and sentenced to death in 2005.

In June, Abdulhakim Muhammad killed an Army recruiter in Little Rock and wounded a second recruiter. He told investigators he would have killed more people if he had seen them.

Fortunately, other plots were broken up by law enforcement before anyone got hurt. But in those cases, the Islamist organizations have cast the FBI as engaging in a sinister effort to entrap people otherwise uninterested in violence or incapable of carrying it out.

Among the examples:

Fort Dix

On May 7, 2007, six individuals were arrested for plotting an attack on the Fort Dix military base in New Jersey. The goal of the attack, according to court documents, was to “kill as many soldiers as possible.” Following a jury trial, the plotters were found guilty on charges of conspiracy to harm U.S. military personnel on December 22, 2008. CAIR initially was supportive following the arrests saying, “we applaud the FBI for its efforts and repeat the American Muslim community’s condemnation and repudiation of all those who would plan or carry out acts of terror while falsely claiming their actions have religious justification.”

Later, CAIR also requested that media outlets and public officials refrain from linking this case to the faith of Islam. The council asked mosques and Islamic institutions in New Jersey and nationwide to report any incidents of anti-Muslim backlash.

Bronx Terror Plot

On May 20, 2009, James Cromitie and three others were arrested and indicted on charges arising from a plot to detonate explosives near a synagogue in the Bronx and to shoot down military planes at the New York Air National Guard Base at Stewart Airport in Newburgh, NY. Although they initially condemned the plotters and congratulated the FBI on its efforts, MPAC came to question the motives and methods of the FBI saying that “none of these cases that we’re talking about now involved in al Qaida cells. These were individuals who were either petty criminals or gullible people who were guilty of stupidity. They were not imminent threats to our country, as the FBI has stated.”

North Carolina Jihad

On July 27, 2009, Daniel Patrick Boyd and six others were indicted in North Carolina for planning to “advance violent Jihad including supporting and participating in terrorist activities abroad and committing acts of murder, kidnapping, or maiming persons abroad,” after three years of being under surveillance by the FBI. Among the allegations was that Boyd and his co-conspirators intended to attack the Quantico Marine base. Because a member of Boyd’s group cooperated with law enforcement, MPAC insinuated the FBI improperly investigated the case: “the arrests come at a time when questions have been raised about the use of FBI informants in mosques and tense relations between law enforcement and local communities.”

The same pattern has been applied in the past two weeks, since FBI agents shot and killed a Detroit imam who fired first. Luqman Abdullah had a long history of advocating an offensive jihad and using his mosque for training in martial arts and with weapons. Yet CAIR and other Islamist groups have argued his religious justifications should not be a part of the case and allege the FBI reacted with excessive force after Abdullah fired his weapon.

There’s obviously a lot more to Hasan’s attack still to be learned. He reportedly dreaded his pending deployment to Iraq and may have snapped. But to dismiss his statements about people “strap[ping] bombs on themselves” or that Muslims should rise up and fight the aggressors is irresponsible and counter productive.

This is no isolated incident and the sooner national groups face that fact, the sooner they might heed Amanullah’s challenge to engage in a genuine search for the causes and confront those who help foster such violent ideology.


VIDEO: Geert Wilders’ Life Threatened

November 4, 2009

This is from the United Kingdom, London, Great Britain – Muslims openly threatening Geert Wilders’ life. This is Sharia Law.  This is the heart of Islam.  Hate, NOT Peace.

Muslims threaten to kill Geert Wilders in UK.



Honor Killing in Phoenix: ‘Westernized’ Woman Hit by Dad’s Car: Dies

November 3, 2009

‘Westernized’ Woman Hit by Dad’s Car Dies

Tuesday , November 03, 2009



A young Iraqi woman whose father allegedly hit her with his car because she had become too Westernized died from her injuries Monday after lying in a coma for nearly two weeks.

Noor Faleh Almaleki, 20, underwent spinal surgery and had been in a hospital since Oct. 20, when police say her father ran down her and her boyfriend’s mother with his Jeep as the women were walking across a parking lot in the west Phoenix suburb of Peoria.

The other woman, Amal Khalaf, is expected to survive.

Faleh Hassan Almaleki, 48, fled after the attack but was arrested Thursday when he arrived at Atlanta’s airport, where he was sent from the United Kingdom after authorities denied him entrance.

Peoria police interviewed him and brought him back to Arizona over the weekend, but have declined to release what Almaleki said to them.

At a court hearing over the weekend in Phoenix, county prosecutor Stephanie Low told a judge that Almaleki admitted to committing the crime.

“By his own admission, this was an intentional act and the reason was that his daughter had brought shame on him and his family,” Low said. “This was an attempt at an honor killing.”

Family members had told police that Almaleki attacked his daughter because he believed she had become too Westernized and was not living according to his traditional Iraqi values.

Almaleki, wearing a jail uniform, said only his name and birth date during the hearing. He has declined requests to be interviewed.

Almaleki had faced charges of aggravated assault, but Peoria police spokesman Mike Tellef said the charges will be upgraded in light of Noor Faleh Almaleki’s death.

Police said the Almalekis moved to Peoria from Iraq in the mid-1990s.


The jihadi threat to rail security

September 23, 2009

The jihadi threat to rail security

By Michelle Malkin  •  September 22, 2009 10:15 AM

The arrest of terror suspect Najibullah Zazi has re-focused Obama’s homeland security officials on the ongoing jihadi threat to rail security.

Mass transit systems across the country are on renewed alert:

A 24-year-old Afghan man at the center of an unfolding FBI investigation into a possible U.S. terrorism cell was ordered held without bond in Colorado Monday as authorities raced to learn more about an alleged plot using hydrogen peroxide explosives and who else might have been helping to carry it out.

Meanwhile, authorities in Washington and elsewhere were stepping up safety patrols on mass transit systems in response to an advisory issued in connection with the probe.

Officials with the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI sent a bulletin to transit agencies Friday repeating past warnings to be on guard for attacks on mass transit systems, and identifying hydrogen peroxide-based explosives as a specific risk…Local officials in Washington said the bulletin specifically mentioned Grand Central Station in New York City, but said they have nevertheless increased the number of random patrols…

…Counterterrorism experts said U.S. officials were taking the case “very seriously” because of the apparent similarities to recent plots in the United Kingdom linked to al-Qaeda.

The Zazi investigation has focused on a type of improvised liquid explosive involving hydrogen peroxide — HMTD — that was involved in several plots in Britain traced to operatives linked to al-Qaeda, including the London transit bombings on July 7, 2005, that killed 56 people; a failed copycat attack two weeks later; and a plot, foiled by authorities in August 2006, to blow up at least seven transatlantic airliners.

The transit bombings involved people with backpack bombs, and all plots had ringleaders or other key participants with legal residency in the United Kingdom and who had traveled to Pakistan.

“The explosives element, the training and the backpacks — all are part of the core al-Qaeda bomb-making curriculum as we’ve seen in two specific incidents in the United Kingdom, and if you take out the backpacks, the last three significant U.K. incidents,” said Bruce R. Hoffman, a counterterrorism analyst at Georgetown University.

Unlike in recent U.S. plots — which federal authorities often described as “aspirational” and whose leaders’ search for expertise or weapons often unwittingly led to them to consult FBI informants — Zazi may have been trained to work with explosives.

On September 11, I reported on the Obama administration’s dismantling of the nation’s most highly-trained post-9/11 counterterrorism rail security team:

According to multiple government sources who declined to be identified for fear of retribution, OSSSO’s East Coast and West Coast teams have not worked in a counterterrorism capacity since the summer. Their long-arms were put under lock and key after the abrupt departures of Amtrak vice president for security strategy and special operations Bill Rooney and Amtrak Inspector General Fred Weiderhold.

Weiderhold played an instrumental role in creating OSSSO’s predecessor at Amtrak, the Counter-Terrorism Unit (CTU). He tapped Rooney to oversee the office. But Rooney was quietly given the “thank you for your service” heave-ho in May and Weiderhold was unexpectedly “retired” a few weeks later — just as the government-subsidized rail service faced mounting complaints about its meddling in financial audits and probes.

As I reported in June, Weiderhold had blown the whistle on intrusion of Amtrak’s Law Department into his financial audits and probes. A damning, 94-page report from an outside legal firm concluded that the “independence and effectiveness” of the Amtrak inspector general’s office were “being substantially impaired” by the Law Department – which happens to be headed by Eleanor Acheson, a close pal of Vice President Biden.

Biden, in turn, is tight with the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), the powerful union that represents the Amtrak Police Department. According to OSSSO sources, the APD brass have been aggrieved over the non-unionized counterterrorism unit’s existence from its inception. A West Coast OSSSO team member told me that union leaders blocked police credentialing efforts by his office for more than a year. An East Coast OSSSO team member told me that the FOP recently filed a grievance against one of its counterterrorism officers for assisting a train conductor who asked for help in ejecting a ticketless passenger.

Unlike the highly-specialized officers at OSSSO, APD officers possess minimal counterterrorism training. Past studies show alarmingly low pass rates among APD patrolmen who have attended undergone basic special operations classes, according to government sources. The Amtrak FOP continues to squabble over turf with the rival Teamsters Union; its leaders can’t even agree on minimal physical fitness standards for its members that have yet to be implemented. Nevertheless, OSSSO is now under the command and control of the APD — and federal stimulus funding specifically earmarked for the counterterrorism unit has now been absorbed by the police department.

After my column appeared, Amtrak officials confirmed that OSSSO unit members had their long-arms taken away and that West Coast OSSSO members remain uncommissioned due to union squabbling in California.

“Amtrak fully expects to have a resolution in the near future,” I was told.

Dickering while jihadis plot.

Forever stuck in 9/10 mode.


Carolina Jihad Suspect Talked of Domestic Attacks

August 10, 2009

Carolina Jihad Suspect Talked of Domestic Attacks

IPT News
August 4, 2009

RALEIGH, N.C. – A North Carolina man accused of conspiring to commit terrorist acts abroad grew so frustrated at his inability to carry out his plans that he vented about committing attacks in America, an FBI agent testified Tuesday.

Agent Michael Sutton testified during a detention hearing for Daniel Patrick Boyd, Boyd’s sons Zakariya and Dylan, and co-defendants Hysen Sherifi, Ziyad Yaghi, Anes Subasic and Mohammad Omar Aly Hassan. The men were arrested last week and charged in a conspiracy to commit terrorist acts abroad. If convicted, each could be sentenced to life in prison.

According to the indictment, Boyd and his son Zakariya, along with Yaghi and Hassan, traveled to Israel in June 2007. The men wanted to die as shahid “that is, as martyrs in furtherance of violent jihad,” the indictment alleges. But they came back about a month later, unsuccessful in their attempt to carry out jihad.

A year earlier, the indictment alleges, Boyd tried to get into Gaza “in order to introduce his son to individuals who also believed that violent jihad was a personal obligation on the part of every good Muslim.”

During his testimony, Sutton cited comments Boyd made that were recorded by the government or reported by witnesses.

“If I don’t leave this country soon,” Sutton quoted Boyd saying in one, “I am going to make jihad right here in America.”

In another conversation outside a convenience store, Boyd noticed a group of Humvees.

“We should take them out right now,” Boyd said. He made a similar comment about a North Carolina state helicopter he saw flying over head, Sutton said a witness told him.

The indictment makes no allegations about any domestic terrorist plot by the defendants. They did buy large amounts of rifles and ammunition and conducted training on private property in Caswell County, N.C. this past June and July.

They also found a fatwa, or religious edict, in Boyd’s house saying Muslims have “an individual duty to kill Americans and their allies.”

Boyd often made references to jihad, in one recording saying “Allah knows I love jihad.”

The case is the latest in a string of alleged homegrown terrorist plots, including

  • a Long Island man who joined al Qaeda and allegedly gave the group information about Long Island trains and New York City’s subways.
  • a group of men who converted to Islam in prison and plotted to blow up two Bronx synagogues and a National Guard plane in upstate New York.
  • Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, who stands accused of shooting and killing an Army recruiter and wounding a second in his desire to exact revenge on the U.S. military for “what they had done to Muslims.”

Sutton’s testimony, meant to show U.S. Magistrate William Webb that the defendants are both a threat to the community and a flight risk if released on bond, offered a glimpse into the government’s case.

A packed courtroom heard about financial ties between the defendants, their efforts to raise money for jihad and their training with assault weapons, including the use of armor piercing bullets.

Though his attorney denied it, Boyd reportedly made a move toward a gun in his waistband when arrested. In his home, agents found more than 27,000 rounds of ammunition and a trench that witnesses told investigators had been used to store weapons.

In another recording, Boyd talked with a government witness about “hitting” banks and armored trucks, saying he had “hit” a bank in Pakistan. Boyd reportedly journeyed to Pakistan and Afghanistan in the late 1980s and joined the mujahideen fighting the invading Soviet army.

There, he claims to have met Abdullah Azzam, one of the iconic figures for jihadis and a mentor to Osama bin Laden. In 1991, an Islamic court in Pakistan convicted Boyd of bank robbery and sentenced him to having his hand and foot amputated, but the verdict was later overturned.

Defense attorneys tried to distance their clients from Boyd, noting when their clients were not on tapes with him or if they did not meet up with him abroad.

However, the Boyds were not the only ones to travel abroad in what prosecutors say was part of the conspiracy to wage jihad. Yaghi went to Jordan. In July 2008, Sherifi went to Kosovo, and Jude Kenan Mohammad, who is at large, went to Pakistan. Mohammad was arrested by Pakistani officials near the Afghan border last October.

A Raleigh police officer testified about the violent histories of defendants Hassan and Yaghi. Hassan was arrested for domestic violence, but his girlfriend recanted her story. Yaghi was arrested for assault after beating a man in a dispute over money.

Boyd visited Yaghi in jail, asking whether police asked Yaghi about him. Yaghi told him the questions had nothing to do with his trip to the Middle East.

Relatives and supporters of the defendants packed the courtroom, prompting officials to turn away as many as 100 people. The hearing also drew a representative of the Muslim American Society (MAS). Khalilah Sabra minimized the serious allegations in the case

as “an illusion. Either the defendants have created an illusion, or the agents have created an illusion, but the reality has yet to be seen.”

The hearing continues Wednesday with defense attorneys presenting witnesses who say they will help the defendants post bond and ensure they appear at required pre-trial proceedings.

For more coverage of Tuesday’s hearing, click here.


BREAKING NEWS FLASH!!! Disgruntled Iraqis

June 10, 2009


On this weeks show we have an Iraqi Combat Veteran who breaks news on what is happening in Iraq on the ground.  Sgt. R and Mustang Captain Steve Klein(Ret) report that Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Syria via Al-Qaedaare paying Iraqi citizens to kill our soldiersThe blood money is on a sliding scale based on rank from $100’s of dollars up to tens of thousands of dollars. We learn the new term “Disgruntled Iraqis” who fire on our troops but are not being held when captured because of rules sent down by flag grade officers far from the field of battle.  In other words,  a Disgruntled Iraqi can kill our soldiers in the field of battle and then are let go because they are not technically with Al-Qaeda.  Those DI’s (Disgruntled Iraqi) who are killed,  their families are well compensated (with) Saudi, Iran, and Syria money. These rules of engagement are not meant to win the war but result in getting our soldiers wounded and killed.

Go to and listen now.

Email the news agencies below and demand they report this story.  All facts have been cross checked for accuracy.


Cartoon: Obama Supports Terrorism

May 22, 2009


NY Terror Plot Foiled

May 21, 2009

Authorities: New York Terror Suspects Wanted to ‘Commit Jihad’ in Synagogue Bomb Plot

Thursday , May 21, 2009


Four men sought to wage a holy war against America when they plotted to bomb two New York City synagogues and shoot down military planes in upstate New York — and they were dismayed that a better target had already been hit, authorities said Thursday.

Accused terrorists James Cromitie, David Williams, Onta Williams and Laguerre Payen of Newburgh, N.Y., were disappointed that the World Trade Center was no longer around to attack, a federal prosecutor said.

All the suspects except Payen appeared in federal court in White Plains, N.Y., on Thursday, their hands shackled to their waists. They were held without bail after defense lawyers didn’t seek it.

Payen was expected to appear in court later Thursday.

Cromitie, 55; David Williams, 28; Onta Williams, 32; and Payen were charged with conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction within the United States and conspiracy to acquire and use anti-aircraft missiles.

In arguing against bail, Assistant U.S. Attorney Eric Snyder told the judge “it’s hard to envision a more chilling plot” and described the men as “extremely violent.”

They were “disappointed…that the best target (the World Trade Center) was hit already,” he said, adding that the men were “eager to bring death to Jews.” He also said Cromitie wanted to see what he did on TV and be able to say, “I’m the one who did that.”

Snyder quoted one of the defendants as saying: “I would like to get a synagogue.”

Earlier Thursday, New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly told reporters that the accused terrorists “wanted to commit Jihad” because they were angry about Muslims being killed in Afghanistan and Pakistan by U.S. military forces.

The men allegedly planned to detonate a car with plastic explosives outside the Riverdale Temple, a Reform synagogue, and an Orthodox synagogue called the Riverdale Jewish Center, located a few blocks apart in the Bronx.

They also intended to shoot military planes at the Air National Guard base in Newburgh with Stinger surface-to-air guided missiles, authorities said.

“They stated that they wanted to commit jihad,” Kelly said at a press conference outside the Riverdale Jewish Center. “They were disturbed about what happened in Afghanistan and Pakistan, that Muslims were being killed.”

Click here for photos.

RAW DATA: Federal Complaint (pdf).

RAW DATA: U.S. Attorney’s Press Release (pdf).

The men were arrested Wednesday night, shortly after placing a 37-pound device they thought was an explosive in the trunk of a car outside the Riverdale Temple and two mock bombs in the backseat of a car outside the Riverdale Jewish Center, authorities said.

Police blocked their escape with an 18-wheel truck, smashing their tinted SUV windows and apprehending the unarmed suspects.

“If Jews were killed in this attack … that would be all right,” Kelly quoted one of the accused terrorists as saying.

The arrests came following a nearly yearlong undercover operation that began in Newburgh, about 70 miles north of New York City.

The defendants bought a digital camera at Wal-Mart to take pictures of targets, they spoke in code and they expressed their hatred of Jews on several occasions, according to a criminal complaint.

Kelly said he believed the men knew each other through prison. They had long rap sheets for charges including drug possession and assault.

During Thursday’s hearing, Cromitie told the judge he had used marijuana on Wednesday but was clear-headed enough to understand the proceedings.

All four are U.S. citizens, according to authorities. Cromitie, David Williams and Onta Williams are native-born Americans, while Payen was born in Haiti.

Three of the men are converts to Islam, an official speaking on condition of anonymity told The Associated Press.

Payen occasionally attended a Newburgh mosque, according to Assistant Imam Hamin Rashada, who met Payen through a program that helps prisoners re-enter society.

Payen’s statements on Islam often had to be corrected, Rashada said.

Asked why the suspects chose to target synagogues in the Bronx’s Riverdale section, Kelly said the synagogues in the Bronx’s Riverdale section were probably chosen because of “convenience” — saying the area’s proximity to highways would make for a fast getaway route.

The defendants “wanted to engage in terrorist attacks,” said acting U.S. Attorney Lev L. Dassin. “While the weapons provided … by the cooperating witness were fake, the defendants thought they were absolutely real.”

Mayor Michael Bloomberg warned against stereotypes, stressing that Riverdale Temple is open to people of all faiths, including a Muslim girl who sometimes prays there.

The mayor said the alleged plot shows “that the homeland security threats against New York City are sadly all too real and underscores why we must remain vigilant in our efforts to prevent terrorism.”

According to a criminal complaint, Cromitie began unknowingly working with an FBI informant, who was acting under law enforcement supervision, in June 2008.

He told the government witness that his parents had lived in Afghanistan and he was upset with the ongoing war there, including the deaths of many Muslims in Afghanistan and Pakistan by U.S. military forces.

Cromitie said he wanted to return to Afghanistan and told the informant about how he’d go to “paradise” if he died a martyr, the complaint said.

He also expressed an interest in doing “something to America,” according to the complaint.

In October 2008, the informant began meeting with the defendants at a Newburgh house equipped with concealed video and audio equipment, the complaint said.

The confidential informant who broke the case told Cromitie that he was involved with Jaish-e-Mohammed, a Pakistani terrorist group. It is one of several militant groups suspected of having links to Pakistani intelligence. Jaish set up training camps in Afghanistan under the Taliban and several senior operatives were close to Usama bin Laden.

Cromitie expressed interest in joining the group to “do jihad,” according to a criminal complaint.

In April 2009, Cromitie, David Williams, Onta Williams and Payen identified the synagogues they wanted to hit and began conducting surveillance of them as well as of the Air National Guard base where they intended to strike military planes with Stinger missiles.

The government witness supplied them with a missile he said he’d obtained from Jaish-e-Mohammed, but instead, it was an FBI-made device that wasn’t capable of being fired, according to the complaint. The informant also gave the group inert C-4 explosives.

Cromitie, David Williams, Onta Williams and Payen are each charged with one count of conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction within the U.S., which carries a maximum penalty of life in prison, and one count of conspiracy to acquire and use anti-aircraft missiles, which carries a maximum penalty of life in prison and a mandatory minimum of 25 years in prison.

The defendants were jailed Wednesday night. Reporters yelled questions at three of the four men — Cromitie and David and Onta Williams — as they were taken in handcuffs into the Metropolitan Correctional Center, but the men didn’t respond.

According to state Department of Correctional Services records, Payen was released on parole in August 2005 after serving just more than a year in prison for attempted assault in Rockland County.

Onta Williams served just more than a year in state prison for attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in Orange County. He was released on parole in August 2003.

Cromitie has been in prison at least three times under three different names, prison records show.

He served two years on a drug sale conviction and was released on parole in 1991. Then, under the name of David Anderson, he spent 2 1/2 years in prison for selling drugs in New York City before being paroled in 1996.

Under the name James Crometie, he was convicted of selling drugs in a school zone in 2000 and spent almost four years in prison before being released on parole in 2004.

Rashada, the assistant imam who lives near Payen in Newburgh, described parolee as a “strange kid.”

“He had a lot of psychological problems,” Rashada told the Times Herald-Record.

Since serving a 15-month prison term, Payen lived alternately in Newburgh and Middletown in upstate New York, with occasional stints on the street.

Rashada told the paper he met Payen through the Orange County Transition Center, a program that helps re-integrate parolees back into society.

A senior life coach with the program, Rashada worked with Payen and encouraged him to attend Friday prayers at Masjid al-Ikhlas in Newburgh, where Rashada is an assistant imam, according to the Herald-Record.

But Payen only attended the Newburgh mosque occasionally, Rashada told the paper. He said he assumed the former inmate must have been introduced to Islam in prison, where misunderstandings of its philosophies can occur because educated teachers can be difficult to find.

When he did attend, Rashada said Payen would try to impress other members of the mosque with knowledge of Islam, but was often incorrect.

Payen would then become quiet and wander off, Rashada told the paper.

A Jewish human rights group issued a statement saying the alleged plot and arrests show that Jews in the United States aren’t safe.

“The shocking plan to blow up a Jewish house of prayer with what the jihadist terrorists thought were C-4 explosives is dramatic proof that the dangers from such fanaticism have not passed and that American Jews must maintain their vigilance,” the Simon Wiesenthal Center said.

Bloomberg, Kelly and other city leaders met privately with congregants early Thursday to alleviate security concerns.

“The shock and being floored was followed by relief,” David Winter, executive director of the Riverdale Jewish Center, said afterward.

Kelly said the uniformed officers who flooded the neighborhood were there to improve residents’ “comfort level,” even though “No one was at risk. This was a very tightly controlled operation.”

Nancy Harris Rouemy was alarmed when she learned the news from a neighbor, thinking: “Oh my God, that’s my kid’s school.”

“I definitely paused” before taking her 4-year-old to the Riverdale Jewish Center. “However, the assurance is that the perps were caught and my son wouldn’t be in danger,” she said.

“It is so upsetting,” agreed her husband, Isaac. “If it was an actual bomb, it would be a disaster. It’s not just a synagogue. It’s a school and there are senior citizens who come here too.”

Nihad Awad, national executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, issued a statement praising law enforcers “for their efforts in helping to prevent any harm to either Jewish institutions or to our nation’s military.”

“We repeat the American Muslim community’s repudiation of bias-motivated crimes and of anyone who would falsely claim religious justification for violent actions,” the statement said.

Click here for coverage from

FOX 5 VIDEO: Update on Foiled Terror Plot.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.


I’m Tired

March 6, 2009

I’m Tired by Robert A. Hall

Robert A. Hall is a Marine Vietnam veteran who served five terms in the Massachusetts state senate. He blogs at

I’ll be 63 soon. Except for one semester in college when jobs were scarce, and a six-month period when I was between jobs, but job-hunting every day, I’ve worked, hard, since I was 18. Despite some health challenges, I still put in 50-hour weeks, and haven’t called in sick in seven or eight years. I make a good salary, but I didn’t inherit my job or my income, and I worked to get where I am. Given the economy, there’s no retirement in sight, and I’m tired. Very tired.

I’m tired of being told that I have to “spread the wealth around” to people who don’t have my work ethic. I’m tired of being told the government will take the money I earned, by force if necessary, and give it to people too lazy or stupid to earn it.

I’m tired of being told that I have to pay more taxes to “keep people in their homes.” Sure, if they lost their jobs or got sick, I’m willing to help. But if they bought McMansions at three times the price of our paid-off, $250,000 condo, on one-third of my salary, then let the leftwing Congresscritters who passed Fannie and Freddie and the Community Reinvestment Act that created the bubble help them-with their own money.

I’m tired of being told how bad America is by leftwing millionaires like Michael Moore, George Soros and Hollywood entertainers who live in luxury because of the opportunities America offers. In thirty years, if they get their way, the United States will have the religious freedom and women’s rights of Saudi Arabia, the economy of Zimbabwe, the freedom of the press of China, the crime and violence of Mexico, the tolerance for Gay people of Iran, and the freedom of speech of Venezuela. Won’t multiculturalism be beautiful?

I’m tired of being told that Islam is a “Religion of Peace,” when every day I can read dozens of stories of Muslim men killing their sisters, wives and daughters for their family “honor;” of Muslims rioting over some slight offense; of Muslims murdering Christian and Jews because they aren’t “believers;” of Muslims burning schools for girls; of Muslims stoning teenage rape victims to death for “adultery;” of Muslims mutilating the genitals of little girls; all in the name of Allah, because the Qur’an and Shari’a law tells them to.

I believe “a man should be judged by the content of his character, not by the color of his skin.” I’m tired of being told that “race doesn’t matter” in the post-racial world of President Obama, when it’s all that matters in affirmative action jobs, lower college admission and graduation standards for minorities (harming them the most), government contract set-asides, tolerance for the ghetto culture of violence and fatherless children that hurts minorities more than anyone, and in the appointment of US Senators from Illinois. I think it’s very cool that we have a black president and that a black child is doing her homework at the desk where Lincoln wrote the emancipation proclamation. I just wish the black president was Condi Rice, or someone who believes more in freedom and the individual and less in an all-knowing government.

I’m tired of a news media that thinks Bush’s fundraising and inaugural expenses were obscene, but that think Obama’s, at triple the cost, were wonderful. That thinks Bush exercising daily was a waste of presidential time, but Obama exercising is a great example for the public to control weight and stress, that picked over every line of Bush’s military records, but never demanded that Kerry release his, that slammed Palin with two years as governor for being too inexperienced for VP, but touted Obama with three years as senator as potentially the best president ever.

Wonder why people are dropping their subscriptions or switching to Fox News? Get a clue. I didn’t vote for Bush in 2000, but the media and Kerry drove me to his camp in 2004.

I’m tired of being told that out of “tolerance for other cultures” we must let Saudi Arabia use our oil money to fund mosques and madrassa Islamic schools to preach hate in America, while no American group is allowed to fund a church, synagogue or religious school in Saudi Arabia to teach love and tolerance.

I’m tired of being told I must lower my living standard to fight global warming, which no one is allowed to debate. My wife and I live in a two-bedroom apartment and carpool together five miles to our jobs. We also own a three-bedroom condo where our daughter and granddaughter live. Our carbon footprint is about 5% of Al Gore’s, and if you’re greener than Gore, you’re green enough.

I’m tired of being told that drug addicts have a disease, and I must help support and treat them, and pay for the damage they do. Did a giant germ rush out of a dark alley, grab them, and stuff white powder up their noses while they tried to fight it off? I don’t think Gay people choose to be Gay, but I damn sure think druggies chose to take drugs. And I’m tired of harassment from cool people treating me like a freak when I tell them I never tried marijuana.

I’m tired of illegal aliens being called “undocumented workers,” especially the ones who aren’t working, but are living on welfare or crime. What’s next? Calling drug dealers, “Undocumented Pharmacists”? And, no, I’m not against Hispanics. Most of them are Catholic and it’s been a few hundred years since Catholics wanted to kill me for my religion. I’m willing to fast track for citizenship any Hispanic person who can speak English, doesn’t have a criminal record and who is self-supporting without family on welfare, or who serves honorably for three years in our military. Those are the citizens we need.

I’m tired of latte liberals and journalists, who would never wear the uniform of the Republic themselves, or let their entitlement-handicapped kids near a recruiting station, trashing our military. They and their kids can sit at home, never having to make split-second decisions under life and death circumstances, and bad mouth better people then themselves. Do bad things happen in war? You bet. Do our troops sometimes misbehave? Sure. Does this compare with the atrocities that were the policy of our enemies for the last fifty years-and still are? Not even close. So here’s the deal. I’ll let myself be subjected to all the humiliation and abuse that was heaped on terrorists at Abu Ghraib or Gitmo, and the critics can let themselves be subject to captivity by the Muslims who tortured and beheaded Daniel Pearl in Pakistan, or the Muslims who tortured and murdered Marine Lt. Col. William Higgins in Lebanon, or the Muslims who ran the blood-spattered Al Qaeda torture rooms our troops found
in Iraq, or the Muslims who cut off the heads of schoolgirls in Indonesia, because the girls were Christian. Then we’ll compare notes. British and American soldiers are the only troops in history that civilians came to for help and handouts, instead of hiding from in fear.

I’m tired of people telling me that their party has a corner on virtue and the other party has a corner on corruption. Read the papers-bums are bi-partisan. And I’m tired of people telling me we need bi-partisanship. I live in Illinois, where the “Illinois Combine” of Democrats and Republicans has worked together harmoniously to loot the public for years. And I notice that the tax cheats in Obama’s cabinet are bi-partisan as well.

I’m tired of hearing wealthy athletes, entertainers and politicians of both parties talking about innocent mistakes, stupid mistakes or youthful mistakes, when we all know they think their only mistake was getting caught. I’m tired of people with a sense of entitlement, rich or poor.

Speaking of poor, I’m tired of hearing people with air-conditioned homes, color TVs and two cars called poor. The majority of Americans didn’t have that in 1970, but we didn’t know we were “poor.” The poverty pimps have to keep changing the definition of poor to keep the dollars flowing.

I’m real tired of people who don’t take responsibility for their lives and actions. I’m tired of hearing them blame the government, or discrimination, or big-whatever for their problems.

Yes, I’m damn tired. But I’m also glad to be 63. Because, mostly, I’m not going to get to see the world these people are making. I’m just sorry for my granddaughter.

My Photo

Robert A. Hall
Robert A. Hall, MEd, CAE, has been an association executive since 1982. He was elected to the Massachusetts State Senate in 1972, defeating a Democrat incumbent by 9 votes out of 60,000. He was reelected 4 times by large margins, and was nominated by both parties in 1976, retiing undefeated 1982. Hall holds an AA from Mount Wachusett Community College, a BA in government from the U Mass and an MEd in history from Fitchburg State. He is a Marine Vietnam veteran, having served four years in the regulars and, while a senator, another six in the reserves, finishing with the rank of Staff Sergeant. A frequently-published freelance writer, Hall’s columns, articles, short stories and poetry have appeared in over 75 publications. His book of anecdotes about the Marines and politics, “The Good Bits,” was published by His book on association management, “Chaos for Breakfast: Practical Help and Humor for the Non-profit Executive,” is available at He married his first wife, Bonnie, in 1992. His granddaughter, Britnye, born in 2000, is the light of his life.

Homegrown Jihad

March 3, 2009

Sean Hannity talks to Martin Mawyer (Christian Action Network), producer of the new documentary film, Homegrown Jihad, about the 35 Islamic terrorist training compounds that exist right here in America.




NOTE: Daniel Pearl (journalist) was murdered on his way to interview Sheikh Gilani


Cruel and Usual Punishment

February 6, 2009

excerpts from


Nonie Darwish

pgs. 116-122

…In the famous angry Arab Street, filled with feelings of victimhood, anger, restlessness; always ready after a fiery Friday sermon in the mosque to riot, burn, and even kill…

Sharia was created by the powerful to serve powerful males – from Mohammed in the seventh century who had the first pick of war-captive women, to the caliphs who kept endless harems, to Arabian kings and princes and Muslim dictators who satiate their every whim; from Bin Laden with his multiple wives to powerful religious leaders – sheikhs, mullahs, and ayatollahs – who have wives as young as their granddaughters. All of this is at the expense of women, the family unit, and the majority of Muslim men as well. The powerful have managed to protect Sharia and mold their religious system to their best interests for fourteen hundred years to protect their best-kept Islamic secret, their sexual club. They will never, ever give that up easily.

So what do the poor and powerless males get? They get jihad. For the poor, angry young men, their dreams of sexual pleasure must be limited to the seventy-two houris heaven will provide when they do jihad.

Islamic texts are full of calls for jihad. Violence against infidels is central to Islamic scriptures and jurisprudence. This is what the good Muslim man must do to the unbelievers:
“Your Lord inspired the angels with the message: ‘I will terrorize the unbelievers (non-Muslims). Therefore smite them on their necks and every joint and incapacitate them. Strike off their heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes.’”  Qur’an Sura 8:12

Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, torture them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.” Qur’an Sura 9:5

The above demands from Allah cannot be achieved by happily married Muslim men who live in stable and loving relationships in a relatively peaceful society.

Their deep feelings of guilt and shame as well as their poverty must be the fault of the enemies of Islam, the infidels whom the Qur’an calls apes and pigs and enemies of Allah whom Muslims must never befriend or sign treaties with.

Muslim religious authorities can bluff the ordinary Muslim into believing the convoluted interpretations – which they are not allowed to question anyway – but Muslims cannot hide their texts from the world. Muslims shame comes from the need to explain themselves to infidels. The mere existence of the infidels’ free system causes many Muslim youth and women to ask questions that an obedient, submissive Muslim should never dare to ask. The West is blamed for the Muslim man’s shame, a shame they have managed to live with and have camouflaged and suppressed for centuries. And so the thinking goes: Allah was right when he called infidels apes and pigs and enemies of Islam. He was right when he ordered us to subjugate them and treat them as second-class citizens unworthy of our friendship or respect. Mohammed warned Muslims of the fitna – Arabic for “sedition or schism” – from the enemies of Islam, the part of the world that refuses to abide by Allah’s laws and treats their women equal to men. Those are the same people who occupied Muslims in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries – we proud Muslims who once ruled over them. This shameful fitna can only be rectified through jihad. They must also be ruled by Allah’s law.

Angry Muslim preachers in the mosque become poor Muslim men’s inspiration and role models. They curse and blame the world for the Muslims’ failures and deeds. Thus 9/11, the tsunami, and even democracy are blamed on Jews and other infidels. The solution is always retaliation, boycott, violence in the street, or an uprising. The theme of the sermon is always, “Who has wronged us today?”

Consider the sheer number of jihad, war, and violence verses in the Qur’an and Hadith. Muslim scriptures are consumed with promoting extreme violence against non-believers. Jihad against the outside non-Muslim world is the ultimate and holiest objective, more important than women, children, men, the family, and even happiness of Muslim society.

Islam does not tell the Muslim man he is guaranteed heaven if he makes the world a peaceful place, but it does guarantee him heaven if he blues up the marketplaces and houses of worship of non-Muslims, if he sacrifices his life to kill the perceived enemies of Islam. Heaven is at his feet not when he dies protecting his wife and children from imminent danger. Yet if he dies in the process of expanding the power of Islam, he is guaranteed heaven and its infinite rewards. Jihad is the ultimate honor, more important than family.


Ill-Founded Assumptions of Obama’s Address To Muslims

February 5, 2009





Fitzgerald: The Ill-Founded Assumptions of Obama’s Address To Muslims

The notion that America managed, under Bush, to lose some kind of special place in the affections of the Muslim world — a special place that it possessed because America “had no colonial legacy” — is the kind of thing you read in the cheesiest potted summaries of the postwar period (“because, boys and girls, America had no colonial legacy….”). Does Obama think that the Muslim attacks, from without and within, on the Hindus of India have to do with some “colonial legacy”? Does he think that the attacks on Christian Filipinos in the southern Philippines, or on Buddhists in southern Thailand, have to do with a “colonial legacy”? Does he think that Muslim aggression against non-Muslims in southern Sudan, or southern Nigeria, has to do with a “colonial legacy”? Well, only insofar as Muslims, wherever they do not yet completely dominate but are present in sufficient numbers to attempt to work their will on non-Muslims, will do so.

The business of America not having a “colonial legacy” and thus being somehow more natively attractive to Muslims misses the point, misunderstands reality. The Arabs of the Arabian peninsula – present-day Saudi Arabia – never suffered from “colonialism.” The Arabs of the littoral areas – Muscat and Oman, Yemen (and the Hadramaut), the tribal sheikdoms that became the United Arab Emiratesnever endured colonialism. What they did have was the Royal Navy, suppressing the slave trade from offshore, and then, in this century, a few small garrisons, one at the entrepot of Aden Town, guarding the route to India, and a few among the sheikdoms known Trucial States — so-named because, of course, they were constantly warring, and it was the British who kept the constantly-warring Arabs from being at each other’s throats.

The only “colonialism” in the Middle East was that of the Ottoman Empire, and it was the British (and, to a lesser extent, the French) who freed the Arabs from the Turks. The British remained for all of ten years in Mesopotamia, roughly from 1922 to 1932, creating, and attempting to stabilize, that region. In Syria-Lebanon, the French were there until just after World War II, and similarly, were there as a Mandatory power, not a colonial one. It was the British who ripped out all of Eastern Palestine and handed it over to Abdullah, Jordan, one of the Hashemites, as a consolation prize, the Emirate of Transjordan, because Abdullah’s younger brother Feisal had been given the kingship of Iraq.

Even in North Africa, the French were hardly “colonial” powers for very long. In Morocco and in Tunisia, they controlled things for about 40 years, and in that period the non-Arab Berbers were given rights that the Arabs have been taking away ever since. The only long-term “colonial” presence in the Arab world is that of the French in Algeria, who arrived in 1830 to suppress, after years of other attempts, the war made on Christian shipping, and who remained until 1932. In Algeria the French established, in this “colonial” period, the first schools, the first universities, the first hospitals, and built beautiful broad-boulevarded cities (Oran, Algiers); they brought in modern agricultural methods, too. Since the French left, Algeria has slowly descended into violence that is unlikely to stop. No, this business of the Arabs once being “friendly” to America because America had no “colonial legacy” implies that the Arabs suffered greatly from colonialism. Not only did they suffer far less than any other peoples in Asia, Africa, or Latin America, but they were themselves, and remain, the practitioners of the most successful colonialism, or imperialism, in human history. They conquered vast lands and imposed their language and their culture, everywhere causing the pre-Islamic civilizations of those they conquered to wither and die, with no one to take an interest in them, and everywhere used Islam as a vehicle for Arab supremacism. It is naïve to lump together the experience of those who did indeed suffer from colonialism, such as sub-Saharan Africa, with the history of the Arabs and their extensive conquests.

No, America is not liked for the same reason that the European former colonial powers are not liked, and for the same reason that Hindu India, for that matter, is and will remain a target of Muslim hostility and, whenever possible, aggression. For these are all Infidel lands. If Barack Obama or those who advise him are, just like their predecessors, unwilling or incapable of learning what is in the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira, incapable of studying and then assimilating what the ideology of Islam inculcates, incapable of recognizing that it contains both a politics and a geopolitics, that its hold over the minds of men is far greater, far more akin to the ideologies of Communism and Nazism as a totalitarian regulation of every aspect of life, or at least would like to attain to that in its ideal, most comprehensive reception, then they are likely to make the same kind of colossal mistakes as the Bush administration did in Iraq, with its squandering of men, money, materiel, and morale.

The new administration may think it is “turning a new page,” but is it? Is it not repeating the mistakes of the previous administration? Is it not, like that administration, equally unable to come to grips with Islam as a Total Belief-System, still unwilling to consult the Western scholars of Islam who studied and wrote long before the Age of Arab Money (that has so corrupted academic studies of Islam) and the Great Inhibition, such people as Snouck Hurgronje, Joseph Schacht, Henri Lammens, Arthur Jeffrey, David Margoliouth, Charles-Emmanuel Dufourcq, Georges Vajda, and many others? Is it not still unwilling to listen to, much less heed, the testimony of the articulate Defectors from the Army of Islam — Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Walid Shoebat, Mark Gabriel, Wafa Sultan, Ibn Warraq, Ali Sina? All of those people should be invited to deliver, in solemn conclave assembled, their views directly to Obama and to his chief aides, so that, indeed, “fresh thinking” can take place.

But so far, it appears that it will be some approximation of the mixture as before, that is, hopeless, hapless, pointless “peace-processing” that may result – such things always do – in tangible concessions by Israel, a giving up of its legal, historic, and moral claims to land. These concessions will be made in order to obtain a “peace” treaty that on the Muslim side is – and must be – merely a “truce treaty” that will, as all treaties made by Muslims with Infidels must be, broken at the earliest opportunity, in ways little and big. For the lasting model is the Treaty of Hudaibiyya, and unless and until that phrase – “Treaty of Hudaibiyya” – is well-understood in the White House and the State Department – there will be all sorts of wasted efforts and naïve hopes, always to be dashed (but at Israel’s expense, and not ours, not at the expense of those who pressure Israel into these colossal, largely undoable surrenders).

And so, ignorant of Islam, we continue to lavish aid on Pakistani generals, for it was the Americans who paid for, who provided the discretionary funds for, A. Q. Khan and his science project. It is the Americans and Europeans who now keep the Slow Jihadists of Fatah going, who supplied Arafat with billions that have disappeared into the ether, and who continue to supply aid to his longtime henchman and Holocaust-denier, Mahmoud Abbas, who more recently says he has “chosen peace as a strategic option.” (But unless we know about Islam, and about Hudaibiyya, we do not know what that phrase must surely mean.) Abbas is having a good run as the nobody-here-but-us-accountants public face of the Slow Jihadists. They are more worldly, more corrupt, more willing to delay a bit in order to get that Western aid steadily coming in, so that so much of it can be diverted for the use of the Fatah bigshots and their retinues. They seem “good” only by comparison with the Fast Jihadists of Hamas, but with the latter, in reality, they share the exact same goals, and differ only on questions of tactics, timing, and who gets the lion’s share of what loot.

The same goes for Egypt, a country that has not fulfilled a single one of its solemn commitments under the Camp David Accords to encourage friendly relations, at the level of both governments and people, with Israel. Egypt is in the forefront of the diplomatic war waged against Israel. Egypt has allowed, its government even encouraged, antisemitism on its official television channels, Recently a whole series was based on the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. But this gets no attention in Washington. Meanwhile, the United States has lavished close to seventy billion dollars on Egypt, that is, on Mubarak and his courtiers, to pay for his Family-and-Friends Plan.

The corrupt Mubarak regime, one more in a series of stratokleptocracies in Egypt, allows itself to be given credit in the West for its supposed “moderation,” as reflected in its new enmity toward Hamas. But for years the Egyptians not only allowed Hamas to smuggle in gigantic amounts of weaponry, but many Egyptians acted as partners, and received a cut of the proceeds from Gazan Arabs in the tunnel-building and the arms smuggling through the Sinai to those tunnels. If Egypt today is not happy with Hamas, this has nothing to do with a change of heart toward Israel, but reflects only the Egyptian regime’s fear that a Hamas victory, or the perception of such, might encourage the Ikhwan, the Muslim Brotherhood, in Egypt proper. And that is something the Egyptian regime cannot abide.

The failure over many decades of successive American governments and its peace-processors to learn about Islam has resulted in all those Rogers Plan and Kissinger Plans, and the plans of James Baker, and in all the endless shuttling-diplomacy of all those peace-processors, including those four horsemen (in declining order of intelligence), Dennis Ross, Richard Haass, Martin Indyk, and Aaron Miller. All of them are innocent of Islam, and by this point willfully so. For if they allowed themselves to learn about Islam and to figure out why exactly it matters and what it means, then they would also have to admit to themselves that their past efforts were exercises in missing-the-point, squanderings of time and effort, while the real subject – the worldwide efforts to promote Jihad (that is, the “struggle” to remove all obstacles to the spread, and then the dominance, of Islam) – wandered off by itself while the American government, fixated on making “peace” between Arabs and Israelis, did not so much lose the plot as never figure out the real plot in the first place.

American diplomacy in the Middle East, so time-consuming, so exhausting, so largely vain, has been based, as the goals in Iraq, and even perhaps the original invasion of Iraq, on a misunderstanding of the real situation. Just look at those professional peace-processors. Their entire professional lives have been spent ignoring the relevance, the centrality, of Islam. Islam, of course, is not something you can see. It is not something that accompanies a smiling Arab leader or diplomat, as he tells you exactly what he wants you to hear (which often overlaps with what he thinks you want to hear). Only after years and years does the meretriciousness, the deception, as a way of life manage to sink in. And even then, what is not being talked about, what is the Great Unspoken – the Great Unspoken is Islam, which you have to know about in order to recognize what it does to the minds of men, or so many men, that it cannot be ignored, cannot be minimized. In the life of individual Muslims, and Muslim states and societies, Islam is the central fact.

Yet, even those who Middle Easterners of Muslim background remain, out of filial piety or fear or other considerations (“effectiveness” might be one that they rely on), those who are certifiably fine people, the kind you might spend an evening with, real charmers such as Fouad Ajami and Azar Nafisi, never ever discuss Islam straight on, flat out, with non-Muslims in public – and instead refer glancingly or obliquely to this famous Elephant In the Room, the first by offering adjectives about “this tragic land, that had never known peace” (well, why was that, Professor Ajami?) or “the Arabs, who preferred to live in the past, in a dream world” (well, how does that connect to Islam?) and, in the Nafisi Persian-patriot Hafiz-Sa’adi-Firdowsi version or variant, we get “Irahn has a 3000-year-history, Irahn is much more than the Islam that the Arab invaders brought, and you cannot put all Muslim countries together.” And thus even Fouad Ajami and Azar Nafisi are in the end unsatisfactory guides to Middle Eastern reality. Do they in fact see right to the bottom of the thing, or do their own family memories get in the way of understanding, because they confuse those who ignored much of Islam with Islam itself, and do not grasp the truth of that statement that “there are moderate Muslims, but Islam itself is not moderate”?

They have invested too many years, even decades, of their professional lives – in essence, their entire professional lives – on the notion that there is a “solution” to the “Arab-Israeli” “problem,” and that this “solution” involves surrender of territory by Israel in exchange for “guarantees” by the Arabs, that is, the Arab Muslims. They think that this will constitute a durable “solution” even if, necessarily, it means that Israel loses essential control of the “West Bank,” with its invasion routes through the Jordan Valley, and is reduced to the ridiculous dimensions in which it was left at the end of the 1948-49 war, dimensions which the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in a study commissioned in 1967 and not released for fully sixteen years, recognized as absurd and militarily indefensible. Not one of these has considered the difference between Making A (Delusive) Peace and Keeping the Peace. Right now Israel is, through deterrence, Keeping the Peace. It’s the best, given the texts and tenets and attitudes inculcated by Islam, that Israel or those who wish it well can ever hope for. Hardly perfect. Intermittent violence, no doubt. But it is only deterrence, only the concept of Darura, or Necessity, that will keep the peace. Darura is to be invoked by Arab leaders, in order not to go to war, and it can be invoked only if Israel is perceived to be overwhelmingly more powerful, so that a war would lead to certain Arab defeat.

But if you don’t study Islam and don’t recognize that Fatah consists not of peacemakers, however reluctant, but rather of warmakers, Slow Jihadists willing to be a little more patient and various in their methods than the impatient Fast Jihadists of Hamas, then you will continue to prate about “two-state solutions” and, with great self-assurance, tell the world, as does Aaron Miller (“adviser to five presidents and a Middle East expert”) hither and yon, that there are four core issues: settlementssecurityrefugeesJerusalem, or securitysettlementsJerusalemrefugees, or Jerusalemrefugeessecuritysettlements or…well, you get the idea), and once these “four core issues” are settled, it will practically be some variant of Edward Hicks’s “Peaceable Kingdom” smack in the middle of the Middle East. Oh No It Won’t.

And of course, inattention to Islam has been encouraged by Mr. Big, that is, Saudi Arabia. Decades ago the propagandists of ARAMCO, churning out material for that glossy magazine ARAMCO World, and also helping supply material for those National Geographic articles on Saudi Arabia (usually with photographs by the ubiquitous Robert Azzi) helped to present a picture of, and spin a tale about, Saudi Arabia that, as J. B. Kelly wrote, “the ghost of Scheherezade could not have bettered.” There was Saudi Arabia, so ably ruled by the noble Al-Saud, who brought peace and harmony to the warring Arabs (even as Muhammad did, in the early seventh century A.D.), and who had been fast friends of America ever since Ibn Saud had met with FDR on that warship. And things had only gotten better and better. Yes, Saudi Arabia, with a little help of a small army of Western hirelings who served as such able propagandists, was presented, and until just the day before yesterday continued to be perceived, as a “staunch ally” of the United States. It is, of course, nothing of the kind. It is a country that has spent one hundred billion dollars all over the world on mosques, madrasas, Islamic propaganda, and buying votes at international organizations, buying “friends” in the capitals of the West, buying “academic experts” by setting up pseudo-academic institutes where nothing contrary to Saudi desires may be done, where all those of independent bent (see Denis MacEoin, and his experiences at Exeter, or was it Durham, in England) are driven out. The field of Islamic studies has, in too many places, become the preserve of apologists, both Muslim and non-Muslim, for Islam. Saudi Arabia is a state based on Islam, more fanatical in that state-supported Wahhabism than any other Muslim state, and it cannot be anything other than a dangerous enemy of all Infidels, even of the United States. It is true that the Saudis and the Americans collaborated in Afghanistan, but they did so for different reasons, and the Americans did not quite understand. Saudi Arabia was not so much waging war against international Communism, etc. as it was waging war against Russian Infidels. The temporary miscomprehension allowed the Americans to make the fatal mistake of opposing the Soviets by building up the muhajedin. No one seemed to understand that the Soviet Union, already greatly weakened, was hardly in the same league as a revived Islamic world, a world in flames (and not in flames because of Israel, as the apologists say), with Jihad on worldwide scale now seemingly made plausible by OPEC trillions, and by the millions of Muslim immigrants now settled deep within Western Europe.

Saudi Arabia is a permanent enemy not only of the United States, but of the entire Infidel world. And the fact that the Al-Saud have a taste for planeloads of food flown in from Hediard and Fauchon, for buying sprees and gambling junkets to the West, and summers spent in villegiature in Monte Carlo, and of course those planeloads or boatloads (right out to the yachts anchored off Marbella) of Western girls who arrive to console those Al-Saud for their oh so difficult lives (“my wives don’t understand me”), doesn’t change that fact at all. Basta con all this. Stop putting on yet another production of “Hamlet” without the prince. These student productions in Washington are really getting on everyone’s nerves. Unless you have a cadre of reliable advisers who have studied Islam, and studied the history of Muslim conquest over 1350 years of lands populated by Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Buddhists, that is, people who have studied, and have had the leisure to thoroughly assimilate, both the doctrine, and the history of the practice, of Islam, more failures, different ones perhaps – in Afghanistan rather than in Iraq, for example – but still failures, will be the inevitable result. And so too will the continued dreamy belief that the Arab war made on Israel is a “problem” that has a “solution,” rather than what it is – an unassuagable, and inextinguishable, Jihad against the intolerable presence of an Infidel nation-state in the midst of Dar al-Harb, and what’s still more intolerable, one run by the long-despised Jews. And so the survival of Israel, if you care about it, depends not on any treaty-making that will result in further tangible concessions of land by Israel, but rather on Deterrence. Deterrence worked, during the Cold War, and amazingly, it was Soviet Communism that crumbled. Though Russia remains a despotic mess, it is no longer the military threat it once was to Europe, or to America. No one can predict what will happen if the Muslim world continues on its present course, a world of violence and aggression that is beginning to have its clear effects in Western Europe (the new center of the worldwide Jihad, and the place that Obama ought to be worrying about most). No one can predict what a determined effort to get off oil will do to Muslim or Arab influence, and furthermore, what might be the effect if the Western world, its elites made more aware of the meaning, and menace, of Islam, started to discuss, openly, Islam as a vehicle of Arab supremacism, and thus help make the non-Arab Muslims, who constitute 80% of the world’s Muslims, to think again about Islam and what it does to art, to science, to human possibilities and human happiness. If the non-Muslims themselves can begin to make the connection between the political, economic, social, moral, and intellectual failures of Muslim states and societies, and Islam itself, that will surely have its effects on the most advanced people who, through no fault of their own, were born into Islam.

But that requires study of Islam and of the history of Muslim conquests, and the subjugation of non-Muslim peoples, over 1350 years. Can the new Administration spare a little time for such an effort? If it wishes to avoid the colossal mistakes and squandering of the Bush Administration, it had better.


Tom TrentoDirector

Florida Security Council

2200 4th Ave. N. # 3

Lake Worth, FL. 33461

W: 561-582-1424

F: 561-582-7675

C: 561-767-0982


A ‘jihad of self-examination’ is long overdue for Islamists

January 27, 2009

Other Voices: A ‘jihad of self-examination’ is long overdue for Islamists

Posted by Steve Pastner January 22, 2009 12:43PM

By Steve Pastner

Other Voices

Steve Pastner
The writer is a retired anthropology professor and sculptor who specialized in the tribal regions of the Islamic world, conducting fieldwork in southwest Pakistan and the Horn of Africa, among other places.

Sigmund Freud jokingly noted that the Irish are the only group impervious to psychoanalysis. If by that he meant “resistant to constructive self analysis and criticism,” it’s obvious Freud never met Islamists or their supporters, both within and beyond the Muslim community. This is indicated by the spate of demonstrations locally and globally in support of Hamas extremists and associated calls for the abolition of the state of Israel – not just cessation of its Gaza operation.

If pro-Hamas Muslims truly possessed honor, you’d think that to protest the dishonorable horrors perpetrated in the name of Islam by the terrorist likes of Hamas, they’d practice either mass apostasy or a major internal “jihad al aql”- an Arabic term I coined for a thus-far-hypothetical “struggle for rational self-improvement” along the lines of the western “age of reason.”

After all, Jihadi misdeeds not only target “infidels” (in Israel, Mumbai, Beslan, London, Madrid, the Twin Towers, etc.) but also co-religionists in Darfur, Iraq, Afghanistan and indeed Palestinian areas, among others, where they constitute a good chunk of the undeniable misery of many Muslims.

Yet rather than self-criticize, even when they are victims, the most vocal/visible Muslim spokesmen continue to disproportionately blame others for largely self-generated problems.

Numerous factors internal to the Islamic world are behind such problems. Start with endless violent and shifting intra-Muslim ethnic, sectarian and other conflicts down to the level of clans and even families, all as acute in Palestinian areas as anywhere. These make reliable treaties difficult, if not impossible, to achieve and maintain.

Add to this patterns of graft and corruption in many Muslim settings that would shame even the Illinois governor and you’re incubating a homegrown petri dish of problems, quite apart from “zionist” and “western imperialist” whipping boys. The latter scapegoating is particularly hypocritical given Islam’s own history of imperialism that is far older than the West’s, while Israel has no such history at all, beyond U.N.-legitimated ancient claims to a Vermont-sized scrap of real estate. Sadly for all concerned this scrap includes strategic border areas reluctantly occupied in wars Israel won (but didn’t start), about which there is enormous agonizing and debate within the Israeli and wider Jewish communities and which its genocidal, uncompromising enemies won’t even let it return without a fight.

Then throw in an unhealthy dash of religiously sanctioned “taqiyyah” or “say anything if it’ll forward the cause of Islam” on the propaganda and diplomatic fronts. Toss in a generous pinch of children weaponized into homicidal and suicidal “martyrs” via toxic madrassah indoctrination and you’ve got messes that spill into others’ backyards, from the World Trade Center, to Hamas rockets into Israel and a possible war between India and Pakistan over the latter’s stonewalling about its links to the Mumbai massacre.

To contribute essays to Other Voices, contact Bob Needham, opinion editor, at 734-994-6825 or

When that happens it’s not surprising that Muslims, many innocent, suffer. While this is tragic, it’s not a morally equivalent “cycle of violence” at all but instead often has a genesis – and also, importantly, remedies – within the “umma” (Muslim community of believers) itself.

The ineffectiveness of moderate Muslims in reining in extremists should also be a source of embarrassed self-criticism. But this much cliched “vast majority” may, in fact, be numerically overstated, as witnessed by large violent turnouts that can be mobilized for nonsensical cartoon protests and to demonize Jews while few show up to decry, say, the recent Mumbai carnage, or the indiscriminate suicide and rocket attacks on civilians in Israel which are at the root of the current Gaza crisis. In any case, a constructive internal Islamic critique has not materialized in any significant public (a key word!) measure, thereby minimizing opportunities for real peace.

In his “Murder in Amsterdam,” author Ian Buruma addresses the killing by a Dutch Muslim of filmmaker Theo Van Gogh, who was rightly concerned about the dramatic increase in Islamic radicalism in Europe. This book raises the unhappy need to explore “limits to tolerance” when dealing with such extremism in western countries, where liberal values have become a shield protecting grossly illiberal acts and aspirations. Much of the anti-Semitic postering and vocalizing in recent Dearborn and Ann Arbor anti-Israel protests, and elsewhere in the U.S. and Europe, raises just such a troubling specter, as does recent Gaza-related vandalism against Jewish schools in Chicago.

In contrast to well-documented neo-Nazi links to radical Islamists (see George Michaels’ “The Enemy of My Enemy”), many non-Muslim groupies of Hamas and other jihadis, such as Ann Arbor’s longtime synagogue harassers, describe themselves as of the “left.” Frequently they are part of the “International Solidarity,” Green Party (once respectable before its environmentalism was trumped by boosterism for Islamic extremists) and “boycott Israel” movements (a version of which was, happily, trounced at the local food co-op last year). They too, a la Freud’s observation, could profit from cognitive readjustment therapy. This might reconcile the huge “disconnect” between their sanctimonious self-proclaimed status as “peace-loving progressives” and “human rights activists” and their strident, unambiguous support for some of the most repressive, aggressive and bigoted ideologies since Hitler.

News readers should check out the blog site “” affiliated with the local synagogue picketers and boycott advocates. It is a disgrace that local Muslims have not forcefully repudiated these views.

As a former, once-sympathetic professional student of the Muslim world, I hope an internal reformation of Islam, based on more Muslims publicly engaging in constructive self-criticism (a la the brave Somali activist Hirsi Ali, currently under death threats for her criticisms of her own religion, and my friend Akbar Ahmed, the Pakistani scholar-diplomat in exile) makes possible my renewed respect and affection for a rich but currently deeply flawed religious culture (the essence of any religion being what it motivates believers to do in its name).

Until that happens, the growing domination of extremists, both extra-governmental and elected, as in Iran and Gaza , supported by western apologists (whose motives range along a spectrum from well-meaning gullibility through opportunism to anti-Semitic malice) makes Islam hazardous not just to others but to itself.


The Spread of Nihilism’s Bloody Stain

December 15, 2008

The Spread Of Nihilism’s Bloody Stain


War On Terror: The terrorist assault on Mumbai is the latest clash between civilization and nihilism. From the Somali pirates to the Taliban, this is what the world would be like without America.

Read More: Global War On Terror

Mumbai (formerly Bombay) now joins London, Madrid, Bali, Casablanca, Baghdad, Fallujah, Washington, D.C., New York and a field in Pennsylvania as battlefields in the war on terror.

The motives and the identity of the perpetrators are not clear, but they don’t really matter. The assault on freedom, democracy and civilization itself continues. India is a booming economic power rooted in democracy and capitalism and open to Western culture. These are reasons enough.

That the Mumbai bombings occurred on the Thanksgiving holiday may or may not be significant. We certainly can be thankful that the war on terror has prevented similar events here or a repeat of 9/11 since that tragic day the war on terror began.

Yet, as the assault on Mumbai was under way, Amtrak cops with M-16s flooded Penn Station Wednesday after the FBI said it had received a “plausible but unsubstantiated” report that al-Qaida operatives discussed a plan two months ago to bomb New York City’s mass transit system. We are safer, but we are not yet safe.

Those who find the very existence of Guantanamo and the FISA statutes an offense to American democracy need to recalibrate their moral outrage. These legacies of 9/11, and the continuing vigilance of the Bush administration, have kept us safe.

As commentator Alan Caruba noted, there have been some 11,000 terrorist attacks worldwide since 9/11. Virtually all of them took place in a country called “OTTUSA” — Other Than The USA. It’s no accident.

Some will say this proves that the war on terror was being fought in the wrong place. They will say we should have left Iraq alone and scoured Afghanistan until we had Osama bin Laden’s head on a stick. All Mumbai proves is that terror’s battlefield can be anywhere and is everywhere.

Little mentioned in the news accounts of the terrorist atrocities was the comment from Mumbai’s security chief that several of the terror suspects seemed to be British citizens. Maybe the test on Mumbai, India’s financial center, was a dry-run for something bigger in London’s financial center or even on Wall Street.

It’s been tempting to believe the war on terror is winding down. Violence in Iraq has diminished as democracy takes hold. Bring the troops home. In reality, this is the kind of “long, twilight struggle” President John F. Kennedy talked about.

Analysts will ponder what India did to become a target just as some said 9/11 was America’s foreign policy chickens coming home to roost. But the targets of terror are hated for what they represent and not what they do. Terrorist groups from al-Qaida to the Taliban and everywhere in between are at war with Western ideas, ideals, culture and societies, not just with states and their foreign policies.

In a speech before a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001, President Bush rightfully called the 9/11 terrorists and their ilk “the heirs of all the murderous ideologies of the 20th century.

“By sacrificing human life to further their radical visions, by abandoning every value except the will to power, they follow in the path of fascism, Nazism and totalitarianism.”

As columnist Charles Krauthammer once observed: “If poverty and destitution, colonialism and capitalism, are animating radical Islam,” how do we explain that one of the first acts of the Taliban in Afghanistan was to blow up two massive 1,500-year-old statues of Buddha carved into a cliff?

The statues represented an alternate faith and a great work of civilization. To the Taliban, to al-Qaida and to radical Islam, the presence of both was and is intolerable, as is democracy and freedom in Iraq or anywhere else.

The war on terror is not a bumper sticker, and if the United States wasn’t waging it, if we had hunkered down in a fortress America, Mumbai would not be the exception but the rule, soon to be joined by places such as Memphis and Miami.

Calling this a clash of civilizations is too simple. It is a clash of civilization and nihilism. They are at war with civilization itself, the advocates of a new dark age, and in this war there can be no substitute for victory.