Islamic Jihad — Target USA
How Concerned Should You Be?
Despite assurances to the contrary from our nation's commander in chief, it turns out that global Jihad is thriving.
“The establishment of civil and religious liberty was the Motive which induced me to the Field.” –George Washington (1783)
Despite assurances to the contrary from our nation’s commander in chief, it turns out that global Jihad is thriving. According to those who do not bend the truth to comport with political agendas, Jihad now constitutes a greater threat to our nation’s security than at any time in history.
Should you be concerned?
Of course, the answer is “yes,” but with qualification.
The most imminent domestic threat to your life and property, statistically, emanates from the sociopathic drug/gang culture, which continues to metastasize on urban poverty plantations and is now spilling into suburban and rural communities. That threat has been cultivated for the last five decades by ruinous political and social policies that were, ostensibly, enacted to eradicate the poverty those policies institutionalized.
That notwithstanding, the elevated Islamic threat against domestic targets should be a concern – not because the probability of being an individual victim of an Islamist assault will soon be higher than the drug/gang culture threat, but because the probability of being among the cumulative victims of a catastrophic attack on our homeland – be it conventional, nuclear or biological – is escalating largely unabated. I am not suggesting you develop a case of PTSD – PRE-Traumatic Stress Disorder because you are sure catastrophe is imminent, but you should be concerned because it is escalating largely unabated.
The 9/11 attack on our country was perpetrated by 19 al-Qa'ida operatives. Its immediate effects – the loss of lives and the longer-term economic impact – were devastating. It would only take five to 10 al-Qa'ida operatives to create destruction on a 100-fold scale, with a little help from Iran or other terror-sponsoring states.
But the most likely near-term form of attack against civilians on our turf will be modeled after the conventional Islamist assaults in the Middle East — vehicle bombs, suicide bombs and mass shootings, as we have now seen across Western Europe and increasingly in the U.S. at Ft. Hood, Boston, New York and Washington. (Update 2016: Add Chattanooga, San Bernardino and Orlando.) This type of attack is low tech but effective in terms of instilling public fear with the long-term goal of civil acquiescence. However, a note of caution about the predictable “analysis” which will follow these attacks.
Government and media analysts alike, will assert that there is no connection between Jihadi attacks in the west and Islam or Islamic terrorist groups. But describing Islamist terrorists as so-called “lone wolf” actors or “radicalized,” constitutes a lethal misunderstanding of the Jihadi threat. The attacks are, undisputedly, all connected by the fabric of Islamic Jihad, despite Barack Obama’s “blinding Islamophilia. Describing their attacks as "criminal activity” or “workplace violence,” as the Obama administration classified the Ft. Hood attack, is asinine.
Recall that in 2009, after Nidal Malik Hasan, yelling “Allahu Akbar,” killed 13 people and wounded 30 others at Ft. Hood, The New York Times opined: “[It is] important to avoid drawing prejudicial conclusions from the fact that Major Hasan is an American Muslim whose parents came from the Middle East. President Obama was right when he told Americans, ‘we don’t know all the answers yet’ and cautioned everyone against ‘jumping to conclusions.’”
Well, we do “know all the answers” now, and the conclusion is that these acts are directly tied to Islam. Yet the Obama administration and their media outlets insist the Ft. Hood attack, like the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings, were not tied to established Islamic terrorist groups. They offer the same errant analysis of the 2009 murder of two American soldiers outside a military recruiting center in Little Rock, and conspiracies to detonate bombs in Times Square and the NYC subway system. The result is that Islamist ideology is allowed to propagate and flourish across our nation, unabated.
These attacks and those to come, were and will be directly tied to worldwide Jihad by way of the Qur'an, the foundational fabric linking all Islamist violence. Fact is, American Islamists, such as Louis Farrakhan, Anwar al-Awlaki, Sheikh Ibrahim and other self-appointed clerics, have galvanized their following by preaching hatred for America. And other American Muslin leaders, who would like to be perceived as legitimate representatives of Islam, offer little condemnation of Islamic violence. Their silence is deafening.
Meanwhile, Islamist terror groups are thriving and the threat of catastrophic attack against the American homeland, is on the rise.
How real is that threat?
Islamic terrorist groups are surging worldwide, including Khorasan (a.k.a. al-Qa'ida), Jabhat al-Nusra (a.k.a. al-Qa'ida), Boko Haram, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Taliban, Jamaat-e-Islami, Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Muslim Brotherhood and now, front and center, ISIL, a.k.a. the Islamic State – all of which together constitute Jihadistan, that borderless nation of Islamic extremists aligned under the Qur'anic umbrella.
Currently there are many American Islamists actively fighting among the ranks of ISIL in the Middle East – and they have significant networks of support in the United States. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper concludes that the direct links between ISIL and those domestic networks has created “the most diverse array of threats and challenges as I’ve seen in my 50-plus years in the [intelligence] business.”
How did this surge get underway?
In 2012, amid the cascading failure of his domestic economic and social policies, Barack Obama centered his re-election campaign on his faux foreign policy successes, which were built upon the following two boasts: “Four years ago, I promised to end the war in Iraq. I did.” And “al-Qa'ida is on the run.”
The reality, however, is that Obama’s “hope and change” retreat from Iraq left a vacuum for the resurgence of a far more dangerous incarnation of Muslim terrorism under the ISIL label, which has displaced al-Qa'ida as the dominant asymmetric Islamic terrorist threat to the West.
Clearly, it is Obama’s foreign policy malfeasance that poses the greatest threat to U.S. national and homeland security.
So, is the Islamic State actually, well, Islamic?
Not according to Obama. While he subscribes to the hate-driven rhetoric of Afro-centric theology, six formative years of his early life were spent attending Islamic schools in Indonesia, and that has clearly influenced his discernment regarding Islam.
In his address to the UN this week, he declared, “We have reaffirmed again and again that the United States is not and never will be at war with Islam. Islam teaches peace.” That was a repeat from his address to the nation last week, when he claimed, “Let’s make two things clear: ISIL is not Islamic. … And ISIL is certainly not a state.”
Reasonable people may disagree on whether the Islamic State now occupying much of Syria and Iraq is, at least by the Western definition, a state, but it certainly is a state in the Jihadistan context given the Islamic World of the Qur'an recognizes no political borders.
But for Obama to suggest “ISIL is not Islamic” is flatly absurd. Why else are American taxpayers providing Islamist prisoners at Gitmo copies of the Qur'an and payer rugs?
It is equally asinine, of course, for Secretary of State John Kerry to perpetuate the lie that “Islam is the Religion of Peace™” by claiming, “We must continue to repudiate the gross distortion of Islam that ISIL is spreading.”
Their errant assertions prompted this rebuke from Islamic State spokesman Abu Muhammad al-Adnani: “[Obama and Kerry] turned into Islamic jurists, muftis, sheikhs and preachers, standing up for Islam and the Muslims, so it appears that they no longer have confidence in the ability or sincerity of their sorcerers…”
So, is Islamic Jihad really “Islamic”?
Despite Obama’s repeated assertion that Islamic Jihad is disconnected from Islam, Hoover Institution Fellow Dennis Prager writes: “Killing ‘unbelievers’ has been part of – of course not all of – Islam since its inception. Within 10 years of Muhammad’s death Muslims had conquered and violently converted whole peoples from Iran to Egypt and from Yemen to Syria. Muslims have offered conquered people death or conversion since that time. … More than 600 years after Muhammad, Ibn Khaldun, the greatest Muslim writer who ever lived, explained why Islam is the superior religion in the most highly regarded Muslim work ever written, ‘Muqaddimah,’ or ‘Introduction to History’: ‘In the Muslim community, the holy war is religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force.’”
Thus, if you’re among those who resist or refute Muhammad’s teachings, you’re a de facto enemy of Islam.
According to Muhammad in the Qur'anic verses, Allah commands, “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.”
Do you refute any teachings of Muhammad?
Based on the Sunni Islamist history of violence, it is clear that Islam is not “the Religion of Peace,” though a significant percentage of Muslims worldwide, and in the U.S., do not subscribe to Islamist Jihad theology. But the number of Sunni Muslims who do support that totalitarian theology is staggering.
According to the Pew Research Center, there are 2.75 million Muslims in the U.S. today. Notably, about 90% of Muslims in America are Sunni. The Council on American-Islamic Relations and the Nation of Islam have now established more than 2,200 mosques, some of which have become hotbeds of support for Sunni Islamist extremists. The ethnic group with the fastest growing conversion rate to Islam is Latino – 12 million of whom are now in the U.S. illegally, and who continue to pour across our southern border.
Do any of those grim statistics concern you?
Obama declared to the UN, “When it comes to America and Islam, there is no ‘us’ and ‘them,’ there is only ‘us’ because millions of Muslim Americans are part of the fabric of our country.”
Do have less concern now?
Islam, on the other hand, is founded on the abolition of civil and religious liberty – which is to say it is diametrically opposed to the notion that Liberty is “endowed by our Creator.”
And a footnote, recall if you will the prophetic warning issued by George W. Bush in July of 2007: “To begin withdrawing from Iraq…will be dangerous, for Iraq, for the region and for the United States. It will mean surrendering the future of Iraq to [al-Qa'ida](https://patriotpost.us/alexander/4051). It means that we would be risking mass killings on a horrific scale. It will mean we would allow terrorists to establish a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they had in Afghanistan. It will mean that American troops will have to return at some later date to confront an enemy that is even more dangerous.”
President Bush took the battle to the enemy in order to keep the front on their turf, not ours. Obama’s retreat has opened the door for Islamists to move the front to our homeland.
Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Fortis Vigilate Paratus et Fidelis