Posted on 12/14/2005 5:26:37 AM PST by SJackson
The government asks the forbidden question: How closely related is Islamic terrorism to mainstream Islam itself?
Washington's policy-makers have been careful in the war on terror to distinguish between Islam and the terrorists. The distinction has rankled conservatives who see scarce difference.
A little-noticed speech by President Bush in October gave them some hope. In a major rhetorical shift, he described the enemy as "Islamic radicals" and not just "terrorists," although he still denies that radicalism has anything to do with their religion.
Now for the first time, a key Pentagon intelligence agency involved in homeland security is delving into Islam's holy texts to answer whether Islam is being radicalized by the terrorists or is already radical. Military brass want a better understanding of what's motivating the insurgents in Iraq and the terrorists around the globe, including those inside America who may be preparing to strike domestic military bases. The enemy appears indefatigable, even more active now than before 9/11.
Are the terrorists really driven by self-serving politics and personal demons? Or are they driven by religion? And if it's religion, are they following a manual of war contained in their scripture?
Answers are hard to come by. Four years into the war on terror, U.S. intelligence officials tell me there are no baseline studies of the Muslim prophet Muhammad or his ideological or military doctrine found at either the CIA or Defense Intelligence Agency, or even the war colleges.
But that is slowly starting to change as the Pentagon develops a new strategy to deal with the threat from Islamic terrorists through its little-known intelligence agency called the Counterintelligence Field Activity or CIFA, which staffs hundreds of investigators and analysts to help coordinate Pentagon security efforts at home and abroad. CIFA also supports Northern Command in Colorado, which was established after 9/11 to help military forces react to terrorist threats in the continental United States.
Dealing with the threat on a tactical and operational level through counterstrikes and capture has proven only marginally successful. Now military leaders want to combat it from a strategic standpoint, using informational warfare, among other things. A critical part of that strategy involves studying Islam, including the Quran and the hadiths, or traditions of Muhammad.
"Today we are confronted with a stateless threat that does not have at the strategic level targetable entities: no capitals, no economic base, no military formations or installations," states a new Pentagon briefing paper I've obtained. "Yet political Islam wages an ideological battle against the non-Islamic world at the tactical, operational and strategic level. The West's response is focused at the tactical and operation level, leaving the strategic level -- Islam -- unaddressed."
So far the conclusions of intelligence analysts assigned to the project, who include both private contractors and career military officials, contradict the commonly held notion that Islam is a peaceful religion hijacked or distorted by terrorists. They've found that the terrorists for the most part are following a war-fighting doctrine articulated through Muhammad in the Quran, elaborated on in the hadiths, codified in Islamic or sharia law, and reinforced by recent interpretations or fatwahs.
"Islam is an ideological engine of war (Jihad)," concludes the sensitive Pentagon briefing paper. And "no one is looking for its off switch."
Why? One major reason, the briefing states, is government-wide "indecision [over] whether Islam is radical or being radicalized."
So, which is it? "Strategic themes suggest Islam is radical by nature," according to the briefing, which goes on to cite the 26 chapters of the Quran dealing with violent jihad and the examples of the Muslim prophet, who it says sponsored "terror and slaughter" against unbelievers.
"Muhammad's behaviors today would be defined as radical," the defense document says, and Muslims today are commanded by their "militant" holy book to follow his example. It adds: Western leaders can no longer afford to overlook the "cult characteristics of Islam."
It also ties Muslim charity to war. Zakat, the alms-giving pillar of Islam, is described in the briefing as "an asymmetrical war-fighting funding mechanism." Which in English translates to: combat support under the guise of tithing. Of the eight obligatory categories of disbursement of Muslim charitable donations, it notes that two are for funding jihad, or holy war. Indeed, authorities have traced millions of dollars received by major jihadi terror groups like Hamas and al-Qaida back to Saudi and other foreign Isamic charities and also U.S. Muslim charities, such as the Holy Land Foundation.
According to the Quran, jihad is not something a Muslim can opt out of. It demands able-bodied believers join the fight. Those unable -- women and the elderly -- are not exempt; they must give "asylum and aid" (Surah 8:74) to those who do fight the unbelievers in the cause of Allah.
In analyzing the threat on the domestic front, the Pentagon briefing draws perhaps its most disturbing conclusions. It argues the U.S. has not suffered from scattered insurgent attacks -- as opposed to the concentrated and catastrophic attack by al-Qaida on 9-11 -- in large part because it has a relatively small Muslim population. But that could change as the Muslim minority grows and gains more influence.
The internal document explains that Islam divides offensive jihad into a "three-phase attack strategy" for gaining control of lands for Allah. The first phase is the "Meccan," or weakened, period, whereby a small Muslim minority asserts itself through largely peaceful and political measures involving Islamic NGOs -- such as the Islamic Society of North America, which investigators say has its roots in the militant Muslim Brotherhood, and Muslim pressure groups, such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations, whose leaders are on record expressing their desire to Islamize America.
In the second "preparation" phase, a "reasonably influential" Muslim minority starts to turn more militant. The briefing uses Britain and the Netherlands as examples.
And in the final jihad period, or "Medina Stage," a large minority uses its strength of numbers and power to rise up against the majority, as Muslim youth recently demonstrated in terrorizing France, the Pentagon paper notes.
It also notes that unlike Judaism and Christianity, Islam advocates expansion by force. The final command of jihad, as revealed to Muhammad in the Quran, is to conquer the world in the name of Islam. The defense briefing adds that Islam is also unique in classifying unbelievers as "standing enemies against whom it is legitimate to wage war."
Right now political leaders don't understand the true nature of the threat,\ it says, because the intelligence community has yet to educate them. They still think Muslim terrorists, even suicide bombers, are mindless "criminals" motivated by "hatred of our freedoms," rather than religious zealots motivated by their faith. And as a result, we have no real strategic plan for winning a war against jihadists.
Even many intelligence analysts and investigators working in the field with the Joint Terrorism Task Forces have a shallow understanding of Islam.
"I don't like to criticize our intelligence services, because we did win the Cold War," says a Northern Command intelligence official. "However, all of these organizations have made only limited progress adjusting to the current threat or the sharing of information."
Why? "All suffer heavily from political correctness," he explains.
PC still infects the Pentagon, four years after jihadists hit the nation's military headquarters.
"A lot of folks here have a very pedestrian understanding of Islam and the Islamic threat," a Pentagon intelligence analyst working on the project told me. "We're getting Islam 101, and we need Islam 404."
The hardest part of formulating a strategic response to the threat is defining Islam as a political and military enemy. Once that psychological barrier has been crossed, defense sources tell me, the development of countermeasures -- such as educating the public about the militant nature of Islam and exploiting "critical vulnerabilities" or rifts within the Muslim faith and community -- can begin.
"Most Americans don't realize we are in a war of survival -- a war that is going to continue for decades," the Northcom official warns.
It remains to be seen, however, whether our PC-addled political leaders would ever adopt such controversial measures.
It didn't take us 4 years after Pearl harbor to figure out Japanese Imperialism or Nazism. Only a willfully blind, PC mindset can explain this immense dereliction of duty on the part of our leaders and analysts.
Thankfully, at least it's starting to be addressed.
My concern is PC mavens and subversive "civil rights" groups like CAIR, the ACLU and the vicious politicians in the Democrat Party ( and a few "RINOs, like McStain and Lindsay Graham) will murder this tender baby in the womb. They will go after it quickly with sharpened knives. One can already see the effective work they are doing destroying some unpopular underpinnings of this World War, illustrated by such monstrosities as the new "Torture Laws".
"I doubted our exit strategy of building a democracy in Iraq."Same thoughts here but the results so far have been encouraging.The key to a successful(longterm)democracy in Iraq will depend to a large degree on keeping the radical muslims out of power.Pretty tough task when one considers party lines are drawn along religous lines ie Sunni,Shiite,Shia.I'd estimate the possibility of a successful democracy in Iraq at about 50/50.
And this is why I ask the question, "Is it wise to allow people from terrorist states, or even of the Muslim faith to immigrate to the U.S. while this situation remains fluid?"
It would seem prudent to me, to place a moratorium on that segment of our immigration for a period of time.
Undoubtedly, man of these people pose no threat. The problem is, the few in their midst that do. Those few can cost us dearly.
No, but we don't need to have such an open-arms policy toward every crackpot subversive who wants to invade the U.S.
Lets forget their manipulation and exploitation of ethnic minorities and the jailhouse converts grievances against society as a whole, and add the fact that most islamic societies have low rates of use of contraception, and another factor thats often overlooked... One man may have four wives, and thus there are not enough of their own breeding factories to go around after they have locked down their own supply of females for their breeding purposes.
Not only does this produce to an underclass of sexually frustrated males in islamic nations who will be predisposed into falling for islamic sexual fantasies of 72 virgins, but also offers another benefit for the expansion of islam:
1. Using these left over unpaired males to convert their domestic non-muslim females and offering to elevate their low status of dhimmi to the privileged status of muslim. A pick up line that only muslim males can use.
2. Exporting these left over unpaired males into the darul harb, to take over the breeding capability of the kuffar by finding kuffar females (who are required to convert to islam when they marry) and using them to pump out more muslims behind enemy lines.
They perfected the use of the womb as part of their military industrial complex long ago.
Now, THAT's a pretty good formula for growth.
The hardest part of formulating a strategic response to the threat is defining Islam as a political and military enemy. Once that psychological barrier has been crossed, defense sources tell me, the development of countermeasures -- such as educating the public about the militant nature of Islam and exploiting "critical vulnerabilities" or rifts within the Muslim faith and community -- can begin.
Why? I work at Main State in Washington, DC. The Harry S Truman Building. Recently, about a month ago, near all the elevators was a flyer about about a seminar - about understanding Islamic people and countries! I could not believe it! I could not imagine during WW II - or any other wars we have been involved in, including the Cold War - holding seminars in attempting to understand the enemy! I see all kinds of strange things over here. I walked by one office and on the couch was a throw pillow - UN blue with the UN symbol on it! I think we are in dangerous waters in the United States and it may take a major battle within our borders - against elected officials, lawyers, and judges - before it all shakes out.
Ann Coulter was right.
Her 3-prong strategy for addressing this menace is the only path to total and lasting victory.
Gee, maybe the Pentagon should have sent that group of analysts over to Borders Books after giving each of them the money to purchase a copy of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam???
50/50 doesn't sound like good odds...but it's better than I figured going in. Keeping the radicals out of power is the big problem in a democracy. It only takes one super majority to abolish all of the protections, controls and future elections and establish something along the lines of the farce of a democracy that is in Iran. But at this point I think there is a decent chance of establishing enough stability and peace that we will be able to disengage. Those chances go up the greater difficulty in holding power in Syria and Iran. I know some Iranians and that nation is a powder keg waiting to blow up under the Ayatollahs there.
The real figures are: Buddhist 94.6%, Muslim 4.6%, Christian 0.7%, other 0.1% (2000 census)
bump for later
Top post tks.
Good to see someone is at last lifting the veil. It'll take a long time, but we'll get there in the end.
I agree.I've been very impressed with the enthusiasm and determination of the Iraqi people and also very surprised that the people have gone out and voted in spite of the potential for terrorist attacks.(Note:Could you imagine going to vote(here in the US)and knowing in the back of your mind someone could pull up and detonate a car bomb outside or some guy standing in line at the poll had a couple pounds of C4 strapped to his body?)The key is keeping the radicals,islamists,Syria,and Iran out of the picture.
I agree, I have been very impressed with the courage of the Iraqi people to stand up under the threat of being murdered to take the opportunity to vote. I laugh at the Liberals who poo poo the Iraqi elections when they have a better turn out than we do in the US AND in the face of threats.
Did you see the video of the elderly Iraqi woman who was voting who said anyone who doesn't appreciate what the US has done and what George Bush has done can go to hell? That needs to be played as is on TV as a commercial so more of America can see it. Make Murtha watch it a few dozen times.
If the Muslims kill their *apostates*, they are again limiting their own population.
One of the core areas I think we need to exploit more for our advantage which I don't see many use.
The salafis promote a return to pure "real" islam, and use promote islamic beliefs such as the prophecy of the 72 sects (one true islamic sect, vs 72 other islamic sects who have strayed by adopting practices that are "bidah") to underscore the need to stay true to real islam, as practiced and preached by mohamMAD, so eventually, even if they were to wipe out the 5 billion Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, agnostics, atheists etc and their future offspring, muslims will still be obliged to wage war with their own over who is the best or true muslim thus ensuring islam will promote eternal bloodshed and oppression for muslim and non-muslims alike.
On that basis alone, one could argue islam will always be doomed, even if it succeeds.
As you mentioned the very source of their strength, the Koran and Muslim tradition, are also going to be their undoing.
One only needs to go back and point islamic history out to muslims for them to realize nobody gets muslims killed, or kills muslims, better than their own true believers from the time of imam ali and imam an-nawawi to the ikhwan massacre of those they deem "mushrikun" and the present day persecution of Ahmadis, murdering of apostates, and political leaders.
Islam needs to be thoroughly exposed and thrown onto historys ash heap of discarded lies.
To paraphrase: "It was the Saudis all along."
Well, at least we can finally get this religious war going ahead full steam instead of the sputtering mess it's been the last 4 years. Let's break out the neutron bombs.
"They've found that the terrorists for the most part are following a war-fighting doctrine articulated through Muhammad in the Quran, elaborated on in the hadiths, codified in Islamic or sharia law, and reinforced by recent interpretations or fatwahs."
Well, I'll be darned...it's tempting to say they could have learned all that by signing up to FR...but I'm convinced this isn't NEW news, they've known all that for a long time. I expected this 'change of attitude' as soon as Iraq was 'in the bag' so it does not surprise to read this NOW, on the day of voting in Iraq for the ratification of the Constitution.
I see this rather, not as an admittance of past stupidity, but as the Pentagon signalling 'we have rid ourselves of the threat from Saddam, now we are ready to start on the enemy at home.'
In non-islamic countries a campaign of education about islams core beliefs should be embarked upon. What percentage of our own population even know what dhimmitude or darul harb means? Robert Spencer had a few billboards up in L.A. recently to try and get peoples attention. We live in a society and an age where ideas and knowledge can be spread at the speed of light, and must use this to our advantage both at home and overseas by having local translations in developing nations and the emerging states of eastern Europe. With the net, we're only one click away from the truth and must never surrender it to the UN.
In islamic nations they fear exposure to western ideas and hegemony because they are well aware it undemines and erodes islam and its oppressive system based on lies and fear. We could learn much by following the islamic examples of using zakat to fund dawah in the west. Even our instititons of higher learning such as Harvard and Georgetown are being hijacked for their cause as we speak. Give the islamic masses more exposure to western ideas, buy into or manipulate their media and institutions of learning to flood them with the truth, but stop the islamic influx into the west at the same time. Force international organizations like the UN to do our bidding, not the OIC's, and to pound on the issues of rights for women and religious minorities in islamic nations to keep underming their vile theology on multiple levels. This world needs a global leader, not a consensus of the ignorant, corrupt, and the brainwashed. We have the power, but often lack the will or the courage, because we are held back by those at home and abroad who do not undertsand the objectives and long term strategy of the enemy.
IMHO, Sooner or later, no matter what we do, the road to islamic reformation or its ultimate demise will lead thru the hijaz (mecca and medina). It's ground zero for two of islams 5 pillars (there's a not-so-subtle hint in there somewhere). Salafi control of the holy sites legitamizes their message for the global ummah, and while they control it muslims will always be exposed to its indoctrination during their lifetime and relgious obligations. If/when the KSA implodes we better have a plan and be ready to back Hashemite armies to retake custodianship of the holy places and restore their rule of the hijaz because the alternative is not going to be pretty at all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.