Tag Archives: jihad

Ally No More: Erdogan’s New Turkish Caliphate and the Rising Jihadist Threat to the West

NEW CENTER BOOK DOCUMENTS THAT TURKEY IS AN ALLY NO MORE, ERDOGAN’S NEW-OTTOMAN JIHAD STATE MUST BE TREATED AS SUCH

“Whither Turkey?” is a question that has become one of the most pressing national security topics of our time. The available evidence – including, notably, the increasingly overt ambition of Recep Tayyip Erdogan to become the Caliph of a neo-Ottoman empire, his naked hostility toward the United States and the damage being done by Turkey to America’s vital interests and those of the rest of NATO and other allies like Israel and the Kurds – suggests the answer is alarming.

That evidence is thoughtfully assessed in a new book from the Center for Security Policy Press,Ally No More: Erdogan’s New Turkish Caliphate and the Rising Jihadist Threat to the West. Its ten essays include a detailed treatment of the presence of Turkish influence operations and infrastructure in this country that could enable the regime in Ankara not only to harm U.S. interests elsewhere, but to engage in subversion here – making it required reading for American policy-makers and the public, alike. ?

A group of highly respected authors/experts – notably including Harold Rhode Burak Bekdil, Uzay Bulut, David Goldman, Daniel Pipes and the Center for Security Policy’s Executive Vice President Christopher Hull and Senior Fellow Deborah Weiss – contributed chapters to this much-needed book. So did the Center’s Vice President for Research and Analysis, Clare M. Lopez, who also served as Ally No More’s editor.

This extensively footnoted collection of essay features insightful treatments of: Turkey’s own demographic and economic situation; Erdogan’s increasingly autocratic disregard for Turkey’s constitution and escalating record of human rights abuses; and the apparently not-quite-final divorce from Erdogan’s longtime jihadist collaborator, Fethullah Gulen.

Dr. Rhode’s chapter as well as two others focus on a strategic look at how Turkey is not only alienating itself from its own Ataturk legacy by pursuing a frankly jihadist agenda, but from the U.S. directly, through Erdogan’s brazen alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood on U.S. territory. Dr. Pipes offered suggestions for necessarily tough, but effective, measures for Turkey’s NATO allies to take in response to Erdogan’s overtly hostile policies.

Overall, this is a most timely and scholarly contribution to our understanding of shifting realities that must be dealt with in a clear-eyed and expeditious manner if U.S. national security priorities are to be preserved.

Upon the release of Ally No More: Erdo?an’s New Turkish Caliphate and the Rising Jihadist Threat to the West, Frank Gaffney Jr. President of the Center for Security Policy observed:

Few recent geostrategic developments are as fraught as the transformation of Turkey from a reliable, secular and democratic allied nation to one ruled by a hostile, Sharia-supremacist and increasingly despotic regime.  This book maps out that trajectory and its implications – and offers astute and timely suggestions for how America must respond.

Watch the Facebook livestream launch event:

Jihad indoctrination in schools courtesy of the Palestinian Authority

posted by Christopher Holton

The Middle East Media Research Institute has just published an extensive report on schoolbooks used in Palestinian schools to indoctrinate children in jihad and martyrdom operations.

This is of course doubly outrageous in view of the mountains of money the United States has handed over to the Palestinian Authority.

Here is an excerpt and a link to the full MEMRI report…

In July 2017, the Palestinian Authority (PA) schoolbooks for the 2017-18 school year were published. Some of the books are new, and some remained unchanged. An examination of the middle-school books for Islamic Education, some of which have been replaced, shows a significant increase in focus on the early Islamic tenets of shahada (martyrdom), fidaa (self-sacrifice) and tadhiya (sacrifice) as part of jihad for the sake of Allah, and their modern manifestations as part of the Palestinian struggle against Israel.

The books present the historic context of these tenets, portraying jihad, shahada, fidaa and tadhiya as acts that that brought the Muslims victory over their enemies in the early days of Islam.

https://www.memri.org/reports/palestinian-authority-schoolbooks-2017-18-increased-indoctrination-jihad-and-martyrdom

Gaffney Blames H. R. McMaster for Trump Not Calling out ‘Radical Islamic Terrorism’ by Name

Originally published at Breitbart News

Center for Security Policy President Frank Gaffney discussed President Trump failing to mention radical Islamic terrorism in his 9/11 commemoration speech with SiriusXM host Raheem Kassam on Wednesday’s Breitbart News Daily.

“It’s inconceivable that it was not intentional for him,” said Gaffney of Trump’s not using the term “radical Islamic terrorism” in his speech.

Gaffney went on to say United States National Security Advisor H. R. McMaster “has obviously prevailed on the president” and others in getting them to drop the term.

“It’s just wrong not to be describing the underlying problem here,” said Gaffney, invoking the phrase “sharia supremacism.” He went on, “Whether you call it that, or radical Islamic terrorism, or jihadism, you’ve got to get at it if you’re going to defeat it.”

Gaffney insists that the administration’s failure to use said terminology is a key failure in the fight against terrorism.

Breitbart News Daily airs on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern.

Did the Saudi embassy fund a “test run” for 9/11 hijackings?

The New York Post is reporting that new evidence suggests the Saudi embassy may have funded a “test run” for the 9/11 hijackings.

According to documents submitted in a lawsuit against the Saudi government by 9/11 family members, in 1999 the embassy paid for two Saudi nationals, Mohammed al-Qudhaeein and Hamdan al-Shalawi, to fly from Phoenix to Washington, D.C. The documents, drawn from FBI files, allege that the Saudis, who entered the United States as students, were members of “the Kingdom’s network of agents in the US,” and participated in the terrorist conspiracy. The two individuals both reportedly trained at al-Qaeda camps in Afghanistan and kept regular contacts with one of the hijacker pilots and a senior al-Qaeda leader.

During their test Qudhaeein and Shalawi attempted to gain access to the cockpit of the plane multiple times. Their actions resulted in the plane making an emergency landing in Ohio individuals were handcuffed and questioned by the FBI.

The FBI also confirmed that Qudhaeein’s and Shalawi’s airline tickets for the pre-9/11 dry run were paid for by the Saudi Embassy.

The current lawsuit against the Saudi government follows the passage of the  Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), which allows courts to waive claims of sovereign immunity for foreign government officials in cases involving acts of terrorism on U.S. soil.

The law was passed in 2016, partially in response to the 2015 decision of a U.S. Judge to dismiss claims against Saudi Arabia by families of victims  of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. who accused the country of providing material support to al Qaeda. U.S. District Judge George Daniels in Manhattan said Saudi Arabia had sovereign immunity from damage claims by the victims. Fifteen of the nineteen men who carried out the 2001 attacks were Saudi nationals.

On July 15th 2016, 28 pages of declassified material  from the “Congressional Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11”,  were released by Congress and show multiple links between associates of Saudi Arabian Prince Bandar, the former longtime ambassador to the United States, and 9/11 hijackers. The reports suggest possible conduits of money from the Saudi royal family to Saudis living in the United States and two of the hijackers in San Diego. The documents also indicate substantial support to California mosques with a high degree of jihadis sentiment. However, some of this information from the released pages are unconfirmed allegations.

While the 9/11 commission report which was published in 2004, found no direct evidence at the time that senior Saudi officials were involved in the 9/11 attack, the report did criticize the Saudi government for tolerating radical Islam by funding schools and mosques around the world that spread jihadist ideology. The report also noted that some rich Saudis gave money to charities with terrorist links.

The Saudi Arabian government continues to deny any ties to the terrorists who carried out the 9/11 attacks. On August 1st 2017, the Saudi government requested the dismissal of a $100 billion dollar lawsuit filed before the U.S. District Court in Manhattan for 25 pending 9/11 lawsuits.  A decision has not been made yet, however, with this new evidence linking the Saudi embassy to the dry run test for the hijackers, may allow for the victims claims to be upheld in court.

New Center Monograph Shows Continuity of Islamic Warfare

Modern_Islamic_Warfare

The Islamic State may be on its way to defeat, but the brutal savagery of Islamic warfare, which has been with us for nearly fourteen centuries, is not about to exit the world stage just yet. Because the commandment to global conquest by jihad is obligatory for all Muslims today just as for those of the 7th century—until the world ‘be all for Allah’ (Q 8:39)—Islamic warfare of both the violent and stealthy kind will never cease unless forcibly defeated. Until now, however, few had delved deeply into the merciless, systematic, and ongoing methods of classic Islamic warfare that date back to medieval times to understand the nature, the concepts, and the philosophy that combined with such deadly effectiveness to defeat brilliant civilization after brilliant civilization, from the Byzantines to the Hindus to the Persians.

We of Western Civilization (along with the Han Chinese) remain among the only peoples on earth ever targeted by Islam for conquest but not yet subjugated. If we are going to prolong that happy circumstance, we will need to examine the cultural, military, political, and religious currents within Islam that inspire its relentless drive for supremacy. Only by understanding what compels Islam to conquest and the means employed to achieve it will we have a chance to avoid the fate of myriad lost civilizations gone before us which were crushed under the onslaught of Islamic forces. Nor did the Amazigh, Byzantines, Copts, and so many others fall only to Muslim warriors on the field of battle: then as now, asymmetric means, deceit, and guile played their part. 21st century jihad in the Dar al-Harb—the non-Islamic West—is being fought as often as not with asymmetrical means: airliners brought down with explosives secreted in a laptop; the individual jihadi suicide bomber; the car, the gun, the knife.

To help us recall these lessons of the past and understand their relevance for societies fighting to remain free today, the Center for Security Policy is pleased to present the newest monograph in its “Terror Jihad Reader Series”: Modern Islamic Warfare, by Dr. Harold Rhode. This publication explains how the deep Islamic faith and implacable ruthlessness of this enemy shape his tactics and strategy on both the kinetic and civilizational jihad battlefields. Dr. Rhode, who earned a Ph.D. in Islamic History, specializing in the history of the Turks, Arabs, and Iranian peoples, also studied in universities in Iran, Egypt, and Israel. He speaks Arabic, Farsi, Hebrew, and Turkish, and served as an advisor in the U.S. Department of Defense for many years.

He brings to this new monograph a breadth and quality of scholarship that is increasingly rare these days.

Dr. Rhode joined Center President Frank Gaffney for a lively discussion on the eve of the book’s release:

 

Linda Sarsour And Her “Mentor”

Linda Sarsour addressed the 54th ISNA Convention over the Fourth of July weekend.  Her speech is being criticized widely for calling on Muslims to wage “Jihad” against President Trump.

While this is justifiably being criticized, it is not the most unnerving aspect of her speech.  It is all too easy for Sarsour and her supporters to brush aside her Jihad remark by claiming she simply meant to protest and not wage a holy war.

The most controversial remarks in her 22 minute long speech came within the first 2 minutes of her speech where she gives a shout out to her “favorite person in this room” Imam Siraj Wahhaj, who Sarsour calls him a “mentor, motivator, and encourager” of hers.

But why is having Siraj Wahhaj as a “mentor” controversial?

It is controversial because Wahhaj appeared on a list of unindicted co-conspirators in the 1993 World Trade Center bombings.

A report on Wahhaj by The Investigate Project on Terrorism notes:

“Wahhaj provided testimony during the trial to defend the Blind Sheikh, Omar Abdel-Rahman, the former leader of the Egyptian terrorist organization, Gama’a al-Islamiyya. Rahman was found guilty of “conspiracy to murder President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt,” “solicitation to attack a military installation,” and of bombing conspiracy related to a plot to bomb the New York FBI headquarters along with tunnels and other landmarks. During Wahhaj’s testimony, he called the Sheik a “respected scholar,” also calling him “bold, as a strong preacher of Islam.”

In addition to these ties, Wahhaj has made extremist statements while lecturing at the Islamic Association of Northern Texas. In November of 1991, Wahhaj advocated the establishment of an Islamic State in the U.S.”

Following the Rodney King riots in Los Angeles, Wahhaj gave a sermon in which he advocated for armed Jihad in streets for the benefit of Islam.

“We don’t need to arm the people with 9mms and Uzis. You need to arm them with righteousness first. And once you arm them with righteousness first, then you can arm them (with weapons).”

“Even if we go to war, brothers and sisters — one day we will, believe me — that’s why you’re commanded (to fight in) jihad.”

Wahhaj has also stated that Muslims should “get involved in politics because politics are a weapon to use in the cause of Islam.”

We can see now that Sarsour has been a glowing mentee. Sarsour, who is being groomed as a leader of the Democratic Party, has worked hard to promote Islam and Sharia law in America.

Sarousr has describing Sharia as “reasonable” and uses utopian terms to promote Sharia.

She whitewashed Saudi misogyny.


She also claims that Mohammed was “a human rights activist,” “racial justice activist,” “environmental justice activist,” “animal rights activist,” A “feminist in his own right” and the “first victim of Islamophobia.”

This is not the first time Sarsour has embraced objectionable figures.

She attended a Jewish Voice for Peace summit, where she sat alongside PFLP terrorist, Rasmea Odeh, gave her a warm embrace, and while speaking Sarsour said she was “honored and privileged to be here in this space, and honored to be on this stage with Rasmea.”

Image via Legal Insurrection

She associates with the organization Al-Awda and its co-founder (an open and unapologetic Hezbollah supporter) Abbas Hamideh. While having recently distanced herself a bit from Al-Awda,  Sarsour has attended numerous rally’s sponsored by Al-Awda; promoted and solicited donations for their events; spoke at their rallies. She has never renounced the organization.

Sarsour and Hamideh have playfully joked around with each other about the Jewish connection to Israel.

She has also called for people to show solidarity with Muhammad Allan, a member of the terrorist group, Islamic Jihad.  Allan has a history of recruiting suicide bombers.

How long will the political left put up with those who hobnob with terrorism?

Examining Jihad in the United Kingdom

June 3 marks the United Kingdom’s third terrorist attack  in the past three months. The most recent attack occurred in London in the late evening when a vehicle drove into pedestrians on the London Bridge and proceeded to the crowded Borough Market where the terrorists attacked civilians, stabbing several. 7 people were killed and 48 injured. The British police shot and killed the three assailants on site and another dozen have been arrested in association with the attack.

Authorities have publically named the three attackers: Rachid Redouane, Khuram Butt, and Youssef Zaghba. Redouane, a Moroccan and Libyan, was unknown to security services before the attack. Butt, a Pakistani-born British citizen, was known and listed as one of the approximately 23,000 alleged jihadists living in Britain who are currently under observation on suspicion of terror ties. Zaghba, a Moroccan-Italian, was claimed to have not been “a person of interest” by British police forces prior to the attack; however, it is reported that British officials had been warned by Italian authorities about Zaghba after he was stopped at a Bologna airport on suspicion that he was heading to Syria.

On its Amaq news agency, the Islamic State (IS) claimed responsibility for the attack though currently there is little solid evidence for this assertion. A witness of the attack states that the attackers cried out “this is for Allah” during the attack verifying the attackers’ jihadist motivations.

The three attacks that have occurred in the UK over the past three months all seem to be motivated by jihad and the fight for Islam.

The attack in London mirrors Khalid Masood’s car and knife attack in Westminster on March 22. While direct ties to IS have yet to be found, it is suggested that Masood was inspired by its propaganda.

Additionally, the terrorism in London comes less than two weeks after the Manchester suicide bombing which killed 22 people. Though the bomber, Salman Abedi, acted alone he reportedly met with members associated with IS in Libya a month leading up to the attack.

Direct connections between London, Westminster, and Manchester have yet to be made. IS involvement is certainly a possibility given the leading role it has played in recent jihadist attacks in Europe.

Beginning as early as 2005 with the London bombings, terrorist groups have gained a steady presence in the UK. Terror cells such as IS and Al Qaeda have grown and built a solid foundation for themselves throughout the years, often with the assistance of Islamist groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, which works to promote sharia and materially and politically supports Sunni Jihadist groups.

This solid foundation has allowed groups like IS to move out of its clandestine operations into full-blown insurgency and as Frank Gaffney, President of the Center for Security Policy noted move “up to the next level” in their effort to impose what Gaffney called “Sharia Supremacism.”

The threat level for international terrorism in Britain has been labeled as severe. British Prime Minister Theresa May has confirmed that five terrorist plots have been thwarted in the past three months. Since 2013, British authorities have disrupted a total of 18 terrorist plots.

Though terrorism is not novel to Britain, the recent uptick in attacks may be linked to the upcoming election, scheduled to take place Thursday, June 8. This puts Britain in the public eye that can work to heighten the effect of any attack, and creates the possibility a terror attack could alter the election outcome, as was the case with the 2004 Madrid train bombings. Additionally, IS and other Islamist groups averse to Western democracy have reportedly advised civilians to forego voting.

The London attack comes as IS vies to retain control in Mosul. Some argue that its movement in Europe has to do with it “losing its empire.” However, the London attack illustrates the exact opposite.

Though IS is under pressure in places such as Mosul, it is far from losing control of its global influence. It has built a strong presence in the West and this presence is only expanding.

A large part of IS’s success has to do with its unmatched ability to recruit the youth through its successful propaganda and ability to appeal to religious idealists. Additionally, it has a strong global network that works to build and promote a global Caliphate.

As Gaffney warns, countries like the United States are on the “same trajectory” as Europe, and need to be prepared for a comparable uptick in the number and severity of jihadist attacks.

Gaffney defiant in the face of mainstream media attacks

Extract from Secure Freedom Radio, 20 March 2017:

I want to take a few minutes for what is known in government as a “point of personal privilege.” It’s what you do when someone attacks you and you need to set the record straight.

In my case, reporters for prominent national publications have gone after me as a way of attacking Donald Trump and his senior subordinates. Matthew Rosenberg of the New York Times, Eli Lake of Bloomberg, Greg Jaffe of the Washington Post and most recently Peter Beinart of the Atlantic have largely ignored the substance of lengthy interviews I have given them, in order to vilify me and the work we do at the Center for Security Policy.

In each case, it’s clear these journalists don’t approve of our research and the fact that first Candidate Trump and President Trump have arrived at similar conclusions.

As I told each of these reporters, that research has demonstrated several realities:

  • The authorities of Islam contend that the practice of their faith requires abject adherence to a political, legal and military doctrine they call Sharia.
  • It has a veneer of religiosity to it – by some estimates ten percent is concerned with pietistic practices like how often Muslims are supposed to pray, what they can eat, and the like.
  • But at the end of the day, Sharia is about power, not faith.
  • Sharia has been defined for some 1300 years by a rendering of it known as The Reliance of the Traveler.
  • This massive book makes clear that the faithful Muslim is entitled, for example, to brutalize women and otherwise treat them as property, murder homosexuals and kill Jews, apostates, females accused of adultery and anyone who “defames” Islam.
  • I impressed upon each of these journalists – as I do with audiences I address across the country – thankfully, all Muslims do not practice their faith according to Sharia.
  • That is particularly true in the United States to which many of them came from Sharia-compliant countries to escape its horrors.
  • They neither want to live under Sharia nor impose it on others.
  • That said, there is no getting around the fact that Sharia is a supremacist ideology that commands its adherents, not only to practice it unquestioningly themselves, but to compel everyone else – Muslim and non-Muslim, alike – to submit to it worldwide.
  • Sharia dictates that the faithful must engage in jihad in one form or another – violent jihad, demographic jihad, financial jihad or the subversive, stealthy kind the Muslim Brotherhood calls “civilization jihad.”
  • To the extent that Muslims conform to Sharia as the authorities of Islam and Reliance of the Traveler demand, they must reject such American principles and values as democratic self-governance, man-made laws, the freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution, respect for human rights, etc.
  • Instead, it is their duty to supplant those principles and values with Sharia.
  • For example, according to the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam adopted by 56 Muslim nations in 1990, Muslims can enjoy freedoms only to the extent allowed by Sharia.

These are statements of fact.

  • Recounting them is not “Islamophobia,” hate-mongering, racism or bigotry.
  • Rather, it is essential to an accurate understanding of the threat Sharia poses to this country and to Western civilization more generally.
  • And such an understanding is essential if we are to defend our constitutional republic from those who believe it’s Allah’s will for them to destroy it through whatever means is practicable.
  • Yet, Messrs. Rosenberg, Lake, Jaffe and Beinart promote in their respective publications and to varying degrees the false meme that pointing out such facts is evidence of hostility to all It’s said to reflect a desire to deny those in this country their constitutionally protected freedoms and keep those outside our borders from coming in.
  • They are not alone in promoting this phony narrative, of course.
  • According to documents from George Soros’ foundation released last fall by Wikileaks, “marginalizing” me and others who speak such truths has been a project for his philanthropy.
  • And Muslim Brotherhood fronts like the Council on American Islamic Relations, which was founded by Hamas in 1993, the leftist Center for American Progress and the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center have been among those determined to silence national security professionals and others who are effective in challenging Sharia-supremacism in this country and elsewhere.

Let’s be clear, by falsely accusing me and my colleagues of such views, these journalists are not just discounting the salience of our warnings. They are helping Soros and his minions suppress our freedom of expression and reinforcing what amounts to hate-mongering against us.

More importantly, to the extent that such reporters are promoting the fraudulent meme that Donald Trump and his subordinates are being unduly influenced by me or others – and are, therefore, also Islamophobes, racists, etc. – they are seeking to suppress them, too.

Indeed, that’s the transparent object of the exercise. Reporters and media outlets are making common cause with what’s been called the “Red-Green axis” for the purpose of neutralizing – if not actually removing from office – the President and his most principled and capable subordinates, such as Steve Bannon, Jeff Sessions, Kellyanne Conway, Sebastian Gorka and Steven Miller.

Time won’t permit at this juncture a point-by-point rebuttal of the various, spurious charges made against me and others by the aforementioned reporters and their ilk.

Let me take a moment, though, to address a new one leveled by Peter Beinart in his hit piece in The Atlantic concerning the so-called “denationalization” of Muslims in this country.

I had never heard this term before and certainly have never used it myself. Neither have I ever advocated what it evidently describes – seeking to strip all American Muslims of either their nationality or their rights and shutting down all mosques in this country.

Here’s what I do believe: The Sharia-supremacist infrastructure built here over the past fifty years by the Muslim Brotherhood and its fronts –in the form of mosques, Islamic societies, cultural centers and organizations targeting our government, media, churches and synagogues, schools, businesses, etc. – is an incubator for jihad. We continue to ignore it and the stated purposes of those Brotherhood operatives and their Shiite counterparts at our extreme peril.

The first order of business must be to be clear about the threat posed to our Constitution and freedoms by Sharia-supremacism. In his August 15th speech in Youngstown, Ohio, Candidate Donald Trump made clear that he gets that.

Second, we must stop importing more Sharia-supremacists. That is a purpose President Trump’s immigration pause could helpfully advance.

Third, the Trump administration must officially designate the Muslim Brotherhood as the terrorist organization it is. That would create a basis for countering those mosques and front groups it owns and/or operates in this country.

Finally, if the foregoing steps are taken, we have an opportunity to encourage the Muslim-American community to eschew the Sharia-supremacists and their efforts to promote the real denationalization agenda – namely, the Brotherhood’s practice of demanding non-assimilation in and hostility toward the United States, its culture and laws.

These are the sorts of recommendations warranted by the facts, appropriate to the challenges of our time and necessary to protect Western civilization. I am proud to espouse them and refuse to be intimidated or silenced by the relentless vilification to which I am subjected.

I am gratified that people who have arrived at a similar understanding of the facts are now in a position to ensure that those facts receive the necessary policy analysis and debate – instead of being officially suppressed in the name of “political correctness,” “multiculturalism” and “diversity sensitivity.” Whatever we call such behavior, our Sharia-adherent enemies regard it as evidence of our submission, which only emboldens them to secure that condition irreversibly through ever-more-aggressive acts of jihad.

The time has come for action in countering the jihad. Despite all the vilification, intimidation and coercive pressure aimed at silencing those of us at the Center for Security Policy, we will continue to speak the truth about Sharia-supremacism and help those in power act decisively to defeat it.