The global Jihadist movement relies heavily on information operations to advance their cause–to establish rule under sharia worldwide.
They have become very adept at conducting information operations, to the point that some experts have determined that they have information dominance over the West, and America’s bureaucratized countertterror apparatus in particular.
One of their key weapons in the information battle space is a term that has gained currency with the Left and the media in the West: Islamophobia.
Before we begin our commentary on the subject of Islamophobia, we must draw your attention to an excellent video on the subject just posted by the indispensable Robert Spencer of http://www.jihadwatch.com:
Spencer covers the history and use of the term Islamophobia with brevity and authority.
We’d like to focus a little more on the organization that hatched this misleading and outright damaging term.
Islamophobia was coined by the International Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT), a northern Virginia-based Muslim Brotherhood think tank with a history of ties to terrorism. Here some facts about IIIT:
• IIIT was identified as a Muslim Brotherhood organization in the largest terrorism financing prosecution in US history, the US v the Holy Land Foundation.
• IIIT was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial, a prosecution in which all defendants were convicted on all counts for providing material support to Jihadist terrorists. It was the intention of the Dallas US attorney’s office to prosecute the unindicted co-conspirators in that trial, but the then-new attorney general, Eric Holder shut it down.
• IIIT was a major financial supporter–the largest donor in fact–of the Islamic Committee for Palestine, a front group for the terrorist organization Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The Islamic Committee for Palestine was founded by Sami al-Arian, who was convicted on terrorism charges and deported. The organization itself was shut down by the US government.
• IIIT employed Bashir Musa Nafi, one of the original founders of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Nafi was deported in 1996.
What all of this adds up to is that the term Islamophobia was invented as a weapon of Jihadist propaganda.
So, when you see a journalist, blogger, television network or politician in the West start accusing people of Islamophobia, they are in fact parroting enemy propaganda, helping the terrorists with their overall war effort.
by Christopher W. Holton
Vice President for Outreach
Center for Security Policy
The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) has been tied to HAMAS, a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization. CAIR has also been named a terrorist organization itself by US ally the United Arab Emirates (UAE) due to the fact that it is a wing of the Muslim Brotherhood, the granddaddy of all modern Sunni Jihadist organizations.
Now, CAIR is conducting “outreach” to conservative groups and a major Tea Party organization in the state of Georgia.
In view of this development, we thought it important to detail CAIR’s disturbing history, members, officers and ties ahead of more of its “outreach” efforts in Georgia:
• CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the US v. Holy Land Foundation, the largest terrorism financing prosecution in US history.
• The Holy Land Foundation was a Texas-based charity whose officers were sentenced in May 2009 to between 15 and 65 years in prison for funneling over $12 million to Hamas. One of the sentenced officers, Ghassan Elashi, is the founder of CAIR’s Dallas chapter. Elashi’s illegal activities took place while he was affiliated with CAIR.
• CAIR opened its first office in Washington, D.C. with the help of a $5,000 grant from the Holy Land Foundation.
• In a formal letter to Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona dated 28 April 2009, the FBI stated that during the Holy Land Foundation trial, “evidence was introduced that demonstrated a relationship among CAIR, individual CAIR founders (including its current President Emeritus and its Executive Director) and the Palestine Committee. Evidence was also introduced that demonstrated a relationship between the Palestine Committee and HAMAS, which was designated as a terrorist organization in 1995. In light of that evidence, the FBI suspended all formal contacts between CAIR and the FBI.”
• In March 2011, Muthanna al-Hanooti, one of CAIR’s directors, was sentenced to a year in federal prison for violating U.S. sanctions against Saddam’s Iraq.
• In January of 2011, the CAIR California chapter published a poster promoting a conference called “Know Your Rights and Defend Our Communities.” That poster prominently featured the following slogan: “BUILD A WALL OF RESISTANCE DON’T TALK TO THE FBI.”
• On March 22, 1994, During a panel discussion at Barry University in Florida, CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad said: “I used to support the PLO, and I used to be the President of the General Union of Palestine Students which is part of the PLO here in the United States, but after I researched the situation inside Palestine and outside, I am in support of the Hamas movement more than the PLO.”
• On February 2, 1995, U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White named CAIR Advisory Board member and New York imam Siraj Wahhaj as one of the “unindicted persons who may be alleged as co-conspirators” in Egyptian Islamic Group leader “Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdel Rahman’s foiled plot to blow up numerous New York City monuments.
• On April 19, 1996, in its first published report on alleged anti-Muslim discrimination, titled “The Price of Ignorance,” CAIR cited the arrest of Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman (the Blind Sheikh), the Egyptian cleric serving a life sentence for conspiracy to blow up New York landmarks in 1993, and the detention of senior Hamas leader Musa Abu Marzuq, as “incidents of bias and violence” against Muslims in the U.S.
• On July 4, 1998, former CAIR chairman Omar M. Ahmad, told Fremont, California’s daily newspaper, The Argus, that “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant, he said. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.”
• In October 1998, CAIR demanded the removal of a Los Angeles billboard describing Osama bin Laden as “the sworn enemy.” According to CAIR, this depiction was “offensive to Muslims.”
• In 1993, CAIR spokesperson Ibrahim Hooper told the Minneapolis Star-Tribune that “I wouldn’t want to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future. … But I’m not going to do anything violent to promote that. I’m going to do it through education.”
• In September 2003, CAIR’s former Community Affairs Director, Bassem Khafagi, pled guilty to three federal counts of bank and visa fraud and agreed to be deported to Egypt. Federal investigators said that a group Khafagi founded, the Islamic Assembly of North America, had funneled money to activities supporting terrorism and had published material advocating suicide attacks against the United States. Khafagi’s illegal activities took place while he was employed by CAIR.
• In 2004, CAIR-Northern Virginia director Abdurahman Alamoudi pled guilty to terrorism-related financial and conspiracy charges in 2004, which resulted in a 23-year prison sentence.
• In 2006, the co-founder of CAIR’s parent organization, IAP (Islamic Association for Palestine), Sami Al-Arian, was sentenced to 57 months in prison on terrorism charges for financing Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a designated terrorist organization according to the US State Department.
• On August 12, 2006 CAIR helped to coordinate a number of demonstrations in support of Hezbollah and “resistance” groups fighting American forces in Iraq.
• Randall Todd Royer, who served as a communications specialist and civil rights coordinator for CAIR, trained with Lashkar-I-Taiba, an al Qaeda-tied Kashmir organization that is listed on the State Department’s international terror list. He was also indicted on charges of conspiring to help al Qaeda and the Taliban battle American troops in Afghanistan. He later pled guilty to lesser firearm-related charges and was sentenced to twenty years in prison on April 9, 2004. Royer’s illegal activities took place while he was employed by CAIR.
• Onetime CAIR fundraiser Rabih Haddad was arrested on terrorism-related charges and was deported from the United States due to his subsequent work as Executive Director of the Global Relief Foundation, which in October 2002 was designated by the U.S. Treasury Department for financing al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. Haddad raised money for the Ann Arbor, Michigan chapter of CAIR.
• On April 20, 2002: Nihad Awad addressed an anti-Israel rally in Washington D.C. while standing next to Hezbollah flag.
• On October 12, 2001: Ghazi Kankan, executive director of CAIR’s New York office at the time, defended Hamas’s targeting of Israeli civilians. He told the Jewish Week that, like Hamas, he considered all Israelis over the age of 18 to be “military” because “they are all reserves.”
• In 2014, US ally the United Arab Emirates officially designated CAIR
as a terrorist organization.
Given the number of individuals associated with CAIR who have been convicted on terrorism-related causes, as well as the disturbing associations and statements from CAIR and its officials, it is very difficult to take their views seriously.
Georgia conservative and Tea Party leaders must be made aware of the facts surrounding CAIR.
Great Britain just published the results of its exhaustive investigation into the Muslim Brotherhood and it has joined the growing chorus of nations–including Islamic Arab nations such as the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Egypt–who have fingered the Muslim Brotherhood for ties to Jihadist terrorism.
The Obama administration in the US now stands lone in its close, warm ties to what can only be properly described as the granddaddy of all modern Sunni Jihadist organizations. This illustrates the increasing degree to which Obama has become isolated in the world amid appearing completely out of touch with the reality of the Jihadist threat.
While even the overtly socialist Prime Minister of France, Francois Hollande, has embarked upon a crackdown against Jihad in France and an escalated air campaign against the Islamic State in the Middle East, the American president seems all too typically aloof and detached from what has become the overwhelming security concern of the American people.
The Obama administration has had close ties to American Muslim Brotherhood organizations since before he was even elected in 2008. Prominent members of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) have served in the Obama campaigns and even in the Obama administration.
What most Americans still do not know–including most Republicans–is that ISNA is Muslim Brotherhood and was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest successful terrorism financing prosecution in U.S. history: the U.S. v. the Holy Land Foundation. It was the intention of the Dallas U.S. attorney’s office to prosecute ISNA–along with other Muslim Brotherhood unindicted co-conspirators, notably the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), but then-newly minted Attorney General Eric Holder shut the prosecution down.
This was followed up by Obama’s speech to the Muslim world from Al Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt back in 2009, in which he insisted that the Egyptian regime–a long-time U.S. ally–allow members of the Muslim Brotherhood to sit in the front row.
The Obama administration’s ties to an organization that has been increasingly exposed as a Jihadist terrorist organization cannot be overemphasized.
Up to this point, UK Prime Minister David Cameron has gone to great lengths to provide a unified public front with Obama on security issues, but the evidence gathered by his government apparently left him with no choice but to break ranks with Obama when it came to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Among the main findings of the British report, which expose the degree to which Obama has sympathized with and found common cause with a supremacist, totalitarian organization and doctrine:
• The Muslim Brotherhood seeks the unification of the Islamic world under a Caliphate ruled by Shariah. (This is the exact same goal as the Islamic State, Al Qaeda, and every other Jihadist organization in the world.)
• The Muslim Brotherhood has a clandestine, secretive cell structure around the world.
• The Muslim Brotherhood has a large, sophisticated international clandestine network of commercial enterprises, student organizations, small businesses and charities.
• HAMAS, a vicious Jihadist group designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the US government, is in fact the Palestinian wing of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood outside of the Palestinian areas, such as the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, provide funding to HAMAS in support of its violent Jihad against Israel.
• The Muslim Brotherhood’s founding fathers and ideological leaders, notably Hassan al Banna and Sayid Qutb, endorsed and supported violent attacks to promote the Muslim Brotherhood’s goals. Both of these monsters remain revered by the rank and file members, as well as leaders, of the Muslim Brotherhood today. Their views on the use of violence inspired Al Qaeda and continue to inspire violent Jihad today.
• Some Muslim Brotherhood leaders condemned the 9/11 attacks–but only in the context of claiming that it as a false flag conspiracy designed to give the U.S. an excuse to wage war against the Islamic world. In other words, according to these Muslim Brotherhood leaders, Al Qaeda didn’t carry out the attacks, America did.
• The Muslim Brotherhood leadership today opposes violence only when and where the use of violence would be counterproductive and stand in the way of their goals. When they see violence as serving their purposes, they absolutely support violent Jihad.
• The Muslim Brotherhood has been embedding itself in the West for over 50 years with the establishment of front organizations and clandestine groups.
• Muslim Brotherhood charities raise funds in the UK and throughout Europe, at least some of these charities have been implicated in funding terrorism.
In conclusion, the Obama administration stands alone in its close ties with, and support for, an international Jihadist organization that is conducting subversive, seditious activity in the U.S. and the West.
The mantra from the Obama administration has always been that there is no connection between Islam and violence.
In a move eerily reminiscent of re-education programs of monstrous communist regimes from Stalin to Mao to Pol Pot, Obama even had US federal law enforcement training programs purged of any and all materials that point out the aspects of Islamic doctrine which are violent.
Even the Pope has adopted the same mantra, with the astonishingly ignorant claim that “authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Quran are opposed to every form of violence. {Emphasis added}
The problem is, no one who promotes such nonsense has actually bothered to study Islamic doctrine.
But we don’t have to go back over 1400 years of Islamic doctrine to view the evidence of a connection between Islam and violence. All we have to do is to visit the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) web site and view videos of Islamic clerics delivering sermons in mosques encouraging their flocks to commit acts of terrorism and violence. There are scores of such videos.
It’s one thing for a Christian religious leader or an ignorant Western politician to proclaim that there is no connection between Islam and violence. But when actual Islamic clerics make that connection for us, there is absolutely nothing left to prove.
Either our political and religious leaders are lying to us, or they are ignorant. No other possibility exists.
Here is link to a 5-minute video clip that MEMRI posted 2 days ago of an Islamic cleric at a mosque brandishing a dagger (it actually looks like a bayonet to me) during his sermon and encouraging the worshippers to stab Jews. In view of the recent rash of stabbing attacks against Israeli citizens by Muslims, this cannot be dismissed as mere symbolism…
The internet has literally been littered with news reports about a new propaganda campaign being waged by the head of the Council on American Islamic Relations’ (CAIR) Chicago director.
The man’s name is Ahmed Rehab and his methodology has been to run advertising on buses to change the public perception of the word “Jihad.”
Rehab has chosen two of the most liberal cities in America in which to conduct his campaign so far: Chicago and San Francisco.
The name of the campaign is “MyJihad” and it aims to convince Americans that Jihad only means “to struggle” or, more specifically, an internal, personal struggle. Rehab claims that this is the “true” meaning of Jihad.
Unfortunately for Rehab, he is only partially correct and any campaign that claims that the term Jihad only means an internal, personal struggle amounts to disinformation. The dualistic nature of Islam, in this case as it applies to the meaning of “Jihad,” is well documented both in historical Islamic doctrine and in contemporary use of the term.
And Jihad definitely does not only mean an internal, personal struggle. In fact, the most widespread meaning of the term that is of particular interest to Westerners who are threatened by Jihad does in fact entail violence.
A false and misleading statement has been attributed to the San Francisco chapter head of CAIR, Zahra Billoo:
“A common misconception of the word jihad is that it means armed struggle or holy war, and that is something that has been perpetrated by many who’ve made careers out of pushing anti-Muslim sentiment.”
Such a meaning for Jihad has nothing to do with anyone with an “anti-Muslim sentiment.” It has everything to do with Islam itself.
Let us examine definitions of Jihad from two authoritative sources.
Jihad According to the Quran
****************************************
*******************************
The first is the Quran itself. In this case, specifically The Noble Qu’ran, translated into English by two scholars: Dr. Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali, PhD, professor of Islamic Faith and Teachings at the Islamic University, Al-Madinah Al-Munawwarah, Saudi Arabia and Dr. Muhammad Mushin Khan of the same institution. The Noble Qu’ran was published by Darussalam Publishers and Distributors, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. It has been catalogued by King Fahad National Library. On page 818, in a glossary accompanying the text of the Quran, The Noble Qu’ran provides the following definition of Jihad:
“Jihad: Holy fighting in the Cause of Allah or any other kind of effort to make Allah’s Word superior. Jihad is regarded as one of the fundamentals of Islam.”
Can the Quran itself be promoting “anti-Muslim sentiment” as CAIR’s Zahra Billoo asserts?
Jihad According to Shariah
Our second source is Reliance of the Traveler: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law.
Reliance of the Traveler is one of the world’s most widely read manuals of Shariah law. It has been endorsed by a variety of Islamic authorities, including Al Azhar University in Cairo, IIIT (International Institute of Islamic Thought) in Herndon, Virginia, the Fiqh Council of North America, the Islamic Fiqh Academy in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, the Mufti of the Jordanian Armed Forces andthe Imam of the Mosque of Darwish Pasha in Damascus, Syria.
These can hardly be termed as those pushing “anti-Muslim sentiment” as Billoo claims.
On page 599 of Reliance of the Traveler, readers can find the following passage:
o9.0 JIHAD
(O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion…
The scriptural basis for jihad, prior to scholarly consensus is such Koranic verses as:
(1) “Fighting is prescribed for you” (Koran 2:216);
(2) “Slay them wherever you find them” (Koran 4:89);
(3) “Fight the idolators utterly” (Koran 9:36);
and such hadiths as the one related by Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said:
“I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And their final reckoning is with Allah”;
and the hadith reported by Muslim,
“To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it.”
Jihad According to Terrorists
If Jihad truly means to “struggle” and not warfare to establish the religion, how does CAIR explain the names of all these terrorist organizations?
A 4-minute posthumous call to Jihad by American-born Anwar al Awlaki. Keep in mind that, before he became head of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, Awlaki had been an Imam at mosques in San Diego, Denver and northern Virginia and was regarded as a great “moderate” who was a favorite show pony for “outreach” programs. He was invited to the Pentagon. He delivered sermons to the Congressional Muslim Staffers Association on Capitol Hill. Prominent CAIR officers, employees and members attended these sermons. At least one former CAIR employee who attended Awlaki’s sermons on Capitol Hill in Washington DC is now in jail on terrorism charges:
In the wake of the killing of Osama Bin Laden, there is a debate as to the extent that Bin Laden was operationally in charge of Al Qaeda. There have also been those who have naively speculated that Bin Laden’s death means an end to the war on terror or even Jihad altogether.
It seems apparent that Bin Laden was actively communicating with Al Qaeda elements, but it wasn’t in real time. He used a system of couriers to relay messages via email and the internet, but went to great pains to securely communicate. This means no direct internet connection and no phones, cellular, satellite or landline.
This would preclude any real dialogue with operators and cells. It seems as if Bin Laden was able to communicate in general terms about his “commander’s intent,” but was in no position to take part in detailed planning. Bin Laden wanted his followers to carry out mass casualty attacks, he wanted the attacks to occur on important anniversaries and holidays, and he was especially interested in attacks on trains, which is not hard to believe given that Jihadists have been targeting trains in the UK, Spain, France, Germany and India in recent years.
Unfortunately, what this probably means is that the loss of Bin Laden will not operationally hinder Al Qaeda. It may hurt the group’s morale and it may erode some of the group’s financial and moral support, but it might also energize those who seek to avenge Bin Laden’s death at the hands of US special operations forces.
Al Qaeda doctrinal leader Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri still lives and he has been by far more active in communicating in recent years than Bin Laden was. Anwar Al-Awlaki is still at large in Yemen and he has been the one who has successfully trained and inspired Jihadi attacks on US targets in recent years, such as the Fort Hood Jihadi murderer, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the Underwear Bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, Little Rock Jihadist murderer, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad (aka Carlos Bledsoe) and the unsuccessful plot to send bombs embedded in printer cartridges from Yemen to the US on board cargo and passenger airliners.
Muslim Brotherhood apologist Peter Bergen maintains that Awlaki is a small player and that the war on terror should end with the killing of Bin Laden, but this is hardly surprising that Bergen essentially built a career around Bin Laden, including perpetuating the illusion that Bergen himself was some sort of expert on Jihad because he had managed to spend a few hours with Bin Laden in a tent 13 years ago or so.
On top of all this, there is the additional issue of groups and organizations sympathetic to Al Qaeda and allied with Al Qaeda, but not actually part of Al Qaeda. Two significant organizations fall into this category: the Taliban and Lashkar e Taiba.
The Taliban need no introduction, but many people do not realize two things about the Taliban: Taliban leader Mullah Omar specifically declined to merge with Al Qaeda and refused to take an oath of loyalty to Bin Laden. Because of this, Bin Laden exercised no operational control over the Taliban. Second, the failed Times Square bomb plot appears to have been a Taliban operation, vice an Al Qaeda operation: https://terrortrendsbulletin.wordpress.com/2010/05/02/new-york-times-square-car-bomb-bulletin/
The significance of this is that the Taliban are willing and able to attempt terrorist attacks here in America. Adding to this worry is the recent news that six American Muslims, including Imams at a Florida mosque, appear to have been raising money for the Taliban: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1387185/Imam-Florida-mosque-sons-arrested-charges-financing-Taliban-Pakistan.html Moreover, there is no ignoring the Taliban’s recent bombing attack against a Pakistani paramilitary training facility in northern Pakistan, which was declared as vengeance for Bin Laden’s death–with the promise of more to come.
Unfortunately, the slaying of Osama Bin Laden will have no operational impact on Taliban operations.
Then there is Lashkar e Taiba, the Pakistani Jihadi terrorist group which carried out the horrific Mumbai attacks. Again, this is a group that is often misidentified as an Al Qaeda affiliate, but, like the Taliban, LeT is a separate, standalone organization that declined to pledge any oath to Osama Bin Laden.
What does LeT have to do with America? Two things:
1. The Jihadist who conducted recon ahead of the Mumbai attacks was an American from Chicago named David Coleman Headley:
Members of the group fought against US forces in Iraq back in 2004. The group is known to have a presence in Germany and the UK as well.
These are just two examples of Jihadi organizations that pose a threat to America that will not be impacted at all by the death of Bin Laden.
Then there is the “lone wolf” threat, the so-called “sudden jihad syndrome” threat in which enraged Muslims commit acts of violence because they were inspired by organizations like Al Qaeda and people like Osama Bin Laden. There have been examples of this, the most recent being the case of a Yemeni-American who tried to storm the cockpit door of an American Airlines flight whilst screaming “AllahuAkbar!” Fortunately, the reinforced door was securely locked and there were a retired Secret Service agent and retired police officer on board who subdued the subject:
What of Al Qaeda itself? At least four Al Qaeda affiliates have either declared their intent to avenge Bin Laden’s death or issued veiled threats to carry on with the Jihad:
Somalia’s Al Shabaab, including Daphne, Alabama-born Jihadist, Abu Mansur Al-Amriki, mourned Bin Laden’s passing in a radio communication, confirming, incidentally, Al Qaeda’s role in fighting US forces in Somalia way back in 1993:
And, finally, Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (which has been especially active in hostage taking in recent months and years) and Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, both vowed to carry on with Jihad after Bin Laden’s death:
Hezbollah has not targeted Americans with terrorism in recent years, but they did take an active combat and advisory role against US forces in Iraq and they are believed to have a substantial presence inside the USA. Most recently, reports have once again surfaced of the group’s presence along the American-Mexico border:
What could touch off renewed attacks by Hezbollah? A confrontation with Iran for one.
The same can be said for the Palestinian Jihadist terrorist group HAMAS. Like Hezbollah, HAMAS is greatly dependent on Iran for financing, arms and training. Any confrontation with Iran carries with it the danger of HAMAS terror attacks. Many Americans do not remember that Palestinian terrorists used to target Americans with regularity. They stopped, not out of love for America, but to avoid being targeted by American power. HAMAS has the same basic goals as Al Qaeda and issued a eulogy honoring Bin Laden in which they bestowed upon him the honorific title “Sheikh:”
HAMAS is known to have conducted extensive fundraising inside America and, like Hezbollah, is believed to have a major presence inside our country.
So, we have no answers but certainly some educated guesses:
• Bin Laden was unlikely to have played an active operational role in Al Qaeda in recent times; most likely he was limited to expressing “commander’s intent” via intermediaries with little or no direct contact with operatives around the globe.
• The Jihad will of course continue. Jihad is not limited to a few groups and it didn’t commence on September 11th, 2001. It’s been going on for a millennium and is based on Shariah doctrine, not just the personal philosophy of Osama Bin Laden. Jihad, however, can be made dormant for a period through strong resistance since, according to Shariah, Muslims are specifically not supposed to wage Jihad if they are not strong enough to do so, therefore the situation is far from hopeless.
Al Qaeda and its affiliates have pledged to continue the Jihad and allied Jihadist groups still pose an independent threat above and beyond Al Qaeda. In fact Bin Laden’s death may ironically spur them to action. This says nothing of the threat from Jihadists that were not aligned with Bin Laden, such as Hezbollah and HAMAS, who pose an ongoing, if dormant, threat to Americans.
Now is no time to rest or become complacent. Just the opposite.
Muslim Aid was supposed to be one of the “good” Muslim charities. Prince Charles and Prime Minister Gordon Brown had heaped praise on them for the good work they had done, as the good folks at Jihad Watch and Weaselzippers point out:
Why do so many Muslim charities fund Jihadist terrorists?
Because it is their religious duty to do so.
There are 8 approved destinations for “zakat” (a form of tithing in Islam). Number 7 is those fighting in the way of allah. This is spelled out clearly in Islamic law texts, such as “Reliance of the Traveler.”
Terror Trends Bulletin 