Category Archives: Uncategorized

The West has Failed to Defend its Most Innocent and Precious

slide_351726_3800657_free

external

by Christopher W. Holton

Yesterday, 22 May, Jihadists struck again in Great Britain, this time in Manchester at the famed Manchester arena.

In this latest attack, Western civilization has been exposed. We Westerners have failed to protect the most innocent and precious among us, our little girls.

Make no mistake, in Jihadi circles our inability to protect this segment of our population is being viewed with ridicule and disdain today, further emboldening a barbaric, pitiless enemy.

It can be no accident or coincidence that the Jihadis picked as a target a music concert where young teen age girls would be most prevalent.

The concert embodied much of what Sharia-compliant Islam finds abhorrent about Western culture: music, fun, frivolity, and females enjoying themselves independently in public. Wherever Sharia rules–Saudi Arabia, Taliban Afghanistan, Deobandi Pakistan, northern Nigeria, Somalia, the Islamic State, Iran and parts of regions around the globe–music is largely forbidden, women are covered and rendered to be essentially chattel.

The Jihadists chose to lash out at this event in this location on purpose. They pre-selected their victims for this act of war: teenage girls.

What does it say about our society in the West today that we seem to only be able to respond to barbaric, bloody acts of war with sadness?

It is no accident that the Jihadis targeted one of the West’s pop culture celebrations, of which our youth are so consumed. The Jihadis chose a symbol and an idol of our pop culture to target, kill and terrorize the most innocent among us.

The reaction of the Western entertainment industry tells all one needs to know about where we are as a culture and why we are so impotent in fighting back against this scourge in our midst–particularly in the all-important war of ideas.

There was singer Katy Perry lamenting on Twitter that she was “broken hearted for the state of the world.”

This isn’t about the “state of the world.” It’s about the war that is being waged upon us–not just in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, but in our own cities, our own concerts, night clubs, churches, and celebrations. It’s about Islamic jihad. We have been on the receiving end repeatedly of these barbaric attacks rooted in a savage religious doctrine.

It’s not about “hate.” It’s not about “extremism” or “radicalism.” It’s about Islamic jihad, a doctrine that goes back many centuries to the origins of sharia.

When the Nazis bombed Britain during the Blitz in 1940, was the reaction, “What is going on with the ‘state of the world’?”

For that matter, when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, raped Nanking and seized Singapore, was the world’s reaction sadness over the “state of the world?”

Or was the reaction to these acts of war resolve? Was it healthy, understandable anger and a firm intention to respond to the attacks and defeat the enemy? Of course it was. Our grandparents and great grandparents didn’t respond with teddy bears, flowers and candlelight vigils. They knew that they had a mission and a purpose to make things right and save the free world.

Don’t think for a second that what happened in Manchester could not happen in the United States. Of course it could. It has already happened in Orlando, San Bernardino, Boston, New York, Chattanooga, Little Rock, Garland, Washington, Pennsylvania, and elsewhere.

Western civilization must wake up to the fact that we are under assault. We are on the receiving end of a modern-day Blitz, like Britain was in 1940. Today’s Blitz is a very different kind of Blitz, but it is war nonetheless. It is high time that Western leaders quit regarding these attacks as “tragedies” or even “crimes.” They are acts of war. Until we acknowledge that they are acts of war, treat them as acts of war, and respond to them as acts of war, not only will they continue to escalate, but our ability to fight back will continue to be crippled by our own impotence.

Another entertainer who tweeted in response to the Manchester Jihadi attack was Miley Cyrus, who counts among her fan base many of the same young girls who are fans of Ariana Grande. Cyrus called for “No more war.”

Exactly how is that supposed to come about? The young girls massacred last night didn’t know they were at war because they have been lied to by Western leaders and entertainment icons.

The West could lay down its arms today and the Jihadis would only move in and seize control. If the Jihadis laid down their arms, their nail bombs, suicide vests and AK-47s, there would be no war.

Do you think there were any signs in London in 1940 calling for “no more war?” Who in Hawaii was shouting out “no more war” in December 1941? “No more war” in those days would have meant a plunge into darkness and death on an unimaginable scale.

We shouldn’t be calling for no more war today. We should take a clue from our ancestors, who were clearly better than we are, and call for victory.

Our collective mindset must change and it cannot change as long as massacres of civilians in attacks carried out by enemies in our streets are labeled as “tragedies” and regarded as mere “crimes.” We need a war mindset. The survival of our way of life depends upon it.

The only heroes in the current scenario are the first responders, the men and women who arrive on-scene after the carnage is through.

We also need other kinds of heroes–rough men who stand ready to visit violence on those who would harm us.

Why I Don’t Have Much Faith in Robert Mueller

by Christopher W. Holton

Robert Mueller has been appointed as a special prosecutor to investigate alleged Russian influence operations involving the 2016 US elections.

I don’t have a strong opinion on that investigation, but I do believe that all the fawning over Robert Mueller that I have seen the past 24 hours is…well…unwarranted.

That’s because I was thoroughly unimpressed by his tenure as FBI director. When selected by George W. Bush to head the FBI on 4 September 2001–one week before 9/11–the word on Mueller was that he was someone who was selected because he would not rock the boat or make too many sweeping changes.

If ever there was a wake up call to make sweeping changes, it came on 11 September 2001 and America was saddled with a guy leading the FBI who was chosen because he was a “safe” pick.

On Mueller’s watch the FBI bumbled some key counterjihad initiatives.

First of all, the FBI purged counterterrorism training materials that referred to terms like “Jihad” or “Islam” on Mueller’s watch. These decisions were arrived at because Mueller had a “stuck on stupid” habit of conducting outreach with Muslim Brotherhood operatives, some of whom winded up in jail.

Secondly, speaking of Russians, the Russians warned the FBI about the Tsarnaev brothers who then bombed the Boston Marathon and then went on a two-man jihad in the Boston area. The FBI did essentially zilch about them despite the warnings and even conducted outreach with the Boston area mosque co-founded by a man convicted on terrorism charges and described by the Justice Department as the primary Al Qaeda financier in America.

These are hardly indications of a competent guy.

Congressman Louis Gohmert was particularly tenacious in his periodic grilling of Mueller as FBI director. These videos are well worth a look to give you the details–as well as the general idea–of what I’m talking about…

Gohmert Challenges FBI Director About the Purging of Training Material

 

FBI Director Unaware Boston Mosque Founded By al Qaeda Funder

 

GOP’er Louie Gohmert And FBI’s Robert Mueller Explode Over Investigation Into Boston Bombers

Reminder: Why All The Jihadi Attacks? Why Now?

by Christopher W. Holton

Way back in February of 1998, Osama Bin Laden declared a Jihad against Jews and Crusaders in a written document entitled the “World Islamic Front Statement.”

In that document he specifically stated:

The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies — civilians and military — is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it

Despite this, with just a few notable exceptions over the years, few Muslims answered Bin Laden’s call to kill Americans.

Bin Laden was of course killed by U.S. Special Operations forces in May 2011.

Since then, we have seen many more attacks here in the U.S.

Why? If Osama Bin Laden was not able to inspire Muslims to attack and kill Americans, why are we seeing so many such attacks in recent years? Such as:

• The 15 April 2013 Boston Marathon bombing.

• The Orlando night club massacre on 12 June 2016.

• The San Bernardino massacre on 2 December 2015

• The Chattanooga massacre on 16 July 2015

• The failed Garland, Texas attack on 3 May 2015.

• The Queens, New York hatchet attack on police officers standing on a street corner on 23 October 2014.

• The Philadelphia attack on a police officer sitting in his squad car on 7 January 2016

• The Moore, Oklahoma beheading of a grandmother at the hands of a Muslim co-worker on 26 September 2014

• The 28 November 2016 terrorist vehicle attack on Ohio State University campus.

• The September 17-19 2016 bombings in New York and New Jersey.

• The Fresno, California shooting on 18 April 2017.

These are just a few of the incidents in recent years, here in the United States, that have, unfortunately, been categorized as “lone wolf” terrorist attacks by our recalcitrant news media.

In fact, the term “lone wolf” does not exist in Islamic doctrine. What DOES exist in Islamic doctrine is the fact that Jihad is an individual as well as a collective obligation.

What we are seeing are in fact individual acts of Jihad–acts of war, not criminal acts. We continue to deny this at our peril. There is a doctrinal basis for the enemy that is waging war against us. This form of warfare does not require formal ties between fighters or units (organizations) waging the war.

The concept of Jihad being an individual obligation is longstanding and has its basis in mainstream Islamic law (Shariah). We can see this from a widely-read and used text of Shariah sold annually at the convention of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the largest Muslim organization in the United States, which was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism financing prosecution in U.S. history: the U.S. v the Holy Land Foundation. In that trial, ISNA was identified as a Muslim Brotherhood front group. Interestingly, ISNA’s Canadian wing was shut down in 2013 for funneling money to a Jihadist terrorist group in Kashmir.

The name of the Shariah text is A Summary of Islamic Jurisprudence by Dr. Salih Al-Fawzan and published by Al-Maiman Publishing House in Saudi Arabia. Al-Fawzan is a member of the Board of Senior Ulema in Saudi Arabia and also a member of the Permanent Committee for Fatwa and Research in the kingdom.

IMG_0137

Volume One of this work has a chapter devoted to Jihad. On page 473, the basis in Shariah for individual Jihad is explained in detail and reveals for us why we are seeing this escalation of attacks:

For a Muslim, there are certain cases in which jihad is an individual duty:

1) When a Muslim is present at the battlefield, it is obligatory for him to fight and he is prohibited to leave the battlefield and flee.

2) When enemies attack a Muslim country…

3) When a Muslim is needed to help his fellow Muslims fight their enemies.

4) When a Muslim is called by the ruler (or the one in authority) to fight in the Cause of Allah, for the Prophet (PBUH) said:

Whenever you are called for fighting in the cause of Allah, you should go immediately.

As you can see, these four circumstances are quite broad and all could be interpreted as existing right now. But numbers 2, 3 and 4 are particularly relevant right now and serve as the doctrinal basis for why Muslims have suddenly begun rising up in violent Jihad in the West:

• The Islamic State has called on Muslims to wage Jihad because the Islamic State is under attack. This applies to 2 and 3 above.

• Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the self-proclaimed caliph of the Islamic State has issued calls on Muslims in the West to rise up in Jihad. This applies to 4 above and is the key difference between the days of Bin Laden and today.

Bin Laden may have been admired by many Muslims, but he never declared himself as a Caliph and his calls for Jihad were mostly ignored. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi’s calls are being answered because he has declared himself as the Caliph and many Muslims recognize him as such. That is why were are seeing acts of individual Jihad that we mostly did not see before.

And that is why the U.S. and the West cannot tolerate the existence of the Islamic State over the long-term. It has become the flame attracting moths. It will only gain more legitimacy and strength if it is allowed to persist. In short, it must be destroyed.

 

HERE ARE TWO IMPORTANT PASSAGES THAT APPLY TO WHAT WE ARE SEEING TODAY. The news media and our elected officials seem to take comfort when an attacker was “merely inspired” by the Islamic State (ISIS) and were not directed by the Islamic State. The opposite should actually be the case, as reflected by the two remaining passages below from two important Jihadi ideologues:

Individual jihad has recurred throughout Islamic history. In the time of the Crusades…groups of mujahideen responded to the crisis. Many isolated expeditions and groups carried out the obligation of jihad.

Individual jihad using the method of urban or rural guerilla warfare is the foundation for sapping the enemy and bringing him to a state of collapse and withdrawal. It will pave the way for the desired strategic goal.

What mandates these methods as a strategic opinion is the imbalance of forces between the resistance and the large invading alliance of unbelievers, apostates and hypocrites.

We fight them for the sake of incidents to cause political pressure and psychological collapse, so that they leave our lands. Carrying out a small operation every month against the enemy will have more of an impact on him than a big operation every year or two.

Toward a New Strategy in Resisting the Occupier
Muhammad Khalil al-Hakaymah
Al Qaeda Chief of External Operations
Killed by US air strike in Pakistan in 2008

Successful jihad will only happen within an ummah [Islamic nation or community] in which the fighting creed is firmly established and clarified. This must happen in order to attain the “Revolutionary Jihadist Climate” that will spontaneously give rise to instruments of resistance.

Violent jihad is as an individual duty obligatory upon every Muslim. All the ulema have said this…”

The Call to Global Islamic Resistance
Abu Musab al-Suri
Al Qaeda propagandist
Captured in Pakistan 2005

These two passages reflect what we are seeing today, not just in the USA, but even more so in Europe, as evidenced by the March 2017 London parliament shooting and the 20 April 2017 police shooting on the Champs Elysees.

Over a decade ago Al-Hakaymah called for frequent, small-scale attacks rather than big 9/11 type attacks. What we are seeing today was clearly part of the Jihadists’ plans.

Again, well over a decade ago, Al-Suri foresaw an environment in which individual Jihadis would rise up spontaneously in resistance without specific direction and planning from a higher, central authority. Again, that is clearly what we are seeing today.

This “Revolutionary Jihadist Climate” spontaneously giving rise to instruments of resistance is NOT something to take comfort in at all. It is problematic for law enforcement and the intelligence community and dangerous for Americans.

A terrorist cell connected directly in some way to Al Qaeda leadership can be detected, infiltrated and taken down as it communicates with and receives orders from commanders overseas. But individual Jihadis or Jihadi couples who have the intention of carrying out attacks are much more difficult to detect and are very nearly impossible to infiltrate.

The “Revolutionary Jihadist Climate” spontaneously giving rise to instruments of resistance is a relatively new, dangerous phase in the global Jihadist movement.

Abu Sayyaf Beheads Captain of Philippine Fishing Vessel

Abu Sayyaf most wanted poster

Abu Sayyaf Most Wanted

 

posted by Christopher W. Holton

Philippine officials reported Monday that fighters with the terrorist organization Abu Sayyaf have beheaded a fisherman, Noel Besconde, who was taken hostage during the hijacking of the Ramona 2 late last year. Besconde was the vessel’s captain.

Unlike Abu Sayyaf’s last four hostage beheadings, which the group carried out when ransom deadlines passed, the killing appeared to be motivated by the need for mobility. “The reason why he was beheaded is that he was delaying their movement,” said Brigadier-General Cirilito Sobejana.

http://maritime-executive.com/article/abu-sayyaf-beheads-fishing-vessels-captain

 

Three Years Ago This Week: A Symbol of a Failed Presidency

imrs

by Christopher W. Holton

Can there be anything more symbolic of the Obama administration’s failure to combat the global Jihad than Boko Haram’s kidnapping of hundreds of Christian school girls in Nigeria three years ago? Especially given the fact that Boko Haram subsequently became an Islamic State affiliate.

That’s right, one side-effect of the Obama administration allowing the Islamic State to form and metastasize was the joining of forces with the organization that then-first lady Michelle Obama so infamously “attacked” with her hashtag counterterrorism program.

This week marks the third anniversary of the mass abduction…

The BringBackOurGirls (BBOG) group on Friday began its Global Week of Action at the Unity Fountain, Abuja.

There was a low turnout of its members at the opening session of the scheduled seven day of activities to mark three years of the abduction of the Chibok schoolgirls.

About 195 of the girls are still believed to be in the custody of the Boko Haram.

http://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/more-news/228253-three-years-chibok-kidnap-bringbackourgirls-begins-seven-day-global-week-action.html

 

 

Some Thoughts on the Cruise Missile Strikes on the Syrian Regime

694940094001_5388740411001_5388725086001-vs

 

by Christopher W. Holton

I have mixed thoughts on the US cruise missile strike on the Syrian airfield last night.

These thoughts are going to appear all over the map but given the situation in the Middle East, that seems unavoidable:

• There can be no doubt that Syria’s armed forces launched the sarin attack that prompted the US cruise missile strike. The excuse that the Syrians and Russians gave that Al Nusra moved a sarin lab into the area and an air strike inadvertently released the chemicals is absurd. Sarin would burn off in such a strike and would not be dispersed in such a way as to cause mass casualties. Syrian forces have used fixed wing aircraft to launch chemical attacks in the past. It appears that the US military has intelligence, either through technical or human means–or both–about how the chemical attack was conducted.

• I hope that the cruise missile strike is strictly a punitive strike against Assad for his use of chemical weapons and not a signal that the US is getting more involved in the Syrian melee or choosing sides in a multi-sided war that has no good guys (in any significant numbers) on any side.

• America’s main interest in Syria continues to be the destruction of the Islamic State.

• The Jihadists who are arrayed against Assad are organizations that he for years supported and allowed to stage through Syria via rat lines into Iraq’s Al Anbar province. This is a case of Frankenstein’s monsters turning against Dr. Frankenstein.

• The pundits who are claiming that Assad is “secular” or a “protector of Christians” and therefore should not be targeted are ignorant. Assad has been a long-time sponsor of Jihadist terrorism. The groups that he is now fighting against were once under his protection. He is a long-time sponsor of Jihadist terrorism, particularly Hezbollah. Syria has protected and provided safe haven to Hezbollah for decades. Until September 11th, 2001, Hezbollah had racked up the highest body count of Americans of any terrorist organization in the world, including the 23 October 1983 Islamikaze bombing of the US Marine Barracks in Beirut, Lebanon. In other words, Assad is an enemy of the US and always has been. The fact that he dresses like a Westerner and is not a pious Muslim himself is completely irrelevant. Moreover, Assad has waged a propaganda campaign to convince gullible Westerners that he is a protector of Christians. It serves his purposes at this point to portray himself that way, but, remember, the organizations committing genocide against Christians in Syria today once enjoyed Assad’s protection.

• Obama was in a much better position to take action against Assad’s chemical arsenal years ago and failed to do so after speaking loudly about it. President Trump inherited a position of weakness and sought to re-establish American strength in the theater of operations.

• The Russians claimed that they had removed all of Syria’s chemical weapons back in 2014 in a deal trumpeted by the Obamanistas. They lied. The Russians lie. That is what they do.

• The key ally to the Russians and Syrians in the conflict is Iran, a mortal enemy of the US. That’s worth mentioning.

Once a Jihadi, Always a Jihadi

Zakaryia-Abdin-218x150

by Christopher W. Holton

We would do well to recognize that Jihadis are not “criminals.”

They can’t be expected to abandon their way of life like a crook or street thug after spending some time in prison.

Here we have an example of an 18-year old in South Carolina who was just apprehended trying to board a plan to join the Islamic State. Not long ago, as a juvenile, a judge let him skirt a terrorism charge and then skate on a weapons plea.

In other words, a state judge in South Carolina went easy on a known Jihadi just because he happened to be young. Perhaps that judge should talk to some of our returning vets from the campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan to find out more about teen-age Jihadis…

Alleged ISIS Recruit Paroled in Case With Terror Link

A South Carolina teenager was charged Friday with trying to hop a plane to join ISIS overseas — less than a year after he was paroled in another case with terrorism overtones.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/alleged-isis-recruit-zakaryia-abdin-paroled-case-terror-link-n741426

 

 

Al Qaeda back in the crosshairs–and with good reason

map-al-qaeda-2015

by Christopher W. Holton

There is growing evidence that, not only did Barack Obama allow the Islamic State caliphate to become established and metastasize on his watch, but he also looked the other way while Al Qaeda became resurgent.

Sean Durns over at the Washington Examiner has an article that summarizes how Al Qaeda has spread in recent years…

Al Qaeda, the group responsible for the worst terrorist attack in United States history, never really left. Instead, while news media coverage inordinately focused on the Islamic State, al Qaeda re-tooled and re-established itself for a new age.

To paraphrase Mark Twain, reports of al Qaida’s death were greatly exaggerated. Anticipatory obituaries appeared after the death of al Qaida founder Osama bin Laden on May 2, 2011. Then-President Barack Obama, for instance, said on Sept. 10, 2011 that al Qaeda was “on a path to defeat.” Similarly, then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said in July 2011 that the U.S. was “within reach of strategically defeating al Qaeda.”

But as terror analysts Daveed Gartenstein-Ross and Bridget Moreng pointed out in an April 2015 op-ed, “The Islamic State’s offensive through Iraq and Syria last year has dominated the headlines, but the jihadist group that has won the most territory in the Arab world over the past six months is Al Qaeda.”

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/al-qaeda-is-back/article/2613929

As a result, not only has Donald Trump inherited the Islamic State caliphate, he has also inherited an Al Qaeda that is rebounding.

As Trump promised in his campaign, he is taking the war to the enemy. U.S. Special Operations Forces carried out a raid on an Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), a raid that has been the subject of much partisan bickering.

The Leftist news media is predictably celebrating the raid as “botched,” which is typical of their ignorance of military operations. They have evidently grown used to drone strikes which kept national command authority’s image squeaky clean, but also failed to achieve much of anything, given the growth of both Al Qaeda and the Islamic State. To put it mildly, the media is overeager to see the new administration fail and will report everything as a failure.

Nevertheless, the raid reportedly killed two senior AQAP Jihadists, Sultan al-Dhahab and Abd-al-Ra’uf al-Dhahab. It was sufficiently successful to prompt the leader of AQAP, Qasim Al-Raymi, to issue a call for revenge against the U.S.

The media is also all-too eager to buy into the enemy propaganda that the U.S. raid killed civilian women and children. There is no evidence either way and there is sufficient precedent for women and even children to act as combatants for Jihadist organizations, so if they were killed, they are simply casualties of war.

Bill Roggio at Long War Journal has a good report on the renewed campaign against Al Qaeda…

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2017/02/us-military-says-aqap-leaders-killed-in-raid.php

 

 

Why All The Jihadi Attacks? Why Now?

by Christopher W. Holton

Way back in February of 1998, Osama Bin Laden declared a Jihad against Jews and Crusaders in a written document entitled the “World Islamic Front Statement.”

In that document he specifically stated:

The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies — civilians and military — is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it

Despite this, with just a few notable exceptions over the years, few Muslims answered Bin Laden’s call to kill Americans.

Bin Laden was of course killed by U.S. Special Operations forces in May 2011.

Since then, we have seen many more attacks here in the U.S.

Why? If Osama Bin Laden was not able to inspire Muslims to attack and kill Americans, why are we seeing so many such attacks in recent years? Such as:

• The Orlando night club massacre

• The San Bernardino massacre

• The Chattanooga massacre

• The failed Garland, Texas attack

• The Queens, New York hatchet attack on police officers standing on a street corner

• The Philadelphia attack on a police officer sitting in his squad car

• The Moore, Oklahoma beheading of a grandmother at the hands of a Muslim co-worker

These are just a few of the incidents in recent years that have, unfortunately, been categorized as “lone wolf” terrorist attacks by our recalcitrant news media.

In fact, the term “lone wolf” does not exist in Islamic doctrine. What DOES exist in Islamic doctrine is the fact that Jihad is an individual as well as a collective obligation.

What we are seeing are in fact individual acts of Jihad–acts of war, not criminal acts. We continue to deny this at our peril. There is a doctrinal basis for the enemy that is waging war against us. This form of warfare does not require formal ties between fighters or units (organizations) waging the war.

The concept of Jihad being an individual obligation is longstanding and has its basis in mainstream Islamic law (Shariah). We can see this from a widely-read and used text of Shariah sold annually at the convention of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the largest Muslim organization in the United States, which was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism financing prosecution in U.S. history: the U.S. v the Holy Land Foundation. In that trial, ISNA was identified as a Muslim Brotherhood front group. Interestingly, ISNA’s Canadian wing was shut down in 2013 for funneling money to a Jihadist terrorist group in Kashmir.

The name of the Shariah text is A Summary of Islamic Jurisprudence by Dr. Salih Al-Fawzan and published by Al-Maiman Publishing House in Saudi Arabia. Al-Fawzan is a member of the Board of Senior Ulema in Saudi Arabia and also a member of the Permanent Committee for Fatwa and Research in the kingdom.

IMG_0137

Volume One of this work has a chapter devoted to Jihad. On page 473, the basis in Shariah for individual Jihad is explained in detail and reveals for us why we are seeing this escalation of attacks:

For a Muslim, there are certain cases in which jihad is an individual duty:

1) When a Muslim is present at the battlefield, it is obligatory for him to fight and he is prohibited to leave the battlefield and flee.

2) When enemies attack a Muslim country…

3) When a Muslim is needed to help his fellow Muslims fight their enemies.

4) When a Muslim is called by the ruler (or the one in authority) to fight in the Cause of Allah, for the Prophet (PBUH) said:

Whenever you are called for fighting in the cause of Allah, you should go immediately.

As you can see, these four circumstances are quite broad and all could be interpreted as existing right now. But numbers 2, 3 and 4 are particularly relevant right now and serve as the doctrinal basis for why Muslims have suddenly begun rising up in violent Jihad in the West:

• The Islamic State has called on Muslims to wage Jihad because the Islamic State is under attack. This applies to 2 and 3 above.

• Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the self-proclaimed caliph of the Islamic State has issued calls on Muslims in the West to rise up in Jihad. This applies to 4 above and is the key difference between the days of Bin Laden and today.

Bin Laden may have been admired by many Muslims, but he never declared himself as a Caliph and his calls for Jihad were mostly ignored. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi’s calls are being answered because he has declared himself as the Caliph and many Muslims recognize him as such. That is why were are seeing acts of individual Jihad that we mostly did not see before.

And that is why the U.S. and the West cannot tolerate the existence of the Islamic State over the long-term. It has become the flame attracting moths. It will only gain more legitimacy and strength if it is allowed to persist. In short, it must be destroyed.

In closing, the concept of Jihad as an individual obligation didn’t start with Bin Laden in 1998. It has been recognized by Jihadi ideologues for many years. Here are some relevant quotes from significant Jihadis through the years, including Bin Laden:

And ulema [Muslim legal scholars] have throughout history unanimously agreed that the jihad is an individual duty…On that basis, and in compliance with Allah’s order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims: The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies—civilians and military—is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it…We, with Allah’s help, call on every Muslim who believes in Allah and wishes to be rewarded to comply with Allah’s order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it.

Osama Bin Laden
Ayman al-Zawahiri, Amir of the Jihad Group, Egypt
Abu-Yasir Rifa’I Ahmad Taha, Egyptian Islamic Group
Mir Hamzah, Jamiat ul Ulema-e-Pakistan
Fazlur Rahman, Jihad Movement in Bangladesh
23 February 1998

Indeed, every person should according to Islam prepare himself/herself for jihad, and every person should eagerly and patiently wait for the day when Allah will call them to show their willingness to sacrifice their lives. We should ask ourselves, is there a quicker way to heaven? Only Islam can save mankind from itself. And jihad on the individual and international scale will be a necessary part of this process of change.

Dr. A.M.A. Fahmy
International Islamic Forum
1949

Jihad is an obligation from Allah on every Muslim and cannot be ignored or evaded.

Hasan al-Banna
Founder of the Muslim Brotherhood
1948

The establishment of an Islamic State is obligatory. If that state cannot be established without war, then that becomes an obligation also. So it is obligatory for every Muslim to seriously strive for the return of the caliphate.

Jihad becomes an individual duty in three situations:

1. First, when two armies meet.
2. Second, when the infidels descend upon a country.
3. Third, when the Imam calls upon people to fight.
Know that when jihad is an individual duty, there is no requirement to ask permission of parents to wage jihad.

The Neglected Obligation
Muhammad Al-Salam Faraj
Leader of Jamaat al-Jihad, Egypt
1981

The Book commands Muslims to wage their war with the spirit of a religious duty and obligation. This Quranic injunction adds new facets and depths to the concept of a total war. It makes a Muslim citizen answerable both to the state and to Allah in the fulfillment of this divine obligation.

The Quranic Concept of War
Brigadier General S. K. Malik, Army of Pakistan
1979

There is agreement among scholars that when the enemy enters an Islamic land or a land that was once part of the Islamic lands, it is obligatory on the inhabitants of that place to go forth to face the enemy. But if they sit back, or are incapable, lazy, or insufficient in number, the individual obligation spreads to those around them. Then if they also fall short, it goes to those around them, and so on and so on, until the individually obligatory nature of jihad encompasses the whole world. The individually obligatory nature of jihad remains in effect until the lands are purified from the pollution of the disbelievers.

The obligation of jihad today remains an individual obligation on all until the liberation of the last piece of land that was in the hands of Muslims but has been occupied by the disbelievers.

Join the Caravan
Abdullah Yusuf Azzam
“Father of Global Jihad”
Founding member of Al Qaeda
1987

Individual jihad has recurred throughout Islamic history. In the time of the Crusades…groups of mujahideen responded to the crisis. Many isolated expeditions and groups carried out the obligation of jihad.

Individual jihad using the method of urban or rural guerilla warfare is the foundation for sapping the enemy and bringing him to a state of collapse and withdrawal. It will pave the way for the desired strategic goal.

What mandates these methods as a strategic opinion is the imbalance of forces between the resistance and the large invading alliance of unbelievers, apostates and hypocrites.

We fight them for the sake of incidents to cause political pressure and psychological collapse, so that they leave our lands. Carrying out a small operation every month against the enemy will have more of an impact on him than a big operation every year or two.

Toward a New Strategy in Resisting the Occupier
Muhammad Khalil al-Hakaymah
Al Qaeda Chief of External Operations
Killed by US air strike in Pakistan in 2008

Successful jihad will only happen within an ummah [Islamic nation or community] in which the fighting creed is firmly established and clarified. This must happen in order to attain the “Revolutionary Jihadist Climate” that will spontaneously give rise to instruments of resistance.

Violent jihad is as an individual duty obligatory upon every Muslim. All the ulema have said this…”

The Call to Global Islamic Resistance
Abu Musab al-Suri
Al Qaeda propagandist
Captured in Pakistan 2005

Can We Beat the Jihadists? Of Course We Can; Their Doctrine Says So

IMG_0137

by Christopher W. Holton

One of the most common remarks we hear is a reflection of pessimism from many Americans who doubt that we can ever defeat an enemy whose doctrine is so deeply rooted in a religion that is followed by 1.6 billion people backed by oil wealth.

Some say that victory–if it can ever be achieved at all–won’t happen in our lifetimes. Some even say it will take hundreds of years.

But history and Islamic doctrine suggest otherwise.

The fact is, Islamic doctrine hasn’t changed in around 1,400 years. During that time, Islam has been at war with its neighbors almost constantly. ALMOST.

When the Jihadists’ victims have fought back successfully, Islam has sat dormant for long periods of times.

Think about it. In recent years, apologists for Jihad have claimed that they are only waging war against us because we occupy “their lands,” Dar-al-Islam.

But this does not add up historically. For instance, take World War II in North Africa.

Back in 1941-42, the German Afrika Korps, the British 8th Army and the U.S. 7th Army all occupied and ran roughshod over Dar-al-Islam in North Africa and nary a single Jihadist lifted a dagger in anger, much less a rifle or land mine.

Why do you suppose that is?

It was because Islam was far too weak to challenge the Germans, the British or the Americans in 1942.

Can you imagine George S. Patton’s reaction to Jihadist insurgents attacking U.S. troops in those days?

This is in fact reflected in Islamic doctrine. When Islam is too weak to successfully wage Jihad, it is actually forbidden from doing so. And the best way to make Islam too weak is to become too strong for them.

Like I said, it’s in their doctrine. They’ve codified the practice of quitting the fight when the going gets too rough long ago.

A great source for this is “A Summary of Islamic Jurisprudence” by Dr. Salih Al-Fawzan, published by Al-Maiman Publishing House in Saudi Arabia.

In the entire chapter devoted to Jihad in this book of Islamic law (Shariah), the conditions under which Jihadists stop fighting is spelled out in detail based on the Sunnah of Mohammed:

• It is permissible for the ruler to agree to a truce with the disbelievers to stop fighting for a specific period if this serves the interests of Muslims, and only when it is permissible to delay jihad due to the weakness of Muslims. The Prophet (PBUH) agreed to a peace treaty with the disbelievers at Al-Hudaybiyah Peace Treaty (sic), and made a peace treaty with the Jews in Medina. However, it is permissible for the ruler to agree to a truce with the disbelievers when Muslims are strong and able to fight.

This means two things:

1. Jihadists will quit fighting when they are losing. They will seek a truce when they are losing to keep from being defeated. If the Jihadists are strong enough to successfully wage violent Jihad, they must, by their law, do so.

2. If the Jihadists enter into negotiations for a truce, that is in fact the time to “pour it on.” When we respond with weakness to the Jihadists, we compel them to continue to wage Jihad. When we respond with strength, we have a chance to either defeat them or at least compel them to cease violent Jihad for a period of time.

%d bloggers like this: