Sane Email Update Vol. 6. No.
6 September 16, 2010
Dear SANE Subscriber,
Member, or Friend:
Welcome!
A Reminder: at our SANE Works for US web site,
we have now completed our conversion from an “open source” journal on
public policy (stage one), to an open source web log (stage two), and now to a members-only
policy web log and knowledge base (stage three). Our data archives are loaded with
mineral-rich and protein-packed essays and white papers. Many readers, numbering
in the hundreds, have requested membership information. Consider this email a response
if you haven’t received a direct email response to date.. For basic membership privileges to access the web log, one should pledge $150
per month or make a one-time annual donation of $1200. For access also to the archived
knowledge base, $250 per month or $2500 annually. SANE of course is a 501c(3) tax-exempt
organization and these donations are tax deductible. (These are suggested donation
amounts and are subject to change.)
***
The following article published
today in the American Thinker speaks for itself:
Return
to the Article
September 16, 2010
The Shariah Threat to America
By David
Yerushalmi
Nine
years ago, another in a decades-long assault on the U.S. and Western interests was
carried out by mujahideen -- Islamic jihad warriors. September 11 didn't launch
this existential threat of jihad, but it certainly exposed the underbelly of American
vulnerability like no other previous attack (including the first attack on the World
Trade Center in 1993 and the bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon a decade
before that).
That vulnerable underbelly
is not, as some have contended, our "freedoms." There is no "tension," as many commentators
suggest, between freedom and security. The idea that there is a natural tension
is evidence that the pundit has adopted nihilism as the "natural" or "preferred"
political order and views every act of securing the realm a diminution of a libertine
anarchy.
In fact, political order based upon
an equal treatment before the law as grounded in a constitution founded upon the
Judeo-Christian tenet that society consists first of individuals who come together
to form a People through representative government, stands not on the shoulders
of libertarian nihilists, but on those who cherish the political order which gives
voice to the individual -- his life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.
No, the underbelly of American vulnerability exposed by
the jihadi existential threat is the modern idea that despises the fact of a discreet
and identifiable American people. Or, or to put it in a more modern parlance, our
progressive elites, who control the educational system and mainstream media, reject
national existence. These progressives despise and seek to destroy any vestige of
national sovereignty by embracing a transnationalism that would render national
sovereignty an anachronism in the face of world governmental bodies to which we
should all bow, Obama-like, such as the U.N. or the International Court of Justice
in the Hague.
In a word, this underbelly
of vulnerability is the inability to accept that the American people as a nation
unlike any other nation is worth defending and that there are enemies allied and
aligned against us precisely because of who we are. Quite simply, our enemies are
at war with us because of our nation's greatness and the world's dependence on that
greatness.
This underbelly expresses itself
in our military, law enforcement, and political elites -- Democrats and Republicans
alike -- refusing to come to terms with the existential threat we face from Islamic
terrorists. It is simply incredible that nine years post-9/11, there has been no
definitive study or analysis made public, even in unclassified form, which identifies
the "common enemy threat doctrine" of the world's Islamic terrorists.
Yet if you read their jihad tracts and listen carefully
to their pronouncements, the mujahideen from the Arabic-speaking Middle East variety
-- from the Farsi-speaking Persians, the Indian-Pakistani Urdu-speakers, and the
tribal Afghans and their Pashtu dialects to the Arabic speaking Africans of the
Maghreb, and down to the multilingual sub-Saharan tribes -- all embrace the all-encompassing
theo-political-military-legal doctrinal system of shariah as the basis for their
actions. In other words, these grossly disparate cultures with no common language,
history, or political grievances all come together to agree on one thing: Islamic
law -- shariah -- binds them to strive with life and limb (the root word in Arabic:
j-h-d) to impose a worldwide political hegemony, called the Caliphate, on the Muslim
and non-Muslim world.
Under shariah, Muslim
unbelievers are labeled apostates and warned to repent; if they do not, they are
murdered. Non-Muslims, called infidels, are given the following choices: convert,
agree to live under an apartheid-like system as a subjugated second-class resident
called ahl al-dhimma, or be prepared for the violent death of jihad.
There are two brute facts about the shariah common denominator
among the world's fully committed mujahideen and the still dangerous but lesser
committed jihad sympathizers -- collectively numbering in the hundreds of millions
according to surveys in the Muslim world.
FACT
ONE: The shariah doctrine which calls for the murder of apostates and jihad against
the infidels is not some perversion of a peaceful Islamic law.
Shariah by its own terms is a holistic doctrine and system
not subject to division such that the innocuous ritual laws -- for example, those
that regulate diet -- can be amputated and cauterized from the broader corpus which
divides the world up into the dar al-Islam (the realm of peace) and dar
al-harb (that part of the world controlled by infidels and therefore in a state
of constant war with the Muslim realm as a matter of doctrine).
FACT
TWO: U.S. law enforcement, intelligence, military, and political authorities have
not as of yet conducted a serious study and analysis of shariah as the common enemy
threat doctrine.
That
is, the authorities who have taken an oath to protect and defend our lives and our
Constitution from this nation's enemies have consciously chosen not to engage the
enemy by willfully failing to "Know the Enemy," the most fundamental rule of successful
warfare. What drives this failing is not the lack of empirical evidence of the threat
doctrine, but the politically correct fear that identifying shariah as the enemy
threat doctrine will somehow make hundreds of millions of "moderate" Muslims go
"radical" and join the jihad, either in body or in spirit via aid and comfort. Ergo,
we live in a P.C.-fear mode, ever mindful of the threat from "radicalized" "moderate"
Muslims.
All of this came to an end yesterday,
September 15, 2010, with the publication of The
Shariah Threat To America, published under the auspices of the Center for
Security Policy, the Washington, D.C.-based think tank founded in 1988 and headed
by Frank Gaffney. Mr. Gaffney was acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for International
Security Policy, the senior position in the Defense Department with responsibility
for policies involving nuclear forces, arms control, and U.S.-European defense relations,
under President Reagan.
The book-length analysis
of shariah as the enemy threat doctrine, subtitled An Exercise in Competitive
Analysis: Report of Team 'B' II, is modeled after the 1976 document known as
the "Team B Report," which was the original "exercise in competitive analysis" by
CIA outsiders who challenged the then-prevailing official U.S. government intelligence
estimates of the intentions and offensive capabilities of the Soviet Union and the
policy known as "détente" that such estimates ostensibly justified.
Quite simply, the 2010 version of Team B's competitive analysis
challenges the politically correct dogma dominating our defense, law enforcement,
and intelligence establishment elites. To wit, the terrorism conducted throughout
the world against the U.S. and its allies has nothing to do with Islam, and to the
extent it does, it is an absolute perversion of extant and authoritative Islamic
law and doctrine. As with many dogmatic positions, very little substantive analysis
of the empirical evidence supports this politically correct narrative myth, which
nine years after 9/11 continues to dominate and blind those in charge of our national
defense from knowing who our enemies are and, even more importantly, why they have
aligned against us in a global war of terror.
The
key findings of the Team 'B' II Report are as follows:
- The United States is under attack by foes who are openly
animated by what is known in Islam as shariah (Islamic law).
- Shariah is based on the Quran, hadiths (sayings of Mohammed),
and agreed interpretations. It commands Muslims to carry out jihad (holy war)
indefinitely until all of the dar al-harb (i.e., the House of War,
where shariah is not enforced) is brought under the domination of dar
al-Islam (the House of Islam -- or literally, the House of Submission,
where shariah is enforced).
- Shariah
dictates that non-Muslims be given three choices: convert to Islam and conform
to shariah, submit as second-class citizens (dhimmis), or be killed. Not all
classes are given the second option.
- Both
Islamic terrorism and pre-violent "civilization jihad" (popularly referred
to as "stealth jihad") are commanded by shariah. That is not the view of only
"extremists" and "fringe" elements "hijacking the religion," but of many
authorities of Islam widely recognized as mainstream and drawing upon orthodox
texts, interpretations, and practices of the faith.
- The
Muslim Brotherhood is the font of modern Islamic jihad. It is dedicated to
the same global supremacist objectives as those (like al-Qaeda and the Taliban)
who share its adherence to shariah but who believe that violent jihad is more
likely to more quickly produce the common goal of a global caliphate.
- The Brotherhood's internal documents make clear that civilization
jihad is subversion waged by stealth instead of violence only until such
time as Muslims are powerful enough to progress to violent jihad for the
final conquest.
- Those who work to insinuate
shariah into the United States intend to subvert and replace the Constitution
(itself a violation of Article VI) because, according to shariah, freedom of
religion, other civil liberties enshrined in the Constitution, and the rule
of man-made law are incompatible with Islam (which means "submission").
- The shariah-adherent enemy prioritizes "information
warfare," manifested in American society as political warfare, psychological
warfare, influence operations, and subversion of our foundational institutions.
Our government structure fails to recognize this strategy because it is focused
so exclusively on kinetic attacks. As a result, the United States remains
crippled in its inability to engage this enemy effectively on his primary battlefield.
- The Brotherhood exploits the atmosphere
of intimidation created by Islamic terrorists, thus inculcating in the West
a perceived need for "outreach" to the "Muslim community," which, in turn,
opens up opportunities to pursue a campaign of stealthy infiltration into
American and other Western societies. The combined effect of such "civilization
jihad" and jihadism of the violent kind may prove to be considerably more dangerous
for this country and other Western societies than violent jihad alone.
- The Brotherhood has succeeded in penetrating our educational,
legal, and political systems, as well as top levels of government, intelligence,
the media, and U.S. military, virtually paralyzing our ability to respond
effectively.
- Muslim Brotherhood organizations
conduct outreach to the government, law enforcement, media, religious community,
and others for one reason: to subvert them in furtherance of their objective,
which is implementation of Islamic Law.
- An
informed and determined counter-strategy to defend the Constitution from shariah
can yet succeed -- provided it is undertaken in the prompt, timely, and comprehensive
manner recommended by Team B II.
While
this Team 'B' report will not, and should not, be the final word on the analysis
of the enemy and its threat doctrine, it is by light-years the most rigorous and
empirically true analysis conducted to date. All of us who worked on the Team 'B'
II Report tirelessly over many months can only hope those in positions of authority
will finally break free of the PC chains of fear and denial and engage this competitive
analysis seriously. Their oath of office demands no less.
The
members of Team 'B' II, of which I am honored to have been a part, include some
of the best minds on national security, defense, and the law this country has to
offer. They include:
- Lieutenant
General William G. "Jerry" Boykin, U.S. Army (Ret.), former Deputy Undersecretary
of Defense for Intelligence
- Lieutenant
General Harry Edward Soyster, U.S. Army (Ret.), former Director, Defense Intelligence
Agency
- Christine Brim -- Chief Operating
Officer, Center for Security Policy
- Ambassador
Henry Cooper -- former Chief Negotiator, Defense and Space Talks, former Director,
Strategic Defense Initiative
- Stephen C.
Coughlin, Esq. -- Major (Res.) USA, former Senior Consultant, Office of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff
- Michael Del Rosso
-- Senior Fellow, Claremont Institute and Center for Security Policy
- Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. -- former Assistant Secretary of Defense
for International Security Policy (Acting), President, Center for Security
Policy
- John Guandolo -- former Special
Agent, Counter-Terrorism Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation
- Brian Kennedy -- President, Claremont Institute
- Clare M. Lopez -- Senior Fellow, Center for Security Policy
- Admiral James A. "Ace" Lyons -- U.S. Navy
(Ret.), former Commander-in-Chief, Pacific Fleet
- Andrew
C. McCarthy -- former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney (Southern District of New
York); Senior Fellow, National Review Institute; Contributing Editor, National
Review
- Patrick Poole -- Consultant to
the military and law enforcement on antiterrorism issues
- Joseph E. Schmitz -- former Inspector General, Department
of Defense
- Tom Trento -- Executive Director,
Florida Security Council
- J. Michael Waller
-- Annenberg Professor of International Communication, Institute of World
Politics, and Vice President for Information Operations, Center for Security
Policy
- Diana West -- author and columnist
- R. James Woolsey -- former Director of
Central Intelligence
David
Yerushalmi is a litigator and serves as general counsel
to the Center for Security Policy. He is considered a leading expert on Islamic
law and its intersection with Islamic terrorism and national security and was a
member of Team 'B' II.
Page
Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/09/the_shariah_threat_to_america.html
at September 16, 2010 - 01:13:34 PM CDT
***
As always, those of us at
the Society
of Americans for National Existence continue our focus:
To strengthen America’s national existence by
probing a new and deeper discussion of the issues others fear or just avoid. We
are convinced that with integrity of purpose and thought, graced with civility,
the SANE message will pierce the fog that lies heavy on the ground.
All
the best,
.
SANE Staff
Society
of Americans for National Existence (SANE)(sm)
|
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment