Islamic Terrorism and Public Fear

Dr. Babu Suseelan

Our lifestyle has changed drastically to accommodate fear producing, life threatening criminal culture of Jihadis during the past 20 years. We experience deadly Jihadi terrorism in New York, in the Middle East, London, Paris, Mumbai and Madrid. Last week several innocent Hindus, Christians, and Kafirs were murdered in Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Indias and Bangladesh. The Islamic criminals and Jihadi terrorists are terrorizing innocent citizens in every democcratic nations in every nook, cranny, peak and valley. And why not? Innocent people are being robbed, raped, assaulted, murdered, battered, stabbed and maimed and the average arrest clearance record of these Jihadi criminals by Islamic government is shameful.

Gone are the days when our culture, and liberal tradition which, was a trademark of the great democratic nations. The social problem, fear and anxiety caused by Jihadists and Muslim criminals is a fallout tragedy of our compromising attitude, indifference, apathy and passive lifestyle.

Marxist-phony-liberal intellectuals are in a hurry to accuse infidels suffering from Phobia.

Yes, we are afraid of Jihadi-terrorists and Muslims with apocalyptic criminal ideology. Fear is natural, warranted and necessary for human survival from violence, dangerous animals and calamities. Phobia is an unnatural and irrational fear. Anxiety is unnecessary anticipated worry about the unknown.

Because of the criminal culture of Jihadis, we have become a nation that is wary of Jihadis next door. We are afraid to associate with their apocalyptic culture. Our fear is warranted.

The public has natural, rational genuine fear of Islamists hiding in our communities with hidden agendas. Muslims in general are phobic and paranoiac towards Kafirs. Islamic irrational paranoia and phobia are projected skillfully on to infidels by Jihadis.

Fear created by Jihadis through terrorism and violence is clear and alarming. jihadi terrorist acts and their scare mongering preachers can electrify infidels with fear. There is a logical reason for our fear of jihadis living next door. our fear and paranoia cannot easily be undone unless Muslims are willing to reform Islam and change their fear producing Jihadi terrorism. Fear of Islam is nothing new.It is thousands of years old. Islam promotes fear, and deviant amplifying jihadi communities around the world repeats and repeats fear producing heinous crimes. Recently jihadis have created a self-sustaining cycle of fear because of their irrationality and paranoia of infidels.

To protect our life, limbs and liberty from jihadi terrorists, from the petty sociopath leaders of Islamic terrorist groups who violate our lives, and those mullahs who amplify our fears, it is natural and rational to express our fear against Islamists living in our communities.

jihadis want psychologically devastate us and our children. Infidels are venerable, as individuals and as a population. Those who are in denial, ignorant or indifferent, will deny their fear of Jihadis.

Throughout history, non-Muslims have been intrigued by the deviant behavior of Muslims. Islam wants to establish Dar-ul-Islam around the world and want to make non-Muslims as Dhimmis. Violence and terrorism are justified and used as an Islamic legitimate ways to conquer infidel lands and subdue non-Muslims and collect Jaziiya (religious Tax) from those who refuse to convert to Islam. The Islamic doctrine indoctrinates Muslims at an early age that infidels are evil and they should be either converted or slaughtered in the name of Allah. The purpose of Muslims is to correct this evil infidels and strive toward Dar-ul-Islam. Since Muslims used Allah’s dictates in the Koran as the criteria for judging others, infidels who did not conform to Islamic standards was considered “bad”.

For many centuries this concept was part of Islamic dogma and so was given additional authority by Islamic religious leaders and rulers. Even today the Islamic principle of hatred against kafirs and infidels are bad are accepted by Muslims in all walks of life, including Islamic professionals.

The concept that non-Muslims are evil make Muslims consider the world as a battle ground for Dar-ul Islam against Dar-ul-Harb. Jihadis constantly resort to violence, terrorism, homicide bombing and all destructive means for supremacy over infidels.

The concept of duality in Islam can be found deeply embedded in Islamic tradition. It exists in the Koran, Hadith and Sura. If we fail to understand this Islamic mindset, we are doomed to eventual defeat against Islamic violence and Jihadi terrorism. Jihadis hiding in our communities must be regarded with suspicion. Law abiding non-Muslim citizens and law enforcement personnel must always be on guard for signs of violent Jihadi activity and ready to head of such tendencies as they appear.

The methods required to deal with such perverse Islamic tendencies must be powerful ones. Saving citizens from Jihadi terrorism calls for vigorous measures.

Every time we bargain with our deadly criminals, we are compromising with our enemies, every time we show leniency we are compromising with terrorists. Our corrupt political leaders and phony intellectuals appease the masses with political rhetoric and empty slogans year after year, but criminals march ahead with their murder mayhem and the causalities increase.

Muslim Rights and Wrongs

Over the last decade, the treatment of Muslims has dominated discussions about human rights in Europe, the United States and Israel. Whether it's Jihadis seized on the battlefields of Afghanistan, domestic terrorists plotting death and destruction in London, Ramallah or Jersey City, asylum seekers from the coasts of Australia to England, or your regular old Abdul or Hamid who may be a law-abiding citizen or a fanatical mass murderer in waiting – the Western human rights debate over the last 10 years comes down to the treatment of Muslims.

But is that all there is to the story? While left wing "human rights organizations" such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International (which even went the trendy route of appointing a Muslim Secretary General) have dived into the business of protecting the rights of Muslims in the West with both feet, very little attention is paid to the rights of Hindus, Jews, Christians, Buddhists and others living in Muslim countries.

While the media plays up a real estate dispute between Jews and Muslims in Jerusalem as a major human rights story, the last Jews of Yemen are being evacuated after one of the community's few remaining leaders was murdered by a Yemeni Air Force Pilot who ordered him to convert to Islam or die. Yemen in turn fined the pilot and offered to build the remaining Jews their own ghetto for "their own protection." Naturally they chose to leave instead. And this is the life they described behind the "Sand Curtain" of Islam:

A spokesman for the Jewish Federations, who met the Yemeni Jews shortly after they arrived in America, said they described a climate of fear in Yemen. Jewish men had to wear Arab headdresses and wrap their peyot behind their ears to hide their identity. Women wore burkas. “They didn’t have any visible institutions like synagogues,” he said. “They had to meet in people’s apartments.” For the first time, the new immigrants have been hanging mezuzot on the outside of their doors instead of the inside, and openly celebrating festivals like Succot.

Yemeni Jews had been fleeing the country since the 19th century, a flow that only intensified when the Yemeni government began seizing orphaned Jewish children and converting them to Islam in the 1920s (one such child is the current President of Yemen). After the creation of the State of Israel, the majority of Yemen's Jews fled the tide of Muslim violence. And now that last handful of what had been a community of tens of thousands is departing.

But what makes the story of Yemen so damning is that it actually is fairly tolerant by Muslim standards. And that the Jews of Yemen are only a small part of the more than 800,000 Jewish refugees from Muslim lands in the Middle East whose plight is ignored, while the media insists on photographing toothless Palestinian Muslim Arabs posing with house keys.

The 800,000 Jewish refugees are themselves only part of the story. The Armenian genocide and the Assyrian Holocaust both offer eloquent testimony to how Muslims treat non-Muslim minorities. As do the modern day persecutions of the Zoroastrians in Iran and the Christian Copts in Egypt, who are denied basic rights and whose daughters are routinely kidnapped for forced Islamic conversion.

While Muslims incessantly shout about their "rights" in Europe, America and Israel, it might be a good idea to take a look at how non-Muslim guest workers are treated in Muslim countries.

As much as 90 percent of Dubai is run by foreign guest workers who slave away for the Emirs. Thousands of them die annually in construction work to erect the magnificent skyscrapers designed by foreign architects and rented to foreigners that decorate Dubai's skyline.

As much as 40 percent of Saudi Arabia consists of foreign guest workers who do everything for the fat bearded sons of Mahomet but wipe their behinds. And in some cases, even that as well. Saudi Arabia is built on the foreign oil companies they seized, built by American and British oil workers, serviced by Asian maids and African laborers. The latter have their passports seized by their employers, which transforms them into slaves of their employers without the right to even leave the country. The Saudis have built such a nightmarish slave state that it is one of the few rich countries in the world where guest workers actually try to get themselves deported. Without success.

The Saudi and Dubai slave states are all the more relevant because so many of the organizations clamoring for the rights of Muslims in the West are either Saudi fronts, such as CAIR, or Saudi funded, such as Human Rights Watch. And just as the USSR lectured America on civil rights while running the Gulags, Saudi Arabia oversees a nightmarish Islamic oligarchy in which non-Muslims have no rights, while demanding through its front groups that America throw open the doors to Guantanamo Bay, stop detaining Muslims for suspicious behavior, that Europe open wide for Islamic immigration and ban any criticism of Islam, and that Israel turn over land to terrorist organizations again funded by the Saudis.

But until the Muslim world gives the same rights to non-Muslims as to Muslims and the same rights to women as to men, Muslims have no right to make such demands of anyone else. When religious minorities can live in peace and security in the Muslim world, only then can Muslims issue demands to non-Muslim countries.

If Muslims abroad were treated as they treat others at home, they would enjoy few rights, their passports would be seized compelling them to work indefinitely, they would be murdered at random and their attackers let off with a fine, their children would be seized to be converted to another religion and their women would be jailed for not complying with local mores. Instead Muslims enjoy legal equality in their host countries, even as they spread the poison of an Islamist ideology that calls for the murder of non-Muslim. And sometimes act on it.

Not only are Muslims treated far better than they treat others by America, Europe, Israel and the other non-Muslim countries that they routinely malign for "oppressing" them, but they are treated far better than they themselves act while abroad.

Despite all the talk about hate crimes against mosques, Muslims abroad have committed far more violent attacks on other people's houses of worship, than have been committed against theirs. Muslim rapes far outweigh any rapes of Muslims. Muslim terrorist attacks on non-Muslims far outweigh any terrorist attacks carried out against Muslims.

That is the real portrait of Muslim ingratitude and atrocities, thinly veiled by the endless barrage of "Religion of Peace" propaganda, and the squealing by Saudi front groups bewailing the fate of Muslims living high on the hog in Sydney, Paris or Haifa, while spinning their favorite anthem of Death to Everyone Who Isn't Us.

Muslim countries invite in non-Muslim tourists only to jail (Dubai) and murder (Egypt) them, despising non-Muslims and yet greedy for their gold. They rely on slave labor and yet fund lawfare and propaganda campaigns denouncing the U.S. detention of the same Taliban throat slitters that they funded as well. Egypt, where a third of the children are malnourished; Saudi Arabia, where even half the Muslim population has less legal rights than a dog (correction: dogs are actually forbidden in Saudi Arabia); or Pakistan, where it is easier for rapists to convict their victim of adultery, than for the victim to convict them of rape – all somehow manage to find the time to denounce the human rights of non-Muslim countries whose level of jurisprudence they couldn't reach with all the skyscrapers in Dubai.

Perhaps before Muslim bleat about their rights, they should first begin honoring the rights of non-Muslims.

Jihadis Inside the Gate

As the new decade opens, the country is reeling: the year just past saw more attacks by Islamic jihadis directed against Americans than in any other year since 9/11. Several were discovered and stopped before they could claim any victims, including the Najibullah Zazi bombing plot, bomb plots in Illinois and Texas, and the case of the five American-born jihadi wannabes caught in Pakistan.

Two other attacks left Americans dead and injured outside a military recruiting station in Little Rock, Ark. and at Ft. Hood, Texas. That the Christmas Day terror attack by a Nigerian Muslim jihadi on board an intercontinental flight from Europe failed is due only to the incompetence of the al Qaeda bomb-maker who fashioned the device that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab carried on board NWA Flight 253 in his underwear.

Our national security agencies deserve credit for foiling any jihadi attacks. But the enemy is not just getting closer: he’s inside the gates. And the reason is because current U.S. national security policy is simply not adequate to the Islamic jihad challenge that’s coming at us.

How could that be, more than eight years after 9-11? It is so because counterterrorism policy is being formulated under the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), the lead international jihadist organization charged with “eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers…” It’s important to note that the objectives of the Muslim Brotherhood coincide exactly with those of al Qaeda and every other Islamic jihadist organization in the world today: re-establishment of the caliphate/imamate and imposition of Shari’a (Islamic law) over the entire world.

Don Feder nailed it in a 4 January 2010 online posting to GrassTopsUSA, where he wrote that the ineffectual counterterrorism policies of President Obama and his administration “could have been designed by…Ibrahim Hooper of the Council on American-Islamic Relations [CAIR].” In many respects, they are.

Former North Carolina State Senator Larry Shaw, elected CAIR Board Chairman in March 2009 stated that he “looks forward to partnering with the Obama administration…” In case anyone failed to notice, CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) terror funding case and an acknowledged affiliate of the Muslim Brotherhood. So, just how close is that partnership?

The policy implications of Brotherhood influence are both startling and evident. For example, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano sets the tone for the Obama administration view of Islamic jihad, but in April 2009, she rejected any notion that the enemy is either Islamic or a jihadi. Absurdly, she even refused to even use the word “terror," instead preferring the inane “man-made disaster.” She was joined in planting the collective U.S. national security leadership head firmly in the sand by senior counterterrorism advisor to the president, John Brennan, who, apparently oblivious of Islamic doctrine and law, claimed in August 2009 that the meaning of jihad is to ". . . purify oneself or to wage a holy struggle for a moral goal."

Following the foiled Christmas Day airliner bombing, Brennan made a frenzied round of the Sunday talk shows, shocking most of us with the off-hand announcement that a plea deal was “on the table” for Abdulmutallab (who lawyered up and shut up the moment he’d been Mirandized). Treating Islamic jihad as a legal problem or as though it doesn’t exist cripples U.S. national security policy making.

Where did such ideas come from? How could our most senior officials entrusted with the defense of national security be so far off the tracks? It matters critically, because policy executed in ignorance of the essential linkage between Islamic doctrine and terrorism is bound to miss warning signals that involve Muslim clerics, mosques, teaching, and texts. A key indicator about our counterterrorism officials’ failures may be found in their advisors: their jihadi and Muslim Brotherhood advisors.

The inability of the National Counterterrorism Center (“NCTC”) to connect the dots is no accident. It is not meant to connect the dots. In the summer of 2008, the NCTC organized a conference on U.S. Counter-Radicalization Strategy. According to a 4 January 2010 posting by Patrick Poole at Pajamas Media, one of the leading speakers at that conference was Yasir Qadhi, a featured instructor at the AlMaghrib Institute in Houston, Texas. But by his own public admission, Yasir Qadhi was on the U.S. terror watch list!

Yes, a key speaker for an NCTC discussion about Counter-Radicalization Strategy is on the terror watch list. He’s obviously there for good reasons. For one thing, Qadhi’s Ilmquest media company featured audio CD sets of sermons by al Qaeda cleric, Anwar al-Awlaki, on its website and for sale at Ilmquest seminars. Yes, that al-Awlaki -- the one linked to both Maj. Nidal Hasan, the Muslim Ft. Hood shooter, and Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian Muslim would-be Christmas airline bomber.

To be sure, enemy influence within the Intelligence Community didn’t begin in 2009. In fact, the blueprint for the Muslim Brotherhood information warfare operation against the West goes back to a 1981 MB document called “The Project” that was discovered in a raid in Switzerland. More recently, the FBI discovered the MB’s 1991 U.S. Manifesto in a 2004 raid, a manifesto that not only confirmed the existence of the Brotherhood in the U.S., but outlined its organizational structure and agenda in this country.

The dozens of groups listed as associates in that document include a number who’ve succeeded in forging close relationships inside the structures of U.S. national security. One of them is the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA, another unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF trial). The FBI itself has maintained a longstanding liaison relationship with ISNA officials and placed ads in its monthly publication seeking Muslim applicants to become agents. A top FBI lawyer named Valerie Caproni joined senior ISNA official Louay Safi on a 2008 panel discussion at Yale University for a discussion entitled "Behind the Blindfold of Justice: Security, Individual Rights, & Minority Communities After 9/11.” Worse yet, in the wake of the horrific November 2009 military jihad assault at Ft. Hood that took fourteen lives and left dozens injured, it was revealed that Louay Safi was at Ft. Hood providing seminar presentations about Islam to U.S. troops about to deploy to Afghanistan. That’s an amazing record of successful penetration. And it’s just the tip of the iceberg.

As noted above, the influence of the enemy extends to the very words we use to describe that enemy and his campaign of conquest. Words matter because they shape the way we perceive the enemy and design the strategy to confront him. Back in 2008, the National Counter-Terrorism Center (NCTC) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued lexicon guidance to their employees, counseling avoidance of words like “jihad” or “ummah” or “Caliphate” when describing the enemy. They refused to identify the Muslim American sources who’d advised them on their decisions.

But it is enlightening to note the list of Muslim Brotherhood front groups that endorsed the vocabulary list once it had been issued: the Muslim American Society (MAS -- founded by the Muslim Brotherhood); Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC -- which lobbies to remove Hamas, Palestinian Jihad, and Hizballah from the U.S. Foreign Terrorist Organizations list); ISNA; and CAIR. When Republicans on the House Permanent Select Committee, led by Congressman Peter Hoekstra, proposed an amendment to the 2009 Intelligence funding bill that would have prohibited the Intelligence Community “from adopting speech codes that encumber accurately describing the radical jihadist terrorists that attacked America and continue to threaten the homeland”, the Democratic majority rejected it outright.
Congressional Democrats would appear to be thoroughly influenced by the MB. In mid-2009, a group of seven House Democrats wrote Attorney General Eric Holder asking that he meet with representatives of Muslim Brotherhood affiliates including CAIR, ISNA, and the Muslim Students Association. The letter was signed by representatives from California, Ohio, and Northern Virginia who sit on the House Judiciary Committee, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the House Appropriations Committee subcommittee on defense, and the House Homeland Security Committee, among others.
Explanation of how such things could occur in the very halls of the U.S. Congress hit the bookshelves with damning revelations about CAIR’s penetration of Capitol Hill in the 2009 Muslim Mafia by David Gaubatz and Paul Sperry. A meticulously-referenced expose based on CAIR’s own documents, the Muslim Mafia documents an extensive and well-funded CAIR campaign to plant operatives and run influence operations inside law enforcement and on the staffs of congressional offices.

These are the Jihad wars, and they are nearly 1400 years old. The U.S. has only been confronting Islamic jihadis since our 18th century naval campaigns against the so-called Barbary pirates but liberal democracy will not see the 22nd century if we do not acknowledge and confront this enemy here and now in the 21st. Until and unless the United States proves capable of appointing and electing officials to the top ranks of our national security leadership who both understand and reject the influence of Islamic jihad groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, our country will be incapable of effective defense against either kinetic or stealth jihad attack. We can do better than this…..much better.