Can We Identify The Terrorists Among Us

CAN WE IDENTIFY THE TERRORISTS AMONG US? How do you identify a terrorist? Ask this of any man on the street and the responses will be determined by politics. Those of a liberal bent will consider George Bush to be a terrorist. Those of a conservative bent will say Middle Eastern men. And others will shrug and say “anyone could become a terrorist.” The last group is the correct group. “Reverts” to Islam aren’t usually men of “Arabic decent”. Jose Padilla is a man of Hispanic decent who converted to Islam while in prison for murder. Adam Gadahn isn’t of Arabic decent. He’s an American native (Azzam the American). His real name is Adam Pearlman, the product of a Jewish-Christian mixed family. Ernest Thompson became known as James Ujaama after his conversion to Islam. In 1999 this would-be terror cell founder tried to create a training camp in Oregon, complete with a stockpile of weapons. Recently the New York Police Department issued a ninety page report detailing information about terrorists and terrorism as a threat to American safety. Critics claim the report is too broad, so much so that it may cause nationwide paranoia without offering us any solid information by which to defend ourselves. The report discusses a trajectory, a pattern of increased exposure and identification, noted in many of the terror-related cases over the past ten years. This pattern alleges a four-tier profile of activity: 1) Pre-radical life. The person’s life before exposure to “radical Islam” is pretty much indistinguishable from that of anyone else. 2) Self-Identification. The person becomes influenced, either by internal or external mechanisms; they begin to explore “Salafi Islam”. 3) Indoctrination. The person believes or adopts the Jihadi-Salifi teaching. 4) Jihadization. The person accepts their individual duty and self-identifies as a holy warrior of the mujahadeen. All of that sounds well and good. But the report makes a damning statement about identifying potential terrorists: “There is no useful profile to assist law enforcement or intelligence to predict who will follow this trajectory of radicalization.” Really? I think once we stop the shell game (and shed some political correctness) we may see that identifying potential terrorists may not be as difficult as we think. A ROSE BY ANY OTHER NAMEPardon me while I scoff and snort at those who would say Salafi

is different from Wahhabism. Frankly, I don’t care if they find it offensive to be called Wahhabi. Salafi and Wahhabism are just two faces of the same coin. Let’s follow the bunny trail. Muhammed founded Islam. Keeping him company throughout his life were the Salaf, from which the name Salafi is derived. The Salaf were the ones who maintained the words of Mohammed and ultimately produced the Quran and the Hadith (along with the Sira and Tarikh). Since they were such close associates of Muhammed, we can assume they got things right. In the 1700’s the Sunni patriarch, Muhammed Ibn Abd al-Wahhab began teaching the return to the original Islam as intended and recorded by the associates of Muhammed. Also known as the Salaf. Basically Wahhab taught that anything not officially mandated by Muhammed and Allah had no place in the Islamic belief. This meant a return to the Salaf. In other words WAHABBISM is only the “pet” name or the derogatory name for Salafi Islam. Distancing themselves from Osama bin Laden has been an on-going venture for Wahhabist Muslims. They say that bin Laden got his ideas from the writings of Sayyid Qutb, who visited the United States from 1958-1961 and, after having spent a whole three years here, came to the conclusion that our country was waging a moral war against Islam. In a book called The Wahhabi Myth, the author tries to make this distinction: “Bin Laden was not inspired by Wahhabism but by the writings of the Egyptian ideologue Sayyid Qutb, who was executed by President Nasser in 1966. Almost every fundamentalist movement in Sunni Islam has been strongly influenced by Qutb, so there is a good case for calling the violence that some of his followers commit Qutbian terrorism. Qutb urged his followers to withdraw from the moral and spiritual barbarism of modern society and fight it to the death.” While Qutb’s writings no doubt encouraged bin Laden, ultimately the Quran and Hadith’s themselves would be the inspiration. To say that Salafi followers are practicing something that’s corrupted is creating a shell game. As noted on the Prophet of Doom website: “In direct contradiction to all who apply the ‘radical’ label to the Islam of today's terrorists, the only way for Wahhab or Salaf Muslims to be practicing a corrupted version of Islam, is for Muhammad and his Companions to have gotten Islam wrong. And if that were true, the religion has no basis of any kind. The moment you come to grips with this simple, yet profound, truth, the connection between Islam and terror becomes clear.” The clarity becomes frightening when one looks at from where the support for Wahhabist Islam cometh. And it begs the question: is our Government creating terror for us? According to author Reza Safa, the government of Saudi Arabia has been importing Wahhabism to America and other countries to the tune of some $87 billion since 1973. Most of the “Islamicizing” of America comes from established organizations. The three most prominent are ISNA (the Islamic Society of North America); CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) and the MSA (Muslim Student Association).

Supporting organizations include: American Muslim Council (AMC); American Muslim Alliance (AMA); Muslim American Society (MAS); the Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences (GSISS); and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) which operates some 324 plus mosques nationwide. In 2003 Stephen Schwartz testified before the Senate Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security as to the links between Wahhabism/Salafi Islam and Saudi connections and aspirations to inundate American society with “radical Islam.” Schwartz mentioned the goals of the Saudi importation: “First, to control a significant group of Muslim believers. Second, to use the Muslim community in the U.S. to pressure U.S. government and media, in the formulation of policy and in perceptions about Islam… Third, to advance the overall Wahhabi agenda of ‘jihad against the world’ — an extremist campaign to impose the Wahhabi dispensation on the global Islamic community, as well as to confront the other religions.” That Salafi/Wahhabist Muslims outnumber all other groups in the US isn’t a fluke. Although very few will likely call themselves Wahhabi (because of the implied tie to bin Laden) the shell game comes into play when you hear a person say “I am not Salafi! I am not Wahhab! I am just Muslim!” They’re right. They’re all branches of the same corrupt tree: Sunni Islam. And what is the predominant sect in Saudi Arabia? Sunni, with over 70% of it’s population practicing Sunni. God bless our little government! This isn’t news to them. It’s also not news to them that the type of Islam endorsed by the Saudi government just so happens to be a “radical” type. From a State Department report circa 2005: “The majority of citizens [in Saudi Arabia] are Sunni Muslims who predominantly adhere to the very strict Hanbali school of Islamic jurisprudence. The Hanbali school is the strictest of Sunni Islam’s four legal schools. In addition, most Sunnis in the Kingdom subscribe to the tradition of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, an 18th century Muslim scholar belonging to the Hanbali school. For this reason, these individuals are often referred to by others as ‘Wahhabis.’ Most citizens, however, do not so describe themselves, preferring instead to say simply that they are ‘Muslims.’” Gee, go figure. So what have we got here? We have the end result of what happens when expediency meets political correctness: the inability to detect terrorists in our midst. WHO ARE THE TERRORISTS AMONG US?In July of this year, the FBI announced that they were introducing the STAR system, a database which collects information and assesses the information as a sort of profile of would-be terrorists. The system focuses primarily on

foreign suspects but does look at US residents as well. And of course, nobody will be “labeled” a terrorist. Even if he has a stock-pile of AK-47’s in his trunk, a computer with a layout of Kennedy Airport on the hard drive, bank receipts from CAIR, and a card reading “72 Virgins await you in heaven” signed by bin Laden himself. No, we must not label anyone, right? We also have political correctness at the expense of the average man’s security coming from the Bush administration’s liberal critics, such as Paddy O’Leahy, who seems to think the administration gives a damn about my personal life: “The Bush administration has expanded the use of this technology, often in secret, to collect and sift through Americans' most sensitive personal information…” Sift away! You’ll discover I’m in menopause, that I’m not in the $200K classification of the “wealthy”, and that Mom and I share female pattern baldness. The report introduces some aspects of identifying those susceptible to becoming indoctrinated into “radical” Islam. First of all, they pinpoint that the most susceptible are those who are second and third generation Muslims living in the west who are trying to find their roots. But these guys aren’t looking for Kunta Kintay. They’re looking back in time to Mohammedat least as close as they can get to what their founder REALLY believed and taught. And this, at least in the west, takes them back to the Salaf, aka, Wahabbist teachings courtesy of Saudi-sponsored Mosques and educational centers. The report also points out that these potential terrorists live in enclaves dominated by Islam. These enclaves are patriarchal in nature in terms of Islamic belief and practice. And to make it more interesting, there seems to be no relationship to poverty here. One would think a life of poverty could lead one to not mind committing suicide for Allah if life in the hereafter were going to be better. But this isn’t the case. And recent events surrounding a group of doctors and physician assistants who conspired to attack the United States seems to buttress the conclusion of the NYPD report. Of course, that’s not to say that all of the terrorists we’ve seen to date are necessarily well educated and middle class. Potential terrorists may well be culled from the less affluent. Which suddenly makes one wonder: do we really have any tell-tale attributes? The report whittles down some characteristics: > They tend to be under 35 > They’re local residents and citizens of western democracies. > Varied ethnic backgrounds, often 2nd and 3rd generation western.> Middle class backgrounds; not destitute. > Educated, at least High school graduates and/or college students.> Recent converts to Islam are particularly vulnerable.

> Don’t start out as radical nor even devout Muslims. > Unremarkable- have ordinary lives and jobs. > Little if any criminal record. Congratulations NYPD. You have just identified a huge hunk of young Muslim America as potential terrorists. It’s important to remember that there are influences. While the report talks about personal influences, both internal and external, it also discusses such things as the influences of spiritual leaders. Of course we here in the US have this bad habit of shooting ourselves in the foot when it comes to “spiritual enemies.” We’d rather chase after Mel Gibson as an anti-semite than take a close look at some of the whacked out spiritual leaders here in the USA who are teaching crap to mush minds in our prisons, Mosques and yes, schools. In the end, the report leaves us still wondering how in the world we can possibly pinpoint a would-be terrorist. With a majority of young Muslims fitting most or all of the above list, we are stymied: what if the terrorists decide to use older Muslims? Or children under age fifteen? Or women? Let’s face it. We cannot possibly know who is, or is not, a potential terrorist until they get arrested for something. Or, until we get the gonads to actually start investigating- seriously investigating- NGO’s, bookstores, café’s, hookah bars, and internet café’s. We need to get the “Noble Quran” out of our schools and universities. And we need to start realizing that anyone who changes their name from Jack Smith to Muhammed Abd Bakiri is probably going to become an extremist. Last, but not least, we need to realize that the Constitution protects the rights of those citizens who support it and defend it and those persons who abuse it’s existence in order to take over our nation and our lives. And maybe, while we’re at it, we need to demand that our government stop sleeping with the enemy. Why in the world we tolerate the Saudi influence in America is beyond my comprehension. We’re supporting a country which violates human rights on more levels than can possibly be counted. A country which doesn’t afford Christians, Jews and other faiths the same freedom we afford Muslims to worship here in America. A country which backs and funds organizations known to be linked to terrorist organizations (can you say HOLY LAND FOUNDATION, CAIR, ISNA, NAIT?) And for what? Some oil? Dancing girls? A lone military base in the middle of Camelass, Saudi Arabia? America has been playing nice-nice with the House of Saud for fifty years. A 2000 report from the Middle East Policy Council makes it abundantly clear that our interests in Saudi Arabia have to change and change drastically. Where once we had a relationship with them which inhibited the propagation of Wahhabi/Salafi style Islam, now Saudi is the home base for it.

So how do we identify a potential terrorist in our midst? Simple: they’re a follower of Mohammed in the strictest sense. They’re Wahhabi-Salafi-Sunni and they’re funded by our dear friends, the Saudi government. And we stupidly protect them.