Ask a leftist or a Paulestinian why Usama bin Laden orchestrated the 9/11 attacks, and you’re likely to get a lecture involving imperialism, cultural insensitivity, blowback, or all of the above, while a conservative would be more likely to blame radical Islamic ideology.  Tonight’s “Hannity” explores a far simpler factor—he thought he could get away with it:

HANNITY: A former Usama bin Laden associate has come forward with shocking allegations about the 9/11 terror attacks. Now, the man’s name is Noman Benotman, and he claims that he was with bin Laden in the months just prior to the attacks.

And now, in an interview with a WTOP reporter, the man says bin Laden was stunned at the way the U.S. responded to the attacks. Now he says the Al Qaeda leader did not expect President George W. Bush to retaliate the way he did [...]

NOMAN BENOTMAN, FORMER BIN LADEN ASSOCIATE: What happened after the 11th of September, it’s beyond the imagination. I am 100 percent sure they haven’t a clue about what is going to happen. They said, “This time, maybe they’re going to launch 200 cruise missiles.”

The WTOP report quotes an unnamed CIA official as backing up Benotman (former head of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group), but also quotes Michael Scheuer (the Left’s favorite CIA vet) as more skeptical: “I come hard up against an awful lot of evidence that [harsh American retaliation is] exactly what [bin Laden] wanted.”

Regardless of Benotman’s personal credibility, the underlying point is obvious: bad guys are more brazen when they believe the consequences of their actions will be light or nonexistent.  And as Hannity and Lt. Col. Oliver North discuss, the abysmal record of the 1990s under the Clinton Administration gave bin Laden ample cause for optimism:

NORTH: I don’t think anybody should have expected Bill Clinton to respond any differently than what he did after embassies are blown up or ships are hit, all the rest of the things that occurred in the Clinton administration.

The bottom line of it is, George W. Bush was not cut from the same bolt of cloth as William Jefferson Blythe Clinton, and we ought to be thankful for it.

HANNITY: Well, but what he is saying, the way I’m interpreting this, after the embassy bombings in Kenya, Tanzania, the Khobar Towers, the USS Cole, the first Trade Center bombing, is that they’re at war with us. America is not going to respond. So they anticipated…

NORTH: The same kind of response.

HANNITY: … the same kind of non-response.

Granted, in the case of jihadists willing to martyr themselves for Allah, fear of death is less of an deterrent than in, say, the Cold War.  But note well that Usama himself wasn’t among the hijacking party, and while individual jihadist nuts will always plague us as long as violent, totalitarian interpretations of Islam thrive, terrorist groups and rogue states are actually trying to accomplish something.  Irrational and dogmatic though they may be, leaders and would-be recruits aren’t entirely incapable of noticing whether their strategies are bearing fruit, or just bringing hell upon themselves.

After the lessons of the twentieth century, we in the twenty-first should have thrown appeasement onto history’s ash heap a long time ago and never looked back.  But incredibly, we still have one major political party firmly behind the suicidal doctrine, and fringe voices in the other who cling to it without the slightest regard for reality.  The War on Terror isn’t going anywhere, and the sooner adults who understand that regain control, the better.

_____

Hailing from Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, Calvin Freiburger is a political science major at Hillsdale College.  He also writes for the Hillsdale Forum and his personal website, Calvin Freiburger Online.

Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Dave Gaubatz, the first U.S. civilian (1811) Federal Agent deployed to Iraq in 2003. He is the owner of DG Counter-terrorism Publishing. He is currently conducting a 50 State Counter-terrorism Research Tour (CTRT). He is the co-author (with Paul Sperry) of the new book, Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld that’s Conspiring to Islamize America. He can be contacted at davegaubatz@gmail.com.

FP: Dave Gaubatz, welcome to Frontpage Interview.

You were recently in the Los Angeles area conducting lectures and book signings. Fill us in a bit about what you learned about the Los Angeles County Sheriff (Sheriff Baca) and his ties to the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).

Gaubatz: Thank you Jamie. I spent 5 days in the LA area and utilized every minute communicating with citizens and collecting counter-terrorism intelligence on Sheriff Baca. I visited four Islamic Centers to determine their association with CAIR and likewise his link to this terrorist supporting organization.

Unfortunately for the citizens of LA, Sheriff Baca supports Islamic groups who advocate violence against the very people he is supposed to be protecting. I informed the attendees of my lectures that there are only three primary reasons anyone supports CAIR and the violent ideology they spread and advocate.

FP: Why would someone support CAIR?

Gaubatz: The first is out of pure ignorance of what CAIR advocates behind the scenes. Second: job incompetence (lack of proper training in counter-terrorism and the Islamic ideology). Third and the most worrisome: like in the case of Sheriff Baca, certain people are in bed with the enemy for financial gain or political power.

FP: Expand on why you think this is the case with Sheriff Baca.

Gaubatz: I spoke with numerous people, reviewed materials from the Islamic Centers Sheriff Baca and CAIR both endorse, and talked with officers of Sheriff Baca’s Islamic Community Affairs program. At this stage of my research I would analyze Sheriff Baca as incompetent, and regardless of the innocent lives he is jeopardizing by supporting Islamic based terror groups, he is more concerned with the votes/funds CAIR can generate for his personal political goals.

I have advised several times to readers they should not become confused by the various acronyms used by Islamic based non-profit organizations. CAIR, ISNA, MSA, MAS, MANA and the host of others are Muslim Brotherhood (MB) and they encourage through their materials terrorist attacks against our troops in Iraq, Afghanistan, and even in America (Ft. Hood).

Readers may know I had over 23 years of U.S. Federal Service, was a Federal Agent, trained Arabic linguist, counter-terrorism specialist, visited numerous Middle east countries, was the 1st U.S. civilian Federal Agent in Iraq, had the highest U.S. government clearance, briefed into numerous ‘special government projects,’ personally conducted counter-terrorism research in over 200 Islamic Centers, obtained and reviewed thousands of documents/manuals from U.S. based Islamic Centers, and did what our federal government with vast financial and manpower resources could not do. I planned and executed an intensive (legal and professional) undercover research project placing 5 people (male and female) inside CAIR National (Top Branch of the Muslim Brotherhood operating in America) for a period of 6 months.

Based on my training and experiences, Sheriff Baca is aiding and abetting the Muslim Brotherhood. It will be our children who will suffer.  Sheriff Baca and any officer or politician who is supporting his actions should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and of course replaced with law enforcement officers who understand the violent aspects of the Islamic ideology and the Muslim Brotherhood.

If we want to save our country from Islamic terrorists, we as a country must be proactive and begin prosecuting anyone who seeks to hurt our children’s future. No longer do Americans want to see the Sheriff Bacas roll up in their decked out patrol cars, give a political speech about how effective his officers responded to a terrorist scene, and how brave everyone was.  This is no longer acceptable. Sheriff Baca needs to understand if he and his officers respond to an Islamic based terrorist scene, he has failed. Neither he nor any officer who ever supported his actions should be considered a ‘hero’ after our country has been attacked and lost innocent lives due to the ignorance, incompetence, and personal political goals of men like Sheriff Baca.

FP: You mentioned you visited several Islamic Centers in the LA, CA, and area. Can you describe the type of material you observed/obtained?

Gaubatz: Of course.  The four Islamic Centers I visited were Sunni/Salafist, (Wahhabi) ‘Pure Muslim’, backed by the Saudi government, CAIR (Muslim Brotherhood), and had material available for their worshippers that advocate violence against innocent people, treason and sedition.  I will mention one for the time being:

Omar Ibn Al-Khattab Foundation
1025 Exposition Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90007

A few weeks ago Sheriff Baca had visited this Islamic Center with CAIR executives and publicly endorsed CAIR and the teachings of this mosque.  I respectfully ask readers to review the following statements obtained in materials endorsed by CAIR and I observed/obtained in LA County and from people who support CAIR Executives:

“What should you do if you are arrested or framed by the racist, fascist, criminal police? Or the racist, fascist, criminal FBI?

Note by Gaubatz: This manual is distributed by CAIR supporters throughout the U.S.  It is an 81 page manual that clearly shows their support for terrorist organizations and not our U.S. Constitution or law enforcement.

“If we really want to produce such youth who should be prepared to lay down their lives for the sake of their country (Islamic Ummah) and also for the survival of the Islamic way of life, we should undertake to give them Islamic instruction of high standard along with sophisticated military training”.

Note by Gaubatz: This manual by Maududi (Jammet Islami founder) was obtained at an LA County Islamic center who instruct their children to fight (Jihad) for Islam, not America, and to train to the highest military standard in order to defeat their enemies (Christians, Jews, and non Sharia compliant Muslims).

I ask readers to closely review the following statements from materials endorsed by CAIR, published by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and provided to Islamic Centers, schools, and libraries across America. This manual was obtained at an LA County mosque:

“Islam does not acknowledge territorial boundaries, national or popular relations, and nationalities, as these lead to separation and differentiation among people. There is no nationality for Muslim except Islam”.

Note by Gaubatz; This statement alone by the Saudi government explaining the Islamic ideology should answer the question in people’s minds if Muslims can follow Islam and be American. The answer was no 1400 years ago and is no today.

“Apostasy from Islam is a grievous crime punishable by death. One who commits apostasy from Islam rejects truth after he known it, thus, he does not deserve life.”

Note by Gaubatz: Again this manual is distributed by the Saudi government and is in thousands of Islamic centers across America. Please keep in mind the above statement made by the Saudi government that ‘Islam does not acknowledge territorial boundaries.” This means if a young Muslim child (like 17 year old Rifka Bary) decides they want to leave Islam and convert to Christianity that the Saudi government and Islam fully support killing her and anyone who leaves Islam. This is regardless of the country they reside in. This statement alone is why ‘honor killings’ of innocent Muslims are committed every year across America by Sharia compliant worshippers and the media seldom reports on them. Why? Because a large part of our media worships at the altar of political correctness and is also financially supported by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

FP: Final thoughts?

Gaubatz: Jamie; I again thank you and your organization. Sheriff Baca is not the lone senior law enforcement officer or politician who is knowingly cooperating with those forces who are working to destroy our country. They are scattered across our great country and we are currently being attacked from within, and we are losing the ‘war on terrorism.”  There are few officers or employees of a politician who will not follow the orders of their ‘leader’. This equates to Sheriff Baca having the support of thousands of LA county Sheriffs who would back the Muslim Brotherhood before they would a hard working American family that prioritizes patriotism to our country above all.  Or would they? I will have more intelligence on CAIR, Sheriff Baca, and other terrorist supporters on our site muslimmafiainternational.com Thank you.

FP: Dave Gaubatz, thank you for joining Frontpage Interview.

Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Vijay Kumar, who is currently running for the U.S. Congress as a Republican candidate for Tennessee 5th Congressional District. The Primary vote comes on August 5 of this year, and the General Election is on November 4. When he ran before, in 2008, he received about 30% of the vote in Republican Primary. His website is kumarforcongress.com. Visit his blog at kumarforcongress.net.

FP: Vijay Kumar, welcome to Frontpage Interview.

You are one of the rare individuals running for office in America who is actually making the issue of Islamic Jihad a significant part of your campaign. Tell us your view of Islamic Jihad and the background you have to make you see it the way you do.

Kumar: I am a native of Hyderabad, India, which is where I first encountered the Muslim culture. We have a substantial number of Muslims there, a higher percentage than most other parts of India, and I began to observe things that troubled me. Later, I traveled a number of Islamic nations, and I lived in Iran from 1976 to 1979, during the Islamic Revolution of Ayatollah Khomeini. I immigrated to the United States in 1979. All my life, I have been interested in political thought. During my travels, I came to realize that Islam is unlike any of the other world religions for a variety of reasons, and they summate to the Islamic ideology behind Jihad.

First, Islam was conceived as a world empire to govern all mankind. It teaches that all the world, and everyone and everything in it, already belongs to Islam–some people just haven’t been made to understand that. Until they have, according to Islam, they are considered “infidels” and inferiors. Put another way, the Islamic view is that all of us in the world are subjects of the Islamic Empire, and those of us who do not acknowledge our subjugation to it must be overcome and brought to submission, through conversion or force. No other religion in the world has such a purpose of world conquest and domination.

Second, Islam does not allow any introspection or self-criticism. It calls for total acceptance, total submission. The very word “Islam” means “submission,” and the word “Muslim” means “one who submits.” The other side of submission, of course, is domination. Islam seeks to dominate every individual and every nation into submission. In that, it shares a key element of slavery, which the civilized world has properly decried and abolished. Such submission is a political act. I am a freeman, and I refuse to submit to Islamic hegemony.

Third, Islam does not have any exit policy for its believers. The act of submission required to become a Muslim is held to be final, irrevocable, and permanent. So criticizing or questioning Islam or its teachings or leaders, or attempting to leave Islam, all are considered severe crimes against Islam, punishable by death.

In contrast, non-Islamic religions allow for dissenting views, introspection, and reasoned debate. In non-Islamic religions, if you so choose, you can leave the faith you were born into without being threatened with physical violence or death. In Islam, both criticism of the faith and apostasy are capital offenses.

All of that is what drives Jihad: Jihad is a permanent war against the unbeliever and his land to bring about his submission. It has been going on for fourteen centuries all over the world, which is why I coined the term “Universal Jihad.” Islam’s Universal Jihad is the single greatest threat to Western civilization and to the entire non-Islamic world in general. It is more dangerous than Nazism and Communism combined.

FP: More dangerous than Nazism and Communism combined? Please explain this perspective.

Kumar: Nazism was in power for 15 years or so. Communism was in power for about 70 years. Today, Germany, Japan, and Russia, our former adversaries, are now our allies. Also, they are liberal democracies.

Nazism, Communism, and Islam are all three totalitarian ideologies. Communism and Nazism, though, lack a system of transcendental metaphysics, which Islam has. Nazism and Communism do not claim to be religions, and there is no threat of hell-fire to hold over its adherents. By contrast, Islam is a totalitarian form of governance that also claims to be a religion, and so has proved to be far more sustainable than any other form of aggressive totalitarianism.

The doctrine and politics of Universal Jihad have been assaulting the world for 1,400 years. It is exactly what launched the Christian Crusades, which were an attempt to save European civilization from the relentless onslaught and wholesale murder of invading Muslim forces.

Under Universal Jihad, non-Muslim civilizations have been annihilated. To mention just a few examples: Turkey was Christian; Iran was Zoroastrian; North Africa and the Middle East were predominantly Christian; Afghanistan and Central Asia were Buddhist; Pakistan was Hindu; Egypt was Coptic, orthodox Christian. All have fallen prey to invasion by Islam.

Today, Universal Jihad has been brought to the West–not just by overt violence, but through every strategy and tactic conceivable. Islam is not just the faith of another immigrant group; it is a complete political and paramilitary ideology. Political Islam is here to Islamize the Western nations, and that includes the United States.

So Universal Jihad is a permanent form of warfare against the infidels, their nation-states, and every non-Islamic form of government in the world. It has been Islam’s mandate for 1,400 years that other cultures must submit to it. Islam is devoted to an eternally-unchanging doctrine: it is obligated to conquer entire world.

No one needs to take my word for it. Syed Abul A’ala Maududi, a Pakistani, was arguably the most influential Muslim theologian and thinker of the 20th Century. He said the following point-blank:

“Islam wishes to destroy all States and Governments anywhere on the face of the  earth which are opposed to the ideology and program of Islam regardless of the country or the Nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a State on the basis of its own ideology and program . . . [T]he objective of Islamic Jihad is to eliminate the rule of an un-Islamic system and establish in its stead an Islamic system of State rule. Islam does not intend to confine this revolution to a single State or a few countries; the aim of Islam is to bring about a universal revolution.”

Any Muslim or apologist who claims otherwise, or who insists that Islam is just “a religion of peace” is not arguing against me: they are arguing against their own most revered leaders and experts on Islam and its true purpose. They are spreading Islamic propaganda that has no other purpose than to lull the infidel into a false sense of  friendship and security.

Such propaganda is a primary and vitally important tool of Islam’s psychological warfare. Syed Abul A’ala Maududi also spelled out clearly how many different ways Universal Jihad is to be waged against ”the infidels”:

“In the jihad in the way of Allah, active combat is not always the role on the battlefield, nor can everyone fight in the front line. Just for one single battle preparations have often to be made for decades on end and the plans deeply laid, and while only some thousands fight in the front line there are behind them millions engaged in various tasks which, though small themselves, contribute directly to the supreme effort.”

Unlike any other religion anywhere in the world, Islam’s clear, inarguable overarching purpose is Universal Jihad and global conquest, using any means. It is not waged just through terrorism and violent conflict. That is an extraordinarily naive view. Islam also uses psychological warfare, propaganda, covert operations, infiltration, and demographic saturation.

Universal Jihad exists and no amount liberal “political correctness” is going to wish it away. It is here on the soil of the United States right this minute. Its openly-declared goal is to destroy the United States as a system of government, to tear up our Constitution, and subject us all to Islamic totalitarianism under Sharia law.

FP: Let me ask you this: World War I was won in four years, World War II was won in six years. But the Israel/Palestine and the India/Pakistan conflicts have not resolved after 62 years. Why do you think?

Kumar: It’s simple: Muslims do not want peace, they want conquest. When they enter into an alleged “peace accord,” it is only a ploy to buy time to build their position for ultimate conquest. This is by their own creed: in Islam’s system of “ethics,” it is perfectly acceptable to lie to mere infidels.

In the case of Israel, the West has never been 100% behind Israeli sovereignty. Both the West and Israel have always only wanted to buy truce with the Islamic nations–never peace. It is an endless case of appeasement that puts Neville Chamberlain to shame.

As I have said before, and as history proves conclusively and invariably, Islam does not recognize pluralism, and Islam never wants a lasting peace with any non-Islamic people or states. When Muslims are in a relatively weak position they may offer truce–a temporary agreement–but never lasting peace. Even a cursory study of the treaties made by Muhammad proves at once that every Islamic treaty is merely another tactic toward ultimate conquest and domination. He set the standard for using treaties as a path to conquest.

Since then, Islam has been waging a relentless war for the past 1,400 years against every non-Muslim within their reach. In the last century, technological advances have extended the reach of the Muslim world considerably. Anybody who believes that it’s suddenly going to change–for any reason, through any amount of “diplomacy”–is either grossly uninformed or delusional.

Islamic imperialists have no desire at all for peaceful coexistence with Israel. They want to annihilate the “Zionist Entity.” By the way, during the last 60 years, Israel has absorbed more than a million Sephardic Jews from Arab countries. The Arab nations, on the other hand, refuse to absorb two million Palestinians. It’s a sad irony that two million Palestinians are considered so important while at the same time the suffering inflicted upon 50 million Kurdish people by Muslim nations goes almost unnoticed, unremarked.

Muslims do not recognize the right to existence of either Israel or India. They simply consider them roadblocks to world conquest that need to be removed, no matter what it takes, no matter how long it takes. Universal Jihad is infinite, endless war against the infidel. It has been formally, blatantly declared. To the Muslim, Jewish Israel and Hindu India are nothing more than inferior infidel nation-states that must be torn down and brought under Islamic control.

Remember this: Kashmir was a Hindu land continuously for 5,000 years. That’s over twice as long as the time that has passed since the birth of Christ. Islam went there as an imperial force, subjugated the local people, and conquered them, both politically and demographically, after 5,000 years of Hindu peace and civilization. Hence, today the Kashmiri Hindus are refugees in their own land. They have been reduced to a minority.

It is not Kashmir alone. Now Muslims of India wants Mughalstan, the Land of Mugal empire. They want to build an Islamic state from Pakistan to Bangladesh that includes the entirety of north India.

Every year, we are paying Islamic tribute to Pakistan, Egypt, and Palestinians in hopes of maintaining a tenuous truce. We are not really giving them “aid.” It is nothing but Islamic tribute to keep them at bay.

It’s really too simple for anyone to try to complicate it: Islam wants the entire world to submit. India and Israel are simply two obstacles or roadblocks to that goal. If they can get Israel and India to disappear from the face of earth, Islamic Umma–community, or “nation” in the larger sense–would be one unified imperialism from Morocco to Indonesia. Then it would be Europe’s turn to be annihilated.

FP: How do we best win the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in your opinion?

Kumar: It can’t be overstated or said too many times that these are merely the current fronts of open conflict in Universal Jihad. In fact, it plays into the purposes of Universal Jihadists for the Western world to be fixated on isolated actions in various geographical locations, and thereby never see the bigger picture.

Universal Jihad is an ideology, a doctrine, that is fixed and unchanging. Waging battles of force and military action alone– especially on Islam’s home turf–and continuing to send troops out as reaction to the latest flare-ups or hot-spots in Islam’s endless war will never succeed. Never.

That’s also why the idea of a “War on Terror” is absurd. Terrorism is nothing more than one of the many technique and tactics used to advance Islam’s political ideology. On this subject of terrorism, groups like the Taliban are a bunch of obedient foot soldiers. They are what Karl Marx called the “lumpen-proletariat.” Allow me to direct your attention to the fact that we never see Islamic Imams–religious leaders–blowing themselves up. If martyrdom is such a high holy act, as Islam’s leaders preach, why aren’t they the ones strapping on the explosives? It’s a curious case of “do as I say, not as I do.”

Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan form the Axis of Universal Jihad. Unless and until we address the leaders of this Axis of Jihad, and the militaristic ideology of world domination that is their chief export, there is no possibility for peace in the future for humanity.

The real power behind Universal Jihad, in all of its manifestations, lies with the Pakistani ISI–the intelligence services of Pakistan–along with the Pakistani military, the Pakistani feudal elite, and the Islamic theological leaders. As a nation-state, Pakistan exists for two reasons: its pathological hatred of India and Hindus, and its parasitic dependence on American aid. Their leaders’ battle cry is always “Islam in danger” when they want to stoke the fires of Jihad, and of course Muslims are commanded by the Quran to go forth immediately when called to fight by their Islamic leaders.

Make no mistake: you can only solve the problem of Afghanistan when you address the problem of Pakistan, because Afghanistan is a client state of Pakistan. And you can only solve the problem of Pakistan when you address the problem of Saudi Arabia, because Pakistan is a client state of Saudi Arabia.

The Pakistanis are being sponsored by the hedonistic rulers of Saudi Arabia. Saudi rulers are materialistic hedonists in their practice, but preach Wahabi Islamic fundamentalist doctrine to the world.

The bottom-line is this: The hedonist Saudi ruling elite form the epicenter for global terrorism, because it is they who fund all mosques and madrasas around the world–and that includes the United States.

They export oil and worldwide Islamic fundamentalist revolution.

That fundamentalist revolution is Universal Jihad, and its entire force comes solely from its ideology, an ideology that was born right in the deserts of Saudi Arabia. Therefore, the only real war, and the war that is winnable, is against the ideology that is the doctrine of Universal Jihad.

All three of these nations that make up the Axis of Jihad are ready for internal revolutions. We, the West, are not taking advantage of that situation.

In Iran, for example, a majority of the Iranian population is under 25 years old. They were born after the Iranian Islamic Revolution of 1979. All of those young men and women are ready to be liberated from the totalitarianism that prevails at the hands of the Ayatollahs. We must appeal to their reason and their own human desire for freedom, liberty, and the right to free will.

Similarly, the Saudi regime is ready to collapse because of its own corrupt system. It is beginning to come under assault from Islamic fundamentalists for its hedonistic life style. Instead of kowtowing to the Saudis, we should be shining a bright light on the rampant hypocrisy.

FP: What do we do then to confront Jihad effectively?

Kumar: To reach a lasting solution to Universal Jihad, and to all the violence and terror and misery it causes throughout the world, the goal of the Western world should be to demilitarize, secularize, and democratize the Axis of Jihad. Anything short of that goal is like putting a band-aid on leprosy. For starters, we should do the following things:

1. Stop all immigration from the Axis of Jihad nations.

2. Stop paying Islamic tribute–so-called “aid”–to Pakistan, Egypt and the Palestinians.

3. Support those moderate, secular, Muslims–there are many—against theological fundamentalists.

4. Build a United Front of Victims of Jihad. That is where Jew and Gentile, Saxon and Slav, Hindu and Buddhist, Norwegian and Nigerian, Catholic and Protestant, Evangelical and Orthodox, have common ground. All can unite to contain the extremist ideology, because all historically have been victims of Universal Jihad.

The United States and Israel have many allies and friends in this cause. All we have to do is look around.

Together, there are many ways we can fight the ideological war and win it with reason, and with appeal to the human quest for freedom. That is our strongest ally.

The first ideological hurdle to overcome is a clear recognition by our own leaders that the only real enemy is Universal Jihad and the three seats of its power: Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan. It is an existential crisis for all non-Muslim nations, and for all freedom-loving people everywhere in the world. This transcends all ethnic, cultural, religious, and political boundaries. Islamic imperialism draws no distinctions between “infidels.” Until we win this war, we are all targets for takeover.

FP: You mention immigration. Expand on your thoughts on demographics when it comes to Islam.

Kumar: Demographic conquest is the most permanent form of Islamic conquest. Before the expansionism of Islam, by force and infusion, Egypt, North Africa, and the southern coast of the Mediterranean were Christian. There was a Buddhist monastery in Alexandria, Egypt. Turkey was Buddhist and Christian. Persia–now Iran–was Zoroastrian. The Hindu culture covered an area of the world twice as large as it is now.

The fatal flaw of every one of these nations that has fallen before Islamic invasion has been to open its arms to Islam, only to be stabbed in the back.

Islam primarily is a political and military doctrine, dedicated to world conquest, that wears the cloak of religion. The religious cloak is the Trojan Horse it uses to infiltrate the cultures and nations and civilizations it seeks to destroy and replace with Islamic totalitarianism.

Liberals and progressives in those target nation-states become the water-carriers for Islam’s demographic tactics, demanding that immigrant Muslims be granted all the “rights” they need to kill off the host country and take over. The irony is that the liberals who tout the Islamic cause are the first victims when Sharia takes its grip around the throat of a nation. But this appeal to liberals for sympathy and support is a key part of Islam’s ideological war.

Unrestrained legal and illegal immigration is tearing apart the very fabric of Europe and the United States and Canada. To survive, the West must ban immigration from all Muslim nations where Sharia is the law of the land. The only exceptions should be apostates and refugees from Islam. We must pass laws to denaturalize and deport all those advocates of Sharia from the West. Europe is already becoming Eurabia, and in Europe multiculturalism means submitting to Islamic supremacy.

FP: Your perspective on Islam’s dualistic ethics?

Kumar: The Quran, the Islamic holy book, has two sets of ethics. One set of ethics is for believers, the other set of ethics for the Kaffirs–their name for infidels, non-Muslims. The Quran has no good news for the infidel.

In Islam ethics are based upon a simple formula: “good” is whatever advances the cause of Islam, and “evil” is whatever resists the cause of Islam.

In Islam, all Muslims are brothers who should be kind and honest to each other. But Allah hates the infidel; Allah plots against the infidel, so Muslims should, too. Over 60% of the Quran is devoted to the Kaffir, and every mention is negative, demeaning, insulting, or hateful. It teaches war in the name of peace, hate in the name of love.

“Ethics” in Islam is an ideology of double standards, internally warring dichotomies, and endless contradictions. Even its own Imams war among themselves on what is correct “interpretation.” That is why it can be fought with reason and overcome.

FP: Let’s finish up by talking some more about what can be done. Expand on the best way that free peoples who want to remain free can defend themselves against Sharia and Islamic Jihad. What is the wrong way to do it? What are the consequences?

Kumar: The wrong way to do it is for the liberal media and politicians to keep inhaling the opiate of Islamic propaganda about “peace, peace, peace, peace be upon you,” and blowing that toxic smoke all over the world. If we don’t shake them out of their narcoleptic slumber, their own children, or their children’s children–and ours as well–are going to be bowing in submission before the tyranny of Islamic domination and Sharia law on our own soil.

Here’s how the liberals and progressives can help: they should start an organization like the Peace Corps, called Free Americans for Islamic Rehabilitation–F.A.I.R.–that sends volunteers to all Islamic nations to demand tolerance and equal rights in those nations for all other religions, for women, for minorities, and for homosexuals. Now there would be true liberalism in action. We’ll see how far they get putting their money where their mouth is in an Islamic nation.

Meanwhile, those of us who are already awake have got to energetically build a coalition of free nations and people around the globe, regardless of race, creed, ethnicity, politics, or religion, and begin an information campaign that is more relentless and eternal than Universal Jihad. That sums up why I am running for Congress. I want to help build that coalition and help raise people’s awareness.

Our leaders have to come to grips with the fact that the seats of power of Universal Jihad are Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Pakistan. These are the command centers. They are openly declared enemies of every principle our nation was founded upon. We must treat them as such, or Universal Jihad will continue unabated around the world, flaring up endlessly as we pour more money and innocent blood down the drain.

We can win this war, and we can win it decisively, but we have got to recognize and name the true enemies of mankind and freedom, and take effective action in combating the ideology that drives them. Right now, our own State Department and government agencies are spending enormous amounts of dollars and energy defending the very ideology that wants to wipe them and our whole form of government from the face of the earth!

This is why I say repeatedly, as a central part of my campaign, and why I fully believe that war against Universal Jihadists can be won globally in less than five years, that it can be won for less than one billion dollars, and that can be won without any more loss of American or Western lives.

There are two great forces at work in this war. One is the totalitarian ideology of Islamic theocracy, which permits of no separation of church and state, no true freedom of thought, freedom of speech, or equal rights under the law. The other is our own  Declaration of Independence and our Constitution, which proclaim and guarantee human freedom, sovereignty, dignity, and basic inalienable human rights.

These two ideologies are diametrically and irrevocably and irreconcilably opposed. It is a war of ideas. It is a war of philosophies. They are mutually exclusive. One of them is going to win over the other.

Which will it be?

FP: Vijay Kumar, thank you for joining Frontpage Interview.

In Turkey just recently, a father and grandfather repeatedly beat Medine Memi, a sixteen-year-old girl, for the crime of talking (allegedly) to boys. The police weren’t interested. The beatings were eventually deemed insufficient punishment for Medine for the temerity of having her own human agency, so the father and grandfather killed her by burying her while she was “alive and fully conscious.”

My dear friend and courageous freedom fighter Phyllis Chesler has written about this barbaric murder and described it as a “savage, heartless, primitive act” that “is the ultimate, logical consequence of burying women alive—shrouding them–while they still roam the earth. One becomes claustrophobic under the burqa, until one gets used to being seen as a ghost, invisible, non-human, dead.”

Medine’s father is incredulous about why he has been arrested, explaining, matter-of-factly in his statements to the police, that his daughter had male friends and that the family was unhappy about it. This serves as a reminder of Muslim rapists casually testifying that their victims deserved their fate since they were either not veiled or weren’t Muslims. It also brings to mind when the Spanish Muslim cleric Mohamed Kamal Mustafa, to his great surprise, was prosecuted and sentenced to fifteen months in jail by a Spanish court for giving Muslim men specific instructions in a book on how to beat their wives. In court, he defended himself by arguing — correctly — that he was only repeating and interpreting passages from the Koran (i.e. Sura 4:34).

I can’t help from wondering: when are all the brave Western leftist feminists going to protest with vehement anger about the fate of Medine Memi and about the Islamic ideology that spawned her barbaric murder?

I wonder if we’ll be hearing from Naomi Wolf? She really cares about women’s rights, doesn’t she? Well, she thinks the burqa is “sexy,” we know that.

So the question must be asked: Does Naomi think throwing Medine Memi into a hole in the ground and burying her alive is sexy too? If she doesn’t think it’s sexy, where are her expressions of moral outrage at this vicious crime committed against a young Muslim girl, a crime that represents the horrible oppression of women under Islamic gender apartheid?

Could it just be that we won’t be hearing from Naomi Wolf — or from any of her like-minded “feminists” — because, when it comes down to it, she really doesn’t care about Medine Memi and other victims of Islamic gender apartheid? Could it be that she fully knows that if she speaks out on behalf of Medine, then she might have to speak out against the Islamic theology that engendered her murder? Could it be that Naomi Wolf fully knows this is a step she cannot take because doing so will destroy the entire foundation of her anti-American worldview and her conception of her own personal identity?

Well, we’re waiting for your howls of moral indignation about what happened to Medine Memi in any case, Ms. Wolf.

We know they will never come, neither from you, nor from the ranks of the feminist and progressive Left that you supposedly lead.

The question lingers: Do you have any sense of shame, at last?

In Turkey just recently, a father and grandfather repeatedly beat Medine Memi, a sixteen-year-old girl, for the crime of talking (allegedly) to boys. The police weren’t interested. The beatings were eventually deemed insufficient punishment for Medine for the temerity of having her own human agency, so the father and grandfather killed her by burying her while she was “alive and fully conscious.”

My dear friend and courageous freedom fighter Phyllis Chesler has written about this barbaric murder and described it as a “savage, heartless, primitive act” that “is the ultimate, logical consequence of burying women alive—shrouding them–while they still roam the earth. One becomes claustrophobic under the burqa, until one gets used to being seen as a ghost, invisible, non-human, dead.”

Medine’s father is incredulous about why he has been arrested, explaining, matter-of-factly in his statements to the police, that his daughter had male friends and that the family was unhappy about it. This serves as a reminder of Muslim rapists casually testifying that their victims deserved their fate since they were either not veiled or weren’t Muslims. It also brings to mind when the Spanish Muslim cleric Mohamed Kamal Mustafa, to his great surprise, was prosecuted and sentenced to fifteen months in jail by a Spanish court for giving Muslim men specific instructions in a book on how to beat their wives. In court, he defended himself by arguing — correctly — that he was only repeating and interpreting passages from the Koran (i.e. Sura 4:34).

I can’t help from wondering: when are all the brave Western leftist feminists going to protest with vehement anger about the fate of Medine Memi and about the Islamic ideology that spawned her barbaric murder?

I wonder if we’ll be hearing from Naomi Wolf? She really cares about women’s rights, doesn’t she? Well, she thinks the burqa is “sexy,” we know that.

So the question must be asked: Does Naomi think throwing Medine Memi into a hole in the ground and burying her alive is sexy too? If she doesn’t think it’s sexy, where are her expressions of moral outrage at this vicious crime committed against a young Muslim girl, a crime that represents the horrible oppression of women under Islamic gender apartheid?

Could it just be that we won’t be hearing from Naomi Wolf — or from any of her like-minded “feminists” — because, when it comes down to it, she really doesn’t care about Medine Memi and other victims of Islamic gender apartheid? Could it be that she fully knows that if she speaks out on behalf of Medine, then she might have to speak out against the Islamic theology that engendered her murder? Could it be that Naomi Wolf fully knows this is a step she cannot take because doing so will destroy the entire foundation of her anti-American worldview and her conception of her own personal identity?

Well, we’re waiting for your howls of moral indignation about what happened to Medine Memi in any case, Ms. Wolf.

We know they will never come, neither from you, nor from the ranks of the feminist and progressive Left that you supposedly lead.

The question lingers: Do you have any sense of shame, at last?

Most Iranians can remember the exact moments in their lives when they discovered that the Ayatollah Khomeini had died. For many Iranians, this was a joyous occasion and the cause of days of partying, drinking champagne and fanciful thinking about the fate of their country.  Schools were closed for forty days, and Iranians abroad remained attached to their television sets wondering if they would touch the soil of their homeland once again. Khomeini’s name was synonymous with the Revolution, the precarious social ambiance and the severe impact that Islamic ideology had on the country.  The root of that influence was now gone.

Khomeini, best known to the rest of the world as the founder of modern Islam, the supporter of the Hostage Crisis and the man who issued a fatwa (death decree) on the head of author Salman Rushdie, represented for the Iranian people a central chapter of their modern history that is both complicated and tragic. In the roughly ten years that he reigned, over 100,000 Iranians were executed. The Iran-Iraq war futilely dragged on for almost a decade, and persecuted Iranians across a multicolored Iranian population wondered what the Revolution had achieved.

Looking back at that time makes it difficult to understand how Islamic Republic leaders are now bringing back a cultish reverence for the Khomeini era. Since the post-election protests, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and likewise, reformist Presidential candidates Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karoubi have made serious efforts to revive a faux nostalgia for the late Ayatollah among the opposition.

On the part of the current regime, uniting their modus operandi with that of Khomeini’s gives them a legitimate claim to the Islamic Republic.  Recalling that period reminds Iranians of a time when they were curious to see what the Ayatollah Khomeini could offer them.

For the reformists, who are proposing ‘change,’ they are motivated to do so within the confines of the regime, making respect and support for the Khomeini camp a prerequisite to remain part of and function within the Islamic Republic. As a matter of fact, Mousavi and Karoubi have been quick to use Khomeini’s legacy to strengthen their constituency, alleging that the Ayatollah was a more righteous leader, and that Khamenei’s government has severely deviated from the principles initially set forth.

Besides bearing such resemblances in surnames, Khomeini and Khamenei share similarities beyond the superficial. Both support mass executions, terrorism, and a fundamentalist Islamic ideology. Khomeini was famous for the words, “We do not worship Iran.  We worship Allah. For patriotism is another name for paganism. I say let this land [Iran] burn. I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world.” To spread Islam and its influence was his agenda, not much different from the current regime. So inherent is Khomeini’s role in the Islamic Republic landscape that to eradicate his influence from the movement is to study the establishment of the American government system without George Washington, or better yet, to assess Nazism absent Adolph Hitler.

The cleansing of Khomeini’s image became en vogue under former President Mohammad Khatami, who sought to salvage the late Ayatollah’s bloody reputation and in effect absolve the regime, beginning at its very roots. It is said that Khatami began his campaign to change the then dull and disillusioned mood during his presidency and to purify Iran’s modern history.  It also might have to do with the fact that Khatami and Khomeini were related. Khatami’s brother, Mohammad Reza, is married to Khomeini’s granddaughter, Zahra Eshraghi.

Incidentally, the intricate web of marriages within the handful of regime dynasties does not stop at the Khatami and Khomeini families. Most staggeringly, the fathers of Mousavi and Khamenei are brothers, making them first cousins. The unions demonstrate how far the inner circle of the regime will go to preserve their stronghold.

Under every IRI leader since Khatami, there has been a push to glorify the name and legacy of Khomeini, a move the leaders believe will sustain the Islamic Republic. For the current government it relies on erasing a very recent history, and for the reformists, it means tying themselves to a retrospectively more ‘benevolent’ supreme leader, in order to say that not everything about the Islamic Republic is corrupt; it had its glory days too.

Making such a claim relies entirely on pandering to a population of Iranians under the age of 30, who do not clearly remember Khomeini’s track record. Or maybe they do remember it and choose not to. It is clearly more pleasant to remember a peaceful history rather than one dotted with executions, stonings and lack of human rights. The leaders may take advantage of the people’s yearning for a united Iran, albeit one that chooses to forget its own history and thus remains under the grips of an Islamic Republic.

When Khomeini’s picture was rampantly burned in the streets of Iran in early December during National Students’ Day, many believed that was, at the very least, a clear and overt indication that the unrest was certainly not just over a fraudulent election. More profoundly taken, burning the picture of the founder of the Islamic Republic represented a denunciation of a theocratic regime and a manifestation of a movement pro-secular.

Yet when the government announced that those in violation are deemed “moharreb,” or Enemies (of God), and subsequently blamed Mousavi and Karoubi for instigating the event, the reformist leaders then in turn blamed the government for staging the incident it in order to discredit the opposition as irreverent and sacrilegious. Subsequently, the Green party urged the opposition to carry pictures of Khomeini to demonstrations in reverence and to never burn or disrespect the late Ayatollah again. In the end, Khomeini actually emerged more popular and even more of a central player in the backdrop of the movement.

It is still not clear who was behind the original burning of the pictures, but the more poignant revelation was how radical the Iranian momentum has become. So incendiary was this incident that it triggered a fad across several continents of posting videos of burning Khomeini’s picture. There are dozens of such groups on Facebook and Youtube created for the cause. Groups such as “I burned Khomeini’s picture” on Facebook has almost 2,000 members. There is even a video capturing a “Burning Khomeini’s picture party” that takes place in Europe, that shows a large group of expatriate Iranians burning the Ayatollah’s picture.

These cyber campaigns, seeking to eradicate Khomeini’s legacy, were created in reaction to the regime’s campaign to exalt it. Freedom-seeking Iranians are warning their countrymen of what can happen if Iranians fail to recall history and fall into the trap of the regime once again.

With the FBI cutting off ties to the Council on American-Islamic Relations and now subpoenaing some 12,000 internal CAIR documents under temporary restraining order as part of the bureau’s ongoing criminal investigation of CAIR, the terrorist front group is suddenly cooperating with the FBI — or at least making a show of it.

Suddenly CAIR, an unindicted terrorist co-conspirator, is acting like a good citizen. Suddenly it’s concerned about young Muslim-American men going on jihad. Suddenly it’s concerned about “certain” passages of the Quran inspiring jihadists.

It’s all too little, too late.

Thanks to CAIR, 42 brave American soldiers were gunned down by an Islamic nut in Texas. That’s right, thanks to CAIR.

How so? For starters, it was the intimidating and ruthless CAIR that almost single-handedly created a climate of fear of reporting any suspicious anti-American behavior on the part of Muslim soldiers like Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, accused of the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11.

The CAIR-induced mass silence led to mass murder.

Fear in the military of being seen as anti-Muslim also blocked intellectually honest discussion of violent Islamic ideology in the ranks.

Thanks to CAIR, the military along with everyone else in government is terrified of associating terrorism with Islam. No one dares utter the M word, lest they be sued for discrimination or branded an “anti-Muslim bigot” or “Islamophobe” by CAIR’s smear merchants.

“There were definitely clear indications that Hasan’s loyalties were not with America,” said Lt. Col. Val Finnell, one of the Army doctors who served with Hasan. But nobody said anything because “there’s a political correctness climate in the military,” and everybody’s “afraid of an equal opportunity lawsuit.”

CAIR’s lawyers have filed thousands of EEOC complaints and lawsuits since 9/11. They’ve even gone after John Doe citizens who alerted airline crew to Muslim men behaving as menacingly and suspiciously as the 9/11 hijackers. CAIR’s “Flying While Muslim” anti-profiling campaign has had a chilling effect throughout the aviation security industry.

CAIR gulled non-Muslims into the kind of see-no-evil dhimmitude that allowed Hasan to carry out his alleged terror. Had anyone dared officially protest Hasan’s extremist views, they would have not only risked their military careers but potentially faced a lawsuit sponsored by CAIR.

Hasan was treated with kid gloves because CAIR demanded it.

Thanks to CAIR, a dozen soldiers lay dead, along with 29 wounded, some so severely they’ll never be deployed in the war on terror again, which is just fine by CAIR.

Since 9/11, the Saudi-funded front group has consistently and vehemently protested the war, even in Afghanistan, while defending the Taliban and other terrorists.

CAIR is the No. 1 generator of the false narrative that America is at war against Islam, which is the single-most compelling force motivating homegrown terrorists such as, allegedly, Hasan, who said as much in his PowerPoint diatribe and comments to colleagues. In fact, the chosen topic of his presentation was, “Is the War on Terror a war on Islam?”

Around the same time, CAIR’s then-chairman answered his question: “The United States is at war with Islam itself.”

Thus CAIR is the primary Muslim NGO fueling anti-American hostilities and extremism in the Muslim community.

CAIR at the same time has mocked concerns over growing Islamic extremism in America, effectively lowering our collective guard against attack.

“This is an isolated incident,” CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad said of the Fort Hood terrorist attack, even though it came on the heels of some 70 arrests of Muslims involved in homegrown terrorism over the previous 12 months.

“I don’t foresee a rise in religious extremism in the Muslim community,” CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper sniffed in 2007.

That same year, CAIR mounted a PR offensive against a prescient report from the intelligence branch of the NYPD. Entitled “Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat,” the report warned that seemingly law-abiding young Muslim men in America can be turned into terrorists through jihadi indoctrination.

CAIR quickly condemned the report as racist. And a confidential CAIR memo reveals its New York operatives feverishly lobbied NYPD officials to amend the report by softening its conclusion that young Muslim men pose a high security risk.

Following the Muslim Brotherhood playbook to Islamize in America, CAIR effectively has shut down all critical debate. CAIR and the Brotherhood are the enemy. And they are winning the propaganda war.

As part of their disinformation campaign, CAIR whitewashes the threat from jihad during Islamic-sensitivity training for the military, while pressuring brass to erect mosques to serve Muslim soldiers (and convert others), including the new one at Quantico. Its sister organization ISNA, meanwhile, goads the military into recruiting more Muslims, while certifying radical chaplains and lay leaders to counsel them.

No wonder commanders are blind to the jihadist threat in their midst. CAIR and the Muslim Mafia have thrown sand in their eyes. They run and control the Muslim racket in the military.

Hundreds of thousands of Muslims — including even some U.S. military officers — engage in or support jihad. It makes little sense that they all could misunderstand their religious obligations. Yet that’s the load of
manure CAIR is cramming down the throats of U.S. authorities, as it privately engages in and supports jihad itself.

CAIR and the 9/11 Mosque

In addition, CAIR has long supported the radical 9/11 mosque where Hasan worshipped, and still protects it from the investigative scrutiny (and bulldozers) it deserves. Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church, Va., is a known breeding ground for terrorists, including:

* Fugitive Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook, a former mosque leader to whom CAIR funneled at least $40,000.

* Top al-Qaida fundraiser Abdurahman Alamoudi, a one-time CAIR director now serving 23 years in federal prison for terrorism.

* Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, the would-be al-Qaida presidential assassin who trained with a cell led by a former CAIR official.

* Mohammed al-Hanooti, a current mosque leader and unindicted co-conspirator in both the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and recent Holy Land Foundation terror finance case.

* Ismail Elbarasse, a founding mosque member and leader who was arrested for allegedly casing the Chesapeake Bay bridge for attack.

* Abdelhaleem Ashqar, mosque leader and suspected Hamas operative recently convicted for obstruction of justice.

* Abdullah bin Laden, nephew of the al-Qaida kingpin whose name appears on the federal terrorist watchlist.

*  Hani Hanjour, 9/11 hijacker and Saudi national who flew the jumbo jet into the Pentagon.

* Nawaf al-Hazmi, 9/11 hijacker and Saudi national who joined Hanjour  on the Pentagon flight and acted as second in command of the entire al-Qaida operation behind hijacking ringleader Mohamed Atta.

After 9/11, investigators found the phone number for Dar al-Hijrah in the Hamburg, Germany, apartment of one of the planners of the 9/11 attacks — Ramzi Binalshibh, a Gitmo detainee who will soon stand trial in Manhattan, if the Obama administration has its way.

Constructed with $5 million from the Saudi Embassy and run by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, Dar al-Hijrah is a terror mill and a direct threat to national security. Yet the only thing standing in the way of the mosque and justice is CAIR, which also happens to be a threat to national security.

CAIR maintains a booth at the mosque, and coordinates fundraising with it. Last year the group listed Dar al-Hijrah among its main supporters — along with the Saudi Embassy. The mosque’s leaders are listed as VIP contacts in CAIR’s executive Rolodex.

And once a month, Dar al-Hijrah’s lead imam — Shaker Elsayed — meets with top CAIR officials on the first floor of their D.C. headquarters. Elsayed has said that Muslims have the right to use violence. “We do have license to respond with all force necessary to our attackers.”

He also says he believes in the teachings of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna, which he describes as “the closest reflection of how Islam should be in this life.”

Here’s a sample of what the late al-Banna taught: “Islam wishes to do way with all states and governments anywhere which are opposed to this ideology and program of Islam. Islam requires the earth — not just a portion, but the entire planet.”

Also joining the monthly CAIR breakfast: Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison, the nation’s first Muslim member of Congress.

Another imam at the mosque, Johari Abdul Malik, has preached to American Muslims that they are within Islamic law to “blow up bridges” and other infrastructure. “You can do all forms of sabotage,” he said in a 2001 Hamas conference.

He’s also called for Islamic supremacy in America.

“We will see the day when Islam, by the grace of Allah, will become the dominant way of life,” Malik told his flock in 2004. “You will see Islam move from being the second largest religion in America to being the first
religion in America.”

Malik is a close friend of the former Dar al-Hijrah imam, Anwar al-Awlaki, who privately ministered to the 9/11 hijackers. After the attacks, Awlaki fled to London, where he gave a sermon extolling the virtues of martyrdom.

In an interview with me, Malik defended his friend’s sermon, arguing Muslims who die while fighting unbelievers in the cause of Allah are no different from U.S. Marines fighting and dying for America in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“That’s the same thing as telling Marines in this country semper fidelis,” Malik said. “Telling people to give their all for their faith is not an unusual idea.”

His mosque handled the funeral services of Maj. Hasan’s mother when she passed away in 2001. It was then that Hasan fell under the spell of Dar al-Hijrah cleric Awlaki, aka Aulaqi.

CAIR and the 9/11 Imam

One of al-Qaida’s top Western recruiters, Awlaki is considered a rock star among jihadists, and has cultivated fans among CAIR officials. Hooper’s protege Ismail Royer and his terrorist cell chauffeured Awlaki around
Washington as he looked for new terrorist recruits. Prosecutors also found his phone number stored on their cell phones.

Currently heading his booster club within the organization, with Royer now behind bars, is the civil-rights coordinator for CAIR’s Los Angeles chapter, Affad Shaikh, who has listened to Awlaki’s lectures and posted links to his Web site on his blog Muslamics.

Shaikh, who in 2008 was questioned by Homeland Security agents near San Diego, appears to have a death wish.

“In death there is something to celebrate,” he recently wrote on his blog in a post titled “Celebrating Death.” The essay mirrors one Awlaki previously posted on another Web site titled “Why Muslims Love Death.”

“Our culture of martyrdom needs to be revived,” the imam preaches, “because the enemy of Allah fears nothing more than our love of death.”

Global Islamic domination is the goal.

“We will implement the rule of Allah on earth by the tip of the sword whether the masses like it or not,” Awlaki has written.

In the final slide of Hasan’s 50-slide PowerPoint screed on Islam, he borrowed a page from Awlaki’s hatebook, warning fellow Army doctors: “We love death more than you love life.”

He also wrote: “If Muslim groups can convince Muslims that they are fighting for God against injustices of the ‘infidels’: ie: enemies of Islam, then Muslims can become a potent adversary ie: suicide bombing, etc.”

He no doubt had Muslim groups like CAIR in mind, which have certainly accomplished that goal through radical propaganda and the financing of suicide bombings through charitable fronts groups.

Al-Qaida’s Awlaki, whom Hooper describes simply as “a former Virginia imam,” has spoken at Islamic conferences with longtime CAIR director and fundraiser Siraj Wahhaj.

Establishing an Islamic State

Army doctors recall Hasan declaring Islamic law trumped the U.S. Constitution as the supreme law of the land. “I’m a Muslim first and I hold the Shariah, the Islamic law, before the United States Constitution,” he
said.

Hasan also encouraged Muslims to fight to “establish an Islamic state” in America.

Where have we heard this before? From none other than CAIR’s founding chairman, Omar Ahmad, who once told a Muslim audience: “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Quran should be the highest authority in America.”

And we’ve also heard it from CAIR communications director Hooper, who last decade let it slip out 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.”

CAIR and Hasan share the same radical agenda.

CAIR may bill itself as a “civil-rights advocacy group,” but the FBI says
that far from being a benign nonprofit, it’s a front group for Hamas
terrorists and the radical Muslim Brotherhood in America. And the bureau
last year cut off formal ties to CAIR’s national office in Washington and
all 30 of its branch offices across the country.

CAIR at the time blamed the severance policy on the “right-wing” Bush administration, and confidently predicted that a Democrat administration would restore relations. No such luck. Nearly a year into the Obama administration, CAIR remains frozen out. Even the Muslim-friendly President Obama has not helped CAIR, much to its chagrin.

At the same time, the Justice Department has blacklisted CAIR as an unindicted terrorist co-conspirator in the largest terror finance case in U.S. history, the Holy Land Foundation trial. It ended in convictions on all
108 counts.

Prosecutors have also connected CAIR to the Muslim Brotherhood, a worldwide
jihadist movement that seeks to institutionalize Shariah law (think:
Taliban) in America and the West through immigration, coercion and political
infiltration.

“From its founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists,” assistant U.S. Attorney Gordon Kromberg stated in a court filing.

The Brotherhood is the parent of Hamas and al-Qaida. They share the same goals but use different methods to achieve them. “The only difference between the guys in the suits and the guys with the AK-47s is timing and tactics,” explains an FBI official in Washington.

The FBI last year severed ties to CAIR, citing court evidence that its leaders were participating in an “ongoing” conspiracy to support terrorists. Democrat Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York has requested that the FBI’s anti-CAIR ban “should be government-wide policy.”

CAIR’s Proven Ties to Terrorists

No fewer than 15 CAIR officials have been convicted or implicated in terrorism investigations since 9/11 — including its founding chairman, Ahmad, and acting executive director, Nihad Awad. The two Palestinian
refugees participated in a secret Hamas meeting (wiretapped by the FBI) whereby a plot was hatched to disguise payments to suicide bombers as charity. Millions subsequently were funneled to Hamas through the Holy Land charity.

And the CAIR co-founders remain under government suspicion, as a result of evidence emerging from the Holy Land terror trial.

“During that trial, evidence was introduced that demonstrated a relationship among CAIR, individual CAIR founders (including its current President Emeritus and its Executive Director) and … HAMAS,” wrote assistant FBI Director Richard Powers in an April 2009 letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Tipping Off Terror Targets

Meantime, CAIR and its surrogates are spying on the FBI. The group has cultivated spies inside a Washington-area law enforcement agency, which resulted in at least one Muslim cop representing CAIR on the force searching a classified federal database and then tipping off a fellow Muslim who had been under FBI surveillance as a terrorist suspect.

CAIR also is aggressively lobbying to deny law enforcement tools needed to crack down on terrorists and protect the nation from another 9/11.

CAIR is a tax-exempt nonprofit bound by IRS rules restricting lobbying activities; yet in one year alone, internal records show CAIR officials made 72 separate trips to Congress to lobby to kill the USA Patriot Act.

Concerned members of Congress led by intrepid Rep. Sue Myrick have asked the IRS to audit CAIR and its shady financing. Americans should know the following about this unregistered foreign lobbyist:

* CAIR’s major funding comes from Persian Gulf sources, including Saudi Arabia, and not from grass-roots domestic supporters as it publicly claims (in fact, membership dues now account for a puny 1% of CAIR’s total revenue).

* CAIR leaders, including spokesman Hooper, travel frequently to the Middle East to personally raise cash.

* Bank wire records published exclusively in “Muslim Mafia” show a Saudi royal family member recently transferred more than $110,000 directly into CAIR’s bank account at Citibank, for example.

* After 9/11, the ruler of Dubai took a nearly $1 million stake in CAIR’s headquarters, just three blocks from the U.S. Capitol, and has pledged millions more.

* “Do not think about your contributions [to CAIR] as donations,” CAIR’s former chairman told CAIR’s UAE patrons. “Think about it from the perspective of rate of return. The investment of $50 million will give you
billions of dollars in return for 50 years.”

CAIR is selling its services to the UAE and Saudi governments by doing their ideological and commercial bidding.

Yet CAIR is not registered as a foreign agent, as required by the Justice Department. And it has never disclosed its foreign funding or relationships with countries tied to 9/11 and potentially still hostile to U.S. interests.

CAIR says it’s the Muslim ACLU. But it’s the Muslim ACORN — only more dangerous because it’s backed by Arab governments, supports terrorism, and ultimately seeks to convert the U.S. into an Islamic police state modeled after Saudi Arabia.

Make no mistake. Do not be fooled by the moderate mask. Or the belated patriotic rhetoric. CAIR wants the same demise for America as al-Qaida does.

CAIR helps terrorists, and hates the FBI.

That’s because CAIR is one of the bad guys.

CAIR is America’s enemy.

CAIR is your enemy.

Sperry, a Hoover Institution media fellow, is author of “Infiltration” and co-author of the new book, “Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America.” Email: Sperry@SperryFiles.com.

But is anyone listening? Pamela Geller reviews Wafa Sultan's superb and essential new book for FrontPage:

Wafa Sultan's seminal moment was when she took on an Islamic cleric on Al-Jazeera. The clip went viral on Youtube, and it really was a defining moment in the clash of civilizations. Here was a woman, basically considered "property" in the Muslim world and expected to do what she was told, turning around after she had been interrupted numerous times, and saying in effect, "Quiet, it's my turn."

Now comes her new book, A God Who Hates, which will undoubtedly prove to be a key resource in the resistance to jihad and Islamization. In it, the brilliant psychiatrist from Syria, now an American citizen, tells her own story.

It is the story of a Muslim woman who grew up in a country where she was indoctrinated in Islamic ideology. So her perspective is very important in terms of establishing the credibility of scholars like Robert Spencer and Dr. Andrew Bostom. But what makes this book great, apart from its breathtaking honesty and truth and the clarity and urgency of its warning, is that it is also a beautiful love letter to America.

Wafa speaks powerfully about what America means to her. It manifests itself in little things. She leaves her house at 5 am and makes her way to Starbucks to have her coffee without fearing that someone might see her and accuse her of immoral behavior. To her, America means saying "good morning" to her neighbor and chatting with him for a few moments without being accused of having spent the night with him. America, for this courageous woman, means that her daughter can come home and tell her that she had lunch with her boyfriend without being beaten or accused of having impugned the family honor.

It is clear throughout A God Who Hates that Wafa Sultan was always a very independent thinker, even though there were times in her life when she did not immediately allow herself to go to the next step to which her thinking was leading her. She writes lovingly about her husband, who was very supportive of her. He was an open-minded thinker -- initially more so than was Wafa herself. But she recounts in the book certain momentous events that jarred her thinking, such as in 1979 when Muslims screaming "Allahu akbar" murdered one of her professors, the ophthalmology lecturer Dr. Yusef Al-Yusef, whom she respected and admired. Wafa witnessed the murder - and at that exact moment started to question the nature of the Islamic faith.

"But I was afraid," she explained when I interviewed her recently, "to express my feelings. I was afraid to express my thoughts, because under Islamic sharia, a Muslim who dares to leave Islam or dares to convert to any other religion is to be killed. And every Muslim has the right to kill someone who has left Islam without being asked a question. This is the Islamic law. Once you were born as a Muslim, you're not allowed to leave it. This is simply the Islamic law, and it seems to me it's very hard to convince Americans that this is the way it is."

The recent Rifqa Bary apostasy case shows how right Wafa is about that, and how urgent her message is. Rifqa Bary is the teenage girl, a Muslim in Ohio, who left Islam four years ago and converted to Christianity. When her father found out about her conversion, she fled from her home in fear for her life. She said she ran away to Florida because she wanted to get as far away as she could -- because not only her family but the mosque and the community in Ohio is very devout, and as an apostate she is in danger. But now she has been returned to Ohio, in large part because American authorities don't know anything about Islamic apostasy law....

Read it all.

A God Who Hates: The Courageous Woman Who Inflamed the Muslim World Speaks Out Against the Evils of Islam.
By Wafa Sultan
St. Martin’s Press, 2009
256 pages

Wafa Sultan’s seminal moment was when she took on an Islamic cleric on Al-Jazeera. The clip went viral on Youtube, and it really was a defining moment in the clash of civilizations. Here was a woman, basically considered “property” in the Muslim world and expected to do what she was told, turning around after she had been interrupted numerous times, and saying in effect, “Quiet, it’s my turn.”

Now comes her new book, A God Who Hates, which will undoubtedly prove to be a key resource in the resistance to jihad and Islamization. In it, the brilliant psychiatrist from Syria, now an American citizen, tells her own story.

It is the story of a Muslim woman who grew up in a country where she was indoctrinated in Islamic ideology. So her perspective is very important in terms of establishing the credibility of scholars like Robert Spencer and Dr. Andrew Bostom. But what makes this book great, apart from its breathtaking honesty and truth and the clarity and urgency of its warning, is that it is also a beautiful love letter to America.

Wafa speaks powerfully about what America means to her. It manifests itself in little things. She leaves her house at 5 am and makes her way to Starbucks to have her coffee without fearing that someone might see her and accuse her of immoral behavior. To her, America means saying “good morning” to her neighbor and chatting with him for a few moments without being accused of having spent the night with him. America, for this courageous woman, means that her daughter can come home and tell her that she had lunch with her boyfriend without being beaten or accused of having impugned the family honor.

It is clear throughout A God Who Hates that Wafa Sultan was always a very independent thinker, even though there were times in her life when she did not immediately allow herself to go to the next step to which her thinking was leading her. She writes lovingly about her husband, who was very supportive of her. He was an open-minded thinker — initially more so than was Wafa herself. But she recounts in the book certain momentous events that jarred her thinking, such as in 1979 when Muslims screaming “Allahu akbar” murdered one of her professors, the ophthalmology lecturer Dr. Yusef Al-Yusef, whom she respected and admired. Wafa witnessed the murder – and at that exact moment started to question the nature of the Islamic faith.

“But I was afraid,” she explained when I interviewed her recently, “to express my feelings. I was afraid to express my thoughts, because under Islamic sharia, a Muslim who dares to leave Islam or dares to convert to any other religion is to be killed. And every Muslim has the right to kill someone who has left Islam without being asked a question. This is the Islamic law. Once you were born as a Muslim, you’re not allowed to leave it. This is simply the Islamic law, and it seems to me it’s very hard to convince Americans that this is the way it is.”

The recent Rifqa Bary apostasy case shows how right Wafa is about that, and how urgent her message is. Rifqa Bary is the teenage girl, a Muslim in Ohio, who left Islam four years ago and converted to Christianity. When her father found out about her conversion, she fled from her home in fear for her life. She said she ran away to Florida because she wanted to get as far away as she could — because not only her family but the mosque and the community in Ohio is very devout, and as an apostate she is in danger. But now she has been returned to Ohio, in large part because American authorities don’t know anything about Islamic apostasy law.

If they had read A God Who Hates, Rifqa might be in a safer place today. “This case,” said Wafa, “showed America in a very ugly light, that we will sacrifice a young girl on the altar of political correctness rather than do the right thing.”

A God Who Hates is a devastating book, coming from a most reliable witness. “My book,” Wafa told me, “is about my personal life. In my book I lead my readers step by step throughout my life, from A to Z, so they can figure out what has changed me, what has helped me to break free from Islam. It didn’t happen overnight. It took many years and a great deal of pain to reach where I am today. Through my book I am trying to send a message to the West, that Islam is a hateful ideology and it’s very dangerous for Islam to be established in this free country. This is my message to the West.”

Wafa Sultan is trying to get her message to the Muslim world, not just to the West. Hers is a very powerful voice, and one that Islamic supremacists would very much like to silence. As she told me in our interview: “It’s very dangerous to go against Islam. Prior to my book release I was forced to go into hiding, fearing for my safety and for my family’s safety. I received death threats on a daily basis, and I know what they mean by telling me that, I know how bitter they are, I was one of them. I can very much understand the mindset of Muslims.”

Nevertheless, despite the immense risks, A God Who Hates will be translated into Arabic and made available in the Arab-Muslim world. And it is a must read for all free people. This is a book that you not only have to read, but to give to the people in your office. Give it to your daughters, give it to your children. Show them why they should love America, and fight to defend her from the Islamic oppression that Wafa Sultan escaped.

[To order a copy of A God Who Hates, click here.]

Pamela Geller is the founder, editor and publisher of the popular and award-winning weblog AtlasShrugs.com. She has won acclaim for her interviews with internationally renowned figures, including John Bolton, Geert Wilders, Bat Ye’or, Natan Sharansky, and many others, and has broken numerous important stories — notably the questionable sources of some of the financing of the Obama campaign. Her op-eds have been published in The Washington Times, The American Thinker, Israel National News, Frontpage Magazine, Big Government, World Net Daily, and New Media Journal, among other publications. She is the co-author (with Robert Spencer) of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America (forward by Ambassador John Bolton), coming soon from Simon and Schuster.