Re-litigating the Holy Land Foundation Trial?


Yesterday (2/12/20) Brigitte Gabriel via ACT for America sent out an email alerting her readers that terrorist supporting Islamic organizations are beginning public and legal pressure to remove their Islamic terrorist connections associated with the Holy Land Foundation trial that ended with several guilty verdicts for supporting Hamas Islamic terrorism.

 

The ACT for America website picked up a 2/7/20 Center for Security Policy (CSP) story on the attempt to erase the unindicted co-conspirator list in America.

 

JRH 2/13/20

Your generosity is always appreciated – various credit, check 

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business – 

OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee.

 

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protester restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

**************************

Re-litigating the Holy Land Foundation Trial?

 

Sent Brigitte Gabriel

Sent Feb 12, 2020, 4:34 AM

Email from ACT for America

 

Hamas Linked “Bridge Initiative” wants to re-litigate the Holy Land Foundation Trial

 

The ultimate goal of the Bridge Initiative is to remove Hamas/CAIR and other radical Islamic organizations from the designated terrorist list. The Bin Talal Center claims that the terrorist designation raises issues about “due process, equal protection, judicial deference, the chilling of free speech…”

 

This is how the EU weasels out of designating Hezbollah as a terrorist entity!

 

I’ve detailed where projects like the Bridge Initiative get their funding extensively in my book, “Because They Hate.” In 2006 alone, Georgetown University received 28.1 million US dollars from Saudi Arabia to fund programs like their Bridge Initiative.

 

In 2009, at the request of the White House, Georgetown University covered all religious symbols during an address given by Obama — Georgetown is the oldest Catholic and Jesuit institution of higher education in the United States.

 

+++++++++++++++++

Hamas-linked “Bridge Initiative” wants to re-litigate Holy Land Foundation trial

 

Georgetown University building

 

By  Kyle Shideler

Originally Published on the Center for Security Policy

CSP Date 2/7/20

ACT for America

 

The Bridge Initiative, a project of the Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim Christian Understanding, continues to embarrass its host, Georgetown University, this time by publishing a “factsheet” in defense of the convicted Hamas fundraising organization known as the Holy Land Foundation.

 

The sheet is short on facts, and long on emotional appeal. It distorts basic facts about the Holy Land Foundation case, in which the nation’s largest Islamic charity and five of its employees were convicted on 104 felony counts, including providing material support for the terrorist organization Hamas.

 

While the Bridge Initiative wants to relitigate the HLF case, wholly endorsing arguments made by the defense that were soundly rejected by judge and jury, ultimately what it seeks to do in their factsheet is argue that Hamas should not be designated as a terrorist organization at all. They likewise condemn U.S. Treasury Terrorism designation efforts in general, despite these efforts being a mainstay of the effort to combat terrorism since 9/11.

 

The Jewish Journal describes the project’s factsheet noting,

 

“The fact sheet says that Hamas ‘was founded in Palestine in 1987 as a political and social organization, with an armed wing aimed at resisting the Israeli occupation of Palestine.’ It acknowledges that the United States designated Hamas a terror organization in 1997, but then states that designating Hamas as a terror group “has been criticized by legal scholars as being politicized by the State Department, and as raising issues concerning due process, equal protection, judicial deference, the chilling of free speech, and having ‘disparate impact on the Arab Muslim community.’”

 

The defenders of Hamas have long relied on the false distinction that the group has an “armed wing” which engages in violence, claiming the majority of the group merely performs otherwise legal work in the social and political spheres.  Ironically, Hamas’ own founder rejected the distinction between armed and unarmed wings, and the organization is tightly integrated. Terrorist activities take place under the direction of the group’s political leadership, as Matt Levitt, Author of “Hamas: Politics, Charity and Terrorism in Service of Jihad” has ably documented.

 

It’s no surprise that Bridge Initiative would be playing the role of Hamas apologist, given that its founder, John Esposito, has a history with the very Hamas network of which the Holy Land Foundation was the prominent member. Esposito served as a member of the advisory editorial board for the journal of the United Association for Studies and Research (UASR). UASR, which the federal government described as a Hamas “think tank”, was founded by Mousa Abu Marzook, currently deputy chairman of Hamas’ political bureau. UASR’s executive director and the editor of the journal of which Esposito was an advisor, Ahmad Yousef, who went on to serve as a Hamas spokesman.

 

Esposito’s Bridge Initiative is not alone among groups with questionable ties seeking to memory-hole the reality of the Holy Land Foundation Trial. The Charity and Security Network (CSN), a project of the Center for Effective Government (formerly OMB Watch), has been a leader in this regard. CSN also attempts to paint the Holy Land Foundation case as an overly broad smear of Muslim charities. As Sam Westrop of Middle East Forum has ably demonstrated, however, CSN itself receives funding and support from several charities with known links to terror finance.

 

First designated for its terror ties in 2001, and convicted in 2008, it seems that HLF’s partisans believe the time is right to proclaim these Hamas financiers as champions of virtue wrongly convicted. They are no doubt counting on the fact that few in 2020 remember the long trial or the copious documentary and surveillance evidence the government produced in the case. They likewise are convinced of their ability to falsely slander those experts who have studied the case as Islamophobes and bigots.

 

But it isn’t going to work.

++++++++++++++++++++++

BLOG EDITOR: I’ve apparently been placed in restricted Facebook Jail! The restriction was relegated after criticizing Democrats for supporting abortion in one post and criticizing Virginia Dems for gun-grabbing legislation and levying protester restrictions. Rather than capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post and share until the Leftist censors ban me completely. Conservatives are a huge portion of Facebook. If more or all Conservatives are banned, it will affect the Facebook advertising revenue paradigm. SO FIGHT CENSORSHIP BY SHARE – SHARE – SHARE!!! Facebook notified me in pop-up on 1/20/20: “You’re temporarily restricted from joining and posting to groups that you do not manage until April 18 at 7:04 PM.”

____________________________________

DONATE to ACT for America

 

© 2019 ACT Content LLC. This may not be reproduced for commercial purposes. ACT for America Education, Inc. is a registered 501 c (3) organization.


Address: 1300 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 190, #614, Washington D.C., 20004 USA

 

Killer Pseudo-Palestinian Terrorists as Human Rights Activists?


John R. Houk

© August 8, 2019

 

As a Christian Zionist I’ve never believed the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians should get 0ne inch of the Biblically Promised Land God gave to the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; then God enabled the first Jewish possession under the leadership of Moses and Joshua.

 

I realize that is a minority opinion in this world’s geopolitics. And I believe my opinion is even vilified by Left-Wing Jews globally and in Israel, more concerned about their politics than their God-given heritage.

 

Saying that, there are MUSLIMS in Congress that are supporters of Arab-Islamic terrorists calling themselves Palestinians that these Muslim members of the U.S. Congress call the indiscriminate murder (oft times butchery) of Jewish men, women and children human rights activism. I’m telling you this terrorist focus against Jews by Arabs who call themselves Palestinians make themselves undeserving of political power ANYWHERE let alone in their own fake nation that might be called Palestine.

 

Clare Lopez illustrates the picture of these Arab-Islamic-Palestinian killers centering on Congress member Rashida Tlaib.

 

JRH 8/8/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

********************

Rashida Tlaib Glorifies Palestinian Terror While HAMAS, Iran & the PA Pay For It

 

Rashida Tlaib at her campaign headquarters in Detroit Michigan 8/7/18

 

By Clare M. Lopez

August 8, 2019

Center for Security Policy (CSP)

 

No, Representative Tlaib, when two Palestinian savages stabbed to death five members of the Jewish Fogel family in their home in 2011, including an 11-year-old, a 3-year-old, and a little baby only 3 months old, they were not “human rights activists.” That is called terrorism, even though the murderous Palestinian Authority (PA) will pay to the families of the two killers a monthly stipend of $3,200 each as long as they remain jailed in an Israeli prison.

 

What about the Palestinian savage who fatally stabbed Ari Fuld, a dual U.S.-Israeli citizen, father of four and grandson of a Holocaust survivor, one day in 2018 when he was out shopping? That savage, another Palestinian from a village near Hebron, was shot by the heroic Fuld before he himself collapsed, but his family will be receiving around $400 a month from the ever-generous Palestinian Authority while he spends the rest of his life in jail. Then there was Omar al-Abed, who stabbed a Jewish father and two of his children to death and seriously injured his wife in a July 2017 attack.  The PA will be paying his family $3,120/month as a reward for that depravity.

 

These payments are nothing less than incitement to murder and terror. Thankfully, the Taylor-Force Act passed the U.S. Congress in March 2018 and will halt U.S. funding to the PA until it stops paying Palestinian killers and their families for heinous acts of pure evil. But given the depth of the hatred spewed by Palestinian terrorists and their official HAMAS and PA enablers, who vow to continue the payments anyway, that may not be enough.

 

Unfortunately, it is the Iranian-regime-funded HAMAS, PA, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ)—and those who insist upon funding them through the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) and other programs—that poison the minds of young Palestinians from the earliest ages, teaching them that Islam holds  it  glorious to murder Jews because they are Jews, an act they are told will earn them Allah’s approval and eternal reward (on top of those payments to their families). That is called Islamic supremacy, Rep. Tlaib.

 

When a Palestinian suicide bomber detonated his shrapnel-laden explosives inside a Sbarro Pizza shop in 2001, killing mothers, fathers, and children, maybe that wasn’t terrorism either? Or when a HAMAS suicide bomber massacred 30 innocent people and injured 140 in the 2002 Passover attack at the Park Hotel in Netanya, he was just trying to promote human rights? No, the Palestinian savages responsible for those atrocities thought they were going to be shaheeds, rewarded with the 72 virgins in paradise that Islam promises to such monsters. They might even get to have a park, school, or street named after them, to inspire future generations to more such depravity.

 

Until the Palestinians, whether it’s HAMAS and PIJ in Gaza or the PA in Ramallah, stop running children’s summer camps and TV programming that teach young Palestinians genocidal Jew-hatred and provide the paramilitary training to act out that hatred, there will never be peace in the Middle East. But, although her parents were immigrants from Jerusalem and the West Bank, Rashida Tlaib (D-Michigan) herself was born and raised in the United States. She graduated from Detroit, Michigan public schools. We Americans obviously have some work to do right here at home: what kind of education at home, in madrassa, mosque, or public school turned out a graduate imbued with such hatred as Tlaib’s? Unless we root out the inculcation of such Jew-hatred and glorification of Islamic terror right here in the USA, there will be more like her, possibly even in the U.S. Congress.

 

Murder of innocent human beings just because they are Jews is not human rights activism, Representative Tlaib. It is a despicable crime against humanity called terrorism.

______________________

Killer Pseudo-Palestinian Terrorists as Human Rights Activists?

John R. Houk

© August 8, 2019

_____________________

Rashida Tlaib Glorifies Palestinian Terror While HAMAS, Iran & the PA Pay For It

 

Clare M. Lopez is Vice President for Research & Analysis at the Center for Security Policy.  She previously was a Senior Fellow with the Center as well as with the London Center for Policy Research, member of Sen. Ted Cruz’ 2016 presidential campaign national security advisory team, Executive Director of the Iran Policy Committee, and a career operations officer with the CIA. Read her complete bio here. Follow Lopez on Twitter @ClareMLopez

 

Copyright © 1988-2018 Center for Security Policy | All Rights Reserved 

 

SUPPORT CSP with a DONATION

 

ABOUT CSP

 

The “Trump Hid His Meetings with Putin” Stories Begin to Unravel


Fake News exposed AGAIN!

 

JRH 1/15/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

******************

The “Trump Hid His Meetings with Putin” Stories Begin to Unravel

 

By Fred Fleitz

January 15, 2019

Center for Security Policy

Over the weekend the mainstream media launched a new ploy to promote their Trump-Russia collusion narrative with a story that first appeared in the Washington Post titled “Officials in dark on Putin talks.” A similar piece was published in the Wall Street Journal today, “Trump didn’t use notetakers at Putin/ Meeting.” Cable News networks and Democratic congressmen claimed these stories indicated that President Trump held secret discussions with Russian President Putin that were revealed to no one. For example, Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) told CNN on Sunday that the U.S. government ‘does not know’ what Trump and Putin discussed.

 

These stories were misleading, if not mostly false. First, they neglected to mention that the President’s decision to restrict access to read-outs of his one-on-one meetings with Putin were due to the extraordinary number of leaks to the press of his phone calls and meetings with foreign officials at the beginning of his presidency.

 

Second, it is untrue that senior officials are unaware of what was discussed in President Trump’s meetings with Putin.

 

Concerning Trump’s first meeting with Putin in 2017, although a notetaker reportedly was not present and Mr. Trump allegedly took possession of his interpreter’s notes, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson attended this meeting and provided a detailed read-out to senior U.S. officials. It is clear that the unnamed officials cited in the Washington Post piece on the 2017 Trump-Putin meeting were irritated they were not provided with copies of Tillerson’s read-out of the meeting, not that there wasn’t a read-out. It also is ridiculous for the press to assert that President Trump said something nefarious to Putin with Tillerson present.

 

Concerning President Trump’s one-on-one meeting with Putin in Helsinki last July, I can attest as former National Security Council Executive Secretary and Chief of Staff that senior U.S. officials – including myself – knew everything that was discussed. Again, the real issue here is that some U.S. officials are irritated they were excluded from read-outs of this meeting and voiced their frustrations to the press.

 

The media’s claim that this story amounts to a U.S. president concealing his secret discussions with the Russian president as part of his alleged collusion with Russia is fake news. Senior U.S. officials knew exactly what was discussed in these meetings. This story is really about a successful effort by President Trump to prevent anti-Trump government officials from leaking sensitive national security information to the press.

 

Good job President Trump!

_______________________

About Fred Fleitz

 

Fred Fleitz is President and CEO of the Center for Security Policy. He recently served as a Deputy Assistant to President Trump and Chief of Staff to National Security Adviser John Bolton. He previously worked in national security positions for 25 years with CIA, DIA, the Department of State and the House Intelligence Committee staff. Read his complete bio here. Follow Fleitz on Twitter @fredfleitz.

 

 Copyright © 1988-2018 Center for Security Policy | All Rights Reserved

 

About CSP

 

The Center for Security Policy was founded in July 1988 by 30 national security policy practitioners united by an overarching goal – to perpetuate the time-tested policy Ronald Reagan used to such transformative effect during his presidency: “Peace through Strength.” Led by Frank Gaffney, a former Reagan Defense Department official and aide to Senators Henry “Scoop” Jackson and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Tower, they founded an non-partisan, educational public policy organization with a single, overarching mission: secure freedom.

 

“What an exemplary organization you are — devoting yourselves to the pursuit of peace and national security.  I can think of no loftier purpose or goal.” — 1995 letter from President Ronald Reagan to the Center for Security Policy

 

The Center has diligently advanced that goal ever since through a combination of: cutting-edge public policy research; the skillful and evolving use of multi-media platforms for outreach to – and impact with – the nation’s leadership and people; and, most uniquely, the creation and direction of coalitions to undertake effective advocacy.

 

In its early days, the READ THE REST

 

DeSantis Hearing Establishes the Muslim Brotherhood Must Be…


The Muslim Brotherhood should have been declared terrorist organization decades ago. Thanks to a hearing at the Subcommittee on National Security of the House oversight committee chaired by Ron DeSantis, the terrorist designation seems closer than ever.

 

JRH 7/12/18

Please Support NCCR

**********************

DeSantis Hearing Establishes the Muslim Brotherhood Must Be Designated as a Terrorist Organization – the Sooner, the Better

 

Press Release Contact: Deborah Hamilton

Sent 7/11/2018 6:25 PM

Sent From: Center for Security Policy

 

WASHINGTON, D.C.— It is no longer a question of whether the United States will designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization. It is only a matter of when and how.

 

That’s the principal take-away from a congressional national security panel this morning that addressed “The Muslim Brotherhood’s Global Threat” and what the US should do about it.

 

“This hearing is an opportunity to discuss what the United States’ next step should be in combatting the Muslim Brotherhood’s threat,” said Congressman Ron DeSantis (R-FL), chairman of the Subcommittee on National Security of the House oversight committee.

 

“The Muslim Brotherhood is a militant Islamist organization with affiliates in over 70 countries,” DeSantis said. “There’s no question that the Muslim Brotherhood’s affiliates are involved in terrorism.”

 

The historic hearing follows a June 28 Center for Security Policy Decision Brief that called on the Trump Administration to declare the entire Muslim Brotherhood and its fronts and affiliates as terrorist organizations.

 

“Thankfully the Trump Administration has discarded the Obama-era policy of treating the Brotherhood as a potential ally,” DeSantis said. “Now, the questions are focused on how expansive to make the terror designation, and whether it should be done through the State Department or Treasury Department.” 

 

Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, President of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy and a longtime associate of the Center for Security Policy, was one of the four witnesses who testified. He was the only Muslim witness, and made the case powerfully for Center-recommended policy of designating the entire Muslim Brotherhood and its fronts as terrorist entities.

 

In the course of his testimony, Dr. Jasser rebutted characterizations by the Brotherhood’s apologists and enablers of its critics as “haters” and “Islamophobes”:

 

Nothing would be more pro-Muslim than the marginalization of the Muslim Brotherhood and its direct affiliates. Making the Muslim Brotherhood radioactive would allow the light to shine upon their most potent antagonists in Muslim communities – those who reject political Islam and believe in liberty and the separation of mosque and state.

 

He also discussed national security risks associated with failing to designate the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates as terrorist entities. One of them is censorship of jihadist terminology in U.S. government agencies.  Dr. Jasser correctly observed that such censorship impedes analysts’ ability to protect the nation:

 

To think that these words and concepts, and others are off limits in the freest nation on earth, censored [in] our agencies, is just incredulous considering the growing threat we face today from violent Islamism.  It smacks of a bizarre invocation of blasphemy laws in America. It is groups like the Muslim Brotherhood that have benefited from our refusal to discuss these elements of Islam and Islamism.

 

The three other witnesses – Hillel Fradkin of the Hudson Institute, Jonathan Schanzer of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, and Daniel Benjamin of the Qatar-funded Brookings Institution – agreed to varying degrees that the Muslim Brotherhood constitutes a threat.  They recommended, however, more narrow terrorist designations of specific Muslim Brotherhood entities.

 

Chairman DeSantis observed: “It is clear that the Brotherhood constitutes a real threat to the national security interests of the United States.  We can debate the best way to counter this threat, but simply ignoring the threat is not an acceptable answer.”

 

The Center for Security Policy has submitted a statement for the hearing record endorsing Rep. DeSantis’ assessment and laying out the factual basis for designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization.

 

Center President Frank J. Gaffney urged legislators, executive branch officials, the media and the public at large to examine particularly compelling evidence of the threat the Brotherhood poses: Its 1991 Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal of the Group in North America– a secret plan for “destroying Western civilization from within” written by a top Muslim Brotherhood operative, Mohammed Akram, and introduced by the federal government into evidence in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation et.al. v. United States terrorism financing trial.

++++++++++++++++++++

Designate the Entire Terrorist Muslim Brotherhood Now

 

By Frank Gaffney – Secure Freedom Minute

July 12, 2018

Center for Security Policy

 

This is Frank Gaffney with the Secure Freedom Minute.

 

Congratulations to Rep. Ron DeSantis and others who took on the Muslim Brotherhood yesterday in a hearing on Capitol Hill.  They established that it’s a foreign terrorist organization and will be officially designated as such by the U.S. government.  The only question is how soon and how comprehensively.

 

Muslim reformer Zuhdi Jasser testified that in 2011 then-FBI Director Robert Mueller told Congress that “elements of the Muslim Brotherhood both here and overseas have supported terrorism.” Dr. Jasser added, “Nothing would be more pro-Muslim than the marginalization of the Muslim Brotherhood and its direct affiliates.”

 

That’s because the Brotherhood seeks to impose its seditious Sharia-supremacist doctrine on pro-American Muslims as it works – according to the group’s secret plan – to use stealthy “civilization jihad” to “destroy Western civilization from within.”

 

They must be stopped.  Start by designating the entire Muslim Brotherhood now.

 

This is Frank Gaffney.

+++++++++++++++++++++

VIDEO: The Muslim Brotherhood’s Global Threat [Feed actually Begins at the 9:30 mark]

 

Posted by oversightandreform

Streamed live on Jul 11, 2018

 

Learn more at https://oversight.house.gov/

________________________

DeSantis Hearing Establishes the Muslim Brotherhood Must Be Designated as a Terrorist Organization – the Sooner, the Better

 

AND

 

Designate the Entire Terrorist Muslim Brotherhood Now

 

About The Center for Security Policy

 

The Center for Security Policy is a non-profit, non-partisan national security organization that specializes in identifying policies, actions, and resource needs that are vital to American security and then ensures that such issues are the subject of both focused, principled examination and effective action by recognized policy experts, appropriate officials, opinion leaders, and the general public. For more information visit www.securefreedom.org

 

 Copyright © 1988-2018 Center for Security Policy | All Rights Reserved

 

Russian Strategy and Europe’s Refugee Crisis


Paul Sutliff sent me a link to a Center for Security Policy (CSP) pdf link with this recommendation:

 

This is a must read. I am hoping to have at least one of the authors on my June 28th show when I move to Thursdays. This is a must read!

 

That show, by the way, is Civilization Jihad Awareness with Paul Sutliff on Blog Talk Radio. The show comes on live, but it is archived. You should go there and catch up.

 

The pdf is 20 pages with foot notes. Take your time and thoroughly read the CSP analysis. I could probably write a whole other post trying to introduce this extremely important analysis, but I won’t.

 

That which I say will little justice to the content presented, but here goes a brief thought. The central bad guy as to American National Security is Russia. You will discover that Russia is at the heart of the Muslim Refugee crisis smacking Europe. AND in relation to that you should understand the Russian goal is destabilization first in Europe and second in the USA. Russia even has tentacle infiltrating European Nationalist movements to foment societal chaos while also publicly supporting the Multicultural Left ideals. This duo strategy has only one purpose: cultural destabilization designed to disunite European resolve and alienate a united Europe away from America.

 

TRUST ME! Those brief words about “Russian Strategy and Europe’s Refugee Crisis” is only the mere tip of the iceberg that I pray you take the time to fully understand what the authors J.R. Nyquist and Dr. Anca-Maria Cernea are trying to enlighten you concerning the survival of our Western Culture via strategic concepts of National Security and National Interests.

 

JRH 6/5/18

Please Support NCCR

************************

Russian Strategy and Europe’s Refugee Crisis

 

By J.R. Nyquist and Dr. Anca-Maria Cernea

May 29, 2018

Center for Security Policy

 

INTRODUCTION

 

Forty years ago, a serious long-term problem confronting Moscow was the USSR’s fast-growing Muslim population. It was then speculated that the Soviet Union’s high Muslim birthrate would turn the USSR into a majority Muslim country by the middle of the twenty-first century. It is a strange joke, and more than a curious twist of fate, that NATO faces this same prospect today.

 

The Russian armed forces officially moved into Syria on 30 September 2015. Already a massive Muslim “refugee” invasion of Europe was underway, stretching through the spring and summer of that year. This migrant flood occurred without a dramatic change in the Syrian crisis. According to a report by investigative journalist Witold Gadowski, published in mid-September 2015, the people then pouring into the heart of Europe included more than refugees, and possibly included ISIS terrorist infiltrators.1

 

Gadowski was a well-known war reporter, documentary film director, and winner of several journalism prizes in Poland and abroad. He went to Syria in 2015 and discovered that in the territory controlled by the Islamic State (ISIS), there was no chance for anyone to leave ISIS-controlled territory without permission. As he explained, the punishment for attempting to escape was crucifixion.2

 

In Gadowski’s opinion, the flood of refugees had been triggered by decisions made in Moscow, and perhaps in Tehran. In fact, the mass killing of Syrian civilians was an ongoing project of the Russian-backed Syrian dictator, Bashar al-Assad – whose troops were killing seven times more civilians than ISIS.3 Once the Russian bombers arrived, even more civilians were targeted.4

 

Of special interest, and contrary to public declarations, Russian and Chinese technicians were busy helping ISIS to maintain its captured oil rigs and refineries, while Russian trained Iraqi military officers (formerly in Saddam Hussein’s army), were leading ISIS forces against the Baghdad government (which government set up a joint intelligence headquarters in league with Iran and Russia).5 From this and other evidence it appears that Russia has been playing a double game in the Middle East.

 

Using the Iraqi oil infrastructure, relying on clandestine Russian technical support, ISIS earned $800 million in annual revenues by “selling more than 60,000 barrels of oil per day.” But this was not the Islamic State’s only source of income. According to Gadowski:

 

…the Islamic State trades artworks and archeological artifacts. It is not true that the monuments of antique culture are destroyed. They are sold and bring a large income. In 90 percent of the cases, this is happening through the Russian mafia. The Islamic State and the wave of refugees bring profits to the Russian, Turkish and Albanian mafias.6

 

In this matter the Russian mafia is not simply the Russian mafia, and the same can be said of mafia organizations which have appeared throughout the “former” communist world. As noted by Brian Whitmore of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, “Organized crime is now a major element of Russian statecraft.”7 According to Gadowski, Russia’s game is to “checkmate Europe, and to a lesser extent the United States.” Outwardly Russia pretends to fight ISIS. In reality, Russia helps ISIS. Essential to the plan, the Syrians were generating refugees by terrorizing civilians in Syria. As stated above, Gadowski believed that a secret Islamic State Terrorist Unit (AMNI) was placing fanatical killers among the refugees. In this way a vast network of suicide bombers and murderers entered Europe.8

 

After arriving in Syria, Russian air units launched bombing raids against Syrian civilians, adding to the refugee flow in late summer. Of course, the refugee crisis was well under way before the Russians arrived. It had peaked earlier. What the bombing showed, however, was Russia’s strategic intention. The Syrians and the Russians were following a pre-defined path. The bombers were the icing on a cake already baked. Long before the Russian bombers arrived other means of pressure had been employed by Syria – including the use of chemical weapons. Refugees (and terrorists) had long since flooded into neighboring Turkey. Through the spring and summer of 2015, the numbers were getting larger and larger. A significant proportion of these masses moved into Europe. This paper will present evidence and arguments that Russia and her allies (Syria and Iran) set this process in motion as part of a larger strategic design. The authors believe that Moscow does not act haphazardly. Rather, its moves are carefully thought-out in advance. The strategy being applied is complex, its objectives masked by disinformation and subterfuge, extortion and blackmail, organized crime and false flag terrorist operations.

 

THE ARAB SPRING

 

When rebellions began to break out in the Middle East several years ago, the former chief of Romanian intelligence, Ion Mihai Pacepa, wondered why the first rebellions in the series took place “only in Islamic countries that are pro-American.” He asked why the rebels were burning American flags. He thought it suspicious that the United States had no advanced warning of the mass demonstrations that swept the Arab world from Morocco to the Persian Gulf. Pacepa noted that “on the first day of the Cairo uprising” the demonstrators “were carrying flags displaying the hammer and sickle.” He called this “a mistake caused by overzealousness….”9

 

The rebellion that began on 17 December 2010 in Tunisia, and spread across the Arab world, was an attempt to sweep away “moderate” Arab regimes. It was not a revolution for freedom or democracy. As Richard Miniter wrote in a 2011 Forbes article, “Virtually every element of the media narrative [on the Arab Spring] … is wrong or misleading.” The rebellion was not a spontaneous reaction to local dictatorships. According to Miniter, Egypt’s chief of intelligence warned Gen. David Petraeus in 2010 that Iran – a close ally and client state of Moscow – was preparing to “bring down [Egypt’s] Mubarak regime.”10

 

Miniter was told by intelligence officials that “Iran’s agents are behind the street demonstrations and violent attacks on government buildings.” 11 Iran’s revolutionary activity throughout the region, however, was not merely Iranian. This activity was connected to Russia, and to Russia’s past support for the communist cause. According to an Iranian specialist, the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ali Khamenei, was educated in Moscow and may be a Russian intelligence asset. Worse yet, other top leaders in Iran were also educated in Russia, with ongoing ties to Moscow.12

 

In a recently published article by the Katehon Institute13 in Russia, B. Ozerov explained that the Soviet government in 1918 “was guided by understanding Islam as a close ideology to the communist doctrine.” After all, Islam favored ideals of equality, social justice, and the redistribution of wealth. According to Ozerov, Moscow’s initial plan in the region was “to transform Islam into an Eastern edition of Communism….”14

 

In a 4 July 1925 interview with the Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shimbun, Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin was asked if he believed revolutionary turmoil in China, India, Persia and Egypt was bound to sweep away the Western powers. “Yes, I do,” said the communist leader, who added that the West would be “attacked on two sides – in the rear as well as in front.”

 

RELATED INSIGHTS OF V. KALASHNIKOV AND A. ILLARIONOV

 

In June 2013 J.R. Nyquist interviewed a disaffected KGB officer in Russia named Viktor Kalashnikov. In reference to Syria, the former KGB lieutenant colonel said, “It’s all about struggle against the United States. All allies are measured in terms of their anti-Americanism. If they are anti-American, they are our friends.” Kalashnikov then referred to the deployment of “terrorist armies.” Armies composed of terrorists, said Kalashnikov, were better than old-fashioned Soviet tank armies. They were more flexible, and cheaper than tanks. “The head of the Russian state has publicly warned the West that … arms deliveries to the opposition in Syria might result in terrorist attacks against Europe. That’s a clear causus belli – a real terrorist threat,” said Kalashnikov.15

 

When Nyquist advanced the idea that the Cold War was over, Kalashnikov scoffed. This is yet another topic, he said. “But we have to ask what happened to the Soviet Union in 1991. It was dismantled for the sake of reorganization and for the sake of Russian power.” The Soviet generals were not happy with the strategic situation. The large tank armies of the Soviet Union were, in Kalashnikov’s words, “a wasting asset, especially after 1983.”16

 

The core strategy, he explained, “was splitting Europe from America.” In the 1980s this was attempted with the threat of war. But now, under present circumstances, a different method would have to be devised. “What happened on 9/11 was just an omen of things to come,” he explained.

 

In Part 1 of the interview, headlined “Russia’s Islamist Alliance, Plans to Destroy NATO,” the former KGB lieutenant colonel, who had been trained as a strategist, attempted to draw the interviewer’s attention to Russia’s support for the anti-immigrant parties in Europe. Here Kalashnikov referred to Islam as a Russian weapon in the destruction of NATO. Realizing the interviewer was perplexed, Kalashnikov said, “Let me talk about [the neo-fascists] in Hungary. They are pro-Putin. They are nationalists, and of course, they are absolutely anti-Semitic and anti-American.”17

 

What did the anti-immigrant parties have to do with “terrorist armies” in the Middle East? What did any of it have to do with splitting America off of Europe? Here was a question requiring careful consideration. To answer this question, one might well imagine how NATO would have prospered if Hillary Clinton and Marine Le Pen had won their respective elections. What if Europe followed France’s lead? Would the politically correct Americans remain allies with the new Europe? “What I would suggest,” said Kalashnikov, “is that your anti-terror experts read Vladimir Lenin who provided the textbook for terrorists. How they should set up combat units; who is to be killed first and second; what strategy and tactics to adopt. Lenin developed a complete theory for using terrorism to take power and govern a huge state. That was the beginning of Soviet strategy, statehood and government, as well as international policy.”18

 

Was Kalashnikov talking about Europe?

 

More than one year after Kalashnikov’s curious pronouncements, a former Kremlin economic advisor named Andrei Illarionov, made an even more curious statement. In a December 2014 television interview, Illarionov noted that Europe had reached its lowest level of defense readiness. He also noted that Russia was openly threatening the West with nuclear war. Illarionov then made an astonishing prediction, adding that “the European nations will not be very much surprised, let’s say, if in the spring of next year, 2015, there will be some kind of massive political movement – let’s say a kind of ‘Islamic spring.’”19

 

Being Russian himself, having worked in the Kremlin, it seems obvious that Illarionov had access to high-level sources. The coming “Islamic spring,” he said, would not occur in the Middle East, “but in Europe.” He mentioned destabilizing effects on “certain European countries” where the crisis would “consume the energy and attention of European leaders at a time when Mr. Putin would try and fulfill his neo-imperial project….”20

 

Illarionov was quite specific when he said the coming “Islamic spring” in Europe would involve “movements and activities … in European countries themselves.” When asked if this could be triggered by Russia, Illarionov said, “I am just warning … when it should happen … European societies should not be [too] much shocked and surprised.”

 

Illarionov’s prediction carries forward the suggestion that Moscow instigated the migrant crisis. For how else could Illarionov have known about an “Islamic spring” involving “movements and activities … in Europe”? His prediction was an unlikely direct hit. To know something in advance is to know something is being planned. Illarionov clearly predicted the most significant event of the following year. He also implied this event was planned to distract the West from Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. And this prediction fits perfectly with the analysis of Lt. Col. Viktor Kalashnikov, a resident of Moscow, who warned of Russia deploying “terrorist armies” in 2013. The fact is, people in Moscow knew what was coming. And why wouldn’t they? It takes enormous resources and real planning to move millions of people from the Middle East to the heart of Europe. A lot of people had to know in advance, if only to set up the needed transport system.

 

INSIGHTS OF A ROMANIAN GENERAL

 

Those who have lived under communist regimes, who were educated as strategists, are in a better position to properly evaluate recent events than their West European counterparts. During an August 2015 Adevarul Live television discussion, retired Army General Constantin Degeratu referred to the European refugee crisis as a “hybrid war” of aggression, conjured out of the Middle East by Russia. Superficially, the refugee crisis “completely covered the problem of the Russian aggression against Ukraine,” Degeratu noted. He then stated that the whole refugee operation was “well organized.” The general added, “Look at the people who are coming. They are better dressed and better fed than 10 to 15 percent of Romania’s population. This is a planned invasion, it doesn’t have a direct cause in the Middle East….” He then pointed out the logistical difficulties involved in moving millions of people hundreds or thousands of miles. “If somebody is to come from Afghanistan with a trolley to the border of Macedonia, this requires logistics.”21

 

As if to clarify Kalashnikov’s earlier point about Hungary, Degeratu pointed to a curious anomaly. “It is said that this threefold increase in the number of refugees compared to the numbers of last summer is taking everyone by surprise. But [this] occurred a week after Hungary completed the building of [a large border] fence. Doesn’t it seem interesting to you that first the fence was built and afterwards this migration started, in that particular area?”22

 

Retired Army General Alexandru Grumaz was also on the program. He agreed that the migration was “well supported.” He added that Turkey also had an interest in pushing the refugees along, toward Europe. It was, said Grumaz, a crisis of European institutions. Degeratu said the problem of the refugee invasion could not be solved. Why? “Because it is managed by Russia and thus it is meant not to be solved, but to be maintained.” The general then said, “Russia’s interest is to maintain this crisis.”

 

“It is clear,” said Degeratu, “that if the European Union doesn’t want to live the nightmare … which says that in the years 2030 to 2040 more than 60 percent of the active EU population will be Muslim … then the European countries should decide if they want to survive as a civilization or not.” According to Degeratu’s strategic assessment, “We have to understand that we are the target of a war, and we may call it hybrid, or an asymmetrical war, but this migrant wave is a consequence of it.” He then summarized the perilous cost of the migrants for Europe, noting, “the cost for each one of these people is three times the minimum retirement pension in Romania!”23

 

Surely, said Degeratu, “The political attitude [in Europe] with regard to this situation needs to change. So far, it’s been peace-time politics. Now we are the target of an aggression. Border control is absolutely mandatory.”

 

According to Prof. Przemysław Żurawski vel Grajewski, who was asked by Dr. Cernea to comment on Gen. Degeratu’s assessments, “The opinions of Gen. Degeratu are fully justified and I would subscribe [to] each of his statements….” Prof. Żurawski is one of Poland’s best political analysts. He teaches social science at the University of Łódz and the National School of Public Administration, serving in the National Council for Development, an advisory board to President Andrzej Duda. He is also a counselor to the current Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs, Jacek Czaputowicz. According to Prof. Żurawski, the Russians are not responsible for all the refugees who have flooded into Europe, but it is certain “they did their best to make [the problem] larger … to confuse the political scene in European countries … as much as they can. Russia is the main ally of Assad and Iran….” These allies of Russia, he said, have maximized “the scale of the refugees.” Prof. Żurawski also pointed to “the semi-criminal FSB/local mafias and hybrid structures in Bosnia and Herzegovina.” These also played a role in moving refugees through the Balkans into the heart of Europe. “The conclusion is,” he said, “that Russia had instruments to maximize the troubles” despite Europe’s inability to find “a smoking gun.”24

 

Prof. Żurawski also noted that, “Anti-immigrant parties in the West are usually pro-Russian (Front National, AfD); so deepening the crisis helps Russia’s followers in the West.” This point should not be overlooked. (Kalashnikov hinted at this factor with reference to Hungary more than a year before the refugee crisis began.) Here the manipulation of the European right that takes center stage. Moscow has every reason to believe the European anti-immigrant parties will gain political traction as the refugee crisis intensifies. Moscow, therefore, has reason to invest in the European right. Simultaneously, Moscow also uses its agents on the European left. These agents intensify the crisis through “politically correct” policies. As the left drives the crisis forward, the right opposition grows and seeks ready allies – and is driven into Moscow’s open arms.

 

This process may already be underway in Hungary where Prime Minister Viktor Orban has shifted toward Moscow.25 The Chief of the Hungarian General Staff, Gen. Tibor Benkő, says that Hungary does not have to buy equipment exclusively from NATO countries. Russia is currently modernizing Hungarian Mi-24 and Mi-17 helicopters for $64 million.26 Perhaps even more alarming is Prime Minister Orban’s tolerance with regard to Russian infiltration of the Hungarian right. Former Hungarian anti-communists are now celebrating Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin, linking arms with Russian officials. According to authors Péter Krekó and Lóránt Győri, Russia has invested political capital in “hate groups in Central Europe,” with financial ties “to violent organizations in Central and Eastern Europe as well….”27 This is a conscious strategy:

 

In Moscow’s toolkit of active measures and hybrid warfare, the boundaries between violent and nonviolent tools are increasingly blurry. And this process is two-directional: not only can information be weaponized; violent organizations can be used as soft-power tools. The Kremlin is highly effective at infiltrating fringe parties and paramilitary organizations in Central Europe. They are easy to purchase or control, as these extremist groups tend to be small and easily manipulated.28

 

What is the ultimate strategic value of the infiltration and manipulation of fringe parties and paramilitary groups? Keeping this question in mind, when we look at the present-day chaos in the Middle East, Russia’s past support for terrorist organizations of every kind becomes less and less of a riddle.

 

The former Romanian Minister for Communications and Information,29 Marius Bostan, was asked by Dr. Cernea if he agreed with Gen. Degeratu’s remarks. Bostan replied, “From the perspective of my own experience in public service and politics, I do agree with Gen. Degeratu’s opinion that Russia is likely to have been involved in the migrant crisis and … it should be regarded as a hybrid war operation against the West.” Bostan emphasized that “a very important component of the hybrid war is the cultural dimension.” Here the Internet plays a key role. The Russian long-term investment in “propaganda, disinformation, opinion and behavior-shaping” cannot be underestimated. A short-term view would be a mistake. Bostan explained,

 

There is something about the Russian strategy that is difficult to explain to our Western allies. It’s the fact that Russia usually acts on both sides of a (real or manufactured) conflict. For instance, on [the] Internet we notice that Russian propaganda, disinformation or trolling activity on forums and social networks typically carry messages meant to create/amplify conflicts between different ethnic or religious groups – Romanians versus Hungarians, Poles versus Ukrainians, Christians versus Jews, etc. And they encourage at the same time groups with opposed views – far left anti-market tendencies [versus] libertarian ones, LGBT-rights [versus] conservative Christian activism, open-border multiculturalism [versus] anti-immigration movements, etc. Thus, Russia is able to provoke conflicts and crises, and to influence the public agenda of the countries it targets for subversion.

 

This ambivalence may seem paradoxical to Western minds, used to a binary logic according to which something cannot be black and white at the same time. Well, Russians are not Westerners. In the East, black and white may be defined in many different ways. Moreover, the Russian leaders still function according to a mentality shaped by Marxist dialectics, which says that progress results from the constant struggle between contrary elements.

 

It looks like the West is only now discovering that, for instance, Russian internet trolls simultaneously support a certain cause and its contrary.30

 

Bostan has laid out one of Russia’s key strategies. He says this kind of strategy is “difficult” for the West to understand. As Rudyard Kipling expressed it, “East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet.” At some point in the future, however, the West must learn to appreciate Russia’s “scissors strategy” – “that Russia usually acts on both sides of a … conflict.” If there is one central lesson to be drawn from this study, Bostan has underscored it.

 

In their Atlantic Council article, “From Russia with Hate,” Péter Krekó and Lóránt Győri explain how Polish counterintelligence “is currently investigating Mateusz Piskorski, the leader of the Polish leftist party … as well as former activists of the far-right Polish Congress of the New Right (KNP) on charges of espionage on behalf of Russia.”31 Here is the classic Russian “scissors strategy” at work If the refugee crisis is part of a Russian scissors strategy, how does Russia benefit? First, political tensions are intensified between the European right and left; second, the right can be pushed toward Moscow by a variety of mechanisms; third, a general weakening of NATO develops under a scenario of “divide and conquer”; fourth, a general demoralization and loss of belief in existing institutions naturally follows.

 

In his interview with Epoch Times in November 2015, General Degeratu showed the depth of this understanding when he said we “should see who takes profit” from the refugee crisis. “Well,” he explained, the Russians profited, and many cracks appeared in NATO. “We see how ‘united’ Europe has been,” Degeratu added. “Full unity! There have been 50 voices in our European ‘unity.’”32

 

Those who have set up the exercise have understood all our weaknesses and have exploited them properly. What else have they obtained … does anyone still speak about the Ukrainian crisis? Not anymore. There are also 1 million – in fact, 800,000 – refugees, from Eastern Ukraine and Crimea, most of them from Donbass. Eight hundred thousand. There are 8,000 dead. Around 2,000 children and pregnant women have died in this crisis. We almost haven’t seen them on the (TV) screen, there have been no gatherings, there was no session of the Romanian Parliament….33

 

Degeratu is extraordinarily perceptive, and other experts agree with his assessment that Russia is waging a hybrid war against Europe. “Maybe some of us are too militarily-minded and ask questions that shouldn’t be asked,” said Degeratu.

 

DIRECT TESTIMONY FROM A SYRIAN GENERAL ON RUSSIA’S DOUBLE GAME

 

There is a stunning revelation in the fragment of a September 2015 interview given to Witold Gadowski by Syrian Brigadier General Ahmad Aljjdeaa, a soldier with thirty years of experience in the Syrian Army who is also the deputy minister of defense in the Syrian government-in-exile. According to Gen. Aljjdeaa, “Russian officers are constantly present in the branches of the Syrian army supporting the regime of Bashar Assad….”

 

Then he added, “Russia is interested in confusion in Syria. There are also four military training centers in Russia, in which fanatics are trained, who then fill the ranks of the Islamic State troops (ISIS). Among the trained are also Chechens.”34

 

Related to this, another curious headline reads: “In retreating from Iraq, ISIS terrorists

 

lost their Russian passports.”35  The facts are reported as follows: “The Iraqi military, who at the end of last week occupied the university building previously held by ISIS in the city of Mosul, displayed what was found in evidence as the identification papers of Islamic State terrorists, which mostly turned out to be Russian.”36

 

Again, it is a case of the “scissors strategy.” Moscow has perfected the fine art of stage-managing fake wars and phony splits with false fronts made up of “useful idiots.”37 Russia’s deployment of terrorist and counter-terrorist forces in Syria and Iraq should surprise no one. This procedure was used during the Soviet-Afghan War in the 1980s and again during the recent wars in Chechnya.38

 

At this juncture it may be useful to recite a bit of history. In July 2005 the Russian KGB/FSB defector Alexander Litvinenko told the Polish newspaper Rzeczpospolita that Ayman al-Zawahiri (then Al-Qaeda’s second in command) was trained by the FSB in Dagestan in 1997. According to the former KGB foreign intelligence officer Konstantin Preobrazhensky, Litvinenko “was responsible for securing the secrecy of al-Zawahiri’s arrival in Russia … in 1996-1997.”39

 

The Romanian intelligence defector, Lt. Gen. Ion Mahai Pacepa, has described Moscow’s use of Arab terrorist organizations throughout the Cold War in his books.40 We know that Russia stands firmly behind the Islamic terror regime in Tehran. Researcher Antero Leitzinger explained, “Modern terrorism was born within a year, 1967-68. International socialists (communists) started the fashion all over the world simultaneously, which should make us suspicious about the common roots. National socialists followed suit, turning Marxists of Muslim origin into Islamists of Marxist origin.”41

 

Among the closest associates of Khomeini, there were many Communists who had conveniently grown beards. Mustafa Ali Chamran had studied in California and Egypt before he founded a Red Shi’ite secret society. His pupils included later foreign minister Ibrahim Yazdi, oil minister Mohammed Gharazi, and Lebanese fellow student in Berkeley University, Hussein Shaikh al-Islam, who led the occupation of the US Embassy in Tehran. This occupation, shortly before the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, focused Iranian radicalism into anti-Americanism…. Mohammed Beheshti, whose death at a bombing on June 28th, 1981, remained a mystery, had resided in East Germany. Khomeini’s early companion and foreign minister, Sadegh Ghotbzadeh had successfully accommodated with the new regime. Both Ghotbzadeh and Chamran had received Palestinian terrorist training. As a student in the USA, Ghotbzadeh had been recruited by the [Soviet] GRU.42

 

With regard to the Soviet-Afghan War, Leitzinger explained that Soviet Military Intelligence (GRU) had developed special capabilities by the late 1980s, especially “how to manipulate Islamists and to make Communists (of the Khalq faction) to grow beards and join their declared enemies.” According to Leitzinger, “This ‘Khalq strategy” provided a successful alternative to the more orthodox “Parcham strategy” that relied on ideologically less unholy alliances.”43

 

Leitzinger argued that the Russian secret services “gained a tight hold on international terrorism, and [especially] on Islamism” in the 1990s. The terrorist is, in essence, a special kind of agent provocateur. A Western analyst finds it difficult to see the Afghan-Soviet War or the first and second Chechen Wars as utilizing provocation techniques on a broad scale. Former CIA official T.H. Bagley and KGB defector Peter Deriabin noted, “Soviet provocation … remains little understood in the West. People safe in a democratic system may find it difficult to conceive that rulers would systematically use such hostile techniques against their own subjects.”44

 

If Moscow’s wars in Afghanistan and Chechnya were built around terrorist provocations, and the objective was to radicalize and infiltrate Islam, and reorient Islam against the West, then the wars in Afghanistan and Chechnya appear in a more intelligible light. The Soviet Union did not invade Afghanistan for conventional reasons, or to attain classical military control.

 

With the advent of the refugee crisis in Europe, with the likelihood of thousands of terrorists settled within a mass of protected Muslim refugees, the least sign of Russian involvement – or the involvement of Russia’s Islamist surrogates – ought to inspire a shockwave of alarm through Europe’s security establishment. Given the history of Moscow’s infiltration of Islam, and the mounting evidence of Russia’s double game, the Kremlin would be the most natural suspect in any close study of the refugee crisis. Arguably, any other focus would be irresponsible.

 

As reported by the BBC, U.S. Gen. Philip Breedlove, the senior NATO commander in Europe, said that Russia and Syria were “deliberately weaponizing migration in an attempt to overwhelm European structures and break European resolve.” He cited Russia’s use of barrel bombs against Syrian civilians. What was the purpose of such indiscriminate attacks? The purpose was, he said, to “get them [masses of people] on the road” to Europe.45

 

Masses of homeless people, adhering to an alien religion, is one problem for Europe. Terrorism is yet another. Since the refugee crisis began Europe has been hit with an unprecedented wave of terrorist attacks (not to mention rapes and robberies). First came the Paris killings of November 2015, then the Brussels bombings of March 2016, then the Nice truck attack and the Normandy church attack of July 2016. Then there was the string of Islamic stabbings across Europe.46

 

Some of our sources (quoted above) have claimed that modern terrorism was introduced to the Muslims by the communist bloc half a century ago. This point must not be forgotten when evaluating the left’s strange love affair with Islam. “From the very beginning,” said former KGB Lt. Col. Konstantin Preobrazhensky, “the so-called Bolsheviks, or communists, were considering Muslims as the reserve [army], as the human resource for the world revolution. Not all … people know that the second appeal by Lenin, after the Great October Socialist Revolution in 1917, was addressed to Muslim toilers….” Preobrazhensky continued:

 

At that time Islam was the religion of the oppressed … of the people colonized by the West. As Lenin said by the time of the … Communist International, ‘The West is existing at the expense of the East.’ Even now we can hear such conclusions, such ideas. And as soon as the Russian Revolution took place, Russian Muslims immediately supported it, so that the communist Muslim military organizations were formed. The Muslim communists were dethroning the local bourgeois Muslim governments which appeared in the Russian Empire47.

 

MUSLIM REFUGEES TO EUROPE: A RUSSIAN POLICY

 

According to Antoni Rybczynski, “The migratory crisis in Europe is largely a work of Russian policy….” He further stated, “Already … when nobody expected Russian raids in Syria, Vladimir Putin warned that Europe would face the great problems associated with the influx of immigrants.” In this way Moscow supported Assad while undermining Europe.48

 

Another Niezalezna.pl headline underscores this same idea: “Putin’s diabolical game, Exporting Muslim immigrants to Europe.” The article begins, “The Norwegian authorities believe that the refugees’ invasion of their country is a Russian provocation.”49

 

In October 2015 the Czech Minister of Defense, Martin Stropnicky, suggested that Russia was possibly financing the transportation of refugees to Europe. “Although I do not have 100 percent proof of this information,” he said, “I cannot discount it either.”50 Given all we know, his surmise is logical. It is sensible. Why wouldn’t Russia – which has armed Islamic terrorists throughout Asia – arm Islamic terrorists in Germany, Britain, France or Sweden?

 

According to a member of the Estonian National Defense League, Ants Laaneots, “Putin’s aim is the disintegration of the European Union and NATO, if possible.” Russia, he added, is promoting “Euroscepticism.”51 More likely, Russia’s strategy includes many subtle and indirect objectives. As with the work of the late Mohammad Fahim in Afghanistan, Russia can take over a NATO-defended country through the work of an enterprising criminal. Russia can thereby paralyze the heart of Afghanistan or the heart of Europe in a way that mocks European compassion.

 

The Chairman of the Supreme Council of Lithuania, Vytautas Landsbergis, made an observation on 15 September 2015 about the refugee crisis almost identical to others we have seen:

 

I was thinking who had to profit, and I know now. In the current crisis, the whole attention is focused on Europe. Nobody is speaking of Ukraine any more, although there are almost 2 million refugees there as well. Putin has chased them away, and nobody is proposing them to go where life is better….52

 

According to Landsbergis, the current migration crisis is a threat to European civilization.

 

Europe has met a big danger for its own system, even for its own civilization. The Germans earlier had illusions, that they would manage to integrate a million Turks, that the Turks would become Germans and there would be no problem. It didn’t work. Ghettos were created, a state within the state, and these are big problems….53

 

The Ukrainian MP, Anton Gerashchenko, speaking on TV Channel News One, stated:

 

The crisis of migrants in Europe arose because of Putin. The war in Syria began in 2011, but migrants flooded [Europe] like a large river in the spring of 2015. Russia made a decision after Europe imposed economic sanctions on Russia: ‘Let’s create problems for them.” They created a problem: $1,000 was allocated for the head of [each] refugee who will be taken from Syria to Europe. A million refugees are a billion dollars. This is nothing to Putin….54

 

The cost to Europe, however, is much more than a $1 billion. Gerashchenko added that an atmosphere of xenophobia has been created in Europe along with the growing influence of various nationalist parties, which are known for their favorable position toward Putin’s Russia.

 

CONCLUSION

 

Whatever the causes of the Refugee crisis, Moscow’s strategists have taken full advantage of the situation. Those who know Russian policy best, who are geographically further east, know that Russia has something to gain. If a “smoking gun” is absent, in a strict sense, there is yet a loaded gun. One might say this gun is pointed at the heart of Europe.

 

With regard to proof, the strategist does not wear a white lab coat or follow some academic procedure to understand the world. He is not a prosecuting attorney who has to prove his case in a court of law. He is engaged in “a duel on an extensive scale” – which was Carl von Clausewitz’s famous definition of war. If military and political leaders only acted on the basis of scientific proof – or rely on proofs used to convince a jury – they would not be able to act at all. The soldier and the stateman exercise judgment on a more commonsense level.

 

Consider the following analogy: If it is 2 December 1941 and an American plane spots six Japanese aircraft carriers moving east between Alaska and Midway Island, a sensible strategist would assume that the Japanese were intending to attack the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor. The sensible strategist would be quite foolish to declare that “there was no proof” of a Japanese intention to attack. It would be pedantic, under the circumstances, to say there was “no smoking gun.” Strategy dictates an entirely different epistemology. The reported movement of the Japanese aircraft carriers would constitute a loaded gun, aimed at the U.S. Pacific Fleet. A responsible military leader does not wait for that gun to be fired. An American admiral, drawing the proper inferences, would know exactly what to do. He would alert the fleet at Pearl Harbor and take countermeasures. He would know, as one who directs fleets, that every enemy move speaks to intention. That must be the foundation of his certitude, of his practical knowledge.

 

In terms of the Muslim refugee crisis in Europe: reports of ISIS training camps in Russia, reports of GRU/SVR and Russian Mafia assistance to a massive influx of refugees, reports of Russian infiltration of terrorist organizations throughout the Muslim world, etc., constitute a loaded gun. We must judge these reports as strategists – not as social scientists or academics. This must be the foundation of a new strategic methodology for the Muslim Refugee problem. Clearly, this is not simply about Islam. Russian involvement is indicated. Russian strategy must be understood as part of a greater strategic whole in order to properly assess the larger situation.

 

NOTES

 

1 http://www.fronda.pl/a/gadowski-dla-frondapl-agenci-panstwa-islamskiego-wsrod-imigrantowf,57134.html?part=1

 

2 Ibid.

 

3 http://www.vocativ.com/news/224151/syria-government-assad-kills-more-civilians-than-isis/index.html

 

http://www.vocativ.com/news/247479/russian-airstrikes-killed-more-syrian-civilians-than-isis-fighters/

 

5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_military_intervention_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War

 

6 http://ileanajohnson.com/2015/12/witold-gadowski-polish-journalist-talks-to-fronda-pl-about-syrian-refugees/

 

7 http://www.businessinsider.com/organized-crime-is-now-a-major-element-of-russia-statecraft-2015-10

 

8 http://ileanajohnson.com/2015/12/witold-gadowski-polish-journalist-talks-to-fronda-pl-about-syrian-refugees/

 

9 https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2011/02/usegypt_relations_under_attack_1.html#ixzz58Jw FkwoF

 

10 https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardminiter/2011/08/18/the-exciting-notion-of-arab-spring-is-a-jedi-mind-trick/#2ab603254ce7

 

11 Ibid.

 

12 The former intelligence official was interviewed by J.R. Nyquist on condition of anonymity.

 

13 Katehon’s president is Konstantin Malofeev, a Russian oligarch with close ties to Aleksandr Dugin, previously the co-founder of the National Bolshevist movement (along with Eduard Limonov). This was a movement which combined nationalism and communism (i.e., a Red-Brown prototype movement). More recently Dugin changed his ideological formula, mixing pan-European or Eurasianist ideas with nihilistic metaphysics in order to justify a worldwide anti-U.S. alliance between traditionalist and Marxists. All this is interspersed with a thinly disguised Lenin-style anti-capitalist millenarianism which seeks to hasten the “end times” with the destruction of Carthage (i.e., the United States). Dugin’s pretense at Orthodox Christianity should not be taken any more seriously than his nationalist pretenses. His entire ideology is an arcane justification for a renewed USSR/Third Rome. His enemies are the old enemies of the USSR. His friends are the old friends of the USSR. Dugin’s philosophic sophistication is not to be taken seriously, though his past fascination with Aleister Crowley’s black magic craves closer investigation. Of course, Dugin’s flirtation with esoteric ideas has helped to win adherents on the alt-right, particularly among neo-pagans, occultists and Sufis. His supposed positive attitude toward traditional Christianity leads to the conclusion that he is consciously toying with dialectically opposite theologies and ideologies. Using conspiracy theory as a tool to advance his anti-U.S. agenda, Dugin also pretends to support President Donald Trump, making English language broadcasts praising Trump for stopping globalism and “the expansion of liberal ideology.” Dugin also praises Alex Jones and Infowars. To watch Dugin’s English language broadcasts, see – “The Mystic Shaping Russia’s Future and Bringing Back the Dark Ages, https://godsandradicals.org/2017/03/28/the-mystic-shaping-russias-future-and-ending-the-modern-era/. See also, http://www.4pt.su/en/content/who-aleksandr-dugin and https://www.nationalreview.com/2014/06/dugins-evil-theology-robert-zubrin/.

 

14 http://katehon.com/article/tragic-loss-red-pasha

 

15 http://www.trevorloudon.com/2013/06/exclusive-part-2-former-kgb-colonel-victor-kalashnikov-on-the-dangers-of-putin-worship-russias-anti-western-alliance-with-islam-israel-syria-iran-and-the-kremlins-grand-strateg/

 

16 Ibid.

 

17 http://conservativeread.com/former-kgbs-victor-kalashnikov-dangers-of-putin-worship-russias-islamist-alliance-plans-to-destroy-nato/

 

18 http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2013/07/were-911-terror-attacks-false-flag.html

 

19 https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=27&v=F6vj0z_oZIs – at about 15 minutes into the interview.

20 Ibid. 

21 http://adevarul.ro/international/europa/adevarul-live-generalul-degeratu-despre-criza-imigrantilor-rusia-cea-genereaza-criza-acestei-migratii-excesive-1_55e05dbdf5eaafab2c014a6e/index.html

 

22 Ibid.

 

23 Ibid.

 

 24 From Żurawski’s written reply to Dr. Cernea.

 

25 newsweek.com/vladimir-putin-meets-hungary-viktor-orban-agenda-gas-soviet-sanctions-551263

 

26 http://www.defence24.pl/geopolityka/wegry-sie-zbroja-orban-kupi-sprzet-w-rosji

 

27 http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/component/content/article?id=35796:from-russia-with-hate-the-kremlin-s-support-for-violent-extremism-in-central-europe

 

28 Ibid.

 

29 Bostan was minister from Nov. 2015 to July 2016.

 

30 Written response to inquiry of former Communications and Information Minister Marius Bostan to Dr. Cernea, dated 3 March 2018.

 

31 atlanticcouncil.org/component/content/article?id=35796:from-russia-with-hate-the-kremlin-s-support-for-violent-extremism-in-central-europe

 

32 http://epochtimes-romania.com/video/constantin-degeratu-criza-refugiatilor-a-fost-o-operatiune-organizata—1099

 

33 Ibid.

 

34 https://wpolityce.pl/swiat/260088-syryjski-general-oskarza-w-rosji-szkoleni-sa-fanatycy-ktorzy-potem-zasilaja-szeregi-panstwa-islamskiego

 

35 org/wycofujac-sie-iraku-bojowcy-isis-zgubili-swe-rosyjskie-paszporty/

 

36 Ibid.

 

37 See, especially,Yao Ming-le, The Conspiracy and Death of Lin Biao (1983). There it is explained how Gen. Lin Biao secretly prepared to wage a phony war with the Soviet Union in 1971.

 

38 See, especially, Bearden and Risen, The Main Enemy: The Inside Story of the CIA’s Final Showdown with the KGB (New York: Random House, 2003), p. 233.

 

39 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Litvinenko#cite_note-69

 

40 Ronald Rychlak and Ion Mihai Pacepa, Disinformation: Former Spry Chief Reveals Secret Strategies for Undermining Freedom, Attacking Religion, and Promoting Terrorism (WND Books, 2013). See also, Pacepa, Red Horizons: The True Story of Nicolae and Eana Ceausescus’ Crimes, Lifestyle, and Corruption (1990).

 

41 See also Antero Leitzinger’s article in the The Eurasian Politician – Issue 5 (April-September 2002), “The Roots of Islamic Terrorism,” http://users.jyu.fi/~aphamala/pe/issue5/roots.htm

 

42 In this matter Leitzinger offers citations from the following sources: Livingston & Halevy, Inside the PLO (USA, 1990), p. 153-154; and Kuzichkin, Inside the KGB – Myth and Reality (Frome, 1990), p. 302.

 

43 eitzinger referenced Finnish researcher Anssi Kullberg’s master’s thesis on Russian geopolitics focusing on the Islamic Renaissance Party founded in Astrakhan in June 1990, “under KGB surveillance.” Kullberg

 

44 Deriabin and Bagley, KGB: Masters of the Soviet Union (New York, 1990), p. 252.

 

45 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35706238

 

46 http://time.com/4607481/europe-terrorism-timeline-berlin-paris-nice-brussels/

 

47 Konstantin Preobrazhensky: “How the Russian Communists Run Islam.” https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Preobrazhensky+Konstantin+How+the+Russian+Communists+r un+Islamic+Terrorism+https%3a%2f%2fwww.youtube.com%2fwatch%3fv%3d0AqMCLqTRFo&PC=ACTS &refig=ebf0ef63163f4c948bcf96c60aeb434a&ru=%2fsearch%3fq%3dPreobrazhensky%2bKonstantin%2 bHow%2bthe%2bRussian%2bCommunists%2brun%2bIslamic%2bTerrorism%2bhttps%253A%252F%252 Fwww.youtube.com%252Fwatch%253Fv%253D0AqMCLqTRFo%26FORM%3dEDGNCT%26PC%3dACTS% 26refig%3debf0ef63163f4c948bcf96c60aeb434a&view=detail&mmscn=vwrc&mid=19EC1DC31D497F37 378719EC1DC31D497F373787&FORM=WRVORC

 

48 http://niezalezna.pl/77702-jak-putin-i-asad-produkuja-uchodzcow-rosjanie-stosuja-taktyke-z-wojny-czeczenskiej

 

49 http://niezalezna.pl/73114-diabelska-gra-putina-rosja-eksportuje-islamskich-imigrantow-do-europy

 

50 http://www.uawire.org/news/czech-minister-of-defense-it-is-possible-that-russia-is-financing-the-influx-of-refugees-to-europe

 

51 http://www.uawire.org/news/estonian-politician-russia-uses-the-migration-crisis-as-part-of-its-hybrid-war#

 

52 http://zw.lt/litwa/landsbergis-o-kryzysie-z-uchodzcami-winna-jest-rosja/

 

53 Ibid.

 

54 https://newsone.ua/news/politics/gerashhenko-krizis-migrantov-dlya-evropy-pridumal-putin.html

 

________________

Center for Security Policy HOMEPAGE

 

About CSP

 

The Center for Security Policy was founded in July 1988 by 30 national security policy practitioners united by an overarching goal – to perpetuate the time-tested policy Ronald Reagan used to such transformative effect during his presidency: “Peace through Strength.” Led by Frank Gaffney, a former Reagan Defense Department official and aide to Senators Henry “Scoop” Jackson and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Tower, they founded a non-partisan, educational public policy organization with a single, overarching mission: secure freedom.

 

“What an  exemplary organization you are — devoting yourselves to the pursuit of peace and national security.  I can think of no loftier purpose or goal.”  — 1995 letter from President Ronald Reagan to the Center for Security Policy

 

The Center has diligently advanced that goal ever since through a combination of: cutting-edge public policy research; the skillful and evolving use of multi-media platforms for outreach to – and impact with – the nation’s leadership and people; and, most uniquely, the creation and direction of coalitions to undertake effective advocacy.

 

In its early days, the Center for Security Policy became famous for  READ THE REST

 

National Security Experts Exhort JCPOA Abrogation


John R. Houk

© September 23, 2017

 

The Center for Security Policy (CSP) released an open letter that was also sent to President Trump pertaining to Obama’s Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). For clarity’s sake, the JCPOA was not a treaty confirmed by the U.S. Senate as the Constitution stipulates for binding international agreements. Rather Obama chose to by-pass the Senate and made largely Classified undisclosed agreement components (AIM – 9/8/16 and Fox News 2/7/17) with Iran allegedly to prevent militarization of nuclear power for – GET THIS – only ten years.

 

Obama’s JCPOA is a classic 21st century version of pre-WWII agreements between Britain’s Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and Germany’s Fuehrer Adolf Hitler in 1938. Chamberlain declared he negotiated a successful peace for our time. That peace was delusional as Hitler was permitted to carve up Czechoslovakia in the name of peace which emboldened Hitler to invade Poland which began WWII.

 

Bolton’s alternative to the JCPOA is not a renegotiation with Iran, rather it’s a strategic alternative to check Iranian expansionism and nuclear militarization.

 

Trump has been falling for the lie Iran has been complying to the JCPOA and thus has recertified that idiotic agreement contrary to the campaign promises. I pray the President listens to the signatories of this letter.

 

JRH 9/23/17

Please Support NCCR

************

45 National Security Experts Urge President Trump to Withdraw From Nuclear Deal with Iran Using the Bolton Plan

 

Email sent by Center for Security Policy

Email Contact Maya Carlin

Email Sent 9/21/2017 11:13 AM

PDF Version

 

(Washington, D.C.):  Today 45 national security experts, many of whom held senior positions in the nuclear weapons, arms control, nonproliferation and intelligence fields, sent a letter to President Trump urging him to withdraw the United States from the deeply flawed 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran (the JCPOA) using a comprehensive plan drafted by former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton.

 

The signatories believe President Trump was exactly right during the campaign when he said the JCPOA is one of the worst agreements ever negotiated.  They believe this agreement is dangerous because it allows Iran to continue its pursuit of nuclear weapons while the deal is in effect, has extremely weak verification provisions, and ignores Iran’s increasingly destabilizing behavior.  Because of the enormous risks the JCPOA poses to American and international security and the impossibility of convincing Iran to amend the agreement, the signers believe the only option is for the United States to withdraw and initiate a new, more comprehensive approach that addresses all of the threats posed by Iran – including its missile program and sponsorship of terrorism – with a broad alliance that includes Israel and America’s Gulf State allies.

 

The signatories endorse Ambassador Bolton’s plan to implement this approach by withdrawing from the JCPOA in coordination with America’s allies.  The signers believe the Bolton plan is the best way to reverse the damage done by the reckless concessions that Obama officials made to Iran to negotiate the JCPOA and to prevent the Iranian nuclear program from spinning out of control as North Korea’s nuclear effort has.

 

Some of the eminent individuals who signed the letter include:

 

  • Gen. William G. Boykin, USA (Ret.), Former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence

 

  • Ambassador Henry F. “Hank” Cooper, Former Chief U.S. Negotiator for Defense and Space and SDI Director

 

  • Manfred Eimer, Former Assistant Director for Verification and Intelligence, U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency

 

  • Douglas J. Feith, Former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy

 

  • William R. Graham, Former Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy

 

  • Ambassador Robert G. Joseph, Former Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security

 

  • Ambassador C. Paul Robinson, former President and Director of Sandia National Laboratories

 

  • Admiral James A. Lyons, U.S. Navy (Ret.), Former Commander-in Chief, Pacific Fleet

 

The full text of the letter is below.

 

September 21, 2017

 

The Honorable Donald J. Trump

President of the United States

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

Washington, DC

 

Dear President Trump:

 

We are writing to you as national security experts, many who worked in the nuclear weapons, arms control, nonproliferation and intelligence fields, to express our strong opposition to the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA) and to ask that you withdraw the United States from this dangerous agreement as soon as possible.

 

We also call on your administration to declare to Congress next month that Iran has not been complying with this agreement and that it is not in the national security interests of the United States.

 

We strongly supported your statements during the 2016 presidential campaign that the JCPOA was one of the worst international agreements ever negotiated and as president that you would either withdraw from or renegotiate this deal.  Your campaign statements accurately reflected that the JCPOA is a fraud since it allows Iran to continue its nuclear weapons program while the agreement is in effect by permitting it to enrich uranium, operate and develop advanced uranium centrifuges and operate a heavy-water reactor.  Such limited restrictions as the deal actually imposes on Iran’s enrichment program will expire in eight years.  In addition, the JCPOA’s inspection provisions are wholly inadequate.

 

We also note that a joint July 11, 2017 letter to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson from Senators Cruz, Rubio, Cotton and Perdue outlined significant violations of the JCPOA by Iran, the most important of which is Iran’s refusal to permit IAEA inspections of military facilities.

 

In addition, although the JCPOA did not require Iran to halt its belligerent and destabilizing behavior, President Obama and Secretary Kerry repeatedly claimed it would lead to an improvement.  This has not happened.  To the contrary, after the JCPOA, Iran’s behavior has significantly worsened.  Tehran stepped up its ballistic missile program and missile launches.  There was a 90% increase in Iran’s 2016-2017 military budget.  Iran has increased its support to terrorist groups and sent troops into Syria.  Harassment of shipping in the Persian Gulf and Red Sea also increased, including missiles fired at U.S. and Gulf state ships by the Houthi rebels, an Iranian proxy in Yemen.

 

Moreover, in light of major advances in North Korea’s nuclear program, we are very concerned that North Korea and Iran are actively sharing nuclear weapons technology and that Iran is providing funding for North Korea’s nuclear weapons program.  CIA Director Mike Pompeo suggested this possibility during a September 11 Fox News interview.

 

We are unconvinced by doom-and-gloom predictions of the consequences of a U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA.  The sky did not fall when you withdrew the United States from the Paris Climate Accord.  Claims that Iran will step up its nuclear program or engage in more belligerent behavior must be considered against the backdrop of what Iran is allowed to do under the JCPOA and its actual conduct since this “political understanding” was announced.

 

Some Iran deal advocates argue that the United States should remain in the JCPOA and instead try to amend it to fix its flaws over several years.  A few contend you could decertify the agreement to Congress, but remain in the deal and then try to amend it.  Since Iran has made it clear it will not agree to changes to the JCPOA, we believe these proposals are unrealistic.  Continuing to legitimate the agreement is not conducive to its renegotiation.  The day will never come when the mullahs agree to amend the sweetheart deal they got in the JCPOA.

 

Ambassador John Bolton has drawn up a plan to implement a far more effective, comprehensive and multilateral approach to address the threat from Iran.  This approach includes strict new sanctions to bar permanently the transfer of nuclear technology to Iran.  He also calls for new sanctions in response to Iran’s sponsorship of terrorism and efforts to destabilize the Middle East, especially in Syria, Iraq and Yemen.

 

Unlike the JCPOA, which was negotiated with no input from America’s allies in the Middle East, Ambassador Bolton outlines a multilateral campaign to forge a new comprehensive approach to the threat from Iran that includes the Gulf States and Israel to assure that their security interests are taken into account.

 

We agree with Ambassador John Bolton that strong international sanctions, a tough negotiating strategy and a decisive American president who will not engage in appeasement is the best approach to rein in Iran’s belligerent behavior and induce it to joining negotiations on a better agreement.

 

As national security experts who understand the urgency of addressing the growing threat from Iran, we urge you to implement the Bolton plan, withdraw from the dangerous Iran nuclear deal and not certify Iranian compliance to Congress next month.  It is time to move beyond President Obama’s appeasement of Iran and to begin work on a comprehensive new approach that fully addresses the menace that the Iranian regime increasingly poses to American and international security.

 

ATTACHMENT: “Abrogating The Iran Deal: The Way Forward” By Ambassador John Bolton [Blog Editor: The “ATTACHMENT” at the end of the signatures in this CSP email. But if you are impatient, here is the National Review version by John Bolton]

 

Sincerely,

 

Winston Lewis Amselem

U.S. Foreign Service Officer, Minister-Counselor (Ret.)

 

Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin, USA (Ret.)

Former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence

 

Ambassador Henry F. Cooper

Former Chief U.S. Negotiator for Defense and Space and SDI Director

 

Stephen Coughlin

Former Joint Chiefs of Staff intelligence analyst

 

Jack David

Hudson Institute Senior Fellow and former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Combating Weapons of Mass Destruction and Negotiations Policy

 

Paula A. DeSutter

Former Assistant Secretary of State for Verification and Compliance

 

Joseph E. diGenova

Former U.S. Attorney District of Columbia

 

Jessie Jane Duff

Gunnery Sergeant USMC (Ret.)

Senior Fellow London Center for Policy Research

 

Dr. Manfred Eimer

Former Assistant Director for Verification and Intelligence, U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency

 

Fritz Ermarth

Retired CIA officer.  Former chairman of the National Intelligence Council

 

Douglas J. Feith

Former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy

 

Frederick Fleitz

Former CIA analyst and Professional Staff Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence

 

Kevin D. Freeman, National Security Investment Counsel Institute

 

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.

Former Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy (Acting)

 

Daniel J. Gallington

Former General Counsel, U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and Member, U.S. Delegation to the Nuclear & Space Talks

 

D. Scott George

Brigadier General, USAF (Ret.). President/CEO, IN-Cyber Vision, Inc.

 

Dr. William R. Graham

Former Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and Science Advisor to the President; NASA Administrator and Chairman of the General Advisory Committee (GAC) on Arms Control and Disarmament

 

Larry K. Grundhauser

Brigadier General, USAF Retired

 

Philip Haney

Department of Homeland Security founding staff member and former U.S. Customs and Border Protection Officer

 

George William Heiser II

Former Director for Arms Control, Reagan National Security Council Staff

 

Richard T. Higgins

Former Director for Strategic Planning, Trump National Security Council

 

Peter Huessy

President, GeoStrategic Analysis, Former Special Assistant to the Secretary of the Interior for International Energy Security

 

Ambassador Eric M. Javits

Former US Permanent Representative and Ambassador to the Conference on Disarmament and to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons

 

Ambassador Robert G. Joseph

Former Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security; Assistant to the President on Arms Control and Nonproliferation; and Chairman of the ABM Treaty Standing Consultative Commission

 

Morton A. Klein

Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) National President

 

Dr. Charles M. Kupperman

Former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan; former Executive Director, General Advisory Committee to the President on Arms Control and Disarmament

 

Herbert I. London

President, London Center for Policy Research

 

Robert L. Luaces

Foreign Service Officer (Ret.). Former Director, State Department Office of Multilateral Nuclear and Security Affairs

 

Admiral James A. Lyons

U.S. Navy (Ret.).  Former Commander-in Chief, Pacific Fleet

 

Lt. Gen Thomas McInerney, US Air Force (Ret.)

Assistant Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force and Director of the Defense Performance Review

 

Vice Admiral Robert R. Monroe, U.S. Navy (Ret.).  Former Director, Defense Nuclear Agency

 

Daniel Pollak

Co-Director of Government Relations, Zionist Organization of America (ZOA)

 

Dr. Peter Vincent Pry

Executive Director, Task Force on National and Homeland Security; Senior Staff on the Congressional EMP Commission, Congressional Strategic Posture Commission, the House Armed Services Committee, and the CIA

 

George Rasley

Editor of ConservativeHQ and consultant

 

Major General Edward M. Reeder

U.S. Army (Ret.)

 

Ambassador C. Paul Robinson

Former President and Director of Sandia National Laboratories.  Head of the Nuclear Weapons and National Security programs at Los Alamos National Laboratory.  Chief Negotiator and Head of the U.S. Delegation to the U.S./Soviet Union Nuclear Testing Talks

 

Nina Rosenwald

Founder and President, Gatestone Institute

 

Mark Schneider

Senior analyst, National Institute for Public Policy.  Former Senior Director for Forces Policy and Principal Director for Strategic Defense, Space and Verification Policy, Office of the Secretary of Defense.  Former Senior Foreign Service Officer.

 

Tony Shaffer, LTC (ret)

Vice President for Strategic Initiatives and Operations, London Center for Policy Research.  Former CIA-trained senior intelligence operative

 

Sarah Stern

Founder and President, Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET)

 

Kenneth R. Timmerman

President and CEO, Foundation for Democracy in Iran

 

Victoria Toensing

Former Chief Counsel, Senate Intelligence Committee

 

Adam Turner

General Counsel and Legislative Affairs Director, Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET)

 

J. Michael Waller

Founding Editorial Board Member, NATO Defence Strategic Communications

 

David Wurmser

Former Senior Advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney

 

 

 

ABROGATING THE IRAN DEAL: THE WAY FORWARD

By Ambassador John Bolton

 

I. Background:

 

The Trump Administration is required to certify to Congress every 90 days that Iran is complying with the July 2015 nuclear deal (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action — JCPOA), and that this agreement is in the national-security interest of the United States.1 While a comprehensive Iranian policy review is currently underway, America’s Iran policy should not be frozen. The JCPOA is a threat to U.S. national-security interests, growing more serious by the day. If the President decides to abrogate the JCPOA, a comprehensive plan must be developed and executed to build domestic and international support for the new policy.

 

Under the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015, the President must certify every 90 days that:

 

(i)  Iran is transparently, verifiably, and fully implementing the agreement, including all related technical or additional agreements;

 

(ii)  Iran has not committed a material breach with respect to the agreement or, if Iran has committed a material breach, Iran has cured the material breach;

 

(iii)  Iran has not taken any action, including covert activities, that could significantly advance its nuclear weapons program; and

 

(iv)  Suspension of sanctions related to Iran pursuant to the agreement is –

 

(I)  appropriate and proportionate to the specific and verifiable measures taken by Iran with respect to terminating its illicit nuclear program; and

 

(II) vital to the national-security interests of the United States.

 

U.S. leadership here is critical, especially through a diplomatic and public education effort to explain a decision not to certify and to abrogate the JCPOA. Like any global campaign, it must be persuasive, thorough, and accurate. Opponents, particularly those who participated in drafting and implementing the JCPOA, will argue strongly against such a decision, contending that it is reckless, ill-advised, and will have negative economic and security consequences.

 

Accordingly, we must explain the grave threat to the U.S. and our allies, particularly Israel. The JCPOA’s vague and ambiguous wording; its manifest imbalance in Iran’s direction; Iran’s significant violations; and its continued, indeed, increasingly, unacceptable conduct at the strategic level internationally demonstrate convincingly that the JCPOA is not in the national-security interests of the United States. We can bolster the case for abrogation by providing new, declassified information on Iran’s unacceptable behavior around the world.

 

But as with prior Presidential decisions, such as withdrawing from the 1972 ABM Treaty, a new “reality” will be created. We will need to assure the international community that the U.S. decision will in fact enhance international peace and security, unlike the JCPOA, the provisions of which shield Iran’s ongoing efforts to develop deliverable nuclear weapons. The Administration should announce that it is abrogating the JCPOA due to significant Iranian violations, Iran’s unacceptable international conduct more broadly, and because the JCPOA threatens American national-security interests.

 

The Administration’s explanation in a “white paper” should stress the many dangerous concessions made to reach this deal, such as allowing Iran to continue to enrich uranium; allowing Iran to operate a heavy-water reactor; and allowing Iran to operate and develop advanced centrifuges while the JCPOA is in effect. Utterly inadequate verification and enforcement mechanisms and Iran’s refusal to allow inspections of military sites also provide important reasons for the Administration’s decision.

 

Even the previous Administration knew the JCPOA was so disadvantageous to the United States that it feared to submit the agreement for Senate ratification. Moreover, key American allies in the Middle East directly affected by this agreement, especially Israel and the Gulf states, did not have their legitimate interests adequately taken into account. The explanation must also demonstrate the linkage between Iran and North Korea.

 

We must also highlight Iran’s unacceptable behavior, such as its role as the world’s central banker for international terrorism, including its directions and control over Hezbollah and its actions in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. The reasons Ronald Reagan named Iran as a state sponsor of terrorism in 1984 remain fully applicable today.

 

II. Campaign Plan Components

 

There are four basic elements to the development and implementation of the campaign plan to decertify and abrogate the Iran nuclear deal:

 

  1. Early, quiet consultations with key players such as the U.K., France, Germany, Israel, and Saudi Arabia, to tell them we are going to abrogate the deal based on outright violations and other unacceptable Iranian behavior, and seek their input.

 

  1. Prepare the documented strategic case for withdrawal through a detailed white paper (including declassified intelligence as appropriate) explaining why the deal is harmful to U.S. national interests, how Iran has violated it, and why Iran’s behavior more broadly has only worsened since the deal was agreed.

 

  1. A greatly expanded diplomatic campaign should immediately follow the announcement, especially in Europe and the Middle East, and we should ensure continued emphasis on the Iran threat as a top diplomatic and strategic priority.

 

  1. Develop and execute Congressional and public diplomacy efforts to build domestic and foreign support.

 

III. Execution Concepts and Tactics

 

  1. Early, quiet consultations with key players

 

It is critical that a worldwide effort be initiated to inform our allies, partners, and others about Iran’s unacceptable behavior. While this effort could well leak to the press, it is nonetheless critical that we inform and consult with our allies and partners at the earliest possible moment, and, where appropriate, build into our effort their concerns and suggestions.

 

This quiet effort will articulate the nature and details of the violations and the type of relationship the U.S. foresees in the future, thereby laying the foundation for imposing new sanctions barring the transfer of nuclear and missile technology or dual use technology to Iran. With Israel and selected others, we will discuss military options. With others in the Gulf region, we can also discuss means to address their concerns from Iran’s menacing behavior.

 

The advance consultations could begin with private calls by the President, followed by more extensive discussions in capitals by senior Administration envoys. Promptly elaborating a comprehensive tactical diplomatic plan should be a high priority.

 

  1. Prepare the documented strategic case

 

The White House, coordinating all other relevant Federal agencies, must forcefully articulate the strong case regarding U.S. national-security interests. The effort should produce a “white paper” that will be the starting point for the diplomatic and domestic discussion of the Administration decision to abrogate the JCPOA, and why Iran must be denied access to nuclear technology indefinitely. The white paper should be an unclassified, written statement of the Administration’s case, prepared faultlessly, with scrupulous attention to accuracy and candor. It should not be limited to the inadequacies of the JCPOA as written, or Iran’s violations, but cover the entire range of Iran’s continuing unacceptable international behavior.

 

Although the white paper will not be issued until the announcement of the decision to abrogate the JCPOA, initiating work on drafting the document is the highest priority, and its completion will dictate the timing of the abrogation announcement.

 

A thorough review and declassification strategy, including both U.S. and foreign intelligence in our possession should be initiated to ensure that the public has as much information as possible about Iranian behavior that is currently classified, consistent with protecting intelligence sources and methods. We should be prepared to “name names” and expose the underbelly of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard business activities and how they are central to the efforts that undermine American and allied national interests. In particular, we should consider declassifying information related to activities such as the Iran-North Korea partnership, and how they undermine fundamental interests of our allies and partners.

 

  1. Greatly expanded diplomatic campaign post-announcement

 

The Administration, through the NSC process, should develop a tactical plan that uses all available diplomatic tools to build support for our decision, including what actions we recommend other countries to take. But America must provide the leadership. It will take substantial time and effort and will require a “full court press” by U.S. embassies worldwide and officials in Washington to drive the process forward. We should ensure that U.S. officials fully understand the decision, and its finality, to help ensure the most positive impact with their interlocutors.

 

Our embassies worldwide should demarche their host governments with talking points (tailored as may be necessary) and data to explain and justify abrogating JCPOA. We will need parallel efforts at the United Nations and other appropriate multilateral organizations. Our embassies should not limit themselves to delivering the demarche, however, but should undertake extensive public diplomacy as well.

 

After explaining and justifying the decision to abrogate the deal, the next objective should be to recreate a new counter-proliferation coalition to replace the one squandered by the previous Administration, including our European allies, Israel, and the Gulf states. In that regard, we should solicit suggestions for imposing new sanctions on Iran and other measures in response to its nuclear and ballistic-missile programs, sponsorship of terrorism, and generally belligerent behavior, including its meddling in Iraq and Syria.

 

Russia and China obviously warrant careful attention in the post-announcement campaign. They could be informed just prior to the public announcement as a courtesy, but should not be part of the pre-announcement diplomatic effort described above. We should welcome their full engagement to eliminate these threats, but we will move ahead with or without them.

 

Iran is not likely to seek further negotiations once the JCPOA is abrogated, but the Administration may wish to consider rhetorically leaving that possibility open in order to demonstrate Iran’s actual underlying intention to develop deliverable nuclear weapons, an intention that has never flagged.

 

In preparation for the diplomatic campaign, the NSC interagency process should review U.S. foreign-assistance programs as they might assist our efforts. The DNI should prepare a comprehensive, worldwide list of companies and activities that aid Iran’s terrorist activities.

 

  1. Develop and execute Congressional and public diplomacy efforts

 

The Administration should have a Capitol Hill plan to inform members of Congress already concerned about Iran, and develop momentum for imposing broad sanctions against Iran, far more comprehensive than the pinprick sanctions favored under prior Administrations. Strong congressional support will be critical. We should be prepared to link Iranian behavior around the world, including its relationship with North Korea, and its terrorist activities. And we should demonstrate the linkage between Iranian behavior and missile proliferation as part of the overall effort that justifies a national-security determination that U.S. interests would not be furthered with the JCPOA.

 

Unilateral U.S. sanctions should be imposed outside the framework of Security Council Resolution 2231 so that Iran’s defenders cannot water them down; multilateral sanctions from others who support us can follow quickly.

 

The Administration should also encourage discussions in Congress and in public debate for further steps that might be taken to go beyond the abrogation decision. These further steps, advanced for discussion purposes and to stimulate debate, should collectively demonstrate our resolve to limit Iran’s malicious activities and global adventurism. Some would relate directly to Iran; others would protect our allies and partners more broadly from the nuclear proliferation and terrorist threats, such as providing F-35s to Israel or THAAD resources to Japan. Other actions could include:

 

  • End all landing and docking rights for all Iranian aircraft and ships at key allied ports;

 

  • End all visas for Iranians, including so called “scholarly,” student, sports, or other exchanges;

 

  • Demand payment with a set deadline on outstanding U.S. federal-court judgments against Iran for terrorism, including 9/11;

 

  • Announce U.S. support for the democratic Iranian opposition;
    • Expedite delivery of bunker-buster bombs;

 

  • Announce U.S. support for Kurdish national aspirations, including Kurds in Iran, Iraq, and Syria;

 

  • Provide assistance to Balochis, Khuzestan Arabs, Kurds, and others — also to internal resistance among labor unions, students, and women’s groups;

 

  • Actively organize opposition to Iranian political objectives in the U.N.

 

IV. Conclusion

 

This effort should be the Administration’s highest diplomatic priority, commanding all necessary time, attention, and resources. We can no longer wait to eliminate the threat posed by Iran. The Administration’s justification of its decision will demonstrate to the world that we understand the threat to our civilization; we must act and encourage others to meet their responsibilities as well.

 

  1. Although this paper will refer to “the JCPOA,” the abrogation decision should also encompass the July 14, 2015, statement by the Security Council’s five permanent members and Germany, attached as Annex B to Security Council Resolution 2231. The JCPOA is attached as Annex A to Resolution 2231.

 

[CLICK HERE FOR PDF COPY OF THIS RELEASE]

______________

National Security Experts Exhort JCPOA Abrogation

John R. Houk

© September 23, 2017

______________

45 National Security Experts Urge President Trump to Withdraw From Nuclear Deal with Iran Using the Bolton Plan

 

About The Center for Security Policy

 

The Center for Security Policy is a non-profit, non-partisan national security organization that specializes in identifying policies, actions, and resource needs that are vital to American security and then ensures that such issues are the subject of both focused, principled examination and effective action by recognized policy experts, appropriate officials, opinion leaders, and the general public. For more information visit www.securefreedom.org

 

The Hijra: Conquest Of The West By Colonization


Blog Editor Intro to Fatouros Post on Ann Corcoran

Editor John R. Houk

Intro date: April 25, 2016

Ann Corcoran screen capture from Youtube

Ann Corcoran

Dee Fatouros sources The Counter Jihad Report in turn sources the Center for Security Policy (CSP). How’s that for a Counterjihad pedigree? The key for all is the expertise of Ann Corcoran who blogs at Refugee Resettlement Watch. Corcoran has recently released a book entitled “Refugee Resettlement and the Hijra to America”.

 

The term “Hijra” has many Arabic spellings and apparently meanings depending on the part of the Muslim world is culturally from. The original meaning refers to the Muslim false prophet Mohammed – Courtesy Wikipedia:

 

The Hegira or Hijrah (Arabicهِجْرَة), also romanized as Hijra and Hejira, is the migration or journey of the Islamic prophet Muhammad and his followers from Mecca to Yathrib, later renamed by him to Medina, in 622 CE.[1] In June 622 CE, after being warned of a plot to assassinate him, Muhammad secretly left his home in Mecca to emigrate to Yathrib, 320 km (200 mi) north of Mecca, along with his companion Abu Bakr.[4] Yathrib was soon renamed Madīnat an-Nabī, literally “the City of the Prophet”, but an-Nabī was soon dropped, so its name is “Medina”, meaning “the city”.[5]

 

The Hijrah is also often identified erroneously with the start of the Hijri calendar which was READ ENTIRETY at Wikipedia

 

Wikipedia also provides a brief page of other meanings and Western World uses of the word “Hijra”.

 

Ann Corcoran focuses on a meaning that use migration as a form Muslim Jihad to conquer the Western World for Islam. This Hijra Jihad sounds something a bit similar to the Muslim Brotherhood agenda for the West in a discovered document entitled “The Project”: The Patrick Poole explanation and the IPT PDF that includes the English Translation after the original Arabic.

 

READ THE Fatouros explanation of Ann Corcoran’s position that watch her on a Youtube video which Fatouros posts afterword.

 

JRH 4/25/16

Please Support NCCR

***********************

The Hijra: Conquest Of The West By Colonization

 

Posted by Dee Fatouros

April 24, 2016

The Realistic Observer

 

Catholic Charities ... helping refugees

Catholic Charities has targeted services for helping refugees. (FOX 8 Photo)

 

Ann Corcoran has been a leader in sounding the clarion regarding what has happened to and what is really behind our so called “refugee resettlement program”.


There is much information and some pertinent links as well as her concise 4 minute video at the end of this post.


Citizen awareness concerning this issue is vital to the survival of our American way of life.

MUSLIM COLONIZATION OF AMERICA: THE HIJRA AND THE HIJACKING OF AMERICA’S REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT PROGRAM

Washington, DC — Last week, the chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security, Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina, wrote the Department of State demanding that it halt the resettlement of refugees in the city of Spartanburg in his district. In his letter dated April 15, 2015, Congressman Gowdy objected to the “lack of notice, information and consultation afforded to me and my constituents” and posed seventeen pointed questions, including (as paraphrased by Politico):

  • Why and when was his district approved [as a refugee resettlement site]?

 

  • What steps were taken to notify local government officials and whether they approved the plan, and where funds for the office and the refugees will come from?

 

  • When are the first refugees expected to arrive?

 

  • What benefits are they entitled to?

 

  • How many will be resettled?

 

  • What is their country of origin?

 

  • Who is responsible for housing, employment and education services for them?

 
Rep. Gowdy was particularly concerned about the security implications of this immigrant migration. He asked: “Do any of the refugees to be resettled in the Spartanburg area have criminal convictions? If so, for what crimes has each been convicted?” And “Please explain the background-check process performed on refugees scheduled to be resettled in Spartanburg.

The necessity for such congressional oversight has been underscored by an important new monograph by Ann Corcoran entitled, Refugee Resettlement and the Hijra to America, which was published today as part of the Center for Security Policy’s Civilization Jihad Reader Series. Ms. Corcoran documents that Muslim immigration as a form of jihad via colonization called hijra dates back to the time of Mohammed. In fact, she quotes hadith sources that assert that migration is a religious obligation for Muslims to spread Islam and build the Islamic state. She also cites longtime Libyan leader, Muammar Qaddafi, who once said that Europe would be conquered without guns and swords, but with Muslim migrants overrunning the continent. A powerful new documentary by Martin Mawyer called “Europe’s Last Stand; America’s Final Warning” illustrates just how accurate this prediction is proving to be.

As practiced today, the hijra strategy is an important part of a covert, pre-violent “civilization jihad” pursued by the Muslim Brotherhood. The UN High Commission on Refugees – which, like the rest of the United Nations, is dominated by the dictates of the Islamic supremacist organization known as the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) – is complicit in the process of bringing Muslim refugees to America. Interestingly, no Muslim refugees are ever resettled in wealthy, low-population density Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia.

Particularly troubling is the evidence that Ms. Corcoran compiles concerning the secrecy surrounding this U.S. refugee resettlement program. She provides estimates of how many Muslim immigrants have been quietly resettled in American communities with no local input. And she discusses the State Department’s primary targets in the United States for Muslim resettlement and showcases models to be found in communities that are resisting this program.

In her book, Ms. Corcoran recounts her personal trajectory from typical, uninformed citizen to a national authority on refugee resettlement policies and programs, the focus of her highly acclaimed blog, Refugee Resettlement Watch. It began in 2007, when large numbers of Muslim Meskhetian Turks were quietly resettled by the U.S. State Department in her hometown in Western Maryland, prompting her to research intensively what was afoot.

Although the author and other concerned local residents succeeded in that instance in blocking the dumping of immigrants that are, as a practical matter, unlikely ever to assimilate, the episode led Ms. Corcoran to the discovery of a frightening pattern: Across the United States, the federal government is attempting stealthily to relocate Muslim immigrants into unsuspecting and often unsuitable rural communities. She found that the affected locals, and even states, are totally by-passed in a resettlement process effectively driven by the United Nations, with U.S. agencies playing a clearly subordinate and non-sovereign role.

In addition, Ms. Corcoran has documented how U.S. officials stubbornly refuse to answer affected communities’ questions about Muslim resettlement. In fact, the State Department went so far as to stop holding townhalls and meetings in Washington, DC to discus after local community representatives began to attend.

Center for Security Policy President Frank Gaffney said of the new Civilization Jihad Reader:

Ann Corcoran’s report is required reading for anyone worried about the threat to America from the global jihad movement. She has provided shocking details of how a stealth effort by jihadists to advance their stated goal of “destroying Western civilization from within” is being abetted by the U.S. government. 

It is to be profoundly hoped that Ms. Corcoran’s analysis will raise awareness of this problem and that, especially with the concern being expressed by influential legislators like Congressman Trey Gowdy, it will help force U.S. officials to halt a dangerous refugee resettlement program. Her suggestions about what average citizens can do to catalyze such changes amounts, moreover, to a real public service.

An excellent site for further reading and information can be found at, Center For Security Policy.

For further information on the threats shariah poses to our foundational liberal democratic values, see more titles from the Center for Security Policy’s Civilization Jihad Reader Series at

Center for Security, Jihad Reader Series

Citizen researcher: Get “the plan” for your community before it goes to Washington

Ann’s Book Release: Refugee Resettlement and the Hijra to America [Blog Editor: Here is the CSP pdf link]

 

VIDEO: Ann Corcoran on Refugee Resettlement

 

 

Posted by securefreedom

Published on Apr 20, 2015

 

Buy Refugee Resettlement and the Hijra to America on Amazon.com: http://www.amazon.com/Refugee-Resettlement-America-Civilization-Reader/dp/1508820708

 

Source: The Counter Jihad Report

___________________

The Realistic Observer Homepage

 

Secure America’s Border


ISIS in MX means ISIS in USA

CSP Provides the Knowledge Tools

 

By John R. Houk

© April 21, 2016

 

Frank Gaffney has sent an email that has a hook – a petition, and a goal – fund raising. Frank Gaffney is the Founder and President of the Center for Security Policy (CSP) in Washington, D.C. Mr. Gaffney is the host of Secure Freedom Radio, a nationally-syndicated radio program. Secure Freedom Radio is a part of the CSP strategy as a Counterjihad organization dedicated to America’s National Security especially against the threat of Radical Islam toward Americans. The CSP looks at the dissemination of Radical Islam via the fifth column aspects of the Muslim Brotherhood and their deceptive offshoots of Muslim-American organizations that outwardly attempt to promote the image of Moderate Islam and the mesmerization of the concept that Islam is peace on the non-Muslim American people yet have a Caliphate agenda to Islamize America.

 

The petition itself serves an awesome purpose if you can get past CSP fund raising. Although admittedly, CSP is an awesome organization to invest. Largely because most of the CSP educational resources are FREE. One of the points this email makes you aware of is that CSP is donor supported and receives no funding from the government. As if an Obama led U.S. government would ever support any actual Counterjihad strategy to keep America safe from any Caliphate agenda.

 

The petition is a part of CSP’s Secure Freedom Strategy:

 

(Washington, DC): If there were any lingering doubts that the United States and the rest of the Free World are losing a decades-long war with the Global Jihad Movement (GJM), events of the past week should have put them to rest. Murderous attacks in Europe, warnings by MI5 of more – and worse – to come, there and perhaps here and an intercepted plot to attack the U.S. Capitol are the most obvious indicators.

 

Less evident, but no less portentous, is the absence of the President of the United States from the Western effort to push back – compounded by his record of accommodation to, and collaboration with, those seeking to impose “blasphemy” and other restrictions driven by their shariah ideology at the expense of Americans’ constitutional freedoms.

 

Such developments have moved a remarkable, ad hoc group of highly skilled national security professionals to step forward and offer an alternative approach: a strategy for actually countering and defeating totalitarians and their supremacist ideology that has been proven effective in the one environment that matters: the real world.

 

This “Tiger Team” has been sponsored by the Center for Security Policy, an organization whose mode of operation from its founding 26 years ago has been modeled after the best of America’s military – its elite unconventional warfare units. As the “Special Forces in the War of Ideas,” the Center has pulled together, much as the real special operators would do, sixteen of the best in the business, individuals with unique and necessary skill sets for the mission at hand: Adapting the strategy that defeated the last totalitarian ideology that sought our destruction, Soviet communism.

 

At a National Press Club conference at noon on Friday, 16 January 2015, ten members of this Tiger Team will introduce and explain the component parts of READ ENTIRE PDF press release (NATIONAL SECURITY TIGER TEAM PRESENTS THE ‘SECURE FREEDOM STRATEGY’ FOR VICTORY OVER THE GLOBAL JIHAD MOVEMENT; CSP Press Release; 1/15/15)

 

On The Secure Freedom Strategy page at CSP one of the exponents of the strategy – Tommy Waller (a Marine Reserve Major – LinkedIn profile) – has a roughly four-minute video introducing the concept of Civilization Jihad:

 

VIDEO: Tommy Waller: “Civilization Jihad is here”

 

 

Posted by securefreedom

Published on Jan 16, 2015

 

Tommy Waller, Director of State Legislative Outreach at the Center for Security Policy, discusses matters of information dominance and civilization jihad at the launch of the Center’s new “Secure Freedom Strategy” to combat jihad.

 

The Secure Freedom email you are about to read is informative. At the very least it gives you a great idea to go to one of the great Internet sites to educate yourself on what many call Radical Islam – I just call it Islam. The petition link allows you to read the petition that will be sent to your Congressman according to your zip code. Then as you sign by clicking “submit,” you will be redirected to the donation page of CSP. If it’s in your budget, throw a little support toward the Center for Security Policy. If it’s not in your budget, feel good about doing the right thing for joining the CSP petition that will reach your Congressman. And of course take advantage of educating yourself at CSP. ( For that matter wouldn’t hold it against you to through a little financial love to your Blog Editor via the SlantRight 2.0 Paypal button or perhaps this Paypal link.)

 

The Petition is to encourage your Congressman to do this:

 

This petition is part of a targeted signature campaign being launched in response to elevated security concerns over the vulnerability of our country due the lax security of our southern border.

 

The link to the petition will include my name and email – CHANGE IT TO YOUR INFORMATION.
3 Jihad Stages- Immigrate, Infiltrate & Caliphate

JRH 4/21/16

Please Support NCCR

******************

ISIS Camp 8 Miles From USA

 

Email sent by Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.

Sent: 4/20/2016 10:05 AM

Response Action Network: Below please find a special message from one of our advertisers:

 

Go here to find a formal petition addressed to your Member of Congress.

Please read it carefully. If you agree with it, I would like to ask you to please SIGN and AUTHORIZE it immediately for transmission to your U.S. Representative in Washington, DC.

 

This petition formally requests that your U.S. Representative make defending the security and safety of the United States a top Congressional priority by supporting measures to fully guard, monitor and protect the 2,000 mile border between Mexico and the United States.

This petition is part of a targeted signature campaign being launched in response to elevated security concerns over the vulnerability of our country due the lax security of our southern border.

I do not want to alarm you. We are aware of no actionable intelligence of an immediate threat of violence in your vicinity or against the United States.

But there are growing concerns regarding the threat posed by documented numbers of drug and sex-traffickers, gang members and suspected jihadists who are taking advantage of the border’s porousness.

It is widely known, for example, that Iran and its proxy, the terrorist organization Hezbollah, have had a presence in Latin America for years.

And most recently, ISIS, the notorious terrorist jihad group, has been discovered operating a camp about 8 miles from the U.S. border near Juarez in Mexico. And another ISIS cell in Puerto Palomas is close to the New Mexico towns of Columbus and Deming and has easy access to the United States.

And perhaps the gravest warning was sounded by the Home Secretary of Great Britain, a key ally in the war on terror, who stated that “ISIS could become the world’s first truly terrorist state,” and that “we will see the risk . . . that the terrorists will acquire chemical, biological or even nuclear weapons to attack us.”

Some “experts” and Members of Congress dismiss these concerns. But as Pearl Harbor should have taught us, it is the nature of warfare to exploit surprise and vulnerability. And it is widely acknowledged that our insecure southern border offers enemies of this country abundant vulnerabilities and opportunities for surprise attacks.

In the words of the Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, Representative Michael McCaul:

 

“President Obama claims that our borders are more secure than ever before . . . This is simply not true. As of last count, only 44 percent of the border was under operational control.

“Just last year the Border Patrol apprehended almost half a million individuals along our Southern border — representing only the people we know that are being stopped. We have no way of telling how many people we didn’t catch, or what they brought with them.”

 

WHY IS CONGRESS NEGLECTING TO TAKE THE COMMON-SENSE STEPS NEEDED TO PROTECT OUR BORDERS FROM THE LIKELIHOOD OF TERRORIST INTRUSION?

We believe a good part of the answer lies with the policies of Barack Obama.

President Obama’s political agenda of dramatically increasing immigration appeals to many of his partisans. And the prospect of more and more aliens-turned-voters causes even some of his political opponents to shy away from taking key steps to secure our borders lest they alienate potentially influential voting blocs.

Politics, in short, has again taken precedence over Congress’ responsibility to do what is right for our country — which is why we have made the decision to launch this citizens’ campaign and ask for your support by signing this letter to your Member of Congress.

As I will explain below, I must also request financial support of this effort with a contribution of at least $25.

But most importantly, please authorize your formal petition as quickly as possible.

HOW URGENT IS THE THREAT?

Surprise attacks are, by definition, “unlikely.” That is why they are “surprise attacks.” But there are often forewarnings.

For example, the surprise 9/11 attack was preceded by a failed attempt to bomb the World Trade Center years earlier.

And the Wall Street Journal last year ran an account of an attack on a California power station, reporting that the former chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission “is calling it a terrorist act that, if it were widely replicated across the country, could take down the U.S. electric grid and black out much of the country.”

And the intent of ISIS to launch attacks on shopping malls and kill as many Americans as possible is being widely reported.

Even the threat of nuclear or chemical terror attack, while also dismissed as “unlikely” by some, cannot be responsibly ruled out.

 

According to Marine Corps Gen. John Kelly, Commander of the U.S. Southern Command, “Terrorist organizations could seek to leverage . . . smuggling routes to move operatives with intent to cause grave harm to our citizens or even quite easily bring weapons of mass destruction into the United States.”

 

The hard truth is, a mass-destruction assault on the U.S power grid, or financial or communications hubs, a population concentration such as a sporting event or shopping mall, or to our seat of government could be catastrophic to our nation.

And who would argue that such attacks are not being discussed, planned and encouraged right now as part of the global Jihad strategy in terror in training camps in places like Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Somalia and countless other places around the world?

In light of this, we believe that leaving the “back door” of our nation unlocked, open and unguarded in the face of these gravely serious threats is utterly unacceptable.

THERE ARE SIMPLE, PRUDENT STEPS THAT CONGRESS CAN TAKE.

For example:

 

Under former Texas Governor Rick Perry, his state’s Department of Public Safety, Border Patrol agents and other federal officials utilized an array of military-grade video cameras to monitor key crossing points along the Texas-Mexico frontier.

 

The cameras’ feed was posted on the Internet, drawing on many thousands of volunteers to help monitor and alert the authorities to aliens sneaking across the border. This army of “online deputies” helped achieve a 92% rate of interception of individuals crossing the Rio Grande and elsewhere illegally. But, incredibly, this practical and proven system — which could be very cost-effectively deployed across the entire U.S.-Mexico frontier — has been discontinued.

 

In short, we have the technology, know-how and resources to secure our borders. That is not the issue.

WHAT IS NEEDED IS THE POLITICAL WILL TO ACT.

And that is why we are launching this campaign to educate and remind Congress of their prime responsibility to protect our country by protecting our borders — and why your signature is so important.

Limited resources mean we must begin by focusing on certain key Members of Congress for this campaign. Our goal during this phase is to gather a minimum of 1,000 signatures from every targeted Congressional District.

YOU ARE ONE OF THE SIGNATURES NEEDED TO HELP MEET THIS GOAL.

Will you help out by signing your formal petition, indicating your authorization of its language and purpose, and, if possible, making a contribution of $25, $50, $100 or more to support this campaign and our other research and education projects?

Secure Freedom receives no funding from the government. We are entirely independent — so we must rely on voluntary contributions like yours to sustain our efforts.

Even just the mailing portion of a campaign such as this costs upwards of $100,000 for printing, postage and processing. And, if we have the resources, we hope to heighten the awareness of this critical issue through a campaign of TV, radio and print ads, op-ed articles, position papers and studies to be distributed to the press and Congress.

But right now, your signature on the petition to your U.S. Representative is the single most important step in moving this campaign forward.

And your contribution of at least $25 will significantly strengthen and heighten the impact of your involvement, enabling us to urge more citizens to contact more Members of Congress.

So please do what you can. Please sign your petition, and make whatever contribution you can to help support this campaign and sustain our ongoing efforts to promote a national security philosophy of Peace Through Strength.

We face very real, very ominous threats from some of the most ruthless and brutal adversaries our nation has ever encountered. They have said — and demonstrated — that they will do anything to harm and destroy us.

Protecting our “back door” to keep these sworn enemies of freedom and America from literally walking in and doing us harm is just common sense.

Please ask your Member of Congress to act responsibly and protect our borders.

Sincerely,

 

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.
President, Secure Freedom

P.S. Some try to discount these warnings as “alarmist.” But U.S. Representative Lamar Smith, chair of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, recently substantiated our concern over the border’s insecurity, stating flatly: “The border is not more secure than it’s ever been.” And with reports that ISIS has now set up a camp in Mexico, just a few miles away from the border, I feel it is grossly irresponsible for Congress to wait for another devastating surprise attack on our nation before it takes concrete and long-overdue action.

This year Congress will authorize well over half a trillion dollars in defense spending in order to protect our nation from jihadist enemies and others now on the march around the globe — from Iraq and Iran to Afghanistan and Africa to our own hemisphere.

Taking steps to protect us from harm right here at home just makes common sense. And choosing NOT to do so — for fear of “offending” the political interests of pro-immigration voter-blocs — is grossly negligent and irresponsible. We are, after all at war. The global Jihad mission to destroy the West –and in particular America — is fully known. And our lack of defense of our homeland has already cost thousands of American lives.

If you agree, please let your Member of Congress know how you feel ASAP.

Please sign the petition for immediate transmission to your U.S. Representative. And please consider making a contribution of at least $25 to support this critical effort.

Thank you.

The number one priority of every Member of Congress should be to protect the security and safety of our nation and our citizens.

F.J.G.

___________________

Secure America’s Border

By John R. Houk

© April 21, 2016

__________________

ISIS Camp 8 Miles From USA

 

Secure Freedom
1901 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 201 Washington, DC 20006, (202) 835-9077

As a 501c3 tax-exempt organization, we are able to do our part to keep America safe by educating citizens and members of Congress on vital matters of national security. All gifts to Secure Freedom are therefore tax-deductible. Thank you for helping to secure freedom in America!

 

About Rapid Response Network

 

The Response Action Network team works every day to ensure that our values are protected. We believe that each of us can make a difference in the political process, and we each have devoted our working lives to that end.

 

The Response Action Network (RAN) is a special project of Viguerie Political lists, which connects the grassroots to conservative political and advocacy organizations, and campaigns to advance the cause of freedom.  RAN gives you perspective you won’t find anywhere else – because everything we do is backed with decades of hands-on political experience.  We give you a window on the politics and policy affecting our liberties– and a powerful platform to make your voice heard.

 

You may have heard of Richard Viguerie. He is considered by many to be one of the most innovative tacticians and fundraisers in modern politics.  He has always strongly believed in helping the right candidates reach the right voters, and the right organizations reach the right activists. It is this mission that is at the core of who we are.

 

Viguerie founded what Viguerie Political Lists is today 50 years ago, and has raised billions of dollars in defense of freedom.  Richard responded to a question from Campaigns & Elections magazine about what his goals are:

 

To use the Internet to involve Americans in the political process, to help conservatives gain an advantage over the left. To fight against government’s use of power, to fight for individual rights and responsibilities. . .

 

RAN builds on that foundation. We educate. We energize. We connect. And most of all, we listen…to you.

 

This website is our hub, the place where we share news, ideas, and issue calls to action.

 

We invite you to READ THE REST

Islam is Dangerous to America


Frank Gaffney

Clare Lopez - CSP VP

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

John R. Houk

© April 15, 2016

 

I found an email in my inbox promoting a new book written by Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. and Clare Lopez of the Center for Security Policy (CSP) entitled “See No Sharia: ‘Countering Violent Extremism’ and the Disarming of America’s First Line of Defense”.

 

The email breaks down the book to how Radical Islam has been creeping into America due to government policies that are designed to show favoritism to all Islam. And when I say “all Islam” I am saying government policies are looking at Islam as peaceful in general hence believing the lies that Radical Muslims are advocates of Moderate Islam.

 

This gullibility by the U.S. government was actually began by one of my hero Presidents in G.W. Bush. After the 9/11 attack on American soil by al Qaeda Bush accurately described the act brutality as the work of Islamofascists and that we will find and bring down those who were responsible. Thus began our invasion of al Qaeda’s protectors the Taliban then ruling Afghanistan.

 

American Patriotism made many Americans angry. Many Americans joined the U.S. Military to do their part in a war effort against Islamofascism. Other Americans had no intention of serving militarily but were still incensed. Angry Americans have a tendency to operate in spontaneous acts of vengeance against people perceived as Muslims.

 

Thus many Americans and resident aliens that had a Middle Eastern look about them were treated as Islamofascists rather they were non-violent Muslims or Muslim look-alikes such as Sikhs who as a part of their faith wear turbans.

 

So very soon after President Bush’s hunt-the-Islamofascists down promise, Bush went public with the meme that not all Muslims are Islamofascists to head off the American emerging revenge mindset against all people appearing to be Muslim. President Bush went public with the semi-falsehood that “Islam is peace” statement implying that good Muslims are Moderates in their faith of a true Islam.

 

Let’s be truthful. A majority of Muslims that are religious indeed believe that Islam is peace because that is what they are told by their religious leaders (Clerics, Mullahs or whatever). Shoot even Radical Muslims believe Islam is peace at least between Muslims that follow Sharia Law.

 

The reality is that if you read the Quran, Hadith and Sira through unfiltered lenses will see that Islam is violent theopolitical religion against those that refuse to believe in Islam and even against Muslims if they don’t follow the rules of Sharia or the writs of their revered writings.

 

It is my opinion unwittingly promoted the Islam is peace meme to prevent violent chaos against peaceful people. However, it is also my opinion that President Barack Hussein Obama took this peace meme to the next level that has welcomed Radical Muslims into sensitive jobs in the U.S. government. With most of these Radical Muslims sympathetic or even in collusion with the Radical Islamic paradigm of a global Caliphate.

 

This is where Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. and Clare Lopez come into the picture exposing Islamic infiltration into America and offering a scenario to defeat Islamic terrorism. I have not read this book myself yet, but I do intend to pick a copy up. Below is the email promoting the book “See No Sharia”.

 

JRH 4/15/16

Please Support NCCR

*******************

BOOK RELEASE: SEE NO SHARIA: How Our First Lines of Defense Have Been Disarmed

See No Sharia book jacket

Sent by Adam Savit | savit@securefreedom.org

Sent: April 14, 2016 1:52 PM

Sent from: Secure Freedom – (CSP link to email)

 

(Washington, D.C.): For much of the past fifteen years, the United States government has failed to understand, let alone decisively defeat, the enemy that, under the banner of its al Qaeda franchise, murderously attacked our country on September 11, 2001.  The reason why that has been so – notwithstanding the bravery and skill of our men and women in uniform and the expenditure of hundreds of billions of dollars – has been unclear to most Americans, including some in government.  Until now.

 

With the publication by the Center for Security Policy of a new book by two of its leaders, President Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. and Vice President Clare Lopez, See No Sharia: “Countering Violent Extremism” and the Disarming of America’s First Lines of Defense, the case has been forcefully made that this sorry state of affairs is a product of a sustained and highly successful influence operation by Islamic supremacists. Under both Republican and Democratic administrations, Islamists in general and the Muslim Brotherhood in particular have gained access to and considerable sway over policymakers in the White House, the FBI and the Departments of State, Justice, Defense and Homeland Security.

 

[Blog Editor: The email at this point has a photo of Frank Gaffney with a link to a Youtube video associated to the photo. In place of the photo here I am posting the Youtube video.]

 

VIDEO: See No Sharia: ‘Countering Violent Extremism’ and the Disarming of America’s First Line of Defense

 

 

Posted by securefreedom

Published on Apr 14, 2016

 

For more information visit: http://bit.ly/1T6Dcta

 

See No Sharia describes the trajectory that has flowed from such penetration and subversion.  It traces how fact-based counterterrorism and law enforcement have inexorably been supplanted by an approach defined by accommodations demanded by Islamists – purged lexicons and training programs, limitations on surveillance, case-making and rules of engagement and above all, eschewing anything that gives “offense” to Muslims.

 

In addition to showing the perils associated with such policies and practices as America faces the growing threat of global jihad and its animating doctrine of sharia, this book provides specific recommendations as to how to restore our first lines of defense – the FBI and other law enforcement, the Department of Homeland Security, the military and the intelligence community – whose effective service is needed today more than ever.

 

Frank Gaffney noted,

 

“Americans expect government officials to fulfill their oaths of office by protecting the Constitution, the Republic it established and its people from all enemies, foreign and domestic.  The vast majority of our public servants yearn to do their duty. Yet, as See No Sharia makes plain, for at least a decade and a half, they have been obliged to conform to policies that greatly diminish their chances for success.  We simply cannot afford to disarm those in our first lines of defense against Islamic supremacism and its jihad – both the violent kind and the stealthy sort the Muslim Brotherhood calls ‘civilization jihad.’”

 

Clare Lopez added,

 

“As a career intelligence professional, the extent to which our policymaking apparatus has been penetrated and subverted by Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist operatives is deeply problematic.  This book is meant to expose their handiwork – and to impel the urgently needed and long-overdue policy course-correction.”

 

The Center for Security Policy/Secure Freedom is proud to present this monograph as a superb addition to its Civilization Jihad Reader Series.  “The Gulen Movement: Turkey’s Islamic Supremacist Cult and Its Contribution to Civilization Jihad in America” is available for purchase in kindle and paperback format on Amazon.com.

 

Click here for a full PDF of the newly released monograph.

______________________

Islam is Dangerous

John R. Houk

© April 15, 2016

____________________

BOOK RELEASE: SEE NO SHARIA: How Our First Lines of Defense Have Been Disarmed

 

About The Center for Security Policy

 

The Center for Security Policy is a non-profit, non-partisan national security organization that specializes in identifying policies, actions, and resource needs that are vital to American security and then ensures that such issues are the subject of both focused, principled examination and effective action by recognized policy experts, appropriate officials, opinion leaders, and the general public. For more information visit www.securefreedom.org

 

Donate to CSP

Pay Attention America – Civilization Jihad is Real


Muslim Brotherhood NOT the Only U.S. Infiltrators

John R. Houk

© December 19, 2015

Have you ever heard the term “Civilization Jihad”? It is a reference to Muslim immigrating to Western nations and infiltrating the local culture slowly instituting the tenets of the theopolitical ideology called Islam. Another term is Stealth Jihad.

Counterjihad writers have been playing Jeremiah telling their nations that Civilization Jihad is a very real practice taking place in the West to subvert our society, culture and essentially our Liberty that in the USA is insured by the U.S. Constitution.

The term first reared its ugly face in a Muslim Brotherhood document aimed at using stealth to transform North America into an Islamic dominated area. Check out this excerpt:

Under shariah, civilization jihad – a “pre-violent” form of jihad – is considered an integral, even dominant element of jihad that is at least as obligatory for shariah’s adherents as the violent kind.

Such tactics are ostensibly “non-violent” (and therefore “moderate”) not because the Muslim Brotherhood eschews violence out of principle, but because it has decided that this phase of battlefield preparation is better accomplished through stealthy means. Hence civilization jihad can be considered “stealth jihad.”

Civilization jihad is a form of political and psychological warfare that includes multi-layered cultural subversion, the co-opting of senior leaders, influence operations, propaganda and other means of insinuating shariah gradually into Western societies.

Origins of civilization jihad

We get the concept of civilization jihad from, among other sources, a document that was entered into evidence in the 2008 United States v Holy Land Foundation terrorist finance trial. The document, titled An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group, was written in 1991 by Mohamed Akram, a senior Hamas leader in the United States and a member of the board of directors for the Muslim Brotherhood in North America.

The Explanatory Memorandum (click here for the original document in Arabic) explains that the Muslim Brotherhood-organized “Islamic Movement” in the US is a “settlement process” to establish itself in the United States and, once entrenched, to undertake a “grand jihad” characterized as a “civilization jihadist” mission under Muslim Brotherhood direction.

Specifically the document describes the “settlement process” as a “grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated.” READ ENTIRETY (‘Civilization Jihad’ – the Muslim Brotherhood’s Potent Weapon; ShariaTheThreat.org)

Also consider this excerpt:

Careful thought in this would go back to the first large amount of Muslims coming to America in 1962. Did they come for the purpose of jihad? This would account for the founders of the North American Muslim Brotherhood. It would also explain their usage of the term civilization jihad in 1991 when they defined their goals. It directs the Muslim migrant who came for jihad, on how to pursue that goal.

If Muslims coming here would have the purpose of jihad, you would expect them to:

1) You would expect to find communities of Muslims starting to request sharia law.

2) You would expect to find Muslims here coordinating new Muslims coming to the states into designatedareas for the furtherance of Islam and the declaration of sharia law.

3) Attempt to infiltrate every level of government for the purpose of subverting the constitution.

These things are happening today! 20,000 Syrian Muslims are slated to arrive in the USA between 2015 and 2016. Will America cease to be the land of the free and become dar al Islam (land of submission) if it does not wake up soon?

We have to fight and make America wake up NOW! (al-Hijrah: The secret Islamic doctrine of Migration for Jihad; By Paul Sutliff; Paul Sutliff on Civilization Jihad; 3/30/15)

The Muslim Brotherhood is not the only transnational purist Islamic organization that has an agenda for North America. For this post I am highlighting a purist group that chances are that you never heard of or at least know very little about. That purist Muslim group is the Gulen Movement founded by and actually operating from the USA – Fethullah Gulen.

The Center for Security Policy (CSP) via their Secure Freedom project has put together a 90 page document that you can purchase via Kindle and paperback from Amazon or even better as a PDF for free.

Below is the promotional press release from CSP.

JRH 12/18/15

Please Support NCCR

*************************

Islamic Supremacism Does Business in U.S. Via a Turkish Cult:

Gulen Movement is an Engine for “Civilization Jihad”

Sent by Adam Savit

Sent from: Center for Security Policy

Press Release

Sent: Dec 18, 2015 at 10:17 AM

(Washington, D.C.): It has become increasingly apparent that the United States is not only confronting a violent effort by Islamic supremacists to impose the program they call shariah on the rest of the world, Muslim and non-Muslim, alike. Dangerous as jihadist terrorism is, America – and the rest of the Free World, for that matter – also face what amounts to a pre-violent assault.

The Muslim Brotherhood calls this stealthy, seditious effort to “destroy us from within” a “civilization jihad.” One of its prime practitioners in this country is the Gulen Movement, a cult/business empire led by a reclusive Turkish expatriate, Fethullah Gulen, who operates from within an armed camp in the Poconos.

VIDEO: Gulen Movement: Turkey’s Islamic Supremacist Cult and the Civilization Jihad

 

Posted by securefreedom

Published on Dec 18, 2015

It has become increasingly apparent that the United States is not only confronting a violent effort by Islamic supremacists to impose the program they call shariah on the rest of the world, Muslim and non-Muslim, alike. Dangerous as jihadist terrorism is, America – and the rest of the Free World, for that matter – also face what amounts to a pre-violent assault.

The Muslim Brotherhood calls this stealthy, seditious effort to “destroy us from within” a “civilization jihad.” One of its prime practitioners in this country is the Gulen Movement, a cult/business empire led by a reclusive Turkish expatriate, Fethullah Gulen, who operates from within an armed camp in the Poconos.

For more information see: http://bit.ly/1ZfUZBb

This movement and its penetration of our country is the subject of an important new monograph published as part of the Center for Security Policy’s Civilization Jihad Reader Series: The Gulen Movement: Turkey’s Islamic Supremacist Cult and Its Contribution to Civilization Jihad in America. It is co-authored by two members of the Center’s senior leadership team: Vice President for Outreach Christopher Holton and Clare Lopez, Vice President for Research and Analysis.

As The Gulen Movement monograph makes clear, one of the most troubling aspects of this cult is its success in advancing the Islamic supremacist agenda – albeit under the guise of Turkish nationalism – via one of the fastest-growing networks of publicly funded charter schools in the United States.

Fethullah Gulen is wanted on multiple international arrest warrants issued by the regime of his one-time ally, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Here in the United States, government investigators are also looking into numerous allegations against the Gulen Movement involving: indoctrination, influence operations, salary-kickback schemes, visa system abuse and more.

In fact, the allegations against the Gulen Movement extend all the way to the U.S. Congress. In late October 2015, a USA Today investigation revealed that the Gulen Movement had illegally funded more than 200 trips to Turkey for Members of Congress since 2008. It did so using false disclosure statements that concealed their Gulen sponsorship from both the legislators and the House Ethics Committee, which had been misled into approving member- and/or staff participation in the trips.

Thus, in spite of the Gulen Movement’s carefully projected image of harmony, interfaith dialogue, and tolerance, a far more troubling picture is beginning to emerge that the Center believes warrants a closer look. In praise of this new Center publication, Center for Security Policy President Frank Gaffney said:

In short, the Gulen Movement in Turkey, the United States, and worldwide promotes a far-more problematic program than its adherents would have us believe. It is not a benign cultural and educational institution, or even a billion-plus dollar commercial empire. Rather, it is a prime practitioner of civilization jihad, enabling the spread of the Islamic supremacism’s shariah doctrine under the banner of a Turkey that aspires to renew its role as the Caliphate of the Ottoman empire’s glory days.

U.S school districts, parents and students, federal, state and local governments, media organizations and academic institutions have clearly been successfully targeted by the Gulenists’ influence operations. It is essential that we expose the true nature and civilization jihadist ambitions of Gulen’s taxpayer-subsidized educational empire and the favors its parent movement has deployed – notably, via all-expenses-paid trips to Turkey. This monograph makes an important contribution to that end.

The Center for Security Policy/Secure Freedom is proud to present this monograph as a superb addition to its Civilization Jihad Reader Series. “The Gulen Movement: Turkey’s Islamic Supremacist Cult and Its Contribution to Civilization Jihad in America” is available for purchase in kindle and paperback format on Amazon.com.

Click here for a full PDF of the newly released monograph.

 

_____________________

Pay Attention America – Civilization Jihad is Real

John R. Houk

© December 19, 2015

____________________

Islamic Supremacism Does Business in U.S. Via a Turkish Cult

About The Center for Security Policy

The Center for Security Policy is a non-profit, non-partisan national security organization that specializes in identifying policies, actions, and resource needs that are vital to American security and then ensures that such issues are the subject of both focused, principled examination and effective action by recognized policy experts, appropriate officials, opinion leaders, and the general public. For more information visit www.securefreedom.org