Mosques and Moslem Radicalization.

Mosques as Barracks in AmericaBy Andrew G. Bostom Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan represents the triumphant Janus-faced approach to the fundamentalist global "Islamic revival." He and his pious forbears have now completed dismantling Turkey's secular experiment, and achieved the full-throated re-Islamization of Turkish society, an insidious process begun already within the decade after Ataturk's death, in 1938. When currying favor with gullible Western audiences, Erdogan burbles disingenuous ecumenical platitudes about the "Alliance of Civilizations." But in reality, this is an Islamization campaign promoted by the Organization of the Islamic Conference, notably Saudi Arabia, which rewarded Erdogan, for his role in the Alliance, specifically, as "services to Islam," with the "King Faisal International Prize," considered the "Nobel prize" of the Arab world. Regardless, Erdogan has always aroused his Muslim constituencies by brazenly appealing to their deep-seated jihadist sentiments as he did while mayor of Istanbul, in 1997, delivering a fiery speech that reminded the masses of these words from the poem "The Soldier's Prayer," written (in 1912) by Turkish nationalist poet Ziya Gokalp: The minarets are our bayonets, the domes our helmets, the mosques our barracks and the faithful our army.Cited appropriately by successful opponents of minaret construction in Switzerland, such rhetoric should now resonate uncomfortably in America with the online release Monday June 6, 2011 of alarming survey data from a representative national sample of US mosques. During August 2007, the New York City Police Department (NYPD) released "Radicalization in the West - The Homegrown Threat." This insightful 90-page report evaluated the threat that had become apparent since 9/11/2001, analyzing the roots of recent terror plots in the United States, from Lackawanna in upstate New York to Portland, Ore., to Fort Dix, NJ. Based upon these case-study analyses of individuals arrested for jihadist activity, the authors concluded that the "journey" of radicalization that produces homegrown jihadists began in so-called "Salafist" ("fundamentalist" to non-Muslims) mosques characterized by high levels of Sharia-Islamic Law-adherence. The landmark study just published, "Sharia and Violence in American Mosques" (Kedar M, Yerushalmi D. The Middle East Quarterly, Summer 2011, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 59-72) sought to expand considerably upon the NYPD's post-hoc, case study approach-systematically gathering objective survey data, with much greater methodological rigor-and address these two a priori questions: I) Is there a robust association between observable measures of religious devotion, coupled to Sharia-adherence in US mosques, and the presence of violence-sanctioning materials at these mosques?; and II) Is there a robust association between the presence of violence-sanctioning materials at a mosque, and the advocacy of jihadism by the mosque's leadership via recommending the study of these materials, or other manifest behaviors?Full details of the sampling methodology, extracts of representative jihad promoting materials (texts), and specific Sharia-compliant behaviors recorded, are provided in the accompanying appendices, reproduced from the full study (which will be available here 6/6/11). In brief, survey data were collected from a nationally representative, random statistical sample of 100 US mosques, covering 14 states, and the District of Columbia. This concise overview of the basic data collection procedures-including a self-critical, honest caveat by the authors about "completeness" of the available information on US mosque locations-is reproduced verbatim from the report (p. 68): A surveyor visited a subject mosque in order: (a) to observe and record 12 Sharia-adherent behaviors of the worshipers and the imam (or lay leader); (b) to observe whether the mosque contained the selected materials rated as moderate and severe; (c) to observe whether the mosque contained materials promoting, praising, or supporting violence or violent jihad; and (d) to observe whether the mosque contained materials indicating the mosque had invited guest speakers known to have promoted violent jihad. Thus, the survey only examined the presence of Sharia-adherent behaviors, the presence of violence positive materials in mosques, whether an imam would promote the study of violence-positive materials, and whether a mosque was used as a forum to promote violent jihad. Since there is no central body to which all mosques belong, it was difficult to ascertain that the sampling universe list was complete. This may have introduced bias into the sampling although the authors find no evidence of any systemic distortions. The study's results provide clear-and ominous-affirmative answers to the a priori questions posed. Sharia-adherence was strongly associated with the presence of jihad-violence sanctioning materials, and the presence of jihad-violence sanctioning materials was in turn robustly associated advocacy of jihadism by mosque imams-religious leaders. This key summary finding was highlighted by the authors: ...51 percent of mosques had texts that either advocated the use of violence in the pursuit of a Shari'a-based political order or advocated violent jihad as a duty that should be of paramount importance to a Muslim; 30 percent had only texts that were moderately supportive of violence like the Tafsir Ibn Kathir and Fiqh as-Sunna; 19 percent had no violent texts at all.Thus 81% of this statistical sample representative of US mosques were deemed as moderately (30%) to highly (51%) supportive of promulgating jihad violence to impose Shari'a.Additional profoundly troubling findings emerge when the data are explored in depth beyond these summary observations. For example, only 4.7% of Muslim worshippers attended mosques where jihadist materials were not provided because Sharia-compliant mosques promoting jihad were the most heavily attended. The authors also describe these specific details indicating that the preponderance of US mosques sanction jihad terrorism and its ultimate goal of a Caliphate (i.e., the transnational imposition of strict Islamic law in current Muslim nations, and ultimately global imposition of Islamic Law, including in the US), if one includes advocacy of financial support for this sacralized violence (from pp. 67-69). The survey found a strong correlation between the presence of severe violence-promoting literature and mosques featuring written, audio, and video materials that actually promoted such acts. By promotion of jihad, the study included literature encouraging worshipers to engage in terrorist activity, to provide financial support to jihadists, and to promote the establishment of a caliphate in the United States. These materials also explicitly praised acts of terror against the West; praised symbols or role models of violent jihad; promoted the use of force, terror, war, and violence to implement theSharia; emphasized the inferiority of non-Muslim life; promoted hatred and intolerance toward non-Muslims or notional Muslims; and endorsed inflammatory materials with anti-U.S. views... [O]f the 51 mosques that contained severe materials, 100 percent were led by imams who recommended that worshipers study texts that promote violence. [M]osques containing violence positive materials were substantially more likely to include materials promoting financial support of terror than mosques that did not contain such texts. A disturbing 98 percent of mosques with severe texts included materials promoting financial support of terror. Those with only moderate rated materials on site were not markedly different, with 97 percent providing such materials.These results were comparable when using other indicators of jihad promotion. Thus, 98 percent of mosques that contained severe-rated literature included materials promoting establishing an Islamic caliphate in the United States as did 97 percent of mosques containing only moderate rated materials.These are the hard data that make plain why the "see no Sharia in America" mindslaughter redolent across the political spectrum amongst our policymaking, academic, and journalistic elites, is so dangerously delusive. Indeed such disturbing survey results from a nationally representative sample of US mosques demonstrate Islam's doctrinal and behavioral consistency across nearly 14 centuries, past as prologue to the present. Over 17,000 jihad terror attacks have been committed by Muslims worldwide since the cataclysmic acts of jihad terrorism committed against the United States itself on September 11, 2001. These data should remind us that there is just one historically relevant meaning of jihad despite contemporary apologetics. Jahada, the root of the word jihad, appears 40 times in the Koran. With 4 exceptions, all the other 36 usages in the Koran as understood by both the greatest jurists and scholars of classical Islam (including Abu Yusuf, Averroes, Ibn Khaldun, and Al Ghazali), and ordinary Muslims-meant and mean, "he fought, warred or waged war against unbelievers and the like."The Muslim prophet Muhammad waged a series of proto-jihad campaigns to subdue the Jews, Christians and pagans of Arabia. Numerous modern day pronouncements by leading Muslim theologians (see Yusuf Al-Qaradawi's "The Prophet Muhammad as a Jihad Model," 2001) confirm that Muhammad remains the major inspiration for jihadism today. Jihad has been pursued continuously since the 7th century advent of Islam, through the present, because it was institutionalized by seminal early Muslim theologians based on their interpretation of Koranic verses, and long chapters in the "hadith," or acts and sayings of Muhammad. Within a century of Muhammad's death, violent jihad conquests-achieved by religiously sanctioned massacre, pillage, enslavement, and deportation-Islamized a vast swath of territory, extending from modern Pakistan to Portugal. The permanent goal of jihad is to bring humanity, en bloc, under the jurisdiction of Sharia-a totalitarian system of religious governance, particularly oppressive to all non-Muslims, and women.American Presidents John Quincy Adams and Theodore Roosevelt each possessed a remarkably clear, uncompromised understanding of the permanent Islamic institution of jihad war-both its doctrinal basis, and history. Regarding jihad, Adams states in an 1829-30 essay series, ...he [Muhammad] declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind...The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God.Roosevelt offered this historical perspective in 1916 on the consequences for Western civilization of succeeding, or failing to repel jihad conquerors: The civilization of Europe, America, and Australia exists today at all only because of the victories of civilized man over the enemies of civilization...[including] those of Charles Martel in the 8th century [over Arab jihadists] and those of John Sobieski in the 17th century [over Ottoman Turkish jihadists]. During the thousand years that included the careers of the Frankish soldier [Martel] and the Polish king [Sobieski], the Christians of Asia and Africa proved unable to wage successful war with the Moslem conquerors; and in consequence Christianity practically vanished from the two continents; and today nobody can find in them any 'social values' whatever, in the sense in which we use the words, so far as the sphere of Mohammedan influence [is]...concerned."Also writing in 1916, C. Snouck Hurgronje, the great Dutch Orientalist, underscored how the jihad doctrine of world conquest, and the re-creation of a supranational Islamic Caliphate remained a potent force among the Muslim masses: ...it would be a gross mistake to imagine that the idea of universal conquest may be considered as obliterated...the canonists and the vulgar still live in the illusion of the days of Islam's greatness. The legists continue to ground their appreciation of every actual political condition on the law of the holy war, which war ought never be allowed to cease entirely until all mankind is reduced to the authority of Islam-the heathen by conversion, the adherents of acknowledged Scripture [i.e., Jews and Christians] by submission.Hurgronje further noted that although the Muslim rank and file might acknowledge the improbability of that goal "at present" (circa 1916), they were, ...comforted and encouraged by the recollection of the lengthy period of humiliation that the Prophet himself had to suffer before Allah bestowed victory upon his arms...Thus even at the nadir of Islam's political power, during the World War I era final disintegration of the Ottoman Empire, Hurgronje observed how ...the common people are willingly taught by the canonists and feed their hope of better days upon the innumerable legends of the olden time and the equally innumerable apocalyptic prophecies about the future. The political blows that fall upon Islam make less impression...than the senseless stories about the power of the Sultan of Stambul [Istanbul], that would instantly be revealed if he were not surrounded by treacherous servants, and the fantastic tidings of the miracles that Allah works in the Holy Cities of Arabia which are inaccessible to the unfaithful. The conception of the Khalifate [Caliphate] still exercises a fascinating influence, regarded in the light of a central point of union against the unfaithful (i.e., non-Muslims).Nearly a century later, the preponderance of contemporary mainstream Muslims from Morocco to Indonesia, apparently share with their murderous, jihad terror waging co-religionists from al-Qaeda the goal (if not necessarily supporting the gruesome means) of re-establishing an Islamic Caliphate. Polling data released April 24, 2007 in a rigorously conducted face-to-face University of Maryland/ WorldPublicOpinion.org interview survey of 4384 Muslims conducted between December 9, 2006 and February 15, 2007-1000 Moroccans, 1000 Egyptians, 1243 Pakistanis, and 1141 Indonesians-reveal that 65.2% of those interviewed - almost 2/3, hardly a "fringe minority" - desired this outcome (i.e., "To unify all Islamic countries into a single Islamic state or Caliphate"), including 49% of "moderate" Indonesian Muslims. The internal validity of these data about the present longing for a Caliphate is strongly suggested by a concordant result: 65.5% of this Muslim sample approved the proposition "To require a strict [emphasis added] application of Sharia law in every Islamic country."Such Caliphate dreams -- to be achieved through jihad conquests -- have always been nurtured in mosques. The authoritative Brill Encyclopedia of Islam entry on "masdjid," or mosque, highlights the mosque's primary socio-political functions -- including holding war councils -- since the advent of the first Muslim polity under Islam's prophet-warrior and ruler, Muhammad, in Medina:The mosque was the place where believers assembled for prayer around the Prophet, where he delivered his addresses, which contained not only appeals for obedience to God but regulations affecting the social life of the community; from here he controlled the religious and political community of Islam...From the Medina mosque was developed the general type of mosque. It was inherent in the character of Islam, that religion and politics could not be separated. The same individual was ruler and chief administrator in the two fields, and the same building, the mosque, was the center of gravity for both politics and religion. This relationship found expression in the fact that the mosque was placed in the center of the camp, while the ruler's abode was built immediately adjacent to it, as in Medina. [W]ar was inseparably associated with early Islam and the mosque was public meeting place of ruler and people...councils of war were held in the mosque.Richard Mitchell's seminal analysis of the contemporary Muslim Brotherhood-the prototype modern fundamentalist organization-state's simply, that from its advent, Throughout the history of the [Muslim Brotherhood] movement the mosque continued to be its principal recruiting office.This doctrinal and historical context explains why the "Sharia and Violence in American Mosques" study results-while immediate, justifiable cause for alarm-are unsurprising, even predictable. Moreover the current findings were augured by a qualitative assessment of US mosques by Sheikh Hisham Kabbani described in 1999, and the localized Detroit area survey of mosques conducted in 2003.During a 1999 State Department presentation entitled "Islamic Extremism: A Viable Threat to U.S. National Security" Sufi Sheikh Kabbani, who heads The Islamic Supreme Council of America, based upon personal visits to mosques across the US, asserted that 80% were run by "militant," i.e. fundamentalist clerics. "The Detroit Mosque Study: Muslim Views on Policy and Religion," was conducted by Ihsan Bagby an Associate Professor of Islamic Studies at thye University of Kentucky and a fellow at the Institute for Social Policy Understanding-a Muslim organization. Data were gathered during the summer of 2003 and published online in 2004. These portentous findings were described on page 37 of the report: Mosque participants were asked, whether they agree or disagree with the statement, "Shari'ah should be the law of the land in Muslim countries?"Apply Islamic Law in Muslim LandsStrongly Agree - 59%Somewhat Agree - 22%(i.e., collectively = 81%)Somewhat Disagree - 8%Strongly Disagree - 3%Don't Know - 8%Such data supposedly reflected the Detroit area Muslims views of "Islamic countries," only. But given the intrinsic, universally supremacist nature of Islam and the global umma (i.e., as stated in Koran 3:110, and the Orwellian-named Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Islam, "Ye are the best community that hath been raised up for mankind. Ye enjoin right conduct and forbid indecency; and ye believe in Allah"), once an area has a Muslim majority it is assumed by Muslims that Islamic Law should prevail-hence the "enclave" phenomenon, even here in the United States.Publication of the "Sharia and Violence in American Mosques" study provides irrefragable evidence that the overwhelming majority of American mosques -- consistent with mainstream Islamic doctrine and practice since the founding of the Muslim creed -- are inculcating jihadism with the goal of implementing Sharia here in America. Finally, Whittaker Chambers' autobiographical opus "Witness," which chronicles his apostasy from Communism, offers these searing insights that elucidate how American Muslims could rationalize such seditious behaviors -- consistent with Islamic doctrine -- and why this phenomenon remains largely incomprehensible to American non-Muslims, despite its existential threat to them. What went on in the minds of those Americans...that made it possible to betray their country? Did none of them suffer a crisis of conscience? The question presupposes that whoever asks it has still failed to grasp that Communists mean exactly what they have been saying for a hundred years: they regard any government that is not Communist, including their own, merely as the political machine of a class whose power they have organized expressly to overthrow by all means, including violence. Therefore the problem of espionage never presents itself to them as problem of conscience, but a problem of operations...The failure to understand that fact is part of the total failure of the West to grasp the nature of its enemy, what he wants, what he means to do and how he will go about doing it. It is part of the failure of the West to understand that it is at grips with an enemy having no moral viewpoint in common with itself, that two irreconcilable viewpoints and standards of judgment, two irreconcilable moralities, proceeding from two irreconcilable readings of man's fate and future are involved, and hence their conflict is irrepressible.(See appendix on methodologies here)Sponsored Video: Already have an account with American Thinker? Login below.Register | LoginCOMMENTS ON AMERICANTHINKER U-DogYesterday 09:24 AMGood! That means all concerned know where they are congregated for Friday prayers......Introspective Question : Are those who have touted and assisted the resettlement of third-world savages here in our midst and called it wonderful really happy about the results? It would seem that fashionable "multiculturalism" has been viewed as nothing more harmful than an exotic array of UN food samples at a buffet. The only trouble is that the idiots have taken home "doggie bags" for the rest of us. And it IS Islam that is the primary danger / infection. For IT in a nutshell, go to YOUTUBE and type in "There's a Coach Coming In" (9:12). All of you reading this can spare 9:12.....watch it all -- the end frame COUNTS. It will all the inspiration you need.reply SpecialKinNJYesterday 09:38 AMAs the twig is bent, so grows the tree, and in a culture that tends toward the medieval,mosques tend to nourish cultural tendencies, evil, that are more pronounced in some twigs than in others who bend more toward evil than their sisters and brothers. Unfortunately, the latter sometimes tend to ignore the twigs with such bent; and thereby condone, by default, their malicious intent. Given the deep roots of such cultural tendencies--dating back many centuries-- it's quite hard to see when, if ever, its hapless inheritor-twigs might grow up tall and straight, culture-free.reply dygeneYesterday 09:54 AMFinally, a comprehensive report on this vile cancer that our political "elites" refuse to extract. Of course, the muslim in chief will side with the mohammedans before his own "countrymen." Or maybe he is siding with his own "countrymen."reply GatorgirlYesterday 10:11 AMThey all belong to one central body, that being Islam. They all have one goal as you stated, and we are in their way. I know the Constitution gives us freedom of religion, but that has been perverted to freedom from religion. Perhaps, that perversion could be used against this Islamic and Sharia takeover of our country.reply burkanuckYesterday 12:21 PM"Question : Are those who have touted and assisted the resettlement of third-world savages here in our midst and called it wonderful really happy about the results?" Yes, U-Dog, they are. They're true goal is to undermine and unravel Western civilation and they don't care who their bed partners are as long as they can achieve that goal. They incomprehensibly believe that they can entrust the assisatnce of these radical jihadis and then cast them aside when they have destroyed the evil "capitalist" system. They are going to be in for a BIG surprise when they come to the realization that there are those out there who are far more "radical" than they are and who will turn on them in an instant when they have ceased to be useful to those they unwittingly thought they were using.reply Kit_JeffersonYesterday 12:41 PMCall it Islam, Communism, Socialism, Fascism or whatever other "ism", they all amount to the same thing - tyranny over the many by the few.reply rodguy911Yesterday 12:50 PMAndrew Bostom has just given reason to logic as far as why Islam should not be considered a religion but a political entity. In the sense that we consider other mainstream religions here in the US.No other "religion" suggests that violence should be pursued by its followers or that it be a "duty" of any religious following. These mandates that are incudied in Sharia are more of a political(brainwashed) following not religious. The fact that 51% of US mosques advocate such BS is staggering. Why are they still given religious acknowledgement instead of political acknowledgments. It's not like we don't know where these teachings lead! Just look at Yemen,Iran,most any radicalized country, Egypt,and see what the future holds for those who let sharia/Islam take over the religious and political dictates of their country. It's chaos followed by endless slavery. Truth is and more and more are learning it each and every day, that mosques fulfill the same intended consequences as do jails. They create more Jihadists to take over the country by violent force. It's the Jihadi way.Until we acknowledge these facts both about jails and mosques we run the risk of getting near the coveted 10% population... show morereply TieDyeYesterday 01:19 PMA fascinating article, Mr. Bostom, and thanks to you and AT for the always welcome information about the never-wavering threat by the Islamists to our country and our very lives. The city where I live is an example of that threat, and of Islams' insidious creep toward their goal of total control. The door is opened by liberals' religion of political correctness, which includes the vilification of Christianity among its tenets. That is the basis of the bond between Islam and liberalism/progressives/communism. My city has for many, many years had a very active Islamic 'community', lovingly ensconced by the liberals within the 3 local university/colleges, and within the large medical population of 5 local hospitals. Education and the medical profession are typical 'cover' occupations for the dedicated 'soldiers of allah'. The purpose of their presence here went un-noticed by the blind eyed sycophants in control of the local government and of public education grades K-12...until shortly after September 11, 2001, when the Feds announced Osama Bin Laden's satellite phone had been purchased by one of our local Muslims, at our local Radio Shack. The revelations continued, peaking a few years later with the FBI raid of the locally-operated main offices of an international Islamic charity:... show morereply SimpleYesterday 01:26 PMFirst the Islamic New World Order and finally the ushering in of the Luciferian Totalitarian Socialist state. This has been the agenda all along and thus explains the "tolerance" of the "powers that be"...political frontmen...actors on the stage of political theater. Related...Gulen schools, Gulen movement, Islamberg, terrorist training camps...funded by the CIA, Bill Gates and the American taxpayer. Author Paul Williams has written extensively on this subject. Sibol Edmonds, brave woman that she is, has testified on this subject as well. I have met the enemy and he is me.reply TavYesterday 01:26 PMNo other totalitarianism, not Fascism nor Marxism, is as dangerous to humanity as is Islam. Worse still, now instead of men such as Martel and Sobieski, we have men such as Petraues and Casey, who instead of being warriors against Islam are in plain and clear fact among it's chief apologists and hence among it's chief enablers and therefore among it's chief auxiliaries.reply Arctic FoxYesterday 01:47 PMBack when I spent time in Saudi Arabia, we used to joke that it was "the world's largest women's prison." Actually, by comparison, women prisoners in the West have far more rights than women in general in Saudi, as well as many other lands of the Middle East.reply SantaAnaYesterday 01:54 PMThe Saudi millions (derived from our own payment for their oil) have been spent on building mosques and sending imams of the most fundamentalist i.e. 8th century form of Islam to preside over them seeding a world wide caliphate. Not a single Muslim congregation has repudiated these extremist spiritual leaders, thus exposing the "moderate Muslim" oxymoron. If they're moderate, they're not considered proper Muslims by the Islamic mainstream. If they're Muslim, then they're not moderate no matter how pleasant a takiya face they show you while they are a small minority. In pockets where they outnumber the natives, their true exclusionary supremacist face starts to emerge. The mosques sprouting like Trojan horses on every street corner in the west are the equivalent of allowing nazi recruitment centers during WWII if nazis had thought to play up their neo-pagan religion as a cover. Muslims were after all, nazi co-conspirators and preach hatred of Jews first and foremost among all non-Muslims. How has the hyper-sensitive Jewish nazi radar not picked that up?hide 1 reply reply Old BobYesterday 03:22 PMIslam could well be the rock upon which the American concept of free exercise of religion will founder. Either we, in effect, decertify Islam as a recognized religion or we accept it as a religion protected in all its hideous aspects by the 1st Amendment. A supreme court justice once said that the Constitution wasn't intended to be a suicide pact. American lawyers and judges had better start working on a Constitutional argument that will enable us to deny the protections of the 1st Amendment to those religious institutions that teach, support and practice the violent imposition of a system of oppressive beliefs on others. Either that or .... well what will be the alternative??reply Jeanne T.Yesterday 03:32 PMThe Mosques are going up all over the Bible Belt; what does thattell you?There should be no denial as to the goals of Islam. Islam will have no rivals It is completely incompatible with our constitution antithetical to our American/Western way of life. We are all put on this earth for a purpose, and we do not choose the time and place. We are still living in the most free country in the world and we must take advantage of our freedoms by choosing to act NOW to keep America free from tyranny in all its forms. Use your freedoms to tell the truth about Islam. We can be a very loud choir.reply U-DogYesterday 03:50 PMYes, Burkanuck, I know some people had it planned all along (as in the Youtube video I recommended in my earlier post), but I think that circa 3/4 of folks are just so oblivious to what's happening or fashionably inclined to excuse it to the point of idiocy.......they'd swallow anything EXCEPT the absolute truth. At any rate, please take my recommendation and view "There's a Coach Coming In" video (9:12). As I said, it will be all the inspiration you need. ( I know...left out the "be" earlier -- interrupted to let the dog out and no coffee yet.) Anyhow, it is worth even leaving AT for 10 minutes to see it........then come back or JC might get us !reply LightbringerYesterday 05:39 PM"How has the hyper-sensitive Jewish nazi radar not picked that up?" Many of my less educated and more secular co-religionists think that Judaism is about being nice and supporting the underdog, no matter who the underdog is. In fact, many of my Jewish brothers and sisters are more loyal to left-wing liberalism than to Judaism -- or to America, the country that has accepted us, allowed us to thrive or starve on our own merits, and permitted us free practice of religion. Their ingratitude to this country makes me sick, but they are ignorant children (even the old ones who feel that way) and I pray for their enlightenment. I also pray that their enlightenment does not come while we are standing together awaiting our turn in the gas chambers.reply SaguaroJack1Today 12:06 AMLightbrinreply GeorgiaBoy61Today 01:16 AMFor those interested in the subject of Islamic jihad and its threat to America, a provocative and chilling trilogy of novels was penned a few years back by Robert Ferrigno, whose first installment "Prayers for the Assassin," was set in the Islamic States of America, circa 2040. Following a series of suitcase nuclear weapon attacks on U.S. cities, a civil war fragments America into several regions, one of which is Islamic, the other the Christian "Bible Belt" states. The SW USA is retaken by Mexico. As the author imagines it, most of what is today's "blue state" America becomes Islamic, while much of what is today's "red state" America does not. Former US Army intel officer, LTC Ralph Peters (ret), has also speculated fictionally on what a global war between Islam and the west would look like, in "The War After Armageddon" (2009). The point here, it seems to me, is that the threat is real enough, at least to these authors, to merit being taken seriously. Brad Thor has also done yeoman fictional work writing about the undeclared war between Islam and the west. When will our policymakers do the same, and begin treating the subject with the respect it deserves? Other than Congressman... show more

Replies

Note: this page contains paid content.

Note: this page contains paid content.

Note: this page contains paid content.

Note: this page contains paid content.

Note: this page contains paid content.

Note: this page contains paid content.

Note: this page contains paid content.

Note: this page contains paid content.