http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.7084/pub_detail.asp

 


The Real Threat Levels


August 18, 2010 -
<http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/authors/id.104/author_detail.asp> Bill
Siegel 


Print This <javascript:%20printVersion()>  E-mail This
<javascript:%20emailVersion()>  



 <javascript:void(0);> http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/images/share.png


ShareThis <javascript:void(0);> 

 

Comments
<http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/comments.asp?id=7084>
(4)

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/imgLib/20100817_CrescentUSA.jpgThe
Ground Zero Mosque controversy has not raised our terror threat level one
color. It affords us, however, an excellent opportunity to sort out the
actual levels of threat we face from those who seek to destroy America as it
is and transform it into an Islamic Sharia based territory. 

 

Let’s bypass the common but unhelpful questions “Is Islam a religion of
peace?” and “Where are the Moderate Muslims?” and “Isn’t the American Muslim
assimilated into our culture and doesn’t he share our beliefs and values?”
and agree that some number of Muslims are openly devoted to, quietly in
conformity with, or poised to fall in line with those who seek to establish
Sharia law and secure Islam globally- our Islamist Enemy. Its actual numbers
would astonish most Americans.

 

This enemy operates on at least three different levels. The most familiar
and easiest to comprehend is that of terrorism. While the U.N. has
difficulty deciding on a definition of terrorism, for “level” purposes we
all know it when we see it- violent acts geared to intimidate in support of
the supposed rights of the Islamic community. This level covers the many
killings, bombings, beheadings, and kidnappings we have seen worldwide for
decades executed in the name of Islam, including by individuals, small
groups, and well known entities such as Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah and other
proxies for the Islamic Republic of Iran. While the Obama administration has
made it politically incorrect to combine the words “Islam” and “terror,” few
are fooled by this idiocy.

 

A more insidious level of threat labeled the “Civilizational Jihad (“CJ”) in
the Muslim Brotherhood documents that outline its agenda and strategies.
This is the level upon which our Islamic Enemy seeks to use our Constitution
to destroy our Constitution. It uses our courts to expand Islam’s scope and
ability to assert itself, to intimidate and threaten any challenge to such
expansion, and to establish a posture of “victimhood” from which to
manipulate the good will of Americans. It infiltrates our public and private
institutions. This is the level on which seemingly “moderate” organizations
utilize the Islamic permission and commands to deceive our population in
order to establish a foothold; utilizing Islam’s “religious” face to Trojan
Horse its anti-American forces into our land. 

 

This is the level upon which the Muslim Brotherhood, the world’s largest
Islamic organization, controls the expansion, ever aware that the violence
on the terrorism level is fully counterproductive to its long term goal.
They are on Islamic time; a clock that moves towards only one point- the
time at which Islam rules throughout the entire world. 

 

Islam is only a religion of peace in the sense that peace comes when this
clock reaches that point. Andrew McCarthy’s
<http://www.amazon.com/Grand-Jihad-Islam-Sabotage-America/dp/1594033773/ref=
sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1282073079&sr=8-2> The Grand Jihad and Robert
Spencer’s
<http://www.amazon.com/Stealth-Jihad-Radical-Subverting-America/dp/159698556
9/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1282073079&sr=8-2-fkmr0> Stealth Jihad,
coupled with the work of
<http://www.amazon.fr/conquête-lOccident-projet-secret-islamistes/dp/202081
6237/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1282073037&sr=1-1> Sylvain Besson and
<http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=4476> Patrick Poole,
are excellent expositions of this level. 

 

There is a third and under exposed level, that of the “International
Institutional Jihad (“IIJ”)” This is where Islamic goals are furthered under
the auspices of the U.N. and other institutions established by agreement
with and among Islamic nations. This is where the Organization of Islamic
Conference, the 57 member state assembly, asserts Islamic goals as
international principles in an effort to force them into non-Islamic lands
as Bat Ye’or and others have described. This is where national constitutions
and organizational charters merge to access the full power of nations to
spread Sharia globally, step by step. While there are many intra-Islamic
differences such as the Sunni-Shia divide which make some alliances
difficult, this level seeks to overlook those conflicts in the interest of
advancing the global goals of Islam that unite them all when beneficial. As
Islam impresses itself more powerfully on the world stage, this level
becomes better able to push through its agenda.

 

What makes this level analysis so critical is that so much is achieved
through “level confusion.” President Obama has sought to reduce the conflict
with our Islamic Enemy to the terrorism level, and even more so, to Al Qaeda
alone. We have a sense of how to fight terrorism, through both police and
military action. We have some sense of how to punish terrorism, again either
through criminal or military court action or on the battlefield. For all the
disputes concerning interrogation techniques and Guantanamo etc. we have
some confidence that terrorism can be fought. By defining our threat as Al
Qaeda, Obama, for political purposes, defines the problem by virtue of the
solution he sees available. He endangers us all the more, however, by
obfuscating the full picture of the other levels on which we are being
assaulted. Unfortunately, the nation is so petrified of truly seeing the
enemy in all its power that many buy directly into Obama’s level distortion

 

This level confusion prevents us from dealing with the CJ. That is, in
assessing the Muslim Brotherhood organizations (CAIR, MSA, ISNA etc.), the
inquiry has been into whether they “support” terrorism or engage in any
violent acts upon civilians. While there are many such connections to be
revealed, the threat on this level exists by virtue of their objectives, not
their demonstrable connections to terrorist organizations.

 

This is where the Ground Zero Mosque issue sits. The condemnation of Imam
Feisal Rauf is largely based on his alleged deception and clarity of purpose
as an Islamic supremacist. Absent a terror or violence link, we are at a
loss as to how to stop him. And this is precisely the problem- our
Constitution provides no real mechanism to stop those who seek to use it to
destroy it. Unfortunately, seeking to tie the CJ efforts to terrorism will
not solve this Constitutional paradox. This is especially true in an era of
progressive multicultural judicial activism. 

 

Talk show host Joe Scarborough is a perfect example of one suffering from
level confusion. He recently castigated Newt Gingrich for charging that Rauf
is a “radical Islamist.” Scarborough, without hesitation, converted
Gingrich’s comments into a charge that Rauf is a “terrorist.” Half an hour
of ridiculous “conversation” followed premised on this error, intentional or
not, attempting to substitute Gingrich as our real enemy. The key to the CJ
is precisely that its actors are not terrorists; they view any violence as
hazardous to their cause. In this case, Rauf even has fellow host Pat
Buchanan convinced he is a peaceful Sufi. What would make Rauf a “radical”
is his intentions, fully in line with the CJ; not any act of terror. Because
Scarborough, like so many others, is completely ignorant of the threat level
differences while parading himself as a critical thinker, he is particularly
dangerous to our effort to sort out the threat levels. (Curiously, in the
same show, fellow host Mika Brzezinski, criticizing Jon Stewart for making a
joke about Obama she did not favor, said “I think that talk show hosts and
comedians kinda need to get over themselves.”)

 

Similarly, we are ill prepared to combat the IIJ. Having glorified
globalization, some Americans feels hard pressed to counteract the growing
power of international institutions in setting agendas, moral and legal
standards, and methods of enforcement. Wilsonian principles appeared
sanctified enough as long as we had sufficient control over the
institutional apparatus- most importantly the ability to choose when or not
to participate, to turn away when it is in our interests to do so. And, as
former U.S. Ambassador John Bolton describes, the process of “norming”
(whereby principles such as restrictions on free speech that would otherwise
not be approved domestically are pressured to be imported through
participation in treaties or through other international obligations) is
becoming more pressing. As America loses power and as the Islamic presence
asserts itself more aggressively, the IIJ becomes a formidable threat to
force upon us much that is not in our interests.

 

Tracking the different threat levels is an important task as we learn to
adapt to the enemy we face. An honest look reveals that we do not, as yet,
have effective strategies for confronting each level. Until we have clarity
and cease attempting to address, for instance, the CJ by framing it in terms
of terrorism, we will only keep ourselves in the dark. The lesson of the
Ground Zero Mosque is to force ourselves to look upon the CJ as its own
beachhead and develop a defense on its own terms: a constitutionally
acceptable resolution to the paradox “How do we give freedoms to those who
seek to destroy freedoms?” If these levels had colors, the Mosque affair
should certainly move us to red.

 

Bill Siegel lives in New York and is a Contributing Editor to
<http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/> FamilySecurityMatters.org.

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, 
[email protected].
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[email protected]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: [email protected]
  Subscribe:    [email protected]
  Unsubscribe:  [email protected]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to