This is likely to cause a firestorm, but of course it is simple common sense to recognize what the enemy invokes as his guiding principle, and learn what can be learned from it. In a sane world, the failure to have done this in the five years since 9/11 would be the cause for the firestorm, not the idea of studying Muhammad in order to understand the jihadists. To this, of course, my work has been dedicated for years.
"Ex-official: Muhammad reveals key to overcoming jihadists: Failure to analyze military plan of 'prophet' hurts U.S. military," from WorldNetDaily.com, with thanks to Doc Washburn:
The Pentagon must study the Muslim prophet Muhammad and his military doctrine to beat the growing number of jihadists, a former senior Pentagon intelligence official warns.The failure of Pentagon brass to implement a "systematic study" of Muhammad's military doctrine is hurting the U.S. military's effort to control and defeat insurgents and terrorists, complains William Gawthrop, who until recent months headed a key counterintelligence and counterterrorism program set up at the Pentagon after 9/11.
During this year's Ramadan, just ended, U.S. troops suffered another spike in casualties. Ramadan is the Islamic holy month when Muslims believe Muhammad received the Quran, the Muslim scripture, in a divine revelation. Almost 100 GIs have been killed in Iraq this month alone. Attacks on U.S. and other coalition soldiers in Afghanistan also increased during Ramadan.
The U.S. still does not have an in-depth understanding of the war-fighting doctrine laid down by Muhammad, says Gawthrop, who recently stepped down as program manager for the Joint Terrorism Task Force of the Defense Department's Counterintelligence Field Activity, or CIFA.
"As late as early 2006, the senior service colleges of the Department of Defense had not incorporated into their curriculum a systematic study of Muhammad as a military or political leader," Gawthrop said. "As a consequence, we still do not have an in-depth understanding of the war-fighting doctrine laid down by Muhammad, how it might be applied today by an increasing number of Islamic groups, or how it might be countered...."
Gawthrop says jihadists in Iraq and Afghanistan are simply following the example of Muhammad, who some 1,400 years ago personally led 27 attacks and sent his armies out 47 additional times against non-Islamic communities averaging about seven operations a year.
He says the Muslim prophet's military doctrine is contained in the Quran and its supplements, and the insurgents and terrorists are using them as their manual of warfare. They are Muhammad's soldiers in the 21st century. Homegrown and freelance terrorists are also following his example, he notes.
"There is evidence to support the contention that sources of terrorism in Islam may reside within the strategic themes of Islam," Gawthrop said. They include "the example of Muhammad, the Quran, the hadiths, Islamic law, the pillars of faith and jihad."
The Muslim sacred books cover all aspects of warfare, from methods and tactics of violence against kafirs to war booty to truces, he says. Even alms-giving is directed toward jihad, which is obligatory for Muslims, who are told by the Quran that "fighting is prescribed for you" (another translation says "warfare is ordained for you").
Gawthrop says the Pentagon needs to develop a broad new strategy to deal with the threat from Islamic terrorists. But to do so, officials must first overcome the political taboo of linking Islamic violence to the religion of Islam, its sacred scripture and the personal example of its revered prophet.
"Muhammad's mindset is a source for terrorism," Gawthrop flatly says.
Dealing with the threat on a tactical and operational level through counterstrikes and capture has proven only marginally successful. Gawthrop and other military leaders want to combat it from a strategic standpoint, using informational warfare, among other things. A critical part of that strategy involves studying Islam, including the Quran and the hadiths, or traditions of Muhammad, and exploiting critical vulnerabilities and controversies within the faith itself.
"The ideological lever has largely been ignored," he said, while the threat from Islamic terrorism and jihadism grows stronger and stronger – now now infecting Great Britain, France, Germany, The Netherlands, Belgium, in addition to Thailand, Indonesia (and indirectly Australia), Somalia, Russia and India.
"Today the United States and an increasing number of other governments are beleaguered by an expanding array of states, groups and individuals whose goals, actions and norms are animated by Islamic values," Gawthrop said. "This places the defenders in the unenviable position of having to fight, at the strategic level, against an idea."
How do you attack an idea? By hitting "soft spots" in the Islamic faith that, once exploited, "may induce a deteriorating cascade effect upon the target," Gawthrop says.
"Critical vulnerabilities of the Quran, for example, are that it was uttered by a mortal," Gawthrop said. "Similar vulnerabilities may be found in Muhammad's character."
As the jihad spreads, he says the government eventually will have to get involved in a such a controversial national education campaign, politically incorrect as it may be.
"If the United States, moderate Muslim governments and the non-Muslim world seek to engage ideological adversaries on their own ground," he said, "they will have to develop, use and maintain the full range of capabilities in the ideological component of national power, and address Islam's strategic themes directly."
Gawthrop notes that the Defense Intelligence Agency has produced reports on jihad, but not any detailed reports on Muhammad and his political and military doctrine. The reports discussing jihad include: "Y: The Sources of Islamic Revolutionary Conduct" by Air Force Lt. Col. Stephen P. Lambert and "Islam: The Peaceful Religion in Perpetual War" by the Joint Military Intelligence College.
Gawthrop's analysis appears in the new fall 2006 edition of "The Vanguard," the professional journal of the Military Intelligence Corps Association published out of Fort Huachuca, Ariz., the Army's intelligence headquarters.
a major soft spot is to report all the crimes done in the name of mohammed.
I'm bored of the jew hating media harping on about every "palestinian" who looses a toe nail and ignoring millions of blacks and asians killed by jihad.
All moslems get told in sermons is about how oppressed moslems are everywhere when the truth is they are oppressing.
Time to set the record straight.
At one anti-war demonstration I asked a veiled oppressed moslem how many people died in "palestine" and how many she throught were killed in the sudan by mujahdeen.
She was shocked to hear the balance of death was millions to tens...
In the course of setting the record straight and being shouted at by angry socialist worker party members (left-islam alliance again) a crowd of saturday afternoon shoppers had assembled and clapped.
That showed me that the genaral masses here support someone standing up for the truth...
To that end we can keep quite and at the right moments bring into the a converstation challenges to the islam=peace and other lies based on facts and events we read up on outside the msm.
watch as truth spreads like a cancer through your friends and acquaintances....
This is why the muslims war manual (the koran) must be banned. It should NEVER be treated with respect. It's not worthy.
Compilation of and links to all of my posts regarding polls of Muslims:
http://icevikings.blogspot.com/2006/10/compilation-of-and-links-to-all-of-my.html
Why on earth did this official step down? Was he ousted for "racism" or some such nonsense?
He should be the goddamn president.
_________________
Amen.
"Islam: The Peaceful Religion in Perpetual War" --
I like that. It is a revelation to me to learn that there is some "military intelligence" [tartey mashma`]. A good sign. But beware of politicians.
It would be helpful for those who confront Muslim militants or pro-Muslim militants in their daily lives to have available a number of selected Quranic quotations printed on a folding stiff paper card that can fit into the breast pocket. Such quotes should include 9:29, 5:12 and 5:20-22, and various other Quranic verses that call for war on infidels, oppression, humiliation and exploitation of infidels, of women, plus verses that endorse Jewish ownership of the Holy Land [5:20-22, etc.], that express hatred of Jews, Christians, and others [mushrikin?]. The Muslims and their sympathizers need to be confronted with verses that contradict what they have been taught. Of course, they'll claim that 5:20-22 has been superseded. So what? We want them and THEIR SYMPATHIZERS to start thinking. We want to challenge their beliefs on their own terms [the Quran]. Let them explain why the more liberal Meccan verses have been abrogated in favor of Medinan verses. It is not our job to explain that. Put them on the stop to explain why the "Zionist" verses in the Quran are no longer valid or were never valid or whatever.
Highlight verses that endorse beating wives. Ask why they kill their daughters and sisters, etc.
Robert Spencer finally awoke the sleeping giant.
Too bad he won't get the credit for that at the Pentagon though.
from the article: "Critical vulnerabilities of the Quran, for example, are that it was uttered by a mortal," Gawthrop said. "Similar vulnerabilities may be found in Muhammad's character."
Reminds me of this article at the Brussels Journal, How to Criticize the Prophet:
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/806
"Somers’ considered verdict is that Mohammed was a textbook case of paranoid delusion, a self-centred belief in his own unique status as God’s spokesman, nurtured with recurring visual and auditory hallucinations. As for content, the hallucinations brought to the surface bits and pieces from Mohammed’s memory bank: his own opinions on religious or worldly matters and his own very human desires, along with elements of Judeo-Christian lore which he had learned around the campfire from Jews and Christians during his business trips. There is not a single sentence in the Quran that cannot be explained from Mohammed’s own socio-cultural background, nothing at all that indicates a superhuman source. Consequently, Islam as a belief system is nothing but a collective secondhand delusion, borrowed from a mentally afflicted Arabian businessman.
"That is what I told my two fellow panelists and an audience of several hundred Muslims....
"But if Mohammed is shown to have heard a voice that spoke from his own subconscious rather than from heaven, and that the Quran is nothing but a collection of all-too-human dreamspeak, the whole edifice of Islam is undermined. Not religiousness as such, not devotion to Allah, but that which distinguishes Islam from other religions, viz. the belief in Mohammed’s prophethood...
"Questioning the legitimacy of Mohammed’s self-image as God’s spokesman, by contrast, may rather tend to provoke doubt and intellectual reflection."
There is only one problem with this bit of advice - it is far too sensible to be taken notice of.
Put him in charge.
And make sure that the "learning about Islam" is done properly. No fantasies supplied by the likes of Karen Armstrong or special trainers supplied by CAIR. Sober texts, beginning with Spencer's careful compilation of what how the Muslim biographers themselves present the Life of Muhammad, that military leader who took part in 78 campaigns, 77 of them offensive, who told his followers that "war is deception," who made a treaty but broke that treaty just as soon as he felt powerful enough to do so (and the Treaty of Al-Hudaibiyyah became the model and basis of all subsequent agreements involving peace and war between Muslims and Infidels). Muhammad is the Perfect Man, uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil.
Muhammad is to be followed. Allah Ta'ala, Allah knows best, but Muhammad is the interpreter, the amanuensis, the guide, the man who in putting it all into practice, provides a living gloss on the passages of the Qur'an. The Qur'an is the uncreated word of Allah, but it comes to us through Muhammad. And the Sunnah -- the name one gives to all the manners and customs of Muhammad and his Companions in 7th century Arabia that flesh out the Qur'an -- well, that's entirely a matter of Muhammad, what he said, what he did, and even when he was silent.
Can't a little common sense, and a modicum of knowledge, possibly come to affect the making of policy that will determine the future of Europe, and possibly of the United States, whether our legal and political institutions, individual rights, arts and sciences, live or die? Are we being too demanding that people who make policy should learn about Islam -- and not from the apologists of Islam, of which there is now a small army of the timid, the stupid, and the venal?
This certainly is common sense. But military planners need to study how the Mongols were successful in destroying the Abbasid dynasty and what they did to destroy the Al Qeda of the assassins cult.
So why is there a call to prayers 5 times a day at Gitmo if its training in their military doctrine? Why not a call to sensitivity training? Why not give them Nancy Drew and Hardy Boys to read, and they work up to Agatha Christie?
Why did Bush set up Islamic Republics in Afghanistan and Iraq?
Why are US, UK and NATO troops dying to uphold Sharia law and religious courts in Afghanistan and Iraq, if its a doctrine of war against our troops?
If Bush invaded Iran, which is unlikely, would it be to set up an Islamic Republic based on Sharia law and for American soldiers to die to uphold the rulings of religious courts? Would he build up the army and the central government so that they were strong enough to set aside large reservations that could build nuclear weapons in peace?
Sharia Law at Wordpress
The best news I have heard all day
"
How do you attack an idea? By hitting "soft spots" in the Islamic faith that, once exploited, "may induce a deteriorating cascade effect upon the target," Gawthrop says."
What this means in effect is that we have to pull apart Islam - its full of inconsistencies and illogicalities - its a house of cards ready to fall but do they have the balls?
I knew we'd get to this point some day. Keep on keepin' on. The world's going to keep turning and the worms going keep turning.
Tear Mohammed down and you tear it all down. Jihadi fighters - mark this day. Our progress won't be linear but now some of us have the thing in our hands.
Ye lets pull apart all the Islam shit - when we start to be honest about all the lies and deceit that their disgusting religon is it will fall--fall--fall-halaliuja
The problem here, of course, is that the man who should be running the show because he knows the enemy is only a "FORMER senior Pentagon official." What we need are CURRENT senior Pentagon officials who know the same things -- and act on them.
Yes but generally this is house institutions like the Pentagon change. Someone resigns and starts to speak what everyone inside the institution beleives - he is the fall guy that instigates the sea change - lets hope it happens - I feell much better already!
Amen to that.
We make absolutely no progress against terrorism by looking at each other trying to convince ourselves that Islam is a religion of peace.
The academic establishment which prides itself so much on skeptical inquiry has become lazy when it comes to Islam. They look with pride on those who dared to stand up to the Catholic Church in spite of persecution, yet when it comes to being critical of Mohammedanism and its arrogant fanatical dogmatism, they themselves exhibit no similar bravery. They are cowards and hypocrites.
My guess is that Gawthrop, who is exactly on target, was seen by his superiors as a "loose cannon" and a nuisance who kept spouting these wild ideas, that not only went against the current version of group think but were also not politically correct and might have offended our Muslim allies. I wonder how far his ideas got up the chain of command before they were blocked? He was probably forced out or left in disgust.
Someone about Foggy Bottom who makes sense ?
Quick, give him some awards and press him back into service.
Was he the sole black sheep or are there other aware people among his former employment ?
Dont let this guy go; we need him.
Finally some hope...except for the fact that he is a "former" employee there.
Hopefully in this case he has realized that if he goes out on his own and comes back as a "consultant" he can make boatloads of money and can get his message out to more places.
(This is probably the only time I am not grousing about the revolving door that often occurs with government employees who, after leaving to go out into the business world, go back and do the same thing they were doing for a lot more money.)
Then comes the real politically incorrect decision - ban Islam. Queen Isabella did it, she told the Moors, if you don't want to change, you have to leave. Jan Sobieski did it and banished Islam from Poland. Political correctness is a tall thick wall and we can only hope that the Pentagon is finally waking up to the 'root cause' of terrorism.
Yes, Mo does reveal the key to defeating the jihadists. The part about destroying the enemy wherever you find him.
"But military planners need to study how the Mongols were successful in destroying the Abbasid dynasty and what they did to destroy the Al Qeda of the assassins cult." - David England
I'm not sure that you could get away with massacring the entire populations of a few select cities nowadays (it makes all the other cities go remarkably quiet, though).
Of course he's absolutely right. You can't kill an idea with guns and bombs. Violence just feeds Islam. To starve it you have to use brains.
OK, so the Pentagon, FBI etal study the Koran and hadiths and come away fully aware that the Jihad is Koranically sanctioned official policy of Islam. What then?
The problem is that the Jihad is being waged by civilians on us civilians. It is being waged by Muslims in the West, who are citizens, and cannot be regarded as uniformed soldiers of Mohammed, even though they themselves regard themselves as such.
How do you combat this without a fundamental re-think of what constitutes war under such circumstances.
DP111
I agree. "What then" indeed? Having the military understand the drivers behind Islamic violence is perhaps useful, but not nearly as useful as having the civil authorities and policy makers alerted to the problem and willing to act. Is it too late for Western civil authorities to become educated in the root source of problems brought about by legal migration of Moslems to the West, such as home-grown terrorism, abuse of Western social safety nets by hostile immigrant groups, insinuation of Islamist influence into the halls of power, the ongoing erosion of Western values --particularly free speech, the steady insertion of Moslem-friendly propaganda into the public eye by a sycophantic press, just to name a few? And what about the injustices perpetrated by Islam outside the West, such as the lack of religious freedom in Islamic countries? These all are issues that are not to be addressed on the military level. The military knows how to hunt these creatures, but they need the go ahead from the civilian leadership.
My fear is that many in the governments of the West know full well what they are dealing with but are on the take, one way or another, from the big oil producers.
This thought terrifies me, consider that at the helm of our government is a president and staff that rely on Muslims for translation, for "sensitivity training", to assist in the prison and military chaplaincy program and who has personal and financial ties to Arab potentates (e.g. the "magic Kingdom" and the Emirs of Dubai and Kuwait).
Consider that and then consider just who they would choose to "educate" our military and teach classes in our Acadamies and War Colleges. Err... they already have that's why William Gawthrop is writing articles for WND and not providing patriotic service to our country..he is either persona non grata or has had his hands tied and his mouth sealed from within the sanctified halls of the neo conned Outhouse.
As this William Gawthrop shows, possessing common sense on Capitol Hill can and usually IS a major liability.
But, sooner or later, someone in the US government WILL pick up on what he is saying and start making policies about Islamic insurgebcy based on an understanding of them instead of blindly trying to implement policies that may have been useful in handling the Soviet threar but are useful in fighting terrorism.
ps-Thank you Nariz. Now I KNOW Gawthrop is on the right track!!!