35 Jamaat al-Fuqra "terror training camps" still operating in the U.S.

"Map 'em. Every last one of 'em...and start applying steady, unrelenting pressure to local law enforcement and local and State government, to have it shut down."

In the U.S. this is really hard to do. Government cannot respond to pressure unless it has a legal way to do so. We only have a few options:

First, law enforcement can nibble at the problem. Find environmental violations and the like and use them to harass these camps. This approach requires a lot of work and the return is small, because it is hard to make these violations stick for long.

The second approach is to obtain warrants to actively surveil these groups and then arrest them once enough evidence is gathered. The problem is that you need probable cause of a crime to get the warrants, and it takes a brave polititian [an oxymoron] to equate preparing for jihad with a crime. Yes, planning terrorism is a crime in the U.S., but the legal hurtle is not low. Perhaps this video can change that hurtle.

The third approach is to wait until something big happens and then swoop in - the politically favored approach. If a couple of big terror attacks happen in the U.S. and they are traced back to these camps then the gloves will come off. The downside is that hundreds will have to die first, and the politicians will respond by passing more laws.

The fourth option is the hardest. Federal law prohibits private militias in the U.S. They do exist, and they get away with it because they can simply claim to be part of the 'unregulated militia' that is acknowledged by Federal law to exist within the citizenry. That claim is often bogus, especially when these groups have membership requirements that go beyond that of the law, such as a requirement that the members all belong to a particular religion. So, in summary, these groups belonging to Jamaat ul-Fuqra are private militias and can be prosecuted as such, but doing so would consequently strengthen the legal standing of the 'unregulated militia' and this is something that gun control advocates simply will not allow.

So, yes, let's put up a map on the internet and add the video. Old media will not likely cover the story. Most localities have one or more email newsletters these days, so find the ones close to the camps and see if they will carry the story. And yes, go to undaunted's site and prepare. But absent political will to equate all jihad with illegal acts there is little else that can be done.

I'm on your side.

But remember we have an American pressure-group-force to reckon with, which is effectively allied with Muslim/Islamists called the A.C.L.U., behind a thin veil. That will be vigorously denied by the A.C.L.U., of course; but remember always that the Muslims/Islamists are very effectively using the A.C.L.U. behind the shielding veil of "Lawfare".

It's interesting also that groups instantly shrieking,"Rights! Violation!" at every opportunity they fancy is against Muslim/Islamist terrorist "free-speech"......which are so quiet when anti-Semitic activities are called up for attention.

Massive hypocrisy right here at home in our own back yards....and front yards, for all to see, stepping oh-so-carefully among the egg shells of "Political Correctness."

Sickening.

"With the muslim-in-chief sympathizer/appeaser residing in "Our" White House"

Look at the date of the referenced JihadWatch article: 2007. George Bush was President then. Also, the article itself refers to 2003: George Bush President.

Just 'keeping an eye (and ear)' on these places need not involve any particularly obtrusive activity.

More a matter of the kuffar who live in the vicinity- such as local farmers - consciously 'tuning in' to such things as volume and type of traffic going in and out. All you needf to do is to become aware of the 'normal' pattern of activity...so that you will pick it up when there's something unusual, a change, a drop in activity or a sudden intensification of activity. Just like you notice when your neighbours up the road are having a party.

Consciously noticing and noting this sort of thing doesn't necessitate hanging around the front gates making like you're 007.

And when there *is* such a perceptible change from whatever 'normal' pattern you've observed - say, a *lot* of people suddenly turning up at the J a F camp late at night - then you and, say, the dozen or so fellow members of your 'ACT for America' chapter, go on Alert.

I would add that all of this does not simply apply to J a F 'camps'. It also applies, in spades, to the downtown neighbourhood or suburban mosque, of which there are many, many more, and which is much easier for the surrounding kuffar neighbours to keep an eye and ear on...

If there is a mosque in your suburb, or in the next suburb over and you pass it regularly in the course of your normal daily round...just casually but all the time KEEP AN EYE ON IT. It's the equivalent of a biker den, mafia hangout, neonazi base or crack house.

And if it has an 'Open Day' to ladle out the Taqiyya to the unwary kuffar...go along and sus it out. Note: J a F don't hold Open Days, but mosques sometimes do, which is a great opportunity for the Jihadwatcher to get a look inside at least part of the compound of the local Mohammed mob military base/ fortress/ arsenal/ recruitment-and-indoctrination centre.... If you see members of the Mob present as you pass by, or when you trundle along to the Open Day, have a good (surreptitious) look, and think about who they are. Are they mostly male (and if so, what age-range?). Mixed-gender (families)? What version of the Slave Rag are most of the women wearing? - the more covered-up they are, as a general rule, the more jihad-minded their menfolk are. How big is the mosque in relation to the visible Mohammedan social presence in the area (i.e is there a mismatch -a very big and expensive flashy mosque but only a small Mohammedan presence as yet)? What's the probable ethno-linguistic composition of the 'congregation' - Afro-American converts, Anglo-American converts, immigrant African Muslim (Somali, Nigerian, etc.), 'Arab', Persian, Indo-Pakistani? (Again, this is the kind of thing you won't be able to easily tell re a J a F 'camp' but which you have a very good chance of getting to know, as regards your local neighbourhood mosque). And how do those Mohammedans behave toward you, not just on that Open Day, but when you encounter them in the nearby streets and shops in the course of your normal daily round?

As you mosey past every day on your way to and from work, or as you do the shopping,or as you walk your dog, just...flick a casual glance at that mosque. Where is it in relation to significant kuffar landmarks such as churches, synagogues, schools, police station, major transport route? Does it have minarets and do they have loudspeakers? If there was a sniper in the minaret, what would be within his range? What's it *called*? - sometimes the name of a mosque will give you a clue as to the mindset of the founders and congregation.

And what is your chapter of FDI or SIOA or ACT for America going to do if and when an allahu-akbaring male mob swarms out of *that* mosque? (As they did in Australia at the time of the Cronulla riots: the Mohammedans swarmed out of the big Lakemba mosque, en route to burn, smash and bash).

Never mind about J a F.

Know and watch your local mosque: where it is, who attends it, and what's going on there. Half the time, these days, they have websites and advertise their guest speakers and so on.

Same deal applies to 'Islamic schools'.

There are a whole lot more mosques, and Islamic schools, all over the USA and all over the non-Muslim lands, than there are J a F training camps.

It might take a special effort, and particularly motivated and smart people, to watch the latter; I don't think it would be all that hard to casually monitor the former.

I like your thinking and your strategy very much indeed, Tom. Let me flesh out a couple of your ideas. First, your suggestion about using "environmental violations" as a weapon is a masterstroke of genius. The EPA does it all the time--usually against innocent, middle class homeowners and small business owners--and, given the monster agency's unlimited resources, army of voracious government lawyers, and untrammeled power to sue, fine, and imprison anyone for the slightest reason (or, often, none at all), it's a formidable weapon indeed. Time to unleash its fangs and claws against a real enemy, for a change. Declare these cesspools of terrorism "wetlands," or "superfund sites," or the "habitat of an endangered species of feces-eating worm," or whatever it takes. As Lavrenty Beria sneered, "You bring us the man; we'll find the crime." Another idea occurs to me: seize them under eminent domain. It worked well enough against an old lady whose home was taken and demolished in New Haven; why not terrorist camps? After all, the Supreme Court ruled that it's just fine in Kelo vs. New Haven.
Next, Eric Holder has about 1,000 times more probable cause to conduct armed raids on these camps, with guns blazing, than Janet Reno did to order the massacre of 80 innocent men, women, children, and babies by incinerating them alive at Waco, or the kidnapping at gunpoint, and shipping back to Cuba, of Elion Gonzalez in Miami. (Of course, Holder won't move on the evidence; he's too busy suing Arizona, Alabama, and South Carolina, and demanding "tougher gun control laws" on NRA members and Arizona ranchers--and lying under oath about it to Congressional committees.) Likewise, the BATFE ought to be at least as interested in the terrorists' arsenals of real assault rifles and military explosives as they are in a licensed, compliant gun shop's sales to sportsmen...but that's asking too much, given BATFE's demonstrated agenda and priorities. Next, yes, I'd like to see the FBI go after these jihadists--the Bureau could certainly make a strong case, if it wanted to. But unfortunately today's FBI is not the FBI of Inspector Erskine (Efrem Zimbalist, Jr.). Today's FBI is better characterized by its triumphs at Ruby Ridge and Waco, by its shielding of Whitey Bulger for years as he killed, and killed again; and by guarding its own "turf" rather than cooperating with the CIA, NSA, local police and sheriffs, and the other agencies it's supposed to work with, rather than against. To sum up what ought to happen, I'll paraphrase a famous dictum of Saddam Hussein's--by changing just one word, so that it reads: "Where there is a Muslim, there is a problem. Where there is no Muslim, there is no problem." How could anyone argue with such a reasonable proposition?

"Just 'keeping an eye (and ear)' on these places need not involve any particularly obtrusive activity."

Oh, I agree that it need not. I really was not trying to nix your ideas - we really need them. It is just that effective and unobtrusive surveillance takes much time and some money. I know firsthand: I tried doing it with the drug dealers on my street to get some evidence and all I got out of the hours it cost me was a chuckle while watching one roll a joint in his car with trembling hands (he got arrested, posted bail, and got home to his weed all in six hours - a bad day for him!). This was in suburbia; rural areas offer much less cover.

Just because it isn't easy doesn't mean we shouldn't try, but I do want to be practical about risks and costs and the intel that is returned. Risks are real but can be minimized, the return may be minimal or maximal (do we have to get all of the license plates?), but there is ALWAYS a cost in time and money. Maximal returns will have large costs.

This is a good discussion and it might hatch a good attempt. I really do hope so.