| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
How do jihadists recruit peaceful Muslims? By making the case from Islamic sources that jihad warfare is their religious responsibility. And they make this case on the Internet, making it easier for them than ever before to reach their target audience. They don't have to deal with law enforcement officials in majority-Muslim countries who may be trying to put a lid on the jihad; they don't have to cross borders or find hideouts or hazard open activity in areas where it might be viewed unfavorably. All they have to do is go online.
"The Internet's Role In Fort Dix Plot," by Robert Windrem for MSNBC (thanks to Jeffrey Imm):
Six men described by federal prosecutors as "Islamic militants" were arrested on charges they plotted to attack the Fort Dix Army base and "kill as many soldiers as possible," authorities said Tuesday.A former senior U.S. intelligence official tells NBC News do not lose sight of the role the Internet played in inspiring these prospective jihadis. The FBI affidavits note that among the materials used in organizing, training and proselytizing the jihadis were al-Qaida training videos, the video wills of two 9-11 hijackers, and videos of U.S. soldiers being killed in Iraq....
He noted that the Internet also helped in the recruitment and inspiration of jihadis who planned terrorist attacks in places like Singapore and England.
"The guys in Singapore, all middle class, were all recruited off the network of jihadi Web sites," he added.
What is missing and needed, he added is, a "countervailing message" from moderate Islamists.
"Where is the countervailing message from Islam on the Internet?," he asked. "They aren't going to believe anything we in the West have to say. It has to come from Islam."
Quite so. And where is that countervailing message? Why isn't it out there? That's the 800-pound gorilla in the room that no one wants to notice.
Posted by Robert at May 9, 2007 8:22 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
Relax.
The "surge" continues. And the "basic laws common to all insurgencies" have been well-studied, by such people as Arthur Herman, who along with others has found the Magic Wonderworking Answer in the writings of the French army officer David Galula. And "insurgencies last, on average, ten years," we are told, and therefore we have only --what is it? -- six years or so to go.
Perhaps that is why, when the head of the National Guard in Kansas, asked the Pentagon sometime ago about when the Kansas Guard could expect to have its store of equipment, so dangerously depleted because so much had been shipped to Iraq, apparently to remain their permanently, he was told "oh, in about six years."
Yes, don't forget the mantra. Say it ten times today, and then again ten times early tomorrow morninng, as you attempt for another day to perform the task of believing Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast.
"We are fighting them over there (Iraq) so we won't have to fight them over here."
Say it. Say it right now. Try to believe it.
Posted by: Hugh![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at May 9, 2007 8:35 AM
Agreed 100% Hugh.
Bush backs up the baseless mantra by ignoring the unchecked immigration policy and wide-open borders.
It is comforting to know that retail clerks, luckily through inititation by an immensely arrogant or stupid move by the jihadists, are keeping America safe.
Posted by: awake at May 9, 2007 9:51 AM
File Under: The Dualistic Disorder of Islam
Relatives in the ethnic Albanian-populated town of 15,000 said they had not seen the brothers in more than two decades, but expressed disbelief Wednesday that the three would attack the United States.
We all have been supporters of America. We were always thankful to America for its support during the wars in Kosovo and Macedonia," a cousin, Elez Duka, 29, told The Associated Press.
"These are simple, ordinary people and they've got nothing to do with terrorism. I expect their release and I expect an apology," he said, waving his hands. "I see injustice. These are ridiculous charges."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070509/ap_on_re_eu/fort_dix_balkans
Being Muslim means never having to say you're sorry.
Notice Duka says "were" not "are." With Muhammadans the gratitude, if there is any, never lasts long.
at May 9, 2007 4:27 PM
So what are you suggesting Hugh? Cut and run? Do you really think that will make us safer? And how many jihadis do you think would be here if we pull out?
Posted by: Favre4Favre at May 9, 2007 4:35 PM
Favre4Favre
Please read Hugh's archives - link at the top of this page. Hugh has spelt out umpty times how a civil war in Iraq and neighboring countries is to our benefit.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at May 9, 2007 4:58 PM
Posted by: Favre4Favre
"So what are you suggesting Hugh? Cut and run? Do you really think that will make us safer? And how many jihadis do you think would be here if we pull out?"
Lord Have Mercy!
Please don't get Hugh worked up again on this point. Cut and run? Those were G-Dub the dhimmwit's words.
Favre, how many Jihadists are there in the US now? How many more will be coming over here as refugees from the destroyed country of Iraq? How many Jihadi attacks in this country since 2003, the year the US invaded Iraq? How does helping to institute an Islamic theocratic state (a la Iran) run by the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in what was formerly the secular state of Iraq mitigate the forces of Jihad against us? It doesn't and it can't.
Iraq will not be won. However, leaving the Sunnis and Shia to kill each other is a step in the right direction. Democracy, human rights, secularism will never come to pass in Iraq. Never.
There is no way the security of the US is enhanced by sending our troops to die to adjudicate a civil war between two sects of muhammad that have been at war since the fiend died 1400 years ago.
Finally, are you so STUPID that you think the USA has friends, allies in Iraq. Who are our allies? The Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution? SCARI, is the acronym and scary it is that six years after 9-11 we would be in a muslim country dismantling a secular state and helping to replace it with a proxy state of Iran.
Is it my turn to be President?
Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at May 9, 2007 5:01 PM
We all know that the United States wants to establish a moslem Kosovo in Europe and they want to push Turkey into the EU.
Noone can deny these two objectives of the US. My question is WHY exactly do they wish to do these things?
On the surface I cannot ascertain any benefit at all for either the US or the EU from either of these two things.
I could speculate.. like.. are the highest American officials being bribed so they will push this islamist aganda?
Are they somehow "afraid" of islam, which I find hard to imagine given our military superiority.
What on Earth is the reason they are breaking up Serbia and islamizing Europe?
I am so relieved the French have at least put a temporary halt to this Turkey nonsense.
Sarko has said verbatim that Turkey is neither physially nor culturally European and therefore is not a match for the EU.
I could not say it any better than that. Let's hope the French will be leaders in keeping Europe well.. European.
In thew meantime.. who has some ideas why the US is pushing these two things? They;ve been at it before Dhimya so is everyone getting paid off? Or was it simply political correctness for brother Bill to bomb Serbia?
I am actually quite surprised they'd go that far in antagonizing Russia with no discernibel benefit for anyone in the West.
I mean they say they can't do anything in Sudan because of China but when it came to bombing Serbia there was no talk about .. oh.. we can;t interfere in Serbia, which has such strong ties to Russia.
They just went right ahead and bombed a Christian state in the middle of Europe and all the stupid Sozis like Schröder and the stone-thrower Joschka Fischer gleefully went along with it.
The same SchröderFishcer who opposed the war in Iraq.
Which I am also against but for vastly different reasons.
Posted by: Allahfanculo at May 9, 2007 5:18 PM
TERRORISM: U.S. ARMY BASE PLOT 'CONFIRMS EXISTENCE OF WHITE AL-QAEDA' BALKAN EXPERTS SAY
Thanks to http://Rushlimbaugh.com for the source.
Posted by: Infidel Pride at May 9, 2007 6:01 PM
Allahfanculo: I always thought that a part of destroying Serbia was just doing Jihadis a favour and expecting cooperation in return (but they're only interested in dhimmis and not partners) and part experiment to see whether they can direct Jihad to a particular spot. It has been obvious for some time now that both things failed miserably. This whole Fort Dix affair is just a big slap in the face of dhimmis but not unexpected to anyone paying attention. It is beyond me why they still persist with this experiment.
Posted by: SerbInfidel at May 9, 2007 8:03 PM
Actually being in Iraq has brought the islamist out of the woodwork. hastens the fight against islamists, before they can become higher in numbers.
but back to the point of "cut in run"
l have not had a good answer of how can you look like you won when you run out of war before it is finished. the US military does not lose a war, but the wash.beltway politicans make it a loss.
Saddam, Osamma and company kept the tapes of the Somalie taking the US marines, in BlackHawkDown, and boasted at how when the US loses a few men they cut and ran. this was under Clinton of course who was poll driven, and of coures he has no backbone. so in the eyes of islamist the US appeared a paper tiger. When the terrorists and Democrat liberal leftist both agree about Bush and leaving Iraq l have to questions their motives. Do we strike first, or wait for another more fierce 9-11?
at May 9, 2007 10:32 PM
Aena,
Of course we wait. There is no war on anything except "terror," whatever that is, wherever it comes from is unknown, not recognized by the Bush administration (beholden to the Saudis).
Posted by: unicorns62000 at May 9, 2007 11:12 PM
(Not Aena, but Zena)
The only way to "win" in Iraq now--save the situation--is to remove our troops from harm's way, slowly--and let the "Iraqi people" destroy itself. If Iran interferes . . . well then--but don't we have generals and admirals, etc., who can figure out what to do?
Even our last two "Presidents" have not been in it for the American people, but for themselves. Clinton could not have been such an idiot as to think that his beloved Kosovars were not Moslems, Albanian Moslems, as many jihadists amongst them as there are among all others of that persuasion.
Clinton, botched Somalia, the USS Cole affair and his entire presidency which was concentrated on his genitalia rather than on the welfare of the United States.
Bush (G.W.) is beholden to his Saudi partners. He takes directions from them. That means Moslems are never blamed for anything, only the ever-elusive "terrorists."
I hope that I am not judged as being "unhinged" for saying this by the authorities of this site. I try, oh how I try, to keep the hinged lid on myself, but it becomes more and more difficult. something's gotta give, not only in me, but in the American people.
Islam is not only "Middle Easterners" nor Pakistanis but also the Moslem Albanians, descended from the Illyrians, and looking perfectly acceptable. Calling them "former Yugoslavs" is doing a disservice to the American people. Call an Islamic an Islamic might be a start. But, unless we change our leadership here, is nigh impossible. Oh well, time to tighten the screws that hold on the old hinges.
Posted by: unicorns62000 at May 9, 2007 11:36 PM
Well it is obvious that people here are becoming frustrated with all of this. Dhummilizah Rice supporting the Islamic non-secularization of Turkey, and Dhimwhit Bush supporting the Jihad in Kosovo, and our out of control immigration problem in this case specifically brought me to the boiling point yesterday. Would we all be better off watching Entertainment Tonight in fuzzy slippers drinking tea? No. We are on here because we care about what is going on. We want to make a difference. Personally I do all I can by taking information from here and spreading it to all who will listen. Heck I’d force feed it to people if I could. It is all we can do. I have several converts to this point, and they vote.
Posted by: Ameriki at May 10, 2007 1:46 AM
Bush (G.W.) is beholden to his Saudi partners. He takes directions from them. That means Moslems are never blamed for anything, only the ever-elusive "terrorists."
unicorns62000, this statement above is old and does not take into account that every president has been beholden to the sawdis.
l still am waiting for what ever can be said about leaving iraq without having the label as American is a paper tiger, loser, the Vietnam syndrome that still effects the US today. the point is that if the US leaves, iran will take over control, oil will skyrocket and American and the West be at hostage.
you may want that, a quicker war to destroy one side or the other, it may still happen.
at May 10, 2007 7:26 AM
I don't think we can "finish the job" in Iraq so I agree with unicorns62000 and think we should withdraw slowly and let them (hope) they destroy themselves. Unfortunately, Hizbollah and other groups are only too ready to step in and help get these countries built back up, comfortable and ready for jihad (we saw this in Lebanon recently). People have allegiance to whomever fill their bellies.
I wish we felt safer within the US. I would rather see our troops surrounding borders, in airports, in large cities etc.
at May 10, 2007 7:36 AM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)