CAN WE IDENTIFY THE TERRORISTS AMONG US?

How do you identify a terrorist? Ask this of any man on the street
and the responses will be determined by politics. Those of a liberal
bent will consider George Bush to be a terrorist. Those of a
conservative bent will say Middle Eastern men. And others will shrug
and say “anyone could become a terrorist.”

The last group is the correct group. “Reverts” to Islam aren’t usually
men of “Arabic decent”. Jose Padilla is a man of Hispanic decent
who converted to Islam while in prison for murder.

Adam Gadahn isn’t of Arabic decent. He’s an American native

(Azzam the American). His real name is Adam Pearlman, the product
of a Jewish-Christian mixed family.

Ernest Thompson became known as James Ujaama after his conversion to

Islam. In 1999 this would-be terror cell founder tried to create a training camp
in Oregon, complete with a stockpile of weapons.

Recently the New York Police Department issued a ninety page report detailing
information about terrorists and terrorism as a threat to American safety.
Critics claim the report is too broad, so much so that it may cause nationwide
paranoia without offering us any solid information by which to defend ourselves.

The report discusses a trajectory, a pattern of increased exposure and identification, noted
in many of the terror-related cases over the past ten years. This pattern alleges a four-tier
profile of activity:

1) Pre-radical life. The person’s life before exposure to “radical Islam” is pretty much
indistinguishable from that of anyone else.
2) Self-Identification. The person becomes influenced, either by internal or external
mechanisms; they begin to explore “Salafi Islam”.

3) Indoctrination. The person believes or adopts the Jihadi-Salifi teaching.

4) Jihadization. The person accepts their individual duty and self-identifies as a holy
warrior of the mujahadeen.

All of that sounds well and good. But the report makes a damning statement about
identifying potential terrorists:

“There is no useful profile to assist law enforcement or intelligence to predict who will
follow this trajectory of radicalization.”

Really? I think once we stop the shell game (and shed some political correctness) we may
see that identifying potential terrorists may not be as difficult as we think.

A ROSE BY ANY OTHER NAMEPardon me while I scoff and snort at those who would say Salafi
is different from Wahhabism. Frankly, I don’t care if they find it offensive to be called
Wahhabi. Salafi and Wahhabism are just two faces of the same coin.

Let’s follow the bunny trail.

Muhammed founded Islam. Keeping him company throughout his life were the Salaf, from
which the name Salafi is derived. The Salaf were the ones who maintained the words of
Mohammed and ultimately produced the Quran and the Hadith (along with the Sira and
Tarikh). Since they were such close associates of Muhammed, we can assume they got
things right.

In the 1700’s the Sunni patriarch, Muhammed Ibn Abd al-Wahhab began teaching the return
to the original Islam as intended and recorded by the associates of Muhammed. Also known
as the Salaf. Basically Wahhab taught that anything not officially mandated by Muhammed
and Allah had no place in the Islamic belief. This meant a return to the Salaf. In other
words WAHABBISM is only the “pet” name or the derogatory name for Salafi Islam.

Distancing themselves from Osama bin Laden has been an on-going venture for Wahhabist
Muslims. They say that bin Laden got his ideas from the writings of Sayyid Qutb, who visited
the United States from 1958-1961 and, after having spent a whole three years here, came
to the conclusion that our country was waging a moral war against Islam.

In a book called The Wahhabi Myth, the author tries to make this distinction:

“Bin Laden was not inspired by Wahhabism but by the writings of the Egyptian ideologue
Sayyid Qutb, who was executed by President Nasser in 1966. Almost every fundamentalist
movement in Sunni Islam has been strongly influenced by Qutb, so there is a good case for
calling the violence that some of his followers commit Qutbian terrorism. Qutb urged his
followers to withdraw from the moral and spiritual barbarism of modern society and fight
it to the death.”

While Qutb’s writings no doubt encouraged bin Laden, ultimately the Quran and Hadith’s
themselves would be the inspiration. To say that Salafi followers are practicing something
that’s corrupted is creating a shell game. As noted on the Prophet of Doom website:

“In direct contradiction to all who apply the ‘radical’ label to the Islam of today's
terrorists, the only way for Wahhab or Salaf Muslims to be practicing a corrupted version
of Islam, is for Muhammad and his Companions to have gotten Islam wrong. And if that
were true, the religion has no basis of any kind. The moment you come to grips with this
simple, yet profound, truth, the connection between Islam and terror becomes clear.”

The clarity becomes frightening when one looks at from where the support for Wahhabist
Islam cometh. And it begs the question: is our Government creating terror for us?

According to author Reza Safa, the government of Saudi Arabia has been importing
Wahhabism to America and other countries to the tune of some $87 billion since 1973. Most
of the “Islamicizing” of America comes from established organizations. The three most
prominent are ISNA (the Islamic Society of North America); CAIR (Council on American
Islamic Relations) and the MSA (Muslim Student Association).
Supporting organizations include: American Muslim Council (AMC); American Muslim Alliance
(AMA); Muslim American Society (MAS); the Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences
(GSISS); and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) which operates some 324 plus mosques
nationwide.

In 2003 Stephen Schwartz testified before the Senate Subcommittee on Terrorism,

Technology and Homeland Security as to the links between Wahhabism/Salafi Islam and
Saudi connections and aspirations to inundate American society with “radical Islam.”

Schwartz mentioned the goals of the Saudi importation:

“First, to control a significant group of Muslim believers.

Second, to use the Muslim community in the U.S. to pressure U.S. government and media,
in the formulation of policy and in perceptions about Islam…

Third, to advance the overall Wahhabi agenda of ‘jihad against the world’ — an extremist
campaign to impose the Wahhabi dispensation on the global Islamic community, as well as
to confront the other religions.”

That Salafi/Wahhabist Muslims outnumber all other groups in the US isn’t a fluke. Although
very few will likely call themselves Wahhabi (because of the implied tie to bin Laden) the
shell game comes into play when you hear a person say “I am not Salafi! I am not Wahhab! I
am just Muslim!”

They’re right. They’re all branches of the same corrupt tree: Sunni Islam. And what is the
predominant sect in Saudi Arabia? Sunni, with over 70% of it’s population practicing Sunni.
God bless our little government! This isn’t news to them. It’s also not news to them that
the type of Islam endorsed by the Saudi government just so happens to be a “radical” type.
From a State Department report circa 2005:

“The majority of citizens [in Saudi Arabia] are Sunni Muslims who predominantly adhere to
the very strict Hanbali school of Islamic jurisprudence. The Hanbali school is the strictest
of Sunni Islam’s four legal schools. In addition, most Sunnis in the Kingdom subscribe to
the tradition of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, an 18th century Muslim scholar belonging
to the Hanbali school. For this reason, these individuals are often referred to by others as
‘Wahhabis.’ Most citizens, however, do not so describe themselves, preferring instead to
say simply that they are ‘Muslims.’”

Gee, go figure.

So what have we got here? We have the end result of what happens when expediency meets
political correctness: the inability to detect terrorists in our midst.

WHO ARE THE TERRORISTS AMONG US?In July of this year, the FBI announced that they
were introducing the STAR system, a database which collects information and assesses the
information as a sort of profile of would-be terrorists. The system focuses primarily on
foreign suspects but does look at US residents as well.

And of course, nobody will be “labeled” a terrorist. Even if he has a stock-pile of AK-47’s in
his trunk, a computer with a layout of Kennedy Airport on the hard drive, bank receipts
from CAIR, and a card reading “72 Virgins await you in heaven” signed by bin Laden
himself. No, we must not label anyone, right?

We also have political correctness at the expense of the average man’s security coming
from the Bush administration’s liberal critics, such as Paddy O’Leahy, who seems to think
the administration gives a damn about my personal life:

“The Bush administration has expanded the use of this technology, often in secret, to
collect and sift through Americans' most sensitive personal information…”
Sift away! You’ll discover I’m in menopause, that I’m not in the $200K classification of the
“wealthy”, and that Mom and I share female pattern baldness.

The report introduces some aspects of identifying those susceptible to becoming

indoctrinated into “radical” Islam. First of all, they pinpoint that the most susceptible are
those who are second and third generation Muslims living in the west who are trying to find
their roots.

But these guys aren’t looking for Kunta Kintay. They’re looking back in time to Mohammed-
at least as close as they can get to what their founder REALLY believed and taught. And
this, at least in the west, takes them back to the Salaf, aka, Wahabbist teachings courtesy
of Saudi-sponsored Mosques and educational centers.

The report also points out that these potential terrorists live in enclaves dominated by
Islam. These enclaves are patriarchal in nature in terms of Islamic belief and practice. And
to make it more interesting, there seems to be no relationship to poverty here. One would
think a life of poverty could lead one to not mind committing suicide for Allah if life in the
hereafter were going to be better.

But this isn’t the case. And recent events surrounding a group of doctors and physician
assistants who conspired to attack the United States seems to buttress the conclusion of the
NYPD report. Of course, that’s not to say that all of the terrorists we’ve seen to date are
necessarily well educated and middle class. Potential terrorists may well be culled from the
less affluent. Which suddenly makes one wonder: do we really have any tell-tale attributes?
The report whittles down some characteristics:

> They tend to be under 35

> They’re local residents and citizens of western democracies.

> Varied ethnic backgrounds, often 2nd and 3rd generation western.> Middle class
backgrounds; not destitute.

> Educated, at least High school graduates and/or college students.> Recent converts to
Islam are particularly vulnerable.
> Don’t start out as radical nor even devout Muslims.

> Unremarkable- have ordinary lives and jobs.

> Little if any criminal record.

Congratulations NYPD. You have just identified a huge hunk of young Muslim America as
potential terrorists.

It’s important to remember that there are influences. While the report talks about personal
influences, both internal and external, it also discusses such things as the influences of
spiritual leaders. Of course we here in the US have this bad habit of shooting ourselves in
the foot when it comes to “spiritual enemies.” We’d rather chase after Mel Gibson as an
anti-semite than take a close look at some of the whacked out spiritual leaders here in the
USA who are teaching crap to mush minds in our prisons, Mosques and yes, schools.
In the end, the report leaves us still wondering how in the world we can possibly pinpoint a
would-be terrorist. With a majority of young Muslims fitting most or all of the above list,
we are stymied: what if the terrorists decide to use older Muslims? Or children under age
fifteen? Or women?

Let’s face it. We cannot possibly know who is, or is not, a potential terrorist until they get
arrested for something. Or, until we get the gonads to actually start investigating- seriously
investigating- NGO’s, bookstores, café’s, hookah bars, and internet café’s. We need to get
the “Noble Quran” out of our schools and universities. And we need to start realizing that
anyone who changes their name from Jack Smith to Muhammed Abd Bakiri is probably going
to become an extremist.

Last, but not least, we need to realize that the Constitution protects the rights of those
citizens who support it and defend it and those persons who abuse it’s existence in order to
take over our nation and our lives.

And maybe, while we’re at it, we need to demand that our government stop sleeping with
the enemy. Why in the world we tolerate the Saudi influence in America is beyond my
comprehension. We’re supporting a country which violates human rights on more levels
than can possibly be counted. A country which doesn’t afford Christians, Jews and other
faiths the same freedom we afford Muslims to worship here in America. A country which
backs and funds organizations known to be linked to terrorist organizations (can you say
HOLY LAND FOUNDATION, CAIR, ISNA, NAIT?)

And for what? Some oil? Dancing girls? A lone military base in the middle of Camelass, Saudi
Arabia?

America has been playing nice-nice with the House of Saud for fifty years. A 2000 report
from the Middle East Policy Council makes it abundantly clear that our interests in Saudi
Arabia have to change and change drastically. Where once we had a relationship with them
which inhibited the propagation of Wahhabi/Salafi style Islam, now Saudi is the home base
for it.
So how do we identify a potential terrorist in our midst? Simple: they’re a follower of
Mohammed in the strictest sense. They’re Wahhabi-Salafi-Sunni and they’re funded by our
dear friends, the Saudi government.

And we stupidly protect them.