Doc's Talk: The Muslim Brotherhood and Fort Hood

Friday, November 06, 2009

The Muslim Brotherhood and Fort Hood –

by Jamie Glazov

FP: Dave Gaubatz, welcome to Frontpage Interview.

A terrible tragedy occurred yesterday at Ft. Hood, Texas. Because you are the co-author (with Paul Sperry) of the new book Muslim Mafia, I would like to ask you this: are there any correlations between your message in the book about the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood and the murder spree at Ft. Hood? Gaubatz: Thanks Jamie.

Yes. The murders by Malik Nadal Hasan at Ft. Hood, TX are not a ‘lone wolf incident’ as being described by most media organizations. Hasan had been taught the ideology that is being advocated by hundreds of Islamic scholars and Imams in the U.S. We as a country can continue to deny there are numerous Islamic leaders and their supporting organizations such as CAIR, ISNA, MSA, and MANA, to name a few, who advocate killing innocent men, women, and children whom they allege ‘oppress Islam.’

How many more incidents similar to this that have been occurring in America does it take before even the media wants to report the truth? Politicians will always say or do whatever will get them their next vote in an upcoming election, but there was a time in our history when journalists reported everything and were not concerned with ‘political correctness.’

This type of journalistic reporting is dangerous and in itself is a national security issue. Journalists and their affiliated news organization are so afraid of being labeled or sued by organizations such as CAIR that they will withhold the truth from the American people. In part, the murders of innocent people are partly the fault of such journalists and politicians who support organizations such as CAIR.

FP: Your thoughts on CAIR and what happened at Ft. Hood?

Gaubatz: My team and I have conducted first-hand research at over 200 Islamic Centers in the U.S., and in various Islamic organizations such as CAIR. There is one common denominator: There is an open hatred being advocated by Islamic scholars toward Christians, Jews, and Muslims who do not adhere to ‘all aspects’ of Sharia law (Islamic law).

The materials being distributed by these scholars are very clear in their message: violence against anyone who “oppresses” Islam is justified. It makes them subject to the punishment of death. Rifqa Bary (the 17-year-old Muslim girl who left Islam for Christianity) tried to speak out, but has been ignored. Many more Muslims have tried to speak out but the PR machine of the Muslim Brotherhood (backed by Saudi and Egyptian money) keeps them silent.

Young Muslims know what is being taught at their mosques, but have no other choice but to follow their parents and the Imams. If they try to speak out they know there are few politicians, law enforcement, lawyers, or judges who will help them. They are afraid of becoming the victims of people like Malik Hasan who will carry out the orders of the Muslim Brotherhood.

FP: Can you give us some examples of what Muslims in America are being taught and why you believe Malik Hasan was carrying out the orders of the Muslim Brotherhood?

Gaubatz: Jamie there are numerous examples. I will provide a few. Investigative journalists need to ask Imams across our country what these following statements mean and if it is likely and very possible that Muslims could use these teachings to commit acts such as occurred at Ft. Hood, Va. Tech, ‘Trolley Square” (SLC, UT), and numerous other locations.

[1] “The objective of Islamic Jihad is to put an end to the dominance of the un-Islamic systems of government and replace them with Islamic rule, Islam intends to bring about this revolution not in one country or in a few countries but in the entire world. Although initially it is the duty of every member of the Muslim party to work for revolution wherever he lives the final purpose is nothing but a world revolution. Any revolutionary ideology which upholds the good of all mankind, and is not of a mere national unit, cannot limit its horizons to those of any single country or nation.”

Book: “Come Let Us Change This World,” pp. 106–107. Author: Sayyid Abul A’la Mawdudi. Founder of Jamaat-e-Islami (The Islamic Party), a political party in Pakistan.

[2] “If you accept the whole of Islam in your life…a time will come when Communism will fear for its survival in Moscow, Capitalistic democracy will tremble for its safety in Washington and New York.”

Book: “Come Let Us Change This World,” p.83. Author: Sayyid Abul A’la Mawdudi. Founder of Jamaat-e-Islami (The Islamic Party), a political party in Pakistan.

[3] “It is learnt from this Hadith that physical jihad will continue right till the day of resurrection and will be waged as such in some part or the other of the world”. We do not deny the benefit of waging an academic and intellectual war. However, an intellectual war alone cannot be fought everywhere. There are special places and occasions for it. In short, despite waging a jihad with the tongue, pen, rationale and intellect, the Muslim community cannot be absolved of the duty of waging physical jihad.”

Pamphlet: “40 Hadith on Jihad,” pp. 21 -22. Author: Maulana Abdus Samad Siyal. Published in Pakistan.

[4] “The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land, will be that they will be killed.”

Booklet: “Duties of the Learned to Ignorant Muslims,” p. 5. Author: Abdul Qadir Oudah (Muslim Brotherhood/Egypt). Published in Pakistan.

[5] “The person who raises arms in order to curb tyranny and oppression and to eradicate evil is the blessed soul who fights in the way of Allah.”

Pamphlet: Jihad in Islam, p.15, by Abdul Hameed Siddiqi. (Jemmah Islamiyah) Published in Pakistan.

[6] “Islam wishes to destroy all States and Governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and programme of Islam regardless of the country or the Nation which rules it. Islam requires the earth—not just a portion, but the whole planet. Towards this end, Islam wishes to press into service all forces which can bring about a revolution and a composite term for the use of all these forces is ‘Jihad.’

Pamphlet: “Jihad in Islam,” pp.9 -10. Syed Abul A’al Maududi (founder of JI terrorist organization).

FP: Where do Muslims get this type of material?

Gaubatz: This type of material is openly provided to Muslims across America. Islamic scholars have convinced our politicians, courts, and law enforcement that this type of material is covered under our U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment.

Americans need to determine for themselves if the calling for the destruction of our country and the safety of our children was intended by our forefathers. I believe most reasonable people would say violence advocated against innocent people was not the intention of our forefathers, thus this conclusion would leave open the debate that many current politicians are not reasonable people and/or have been ‘bought’ by professional lobbyists within CAIR and similar Muslim Brotherhood organizations. Their personal agenda is leaving our country vulnerable to attack from within.

FP: Final thoughts on the Ft. Hood tragedy?

Gaubatz: Expect more. Israel has endured ‘suicide/attacks’ similar to this for many years. Malik Nabal Hasan is a terrorist supporting the ideology of Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, and yes, CAIR. In Palestine, the leaders send out the young and vulnerable to carry out the murders in the name of Islam. The same is happening in America.

Support organizations such as ACT! for America because these Americans are educating themselves about such organizations as CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood. They are great people who care about our country and the innocent people worldwide. I encourage everyone to not only read the book Muslim Mafia, but to conduct their own research of the information outlined in the book. Paul Sperry did an outstanding job. Provide a copy to your local politicians and law enforcement officials and ask them what they are doing to protect innocent people in their localities from the Muslim Brotherhood ideology.

FP: Dave Gaubatz, thank you for joining us, for your courage to tell the truth, and for standing up for America.

Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Dave Gaubatz, the first U.S. civilian (1811) Federal Agent deployed to Iraq in 2003. He is the owner of DG Counter-terrorism Publishing. He is currently conducting a 50 State Counter-terrorism Research Tour (CTRT). He is the co-author (with Paul Sperry) of the new book, Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld that’s Conspiring to Islamize America. He can be contacted at davegaubatz@gmail.com.

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk