• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

In recent weeks, abject intel failures in America, Britain and France have proved deadly. Associated Press reported that at the “Boston Marathon, in the streets of London and in the shadow of one of Paris’ most recognizable monuments,” Muslims “carried out jihadi attacks with little help, using inexpensive, widely available knives and explosives from everyday ingredients. In each of the attacks, suspects had previously been flagged to law enforcement and deemed not to be a priority.”

A French government report that has just recently been released shows the breadth of this intelligence failure. A French academic, Mathieu Guidere, explained that the West’s intelligence agencies were “not originally made for fighting against this kind of threat. They’re intended to fight against cells, against groups, against organizations, but not against individuals. It’s a question of adapting. That’s why there are the same errors in Boston, London and France. There was identification – but not detention – before the suspects passed into the realm of action.”

However, David Omand, Britain’s former security and intelligence coordinator, disagreed, saying that “no reliable psychological test or checklist has been devised that can predict when such an individual may tip over into actually taking violent action. Short of a police state on East German lines the number of such individuals who can be subject to very intensive surveillance sufficient to detect preparations for violent action is but a small proportion of the total – and of course individuals can flip quickly even where they have been checked out previously.”

It’s true that Western intelligence officials don’t have a “reliable psychological test or checklist” to ferret out jihadists, whether or not one can be devised. France’s highest security official, Manuel Valls, complained that the Paris jihad attacker “simply didn’t ‘fit the profile of a jihadist.’”

I disagree. All of the Muslims involved in these attacks absolutely fit the profile of an operational jihadist. The question is, who determines what the profile of a jihadist is? Are intelligence officials in Britain, France and the United States consulting with experts on jihad like Robert Spencer or Ibn Warraq? No. So of course they get it wrong. Barack Obama scrubbed all counter-terror materials and training of jihad and Islam – how can an accurate profile of a jihadist be rendered by American intelligence officials? Last week, Obama recommended that to prevent “violent extremism” inspired by violent jihadists, intel agencies must work with Muslim groups (the same groups that work to dismantle counter-jihad programs) “to identify signs of radicalization and partner with law enforcement when an individual is drifting toward violence.”

Historically, they oppose us. They protest our freedom rallies. The Daily Mail reported Monday that the jihad murderer Mujahid Adebolajo “was among hundreds of young Muslims who gathered outside Harrow Central Mosque in North-West London” on Sept. 11, 2009, so as to “‘defend’ it against a planned joint protest by the English Defence League and Stop the Islamisation of Europe group.” The jihad murderer was protesting our group – in the company of numerous Muslim “moderates” who deplored our “Islamophobia.”

But where are their protests, beyond simple press statements, against how the Islamic jihadists have used the texts and teachings of Islam to justify the jihad murders in Boston and London? Where are the protests against the Quranic texts and teachings that command jihad? This is who Obama is advising us to count on?

The mainstream jihad-sympathizing AP is reporting that in the wake of the Boston, London and Paris attacks in the past month intelligence agencies are struggling to access red flags.

It is not difficult. We outline the program in our AFDI 18-point platform:

  • AFDI calls for profiling of Muslims at airports and in hiring in professions in which national security and public safety could be compromised.
  • AFDI calls for immediate investigation into foreign mosque funding in the West and for new legislation making foreign funding of mosques in non-Muslim nations illegal.
  • AFDI calls for surveillance of mosques and regular inspections of mosques in the U.S. and other non-Muslim nations to look for pro-violence materials. Any mosque advocating jihad or any aspects of Shariah that conflict with constitutional freedoms and protections should be closed.
  • AFDI calls for curriculum and Islam-related materials in textbooks and museums to describe the Islamic doctrine and history accurately, including its violent doctrines and 1,400-year war against unbelievers.
  • AFDI calls for a halt of foreign aid to Islamic nations with Shariah-based constitutions and/or governments.
  • AFDI denounces the use of Shariah law in any Western court or nation.
  • AFDI advocates deportation hearings against non-citizens who promote jihad in our nations.
  • AFDI calls for an immediate halt of immigration by Muslims into nations that do not currently have a Muslim majority population.
  • AFDI calls for laws providing that anyone seeking citizenship in the United States should be asked if he or she supports Shariah law, and investigated for ties to pro-Shariah groups. If so, citizenship should not be granted.
  • AFDI calls for the cancellation of citizenship or permanent residency status for anyone who leaves the country of his residence to travel for the purpose of engaging in jihad activity, and for the refusal of re-entry into his country of residence after that jihad activity.
  • AFDI calls for careful investigation of Muslims resident in non-Muslim countries who have obtained naturalized citizenship or permanent residency status, to ensure that that status was not obtained under false pretenses.

If these steps were implemented, the jihad in the West would be stopped in its tracks.

 

 

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.