Slick jihadis: The many tools ISIS uses

It is a fact that we are at war Islamic terror right here on American soil, yet most people don't recognize it yet. We see terrorist attacks like the one in Paris and react by putting up signs on Facebook that say "je suis Charlie Hebdo." People return to the Boston Marathon to stand up to terror. However, we don't see those attacks as akin to Pear Harbor. The vast majority, whether it is the media or politicians, seem to be focused on the act of terrorism without seeing, and dealing with, the truth of the matter: We are being attacked by an enemy that considers itself war with the West. In their eyes, we are afraid to fight back, or worse, leaders are complicit and will not fight back.

The war against Western culture is being waged in a new way, and if we don't wake up we will have lost before we have even started to fight back. The U.S. is sending bombers "over there" to "degrade" an enemy we know little about. There are food drops to Kurds. There are weapons sales to those who pledge to fight ISIS in the Middle East. The U.S. supported attacks on Assad in Syria, but now defend him. However, the war isn't just in Iraq, Yemen and Syria. It is right here at home on our streets and on our social media.

The war is being fought in slick media that includes publications, YouTube, Facebook and Twitter. There is person-to-person recruitment in prisons and on college campuses as well as in some mosques. There is also political pressure, whether it is campaign contributions or organizing marches and cries of discrimination.

Physical terror attacks are the ones that most easily catch the attention of the public. Cyber attacks have made front-page news in the new year. One of the most obvious was the hack of the Central Command Twitter account.

ISIS has replaced al-Qaida as our bogyman of choice due in great part to high-profile news coverage. While news agencies are now focused almost exclusively on ISIS, there may be more actors that should be of concern. There are cells in the U.S. and Mexico along their northern border just as ISIS has cells in Europe. Active groups in the Americas are being openly sheltered in Venezuela and Paraguay. Other sleeper groups are in Brazil, Mexico and probably other places in the Americas. The cells in the Americas are primarily backed by Iran.

TRENDING: Trump takes detour in middle of speech, absolutely tears 'dumb son of a b****' Mitch McConnell

In 2010 the hacker group LulzSec hacked into Arizona Department of Public Safety computers and revealed an internal memo from the Tucson Police Department that showed organizing and direction of would-be jihadis in the U.S. being run from Mexico. Mexican authorities arrested Jameel Nasr in Tijuana, Baja California. Nasr was tasked with establishing the Hezbollah network in Mexico and throughout South America. In New York City the arrest of Jamal Yousef exposed a weapons cache of 100 M-16 assault rifles, 100 AR-15 rifles, 2,500 hand grenades, C4 explosives and antitank munitions. According to Yousef, the weapons, which were being stored in Mexico, had been stolen from Iraq with the help of his cousin who was a member of Hezbollah.

Whether it is Europe or the U.S., Islamists' primary efforts for recruitment are aimed at Muslim teens and young men in the 20s and early 30s they call a "third generation." These young men feel alienated from the countries to which their parents and grandparents immigrated. A significant group of these men feel marginalized within their own country and have no experience of any other. Thus, the IT program is probably more important to recruitment than any physical attacks at this time. While these young men have few skills, one of the efforts is aimed at the putting members of this third generation together with veteran jihadists – men like Abdelkader Hakimi. Now 48, Hakimi left prison in 2011 after serving time for terrorism. On Facebook last year he suggested he was in Aleppo, Syria.

Besides IT and media efforts, ISIS and Iran have implemented social programs in the U.S. and Europe. Both groups run sports and food programs aimed at the poorest young men in high Muslim population areas. Al-Qaida and Iran also provide clothing programs, giving trendy items to young men who could not otherwise hope to have branded sports shoes, sweatshirts and, of course, baseball caps. Prison programs like visitation to those who have no family are also important radicalization efforts. In the U.S. Iran has supported motorcycle gangs with training and importing specialized weapons for them. Unlike the concerns of U.S. government agencies, Iran smuggled weapons into California rather than taking them out of the country.

These efforts are just the beginning of the programs instituted by several jihadist groups. While violent attacks fill headlines, there are many more faces to this very real warfare. Whether our governments admit it or not, we are at war on our own ground with a very "Islamic State." It is a threat we must face.

How do we face it?

First off, Mr. President, and with all due respect, you cannot defeat an ideology unless you're willing to name it. In the past year, you have referred to the Islamic State, variously, as "not Islamic" and as al-Qaida's "JV team," statements that reflected confusion about the group and may have contributed to significant strategic errors. 

The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic. Yes, it has attracted psychopaths and adventure seekers, drawn largely from the disaffected populations of the Middle East and Europe. But the religion preached by its most ardent followers derives from coherent interpretations of Islam.

Virtually every major decision and law promulgated by the Islamic State adheres to what it calls, in its press and pronouncements, and on its billboards, license plates, stationery, and coins, "the Prophetic methodology," which means following the prophecy and example of Muhammad, in punctilious detail.

Muslims can reject the Islamic State; nearly all do. But pretending that it isn't actually a religious, millenarian group, with theology that must be understood to be combated, has already led the United States to underestimate it and back foolish schemes to counter it.

Mr. President: You will need to get acquainted with the Islamic State's intellectual genealogy if you are to react in a way that will not strengthen it, but instead help it self-immolate in its own excessive zeal.

Second, it is high time to resolve how best to defeat ISIS both on the battlefield and politically, rather than constantly debating how "Islamic" it is. There can be no doubt that ISIS is composed of fanatical Muslims who justify everything they do through a bizarre and vicious interpretation of Islam. To try to argue that because an organization's beliefs and practices are manifestly evil, they cannot be "Islamic" because Islam is good is understandable from a political and diplomatic point of view. But it is intellectually indefensible.



Third, Assad and ISIS are two sides of the same coin. Anyone who doesn't believe this is just either clueless or delusional. Same goes for al-Qaida and Iran. Talking about the latter, a bad deal is much worse than no deal, and I am afraid the deal the U.S. administration is currently negotiating with Iran is nothing but a nightmare.

Here's why:

• There will be no limits on Iran's ballistic-missile force, the presumed delivery means for its nuclear weapons. The U.S. position of seeking limits on the missile force was abandoned when the Supreme Leader objected.
• There will be no resolution of Iran's weaponization activities – described as "very alarming" by the Obama White House in November 2011 – before an agreement is reached. Iran is likely to promise once again to cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency in its investigation, but no serious observer would expect anything other than continued obstructionism by Iran. At one point, a resolution of weaponization activities was a precondition for an agreement. Now it is being treated as an implementation issue.
• Verification will likely be based primarily on Iran's current safeguards agreement and a promise to implement the Additional Protocol – a promise Iran first made over a decade ago. Even if the Additional Protocol is observed, inspections will be by "managed access" based on Iran's cooperation and good will. At one point, the U.S. insisted that effective verification required full access to facilities and people. Now, the U.S. and its P5+1 negotiating partners have settled for far less. There will be no unfettered inspections of suspected covert facilities such as the Lavizan-3 site recently revealed by the National Council of Resistance of Iran.

Bottom line: Preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear-weapons capability is the surest way to prevent war and preserve peace. To that end, the negotiators should return to the table insisting upon limits that will permanently block Iran's paths to nuclear weapons and resolve the IAEA's concerns about Tehran's nuclear-weapons work as a condition of an agreement.

The real choice is not between the administration's deal and war, but between preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and capitulation – and God knows what will surely happen if the U.S. ever capitulates.