Force Protection

I could have commemorated 9-11 by recalling my personal experiences with the events of that dreadful day, but I have covered that topic sufficiently in the past. And rather than reprise the history of our response — which others can do much better than I can — I’d like to take a look at what has really been happening to us over the past nine years.

First, the facts.

On September 11th, 2001, nineteen Middle Eastern Muslims, grouped in four separate teams (or cells), used jetliners to kill almost three thousand people in New York, Pennsylvania, and Northern Virginia. Their self-identified reason for committing these atrocities was that they were fighting jihad against unbelievers in the cause of Allah.

The “magnificent nineteen” were devoted followers of Islamic law, or sharia. According to the standard canons of sharia as taught in all four schools of Sunni jurisprudence (and also by Shi’ite doctrine), it is the duty of all able-bodied adult Muslims to wage jihad against the infidel, or to materially support those who do so.

The above summary is not in dispute. This formulation enjoys the consensus of the scholars within Islam, and is taught in officially-approved Islamic schools from Djakarta to Casablanca, and even in London and Houston. It is not “extreme”, but standard, mainstream Islamic law.

Next, let’s consider two videos, each of which shows an excerpt from a recent news story. The first is from a joint press conference held by President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan and President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono of Indonesia about Koran burning:


President Karzai experienced the Florida church's plan to burn Korans (which was later cancelled) as an insult to 1.4 billion Muslims. President Yudhoyono urged the US government to take action to prevent the burning. Both statesmen obviously felt that this was a matter that should be of official — and punitive — concern to President Obama and the United States government.

The second video is a CNN report about a potential problem in Afghanistan, which was handled adroitly by the U.S. military authorities:


So the United States is required to protect the lives of its troops serving in Afghanistan by:

1.		Making sure that no Americans burn Korans, and
2.		Burning Bibles.

Hmm… What’s wrong with this picture?

And what conclusions can we draw from it?

Now, we can certainly say that Islam is violent and barbaric, that Muslims are intolerant and exhibit a double standard, and that our leaders are craven appeasers who invariably cave in to Islamic extortion. All of these assertions are true, but virtually everyone reading this post has already been there, done that. So let’s not bother rehashing it all.

The most important conclusions to be drawn from these news stories are the following:
- - - - - - - - -

1.		The Muslim world is demanding that the United States enforce sharia law, both in Afghanistan and within its own borders.
2.		The United States is actively and willingly complying with this demand.
3.		American officials are unaware of #1 and #2, with the exception of highly-placed agents of the Muslim Brotherhood (and possibly President Barack Hussein Obama).

The desired goal of both jihad and da’wa (Islamic proselytization) is to induce the nations of the unbelievers to obey sharia law. Jihad is the sharp end of the spear, and will be used when necessary, but da’wa is the preferred technique, because it is less costly — and, when dealing with powerful but gullible Westerners, it is much easier to accomplish.

In other words, by its own standards, the Muslim Brotherhood is now approaching victory against the infidels of the West, and the kafir doesn’t realize that he is being beaten, nor does he understand the nature of the war that is being fought. With the United States in voluntary submission — even as it fights “terrorism” and “violent extremists” abroad — Islam is more than halfway towards its goal.

All this, mind you, without engaging in a shooting war, without doing battle with the enemy, without levying a single company of soldiers. Terrorist attacks serve both as diversions and as a threat: a few suicide attacks are enough to persuade frightened Western leaders to lie down and expose their naked underbellies to the scimitars of the hosts of Mohammed.

When examined in this light — by the standards of Islam itself — this is a magnificent achievement, one of the greatest victories in the history of warfare.

How is this possible? How could such a thing come about?

Islam has had fourteen hundred years to refine its techniques of stealth, deception, infiltration, sabotage, and demoralization. These are the preferred techniques of a weaker and devious power against a stronger but naïve enemy.

As Dr. John J. Dziak described in his recent article, the behavior of the Ummah bears all the hallmarks of what he calls the counterintelligence state. Subterfuge and covert operations are the natural métier of Islam, especially when it is surrounded by more powerful infidel nations.

These successful techniques bear a strong resemblance to those used by the Communists in the mid-20th century:

• They are international in scope, transcending national boundaries and languages.
  
• Their clandestine networks are guided and funded by shadowy, secret central groups abroad.
  
• The dissemination of propaganda and disinformation is a central strategy for their cause.
  
• They are aided and abetted by apologists and fellow travelers in the West.
  
• One of the prime vectors for the spread of their contagion is the Academy.

This is no coincidence. Not only did al-Banna, Qutb, Qaradawi, and many other members of the Muslim Brotherhood borrow techniques and methodologies from the Soviets, but Islamic ideology lends itself naturally to these sorts of practices. Any inherently totalitarian ideology — which Islam most certainly is — inevitably tends to form a counterintelligence state.

So the structure and function of the international networks of the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates are uncannily like those of the Comintern. They engage in the time-honored practices of misdirection and obfuscation — kitman and taqiyya — which are eerily evocative of the classic KGB playbook:

1.				provocation (provokatsiya)
2.				penetration (proniknoveniye)
3.				fabrication (fabrikatsiya)
4.				diversion (diversiya)
5.				agent of influence (agent vliyaniya or agent po vliyaniyu)
6.				clandestine work (konspiratsiya)
7.				disinformation (dezinformatsiya)
8.				wet affairs (mokrye dela)
9.				direct action (aktivnyye akty)
10.				combination (kombinatsiya)

When contemplating the actions of Muslim agents in the West, it is important to keep these ten categories in mind. Those which involve violence — wet affairs and active measures — are reserved for the final jihad phase of operations, when the enemy has already fallen to his knees and is ready to have his head lopped off.

But the others — disinformation, provocation, penetration, diversion, conspiracy, and all the rest — are routinely and repeatedly employed against us to good effect. And all indications are that the national security community — at least at the highest levels, where it interfaces with our political leadership — is completely clueless about the whole thing.

We are pursuing the goal of “force protection” by instituting what the enemy openly states as his war aim: the institution of sharia law in the nations of the West.

This is not just stupid. It is insane.

While we play these idiotic ideological games about “violent extremism” and “the hijacking of a noble religion” and “showing respect for Muslims” — all of which terms are disinformation planted through conspiracy by agents who have engaged in successful penetration — the enemy is employing the entire arsenal of the counterintelligence state to defeat us handily.

Until we consciously adopt the counterintelligence mindset, and are ready to think and act on the same terms, we haven’t a prayer of winning.


Hat tips: DF for the Karzai/Bambang video, Vlad Tepes for YouTubing it.