Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Il Pentagono si prepara alla guerra contro l'Islam?

Siamo alla fase 1) (Capire il nemico)
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20539
The Pentagon Breaks the Islam Taboo	
By Paul Sperry
FrontPageMagazine.com | December 14, 2005
Washington's policy-makers have been careful in the war on terror to 
distinguish between Islam and the terrorists. The distinction has 
rankled conservatives who see scarce difference.
A little-noticed speech by President Bush in October gave them some 
hope. In a major rhetorical shift, he described the enemy as "Islamic 
radicals" and not just "terrorists," although he still denies that 
radicalism has anything to do with their religion.
Now for the first time, a key Pentagon intelligence agency involved in 
homeland security is delving into Islam's holy texts to answer whether 
Islam is being radicalized by the terrorists or is already radical. 
Military brass want a better understanding of what's motivating the 
insurgents in Iraq and the terrorists around the globe, including those 
inside America who may be preparing to strike domestic military bases. 
The enemy appears indefatigable, even more active now than before 9/11.
Are the terrorists really driven by self-serving politics and personal 
demons? Or are they driven by religion? And if it's religion, are they 
following a manual of war contained in their scripture?
Answers are hard to come by. Four years into the war on terror, U.S. 
intelligence officials tell me there are no baseline studies of the 
Muslim prophet Muhammad or his ideological or military doctrine found at 
either the CIA or Defense Intelligence Agency, or even the war colleges.
But that is slowly starting to change as the Pentagon develops a new 
strategy to deal with the threat from Islamic terrorists through its 
little-known intelligence agency called the Counterintelligence Field 
Activity or CIFA, which staffs hundreds of investigators and analysts to 
help coordinate Pentagon security efforts at home and abroad. CIFA also 
supports Northern Command in Colorado, which was established after 9/11 
to help military forces react to terrorist threats in the continental United
States.
Dealing with the threat on a tactical and operational level through 
counterstrikes and capture has proven only marginally successful. Now 
military leaders want to combat it from a strategic standpoint, using 
informational warfare, among other things. A critical part of that 
strategy involves studying Islam, including the Quran and the hadiths, 
or traditions of Muhammad.
"Today we are confronted with a stateless threat that does not have at 
the strategic level targetable entities: no capitals, no economic base, 
no military formations or installations," states a new Pentagon briefing 
paper I've obtained. "Yet political Islam wages an ideological battle 
against the non-Islamic world at the tactical, operational and strategic 
level. The West's response is focused at the tactical and operation 
level, leaving the strategic level -- Islam -- unaddressed."
So far the conclusions of intelligence analysts assigned to the project, 
who include both private contractors and career military officials, 
contradict the commonly held notion that Islam is a peaceful religion 
hijacked or distorted by terrorists. They've found that the terrorists 
for the most part are following a war-fighting doctrine articulated 
through Muhammad in the Quran, elaborated on in the hadiths, codified in 
Islamic or sharia law, and reinforced by recent interpretations or fatwahs.
"Islam is an ideological engine of war (Jihad)," concludes the sensitive 
Pentagon briefing paper. And "no one is looking for its off switch."
Why? One major reason, the briefing states, is government-wide 
"indecision [over] whether Islam is radical or being radicalized."
So, which is it? "Strategic themes suggest Islam is radical by nature," 
according to the briefing, which goes on to cite the 26 chapters of the 
Quran dealing with violent jihad and the examples of the Muslim prophet, 
who it says sponsored "terror and slaughter" against unbelievers.
"Muhammad's behaviors today would be defined as radical," the defense 
document says, and Muslims today are commanded by their "militant" holy 
book to follow his example. It adds: Western leaders can no longer 
afford to overlook the "cult characteristics of Islam."
It also ties Muslim charity to war. Zakat, the alms-giving pillar of 
Islam, is described in the briefing as "an asymmetrical war-fighting 
funding mechanism." Which in English translates to: combat support under 
the guise of tithing. Of the eight obligatory categories of disbursement 
of Muslim charitable donations, it notes that two are for funding jihad, 
or holy war. Indeed, authorities have traced millions of dollars 
received by major jihadi terror groups like Hamas and al-Qaida back to 
Saudi and other foreign Isamic charities and also U.S. Muslim charities, 
such as the Holy Land Foundation.
According to the Quran, jihad is not something a Muslim can opt out of. 
It demands able-bodied believers join the fight. Those unable -- women 
and the elderly -- are not exempt; they must give "asylum and aid" 
(Surah 8:74) to those who do fight the unbelievers in the cause of Allah.
In analyzing the threat on the domestic front, the Pentagon briefing 
draws perhaps its most disturbing conclusions. It argues the U.S. has 
not suffered from scattered insurgent attacks -- as opposed to the 
concentrated and catastrophic attack by al-Qaida on 9-11 -- in large 
part because it has a relatively small Muslim population. But that could 
change as the Muslim minority grows and gains more influence.
The internal document explains that Islam divides offensive jihad into a 
"three-phase attack strategy" for gaining control of lands for Allah. 
The first phase is the "Meccan," or weakened, period, whereby a small 
Muslim minority asserts itself through largely peaceful and political 
measures involving Islamic NGOs -- such as the Islamic Society of North 
America, which investigators say has its roots in the militant Muslim 
Brotherhood, and Muslim pressure groups, such as the Council on 
American-Islamic Relations, whose leaders are on record expressing their 
desire to Islamize America.
In the second "preparation" phase, a "reasonably influential" Muslim 
minority starts to turn more militant. The briefing uses Britain and the 
Netherlands as examples.
And in the final jihad period, or "Medina Stage," a large minority uses 
its strength of numbers and power to rise up against the majority, as 
Muslim youth recently demonstrated in terrorizing France, the Pentagon 
paper notes.
It also notes that unlike Judaism and Christianity, Islam advocates 
expansion by force. The final command of jihad, as revealed to Muhammad 
in the Quran, is to conquer the world in the name of Islam. The defense 
briefing adds that Islam is also unique in classifying unbelievers as 
"standing enemies against whom it is legitimate to wage war."
Right now political leaders don't understand the true nature of the 
threat,\ it says, because the intelligence community has yet to educate 
them. They still think Muslim terrorists, even suicide bombers, are 
mindless "criminals" motivated by "hatred of our freedoms," rather than 
religious zealots motivated by their faith. And as a result, we have no 
real strategic plan for winning a war against jihadists.
Even many intelligence analysts and investigators working in the field 
with the Joint Terrorism Task Forces have a shallow understanding of Islam.
"I don't like to criticize our intelligence services, because we did win 
the Cold War," says a Northern Command intelligence official. "However, 
all of these organizations have made only limited progress adjusting to 
the current threat or the sharing of information."
Why? "All suffer heavily from political correctness," he explains.
PC still infects the Pentagon, four years after jihadists hit the 
nation's military headquarters.
"A lot of folks here have a very pedestrian understanding of Islam and 
the Islamic threat," a Pentagon intelligence analyst working on the 
project told me. "We're getting Islam 101, and we need Islam 404."
The hardest part of formulating a strategic response to the threat is 
defining Islam as a political and military enemy. Once that 
psychological barrier has been crossed, defense sources tell me, the 
development of countermeasures -- such as educating the public about the 
militant nature of Islam and exploiting "critical vulnerabilities" or 
rifts within the Muslim faith and community -- can begin.
"Most Americans don't realize we are in a war of survival -- a war that 
is going to continue for decades," the Northcom official warns.
It remains to be seen, however, whether our PC-addled political leaders 
would ever adopt such controversial measures.


non gli sono baste le bastonate che ha prese.
Vogliono le altre!!!
sadomaso 


La deficence yankee si sta svegliando.
Sono ancora convinti di aver vinto la guerra fredda, pia illusione.
Stanno allargando l'impero ovunque, poveretti.
E non hanno neanche alba di chi siano gli islamici.
Con cui collaborano da anni e tuttora.
Non e' mai troppo tardi, ma li vedo sprofondare nelle sabbie mobili al
petrolio, triste fine per una nazione che anni fa ammiravo.
Saluti Cad Ali'
--
Dalla sura * della Conversione*..............
"Combattete coloro che non credono in Allah e nell'Ultimo Giorno, che non
vietano quello che Allah e il Suo Messaggero hanno vietato, e quelli, tra la
gente della Scrittura  che non scelgono la religione della verità, finchè
non versino umilmente il tributo, e siano soggiogati" (Sura 9:29).
"Se non vi lancerete nella lotta, Allah vi castigherà con doloroso castigo e
vi sostituirà con un altro popolo, mentre voi non potrete nuocergli in
nessun modo" (Sura 9:39).
"Uccidete gli idolatri ovunque li troviate, fateli prigionieri, assediateli
e combatteteli con ogni genere di tranelli" (Corano 9,5).
"Combatti quelli che non credono in Allah... combattete finchè non paghino
con umiliazione il tributo" (Corano 9,29).


In italiano si dice masochista...
Raffaele

 petrolio, triste fine per una nazione che anni fa ammiravo.
Non ci contare particolarmente.
Non ho dati precisi, solo intuizioni e interpretazioni di pochi dati di 
fatto.
Ma se i pozzi petroliferi dell'Arabia Saudita cominciano a non essere 
più appetibili come lo erano una volta, la tolleranza che gli USA hanno 
per i sauditi calerà vistosamente.
Già adesso ci sono mosse che non presagiscono nulla di buono per i sauditi.
Tutto messo sotto sordina, perché il petrolio è un fattore fondamentale; 
ma non durerà in eterno.
Quelli presi male sono i sauditi:
1) Hanno una demografia sballatissima
2) Hanno un reddito medio in calo da decenni
3) Hanno un popolo pieno di ignoranti incapaci di lavorare e non 
interessati a farlo
Tolto il petrolio valgono anche meno dell'Africa Sub sahariana.
Mirco