Shariah: The Threat to America

Shariah: The Threat to America
An Exercise in Competitive Analysis

The following information is extensive, with more credibility than all the conspiracy theories, celebrity pundits and mainstream media opinions combined and ...has been happening under Americans noses for years.

This is no time to be naive. Americans need to set aside politics and the opinions of 'celebrity pundits' to take time, study and understand realities posing a grave and well documented threat to the lives of innocent citizens even unto children as the world witnessed in Boston.

In the wake of the Boston Marathon bombing and in as much as America is fighting against elected officials determined to undermine National Security,  the founding principles and Constitution of the United States, we must also be vigilant in understanding threats against America working behind the scenes.

Before any updates, this article was first written in 2010. Statistically, the majority of readers only look at the pictures rather than read the article and watch the videos within. 

As current events unfold in 2013, readers should understand the warnings researchers have been giving Americans well before now.

Boston Marathon bomber's mosque long a lightning rod for criticism
Published April 24, 2013

'The mosque where at least one of the two suspected Boston Marathon bombers prayed has a controversial history, with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, terror funding and frequent fiery sermons, according to a group that has long monitored the house of worship.

“This is a radical mosque,” Dennis Hale, of a Boston-based group called Americans for Peace and Tolerance, said of the Islamic Society of Boston.'

With much gratitude The Endrun Project has the fortunate opportunity of having friends and associates offer information and support relevant to our research and concern for America's National Security and future as well as global security and future of Humanity itself.

The following excerpts in part, by expressed permission from:

Copyright © 2010 Center for Security Policy
October 2010 Edition

The relationship of Jihad and Sharia

The Arabic word “shariah,” according to one modern English- language student textbook on Islam, “literally means a straight path (Quran 45:18) or an endless supply of water. It is the term used to describe the rules of the lifestyle (Deen) ordained for us by Allah. In more practical terms, shariah includes all the do’s and don’ts of Islam.”

Shariah contains categories and subjects of Islamic law called the branches of fiqh (literally, “understanding”). They include Islamic worship, family relations, inheritance, commerce, property law, civil (tort) law, criminal law, administration, taxation, constitution, international relations, war and ethics, and other categories.

Much can be said about the brutally repressive, even totalitarian
character of shariah with its harsh treatment of women, homosexuals, Jews and other “infidels,” apostates and petty criminals, among others. Shariah is wholly at odds with U.S. national sovereignty, the U.S. Constitution, and the liberties it guarantees.

Jihad in the form of violent acts, often referred to by some as “kinetic” jihad, dominates the attention of those responsible for national and homeland security. But the more dangerous threat, especially in the long run, is what the Muslim Brotherhood calls “civilization jihad” – a form of warfare that Robert Spencer has
more popularly dubbed “stealth jihad.

Robert Spencer:


Successfully assuring American security in the face of a determined jihadist effort to destroy this country will depend in part on an understanding of several attributes inherent in this seditious doctrine that have direct bearing on the character and insidiousness of the threat.

Official U.S. doctrine on threat development requires that threat assessment begin with an unconstrained analysis of the enemy’s stated threat doctrine. The first two sections of this report make plain that it is possible to know the enemy and his intentions with certitude.

If adherents to shariah have sworn to destroy us, it is their doctrine we are required to know. Whether that doctrine is judged by us to be accurate, appropriate or even identifiable with “genuine” Islam is wholly irrelevant. If it can be demonstrated that the enemy that attacks and kills Americans and seeks to subvert our Constitution refers to and relies on this doctrine to guide and justify his actions, then that is all that matters in terms of the enemy threat doctrine U.S. civilian and military leaders must thoroughly understand and orient upon for the purpose of defeating such foes. (It is only in what the military calls the “course of action” development phase that issues concerning the actual validity of the threats adherence to Islamic law entails come into play.)

Failing to orient on an enemy’s self-identified doctrines not only violates our own doctrine on threat analysis but renders us unable to defeat the enemy because we have failed properly to identify him. As noted at the beginning of this report, such failure defies the rules of warfare reaching back to Sun Tzu on the requirement to “know the enemy.” It also completely defies common sense and the canons of professional conduct of our leadership.

Sacred Space

The concept of “sacred space” is well-developed in shariah,
which centuries of commentary have established as authoritative.

Indeed, shariah is an aggressively territorial system that holds all land on earth has been given by Allah to Muslims in perpetuity:

Since the world already belongs in its entirety to Muslims – whether currently in reality or prospectively – they are both destined and obligated to dominate it.

Land already conquered and occupied by Muslims as well as any space ever gained in the past for the forces of the faith are waqf and considered sacred ground, endowed by Allah to the ummah or Muslim people forever. If ever such space has been lost, it is the duty of all Muslims to regain it, by jihad, if necessary.

Chechnya, the State of Israel, Iberian Peninsula (or al-Andalus), and Indian subcontinent (Hind) are all examples of such territory, once conquered by the armies of Islam but now under the control of non-Muslims (infidels, or kuffar). In keeping with the shariah principle of sacred space, each of these places is to remain the target of declarations of ownership by the forces of jihad and repeated terrorist attacks and plots by Muslim jihadis intent upon returning them to the Dar al-Islam.

Sacralizing new or reclaimed territory for Islam is an ongoing venture in which migrant and converted Muslim communities in the West are constantly engaged, according to Patrick Sookhdeo, who has written extensively about the concept of Sacred Space in Islam.

Such Muslims may first sacralize the spaces within their own homes and mosques while later generations typically move outward to claim an ever-expanding share of the public space.

This Muslim mission to sacralize new physical ground for Islam has been especially obvious in Europe. There gigantic mosques (some have been dubbed “mega-mosques”) have been going up across the continent since the mid-20th century, when infusions of Saudi oil money began to make such massive buildings possible. The mosques, with their towering minarets, attest in a deliberately physical way to the presence and dominance of Islam. As Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated in 1998, “The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets, and the faithful our soldiers.”

The neighborhoods around such mosques often are purchased in an incremental way, too, gradually expanding to encompass apartment buildings and even entire city blocks occupied exclusively by Muslims. This tactic (in the U.S.) often involves Muslim real estate agents who ensure that homes occupied by Muslims will always be occupied by Muslim families. By establishing such a network of Muslim-controlled space, in which adherence to shariah is enforced and from which non-Muslims are excluded, Islamic communities seek the ability to live in imitation of Mohammed and the earliest Muslims after the hijra (the move from Mecca to Medina). Muslims also demonstrate their dominance by requiring non-Muslims who may be permitted access to such areas to comply with shariah while in Muslim space.

In many cases, as these segregated areas expand, they become not only ghettos where crime flourishes among an immigrant population that refuses to assimilate, but actual sacred space where shariah is practiced in contravention and supersession of local law. All too often, as is the case in France and elsewhere, such enclaves are avoided by the security forces, which literally cede sovereignty by abrogating their duty to enforce local law in such areas.

The concept of sacred space also explains why Muslims who conquer enemy territory traditionally erect mosques and Islamic centers literally on top of the destroyed sacred places of other faiths. Examples of this practice include: the great Hagia Sophia mosque in Istanbul (formerly the Cathedral of St. Sophia in Constantinople); the al-Aqsa Mosque and Dome of the Rock Mosque, both built on Jerusalem’s Temple Mount, directly above the remnants of the Jewish Second Temple; and the Cordoba mosque complex – the third largest in the world – which transformed a Christian cathedral in the capital city of the Moorish kingdom. The city was conquered in the 8th Century and was the headquarters of what came to be known as the “Cordoba Caliphate” for the next 500 years.

Most recently, plans were announced to construct a $100 million, 13-story Islamic center and mega-mosque complex two blocks from Ground Zero in New York City, the site of the World Trade Center, which was destroyed in jihadi attacks on September 11, 2001.

The name of the organization leading the Ground Zero mosque project is likewise revealing of Islamic traditions: it is called the “Cordoba Initiative.”

Sometimes, mere proximity to Muslims’ sacred space, where displays of Islamic supremacy are expected, is sufficient to compel Westerners to censor their speech or alter their behavior or dress. Examples include female journalists who don a headscarf for an interview with a Muslim personage and Western political figures who do the same thing, even when they are visiting Muslim heads of state whose own wives do not wear the hijab. This sort of behavior demonstrates a kind of pre-emptive submission on the part of non-Muslim Westerners who adopt a subservient mentality of dhimmitude, erroneously believing their diplomacy, interview or outreach will go the better for it.

Background of The Report Shariah: The Threat to America

On September 15, 2010 the Center for Security Policy presented its Team B II Report, Shariah: The Threat to America, to Congressmen Trent Franks and Pete Hoekstra on Capitol Hill. Present at the event were Team B II members Frank Gaffney, Andy McCarthy, Lt. Gen. Soyster (Ret.), David Yerushalmi, Amb. Hank Cooper, Michael Del Rosso, Christine Brim, Stephen Coughlin, John Guandolo, Adm. "Ace" Lyons, Tom Trento, Patrick Poole, Clare Lopez, and Diana West.

The video discusses the position the Obama administration has taken concerning the expansion of Sharia in America.

The video of the press conference is below.

Read the entire report

Shariah-The Threat to America


Copyright © 2010 Center for Security Policy
October 2010 Edition

'At some point, ... it will be too late for effective political action. ... there reaches a point where it won’t matter who’s president and it won’t matter how devoted Congress is, the damage will be out of control.

A message to Humanity: 

Wherever you are ...whatever your focus, faith or belief ...notwithstanding, politics, religion, the war in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran, the emergence of China, the Arab Spring, the collapsing global economy or conspiracy theories ... sooner than one realizes (if not directly feeling the impact) ...all eyes will be on events surrounding Israel.

We know of these things ...but do we really understand them?

Through examining the scope of events, one can see how the pieces are falling together. 

One could ask, where Israel isn't even remotely associated with Arab protests in North Africa and the Middle East (including Egypt and Syria), how can any conclusion be drawn on Israel being relevant?

'At some point, ... it will be too late for effective political action. ... there reaches a point where it won’t matter who’s president and it won’t matter how devoted the global community is ...the damage will be out of control


Is this you?

God gave us common sense and a conscientious for a reason if we choose not to use them we pay the consequences as we are NOW.

There is a price to pay for this...

3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. 5 But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist
; 2 Timothy 4, 3-5
But you are not called to be foolish. 

Stay vigilant ...the picture will become even clearer as events of 2012 continue to unfold.

**He who has ears, let him hear... Endrun Project Post: **November 3, 2010: Now What?'


Watch out that no one deceives you! Matthew 24 



Related Articles

To understand why these articles are frequented by governments, world leaders and global journalists, new readers, journalists, political or 'religious' 'pundits' are encouraged to set aside failing 'conventional wisdom', read between the lines and connect the dots.

Contents are documented with current events
, vetted sources and minimal speculation.

Read also: