MODERN HITLERS
SADDAM HUSSAIN
DR DAVID DUKE
MUAMMAR AL GHADDAFI
AHMEDI NEJAD
BAFS !
DANGER ROOMISRAEL'S WARS - NUKE MECCA HIROSHIMA TACTICS
U.S. Military Taught Officers: Use ‘Hiroshima’ Tactics for ‘Total War’ on Islam
- May 10, 2012 |
- 4:00 am |
- Categories: Crime and Homeland Security
Lt. Col. Matthew A. Dooley's Joint Staff Forces College presentation on "A Counter-Jihad Op Design Model" (.pdf) calls for violent measures in a war against Islam. (emphasis added)
A second slide from Lt. Col. Dooley's presentation (.pdf) mocks the idea of moderate Muslims.
John Guandolo offered to military officers this list of "Usual Responses From the Enemy When Presenting the Truth" (.pdf), asserting that Muslims are bent on world domination. (emphasis added)
A cartoon included in Shireen Burki's Joint Staff Forces College presentation on "Jihad: Defined and Operationalized" (.pdf) contains a number of ugly stereotypes.
John Guandolo's primer on "Understanding Shari'ah's Role in The War" (.pdf), distributed to students at the Joint Staff Forces College. (emphasis added)
Stephen Coughlin's presentation to the Joint Staff Forces College on "Imposing Islamic Law" (.pdf) began with a nod to Star Wars.
A later slide from Coughlin's presentation (.pdf) made fun of people who didn't see Islam in the same way he did.
John Guandolo's action items for military officers (.pdf) on what they can do to fight Guandolo's perceived enemies. (emphasis added)
The course, first reported by Danger Room last month and held at the Defense Department’s Joint Forces Staff College, has since been canceled by the Pentagon brass. It’s only now, however, that the details of the class have come to light. Danger Room received hundreds of pages of course material and reference documents from a source familiar with the contents of the class.
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff recently ordered the entire U.S. military to scour its training material to make sure it doesn’t contain similarly hateful material, a process that is still ongoing. But the officer who delivered the lectures, Army Lt. Col. Matthew A. Dooley, still maintains his position at the Norfolk, Virginia college, pending an investigation. The commanders, lieutenant colonels, captains and colonels who sat in Dooley’s classroom, listening to the inflammatory material week after week, have now moved into higher-level assignments throughout the U.S. military.
For the better part of the last decade, a small cabal of self-anointed counterterrorism experts has been working its way through the U.S. military, intelligence and law enforcement communities, trying to convince whoever it could that America’s real terrorist enemy wasn’t al-Qaida — but the Islamic faith itself. In his course, Dooley brought in these anti-Muslim demagogues as guest lecturers. And he took their argument to its final, ugly conclusion.
“We have now come to understand that there is no such thing as ‘moderate Islam,’” Dooley noted in a July 2011 presentation (.pdf), which concluded with a suggested manifesto to America’s enemies. “It is therefore time for the United States to make our true intentions clear. This barbaric ideology will no longer be tolerated. Islam must change or we will facilitate its self-destruction.”
Dooley could not be reached for comment. Joint Forces Staff College spokesman Steven Williams declined to discuss Dooley’s presentation or his status at the school. But when asked if Dooley was responsible for the course material, he responded, “I don’t know if I would classify him [Dooley] as responsible. That would be the commandant” of the school, Maj. Gen. Joseph Ward.
That makes the two-star general culpable for rather shocking material. In the same presentation, Dooley lays out a possible four-phase war plan to carry out a forced transformation of the Islam religion. Phase three includes possible outcomes like “Islam reduced to a cult status” and “Saudi Arabia threatened with starvation.” (It’s an especially ironic suggestion, in light of today’s news that Saudi intelligence broke up the most recent al-Qaida bombing plot.)
International laws protecting civilians in wartime are “no longer relevant,” Dooley continues. And that opens the possibility of applying “the historical precedents of Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki” to Islam’s holiest cities, and bringing about “Mecca and Medina['s] destruction.”
Dooley’s ideological allies have repeatedly stated that “mainstream” Muslims are dangerous, because they’re “violent” by nature. Yet only a few of al-Qaida’s most twisted fanatics were ever caught musing about wiping out entire cities.
“Some of these actions offered for consideration here will not be seen as ‘political correct’ in the eyes of many,” Dooley adds. “Ultimately, we can do very little in the West to decide this matter, short of waging total war.”
Dooley, who has worked at the Joint Forces Staff College since August 2010, began his eight-week class with a straightforward, two-part history of Islam. It was delivered by David Fatua, a former West Point history professor. “Unfortunately, if we left it at that, you wouldn’t have the proper balance of points of view, nor would you have an accurate view of how Islam defines itself,” Dooley told his students. Over the next few weeks, he invited in a trio of guest lecturers famous for their incendiary views of Islam.
Shireen Burki declared during the 2008 election that “Obama is bin Laden’s dream candidate.” In her Joint Forces Staff College lecture, she told students that “Islam is an Imperialist/Conquering Religion.” (.pdf)
Stephen Coughlin claimed in his 2007 master’s thesis that then-president George W. Bush’s declaration of friendship with the vast majority of the world’s Muslims had “a chilling effect on those tasked to define the enemy’s doctrine.” (.pdf) Coughlin was subsequently let go from his consulting position to the military’s Joint Staff, but he continued to lecture at the Naval War College and at the FBI’s Washington Field Office. In his talk to Dooley’s class (.pdf), Coughlin suggested that al-Qaida helped drive the overthrow of Egyptian strongman Hosni Mubarak and Libyan dictator Muammar Gadhafi. It was part of a scheme by Islamists to conquer the world, he added. And Coughlin mocked those who didn’t see this plot as clearly as he did, accusing them of “complexification.”
Coughlin titled his talk: “Imposing Islamic Law – or – These Aren’t the Droids Your Looking For!”
Former FBI employee John Guandolo told the conspiratorial World Net Daily website last year that Obama was only the latest president to fall under the influence of Islamic extremists. “The level of penetration in the last three administrations is deep,” Guandolo alleged. In his reference material for the Joint Forces Staff College class, Guandolo not only spoke of today’s Muslims as enemies of the West. He even justified the Crusades, writing that they “were initiated after hundreds of years of Muslim incursion into Western lands.”
Guandolo’s paper, titled “Usual Responses from the Enemy When Presented With the Truth” (.pdf), was one of hundreds of presentations, documents, videos and web links electronically distributed to the Joint Forces Staff College students. Included in that trove: a paper alleging that “it is a permanent command in Islam for Muslims to hate and despise Jews and Christians” (.pdf). So was a video lecture from Serge Trifkovic, a former professor who appeared as a defense witness in several trials of Bosnian Serb leaders convicted of war crimes, including the genocide of Muslims. A web link, titled “Watch Before This Is Pulled,” supposedly shows President Obama — the commander-in-chief of the senior officers attending the course — admitting that he’s a Muslim.
Dooley added the caveats that his views are “not the Official Policy of the United States Government” and are intended “to generate dynamic discussion and thought.” But he taught his fellow military officers that Obama’s alleged admission could well make the commander in chief some sort of traitor. “By conservative estimates,” 10 percent of the world’s Muslims, “a staggering 140 million people … hate everything you stand for and will never coexist with you, unless you submit” to Islam. He added, “Your oath as a professional soldier forces you to pick a side here.” It is unclear if Dooley’s “total war” on Muslims also applied to his “Muslim” commander in chief.
After the Pentagon brass learned of Dooley’s presentation, the country’s top military officer, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey, issued an order to every military chief and senior commander to get rid of any similar anti-Islam instructional material. Dempsey issued the order because the White House had already instructed the entire security apparatus of the federal government — military and civilian — to revamp its counterterrorism training after learning of FBI material that demonized Islam.
By then, Dooley had already presented his apocalyptic vision for a global religious war. Flynn has ordered a senior officer, Army Maj. Gen. Frederick Rudesheim, to investigate how precisely Dooley managed to get away with that extended presentation in an official Defense Department-sanctioned course. The results of that review are due May 24.
Ironically, Dooley and his guest lecturers paint a dire picture of the forward march of Islamic extremism right as its foremost practitioner feared its implosion. Documents recently declassified by the U.S. government revealed Osama bin Laden fretting about al-Qaida’s brutal methods and damaged brand alienating the vast majority of Muslims from choosing to wage holy war. Little could he have known that U.S. military officers were thinking of ways to ignite one.
Tags: Exclusive, Info War, Islamophobia, John Guandolo, Joint Forces Staff College, Matthew A. Dooley, Stephen Coughlin
| Having trouble viewing this email? Click here |
|
US Congress held on leash by Israel
ReplyDeleteThe US Congress has approved new unilateral sanctions on Iran hours before P5+1 talks are to be held to affect the ability of the White House to build cooperation in talks.
Press TV has interviewed Mark Glen from the Crescent and Cross Solidarity movement, Idaho, about the unbalanced influence Israel has over the US Congress that has spearheaded the recent increase in illegal sanctions against Iran. What follows is a rough transcript of the interview.
Press TV: Speaking about the move that has been made by the US Senate just hours before the talks are to start in Baghdad between Iran and the P5+1 group. What do you think this move showing sanctions being approved - another round of unilateral US sanctions… Is this meant to affect the atmosphere of the talks?
Glenn: Well, of course it is. But we also have to keep in mind that we have various diverse interests involved in this.
The Congress in the US is Israeli-controlled territory; there is no question about that. If Congress had its way we would have been at war with Iran and at least a dozen other Islamic countries already.
The White House on the other hand obviously given the fact that they are participating in negotiations and they are not as keen to go to war as the US Congress is… really what it indicates to me is that… The principal sponsor of this legislation is of course Mark Kirk who is firmly in the back pocket of Israel… and what this is meant to do is to undermine the Obama administration's ability to work out some type of agreement with the Iranians short of going to war.
So I think this is the realistic approach that we have to take in understanding what has taken place. As I've said, you have Congress, which is firmly held on a leash by Israel and then you have the Obama administration that at least has some recalcitrant and some independent thought.
Press TV: What is concerning here in Iran and has been voiced by officials is whether the US is actually serious in reaching any kind of conclusion or agreement with Iran by participating in these talks.
For instance, we saw earlier on, and Iranians are bringing that issue a lot here, that when the Tehran declaration for instance was agreed upon by Iran Turkey and Brazil, the US effectively torpedoed that effort and was totally against it - that was about of course, sending uranium to a third country to be enriched, but against the US voted against that move and effectively made it not happen.
So, how serious do you think the US is in reaching a deal or agreement with Tehran?
Glenn: I think that the most important thing for the US right now is to avoid going to war and when I say the United States, obviously there are other players who would like to see the US at war with Iran, certainly the neo-cons and certainly a good portion of the US Congress, but I think the Obama's administration obviously is not interested in going to war against Iran.
I think Obama and the people who are behind him would rather see Iran fall into the kind of chaos and disarray that we have seen taking place in the last year in these various Arab countries; certainly with what is taking place in Syria now.
ReplyDeleteIt’s just too expensive right now for the US both in terms of money and man power and world opinion. We have suffered a terrible blow to our image around the world as a result of allowing this little dictator …[entity] known as Israel to push us into going to war against Iraq and Afghanistan.
So I think at this point the Obama administration, its first priority is to avoid going to war with Iran for the various reasons I just mentioned.
As far as these negotiations that are taking place and whether or not the US is serious about them, I think the other factor that we have to put into this is that the US is being pulled in several different directions.
The president has got these organized Jewish groups breathing down his neck and screaming in his face for war with Iran; they're threatening him during an election year that he's not going to be reelected if he doesn't play ball with them; at the same time he understands that launching any kind of military adventures against Iran would be disastrous for the country.
So he is being pulled in several different directions here, so if his administration appears to be taking on policies that appear to be contradictory to each other I think that this is the best explanation for it.
I think that they don't know exactly what to do at this point other than to do whatever is necessary to avoid widening an already disastrous military conflagration that we’re already in.
SC/HGH
23 May 2012