Firsthand Field Research

9-11 Jan 2020

Pensacola, Florida

The following Islamic Mosques were researched and subsequent threat analysis results provided by retired Federal Agent, Dave Gaubatz

#1: Islamic Center of Northwest Florida, Pensacola, FL, 32514 Phone: 850-698-0222

RATING: Extremely Dangerous

#2: Al-Islam Dawah Center, 1550 Barrancas Av, Pensacola, Fl, 32502 Phone: (850) 435-7238

RATING: Extremely Dangerous

Summary: In Jan 2020, retired U.S. Federal Agent Dave Gaubatz was asked by citizens of Florida to conduct an unbiased firsthand research project at the two mosques listed above. The citizens were concerned the Saudi national Muslim terrorist Saudi Air Force student Mohammed Saeed Alshamrani may have been encouraged by members of both Pensacola mosques to conduct murders against innocent Americans.

On 10 Jan 2020, I (Dave Gaubatz) attended the mosques during the Friday Jummah prayer times. Fortunately, the prayer times were scheduled at different times. I had to split my time between the two mosques. The concerns of the Florida citizens were correct. Both mosques are controlled by Saudi Arabia (Sunni/Wahhabi) and there was an abundance of materials advocating hate toward non Muslims (especially Jews and Christians), hatred and advocating death to homosexuals, marrying female children as young as 6 years old, taking slaves in the current day, and destroying non Islamic governments.

1.1 (Courtesy of the Daily Mail) On 6 Dec 2020 Six Saudis are arrested over Pensacola naval base shooting including three who FILMED the attack by countryman who killed three and wounded eight before being shot dead – as FBI probes terror link

Shooting took place on base early Friday morning, sparking a lockdown

Sources identified the suspected gunman as Saudi Air Force aviation student Mohammed Saeed Alshamrani

As of Friday evening, six Saudi nationals have been detained for questioning

It’s reported that three of them filmed the shooting as it happened

Rep Matt Gaetz, a Republican representing Pensacola, called the shooting ‘an act of terrorism’

President Trump tweeted that King Salman told him ‘the Saudi people are greatly angered by the barbaric actions of the shooter…’

Three other people were shot and killed during incident inside classroom building on base

The Air Force trainee who killed three and injured eight when he opened fire at a naval base in Florida assailed the United States as ‘a nation of evil’ before he went on his shooting rampage, AFP reports.

The man, first identified by NBC News as Saudi national Mohammed Saeed Alshamrani, opened fire inside a classroom at Naval Air Station in Pensacola early Friday morning. Police quickly responded to the scene and he was shot dead.

as Saudi national Mohammed Saeed Alshamrani, opened fire inside a classroom at Naval Air Station in Pensacola early Friday morning. Police quickly responded to the scene and he was shot dead. US officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation, said the suspect was a second lieutenant attending the aviation school at the base.

Meanwhile six other Saudi nationals were arrested near the base shortly after the attack, as investigators began to probe a terror link.

Sources say over 12 Saudi servicemen to be expelled from US following Naval Air Station shooting: report By Marty Johnson – 01/11/20 Over a dozen Saudi servicemen who were training at various U.S. military bases are being expelled from the country, following the deadly December shooting at a Naval Air Station in Pensacola, Fla., sources told CNN. In early December, 21-year-old Saudi 2nd Lt. Mohammed Saeed Alshamrani opened fire at the air station, killing three people. Sources told the network the Saudi officers in question aren’t accused of being a part of Alshamrani’s plan, but have been linked to other extremist movements. Additionally, a subset of the group have been accused of possessing child pornography, according to CNN.

Note by Dave Gaubatz: Muslims possessing child pornography should not be a surprise to anyone. Their Prophet Mohammed was an admitted and well documented serial rapist of young girls. His youngest wife was Aisha and she was six. In the Islamic ideology this was acceptable by Muslims during the times of Mohammed and nothing Mohammed ever did has been found unacceptable by Muslims as of today. Muslims of young boys and girls are raped by devout Muslims worldwide and it is an epidemic in America. Our young non-Muslim girls are at risk just as the innocent Muslim girls are.

Spokespeople for the FBI and Justice Department declined CNN’s request for comment.

Investigators still believe that Alshamrani acted alone, and it is expected that the Justice Department will conclude that the attack was an act of terrorism, CNN reports.

(New York Times) Abbas Musa, the imam at the Al Islam Dawah mosque in Pensacola, said he did not recognize the shooting suspect, and said news of the attack had made his skin crawl. “What in the world would trigger you to do something like that?” Mr. Musa said. “It makes you sick. We reject it.”

Note by Dave Gaubatz: On 10 Jan 2020 when I attended the Jummah prayer the Imam preached to about 150 men and an unknown number of children and women who were not allowed in the main prayer room. Per the norm they were behind walls so they would not be visible. The Imam is clearly lying. He has an open view of the worshippers and there were foreign military in uniform during the prayer I attended. It is the Imam’s responsibility and duty to speak with his worshippers, get to know them, hold various Islamic lectures with them, and have materials available to them to study in order to fully understand what the Sunni/Wahhabi beliefs are. If the Imam did not recognize the Saudi terrorist, either he is a liar or he is a poor, poor Imam and should be fired. Neither the Saudi government who provides guidance and money to the mosque would approve of his behavior.

My analysis on the Imam: He knew the Saudi terrorist and had numerous Islamic manuals encouraging murdering innocent people and advocated child marriages. Their Prophet Mohammed is the ideal perfect man in all respects and can never be criticized for any act he ever committed or any word he ever spoke. Child marriages were approved by Mohammed and they are approved by all Muslims in 2020. I have written numerous articles about the materials in a mosque that encourage Muslim men to have sex (rape) of innocent Muslim and non-Muslim girls as young as 6. I have been to other Sunni/Wahhabi mosques in which young girls (7-year-old) have informed my researchers they are married to ‘old men’ who rape them on a routine basis and beat them severely. This is a fact Americans must come to understand and begin standing up for the innocent Muslim children.

Being a former federal agent I have conducted numerous searches of homes, offices, mosques, and other locations. In the U.S. I have now conducted firsthand research in over 375 mosques. It is my professional opinion the Islamic leaders of the Al-Islam Dawah Center knew the FBI would investigate their mosque so they mad an attempt to ‘clean up’ criminal evidence of material discussing treason, hate, murder, and the avocation of raping children. There were few Islamic materials in the mosques open to the public. This is not the norm. When I conduct research in a mosque I go in as a practicing Muslim. I am immediately accepted and trusted because it is clear to them in my dress and knowledge of Islam that I am a ‘Pure Muslim’. I have conducted pseudo conversions to Islam with several leading scholars as my witness.

Based on an Islamic leader trusting me, he took me to a back room of the mosque, unlocked the door, and allowed me to browse the materials in the locked room for about 20 minutes. There were literally thousands of books, manuals, dvd’s, tapes, and other material in the room. I observed material by convicted terrorist Ali Al Timmimi serving a life sentence in a U.S. prison for terrorist related activities. Also material by Abu Maududi (Pakistan) and Syed Qutb Egypt)

The FBI have very good agents (at the street level), but they lack the training to understand Islam as it must be taught by Islamic terror professionals and not by Islamic terrorist groups such as CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) and by their terrorist supporters the Southern Poverty Law Center. I estimate 99.9% of FBI Agents and other Homeland Security personnel do not understand Shariah law and the major manuals studied by Al Qaeda, Hamas, ISIS and other Sunni Islamic terrorist groups and their supporters.

I encourage readers to contact their local FBI offices and ask them if they have studied the following manuals:

A; Tafsir Ibn Kathir

B: Sahih Muslim

C: Fiqh Us Sunnah

D: Bukhari

E: Brief Understanding to Understanding Islam (A book published by Saudi Arabia, written and edited by Muslim terrorists, and Ahmed Sakr, an Islamic scholar in America who travels around the U.S. training young Muslims to hate U.S. leaders, do not follow the laws of the U.S. Constitution, and if they do, they will go to hell.

F: Umar: Muslim fighter

G: Riyadh Ul Salheen

This is just a sampling of what was in both Pensacola mosques where foreign military personnel attend and study.

It must be noted that during the Jummah prayer lecture by the Al-Islam Dawah Center Imam, he made a statement to support jihad activities.

Note: The Islamic Center of Northwest Florida had the very same materials in the prayer rom available to the public.

Note: The Imam at the Al-Islam Dawah Center had publicly said the Saudi terrorist was not a worshipper he recognized. It is highly unlikely the FBI seized the camera and audio tapes surrounding the inside and outside of the mosque. The tapes would confirm or refute the Imam.

NOTE: When I conduct counter-terrorism research in America it is my objective to expose Islam when Islam requires exposing, which is 24/7. Anything I do or any materials I uncover are for public release. It is my policy to provide the public my raw intelligence first before providing to all others. Only the American public can protect America. It is the responsibility of the public to demand politicians and our senior law enforcement do the job which they have sworn an oath to do, which is protect America and most importantly protect our children. The public must also demand our media report the news based on facts and evidence and not their personal political agendas as is now the case by far in America.

Note: The following 19 points are for credibility purposes to validate the counter-terrorism research I conducted in Pensacola during the period 9 -11 Jan 2020.

Background: I was a U.S. Federal Agent with a Top Secret/SCI clearance for approximately 15.5 years. This was during the time 1988 – 2003.

In addition to my Top Secret/SCI clearance I was also briefed into many programs known to the public as “Black Projects”. These projects pertained essentially to counter-terrorism and counter-intelligence operations. These cases were U.S. National Security matters. On 11 Sep 2001, I was assigned as an (1811) civilian Federal Agent in Albuquerque, NM. I had primarily been assigned the duties of ‘Technology Protection’ in regards to our countries highest classification of technologies used to defend our country. After the attack on our country, 11 Sep 2001, I was assigned to the Foreign Service Institute (U.S. State Dept./Arlington, Va. My duties were to train full time in Arabic and counter-terrorism issues. The Arabic language course was one year. During this time period I was sent to Jordan for a three-week immersion program to better understand the Arabic language, the culture, and Islam. In Jan 2003, before Operation Iraqi Freedom, I was deployed as a civilian Federal Agent to ArAr Air Base, Saudi Arabia (next to Iraqi border). My full time duties were to collect intelligence involving potential attacks against U.S. Armed Forces personnel and to conduct counter-espionage against Saudi Arabian government/military, Iraqi, and other people in the ArAr area. I led several counter-terrorism/counter-intelligence expeditions. From Apr – Jul 2003, I was assigned inside Nasiriyah, Baghdad, Basrah, and other cities in Iraq, and my primary duties were counter-terrorism and counter-intelligence. While in Iraq I interviewed numerous Iraqis and Iranians in regard to terrorism acts against the U.S., the Islamic ideology pertaining to violent Jihadists activity, and the methodology of Islamic terrorists. While in Iraq I had the opportunity to discuss the training and tactics used by Islamic terrorist leaders and their supporters. I had the opportunity to review thousands of pieces of Islamic material pertaining on tactics to attack U.S. interests and the overthrow of America. I have received training on the Islamic ideology/tactics from people who were former members of Islamic terrorist groups and from Muslims who were investigating groups themselves. These people included military and police officers who served under Saddam Hussein (former Iraqi President). Since returning from Iraq in 2003, I have trained over 3000 U.S. law enforcement officers in Arabic and counter-terrorism involving Islamic terrorist groups and their supporters. I have discussed Islamic issues with over 600 Imams and Islamic leaders. I have listened to over 2000 hours of lectures by Islamic scholars/leaders that have been trained in I have read over 5500 different publications, books, and brochures by Islamic scholars. In 2005, I hired a senior Council on American Islamic Relations leader to provide me training on the operation of this Islamic organization. This was an undercover operation directed toward CAIR. I have personally conducted first hand research at over 375 Islamic Centers/Mosques in America and over 100 outside of America. The research has included speaking with the leaders, worshippers, and reviewing the materials they use to educate their worshippers (men, women, and children. I have monitored several overseas based Islamic terrorist group internet sites. I have received numerous U.S. Government awards pertaining to my work in protecting our country, our technology, and U.S. Armed Forces personnel. I have worked jointly in counter-terrorism research and investigations with Muslims and non-Muslims. I have written two books. 1: Arabic for Law Enforcement and Military 2: Muslim Mafia At the direction of a former Under Secretary of Defense for President Ronald Reagan I placed 5 undercover researchers inside a Muslim Brotherhood organization (CAIR) operating inside America. The result was uncovering over 12,000 documents and 300 hours of audio/video relating to criminal terrorism against America.

MOSQUE RESEARCH STRATEGY

It is very important for American citizens and others who are victimized by Islamic based terrorist groups and their supporters to understand there is a dramatic difference in investigating mosques in predominately Islamic countries such as Saudi Arabia versus mosque activity in America. One cannot rely on Sharia compliance from a Saudi mosque for instance and a mosque in Miami, Fl. Sharia compliance alone can more closely determine if a mosque in an Islamic country poses a potential threat to innocent people and countries than Sharia compliance in a mosque in America will.

Mosques located throughout the Middle East have been around for over 1400 years and the earliest mosque in America was less than 100 years ago (1922, Chicago, Illinois). Even as late as 1980 there were only 150 or so in America. Now there are approximately 3000 known mosques and the likelihood of another 6000 that I refer to as underground mosques. This is in no comparison to the tens of thousands throughout the Middle East and for which Sharia compliance has been brainwashed and enforced into the Muslim mind for 1400 plus years. Sharia compliance in a mosque has been branded in the Islamic culture throughout the Middle East but is still in its infancy in America.

The major point for one to understand is that it does not take a large percentage of Muslims in a mosque to be Sharia compliant in order for the mosque to be evaluated as a high risk for terrorism to generate from the mosque. Example: If the mosque membership is 350 and only 20 are truly Sharia compliant does not necessarily mean this mosque poses a low threat of potential violence. In the Middle East it likely would. But, since many Muslims in America are first generation ‘converts’ they are still in a learning curve compared to their fellow Muslims in the Middle East. It will take time for Sharia compliance by a large percentage of Muslims in an American mosque to be the primary source to determine the potential danger the mosque poses.

To make an accurate determination if an American mosque is more dangerous than another American mosque or Middle Eastern mosque requires the researcher to have many of the requirements as are mentioned in my 19 points of credibility listed above and to have the 26 factors evaluated as I have identified below. I have named this evaluation criteria “The Islamic Terror Alphabet” (copyright Dave Gaubatz 2019)

GROUND RULES DURING EVALUATION:

The Islamic ideology is not peaceful; it is violent and dangerous to the world.

There are no safe mosques; there are only various degrees of danger.

When (not if) the Islamic leaders throughout the world (Sunni/Shia/Sufi) determine they are powerful enough to plunge the world into total chaos so as to complete their final objective of an Islamic Ummah (nation) worldwide, all mosques, all Muslims will unite to meet this goal.

There is only Pure Islam and Pure Muslims. There is no such thing as moderate Islam or moderate Muslims. A Muslim in accordance with their Prophet Mohammed must adhere to all aspects of Sharia law. They are not allowed to pick and choose which parts of Sharia to follow and not to follow. Sharia is an all or nothing. If a Muslim does not do this, they are Apostates of Islam. The penalty is death for them, regardless if they are in Saudi Arabia or Miami, FL.

Islam defined: Islam is a political, economic, and military ideology which uses religion as a tool to achieve their ultimate goal of an Islamic Ummah worldwide and under Sharia law.

Sharia law defined: Sharia is a belief that everything Mohammed said or did in his life is the perfect example to all. What he did and said is Sharia. Sharia covers everything a Muslim does in his/her life from the moment they awake until they fall asleep and even while they are deep in sleep.

Sharia law cannot be changed nor removed from Islam. There is no validity in the reform of Islam. There are Muslims (Apostates) who claim to want to reform Islam, but once you have removed Sharia, you have simply started another religion. You can no more remove Sharia from Islam than you can the 10 Commandments from Christianity.

Evaluate the mosques solely on firsthand evidence and do not rely on 2 nd , 3 rd , or other sources unless they are validated by an experienced counter-terrorism researcher.

, 3 , or other sources unless they are validated by an experienced counter-terrorism researcher. Remain unbiased. If there is no firsthand evidence to support a rating above ‘Dangerous’ then rate the mosque at the lowest level.

Innocent people throughout the world must realize that the Islamic Prophet Mohammed endorsed child marriages and Islamic scholars do not refute this. Mohammed married Aisha when she was six (6) years old and consummated the marriage when she was nine (9). In actuality Mohammed married a 6-year-old child and began sexually assaulting and raping her. Do not get wrapped up in the nice and soft word of consummating. An adult does not consummate with a child, he rapes them. This very act and belief alone makes the whole of Islam dangerous regardless of the millions of peaceful interfaith meetings Islamic leaders may put on. Although Mohammed died over 1400 years ago Muslims firmly believe he is the purest example of all and one who must be followed in every aspect of his life. To this day in 2019 Muslims believe Mohammed was correct in marrying children and raping them. This practice has not repealed by Islamic scholars and is still conducted openly throughout the world, to include America.

The study of common words and phrases used by Islamic leaders must be understood. In Sharia law lying or deception is not only used but authorized when Muslims feel Islam is being oppressed. Currently Islamic leaders worldwide have opined they are oppressed and at war with non-Muslims and non-Muslim governments. The following examples are used.

When Islamic leaders say they love America : Most truly love America, but their true meaning is they love America, not Americans. They love the vast resources of America and the millions of square miles of beautiful land. They want America for Islam. They want America under Sharia law.

: Most truly love America, but their true meaning is they love America, not Americans. They love the vast resources of America and the millions of square miles of beautiful land. They want America for Islam. They want America under Sharia law. When Islamic leaders during Dawah (spreading the word of Islam) say there is only one God , their true meaning is that there indeed is only one God, but it is Allah (a Muslim God) and my no means is it the Christian and Jewish God.

, their true meaning is that there indeed is only one God, but it is Allah (a Muslim God) and my no means is it the Christian and Jewish God. When Islamic leaders say they love Jesus they mean it, but their true meaning is that they believe Jesus and all Christian Prophets were Muslim.

they mean it, but their true meaning is that they believe Jesus and all Christian Prophets were Muslim. When Islamic leaders use the word convert their true definition and meaning is that they believe ALL people from the beginning of mankind until the present were born Muslim and only because one’s parents were bad or misinformed is the reason a person turns to Christianity, Judaism, or even atheism. In reality Muslims do not believe a person can convert to Islam, they can only revert to Islam because since all were born into Islam they can only revert back, not convert.

their true definition and meaning is that they believe ALL people from the beginning of mankind until the present were born Muslim and only because one’s parents were bad or misinformed is the reason a person turns to Christianity, Judaism, or even atheism. In reality Muslims do not believe a person can convert to Islam, they can only revert to Islam because since all were born into Islam they can only revert back, not convert. When Islamic leaders say they denounce all forms of terrorism to include suicide bombings they truly mean all violent acts by Muslims toward their enemies are legitimate forms of Jihad and not terrorism. They believe violent acts from Christians and Jews are forms of terrorism.

to include suicide bombings they truly mean all violent acts by Muslims toward their enemies are legitimate forms of Jihad and not terrorism. They believe violent acts from Christians and Jews are forms of terrorism. Muslim leaders do not use the term suicide bombings when they are referring to acts by Muslims against their enemies in which the Muslim for instance used a vest laden with bombs and died in the process. They mean the Muslim died in an act of defensive war against their enemy and is a martyr of Islam and not a person who committed suicide.

Jihad in Islam (Maududi) Found in Sunni mosques “

“Islam is not the name of a ‘Religion’, nor is ‘Muslim’ the title of a ‘Nation’. In reality Islam is a revolutionary ideology and programme which seeks to alter the social order of the whole world and rebuild it in conformity with its own tenets and ideals. ‘Muslim’ is the title of that International Revolutionary Party organized by Islam to carry into effect its revolutionary programme. And ‘Jihad’ refers to that revolutionary struggle and utmost exertion which the Islamic Party brings into play to achieve this objective”.

ISLAMIC TERROR ALPHABET CRITERIA (ITAC)

(copyright 2019 by Dave Gaubatz) Dave Gaubatz encourages all to use the ITAC system as a tool and to share with others, but be professional and give credit to Dave Gaubatz for the development of this counter-terrorism tool.

A: Mosque location (neighborhood, strip mall, typical identifiable mosque structure, or Islamic Center) Keep in mind a mosque is defined as a place for Muslims to gather for prayer and strategic planning. The place can be in the basement of a house, a garage, a room in a university, a small building structure or a mega structure) The 2 mosques I visited in Pensacola are in typical building structures or older churches.

B: Number of members: Average # of Muslim Members per mosque: 150 men (note: not all members attend the main Friday prayer or other prayer sessions during the week). Estimated 50 women and children.

C: Sunni/Shia/Sufi: The mosques I visited practice the Sunni Wahhabi/Salafist style of Islam and primarily use the Hanbali Islamic school of thought. There are four Sunni schools of thought. 1. Hanafi 2. Maliki 3. Shafi’I 4. Hanbali. Most counter-terrorism professionals agree the Hanbali school of thought is the most dangerous. Al-Shabaab, Boko Haram, ISIS, Al Qaeda and other Sunni terrorist organizations typically follow the Hanbali school of thought.

D: Material in mosque (such as Fiqh Us Sunnah, Riyadh Ul Salheen, Sahih Muslim, Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Sahih Bukhari, Reliance of the Traveler, Maududi or Qutb material, etc…) Fiqh US Sunnah, Riyadh Ul Salheen, Sahih Muslim, Jihad in Islam, Sahih Bukhari, and more were located in the mosque and prayer room. They were available to worshippers. and/or in the Halal markets (online, such as Halalco in Fairfax, VA). These manuals describe in detail for Muslims to carry out physical (fighting) Jihad, Child marriages (authorized), Slavery (authorized), the beating of women (authorized), killing of non-Muslims and even Muslims who are not Sharia compliant, informing Muslims to never take as friends Christians and Jews, killing of Apostates of Islam (authorized anywhere in the world), and the describing the objective of Islam which is to establish an Islamic Ummah (nation) worldwide and under Sharia law. The objective can and must be established by warfare as needed. Many other violent topics are discussed in the manuals. Much of the material in the mosques is in Arabic. For those Muslims who do not read Arabic they are encouraged to go online and read the materials in English which are readily available. Below are a few examples of books and manuals found during my research in Pensacola, Fl.

The Imams had an adequate amount of material in the mosque in which to identify it as a Sunni/Salafist/Wahhabi affiliated mosque. Extremely dangerous material available to all members of the mosque. One can sign out certain DVD’s, books, pamphlets, brochures, or some is available to purchase. Dave G was provided some free material by the Imam and $80.00 (at Al-Islam Dawah Center) of books were purchased. The following extremely dangerous materials were observed in the mosque, in front entrance room and in the men’s prayer area:

Tafsir Ibn Kathir Sahih Muslim Riyadh Ul Salheen Umar (mujahedeen fighter) Abu Maududi Syed Qutb Brief Illustrated Guide to Understanding Islam. Fiqh Us Sunnah

Many more books and brochures were available. CAIR, MAS, and ISNA material were there.

The Concise Presentation of the Fiqh

I found numerous references in the mosques to homosexuality. There appeared to be a strong campaign within the community informing Muslims the stance of Islamic scholars pertaining to homosexuality. The punishment is death.

“If a male commits sodomy with another male the punishment is death, whether they be virgins or non-virgins”. Note by Dave Gaubatz: Numerous references were found strongly advising Muslims that Sharia law always counters man made laws, and since Sharia indicates the penalty is death for homosexuals, it does not matter if the crime (in accordance with Islam) is committed in Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Pensacola, FL, or Wilmington, NC that the person guilty of homosexuality must be killed. This is very dangerous and I have yet to hear of a good reason (because there is none) why Democrats (liberals/socialist) support the Islamic community knowing this is the view point all Sharia compliant Muslims have in regards to homosexuals. Further, there are numerous other violent and dangerous beliefs under Sharia law.

44 Ways for the brothers and sisters to support Jihad (Used in most Sunni/Wahhabi mosques)

Arms training

“Preparing for Jihad is obligatory since Jihad today is obligatory and the sharia rule states that: “Whatever is needed for an obligatory act becomes obligatory” Arms training is an essential part of preparation for Jihad. Allah says: “And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them whom you don’t know but Allah knows” (8:60) The Messenger of Allah (saaws) said regarding this verse: “Power is marksmanship, power is marksmanship” (Related by Muslim)The issue is so critical that if arms training is not possible in your country then it is worth the time and money to travel to another country to train if you can”.

RIYADH UL SALHEEN

“War is deception. Employing a strategy which causes misunderstanding to the enemy, and one’s real intent does not become evident to them. This is evident to them in the state of war”

Note by Dave Gaubatz: Islamic leaders worldwide have discussed the meaning of this statement with me during my mosque visits. Currently Islam is at war with Israel and America, and other countries. Deception is legal (Haram). This is one of the reasons there are so many Islamic organizations in America. The purpose is to confuse the enemy by having them try keeping up with the dozens of Muslim organizations. Examples are CAIR, ISNA, MSA, MANA, ICNA, and more. The same goes for the many Islamic terror groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah, Al Qaeda, ISIS, and more. Although literally dozens of Muslim groups exist, they all have the same objective which is to establish an Islamic Ummah (nation) worldwide and under Sharia law. When ISIS was formed we had every law enforcement agency and terrorism analysts scrambling to define who this new group was. This was the intent of Islamic scholars. Thousands upon thousands of hours were devoted to studying ISIS, and billions of dollars wasted in pursuit of determining their objective. In America we could have saved money and lives if we would have simply ignored the new acronym and continued fighting all groups as one.

JIHAD IN ISLAM

So if Islam be a ‘Religion’ and the Muslims are a ‘Nation’. ‘Jihad’ (on

account of which it has been accorded the dignity of ‘The Best of all Prayers’ in

Islam) becomes useless term. But the truth is that Islam is not the name of a

‘Religion’, nor is ‘Muslim’ the title of a ‘Nation’. In reality Islam is a

revolutionary ideology and programme which seeks to alter the social order of the

whole world and rebuild it in conformity with its own tenets and ideals. ‘Muslim’

is the title of that International Revolutionary Party organized by Islam to carry

into effect its revolutionary programme. And ‘Jihad’ refers to that revolutionary

struggle and utmost exertion which the Islamic Party brings into play to achieve

this objective.

Like all revolutionary ideologies, Islam shuns the use of current

vocabulary and adopts a terminology of its own, so that its own revolutionary

ideals may be distinguished from common ideals. The word ‘Jihad’ belongs to

this particular terminology of Islam. Islam purposely rejected the word ‘harb’ and

other Arabic words bearing the same meaning of ‘war’ and used the word ‘Jihad’

which is synonymous with ‘struggle’, though more forceful and wider in

connotation. The nearest correct meaning of the word ‘Jihad’ in English can be

expressed as under:

E: Conversations with worshippers: Dave Gaubatz spoke with Islamic leaders and worshippers. Sunni/Salafist is the predominant ideology of this mosque that the Imam tries to instill.

F: Sharia decorum in mosques (example: prayer rug/carpet) No Black Flag of jihad was observed. The prayer rug did have the required lines on the rug for the ‘forming of the lines’. The Wudu (cleansing of the body) was in the mosque. The women were in a separate side away from the men. There was a throne type seat in the front area of the prayer room.

G: Any affiliation with CAIR, IIIT, MSA, ISNA, etc. Brochures from MANA, IIIT, ISNA, MSA and CAIR were observed.

H: Sharia compliance of Islamic leaders: The Imam and Islamic leaders Dave G. observed were Sharia compliant.

I: How are women/children treated: The women are not allowed contact with the men. They are completely isolated from the men. Children were observed in the men’s and women’s side of the prayer room. Young girls about 6 years old were observed in full Hijabs. This is often an indicator the child is married or an arranged marriage for her has been conducted between two families. Since the Islamic Prophet Mohammed married a six-year-old child and he is considered to be the pure Muslim to follow, child marriages are still considered Halal (legal) in Sharia law.

Note by Dave Gaubatz: Prophet Mohammed married a six-year-old child and thus Sharia law allows the marriage of a young girl child. Also, Islamic leaders in Pensacola are likely marrying off young girl children because Sharia law is always above any man made law. Puberty is considered early (precocious) if it occurs before the age of 8 years in girls and 9 years in boys and is considered late or delayed if it has not begun prior to the age of 13 years for girls and 14 years

Prophet Mohammed did, so all Muslims can because he is the example for all people to follow!

J: Mosque etiquette (forming of line during prayer, selling of material in mosque, etc..). The Imam paid close attention to the forming of the line before the prayer. It is against Sharia law to openly sell materials in a mosque prayer room. No sales were observed, although I was able to discuss the Islamic materials available at the entrance to the mosque.

K: Imam lecture (mention of Sharia, Jihad Qital, Punishment in the grave, Fiqh, etc…) Sharia compliance and Jihad Qital (fighting) was mentioned throughout the lecture at the Al-Islam mosque. The lecture was in English.

L: Invited guests (out of town Islamic leaders, CAIR, etc.) No invited guests were observed.

M: Sharia compliance of non-Islamic leaders: Roughly 95% plus were Sharia compliant.

N: Business cards shared (internet sites, businesses, emails, etc.) Halalco Bookstore was suggested.

O: Confirmed Islamic terrorists have/had not visited mosque: Know Muslim terrorists have visited the mosques.

P: Active duty military at mosque: Foreign active duty in uniform were observed.

Q: U.S. Govt. Civilians and/or politicians at mosque: None observed.

R: Local, State, Federal Law Enforcement presence: Local law enforcement have increased patrols of the mosques. (Note: This is abuse of American taxpayer’s money. Non-Muslim American citizens should have increased patrols to protect them from the two Saudi mosques advocating and committing terrorists against our service members.

S: Is local govt. liberal or conservative: Many describe Pensacola as neutral.

T: Are U.S. military bases within 50 miles: There are U.S. military installations within 50 miles of the mosque.

U: Are Islamic businesses within 15 miles: Yes, restaurants and convenience stores.

V: Is state liberal or conservative: Conservative

W: Local media liberal or conservative: Media in local area is considered liberal.

X: Interfaith programs: There is public information the mosque leadership are involved in interfaith activity with Christian and Jewish people/leaders. Based on my experiences this often means the Islamic leaders feel they have Christian and other religious leaders on their side and do not have to spend as much time with them.

Y: How does mosque compare to mosques in U.S. with confirmed terrorist ties such as Dar Al Hijra mosque in Fairfax, VA): Dave Gaubatz and his team of CT (counter-terrorism) researchers have spent in excess of two weeks at Dar Al Hijra mosque in Virginia. 911 terrorists had visited the mosque. The mosque I visited in Pensacola are on par with Dar Al Hijra. Pensacola would be an area Islamic terrorists and their supporters who are travelling or reside here would feel comfortable attending. They would be welcome at this mosque. Sharia law is observed.

Z: GUT feeling of qualified researcher (Very Important) This area is rated very high. An explanation and analogy is required. Every human and animal have internal systems fight or flight sensors that alert them to potential dangers. This is how we survive. Over years and years of life experiences our minds are able to fine tune this protective system. Police officers use this safety mechanism each and every day to evaluate hundreds of potential danger signals in order to know how to respond in order to save their lives and the lives of innocent people. In a shoot or don’t shoot situation officers sometimes have a few seconds or less to evaluate situations to best respond. This is when their life experiences kick in and numerous things race through their mind when they are deciding to shoot (kill) or not shoot (not kill).

When evaluating the potential danger of an Islamic mosque Dave Gaubatz does the same thing as one of the 26 indicators to determine danger. He bases over 35 years of travelling and working in Islamic based countries, visiting hundreds upon hundreds of mosques, interacting with good and bad people of the Islamic ideology, interviewing dozens of confirmed Muslim terrorists, their supporters, and reviewing thousands upon thousands of pages of their books and manuals, and in operating in dangers gang infested areas within America and in combat zones in Iraq. Based on these experiences within a matter of minutes or less he is able to kick in his survival skills upon entering a mosque. His experiences have led him to accurately analyze and reason that all mosques are homes to potential danger, but at varying degrees. When he worked gangs and narcotics in numerous major American cities there was little doubt a gang infested neighborhood posed likely dangers, again there were various levels of dangers based on other aspects of his experiences. The same is true using the ITAC system. A GUT feeling combined with 25 other important factors triggers an evaluation for danger.

Evaluation Rating: Dangerous, Very Dangerous, or Extremely Dangerous

Final Evaluation: Extremely Dangerous. On a scale of 1-10 with 10 being the most dangerous, this mosque would rate a 10 based.

Below is a sampling of the major factors which led to an evaluation of Pensacola mosques receiving a scoring of “EXTREMELY DANGEROUS:

Violent material by convicted terrorists in each mosque and Somali Halal markets. Ali Al Timimi:



Scholar Is Given Life Sentence in ‘Virginia Jihad’ Case

By Eric Lichtblau, New York Times July 14, 2005 ALEXANDRIA, Va., July 13 – An influential Muslim scholar, whom prosecutors called a “purveyor of hate and war,” was ordered on Wednesday to spend the rest of his life in prison for inciting his young followers in Northern Virginia to wage war against the United States in the days after the Sept. 11 attacks. The scholar, Ali al-Timimi, was defiant to the end, telling a federal judge as he was about to be sentenced that he considered himself a “prisoner of conscience” who was being persecuted for his strong Muslim beliefs. “I will not admit guilt nor seek the court’s mercy,” Mr. Timimi told a hushed courtroom filled with more than two dozen Muslims who have rallied around him. “I do this simply because I am innocent.” The federal district judge hearing the case, Leonie M. Brinkema, ordered the life sentence grudgingly, saying she was bound by federal guidelines. While Judge Brinkema said there was significant evidence that Mr. Timimi had incited his followers toward violence, she said she considered the prison terms mandated by the guidelines under four counts of the conviction to be “very draconian.” She said she had no choice but to impose the life sentence after refusing a defense request to set aside the guilty verdicts. Mr. Timimi, an Iraqi-American cancer researcher who lectured at a mosque in Northern Virginia and circulated his religious writings on the Internet, is the most prominent Muslim prosecuted in connection with what federal prosecutors have labeled extremely dangerous. Prosecutors portrayed Mr. Timimi as a spiritual and intellectual leader of the young men in the network, as they traveled to foreign training camps and prepared to wage a holy war in defense of Islam by playing paintball and gathering weapons and explosives. Gordon Kromberg, the lead prosecutor in the case for the Justice Department, called Mr. Timimi “a purveyor of hate and war” in court on Wednesday. “Al-Timimi hates the United States and calls for its destruction,” Mr. Kromberg said in urging lifelong imprisonment. “He’s allowed to do that in this country. He’s not allowed to solicit treason. That’s what he did. He deserves every day of the time he will serve.” At one dinner meeting on Sept. 16, 2001, Mr. Timimi told some of the men in the group that it was their Muslim duty to fight for Islam overseas and to defend the Taliban in Afghanistan against American forces, according to testimony at his trial. And in an Internet message in 2003, he described the destruction of the space shuttle Columbia as a “good omen” for Muslims in an apocalyptic conflict with the West. Defense lawyers for Mr. Timimi argued that his language, while offensive to many, was free speech protected by the First Amendment. At Wednesday’s hearing, the defense lawyers used that argument and others in seeking to have the judge set aside the guilty verdicts handed up by a jury in Alexandria in April. The jury convicted Mr. Timimi on charges of conspiracy, attempting to aid the Taliban, soliciting treason and soliciting others to wage war against the United States, and aiding and abetting the use of firearms and explosives. The last charge carried a mandatory life sentence. Judge Brinkema said she found the free-speech defense “unpersuasive” and refused to throw out any of the verdicts. “This was not a case about speech; this was a case about intent,” she said, specifically Mr. Timimi’s intent to incite others to commit crimes against the United States. She said the testimony “did strongly support” the legitimacy of the verdicts. Several Muslim supporters of Mr. Timimi wept as the life sentence was imposed. Mauri Saalakhan, a leader of a Maryland human rights group called the Peace and Justice Foundation, which supports Islamic causes, said outside the courthouse that the sentence was “a tragedy not just for Dr. Timimi but for all of us.” Edward B. MacMahon Jr., one of the defense lawyers, described Mr. Timimi as “a gentle man” and said he was “not a criminal,” but Mr. MacMahon acknowledged that the life sentence was the only possible penalty once Judge Brinkema refused to throw out the convictions. Mr. Timimi delivered to the court an impassioned and often eloquent speech that lasted nearly 10 minutes, touching on Greek and Roman philosophy, religious history and the United States Constitution…

From an article by Daniel Pipes

Ali Al-Timimi

Islamic Awareness Week

Delivered at Purdue University, October 20, 1993

http://islaam.com//Article.aspx?id=644 All praise belongs to God and may His blessings and peace be upon the Messenger. The topic that I have been asked to address is of immense personal interest. For it pains me to see Muslims en masse, without any qualification, vilified with labels of “terrorist” or “fundamentalist,” as is so often the manner of our portrayal in today’s media. It pains me even more when Muslims commit in the name of their religion acts which Islam condemns. Before addressing these two labels, terrorist and fundamentalist, I would like to preface my remarks begin with a brief historical introduction to the portrayal of Islam as violent. The spread of Islam by the sword First we need to recognize that there is a certain historical context that has caused much of the confusion regarding the Islamic religion. This historical context is centered on the notion that Islam was spread by the sword.[1] Initially, this allegation was employed by certain European Christian authors in their polemical works against the Islamic religion. Their argument was that Islam could not be a true religion since it was spread by the sword and further how could the prophet Muhammad truly be God’s prophet while his message contains warfare or jihad? I am amazed to see such an argument while in the Gospel of Matthew ‘Isa ibn Maryam, Jesus the son of Mary, is reported to have said: Think not that I have come to send peace on earth, I have come not to send peace, but a sword. So even with such a clear statement where Jesus Christ describes himself that he has not “come to send peace on earth, but a sword,” that is war; these authors conveniently overlooked this to lay a charge against Muslims because there are certain Islamic rulings regarding warfare or jihad; and they then further argued from this that Islam is a false religion and that the prophet Muhammad is a false prophet not truly sent by God. Validity of the prophet Muhammad’s claim As I have remarked in an earlier lecture that entire validity of Islam centers upon the claim that Muhammad was truly sent by God for humanity’s guidance. This is true irrespective if we are investigating Islam’s beliefs, practices, manner of dealing with others, moral code, view on women, or whatever. There would be no validity to any of Islam’s positions regarding these or other issues unless we accept that Muhammad was God’s messenger. If we reject such a claim then in reality Islam is no longer worthy of our investigation, as the foundation for its teachings would be inherently false. For this reason, any debate or discussion regarding the validity of Islam’s view regarding a particular topic should be preceded with a discussion on the validity of the prophethood of the Muhammad. Was he, as he claimed, truly a prophet sent by God for the guidance of all of humanity? Thus implying that anything he said and did true? Or was he not a prophet sent by God, but merely an imposter? And if the latter then whatever is attributed to the Islamic religion can be have little value at best. Europe’s “enlightenment” The second factor in this historical context is what occurred in Europe during what was known as the age of enlightenment. This period followed the Renaissance when Europe shed what it viewed as the yoke of an oppressive church. As an alternative to religious teaching, a philosophy developed in Europe known as humanism which in turn had a certain political ramification known as secularism. Now since the Islamic world, or we should say at least as how it should be, according to its teachings makes no distinction between personal religious belief and societal practice. For Muslims believe humans have been created to worship God and further they believe that this worship of God extends to all spheres of life. Hence modern Western authors, who tend to look at the Islamic world from the backdrop of their civilization, find it something medieval, backwards, oppressive. They derive such ideas from their civilizational experiences with the Catholic Church and what subsequently happened during the Protestant reformation and the age of Enlightenment. Thus with Western civilizational embrace of humanism and secularism, in addition to old religious prejudices that stemmed from the historical conflict between the Islamic world and Europe; certain perceptions of Islam are found in the modern West as these societies are still Christian in nature or at least have their roots in Christianity. It is not uncommon therefore for certain individuals nowadays to employ certain expressions to describe Muslims. Among these are the labels of fundamentalist or terrorist. However, before I address these two terms specifically, it would be instructive to first see how Muslims look toward unbelievers. Viewing ‘the other’: classification of non-Muslims under Islamic law Obviously when a Muslim looks at the world he will see coreligionists who embrace the central tenet of Islamic faith by their recognizing that only God is to be worshipped and none other besides Him neither prophet like Jesus Christ or the prophet Muhammad or anyone or thing else. These individuals will also believe in the finality of the prophethood with the sending of the prophet Muhammad. A Muslim will also recognize that there are individuals outside of his community. There are people who adhere to other religions whether those religions Muslims would believe were originally rooted in the revelation sent by God, and subsequently corrupted only like Judaism and Christianity; or they believe that these religions have no basis from God and were invented by their peoples like the various pagan religions. These non-Muslims according to Islamic law fall into two major categories: (1.) unbelievers with whom Muslims are at war, and (2.) unbelievers with whom Muslims have a treaty.[2] Unbelievers with whom Muslims are at war The first category of unbelievers, we said, are those non-Muslims with whom Muslims are in a formal war setting. For example, let us imagine two countries at war: one Muslim and the other non-Muslim. These non-Muslim combatants are referred to in the books of fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) as al-harbiyun (combatants). With regards to these specific individuals, clearly Muslims would not show them gentleness, as they are enemy combatants during a war. Muhammad is the messenger of God. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves. (The Qur’an, 48:29) Non-combatants during war Yet at the same, it must be emphasized that Islam has prohibited under all circumstances the intentional taking of the lives of non-combatants. The Prophet has instructed: Do not kill a decript old man, or a young infant, or a woman. [3] Based on this and similar statements by the Prophet, the Muslim scholars are in agreement that it is forbidden to kill the children and womenfolk of the unbelievers so long as they themselves do not participate in the war.[4] Thus innocents, like women, children, elderly men who are incapable of participating in warfare, and likewise by the prophet Muhammad’s instructions, those religious monks who are typically pacifists and hence do not engage in warfare; regarding all these people, the prophet Muhammad has forbidden us under any circumstance to deliberately take any of their lives. On one occasion during the lifetime of the prophet Muhammad, the Muslims attacked an inhabitation and during the heat of battle entered into a household and killed some women and children. When the Prophet came to know of this, he became angered and remarked that God has not sent us to kill the likes of these persons. The application of weapons of mass destruction upon civilian populations Also if you look at the books of fiqh written in earlier centuries a question appeared concerning the use of catapults and cannons against civilian populations. As at the time of the sending of the prophet Muhammad, the weapons employed in Arabia were simple sword, javelin, arrows, and so forth. It was only much later that the use of the catapult and the cannon became prevalent in warfare. The Muslim scholars writing at that time were in agreement that it was impermissible to use the catapult or the cannon against civilian populations. Their reasoning was that when laying siege to a city and you bombard it with catapults and cannons, this would necessarily result in the death of non-combatants. So therefore the Muslim army when laying siege to a city of a country to which they were at war, they should not use these weapons that in the modern times we would equate with weapons of mass destruction. Such attitudes show how Islam values the sanctity of life and only permits the taking of the lives of those specific individuals who are actually engaged in warfare on the battlefield. The rules of war The point here is that the rules of war have been unambiguously laid down in Islam. Among these rules, as we have mentioned, is that Islam does not permit the taking of innocent life even when you are at war. Interestingly, some researchers into the code of conduct during war have shown that a large part of the modern rules of engagement were actually adopted by West from the very rules of engagement applied by the Muslims during the wars between the two civilizations in the Middle Ages. Unbelievers with whom Muslims have a treaty Islamic law recognizes three forms of treaties with the unbelievers. [5] A treaty for protective status, or, ‘aqd adh-dhimma A treaty for cessation of hostilities, or ‘aqd al-hudna And a treaty for safe passage, or ‘aqd aman Let us separately investigate each one of these three treaties. Unbelievers under protective status The first form of treaty regards unbelievers, who are known as ahl adh-dhimma. They have been given a covenant that God’s judgment and that of His messenger will be applied to them in perpetuity as they have decided to live on a permanent basis in a land governed by Islamic law. They are allowed to remain upon their religion and in return they pay a tax that is known as the jizya. Unbelievers under a treaty of cessation of hostilities The second type of treaty covers unbelievers who have agreed to refrain from warring against the Muslims. They are referred to as either ahl al-‘ahd, or ahl as-sulh, or ahl al-hudna. They differ from the previous group, ahl adh-dhimma, as they reside in their own lands. Hence Islamic law does not extend to them. The main stipulation for this treaty is that they will refrain from in engaging in any act of warfare against the Muslims. With these unbelievers, God instructs us in the Qur’an with the following: So long as they are true to you, be true to them. (The Qur’an 9:7) In other words, so long as these unbelievers observe their part of the treaty, observe your part of the treaty. The verse then concludes with the following exhortation: Lo! God loveth those who keep their duty. So here in this verse, God teaches us that God loves for the Muslims to uphold their treaties with the unbelievers and that so long as the unbelievers uphold their treaty with us, we are obliged to uphold our treaty with them. Unbelievers under a treaty of safe passage The final treaty covers unbelievers who find themselves in an Islamic land for a short period of time. Here Islamic law recognizes four groups of unbelievers who would fall under this treaty, namely: (1.) emissaries; (2.) traders; (3.) individuals seeking shelter; (4.) and finally individuals in need. In all these cases, these individuals known as al-musta’minun have come to an Islamic land without seeking permanent residence. Again these individuals have asked for safe passage through Islamic lands because they are traders, or members of a diplomatic delegation, or merely just individuals who need to pass through a Muslim land as they seek to go from one end of the earth to another. Regarding these individuals God has very clearly stated: And if anyone of the idolaters seeketh thy protection (O Muhammad), then protect him so that he may hear the word of God, and afterward convey him to his place of safety. (The Qur’an 9:6) In other words afford him the opportunity to be invited to the religion of Islam, and then deliver him to wherever he has asked you to take him. This is a very clear verse in the Qur’an. Based upon this, it is clearly forbidden for Muslims to take the lives of diplomatic embassies, businessmen, individuals passing through Muslim lands, and likewise people in transit that are going from one point of the earth to another point and are required to pass through an Islamic land. Acts of violence perpetuated by Muslims So these are the categories of unbelievers as viewed by Islamic law. If you consider this, then we can frankly say that certain acts of violence perpetrated by Muslims against non-combatant unbelievers over the last ten or fifteen years clearly contradict Islam. It is exceedingly important that Muslims are the first and foremost to condemn and reject such actions. Violence against diplomatic missions Among the directives given by the Prophet was his prohibition that emissaries be killed. [6] The Prophet, likewise, forbade that emissaries be imprisoned. [7] Thus the taking hostage of the US diplomatic mission to Iran some fourteen years ago [8] is an act that the Prophet himself forbade. Unfortunately, it was perhaps this specific act that perhaps began the recent cycle of labeling Muslims as terrorists. All diplomatic missions are considered by the Islamic law to fall under the category of those individuals who have come to the Muslim world under a guarantee of safety, or an aman. Hence they are given safe passage and permitted to remain in a Muslim land for some temporary period of time without fear of any harm to their persons or property. Violence against tourists Similar to the prohibition of violence against diplomatic missions would be violence against tourists as is with the recent events in Egypt. Like diplomats, these people have entered the lands of the Muslims assuming that they will be unharmed. Now whether certain forms of tourism are approved by Islam or not is not the issue here. The issue is that these individuals have come to a Muslim land under the assumption that while in these lands both their person and property will be unharmed. Therefore, to take their lives is a breach on our part of that agreement. Hijacking of airplanes Individuals in transit, like passengers on an airplane that either originates in a Muslim land or happens to stop in a Muslim land, also fall under the category of al-musta’minun. We are required to provide them all assistance they require while they are in transit from one point to another. Consequently, hijacking passenger airplanes is forbidden according to the religion of Islam. If this is the case with merely hijacking an airplane and diverting it from its course, then how much greater would the prohibition be if the hijacking entailed blowing up the airplane resulting in loss to either person and/or property. Deliberate killing of non-combatants To intentionally kill non-combatants (like innocent women and children) would be under any circumstance forbidden irrespective if those women and children are citizens of a country with which Muslims are at war with the Muslims or not and irrespective if there exists an actual formal declaration of war or not. When we witness any of these or similar acts perpetrated by some Muslims, we must condemn these acts. It is very sad to see Muslims ignorant of their religion and not adopting the guidance of the prophet Muhammad. Due to their ignorance they commit these acts assuming they have religious sanction justifying such acts. They therefore smear the religion of Islam by their ignorance. In no way are we trying to be apologetic for our beliefs, however when we find something that our religion forbids we must clearly declare that it is forbidden without any hesitation. These acts when perpetrated by Muslims have led to the perception of Muslims as terrorists in addition to the prejudices that were derived from the historical context to which I alluded. Muslims living in non-Muslim countries The next matter I would like to discuss is with regards to Muslims living under non-Muslim rule. This is the case with Muslims currently residing in the United States, Europe, Australia, or for that matter anywhere in the world where Muslims reside in a non-Muslim country. First it should be pointed out that according to Islamic law, Muslims in general should not seek to live among non-Muslims. This is the ruling of Islamic law even though many Muslims seeking to better their economic fortunes have become lax with regards to this ruling and have chosen to permanently reside among non-Muslims. And yes of course, there are those Muslims, like students, persons seeking medical care, and the like who are in non-Muslim lands only on a temporary basis. These individuals among others would be exempted from the prohibition of residing among non-Muslims. Nevertheless, whether Muslims find themselves in a non-Muslim land on a permanent or temporary basis they are required by Islamic law under all circumstances to uphold their contracts with the unbelievers. When God instructs us by saying: O ye who believe! Fulfill your contracts! (The Qur’an 5:1) This means with everyone, Muslim and non-Muslim alike. So therefore any Muslim who, for instance, comes to the United States and then in order to facilitate his entrance lies, then that individual would be sinful for breaching his contract. Similar in sinfulness to the Muslim who comes to this country on a false pretense, would be, for example, that Muslim who stays in this country illegally after he has given his word that he will remain only for that specific duration allotted to him and then subsequently leave. So if only by such minor breaches of contract a Muslim would be considered sinful, then how much more sinful would a Muslim be if he not only commits such acts but then further proceeds to takes lives that are inviolable by Islamic law. Regarding the taking of any innocent life of an unbeliever, the Prophet has said: Whoever kills an unbeliever protected by a treaty (mu‘ahad) that person would not smell the scent of paradise even though its scent will be smelt from a distance of forty years.[9] This means such individuals who unjustly kill non-Muslims will face the threat of a great punishment on the Day of Judgment of being barred from paradise. I hope this clears up the accusation that Islam condones, let alone promotes, terrorism. Muslims categorically say that what is done by our fellow Muslims from acts of terrorism is indisputably contrary to our religion. The World Trade Center bombing I remember that when I was told that some Muslims were implicated in the World Trade Center bombing. [10] I was very saddened. At that moment, I jotted down on these two sheets of paper some thoughts that came to my mind that illustrate that this act is forbidden in Islam. The first point I wrote was that this act of bombing the World Trade Center, if Muslims did do so, would be counted among the great sins [11] and falls under the category corruption upon earth that God has forbidden. Those who break the covenant of God after ratifying it, and sever that which God has ordered to be joined, and (who) cause corruption on earth: Those are they who are the losers. (The Qur’an 2:27) That was my first point. I also wrote nine other points that are perhaps not directly relevant to our topic. What I would like to emphasize is that according to Islamic law, this act perpetrated by those Muslims is forbidden. It is exceedingly important that we Muslims have no hesitation in declaring that. Yes, we should be strict with our religion. And yes we should hold firm to it. But at the same time, when a Muslim does something criminal we Muslims will all say that it is immoral without any uneasiness on our part to assert that. Fundamentalism The next matter that I will discuss concerns the accusation of fundamentalism. The question of fundamentalism really stems from an issue that it is significant to Protestant theology. Specifically, that following the period referred to as the Enlightenment a debate arose in European Protestant circles as to whether the Bible should be viewed as the literal word of God? In other words, are the events mentioned in the Bible, and in particular those found in the Old Testament, like the creation of Adam or the flood of Noah, are these stories to be taken literally? Or are these stories simply a reflection of the ideas held by the individuals who authored these books. On this matter, Protestant theologians basically divided into two groups: those who accepted these stores as literal and those who did not accept them as literal. The former came to be known as fundamentalists in opposition to those who were more liberal in their views. [12] However, if we were to adopt this original definition of fundamentalism and then attempt to apply it to Muslims, we would find it to be completely without foundation. Why? Because all Muslims believe the Qur’an to be the literal word of God; meaning Muslims believe that God actually spoke the words of the Qur’an to the angel Gabriel who then transmitted it to the prophet Muhammad who in turn proclaimed those very words to all humanity. So since Muslims hold the Qur’an to be God’s literal words, every Muslim would be by the very definition of fundamentalism a fundamentalist! And hence to say “Muslim fundamentalist” is a misnomer as the term fundamentalist in its original context is not really applicable as the question of the validity of the text of the Qur’an is inapplicable. So any Muslim by virtue of being a Muslim is a fundamentalist. You can see that this misconception that there are certain Muslims who are fundamentalist, and therefore necessarily backward in their views, and other vulgar portrayals, is really a problem dealing with their doubts regarding the validity of their own religious beliefs. These doubts that they harbor have caused them this bias against religion as a whole and specifically their own religion. They have then reassigned these biases to the Muslim faith. Again the issue of fundamentalist vs. non-fundamentalist Muslim should not be an issue that needs to be addressed for as we have said every Muslim is a fundamentalist in the sense that he believes the Qur’an to be God’s literal word. This is a stipulation for faith regarding which there is no difference of opinion. [13] Now if the charge of fundamentalist is used to describe how certain Muslims deal with the modern world, as opposed to another group of Muslims who are referred to as modernist; then in actuality, those Muslims who are labeled as fundamentalist often do not differ greatly from what would be considered as proper conduct for change by secular norms. For example, the Algerians who sought to reform their society did so via elections and what would be called here in the US as the democratic process, irrespective if secular democracy is permissible by Islamic law or not. When the military junta in Algeria decided to cancel the elections, usurp the process and further imprison, and then torture the leaders of the FIS there was no uproar or condemnation by anyone in the “Democratic” West. Unfortunately, where the media emphasis is upon is on that minority who commit acts outside the law. In summary, we may say these accusations of terrorism and fundamentalism have an historical context: ancient Christian intolerance against Islam that was then amplified after the period known as the European enlightenment due to the West’s subsequent adoption of humanism as its philosophy and secularism as its political system. It is in this light, that the West continues to look at the Islamic world. These prejudices have been compounded by acts of certain Muslims who regrettably adopt as a method for effecting political change in their society the guidance of Marx rather than that of Muhammad These Muslims engage in activities that are very clearly according to Islamic law– again this is not just one interpretation of some Muslim scholars – against Islam as those acts entail the taking of life forbidden under these circumstances. With this I will conclude my remarks and open the floor for questions and comments. [1] The Qur’an is clear on this subject: There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. (The Qur’an 2:256) The biographical works on the life of the prophet Muhammad, or sira works, provide us with a background to the revelation of this verse namely that when some of the companions of the Prophet became Muslim they then attempted to force their new faith upon their children. God revealed the instructions that there can be no compulsion in religion. [2] Ibn al-Qayyim (died 751 A.H.), Ahkam Ahl adh-Dhimma, Vol. 2, p. 475. [3] Reported by Abu Dawud. [4] Ibn Rushd (died 595 A.H.), Bidayat al-Mujtahid, vol. 1, p. 383. [5] Ibn al-Qayyim, Vol. 2, p. 475. [6] Reported by Abu Dawud and Ahmad. See Mishkat al-Masabih, Vol. 2, p. 847. Ibn Jama‘ah (died 733 A.H.) remarks that in addition to the Prophet’s specific prohibition, the general welfare prohibits such acts. See Tahrir al-Ahkam fi Tadbir Ahl al-Islam, p. 184. Within Islamic law we find a strong tradition of what we would today refer to today as diplomatic immunity. This practice traces back to the direct instructions of the Prophet. These prophetic directives form a nucleus for the rules governing diplomatic missions that were subsequently elaborated upon by scholarly works and the conduct of Muslim rulers during war and peace. [7] Reported by Abu Dawud. See Mishkat al-Masabih, Vol. 2, p. 847. [8] The embassy takeover occurred in November 1979. [9] Reported by Al-Bukkhari. [10] The World Trade Center bombing occurred in March 1993. [11] Sins in Islam are two categories: greater and lesser. Adh-Dhahabi (died 748 A.H.) does not distinguish between murdering a believer and murdering an unbeliever protected by treaty in his book on majors sins. See al-Kaba’ir, p. 43. [12] In his work Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism, George M, Mardsen (1991) writes on the origin of the term fundamentalist: “The vast cultural changes of the era from the 1870s to the 1920s created a major crisis within [the] evangelical coalition. On the one hand were theological liberals who, in order to maintain better credibility in the modern age, were willing to modify some central evangelical doctrines, such as the reliability of the Bible or the necessity of salvation only through the atoning sacrifice of Christ. On the other hand were conservatives who continued to believe the traditionally essential evangelical doctrines. By the 1920s a militant wing of conservatives emerged and took the name fundamentalist.” [13] It should be noted that in addition to the Qur’an, Muslims also view the words and deeds of the prophet Muhammad as authoritative.

Factors determining rating of “Extremely Dangerous cont.:

It is public record that CAIR has close ties to Islamic terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Al Qaeda. As a former Federal Agent I found it astonishing but not surprised by the fact America’s law enforcement at state, county, city and federal levels were identifying with a known Islamic organization such as CAIR that practices hate crimes against America and Americans on a daily basis.

During my 6-month firsthand research in 2008, (For further evidence obtained toward CAIR refer to my book published in 2009, titled ‘Muslim Mafia’) in which I placed 5 of my researchers inside CAIR national, Washington DC, it was revealed CAIR has material in their office calling for support for Al Qaeda, child marriages, the killing of innocent Christians and Jews, slavery, treason and sedition against America, the hatred and belief toward Israel that this country should be wiped off the face of the earth. In addition, CAIR receives and distributes thousands of books from Saudi Arabia by convicted Muslim terrorists such as Ali Al Timimi. One such book is “A Brief Illustrated Guide to Understanding Islam”. Not only does CAIR place these books inside American mosques, but also in our public libraries and schools. This book is likely in the Pensacola public libraries This particular book is very colorful and appears innocent, but the objective of Saudi Arabia and CAIR is for this book to be read by America’s youth. They are then encouraged to read other books and lectures by the authors and editors of this book, which leads to more and more violent and hate filled ideology. This book is used by CAIR to slowly and methodically groom the minds of youth so they will eventually accept Islam and fight in Jihad the enemies of Islam.

In 2009, the FBI was directed to cut off all liaison with CAIR because of their ties to Islamic based terrorist groups.

2 FBI Rejects CAIR- Will No Longer Meet With Hamas Mouthpiece

February 1, 2009 – San Francisco, CA – PipeLineNews.org – According to sources familiar with the matter, the Council on American Islamic Relations [CAIR] has been dealt what could prove to be a mortal blow by the FBI [see, Mary Jacoby, “FBI Cuts Off CAIR Over Hamas Question,” the Investigative Project, http://www.investigativeproject.org/article/985] forced it seems in the wake of the successful prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation [HLF], to re-evaluate its relationship with the terror friendly Hamas mouthpiece. Last autumn, FBI field offices began notifying state CAIR chapters that bureau officials could no longer meet with them until CAIR’s national leadership in Washington had addressed issues raised by the HLF trial, according to people with knowledge of the notifications. Among the key elements in this decision were apparently the naming of CAIR as an unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF case and CAIR’s prominence in organizing demonstrations in support of Hamas during the recent Israeli actions against the terrorist group in Gaza. During these demonstrations, anti-Semitism was a prominent fixture. Critics of the FBI’s long and controversial relationship with CAIR have been pointing out for years, the incongruence of the nation’s top law enforcement organization having any dealings with a group whose sole reason for existence was to serve as a public relations arm for Hamas. CAIR’s ties with HLF were intimate, to the extent that it was HLF funding – in the form of a $5,000 wire transfer – that was used to underwrite the group’s Washington DC office [see, “The Muslim Response To The Holy Land Foundation Guilty Verdict,” http://www.pipelinenews.org/index.cfm?page=hlfid=11.28.08%2Ehtm]. Of particular note, the group’s founders had key roles in Hamas terrorist Mousa Marzook’s Palestinian Committee. “A North American branch of the Brotherhood supervised HLF, CAIR and other organizations to build political, financial and public relations support for Hamas, evidence at the HLF trial showed. The U.S.-based Brotherhood formed a Palestine Committee, headed by Hamas official Mousa Abu Marzook, in 1988 during the first intifada uprising in Palestinian territories against Israel. Hamas’s stated policy is for the destruction of Israel. CAIR co-founders Ahmad and Awad were early active members of the Palestine Committee, evidence showed. Wiretaps recorded the two CAIR leaders participating in strategy meetings of the committee in the 1990s, and both were also on a phone list of its members, the evidence showed.” [source, ibid] While we commend the FBI on this welcome but belated move to sever its relationship with CAIR, there are questions which still need to be answered, among them why this decision took so long. It was the FBI after all, which wire tapped the above referenced 1994 “Philadelphia meeting,” a Hamas strategy session for all intents and purposes, and as a result had full knowledge of the degree to which CAIR and the Palestinian terrorist organization were linked and yet entered into these touchy-feely relationships with the group notwithstanding that in-depth understanding. In the ensuing period of time, acting in full accord with the plan of internal subversion laid out by the Muslim Brotherhood [see, On the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America] to be used against the West, CAIR was allowed to use it relationship with the FBI as a means of establishing faux credibility and legitimacy which allowed it to work its way into other groups, buoyed by DOJ’s imprimatur. We believe that the FBI’s [mirrored by other law enforcement organizations] poor judgment in the past regarding this matter has materially and negatively affected national security, as has its apparent current policy of backing out of these relationships with the terror friendly CAIR in secret and completely without fanfare. From a certain perspective this is understandable; it certainly is embarrassing to have the nation’ s top cops breaking bread with the enemy for so long, however it’s another thing entirely to now attempt to paper over that mistake and not in a very public way explain why CAIR is a tainted organization and therefore not deserving of official recognition at any level. Until that happens, this sad saga is a long way from over. http://www.pipelinenews.org/index.cfm?page=cairid=2.1.09%2Ehtm

Federal Law Enforcement Have Determined CAIR Will Not Be a Liaison Partner with the 2020 Census Bureau Because They Have Ties To Hamas (Ruling Determined in Sept 2019)

RECOMMENDATION:

Provide this sworn affidavit to the public in a mass distribution campaign. Then and only then will America’s senior law enforcement and politicians do the job they have sworn an oath to do (protect America and our children). Do not be fearful of personal attacks or frivolous lawsuits or the name calling (Islamaphobe, haters, racists) that will without a doubt come about. The protection of America, our Constitution and our children should and must be the ultimate goal of all Americans. Seek to have the Islamic book ‘A Brief Illustrated Guide to Understanding Islam’ that has as its editor a convicted Muslim terrorist (Ali Al Timimi) removed from the Pensacola public library and all libraries in Use all legal means to insure Florida, county, city, and state, employees never conduct ANY form of liaison or other contact with the Muslim organization CAIR, which has been identified in federal court to having close ties with the U.S. designated Islamic terrorist organization Coordinate with FBI national HQ and in Fl to demand FBI employees cease meeting with CAIR, as the DOJ mandated in 2009. Christians and Jews in Pensacola should brief their respective religious leaders about the findings of this firsthand research project. Interfaith dialogue between Christian, Jewish, and Muslim leaders is not recommended. Islamic scholars are highly educated and experienced in the Islamic Dawah procedures and can and have easily turned Christian and Jewish leaders against their own congregations. Foreign military personnel who are Muslim should not be allowed onto U.S. military bases. Both mosques in Pensacola mentioned in this report should immediately have their IRS approved nonprofit status removed and be closed down. Islamic scholars from Saudi and Iran admit Jihad Qital (fighting and having armies in the name of Islam) is and always has been a major part of the Islamic ideology. No religion itself should be allowed in America that has a strategic structure to form fighting militaries. Sharia law is in no way compatible to the U.S. Constitution.

WARNING: There will be an escalation of attacks toward innocent people in Florida because politicians, senior law enforcement, and the liberal media allow Islam to flourish.

IN CLOSING:

Florida as a whole is a hotbed of Islamic terrorist sleeper cells. When the call to Jihad comes or limited acts of terrorism are needed, the Muslim community in Florida are in place and ready to carry out acts of violence toward innocent people.

In the report I mentioned child marriages being allowed in Sharia law, but I feel it is needed to mention one additional statement regarding this. During the time around 2012 one of my female researchers and I went to Nashville, TN, to conduct firsthand research at a Somalian Islamic mosque. Allegedly a group of Somalians had left MN and subsequently formed a mosque in Nashville. During the research I observed numerous books in the mosque library pertaining to the marriage of young girls. In addition, we observed small children being hit with sticks during Sharia classes. During one such sharia class a young girl began speaking to my female researcher. The girl told my researcher her arms, back, and legs were hurting because Islamic leaders hit the children during classes. Then the young girl, who said she was 7 (seven) years old started talking about what her HUSBAND did to her. I immediately informed law enforcement at various levels, senior politicians, and even CAIR requesting assistance to help this innocent child. They all refused stating it was a religious and culture matter and they could not intervene. Finally, after several months Child Protective Services responded and helped the child.

“Our American military and law enforcement officers have died by the thousands to protect our Country, Constitution, and Children (3 C’s). They do not run from the enemy and American citizens must never run from the enemy, especially inside our great country. To do so will result in an automatic defeat”. Dave Gaubatz

Electronically Signed, 13 Jan 2020

PAUL DAVID GAUBATZ

Retired USAF, Retired U.S. Federal Agent, Active American Patriot