Fitzgerald: Is the Pentagon watching da'wa? If they aren't, shouldn't they?

What are the parts of Jihad? If you'd only be partially right if you said suicide bombers and other violence. Jihad is the struggle for Islam using any means possible. Thus, if the Pentagon or others are is serious about winning the "War on Terror," or the War against Islamism or Islamic extremism, they would also look into the struggle meted out through the economic system, the education system, and so on. And system not thought of is da'wa, the calling to Islam, or proselytizing by Muslims whether cleric or laymen.

How many new Muslims are out there that have been turned against the United States and, perhaps, are ready to do harm to the country and Americans for the sake of Islam?

The Pentagon may patrol the internet for evidence of "terrorism," but have they thought of extremists that are "only proselytizing?"

Here's Hugh Fitzgerald at JihadWatch:

The Pentagon, we are told, is watching “Jihadi” websites closely. Of course, what one wishes to hear is not only that a few dozen people are surfing "Jihadi" websites, but also vigilantly visiting and recording the contents of the mainstream websites of Muslims in the West to keep track of the advice given on how to conduct Da'wa (targeting what particularly vulnerable populations) and on how to win over Infidels.

Many Muslim sites are worth following. The government should be tracking all the advice given to Muslims on Muslim websites as to how to "present" Islam. The very idea that one must be told how to do it, what rhetorical and other strategies to employ, should astonish. But a study of, and collection of, such advice (everything from being sure to offer food, or concentrating on subjects such as Ramadan and the five canonical prayers, and denying or avoiding entirely the subjects of Jihad and of course the Dhimmi -- a word no Muslim will ever voluntarily bring up or discuss with Infidels), should also be the subject not only of Pentagon surfers, but of others tracking the infiltration everywhere in the countries of the West.

For example, several leading Muslim websites explain to "brothers" that, when Infidels ask questions about the treatment of women, make sure that you "allow" a "Muslimah" to reply. That will show that women are fully independent, as they tell one and all how delighted they are to carry around the "portable seclusion" of the burqah or the warning-sign of the hijab, and just how wonderful it is to be a Muslim woman. A "revert" will usually be more enthusiastic about this -- and you don't want any female ex-Muslims from the Middle East coming in and spoiling things. It would not do, after all, to have the Muslim men take the lead and discuss how wonderful women have it with those Muslimahs silent in the background, but since it would possibly not occur to all of them to let the Muslimahs speak on this occasion for public-relations purposes, they must be told at these websites to do so.

Or, as has previously been posted here, a great deal of attention is given as to how to win favors from school administrators and teachers, for prayer rooms and so on. Parents are instructed to be "polite and soft-spoken at first," and then to raise holy hell only if their demands are thwarted. Nothing, of course, is said about the First Amendment and Constitutional limits. Nothing is said about offending Infidels or about what would happen if non-Muslims made similar demands -- made any demands at all, come to think of it -- in Muslim countries.

No, it is all a matter of tactics. Demonstrate sweet reason. And invite teachers and principals home for a good meal. Food is the way to an Infidel's heart. It is the most important part of the false-show-and-false-tell of all those Mosque Outreach programs, and of those phony "Muslim-Christian" and "Muslim-Jewish Dialogues" which are always and everywhere special pleading on behalf of Islam, with nothing owned up to about the contents of the Qur'an and Hadith (oh, the Hadith and Sira are NEVER mentioned), nothing about the 1350-year Jihad-conquests and subjugation of non-Muslims. Show them that Muslims are good family men, etc. Show them that we have family.

One hopes that all this information on How to Present Islam to Infidels will be the subject of many articles, and even books -- financed by foundations and, hone hopes, also Western governments. They need to track the advice given, and forewarn Infidels just how it all works. Their duty is to protect, and part of protection requires, in this case, instruction in the tactics and strategems of the Defenders, and Spreaders, of Islam. Taqiyya and kitman do not cover everything; oozing attempts to curry favor (sometimes with curry) are also part of the game.

Those entrusted with the defense of the United States should be working on a guide to all the techniques used, and to the half-dozen Qur'anic passages, and apocryphal (inauthentic) Hadiths (the one about Muhammad returning from war, from "the Lesser Jihad to the Greater Jihad," is an especial favorite), that are commonly quoted. Sometimes these are invoked not only by the cunning but also by innocent Muslims who want to believe that the Happy Face of Islam they present to the Infidels can, if only we all agree to play Let’s Pretend, the real thing. They attempt this in some cases for their own sanity, so that they can in good conscience remain Muslims. Who wants to face up to the history of the real contents of that belief-system? Very few, and only very reluctantly. But the Happy Face of Islam cannot, and will not, become the real thing. Hundreds of millions of people will refuse to play.

If the Pentagon isn't paying attention to these sites as well, they should do so post haste.