Category: Books

Twilight in America (the untold Story of Islamic Terrorist Training Camps Inside America)
by Martin Mawyer with Patti A. Pierucci

October 25, 2012 in Featured, Officer Safety, Posts, Terrorism by Martin Mawyer

“They are asleep. They are a bomb. Here is the scariest part … Anything can happen with MOA (Muslims of Americas) at any time.”

Those are the words of a young Muslim man named Ali Aziz. Who is he? And what is this dangerous “MOA” that he refers to?

The existence of dozens of Islamic guerrilla warfare training camps located in rural neighborhoods throughout America, and the serious crimes they have already committed—and are planning to commit—should be of concern to all law enforcement officers.

The group known as Muslims of the Americas (MOA), which itself is a front group for a radical terrorist group called Jamaat Al Fuqra (Arabic for “community of the impoverished”), has established dozens of training camps throughout the United States. The group is led by a Muslim cleric in Pakistan, Sheikh Mubarik Gilani.

Aziz told his story exclusively to me, revealing that he worked as an undercover informant for eight years for the New York Police Department (NYPD). During that time, he lived on MOA camps and worked closely with MOA leadership, all the time supplying the NYPD with information about illegal activity on the camps—including guerilla combat training to prepare members for terrorist attacks against the United States.
The Muslims of America’ are suing ‘Christian Action Network’ for exposing their terrorist training camps around the United States
They are suing Matin J. Mawyer of the Christian Action Network for $15 million in damages for defamation and libel and are attempting to stop the sale of his book ‘Twilight in America.’


“The Common Word” by Sam Solomon and E Al Maqdisi

How Islam has deceived the main line Christian Denominations in America into compromised partnership. The ELCA is one of the signers of a document stating that Quran and the Bible have common origins and content. This is totally false. Jews and Christians from the time of the first writing of the Quran rejected it as being inspired by God.

Dhimma—Treaty of protection that may be granted to “People of the Book” (Jews and Christians) following their defeat by Muslim forces.

Dhimmi—Literally “protected”; non-Muslim, non-pagan (usually Jewish or Christian and Zoroastrians) inhabitants of Islamic lands subjected to discriminatory laws and the jizya or poll tax.

Dhimmitude—word coined by Bat Ye’or to describe the status of Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians conquered but not killed or converted by Islamic jihad.

Definitions from: “Religion of Peace” by Gregory M. Davis

World War III is On, Now

Chapter Two -Bad Language- of Gregory M. Davis’ book Religion of Peace says, “One can only imagine what the reaction would have been following Pearl Harbor had President Roosevelt requested a declaration of war against “sneak attacks” rather than against the empire of Japan. Fighting a “war” against “terror” permits the powers that be to avoid facing the awkward reality that we are in war with Islam. “But to blame a religion for causing violence transgresses the unwritten speech codes of today, so instead we get righteous indignation toward “terrorism” but not toward the religion that spawns it.” Bad language creates bad foreign policy that kills people.

Book List: Religion of Peace

Add to your reading list the Book, Religion of Peace, by Gregory M. Davis. This is an excellent book that includes many generalizations that hit the nail on the head about questions everyone needs to have answered. Quote page 8: “Because there would be no obvious solution (except all out war) to such a titanic problem (Islamic terrorism), there must not be a problem at all (denial).” Quote page 10: “Westerners may no longer be willing to sacrifice themselves for their gods, but they are impossibly naive if they think that the rest of the world shares their apathy.”

Parents: Be alert to the fact that teachers sometimes use comic books to teach reading. Watch out for this comic book, especially in the elementary grades.

Muslim superhero, victim of “Islamophobia,” to join “Green Lantern” comic book series

The latest hero for DC Comics was inspired by the diverse background of its creator.
Chief creative officer and writer Geoff Johns used his Lebanese ancestry and childhood in the Detroit suburbs to shape the comic label’s most prominent Arab-American and Muslim superhero yet.
The story begins with the character’s family watching the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the suspicion and ostracism that followed for many Muslims and Arabs.

The truth doesn’t need propaganda efforts: it is manifest. It is the Big Lie that needs constant reinforcement, constant repetition, because otherwise it would collapse under the weight of its own unreality. And so the proponents of the concept of “Islamophobia” have constantly to nag at us, and to insinuate themselves into every possible quarter, even children’s comic books, to push their fictional idea that Muslims are victims in the United States, where in fact they enjoy greater freedom here than they do in Muslim countries. But the goal of the victimhood game is to deflect attention away from jihad and Islamic supremacism. The creators of Simon Baz, wittingly or unwittingly, are abetting that victimhood mythology, and its sinister goal.

See web post below:

Masters of Audacity and Deceit

Masters of Audacity and Deceit   by William E. Bean

“This story begins with humiliation: a U.S. warship- the first ever in the Mediteranean Sea- sailing into the harbor of Algiers to pay protection money to Algerine ruler Dey Bobba Mustafa.” September 1800 Dey orders Captian Brainbridge to carry a treasure to Constantinople then under the power of the Ottoman Empire. The Captian objects. Dey replies, “You (The United States of America) pay tribute, by which you become my slaves. I have therefore, a right to order you as I think proper.” p4

(Stay tuned)

“The Common Word” by Sam Solomon and E Al Maqdisi

Commentary: How Islam has deceived the main line Christian Denominations in America into compromised partnership. The ELCA is one of the signers of a document stating that Quran and the Bible have common origins and content. This is totally false. Jews and Christians from the time of the first writing of the Quran rejected it as being inspired by God.

Excellence Reference:
The following article “The Common Word among Us” is from:

On 12 September 2006, Pope Benedict XVI delivered a speech at the University of Regensburg which also contained some comments on Islam that elicited protests by Muslims from around the world, see the Wikipedia article Pope Benedict XVI Islam controversy. It is no surprise that Muslim leaders came to the conviction that public critique of Islam from such a high-ranking and influential person needed a public response. On October 12, 2006, 38 top Muslim scholars and clerics, published an Open Letter to the Pope (cf. this response). On October 11, 2007, one year after the release of the open letter to the Pope, a larger group of 138 Muslim scholars, clerics and intellectuals sent another open letter, entitled A Common Word Between Us and You, to Pope Benedict and the leaders of other Christian denominations.

This latter declaration has received responses from many people and institutions. The most highly publicised response was written by a group of four academics from the University of Yale, entitled Loving God and Neighbor Together. This response has been endorsed by over 300 Christian leaders from around the world. But it has also received a good measure of critique.

The Muslim letter, A Common Word Between Us and You, is a carefully crafted document, containing subtlety that is not easily detected, and some statements may mean something different than they appear to say at first glance. It is a large document which cannot be evaluated in only a few paragraphs. In the following, we present links to comments and evaluations of both the Muslim open letter as well as the Yale response. These links are mostly of a critical nature since we feel that a counterbalance and deeper reflection is needed to the often uncritical praise and support of these documents. The first entries in the two lists of responses are carefully written comprehensive replies, the latter entries are postings on blogs that pick out one or two issues that they are commenting upon. On the blog postings, sometimes the discussion that comes after the blog entry is valuable as well.

A review of God’s Battalions. By Rodney Stark.

HarperOne, 2009. (Available in Australia at Koorong Books)

Very few people have much good to say about the Crusades nowadays. Most think it was a terrible blight on Christian history, and cannot be condoned or justified in any way. Certainly during the past few centuries, Christianity has been attacked, and people have sought to discredit the faith, partly on the basis of the Crusades.

In such an atmosphere, this new book by Rodney Stark is as about as revolutionary as they come. He takes head on myth after myth surrounding the Crusades, and makes the case that the Crusades not only had their place, but were in fact in many ways justifiable. He clearly demonstrates that modern histories about the Crusades are among the great hatchet jobs of recent times.

Dispelling the many myths about the Crusades takes guts, and someone with the right intellectual and academic qualifications. Stark is certainly the man for the job: he has become one of our finest writers on the sociology and history of religion, and is unafraid to go against the tide.



Buy this from Amazon:

God’s Battalions: The Case for the Crusades

by Rodney Stark

Click Here


In this important volume he debunks the historical revisionism (which is often coupled with anti-Christian bigotry) about the Crusades to offer us a more sober and clear picture of what in fact took place. He notes that it was especially during the time of the Enlightenment and onwards that critics claimed that the Crusaders were mainly Western imperialists, those who set out after land and loot.

Moreover, the contrast is often made between the bloodthirsty barbaric Christians, and the peace-loving Muslims. But as Stark persuasively documents, none of this is close to the truth. The real story is this: the Crusades were certainly provoked, and the Crusaders were mainly concerned to free the Holy Lands from Muslim oppression and to protect religious pilgrims who travelled there.

Indeed, to properly understand the Crusades, a lot of background information needs to be considered. That is why Stark spends the first hundred pages of his book looking at the 600-year period of Muslim conquests and dhimmitude.

The story of course begins in the seventh century when Muslim armies swept over the Middle East, North Africa, and southern Europe. One Christian land after another was attacked and conquered by advancing Muslim forces.

Stark reminds us that Muhammad told his followers, “I was ordered to fight all men until they say ‘There is no god but Allah.’” Therefore a century after his death vast swathes of territory hung under the bloody sword of Islam.

And what of the conquered Christians living under Islamic rule? They, along with Jews, were known as dhimmis. While revisionist historians and Muslim apologists speak of Muslim tolerance here, the “truth about life under Muslim rule is quite different”.

Indeed, the subject peoples had few options: death, enslavement or conversion were the only avenues open to them. Dhimmitude was no picnic. Death was the fate of anyone who dared to convert out of Islam. No churches or synagogues could be built. There was to be no public praying or reading of Scripture. They were at best treated as second-class citizens, and at worst, punished and killed.

And massacres of Jews and Christians were quite common in the centuries leading up to the Crusades. In 1032-1033 in Morocco alone, there were over six thousand Jews murdered. Jerusalem fell to the Muslims in 638. The Dome of the Rock was built from 685 to 691, and churches and synagogues were levelled in the ensuing centuries.

The condition of Christians in Jerusalem was pretty appalling during this period, as was the plight of penitent pilgrims seeking to enter Jerusalem. They suffered much persecution, and risked their lives simply to travel to the holy city. The destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre – along with thousands of other Christian churches – under the bloody reign of Tariqu al-Hakim at the end of the first millennia simply served as the climax to all this misery and outrage.

It is in this light of six centuries of Islamic conquest, bloodshed and tyranny that the Crusades must be viewed. They were not always pretty, but life in general back then was not pretty. If Crusader excesses took place, this was just par for the course, as excesses by Muslims and others were more than commonplace.

As Stark reminds us, “Granted, it was a cruel and bloody age, but nothing is to be gained either in terms of moral insights or historical comprehension by anachronistically imposing the Geneva Convention on these times.”

He looks at the various Crusades, dealing with the host of mythologies that have grown up around them. One is the fanciful depiction of Saladin as some gallant, humane Muslim resisting those bloodthirsty Christians. For example, when he re-conquered Jerusalem in 1187, the city was spared a massacre.

But the rules of warfare back then stipulated that cities would be spared if they were not forced to be taken by storm. So while bloodshed was limited, “half the city’s Latin Christian residents were marched away to the slave markets”.

And as Stark reminds us, Jerusalem was the exception to Saladin’s normal style. Savage butchery of his enemies was his usual habit. Indeed, he had been looking forward to massacring the inhabitant of Jerusalem, but a compromise was struck which prevented this. But he had plenty of other opportunities to let the blood flow freely, often at his own hand.

Then there is the myth that the Crusades have been a longstanding grievance amongst Muslims. Not so argues Stark: “Muslim antagonism about the Crusades did not appear until about 1900, in reaction against the decline of the Ottoman Empire”.

Christians today can well argue whether the Crusades were in fact warranted. But any such discussion about the pros and cons of the matter must be made under a clear understanding of what exactly transpired and why. This book admirably serves that purpose, and must be the starting point for any future debates over the topic.