STARRS Podcast

STARRS Town Hall: "The Threat of the Red-Green Axis" with speaker John Guandolo

• STARRS • Season 5 • Episode 33

Share episode

In this powerful and eye-opening STARRS Town Hall, guest speaker John Guandolo (USNA '89 grad, former Marine officer and FBI Special Agent) outlined his path from FBI counterterrorism work to training government and local entities on the “Red-Green Axis” — the collaboration between Islamist and Marxist movements. He talked about how the U.S. is engaged in a non-kinetic war primarily in the information and counterintelligence space. He explained how Islamist and communist networks operate together at the local level across the country and view themselves in late-stage victory.

John discussed how Sharia is the doctrinal basis for jihad and governance in normative Islam, is taught consistently to Muslim youth, and that Western leaders mischaracterize Islam due to influence operations and deceptive language use. He says U.S. policy fixates on “violent extremism” (a term he argues has no legal meaning) rather than legally defined enemies (e.g., jihadis, communists), which blinds institutions to the true threat and leads to strategic failure.

John said Islamic Sharia-based movements seek to replace the US Constitution, so anyone who swore an oath to the Constitution has a duty to defend it against such efforts--foreign and domestic.

For more information about John as a speaker and the training he offers, go to JohnGuandolo.com. Follow him on X @JGuandolo54271

_______________________________________

For more information about STARRS, go to our website: https://starrs.us which works to eliminate the divisive Marxist-based CRT/DEI/Woke agenda in the Department of Defense and to promote the return to a warfighter ethos of meritocracy, lethality, readiness, accountability, standards and excellence in the military.

Join our Mailing List for our weekly newsletter on this issue.

Follow STARRS:
X | Facebook | LinkedIn | Rumble | YouTube | Truth | Gettr | Gab

Support the Mission: Make a tax-deductible donation to STARRS.


Ron Scott:

Let's go and get started. Uh welcome everybody. Uh apologies for the late start. Uh we discovered that just as we're getting ready to to go on the air, we got notices that uh Verizon and uh some of the nationwide cell towers are down now. So most of this is through the internet. So welcome to another STARRS Town Hall. On behalf of Major General Bentley Rayburn, our board chair, and other members of our leadership team, I am Ron Scott, President CEO of STARRS, and your host for today. So to get this started off properly, Cindy, would you bring up the American flag? And uh everyone, please join me in our Pledge of Allegiance. And to the Republic of which is statute, one nation to the other god, indivisible with liberty, liberty, and justice for all. Thank you, everyone. Let me cover some administrative remarks real quick before we get started. Those in attendance today include senior and junior officers. We're talking at the three-star level. I don't see any four-stars on this call today, enlisted men and women, non-veteran patriots, and our colleagues in the media. We are recording the session and we will post it on the stars website. Please mute your microphones unless speaking, and to speak, we ask that you use the raise your hands icon available on the toolbar at the bottom of the screen. Comments and questions are welcome in the chat box. For follow-up responses, please provide your contact information. Today's lineup, a presentation by Mr. John Guandolo, a QA session, and closing remarks from our board chair, General Raver. So at this point, it is my pleasure and honor to introduce today's guest speaker, Mr. John Guandolo. John is a Naval Academy graduate, a Marine, a former special agent with the FBI, and most importantly, a nationally acclaimed expert on what is called the red-green axis. So without any further ado, over to you, John.

John Guandolo:

Thanks very much, Ron, and thanks to all of you for uh for being on here. Uh what I, you know, in contemplating what to present, I do have I'm gonna share some things with you. Um, but I'd like to walk through uh the threats, and I'm gonna focus domestically, but I'm also uh I'm gonna begin by kind of sharing my journey because I've found over the years that helps people frame um uh your understanding as well as uh the questions that that might pop up, uh if that hopefully makes sense to everybody. Um so when I came out of the Marine Corps, I was uh I joined the FBI and I was assigned to the Washington Field Office, which is where I spent the bulk of my career in Washington, D.C. for almost 13 years. Um and after about five years in the criminal division, uh after 9-11, I was moved over to the counterterrorism division. And my uh supervisor at the time was a uh Naval Academy grad Marine tanker who also had been a pilot. Um and basically he was one of two supervisors tapped with creating a new unit at the Washington Field Office to be a very aggressive counter-terrorism uh unit. And through a series of investigations, a few things uh kind of fell into my lap. One through uh investigating the Muslim chaplain program and the linguist program inside DoD came to realize that the certifying authorities for the Muslim chaplain program, uh number one, the Muslim chaplain program was founded by an al-Qaeda guy uh named Abdur Rahman al-Amoodi, and the the two organizations certifying Muslim chaplains for the DoD were both Hamas Muslim Brotherhood organizations. Uh, and that didn't make sense. But as I unpacked it, I came to see that the largest Islamic organizations in the United States uh were hostile, and the leaders were the exclusive advisors to our government on uh you know jihadis telling us how to defeat jihadis like Al-Qaeda, later Islamic State, ISIS, and others. Um from the investigative work, I started creating training programs inside the government for not only FBI but other agencies as well as uh police officers, analysts, and uh that that work culminated in the summer of 2006 with a program I created, a two-week training about not just the global Islamic movement and the Islamic movement in the United States, uh, but also by that time the communist movement, which had been working since right after, I mean, beforehand, but more overtly after 9-11 with the Islamic movement in the United States. Um, so groups like Communist Party USA, Democratic Socialists Answer, uh, REVCOM, Code Pink, Green Party, uh, all of those working together with Hamas groups like uh the Council on American Islamic Relations, Islamic Society in North America, Islamic Circle of North America, Muslim American Society, Muslim Student Associations, all these other Muslim Brotherhood groups. And so started training. Uh, and then at the end of 2008, was recruited out of the FBI by the Department of Defense to work in the irregular warfare section. And myself and Steve Coghlin, who was also recruited out of the joint staff where he was working for General Pace, the chairman, um, we worked together and briefed senior leaders, and we became the first two guys inside the government briefing uh on these on these issues. And I'll just kind of start at the at the top is that um the enemy we were fighting, and I'll just start with Al-Qaeda at the time, uh, stated unequivocally that what they were doing, uh they were waging jihad in order to establish a caliphate under Sharia, Islamic law, Allah's divine law. And Sharia was the doctrine for which they were fighting, and the doctrine it was the law that they seek to impose on the entire earth. So American warfighting doctrine requires us to analyze an enemy based on who they say they are and why they're fighting. And a look, a intellectual and practical and war-fighting review of normative Islamic law reveals that in fact uh Islamic law exists, it's real law, it has real consequences, and in fact, Al-Qaeda and ISIS and Hezbollah are actually following it. And it's consistent uh with what is taught to 10-year-old Muslim children in U.S. Islamic schools. Uh and so that creates a different problem. Uh, if we say that the problem has nothing to do with Islam, then we're literally telling the entire warfighting uh apparatus of the U.S. government, the entire intelligence community, don't look for the answer where the answer resides. And uh I would argue um that that's why we lost wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria. It's why the U.S. government wrote constitutions for Iraq and Afghanistan, uh, making Sharia the law of the land, because we we had no, um, and I believe we still don't have a good strategic understanding of what it is and its role. So what I've been doing both inside and outside the government is training uh national state and local officials and citizens uh about not just that, but the networks that exist, because currently the Islamic movement and the communist movement are operating seamlessly at the local level across the United States. And from their perspective, from the enemy's perspective, they're in the final stages and are uh there there seems to be nothing in their way uh to victory. And I would I would concur with that assessment. Um we are looking at it from almost exclusively a kinetic perspective, and yet the war they're waging against the United States is primarily being done uh overall in the information warfare battle space, but uh it's counterintelligence, espionage, subversion, economic warfare, uh, and the like. And we're not addressing it um strategically or operationally at those levels. And when we do, it's um we have a pretty underwhelming effect on the enemy. Um so that's the intro, if you will. What I'd like to do, if we can, and I do I want to say at the outset, because I normally do say this, um, a couple things. Um one, I encourage questions, I encourage uh pushback. Um I've been doing this a long time, and I find the discussion is much more fruitful. Um, if you don't hold back, uh, because if you do hold back and you get off the call and just grumble about something, uh that's not doing you or anybody else on this call any good. And I from what uh Cindy and and I understand about stars, I don't think that's gonna be a problem, but I'm just wanted to say that out loud. Um so what I'd like to do is I'd like to share um my screen. And um I think I can, oh, it's not turned on. So am I allowed to share? No, okay, I can.

Ron Scott:

Yeah, go ahead.

John Guandolo:

Okay, there. So what I'm gonna do is I'm gonna share my screen. Let me uh move this down, and what I'm gonna do is um uh put this down, and I'm just gonna can you all see that screen with my name? Yes. Yes, okay. So what I'm gonna do is I want to play a video. It's about a minute and 40 seconds, and uh I'm gonna play it for a few seconds, and then I'm just gonna ask if everyone can hear it and if the audio is good. It should. This usually works, but who knows? Uh it's a mixed bag, so stand by. Well, just in case.

Speaker:

Every now and then, every time we have a conference, everyone could everyone hear that?

John Guandolo:

Yes, sir. Okay, here we go.

Speaker:

Every now and then, every time we have a conference, every time we invite a speaker, they always can come with the same accusations. This speaker supports the death penalty for homosexuals, this speaker supports death penalty for this crime, or this crime, or that is homophobic, they subjugate women, etc. etc. etc. It's the same old stuff coming all the time. And we always try to tell them, I always try to tell them that look, it's not that speaker that we're inviting who has these extreme radical views, as you say. These are general views that every Muslim actually has. Every Muslim believes in these things. Just because they're not telling you about it, just because they're not out there in the media doesn't mean they don't believe in them. So I'm gonna ask you, everyone in the room, how many of you are normal Muslims, you're not extremist, you're not radical, normal Sunni Muslims? Please raise your hands. Everybody must Allah. Okay, take down a minute, okay. Next question. How many of you agree that the punishment described in the Quran and the Sunnah, whether it is death, whether it is stoning for adultery, whatever it is, if it is from Allah and His Messenger, that is the best punishment ever possible for humankind. And that is what we should apply in the world. Who agrees with that? Allahu Akbar. Are you all radical extremists?

John Guandolo:

Okay, so the point uh to be made here is um that uh if you caught what he said, just because we're not telling you, just because we're not out in the media sharing this, these are views held by uh you know all Muslims. And if you actually, again, um one of the things I'll be speaking from this book, What Islam is all about, is the most widely used textbook in U.S. uh Islamic schools. Um, and we found it across the country. They sell it at Islamic conferences. Uh, we found it on military bases to teach uh adults, actually, but it's for 12-year-old, seventh graders. And uh there's nothing in there that contradicts what Al-Qaeda and ISIS and Hamas and Iran teach about Islam. And um so the point to be made is are we at war? And if we're at war, who we are we at war with? Because the focus uh from the uh governmental side, like DHS, FBI, et cetera, and from the military side and the law enforcement side has been to put all of our focus on the violence. And yet, in reality, the violence is a very small part of the war that's being waged against us. So I want to I want to lay some things on the table. So uh there's a jihadi who now runs New York City, Mayor Mamdani. And uh I like to use this photo because number one, he put it out. That was a publicity photo for him. And the guy, as you're looking at the picture to his right, is Siraj Wahaj, uh who is a senior Muslim Brotherhood leader in the United States, an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, uh, a guy who was a character witness in the trial for Al-Qaeda's blind sheikh, Omar Abdel Rahman, and whose children were arrested because in New Mexico they built a terrorist training camp to train children how to wage jihad in the United States. And yet he's still walking around free. Uh, Abdul Rahman al-Amoudi was the founder and leader of two dozen of the largest Islamic charities in North America. As I mentioned a moment ago, he founded the Muslim Chaplain Program for the Department of Defense. He was a goodwill ambassador for the State Department and actually participated in Middle East peace talks on behalf of the United States. And in fact, he was arrested in 2003 at London's Heathrow Airport with $340,000 cash uh for the global jihad. And as it turns out, he was the largest fundraiser for al-Qaeda in North America, and uh he was uh involved in a number of plots, including a plot to kill Saudi Crown Prince uh Abdullah with Al-Qaeda operatives. Uh but he was also for eight years the advisor to President Clinton and was brought into the Bush camp to advise them on Islamic issues before Mr. Bush was sworn in. Now, I just I want you to just contemplate a few things. Uh an al-Qaeda guy founded the Muslim Chaplain Program in the Department of Defense. So it should not be shocking that for the DoD and the Bureau of Prisons, the certifying agencies are a Muslim Brotherhood organization. Muslim Brotherhood, whose uh stated objective in their bylaws is exactly the same as Al-Qaeda. Um so I'll lay that on the table. The second thing I maybe you want to contemplate is how's the FBI vetting and Secret Service vetting? How's that going? Something to think about. Now, after 9-11, uh George Bush spoke at the Islamic Center of Washington, D.C., which is a jihadi mosque, and uh literally over one shoulder he had Nihawad next to him, the leader of Hamas United States, and over the other shoulder he had Alamudi, the Al-Qaeda guy's deputy Khalid Safari. Because this is influence operations, this is counterintelligence, espionage, subversion, this is about information control. And if these are the guys influencing presidents, vice presidents, national security advisors, chairman of Homeland Security Committee, chairman of intelligence committee in the House, uh, generals and admirals, um, and governors, state legislators, pastors, uh, this is why we not only are losing the war, but it's why we have an understanding of the war that's exactly opposite of what it is. Um, if we bring it to today and look at the Trump administration, we have numerous Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas operatives working inside. And I just want to focus on two. The guy kind of in the center at the bottom there, Randall Royer, who goes by the name of Ishmael Royer after he converted. Uh, this was a case that my squad at the Washington Field Office of the FBI worked. And Randall Royer um was a terrorist, uh, is a terrorist, who first fought overseas as a mujahideen in Chechnya, came back to the United States, went back overseas, uh, went through a terrorist training camp, Lashkari Taiba, a designated terrorist group, and then came back to Northern Virginia to recruit people to go fight for Lashkari Taiba and others. And uh he was sentenced to 20 years in prison. He served, I believe, 14 years in prison, and now serves on the Trump administration's commission for religious liberty. And the benchmark for how we know he's no longer a jihadi is because he said so. That apparently is today's professional standard. So um that's that's one guy. The guy above him, Hamza Yusuf, is one of the senior Islamic jurists. Or scholars for Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood in North America. He's met with President Trump several times and is also on the U.S. Commission for Religious Liberty under the Trump administration, appointed by uh Mr. Trump. So I just want you to think, how is this possible? And I think that's pretty much the question. Here's another one. Uh, this is the original program for the Trump inauguration, the most recent one, Mr. Trump's inauguration. And when I saw this, this was put out on social media, I then immediately posted that Imam Al-Husseini is a Hezbollah guy. And uh that was very disturbing that uh a Hezbollah guy was being invited to the Trump inauguration. Well, after I put the post out, about 10 minutes later, I got a call and someone said, Do you have evidence of this? And of course, this is someone who knew me and knew I wouldn't put it out unless it was what it is. And I said, Yeah, but you can Google that guy's name. He's an easy one. Uh, but I I was asked to send a few bullet points, and I did. And what this person did was they called into the president's chief of staff directly, gave that uh Ms. Wiles the information, and uh I got a call back again about 10 minutes later, and was told that that guy was uninvited, but they were inviting another guy. And I said, Before you give me his name, here's what I will tell you there is a 100% chance he is also a hostile, he's a jihadi. Uh, because you don't get invited to these things unless you are. And of course, they gave me the name. I did a like a one-pager sent it back, and then that guy was not invited. And as it turned out, they switched the inauguration inside, and none of these guys spoke. Um, again, here's some questions or issues to think about. Who was fired because they invited a Hezbollah guy to the Trump inauguration? Uh, and you're probably guessing the answer is nobody was fired. What internal investigations were done, and what change of vetting procedure was done uh to keep this from happening in the future? And according to people inside the White House that I'm talking to, nothing was changed. It's like nobody cared that a Hezbollah guy got invited to the Trump inauguration. So I'll just put that on the table for you. Now, uh Rabul Showdri uh is on the executive board of a Hamas organization called the Council on American Islamic Relations. Uh, I have something on my website, johnguandolo.com, a document entitled Care is Hamas, listing uh pages of evidence. But the short story is the Council on American Islamic Relations was the fourth organization created by the Muslim Brotherhoods, the U.S. Muslim Brotherhoods Palestine Committee, which is Hamas in the U.S. per evidence and the largest terrorism financing trial in American history. This guy sits on the executive board uh in Pennsylvania for care, and he's in the Trump White House. Um I'll just put that on the table. And then you've got this uh Al-Qaeda leader who killed and tortured Americans, our guys overseas, Muhammad al-Jul Jalani, uh, who now goes by a different name and he's the interim president of Syria. So he gets invited into the White House and his ass is kissed on international TV, and um he's told that he's a good guy by the president of the United States. Now, I want to make clear, I understand that uh there are certain decisions made about how we're gonna deal with something in the immediate, but the purpose of me sharing this is we need to understand this through the lens of the enemy. And the Islamic movement, the global Islamic movement, only understands everything through the lens of sharia. And Islamic law, Allah's divine law, sharia, mandates, obliges jihad when the Islamic community has the ability and the resources to wage it. And when the enemy, us, demonstrates weakness, submission, uh, they are required to wage jihad much more brutally and aggressively. So, regardless of what the intent politically is of these actions, having these people inside your administration, known terrorists, uh, what the message is, both internationally to the hostile countries and to the hostile organizations, be it Al-Qaeda, ISIS, Tabliki, Jamaadi Islami, the Dio Bandis, the Muslim Brotherhood, uh, the message is America is surrendering, so we need to we need to slaughter Americans with in a in a quicker and much more violent way. So that's the message that's gone out, and I can tell you the intelligence that we have is that's been the topic of discussion for them in the last uh few months uh of when and how to go violent on a large scale inside the United States. So we're we're there are very dangerous steps being taken by our leaders at the state and federal level. My guess is those are not the intended, uh that's not the intended outcome, but we're not looking at it through our enemy's eyes, and we haven't since 9-11. Um, so so how did we get here? Well, I would argue uh the things I just laid out, not knowing the enemy, deciding, making an intentional effort we're not going to know the enemy. Uh deciding that we're gonna have jihadis advise us on how to fight jihadis might be a reason we're not only not winning, we're losing, um, and not understanding that their stated reason for fighting and the thing they seek to impose on the world, Sharia, uh, is not being taught anywhere. It's not being taught in the FBI, at uh new agent training, at any advanced training. The only two times it was taught were during the the two trainings I created and ran in 2006 and 2007. Um it's not being taught across DOD uh to enlisted or officers. Uh it's not being taught inside the intelligence community. Uh to a to a degree, um it's being mentioned now by some, but not being taught. So uh I would argue all these are the reasons uh we got there. So uh we are engaged currently in a war that is being waged by the Islamic movement and the communist movement, those collaborating with them and financing them. And uh I'll say this again in a minute. I recognize there are other hostile entities, um, and we could define them all day, but uh where the rubber meets the road in the United States, in Dallas, Texas, in Arlington, Virginia, in Wichita, in Boston, in Phoenix, in Portland, in you know, Jacksonville, Florida, and everywhere else. Uh, those people getting it done at the ground level are the communists and jihadis and uh those uh supporting them operating seamlessly at the ground level. Um they're the ones. So it's I'll jump ahead, but uh, what I've been doing uh for a number of years uh that has been most effective is training local communities how to flush the entities, the communist and jihadi leaders and entities out of their counties and taking away the ground they have to operate on uh so they can't, and helping these communities understand these are not civil actions, these aren't political actions, these are it's a war, and they're waging a war, and we walk that out with them. Um and this is primarily a hostile information operation. 95% of the war is hostile information, and the violence is used as a tool, and we're gonna come back to that in a second. Um from the time I was in the FBI, and it was certainly true in my work uh while I was in the FBI with DOD entities, um, because I worked a couple major cases uh and we were working with various entities in the Department of Defense as well as other government entities. Our leadership, both in the civilian and the uniform government, uh, focused exclusively on the violent entities. And we were told that it's uh our adversaries were violent extremists. So I just want to make a couple points. Uh and pardon me, I don't want anybody to, I'm not pandering, and I'm certainly not. We have some very esteemed people on this call who are a lot smarter than me. Uh so when I say things, I'm maybe just putting them in context or laying uh setting the table for something else I'm gonna share in a moment. Uh but our oaths of office require us to uh protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And the term enemies is legally defined in federal code. The term violent extremists is not, and that is the intentional outcome of our adversaries. And I'll give you the 40-second story, but if you want to ask in the question questions, I can give you more info. The Muslim Brotherhood in Europe, specifically in England, uh fed a big, huge turd to the British government called combating violent extremists. That was a Trojan horse. And the groups that did it were the most senior Muslim Brotherhood groups, in most cases, in the United Kingdom, also in Europe, and they gobbled it up. And then in the 2000 early 2007 timeframe, leaders from FBI, DHS, and others went over to England to meet with their leaders and brought this huge steaming turd. Pardon my language, but I'm a Marine, so at least I'm not using foul language, um, brought that back to the United States. And um we swallowed it up uh under the Bush administration, combating violent extremism. And this is one of the biggest uh losing for us, uh successful uh lines of operation for the Islamic movement, is they get us to target violent extremism, which has no legal definition and is uh the only definition you'll find inside the government was a policy that DHS created that said it's basically anyone willing to use violence uh to defend their beliefs. Well, that would be all of us on this call. Uh when it's authorized, we're all, and some of us have, used violence to defend uh the Constitution and our belief. Uh but the point here is that so long as you're focused on violent extremism, what you're not focused on are jihadis and communists and other adversaries. And that's the intentional outcome. And I'm gonna dig a little deeper into that in a second. So coming back to the way I would argue this is not the way it works, yes, uh violence needs to be dealt with. And then if the FBI uh gets information that someone wants to uh hijack a bus, a school bus, or bomb a mall, of course, you have to follow that up. But we need to understand that violence is a tool to advance the much larger effort. And again, this effort is going on in North America and Europe and elsewhere, but my focus for today is uh is only the United States primarily. Um but this is not how they intend to win the war. They did not intend to defeat us, um, although it would have been nice for them, on the battlefields, uh, draining our treasury, uh, killing our troops, demoralizing the population. That's all part of why they do the violent warfare. Um and they do when it comes to the United States, when they wage jihad uh on a much grander scale than we've seen thus far, uh, they do expect uh to be victorious, but the the place our adversaries expect to win in this is this north-south, if you will, access. Uh the international communist movement and the U.S. Communist movement, and of course, uh the comment, International Communist Party, and uh the suit-wearing jihadis primarily, and it's not just the Muslim Brotherhood, it's obviously uh the Iranian uh Shia assets, the Diobanis, Tabliki Jamaat, and others, but the Muslim Brotherhood leads that, and currently Turkey under Erdogan uh controls the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood uh through the Turkish DNA in the United States. Uh so they're actually waging a significant war, uh they're kicking our ass, and we don't uh seem to have any so far that I've seen uh any coherent response. Now, the 500-pound guerrilla, the OIC, um, when I brief uh whether it's leadership or even citizens or whoever, uh, very few people have an understanding of the OIC. The OIC is the Organization of Islamic uh cooperation, which is the largest voting bloc in the United Nations, and it's made up of 57 member states, 56, every Islamic nation on earth, and the 57th is something they call the state of Palestine. And they meet every year to discuss the global Islamic movement and the strategy, and every or every every year and every three years at the head of state and king level, they make decisions that are legally binding for the umma, the global Muslim community. And um, I'm gonna I'd actually want well, let me let me jump ahead real quick because I want to um jump down to this and then I'll jump back up. In 1990, the OIC approved, and in 1993 they uh served to the United Nations um the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights. And the last two articles in that declaration state all rights and freedoms stipulated in this declaration on human rights in Islam are subject to Islamic Sharia. And the last article, Article 25, Islamic Sharia is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any articles in this declaration. So when an Islamic leader refers to the phrase human rights, they've legally defined it at a geopolitical level as the imposition of sharia. Not to understand that is to be lost in this war, is to lose the war. So uh normative and universally taught Sharia states the purpose of Islam is to wage war against non-Muslims until an Islamic state is established on the earth under Sharia. That's it. That's why they teach it to 12-year-olds in U.S. Islamic schools. It's the purpose of Islam. Um normative and universally taught Islam teaches that um you know lying is obligatory, and I'll actually go back because that's where we uh left off, which was right here. One of the questions uh I get is Umf all this is true, how is it uh why aren't more of our leaders speaking up? And some have over the years, uh, but not many. So I'll just ask, uh I'll present this this way with a question. How is it that what our leaders have said for years about Islam, because of what their Islamic advisors or Muslim leaders have told them, is exactly opposite of what 10 and 12-year-old Muslim children are taught about Islam in U.S. Islamic schools? And I'll just let that sit on the table for a second. How is it that what from President Clinton to today, presidents, vice presidents, national security advisors, leaders in the House and Senate, military leaders, pastors, governors have said about Islam is exactly not what 10-year-old Muslim children are learning in Islamic schools about Islam. And I'll put that into perspective. Well, number one, Islamic law under the law of apostasy says it is a capital crime for a Muslim to teach another Muslim anything about Islamic law that's not true. That's point one. And finally, point two is that in Islam it's obligatory for Muslims to lie if the goal is obligatory. And the stated purpose of Islam is to wage war, wage jihad against non-Muslims until the entire world is under Allah's divine law, Sharia. So the law under penalty of death obliges Muslims to lie to non-Muslims if it advances Islam, and it requires that Muslims, when teaching other Muslims about Islam, they must teach true Sharia, which is why if you want to learn about Islam, you cannot uh ask your Islamic friend or Muslim friend or advisor or paid government employee about Islam, because that's unprofessional. You have to get a book that is used, either an authoritative book of Islamic law, which is available uh at mosque bookstores across the United States and North America and everywhere else, or buy a textbook used to teach Muslim children about Islam and read it. And what you will find is that what Al-Qaeda and ISIS teach its soldiers is normative Islam. So when we see children in the Muslim Brotherhood's Muslim American Society mosque in Philadelphia singing about chopping people's heads off and leading the armies of Muhammad against the infidel, um what do we, you know, we're shocked for 10 seconds and then we go on to the next story. Uh, you know, after that incident happened a few years ago, and I got I did a lot of interviews, and I was asked, John, why would they teach that? And my response is what why wouldn't they teach that? What is it you think they're teaching in mosques and Islamic schools? I'm pretty sure they're teaching Islam. And that right there, that's Islam. That's normative, universally. Taught Islam. And as you saw at the video in the beginning, just because they're not telling you about it, just because they're not out there in the media, I would say honestly, the current since the late 1970s, but really since the early 90s, since the Islamic movement in North America and the United States specifically has exponentially expanded its efforts. This is the greatest strategic deception operation and war in the history of mankind. The fact that a 10-year-old Muslim children knows it, and presidents and national security advisors don't know it, that's, I think, prima facie evidence. And you can't, and my challenge to everyone on this call is name one book of authoritative Islamic law or one textbook used to teach Muslim children Islam in the United States or anywhere on the planet in any century that says something different that teaches, you know, love your neighbor, love your non-Muslim neighbor, because it doesn't exist. And and I want to say one thing because um my guess is it's gonna come up what's that? Somebody asked a question? Okay. So um when I was in the FBI, I handled a number of sources uh who are Muslim. Uh two in particular did very dangerous work. Uh and this one individual, I traveled overseas uh with him on uh occasions, uh, but I couldn't go where he went. He went into Al-Qaeda safe houses and he identified bad guys on the ground that are no longer with us, and he identified caches of weapons and money and all kinds of things. And so uh his purpose for working with me, and I believe it was legitimate, was because he was uh from Afghanistan and his family had been in power in his region, and he wanted to get the Taliban out and go back to what they were doing. Um, and I know what his private life was, and he was not a Sharia herent Muslim. But someone who identifies as a Muslim who doesn't subscribe to Sharia and decides, you know, I'm not gonna wage jihad and I'm not gonna follow Sharia, that does not constitute a different version of Islam. There is one Islam, there's one Sharia. And while there are different schools of thought and there are some differences in the way the law is adjudicated, when it comes, and this is the key, when it comes to the non-Muslim world, there are no debates. The debates are never about the law itself. There might be debates about how the law is applied under certain circumstances, but there's no debate that the penalty for leaving Islam is death. There's no debate that being homosexual is death. There's no debate that if you are a non-Muslim, you must convert or be killed. There's no debate that if you're a Jew, Christian, or Zoroastrian, you must convert to Islam, submit to Islamic law, and pay the non-Muslim poll tax or be killed. There's no debate anywhere in Islam about that, and there's no version that that teaches something different than that. So I want to go back to this idea of the information warfare and the violence and how they control the language. Uh, and I think what I'll do is I'll maybe make that point, jump to the end, and and then I find we'll get, um, let me look at the time here. I find that we'll we'll get a lot uh deeper when we ask you all ask the questions. So my colleague, who was tapped by General Pace uh in the joint uh in the joint staff to be the Islamic legal uh expert uh in the Pentagon, uh, he was tapped because he was the only guy with any experience of actually uh working uh a case as an attorney uh using Pakistani law. And um Steve literally bought thousands of dollars worth of Islamic law books out of his own pocket and uh did his own study and then worked with General Pace to demonstrate that actually Al-Qaeda said Sharia is the purpose uh they seek to impose on the earth and it's their doctrine for how they fight the war. Uh, and we ought to be reading it, studying it, teaching it to our troops. Um but when he did this report uh in um 2016, I just want to share this one piece. Violent extremism is an imposed construct that purposely, purposefully renders analysis irrelevant to the real counter-terror environment. And that's exactly right. So long as we're targeting violent extremism, we're not targeting jihadis, we're not targeting communists, we're not targeting fill-in-the-blank. So I'll give you a no BS example. The 9-11 report comes out, and um the Muslim Brotherhood in the form of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, which is a Muslim Brotherhood entity, um formed out of the uh um Islamic Society of Southern California, which was created by two of the most prominent uh Muslim brothers uh who came to the United States out of Egypt who were in prison because they were a Muslim Brotherhood. Uh but anyway, I digress. Uh out of that comes the Muslim Public Affairs Council, and the Muslim Public Affairs Council uh writes a letter to the 9-11 Commission report, and they say terminology is important in defining our goals. The 9-11 Commission identifies Islamist terrorism as a threat. The Muslim Brotherhood, uh doing business as the Muslim Public Affairs Council, recommends the U.S. government find other terminology. Well, if it's just some letter, who cares? Except there was an effect, there was a real impact. So in the 9-11 Commission report, they used words like sharia, words like caliph, uh, you know, the leader of the caliphate, Islam, Muslim, jihad, enemy, hundreds of times. The letter comes in, and then that's the result. It's a complete whitewashing of our national security understanding of the enemy. And if you go to the report, the national security strategy published in November 2025 under the current administration, no mention of jihad, of Islam, of communism, nothing. Uh so this is why we're losing the war and uh why I believe the enemy's analysis is correct. In the United States, they're on the downside of uh winning this thing. So uh now we we jump forward to the current administration, and uh when they put out this report in September about the impending massive Al-Qaeda attack, which I hope somebody will ask about, uh, because if it's even a portion of what it appears to be, uh this will be something we've never even come close to in the United States as far as an attack on the homeland. Uh but how did um the NCTC, National Counterterrorism Center, identify the enemy? Violent extremists. This is catastrophic failure. Absolutely catastrophic failure in understanding our adversaries. So as long as we're focused on violent extremism, we're not focused on communists, and we're not focused on uh jihadis. Um and I think what I'd like to do now is um just jump down to um yes this I just want to finish up here. So I'll go back to what I said earlier when when we talked about the phrase human rights. You have to translate when you're dealing with the Islamic threat, you I mean, I encourage it, but you have to translate English to English through the lens of Sharia. So we already talked about human rights. To us, it means one thing. We think, as Americans, the International Declaration on Human Rights, right? The Christian understanding of human rights. Um, but that's not what it means. And in Islam, uh, legally, they've officially clarified that they view it through the lens of Sharia, which is very different. Uh the word peace, I'm not going to hit all these, but I'll hit a couple. Islam divides the entire world into two parts: the house of Islam, where Sharia is the law of the land, and everywhere else, which is called the house of war. The purpose of Islam is to eliminate the house of war until the entire world is under the house of Islam, Sharia is the law of the land, and then you have peace. But that's not the peace as we understand it, because peace under Sharia is slavery, is uh injustice, etc. Justice is justice under Sharia, freedom, freedom from man-made laws. You get the point. The point is when you are speaking to these folks, you have to know this or they're gonna be running circles around you. And a good example is during the first Trump administration, he went to Saudi Arabia, and um the king of Saudi Arabia was sitting there talking to the entire Muslim leadership. I think the only leader in the Muslim world that wasn't in the room was Iran. Mr. Trump sitting there, and the king is talking about we need to get rid of terrorists. And everyone in the room knew that what he was saying is we need to get rid of you, Mr. Trump. But we're viewing that, and the State Department views it through the lens of uh our Western eyes, not through the lens of Sharia. It's just it's catastrophic failure. So I'm gonna bypass this, and I just want to go um to uh to this. Last thing I'll say, because when we teach uh state and local officials, um we have to recognize that um a lot of people, and I would argue the entire uh government at the federal and state level are focused on issues. And every one of these issues represented by these photos here, I think are very important. None more so than the right to defend human life. That's an inherent right, it's an unalienable right given to us by God, the right to free expression, the right to self-government, the right to defend myself and therefore bear the tools to do so. All of these things. However, uh, and again, this is one of those moments I want to, because of the people on this call, um I'm I defer to you, but wars are not won by uh changing policies and fixing issues. Wars are won by identifying and vanquishing the enemy, something we are not doing currently. Um while we may be uh thinning the herd overseas and had been for some time of the bad guys' ranks, uh what we're not doing is dealing with their massive network here in the United States. And so we're focused on these uh policies and issues, and we're not actually dealing with the root cause, which again uh is the Islamic movement, the communist movement operating seamlessly at the ground level. So I'm gonna go ahead and stop sharing and and uh take a take a pause and then let you all uh drill down and ask uh ask questions. So, Ron, I turn it back to you.

Ron Scott:

Great, John, that was awesome. Uh I'll point out I I bought purchased all your books, and one of those that really got my attention was one that came out in 2010. Sharia, the threat to America, where you were one among several individuals on this special group, many that I recognize, John or Stephen Coglin is there, uh General Boykin, uh, one of my mentors at Applied Research Associates, Hank Cooper. You got former CIA director James Woolsey. It was a pretty meaty book. And one of the characters that I was really surprised to see presented so candidly was John Brennan. You want to comment on John Brennan real quick?

John Guandolo:

Uh, sure. So I was the first one to uh publicly uh bring forth the story that John Brennan converted to Islam when he was a CIA station chief in Saudi Arabia. Uh, because I had uh, and I'm not now and I haven't ever released who those people are, but there were uh assets on the ground that had firsthand knowledge that uh not only did he uh did John Brennan uh make the shahada, the statement of faith in Islam to convert uh from a non-Muslim to a Muslim, but he did it in the presence and exclusively in the presence of Saudi government officials, including Saudi Mubayath, the intelligence officials. Um but I would also say that he wasn't the only CIA station chief in Saudi Arabia to do so. And when I was in the FBI, several legal attaches uh for the FBI were converted by the Saudis into Islam while they were there. It was these are intelligence operations, these are operations uh to bring them onto the Saudi side. And never once was there a counterintelligence investigation lost uh or launched, etc. Now, I do think it's worth noting, I took a drubbing in the national media for putting this out for quite a long time until a guy named Brad Johnson, another uh retired CIA station chief, when he retired, he went on uh you know national media and said uh it was well known within the agency that John Brennan converted to Islam. So uh, you know, again, the attacks, this is an information war. Um, you just you need to do nothing more than Google my name and see the media outlets from BBC to CNN to Fox News to you know New York Times, Wall Street, you know, name it. I mean, I've been blasted for 20 years, uh, and I get it, that's just part of the game, that's part of the war. Uh, but the reality is, uh, I think everyone knows now, uh, John Brennan's a traitor. He should be tried and convicted for treason.

Ron Scott:

And uh, you know, when you talk about the red-green axis, John Brennan symbolizes that the fact that he voted for a communist candidate previously. It's amazing that he made it through the security wickets to get into positions that he's had because he represents both elements of that axis, red and green. Uh that's right.

John Guandolo:

And I want to say something, Ron, you bring up a great point. Um, you know, I mentioned, and I can, I mean, I literally have uh it's about a now it's about uh a day and a half briefing of just the penetration into the U.S. government uh by the jihadis and the communists. But uh James Comey admitted he was a communist uh when he was leaving his position as the uh U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York in 2003. Uh he gave an interview to the New York magazine in October 2003, and he said I'd moved from communist to whatever I am now, not really sure. And then he went and took a position as the number two guy at DOJ. Never was there a counterintelligence uh investigation open, and that guy became the FBI director. And I would argue very few things demonstrate how catastrophically broken and penetrated our system is, in that nobody gave a shit, pardon my language, nobody gave a crap that a guy who had admitted to be a communist, and my assessment and my team's assessment is uh he's still a communist based on his behavior and his uh public comments over the last 10 years and his behavior, uh violating federal law uh to go after a uh a sitting president the way he did. And all the evidence now is on the on the table on that.

Ron Scott:

Well, let me ask one more question, John, and then I'm gonna open it up to uh we've got Act Now that's on decked. Uh the American experiment is exceptional in achieving unprecedented peace and prosperity, ostensibly due to the rights enshrined in our First Amendment. Given our belief in religious freedom, and religious may be uh imprecise here. Given our belief in religious freedom, how do we address the intolerance of Sharia law within the legal framework of our constitutional republic?

John Guandolo:

Oh, that's actually a less complicated than issue than I think most people give it uh credence to. First, I'm gonna read from this uh book, What Islam is all about, and this is the first substantial page in the book. This is what they teach uh 10-year-old children in the United States in Islamic schools. Islam is not a religion, however, but a complete way of life, and it goes on to demonstrate that complete way of life is the sharia of Allah. Um I'll just read some of these. The way of life known as Islam is a complete code of life. There is no separation of majid and state, the mosque. Uh, sharia is Islam, Islam is sharia. Uh, the basis of the legal and political system is the sharia of Allah. Its main sources are the Quran and the Sunnah. The duty of Muslim citizens is to be loyal to the Islamic State, and it goes on and on. So this is not a First Amendment issue. The First Amendment does not touch this. This is a totalitarian system that seeks to overthrow the U.S. government and impose a hostile uh totalitarian system governed by a foreign law, sharia. That's it. There's no First Amendment protection for that. Article 6 of the Constitution says this constitution shall be the supreme law of the land. And anyone that seeks to overthrow that is violently opposing that. And everyone on this call who's ever sworn an oath of to protect and defend has a legal binding duty to uh to oppose Islam and Sharia in the community.

Ron Scott:

Great, very precise answer. Thanks, John. Well, act now, you're up.

Speaker Question 1:

Okay, can you hear me okay?

Ron Scott:

Yes.

Speaker Question 1:

Great. I have three questions. Please make sure you answer all three, particularly the third one, because I thought my eyes were opened, but oh my gosh, you have blown my mind with this meeting. So my first question is this I've been taking some screenshots of this. Can we and how can we use these slides that you presented on further meetings and on education groupings? Do we have to cite them? Can we just take them and run with it? That's my first question. My second question where can we go? Hold of this textbook specifically. If you have a link, that's my second question. How can we gather that? And my third one is this I feel like I'm trapped in rational thinking. Everything everything that's I mean like you're talking about the the um the violent uh extremists. All right, that's what literally I feel like I've been like concerned about, but now you have literally I I I don't know how to uh like this the Sunni, oh there's two different belief systems, oh the Sunni and the moderate Muslims, oh okay. Some I feel like I'm not fighting them, but apparently I am. How do I go out of like give me some uh ways for my eyes to be open even more and to then communicate that with people because I think everybody, a normal person like me, is thinking, oh, well, the if they're nonviolent, all is well. But what you're saying is guess what? There is no non-violent, it is just a matter of time. That's my question. Those are my three questions.

John Guandolo:

Well, those answering those three could take about uh 45 minutes, but I'll be succinct for Ron's uh adhering to Ron's guidance. Um, so first you can get the I think it's question two, but you can get the book. Uh I like to go to Abe Books, like Abe, like Abe Lincoln, ABE Books Dot. I think it's dot com, might be.org, but I think it's dot com. Just because I like buying used books. I'm still one of those guys that likes to hold a book. Uh I do use audiobooks, but I really like to hold a book, underline, make notes, uh, go back, reread. Uh, but you I mean, these books are I'd buy it used.

Speaker Question 1:

What's the name?

John Guandolo:

Uh it's what Islam is all about by Yaya Emmerich. Um, there is a PDF. Um I can uh text the link to uh Cindy that she can put out through Ron's list of this book, which is uh Islamic law, the Umdat al-Salik, Reliance of the Traveler. It's the most widely uh used uh tabletop book of Islamic law in North America. And if you go to any Islamic conference, which I'm guessing most of you do not, uh they have tables of these. Um, but it's a good tabletop book of Islamic law. I have a PDF that goes through chapter W in here that I could send. And if if Ron, you want to then send it out to the list. It's a good reference. So if you don't believe me, just you know, go to book R and go to book R8.0 and read about lying. Uh go to book O, section eight uh point zero and read what the legal definition of jihad is, uh, because I'm telling you right now it's not an internal spiritual yoga. Um and then just read. Read the obligation of jihad. And what you I think what most people that I talk to are shocked about is how crystal clear Islamic law is, and yet our adversaries have uh gotten to a point that they've convinced our leaders that there are thousands of interpretations, it's very confusing, and that's why you need me, the Imam, to tell you. That's why we have my Imams. I mean, I once spoke years ago. Uh actually, I was invited to ask questions quietly, but I mean, there were almost a thousand people at DOD at the DIA uh headquarters, and I stood up and was handed a mic and um started explaining some of this, and two people, not a row away, they're probably 22 years old that were linguists at DIA, got up and started arguing. And I picked up the book of Islamic law and quoted it, and I made the guy read it, and I basically told him so sit the F down. And I said, the fact that these two are employed here is the problem, and they should be fired today and walked out of the building because they're lying to you, and they know they're lying based on what they just said in front of a thousand people, but I doubt they were. Um, this is the problem. I mean, we there's a so and the slides.

Speaker Question 1:

Can we use the slides?

John Guandolo:

Okay, okay, so the slides. So so, first of all, how do you learn to talk about it? That's not something you're gonna do in a in a 30-minute brief. I I created these training programs. Uh, we have many training programs, but three main programs. One is a one-day, it's called Into Action, and that is for citizens primarily, and of course, we normally get local elected officials and others. That's a one-day program to teach them how to identify these adversaries in their county, how to organize as a team, and how to lawfully flush them out. Uh, that's the 10-second version. The second is a three-day course for excuse me, law enforcement, military, national guard, uh, first responders, prosecutors, judges. That's three days. And the first two days is all just laying out the enemy in great detail. Uh, and then the last day is now what do you do if you're a local police officer, if you're an FBI agent, uh, if you're an intel officer, if you're a whatever, and it covers everything from investigatively tactical, HR issues, hiring uh people, all these kinds of things, interrogating, uh, invest uh interviewing people, all that. Uh and then we have the train the trainer, which is a two-week course that is a deep dive to teach people to teach this. Now, in addition to the one-day into action course, we it used to be a three-day program, um, but people complained it was too long. So we cut it to two days, and people complained it was too long, and then we cut it down to three hours on a Friday and all day Saturday, and that was too long, and now it's just one day. And now people complain it's too short because once they understand the problem, they're like, oh my God, we actually need more information. Just happened Saturday, we ran a training in Texas, and they're like, they asked a question almost identical to what you said. They're like, How do I learn to share this information? I'm like, Well, that used to be a part of this course, and it was literally about five hours where we literally first we teach it, and then we spend about three and a half to four hours where you just go literally station to station, and you had a conversation, and the conversations got increasingly hostile, and you had to defend uh the information. It's great, but that we also teach that as a side course. Excuse me, and then your last question, um I think um is the tougher question. What I've learned in my 24 years of doing this is um there are some people, and maybe some of you on this call, who when uh maybe some of you are like, I think John's full of crap, and that's fine, because at this point, trust me, you're not gonna hurt my feelings. Um but there are some people that are shutting down, and when I've briefed people over the years, I can see it in their face. Uh, they shut down and fear and a reality of the situation kind of drifts in. Um and I would say, in my experience, that's at least 35 plus percent of the people I briefed over the years fall into that category. And while many of them believe it's true, uh they really can't bring themselves to engage, and I'm okay with those people. Um, I get it. That's just this is reality is pretty uh disheartening. I think what's worse is for 25 years our leaders have lied to us about the actual reality of the threat. And that to me, over the years, has been very frustrating. Sitting in a room with 60 members of Congress and you brief them and they're like, holy crap, this is terrible. And then they walk out and don't do anything. And of course, the ones that we worked with for long periods of time that did do something, that in my opinion are heroes and courageous leaders like Sue Myrick in North Carolina or Chip Kravak in Minnesota or Michelle Bachman or Louis Gomer or Alan West or Trent Franks or Dan Lundgren, real heroes who kind of smashed leaders in the civilian government in the face, they were attacked. And primarily they were attacked by Republican leaders uh because they were speaking truth about the Muslim Brotherhood movement and about Islam, about Sharia. And that's you know, 15, 16 years ago in some cases. Uh, you know, that's this is just the nature of how I believe uh change occurs. Um, and I don't want to go too deep, but I I want to mention two things. In the train the trainer program, one of the required readings during the course, like they the train the trainer program is two weeks, and you live on site and you're sequestered, and it's phones off, freaking head down, long days, uh, because it's this is important shit. You need to know the enemy. And uh um for the month to five weeks leading up to it, like having regular calls, um, getting people prepped, during the course, one of the books we have them read is a thin book, but it's called Abuse of Language, Abuse of Power. And it's the whole um um understanding of how language is used uh to control and enslave people, and how you manipulate language, like is being done today. That if I speak truth about Islam, uh CNN and they have calls me an Islamophobe. Well, the problem is the term Islamophobe was created by the Muslim Brotherhood, and it actually is the imposition of the Islamic law of slander. And in Islam under Sharia, the Islamic law of slander is to say anything about a Muslim or Islam that a Muslim would quote dislike. That's the legal language. It doesn't matter if it's true, Islam dislikes it, and it's a capital crime. So when you get called or I get called an Islamophobe, they are threatening your life. And they are telling the Muslim community that person needs to be killed. And real people have been killed in places like Paris, France. Charlie Hebdo, Theo Van Gogh, Garland, Texas. Um, this is real. Um, so understanding that both from their perspective and and how the language is being done. Uh and I'll just kind of finish with this. One of the questions I've been asked a lot over the years, uh, and I just got um trying to think when it was, pretty recently, a colleague of mine called me, and uh he's been uh as beat up as beat up as I have over the years, and um he asked me, he's like, How do you do it? Uh, because he's like, I'm a bitter angry guy. And he goes, How do you, John, how do you do it? And you seem to be kind of you keep your sense of humor, um, and you just kind of drive on. Um, and I would say um three things. One, uh, I do have a deep faith, I trust that uh if I speak truth and um do the right thing, um, I can be lambasted for it, but they can't say I'm not speaking truth, and I'm okay with that. Uh number two, I uh you've got to, you've you've got it, so that anchor, you gotta have an anchor, I believe. Uh number two, I have a hobby. I mean, I've I've been a songwriter and musician for years. It's a big part of my life. Uh, but I tell people in our trainings, we tell them if you don't have a hobby, you need one. You gotta get away from this work and take breaks. That's why I, you know, I have friends who call me and say, you know, I've been trying to get a hold of you. And I'm like, yeah, I turned my phone off because I need a break. And uh that's and the other thing is I I listen to a lot of stand-up comedy and uh I honestly don't take myself too seriously. So when people scream at me and tell them call me names, I'm like, yeah, well, you can call me names, but tell me where I'm wrong. And then they just get louder and angry and run away. Uh, I could tell stories all day, but I do want to tell this one more story because I've learned recently that not only do people like them, it gives a perspective of the war we're in. Uh, about 10 years ago, I was in Wichita giving a presentation. And uh as you all know, there's a group called Indivisible, which is a communist group, and uh they're paid by the hour, so they show up exactly, you know, like at noon and at one o'clock, boom, they're gone. So they showed up. And uh against the wishes of the hosts, I snuck out the back door, and I was in like dressed like this. I snuck out the back door, walked down the sidewalk, and just kind of plunged myself into the crowd. And I was like, hey, what's going on? And they were like, Oh, there's this guy, and he he hates Muslims. I'm like, really? What's his name? They're like, What is his name? John somebody, and I'm like, Oh, really? What's he what's he say? And they look at each other like we don't really know. And I'm like, but he talks about Islam, and they're like, Yeah. And I said, Well, he talks about what about Islam? And they're like, Well, we don't know. And I'm like, Well, have you read Sharia? And they're like, No. I'm like, Do you know what it says? Or like, no, and you've never heard him talk, so you don't know what he says, and they're looking at each other like, not really. And I'm like, Well, how do you know he's wrong? And right then the coordinator for this gaggle of communists screams, hey, this big tall woman. She's like, Are you John Guandola? And I'm like, Yes, I am. And then of course they all started screaming at me and calling me names, and I went back inside. But the point was, that's the kind of war this is. And a lot of people are scared to be called names, they're scared to lose their jobs. Um, and I would just say, at this point, if that's keeping you down, then just get out of the way, please, because there's a war on, and uh most of us would like to win it. Okay, I'll I hope that answers some of your question. Uh Ron, back to you.

Ron Scott:

Great story, John. Uh we've got four more hands up, and we've got about five minutes left, so hopefully we can uh go through these pretty quickly. iPad and then chips on deck.

unknown:

All right.

Speaker Question 2:

And particularly to the children and to the families, to the pastors, to the churches. At this point, we're facing a mosque situation here in Colorado Springs. The land's already been purchased, the zoning's already been done. I see the fact that we can connect to people, we will certainly do that and continue to walk it out. But I'm seeing that there is a legal solution that's needed here, not just locally, but also federally, that we're running into an issue of not having necessarily the tools we need legally to stop things. That's number one. Number two, who, if anyone, is putting together the cultural tools that we need? The the, you know, we've got this great education that's going into the seventh grade level that's also being used for the adults on the Islam side. Where do we have those exact same tools on our side that we can educate pastors, that we can educate children, that we can educate families? Those are the two areas that I'm picking up on mostly, and really would appreciate your answer to those. Thank you.

John Guandolo:

Okay, I'm gonna I I can answer those pretty quickly. First of all, all the legal tools are on the table. Um uh there's nobody has a right uh to conspire, to commit murder, to launder money, to materially support terrorism. Uh the Muslim Brotherhood movement does that. Uh I've worked in Colorado for years. The the lands that are owned uh are owned by, in most cases, Muslim Brotherhood entities like the North American Islamic Trust and others, uh, which has not only been identified as a hostile movement in the United States by the evidence in the HLF trial. Uh this is more about holding leaders accountable, citizens holding leaders accountable. Um, you do not have a legal right to build anything that advances an effort to overthrow the Colorado State Constitution nor the U.S. Constitution. So that's that's it. Uh everyone wants to make new laws, create new policies. Uh you just need to defend the Constitution, speak truth about it. The fact that Islam is being taught in any way in the schools is an abomination. Um, you know, why aren't we? I mean, I was gonna say, why aren't we teaching communism in schools, but actually uh they are, and I think it's because most uh citizens, we we've been sitting on the sidelines trusting that the schools were doing their jobs. Uh but you know, the school system and uh many of the teachers' unions at the national level are controlled by the U.S. communist movement. So um I'm not sure why we're surprised at any of this. Um so those are some of the first answers. Now, we're the only organization in the country running this kind of training and have been since I did the first training uh inside the government in 2005, um even before we did the the big training in 2006. Uh so uh somebody I see somebody in the chat said we've been on the phone for 90 minutes and no answers. Uh I've worked at the national level, the state level, and the local level. If I thought there was something more productive, I would be doing it. The training bringing the end action to your community for the citizens, the three-day law enforcement training, bringing that to your community and addressing this at that level, it's clear that at the national level, at the federal level, it is not gonna be handled. It's clear that while some, and when I say some, I would say three, maybe two governors in the country are doing anything, not one governor in the last 25 years has taken any action that actually puts the finger on the bad guys. Remember, policies and issues don't win this thing. You got to put your finger on the bad guy, a little uncomfortable, but it is a war. And we need to get them out of our communities. And when they say we'd like to build a mosque, you say, Well, you're not welcome to build a mosque. Get out. Well, we're gonna sue you. That's sue us. And we're gonna have the entire community here. Uh, we're not even gonna let you in the room. And if you start screaming, will they have a right to be in the room? No. People that want to kill and overthrow your form of government don't have a right to be in the room, actually. And we need to just simply stand up and tell them that you're not welcome in the community, and neither are communist leaders. So the fact that communities have Communist Party USA and Democratic Socialists and Green Party and Code Pink and these others that are also conspiring to overthrow the government uh and do all these other things that are against the law. There are plenty of laws on the books. We just need to reinforce them. I I offer my website, johnguandolo.com, use it as a resource, let us come train you. Uh, this isn't just an info more. I've been doing this as long as anyone in the country. If there was something better, I would encourage you to do that. And while we're while we're talking, while you're asking the last uh questions, I'm gonna I'll put this uh little resource list uh up on the um you know um up here on the screen and you can use it as you you wish. Um so any other questions before Ron cuts us out?

Ron Scott:

Yeah, uh Chip, you were on tech.

Speaker Question 3:

Excellent presentation, John. Thank you for what you're doing. I appreciate it.

John Guandolo:

Thank you.

Speaker Question 3:

One of my questions was already answered. The the question I have now is how do you respond to people like Zudi Jasser, uh who's I don't know, maybe I'm unrealistic, says he's you know trying to reform Islam into a peaceful religion. Is it a possible battle, or what what would you say to someone like him? Thank you.

John Guandolo:

Uh so that's actually an an interesting uh question. I uh no knew, I still do, uh Zuti. Um let me see if I can hold on. Anyway, I don't know I'm gonna fix that, but that's unconstrainedanalytics.org.com. Um I met Zudi, and I'll just tell you a five, 10 second story uh when I was in the FBI because I was uh assessing his uh intent and uh fast forward to sitting in a coffee shop in Georgetown uh in Washington, D.C. with the former inspector general of the Department of Defense, uh myself and Zuti. And during the conversation, Zuti looked at me and he said, Well, you understand Sharia better than I do. And my response is that's correct, and that's why I've encouraged you to stop talking. Because what Zuti's presence does is it continues to uh propagate the lie that there are competing versions of Islam. In Zuti's own word, there's radical Islam and then there's normal Islam. That's um, I think the legal term is bullshit. That's what that is. That's just not true. There's no version of Islam uh that doesn't require warfare against non-Muslims to sta establish an Islamic State under Sharia. So no matter what his intentions are, the practical outcome of what he is doing is perpetuating the the lie um that there are these competitors. Same thing with Rahil Raza and Kata Ahmed and the others. Although Rahil Raza and Qata Ahmed, I know are intentionally doing it. I'll give Zudi the um the benefit of the doubt that he's just uh immature, uh incoherent, uh unknowing. Uh, but what he's doing is disastrous uh in the information battle space.

Ron Scott:

I might just add that what makes this complex is we have a lot of people with good intentions working this from different angles, different perspectives, which is why one of the comments in the chat, you know, we've talked for 90 minutes, but we don't have any solutions. Well, there's a lot of solutions that are ready for action, but they have to have the levers and the people that are in positions to do things uh in a proper way. Um but anyway, we we are at the 90-minute mark, and I'll tell you, we could go longer. John is a wealth of information experience here that I think helps to really uh better inform us of the nature of this problem. Uh, but I'd like to bring it to a close here uh by inviting our board chair, uh Major General Bentley Rayburn for some closing remarks.

Bentley Rayburn:

Uh yeah, thanks. Uh Ron. I just want to uh uh uh again express my appreciation to uh all of you who have joined us for this uh presentation. I think it's been uh fascinating and very informative. I want to especially, of course, thank John for not only this very informative and uh helpful presentation, but uh also for the significant work he's done to highlight the issues and and the severity of this whole issue to the American people. So thanks, John. I believe this is an existential threat to the United States and to the West, uh a threat that absolutely can't be ignored. Uh we see it's playing out in Europe uh and that's just a precursor of what's gonna happen here if if we do ignore it. Um we will continue to bring these town hall focus, uh these town halls focused on key issues uh that bear on the issues that STARS uh is working on. And I just say if you're not getting our bi-weekly uh newsletter, please sign up for it at STARS. That's s t-a-r-r-s.us. And for all of us at STARS, thank you again for joining us today, and thank you again uh to John. Have a great day. Thanks, everyone.