[Gadi Adelman is] "Leading in the movement in the study of counter-terrorism", Dr. Walid Phares, Advisor to the Anti-Terrorism Caucus in the US House of Representatives

Gadi Adelman - Speaking


Gadi Adelman

Gadi Adelman is a dynamic speaker whose rare combination of clarity, compassion and enthusiasm bring a deeper understanding to everyone he encounters.  He inspires his listeners with the facts and excellent advice on how they can contribute in their own way starting with the individual and their families all the way to organizations and government agencies.

Gadi Adelman has taught and lectured at various Community Organizations, Schools, Colleges and Law Enforcement agencies. Today, he continues to lecture and speak publicly on Terrorism, Jihad, Sharia and Islam. He writes a weekly article as a contributing editor for the Family Security Matters website and can often be heard as a guest on various radio talk shows as well.

Gadi can speak on any of the following subjects:

  • Islam & Islamization
  • Islamic Sharia Law
  • Islamic Terrorism
  • Honor Killings
  • Islamic Culture
  • Jihad
  • Terrorism
  • History of Islam
  • History of Terrorism
  • The Clash of Civilizations
  • The Islamization of Europe
  • Islam's Plans for North American Islamization
  • The Muslim Brotherhood
  • Current Security Topics including:
    • Homeland Security
    • Transportation Security
    • Border Security

If you want to have Gadi speak for your organization, please contact us directly at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .



Gadi Adelman voted Patriot of the Month

I want to thank the Conservative Army Website for even considering me as Patriot of the month. This award should be for each and every individual that puts on a uniform for our Nation!

Thank you once again.

You can see the website by clicking on the link below.

Conservative Army Website!

Dear Gadi - just saw the news about your accepting the position of National Field Director for SIOA (Stop the Islamization Of America) and want to send my congratulations. Cannot think of a better person than you to take this on, together with the rest of the superb SIOA leadership. Your moral and mental clarity on the threat to our Constitution and the American way of life that is posed by Shari'a is an inspiration for us all.

SIOA is an excellent initiative and I'm glad to see you at the forefront of its program...ready to help support you and SIOA in any way possible.

With very best regards,
Clare M. Lopez
Vice President of the Intelligence Summit

Clare M. Lopez is a strategic policy and intelligence expert with a focus on Middle East, homeland security, national defense, and counterterrorism issues. Lopez began her career as an operations officer with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), serving domestically and abroad for 20 years in a variety of assignments, acquiring extensive expertise in counterintelligence, counternarcotics, and counterproliferation issues with a career regional focus on the former Soviet Union, Central and Eastern Europe and the Balkans. She has served in or visited over two dozen nations worldwide, speaks several languages, including Spanish, Bulgarian, French, German, and Russian, and currently is studying Farsi.

Gadi Adelman has the rare ability of making the complex world of anti-terrorism simple, clear, concise, and easy to understand.  Breaking the Islamist threat down to its most basic historical political elements is essential to understanding the true nature of our enemies.  Gadi Adelman is way beyond political correctness making his work fresh, honest, provocative, and truthful above all else – a rare commodity these days.

Alan Kornman, Radio Jihad

Whenever Gadi publishes an article for our web site,, I know we are going to have robust response from both sides of the terrorism issue. This agitation lets us know how spot-on Gadi is in his reporting.  As we often say, "You don't take any flak if you are not directly over the target." Gadi is on-target each and every time.

Carol A. Taber

Dear Mr. Adelman,

I want to complement you on your lucid and heart-felt article about creeping Sharia.  Somehow Americans are under the notion that these laws are merely "religious laws," which we should tolerate them since they apply only to Muslims.  Wrong.  Sharia Law invades every aspect of lives of Muslims, and worse yet, non-Muslims get impacted, too. There is an excellent comparison of Sharia Law with the U.S. Constitution at We should never lose sight of the fact that Sharia Law actually violates the provisions of our constitution.  One can't claim to be "American" and still embrace Sharia Law.

C C, Los Angeles

I very much enjoyed your common sense, down to earth approach to the definition of terrorism, as well as the beginning of the article where you point out that the suicidal Austin, TX plane crash is definitely not terrorism.  As a pilot and a reporter (and, coincidentally, an Israeli), I find just about all coverage of aviation issues atrociously poor and, in many cases, biased.

In my opinion, coverage is worse with General Aviation.  It seems since there are less stringent security standards, the media and politicians are happy to jump on GA stories and blast the TSA for their lack of regulations, while failing to notice that a terrorist attack from a single engine airplane would fail to, by your definition, "intimidate or coerce a civilian population."

In the most recent case, the fact that very few reporters had any idea how the aviation/air traffic control system works only exacerbated the problem.  Theoretically, a 747 taking off from Austin-Bergrstrom International Airport could've done the exact same thing.  It's very difficult, if not impossible, to stop a crazed pilot who doesn't pop up on watch lists.

One last thought.  Maybe I'm biased as an Israeli, but I think we have a very different perspective on terrorism and how to deal with terrorism, simply because it's a reality we've known far longer than many populations.

Anyway, I just wanted to send an appreciative note from a fellow reporter!

O L, Norfolk, VA

Dear Mr. Adelman,

I can't believe what I've just read.  Actually, I can.  I've been following this since joining Act for America.  I think people are getting it, but we got a slow start, while the miserable Muslims have duped us.  Thank you so much for your article.  It hits it on the head.  You can be sure I'll pass it on.

S S, Walnut Creek, Cal.

Excellent article. I suppose we have to also question the leader of this country Mr. Obama himself? To be a fly on the bedroom wall of Barach and Michele to hear what they really intend. But I have to wonder is Mr. Obama is really that smart? Actually he's just a pawn of the god of this world the Devil himself. The Devil hates America because America helps, protects and supports the Jewish state. Amen?

posted by : L F
Monday, January 18, 2010 at 11:17 AM

Excellent article. Your counter-terrorism expertise and clear mindedness are most refreshing!

posted by : B P
Monday, January 18, 2010 at 11:35 AM

Bravo, Gadi - you nailed it. Would even go one step farther and say, We are at war with all who follow the call of Islamic jihad which derives from the Qur'an, the hadiths, and the Sira.

Wonderful clarity. Thank you.

posted by : C L
Monday, January 18, 2010 at 11:55 AM

It's just too bad we can't dress Eric Holder and Janet Napolitano in Marine fatigues and send them over there with 100 lb back-packs. Let them go out on patrols and run the gauntlets of IEDs, drop in to hostile villages and interview the populace,find out what every other soldier is going through. It's no cake walk and these morons just have no sensitivity towards there own troops. As a matter of fact they offer more sensitivity to the enemy than to their own troops.

They disgust me and I'm just waiting for the political bombshell that will allow them all to be impeached for traitorism.

posted by : K B
Tuesday, January 19, 2010 at 08:38 AM

> "What animates, connects and indeed unites these various groups – and many more? Jihad."

Good article, as far as it goes. But you actually are making a similar mistake as Obama.

To continue using the WWII analogy, saying we are at war with "Jihad" is similar to saying we are at war with "Blitzkrieg", instead of Nazism.

The root cause of WWII, was the fascist ideology behind the 25th Panzer Division and the Blitzkrieg.
And the reality is that the underlying fascist ideology behind the Jihad is Islam. Without acknowledging this, we still aren't recognizing our enemy for who he is.

posted by : SD
Tuesday, January 19, 2010 at 01:04 PM

Can we add that the clearest definition of enemy is anyone that promotes death of humanity.

Whether they are based in Detroit, Sydney, London or Yemen, the sooner that we start taking out the 'imams' promoting this, the sooner we will be cutting off the head.

posted by : D
Tuesday, January 19, 2010 at 07:31 PM

When we went to war with Japan during WWII, we interred Japanese Americans. So why are we allowing arselifters to enter the US and roam freely when we are waging a war on terror (i.e. islam)?

posted by : GR
Monday, January 25, 2010 at 08:00 AM

WOW! A most superb article indeed, my man! Thoroughly enjoyed all those thought-provoking highly intelligent comments too.

I have no words to truly express my contemptible outrage that this Christian founded government has now sold its collective soul to the Devil. Too embrace this kind of "counterfeit brutal twisted religion" is most unwise.

OK,they want foot baths? I want a stunning replica of those two tablets containing the 10 Commandments proudly displayed in every public place.

And to H---E---L---L with Islam.

posted by : PW
Monday, January 25, 2010 at 02:20 PM


posted by : n
Monday, January 25, 2010 at 08:09 PM

I challenge all Americans to use these footbaths. They cannot make it illegal for nonmuslims to use the baths. It will outrage them and bring the fight to the media. Don't forget to wear your cross and watch your back!!

posted by : j
Tuesday, January 26, 2010 at 08:33 PM

Two facts I recently ran across:

1) Six of the original thirteen states had official state-supported churches or "establishments of religion" that were Christian. In fact, Conn., Georgia, Maryland, Mass, New Hampshire, and South Carolina refused to ratify the Constitution unless it included a prohibition of federal meddling with their existing state "establishments of religion"!

2) Read closely what Supreme Court Justice Story had to say about the first amendment (the one that gave us the establishment clause, NOT separation of church and state that the secularists want you to believe):

“At the time of the adoption of the constitution, and of the amendment to it, now under consideration [i.e., the First Amendment], the general, if not the universal sentiment in America was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the state, so far as was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience, and the freedom of religious worship. Any attempt to level all religions, and to make it a matter of state policy to hold all in utter indifference, would have created universal disapprobation, if not universal indignation.”

"The real object of the First Amendment was not to countenance, much less to advance Mohammedanism, or Judaism, or infidelity, by prostrating Christianity, but to exclude all rivalry among Christian sects [denominations] and to prevent any national ecclesiastical establishment, which should give to a [church] hierarchy the exclusive patronage of the national government."

Can I get a big Amen! Matt

posted by : M
Tuesday, January 26, 2010 at 10:19 PM

Yes, I agree that we have all become slavishly obedient to that most mesmerizing technology out there. These new high-tech gadgets offer the public a better way to communicate with those flesh and blood gods, primarily in the entertainment business. It also makes companies like Apple much richer.

That Haiti disaster a few weeks ago doesn't seem to matter anymore, I guess? 200,000 or 200 million casualties would only grace the media spotlight for short number of days. We both know that to be true.

Without question only a fool would argue otherwise that Iran would certainly nuke Israel without any hesitation whatsoever, if they were to acquire one single low yield nuke.

Fact they would do this just days after obtaining a weapon of mass destruction too.

Fact,Israel would immediately retaliate with the Sampson option, thus igniting the Middle East in a horrific nuclear holocaust.

Sad fact, millions of innocent people on both sides would most certainly die instantly. Millions more would follow them weeks later from that radiation poisoning.

Naturally without hesitation the world would come to the rescue. Oh yes we would bury a few million corpses heal the land from the radiation contamination and continue on with those "liberal orchestrated policies of appeasing everyone including terrorists too"

Fact, Proposing tougher sanctions on Iran would only effect a selected few. for the most part they would be ineffective on any country whose leaders were already controlled by demonic influences. In Iran's case these evil influences would like nothing better than to see its neighbor "Israel (the apple of gods eye) completely destroyed with a 100% casualty rate.

Ah, just forget all that for now because we love everyone even those who have sworn to obliterate us all.

But the most important news that the media is now concentrating on is all about Hollywood once again. Yes, with the Grammy awards last night Nielsen ratings for the event were slightly higher than average. That can only mean one thing? Once again the people who now entertain the animal attributes of mindless sheep flocked to the celebrations of the rich and famous without so much as a second thought while back in Haiti rescuers continue with the grizzly task of recover dead mangled rotting corpses from the rubble.

Did you ever stop to think that the primary reason this highly questionable administration doesn't seem to care too much about Iran developing a few nukes to wage genocide on Israel may be 2 fold.

Fact,a nuclear strike against Israel would be considered a godsend to that Obama clan. Unlike 911 it would open the door wide to instigate a form of Marshall law here.

After all isn't that the primary reason why our glorious government is now on the crash shelter building program???

posted by : P W
Monday, February 1, 2010 at 09:55 AM

Excellent article. I truly wish that more people would open their eyes and be more observant i.e. the government. As citizens we also have a duty to protect one another, instead of just relying on the idiots in Congress.

posted by : SK
Monday, February 15, 2010 at 06:59 AM

I agree with OL - points made by Adelman are valid and factual. There are many definitions of terrorism, however, and one of them, in my humble opinion, is to frighten and kill - regardless of your nationality!

posted by : EMA
Tuesday, February 23, 2010 at 10:54 AM

I agree with some points and disagree with others. Simply citing the US legal definition of terrorism doesn't prove the author wrong. Far from it.

The article specifically points out that there's no internationally accepted definition. Americans view it through a very specific lens, one certainly tinted by 9/11, which is completely understandable. The Patriot Act definition was one written a month after 9/11 out of need. That doesn't make it necessarily right or universally accepted.

There's no way the Austin, TX plane crash was a terrorist act. It was a man disgruntled with the IRS. Simply because he wrote a "manifesto" instead of a short essay, that doesn't change it from an act of suicidal stupidity to an act of terrorism. He didn't intend to shake American faith in the IRS, nor did he have the power to do that through his online ramblings, no matter how compelling or planned his language seemed. If someone is annoyed at the government, writes a few thousand words and then crashes a car into police headquarters, is that person a terrorist? No way.

I think Charles M. makes an excellent point which is mirrored in the author's definition of terrorism and the Patriot Act. It's about "intent," and the desire to change the way you live your life out of fear. Paul W. gets at this feeling by mentioning "spirit."

Mr. Adelman, as an Israeli, understands this to a depth which few in this country have experienced. A suicide bomber blowing up a coffee shops on a busy street isn't something we as Americans can fully comprehend, as acts of terrorism in the US have been fairly large scale (and, lately, they've been foiled, i.e., underwear bomber). Does that make him automatically right on everything terrorism-related? Of course not, but it's a different perspective on an issue that drives a lot of decisions at the highest levels in this country.

But I don't think the author was ever intending to posit his definition as the best one. Rather, he was trying to curtail the blatantly incorrect use of the word we hear so often today. And maybe inspire readers to think of how they view terrorism.

posted by : OL
Monday, February 22, 2010 at 11:14 PM