Archive for the ‘Obama and Islamists’ category

Four Muslim Groups Reject US Counter-Terror Funding

February 13, 2017

Four Muslim Groups Reject US Counter-Terror Funding, Clarion ProjectRyan Mauro, February 13, 2017

(Good! Now perhaps some of the funding will go to anti-Islamist groups, likely to use the money to discourage rather than to encourage radicalization. — DM)

minnesota-four-hpFour Minnesota youth from the Somali community who were convicted of terrorism-related offenses.

The good news is that there are plenty of non-profits, including Muslim ones with an unequivocal stand against Islamism that deserve the grant money. These organizations generally lack financial support from which to build a network, provide services, etc.

If certain Muslim nonprofits choose to put politics and ego above fighting extremism, then there are plenty of other options for these grants. 

***********************************

In a revealing trend, four nonprofits groups involved with the Muslim-American community have rejected federal funding for countering violent extremism. For these groups, their image — as well as making a political point – is a higher priority than fighting radical Islam and helping their communities.

The four Muslim groups had been privileged to receive Homeland Security grants to support their efforts to “counter violent extremism,” a generic and politically-correct term that the Obama Administration used to avoid verbiage related to Islam.

Now, these groups are willing to sacrifice that funding and cut their programs just to stick it to President Trump. Their form of protest is not to use their voices, but to try to show how bad President Trump is by increasing the suffering and danger for their constituents and country more broadly.

An organization for Somali youth in Minnesota named Ka Joog is rejecting $500,000 that was supposed to promote education, prevent radicalization, drug use and other harmful activities. Whether you agree with the premise that radicalization is caused by those problems or not, the fact is that Ka Joog chose to deny help to Somali youth in need.

Apparently unaware of how ridiculous his sentence sounded, executive director Mohamed Farah said the decision was made because President Trump is “promoting a cancerous ideology.” Yes, he actually said he’d decline an opportunity to fight the cancerous ideology of radical Islam because he is offended by the so-called “cancerous ideology” of President Trump.

One local Somali activist with a record of standing against radical Islam, Omar Jamal, said he disagrees with President Trump but “the community desperately needs the money” and it’s better to work with the government as best you can, regardless of politics.

A group in Michigan, Leaders Advancing and Helping Communities, won’t take $500,000 because it believes President Trump’s counter-extremism programs involve spying on Muslims. The group provided no evidence that accepting the money would actually require them to do that.

The organization’s programs involve public health, human services, youth development and education. They will suffer because of a hypothetical requirement that hasn’t happened yet or even been proposed by the Trump Administration.

The third group to join in, Unity Productions Foundation of Virginia, was offered $400,000 to develop films featuring Islamic scholars condemning terrorism and Muslim-Americans contributing to society.

Muslim-American leadership regularly complains that Islamic condemnations of terrorism do not get adequate attention and the public doesn’t seeing how Muslim-Americans are a positive part of the country.

This group was given a whopping $400,000 to do just that—but instead, it is responding to President Trump’s alleged anti-Muslim sentiment by rejecting money from his administration to combat anti-Muslim sentiment.

That makes absolutely no sense.

The Bayan Claremont Islamic school in California is the latest to join the trend, turning down $800,000 that was to be given to “improve interreligious cooperation, civic engagement and social justice.” About $250,000 of that would have been transferred to a dozen other nonprofits doing work for the Muslim-American community.

The school’s faculty includes some controversial Islamic leaders accused of spreading radicalism and ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. The staff includes Imam Suhaib Webb, Omid Safi and Ihsan Bagby.

Its president, Jihad Turk, said it was partially a response to reported plans by the Trump Administration to rename the Countering Violent Extremism programs to a title identifying radical Islam as the focus.

Keep in mind, Trump’s controversial plans—the travel pause (derided as a “Muslim ban”) designed to identify threats of radical Islam—don’t alter these services. These policies do not stop these groups from combating extremism on their own or from providing charity to those in need. You don’t have to agree with your president to help others and work to protect your country to the best of your ability.

By this logic, schools that dislike Education Secretary Betsy DeVos should punish their students by turning away federal funding.

Another element is at play here: Pressure from Islamists and their allies.

Fox News reports that two of the nonprofits “said they were rejecting grants they had already been awarded under the program because of concerns that it could damage their credibility or come with uncomfortable strings attached.”

Such attacks can make the Trump Administration lose Muslim partners, enabling Islamists to rally the community together like a single political party under their helm. An added bonus is that any danger and controversy that arises from the severed relationships can be blamed on Trump’s policies that these Muslim groups sabotaged.

The good news is that there are plenty of non-profits, including Muslim ones with an unequivocal stand against Islamism that deserve the grant money. These organizations generally lack financial support from which to build a network, provide services, etc.

If certain Muslim nonprofits choose to put politics and ego above fighting extremism, then there are plenty of other options for these grants.

Revealed yesterday: The Muslim Brotherhood lost a good friend when Obama left office and gained a formidable opponent with Trump

January 24, 2017

Revealed yesterday: The Muslim Brotherhood lost a good friend when Obama left office and gained a formidable opponent with Trump, American ThinkerThomas Lifson, January 24, 2017

Yesterday saw a stunning contrast as it was revealed that the outgoing Barack Obama funded Palestinians as almost his last act in office, while Donald Trump’s first full workday saw him call Egypt’s President Al-Sisi to offer support in his battle against the Muslim Brotherhood, the Ikhwan, which seeks his overthrow.

It’s all about the Muslim Brotherhood, that octopus of Islamic supremacist jihad that seeks to use all methods — legal, violent, or deceptive – to advance the goal of a world ruled by Islam.

Former President Obama’s last few hours in office saw him override a Congressional “hold” placed on $221 million funding for the Palestinians, whose goal remains the destruction of Israel in line with the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategy. Matthew Lee and Rick Lardner broke the story for the AP:

A State Department official and several congressional aides said the outgoing administration formally notified Congress it would spend the money Friday morning. The official said former Secretary of State John Kerry had informed some lawmakers of the move shortly before he left the State Department for the last time Thursday. The aides said written notification dated Jan. 20 was sent to Congress just hours before Donald Trump took the oath of office. (snip)

Congress had initially approved the Palestinian funding in budget years 2015 and 2016, but at least two GOP lawmakers — Ed Royce of California, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Kay Granger of Texas, who sits on the House Appropriations Committee — had placed holds on it over moves the Palestinian Authority had taken to seek membership in international organizations. Congressional holds are generally respected by the executive branch but are not legally binding after funds have been allocated.

That this move was a single digit salute to his opponents is evident in the other last minute beneficiaries of Obama’s granting of boons: the United Nations and climate change funding:

In addition to the $221 million for the Palestinians, the Obama administration also told Congress on Friday it was going ahead with the release of another $6 million in foreign affairs spending, including $4 million for climate change programs and $1.25 million for U.N. organizations

President Trump has come under fire for allegedly being anti-Muslim, when in fact his opposition is to violent jihad and those who promote world domination for Islam and the imposition of sharia law on every human being on the planet.  Oddly enough, the women marchers on Saturday were led by a fan of sharia, Linda Sarsour.

Actually, President Trump sees good relations with Muslims who oppose violent jihad and the Ikhwan, and acted dramatically on that yesterday, as Reuters reports:

 Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi and U.S. President Donald Trump discussed ways to boost the fight against terrorism and extremism on Monday and the new American leader underscored his commitment to bilateral ties, the two countries said.

Trump told Sisi in a telephone call he appreciated the difficulties faced by Egypt in its “war on terror” and affirmed his administration’s commitment to supporting the country, Sisi’s spokesman Alaa Youssef said in a statement.

“The U.S. president also expressed during the call his looking forward to the president’s awaited visit to Washington which is being prepared for through diplomatic channels,” the statement said.

“The U.S. president also expressed during the call his looking forward to the president’s awaited visit to Washington which is being prepared for through diplomatic channels,” the statement said.

The people who want to inflict terror attacks on us support the Palestinians funded by Obama, while they want to force Sisi out of office. For the moment, I will leave it to historians to explain why Obama chose to align himself with the former group, and I thank God that president Obama [sic] is supporting President Al-Sisi, who has openly called for reform of Islam.

 

Congratulations, President Trump! Now what? Reversing the ostrich complex

January 21, 2017

Congratulations, President Trump! Now what? Reversing the ostrich complex, Jihad Watch

The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government.

trump-oval-office

We, as military officers, have failed to treat linguistics – the war of words – with the level of importance to which it deserves. As summarized in Lawfare: The War Against Free Speech:

“The war against Islamism is as much a war of ideas as it is a physical battle, and therefore the dissemination of information in the free world is paramount. The manipulation of Western court systems, the use of Western “hate speech laws” and other products of political correctness to destroy the very principles that democracies stand for, must be countered.

Unfortunately Islamist lawfare is beginning to limit and control public discussion of Islam, particularly as it pertains to comprehending the threat posed by Islamic terrorist entities. As such, the Islamist lawfare challenge presents a direct and real threat not only to our constitutional rights, but also to our national security.”[184]

Can you imagine a scenario where, during World War II, if Nazis complained to us about our analyzing Mein Kampf or the Enigma machine, we would have stopped?[117] Or where we would have appointed Nazi party members or open supporters and advocates to senior leadership positions within the Executive Branch departments or as special assistants to the President?[118][119] [120] It would have been insane to fight a war that way.

And yet that is exactly what we are doing now with this policy and this administration. Islamic doctrine, as codified in the Qur’an, Hadith, Sira and sharia law, is the Enigma machine with which we can decode the actions and intentions of the threat. But Islamic law prohibits non-Muslims from even purchasing the Qur’an.[121]

****************************

“ISIL [The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant] is not ‘Islamic.’” – President Barack Obama[1]

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” – Joseph Goebbels[2]

Why does our government recoil “at the notion that we might actually want to scrutinize an ideology that fuels anti-American militarism”?[3] The purge of “Islam,” “jihad,” “sharia,” and other related words from our National Security documents, counter-terrorism training, and intelligence analysis is eerily reminiscent of the warning George Orwell described in his seminal work – 1984.[4] “The purpose of Newspeak was…to make all other modes of thought impossible…by eliminating undesirable words and by stripping such words as remained of unorthodox meaning”[5] This policy is the “Ostrich Complex,” a synonym for Jihad Denial Syndrome (JDS).[6] [7]

Both the Bush and Obama administrations have effectively ascribed to a “see no evil” policy when it comes to Islam.[8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] The problem is that “words convey reality,” and it is our duty as military officers to be connected to reality.[20] Our oath requires us to “…support and defend the Constitution of the United States, against all enemies, foreign and domestic…”.[21] Yet this administration has tasked us to focus on the euphemistic “violent extremists”, which aside from being woefully ambiguous, ignores those who may not meet the narrow definition of violent extremists – yet still meet the broader threshold of being enemies.[*][22]

In 2004, The 9/11 Commission Report identified the enemy as “twofold: al Qaeda, a stateless network of terrorists that struck us on 9/11; and a radical ideological movement in the Islamic world, inspired in part by al Qaeda, which has spawned terrorist groups and violence across the globe.”[23] It went on to note that “ Islamists consider Islam to be as much a religion as an ‘ideology.’”[24] In spite of this, President Obama “and his subordinates, in consultation with advisors from Islamist organizations [like the Muslim Brotherhood], have purged training materials used to instruct national security agents of information deemed to be unflattering of Islam.”[25]

In December 2014 , the Commanding General of a key organization leading the fight against the Islamic State – Special Operations Command Central (SOCCENT) – admitted, “We do not understand the movement, and until we do, we are not going to defeat it. We have not defeated the idea. We do not even understand the idea.”[26] Major General Nagata was speaking of the Islamic State, the rebranded name for al Qaeda in Iraq – an offshoot of what is now called “core al Qaeda.”[27] Regardless, almost a decade and a half after the slaughter of almost 3,000 Americans, this is inexcusable.

Although there are multiple, competing interpretations of Islam, it is beyond the scope of this white paper to attempt to broker the differences, but rather to ensure we are able to address the aggressive, supremacist ideology that constitutes a continuing national security threat based on our enemies own statements claiming legal and theological accuracy and justification for their actions.[28]

“Does concern for multicultural or religious sensibilities justify relinquishing free speech in public discourse and scholarly endeavors?”[29] This report argues in the negative…and that, in fact, such an order to subordinate national security interests and intelligence analysis to anything less than a full and factual analysis constitutes dereliction of duty on behalf of the practitioner and an illegal order on behalf of the party responsible for issuing the order, policy or regulation.[30] [31]

The Problem

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” – George Santayana[32]

“Today there are two great threats facing the survival of the modern liberal West. The first is its exaggerated confidence in the power of reason;the second is its profound underestimation of the forces of fanaticism.” – Lee Harris, The Suicide of Reason[33]

We have faced a totalitarian, supremacist ideology bent on world domination before.[34] Adolf Hitler told us what his goal was in Mein Kampf when it was published in 1926.[35] [36] The problem was, almost no one believed him. And people could not imagine the depths of evil of which the Nazi regime was capable. In fact, the word “genocide” was not invented until 1944.[37] Hitler said to the German people, “‘I offer you struggle, danger and death,’ and as a result a whole nation flung itself at his feet.”[38] Effectively, so too did Muhammad – by his words and actions.[39][40]

Some will find the comparison of Nazi ideology to Islamic ideology offensive. This warrants further exploration. Dr. Bill Warner, Center for Study of Political Islam, has analyzed the anti-Semitism in Mein Kampf (7%), the Meccan Koran (1%), the Medinan Koran (16.9%), Sahih al-Bukhari (8.9%) and the Sira (12%).[41] Overall, the trilogy of Islamic texts averages 9.3% anti-Semitic content – clearly more anti-Semitic than Mein Kampf – especially when total word count is considered. [42] With respect to violence, only 5.6% of the Hebrew Bible is dedicated to violence.[43] By comparison, 9% of the Koran, 21% of the Hadith of Bukhari, and 67% of the Sira are dedicated to violent jihad. [44] The complete Islamic trilogy is 31% dedicated to political violence. [45]

And it’s not just a matter of an academic analysis of the doctrine. Words and declarations precede actions. We effectively ignored al Qaeda’s fatwa that constituted a declaration of war – despite the first World Trade Center Bombing in 1993, the attacks on our embassies in Africa and the deadly attack on the USS Cole – until 9/11.[46]

According to Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law, “The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians…until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax.” It is beyond the scope of this paper to explain the concept of progressive revelation with respect to the Qur’an, but suffice it to say that Qur’an 4:89 “Slay them wherever you find them” remains a commandment from Allah that is fully in effect and applies to all Muslims for all times (as does Qur’an 9:29, and 9:5’s “Sword Verse” for that matter).[47]

“Militant Islam may actually pose an existential threat to the United States. At a minimum, it constitutes a formidable strategic threat.”[48] Despite the onslaught of Islamic inspired terrorism, the Ostrich Complex manifested itself visibly just last week, when the Obama Administration released its final National Security Strategy.[49] The only mention of Islam is to “reject the lie that we are at war with Islam.” [50] There was no mention of the doctrine of jihad or sharia law. Yet a study of Islamic doctrine and the proclamations of the jihadists attacking us, makes it clear that Islam is the justification for those attacks.[51] In the jihadists’ minds, it is clear that they are at war with us.

The problem is: how can you defeat an enemy you cannot name? How can you know and understand an enemy you are prohibited from analyzing? This prohibition subverts the intelligence analysis process and leaves us strategically blind to the enemy.[52]

In 2009, during one of his first major foreign policy speeches overseas, President Obama declared “And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”[53] A review of the U.S. Constitution reveals no such duty.[54] But the President had set the tone and effectively the policy for his administration with respect to Islam when he said those words in 2009. And so doing, we see that “the abuse of political power is fundamentally connected with the sophistic abuse of the word.”[55]

As Josef Pieper warned, “the general public is being reduced to a state where people not only are unable to find out about the truth but also become unable even to search for the truth because they are satisfied with deception and trickery that have determined their convictions, satisfied with a fictitious reality created by design through the abuse of language.”[56] So too is our National Security apparatus is being subverted by this policy.

The problem is partially rooted in a misunderstanding of our own Constitution, which affords religious protections under the First Amendment.[†] This is understandable because “Many people confuse politics and religion.”[57] However, Islam is not just a religion – it is a complete civilizational alternative that includes a legal, political, economic, social and military doctrine known as shariah law.[58] As comprehensively explained in the Muslim Brotherhood’s Explanatory Memorandum, [59] the strategy for subverting the US Constitution to comport with shariah law is a “Civilization-Jihadist Process” which calls for “eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”[60] This makes it clear that although the Muslim Brotherhood varies in ways and means from al Qaeda and the Islamic State, their ends – the end state – remain the same.

Although religion is only a portion of Islam, shariah makes it is impossible to separate Mosque and State in Islam.[61] “The religion of Islam is what a Muslim does to go to paradise and avoid hell. Political Islam determines the treatment of unbelievers and the governance of Muslims.”[62] It is the political focus on non-believers that raises the national security interests. Were the religious and the political not inseparable in Islam, we would remain unconcerned with what we would deem to be the strictly religious aspects of Islam. The scope of the problem is exacerbated by the fact that 61% of the Qur’an, 75% of the Sira and 20% of the Hadith is dedicated to the political. [63] This is why David Yerushalmi argued that “the active and purposeful pursuit of Shariah in the U.S. has implications for the federal criminal law of sedition (notably Title 18, Section 2385 of the U.S. Code),” where Jewish law, Christian dogmas and Catholic canon do not.”[64]

Background

Perhaps the most high profile case of Islamic suppression of free speech (before the attack on Charlie Hebdo)[65] was the fatwa[‡] that constituted a death sentence against Salman Rushdie as a result of his publishing The Satanic Verses.[66] [67] 25 years after the original fatwa was issued calling for his death, it was renewed.[68]

But the Islamic war on free speech dates back to the time of Muhammad himself when in 624 he first started ordering the assassination of poets who mocked him (Al-Nadr bin al-Harith,[69] Uqba bin Abu Muayt,[70] Asma bint Marwan,[71] Abu Afak,[72] Kab bin al-Ashraf,[73] [74] Ibn Sunayna,[75] a one-eyed Bedouin,[76] and one of Abdullah bin Katal’s two singing-girls. [77] [78])[79] For those unfamiliar with Islamic jurisprudence, it warrants pointing out that the first source is the Qur’an, the second is the example of Muhammad – who the Qur’an cites is the model for Muslims to emulate. Hence the significance of these events.

In addition to physical threats of violence, Islam also employs jihad of the pen. As an example, much of the academic aversion to discuss Islam honestly can be attributed to the aggressive tone of Edward Said’s Orientalism that amounts to intellectual terrorism as a result of “spraying charges of racism, imperialism and Eurocentrism from a moral high ground.”[80] [81] If only Ibn Warraq’s seminal Defending the West: A Critique of Edward Said’s Orientalism were as well read in academic circles.[82]

On October 19th, 2011, in order to advance their efforts to silence critical examination of Islam in relation to the threat, a number of Muslim groups sent an open letter to John Brennan, who was then serving as Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism and Deputy National Security Advisor.[83] In it, they accused “the federal government’s use of biased, false and highly offensive training materials about Muslims and Islam” and demanded a purge of the offensive training materials from the FBI, CIA, Homeland Security and the DoD.[84]

That same month, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Homeland Defense Strategy and Force Planning Jose Mayorga formally requested that the Director of the Joint Staff task the “Combatant Commands, Services, National Guard Bureau and Component Commands” to determine the criteria for instructors on “countering violent Islamic extremism.”[85] After that tasking did not have a sufficiently chilling effect on “offensive” counterterrorism training, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey himself signed a letter further reiterating his concern about “ideas, beliefs, and actions that are…disrespectful of the Islamic religion.” And that the review should ensure that programs exhibit “cultural sensitivity, respect for religion and intellectual balance…”[86] [87]

In so doing, Chairman Dempsey violated his own duty to the American Public when he silenced those who would honestly analyze the threat.[88] His actions placed the ideology of multiculturalism over his responsibilities as an officer in the US Military who has sworn an oath of office,[89] despite his duties as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.[90] It appears as if his primary concern was not with American values and security, but rather with not offending the Muslim world. [91]

It is a shame General Dempsey has failed to heed the advice of his predecessor, General Pete Pace, who warned:

“I say you need to get out and read what our enemies have said. Remember Hitler. Remember he wrote Mein Kampf. He said in writing exactly what his plan was, and we collectively ignored that to our great detriment. Now, our enemies have said publicly on film, on the Internet, their goal is to destroy our way of life. No equivocation on their part.”[92] [93]

Or for that matter, General George Washington, who prognosticated, “If the freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”[94]

Bad Actors

Two of the organizations leading the efforts to subvert our ability to even discuss Islam in the context of National Security are the Muslim Brotherhood and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). The United Arab Emirates (UAE) named both the Muslim Brotherhood and the CAIR as designated terrorist organizations.[95] [96] Additionally, CAIR has been extensively linked with Hamas – a U.S. designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO).[97] [98] [99]

The Muslim Brotherhood has been extensively documented as a terrorist organization,[100] [101] and was banned in Egypt in 1948, and is now once again outlawed in Egypt.[102] Additionally, the Muslim Brotherhood has been designated as a terrorist organization by Egypt,[103] [104] Russia, [105] [106] Syria,[107] Saudi Arabia[108] and the United Arab Emirates.[109] [110][111] The 9/11 Commission Report recognized the Muslim Brotherhood as a principle ideological inspiration for al Qaeda.[112]

The actions of these two organizations (Muslim Brotherhood & their front group – CAIR) in particular, I will argue – as Andrew McCarthy did in his conviction against Omar Abdel Rahman (the “Blind Sheik”) – constitutes seditious conspiracy,[§] that is “a confederation to wage war against the United States.”[113] [114]

A Judicial Watch Special Report titled “U.S. Government Purges of Law Enforcement Training Material Deemed ‘Offensive’ to Muslims” extensively documents the history of the purge within the Department of Justice.[115] Which begs the questions as to why the Pentagon is listening to Hamas-linked and designated terrorist organizations?[116]

Can you imagine a scenario where, during World War II, if Nazis complained to us about our analyzing Mein Kampf or the Enigma machine, we would have stopped?[117] Or where we would have appointed Nazi party members or open supporters and advocates to senior leadership positions within the Executive Branch departments or as special assistants to the President?[118][119] [120] It would have been insane to fight a war that way.

And yet that is exactly what we are doing now with this policy and this administration. Islamic doctrine, as codified in the Qur’an, Hadith, Sira and sharia law, is the Enigma machine with which we can decode the actions and intentions of the threat. But Islamic law prohibits non-Muslims from even purchasing the Qur’an.[121]

The reality that Islam currently has over a billion adherents creates a tremendous apprehension about the possibility that these adherents follow an ideology that is rooted in an aggressive, totalitarian, supremacist doctrine bent on world domination. Even if President Obama is correct when he states that “99.9% of Muslims” reject that interpretation of Islam, that still leaves over a million jihadists committed to global Islamic reign.[122] And polls show that number is actually much higher than what the President is portraying.[123] It is that fear [of the possibility that there are over a million people that ascribe to a violent ideology] that allows the lie – of Islam as a religion of peace – to live. As David Horowitz said, “A lie grounded in human desire is too powerful for reason to kill.”[124]

In fact, the size of Islam’s followership is one of the arguments used by Muslim Brotherhood sympathizers simultaneously as both evidence of Islam’s validity and an implied threat.[125] But behind that argument is a logical fallacy – the bandwagon –that holds that an ideology has credence because many people ascribe to it.[126] And more importantly, the size of Islam’s adherents exponentially increases the severity of the danger from the ideology spreading.

As Thomas Paine said, “I prefer peace. But, if there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace.”[127] The problem is, “It is simply delusional to think there is no correlation between what a person believes and how they are likely to act – as delusional as it is to think there is no correlation between Islam’s doctrinal summons to violence and Islamic terrorism.”[128]

Recommendations

“In political warfare, the weapons are words.” – David Horowitz[129]

Ideally, the U.S. Government would reverse the policy to ban the examination of the same Islamic doctrine that our declared enemy says they follow. Recognizing that this administration will not reverse this policy leaves national security professional with a tremendous ethical dilemma. If we are obsessed with political correctness, policies, and promotions, we are negligent in our highest duty: to support and defend American lives.[130]

As Gary Hull discussed in Mohammad: The Banned Images:

“In the battle between open discourse and terrorist intimidation, the immediate philosophic issue is: how does one settle competing claims? Such claims cannot be avoided and are inherent in living in a social setting. … Fundamentally, there are only two methods by which to settle such claims: by reference to persuasion, debate, arguments – i.e. by appealing to reason – or by knives, guns, and bombs – i.e., by reference to the threat or actual initiation of physical force.”[131]

Right now, our options are limited to challenging the status quo or violating our professional oaths, not to mention professional canons. We should continue to conduct personal professional development through extensive reading of both primary Islamic source material, e.g. the Qur’an,[132] Sahih al-Bukhari (specifically Volume 4, Book 56[133] and Volume 9, Appendix III[134]), the Sira,[135] the Reliance of the Traveller,[136] War and Peace in the Law of Islam,[137] The Quranic Concept of War[138] and Freedom of Expression in Islam[139]; secondary source material that predate political correctness, like Moslems: Their Beliefs, Practices, and Politics[140] or shun political correctness, like The Suicide of Reason[141]; books by counter jihadists like Raymond Ibrahim,[142] Robert Spencer,[143] [144] Stephen Coughlin,[145] [146] Frank Gaffney,[147] the Team B2,[148] Walid Phares,[149] and Brigitte Gabriel,[150]; as well as books written by apostates like Ibn Warraq,[151] [152] [153] [154], Ayaan Hirsi Ali,[155] [156] [157] Nonie Darwish,[158] [159][160] and Wafa Sultan.[161]

Others outside the Executive Branch, specifically the Legislative Branch and the press, can continue to press the Administration for information about the actions they are taking and to expose the ill-advised and ill-guided policies being forced on the Executive Branch. In this respect, articles exposing Administration, supported by information gained through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and lawsuits can assist in righting this ship.

Once Chairman Dempsey leaves this summer, we can work towards educating the new Chairman about the nature of the threat – both foreign and domestic – and push to have him rescind or supersede Chairman Dempsey’s purge letter. [162] [163] We can encourage the new Chairman to update professional reading lists to include primary Islamic source materials as well as the politically incorrect books that nonetheless accurately identify, assess, and diagnose the threat. Additionally, we should review and update our policies and training in accordance with the recommendations of the US Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee in accordance with their special report A Ticking Time Bomb[164] regarding the Fort Hood attack, rather than the politically correct report produced for the Federal Bureau of Investigation[165] and the Department of Defense’s report, which only mentions Islam once, and that reference was buried in a footnote.[166] Despite Secretary Gates’ guidance, this has not been done.[167]

Regardless of the results of the Presidential election in 2016, we must push the new administration to designate both the Muslim Brotherhood and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as Foreign Terrorist Organizations. During the Holy Land Foundation trial, Judge Solis directly associated CAIR with a designated terrorist organization.[168] As previously mentioned, this has already been done by Egypt,[169] [170] Russia, [171] [172] Syria,[173] Saudi Arabia[174] and the United Arab Emirates[175] [176] [177] – and we should follow their leads in this case. This may be no easy task depending on who wins the White House, given that CAIR has already started attempting to manipulate the 2016 Republican Presidential candidates publically.[178] [179]

One of the ways to eliminate political correctness from intelligence analysis would be to hold National Security professionals and Intelligence Analysis products to a legal standard. As Andrew McCarthy explains in his book, Willful Blindness:

“Trials have been a priceless elucidation of alarming truths. A trial is a crucible like no other. Political correctness and sloganeering melt away. … [Jurors] have to be told a story that comports with reality, or they won’t convict the person whose fate lies in their hands. A trial is not an exercise in rhetoric or spin. You don’t get to make blithe pronouncements – that terrorism has nothing to do with Islam, that jihadists are a bare fringe distorting the true faith, or that terrorists acted because of poverty, alienation or, needless to say, Israel. You actually have to prove things beyond a reasonable doubt. You have to depict the world as it is, not as we wish it were.”[180]

Finally, we can determine if my political heresy has been the result of some blend of xenophobia and conspiracy theories, or if it is the result of an honest intellectual development that can be replicated and shared throughout the National Security apparatus, and if so, how.[181]

Conclusion

“War is a mere continuation of policy by other means.” – Clausewitz[182]

“Politics is war conducted by other means.” – David Horowitz[183]

We, as military officers, have failed to treat linguistics – the war of words – with the level of importance to which it deserves. As summarized in Lawfare: The War Against Free Speech:

“The war against Islamism is as much a war of ideas as it is a physical battle, and therefore the dissemination of information in the free world is paramount. The manipulation of Western court systems, the use of Western “hate speech laws” and other products of political correctness to destroy the very principles that democracies stand for, must be countered.

Unfortunately Islamist lawfare is beginning to limit and control public discussion of Islam, particularly as it pertains to comprehending the threat posed by Islamic terrorist entities. As such, the Islamist lawfare challenge presents a direct and real threat not only to our constitutional rights, but also to our national security.”[184]

Paraphrasing from Muhammad: the Banned Images:

“We need to re-examine our commitment to free expression. When an institution such as the Executive Branch needs to suppress scholarly work and legitimate intelligence analysis because of the theoretical possibility of violence or the offended feelings of a select group, it grants legitimacy to censorship and casts serious doubts on our commitment to freedom of expression, and more importantly – our commitment to winning this trans-generational war. The failure to defend our right to examine threat doctrine, as promulgated by the enemy, emboldens those who would attack us and undermines our national security. It is time for the Chairman, the President and the Congress to exercise moral and intellectual leadership.”[185]

“The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” [186] Just as “Mein Kampf’s existence denied the free world the excuse of ignorance”,[187] so too does the Qur’an,[188] Sahih al-Bukhari,[189] [190] the Sira[191] and Islamic law[192] itself deny us the excuse of ignorance about the trans-national, trans-generational, totalitarian, supremacist, genocidal threat we face from Islam today.

If we do not study the threat, we won’t be able to accurately distinguish friend from foe and hence, ultimately lose the ability to defeat the enemy. The challenge is finding a way to understand the evil that motivates totalitarians like al Qaeda, the Islamic State, the Muslim Brotherhood and their ilk, while still being able to leverage those Muslim leaders, nations and populations who actively support the United States in this war against supremacist, totalitarian jihadism – from King Abdullah II of Jordan,[193] and President al-Sisi of Egypt,[194] to Malala.[195]

“Mundus vult decipi”[196]

Notes

[*] enemy. (13c) 1. One who opposes or inflicts injury on another; an antagonist. 2. A opposing military force. 3. A state with which another state is at war. — Also termed public enemy. 4. A person possessing the nationality of the state with which one is at war. — Also termed enemy subject. 5. A foreign state that is openly hostile to another whose position is being considered.

Source: Black’s Law Dictionary (9th Ed.)

hostility. (15c) 1. A state of enmity between individuals or nations. 2. An act or series of acts displaying antagonism. 3. (usu. pl.) Acts of war. Source: Joint Publication 1-02 Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms

enemy combatant — In general, a person engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners during an armed conflict.  Also called EC.  Source: DoD Directive 2310.01E

[†] “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Source: U.S. Constitution.

[‡]The author of The Satanic Verses, a text written, edited, and published against Islam, against the Prophet of Islam, and against the Koran, along with all the editors and publishers aware of its contents, are condemned to capital punishment. I call on all valiant Muslims wherever they may be in the world to execute this sentence without delay, so that no one henceforth will dare insult the sacred beliefs of the Muslims.” – Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

Source: http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~owend/I/islam/fatwa.html

[§] Seditious Conspiracy: If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both. Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2384

[1] Obama, Barack. “Statement by the President on ISIL.” The White House. September 10, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/09/10/statement-president-isil-1.

[2] Goebbels, Joseph. “Joseph Goebbels: On the “Big Lie”” Joseph Goebbels On the “Big Lie” Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/goebbelslie.html.

[3] McCarthy, Andrew C. Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad. New York: Encounter Books, 2008. 105.

[4] Orwell, George. Animal Farm and 1984. New York: Harcourt, 2003. 373-385.

[5] Orwell, George. Animal Farm and 1984. New York: Harcourt, 2003. 373.

[6] Rodgers, Guy. “Jihad Denial Syndrome.” TheHill. June 24, 2010. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/homeland-security/105243-jihad-denial-syndrome.

[7] Limbaugh, David. “Obama’s Jihad-denial Syndrome.” WND. September 17, 2012. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/obamas-jihad-denial-syndrome/.

[8] Spencer, Robert. “Is the Pentagon Waking Up?” Jihad Watch. December 14, 2005. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/12/is-the-pentagon-waking-up.

[9] Fitton, Thomas. “U.S. Government Purges of Law Enforcement Training Material Deemed “Offensive” to Muslims.” Judicial Watch. December 5, 2013. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/JWSRGovtPurgeAndActiveMeasures5Dec2013.pdf.

[10] “Words That Work and Words That Don’t: A Guide for Counterterrorism Communication.” Investigative Project on Terrorism. March 14, 2008. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/127.pdf.

[11] Gertz, Bill. “Inside the Ring.” Washington Times. January 4, 2008. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jan/4/inside-the-ring-8-34302/.

[12] “Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole Speaks at the Department’s Conference on Post 9/11 Discrimination.” The US Department of Justice. October 11, 2011. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/deputy-attorney-general-james-m-cole-speaks-department-s-conference-post-911.

[13] “Obama Administration Pulls References to Islam from Terror Training Materials, Official Says.” Yahoo! News. October 21, 2011. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://news.yahoo.com/obama-administration-pulls-references-islam-terror-training-materials-044605689.html.

[14] Lopez, Claire. “Muslim Brotherhood Takes Charge of FBI Counterterrorism Training” ClarionProject.org. April 25, 2012. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/muslim-brotherhood-takes-charge-fbi-counterterrorism-training.

[15] Dempsey, Martin E. “Martin Dempsey’s Letter Calling for Review of Military Education and Training Curriculum.” The New York Times. April 24, 2012. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/04/25/us/Review-of-Military-Education-Training-Curriculum.html.

[16] Poole, Patrick. “A Detailed Look at ‘the Purge’ of U.S. Counter-terrorism Training by the Obama Administration.” The Blaze. March 26, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2014/03/26/a-detailed-look-at-the-purge-of-u-s-counter-terrorism-training-by-the-obama-administration/.

[17] Rusin, David. “Problems in the U.S. Military: Denying Islam’s Role in Terror.” Middle East Forum. Spring 2013. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.meforum.org/3485/us-military-islam.

[18] Cavanugh, Tim. “DHS CRCL CVE Training – Dos and Donts.” Scribd. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.scribd.com/doc/141998997/DHS-CRCL-CVE-Training-Dos-and-Donts.

[19] “Terminology to Define the Terrorists: Recommendations from American Muslims.” Department of Homeland Security. January 1, 2008. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/126.pdf.

[20] Pieper, Josef. Abuse of Language, Abuse of Power. San Francisco, Calif.: Ignatius Press, 1992. 15.

[21] “Oath of Commissioned Officers.” Oath of Commissioned Officers. August 1, 1959. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.army.mil/values/officers.html.

[22] Obama, Barack. “Strategic Implementation Plan for Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism In The United States.” White House. December 1, 2011. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/sip-final.pdf.

[23] Kean, Thomas H. The 9/11 Commission Report. Washington, DC: [National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States], 2004. 363.

[24] Kean, Thomas H. The 9/11 Commission Report. Washington, DC: [National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States], 2004. 562.

[25] McCarthy, Andrew C. “The Articles of Impeachment.” In Faithless Execution: Building the Political Case for Obama’s Impeachment, 152, 223-224. New York: Encounter Books, 2014.

[26] Schmitt, Eric. “In Battle to Defang ISIS, U.S. Targets Its Psychology.” The New York Times. December 28, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/29/us/politics/in-battle-to-defang-isis-us-targets-its-psychology-.html.

[27] Schmitt, Eric. “In Battle to Defang ISIS, U.S. Targets Its Psychology.” The New York Times. December 28, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/29/us/politics/in-battle-to-defang-isis-us-targets-its-psychology-.html.

[28] McCarthy, Andrew C. “The Articles of Impeachment.” In Faithless Execution: Building the Political Case for Obama’s Impeachment, 152, 223-224. New York: Encounter Books, 2014. 221.

[29] Hull, Gary. Muhammad: The “banned” Images. Mesa, Ariz.: Voltaire Press, 2009. 13.

[30] United States Code, Title 10, Subtitle A, Part II, Chapter 47 (The Uniform Code of Military Justice).

[31] (Coughlin, Stephen. Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad. Washington DC: Center for Security Policy, 2015.)

[32] “George Santayana.” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.iep.utm.edu/santayan/.

[33] Harris, Lee. The Suicide of Reason: Radical Islam’s Threat to the Enlightenment. New York: Basic Books, 2007. xxi.

[34] Orwell, George. “Review of Mein Kampf.” Carnegie Council. March 1, 1940. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://worldview.carnegiecouncil.org/archive/worldview/1975/07/2555.html/_res/id=sa_File1/v18_i007-008_a010.pdf.

[35] Hitler, Adolf. Mein Kampf. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1999. xv.

[36] Orwell, George. “Review of Mein Kampf.” Carnegie Council. March 1, 1940. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://worldview.carnegiecouncil.org/archive/worldview/1975/07/2555.html/_res/id=sa_File1/v18_i007-008_a010.pdf.

[37] Hitler, Adolf. Mein Kampf. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1999. xv.

[38] Orwell, George. “Review of Mein Kampf.” Carnegie Council. March 1, 1940. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://worldview.carnegiecouncil.org/archive/worldview/1975/07/2555.html/_res/id=sa_File1/v18_i007-008_a010.pdf.

[39] Al-Bukhari, Imam. “Sahih Al-Bukhari (9 Vol. Set).” Islam Future. November 25, 2012. Accessed February 10, 2015. https://islamfuture.wordpress.com/2012/11/25/sahih-al-bukhari-9-vol-set/.

[40] Al-Bukhari, Imam. “Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 56, Verse 2797.” Future Islam. Accessed February 10, 2015. https://futureislam.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/sahih-al-bukhari-volume-4-ahadith-2738-3648.pdf. 52.

“I would love to be martyred in Allah’s Cause and the come back to life and then get martyred, and then come back to life again and then get martyred.”

[41] Warner, Bill. ”  Anti-Jew Text in Trilogy.” Center for the Study of Political Islam. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.cspipublishing.com/statistical/TrilogyStats/Amt_anti-Jew_Text.html.

[42] Warner, Bill. ”  Anti-Jew Text in Trilogy.” Center for the Study of Political Islam. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.cspipublishing.com/statistical/TrilogyStats/Amt_anti-Jew_Text.html.

[43] Warner, Bill. Factual Persuasion: Changing the Mind of Islam’s Supporters. Center for the Study of Political Islam, 2011. 30-31.

[44] Warner, Bill. Factual Persuasion: Changing the Mind of Islam’s Supporters. Center for the Study of Political Islam, 2011. 30-31.

[45] Warner, Bill. Factual Persuasion: Changing the Mind of Islam’s Supporters. Center for the Study of Political Islam, 2011. 30-31.

[46] “The 9/11 Commission Report.” The 9/11 Commission Report; January 1, 2004. Accessed October 9, 2014. http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf.

[47] Ibn Naqib Al-Misri, Ahmad, and Noah Ha Mim Keller. “Justice: The Objectives of Jihad.” In Reliance of the Traveller: The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law ʻUmdat Al-salik, 599-602. Rev. ed. Beltsville, MD, U.S.A.: Amana Publications, 1999.

[48] McCarthy, Andrew C. Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad. New York: Encounter Books, 2008. 309.

[49] Obama, Barack. “National Security Strategy.” The White House. February 6, 2015. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2015_national_security_strategy_2.pdf.

[50] Obama, Barack. “National Security Strategy.” The White House. February 6, 2015. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2015_national_security_strategy_2.pdf.

[51] Ibrahim, Raymond. The Al Qaeda Reader. New York: Doubleday, 2007.

[52] (Coughlin, Stephen. Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad. Washington DC: Center for Security Policy, 2015.)

[53] Obama, Barack. “Remarks by the President at Cairo University, 6-04-09.” The White House. June 4, 2009. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-cairo-university-6-04-09.

[54] “The Constitution of the United States.” The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. September 17, 1787. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html.

[55] Pieper, Josef. Abuse of Language, Abuse of Power. San Francisco, Calif.: Ignatius Press, 1992. 32.

[56] Pieper, Josef. Abuse of Language, Abuse of Power. San Francisco, Calif.: Ignatius Press, 1992. 34-35.

[57] Horowitz, David. The Art of Political War: And Other Radical Pursuits. Dallas, Tex.: Spence, 2000. 47.

[58] Lopez, Clare. Shariah: The Threat to America : An Exercise in Competitive Analysis. Washington, DC: Center for Security Policy Press, 2010. 2.

[59] Akram, Mohammed. “An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group In North America.” Investigative Project on Terrorism. May 22, 1991. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/case_docs/445.pdf.

[60] Akram, Mohammed. “An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group In North America.” Investigative Project on Terrorism. May 22, 1991. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/case_docs/445.pdf.

[61] Ibn Naqib Al-Misri, Ahmad, and Noah Ha Mim Keller. “Apostacy from Islam.” In Reliance of the Traveller: The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law ʻUmdat Al-salik, 596-598. Rev. ed. Beltsville, MD, U.S.A.: Amana Publications, 1999.

[62] Warner, Bill. Islam 101. Center for the Study of Political Islam, 2008. 13-14.

[63] Warner, Bill. Islam 101. Center for the Study of Political Islam, 2008. 14.

[64] Yerushalmi, David. “Shariah vs. Jewish Law.” FrontPage Magazine. October 10, 2008. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=32710.

[65] “Charlie Hebdo Attack: Three Days of Terror.” BBC News. January 14, 2015. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30708237.

[66] Rushdie, Salman. The Satanic Verses. New York, N.Y.: Viking Penguin, 1989.

[67] Rushdie, Salman. “The Satanic Verses.” Salman Rushdie. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.salman-rushdie.com/blog/the-satanic-verses/.

[68] Graaf, Mia. “Iranian Mullah Revives Death Fatwa against Salman Rushdie over Satanic Verses 25 Years after It Was Issued.” Mail Online. February 16, 2014. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2560683/Iranian-mullah-revives-death-fatwa-against-Salman-Rushdie-Satanic-Verses-25-years-issued.html.

[69] Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1987. 136; 163, 236; 181, 262; 308, 458.

[70] Khan, Muhammad Muhsin. “Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4.” Darussalam. Accessed February 9, 2015. https://futureislam.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/sahih-al-bukhari-volume-4-ahadith-2738-3648.pdf. No. 2934.

[71] Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1987. 675-76; 995-96.

[72] Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1987. 675, 995.

[73] Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1987. 364-369.

[74] Khan, Muhammad Muhsin. “Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 5.” Darussalam. Accessed February 9, 2015. https://futureislam.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/sahih-al-bukhari-volume-5-ahadith-3649-4473.pdf. No. 4037.

[75] Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1987. 369, 534.

[76] Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1987. 674-675.

[77] Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1987. 550-51, 819.

[78] Khan, Muhammad Muhsin. “Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4.” Darussalam. Accessed February 9, 2015. https://futureislam.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/sahih-al-bukhari-volume-4-ahadith-2738-3648.pdf.

No. 3044.

[79] Arlandson, James. “Muhammad’s Dead Poets Society: The Assassination of Satirical Poets in Early Islam.” Answering Islam. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/dead_poets.htm.

[80] Said, Edward W. Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books, 1979.

[81] Warraq, Ibn. Defending the West: A Critique of Edward Said’s Orientalism. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 2007. 18.

[82] Warraq, Ibn. Defending the West: A Critique of Edward Said’s Orientalism. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 2007. 18.

[83] “CAIR Letter to the Honorable John Brennan.” Thomas More. October 19, 2011. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.thomasmore.org/sites/default/files/files/Letter_to_John_Brennan_19_OCT_2011%20(3).pdf.

[84] “CAIR Letter to the Honorable John Brennan.” Thomas More. October 19, 2011. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.thomasmore.org/sites/default/files/files/Letter_to_John_Brennan_19_OCT_2011%20(3).pdf.

[85] Mayorga, Jose S. “Screening Process for Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) Trainers and Speakers.” The Daily Caller. October 11, 2011. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Joint-Staff-Action-Trainers.pdf.

[86] Dempsey, Martin E. “Martin Dempsey’s Letter Calling for Review of Military Education and Training Curriculum.” The New York Times. April 24, 2012. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/04/25/us/Review-of-Military-Education-Training-Curriculum.html.

[87] Spencer, Robert. “Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Orders Military to Purge All Training Material of Truth about Islam.” Jihad Watch. May 3, 2012. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/05/exclusive-senior-us-general-orders.

[88] Hull, Gary. Muhammad: The “banned” Images. Mesa, Ariz.: Voltaire Press, 2009. 7.

[89] “Oath of Commissioned Officers.” Oath of Commissioned Officers. August 1, 1959. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.army.mil/values/officers.html.

[90] “10 U.S. Code § 163 – Role of Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff.” 10 U.S. Code § 163. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/163.

[91] Hull, Gary. Muhammad: The “banned” Images. Mesa, Ariz.: Voltaire Press, 2009. 8.

[92] “Extemporaneous Remarks on Our National Strategy for Victory in Iraq.” Lecture, keynote speech presented at National Defense University from General Peter Pace, USMC, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff, Fort McNair, December 1, 2005.

[93] Coughlin, Stephen. “To Our Great Detriment: Ignoring What Extremists Say About Jihad (with Appendices).” Assyrian International News Agency. July 1, 2007. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.aina.org/reports/iwesaj.pdf.

[94] Hull, Gary. Muhammad: The “banned” Images. Mesa, Ariz.: Voltaire Press, 2009. 10.

[95] “UAE Cabinet Approves List of Designated Terrorist Organisations, Groups.” Emirates News Agency. November 15, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.wam.ae/en/news/emirates-international/1395272478814.html.

[96] Mauro, Ryan. “UAE Doubles Down on Designation of CAIR as Terrorists | Clarion Project.” Clarion Project. November 26, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/uae-doubles-down-designation-cair-terrorists.

[97] “Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).” Discover the Networks. February 9, 2015. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=6176.

[98] “Foreign Terrorist Organizations.” U.S. Department of State. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/other/des/123085.htm.

[99] “5th Circuit Upholds Holy Land Foundation Convictions.” Investigative Project on Terrorism. December 7, 2011. Accessed February 12, 2015. http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/case_docs/1851.pdf.

[100] “Muslim Brotherhood.” Discover the Networks. February 10, 2015. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=6386.

[101] Abdallah, Essam. “Islamist Lobbies’ Washington War on Arab and Muslim Liberals.” The Investigative Project on Terrorism. February 16, 2012. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.investigativeproject.org/3453/islamist-lobbies-washington-war-on-arab.

[102] Fahim, Kareem. “Egypt, Dealing a Blow to the Muslim Brotherhood, Deems It a Terrorist Group.” The New York Times. December 25, 2013. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/26/world/middleeast/egypt-calls-muslim-brotherhood-a-terrorist-group.html?_r=0.

[103] Nasralla, Shadia. “Egypt Designates Muslim Brotherhood as Terrorist Group.” Reuters. December 25, 2013. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/25/us-egypt-explosion-brotherhood-idUSBRE9BO08H20131225.

[104] Abdelaziz, Salma, and Steve Almasy. “Egypt’s Interim Cabinet Officially Labels Muslim Brotherhood a Terrorist Group – CNN.com.” CNN. December 25, 2013. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/25/world/africa/egypt-muslim-brotherhood-terrorism/.

[105] “Отключены или не поддерживаются активные сценарии (JavaScript).” Устаревший или неподдерживаемый веб-обозреватель. February 12, 2003. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://base.consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online.cgi?req=doc;base=EXP;n=257852.

[106] “Russia Names ‘terrorist’ Groups.” BBC News. July 28, 2006. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5223458.stm.

[107] “Assad Says ‘factors Not in Place’ for Syria Peace Talks.” Hurriyet Daily News. October 21, 2013. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/assad-says-factors-not-in-place-for-syria-peace-talks.aspx?pageID=238&nID=56611&NewsCatID=352.

[108] Ajbaili, Mustapha. “Saudi: Muslim Brotherhood a Terrorist Group.” Al Arabiya News. March 7, 2014. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2014/03/07/Saudi-Arabia-declares-Muslim-Brotherhood-terrorist-group.html.

[109] Shahine, Alaa, and Glen Carey. “U.A.E. Supports Saudi Arabia Against Qatar-Backed Brotherhood.” Bloomberg.com. March 9, 2014. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-03-09/u-a-e-supports-saudi-arabia-against-qatar-backed-brotherhood?cmpid=yhoo.

[110] “UAE Cabinet Approves List of Designated Terrorist Organisations, Groups.” Emirates News Agency. November 15, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.wam.ae/en/news/emirates-international/1395272478814.html.

[111] Mauro, Ryan. “UAE Doubles Down on Designation of CAIR as Terrorists | Clarion Project.” Clarion Project. November 26, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/uae-doubles-down-designation-cair-terrorists.

[112] “The 9/11 Commission Report.” The 9/11 Commission Report. p.51; January 1, 2004. Accessed October 9, 2014. http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf.

[113] McCarthy, Andrew C. Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad. New York: Encounter Books, 2008. 272.

[114] Title 18, US Code, Section 2384.

[115] Fitton, Thomas. “U.S. Government Purges of Law Enforcement Training Material Deemed “Offensive” to Muslims.” Judicial Watch. December 5, 2013. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/JWSRGovtPurgeAndActiveMeasures5Dec2013.pdf

[116] Spencer, Robert. “Why Is the Pentagon Listening to Hamas-Linked CAIR?” PJ Media. July 31, 2012. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://pjmedia.com/blog/why-is-the-pentagon-listening-to-hamas-linked-cair/.

[117] Smith, Michael. “Breaking the Enigma Code Was the Easiest Part of the Nazi Puzzle.” The Telegraph. November 15, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/world-war-two/11231608/Breaking-the-Enigma-code-was-the-easiest-part-of-the-Nazi-puzzle.html.

[118] Rossomondo, John. “Egyptian Magazine: Muslim Brotherhood Infiltrates Obama Administration.” The Investigative Project on Terrorism. January 3, 2013. Accessed February 12, 2015. http://www.investigativeproject.org/3869/egyptian-magazine-muslim-brotherhood-infiltrates.

[119] “The Muslim Brotherhood Infiltrates Obama Administration.” FrontPage Magazine. March 28, 2013. Accessed February 12, 2015. http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/frontpagemag-com/the-muslim-brotherhood-infiltrates-obama-administration/.

[120] Henry, Devin. “Bachmann: Investigate the Reach of the Muslim Brotherhood.” MinnPost. July 10, 2012. Accessed February 12, 2015. http://www.minnpost.com/dc-dispatches/2012/07/bachmann-investigate-reach-muslim-brotherhood.

[121] Ibn Naqib Al-Misri, Ahmad, and Noah Ha Mim Keller. “Justice: The Objectives of Jihad.” In Reliance of the Traveller: The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law ʻUmdat Al-salik, 379. Rev. ed. Beltsville, MD, U.S.A.: Amana Publications, 1999.

[122] “Obama: This “Medieval Interpretation Of Islam” Is Rejected By “99.9%” Of Muslims, Not A “Religious War”” CNN. February 1, 2015. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/02/01/obama_this_medieval_interpretation_of_islam_is_rejected_by_999_of_muslims_not_a_religious_war.html.

[123] Secrest, Barry. “Conservative Refocus News.” Stunning Poll Shows Obama’s 99.9 % Figure for Peaceful Muslims Worldwide False. February 6, 2015. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.conservativerefocus.com/blog5.php/2015/02/06/stunning-poll-shows-obama-s-99-9-figure-for-peaceful-muslims-worldwide-false.

[124] Horowitz, David. The Art of Political War: And Other Radical Pursuits. Dallas, Tex.: Spence, 2000. 192.

[125] Enein, Youssef H. Militant Islamist Ideology Understanding the Global Threat. Annapolis, Md.: Naval Institute Press, 2010. 203.

[126] “Your Logical Fallacy Is Bandwagon.” Thou Shalt Not Commit Logical Fallacies. Accessed February 9, 2015. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon.

[127] Paine, Thomas. “The Crisis.” Ushistory.org. December 23, 1776. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.ushistory.org/PAINE/crisis/c-01.htm.

[128] McCarthy, Andrew C. Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad. New York: Encounter Books, 2008. 178.

[129] Horowitz, David. The Art of Political War: And Other Radical Pursuits. Dallas, Tex.: Spence, 2000. 39.

[130] McCarthy, Andrew C. Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad. New York: Encounter Books, 2008. 13.

[131] Hull, Gary. Muhammad: The “banned” Images. Mesa, Ariz.: Voltaire Press, 2009. 9.

[132] Ali, Abdullah Yusuf. The Qurʼan. Elmhurst, N. Y.: Tahrike Tarsile Qurʼan, 2005.

[133] Al-Bukhari, Imam. “Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4.” Future Islam. Accessed February 10, 2015. https://futureislam.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/sahih-al-bukhari-volume-4-ahadith-2738-3648.pdf.

[134] Al-Bukhari, Imam. “Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 9.” Future Islam. Accessed February 10, 2015. https://futureislam.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/sahih-al-bukhari-volume-9-ahadith-6861-7563.pdf.

[135] Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1987.

[136] Ibn Naqib Al-Misri, Ahmad, and Noah Ha Mim Keller. Reliance of the Traveller: The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law ʻUmdat Al-salik. Rev. ed. Beltsville, MD, U.S.A.: Amana Publications, 1999.

[137] Khadduri, Majid. War and Peace in the Law of Islam. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1955.

[138] Malik, S. K. The Quranic Concept of War. Lahore: Wajidalis, 1979.

[139] Kamali, Mohammad Hashim. Freedom of Expression in Islam. Rev. ed. Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1997.

[140] Oussani, Gabriel, and Hilaire Belloc. Moslems: Their Beliefs, Practices, and Politics. Ridgefield, CT: Roger A. McCaffrey Pub., 1936.

[141] Harris, Lee. The Suicide of Reason: Radical Islam’s Threat to the Enlightenment. New York: Basic Books, 2007.

[142] Ibrahim, Raymond. The Al Qaeda Reader. New York: Doubleday, 2007.

[143] Spencer, Robert. The Truth about Muhammad: Founder of the World’s Most Intolerant Religion. Washington, DC: Regnery Pub., 2006.

[144] Spencer, Robert. Stealth Jihad: How Radical Islam Is Subverting America without Guns or Bombs. Washington, DC: Regnery Pub., 2008.

[145] Coughlin, Stephen C. “‘To Our Great Detriment’: Ignoring What Extremists Say About Jihad.” Assyrian International News Agency. July 1, 2007. Accessed February 12, 2015. http://www.aina.org/reports/iwesaj.pdf.

[146] (Coughlin, Stephen. Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad. Washington DC: Center for Security Policy, 2015.)

[147] Gaffney, Frank J. War Footing: 10 Steps America Must Take to Prevail in the War for the Free World. Annapolis, Md.: Naval Institute Press, 2006.

[148] Lopez, Clare. Shariah: The Threat to America: An Exercise in Competitive Analysis. Washington, DC: Center for Security Policy Press, 2010.

[149] Phares, Walid. Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies against America. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.

[150] Gabriel, Brigitte. They Must Be Stopped: Why We Must Defeat Radical Islam and How We Can Do It. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2008.

[151] Warraq, Ibn. Why I Am Not a Muslim. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 1995.

[152] Warraq, Ibn. Which Koran?: Variants, Manuscripts, Linguistics. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2011.

[153] Warraq, Ibn. Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak out. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2003.

[154] Warraq, Ibn. Defending the West: A Critique of Edward Said’s Orientalism. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 2007.

[155] Ali, Ayaan Hirsi. Infidel. New York: Free Press, 2007.

[156] Ali, Ayaan Hirsi. The Caged Virgin: An Emancipation Proclamation for Women and Islam. New York: Free Press, 2006.

[157] Ali, Ayaan Hirsi. Nomad: From Islam to America–a Personal Journey through the Clash of Civilizations. New York: Free Press, 2010.

[158] Darwish, Nonie. Cruel and Usual Punishment. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2008.

[159] Darwish, Nonie. The Devil We Don’t Know: The Dark Side of Revolutions in the Middle East. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley, 2012.

[160] Darwish, Nonie. Now They Call Me Infidel: Why I Renounced Jihad for America, Israel, and the War on Terror. New York, N.Y.: Sentinel, 2006.

[161] Sultan, Wafa. A God Who Hates: The Courageous Woman Who Inflamed the Muslim World Speaks out against the Evils of Islam. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2009.

[162] Dempsey, Martin E. “Martin Dempsey’s Letter Calling for Review of Military Education and Training Curriculum.” The New York Times. April 24, 2012. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/04/25/us/Review-of-Military-Education-Training-Curriculum.html.

[163] Mayorga, Jose S. “Screening Process for Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) Trainers and Speakers.” The Daily Caller. October 11, 2011. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Joint-Staff-Action-Trainers.pdf.

[164] “A Ticking Time Bomb: Counterterrorism Lessons from the U.S. Government’s Failure to Prevent the Fort Hood Attack.” Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. February 1, 2011. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.hsgac.senate.gov//imo/media/doc/Fort_Hood/FortHoodReport.pdf.

[165] Webster, William H. “William H Webster Commission Final Report on FBI Counter Intelligence and the Events at Fort Hood.” Federal Bureau of Investigation. July 19, 2012. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/final-report-of-the-william-h.-webster-commission.

[166] West, Jr., Togo, and Vern Clark. “Protecting the Force: Lessons Learned from Fort Hood.” Department of Defense. January 1, 2010. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.defense.gov/pubs/pdfs/DOD-ProtectingTheForce-Web_Security_HR_13Jan10.pdf.

[167] Gates, Robert. “Final Recommendations of the Ft. Hood Follow On Review.” Investigative Project on Terrorism. August 18, 2010. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/case_docs/1363.pdf.

[168] “US v. Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, Et Al.: The Investigative Project on Terrorism.” The Investigative Project on Terrorism. Accessed February 12, 2015. http://www.investigativeproject.org/case/65.

[169] Nasralla, Shadia. “Egypt Designates Muslim Brotherhood as Terrorist Group.” Reuters. December 25, 2013. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/25/us-egypt-explosion-brotherhood-idUSBRE9BO08H20131225.

[170] Abdelaziz, Salma, and Steve Almasy. “Egypt’s Interim Cabinet Officially Labels Muslim Brotherhood a Terrorist Group – CNN.com.” CNN. December 25, 2013. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/25/world/africa/egypt-muslim-brotherhood-terrorism/.

[171] “Отключены или не поддерживаются активные сценарии (JavaScript).” Устаревший или неподдерживаемый веб-обозреватель. February 12, 2003. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://base.consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online.cgi?req=doc;base=EXP;n=257852.

[172] “Russia Names ‘terrorist’ Groups.” BBC News. July 28, 2006. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5223458.stm.

[173] “Assad Says ‘factors Not in Place’ for Syria Peace Talks.” Hurriyet Daily News. October 21, 2013. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/assad-says-factors-not-in-place-for-syria-peace-talks.aspx?pageID=238&nID=56611&NewsCatID=352.

[174] Ajbaili, Mustapha. “Saudi: Muslim Brotherhood a Terrorist Group.” Al Arabiya News. March 7, 2014. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2014/03/07/Saudi-Arabia-declares-Muslim-Brotherhood-terrorist-group.html.

[175] Shahine, Alaa, and Glen Carey. “U.A.E. Supports Saudi Arabia Against Qatar-Backed Brotherhood.” Bloomberg.com. March 9, 2014. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-03-09/u-a-e-supports-saudi-arabia-against-qatar-backed-brotherhood?cmpid=yhoo.

[176] “UAE Cabinet Approves List of Designated Terrorist Organisations, Groups.” Emirates News Agency. November 15, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.wam.ae/en/news/emirates-international/1395272478814.html.

[177] Mauro, Ryan. “UAE Doubles Down on Designation of CAIR as Terrorists | Clarion Project.” Clarion Project. November 26, 2014. Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/uae-doubles-down-designation-cair-terrorists.

[178] “CAIR Open Letter to 2016 Republican Presidential Candidates.” Council on American-Islamic Relations. January 26, 2015. Accessed February 11, 2015. https://www.cair.com/images/pdf/Open-Letter-to-2016-Republican-Presidential-Candidates.pdf.

[179] “CAIR Letter Urges GOP Presidential Candidates to Engage Muslim Voters, Reject Islamophobia – CAIR.” Council on American-Islamic Relations. January 26, 2015. Accessed February 11, 2015. https://www.cair.com/press-center/press-releases/12823-cair-urges-gop-presidential-candidates-to-engage-muslim-voters.html.

[180] McCarthy, Andrew C. Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad. New York: Encounter Books, 2008. 314-315.

[181] Horowitz, David. The Art of Political War: And Other Radical Pursuits. Dallas, Tex.: Spence, 2000. 189.

[182] “Clausewitz: War as Politics by Other Means.” Online Library of Liberty. Accessed February 12, 2015. http://oll.libertyfund.org/pages/clausewitz-war-as-politics-by-other-means.

[183] Horowitz, David. The Art of Political War: And Other Radical Pursuits. Dallas, Tex.: Spence, 2000. 53.

[184] Goldstein, Brooke, and Aaron Eitan Meyer. Lawfare: The War against Free Speech ; a First Amendment Guide for Reporting in an Age of Islamist Lawfare. Washington, D.C.: Center for Security Policy, 2011. 153.

[185] Hull, Gary. Muhammad: The “banned” Images. Mesa, Ariz.: Voltaire Press, 2009. 48.

[186] Goebbels, Joseph. “Joseph Goebbels: On the “Big Lie”” Joseph Goebbels On the “Big Lie” Accessed February 9, 2015. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/goebbelslie.html.

[187] Hitler, Adolf. Mein Kampf. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1999. xxi.

[188] Ali, Abdullah Yusuf. The Qurʼan. Elmhurst, N. Y.: Tahrike Tarsile Qurʼan, 2005.

[189] Al-Bukhari, Imam. “Sahih Al-Bukhari (9 Vol. Set).” Islam Future. November 25, 2012. Accessed February 10, 2015. https://islamfuture.wordpress.com/2012/11/25/sahih-al-bukhari-9-vol-set/.

[190] “Translation of Sahih Muslim.” Center for Muslim-Jewish Engagement. Accessed February 10, 2015. http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/muslim/.

[191] Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1987.

[192] Ibn Naqib Al-Misri, Ahmad, and Noah Ha Mim Keller. Reliance of the Traveller: The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law ʻUmdat Al-salik. Rev. ed. Beltsville, MD, U.S.A.: Amana Publications, 1999.

[193] Laub, Karen, and Mohammed Daraghmeh. “King Abdullah II Thrusts Jordan to the Center of War on Islamic State Militant Group.” US News. February 6, 2015. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2015/02/06/jordans-king-thrusts-country-to-center-of-islamic-state-war.

[194] Ibrahim, Raymond. “Egypt’s Sisi: Islamic “Thinking” Is “Antagonizing the Entire World”” Raymond Ibrahim. January 1, 2015. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.raymondibrahim.com/from-the-arab-world/egypts-sisi-islamic-thinking-is-antagonizing-the-entire-world/.

[195] “The Nobel Peace Prize for 2014.” The Nobel Peace Prize 2014. October 10, 2014. Accessed February 11, 2015. http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2014/press.html.

[196] Pieper, Josef. Abuse of Language, Abuse of Power. San Francisco, Calif.: Ignatius Press, 1992. 25-26.

Obama’s Transparent Presidency

January 13, 2017

Obama’s Transparent Presidency, Front Page MagazineCaroline Glick, January 13, 2017

barack_obama_discusses_ukraine_with_national_security_staff

[During Obama’s Cario speech], he turned his attention to Israel and the Palestinians. Obama opened this section by presenting his ideological framework for understanding the conflict. Israel he insisted was not established out of respect of the Jews’ national rights to their historic homeland. It was established as a consolation prize to the Jews after the Holocaust.

That is, Israel is a product of European colonialism, just as Iran and Hamas claim.

In contrast, the Palestinians are the indigenous people of the land. They have been the primary victims of the colonial West’s post-Holocaust guilty conscience. Their suffering is real and legitimate.

Hamas’s opposition to Israel is legitimate, he indicated. Through omission, Obama made clear that he has no ideological problem with Hamas – only with its chosen means of achieving its goal.

***********************************

Originally published by the Jerusalem Post

President Barack Obama promised that his would be the most transparent administration in US history.

And the truth is, it was. At least in relation to his policies toward the Muslim world, Obama told us precisely what he intended to do and then he did it.

A mere week remains of Obama’s tenure in office.

But Obama remains intent on carrying on as if he will never leave power. He has pledged to continue to implement his goals for the next week and then to serve as the most outspoken ex-president in US history.

In all of Obama’s recent appearances, his message is one of vindication. I came. I succeeded. I will continue to succeed. I represent the good people, the people of tomorrow. My opponents represent the Manichean, backward past. We will fight them forever and we will prevail.

Tuesday Obama gave his final interview to the Israeli media to Ilana Dayan from Channel 2’s Uvda news magazine. Dayan usually tries to come off as an intellectual. On Tuesday’s show, she cast aside professionalism however, and succumbed to her inner teenybopper. Among her other questions, she asked Obama the secret to his preternatural ability to touch people’s souls.

The only significant exchange in their conversation came when Dayan asked Obama about the speech he gave on June 4, 2009, in Cairo. Does he still stand by all the things he said in that speech? Would he give that speech again today, given all that has since happened in the region, she asked.

Absolutely, Obama responded.

The speech, he insisted was “aspirational” rather than programmatic. And the aspirations that he expressed in that address were correct.

If Dayan had been able to put aside her hero worship for a moment, she would have stopped Obama right then and there. His claim was preposterous.

But, given her decision to expose herself as a slobbering groupie, Dayan let it slide.

To salvage the good name of the journalism, and more important, to understand Obama’s actual record and its consequences, it is critical however to return to that speech.

Obama’s speech at Cairo University was the most important speech of his presidency. In it he laid out both his “aspirational” vision of relations between the West and the Islamic world and his plans for implementing his vision. The fundamentally transformed world he will leave President-elect Donald Trump to contend with next Friday was transformed on the basis of that speech.

Obama’s address that day at Cairo University lasted for nearly an hour. In the first half he set out his framework for understanding the nature of the US’s relations with the Muslim world and the relationship between the Western world and Islam more generally. He also expressed his vision for how that relationship should change.

The US-led West he explained had sinned against the Muslim world through colonialism and racism.

It needed to make amends for its past and make Muslims feel comfortable and respected, particularly female Muslims, covered from head to toe.

As for the Muslims, well, September 11 was wrong but didn’t reflect the truth of Islam, which is extraordinary. Obama thrice praised “the Holy Koran.” He quoted it admiringly. He waxed poetic in his appreciation for all the great contributions Islamic civilization has made to the world – he even made up a few. And he insisted falsely that Islam has always been a significant part of the American experience.

In his dichotomy between two human paths – the West’s and Islam’s – although he faulted the records of both, Obama judged the US and the West more harshly than Islam.

In the second half of his address, Obama detailed his plans for changing the West’s relations with Islam in a manner that reflected the true natures of both.

In hindsight, it is clear that during the seven and a half years of his presidency that followed that speech, all of Obama’s actions involved implementing the policy blueprint he laid out in Cairo.

He never deviated from the course he spelled out.

Obama promised to withdraw US forces from Iraq regardless of the consequences. And he did.

He promised he would keep US forces in Afghanistan but gave them no clear mission other than being nice to everyone and giving Afghans a lot of money. And those have been his orders ever since.

Then he turned his attention to Israel and the Palestinians. Obama opened this section by presenting his ideological framework for understanding the conflict. Israel he insisted was not established out of respect of the Jews’ national rights to their historic homeland. It was established as a consolation prize to the Jews after the Holocaust.

That is, Israel is a product of European colonialism, just as Iran and Hamas claim.

In contrast, the Palestinians are the indigenous people of the land. They have been the primary victims of the colonial West’s post-Holocaust guilty conscience. Their suffering is real and legitimate.

Hamas’s opposition to Israel is legitimate, he indicated. Through omission, Obama made clear that he has no ideological problem with Hamas – only with its chosen means of achieving its goal.

Rather than fire missiles at Israel, he said, Hamas should learn from its fellow victims of white European colonialist racists in South Africa, in India, and among the African-American community.

Like them Hamas should use nonviolent means to achieve its just aims.

Obama’s decision attack Israel at the UN Security Council last month, his attempts to force Israel to accept Hamas’s cease-fire demands during Operation Protective Edge in 2014, his consistent demand that Israel renounce Jewish civil and property rights in united Jerusalem, in Judea and Samaria, his current refusal to rule out the possibility of enabling another anti-Israel resolution to pass at the Security Council next week, and his contempt for the Israeli Right all are explained, envisioned and justified explicitly or implicitly in his Cairo speech.

One of the more notable but less discussed aspects of Obama’s assertion that the Palestinians are in the right and Israel is in the wrong in the speech, was his embrace of Hamas. Obama made no mention of the PLO or the Palestinian Authority or Fatah in his speech. He mentioned only Hamas – the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, which shares the Brotherhood’s commitment to annihilating Israel and wiping out the Jewish people worldwide.

Sitting in the audience that day in Cairo were members of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood.

Then-Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak rightly viewed Obama’s insistence that the brothers be invited to his address as a hostile act. Due to this assessment, Mubarak boycotted the speech and refused to greet Obama at the Cairo airport.

Two years later, Obama supported Mubarak’s overthrow and the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood to replace him.

Back to the speech.

Having embraced the Muslim Brotherhood and its Palestinian branch, branded Israel a colonial implant and discredited the US’s moral claim to world leadership, Obama turned his attention to Iran.

Obama made clear that his intention as president was to appease the ayatollahs. America he explained had earned their hatred because in 1953 the CIA overthrew the pro-Soviet regime in Iran and installed the pro-American shah in its place.

True, since then the Iranians have done all sorts of mean things to America. But America’s original sin of intervening in 1953 justified Iran’s aggression.

Obama indicated that he intended to appease Iran by enabling its illicit nuclear program to progress.

Ignoring the fact that Iran’s illegal nuclear program placed it in material breach of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Obama argued that as an NPT signatory, Iran had a right to a peaceful nuclear program. As for the US and the rest of the members of the nuclear club, Obama intended to convince everyone to destroy their nuclear arsenals.

And in the succeeding years, he took a hacksaw to America’s nuclear force.

After Obama’s speech in Cairo, no one had any cause for surprise at the reports this week that he approved the transfer of 116 tons of uranium to Iran. Likewise, no one should have been surprised by his nuclear deal or by his willingness to see Iran take over Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. No one should be surprised by his cash payoffs to the regime or his passivity in the face of repeated Iranian acts of aggression against US naval vessels in the Strait of Hormuz.

Everything that Obama has done since he gave that speech was alluded to or spelled out that day.

Certainly, nothing he has done was inconsistent with what he said.

The consequences of Obama’s worldview and the policies he laid out in Cairo have been an unmitigated disaster for everyone. The Islamic world is in turmoil. The rising forces are those that Obama favored that day: The jihadists.

ISIS, which Obama allowed to develop and grow, has become the ideological guide not only of jihadists in the Middle East but of Muslims in the West as well. Consequently it has destabilized not only Iraq and Syria but Europe as well. As the victims of the Islamist massacres in San Bernardino, Boston, Ft. Hood, Orlando and beyond can attest, American citizens are also paying the price for Obama’s program.

Thanks to Obama, the Iranian regime survived the Green Revolution. Due to his policies, Iran is both the master of its nuclear fate and the rising regional hegemon.

Together with its Russian partners, whose return to regional power after a 30-year absence Obama enabled, Iran has overseen the ethnic cleansing and genocide of Sunnis in Syria and paved the way for the refugee crisis that threatens the future of the European Union.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey’s Islamist leader, was a principle beneficiary of Obama’s admiration of Islamism. Erdogan rode Obama’s wave to destroy the last vestiges of the secular Turkish Republic.

Now he is poised to leave NATO in favor of an alliance with Russia.

Obama and his followers see none of this. Faithful only to their ideology, Obama and his followers in the US and around the world refuse to see the connection between the policies borne of that ideology and their destructive consequences. They refuse to recognize that the hatred for Western civilization and in particular of the Jewish state Obama gave voice to in Cairo, and his parallel expression of admiration for radical Islamic enemies of the West, have had and will continue to have horrific consequences for the US and for the world as a whole.

Cairo is Obama’s legacy. His followers’ refusal to acknowledge this truth means that it falls to those Obama reviles to recognize the wages of the most transparent presidency in history. It is their responsibility to undo the ideological and concrete damage to humanity the program he first unveiled in that address and assiduously implemented ever since has wrought.

A Last, Desperate Plea to Excuse Hamas Support

January 12, 2017

A Last, Desperate Plea to Excuse Hamas Support, Investigative Project on Terrorism, January 12, 2017

1935-1

As President Obama’s tenure reaches its final days, Islamists in the United States are waging a furious lobbying campaign aimed at securing the freedom of five men convicted of illegally routing millions of dollars to Hamas.

An open campaign urges the president to pardon five former officials from the defunct, Texas-based Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), casting them as victims of “anti-Muslim hysteria” triggered by the 9/11 attacks. In 2008, a jury convicted the five – Shukri Abu Baker, Ghassan Elashi, Mohammed El-Mezain, Abdulrahman Odeh and Mufid Abdulqader – of using a network of Palestinian charities controlled by Hamas to funneling money to the terrorist group.

It is not clear whether the requests to pardon the five, or to commute their sentences and release them from prison, is being considered seriously. Obama’s pardons thus far involved somewhat less serious crimes including fraud, embezzlement and non-violent drug offenses.

But advocates are pushing social media campaigns and online petitions aimed at securing a pardon, or, short of that, a commutation of the five men’s sentences to set them free. The campaign also has enlisted support from at least one member of Congress.

Left unspoken is an undeniable truth behind the pardon/commutation campaign, and behind any ongoing defense of the Holy Land Foundation: Advocates do not believe Hamas support is wrong.

The Muslim Legal Fund of America (MLFA) is leading the charge, supported by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and pro-Palestinian groups.

CAIR’s appeal provided a White House switchboard number for supporters to call and request commutations. Some sites even include contact information for key members of Congress, urging supporters to emphasize the “cruelly disproportionate” length of sentences – from a low of 15 years for El-Mezain, to 65-year terms for Baker and Elashi.

1934

CAIR’s Arizona director Imraan Siddiqui described the prosecution as “a political lynching of charity workers … Its effects still haunt American Muslims.”

After reviewing the entire record in 2011, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals saw it quite differently.

Pleas from the MLFA and Siddiqi ignore the exhibits – many of them internal HLF and related documents – showing the family ties between some defendants and Hamas leaders, a reliance on Hamas officials to speak at HLF fundraisers along with other, consistent pro-Hamas messages.

In addition, records show, HLF (formerly known as the Occupied Land Fund) was part of a network called the “Palestine Committee” in the United States. That committee answered to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood’s mandate that global chapters create “Palestine Committees” in their home countries. Their task was “to support Hamas from abroad,” the Fifth Circuit noted in upholding the convictions and sentences. In the United States, that task fell in part to Hamas political leader Mousa Abu Marzook, who helped create HLF and two other branches – a propaganda wing known as the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP) and a think-tank called the United Association for Studies and Research (UASR).

CAIR was added to the Palestine Committee after its 1994 founding.

“The evidence showed that the long-standing connection between HLF and Hamas began in the late 1980s when HLF arose as a fundraising arm for the Palestine Committee …” the appeals court ruling said. “This fact was notably evident from the … [internal Palestine Committee] documents, which showed that HLF was created along with the IAP.” In addition, Palestine Committee bylaws “specifically recognized HLF as ‘the official organization for fundraising.'”

HLF apologists claim the group was merely interested in helping needy widows and orphans. But, the court pointed out, the orphans included Yehia Ayyash’s children. Ayyash was Hamas’s top bomb maker, nicknamed “The Engineer,” before being killed by Israel.

“An audio tape from 1996 that was seized from HLF’s offices contained songs praising Hamas and discussions of suicide bombers as heroes,” the ruling said.

“We believe that a jury could not help but infer from the above evidence that the defendants had a close association with Hamas and that HLF acted to fund Hamas both before and after Hamas’s designation as a terrorist organization.”

Still, CAIR’s Texas chapter called the five convicted HLF officials “humanitarians,” and described their imprisonment as “an immense wrong.” It cited defense attorney Nancy Hollander’s claim that there was no evidence showing her client, HLF executive director Shukri Abu Baker, breaking the law. “Not a word from his lips that he hated Jews. Not a word from his lips that he supported Hamas. These were fictions,” Hollander said.

1933

That cannot be said for Mufid Abdulqader, who performed and acted in a singing troupe that helped raise money for HLF at IAP events. In this video, admitted into evidence during the 2008 trial, he is shown wearing camouflage and a kaffiyeh as he sings, “I am Hamas, O dear ones … I swear to wipe out the name of the Zionist. And protect my land, Palestine.” Then, he pretends to strangle an actor portraying an Israeli.

Hollander failed to mention that Baker ran HLF and was responsible for who spoke and what was said at its fundraisers. Those events routinely featured Hamas leaders and activists. She also neglected to mention her client’s participation in a secret 1993 Philadelphia gathering of Hamas members and supporters who schemed about how to “derail” the U.S.-brokered Oslo peace accord without coming off looking like terror supporters.

It was Baker who set a key ground rule for the talks, which were secretly recorded and translated by the FBI: No one should mention Hamas by name, he instructed. Instead, call it “Sister Samah,” which is Hamas spelled backward.

The gathering, Baker said, was “a joint workshop between the Holy Land Foundation and the IAP.” Participants should not mention Hamas by name.

Hollander then compared the HLF case – brought against a handful of men with documented and recorded connections to Hamas – to the mass internment of 117,000 Japanese American men, women and children during World War II.

The current campaign would settle for a sentencing commutation, essentially freeing the men on time served. The sentences, from 15 to 65 years in prison, were overly harsh, advocates say.

But the Fifth Circuit had considered this, too, rejecting defense department arguments. Its ruling noted that the probation office’s presentence recommendations included significant terrorism enhancements because HLF gave money to Hamas “in order to rid Palestine of the Jewish people through violent jihad, HAMAS’ mission.”

It added that “the trial was replete with evidence to satisfy application of the terrorism enhancement because of the defendants’ intent to support Hamas. The Hamas charter clearly delineated the goal of meeting the Palestinian/Israeli conflict with violent jihad and the rejection of peace efforts and compromise solutions. The defendants knew that they were supporting Hamas, as there was voluminous evidence showing their close ties to the Hamas movement.”

Those claiming the HLF defendants suffered an injustice, or that they somehow deserve relief, lie about this record or pretend it does not exist. To acknowledge reality is to shatter their own argument, or to come clean about their true feelings about Hamas terrorism. They know that’s a losing hand. It’s something Shukri Abu Baker talked about in that 1993 Philadelphia meeting.

They need to mislead people if they are going to be successful, Baker said.

“War is deception,” he said. “Deceive, camouflage, pretend that you’re leaving while you’re walking that way … Deceive your enemy.”

Obama’s Enabling of Palestinian Terror

January 11, 2017

Obama’s Enabling of Palestinian Terror, Front Page MagazineJoseph Puder, January 11, 2017

abbasobama

When we consider last month’s United Nations Security Council resolution (UNSC) 2334 that passed with deliberate U.S. abstention and later, justified in a speech by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, it makes the adage below come to mind. The Midrash (commentary on part of the Hebrew Scriptures) tells us, “He who becomes compassionate to the cruel will ultimately become cruel to the compassionate.”  Maimonides wrote in The Guide of the Perplexed that “the wicked and calculating person who killed intentionally and was sentenced to death – if he seeks sanctuary among us, we must not provide him with asylum, and not have mercy upon him, because compassion toward the wicked is cruelty to all beings.

In supporting the Palestinian regime that seeks the destruction of the Jewish State as its ultimate goal, the Obama administration is being compassionate toward the wrong party.  The Obama administration is knowingly and deliberately supporting the creation of another unstable Arab authoritarian regime that has failed its people.  Mahmoud Abbas, like Arafat before him, albeit more subtle, seeks the same goal: undermining the Jewish state, and replacing it with an undemocratic Palestinian state.  Abbas wouldn’t return to the negotiating table unless he is heavily bribed, and like Arafat, at the crucial moment when all reasonable concessions had been made, he walked out.

At their September 16, 2008 meeting in Jerusalem, Israeli Prime Minister Olmert agreed to forgo sovereignty over the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, Judaism’s holiest site, and proposed that in the framework of the peace agreement, the area containing the religious sites in Jerusalem would be managed by a special committee consisting of representatives from five nations: Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Palestinians, the U.S. and Israel.  The advisors and Fatah officials heard that Olmert laid out for Abbas not only the details of the agreement but also a large map upon which he outlined the borders of the future Palestinian state.  Abbas, like Arafat in July, 2000, walked out.

Considering Palestinian terrorism incited by Hamas and the Palestinian Authority against Jewish civilians and soldiers alike, it becomes clear that the Obama administration has shown compassion toward Palestinian aspirations and contempt for Jews aspiring to settle in their ancestral regions of Judea and Samaria.  The Administration would be quite content on a “judenrein” West Bank.   In fact, the U.S. and its European allies support the PA with huge grants, portions of which goes to pay salaries to Palestinian terrorists with blood on their hands and their families.  They have likewise funded Palestinian-Arab construction projects, built illegally throughout the West Bank and Jerusalem.

The Obama administration has also shown compassion for the Iranian regime by ending the economic sanctions against the radical Islamic Iranian regime, which hangs gays and lesbians as well as juveniles.  Amnesty International reported on January 26, 2016, that “Iran remains the leading executioner of juvenile offenders.”  The New York Post reported on August 3, 2016 that “The Obama administration quietly shipped $400 million stacked on wooden pallets in an unmarked plane to Iran in January – just as Tehran was releasing four Americans who had been detained there.”  This was done to appease the Islamic Republic, which is the leading state sponsor of terror around the world, and that has taken Americans in Iran as hostages.

U.S. Mideast mediator Dennis Ross pointed out that the Obama administration was so enamored with the so-called “moderate” Iranian President Rouhani, that it “showed readiness to accept an industrial-scale Iranian nuclear program and not to roll it back.”  The Obama administration was willing to bend its principles in order to foster a relationship and perhaps an alliance of sorts (against the Islamic State in Iraq) with the Ayatollahs regime that promised “to wipe Israel off the map.”

In the summer of 2009, the Iranian people voted for freedom and against the choices of the theocratic regime that oppressed them. They demonstrated in the millions with signs that read “Obama, are you with them or with us.”  Obama did not respond. He proved to have little compassion for the oppressed.

In Syria, the Shiite-Iranian Revolutionary Guards and their supported Iraqi-Shiite militias, as well as the Lebanese-Shiite terrorist group Hezbollah, are murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent Syrian Sunni Muslims, Christians, and others civilians with impunity.  They are bolstering the dictatorship of the Alawi (offshoot of Shiite Islam) minority ruler Bashar Assad.  The Russians have also joined in the killing of Syrian civilians in the name of combatting so-called “terrorists.”

The Palestinians of Hamas and the PA raise their children on hate and expound on the destruction of the Jewish state in schools, mosques, in the media, and in their policy directives.  The Palestinian intolerance towards Jews and Christians is deeply embedded, but due to political correctness, it has never been sufficiently reported in the western media, or by western governments.  Under the Palestinian regime, Christian Arabs have been victims of frequent human rights abuse by Muslims. There are many examples of intimidation, beatings, land theft, firebombing of churches and other Christian institutions, denial of employment, economic boycotts, torture, kidnapping, forced marriage, sexual harassment, and extortion. Palestinian Authority (PA) officials are directly responsible for many of the human rights violations. Muslims who have converted to Christianity are in the greatest danger. They are often left defenseless against cruelty by Muslim fundamentalists. Some have been murdered.

There is a clear dichotomy in determining who the compassionate side is, and who is the cruel. It comes together perfectly clear in the Syrian civil war arena.  Thousands of Palestinians are fighting on behalf of the Syrian dictator, and help in slaughtering the Syrian people who are fighting for their freedom.  The Palestinian radical group, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC) led by Ahmed Jibril, provided the Assad war machine with intelligence and ground support, when he laid siege to the Palestinian populated Yarmouk refugee camp.  The PFLP-GC, once a member of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) joined the Assad troops in killing fellow Palestinians.

Conversely, Israel has opened its hospital gates to wounded Syrians, both civilians and soldiers.  Prime Minister Netanyahu announced last month “We are prepared to take in wounded women and children, and also men if they are not combatants. Bring them to Israel, we will take care of them in our hospitals as we have done with thousands of Syrian civilians. We are looking into ways of doing this. It is being explored as we speak.”  Netanyahu added, “The suffering is great, and the one initiative we took is to help – as I said – thousands of Syrians who are sometimes mutilated beyond belief. We help them. I offered to do more today. I don’t know if we can resolve [the crisis in] Syria, but we can help mitigate some of the suffering. That is the best that Israel can do.”

Being compassionate toward the Palestinian’s aspirations to destroy the Jewish state in stages by forming a terrorist supporting state, the Obama administration is being cruel toward the Jewish state, which seeks to defend its people from the ongoing Palestinian terror.

Muslim Activist to Trump: Brotherhood Should Be Banned

January 1, 2017

Muslim Activist to Trump: Brotherhood Should Be Banned, Clarion Project, Ryan Mauro, January 1, 2016

egypt-muslim-brotherhood-supporters-flags-ip_3Muslim Brotherhood supporters in Egypt (Photo: © Reuters)

Dr. Qanta Ahmed, a Muslim activist who appeared in the Clarion Project’s Honor Diaries documentary about the oppression of women in the Muslim world, asked President-elect Trump to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization in a new op-ed in Newsday.

She recommends designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, just like its Palestinian wing, Hamas, has been designated. This is a necessary step in waging a broader ideological war against Islamism rather than just against a few specific Islamist terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State.

Dr. Ahmed writes:

Trump can start by outlawing the Muslim Brotherhood, as President Sisi did in Egypt. He must designate it a foreign terrorist organization and acknowledge that it is at the very least an indicator of extremism. Then, he must follow the money. If Islamism is to be exposed in America, forensic financial investigations must scrutinize all institutions where Islamism can flourish without scrutiny — mosques, charities, and advocacy groups. There can be no exceptions. 

The pushback against those advocating designating the Brotherhood as a terrorist group and making Islamism the target of U.S. strategy is that it will be perceived as—or even qualifies as—a war on the faith of Islam.

The West’s embrace of the Brotherhood and other Islamists is motivated by a false impression that they are “moderate” and a desire to avoid the appearance of a war on Islam where we fail to distinguish Muslim friends from Muslim foes.

Yet, Ahmed rightly points out that the current stance towards Islamism, is exactly that—a “profound inability by the United States to distinguish Islam from Islamism.”

Incoming Defense Secretary General Mattis makes a similar point: Framing the adversary as Islamism (Political Islam) allows a new constituency of partners and allies to be tapped.

On the contrary, the current administration’s set-up of terrorist vs. non-terrorist allows Islamists to fill the “non-terrorist” slot in the struggle, leaving genuine Muslim reformers out of the picture.

The U.S’ narrow focus on the symptoms of terrorist groups overlooks how the Muslim world itself is starting to discuss the diseases of Islamism as well as Islamism’s rejection of modernized interpretations of the religion.

This narrow focus on the part of the U.S. is partially rooted in the assumption that the Muslim world will be alienated by a broader ideological delineation (Islam vs. Islamism). Ironically, the West has been so fixated on declaring what will alienate prospective Muslim friends that it has failed to listen and observe what will actually alienate them.

As I recently wrote, “Overlooked allies amongst Muslims and non-Muslim minorities will surface as U.S. policy forces the Muslim world to take stances on Islamism and its adhering organizations. New allies will be born as the discussion of Islamism leads to rejections of it. If messaged correctly, the U.S. will end up with more Muslim allies of better quality.”

Dr. Ahmed argues that supporting “pluralist Muslims” against Islamism will allow the U.S. to build ties with this constituency:

Like Eisenhower, Trump will be at the right place, at the right time, in the right history. Trump will do battle with Islamism at a time when a disparate Muslim world is finally unifying with enormous political will to join that effort.

A petition has been launched urging President-elect Trump to meet with the Muslim Reform Movement, a pro-Western alliance of Muslims who want to challenge Islamism. You can sign the petition here.

The Trump administration’s strategy towards defeating Islamism will be the biggest factor deciding the success of U.S. foreign policy in the next four years.