As of now, I am in control here, in the White House

The Problem with Not Calling it “Islamic” Terror

President Obama’s ardent adherence to political correctness – exceeding now that even of the French – is a grave error that will harm, perhaps fatally, our war against Islamic extremism.

And a war it is. ISIS has held most of its Caliphate and threatens the United States. Just today, it was reported that ISIS fighters in Syria were making gains despite U.S. bombing. Al Qaeda in Yemen, officially given last rights by the White House, is clearly back in good form. The Taliban remains strong in Afghanistan.

The White House’s refusal to characterize terrorism as based at all in Islam raises an obvious issue: How can you deal with a  problem if you can’t identify it? It’s like providing chemotherapy for heart disease.

Which might soon be happening given the quality of doctors willing to work under Obamacare, but I digress.

Serious people, like those who don’t inhabit the White House, understand that there is a problem in the Muslim world that is feeding Jihadism.

To say this has nothing to do with Islam is not only a farce, but it prevents the White House from working with our Arab and European allies to reform Islam to a more peaceable state of existence. The current White House strategy of just attacking terrorists, militarily and rhetorically, is not nearly enough.

There’s a war on for the hearts and minds of Muslims. It begins in the madrassas that are educating young Muslims to hate the Jews and the West. It extends to the many Muslim religious leaders who are not somehow outside of Islam, but who are preaching hatred within it.

The two leaders of the competing Muslim sects, the Shia and the Sunnis, are respectively Iran and Saudi Arabia. Both support and finance Muslim extremists, and even terrorists. This cannot be an aberration. In Gaza, Palestinians elected a terrorist organization, Hamas, to lead them.

None of this is meant as an attack on Islam. I say it with sadness. But the truth must be recognized so Islam can change and the West can be safe.

Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, who did our dirty work by jailing and killing thousands of Islamist Muslim brotherhood members in his country, understands:

That thinking – I am not saying ‘religion’ but ‘thinking’ – that corpus of texts and ideas that we have sacralized over the years, to the point that departing from them has become almost impossible, is antagonizing the entire world. It’s antagonizing the entire world!

Is it possible that 1.6 billion [Muslims] should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants – that is 7 billion – so that they themselves may live? Impossible! . . . I say and repeat again that we are in need of a religious revolution. You, imams, are responsible before Allah. The entire world, I say it again, the entire world is waiting for your next move … because this umma is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost — and it is being lost by our own hands.

Note he is basing the problem directly in the unwillingness to be flexible about the literal words of “that corpus of texts and ideas that we have sacralized over the years.” Islamic texts.

Thomas Friedman, a liberal columnist for the New York Times who has spent much time in the Middle East, wrote the following Tuesday:

The truth is there is a huge amount of ambivalence toward this whole jihadist phenomenon — more than any of us would like to believe — in the Arab-Muslim world, Europe and America. This ambivalence starts in the Muslim community, where there is a deep cleavage over what constitutes authentic Islam today.

We fool ourselves when we tell Muslims what “real Islam” is. Because Islam has no Vatican, no single source of religious authority, there are many Islams today. The puritanical Wahhabi/Salafi/jihadist strain is one of them, and its support is not insignificant.

Where, Friedman wonders, is “a million-person march against the jihadists across the Arab-Muslim world, organized by Arabs and Muslims for Arabs and Muslims, without anyone in the West asking for it”?

Friedman’s observations are backed up with statistics that demonstrate significant, albeit minority, support for violent extremism in the Muslim world. According to the Pew Religion and Public Life Project:

Around the world, most Muslims also reject suicide bombing and other attacks against civilians. However, substantial minorities in several countries say such acts of violence are at least sometimes justified, including 26% of Muslims in Bangladesh, 29% in Egypt, 39% in Afghanistan and 40% in the Palestinian territories.

Even in the United States, eight percent of Muslims say violence against civilians is at least sometimes justified to “defend Islam.”

In many areas of the Muslim world, values that would seem inconsistent with democracy are extremely popular, according to Pew:

Solid majorities in most of the countries surveyed across the Middle East and North Africa, sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia and Southeast Asia favor the establishment of sharia, including 71% of Muslims in Nigeria, 72% in Indonesia, 74% in Egypt and 89% in the Palestinian territories.

In most countries surveyed, majorities of Muslim women as well as men agree that a wife is always obliged to obey her husband. Indeed, more than nine-in-ten Muslims in Iraq (92%), Morocco (92%), Tunisia (93%), Indonesia (93%), Afghanistan (94%) and Malaysia (96%) express this view.

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest Tuesday justified the White House’s non-use of “Islamism” by saying he was seeking “accuracy.” What he was really doing, as all the politically correct do, is trying not to offend, which is actually the avoidance of accuracy. But the stakes are far too high now to be polite about things.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on LinkedInEmail this to someone

69 Responses to The Problem with Not Calling it “Islamic” Terror

  1. How can a religion whose perfect man was a delusional, head-chopping pedophile be reformed? How can you reform a religion that commands its followers to make war against unbelievers and chop off the heads of those who won’t submit?

    • They have been indoctrinated.
      The same movement is happening in our school systems.
      Parents are told to back off and let the school systems teach their children.
      These school boards had better wake up and realize who is buttering their bread.
      Some of them are a bunch of commie liberals.

  2. “Avoidance of accuracy”.
    That is a phrase that describes the administration to a T.
    Trouble is,….we have the internet, and we no when they are lying.
    Doesn’t seem to bother them though.
    After all,…we are just peons with a computer.

  3. Cameron and o avoiding the no no words. Won’t call it for what it is.
    French do not have a problem with the words, nor Canada.
    Is Cameron going to tell his citizens if he thinks letting Gitmo prisoners let go? I am so fed up with this. I don’t care if someone thinks their God is a rock, If they attack and kill people. They are wrong. They would be affliated with their rock religion. Yes very plain example. o, the media, are making this more complicated than it is. They want to kill us!
    Two people killed in Jihad-related couterterror raid in Belgium. Just announced on Fox.

  4. I don’t know if the West backing the Egyptian President would help him or hurt him. I suspect perhaps hurt him in the eyes of Muslim’s who might be willing to follow his call. But one thing is that he pronounced bravely the problem and called out for Muslims to have their own revolution.

    We can at least help by identifying it as radical islamic terrorism or jihadis. Not making the distinction is what is bad for the Muslims who suffer at the hand of radical Muslims or perhaps choose not to advocate that part of their religion.

    Good piece Keith. Thanks.

    Appeasement of evil never ever works. And look how quickly even the Pope limits free speech.

  5. “Serious people, like those who don’t inhabit the White House, understand that there is a problem in the Muslim world that is feeding Jihadism.” – Mr. Koffler

    I’m not really sure it’s fair to make the statement that “Serious people” don’t “inhabit the White House”. These folks ARE serious…serious about transforming America. If you look through his taquyya, the Chief Instigator is probably even serious about transforming America to his inculcated Shari’a beliefs.

    And at least PART of the “problem in the Muslim world that is feeding Jihadism.” is our Dear Leader himself. INactions can speak as loudly as ACTIONS sometimes, and Mr. President has been shouting a message in that manner here lately…

    Excellent analysis, Mr. Koffler, thank you. It is unfortunate that this is all true. For all of us.

    • “the Chief Instigator is probably even serious about transforming America to his inculcated Shari’a beliefs.”

      I can’t see Michelle donning a burkha.

      • Did you notice one of the protesters this morning. The one laying on the interstate, chained to a barrel full of cement?
        She had a scarf on her face. My point, that is all we need is woman running around the U.S. covering their faces.
        Yes I understand she was covering her face to hide her identity. However the woman of America don’t need anyone to suggest covering their faces.

  6. Before I turn it off Fox (Shep.) is discussing: Paris shooting renews debate on limits of freedom of speech. UGH! I just turned the TV off. I cannot believe this is what is being discussed.
    How about the ugly ugly ugly thing they want to do, or they can discuss baking a cake.

      • Just heard on Fox some of the protesters were comparing cops to terrorist. They did not specify which protest. They just showed it was in DC.
        Sheriff David Clarke in Milwaukee said they are desecrating the legacy of MLK. He mentioned the Mall of America that they took over last month. When King was marching their was a reason.
        He would charge them with a felony. No plea bargin.

  7. I think I’m developing a case of Islamophobia. Up until recently there have been no Muslim sightings in my area. Over the last few weeks, I have spotted at least three dozen women on different occasions wearing the traditional head scarf. The odd thing is they travel in groups of 5 – 6 and are accompanied by one male. The women seem to be extremely subservient. Looks like a cult of sorts, imo.

    But reality really set in last week. I was at the market with my 3 yr. old granddaughter when she suddenly started screaming and crying. I started to lift her out of the grocery cart when I spotted two Muslim women wearing the FULL burka with only the eye slits. They were standing 3 feet away from us. I was shocked, but my granddaughter was hysterical. Needless to say, we left immediately.
    I’m not sure, but I thought the full burka was outlawed in this country. If not, it should be! We don’t have to put up with this (bleep)! I’m still furious!

    • I don’t see them to very often. I notice as well they walk like zombies. I am a people person, and to have them walk by like we do not exist is very noticeable.

    • Our little town has a Muslim population of 10-15 percent. Town officials refuse to tell us exactly how many. They don’t wear the veil here, but otherwise, the full regalia. The women never, never, never go out by themselves. Always 2-3 at the least. With few exceptions they don’t talk to men outside the family, ever, unless they absolutely have to. Local hospitals have accommodated their demand to have the women examined only by female physicians. I could go on, but….

  8. When muslims are as outraged over the atrocities committed on a daily basis, in the name of their god, as they are over cartoons, I may have some respect for them. Until then, I have nothing but hatred and contempt.

  9. What is a moderate muslim?

    One who makes “his women” walk around under a tarp?

    One who does not let “his women” drive?

    One who practices gender apartheid?

    One who feels he has the right to restructure an American company so he can pray at the right time five times a day?

    One who feels he can restructure an American company so he can be a grocer checker but never touch wrapped pork or a cab driver who can pass by blind people with guide dogs or a bottle of wine?

    One who feels a company should alter their uniform so as to meet muslim dress requirements?

    Are we all imagining something different when we use an undefined term such as “moderate muslim?”

      • Lee, devout muslims are not supposed to drink alcohol, and dogs are considered filthy and are forbidden, except to help men hunt , or to protect flocks of sheep or goats. There have been incidents of muslim cab drivers refusing to take passengers who have liquor with them. They have also refused to allow service dogs into their cabs, in violation of the law.

  10. What’s truly crazy is that the terrorists are proclaiming that THEY are the victims, that people are picking on them! I understand the imans are selling that nonsense to their unwashed, but really, that kind of thinking is nuts. Of course, it’s nothing new for them.

  11. please read what happened in Kennesaw GA in December when they tried to oppose a mosque ….first a refusal then mysteriously it was approved by the city council after legal threats….my state…in fear

  12. If the name fits wear it.
    The name fits:
    These people are Radical in thought, word, and deed.
    These people are self proclaimed Islamists.
    These people deliberately inflict terror and horror upon others.
    They are all these things – On purpose.
    I have been aware since 2008 that this administration is highly skilled at manipulation of the masses through their carefully chosen words.
    Their refusal to use Radical Islamist Extremists or Islamist Terrorists (or any combination of these words) is because they want to manipulate people for a purpose – on purpose.
    Astute observations, Keith. Thank you.
    One observation – were the women in the above poll asked questions in front of the male relative that must always accompany them when in public (in most Islamic countries but not all)? If so – their answers are meaningless as a polling sample.

  13. Perfectly correct, AfVet. The Muslims were determined, even then, to turn Europe into a caliphate and were killing and destroying everything in sight to reach that goal. It wasn’t that Christian Europe and the Popes (all through the seven Crusades) decided one day, “Well, life’s pretty boring around here. Let’s go kill us some Muslims.” Though it’s often taught that was what happened.

    Good books to read:

    Bernard Lewis’ “What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East” (Anything about Islam by Lewis is worth a read.)

    Robert Spencer’s “The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World’s Most Intolerant Religion”

    Ibn Ishaq’s “The Life of Muhammad”.

    Ishaq wrote his book in 768 about 100 years after the Big Dude died, and was a true believer. He clearly states that “The Prophet” was a murderer, a rapist, a warrior–all in the name of submitting everyone to Islam. Muhammad fought in 27 major battles (wars, I guess), so he wasn’t a gentle guy. When he came back to retake Mecca, he had a list of 8 people he wanted to have immediately assassinated–three of them committed the “crime” of writing songs that mocked him. The current Islam campaign to kill all those who mock Muhammad comes directly from that act.

  14. Let me help the White House…The “War on Terror” or by any name-has failed for a simple reason. It is because there is no such a thing as “war on terror”. Terrorism is a technique, a method, a weapon, a means to an end. Terrorism is not an enemy that can be named or identified, much less fought effectively.

    A “War on Terror” is a war on shadows, a war on nothing and on no one. It is a fool’s errand. Terrorism is the “How”, the “WHO” are true and devoted MUSLIMS and the “WHY” is the cult ideology called ISLAM!

    You are welcome Mr. President!