June 25, 2016

*Answering the President's Question*

By Greg Richards <http://www.americanthinker.com/author/greg_richards/>

The president put on a trademark performance
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtDE5z-fnew> last week (he is so good at
this, you forget why you disagree with him) two days after Orlando,
discussing his non-use of the term "radical Islam."

He made his argument by asking rhetorical questions.  A master of
misdirection, the president asked all the wrong ones so that the implied
answers did not address any of the points at issue in terms of Islam's war
on America (and the West).

His principal question was...

What exactly would using this label [radical Islam] accomplish – what
exactly would it change?

The president defined "change" as an effect on ISIL (as he calls it).  But
the change from the president using the label "radical Islam" is not on
ISIL, but on us.  Why?  *Because it names the enemy and thus defines the
mission* – *taking out the enemy.*  Obama has steadfastly refused to do
this – the consequences of which are numerous and grievous.

*ISIS vs. ISIL*

The president is the only figure of note to use the term "ISIL" to
designate the caliphate organized by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, which arose out
of al-Qaeda in Iraq as Iraq collapsed following our final departure.  The
more common term is "ISIS."  ISIS extends over territories in Iraq and
Syria, hence the term "ISIS," which means the Islamic State in Iraq and
Syria.

Obama uses the term "ISIL," which did not catch on with anybody but
himself.  Although designating the same organization as ISIS, the term has
a distinctly different meaning.  ISIL stands for the Islamic State in Iraq
and* the Levant.*

What is the Levant?  The Levant includes Syria, so we are good there.  But
it also includes Lebanon, Jordan, *and Israel*.  Lebanon has a Christian
community and thus is not an "Islamic state" yet.  Jordan is a kingdom with
Islam as the primary religion, but it remains very much independent of ISIS.

And Israel.  Israel is neither part of ISIS nor an Islamic state.  But by
using the term ISIL, Obama is putting Israel in Dar al-Islam – the Land of
Islam – presumably temporarily occupied by invaders who came from who knows
where.  Using the term ISIL is a hostile act toward Israel.

The mission of the Muslim assault on America is to replace the Constitution
with the Koran.  How much of the Muslim community supports this goal is not
clear.  The spearhead of this mission is the jihadis, which we misleadingly
name the "radicals."  They are radical in our eyes, but not their own.
They are simply part of the ummah, the Muslim community, which is worldwide.

Islam has always been a religion of war.  It was designed that way.
Mohammed tried a peaceful, contemplative doctrine in Mecca for 13 years.
He got around 1,300 followers.  Then he moved to Medina and changed over to
preaching conquest, savagery, and slavery.  And he conquered the Hijaz
(territory in northwest Arabia that includes Mecca and Medina).  As
constructed by Mohammed, Islam is a community, of which jihadis are the
most outstanding members, and who subdue nonbelievers, loot their assets,
make them serfs – dhimmis required to pay an annual tax – and move on to
the next conquest.

Islam went into eclipse after the failed siege of Vienna in 1683.  It was
held in abeyance for 300 years due to the superior technology of the West.
It reawakened as a force in history following the success of the mujahideen
in pushing the Soviets out of Afghanistan.  (We think it was the CIA
supplying them with Stingers.  They think it was themselves.)

Osama bin Laden institutionalized the victory by creating al-Qaeda.  It was
universalized in the Middle East by the breakout of the Muslim Brotherhood
in 2011 from suppression by strongmen such as Mubarak, Saddam Hussein, and
Gaddafi.  This was misleadingly called the Arab Spring and was supported by
the Obama administration.

Now restored to its militancy, the Muslim project, as we might call it, is
to become the dominant force on the planet.  The soldiers – jihadis – who
spearhead this project secure themselves direct entry to Paradise if they
are killed in jihad.

So far as anybody can tell, Obama supports the Muslim project.  In terms of
his presidency, this goes all the way back to his apology speech in Cairo
in 2009, with the Muslim Brotherhood present over the objections of the
Egyptian government.  (Obama continues the practice of liberals of denying
what he is doing, because liberals know their objectives would not be
supported by the public.  Thus, he denied in debate with Mitt Romney in
2012 that he had engaged in an apology tour in the Middle East when one
would have thought he was proud of it, it being the first step in his
changing America's presumably domineering foreign policy.)

Obama's refusal to use the term *radical Islam* is within this context
(part of which is his statement in the U.N. that "the future must not
belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam").  As we have experienced
attack after attack from jihadis here in the U.S., Obama has characterized
these attacks as workplace violence, or violent extremism, pretending that
the motivation of the purveyor of violence needs to be discovered.

By treating Islam as a quietist religion – a communion between the soul and
the Almighty – Obama has been able to pretend that attention paid to
Islamic connections of possible jihadis is nothing but bigotry.

This attitude has had serious consequences.  Training manuals for both the
FBI and the CIA have been cleansed of any material deemed offensive to
Islamic groups.  This has meant in practice that the FBI cannot follow
leads that are based on the Muslim affiliations of the suspect.

The FBI was tipped off by the Russian FSB (successor to the KGB) that
Tamerlan Tsarnaev was a dangerous person.  The FBI followed up, but once it
ran into Tsarnaev's involvement in a mosque, it closed the file.
Scrutinizing Tsarnaev based on his Muslim affiliation would be prejudice –
"not who we are."

Details are still developing, but we see this also with Omar Mateen.  The
FBI interviewed him twice but dropped him as a suspect because of his
Muslim affiliation, which, to an informed person, would make him *more* of
a danger but in the Obama administration put him out of bounds.

And finally, we have the refusal of the president to connect the dots
publicly.  He uses the term violent extremism to describe jihadi attacks on
the public during his administration.

So we can answer the president's question:

What exactly would using this label [*radical Islam*] accomplish – what
exactly would it change?

   - It would identify and acknowledge our enemy and the tactics he is
   using against us.


   - It would reverse the foolish and self-defeating policies of the
   administration in purging both the material and the mindset of Islamic
   aggression toward America from our federal agencies.


   - It would name the enemy and suggest the mission – defeating the enemy
   – to anyone who had the best interests of the country at heart.


   - It would redefine attacks on the American public from unfocused
   violent extremism to purposeful jihadism.

In short, it would turn our policies around 180o.


Read more:
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/06/answering_the_presidents_question.html#ixzz4Cie41uT8
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter
<http://ec.tynt.com/b/rw?id=dlia0Qbjyr4BNDacwqm_6l&u=AmericanThinker>
| AmericanThinker
on Facebook
<http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=dlia0Qbjyr4BNDacwqm_6l&u=AmericanThinker>

<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=icon>
Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=link>

__._,_.___
------------------------------
Posted by: "Beowulf" <[email protected]>
------------------------------


Visit Your Group
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmOTl1NHE4BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0NjY5NzI3MDc->


[image: Yahoo! Groups]
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlOHE5Mmg0BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQ2Njk3MjcwNw-->
• Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> •
Unsubscribe <[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe>
• Terms of Use <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/>

__,_._,___

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to