The U.S. House Votes against Studying Islamism

*by Clifford Smith*

*The Washington Examiner
<http://meforum.us12.list-manage.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=5a4cc040bd&e=f2aff9f618>**August
11, 2017*

*http://www.meforum.org/6867/franks-amendment-radical-islam
<http://meforum.us12.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=93765a87ab&e=f2aff9f618>*

[image: Description: http://www.meforum.org/pics/large/4276.jpg]

*An amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act requiring the
Pentagon to conduct strategic assessments of radical Islam was vigorously
opposed by Reps. Jamie Raskin (top right) and Pramila Jayapal, among
others.*

Politically, it is difficult to have an honest discussion about the
difference between Islam, a religion with many interpretations, and radical
Islamism, a totalitarian political ideology. In previous years, Sen. Ben
Sasse, R-Neb., and (now former) Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Calif., have been
criticized
<http://meforum.us12.list-manage.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=5ce50dc5c7&e=f2aff9f618>
for remarks
<http://meforum.us12.list-manage.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=53a5a255d2&e=f2aff9f618>
they made discussing this distinction, due to fear such distinctions were
somehow "Islamophobic."

Unfortunately, it seems that little has changed. Last month, by a vote of
208-217, the U.S. House of Representatives voted down an amendment to the
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) by Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ), that
would require the Defense Department to conduct "strategic assessments of
the use of violent or unorthodox Islamic religious doctrine to support
extremist or terrorist messaging and justification."

The rejection of this amendment is disappointing on its merits. A better
understanding of radical Islam would enhance our national security, and the
Pentagon in particular could put these insights to use.

*A better understanding of radical Islam would enhance our national
security.*

Even more dispiriting are the floor statements by several members of
Congress in opposition to the amendment, which highlight the immense moral
and intellectual confusion that exists in America concerning Islam.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), complained that the amendment doesn't "apply
its arbitrary surveillance equally" by "includ[ing] assessments of White
supremacist terrorism or terrorism committed against abortion clinics and
doctors."

While no one is defending anti-abortion related and race-related murders,
they aren't serious national security threats at the moment. There have
been, at most, 11 murders
<http://meforum.us12.list-manage.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=f890de3037&e=f2aff9f618>
in the history of the United States as the result of violent anti-abortion
sentiments. Islamist Nidal Hasan killed more than that in just a few
minutes in the Fort Hood Massacre
<http://meforum.us12.list-manage.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=46b96eadf0&e=f2aff9f618>,
and that's just one attack. White supremacist violence is a bigger problem,
as demonstrated by the Charleston church shooting. But it is diffuse,
unorganized, and lacking in foreign support and connections.

While few people in the U.S. military are likely to come face to face with
an angry and armed racist or anti-abortion activist in the line of duty,
radical Islamists make it their business to kill Americans in nearly every
corner of the world.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) opined that "(T)errorist killers have used
religious doctrines and concepts from every major religion on earth ...
Focusing on (Islam) exacerbates the problem by fomenting the myth that
religious fanaticism and terrorism are unique to the charlatans and
predators of Islam."

*Religiously-inspired threats to U.S. national security emanate
predominantly from Muslims.*

But the question is whether religiously-inspired threats to U.S. national
security emanate predominantly from Muslims at this particular moment in
time. And they do.

It is certainly true that, historically, many sects of many religions have
been exploited to justify murder and violence in pursuit of power. However,
it is unsupportable to say that all religions are the same, or that all
religions have equally threatening ideological trends at all points in
history.

At this particular moment, in our world, as a recent study by the Center
for Strategic and International Studies makes clear, "Islamic extremism ...
dominate(s) terrorism in the world
<http://meforum.us12.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=21f9d63edc&e=f2aff9f618>
."

There are regional exceptions to that even today. The Lord's Resistance Army
<http://meforum.us12.list-manage.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=e6180f00e6&e=f2aff9f618>
in Uganda and Hindu radicals
<http://meforum.us12.list-manage.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=91b5a2ccd9&e=f2aff9f618>
responsible for periodic anti-Muslim attacks in India may be every bit as
reprehensible as Islamists. But it is quite clear that the threat facing
the U.S. is uniquely attached
<http://meforum.us12.list-manage.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=71bfdde0af&e=f2aff9f618>
to Islamic terrorism. According to one comprehensive estimate
<http://meforum.us12.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=58ac64c6a1&e=f2aff9f618>,
there have been at least 31,236 deadly acts of violence around the world
inspired by radical Islamic beliefs since 9/11. Acknowledging this is not
"Islamophobic."

Most Muslims aren't radicals, let alone terrorists. An estimated 85-90
percent of Muslims don't agree
<http://meforum.us12.list-manage.com/track/click?u=b7aa7eddb0f2bb74bfa4f6cb5&id=d35aae6987&e=f2aff9f618>
with radical interpretations of Islam, and even many who agree are not
necessarily violent. Muslims have suffered more than anyone else from the
violent, totalitarian ideology that has taken root in their midst.

*America didn't win the Cold War by denying Communism existed or claiming
Nazism remained a co-equal threat.*

To stop their suffering, as well as the suffering of non-Muslims, radical
Islamist ideology must be confronted, not covered up by political red
herrings about other types of extremism.

America did not win the Cold War by refusing to admit that Communism
existed, nor by extraordinary deference to the sensitivities of
left-leaning non-Communists; nor by claiming Nazism, crushed as a
significant ideology by World War II, remained a co-equal threat to
Communism. The fact that radical Islam has a veneer of religious legitimacy
is no reason for our policymakers to shy away from seeking to understand
this unique ideology. In fact, it is all the more reason to do so.

*Clifford Smith, a former congressional staffer, is director of the Middle
East Forum's Washington Project.*



<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>
<#m_-7409122364670507559_m_4806212184287929633_m_-295111725452609506_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>


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


Visit Your Group
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmamhkNjE0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE1MDI3NjMzNjE->

   - New Members
   
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/members/all;_ylc=X3oDMTJnNnBldGNpBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2bWJycwRzdGltZQMxNTAyNzYzMzYx>
   1

[image: Yahoo! Groups]
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMDRkcXNzBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTUwMjc2MzM2MQ-->
• 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