Newt is right again. In recent years I have lost most of the respect
I once had for Gingrich, I have learned that he is a sonovabitch.
However, as my brother once said, "he may well be exactly that,
but he's our sonovabitch." And when he speaks the truth
we had better listen.
Billy
---------------------------------------------------
NRO
We’re Losing the War Against Radical Islam
* by Newt Gingrich
* March 26, 2015 4:00 AM
Congress needs a strategy to defeat both violent and cultural jihad.
On Tuesday, the House Committee on Homeland Security, under the leadership
of Chairman Michael McCaul, held the first of a series of very important
hearings on the threat of radical Islamism.
As I told the committee in my testimony, it is vital that the United States
Congress undertake a thorough, no-holds-barred review of the long, global
war in which we are now engaged with radical Islamists. This review will
require a number of committees to coordinate, since it will have to include
Intelligence, Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, Judiciary, and Homeland
Security at a minimum.
There are three key, sobering observations about where we are today which
should force this thorough, no-holds-barred review of our situation.
These three points — which are backed up by the facts — suggest the United
States is drifting into a crisis that could challenge our very survival.
First, it is the case that after 35 years of conflict dating back to the
Iranian seizure of the American embassy in Tehran and the ensuing hostage
crisis, the United States and its allies are losing the long, global war with
radical Islamists.
We are losing to both the violent jihad and to the cultural jihad.
The violent jihad has shown itself recently in Paris, Australia, Tunisia,
Syria, Iraq, Libya, Egypt, Gaza, Nigeria, Somalia, Afghanistan, and Yemen,
to name just some of the most prominent areas of violence.
Cultural jihad is more insidious and in many ways more dangerous. It
strikes at our very ability to think and to have an honest dialogue about the
steps necessary for our survival. Cultural jihad is winning when the
Department of Defense describes a terrorist attack at Fort Hood as “_workplace
violence_ (http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=60536) .” Cultural
jihad is winning when the president _refers_
(http://www.vox.com/a/barack-obama-interview-vox-conversation/obama-foreign-policy-transcript)
to “random”
killings in Paris when they were clearly the actions of Islamist
terrorists and targeted against specific groups. Cultural jihad is winning when
the
administration censors training documents and lecturers according to “
sensitivity” so that they _cannot describe_
(http://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/deputy-attorney-general-james-m-cole-speaks-department-s-conference-post-911)
radical Islamists with any reference to the religious ideology which is
the primary bond that unites them.
In the 14 years since the 9/11 attacks, we have gone a long way down the
road of intellectually and morally disarming in order to appease the cultural
jihadists, who are increasingly aggressive in asserting their right to
define how the rest of us think and talk.
Second, it is the case that, in an extraordinarily dangerous pattern, our
intelligence system has been methodically limited and manipulated to sustain
false narratives while suppressing or rejecting facts and analysis about
those who would kill us.
For example, there is clear evidence the American people have been given
remarkably misleading analysis about al-Qaeda based on a very limited
translation and publication of about 24 of the 1.5 million documents captured
in
the Bin Laden raid. A number of outside analysts have _suggested_
(http://www.wsj.com/articles/stephen-hayes-and-tomas-joscelyn-how-america-was-misled-on
-al-qaedas-demise-1425600796) that the selective release of a small
number of documents was designed to make the case that al-Qaeda was weaker.
These outside analysts assert that a broader reading of more documents would
indicate al-Qaeda was doubling in size when our government claimed it was
getting weaker — an analysis also supported by obvious empirical facts on the
ground. Furthermore, there has been what could only be deliberate
foot-dragging in exploiting this extraordinary cache of material.
Both Lieutenant General Mike Flynn, the former head of the Defense
Intelligence Agency, and Colonel Derek Harvey, a leading analyst of terrorism,
have described the deliberately misleading and restricted access to the Bin
Laden documents.
A number of intelligence operatives have _described censorship_
(http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/05/21/over-my-dead-body-spies-fight-obama-p
ush-to-downsize-terror-war.html) from above designed to make sure that
intelligence which undermines the official narrative simply does not see the
light of day.
Congress should explore legislation which would make it illegal to instruct
intelligence personnel to falsify information or analysis. Basing American
security policy on politically defined distortions of reality is a very
dangerous habit which could someday lead to a devastating defeat. Congress
has an obligation to ensure the American people are learning the truth and
have an opportunity to debate potential policies in a fact-based environment.
Third, it is the case that our political elites have refused to define our
enemies. Their willful ignorance has made it impossible to develop an
effective strategy to defeat those who would destroy our civilization.
For example, the president’s own press secretary engages in verbal
gymnastics to avoid identifying the perpetrators of violence as radical
Islamists.
Josh Earnest _said_
(https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/01/13/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-1132015)
that such labels do
not “accurately” describe our enemies and that to use such a label “
legitimizes” them.
This is Orwellian double-speak. The radical Islamists do not need to be
delegitimized. They need to be defeated. We cannot defeat what we cannot
name.
There has been a desperate desire among our elites to focus on the act of
terrorism rather than the motivation behind those acts. There has been a
deep desire to avoid the cultural and religious motivations behind the
jihadists’ actions. There is an amazing hostility to any effort to study or
teach
the history of these patterns going back to the seventh century.
Because our elites refuse to look at the religious and historic motivations
and patterns which drive our opponents, we are responding the same way to
attack after attack on our way of life without any regard for learning
about what really motivates our attackers. Only once we learn what drives and
informs our opponents will we not repeat the same wrong response tactics,
Groundhog Day–like, and finally start to win this long war.
Currently each new event, each new group, each new pattern is treated as
though it’s an isolated phenomenon — as if it’s not part of a larger stru
ggle with a long history and deep roots in patterns that are 1,400 years old.
There is a passion for narrowing and localizing actions. The early focus
was al-Qaeda. Then it was the Taliban. Now it is the Islamic State. It is
beginning to be Boko Haram. As long as the elites can keep treating each new
eruption as a freestanding phenomenon, they can avoid having to recognize
that this is a global, worldwide movement that is decentralized but not
disordered.
There are _ties_
(http://www.cbsnews.com/news/minneapolis-has-become-recruiting-ground-for-islamic-extremists/)
between Minneapolis and Mogadishu.
There are ties between London, Paris, and the Islamic State. Al-Qaeda exists
in many forms and under many names. We are confronted by worldwide
recruiting on the Internet, with Islamists reaching out to people we would
never
have imagined were vulnerable to that kind of appeal.
We have been refusing to apply the insights and lessons of history, but our
enemies have been very willing to study, learn, rethink, and evolve.
The cultural jihadists have learned our language and our principles —
freedom of speech, freedom of religion, tolerance — and they apply them to
defeat us without believing in them themselves. We blindly play their game on
their terms, and don’t even think about how absurd it is for people who
accept no church, no synagogue, no temple in their heartland to come into our
society and define multicultural sensitivity totally to their advantage —
meaning, in essence, that we cannot criticize their ideas.
Our elites have been morally and intellectually disarmed by their own
unwillingness to look at both the immediate history of the first 35 years of
the
global war with radical Islamists and then to look deeper into the roots
of the ideology and the military-political system our enemies draw upon as
their guide to waging both physical and cultural warfare.
One of the great threats to American independence is the steady growth of
foreign money pouring into our intellectual and political systems to
influence our thinking and limit our options for action. Congress needs to
adopt
new laws to protect the United States from the kind of foreign influences
which are growing in size and boldness.
Sun Tzu, in _The Art of War_
(http://www.nationalreview.com/redirect/amazon.p?j=1590302257) , written 500
years before Christ, warned that “all
warfare is based on deception.” We are currently in a period where our enemies
are deceiving us and our elites are actively deceiving themselves — and us.
The deception and dishonesty of our elites is not accidental or uninformed.
It is deliberate and willful. The flow of foreign money and foreign
influence is a significant part of that pattern of deception.
We must clearly define our enemies before we can begin to develop
strategies to defeat them.
We have lost 35 years since this war began.
We are weaker and our enemies are stronger.
Congress has a duty to pursue the truth and to think through the strategies
needed and the structures which will be needed to implement those
strategies.
Cultural jihad is more insidious and in many ways more dangerous. It
strikes at our very ability to think and to have an honest dialogue about the
steps necessary for our survival. Cultural jihad is winning when the
Department of Defense describes a terrorist attack at Fort Hood as “_workplace
violence_ (http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=60536) .” Cultural
jihad is winning when the president _refers_
(http://www.vox.com/a/barack-obama-interview-vox-conversation/obama-foreign-policy-transcript)
to “random”
killings in Paris when they were clearly the actions of Islamist
terrorists and targeted against specific groups. Cultural jihad is winning when
the
administration censors training documents and lecturers according to “
sensitivity” so that they _cannot describe_
(http://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/deputy-attorney-general-james-m-cole-speaks-department-s-conference-post-911)
radical Islamists with any reference to the religious ideology which is
the primary bond that unites them.
In the 14 years since the 9/11 attacks, we have gone a long way down the
road of intellectually and morally disarming in order to appease the cultural
jihadists, who are increasingly aggressive in asserting their right to
define how the rest of us think and talk.
Second, it is the case that, in an extraordinarily dangerous pattern, our
intelligence system has been methodically limited and manipulated to sustain
false narratives while suppressing or rejecting facts and analysis about
those who would kill us.
For example, there is clear evidence the American people have been given
remarkably misleading analysis about al-Qaeda based on a very limited
translation and publication of about 24 of the 1.5 million documents captured
in
the Bin Laden raid. A number of outside analysts have _suggested_
(http://www.wsj.com/articles/stephen-hayes-and-tomas-joscelyn-how-america-was-misled-on
-al-qaedas-demise-1425600796) that the selective release of a small
number of documents was designed to make the case that al-Qaeda was weaker.
These outside analysts assert that a broader reading of more documents would
indicate al-Qaeda was doubling in size when our government claimed it was
getting weaker — an analysis also supported by obvious empirical facts on the
ground. Furthermore, there has been what could only be deliberate
foot-dragging in exploiting this extraordinary cache of material.
Both Lieutenant General Mike Flynn, the former head of the Defense
Intelligence Agency, and Colonel Derek Harvey, a leading analyst of terrorism,
have described the deliberately misleading and restricted access to the Bin
Laden documents.
A number of intelligence operatives have _described censorship_
(http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/05/21/over-my-dead-body-spies-fight-obama-p
ush-to-downsize-terror-war.html) from above designed to make sure that
intelligence which undermines the official narrative simply does not see the
light of day.
Congress should explore legislation which would make it illegal to instruct
intelligence personnel to falsify information or analysis. Basing American
security policy on politically defined distortions of reality is a very
dangerous habit which could someday lead to a devastating defeat. Congress
has an obligation to ensure the American people are learning the truth and
have an opportunity to debate potential policies in a fact-based environment.
Third, it is the case that our political elites have refused to define our
enemies. Their willful ignorance has made it impossible to develop an
effective strategy to defeat those who would destroy our civilization.
For example, the president’s own press secretary engages in verbal
gymnastics to avoid identifying the perpetrators of violence as radical
Islamists.
Josh Earnest _said_
(https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/01/13/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-1132015)
that such labels do
not “accurately” describe our enemies and that to use such a label “
legitimizes” them.
This is Orwellian double-speak. The radical Islamists do not need to be
delegitimized. They need to be defeated. We cannot defeat what we cannot
name.
There has been a desperate desire among our elites to focus on the act of
terrorism rather than the motivation behind those acts. There has been a
deep desire to avoid the cultural and religious motivations behind the
jihadists’ actions. There is an amazing hostility to any effort to study or
teach
the history of these patterns going back to the seventh century.
Because our elites refuse to look at the religious and historic motivations
and patterns which drive our opponents, we are responding the same way to
attack after attack on our way of life without any regard for learning
about what really motivates our attackers. Only once we learn what drives and
informs our opponents will we not repeat the same wrong response tactics,
Groundhog Day–like, and finally start to win this long war.
Currently each new event, each new group, each new pattern is treated as
though it’s an isolated phenomenon — as if it’s not part of a larger
struggle with a long history and deep roots in patterns that are 1,400 years
old.
There is a passion for narrowing and localizing actions. The early focus
was al-Qaeda. Then it was the Taliban. Now it is the Islamic State. It is
beginning to be Boko Haram. As long as the elites can keep treating each new
eruption as a freestanding phenomenon, they can avoid having to recognize
that this is a global, worldwide movement that is decentralized but not
disordered.
There are _ties_
(http://www.cbsnews.com/news/minneapolis-has-become-recruiting-ground-for-islamic-extremists/)
between Minneapolis and Mogadishu.
There are ties between London, Paris, and the Islamic State. Al-Qaeda exists
in many forms and under many names. We are confronted by worldwide
recruiting on the Internet, with Islamists reaching out to people we would
never
have imagined were vulnerable to that kind of appeal.
We have been refusing to apply the insights and lessons of history, but our
enemies have been very willing to study, learn, rethink, and evolve.
The cultural jihadists have learned our language and our principles —
freedom of speech, freedom of religion, tolerance — and they apply them to
defeat us without believing in them themselves. We blindly play their game on
their terms, and don’t even think about how absurd it is for people who
accept no church, no synagogue, no temple in their heartland to come into our
society and define multicultural sensitivity totally to their advantage —
meaning, in essence, that we cannot criticize their ideas.
Our elites have been morally and intellectually disarmed by their own
unwillingness to look at both the immediate history of the first 35 years of
the
global war with radical Islamists and then to look deeper into the roots
of the ideology and the military-political system our enemies draw upon as
their guide to waging both physical and cultural warfare.
One of the great threats to American independence is the steady growth of
foreign money pouring into our intellectual and political systems to
influence our thinking and limit our options for action. Congress needs to
adopt
new laws to protect the United States from the kind of foreign influences
which are growing in size and boldness.
Sun Tzu, in _The Art of War_
(http://www.nationalreview.com/redirect/amazon.p?j=1590302257) , written 500
years before Christ, warned that “all
warfare is based on deception.” We are currently in a period where our enemies
are deceiving us and our elites are actively deceiving themselves — and us.
The deception and dishonesty of our elites is not accidental or uninformed.
It is deliberate and willful. The flow of foreign money and foreign
influence is a significant part of that pattern of deception.
We must clearly define our enemies before we can begin to develop
strategies to defeat them.
We have lost 35 years since this war began.
We are weaker and our enemies are stronger.
Congress has a duty to pursue the truth and to think through the strategies
needed and the structures which will be needed to implement those
strategies.
--
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" 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.
