U.S. Covering Up and Revising Islamic Ties to Terrorism

11By Rachel Alexander

The Obama administration is following the direction of the United Nations and suppressing any mention of radical Islam’s association with terrorism. Even the word “terrorism” is being censored because it has become associated with Islam. Remember President George W. Bush’s “War on Terror?” The phrase has disappeared, even though terrorist attacks are increasing. Obama has stopped using the phrase.

The censorship effort began in 1999, when the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) began urging the U.N. to pass a resolution denouncing “religious intolerance” and “condemning the stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization of people based on their religion.” The U.N.’s Human Rights Council passed two censorship resolutions in 2010 and 2011, and last September Obama encouraged the full U.N. to pass one. In a speech to the U.N. General Assembly, Obama said, “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” Since Christians do not believe that Mohammed was a prophet, many people felt that Obama went too far, forcing Islamic views upon Christians.

Several Islamic world leaders are pressuring the U.N. to adopt the censorship resolution, including Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi, and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Prime Minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf of Pakistan condemned the importance the Western free world places on freedom of speech, saying, “It is sad that the ‘open-minded’ people of the world – who stand against religious extremism and terrorism and consider disrespecting the sentiments of the common man a violation of human rights – justify hurting religious emotions of nearly 1.5 billion Muslims as freedom of speech.”

The move towards censorship in the U.S. started under the second Bush administration. In 2008, the Department of Homeland Security issued a memo containing recommendations from Muslim organizations that instruct Americans to avoid using words like “jihadist,” “Islamic terrorist,” “Islamist” and “holy warrior.” When referring to Muslims, words like “mainstream,” “ordinary,” and “traditional” should be used instead of terms like “moderate.” The “War on Terror” is to be rephrased as “a global challenge, which transcends geography, culture and religion.” It is a “struggle for progress, over which no nation has a monopoly.”

Earlier this year the FBI was ordered by the Obama administration to purge language from its manuals, and subsequently removed more than 700 documents and 300 presentations from training materials. All federal law enforcement agencies were ordered to eliminate the words “Islamic terror” from their training manuals. The Pentagon’s Quadrennial Defense Review and the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review were revised to eliminate the words “Muslim” and “Islam.” Mentions of al Qaeda were replaced with “global violent extremism.”

The U.S. military handbook “Culture Cards: Afghanistan & Islamic Culture” was revised last year to censor anything perceived as negative towards Islam. In the 2011 version, incest in Islam is described as just a different variety of culture; “In some traditionally Islamic Middle East cultures the preferred marriage pattern has been to marry one’s father’s brother’s daughter.” The handbook begins, “Culture is about how people perceive reality. It may not fit the true facts or history…..Soldiers must not let personal prejudices cloud their judgment.” The handbook is full of morally relative statements like, “Norms are not rigid and may be ignored with only minor repercussions.” It concludes by asserting that a “culturally literate soldier” “appreciates and generally accepts diverse beliefs, appearances and lifestyles.”

Read more at Townhall

Muslims Offended—Soldier’s Career Destroyed—Official Army Records Show Loss to Nation

Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) Matthew Dooley

Thomas More Law Center:

ANN ARBOR, MI – During a Pentagon press conference on May 10, 2012, General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, publicly excoriated Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) Matthew Dooley, a 1994 graduate of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and a highly decorated combat veteran.  His reason: The course on Islamic Radicalism which LTC Dooley was teaching at the Joint Forces Staff College (JFSC) of the National Defense University was offensive to Muslims.

General Dempsey characterized LTC Dooley’s course as “totally objectionable,” and ordered all material offensive to Islam scrubbed from military professional education within the JFSC and elsewhere. But that’s not all.  LTC Dooley was fired from his instructor position and given an ordered negative Officer Evaluation Report (OER) — the death-knell for a military career.

The actions against LTC Dooley follow a letter to the Department of Defense dated October 19, 2011 signed by 57 Muslim organizations demanding that all training materials offensive to Islam and Muslims be purged and the trainers disciplined.

A review of LTC Dooley’s OERs going back several years, including his OER as an instructor with JFSC, paint a picture of an outstanding officer with unlimited potential:

  • “LTC Matt Dooley’s performance is outstanding and he is clearly the best of our new instructors assigned to the JFSC faculty over the last six months. . . . A must select for battalion command. . . .  LTC Dooley possesses unlimited potential to serve in positions of much higher authority.”
  • “MAJ Dooley is unquestionably among the most dedicated and hard working officers I have ever known.…  Unsurpassed potential for future promotion and service.”
  • “Our soldiers deserve his leadership.”
  • “This officer possesses unlimited potential for future assignments.  He must be promoted ahead of his peers and selected for Battalion/Squadron Command at first opportunity.”
  • “Superb performance.”
  • “Matt is a consummate professional with unlimited potential;”

Click here for detailed excerpts from LTC Dooley’s Officer Evaluation Reports

The Thomas More Law Center, a national nonprofit public interest law firm, based in Ann, Arbor, Michigan, represents LTC Dooley. The Law Center decided to disclose excerpts from five of LTC Dooley’s previous Officer Evaluation Reports (OER) in order to give the public an idea of the loss to the Army and our Nation caused by the actions taken against LTC Dooley.

What happened to LTC Dooley is more than a personal miscarriage of justice.  When instructors are prohibited from teaching military officers about the true threat posed by Islamic Radicalism, it is a threat to our national security.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center observed, “As you read his OERs, linked here, I’m sure you will come to several conclusions about Matt Dooley.  First, he is an outstanding officer and had a brilliant career ahead of him.   Secondly, he loyally served every one of his commanders.  Third, he was respected by the men under his command.  Fourth, his superiors at the Joint Forces Staff College considered him an outstanding instructor.  And lastly, after all he has done for his country and the Army his superiors sacrificed him to the dogs of political correctness.”

OERs are required at least once a year and are normally completed by two superiors, namely, a rater and a senior rater.   The rating officer on an OER is usually the rated officer’s immediate supervisor, an officer of higher rank, who is most familiar with the rated soldier’s specific duties and performance. The senior rater is a leader who occupies the next higher duty position up from the rater and is best positioned to assess both the rated soldier’s performance in comparison to his peers, as well as the rated soldier’s future potential to serve in higher ranks and increased levels of responsibility.

The OERs clearly demonstrate that LTC Dooley’s raters and senior raters all considered him an outstanding officer and advocated his rapid promotion and advancement to the highest levels of responsibility.  Like many of his peers serving alongside him in the military, LTC Dooley has served honorably and with distinction through a number of complex operating environments. Nevertheless, he has become the latest victim of the “Great Purge” to appease the 57 Muslim groups which demanded that instructors using materials offensive to Islam be disciplined.

In fact, after General Dempsey’s public rebuke, a negative OER was ordered and prepared with direction from the Pentagon covering the period from June 2011 to June 2012.   In contrast to the inaccurate and unjust comments in the Pentagon-directed negative OER, the excerpts from earlier OERs describe LTC Dooley’s outstanding performance.

LTC Matt Dooley attended the United States Military Academy at West Point, where he graduated and received his commission as a Second Lieutenant, Armor Branch in May 1994.  His assignments included deployment to Bosnia, Kuwait, and Iraq for a total of six operational and combat tours over the course of his career.   He served as a Tank Platoon Leader, Tank Company Commander, Headquarters Company Commander, Aide-de-Camp (to three General Officers), and Instructor at the Joint Combined Warfare School.  He is a graduate of the Command and General Staff College as well as the Joint Forces Staff College.

 

Obama Neuters War on Islamic Terrorists

by Cliff Kincaid, Accuracy in Media:

Dr. Sebastian L. v. Gorka, Military Affairs Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said on Tuesday that the Obama Administration is rapidly revising federal counter-terrorism training materials in order to eliminate references to Jihad and Islam.

Government bureaucracies usually take a long time in changing a policy. In this case, he said, “I have never, ever seen such a wide ranging review executed with such alacrity.”

Although he blamed Quintan Wiktorowicz, a member of Obama’s National Security Council, for implementing the Obama Administration’s new overall policy of accommodating radical Islam, including the pro-terrorist Muslim Brotherhood, Gorka said Spencer Ackerman of Wired Magazine had helped sparked the review of federal counter-terrorism training materials through a series of controversial articles. One of those articles ran under an inflammatory headline about “Islamophobia” supposedly characterizing the federal government’s response to global Islamic terrorism.

As a result of this kind of coverage and the new policy, Gorka said the Obama Administration today forbids the use of the word “Jihad” to describe the terrorists that target America for destruction, even though they are members of the Muslim religion and openly declare their Islamic aims. What is happening in terms of redefining the threat is “unprecedented” and dangerous, he said.

The battle against radical Islam has been transformed into a concern, under President Obama and his adviser Quintan Wiktorowicz, about “violent extremism,” not Islamic terrorists or Islamists, he said.

Gorka said that the administration believes there are “good” Islamists and “bad” Islamists and the former can be dealt with. He said this policy is apparent in the decision by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to have contact with the Muslim Brotherhood “Supreme Guide” Mohammed Badei.

While some Islamists are violent and others use democratic methods to achieve power, Gorka said the fact is that they share the same goal—a world-wide system based on Sharia, or Islamic law, resulting in the destruction of America’s constitutional system of government.

Gorka said the process of changing the U.S. approach to radical Islam has even become “un-American” in the sense that training materials, including his own, are being censored by federal authorities without the trainers being told who is ordering them altered or deleted and why. “I was one of the victims of that review,” he said, explaining that certain slides from one of his FBI presentations were ordered removed. There is no “recourse to appeal” in the unfair process, he said.

Ominously, he said that U.S.-based groups sympathetic or linked to the Muslim Brotherhood are reported to have had an influence on the federal committee set up to review the materials, a fact confirmed by Ryan Mauro, a national security analyst with the Clarion Fund. Mauro reported that Islamists are even exercising influence over what the FBI is telling its agents.

Mauro told Accuracy in Media that another factor behind the ongoing review, in addition to the inflammatory reporting of Wired blogger Ackerman, is the influence of the George Soros-funded Center for American Progress (CAP), which issued a “Fear, Inc.” report attacking critics of radical Islam as bigots involved in “Islamophobia.”

To understand the dramatic nature of the change that is taking place, Gorka noted that the 600-page bipartisan 9/11 commission report, released in 2004, mentioned Islam 322 times and Jihad as a form of “Holy War” against the West 126 times. But the Obama Administration’s 2009 National Intelligence Strategy, a presidential-level document, doesn’t mention Islam or Jihad once, he said.

“The enemy has achieved what Sun Tzu, the Asian master of strategy, defined as the ultimate form of victory—if you can win without fighting, you can do no better,” Gorka said. “If your enemy has successfully determined the limits of what you can say about him, he is already winning.”

He went on, “The fact that it is now forbidden to use the word Jihad in government counter-terrorism training means that the enemy is controlling what we are allowed to say about him. That makes it very difficult to defeat him.”

Demonstrating the sensitivity of his remarks, delivered during a conference sponsored by the Westminster Institute, Gorka said that his speech should not be construed as necessarily representing the views of the U.S. Government. He has worked for or with various government agencies for eight years.

The title of the Tuesday event was “Dangerous Embrace: The U.S. and the Islamist.”

Read the rest

Cliff Kincaid Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at cliff.kincaid@aim.org

Islamic Terror Attacks: What is to Blame?

by DR. LAINA FARHAT-HOLZMAN at FSM:

There are two ways to analyze the violent eruption of global terrorist attacks that have marked the past three decades: analyze the nature of the threat and the culture supporting it, or blame it all on the evils of Western colonialism and American militarism. The latter analysis is the choice of the “politically correct,” who say that terrorism is as rampant in the West as it is in the Muslim world. A truth check, however, will tell us that for every Western terrorist (such as Timothy McVeigh), there are hundreds almost exclusively from the Muslim world.

If colonialism is the villain of this piece, why do ideologues only talk about Western colonialism? Why ignore that Arab Muslims (and European Christians) suffered under 500 years of Ottoman Turkish colonialism well before Western colonization? And how about the Muslim world in Central Asia that suffered under both Russian Tsarist and Communist colonialism?

Arabs themselves were dreadful imperialists (700-1,000 A.D.) and every land they conquered is still dysfunctional today, according to Harvard economics professor, Eric Chaney: “Democratic Change in the Arab World, Past and Present,” in the April 7 Economist and Fareed Zakaria in Time, April 7. Wherever Arabs conquered, good governance and economic development were smothered, as they are today. This is even true for countries temporarily conquered but not converted to Islam by the Arabs (Spain, Portugal, Southern Italy).

Islamist terrorism is not just aimed at the West (revenge for colonization), but also at Thailand (Buddhist); Muslim Indonesia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia; and Nigeria, where jihadis murdered Christian church goers on Easter Sunday.  Black slavery was an Arab business long before it was European.

American deniers and apologists for Islamist terrorism have a colleague in Canada: Mira Blinkers, president of “Canadians-are-Under-No-Threat,” who has passionately denounced the treatment of “captive insurgents” (her term for terrorists) and thinks that they should not only be treated better, but should be integrated into Canadian society. The current object of her attention is Afghan jihadi, Ahmed Allah-Akbar.

The satirical website, British Freedom, has offered an imaginary letter from Canada’s Department of Defence, providing Ms. Blinker with a new “Adopt-a-Jihadist” program designed specifically for her.  (See britishfreedom.org/canada’s-new-adopt-a-jihadist-program/)

 
Read the letter here (it is very funny)

 

How the Media Whitewashes Muslim Persecution of Christians

by Raymond Ibrahim:

While the MSM may report the most frugal facts concerning Christian persecution, they utilize their entire arsenal of semantic games, catch phrases, and convenient omissions that uphold the traditional narrative—that Muslim violence is anything but a byproduct of the Islamic indoctrination of intolerance.

When it comes to Muslim persecution of Christians, the mainstream media (MSM) has a long paper trail of obfuscating. While they may eventually state the bare-bone facts—if they ever report on the story in the first place, which is rare—they do so after creating and sustaining an aura of moral relativism that minimizes the Muslim role.

False Moral Equivalency

As previously discussed, one of the most obvious ways is to evoke “sectarian strife” between Muslims and Christians, a phrase that conjures images of two equally matched—and equally abused, and abusive—adversaries fighting one another. This hardly suffices to describe the reality of Muslim majorities persecuting largely passive Christian minorities.

Recently, for instance, in the context of the well-documented suffering of Christians in Egypt, an NPR report declared, “In Egypt, growing tensions between Muslims and Christians have led to sporadic violence [initiated by whom?]. Many Egyptians blame the interreligious strife on hooligans [who?] taking advantage of absent or weak security forces. Others believe it’s because of a deep-seated mistrust between Muslims and the minority Christian community [how did the "mistrust" originate?].” Although the report does highlight cases in which Christians are victimized, the tone throughout—and even from the title of the report, “In Egypt, Christian-Muslim Tension is on the Rise”—suggest that examples of Muslims victimized by Christians could just as easily have been found (not true). The accompanying photo is of a group of angry Christians militantly holding a cross aloft—not Muslims destroying crosses, which is what prompts the Christians to such displays of solidarity.

Two more strategies that fall under the MSM’s umbrella of obfuscating and minimizing Islam’s role—strategies with which the reader should become acquainted—appeared in recent reports dealing with the jihadi group Boko Haram and its ongoing genocide of Nigeria’s Christians.

First, some context: Boko Haram—acronym for “Western Education is a Sin”, its full name in Arabic is “Sunnis for Da’wa [Islamization] and Jihad”—is a full-throated terrorist organization dedicated to the overthrow of the secular government and establishment of Sharia law. It has been slaughtering Christians for years, with an uptick since the Christmas Day church bombing in 2012, which left at least 40 Christians dead; followed by its New Year ultimatum that all Christians must evacuate the northern regions of Nigeria or die—an ultimatum Boko Haram has been living up to: hardly a day goes by without a terrorist attack on Christians or a church, most recently on Easter day, leaving 20 dead.

Blurring the Line Between Persecutor and Victim

Now consider some MSM strategies. The first one is to frame the conflict between Muslims and Christians in a way that blurs the line between persecutor and victim, as in, for example, a recent BBC report on one of Boko Haram’s many church attacks that left three Christians dead, including a toddler. After stating the bare-bones facts in a couple of sentences, the report went on to describe how “the bombing sparked a riot by Christian youths, with reports that at least two Muslims were killed in the violence. The two men were dragged off their bikes after being stopped at a roadblock set up by the rioters, police said. A row of Muslim-owned shops was also burned…” The report goes on and on, with a special section about “very angry” Christians, until one all but confuses victims with persecutors, forgetting what the Christians are “very angry” about in the first place—unprovoked and nonstop terror attacks on their churches, and the murder of their women and children.

This broadcast is reminiscent of the Egyptian New Year’s Eve church bombing that left over 20 Christians dead: the MSM reported it, but under headlines such as, “Christians clash with police in Egypt after attack on churchgoers kills 21″(Washington Post) and “Clashes grow as Egyptians remain angry after attack”(New York Times)—as if frustrated Christians lashing out against wholesale slaughter is as newsworthy or of the same value as the slaughter itself, implying that their angry reaction “evens” everything up.

Read the rest at Gatestone Institute

Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum

In the Crosshairs: Media’s Deadly Bias

by Gadi Adelman at FSM:

Writing articles on terrorism in a post 9/11 world becomes more difficult each day. It’s certainly not due to the lack of terror or terror arrests; that, unfortunately, is never ending. Since 9/11 there have been 18,598 deadly terror attacks all in the name of Islam.
 
The writing on the subject of terror for myself and others has become a ‘cat and mouse game’ with the media and the current administration. I cannot even count the amount of times arrests have been made in a terror plot here in the U.S. and there is absolutely no further information available.
 
When I say no further information, I am referring to the suspect’s gender, age and of course, the name. I have written about this before; if the name of the suspect in any way can even be misconstrued as being Islamic, more often than not either the media or law enforcement refuses to release the information.
 
The factual statistic of a terrorist is: male, age 18-34 of Middle Eastern descent. If the suspect falls into any or all of these categories it is more likely that the information is unavailable.
 
But what is even worse is when it is never even categorized as terrorism. The amount of terror acts committed that get swept under the proverbial prayer rug is actually unknown. What is known are those that come to light long after the fact that were classified as crimes, from vandalism to domestic violence and even murder.
 
I have written on this subject many times before. Just last May I wrote about Fatima Abdallah, a woman murdered in Tampa, Florida in what was an obvious case of an ‘Honor killing’ that was deemed a ‘suicide’ by law enforcement.
 
Many cases of terror never even come to light; the case may be reported as vandalism such as the case I wrote about in both September and October of 2010 when a homemade bomb was thrown at a woman outside the Islamic Society of Portland, Maine by a 13-year-old. Only after I pushed the issue with the District Attorney was it even investigated and then, after being lied to, it was classified as vandalism and the boy was never even charged.
 
Most cases are usually reported as a disgruntled or mentally ill individual not terror; hell, even the case of Major Nidal Hassan, the Fort Hood shooter, was recently classified as “workplace violence” by the Obama administration.
 
This whole situation begs the question: why are the administration and media so afraid of the consequences of reporting the truth – the potential repercussions of reporting the perpetrator was Islamic or is it the fear of being accused of ‘Islamophobia’?
 
So with all the dancing around the issue and the handling of terror reports with kid gloves, what in the hell is with the recent reports of the U.S. soldier who is accused of the Afghan village murders?
 
Releasing the name of the Staff Sergeant accused of killing 16 Afghan villagers last week is one thing, I expected his name to come out eventually, what I did not expect (but in hindsight I probably should have) was the blatant disregard for his family’s privacy and safety.
 
His name was released by the Military on Friday and according to reports was first publicly announced by FOX news, the NY Times reported,
 
The release of Sergeant Bales’s name, first reported by Fox News, ended an extraordinary six-day blackout of public information about him from the Pentagon, which said it withheld his identity for so long because of concerns about his and his family’s security.
 
A six day “blackout” “because of concerns about his and his family’s security”. So did his family all of a sudden become unimportant or just collateral damage waiting to happen?
 
I cannot write how I truly feel about this situation because my words would never make it past the editor. The handling of this story goes well beyond all logic.
 
I have seen his wife’s name and age along with where she works, the two children’s names and ages, the address where they last lived (thank God they recently moved), and the location of his parents.
 
As if this were not enough, even photos and videos of his house have gone viral on the internet and printed publications. So much for the Pentagon’s “concerns about his and his family’s security”.
 
I try and keep my personal information from public view but not for my safety, it is for the safety of my family and friends. I knew when I started writing and hosting a radio show that I would be a target. I accepted and expected that, but my family did not sign up for this.
 
I receive on average 10 death threats a month and that is just due to my articles; one does not need to have a Ph.D. in law enforcement to know the danger these reports have put Sgt. Bales’ family in.
 
The Fatwas (a legal pronouncement in Islam) have already gone out on both his and his family member’s heads.  As I stated earlier, I expected his name to surface eventually, but the media digging and putting forth the information of his family goes beyond any ethical journalism.
 
The Staff Sergeant’s wife, children and parents are not accused of any crimes, but the way this has been handled and the way the media is portraying them, the media may have well pulled the trigger themselves.
 
The comments posted in U.S. publications show just how volatile the situation for his family is. The local news from Tacoma, Washington has had some disturbing comments, to say the least,
 
Kat from Pahrump, NV: What they should do is let the village try him and then do a rapid BEHEADING so his HEADLESS TRUNK could do an IRISH JIG before it drops. LMAO
 
Joe from Las Vegas, NV: He should be publically BEHEADED in that village with a rusty knife.
 
These comments were aimed at the Staff Sgt., but the ones that I have read calling for the harm and death to his wife and family from people here in the U.S. go beyond violent, and I refuse even to post them.
 
The internet is an amazingly positive tool when used correctly but, in a darker way, it can also be used to find people with the stroke of key. The information that has been released about Bales’ family makes it far too easy for someone to locate them if they wished them harm.
 
Bales’ family now is living with a target on their backs; in fact, the media might as well have placed a flashing neon sign over their home that said “Here we are, come kill us”.
 
When it comes to retaliation and Islam, the facts are written in over 1400 years of history and hundreds of thousands of deaths. In this case we are not just dealing with some American nut case who might take it upon himself to seek justice on his own, we are dealing with Islam.
 
Six of our troops were murdered after the Qurans were burned last month with a total of over 30 dead. No need to wonder what would happen to the Bales family when Islam calls for murder over burned books.
 
I am sure those who chose to report about his family’s information have no trouble sleeping at night, but the same cannot be said for the Bales family. Now thanks to the media, they had better be sleeping with one eye open for the rest of their lives.
 
I can only hope and pray that they are long and healthy lives, because if any harm comes to this family, it will fall squarely on the media.
 
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Gadi Adelman is a freelance writer and lecturer on the history of terrorism and counterterrorism. He grew up in Israel, studying terrorism and Islam for 35 years after surviving a terrorist bomb in Jerusalem in which 7 children were killed. Since returning to the U. S., Gadi teaches and lectures to law enforcement agencies as well as high schools and colleges. He can be heard every Thursday night at 8PM est. on his own radio show “America Akbar” on Blog Talk Radio. He can be reached through his website gadiadelman.com.