Friday, December 11, 2015

127 + killed in Paris 11/13 Islamist terrorism attacks, hundreds more injured; 14 killed in San Bernardino 12/2 Islamist terrorism attack, many more injured - What is skillful and appropriate to do?

The following are two particularly interesting and suggestive proposals (plus one) among the many I have heard, read and received:

"One phrase from Saudi clerics could begin the end of Islamic State" The one phrase is discussed at the end of the podcast.

"A virulent ideology powers Islamic State. Nance argues that it’s not a sect of Islam, but a death cult powered by an apocalyptic vision. To beat them, the West must fight against that vision. Ideas are harder to fight than a military force. Hard, but not impossible."

 For the podcast see: 


Here is another overlapping yet at time quite different proposal.


"Call Islamic Terrorism by Its Name"


"Why ignoring the religious beliefs behind the threat is foolish—and dangerous...

Here is the reality. There are radicalized groups of Muslims that pick and choose portions of the Quran and Hadiths religious texts, interpreting them as instructions to pursue jihad and impose their religion on the whole world. Infidels, they believe, have three alternatives: conversion to Islam, submission (the payment of tribute) or death. Killing of infidels is to these extremists a religious obligation that will gain them entry to a sensuous and rewarding life in paradise.

To deal with this, we must strengthen our surveillance capabilities by restoring the portions of the Patriot Act that Congress removed in June. We must establish a no-fly zone in Syria so that the refugees remain there and aren’t brought to the United States. Our ineffective vetting of Tashfeen Malik, one of the killers in San Bernardino, when she came to America is an example of why the process must be overhauled and made much more expansive. Finally, we must recognize and acknowledge that there is an Islamic terrorist war against us, and we must respond appropriately. 

The overwhelming majority of Muslims don’t hold these beliefs. Like members of other religions with ancient roots, these Muslims ignore the barbaric portions of their books and history. Judaism long ago read out of the Old Testament the stoning of women for adultery. Christians long ago abandoned crusades, inquisitions and pogroms. We must encourage Muslim leaders to show the world that Islamic terrorists represent an antiquated and inhumane interpretation of Islam. These leaders need to loudly and dramatically speak for the hundreds of millions of Muslims who worship a peaceful, merciful and loving God. All Americans, in particular those in the media, can do their part by encouraging those Muslim leaders who come forward with a positive message about modern Islam."


"The failure to speak bluntly about Islamic terrorism opens the door to the vast generalizations that can steer the debate in a totally counterproductive direction. The idea of excluding all Muslims is unworkable and legally dubious. It will soon disappear. But it is clear that the Obama administration’s refusal to face up to the nature of Islamic terrorism is never going to change. That is more than foolish. It is also dangerous.

Investigating large multifaceted criminal organizations like the Mafia or making war against similarly complex terrorist organizations requires properly identifying the organizational rationale. Making it politically incorrect to use the proper designation also makes it much harder to see the connections that enable these groups to flourish."

For the full article see: 

And here is another straightforward analysis and proposal whose title summarizes the article:

Trump: ban Islamists, not Muslims