Obama Terrorism Advisor’s Book Confuses and Distorts

January 9, 2012 By 15 Comments

Reading CDR Youssef Aboul-Enein’s book, Militant Islamist Ideology: Understanding the Global Threat, published by the Naval Institute Press (2010), one can see why U.S. leadership is far from “understanding the global threat”; why the Obama administration is supportive of the Muslim Brotherhood; and why so many U.S. politicians rose up in condemnation when one obscure pastor threatened to burn a Koran.

According to the jacket cover, Aboul-Enein is “a top adviser at the Joint Intelligence Task Force for Combating Terrorism” and “has advised at the highest levels of the defense department and intelligence community.”

What advice does he give?

He holds that, whereas “militant Islamists” (e.g., al-Qaeda) are the enemy, “non-militant Islamists” (e.g., the Muslim Brotherhood), are not: “It is the Militant Islamists who are our adversary. They represent an immediate threat to the national security of the United States. They must not be confused with Islamists.”

This theme, sometimes expressed in convoluted language—at one point we are urged to appreciate the “nuanced” differences “between Militant Islamists and between Militant Islamists and Islamists”—permeates the book.

Of course, what all Islamists want is a system inherently hostile to the West, culminating in a Sharia-enforcing Caliphate; the only difference is that the nonmilitant Islamists are prudent enough to understand that incremental infiltration and subtle subversion are more effective than outright violence. Simply put, both groups want the same thing, and differ only in methodology.

Whereas most of the book is meant to portray nonviolent Islamists in a nonthreatening light, sometimes Aboul-Enein contradicts himself, for instance by correctly observing that “the United States must be under no illusions that the agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood includes limiting the rights of women” and other anti-Western aspects.

How to explain these discrepancies? Is the Brotherhood a problem for the U.S. or not?

The book’s foreword by Admiral James Stavridis clarifies by stating that the book is a “culmination of Commander Aboul-Enein’s essays, lectures, and myriad answers to questions.” In fact, Militant Islamist Ideology reads like a hodgepodge of ideas cobbled together, and the author’s contradictions are likely products of different approaches to different audiences over time.

Pages: 1 2

Filed Under: Daily Mailer, FrontPage Tagged With: , , , ,
About

Raymond Ibrahim, a Shillman Fellow at the DHFC, is a Middle East and Islam expert, author of the new book, Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians (Regnery, 2013), and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum. Join him as he explores the "Intersection"—the pivotal but ignored point where Islam and Christianity meet—including by examining the latest on Christian persecution, translating important Arabic news that never reaches the West, and much more.

  • 9-11 Infidel

    Its about time, someone called this guy out. He's the same Saidian Islamic apologist that has been writing articles in Infantry Magazine for several years now. Its a shame that our military and Intel community would rather suck at the teet of multiculuralism than study the wisdom of Sun Tzu. What our military needs is a few more leaders like Alan West and a few less Generals like Casey. We don't need any more Janusaries or their Muslim advisors. What we need is new leadership with the wisdom of Sun Tzu and the heart of Charles Martel. And that should start at the top of the food chain in Washington.

  • Ron Carnine

    Here we go again. Another book that glorifies "moderate" Islam and states that the world's terrorists are not true Muslims and it is the "radical" Muslims that are a threat to the US. The problem is the vast majority of Muslim's in this country (some studies say 91%) are in favor of violent Jihad against the non-Muslim world. Muslim's are doing what Muslim's have always done, using deception and out right lies to carry on their goal of a universal caliphate and world domination, with conquered non-Muslim's paying the bills. It's too bad when those in a position of leadership help spread the lies and try to pacify those who take a look at Islam.

  • WildJew

    The problem is, when you have the president of the United States tell the public, this is the enemy – this is the way it is – that is what the public believes. Both of our central Florida radio talk show hosts were strong supporters of Bush. They still parrot Bush's musings on Islam. Both vociferously condemned the Gainesville pastor for threatening to burn a copy of the Koran; day by day as the media attention mounted. I doubt they even read Aboul-Enein's book. All they had to do was listen to their president. It almost seemed if they didn't condemn Jones, they they thought they would be complicit in the Koran burning.

    Even nationally syndicated radio talk show host Neal Boortz went berserk, condemning Terry Jones, the Gainesville pastor. At least Limbaugh had the presence to maintain a dignified silence on the issue.

    Obama's father was Muslim. Obama told the ummah at Al Azhar University in Cairo Egypt, "I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed." In other words, to Obama, Islam is a religious tradition that was "revealed" by God – by Allah. Several times in the speech, Obama referred to the "Holy Koran." He invited Muslim Brotherhood jihadists to attend the speech. President Mubarak did not attend.

    I am not convinced Obama is ignorant about Islam as many would like to believe. Is it possible Obama knows exactly what he is doing? Is it possible Obama knows exactly what he is furthering?

  • WildJew

    President Bush: "I also want to speak tonight directly to Muslims throughout the world. We respect your faith. It's practiced freely by many millions of Americans and by millions more in countries that America counts as friends. Its teachings are good and peaceful, and those who commit evil in the name of Allah blaspheme the name of Allah…."

    These were marching orders. No?

  • Brujo Blanco

    I agree. Obama knows what he is doing. He will further his ambitions by having the military stand down. I am waiting for the day Obama does what Castro did and announce that he is a communist. Obama has already succeeded at governing without the advice and consent.

  • Jaladhi

    Any information given by a Muslim about the threats of Islamic terrorism is a non-starter. One never knows the truth from lies while reading such a book. And Muslims will deliberately lie to mislead non-Muslims about the threats or no threats from Muslims terrorists.

    One should remember they are all terrorists getting active at some time in their life and they all lie and can never be trusted. We know all of them by by their actions and not by their the words from their forked tongues!!!

  • ObamaYoMoma

    CDR Youssef Aboul-Enein is himself a non-violent stealth and deceptive jihadist that has managed to penetrate the Obama administration. Of course, anyone in the military that has the audacity to point that out publicly would very quickly ruin his or her military career as they would be instantly marginalized as being a bigot and hounded out of the military. As any notion other than that Islam is a so-called Religion of Peace™ being hijacked by a tiny minority of extremists is considered to be bigoted by not only the US government, but also by both major political parties as well.

    He holds that, whereas “militant Islamists” (e.g., al-Qaeda) are the enemy, “non-militant Islamists” (e.g., the Muslim Brotherhood​), are not: “It is the Militant Islamists who are our adversary. They represent an immediate threat to the national security of the United States. They must not be confused with Islamists.”

    In other words, Aboul-Enein holds that violent jihadists are the enemy, at the same time that he also holds that non-violent stealth and deceptive jihadists, i.e., the Muslim Brotherhood, the Saudis, the Gulf States, Muslim immigrants to the West, etc. are not our enemy. Actually, non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad relative to violent jihad is employed against the West astronomically far more prevalently by the Islamic world, and in the long run represents an exponentially far greater threat to our security. Hence, just the opposite is the truth.

    Not only that but because jihad, which can be both violent and non-violent, per the dictates of PC multiculturalism, is always conflated and morally equated with terrorism, which as its name implies is always only violent, non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad, such as mass Muslim immigration to the West for the purpose of stealth demographic conquest, is able to manifest today completely below the radar of scrutiny and totally unacknowledged and unopposed.

    Additionally, non-violent stealth and deceptive jihadists believe that violent jihad as perpetrated by AQ, for instance, is exceedingly counterproductive and harmful because it invites wars against Muslims and at the same time attracts unwanted scrutiny, focus, and attention on Islam.

    In fact, the faction of violent jihadists as led by AQ has been waging a jihad against the much larger proponent faction of non-violent stealth and deceptive jihadists as led by the Saudis since in the 90s. Although both factions agree totally 100 percent on the same exact goal to make Islam supreme, on the other hand, they both violently disagree on the strategy and the tactics to be employed. Violent jihadists, of course, want to use force and violence to rapidly conquer the un-Islamic world and to impose a world Caliphate. While the non-violent stealth and deceptive jihadists, on the other hand, want to use stealth demographic conquest and other means of non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad to slowly but very deliberately conquer the un-Islamic world.

    Hence, since non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad is employed astronomically far greater relative to violent jihad and is currently occurring today throughout the West completely unacknowledged and unopposed thanks to PC multiculturalism, non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad therefore represents an exponentially far greater threat relative to violent jihad to the security of the West despite what Aboul-Enein deceptively claims. As Aboul-Enein is obviously a non-violent stealth and deceptive jihadist and as such he should be arrested and prosecuted ASAP for being a spy.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    He insists that the Arabic word for “terrorist” is nowhere in the Koran—without bothering to point out that Koran 8:60 commands believers “to terrorize the enemy,” also known as non-Muslim “infidels.”

    Actually, I disagree with Raymond Ibrahim and I agree 100 percent with Youssef Aboul-Enein on this one. As jihad, because it is holy fighting in the cause of Allah against non-Muslim unbelievers to make Islam supreme can be both violent and non-violent, it isn't terrorism. Indeed, terrorism as its name implies can only be violent.

    Hence, since there is no comparable word for jihad in the West, since jihad is purely an Islamic manifestation, Western translators at a lost used the closest Western word, terrorism, as terrorism is a ubiquitous Western manifestation. Nevertheless, jihad and terrorism in reality are two separate and mutually exclusive manifestations and in fact two entirely different and very distinct things altogether.

    For instance, jihad, which is a manifestation of Islamic civilization only, is always in the cause of Allah, can be both violent and non-violent, and primarily targets non-Muslim unbelievers, either civilian non-combatants as in the Madrid train bombing, or military combatants such as American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    While terrorism, on the other hand, is a manifestation of Western civilization only, in stark contrast to jihad can be for any number of political causes as opposed to jihad that is always only in the cause of Allah, as its name implies is always only violent as opposed to jihad, which can be both violent and non-violent, and lastly indiscriminately targets civilian non-combatants as opposed to jihad that primarily targets non-Muslim unbelievers.

    However, jihad, which can be both violent and non-violent, per the dictates of PC multiculturalism, is always conflated and morally equated today with terrorism, which can only be violent, it unfortunately enables non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad, such as stealth demographic conquest via mass Muslim immigration to the West for the purpose of stealth demographic conquest, to occur today throughout the West totally below the radar of scrutiny and completely unacknowledged and unopposed.

    • George

      I think you missed something here. The portion of the review you refer to has nothing to do with the word jihad. Ibrahim is saying that Abou-Enein says that the word "terrorist" is not in the Quran, followed by Ibrahim showing that it is disingenuous for Enein to say this when the Quran does talk about terrorizing people. At least that's how I read it.

      • ObamaYoMoma

        No….I'm afraid that you missed the fact that the word “terrorize” is a translation from Arabic to English, and the translators used the closest English word available as there is no comparable manifestation in Western civilization to jihad.

        In addition, as I explained when you conflate jihad with terrorism, per the dictates of PC multiculturalism, it inadvertently enables non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad to manifest totally unacknowledged and unopposed, and non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad relative to violent jihad in the long run is exponentially far more detrimental to our security because it is employed astronomically far more prevalently by the Islamic world against the West.

        Indeed, mass Muslim immigration to the West for the purpose of stealth demographic conquest occurs today throughout the West totally unacknowledged and unopposed thanks to PC multiculturalism, as Muslims never ever migrate to the West or anywhere else for that matter to assimilate and integrate, but instead to eventually subjugate and dominate via the eventual imposition of Sharia for the purpose of stealth demographic conquest to make Islam supreme.

        • Western Canadian

          A perfect example of the concept ‘a little learning is a dangerous thing’… This lout has a very superficial understanding of islam, and has managed to trap a very irrational bee in his bonnet, specifically, his pre-occupation and delusion regarding jihad, which at its most basic, is warfare, which even in the west has taken on many forms. Yes, dishonest jihadis have tried to pretend that the word has another, greater meaning: a struggle against injustice, reaching for self-improvement, etc. But that is, like this poor loons delusion, is merely hot air.

          The incredible and utterly pitiable claim :*
          Indeed, mass Muslim immigration to the West for the purpose of stealth demographic conquest occurs today throughout the West totally unacknowledged and unopposed **

          is a perfect example of how delusional this loon is. It has been pointed out to him that warfare by immigration is not new, it is being commited in our time, and it is something people are aware of, do acknowledge, and are opposing…. But when you are as delusional as he, the mere facts don’t matter.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            Actually, anywhere and everywhere mass Muslim immigration to the West is occurring in the world today, which in reality is actually non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad, just like clockwork the vast overwhelming majority of Muslim immigrants flat out refuse to assimilate and integrate and instead form Muslim only enclaves that over time inevitably morph into Muslim no-go zones ruled by Sharia as fifth columns and in direct contravention to the laws of the states in which they reside. As Muslims never ever migrate to the West or anywhere else for that matter to assimilate and integrate, but instead to eventually subjugate and dominate via the eventual imposition of Sharia for the purpose of stealth demographic conquest to make Islam supreme. In fact, the government of France has identified 758 Muslim no-go zones in France alone.

            As a matter of fact, stealth demographic conquest is the primary means of non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad by which the Islamic world wages jihad against the West today. Yet, it occurs today throughout the West and indeed the world totally below the radar and completely unacknowledged and unopposed thanks to PC multiculturalism, which not only lumps and conflates all civilizations, cultures, and societies together as all being equal and morally equivalent, but also at the same time conflates and morally equates Jihad, which can be both violent and non-violent, together with terrorism, which as its name implies is always only violent, and which also enables at the same time non-violent stealth and deceptive jihad, such as mass Muslim immigration to the West for the purpose of stealth demographic conquest, to take place totally below the radar and completely unacknowledged and unopposed.

            Thus, you mentally deficient Canadian twerp that has been indoctrinated cradle to grave to worship PC multiculturalism, why don't you point out to us all the countries in the world today that currently oppose mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage for the purpose of stealth demographic conquest? Indeed, your own country far from opposing it, actually encourages it, and it is encouraging it because like you it has been rendered totally blind by PC multiculturalism, which also prevents it as it does you from fully understanding Islam and jihad.

            Let me ask you another easy question: Islam is a Religion of Peace™ being hijacked by only a tiny minority of extremists. True or false?

  • Marty

    the koran is a blueprint for and a statement of terrorism. In a variety of verses, the koran encouarges and justifies the slaughter of innocent people and the enslavement of survivors of islamic perpetrated massacres. islam is a violent death cult and is incapable of evolving into anything less sinister. Its adherents are genocidal sociopaths who are fond of killing. The world without democracy and the United States (the iranian leadership's fantasy) would be a world living under the rule of islamic thugs intent on destroying thousands of years of human progress. islam does not deserve to exist. As long as it does, islam will be a threat to everything that is decent.

  • Stuart Parsons

    How can there be a moderate Islam when they all believe the Quran is a Heaven sent set of Instructions from Allah and they hold in great reverence their 'Prophet' who murdered all who spoke out against him and with his deluded booty and sex motivated followers, lied, plotted, enslaved, tortured, killed, robbed, ransomed and raped his way to absolute political and religious power.

    Could it be that they don't read the Quran or the Sunnah or the early biographies of their pathological 'Prophet'.

  • Ellman

    We need to establish the equivalent of an Ayattolah who can issue fatwas against books which have an unadulterated bias towards books and comments which misrepresent Islam as a peaceful religion or a moderate political movement. This book is clearly guilty of Islamophilia and contradicts what even the Koran itself reveals about Islam. Can we get Congress to pass a law which protects us against indiscriminate Islamophilia? Or at least to acknowledge that Islamophilia is no better that Islamophobia?