The Whitewashing of Islamic Terrorism

Judea Pearl, the father of Daniel Pearl who was kidnapped and beheaded by terrorists in the name of the “religion of peace,” writes about the mainstream legitimization of terrorism by Western media and academia.

The key graph:

But somehow, barbarism, often cloaked in the language of “resistance,” has gained acceptance in the most elite circles of our society. The words “war on terror” cannot be uttered today without fear of offense. Civilized society, so it seems, is so numbed by violence that it has lost its gift to be disgusted by evil.

I believe it all started with well-meaning analysts, who in their zeal to find creative solutions to terror decided that terror is not a real enemy, but a tactic. Thus the basic engine that propels acts of terrorism — the ideological license to elevate one’s grievances above the norms of civilized society — was wished away in favor of seemingly more manageable “tactical” considerations.

Frank Gaffney writes that this mentality is adhered to and promoted by President Obama:

Several observers have noted in recent days that Mr. Obama’s outreach to the Muslim world is not only defensive and apologetic. It explicitly embraces a narrative that is factually erroneous and deprecating to his own country.

For example, in his Inaugural address, the president spoke of seeking “a new way forward [with the Muslim world], based on mutual interest and mutual respect.” He amplified this idea during his first post-Inaugural interview, which was granted to a Saudi-owned network, Al Arabiya: He is determined to “restore” the “same respect and partnership America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago.”

The problem with this formulation is that it misrepresents the more distant as well as the recent past, even as it panders to those (abroad and at home) who would blame the United States for the ills of the Muslim world.

He continues:

Mr. Obama has also seriously mischaracterized our enemy as “a far-reaching network of violence and hatred,” averring “We cannot paint with a broad brush a faith as a consequence of the violence done in that faith’s name.” Such statements deliberately ignore the animating and unifying role in jihad of authoritative Islam’s violent and hateful theo-political-legal program: Shariah.

What is really worrying is that Mr. Obama’s actions and rhetoric are almost certainly being perceived by his target audience as evidence not of respect but of subservience - precisely what Islam (literally, “submission” in Arabic) requires of all of us, Muslims and non-Muslims, alike.

Many supporters of Obama appreciate his supposed ability to improve the American image in the eyes of the rest of the world.  However, if the world is blind to evil, if it refuses to denounce terrorism as a barbaric attack on civilization, if it would rather protect itself than stand up to the most obvious tyrannies in human history (the former Soviet Union, North Korea, Saddam’s Iraq, Sudan, Iran and any other state that endorses Shariah law),  should we really be concerned with seeking the world’s approval?  Weren’t we supposed to learn in high school that seeking popularity for its own sake is worthless?