The CNN report on comments by LTG H.R. McMaster, President Trump’s National Security Adviser, has left former Congressman Allen West with a headache. The issue is Mr. McMaster’s statement that he does not find the term “radical Islamic terrorism”  helpful for US goals. Doesn’t that sound like something from the Obama administration? Read Mr. West’s most excellent rebuttal here.

As Written By Allen B. West:

Angela and I got back onto terra firma USA Sunday morning after a delightful week-long cruise with Brent Bozell’s Media Research Center, and some awesome folks. I will tell you right now, sign up for next year’s MRC cruise which will be in August to Alaska.

I was about to keep up with most of the pressing new items, but there was one story that REALLY caught my attention.

As reported by CNN, “New national security adviser H.R. McMaster is already setting a strikingly different tone than his ousted predecessor, Michael Flynn, and President Donald Trump, saying the term “radical Islamic terrorism” isn’t helpful for US goals.

At an all-hands meeting of the National Security Council on Thursday, Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster said jihadist terrorists aren’t true to their professed religion and that the use of the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism” doesn’t help the US in working with allies to defeat terrorist groups, an official present at the session confirmed to CNN.

The phrase is unhelpful because terrorist organizations like ISIS represent a perversion of Islam, and are thus un-Islamic, McMaster said, according to a source who attended the meeting.  An administration official acknowledged there is a “genuine difference of opinion” between Trump and McMaster on the use of “radical Islamic terrorism,” but said McMaster is not telling the president he’s wrong, and added it’s not a “major difference.”

A source also said McMaster signaled that Russia was an adversary, not a friend. And, in contrast to White House strategist Steve Bannon, who has called the European Union a flawed institution and expressed a desire to forge stronger ties with individual European countries, McMaster defended the post-World War II world order, saying it was important for maintaining peace and security.”

Interestingly enough, LTG McMaster had not been in the job one week and has made himself the news — not a great start. But what is truly troubling is that the selection for National Security Adviser believes that defining the enemy as who they are is not “helpful.”

I suppose LTG McMaster, who is an acclaimed warrior scholar, has never read the letter from Thomas Jefferson and John Adams to John Jay dated March 28, 1786. The letter was a report on a meeting Jefferson and Adams had with the Ambassador of Tripoli. Jefferson and Adams were trying to understand the reasons for the Barbary pirate attacks on our shipping and the enslaving of American citizens and merchant sailors.

Here is an excerpt from that letter:

“We took the liberty to make some inquiries concerning the Grounds of their pretentions to make war upon Nations who had done them no Injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation. The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet,1 that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.

That it was a law that the first who boarded an Enemy’s Vessell should have one slave, more than his share with the rest, which operated as an incentive to the most desperate Valour and Enterprise, that it was the Practice of their Corsairs to bear down upon a ship, for each sailor to take a dagger in each hand and another in his mouth, and leap on board, which so terrified their Enemies that very few ever stood against them, that he verily believed the Devil assisted his Countrymen, for they were almost always successful. We took time to consider and promised an answer, but we can give him no other, than that the demands exceed our Expectations, and that of Congress, so much that we can proceed no further without fresh instructions.”

I suppose LTG McMaster has a better understanding about Islamic terrorism than Jefferson and Adams did, two men who would go on to be presidents. And of course, Jefferson realized that the ideology only understood strength and might, not language that would be ‘helpful.” So Jefferson built up our Navy and they conducted our first expeditionary operation along with our venerable U.S. Marines, led by First Lieutenant Presley O’Bannon…to the shores of Tripoli. To this day, the Mameluke sword is the ceremonial sword of Marine Corps officers…the result of action, not kind language, recognizing the intentions and motivations of your enemy and facing them.

I just have to wonder if our new National Security Adviser has ever read the Muslim Brotherhood’s Explanatory Memorandum written in 1991 by Mohammed Akram and uncovered in an FBI raid in northern Virginia?

Or perhaps LTG McMaster is aware of the charter of the Muslim Brotherhood where its motto states, “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope. Allahu akbar!”

It was the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan al-Banna who stated, “It is in the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated, to impose its law on all nations and to extend its power to the entire planet.”

I guess there’s a whole lot of perversion of Islam that has been going on for quite a few years — like almost 1,400. I have to ask if our new National Security Adviser understands the tradition of Mohammed called Al Hijra, and does he grasp how that principle applies to what we see happening in Europe…and maybe that’s why these supposed “allies” of ours refuse to accept refugees?

I’m the first to give great respect and honor to Jordan’s leader King Abdullah and even to Egypt’s President al-Sisi. Heck, there are certain Gulf Cooperation Council States who have declared the Muslim Brotherhood, and even the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) as Islamic terrorist organizations. Does LTG McMaster REALLY believe these nations care about language that’s nice, unoffensive, and helpful in defining Islamic jihadism?

Perhaps LTG McMaster knows better than the self-declared caliph of ISIS, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who has a PhD in Islamic Studies. Maybe al-Baghdadi and McMaster can have a debate, internationally televised, about the nature of modern day Islamic jihadism, began by the infamous Sayyid Qutb.

I could go on with countless other examples, but I believe my point has been made. The United States of America cannot base its national security strategy on adopting language that is helpful and unoffensive, as opposed to being truthful.

We can no longer have a national security strategy based on obfuscation, denial, and an ill-advised sense of niceness. Sadly we’re recovering from eight years of an administration under Barack Obama who made the asinine statement of “Let me make myself clear, ISIS is not Islamic.”

However, the real question I must pose is did President Donald Trump have a policy discussion with LTG McMaster on national security issues and vision? I find it rather perplexing that President Trump would rail on former President Obama and presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for not using the the language of “radical Islamic terrorism” but now has a National Security Adviser aligned with them, not him.

As for me, the ideologically correct reference would be “militant Islamic terrorism/jihadism”, Islamo-fascism, Islamic totalitarianism, or Islamism. Any attempt to separate the ideology of a theocratic-political violent ideology from the basis of Islam is foolish, and divorced from reality and history.

Any sound student of history knows that after his Hijra from Mecca to Medina, Mohammed instituted a belief system rooted in violence — hence why the flag of Saudi Arabia has a Koranic verse with Mohammed’s sword. The assertions of our new National Security Adviser are very disconcerting because …..


What CNN just reported nearly BLEW my head off – Allen B. West – AllenBWest.com

Show more