Willful Blindness – by Jamie Glazov

Jamie Glazov is Frontpage Magazine's editor. He holds a Ph.D. in History with a specialty in Russian, U.S. and Canadian foreign policy. He is the author of the critically acclaimed and best-selling, United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror. His new book is High Noon For America. He is the host of Frontpage’s television show, The Glazov Gang, and he can be reached at jamieglazov11@gmail.com. Visit his site at JamieGlazov.com.


Obama

Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Andrew C. McCarthy, a senior fellow at the National Review Institute and a columnist for National Review. His book Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad (Encounter Books, 2008), has just been released in paperback with a new preface. Check out a description from Encounter Books.

andy

FP: Andrew C. McCarthy, welcome to Frontpage Interview.

Your thoughts on how the Obama administration is handling Abdul Mutallab in comparison to how it handled Hasan? The embarrassing and leaving-us-open-to-terror saga continues? Napolitano, as we know, emerged with some moronic statements. Your thoughts?

McCarthy: Jamie, thanks for having me.  It’s a pleasure.

It would be nice if the government spent half as much energy focusing on what actually catalyzes jihadist terror as it does denying that there is terrorism.  This problem is not unique to Obama officials, but this administration is raising willful blindness to a new level.

Basically, unless they catch a guy wearing an al Qaeda t-shirt, their default position is that everyone is a lone-wolf with no connection to any larger enterprise — and God forbid that we should ask exactly what it is that somehow inspires all these lone-wolves to attack Americans.

In my book, I describe how, right after Sayyid Nosair murdered Meir Kahane in 1990, the first impulse of the NYPD’s chief of detectives was to portray him as a lone, crazed lunatic who was certainly not part of a broader conspiracy and whose religious beliefs were irrelevant — and, as their public statements at the time demonstrate, the FBI went right along publicly with that theory.

Of course it was idiotic for Napolitano to say Hasan’s was not an act of terrorism and that there are no indications Mutallab is part of a larger terrorist conspiracy. Already, evidence to the contrary is overwhelming, on both scores.  But this is the same error we’ve been making for 20 years. We don’t want to come to grips with the fact that something we can’t control — something we can only fight or surrender to — is causing Muslims to terrorize us.  So we pretend the something and the terrorism don’t exist.

FP: It appears that former Gitmo detainees released in 2007 may be behind this latest terror effort. The significance?

McCarthy: Well, we plainly should not have been releasing jihadist detainees all along, and this obsession to shutter Gitmo is sheer madness. Common sense says that, if even the Obama administration realizes it would be problematic to release the last 200 of them, these remnants must be a very serious national security threat.  And yet, less than two weeks ago, we shipped another half-dozen back to Yemen — as a harbinger for what the administration hoped would be the return of dozens more (Yemenis account for about 90 of the remaining 198 or so detainees).  That’s nuts.

The Yemeni government, while it periodically feigns friendship with the U.S., makes common cause with Qaeda jihadists — using them to help fight Shiite insurgents.  The government has a history of releasing and allowing the escape from custody of anti-American terrorists.  Sending them to Yemen — as well as to Afghanistan and Somaliland, as we’ve taken to doing — is like sending them right back to bin Laden.

The only thing possibly more absurd is the delusion that we can move them away from jihadism by sending them to a Wahhabist re-education course run by the Saudis, who have spent billions of dollars and half a century propagating the ideology that fuels Sunni terrorism.

FP: Why was Abdul Mutallab able to board Flight 253? What needs to be done to prevent such a person from boarding another flight? Is our administration capable of getting that done?

McCarthy: He was able to board the flight due to a series of small but mind-boggling failures which take place in the context of a huge conceptual blunder. For now, let me just address the small failures:

They include issuing him a multiple-entry visa without any investigation to speak of; allowing him to begin his trip in Nigeria — a notoriously weak link in airport security — and then connect in Amsterdam without significant, invasive search and inquiry; and, of couse, failing to make sure the information provided by Mutallab’s father to the State Department made its way through all the proper intelligence channels and ultimately the no-fly list.

In the post-9/11 reform craze, critics (myself included) argued that you don’t make security and communication better by creating additional bureaucracies (e.g., the National Intelligence Directorate) and moving around the deck chairs on the Titanic so government can appear to be doing something (e.g., the Department of Homeland Security).

To this day, we haven’t married up the various databases or even coordinated immigration tracking so we can monitor what aliens are in the country and whether they are actually engaged in the purpose for which they claimed to be coming here.  Addressing those rubber-meets-the-road tasks would be a far bigger advance for national security than growing government.

And no, I don’t think this administration has the inclination to get that done, far from it.

FP: What is the greatest failure on our side in all of this? What upsets and worries you most?

McCarthy: The much bigger problem is the failure to come to terms with the fact that we are being targeted by Islamic militants whose ideology — if not their methods — are shared by a broad mainstream of the world’s Muslims. Further, we lack the conviction and confidence that our way of life — the commitment to individual liberty, freedom of conscience, freedom of expression, equality of opportunity — is superior and worth defending on that basis.

We should unapologetically take note of the fact that we are being targeted for mass-murder attacks by Muslim terrorists and for gradual extinction by Islamist theorists (e.g., the Muslim Brotherhood’s Yusuf Qaradawi).  That should inform our foreign policy and our immigration policy.

Regimes such as the Saudi government that support the Muslim Brotherhood and its “voluntary apartheid” strategy for destroying the West are our enemies, not our allies.  And the Constitution is not a suicide pact:  it does not require us to permit entry into our country, or maintain within our country, aliens who are not committed to the principles that are the backbone of our way of life. If you’re an alien who thinks sharia should be the law of the United States, you’re entitled to that viewpoint, but you’re wrong and we don’t need to have you here.

There’s no “marketplace of ideas” justification for making the country a safe-haven and breeding ground for people who want to destroy it.

FP: Andrew C. McCarthy, thank you for joining Frontpage Interview.

  • bubba4

    “The much bigger problem is the failure to come to terms with the fact that we are being targeted by Islamic militants whose ideology — if not their methods — are shared by a broad mainstream of the world’s Muslims.”

    What would be do different if we “realized” this little tidbit. I hope this guys understands that there are plently of people in America that will lash out violently against “dark” foreigners without much discrimination. Just ask the Indian store owners in New York who had their stores trashed because they came from “over there”. Maybe he is suggesting that we make Islam illegal? I mean, how else do you stop it…and if they are all violent…isn't that the smartest thing to do?

    “Further, we lack the conviction and confidence that our way of life — the commitment to individual liberty, freedom of conscience, freedom of expression, equality of opportunity — is superior and worth defending on that basis.”

    We all think defending America is “worth” it. The neocon Christian “exceptionalist” in this country would add a few things to that list though.

  • Robert Bernier

    Wow! Read this one. It is really good. And this gentleman says it just like it is.

    This venerable and much honored WW II vet is well known in Hawaii
    for his seventy-plus years of service to patriotic organizations and causes all over the country. A humble man without a political bone in his body, he has never spoken out before about a government official, until now. He dictated this letter to a friend, signed it and mailed it to the president. Consult : http://xrl.us/bgeewc

  • Robert Bernier

    Every American should know the truth

    No one should miss this video:

    http://xrl.us/bf29mb

    Look to the end ( 10 min.)

  • CowboyUp

    Oh really, who have the dp running DC today ever thought were worth defending America against, the Serbs?

    More innocent people were murdered over an obviously impossible rumour (spread by an American msm outlet) of a koran being flushed down a toilet at Club Gitmo (over 70 documented cases), than over the 9/11 attacks (in which 1 Sikh mistaken for for an Arab was murdered).

  • SamBlue

    ROVERT BERNIER–WHOEVER YOU ARE–WOW!–WHY DO YOU CONTINUE TO KEEP SAYING THIS??Wow! Read this one. It is really good. And this gentleman says it just like it is. This venerable and much honored WW II vet is well known in Hawaiifor his seventy-plus years of service to patriotic organizations and causes all over the country. A humble man without a political bone in his body, he has never spoken out before about a government official, until now. He dictated this letter to a friend, signed it and mailed it to the president. Consult : <a href="http://xrl.us/bgeewchttp://xrl.us/bgeewc<br />LikeReportCancelMore ▼ Logged in as SamBlue Robert Bernier 9 hours ago Every American should know the truth

    • http://www.facebook.com/ Paulina

      Your posting really srtaitghneed me out. Thanks!

  • winoceros

    bubba4 has a valid point, only in that a politcal will to separate and deport by religion isn't really an American way to do things.

    What should be done, though, is to disallow acts of politcal Islam (it's really all the same, but it should be defined this way for American sensibilities). People can practice whatever privately-held beliefs they like. They may not, however, engage in political acts that are contrary to the Constitution.

    The footbaths have to go.
    The minarets have to go.
    The licenses of those cabbies in Minneapolis should have been immediately revoked.
    Qurans must be removed from our public libraries and schools as their incitement to violate human rights is unacceptable. Parents that make children wear hijab should be arrested for child abuse, as hijab is a political statement about the place of women in society. Women who want to wear it on their own, fine. Accusations of enforcement of hijab will result in arrest of the enforcer. This kind of thing.

    Islam may be appealing as a personal faith to those who do not read and understand the fullness of its sharia. That's just fine. Misguided, but fine. Anyone who attempts to act on full adherance to its ideology is in for a world of “no” in my suggested solution.

  • USMCSniper

    Alex Eptstein says:

    The Koran is replete with calls to take up arms in Islam's name: “fight and slay the Pagans wherever you find them . . . those who reject our signs we shall soon cast into the fire . . . those who disbelieve, garments of fire will be cut out for them; boiling fluid will be poured down on their heads . . . as to the deviators, they are the fuel of hell.”

    These ideas easily lead to fanaticism and terrorism. In fact, what is often referred to as the “fanaticism” of many Muslims is explicitly endorsed by their religion. Consider the following characteristics of religious fanatics. The fanatic demands unquestioning obedience to religious dogma — so does Islam. The fanatic cannot be reasoned with, because he rejects reason — so does Islam. The fanatic eagerly embraces any call to impose his dogma by force on those who will not adopt it voluntarily — so does Islam.

    The terrorists are not “un-Islamic” bandits who have “hijacked a great religion”; they are consistent and serious followers of their religion – Islam, the enemy of western civilozation.

  • Cabby – AZ

    How refreshing to read the interview with Andrew McCarthy! Thankfully there are
    those individuals in our country who have wisdom and perception to evaluate the
    situation this country is facing. Although, of course, there are many ramifications
    involved (constitutional rights such as freedom of religion, speech, etc) we are talk-
    ing now about the security and safety of the USA here and now. Isn't the main
    responsibility of the federal government to protect and defend this country? Now
    we have a President, who, for whatever underlying reasons, isn't even able to de-
    fine the enemy, let alone proceed with responsible action. Somehow, he didn't
    even begin to sense the gravity of the situation. Otherwise, why would he wait
    three days to respond to the nation? That behavior is very telltale. We have
    heard, such as it was, from Janet Napolitano, but has anyone heard anything
    from Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton? We had better awaken quickly before
    it is too late!

  • Mustafa Alakf

    Mr. Andrew C. McCarthy is completely mistaken by comparing the peaceful and democratic Republic of Somaliland which itself is a victim of terrorist bombing on 29
    October of 2008 to Afganistan and Yemen.May be he ment Somalia.Somaliland is
    different than Somalia.I hope a correction would be made immediately so as not to
    tarnish the reputation of our peaceful country and our peace loving people unintentionally.

  • johncarens

    Janet Napolitano's statement about “The System Working” is actually quite revealing. In the minds of the radicalized Stalinist Left in this country, “The System” did work exactly as designed:

    1) It has farmed out the muddy, plodding work of securing American soil to transnational organizations. Who would think American safety would depend on Nigerian bankers or Dutch filmmakers? But, now it does. This is how “The System” works.

    But, “The System” also worked as diagrammed mainly because:

    2)We've employed tens of thousands of useless bureaucrats, purchased billions of dollars of useless assets and federally annexed entire functions of American business titans (mainly, allowing federal pencil-necks to determine who can and who cannot board a privately owned aircraft.)

    Also, “The System” worked because the federal government has thoroughly cowed the overly-pliant citizenry into bending to their will.

    It cannot be overstated that Secretary Napolitano's first statement about “The System” working was dead-on…

    …for the Stalinist Radical Left.

  • SamBlue

    It's time for rational Moslems–perhaps an oxymoron–to start to question their own totalitarian faith.Time for true Reform. Incidentally, every movement to take over the “planet” [sic]–Nazism, Communism–eventually goes down to defeat. With the first — WWII; the second–The Cold War. In antiquity–the Roman Empire. it eventuallu morphned into Christianity. It may not be as simple with Islam bcause of its widespread practice. Even if, G-d forbid, it was to conquer, it wouild eventually implode by its own conttradictions–its internecimne and fratricidal tribal wars and killings. But meanwhile the deaths of millions of innocent human beings wriught by that “religion of peace.”

  • Lary9

    bubba~
    I understand your point though I have little sympathy for it. The fact is what this author says is quite true:
    “we are being targeted by Islamic militants whose ideology — if not their methods — are shared by a broad mainstream of the world’s Muslims.”
    Look. Do the math> 1.5 billion Muslims x 20% [est.percent] =0.3 billion potentially active jihadists=300 million hostile global followers of the Quran's Surrahs of the Sword. That doesn't account for 40% of the remaining 1,200 million in scattered, unorganized sleeper cells which, with proper doctrinal education plus motivation, will be coming out to play tomorrow. Listen. I'm a sensitive guy. Some people even think I'm a regular teddy bear. But I'm not turning my back on any taquiyya-spewing, finger-jabbing, sword-brandishing fanatics any time soon. I'd have to be crazy not just crazy and liberal.

  • mikeman

    The left is effective at gaming the system, and they can win elections. But beyond being effective liars, these clowns are completely inept. Yes, obama is an embarassment, bowing and apologizing to our enemies, but take it a few levels down from commandante zero. Did napolitano really say the 9/11 bombers were from Canada? I keep hearing this, but even for a politically correct putz like janet, this is just too ridiculous.

    Many thanks to Andrew McCarthy, and please keep the fight going. Knee clasping milksops like zero, pelosi, reed ( hell the whole democratic party ), will soon be in the unemployment line.

  • jason_gray

    “we lack the conviction and confidence that our way of life — the commitment to individual liberty, freedom of conscience, freedom of expression, equality of opportunity — is superior and worth defending on that basis.”

    not all of us do. and the silent majority is waking up and starting to speak loudly.

  • turbeaux

    This guy gets it. He really, really gets it.

    Currently, every leading Republican Party spokesman and potential presidential candidate, including Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, Rudi Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, etc., etc., etc. still buys into the model whereby Islam is a Religion of Peace™ and the vast overwhelming majority of Muslims in the world today are peaceful and moderate. Yet, that model is a complete and utter sham.

    People like Andrew McCarthy, Steven Emerson, Robert Spencer, Diana West, and Pamela Geller, to name a few who really gets it needs to meet with all the leading Republican Party spokesman and potential presidential candidates to teach, educate, and demonstrate to them that the aforementioned model that underpins their worldviews is wrong and is in fact a sham.

    Leading personalities on the right like Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, and many others, also to include many leading journalists on the right as well, needs to be educated in this matter as well. Otherwise, we will remain forever blind and continue the current failed strategies being applied today which plays right into the hands of our Islamic enemies.

    Additionally, while it is of paramount importance that we protect ourselves from Islamic terrorism, at the same time we must also realize and understand that most of the jihad that takes place around the world happens via non-violent stealth means of jihad of which the employment of demographic conquest and the use of the money weapon are two of those primary means.

  • davorino

    Ya, well the neocoMs would have us subtract a few things from that list which will get us all killed, thank you.

    But hey, at least we will be seen as a sophisticated nation with principles.

  • elizabethwerner

    “failure to come to terms with the fact that we are being targeted by Islamic militants whose ideology — if not their methods — are shared by a broad mainstream of the world’s Muslims”

    Until the people elect leaders who are willing to confront the teachings of the Koran head on – this problem is going to grow. Where are those leaders? (we're all in trouble) The colleges are infested with professors who not only refuse the truth about Islam's teachings but will attack anyone who puts forth any evidence (verses from the Koran). Even the so-called (self-professing) 'Christian' kings of this world have stepped forth to defend Islam, ignoring the fact that the Koran calls the Son of God an abomination (go figure).

    Bear with me here…

    Taught in the Koran:

    009.004 But the treaties are not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term.

    009.005 But when the forbidden months are past {when the 'treaties' expire, although they may break them at any time – if it benefits Islam} then fight ''''''and slay'''''''' the Pagans [non-muslims] wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war.

    008.067 It is not fitting for a prophet that he should have prisoners of war [slay them first] until he hath thoroughly subdued the land. {Treason in all non-Muslim nations (and Genocide)

    033.061 They shall have a curse on them: whenever they are found, they shall be seized and slain without mercy. {Genocidal teaching – no matter how you look at it!

    There's more. But who needs more? Then there are those who spout “Christianity is no better”….which offers no solution to the problem, but rather, an excuse for Islam to continue in its bloody attacks.

    What should we expect if those teachings of the Koran are fed to the young? Why is the Koran legal in the U.S. ?

    In a court of law – is it legal to yell fire in a theater when there is no fire?

    Since when did it become legal to incite the many into carrying out vicious violence?

    Where are the lawyers at? and where are the decent judges at?

    I will not be silent (no matter how 'unpopular' my voice may sound) nor will i have any pity when the bloodshed reaches the families of those who are in power to do something about this problem – but refused.

    The Koran teaches…
    Beheadings (047.004) – Racism (005.041) – Gang Rape (033.052) – Crucifixions (005.033) – Genocide (033.061) – Treason – (008.067)

    The tree is known by his fruit – and we reap what we sow. Where is the wisdom of this world?

    Are those teachings of the Koran good for the young? (the next generation).

    When enough people care to rise up with an ear-deafening roar (cause that's what it's gonna take – which is a shame)…only then will the possiblity exist for the power to BAN the Koran which is Islam.

  • MaryAnn

    American constitutional rights apply to those people who accept the principles which those rights protect. They do not apply to those who use those rights to undermine and ultimately “fundamentally change America”. The idea and the principles of America were in place before the constitution was written. It was written and accepted by Americans because they already believed in those principles. Obama has already stated that he believes our constitution is a stumbling block for the fundamental domestic change he seeks to cram down our throats. It is no surprise, or it should not be a surprise, that he views our constitution the same way in terms of foreign policy.

  • DemocracyFirst

    “What would be do different if we “realized” this little tidbit.

    Good question.

    Because this is war and not a civil matter, we`d act as such. We`d start by profiling, unapologetically. We`d monitor mosques and Islamic organizations, unapologetically. Our public officials and government would openly expect the Islamic community at home to throw out extremist imams, moderate teachings in islamic schools, support freedom of religion in their home countries, and, certainly not least of all, monitor and report all suspicious people in their communties. All non apologetically. Genuinely moderate, patriotic, democratically minded Muslims, will not object, because they`d be protecting their nation, their fellow Americans and their cherished freedoms no less than anyone else`s.

    As for this, `The neocon Christian “exceptionalist” in this country would add a few things to that list though.

    Not true. The Bush admin had many neo-conservative Christians. It and they added nothing to that list. It is a liberal myth and liberal propaganda that neo-Conservative Christians are generally seeking Christian theocracy. Instead, better than most identifiable groups, they have not lost touch with fundamental American values and common sense. And this I say as someone neither Christian nor religious.

  • trapper

    The Democrats should replace the donkey with the ostrich as their symbol.