Naming Names


Pages: 1 2

We are also seeing some of our elites actually sliding back to the pre-9-11 complacency and worse. The Fort Hood massacre occurred because the US Army did not want to discipline an obviously Islamist major who decided his primary allegiance was to his extremist vision of Allah, and not to the United States. Yet, he was not disciplined because people were afraid they would be called Islamophobic, as if they had some “phobia” or unreasoning fear of Muslims. That is the sad truth. A Senate report confirms that the 13 people who were murdered at Fort Hood should not have died.

We are seeing not Islamophobia, but Islamophilia, a kind of phony love or protection of anything Islamic—even when it is a clearly extreme vision of Islam. That is why we see supposed CIA analyses that Iran is not working on nuclear weapons. Well, if they were working on a civilian nuclear power, then why do we see no preparation for nuclear powered electric grids and why were they hiding all their preparations?  These analysts see only positive intentions, but these are the same people—or their ideological descendants– who in 1978 thought that Khomeini was a moderate. Many people have lost heir lives because of this stupidity, but those analysts kept their jobs.

FP: Are you concerned about what some of your targets might do?

Widlanski: No, I can back up everything I wrote. This book was thoroughly vetted by legal experts. I nail down all of my charges with copious source notes.  These sources are an integral part of the book. And as I said, this book has been vetted legally by one of the best publishers in the business. We spent months checking and double-checking. I am not worried. If any of the people at the New York Times or CNN, Columbia or Georgetown, the CIA or the State Department would like to engage me in debate, they will find that I am prepared. And they will lose. Inshallah. That is Arabic for God-willing. And I am willing to hold the discussion in Arabic if that makes them feel more comfortable.

FP: What research went into this work?

Widlanski: The book is based on a lot of research. In the largest sense, it is about more than 30 years of primary and secondary research, including my own experiences as a reporter for The New York Times, Cox Newspapers, as a student and lecturer at universities such as Columbia —from which I have three degrees, and as a soldier and security official on the ground in the Middle East—in Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Israel and Jordan.

FP: What solutions do you suggest for dealing with the dangers and dilemmas we face?

Widlanski: We have to understand the methods and ideologies of the newest generations of terrorists, most of whom are Arab-Islamic terrorists. We have to give our security and law enforcement officials the right training and good intelligence. We have to invest in education, real education, open-minded education, not politically correct and ideologically vetted professors who were taught that “jihad” only means a spiritual journey. As someone who speaks Arabic, let me assure Frontpage readers, that all Arabs know that the common meaning of jihad is a physical war, a holy war, to expand the borders of Islam.

FP: Dr. Michael Widlanski, thank you for joining Frontpage Interview.

We encourage all of our readers to get their hands on: Battle for Our Minds: Western Elites and the Terror Threat!

To order it, click here.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Pages: 1 2

  • Rivkah F.

    Thank you Dr. Widlanski. But I fear that your important book will be ignored because so many of those elites do not want to face the truth.

  • maturin20

    We can also make a list of alarmists posing as American nationals, such as Frank Gaffney, Michael Ledeen, David Brooks, Reuel Gerecht, John Podhoretz, and many, many more. It would make a fine deportation list.

    • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLNn2YflwNs Roger

      Are you going to deport Reagan too?
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detai

    • YetWave

      How do you conflate those who speak authoritatively about the threat of jihad to the west as 'alarmist'.? Those whom you claim to be 'posing as American nationals' speak not only for the US (American is a continent, not a nation; try telling an educated Mexican he or she is not American) but for the west.
      Don't pass your ignorance of islamism off on those who would seek to caution of its peril

      • maturin20

        The last time someone spoke authoritatively about the threat of Jihad to the west was Zbigniew Brzezinski, architect of Al Qaeda. He said a few upset Muslims was worth the price of winning the Cold War, and they can't really harm us. He was far from alarmist.

        I do not think Michelle Gellar or Robert Spencer are authoritative speakers about the threat of Jihad. They seem to be on their own Jihad.

        Why throw in the red herring of Mexicans? I can't say "America" now?

        • YetWave

          Brzezinski, wasn't he the national security adviser to that paragon of national interest, Jimmuh Cartuh? Brzezinski wasn't alarmist, just wrong.

          That you are more often wrong than right doesn't stop you from saying anything.

          • maturin20

            I think a hawkish and steely polish gentleman who handed the USSR a defeat in Afghanistan with Islamic freedom fighters knows a little more than you about the "Muslim Menace."

  • maturin20

    For being a Christian? No. He's dead, anyway.

  • flyingtiger

    I am thinking of buying this book.

  • maturin20

    No, actually I think I will continue on in the United States and enjoy making fun of the barbarians who want us to build The Third Temple using our tax money.

  • John

    Only way a 3rd temple is coming is a world wide war, an earthquake or the 2nd coming.

    I am not holding my breath on the latter 2 & neither should you. You should get out more. You are very parochial in your thinking.

  • maturin20

    The cowardice is really a function of the fact that none of these people want to box.

  • maturin20

    I am parochial? What would the more cosmopolitan view be?