Islamic or Islamist – words matter
Author: Bill Johnson  


We just finished our June newsletter;  a bigger struggle than usual as we grappled with the “take” on President Trump’s Mideast strategy and his speech in Saudi Arabia. His use of the descriptive verbiage, i.e. using Islamic extremism as opposed to Islamist in his speech in Riyadh is one of the main points that has come to the forefront.  Why?

If you haven’t listened to it as yet, it is worth your time.

Please note the following from an article from one of America’s foremost experts on Islam, Andrew C. McCarthy (former Federal Prosecutor who prosecuted the Blind Sheik).  He is a regular contributor to Frank Gaffney’s daily radio broadcast. 

He writes in yesterday’s National Review:

There was much ado in the lead up and delivery of Trump’s speech regarding how he would describe the phenomenon he labeled “radical Islamic terrorism” throughout the 2016 campaign — ridiculing the craven political correctness of rivals who shied away from this terminology. …

…. national-security adviser H. R. McMaster is said to be repulsed by the term “radical Islamic terrorism,” apparently seeing it as needlessly provocative.Other Trump strategists, who supported the campaign’s promise to be unflinching in illustrating the nexus between Islamic scripture and Muslim terrorism, strongly favor the term. Trump, who simultaneously wants (a) profitable relations with the Saudis, (b) the refutation of claims that he is anti-Muslim, and (c) credit for being honest about the connection between Islam and terror, seems torn.

The intramural squabble was evident during the speech. As prepared, the text had the president calling for “honestly confronting the crisis of Islamist extremism and the Islamist terror groups it inspires” (emphasis added). But when he actually delivered his remarks, Trump departed from the script, speaking instead of “honestly confronting the crisis of Islamic extremism and the Islamists and Islamic terror of all kinds.” An unidentified aide insisted to the New York Times that the president was “exhausted” and simply misspoke when he invoked “Islamic.” To the contrary, I believe he is struggling to resolve this tension. As I pointed out prior to his inauguration, however, it is unclear that Trump grasps why the tension is significant: For him, it may reflect concern over the inevitable criticism if he abandons hot campaign rhetoric, not over whether the distinction between Islamic and Islamist is viable. We draw this distinction out of a conviction that Islam the religion should not be confounded with Islamism the political ideology.This conviction may be more a matter of wishful thinking than anything that can be called “realism.” That is manifest when we review the afore-described State Department guidance. Intolerance of non-Muslims and subjugation of women is not a reflection of jihadist “extremism”; it is mainstream Islamas practiced and codified in sharia societies.

Read more at:

I tell my staff and my family that the reason I am so attuned to this continued unfolding of the expansion of the Muslim Brotherhood (and ISLAM), is that I never want to be seen by my loved ones as being as millions in Nazi Germany - seeing, but not seeing. 

I encourage you – please  take this seriously. 

Daniel Horowitz, chief editor of Conservative Review, speaks into this important matter on his  podcast – ISLAM IS ISLAM.

Our President needs our prayers for wisdom, understanding, and to diligently know the difference between those who would lead us astray from that which is constitutional and that which is not; that which is wise and that which is “swamp-like.”

Just because we want President Trump to be “right” on this vitally important fight doesn’t mean he is.  There are those within his administration who hold the “politically correct’ view of Islam (such as National Security Advisor McMaster), that I contend Trump is being mislead by.

Yesterday’s email.

Many brought good cheer with kindly words regarding my sharing my happy moment from yesterday.

If you would like to receive our monthly newsletter, email Kim and ask to be added to our list at:

To support our efforts please click here or mail your gift to American Decency Association (ADA), PO Box 202, Fremont, MI 49412.  

American Decency Association is a member of the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability.


  ADA: on  Status: on

comments powered by Disqus