Jindal’s Brilliant Take on Radical Islam

The problem and solution reside with the people of the Islamic religion themselves.

By Larry Kudlow, NRO

Jindal‘Let’s be honest here. Islam has a problem.”

Those are key sentences in an incredibly hard-hitting speech that Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal will give in London on Monday. It is the toughest speech I have read on the whole issue of Islamic radicalism and its destructive, murdering, barbarous ways which are upsetting the entire world.

Early in the speech Jindal says he’s not going to be politically correct. And he uses the term “radical Islamists” without hesitation, placing much of the blame for the Paris murders and all radical Islamist terrorism on a refusal of Muslim leaders to denounce these acts.

Jindal says, “Muslim leaders must make clear that anyone who commits acts of terror in the name of Islam is in fact not practicing Islam at all. If they refuse to say this, then they are condoning these acts of barbarism. There is no middle ground.”

Then he adds, specifically, “Muslim leaders need to condemn anyone who commits these acts of violence and clearly state that these people are evil and are enemies of Islam. It’s not enough to simply condemn violence, they must stand up and loudly proclaim that these people are not martyrs who will receive a reward in the afterlife, and rather they are murderers who are going to hell. If they refuse to do that, then they’re part of the problem. There is no middle ground here.”

I want to know who in the Muslim community in the United States has said this. Which leaders? I don’t normally cover this beat, so I may well have missed it. Hence I ask readers to tell me if so-called American Muslim leaders have said what Governor Jindal is saying.

And by the way, what Bobby Jindal is saying is very similar to what Egyptian president al-Sisi said earlier in the year to a group of Muslim imams.

Said al-Sisi, “It’s inconceivable that the thinking we hold most sacred should cause the entire umma [Islamic world] to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world.”

He then asks, “How is it possible that 1.6 billion Muslims should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants — that is 7 billion — so that they themselves may live?” He concludes, if this is not changed, “it may eventually lead to the religion’s self destruction.”

That’s President al-Sisi of Egypt, which I believe has the largest Muslim population in the world.

And what Jindal and al-Sisi are saying is not so different from the thinking of French intellectual Bernard-Henri Lévy. Writing in the Wall Street Journal, he calls the Charlie Hebdo murders “the Churchillian moment of France’s Fifth Republic.” He essentially says France and the world must slam “the useful idiots of a radical Islam immersed in the sociology of poverty and frustration.” He adds, “Those whose faith is Islam must proclaim very loudly, very often, and in great numbers their rejection of this corrupt and abject form of theocratic passion. . . . Islam must be freed from radical Islam.”

So three very different people — a young southern governor who may run for president, the political leader of the largest Muslim population in the world, and a prominent Western European intellectual — are saying that most of the problem and most of the solution rests with the people of the Islamic religion themselves. If they fail to take action, the radicals will swallow up the whole religion and cause the destruction of the entire Middle East and possibly large swaths of the rest of the world.

Lévy called this a Churchillian moment. And London mayor Boris Johnson argues in his book The Churchill Factor that Winston Churchill was the most important 20th century figure because his bravery in 1940 stopped the triumph of totalitarianism. So today’s battle with the Islamic radicals is akin to the Cold War battle of freedom vs. totalitarianism.

But returning to Governor Jindal, the U.S. is not helpless. Jindal argues that America must restore its proper leadership role in international affairs. (Of course, Obama has taken us in the opposite direction, and won’t even use the phrase “Islamic radicals.”) And Jindal invokes Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher by saying, “The tried and true prescription must be employed again: a strong economy, a strong military, and leaders willing and able to assert moral, economic, and military leadership in the cause of freedom.”

Reagan always argued that weakness at home leads to weakness abroad. A strong growing economy provides the resources for military and national security. Right now we’re uncomfortably close to having neither.

This is the great challenge of our time. In the early years of the 21st century, it appears the great goal of our age is the defeat of radical Islam.

Jindal gets it.

January 20, 2015 | 15 Comments »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

15 Comments / 15 Comments

  1. @ Not Ovenready:

    “Back in 2008 I felt that McCain should have picked Jindal as VP.

    There would have been a cry against Jindal’s eligibility. This could have been directly countered by a SERIOUS investigation of Obama’s birth cert issue, and might have led to an interesting outcome….”

    Yes, but Jindal had become governor of Louisiana only earlier that same year; under the circumstances, he’d have been accused of being only an ambitious ladder-climber w/o serious intentions about the office he’d recently won. He’d had only one term in the House to point to in his behalf by way of any other elective office, all other govt work consisting only of appointed positions for the state & for GWB’s admin.

    On reflection, I’ve no doubt that McCain chose right in tapping Palin. His mistake was NOT in his selection of running mate, but in letting his advisors tie her hands in the campaign, and then failing to cover her back from Demo snipers & the Demo cheering section represented by MSM. Much wiser would have been to give Gov Palin “her head,” if you know the expression. (Do you ride horses?)

    Anyway, Jindal now has a solid record as CEO of a state that’d had a helluva time w/ Katrina before he entered the governor’s mansion — and he gets a lot of credit for his work as Gov during Hurricane Gustav (evacuated a cpl million people) and for dealing effectively w/ the BP oil spill of 2010. Now, he’s no longer just a rising star, but a major player.

  2. @ yamit82:

    “Playing apologist for your ideological pets once again?”

    “I don’t have pets, little man. But I do see clearly. Jindal needs to play his cards right; so far, he’s been pretty good at the playing…”

    “Don’t all politicians”

    No, in point of fact, they don’t all play; and those that do don’t all play well.

    “it’s a given.”

    Only for the successful ones.

    “Wipe the snot from your nose, Huff’n’puff; it’s gumming up your keyboard.”

    “More ref to bodily fluids?”

    To yours, yes. They keep showing up in the weirdest places, yours & those of your tag-tam partner.

    “Your weird fetish fixation…”

    Nope; no fetishes here. It’s you who needs the sexual releases — and it’s the NEED (not the releases themselves), that opens you up to things like fetishes. They typically play no part in the life of one who doesn’t need the releases.

    “… weird fetish fixation is bursting forth from your sick mind once again.”

    Ah, yes, there’s just no psychobabble like the psychobabble from a babbling psycho. (Indeed, ONE of us most assuredly DOES have a sick mind.)

    “If you had prefaced your opinion with words like I think or I believe, then it’s your opinion that would be taken for that but you state opinions as fact and it’s not necessarily so, Laura believed he was being politically correct or that he actually believes his stated limitation re: Isam vs radical Islam”

    She neither said nor suggested anything about Gov. Jindal ‘believing’ his “stated limitation.”

    But this is utterly beside the point. You’re such a phony, Huff’n’puff. Laura didn’t go thru the motions — any more than I did — of prefacing HER words w/ silly formalities like “I think” or “I believe.” In fact, she was quite definitive & unequivocal about stating what she did state as a FACT (as was entirely proper).

    Yet you didn’t get down on her for the ‘omission’ of your obligatory preface; only me. I repeat: You’re not genuine, buster — you’re a thoroughly transparent, 24-karat fake. It’s amazing that people let you get by with petty, and unmistakably selective shit like this.

    “I was correct…”

    You’ve YET to be correct about me; and this instance was no exception to the rule (in fact, quite the contrary, it was EMBLEMATIC).

    “You defended him with no corroberating evidence…”

    I had said, “The thing to do now is to watch what he does with that posture; adopt a wait-&-see attitude.” What part of “wait & see” do you not understand?

    “… and as usual uyou are just being an apologist for a converted Hindu to your beloved christianity.”

    No, as usual, I’m seeing the bigger picture: Jindal was raised in a household of immigrant Indians undoubtedly well acquainted with the Muslim problem. And as a christian-by-choice in that same Indian immigrant household, he moreover is quite likely to have had his own encounter with Islam from an added perspective.

    Nor do I have a thing for [what is called] “Christianity.”

    What I HAVE had is a bellyful of bigots, however, and WHATEVER name they call themselves, they all have the same characteristic stink.

    — Seems like I can’t have even the most passing encounter with one or another of them w/o feeling like I need to find a stick to clean something off the sole of my shoe.

    “You love inventing narratives to justify your existence.”

    My existence doesn’t require justification.

    You, OTOH, do indeed seem hung-up on inventing narratives — about YoursTruly in particular — to justify your OWN existence.

    After you blow your nose, suggest soaking your head. (SOMETHING’s gotta make it possible for you to get it thru the doorway.)

  3. Back in 2008 I felt that McCain should have picked Jindal as VP.
    1- He would have secured a lot of the ‘brown’ and ‘minority vote. (You’d be surprised how many non-liberal Orientals and Indians (Asian that is) voted for Obama because of his ‘minority’ appeal.
    2- There would have been a cry against Jindal’s eligibility. This could have been directly countered by a SERIOUS investigation of Obama’s birth cert issue, and might have led to an interesting outcome….just saying.

  4. dweller Said:

    But I do see clearly. Jindal needs to play his cards right; so far, he’s been pretty good at the playing. The thing to do now is to watch what he does with that posture; adopt a wait-&-see attitude.

    Don’t all politicians it’s a given.

    dweller Said:

    Wipe the snot from your nose, Huff’n’puff; it’s gumming up your keyboard.

    More ref to bodily fluids??? Your weird fetish fixation is bursting forth from your sick mind once again.

    If you had prefaced your opinion with words like I think or I believe, then it’s your opinion that would be taken for that but you state opinions as fact and it’s not necessarily so, Laura believed he was being politically correct or that he actually believes his stated limitation re: Isam vs radical Islam, You defended him with no corroberating evidence to the fact which placed it in the categorty of opinionated speculation. I was correct and as usual uyou are just being an apologist for a converted Hindu to your beloved christianity. SOP for you.

    You love inventing narratives to justify your existence.

  5. @ yamit82:

    “Playing apologist for your ideological pets once again?”

    I don’t have pets, little man.

    But I do see clearly. Jindal needs to play his cards right; so far, he’s been pretty good at the playing. The thing to do now is to watch what he does with that posture; adopt a wait-&-see attitude.

    “Laura is correct…”

    I said that already.

    — If you weren’t so hell-bent on getting in a dig, you’d have noticed that.

    “…and your take is speculative…”

    EVERYBODY’s take on this is speculative at this point. BFD.

    “… as usual.”

    No, not ‘as usual.’

    I’m speculative when speculation is called for

    — as it is here.

    Wipe the snot from your nose, Huff’n’puff; it’s gumming up your keyboard.

  6. @ Laura:

    “But these statements in fact DO amount to political correctness. The Muslims committing acts of terror are indeed practicing authentic Islam. And jindal’s use of the term ‘radical IslamIST” is also political correctness. It is Islam, period. Islamist is an invented term. And they aren’t radicals, they are simply devout Muslims. So even those purporting to strike a blow against political correctness and speaking the truth, wind up engaging in political correctness themselves.”

    You’re correct, but he’s a politician who knows that if he gets out TOO far in front of his audience at any given moment, he risks losing them before he can bring them along to where he wants to go . . . .

    Jindal is the stateside-born son of Hindu Indian immigrants, and is himself a Xtn convert from an early age. It’s not unreasonable to suspect that he knows damned well that the problem isn’t ‘radical islam’ but ISLAM.

  7. Bobby Jindal is on Neil Cavuto telling him ‘no go’ zones in fact exist! Hurray for Bobby Jindal not backing down on this issue. Cavuto is a tool.

  8. Early in the speech Jindal says he’s not going to be politically correct. And he uses the term “radical Islamists” without hesitation, placing much of the blame for the Paris murders and all radical Islamist terrorism on a refusal of Muslim leaders to denounce these acts.

    Jindal says, “Muslim leaders must make clear that anyone who commits acts of terror in the name of Islam is in fact not practicing Islam at all. If they refuse to say this, then they are condoning these acts of barbarism. There is no middle ground.”

    But these statements in fact DO amount to political correctness. The Muslims committing acts of terror are indeed practicing authentic Islam. And jindal’s use of the term ‘radical IslamIST” is also political correctness. It is Islam, period. Islamist is an invented term. And they aren’t radicals, they are simply devout Muslims. So even those purporting to strike a blow against political correctness and speaking the truth, wind up engaging in political correctness themselves.

  9. America needs to become a center of immigration and organization for every Muslim who is seeking to reform the religion. Those people are already dead meat in their countries of origin, due to their apostasy. Therefore, America should take them in and support their efforts. Indeed, that would be no different than other waves of immigration into America where those who were politically disenfranchised chose to put down new roots: Pilgrims, Catholics, Irish, Russians, Eastern Europeans, Cubans, Jews, etc.

    But this door should swing both ways. We must overcome our political correctness so that we may discharge anyone who supports triumphalist Islam. The courts will have to accept the concept of America being at war with violent Islam and permit the expulsion of anyone of Muslim faith who speaks of overthrowing, replacing or modifying American society. Even fully American citizens should be coerced into choosing a new country more accepting of their views. What is forbidden in peace is frequently permitted in wartime. If we are not at war, then, tell me, what is the nature of the present conflict we are all feeling. Must we wash our hands with our blood spilled in our streets before taking logical actions?

  10. We need more people in the public arena who like Governor Jindal are not afraid to tell the truth about the fraud the Religion Peace is.
    If they really believe that dying as a martyr will be rewarded It’s not enough to simply condemn violence, they must stand up and loudly proclaim that these people are not martyrs who will receive a reward in the afterlife, and rather they are murderers who are going to hell.
    How about a doses of reality. Before anyone go to war against these vermin. We could defend ourselves from the jihadist. If they could be castrated or use as a target their family jewels. Perhaps their Imans ought to tell them to forget about the 72 virgins expected in Paradise. Without a reward they could be dissuaded from becoming a terrorist. See how many of our children we would be saving. If they decide to live in spite of the condition, it will result in effective family planning. So far the resulting vermin they produce have failed to impress the western world. No Noble Prices amongst them. Only murderous barbarians who plot against our society. Against the best of a productive society and our women and children.
    They attack our future by attacking our children.
    More honesty from our press and political leaders.