How Should We Define the Islamist Challenge to U.S. Security?

Frank J. Gaffney, the founder and president of the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C., lists five principles of challenge to America's security in order to counter the pernicious influence of Islamism. Most them deal with the Islamist challenge of violent Jihad, homeland security, and relations with both friends, allies, and enemies that are located OUTSIDE U.S. territorial borders. Indeed the principles and problems he lists are strategic and important to the security of the United States.

As do many others, Mr. Gaffney limits his definition of security challenges to those topics that have rivited the attention of the American public for more than two years: threats of violence, WMDs, the economy, war, politics, and diplomacy, overlooking and failing to see the slow, insidious attempts at change of American civil and constitutional law and institutions that could be more dangerous than terrorism.

A for instance: Is the country more secure when public school children are exposed to curricula that deconstructs American values, that puts hating America first while ridiculing America's founding fathers and founding ideas? Can America continue as America if school children no longer value America's ideals that are being co-opted and twisted by hostile and unfriendly movements.

Our attention has been fixed on the most immediate problems that have to do with security from violence so much that we haven't recognized danger by the teaming of the Left that has teamed up with Islamo-fascism to overthrow freedom and liberty in the United States. This tag team has worked silently in small steps, entering universities, large corporations, government agencies, public school systems, the military and border patrols, as well as the halls of power in Congress and has made attempts at the Oval Office itself. While we were looking at the forest of terrorism, we failed to see individuals that are affecting quiet and pervasive changes that are not in the best interest of the United States, all done in the name of tolerance and a variety of "isms," including that of multiculturalism and post-modern, deconstructivism, and relativistic philosophies, all very suprising as the totalitarianism Lefitst-Marxism and Islamist extremism tolerate neither multiculturalim nor relativism.

Security is not oobtained only through prevention of war and terrorism. Secure people are able to live in manner that allows them to persue their objectives in a cooperative manner with their neighbors. The trick is to convince your neighbors that your objectives are best for them. Post-moden multicultural Lefists and Islamo-fascists have slowly and quietly been working to convince us that their agenda is best for America. Clearly it is not.