Pentagon fires expert on Islamic extremism for being anti-Islamic. Huh? (1 Viewer)

DadsDream

Dreaming of a SAINTS Super Bowl!
Joined
Jul 9, 2001
Messages
41,574
Reaction score
6,200
Location
Hancock County
Offline
Seems a DOD Muslim staffer accused the guy of being a Christian zealot.

WASHINGTON TIMES
Inside the Ring
By Bill Gertz
January 4, 2008
Coughlin sacked


Stephen Coughlin, the Pentagon specialist on Islamic law and Islamist extremism, has been fired from his position on the military's Joint Staff. The action followed a report in this space last week revealing opposition to his work for the military by pro-Muslim officials within the office of Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England.

Mr. Coughlin was notified this week that his contract with the Joint Staff will end in March, effectively halting the career of one of the U.S. government's most important figures in analyzing the nature of extremism and ultimately preparing to wage ideological war against it.

He had run afoul of a key aide to Mr. England, Hasham Islam, who confronted Mr. Coughlin during a meeting several weeks ago when Mr. Islam sought to have Mr. Coughlin soften his views on Islamist extremism.

Mr. Coughlin was accused directly by Mr. Islam of being a Christian zealot or extremist "with a pen," according to defense officials. Mr. Coughlin appears to have become one of the first casualties in the war of ideas with Islamism.

READ MORE
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080104/NATION04/410150204/1008
 
Last edited:
NOTE: I assumed that a guy named Hasham Islam is Muslim. This may not be true. I'll have to do some some research to verify that. ;)
 
That editorial doesn't really say anything.

We don't know why he was accused of being a Christian zealot, or what Hasham Islam's views are...

If anything it sounds like Mr Coughlin's supporters got him fired by accusing England's office of being penetrated by "the enemy".

Who knows....
 
Agreed, Jim. The Washington Times isn't exactly the most prestigious of newspapers either.

While I'm looking for more stuff, here's a brieff National Review moment...you know what you're going to get with NR, of course.

Caution: Right-wing rant ahead.

More on England and Islam [Andy McCarthy]
January 5, 2007


As noted in Cliff's post yesterday (relying on a Bill Gertz report in the Washington Times), the Pentagon has sacked an authentic, influential scholar of Islam, Stephen Coughlin, who evidently refused to lie about — er, I mean, "soften his views on" — Islamic extremism (which, like it or not, is rooted in Islamic scripture) at the insistence of one Hasham Islam, Army Chief Gordon England's Islamophilic factotum (one of countless such creatures now pervading the federal government).

READ MORE
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Y2QzNWYxZThlOTQ4YTBmYzYyNmUzOTQ4MmUzM2M5NDc=
 
Last edited:
That takes us to a professor who is apalled, but saw it coming. Oh, he verifies that Mr. Islam is indeed Muslim.

Caution: Big words ahead.

Eaton Agonistes, Redux?
January 5th, 2008 by Andrew Bostom


Bill Gertz, Washington Times national security columnist, reports (1/4/08) that the Pentagon has fired Stephen Coughlin, its most knowledgeable specialist on Islamic Law, and jihad terrorism. As Gertz observed aptly, the Pentagon thus ended the career of its most effective analyst attempting to prepare the military to wage ideological war against jihadism.

This past September, 2007, I lectured with Mr. Coughlin, a US Army Reserves Major, at The Naval War College, and witnessed his brilliant, tour de force presentation which elucidated the reliance of contemporary jihadism on Islamic Law. Coughlin demonstrated meticulously that “Jihad fi Sabil Allah”—“Jihad in the cause of Allah,” is the animating principle which underlies the threat of global jihad terrorism, and how this understanding should form the basis for rational, effective threat development assessment, and war planning.

That Coughlin’s analyses would even be considered “controversial,” or worse still lead eventually to his firing—perhaps, as Gertz strongly suggests, at the behest of a Muslim aide, Hesham Islam, within the office of Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England—is pathognomonic of the intellectual and moral rot plaguing our efforts to combat global jihadism.

READ MORE
http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2008/01/05/eaton-agonistes-redux/
 
Last edited:
Yes, the Pentagon is so proud to have the Egyptian-born Mr. Islam on the payroll that they've got his lifestory their web site.

Caution: Government written public relations propaganda piece ahead.

Senior Advisor to Deputy Secretary Focuses on Relationship Building
By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service


WASHINGTON, Oct. 15, 2007 – If Hesham Islam’s life story was translated into a screenplay -- and it’s got all the makings of a Hollywood blockbuster -- the director would be hard-pressed to come up with a more compelling chain of events landing him as a top advisor to the deputy defense secretary.

The movie would open with Islam as a young boy growing up in Cairo, Egypt, huddling in terror as Israeli bombs came raining down, demolishing much of the building around him and his family.

Next would be the scene of the teenager who moves to Iraq when his Egyptian naval officer father is transferred to help establish the Arabian Gulf naval academy Islam would later attend.

READ MORE
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=47795
 
Last edited:
What I'd like to see, is a breakdown of what the Pentagon considers to be Coughlin's controversial views - Hasham Islam's record, etc.

Heck, for all we know, he might have been fired b/c he was sexually harassing a page boy.

Too little information to be outraged over, imo.
 
Why is the National Review article a right wing rant and Andrew Bostom's blog post not? They say the same thing.

In fact National Review points readers to the blog.

The blog post is much more critical altogether and much more 'right wing'.

What are you scared of, exactly?

I can only suppose it what folks who will not read both the NR piece and the blog post will think of you for daring to link NR.

Of course feel free to call them both rants.
 
What are you scared of, exactly?

I can only suppose it what folks who will not read both the NR piece and the blog post will think of you for daring to link NR.

Of course feel free to call them both rants.

I'm not scared of anything here, Gumbeau, as you should well know.

Posting a Caution is something we on the EE Board usually reserve for strongly-worded pieces containing profanity or sexually suggestive innuendo.

Posting a Caution was my tongue-in-cheek method of using humor to preclude some insensed poster from goiing off on a tangent, lambasting The Natonal Review as a conservative mouthpiece. Of course, it is a conservative mouthpiece and proud of it.

Bostom, on the other hand, is a historian of note. His piece was written in doctoral thesis level English. To preclude some poster from going off on a tangent, lambasting him for using words that most folks would have to look up in a dictionary, I posted a Caution to acknowledge that. Again, tongue-in-cheek humor.

Hope this clears my intentions up for you, Gumbeau.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom