This special edition of The Glazov Gang was joined by Stephen Coughlin, the co-founder of UnconstrainedAnalytics.org and the author of the new book, Catastrophic Failure.
He came on the show to discuss Naming the Enemy, analyzing the question: “Do we say the word?”
Don’t miss it!
And make sure to watch the special edition of The Glazov Gang with Stephen in which he discusses How “Rules of Engagement” Get U.S. Soldiers Killed, unveiling the disgraceful and deadly cost America pays for obeying Islamic laws in Afghanistan: CLICK HERE.
Important Announcement: The Glazov Gang is a fan-generated program and its life extension is growing short. Please donate through our Pay Pal account to help us keep going. We so appreciate it.
mortimer says
The rules of engagement for Muslim countries only are predicated on discriminatory Sharia law. The premise is that a dirty kafir is impudent to defend himself against a Muslim.
The Geneva Conventions are predicated on the idea of equality. But a kafir is never equal to a Muslim, so Muslims can never accept the Geneva Conventions except if they are forced to do so…just as they do not accept the abolition of slavery, but did so only under pressure from Western powers, chiefly Britain and France.
Richard Paulsen says
Seems strange to me the arabstates being members of the UN.Since they follow another declaration of Human Rights than the UN Declaration of Human Rights.
Arabstates follow the Cairo declaration based om sharia law.
Very strange they are allowed being members of the UN following sharia law.
Unacceptable according to my way of thinking.
Peter Charles says
Yes, it is. They are at war with civilization, but we are not at war with them, That would be “islamophobic”!!!
Richard Paulsen says
That’s the war correctly delfined and it must be won.
dajjal says
The enemy: Muslims.
The enemy threat doctrine: Islam.
“Only Allah has the right to be worshiped.”
“Only Allah has the right to decide, legislate and govern.”
“Jihad is ordained for you.”
Minimum: one military expedition in every year “and more is better”.
“Fight them until…”
“Destruction of the sword is incurred by infidels although they be not the first aggressors.”
Key to victory, given on page 60 of “The Quranic Concept Of War”: destroy their Iman.
Angemon says
Under the Obama administration? Fat chance…
underbed cat says
I do have one question, I can name the enemy, I know what the function of the muslim organizations are to misdirect the target into accepting them as peaceful, with the greatest acting skills of conviction. I did not know it was Cruz who introduced legislation about declaring the MB a terrorist group, excellent, but removing the organizations of support is important but the religion should be identified as subversive in itself, that would be a massive undertaking but the only way…could it be done.
It is amazing the after all these years, few leaders have opened the Quran to even see what is written as commands. Now I understand why Cruz was considered unfriendly to the Republicans and Democrats…extremely disturbing…after all these young men’s lives went to defend the west but supported and never made it home, sent by the defenders of such bad doctrine.
It may have taken Trump to expose what was so actively hidden, with excellent information around this was truly as Stephen says: catastrophic failure in practice.
Fessitude says
At the beginning, Jamie Glazov starts off by noting that Trump has been calling out Obama on his failure to name the problem of “radical Islam”.
It is exquisitely ironic that Glazov, on his own show featuring the problem of “Naming the Enemy”, has to provide a buffer to protect Islam by qualifying it with “radical”, as though there exists a non-radical Islam that is not our enemy.
I left off at 1:09 in the video. I shall now resume watching, to see if this unintentionally Orwellian if not Kafkaesque irony continues…
Fessitude says
When Coughlin begins responding, he doesn’t advert to Glazov’s gaffe, but proceeds to the mainstream problem of not naming the problematic extremism that is besetting the world as being specifically “Islamic”. That’s a subtle distinction; and if it implies that our only problem is “Islamic extremism” and not simply “Islam”, then we have a problem of the problem of the problem – a tertiary problem, where the Counter-Jihad, in complaining about the secondary problem of the problem (i.e., the problem of the Mainstream in its inability to deal adequately with the primary problem, Islam) itself equivocates on naming the primary problem – not Islam itself, but “Islamic extremism”. At best, we have so far with Coughlin a failure to clarify this important subtlety. One bracing, refreshing, and easy way to do it would be to boldly condemn Islam itself.
I’m at 2:00 in the video. Let’s see if it gets any better…
Fessitude says
The discussion then moved on for several minutes to the specific problem of Muslim Brotherhood infiltration and the only candidates to name that branch of the enemy (Trump and Cruz). Later, a little after 6:00, Glazov does refer to the problem of “Islamic supremacism”, which is a good sign… At about 9:00, however, Coughlin repeats a thought he has expressed elsewhere that is disquieting, implying that the enemy goes no deeper and broader than “Muslim Brotherhood” (and its many subsidiary alphabet-soup tentacles, including CAIR, ISNA, MSA, etc.) – namely, his recommendation that we partner up with “Arab countries” (lol, he means Muslim countries) like Egypt who have arrayed themselves against the Muslim Brotherhood in their own countries. On a level of the pragmatic casuistry of a Realislamik, I don’t necessarily mind that recommendation. But one can’t be sure Coughlin is proceeding on that basis. Again, he could dispel this disquietude with one bracing, refreshing, and simple condemnation of Islam qua Islam – followed by the logically consequent clarification that our partnering up with Muslim countries to undo the Muslim Brotherhood influence would be done with our eyes wide open to the fact that any country that is Muslim is, ipso facto, our enemy also, just as much as the Muslim Brotherhood they happen to be opposing; and that thus we would only be making temporary “deals with the devil” for tactical reasons.
On the subject of Realislamik,see at least the first three essays from this Google page:
https://www.google.com/#q=hesperado+realislamik
WorkingClassPost says
@Fessitude.
The point must surely be to get our ‘leaders’ to talk about islam, (albeit saying extremism) and terrorism in the same sentence.
Once they do that, we can begin to discuss where extremists get their ideas from.
John Galt III says
Coughlin says “Name the enemy”
The enemy is not Islam so much as the people in Western Countries that hate freedom, liberty, Christianity, the rule of law, private property, Judaism, Israel and so forth. The left has named the enemy and it is everything we believe in and of course us The Muslims are merely a tool – their private army, their method of crushing us.
Hitler had the SS & Gestapo. Stalin had the NKVD. All of them had millions of informers. Obama and the Democrats have the Muslims and a weakened US Military that is almost untrustworthy.
It all goes so deep that to root it all out will be extremely difficult.
linnte says
Excellent video Jamie!
Larry A. Singleton says
This is the rotten piece of s**t’s “legacy”: ISIS Slaughters 200 Syrian Children in a savage mass execution.
http://www.tlvfaces.com/18-warning-isis-slaughters-200-syrian-children-in-a-savage-mass-execution/
You won’t see this on our equally complicit and treasonous media. Dirty Rotten Scum.
PRESIDENT FAILURE’S SMART DIPLOMACY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjK7MsWrffM
From the petty — such as his buttinsky remarks regarding Britain and the EU, to the tragic — his failure to support the 2009 Iranian revolution — Barack Obama and his “Smart Diplomacy” has been an absolute catastrophe to the United States and her allies, and a huge boon to those countries that wish us harm. In his latest FIREWALL, Bill Whittle lays out the most egregious examples, so be sure to watch as much as you can bear.
Barbarians Inside the Gates: Navy Secretary Ray Mabus and the Cultural Evisceration of the U.S. Navy by Craig Luther.
Our Estranged Generals: Our Generals Are Not on the Same Page as the Rest of Us. In Fact, They’re Not Even Reading From the Same Book by Caroline Glick.—-This is an article about the General Staff of Israel’s Defense Forces. But you could practically superimpose every fact in this article on what is happening in our military.
linnte says
They were indeed children. 🙁