Family Security Matters Briefings

Exclusive: Tehran Wins; the State Department Spins
By Joel Himelfarb

What kind of fantasy world does the State Department live in? And do these people ever talk with the White House in order to forge some kind of coherent common position on Middle East policy? During his just-concluded visit to the region, President Bush and members of his senior staff did a commendable job of explaining the threat posed by Iran and Syria and the need to stand firm against Jihadist terror. Mr. Bush told the Israeli Knesset May 15th that a strategy of trying to negotiate with "terrorists and radicals" was a "foolish delusion." The president added: "We have an obligation to call this what it is: the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history." But just six days later, David Welch, the State Department's senior Middle East diplomat, signaled U.S. acceptance of the Lebanese government's surrender to Tehran's terrorist proxy Hezbollah - allowing it to retain its military communications network in Lebanon and giving the group enough cabinet seats to exercise veto power over government policy. [more...]

Exclusive: Good Jihad, Bad Jihad, and the IC
By Clare M. Lopez

When the Director of National Intelligence declares publicly that "We try not to refer to 'jihad' as something that's bad," even though he knows that the United States and all of civilized society is engaged in an existential struggle with the forces of Islamic Jihad, it is hard to fathom what he could possibly be thinking. Only a few short weeks ago, we were told that referring to jihad might somehow legitimize our enemies. Of all of our leaders charged with the defense and protection of our Constitution, DNI Michael McConnell bears a special responsibility to understand clearly the identity of the enemy and the nature of the threat he poses. He also has a professional responsibility to communicate that honestly to the American people. [more...]

Obama Needs a Quick Refresher Course in Cold War History
By KT McFarland

Recently, Sen. Barack Obama reiterated his pledge to meet with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, among other rogue leaders, without preconditions, suggesting his approach would be consistent with the best, and strongest, American foreign policy of the past century. "Strong countries and strong Presidents talk to their adversaries," said Obama. "That's what Kennedy did with Khrushchev. That's what Reagan did with Gorbachev. That's what Nixon did with Mao." Not so fast. I was in both the Nixon and Reagan administrations, and I can attest that those Presidents understood the danger of prematurely forcing top-level meetings without sufficient preconditions. Neither Richard Nixon nor Ronald Reagan would sit down for face-to-face meetings with their counterparts in enemy nations until America had some realistic - and playable - bargaining chips. They recognized that negotiating without leverage isn't negotiating, it's begging. [more...]

Exclusive: Blasphemy: Islam, Christianity and the Law: Part Two of Two
By Adrian Morgan

In Part One I described some of the history of Islamic and Christian blasphemy. At present, individuals in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan are facing the threat of execution for offending Islamic mores. In Pakistan, the laws were implemented in stages, under the leadership of the military dictator General Zia ul-Haq. The Pakistan Penal Code (PPC), like the secular code of India, had laws which prevented general insult against religion. These laws, which showed no bias toward any particular faith, were a legacy of Britain's colonial rule. It is hard to imagine now that when Pakistan was founded in 1947, under Mohammed Ali Jinnah (who ruled for 13 months before his untimely death) Pakistan was officially a secular democracy. [more...]