Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden responded on Thursday to the latest jihad massacre in France, which left a young mother beheaded and two others dead at a French church. Biden vowed: “A Biden-Harris administration will work with our allies and partners to prevent extremist violence in all forms.” No one among the Biden-compliant media picked up on it, but in this statement, Biden was signaling that his administration would return to the bad old days when the nation’s intelligence and law enforcement apparatus devoted itself not to countering jihad terrorism, but to pretending that jihad terrorism didn’t exist.
The fact that Biden did not refer to jihad violence specifically was significant. On October 15, Biden released a video message to Muslim Advocates, the association of Muslim lawyers that bears the primary responsibility for demanding, back in 2010, that the Obama administration remove all mention of Islam and jihad from counterterror training and refer to an undefined “extremism” rather than to jihad terrorism. Obama, of course, immediately complied, despite the fact that this would hamstring the ability of law enforcement and intelligence agencies to understand — and defeat — jihadists.
The Democratic Party in general, and much of the Republican Party, is committed to the idea that there is no Islamic terror threat, that to speak of such a thing is “Islamophobic,” and that counterterror efforts must be directed against a vaguely-defined “extremism.” Meanwhile, leftist leaders ever more routinely refer to foes of jihad violence and Sharia oppression as “extremists,” and even simply to all those who oppose the leftist agenda. The implications are obvious, and ominous.
What’s more, President Trump has pointed out that Biden “wants to terminate our travel bans and surge refugees from the most dangerous places in the world. He will open the floodgate to radical Islamic terrorism – and you saw three days ago what happened the beheading in France, and today it happened again.” Trump was referring to the beheading of French teacher Samuel Paty for showing a Muhammad cartoon, and the beheading Thursday of the woman in a Lyons church.
Trump was right. Last July, Biden declared: “If I have the honor of being president, I will end the Muslim ban on day one, day one.” There is no “Muslim ban,” but Islamic supremacists and their leftist allies insist on calling the Trump administration’s travel bans on nationals from 13 countries a “Muslim ban,” even though five of those countries — Burma, Eritrea, Tanzania, North Korea, and Venezuela — are not Muslim countries, and there are 49 other Muslim countries upon which there is no ban at all.
The ban exists because these countries cannot or will not provide accurate information about prospective immigrants. The list of countries was devised during the Obama administration, while Biden was vice president. But that didn’t stop Biden from casting it in racial terms, claiming that “Muslim communities were the first to feel Donald Trump’s assault on black and brown communities in this country with his vile Muslim ban.”
It’s a peculiar “assault on black and brown communities” that leaves untouched scores of countries inhabited by “black and brown communities,” but the Left is working on the gut level of rage and hatred, not rational consideration. This kind of language from Biden is also extraordinarily irresponsible, stoking racial resentment at a time when racial tensions are high.
In light of all this, Trump was also likely correct that “under the Biden plan, the horrifying attacks in France will come to our cities and our towns…. These Radical Islamic terrorist attacks must stop immediately. No country, France or otherwise, can long put up with it!”
Biden has also said: “As president, I’ll work with you to rip the poison of hate from our society, honor your contributions and seek your ideas. My administration will look like America, Muslim Americans serving at every level.”
This also was ominous. Biden stated last July: “One of the things I think is important, I wish we taught more in our schools about the Islamic faith.” He clearly meant apologetic information, not an accurate discussion of Islamic jihad activity. Even worse, Biden’s call for this came as he addressed the “Million Muslim Votes Summit,” a call hosted by Emgage Action, which says it is the largest Muslim PAC in the United States. According to the Washington Free Beacon, it is also “a George Soros-backed Muslim group” that serves as an “official cohost of Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) conferences. ISNA was previously revealed to be part of the Muslim Brotherhood network—though it claims it is no longer associated with the group.”
Would Emgage or groups like it be tasked with choosing the Muslims who would staff Biden’s administration? Almost certainly.
Internationally, Palestinian leaders have repeatedly expressed their preference for Biden, hoping that if he is elected, the Trump-brokered peace deals between Israel and several Muslim Arab states will be repudiated, and their jihad against Israel will gain a renewed impetus.
Biden appears to accept the post-9/11 contention of leftists and Islamic supremacists alike: that opposition to jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women is “hate.” As a result, a Biden/Harris administration would almost certainly leave America more vulnerable to jihad attacks, and do nothing to halt the expanding influence of Sharia in the workplace and the educational system. As Palestinian leaders have shown, Biden presidency would be welcomed by jihadis worldwide.
Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of 21 books, including the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His latest book is Rating America’s Presidents: An America-First Look at Who Is Best, Who Is Overrated, and Who Was An Absolute Disaster. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.