FBI Excuse for Redacting Orlando Shooter's ISIS Pledges: 'Ongoing Criminal Investigation'

Since 2011, Lechner explained, "the administration has led a controversial effort to remove any and all mentions of Islamic ideology from training manuals for law enforcement."

PJ Media covered this issue in depth in late June following a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing about "Willful Blindness" on radical Islam. PJ Media's own Andrew McCarthy testified on the issue, former Homeland Security officer Philip Haney recalled the "great purges" of documents relating to terror, and M. Zuhdi Jasser condemned the Obama administration's refusal to use the words "radical Islamic terror" as an insult to Muslims.

Lechner also noted a June 6 Homeland Security report advising law enforcement to use "the right lexicon" for "issues of violent extremism." It encouraged staff to eliminate "religiously charged terminology" and cautioned against using words like "jihad" and "sharia."

Distressing as the use of such words may be to peaceful Muslims, it is important for the American people to understand the nature of the terror threat our nation faces. This is why patriotic Muslims like Jasser argue for the inclusion of such terms — if Americans know that Mateen was inspired by jihad and a certain understanding of Islam, that opens the door for Muslims who disagree to explain why they reject this version of Islam.

Jasser is fighting the battle of ideas, explaining why Muslims should not be inspired by ISIS. He argues for a separation of mosque and state, of sharia (Islamic law) and state law. This is a key American principle for people of all religions: while American legislators and activists must be free to use their religious understanding to inform their work, it is important to divide religious law from public law.

The FBI's refusal to explain the reasoning behind the ISIS omission in the 911 transcript is disturbing, but their reasoning is even worse. After the sham decision not to prosecute Hillary Clinton for her private email server in early July, the bureau has taken a huge credibility hit, and this response to Cause of Action is likely to only worsen its reputation.