Hoekstra:
We Must Recognize Radical Islam to Defeat It
Sirius XM POTUS Channel Morning Briefing
with Tim Farley
November 18, 2015
|
|
|
|
|
Share:  
|
  Be the
first of your friends to like this.
Multimedia for this item
Audio
Recording
|
Farley: Let's welcome to the program a guest who has been with us
from time to time, former Congressman Pete Hoekstra, one time the chair of
the Intelligence Committee. He is joining us here. He's a Shillman Senior
Fellow at the Investigative Project on Terrorism. He tweets @PeteHoekstra,
and I'll spell it for you at the end. Congressman, welcome back. Thanks for
being here.
Hoekstra: Hey, good to be with you. Thank you. Good morning.
Farley: Alright, so put in perspective if you will the events
that have taken place since Friday. We have now understood that the police
in Paris have, or actually in St. Denis, which is a suburb of Paris, have
finally raided, and I'm not sure if it's over now. But clearly this has
been a hair-raising several days. What do you put on this? Give us your
perspective on what has been taking place.
Hoekstra: Well I think what we've seen is something that a lot of
people have expected, you know with the refugees coming in, but also with
just the large Muslim populations in Europe, many of the individuals who
have not been assimilated or integrated into their society, you know we've
seen them act out and carry out the jihadist attack over the weekend. The
French have had a very, very you know hard response to that, both
internally and internationally, attacking ISIS locations in Syria, going
after what they believe are accomplices in Paris. And the rest of Europe is
on an enhanced security footing, and the U.S. is starting an immigration
debate. So a lot of things have happened in the last 72 hours.
Farley: What is your experience with the French and their
intelligence capabilities? There's been some criticism that maybe they were
not as vigilant as they needed to be, especially in the wake of the attack
on the Charlie Hebdo magazine a few months back?
Hoekstra: No, I think the French are very, very good. Not only
are they good domestically; they're also good internationally in parts of
the world, we relied on them very heavily. We were not and are not that
good in Northern Africa and Central Africa. The French are very, very good
there. They've got long roots and a long history there. I think the French
are very, very good. But they also have a much more significant problem
potentially than what the U.S. has, with all the folks that they have inside
their country who have not integrated into their society, where these
radical jihadists can be born, developed, where they can plan, train and
prepare to attack.
Farley: Again, former Congressman Pete Hoekstra with us, as we're
discussing the Paris attacks. And as you mentioned, there is now a debate
on Syrian refugees. The administration has said we can take in 10,000.
There have been some objection, but really not a lot of formal pushback,
now the House of Representatives preparing to vote on legislation that
would indeed cause a pause in this allowance. What is the concern
specifically about the vetting process for these refugees? Because my
understanding is that the vetting for people like that trying to come into
the country is as difficult, if not even more difficult, than somebody who
might be trying to enter the country illegally.
Hoekstra: It's a very difficult vetting process. The problem is,
and I'm talking about information here, it's garbage into the system,
garbage out. When you go into an area like Syria that is an ungoverned
state, an ungoverned region, you don't get very good information as to who
these individuals and who these people are. So it's very, very difficult to
vet, because you're not functioning or working with a nation state who has
records, because we don't have relationships with Syria, and the areas that
were controlled by ISIS, or controlled by the rebels, or some other groups,
you know they have no functioning government, so there's no data, there's
no information. So it's just very, very hard to track. It's a slow, long
process, but if you don't have good information, it doesn't matter whether
it takes three months or whether it takes three years; it's just very, very
hard. The other thing is they do now talk about this process taking two
years from start to finish. Well let's hope in two years we've reclaimed
significant amounts of territory from ISIS, if not all of the territory,
and that we're rebuilding the cities and the communities that these
individuals have come from, and they can start going back home, rather than
having to look to Europe or the United States for resettlement.
Farley: Congressman, there's one other part of this issue that
I'd like to get at if I could, and that is the wording that is used. There
has much been made about in the debate the other night, Democratic
candidates not wanting to use the expression 'radical Islam.' Why do you
think that's important? Why not just refer to it as 'radical terrorism,'
'radical jihadism'?
Hoekstra: You have to recognize the threat for what it is. I'm
not going to get into a debate as to whether Islam is a religion of peace
or it's a religion of violence. But what we do know –
Farley: Do you think there's a debate about that?
Hoekstra: Oh sure, I think there is. I mean you've got President
Bush and President Obama who have defined Islam as a religion of peace; you
have other scholars who have looked at Islam and said – you know that's not
what we're seeing. But what we do know is we do know that the people that
are attacking, that attacked here, that have attacked other places, believe
that they are attacking in the interest of promoting their faith, you know
their faith and their belief in God. So you have to recognize the
inspiration of that. And that doesn't mean we are at war with Islam. That
doesn't mean that we are at war with all Muslims. It just means that we are
concerned about the threat of those who claim that jihad and violent jihad
is a tenant of their religion. So you need to understand it if you're going
to confront it, contain it and ultimately defeat it.
Farley: Do you think that Islam is a religion of peace?
Hoekstra: I think that there are people who are using Islam to
perpetrate very, very violent acts.
Farley: Understood.
Hoekstra: Yes.
Farley: But you believe it is a religion of peace?
Hoekstra: It's not for me to define. There are all different
kinds of strands. I have great relations with lots of Muslims throughout
the Middle East, throughout other parts of the world, that I have worked
with, that I feel very, very comfortable with, that share some of the same,
many of the same values that I would believe that I have. And then there
are others that are using Islam. I won't put myself out there to say you
know – for everyone that is out there, if they use the right interpretation
of Islam, that it is a religion of peace – or that it is a religion of
violence. They are interpreting it differently.
Farley: Alright, we will leave it at that. Congressman, as
always, thank you for being here on POTUS Today.
Hoekstra: Hey, good to be with you.
Farley: Former Congressman Pete Hoekstra is a former chair of the
House Intelligence Committee. He's now a Stillman, I'm sorry, a Shillman
Senior Fellow at the Investigative Project on Terrorism. He joins us and
tweets @PeteHoekstra.
|
Print
Send
Comment
RSS
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment