Jihad and the West - Black Flag over Babylon Chapter Seven Podcast Two

Welcome to an excerpt from Jihad and the West, Black Flag over Babylon by Mark Silinsky, with a foreword by Sebastian Gorka. It was published by Indiana University Press in Bloomington and Indianapolis. This reading is presented by Kensington Security Consulting, which brings education to national security. This reading continues with Chapter Seven and, particularly, the ISIS-inspired killing in California. In that attack, a husband-and-wife pair of ISIS supporters murdered health inspectors in San Bernardino. After they killed fourteen and wounded far more, they went on Facebook to pledge allegiance to the Islamic State. How the Caliphate was involved was debated hotly after that 2015 killing.   Whose Fault?               The killing ignited the long-familiar debate on gun control. President Obama wanted to tighten gun-control laws to “make it harder for [terrorists] to kill.” Omid Safi, director of Duke University’s Islamic Studies Center, blamed America’s “deadly fetish” with firearms. This claim was rubbished by the National Rifle Association (NRA). The NRA’s Chris Cox countered that the weapons used were illegal in California. Laws banning high-capacity magazines in assault weapons were already on the books. A letter to the Washington Post opined, “The reason these laws didn’t prevent Wednesday’s shooting is that gun control does not stop evil.” Campaigning for president, Hillary Clinton did not blame the Caliphate; she blamed the NRA.               Others point to a workplace dispute that preceded the shooting. University of Michigan history professor Juan Cole blamed “someone going postal over his work situation.” But others rejoined that there are daily, sometimes bitter, disputes at work, almost none of which lead to mass murder.               Professor Steven Salaita blamed American “political violence . . . endemic to the United States.” A Columbia University professor underscored the American and Western “Islamophobia and the wanton cruelty of imperialist warfare, [and] the colonial occupation and domination of other people’s homeland.” This was echoed by the Los Angeles executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Hussam Ayloush, who added that the United States supports the “dictatorships” and “coups” that “push people over the edge.” For this reason, according to the CAIR spokesperson, “We [Americans] are partly responsible.”               The argument over gun control would reemerge with vigor after the Florida killing of June 2016. But in winter 2015, residents of San Bernardino tried to heal their community. Several high school girls wore hijabs in solidarity with Islamic students. A seventeen-year-old Muslim girl, Zarifeh Shalabi, was voted prom queen at Summit High School. Her non-Muslim friends passed out colorful scarves and balloons on which were written, “Don’t be a baddie, vote for the hijabi.” Her friends celebrated: “I feel like we have something to teach the rest of the country. It makes me really proud.”   Three Views of Caliphate-Inspired Killings               In response to the multiple murders and the high death count in the name of the Caliphate, Western journalists, politicians, intellectuals, and civil servants often placed the attacks in one of three categories. First, the attacks were not related to Islam; second, the attacks were driven by a distorted view of Islam; third, the attacks were an expression of Islamic mandates. The debate continues.   View One—The Attacks Were Not Islamic               Some in the West hold that political violence perpetrated by Muslims in the name of Islam is not and cannot be authentically Islamic. If Islam is a religion of peace, just as Judaism and Christianity are religions of peace, those who commit violence in its name have warped the religion’s meaning. In this view, the perpetrators are fueled with a rage unconnected to any religion. Even when perpetrators roar “Allahu Akbar” or bellow praises for the Caliphate, these proclamations are dismissed as empty or misguided rhetoric.               Those who hold this view emphasize the perpetrator's emotional instability or anger. For example, in Le Mans, France, police arrested a Muslim who was tearing down Christmas decorations from the city center. The perpetrator then tried to grab a police officer’s weapon while shouting “Allahu Akbar.” Prosecutors declared him mentally ill and had him hospitalized. In Dijon, France, a man yelling “Allahu Akbar” ran over a pedestrian. French prosecutors said, “This is absolutely not an act of terrorism.” Rather, it was a “long-lasting and severe psychological disorder.”  In Bavaria, Germany, a man stabbed four people at a train station while he was yelling “Allahu Akbar.” The Bavarian interior minister said the incident was probably not political but an expression of mental illness. There are many similar cases.               This happens in the United States, too. In November 2015, a student at the Merced campus of the University of California, Faisal Mohammed, stabbed four of his fellow students and was, in turn, shot dead. Police found a printout of the Caliphate’s black flag in his possession. But the county sheriff claimed that Mohammed’s religion had nothing to do with his stabbing spree. Rather, he was angry at rejection. The sheriff compared Mohammed’s references to Allah to a Christian who comes to Jesus.   View Two—A Twisted View of Islam               The first view is that the attacks were unrelated to Islam and likely driven by mental illness or anger management issues. The second view is that Caliphate-connected violence results from a twisted view of Islam. For example, in Chattanooga, Tennessee, a young and attractive engineer, Mohammad Youssef Abdulazeez, went on a shooting spree, leaving four Marines and a sailor dead. In his words, these were symbols of American power. Before the killing started, he texted a friend: “Whosoever shows enmity to a friend of Mine, then I have declared war against him.” Vice President Joe Biden called this the act of a “perverted jihadist.”   View Three—The Attacks Are Driven by Islam               The third view of Caliphate-related attacks is that they are a pure expression of Islam. This view takes the killers and the Caliphate at their word. Many of the Caliphate-associated killers declared loudly, openly, and repeatedly their allegiance to the Caliphate and their belief in Jihad. In one case, a would-be pro-Caliphate killer repeatedly stated his intentions before and after his failed murder attempt. He was Abdul Shaheed, formerly known as Edward Archer.               Shaheed was well known at the local mosque, had made the pilgrimage to Mecca, and studied Arabic. He pledged his allegiance to the Islamic State and was determined to assassinate a police officer in a show of solidarity. But his thirteen-shot blast into officer Jesse Hartnett only wounded his victim, who then returned fire and winged the Jihadi.               Despite Shaheed’s declaration of fealty to the State, Philadelphia mayor Jim Kenney said, “This is a criminal with a stolen gun who tried to kill one of our officers. This has nothing to do with being a Muslim or following the Islamic faith.” But the perpetrator contradicted the mayor and was emphatic that his motives had everything to do with Islam. Under arrest, he explained to investigating officers, “I follow Allah. I pledge my allegiance to the Islamic State, and that’s why I did what I did.” Shaheed, in his view, could not have been clearer about his motives.   Despite Shaheed’s declaration of fealty to the State, Philadelphia mayor Jim Kenney said, “This is a criminal with a stolen gun who tried to kill one of our officers. This has nothing to do with being a Muslim or following the Islamic faith.” But the perpetrator contradicted the mayor and was emphatic that his motives had everything to do with Islam. Under arrest, he explained to investigating officers, “I follow Allah. I pledge my allegiance to the Islamic State, and that’s why I did what I did.” Shaheed, in his view, could not have been clearer about his motives.   This concludes a reading from Jihad and the West – Black Flag over Babylon. If you enjoyed it, please consider subscribing to continue listening to other chapters. The book is available online or at major bookstores worldwide. Also, Dr. Silinsky’s latest book, “Cauldron of Terror – Hamas, Israel, and the World," will be available for purchase in early spring 2026. This reading does not represent the official position of any agency or individual within the United States government. On behalf of Kensington Security Consulting, thank you for listening.