Bobby Jindal: There is No Middle Ground


From Breitbart:

bobby jindal

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal has set the bar for U.S. politicians to speak with clarity and accuracy about the threat posed by the Islamic supremacist code its adherents call sharia. In a speech at the Henry Jackson Society in London, Gov. Jindal told the truth about this totalitarian ideology in a manner reminiscent of the Society’s namesake’s robust stance against communism during the Cold War.

The Louisiana Republican is widely believed to be considering a presidential bid in 2016. That makes all the more extraordinary the forthrightness and courageousness of his remarks at a time when the British government, our own, and virtually all others in the West persist in dissembling about the nature and wellspring of the “terrorism” or, worse yet, “violent extremism” we predominantly face today. It is actually global jihad, and it is animated by Sharia.

The governor hit these realities directly – and the danger of ignoring them:

We have to stop pretending that right and wrong do not exist. For example – Sharia law is not just different than our law, it’s not just a cultural difference, it is oppression and it is wrong. It subjugates women and treats them as property, and it is antithetical to valuing all of human life equally. It is the very definition of oppression.  We must stop pretending otherwise.

Gov. Jindal then called out those – Muslim and non-Muslim, alike – who tolerate, or obscure, sharia’s agenda of Islamic supremacism and jihad conducted to achieve it:

A so-called religion that allows for and endorses killing those who oppose it is not a religion at all, it is a terrorist movement. I do continue to believe and hope that most Muslims oppose these bloodthirsty acts of terror.

But that is not the point.  Whether they do or not, the point is that radical Islamists do advocate the slaughter of those who reject their views.  Free peoples everywhere must not pretend otherwise and must not coddle those who hold these views.  And they must have courage.

Particularly impressive was the governor’s calling out of the authorities and leaders of Islam if they condone, implicitly or explicitly, jihadist behavior:

Let’s be honest here, Islam has a problem. If Islam does not support what is happening in the name of Islam, then they need to stand up and stop it. Many Islamic leaders argue that these are the acts of a radical few.

Ok, it is their problem, and they need to deal with it. Muslim leaders must make clear that anyone who commits acts of terror in the name of Islam is in fact not practicing Islam at all. If they refuse to say this, then they are condoning these acts of barbarism.  There is no middle ground.

Specifically, Muslim leaders need to condemn anyone who commits these acts of violence and clearly state that these people are evil and are enemies of Islam.

It’s not enough to simply condemn violence, they must stand up and loudly proclaim that these people are not martyrs who will receive a reward in the afterlife, and rather they are murderers who are going to hell.

If they refuse to do that, then they are part of the problem.  There is no middle ground here.


I would agree there is no middle ground, and that is a powerful statement for the governor of Louisiana. The fact that he said it in London gives it even bigger teeth, since they, of all people, need to wake up and change their way of dealing with the muslims.

Overall, Jindal’s speech packed a punch, but this statement gives me pause… “I do continue to believe and hope that most Muslims oppose these bloodthirsty acts of terror.”

If that were actually the case, we would have heard more muslims denouncing the actions on 9/11 and every terrorist action that’s happened since then.

There’s talk about Jindal running for president, and yes, he’s a decent conservative, but I don’t think he’s ready for the big job, at least not yet. Not if he’s placing any hope on muslims opposing acts of terror.


Tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Bobby Jindal: There is No Middle Ground

  1. I.R. Wayright says:

    If you took a quran (plus the hadith and sura) and removed all the pages that preached hatred or allowed some outrageous behavior, how many pages would there be left? I still think it is going to be “game on” us versus them, all of them, until THEY renounce THEIR religion or clean up the mess muhammad made.
    ~Pieces be made of them~

    • Kathy says:

      Your ‘game on’ scenario is the most likely event, but we can’t do that until we get a new president. This one sure isn’t going to do anything more to slow them down.

  2. CW says:

    I guess I’m tough to please because I’m not nearly as impressed with Jindal’s speech as the editors of Brietbart are. To me it seems like a contradiction to refer to Islam as a “so-called religion” and then call on “Muslims” to “oppose these bloodthirsty acts of terror.” Islam, as defined by the Koran and practiced by Muslims, either advocates violence against non-Muslims or it does not. If it does then it is Islam, not just “bloodthirsty acts of terror,” that needs to be renounced and rejected. Conservatives should be calling on the free world to stand strong and outlaw the practice of the Islamic “religion” within their territories. Even more importantly, Jindal and others should be calling out leftists like Obama (by name!) whose insistence on appeasement and bastardized notions of “tolerance” are allowing Islam to spread and poison our societies. I’ll be impressed when I finally hear that kind of clarity.

  3. I.R. Wayright says:

    Let’s fast forward a year or so…..
    Let’s say ISIS has not been stopped and is expanding daily in numbers and square miles conquered. Next on their list is Saudi Arabia and it looks like they are about to roll in through Jordan and Kuwait, flanking the extensive fence put up on the Iraq-Syrian border to keep them out. Here is what I would do if I was the king. I would destroy Mecca and the kabaa, the holiest shrine in all of Islam, and blow up the oil wells. What incentive would ISIS have then? Would it destroy a large chunk of Islam?

  4. Liz entrekin says:

    Those who pander to a religious cult and try to legitimize it are just as guilty as those in the cult. I sincerely doubt there is more than 100 pages (if that) left after removing all the violent parts. Some could say the same of the Christian Bible. However, the difference in the two religious works is profound. Cults use any and all means to subjugate followers, cloaking true purpose in lies and pandering to goals of a select few members. Many good religions teach some of the same ideals but are much more transparent in following a path of enlightened social and personal behavior. I have yet to hear Muslims openly allow visitations in any of their meetings beyond the first few minutes which leads to secrecy, speculation, and outright distrust. There are again cases in some other religions that do the same but at no time have any outright advocated abuse of women, beheadings, stonings, murder, or other forms of hatred like this cult.

    If and I mean if, those who follow Muslim faith can show within the pages of their sects works where travesties are specifically addressed and not commanded as part of their beliefs, then I might bend slightly. However, I seriously doubt that those words exist.

    Jindal is my state governor. Like him or not as a governor he has done a reasonable job even against heavy “Good Old Boys” politics. I do not however believe him ready for such a high office but then who in the world would ever believe Madam Clinton would receive backing given her history and handling of issues like Benghazi?

    If I were in political office or backing Obama by word or deed, I would be extremely worried that I would become road kill as he tends to throw even his faithful under a bus. His track record certainly speaks to this as people fall like dominos in either camp for or against him.

    You know not much reference has been made since his first election to the fact that Hilary attained a high office under him even though she opposed him at that time. There are theories of why. But regardless of accuracy, think carefully about what history shows of other presidential hopefuls and their positions after elections. These do not jive with the Obama/Clinton era. Nor is it possible for Hilary to hide her political leanings just like Obama from her early twenties or in Arkansas politics.

    Bobby Jindal is a good man who can speak strongly and back words with action but as in his London visit, where strong words were spoken, he should have first gotten facts before speaking then approached those in another country with their own rights in respectful fashion but with facts if necessary to add credence to conversation. So this as yet is a handicap. I do believe a position in Congress would be in order at least while he tests the waters.

    • Kathy says:

      Great comment, Liz. All I know about the Koran is what I’ve read here and on other sites, so I couldn’t positively state that it commands muslims to kill or not. Reputable sites have stated that it does, so I trust it’s true. If the muslim leaders denounce the terrorist activities, does that equate them to backsliders and the ramifications for that?

      Agreed that Jindal is not ready for the presidency, but he’s been a good governor for Louisiana.

  5. clyde says:

    Jindal is a good governor, and we have to give him props for his spot-on comments about the stuck-in-the-7th-century famel cuckers. However, he would not be my choice for potus.

  6. Garnet92 says:

    This is going to be a “for what it’s worth” comment. Both my adult business-owner son and my geezer brother live in Louisiana – both are Louisiana natives. Since I’ve heard a lot of good about Jindal, I asked both of them (at different times) what they thought about him. Neither of them like him. I didn’t get the reasons, but both are very conservative and neither would vote for him to become president. I’ll try to investigate and get more definitive reasoning just out of curiosity.

    • Kathy says:

      That’s interesting Garnet, perhaps they know more about him than some of us do. I haven’t followed him really closely – just what we see in the headlines mostly. I’m curious why they don’t like him.