Orlando, FL ---“One of the things I believe, is we will see a major terrorist attack in this country or in Europe soon, because there are certain equities that have to happen before a certain date.”

     This was Stephen Coughlin’s answer when asked, “What do you think will happen next?” at an event hosted by ACT! for America on October 21, 2015.  ACT! for America, an organization that “educates citizens and elected officials to help impact national security policy,” hosted  Mr. Coughlin, an International Comparative Law expert and former member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Intelligence Directorate.  Mr. Coughlin presented the case for how constraints on language and analytics are limiting the United States’ effectiveness in defeating it's enemies.

     In Paris, France 31 days later, 130 people were killed in a series of terrorist attacks conducted by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS, KAESH)

     The basis for the current briefing began when Mr. Coughlin realized “what we were saying about the nature of the threat is wrong, and the people in the Department of Defense have a duty to know.”  Mr. Coughlin explains that “they are not responsible to know every interpretation of Islam, but there is a duty to know the version they use to justify destroying us.”  Furthermore, “there are extreme costs associated with choosing not to know the nature of a self-declared threat’s self-identified threat doctrine”

      To demonstrate the purging of language from intelligence strategy documents, Mr. Coughlin shows a comparison of the 9/11 Commission Report, the 2008 FBI Counterterrorism Lexicon (Bush administration), and the National Intelligence Strategy 2009 (Obama administration).  Violent Extremism was used 3, 29, and 9 times respectively.  Religious was used 65, 3 and 1 time respectively.  Al Qa’ida was used 16, 0, and 1 time respectively.  The following words appeared only in the 9/11 Commision Report, published July 22, 2004: Enemy (39), Jihad(126), Muslims (145), Islam (322), Takfir (1), Muslim Brotherhood (5), Hamas (4), Hezbollah (2), Caliph/Kaliph (7), Shari’a (2).  This results in “the destruction of factual analysis by the removal of words that define.”

      Mr. Coughlin was highly sought after for his briefings at the Pentagon.  The briefings were called “the Red Pill Briefings” as they were able to “shift the audiences understanding of the nature of the threat in the War on Terror,” like the “Red Pill” in the movie The Matrix.  Mr. Coughlin used these briefings to show “the relationship between the Islamic legal doctrine of abrogation and a Muslim Brotherhood strategic doctrine based on a book called Milestones by Muslim Brother and Islamic thinker Sayyid Qutb.”

     The changing culture in the administrations of both President Bush and President Obama, have made Mr. Coughlin’s candor unwelcome in the national security agencies.  He says, “We are no longer a fact driven culture, we are a narrative driven culture.”

     Mr. Coughlin shares the following example of inappropriate influence over our national security strategy.  This example began with a briefing he was giving for law enforcement in Columbus, Ohio.  NPR published an article on July 18, 2011 which said some Muslim attendees were offended by some of the language used.  One of the attendees sued Mr. Coughlin over this briefing, but the case was dismissed when it was revealed in discovery that the plaintiff had not attended the briefing.  Mr. Coughlin shares a letter from CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which was sent to the CIA around the same time. It was a letter requesting Mr. Coughlin not be allowed to give his upcoming briefing at the CIA.   The CIA cancelled his briefing as well as the entire training program.

     The Department of Homeland Security came up with the new program called Countering Violent Extremism (CVE).  Mr. Coughlin says the goal was to “realign them with the post-modern narrative to attack people who are not politically correct.”

     Out of the 16 member CVE Working Group, that was the committee to develop the standards, 6 were affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. 

    Mr. Coughlin goes on to share the case against the associates of the Muslim Brotherhood as appropriate advisors.   In the 2008 Holy Land Foundation Trial, the “largest terrorism financing prosecution in American history,” evidence showed the connections between the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas.  Hamas is a designated terrorist organization according to the United States and Canada.  In addition, Judge Solis, the sentencing judge in the HLF trial, wrote a letter stating that CAIR is Hamas in America.  CAIR was listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF trial. Mr. Coughlin’s point: “Are these the people who should be choosing the language and procedures the United States uses in determining a course of action in our counterterrorism efforts?”

     Highlighting the two schools of thought, Mr. Coughlin shows a video clip of a congressional hearing on homeland security where the former Attorney General of the state of California, Daniel Lungren asks Secretary Stockton, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Security, if we are at war with Violent Islamist Extremism.  After many unsuccessful attempts at prodding him to use the term Violent Islamist Extremism, Assistant Secretary Stockton explains, “Al Qa’ida would love to convince the world that the United States is at war with Islam. It’s a prime propaganda tool, and I’m not going to aid and abet the effort to advance their propaganda tools.”  The Attorney General Lungren says, “One of the questions we’re trying to deal with is the radicalization of Islam, …and if we can’t distinguish between Violent Islamist Extremism and Islam then all this stuff about behavioral indicators doesn’t mean anything.”

     Mr. Coughlin shares that this is exactly the problem in threat analysis.  To obey the current rules of threat analytics in the CVE, analysts have to spend time keeping the language “politically correct.” This results in wasted resources, including time, money and brain power.  According to Mr. Coughlin, the more serious problem is that it “has led to tragedy and real loss of life, leaving America vulnerable to those who wish to destroy us.”