“I read that Perry backed off the pro-Islam curriculum, is that true?”
Maybe...not actually sure (haven’t dug in enough). But even if so, it shows how easily he can be duped. And if he did back off, we’ll never know why...because it’s simply wrong, or because it would hurt him politically.
That’s the thing about Cain, he’s got this issue crystal-clear at this point...and that affects 60% of our foreign policy (including whether we support Israel when the MSM gangs up on them).
Well, Perry is friends with the current Aga Khan, the leader of the Ismaili Muslims.
Interesting lot the Ismailis: Shi’ites who regard the last legitimate Imam as one Ismail, who was deposed almost immediately upon assuming the role. The fielded the Assassins and were, for a while, the rising faction in Islam, at least in south and central Asia, until their power was completely destroyed by the Mongols. After that, despite being one of the few sects of Islam to have formally expanded the list of “Pillars of Islam” to include waging jihad, they became almost pacifistic. They regard jihad as including both internal struggle against sin and war against the infidel, but regard only the Aga Khan as having the authority to call for the latter external form of jihad, something they have shown no inclination to do since the Mongol invasion. Recent Aga Khans have been Oxbridge educated and very cosmopolitan, and show even less inclination to call for warfare against the infidel.
(They figure in my list of object lessons on how Islam might eventually be turned into an ordinary religion, the others being non-Islamic examples of the same shift the Ismailis underwent: the pacifism of the theretofore literally militant Anabaptists dates only to the hideous Seige of Muenster, and as the transformation of Imperial Shinto from the last war-cult to use its adherents as guidance systems for bombs into a fixture of post-WWII pacifist Japan.)