—— Original message——
From: Northwestern Interdisciplinary Law Review
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2014 21:38
Subject:Northwestern Interdisciplinary Law Review Offer of Publication
Dear Mr. Bradford,
The Northwestern Interdisciplinary Law Review (NILR) hereby offers to publish your article, Trahison des Professeurs: The Critical Law of War Academy as an Islamist Fifth Column,” in its forthcoming spring issue.
On behalf of the Law Review, we would like to commend your work. The topic of your paper lies at the intersection of law, history, and international relations, making a thorough and persuasive contribution to the interdisciplinary study of law.
Your piece diligently analyses the history, present dynamics, and American understandings of the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. The beginning of the paper disabuses readers of many myths regarding ISIS, while still providing a remarkable history of American war. In particular, your arguments about the psychological battles both against our enemies and within ourselves are engaging and enlightening, from Vietnam to global jihad. Next, the paper could stand on its own simply with your documentation of CLOACA PSYOPs attacks. This section alone is crucial reading for anyone interested in American foreign policy. Yet your paper asks why as well. Section II marshals deeply interesting contentions about the motivations of the attacks on American political will. These arguments are bold, but well researched and thoroughly informative. Finally, your recommendations for the war against ISIS range broadly in their conventionality, but like the rest of the paper are amply supported by logic and evidence. Additionally, we would like to commend your tone throughout the paper. The topic and arguments presented are enormously controversial (falsely, perhaps, as you point out in section II), but the piece is rigorous and even-handed. We would be happy to feature your work in our journal. I hope that readers across every discipline read this paper, and I know that it will spur much future research on ISIS and international law.
As an interdisciplinary journal, the NILR’s editorial board is particularly interested in publishing work that weaves together legal, political, and policy-oriented analyses. In the past, our journal has featured contributions from a wide variety of political thinkers, including Alan Dershowitz, Theodore Sorensen, Louis Wolcher, and Lawrence Friedman, among other scholars, students, and practitioners. Our mission is to provide a platform for new ideas and accessible debate on questions at the nexus of law and the humanities, law and the sciences, and law and society.
We hope that you will consider our offer and respond before November 14th, 2014. If you require more time to consider this offer or have any questions, please contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Editor-in-Chief, Vol. VIII
Northwestern Interdisciplinary Law Review
Roberta Buffett Center for International and Comparative Studies
1902 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL 60208-4005
Phone: 847/467-2770 | Fax: 847/467-1996
In August 2015, President Obama fired Dr. Bradford from his position at the United States Military Academy for his ongoing research into the increasing risk of a U.S. military coup as well as an article published and later cyber burned by the National Security Law Journal. Dr. Bradford’s article, which explains how and why leftist and Islamophilic law of war professors undermine U.S. military effectiveness and erode the willingness of Americans to fight radical Islam, can be downloaded here:
Islamist extremists allege law of war violations against the
United States to undermine American legitimacy, convince
Americans that the United States is an evil regime fighting an illegal
and immoral war against Islam, and destroy the political will of the
American people. Yet these extremists’ own capacity to substantiate
their claims is inferior to that of a critical cadre of American law of
armed conflict academics whose scholarship and advocacy constitute
information warfare that tilts the battlefield against U.S. forces.
These academics argue that the Islamist jihad is a response to valid
grievances against U.S. foreign policy, that civilian casualties and
Abu Ghraib prove the injustice of the U.S. cause, that military action
is an aggressive over-reaction, and that the United States is engaged
in war crimes that breed terrorists, threaten the rule-of-law, and
make us less safe. Rather than lending their prodigious talents to the
service of their nation, these legal academics, for reasons ranging
from the benign to the malignant, have mustered into the Islamist
order of battle to direct their legal expertise against American
military forces and American political will. This psychological
warfare by American elites against their own people is celebrated by
Islamists as a portent of U.S. weakness and the coming triumph of
Islamism over the West.