Tearing my hair out is not
constructive. It's even worse than banging my head against the wall.
And so, I must resist all such impulses.
Please see this article --
"BLIND TO TERROR: The US Government's Disastrous Muslim Outreach Efforts
and the Impact on US Middle East Policy." This is from the Gloria
Center, headed by Barry Rubin, and is written by counterterrorism consultant
Patrick S. Poole (emphasis added):
"The aftermath of the April 15, 2013 bombings in
Boston, Massachusetts, has focused attention on the failure of the
Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) to carry out an adequate investigation of
the suspected bombers despite warnings from Russian authorities. This failure
has partially been attributed to a full scale campaign of
political correctness waged inside the bureau and throughout the U.S. government
under the Obama administration against any attempt to link jihadi
terrorism with anything remotely connected to Islam of any variety (the most
radical versions included). This has extended into other segments of the
government as well, particularly the Department of Defense.
"...The U.S. government’s historical outreach
program, regardless of whether it has been a Democrat or Republican in the White
House, has been based on a schizophrenic policy: In many cases federal
prosecutors have gone into federal court and identified American Islamic
organizations and leaders as supporters of terrorism, and no sooner have left
court before government officials openly embrace these same organizations and
leaders as moderates and outreach partners. In several notable cases, the FBI’s
outreach partners have been under active FBI criminal investigation and were
later convicted on terrorism-related charges at the time the outreach
occurred...
"When President Obama hosted his annual Iftar
dinner in August 2010 to commemorate the Muslim celebration of Ramadan,
the list of invitees published by the White House was curiously missing
the names of several attendees–all of whom were top leaders of organizations
known to be purveyors of jihadi ideology and implicated by federal prosecutors
in financing terrorism.
"...one of the individuals missing on the
official White House list, Mohamed Majid, president of the Islamic Society of
North America (ISNA), was pictured in a news service photograph sitting at the
front table just a few feet from the president as he spoke. When Majid was
hailed by Time Magazine in November 2005 as a 'moderate Muslim cleric'
who was helping the FBI fight terrorists, he quickly published an open letter to
his congregation on the mosque’s website assuring his congregants that he was
doing no such thing, stating that his relationship with the FBI was a one-way
street only to communicate Muslim community concerns–not to report on
individuals suspected of terrorist activity.
"...with the release in 2011 of President Obama’s
strategic plan to combat 'violent extremism' [by expanding] outreach to these
same terror-tied groups, the present administration seems intent on
compounding the disaster wrought by previous administrations. Prior to
the September 11 attacks, there were two prime examples of how the government’s
Muslim outreach policy failed spectacularly: Abdul Rahman al-Amoudi and Sami
al-Arian.
"Al-Amoudi’s case is perhaps the best example,
because he was the conduit through much of the U.S. government outreach that was
conducted following the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Not only was he
asked by the Clinton administration to help train and certify all Muslim
military chaplains...he was later appointed by the State Department in 1997 as a
civilian goodwill ambassador to the Middle East, making six taxpayer-funded
trips.
Further, with the assistance and
encouragement of then-First Lady Hillary Clinton, al-Amoudi arranged the first
White House Iftar dinner in 1996, personally hand-picking the
attendees.
"...As is now known, and the U.S.
government has admitted, at the time that he [al-Amoudi] was
being courted by Democrats and Republicans alike, he was a major fundraiser for
al-Qa’ida according to the Department of the Treasury. However, it isn’t
as if the U.S. government was not aware of al-Amoudi’s attachments. As far back
as 1993, a government informant told the FBI that al-Amoudi was funneling
regular payments from Usama bin Ladin to the “Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdel Rahman,
who was convicted for authorizing terror attacks targeting New York
landmarks.
"In March 1996, al-Amoudi’s association
with Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook was exposed in the pages of the Wall
Street Journal. Two years later, the State Department came under fire by the
New York Post for inviting al-Amoudi to official events despite his known
statements in support of terrorism and terrorist leaders...
"The problem is that such groups have
been legitimized–both by government and the media–as civil-rights groups
fighting anti-Muslim discrimination and stereotyping. Unfortunately, their
definition of such discrimination [includes] anyone who writes about the
existence of...or tries to investigate...radical Islamic terrorist groups and
their allies on these shores.
"..That many of the Islamic groups identified as
outreach partners by the U.S. government were identified by federal prosecutors
in court as fronts for the international Muslim Brotherhood and supporters of
international terrorism has proved incredibly embarrassing.
Extraordinary measures are thus taken to ignore this situation. One
response has been to ignore the problem altogether...
"In March 2012, the FBI released guidelines...This
'Touchstone document' articulates the FBI’s new policy that
associating with a terrorist organization, if that organization has both violent
and legal elements, does not mean that someone agrees with the violent ends of
that organization:
"This
distinction includes recognition of the corresponding principle that mere
association with organizations that demonstrate both legitimate (advocacy) and
illicit (violent extremism) objectives should not automatically result in a
determination that the associated individual is acting in furtherance of the
organization’s illicit objective(s).
"Thus,
according to this new FBI policy, if the group supports violence but performs
some legitimate functions (say, for instance, al-Qa’ida, which Sen. Patty Murray
[D-WA] infamously said helped pay to build schools, roads, and day care
centers), associating with that group, according to the FBI, doesn’t mean you
support that group’s violent ends. Thus, the terror support of their
Muslim outreach partners is absolved with a rhetorical
sleight-of-hand.
"...The Obama administration
has, thus, taken extraordinary measures to protect individuals and organizations
identified by the U.S. government as members and fronts of the Muslim
Brotherhood from prosecution. As the government’s outreach partners, they are
directly contributing to the law enforcement and national security policies that
are responsible for blinding government agencies to active terror
threats....
"What has been the effect of
these relationships with the Muslim Brotherhood on the Obama administration’s
foreign policy? As mentioned earlier, Mohamed Majid was recently in the White
House briefing the president for his recent trip to Jordan and Israel. In May
2011, he was sitting in the front row at the State Department when President
Obama delivered a major speech on the Middle East. He also advises the Pentagon,
the CIA, and the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence."
~~~~~~~~~~
This is
a very long article, and exceedingly well documented. It should be
read by every single American.
Do not,
whatever your impulse, tear your hair out. For that would not be
constructive. It is, rather, the responsibility of all Americans
who love their country to act here constructively before it is too late. The USA
is going the way of Europe. And believe me, my friends, this is not an
exaggeration.
Share
this material broadly. But even more importantly, DEMAND answers from your
elected representatives in Congress.
For
your Congresspersons:
For
your Senators:
Do not
sit still for the current state of affairs, and do not imagine yourselves
impotent. It falls to Americans to act now, before it is too late.
~~~~~~~~~~
A few
points to be made here, in reviewing this material:
This
situation did not begin with the Obama administration. It goes back at
least to Clinton's time. And I wish to point out in particular the
involvement of Hillary Clinton. This is something I learned about in
2000-2001, when I was working with a key American anti-terrorist. The
point is particularly relevant now because of rumors of Clinton's intentions to
run for the presidency.
All of
this said and done, however, Obama has exacerbated the situation and created a
worse problem than that which existed prior to his administration.
His
readiness to take advice from Muslims with documented ties to radicals goes a
long way towards explaining his policies. (See more on his policies, or lack of
policies, following.)
~~~~~~~~~~
As to
Obama's wrong-headed approach to Egypt, Wall Street Journal editor Bret
Stephens, says:
"...As
it is, the people who now are most convinced that Mr. Obama is a secret Muslim
aren't tea party mama grizzlies. They're Egyptian secularists. To
persuade them otherwise, the president might consider taking steps to help a
government the secularists rightly consider an instrument of their
salvation." (emphasis added)
Stephens
wrote this near the end of his piece, "A Policy on Egypt: Support
al-Sisi":
"On the subject
of Egypt: Is it the U.S. government's purpose merely to cop an attitude? Or does
it also intend to have a policy?"An attitude 'deplores the violence' and postpones a military exercise, as President Obama did from Martha's Vineyard the other day...An attitude calls for the suspension of U.S. aid to Egypt...
"An attitude is a gorgeous thing....But an attitude has no answer for what the U.S. does with or about Egypt once the finger has been wagged and the aid withdrawn. When Egypt decides to purchase Su-35s from Russia (financed by Saudi Arabia) and offers itself as another client to Vladimir Putin because the Obama administration has halted deliveries of F-16s...
"Or we could have a policy, which is never gorgeous. It is a set of pragmatic choices between unpalatable alternatives designed to achieve the most desirable realistic result. What is realistic and desirable?
"Releasing deposed President Mohammed Morsi and other detained Brotherhood leaders may be realistic, but it is not desirable...
"Restoring the dictatorship-in-the-making that was Mr. Morsi's elected government is neither desirable nor realistic...
"Bringing the Brotherhood into some kind of inclusive coalition government in which it accepts a reduced political role in exchange for calling off its sit-ins and demonstrations may be desirable, but it is about as realistic as getting a mongoose and a cobra to work together for the good of the mice.
"What's realistic and desirable is for the military to succeed in its confrontation with the Brotherhood as quickly and convincingly as possible. Victory permits magnanimity. It gives ordinary Egyptians the opportunity to return to normal life. It deters potential political and military challenges. It allows the appointed civilian government to assume a prominent political role. It settles the diplomatic landscape. It lets the neighbors know what's what.
"And it
beats the alternatives. Alternative No. 1: A continued slide into outright civil
war resembling Algeria's in the 1990s. Alternative No. 2: Victory by a vengeful
Muslim Brotherhood, which will repay its political enemies richly for the
injuries that were done to it...
"It would be
nice to live in a world in which we could conduct a foreign policy that aims at
the realization of our dreams—peace in the Holy Land, a world without nuclear
weapons, liberal democracy in the Arab world. A better foreign policy
would be conducted to keep our nightmares at bay: stopping Iran's nuclear bid,
preventing Syria's chemical weapons from falling into terrorist hands, and
keeping the Brotherhood out of power in Egypt. But that would require an
administration that knew the difference between an attitude and a
policy." (emphasis added)
~~~~~~~~~~
©
Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by Arlene Kushner,
functioning as an independent journalist. Permission is granted for it to be
reproduced only
with
proper attribution.
If
it is reproduced and emphasis is added, the fact that it has been added must be
noted.
This material
is transmitted by Arlene only to persons who have requested it or agreed to
receive it. If you are on the list and wish to be removed, contact Arlene and
include your name in the text of the
message.
No comments:
Post a Comment