Political Correctness Run Amok
To most in government, revelations such as these were worrisome but dismissed as anomalies. There was little speculation in government that there might be a larger, organized, well-oiled conspiracy. Those who sought to probe further often found their efforts constrained, undermined or thwarted by a culture of “risk avoidance” and “political correctness” that in recent years has run amok. It is the nature of government bureaucracies to abhor controversy, particularly controversy involving matters of faith. Few in government are willing to open themselves to accusations of bigotry, knowing that even groundless accusations can be costly in terms of time, money, lost promotions and battered reputations. For those working in such a setting, controversy is anything but career enhancing. It is like being accused of being a pedophile. Although the individual may be cleared of all charges, the accusation alone can cause irreparable damage. It is McCarthyism in reverse.
Muslim Americans constitute a significant voting bloc, and there has been little desire to risk antagonizing a vocal, wealthy and increasingly powerful minority by putting some of its most revered leaders under a microscope. These and other factors promote a culture that has contributed to government inertia which is reflected, today, by public indifference.
Despite all that has been documented and is in the public record, CAIR and its sister organizations successfully court American politicians who continue to seek their approval and endorsement. CAIR has even successfully partnered with the FBI to provide Bureau agents “sensitivity training.” I am sure, if asked, Bureau officials who promote such programs would state that they are motivated by a desire to build bridges to the American Muslim community and to open productive communications with moderate elements within CAIR.
According to press reports as many as 14 members of CAIR, some in senior leadership positions, have been linked to terrorist activities or are in jail as a result of such activities. There can be little doubt that other investigations are in play. I would argue that if FBI agents need sensitivity training, the federal government with all its resources surely could find a more reputable organization to provide it. To me, the situation is as absurd as if the Bureau were to recruit “moderate” Nazis or Communists to provide FBI agents an understanding of their respective ideologies, values and contributions to the American way of life. So my questions remain: “Just why is the FBI using CAIR to train its agents, and who within the Bureau championed this initiative?” Perhaps there are just some things man was not meant to know.
For CAIR, participation in the program has been a propaganda bonanza. They cite their partnership with the Bureau as an unofficial endorsement and, in effect, a “Good Housekeeping seal of approval.” They argue that no one should question their patriotic credentials when the FBI trusts them enough to train its agents.
Activities such as described not only suggest a serious lack of coordination within DOJ, but a failure to recognize that such actions confer a de-facto legitimacy that promotes the agendas of the Islamists and sends a mixed and contradictory message to the American public and to American citizens of the Muslim faith. To say that CAIR, ISNA, NAIT and their sister organizations are masters of Political Warfare would be gross understatement.
What has been revealed, largely as the fruits of that trial in Dallas is that Political Warfare on a grand scale, is being played out across the American landscape, and little is being done to blunt, much less counter, the message of the radical Islamists or their political and cultural offensive being waged on American soil against America’s citizens and institutions. It is being waged in the corridors of power, on the Internet and in local and national media. It is being waged not only in the Mosques but within America’s Muslim communities as well. Many believe that moderate Muslims who constitute the majority have largely been isolated and marginalized by a driven, vocal, disciplined and ruthless minority.
Khalid Duran, a highly respected Muslim scholar and close friend, has described it as a “struggle for the soul of Islam.” Several years ago, Dr. Duran, a resident of the United States and on the road to citizenship, was the target of a fatwa and like Salman Rushdie was forced into hiding. The decree, reportedly solicited by American Islamists, was issued by the radical Jordanian cleric Abu Zant. It stated that Kahlid Duran’s blood may be spilt which is a standard formulation for sanctioning murder. To me, it is clear that Abu Zant’s American supplicants had engaged in a solicitation to commit murder which, as I understand it, is a criminal offense. However, I have been unable to determine if any serious effort was made to determine if the American Islamists who sought the fatwa had violated U.S. law.
If all this seems eerily familiar it should, as it appears that with just a bit of tinkering and tailoring the American Branch of the Muslim Brotherhood has adopted the political play book of the Communist Party. As the Communists of an earlier era, it has established a web of front groups, media outlets, charities and other entities to promote an ideology that calls for our destruction.
Just as the Soviets through the Comintern and similar mechanisms mounted a more than 50 year campaign of subversion, covert action, deception, disinformation and misinformation against the Western democracies so have the Radical Islamists through the Muslim Brotherhood. Like the Communists, they have been able to insinuate themselves into the highest councils of government and into the confidence of some of our most sensitive law enforcement and intelligence agencies. They meet with Presidents, policy makers, and those who shape American public opinion. Their assertion that they represent the voice of moderate Islam and Muslim America has largely gone unchallenged in the popular press and other media.
We are facing a sophisticated and calculated campaign to shape public perception and define a new political reality. Until our political leadership and the American public fully appreciate the nature and scope of the struggle, the Brotherhood in its various forms and guises will continue to mount aggressive operations to achieve the ultimate Islamization of America and the imposition of Sharia law. The government’s failure to mount an effective and coordinated response to the Muslim Brotherhood’s political/cultural offensive suggests a fundamental lack of understanding as to the nature of the conflict in which we are now engaged. The American people deserve better.
What we are engaged in is not a War on Terrorism but, rather, a protracted Political Conflict in which our War on Terror is but one component. This is a conflict that cannot be won with bombs, guns and technology. This is a war of ideas and competing ideologies. It is Political Warfare in the broadest sense. It is a conflict that will last generations. Our adversaries take the long view; whereas, we continue to be mired in an approach geared to the annual budget cycle. The radical Islamists demonstrate a sense of Grand Strategy. Regrettably, we do not.
Fighting terrorism is not a game for an impatient people. One must carefully think through second and third order consequences. Good intelligence, tenacity, uncommon courage, disciplined restraint, and an engaged public are required. Education is key. However, the public continues to be fed a diet of “feel good” messages and sound bites that do more to obfuscate than inform; and fail to frame for the public a comprehensive, coherent counterterrorism strategy needed to meet an escalating threat. The way we choose to meet the challenge; the strategies and tactics we employ; and how we marshal and deploy our resources will largely determine the winners, the losers, and the price paid by each.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Peter S. Probst served most of his 30-year career with the Central Intelligence Agency and the Office of the Secretary of Defense addressing future terrorist threats and the development of strategies, tactics and policy initiatives to counter them. He also co-authored a provocative major study, “Terror-2000: The Future Face of Terrorism”. He is now a private consultant advising government and Fortune 100 business leaders on the issues of terrorism, political warfare, and infrastructure vulnerability. A highly articulate public speaker, Mr. Probst is often asked to address government, private sector and academic audiences on issues pertaining to intelligence, terrorism, and asymmetric conflict.