              
|
Uncommon Senate Hearing Discusses Islamist Group AgendasIPT News An open hearing of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs bore witness to an unusually candid discussion about the Muslim Brotherhood's network in the United States. It was unusual in the respect that it was discussed at all. The fact that many major American Muslim organizations are derived from the Muslim Brotherhood is rarely addressed on Capitol Hill. The topic of the July 10 hearing was, "The Roots of Violent Islamist Extremism and Efforts to Counter It," and the subject most discussed was Islamist ideology as the root cause of terrorism. What made this hearing significant was the extent to which the U.S.-based Muslim Brotherhood network was discussed in oral and written testimony – largely by Zeyno Baran, senior fellow and director of the Center for Eurasian Policy at the Hudson Institute. Ms. Baran's central point was that, while not all Islamists will become terrorists, all Islamic terrorists begin with Islamist ideology. She cited the Muslim Brotherhood as the "prime example" of the spectrum of Islamist groups that, while differing in tactics, agree on their final goal: a world dominated by Islamic law, or Shariah. As such, Ms. Baran pointed out that there were inherent problems with the outreach policies of various government agencies. She specifically cited sensitivity training for the FBI run by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as "completely self-defeating" as FBI agents might be taught to be overly sensitive and may avoid asking certain questions during investigations that they should be asking. Ms. Baran elaborated on some of the precepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir, an Islamist movement dedicated to re-establishing the Caliphate. In doing so, she made a revealing comment on Islamist strategy in the West:
She also painted a picture of the Brotherhood infrastructure in the United States:
Why haven't these facts been subject to more open and public discourse on Capitol Hill and in the mainstream media? Ms. Baran answered that herself in her opening remarks:
As an observant Muslim herself, Ms. Baran is in a unique position to understand and appreciate the Islamist challenge facing America. Other witnesses before the committee, however, did not agree with her assessment. Dr. Peter P. Mandaville of George Mason University commented that some individuals associated with CAIR may share the Muslim Brotherhood ideology, but said that it would be "wrong to characterize the organization in its entirety" as a Muslim Brotherhood front group. Dr. Fathali M. Moghaddam of Georgetown University dismissed concerns about CAIR's sensitivity training, claiming that the FBI agents he has taught would not be affected by any excessive sensitivity (and incidentally came out with a ringing endorsement of a book by John Esposito, his colleague at Georgetown, and director of the university's Prince Alwaleed Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding). Michael E. Leiter, the Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, refused to condemn the FBI's outreach policy, claiming that outreach was critical. Mr. Leiter advocated full-spectrum outreach, even with those who might be anti-American, but drew the line before those who supported violence. In March, the IPT began to roll out an extensive profile on CAIR, noting its undeniable roots at a 1993 meeting of the U.S.-based Palestine Committee of the Muslim Brotherhood attended by CAIR's founders, Omar Ahmad and Nihad Awad. The profile notes consistent support by CAIR officials and speakers at CAIR events for the use of violence and terrorism in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. By Mr. Leiter's logic, if it were established that CAIR, ISNA, and other American Islamist organizations supported violence in any part of the world, they should not be partners in outreach. Also, if outreach were to become "full-spectrum," as Mr. Leiter advocates, government agencies would have to move beyond the status quo, where all outreach is dominated by Islamist organizations to the detriment of other American Muslim organizations like the Islamic Supreme Council of North America, the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, and the American Islamic Congress – who are comparatively ignored by government officials. Hopefully the hearing and Ms. Baran's testimony will spark further debate in policy circles, in the media, and on the blogosphere. Click here to see IPT Executive Director Steven Emerson's report to the Committee. Related ItemsReader comments on this itemRemember the Trojan Horse Submitted by Patri, Jul 19, 2008 11:10 Islamists are very careful to work withing the United States system and exploiting our laws for thier objectives. They work stealthily to acquire small simple litigious rullings and build from there once a precedent is set. The purposely find "victims" vis-a-vis Walmat, McDonalds, etc. to sue to not so much to obtain money, (which they gladly accept and pass on to their more violent terrorist sectors), but the main and unstated purpose of the suit is to gain LEGAL GROUND. Islamists are not in America to co-exist peacefully, unless America co-exists under Sharia law, leaving behind United States Constitutional Laws. They are masters at deceit and propaganda. They are a small minority, yet they DEMAND and RECEIVE special accommodation; foot baths at our Universities; prayer rooms, etc. No other minority has ever demanded accommodation for RELIGIOUS purposes. The backlash of Islamists is that many Americans now look at Muslims as a threat and with disapproval, where in as little as 10 years ago, Muslim were accorded respect and acceptance. For many Americans it is difficult to distinguish between the "good Muslim" and the "bad Muslim." Bad Muslim meaning those who wish and seek to harm the United States. Fear creates barriers and mis-trust, and rightly so. The MSA and the NAIT are truly recruiting sectors. Please do not ask me to extend the hand of trust and friendship to my enemy when they hold the sword or dagger in theirs.
Comment on this item |
||||||||||
 |
© 2008 The Investigative Project on Terrorism. | Legal Information |
