May 20, 2013

MEMBERS' CORNER: Deference To Appeasement

Whether you call them Islamists, Islamic extremists, Jihadists, or something else, the fact is that there is a segment of the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims who are motivated by Islam to attack and kill Americans. Yet this threat is one that, from the beginning of his presidency and his much-heralded “speech to the Muslim world in Cairo,” President Obama has steadfastly refused to acknowledge.

Instead, the President has made political correctness a policy priority above the safety of Americans.  In 2011 the Justice Department ordered that its training materials remove all references to Islam in connection with any investigations into terror activity. Similarly, the U.S. military was ordered to remove any “anti-Islamic content” from its training materials. Now this recent story (see below) reveals more of the same at the Department of Homeland Security. According to the report, a 2011 memo from the Department instructed national and local law enforcement officials to ensure that the free speech rights of pro-Shariah Muslim supremacists were protected.

We’ve seen the deadly consequences of appeasement. Prior to killing 13 fellow soldiers and wounding dozens of others in the 2009 Fort Hood massacre, Major Nidal Malik Hasan was investigated by the Army and FBI, yet nothing was done despite revelations of his terrorist connections and jihadi sympathies.  Shouts of “Allahu Akbar” while carrying out his murderous rampage still didn’t convince the Obama administration of Hasan’s terrorist inclinations, and the entire event was labeled as “workplace violence.”   

More recent examples of the administration’s policy of appeasement and continued reticence to name the enemy are the Benghazi debacle and the Boston Marathon bombings. Both were Islamist terror attacks perpetrated by Islamists, regardless of where the perpetrators were radicalized, e.g., abroad, at home or via the Internet.

So the question is: How do we overcome a threat that we refuse to name or acknowledge exists?

Scott D. Woller is an attorney practicing in New York, and a member of The National Security Roundtable.

The Daily Caller  |  May 17, 2013

Homeland Security Guidelines Advise Deference To Pro-Shariah Muslim Supremacists

By Charles C. Johnson

Homeland Security-deference.jpg
Youssef Jihani, senior member of Ansar al-Shariah Brigades, speaks to the AP during an interview, in Benghazi, Libya, Sept. 18, 2012. (AP Photo/Mohammad Hannon)

The Department of Homeland Security, which under Secretary Janet Napolitano has shown a keen interest in monitoring and warning about outspoken conservatives, takes a very different approach in monitoring political Islamists, according to a 2011 memo on protecting the free speech rights of pro-Shariah Muslim supremacists.

In a checklist obtained by The Daily Caller entitled “Countering Violent Extremism Dos and Don’ts” the DHS’s Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties notifies local and national law enforcement officials that it is Obama administration policy to consider specifically Islamic criticism of the American system of government legitimate.

This policy stands in stark contrast to the DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis’ 2009 memo “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment” [pdf], which warned of the dangers posed by pro-life advocates, critics of same-sex marriage and groups concerned with abiding by the U.S. Constitution, among others.

The advice of the Dos and Don’ts list is far more conciliatory. “Don’t use training that equates radical thought, religious expression, freedom to protest, or other constitutionally-protected activity, including disliking the U.S. government without being violent,” the manual’s authors write in a section on training being “sensitive to constitutional values.”

The manual, which was produced by an inter-agency working group from DHS and the National Counterterrorism Center, advises, “Trainers who equate the desire for Sharia law with criminal activity violate basic tenets of the First Amendment.”

The checklist also advised against using moderate Muslim “trainers who are self-professed ‘Muslim reformers’” because they “may further an interest group agenda instead of... more here.


[Comment Rules]
We welcome your comments, but please comply with our Comment Rules. You must be registered and logged in to leave a comment. Comments will display your Username and location.

Log In »

Not a member? Register here!