Militant Islam Monitor > Articles > The Obama/Holder War On National Security
The Obama/Holder War On National Security
November 14, 2011
By WILLIAM MAYER
November 14, 2011 - San Francisco CA - PipeLineNews.org - While Americans continue to be preoccupied with limiting the personal effect of one of the longest recessions on record, a behind the scene internecine war led by this administration against a particularly inconvenient truth - that Islamism is the motivating ideology behind the world-wide terrorist threat - is being waged.
This battle is being carried out at the highest levels of the U.S. national security apparatus, sometimes abetted by duplicitous Muslims who have been recruited for their supposed ability to provide a vital, non-radical Islamic perspective. Though nominally hired to be ombudsmen to their co-religionists' communities [bridge building] the effect has been to provide Islamists [sometimes granted high level security clearances] direct access to key administration decision makers and closely held information.
Counter-terrorism expert Patrick Poole identified the problem of infiltration in a piece entitled, 10 Failures of US Government on Domestic Islamist Threat. The article makes clear the concerted effort already well underway by Islamists to infiltrate governmental institutions. Poole's dissection of the role that Louay Safi plays in this ongoing effort is instructive as is Safi's immediate charge of Islamophobia in attempting to underplay/negate the undeniable role that Islamic ideology played in Maj. Nidal Hasan's jihad at Ft. Hood.
"8. Louay Safi (2009) Louay Safi lectures deploying troops at Fort Hood weeks after deadly attack, authorized "preemptive strikes" against troops attacking Moslems, named unindicted co-conspirator in Palestinian Islamic Jihad terror support trial. A criminal investigation launched by Army Criminal Investigations Division into the Army's use of highly controversial Islamic scholar who had been lecturing troops deploying to Afghanistan for three days at Fort Hood was the culmination of a series of events prompted by the killings of thirteen service members and civilian employees by Nidal Hasan last November. According to press reports, Louay Safi was conducting training at Fort Bliss at the time of the massacre at Fort Hood. His pre-deployment seminars were sponsored under a contract by the Naval Postgraduate School. Safi appeared at Fort Hood just a few weeks later to deliver a seminar on Islam to soldiers of the 135th Expeditionary Group and deliver a $10,000 check from his employer, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), for the families of the Fort Hood massacre. Both his seminars and the ISNA donation drew heated criticism. One Army official called Safi's donation "blood money" in light of his defense of terror supporters, his promotion of extremist ideology, and long-time employment with multiple terror-tied organizations. Comments made by Safi after the Fort Hood killings appeared to shift responsibility away from the killer and blame "Islamophobia" for the massacre, saying "the extremist ideology responsible for violent outbursts is often rooted in the systematic demonization of marginalized groups...According to wiretap transcripts presented at Al-Arian's terrorism support trial...Safi was named Unindicted Co-Conspirator #4, Al-Arian blamed the designation of the terror group on a "war waged by Zionists." Safi agreed, saying that Clinton "just wants to please them." Safi was also personally named in a federal search warrant affidavit that was the basis for the March 2002 Operation Greenquest..." 1
Unfortunately in nearly every venue where counter terrorism training is being conducted, from local law enforcement to the highest levels of the federal bureaucracy and the war colleges, those conducting the instruction are increasingly being muzzled; they can no longer tell the truth. The matter has gotten so out of hand that under current guidance just about any statement linking terrorist acts undertaken by people who claim to be Muslim with an underlying Islamist ideology is verboten because that linkage has been deemed by WH's advisors and Islamist pressure groups such as CAIR and ISNA to be Islamophobic.
Under such a restrictive construction there is no justifiable basis to connect acts of terror committed by self-identified Muslims with a subversive ideology based upon the political/military aspects of Shari'a. To do otherwise opens oneself to the charge of being an anti-Muslim bigot.
In an excellent article published in National Revue, written by Nina Shea [a human rights attorney and a Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute] The Administration Takes on "Islamophobia" the author demonstrates how closely Team Obama is working with the OIC [Organization of Islamic Cooperation, formerly the Organization of Islamic Conference, an organization comprised of 56 mostly hard-line Islamic countries] to delude the public regarding the root ideology of most of the terrorism which takes place today. This cooperative work has placed the issue of world-wide Shari'a compliance on the radar screen.
"An unprecedented collaboration between the Obama administration and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC, formerly called the Organization of the Islamic Conference) to combat "Islamophobia" may soon result in the delegitimization of freedom of expression as a human right. The administration is taking the lead in an international effort to "implement" a U.N. resolution against religious "stereotyping," specifically as applied to Islam. To be sure, it argues that the effort should not result in free-speech curbs. However, its partners in the collaboration, the 56 member states of the OIC, have no such qualms. Many of them police private speech through Islamic blasphemy laws and the OIC has long worked to see such codes applied universally. Under Muslim pressure, Western Europe now has laws against religious hate speech that serve as proxies for Islamic blasphemy codes..."
The Obama administration has moved swiftly to denude all official language of any references to Islam which don't pass the standards established by some of the most radical Muslim Brotherhood front groups in America. Regardless of how this effort is being characterized, it's effect will be to instill Shari'a compliance throughout the government, establishing a de-facto dhimmitude.2
To see how far this mindset of censorship has progressed, consider that on November 9, during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on DOJ's now infamous gun running program "Fast and Furious," Senator Dick Durbin [D-IL] directed the following to AG Eric Holder, "we have found that the FBI agents who were given counter terrorism training were unfortunately subjected to many stereotypes of Islam and Muslims, for example FBI agents in training were told..."
"Islam is a highly violent radical religion." "Mainstream American Muslims are likely to be terrorist sympathizers." "The Arabic mind is more likely to be swayed by ideas rather than facts."
Holder was apparently ready for the question because as Durbin was framing it, the AG could be seen referring to what appeared to be prepared notes on the matter. His response served to embellish Durbin's clear implication that the civil liberties of American Muslims are under siege:
"The information you just read is flat out wrong." "[it's]...inconsistent with what we have been trying to do here at the Department..." "those views do not reflect...the views of the Justice Dept, the FBI.." "...that person is not being used anymore by the FBI...and we are reviewing all of our materials, our training materials to ensure that kind of misinformation isn't being used anymore because it can undermine...the really substantial outreach efforts that we have made ...that kind of training sets back those efforts...have a process underway to make sure that mistake does not happen in the future..." [source, C-SPAN video of testimony, http://www.c-span.org/Events/Lawmakers-Question-Holder-on-Operation-Fast-and-Furious/10737425323/]
We contacted Mr. Durbin's office on multiple occasions to determine the source of the quotes he used regarding counter terrorism training. As we go to press the Senator's office has not responded, however we did find a potential source for not only Mr. Durbin's query, but his whole line of questions in that matter.
That source is Wired's "Danger Room," edited by Spencer Ackerman. In a Sept blog posting, FBI Teaches Agents: ‘Mainstream' Muslims Are ‘Violent, Radical' [see, http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/09/fbi-muslims-radical/] Mr. Ackerman writes, "The FBI is teaching its counterterrorism agents that "'main stream' [sic] American Muslims are likely to be terrorist sympathizers; that the Prophet Mohammed was a "cult leader"; and that the Islamic practice of giving charity is no more than a funding mechanism for combat."
If nothing else, the similarity between Durbin's question to the AG and Ackerman's post is a remarkable coincidence isn't it?
From outward appearances, Mr. Ackerman seems to be in lock-step [alongside Mr. Durbin] with the campaign undertaken since 9/11 by Islamists to attack any statement which reflects poorly on Islam as being Islamophobic. This could easily be a first step in having such declarations classified as "hate crimes," as they are in much of Europe where they are punishable by fines and potential jail time. Unfortunately these police state tactics seem not to be of much concern on the Continent.
Spencer Ackerman, for those not familiar with his bio, was part of the JournoList debacle, wherein it was revealed there existed a group of hundreds of lefty journalists who communicated via a listserv protocol [the "JournoList"] and basically conspired to advance their ideology via news manipulation.
As the Daily Caller, which broke the story, revealed, "...In one instance, Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama's relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama's conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, "Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares - and call them racists.'" [source, http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/20/documents-show-media-plotting-to-kill-stories-about-rev-jeremiah-wright/#ixzz1dFXQAbL6]
So propagandizing under the guise of journalism is second nature to Ackerman.
We find it unsurprising that a Democrat Senator might read the rants of shill journos and then use them to advance the Obama agenda, that under this regime one will not speak ill of Islam or its Prophet.
These proscriptions against the denigration of Islam are elemental components of Shari'a, Islamic law, specifically its "blasphemy/apostasy" codes, as Ms. Shea heretofore noted. Therefore the "sanitization" operation that the administration has put into motion, enacting these self-blinding policies, is in a very real sense, advancing Shari'a principles in pursuit of a perverse and divisive multiculturalism.
What got Mr. Ackerman's panties in a bunch [it might be contagious, witnessing Durbin's performance at the Judiciary Committee hearing] was apparently training material assembled by William Gawthrop, a government intelligence analyst and instructor at American Military University who from the archival material we have reviewed, makes clear the distinction between Islam the religion and Islam the ideology, the doctrine commonly referred to as Islamism, political Islam.
Gawthrop's exact guidance on this is, "Understand, what we are going to be doing is looking at Islam as an ideology, not as a religion. What's the difference? Religion is man's relationship with his deity, in the United States we protect it under the First Amendment. We're going to set it aside. We are not going to discuss religion. We're going to discuss Islam as an ideology, man's relationship to other men. At the same time we are going to be discussing Mohammed...we are not going to discuss Mohammed in his capacity as a theological figure...we will discuss him...as a military, political and cultural leader as we would anybody in our academic discussions..." [source, Gawthrop training, YouTube video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjLs5DR9UJo]
Pretty non-controversial, unless you have an agenda designed to intimidate and suppress free speech.
It seems that it was from this training material that Ackerman cobbled together the verbiage which Mr. Durbin apparently regurgitated and for which Mr. Holder conveniently appeared to have a prepared response during the reading of which he stated that he was aware of this trainer's identity.
While Ackerman is not important in and of himself, as a useful idiot he does deserve attention, if only to grasp the nature of what is going on just below the surface as motivated Islamists and leftists ally to undercut the same Constitution which grants them the freedom to act so irresponsibly.
From its inception - going back at least to his Cairo mea-culpa 3 delivered at Al-Azhar University - the seat of Wahhabism - president Obama has set out to curry favor with the Muslim world in a manner destructive to U.S. national security and foreign policy concerns. The ongoing campaign to cleanse official language of supposed negative references to Islam - of which last week's little exchange between Durbin and the AG is only the most recent and public example - is part of the administration's hijacking of the process that the United States has used throughout its history to remain free and secure.
How can a nation [or culture] develop a reasonable defense strategy unless it understands the enemy's threat doctrine? It can't be done under the type of constraints which have been employed across the administration which bars naming the enemy or identifying his attributes
Why Team Obama is doing this is less important than the fact that it is being instituted rapidly and shamelessly. Given the current inertia - and the possibility of "four more years" - soon writers, researchers and others who work in and around national security policy matters might well be faced with the prospect of either being forced into deluding the American people into believing that there is no link between the overwhelming majority of world terrorist acts and a Shari'a based ideology of domination or going to court for telling the truth.
Notes:
1. For a further discussion of Dr. Louay Safi's bio, please refer to the "Global Muslim Brotherhood Report," EXCLUSIVE: U.S. Muslim Brotherhood Leader Central Figure In Newly Formed Syrian Opposition Council, http://globalmbreport.com/?p=5046
2. Dhimmitude, an attitude of submission, derived from the Arabic adjective dhimmi which denotes a non-Muslim, second class citizen in a land which has been conquered by a Muslim power. While nominally "protected," in reality these people were forced to endure severe hardships, including having to wear religious identifiers on their clothing and the paying of a "head tax" or jizya, in exchange for not having to face the edge of a sword.
3. In addition to apologizing to the Muslim world for nearly every calamity that has befallen man since America's founding, we observed at the time, and still think it important that the president has expanded the mandate of the president of the United States to include the defense of Islam, "I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear..." [source, WH website, http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-cairo-university-6-04-09]. This viewpoint is unique to Mr. Obama and far outside the American experience. It's important to recognize that not only were prominent members of the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist organization present at this speech, they were actually invited by the administration to attend. In hindsight it can be seen that this apparent certification of the MB as legitimate players helped them greatly in their now successful power grab in Egypt, allied with an Islamist military.
©2011 PipeLineNews.org LLC. All rights reserved.
http://www.pipelinenews.org/index.cfm?page=train1192011101%2Ehtm
Printer-friendly version 
Email this item to a friend