Islamist Lawfare on Steroids – Part 2

David Meir-Levi writes and lectures on Middle East topics, until recently in the History Department of San Jose State University.


Pages: 1 2

As part of the George Washington University’s conference on “Confronting Discrimination in the Post-9/11 Era,” Department of Justice officials convened a meeting on October 21, 2011, with leaders of several national Muslim organizations and other American Muslims who demanded that the DoJ cut back federal anti-terror funding to state and local law enforcement organizations, rewrite FBI agent manuals to remove references that connect “Islam” and “Muslims” with terrorism, and create a legal basis for the definition of “U.S. citizens’ criticism of Islam” as racial discrimination.

One might think that demands to reduce our nation’s ability to defend itself against terror attacks, to obfuscate the glaringly obvious connection between Muslim terrorists and Islam, and especially to curtail freedom of speech would be met with incredulity and rejection.  But one would be wrong.

Tom Perez, head of the DoJ’s division of civil rights, enthusiastically endorsed these demands and urged the attendees to “…continue to have the open and honest and critical dialogue…” that took place at the meeting.  He took myriad notes and asserted that he had some “concrete thoughts” about how to address these demands.

No one at the meeting raised any objection to the demand for restrictions on freedom of speech!

No one from the DoJ expressed any concern that one of the most outspoken Muslim representatives at the meeting was the Imam Mohammed Majid, president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), a Muslim lobbying group accused of having close ties with Islamic terror organizations.   The Justice Department named ISNA an unindicted co-conspirator in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial – the largest terror-finance case in U.S. history. In a post-trial opinion, a federal judge ruled that prosecutors had provided “ample evidence” to support ISNA’s involvement in the conspiracy to underwrite terrorism, and he refused ISNA’s petition to remove its name from the list of co-conspirators.

The putative justification for the outrageous demands made by the Muslim representatives was the assertion that “…Americans’ fear of Islamists’ bombs has evolved into racism towards dark-skinned men” and “…the word ‘Muslim’ has become racialized.”  One Muslim spokesperson went so far as to say that people in the USA are teaching that “..all Muslims are a threat to the country…” and that criticism of Islam is “religious bigotry and hate.”  None of the Muslim spokespersons offered any evidence for these assertions, nor did the DoJ participants request any.

Ironically, the FBI’s own statistics show that hate crimes against Muslims amount to less than 8% of religious hate crimes in the USA. The latest statistics, for 2008 indicate that there were 1,606 hate crime offenses motivated by religious bias in 2008 (the last year for which the FBI reports identify victims of religious hate crime by religion).  Of these:

  • 65.7 percent were anti-Jewish. (1055 crimes)
  • 13.2 percent were anti-other religion. (191)
  • 7.7 percent were anti-Islamic. (105)
  • 4.7 percent were anti-Catholic. (75)
  • 4.2 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.(65)
  • 3.7 percent were anti-Protestant. (56)
  • 0.9 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc. (Based on the FBI’s Table 1 for hate-crime statistics) (14)

No one at the meeting pointed out the discrepancy between the FBI’s statistics and the near-hysteria of the wildly exaggerated assertions of Imam Majid and others about the anti-Muslim atmosphere in America, nor did anyone point out that no FBI training material, nor anything anywhere else in the DoJ, has ever asserted that all Muslims are a threat to our country.

Shortly after this meeting, in a gloating sermon on his ISNA website, Imam Majid crowed that the DoJ has acknowledged the accuracy of his accusations and will purge the FBI training manuals of their offensive anti-Islamic diatribes.  He clearly felt that he had won a meaningful victory.

None of this makes any sense.

If these DoJ officials were committed to stamping out hate crimes, they should look first into the hate-crimes against Jews, which made up almost two-thirds of all hate crimes in 2008.  If these DoJ officials were consistent with the DoJ’s own actions toward Muslim organizations tied to terror groups, they should never have invited ISNA representatives to the meeting. If these DoJ officials were committed to the defense of the USA against terrorist enemies, they should have spoken out when Muslim representatives ranted about fictitious Islamophobia in FBI training materials and in American society at large.  If these DoJ officials honored the sacred American tradition of freedom of speech, they should have dismissed demands for the criminalization of that freedom when criticism of Islam is involved.

But they did not.

Is the DoJ intimidated by the recent Los Angeles Muslim organizations law suit against the FBI?

Or is it possible that these DoJ officials were acting on the directives of President Obama;  directives made official only a few days ago, which require that FBI training materials be purged of anything that might portray Islam as somehow related to terrorist violence, and that any investigation of the beliefs, motives and goals of jihad terrorists be considered off-limits?

What reason could Obama have for banning the truth about jihad terrorism and Muslim terrorist?  Surely he must know that his directives merely open the door for increased jihadist activity in the USA. Imam Majid has indeed won a victory, and with Obama and the DoJ on a crash course with reality, he has no reason to do anything other than strive for more such victories.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Pages: 1 2

  • jacob

    Allow me to remind people that if there were no pimps, there were no whores…
    All these lawsuits are the court's fault, for allowing the filing of such frivolous
    lawsuits, which reminds me that years ago in CALIFORNIA of all places, some
    Jewish moron tried to sue his parents for civil rights violation :
    THEY DIDN'T GET HIS PERMISSION AS A BABY TO HAVE HIM CIRCUMCISED
    If my memory serves me right, the judge gave both he and his lawyer 3 seconds
    to leave or be kicked out…

    On the other hand, what is so terrible to tell the Muslims in our midst that this is
    the way it is and that rights or no rights, we don't have to bend over backwards
    for them but quite the contrary and if it doesn't suit them, to get the hell back to
    where they came from ??
    After all and in spite of OBAMA's claim that we owe our independence to ISLAM,
    did we send for them or is it the way around ?????

  • PatriotX

    You want to make this go away? Enforce the Constitution in it’s true meaining, not the socialistic version that’s taught in schools or the ACLU’s interpretation of it but the Constitution. If we do this, most if not all of this non-sense goes away.

  • Stuart Parsons

    Just further evidence that Islam is a far, far greater threat to the well-being of mankind than Fascism and Communism ever were.

  • Fred Dawes

    Evil is islam.

  • Beth

    Article. IV. Section. 4.

    The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

    Article. III. Section. 3.

    Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

    Freedom of religion NEVER included the right to preach incitement (their koran) to carry out violence. We need leaders who will enforce U.S. laws.

  • BS77

    Try to complain about your rights as a Christian in Saudi Arabia or Sudan……hahhahahahaaaaaa

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Mass Muslim immigration with all its excess baggage must be banned and reversed and Islam outlawed ASAP, as in country after country and anywhere and everywhere mass Muslim immigration has occurred around the world, just like clockwork the vast overwhelming majority of Muslim immigrants flat out refused to assimilate and integrate and instead formed Muslim enclaves that in the long run morphed into Muslim no-go zones ruled by Sharia as fifth columns and in defiance to the laws of the states in which they reside. Indeed, Muslims never ever migrate to the West or anywhere else for that matter to assimilate and integrate, but instead to eventually subjugate and dominate to make Islam supreme via demographic conquest.

  • Indioviejo

    Why can't we fund a private organization dedicated to suing Muslims for Anything ? Lets make it a money game a let the silly court system be clogged. It's either that or the law of the jungle and I believe they will loose.

    • Beth

      I've been wondering the same for some time now.