CAIR vs. the NYPD Counter-Terrorism Program

Pages: 1 2

The Council on American-Islamic Relations is calling for an investigation into an alleged “secret NYPD-CIA program to spy on Muslims.” The outrage is based on an Associated Press report about NYPD counter-terrorism efforts that sound explosive, but are actually common-sense measures that aren’t anything new. This is just another example of CAIR’s campaign to convince Muslims that they are being victimized and CAIR and other Muslim Brotherhood fronts are their protectors.

The AP report claims that after 9/11, the NYPD went to the CIA to help it build its intelligence-gathering capabilities. David Cohen, a 35-year CIA veteran, went to the NYPD. As a former CIA operations chief, he was an understandable choice. Cohen then asked CIA Director George Tenet for more support and he sent Larry Sanchez in March 2002. The loaning of operatives between government agencies happens regularly and is nothing new, but the receiving agency is supposed to pay the tab of the loaned officer. To the shock of the AP and CAIR, Sanchez remained on the CIA payroll.

The fact that the CIA shared expertise to the NYPD when it was reforming its counter-terrorism strategy is a good thing, and even if Sanchez’s salary shouldn’t have been paid by the CIA, that is not a violation of civil liberties. That’s a problem for the accountants to handle. The outrage over the program makes it sound like the CIA was engaged in domestic spying, which would indeed be a clear violation, but that’s not what is happening. The CIA, including the CIA officers on loan to the NYPD, did not engage in the intelligence-gathering. The agency simply provided guidance. It remained an NYPD operation.

It is alleged that the NYPD hired informants as “mosque crawlers” to infiltrate mosques without any evidence of a crime. To the chagrin of CAIR, Pakistani personnel would even become part of Pakistani communities. Palestinian personnel became part of Palestinian communities. They visited stores and restaurants and if they saw something suspicious, they reported it. The report says that police officers in such neighborhoods would pull over vehicles for speeding, broken tail lights and other reasons and use the opportunity to find evidence of other crimes, including ones related to terrorism. If an undercover officer in a book store noticed someone reading extremist texts, he might talk to the store owner who decided to sell the literature. If someone at a restaurant was overheard expressing joy about the killing of U.S. forces, the NYPD would take note of it.

None of this is a violation of civil liberties, and isn’t different than long-standing law enforcement practices. In fact, if they didn’t perform the above actions, that would be an outrage. There would be justifiable outcry if the NYPD didn’t have undercover officers, and if they didn’t take note of when someone glees at the deaths of U.S. soldiers or sells extremist literature. Furthermore, police officers have always pulled over vehicles for legitimate reasons and watched for indications of other crimes. It isn’t news when a police officer pulls over someone for a broken tail light late at night and then tries to see if the driver is drunk. Yet, when a Muslim immigrant is pulled over for speeding, and the officer is on the look-out for evidence of other illegal activity, CAIR protests.

CAIR says the AP report is “shocking.” Zaheer Udin of New York’s Islamic Leadership Council says, “It seems to many of the leadership here, there are two kinds of authorities they are playing—one is in the forefront which is very cooperative. And there is another authority, which is playing against Islam and Muslims, going against the First Amendment and the security of the country.”

Pages: 1 2

  • jacob

    How about telling CAIR nd all the others, that if the FBI would have been watching
    the suspicious way of aircraft flying training the al Quaida operatives were
    undergoing wherever (staight and level flying but no take-offs nor landings), and
    would have acted on the report that lady operative of theirs of what that flight
    instructor told her instead of shelving the report, THE 9/11 HORROR WOULDN'T
    HAVE HAPPENED and that WE rather be safe than sorry and if they have nothing
    to hide, they shouldn't fear investigations and that THAT IS THE WAY IT IS, as WE
    are not about to put up with a 9/11 replay under any circumstances
    And not to forget that WE didn't send for them but, if they don't like it, remember
    that good old USA's exit gates are wide open and they don't even have to fear
    the doors hitting their "derrieres" on the way out…

  • StephenD

    Why should there be any explaining to, first, a group like CAIR which has lost all legitimacy for its past activities and second, to anyone at all when it comes to national security issues?
    If there is reason to believe there are terrorists among the members of a Catholic Convent, have at it! It will either vindicate the convent or expose the terrorist. Everyone wins. I'd actually like to agree with CAIR. They are "Victims" here and will continue to be…maybe they should leave. We can be helpful in that regard. We can all pitch in to get them a one way ticket to the Islamic Country of their choice.

  • Pole Shift Cover-Up

    Its such as you learn my thoughts! You seem to grasp a lot about this, like you wrote the guide in it or something. I feel that you just could do with some percent to power the message house a bit, however instead of that, this is wonderful blog. A fantastic read. I’ll certainly be back.