Does Muslim-American terrorism pose a significant threat to our nation? Do the alarm, alert and warning levels depicted by the heads of our Homeland Security apparatus and our politicians match the purported threat?
Dr. Charles Kurzman recently authored an interesting report: "Muslim American Terrorism in the Decade Since 9/11" published by the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security, a project of Duke University, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and RTI International (Research Triangle Institute). This is the third yearly report of its kind published by the Center. One noteworthy finding is the fact that in recent years the nation has experienced a constant decline in violent plots as well as the number of Muslim-Americans indicted for support of terrorism and related crimes. Dr. Kurzman's findings concluded that Muslim-American terrorism in 2011 continued to be a miniscule threat to public safety.
We bring the attention to this scientific study mainly to contrast its findings with the inconsistent, embellished and disproportionate warnings continuously issued by our Homeland Security heads, politicians and a new breed of self or media-monikered "terrorism experts." Purportedly among them are national leaders such as attorney General Eric Holder, who happens to be the ultimate authority to whom the FBI director reports; and Janet Napolitano, the Department of Homeland Security's secretary. The line-up of alarmist politicians includes Allen West (FL) and Peter King (NY), frequent automated instruments of paid public relations media professionals who make their living from orchestrating xenophobic campaigns against Islam and Muslims.
Robert Greenwald, in his article, "The Grave Threat of Homegrown Terrorism," makes an assessment similar to Kurzman's, in which he exposes our national security leaders' flatulent and unsubstantiated warnings about alleged homegrown Muslim-American terrorism.
Dr. Kurzman specifically brought the case of FBI's director Peter Muller, who testified before Congress in March 2011, stating that homegrown terrorism has become a threat even more complex and difficult to combat as "we are seeing an increase in the sources of terrorism, a wider arrange of terrorist targets, and an evolution in terrorist tactics and means of communication." Kurzman went on to expose Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano echoing Mr. Muller's concern in her 2011 State of America's Homeland Security Address, in which she stated: "the terrorist threat facing our country has evolved significantly in the last 10 years -- and continues to evolve -- so that, in some ways, the threat facing us is at its most heightened state since those attacks."
By the same token, Glenn Greenwald cites Secretary Napolitano stating before Congress that domestic terrorism and homegrown radicalization is "a very large focus of the Department of Homeland Security." Greenwald also cites Attorney General Eric Holder, in an ABC interview back in December 2010, expressing his concern about the "alarming rise in the number of Americans who are more than willing to attack and kill their fellow citizens." In the same article, the author mentions the most recent Congressional report on this matter published in December 2011 and released by Congressional staff of the known Islamophobe Peter King (R-NY). Greenwald highlighted this report's findings that "Homegrown Islamic terrorists -- possibly including radicalized American soldiers -- who target U.S. military communities in the homeland" are a "severe and emerging threat." This, once again, runs contrary to Dr. Kurzman's findings.
Unfortunately Islam and the Muslim community in the United States are regularly utilized as a ball in the political game to try to score a few votes, kickbacks and financial contributions. Very often, a number of politicians adopt and promote media campaigns focused on irrational critics to the principles of Islam and its followers. In these campaigns, Islam and Muslims are systematically associated to anti-social behaviors, extremism and violence.
If you find these actions unacceptable, it is even more appalling to find the highest ranking individuals from the most important Homeland Security agencies magnifying alleged imminent homegrown threats coming from the Muslim American community for the main purpose of justifying the multi-billionaire budgets that their agencies amass. The inexcusable exaggerated discourse portraying the Muslim American community as a growing danger causes an irreparable damage not only to that specific community, but to all spheres of our society in general. What rationale do these high-ranking public servants have when they vainly represent the Muslim American community as a growing threat other than taking political advantage, preserving their positions, and justifying the assignment of more financial and operational resources to their agencies?
Dr. Kurzman concludes his report imploring all Americans to be "vigilant against the threat of homegrown terrorism while maintaining a responsible sense of proportion." Indeed, let us all be vigilant against fear mongers who invoke phantom terrorists everywhere we look and nuclear bombs around every corner. We will not rest until we defeat and denounce their dubious damaging agendas. Together, we will defend, protect and preserve our most treasured civil rights, which cost many of our real patriots, like Martin Luther King and Malcolm X, their blood, sweat and tears.
Follow Wilfredo Amr Ruiz on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AnalistaInter
Engy Abdelkader: Using the Legacy of Muslim Women Leaders to Empower
Not loud enough?
peace an joy
People have referred to 9/11 as "a modern Pearl Harbor". After Pearl Harbor, Japanese Americans were sent to concentration camps for the duration of the war. Muslims might take some consolation that modern America has recoiled from anything like that.
What Muslim Americans are experiencing is more like what German- and Italian-Americans lived through during WWII - heightened scrutiny. This discrimination ended in 1945 when we destroyed the governments of the Axis nations, ending the threat. We can't destroy all the foreign sponsors of Muslim terrorism, so the only way I see to end this abuse is a very long period without successful attacks in the US.
Ironically, then, the unfair scrutiny of Muslims is the only way I see of ending the persecution Muslim Americans currently suffer. Pragmatically I think you're better off accepting this scrutiny and working with it, because it's a lot better than what is likely to happen if the scrutiny fails to stop a major domestic Muslim terrorist attack.
I know that's unfair. Al Qaeda's greatest victory may be what its terrorism has done to Muslim Americans' civil rights.
J. Edgar Hoover-and those who are now emulating him
Obviously not. But lightning doesn't grow more dangerous year after year if left unchecked. Terrorism does.
What America learned from 9/11 was that if we ignore terrorism, we'll get "Pearl Harbored". We don't look for terrorism to kill a steady number of people each year, we expect there to be rare events of horrific magnitude. The next 9/11 attack could involve chemical, biological, or even nuclear weapons and wipe an entire city off the map -- what's a reasonable annual expenditure to reduce the probability of that? There's no easy answer.
"Better to treat it like gang and organized crime activity."
I'd argue that's what we're doing. The FBI and local police spend lots of money and have special Organized Crime Task Forces. We insert agents into crime gangs and tend to focus on ethic groups like Italians and Russians. We pass special laws meant to control organized crime -- e.g., the RICO laws -- and sometimes convict known gangsters on minor charges (Al Capone, tax evasion) when we can't prove what we *really* know they did. We've enacted draconian property confiscation as a way of hurting crime lords we can't convict.
But the analogy breaks down when you realize that domestic terrorism is often sponsored by organizations harbored in countries that will not assist our police effort. We can't send Eliot Ness to Pakistan to arrest Al Qaeda, so we send the SEALs to kill him.
Dangerous world... But I see the true danger as these fear mongers that think they can flush the Bill of Rights for some exaggerated threats.
The even scarier thing is how this overblown fear has led to lawmakers relinquishing freedoms to "expedite" the process of ferreting out "terrorists". If history has shown us anything, it's that guys with guns don't like to give up power once they have it. Systematically dismantling the framework we have in place for citizens' rights will not have a happy ending.