Politically correct terrorists

It's only fair to share...Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneShare on Google+

The indictment and arrest of University of South Florida professor Sami

 

Al-Arian by the FBI last week was a watershed event in the US war on

 

terrorism.

This was so not because Arian was the CEO of the Islamic Jihad, although

 

that he was. Nor was it a watershed because by arresting Arian, the US has

 

shown that it will apply the full weight of its laws against terrorists,

 

whether their targets are Israeli or American.

 

Nor still was it a watershed because it brought to bear the new anti-terror

 

law enforcement powers granted to police and intelligence arms of the US

 

government by the 2002 Patriot Act.

 

Rather, Arian's arrest was a watershed because of the political will that

 

stood behind the decision to move forward in the case.

 

Arian was arrested on charges of conspiracy to murder and maim people

 

outside the US, conspiracy to provide material support and resources to

 

Islamic Jihad, extortion, obstruction of justice and immigration fraud –

 

charges that carry a sentence of life in prison.

 

Since journalist and terror expert Steven Emerson produced the PBS

 

documentary Jihad in America in 1994, the fact that Arian was the head of

 

the Islamic Jihad in America was the worst kept secret in the world.

In that documentary, Emerson showed that the Islamic Jihad's headquarters in

 

the US has the same address as the World and Islam Studies Enterprise,

 

(WISE), a USF think- tank run by Arian.

 

One of WISE's research fellows was Ramadan Abdullah Shallah. Shallah left

 

the institute in 1995 and moved to Damascus to take over the Islamic Jihad

 

after the group's leader Fathi Shikaki was killed in Malta by the Mossad.

 

In the same 1994 documentary, Emerson showed Arian in action, making

 

speeches in praise of jihad against Israel and suicide bombers.

 

And yet the result of the documentary was that the liberal establishment of

 

the US branded Emerson a bigoted, Islam-bashing racist while Arian was feted

 

as a civil rights trailblazer for Muslims in America.

 

Emerson was banned from National Public Radio and Arian was invited to the

 

White House on four separate occasions – three times by President Bill

 

Clinton and once by President George W. Bush.

 

In spite of Emerson's reams of evidence, which proved conclusively that

 

Arian was an arch-terrorist, Arian received accolades from both the Left and

 

the Right.

 

Middle East studies professors, influential journalists and political

 

organizers spanning the ideological spectrum attacked Arian's accusers as

 

racist right up until the week before his arrest.

 

After years of fighting a lone battle against Arian and the Islamic Jihad

 

cells he funded and organized in the US, Emerson's cause was given a push on

 

September 26, 2001 when Arian was interviewed by popular Fox News

 

commentator Bill O'Reilly. O'Reilly, who questioned Arian about past

 

statements in favor of jihad and suicide bombings in Israel concluded the

 

interview by commenting that if he were in the CIA he would trail Arian '24

 

hours a day.'

 

 

In the aftermath of the interview, USF suspended Arian.

 

This move was met by howls of indignation from Arian's friends on the

 

political Left and in academia. The powerful and respected Middle East

 

Studies Association wrote a letter to USF President Judy Genshaft in

 

February 2002, decrying the suspension as an attack on academic freedom.

 

 

Calling on USF to reinstate Arian, MESA's board of directors wrote, 'The

 

Arian case IS about academic freedom. It is also about the basic first

 

amendment right to freedom of speech.'

 

 

Here then, the most respected Middle East academic organization in the US went on record defending a suspected terrorist and decrying those who would view the issue as one of law

 

enforcement rather than one of civil rights.

On the political Right, Arian's greatest friend and supporter is the

 

Republican political organizer Grover Norquist. Since the late 1990s,

 

Norquist, who is closely allied with President Bush's senior political

 

advisor Karl Rove, has cultivated close relations with radical elements

 

within the US Muslim community.

 

Spurning those who question the wisdom of his feting of Islamic extremists,

 

Norquist was quick to claim after the 2000 elections that 'George W. Bush

 

owes his election to the Muslim vote.' This, in spite of the fact that Bush

 

lost the State of Michigan, which is home to the largest concentration of

 

Muslims in the US to Al Gore.

 

Norquist, who succeeded in getting candidate Bush to support the banning of

 

secret evidence from criminal trials (a position Bush abandoned after

 

September 11), was given an award for his efforts in April 2001 by an

 

organization called the National Coalition to Protect Political Freedoms –

 

or NCPPF. The president of this organization is Arian. Among the coalition

 

members are front organizations for Islamic Jihad, Hizbullah, Hamas, the

 

IRA, the Peruvian Shining Path and the Basque separatists.

 

Just one week before Arian's arrest, Norquist launched a defamatory attack

 

against fellow Washington Republican Frank Gaffney, a former Reagan

 

administration official who now heads the Center for Security Policy, a

 

Washington- based neoconservative think tank. In an open letter to Gaffney,

 

Norquist attacked him for raising questions about a current and a former

 

White House official for having invited heads of radical Islamic

 

organizations with ties to terror groups to the White House.

 

 

Both men, Suhail Khan and Ali Tulbah are the sons of radical Islamic operatives on the

 

West Coast and were hired by the Bush administration to oversee outreach to

 

the Muslim community. Khan was removed from his position after it was

 

exposed that his father hosted an al-Qaida leader during two separate trips

 

to the US.

Ignoring the security implications of inviting known Islamic terror

 

sympathizers to the White House, Norquist claimed that raising criticism

 

amounted to 'racial prejudice, religious bigotry or ethnic hatred.'

 

Here too, then, Norquist on the Right – like MESA on the Left – refused to

 

acknowledge that support for terrorism and, in the case of Arian and his

 

associates, actual action in support of a terrorist organization, bear

 

criminal implications.

 

Instead, terror apologists and perpetrators are viewed as simply another

 

legitimate voice in a free society's marketplace of ideas. Thus US academics

 

like Columbia University professor Joseph Massad, who just last week

 

published an article in Al-Ahram calling for progressive circles to force

 

the Palestinian leadership to again overtly embrace the destruction of

 

Israel and terrorism as official policy, are allowed to act with impunity.

 

The Bush administration's decision to press forward with charges against

 

Arian, in spite of his prominence, now puts these people on notice. It also

 

has several important implications for Israel in our fight against Islamic

 

terrorism – not least, to stop giving voice to those who use the public

 

stage to make apologies for terrorism and incite against Israel.

 

In enabling MKs Ahmed Tibi and Azmi Bishara, whose overt support for

 

terrorist organizations is well documented, to run for Knesset in the last

 

election, our Supreme Court justices showed that they are unable to make the

 

distinction between protected and criminal speech.

 

 

As Justice Minister, Tommy Lapid will preside over the selection of the next generation of

 

Supreme Court justices. His choices will largely determine whether our

 

justice system will finally accept the
necessity of ending the practice of

 

providing legal protections to those who seek common cause with the enemies

 

of the State of Israel.

Today the US Congress is debating the second Patriot Act. This act provides

 

for the revocation of citizenship of those who support terrorist

 

organizations. During his term in office, outgoing Interior Minister Eli

 

Yishai revoked the citizenship of two Israeli Arabs who are members of

 

Hizbullah. Will incoming Interior Minister Avraham Poraz have the political

 

will to continue and widen the practice thus enforcing the state's

 

regulation that stipulates that support for terrorist activities and Israeli

 

citizenship are incompatible?

 

 

In arresting Arian and his Islamic Jihad cronies, the US has shown that its war on terrorism is being consistently and unapologetically fought by all levels of the US government.

 

 

It will be a central challenge of our new government, and particularly of our Shinui

 

ministers, to show that Israel fights our war against terrorism with at

 

least the same seriousness and intensity as the Bush administration.

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post.

It's only fair to share...Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneShare on Google+

No Comments

Leave a Comment