At PJM, terrorism researcher Patrick Poole reports that Mohamed Elibiary, an appointee on President Obama’s Homeland Security Advisory Council, is in hot water with the Texas Department of Public Safety (TDPS). The issue is whether Elibiary used his privileged access to a state law-enforcement database to acquire intelligence reports and then tried to shop them to the media, urging that they showed rampant “Islamophobia” at TDPS under Governor Rick Perry.
Poole says no story was published because, according to one press source, there was “nothing remotely resembling Islamophobia” in the leaked reports. The source told Poole, “I think [Elibiary] was hoping we would bite and not give it too much of a look in light of other media outfits jumping on the Islamophobia bandwagon.”
The Islamophobia bandwagon was the subject of my column last weekend. Seems there are plenty of Islamists and Leftists climbing aboard.
Elibiary, you’ll no doubt be stunned to learn, was also on the Obama DHS’s working group on “countering violent extremism.” That’s the brain-trust that helped devise the new Obama counterterrorism strategy I outlined (here and here) a few weeks back — the one that envisions having law-enforcement pare back their intelligence-gathering activities and take their marching orders from “community partners.” I call the new strategy “factophobia.”
As noted by Poole and the Investigative Project on Terrorism, Elibiary’s history includes an appearance at a conference honoring Ayatollah Khomeini; condemning the Justice Department’s successful prosecution of a Hamas-financing conspiracy designed by the Muslim Brotherhood (the Holy Land Foundation case); praise for Brotherhood theorist Sayyid Qutb; and an aggressive email exchange with Rod Dreher in 2006 (when Dreher, at the Dallas Morning News, countered Elibiary’s praise for Qutb), in which Elibiary reportedly called Dreher “a Klansman without a hood” [ACM: I think that means "Islamophobe"] and warned him: “Treat people as inferiors and you can expect someone to put a banana in your exhaust pipe or something.”
Who better could President Obama possibly choose to help formulate counterterrorism strategy? Actually, once you read the strategy, I think you’ll agree that he made a perfect choice.
Mr. McCarthy: you're too much in the former prosecutor mode. Whether the allegations are true is one thing; how it was obtained is another. Your argument goes to whether evidence is legitimately obtained, not to whether it's true or not.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNot at all surprising and a strong vindication for Gov Perry in the ridiculous accusations of Pamela Geller and friends.
We keep expecting that sooner or later the Obama administration is going to wise up and figure out they've been letting foxes into the hen house, but they aren't going to come to terms with it. We've got to make sure we kick the bums out of office and put in people who are WISE to Islamist strategies.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe Obama Administration hasn't been letting foxes into the henhouse. WE did that when we elected Obama!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseFunny how McCarthy brushes past the question of how and why Elibiary obtained his "privileged access to state law enforcement databases" to begin with. At least Patrick Poole, in his story, acknowledges that Elibiary obtained his DHS advisory group appointment based on his previous appointments in . . . the state of Texas.
If there actually is something wrong with Elibiary having been appointed to advise law enforcement, then that's actually a reflection on Rick Perry, just as much as it is on Obama. But I guess we can trust Andrew McCarthy not to mention this.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOK...let's try and follow your logic on this. Perry is a closet dupe for the Islamicists, so they accuse his administration of being hostile to the Islamic agenda...to...to...deflect attention away from Perry's obvious ties to the Islamic stealth jihad movement in the U.S. Yeah...sounds reasonable. Or as you say, funny. Can you send me one of your black helicopter lapel pins?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseExcept Elibiary apparently did not misuse offical documents for political purposes while serving on the Texas DPS Advisory Board. And having read the DHS announcement on Elibiary's appointment there is no mention to his previous assignment to the Texas DPS Advisory Board, just his work as the President of the Freedom and Justice Foundation. Any 'leveraging' of the Texas appointment is conjecture on Poole's part with no real evidence supplied.
The fact that Elibiary misused official documents might reflect as badly on Perry as it does Obama. However, if Elibiary stays in his current position with full access to official law enforcement documents the reflection is solely upon his boss, Obama.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis is one of those, Guess you had to be there, appointments, marc_b.
Lots of local organizations like Muhamed Elibiary's and CAIR gained legitimization in the late 90's when Dallas grappled with investigations into the Holy Land Foundation (Hamas fund raiser). There was quite a major campaign going on here to beat up the major newspaper for daring to investigate HLF activities. That campaign continued after 9/11 and the 2007-2008 HLF trials.
After 9/11 and the bust of HLF the political correctness had already descended on Dallas media and law enforcement - and it remains in tact today. External Link
I'm trying to track down where Elibiary's civilian advisory appointment to TX DPS came from, but I can tell you it is not listed among the appointments that the Texas Gov makes. External Link
Another thing I can tell you is while some of the Dallas FBI was involved in the investigation and persecution of under the radar Islamists, other parts of the FBI were engaged in active relations with their supporters. External Link
When I read things like, in violation of FBI policy, the New Haven, CT FBI co-sponsored and co-hosted with CAIR the October 2010 conference with the Muslim Coalition of Connecticut, then I know we have a major problem with our Security and Intelligence departments.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseA very unfortunate mistake in writing "persecution" instead of "prosecution" in my next to the last paragraph. Mis-labeling no doubt because I do a lot of writing about religious persecution, rather than a Freudian slip as some will imagine.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis is all very interesting, but my point remains: You can't use Elibiary to get at Obama without raising the same question about Perry.
Tagging Elibiary as "an Obama appointee," while managing to avoid acknowledging the man's Texas state agency appointments to begin with, may be typical McCarthy, but others shouldn't let it pass. And they won't.
Whether Perry personally appoints DPS advisors is really irrelevant. Certainly the commissioners responsible for DPS are all Perry's hand picks. Is he ultimately accountable for government actions in this state, or not?
Honestly, apart from the specific questions Poole raises about Elibiary's recent actions, I think it was perfectly reasonable for Perry's administration -- and Obama's -- to have asked Elibiary to serve. Getting active support for homeland security from within local Muslim communities, just like others, is one of those real-world responsibilities you have to attend to, if you're actually a governor (as opposed to just a campaigner).
I guess you and others may disagree. But if you think Elibiary's presence in advisory capacities shows that law enforcement is being hamstrung by "political correctness," or an "Islamophobia bandwagon," or whatever, then my original point remains: It's on Perry, just as much as it is on Obama.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI think you miss the point, marc. You miss the climate I tried to describe to you that grew up rather strongly in Dallas because of intense PC/PR campaign CAIR waged on behalf of the HLF5.
You can't put the onus of Elibiary's appointment on the Texas Governor who did not make the appointment. We sure can expect Homeland Security to have done their homework on Elibairy's extremely questionable positions over many years before giving him any type of role in Homeland Security issues that would allow him to access secret databases.
The Obama administration has a track record for questionable appointments and hires - flatly ignoring the radical positions of people like Elibiary.
You may think it is reasonable to have these folks involved in our security fold, but I certainly do not. I am of the mind that the vetting process does not have the bar raised high enough for national security purposes.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNo, I read what you wrote, I didn't miss any of it. It just doesn't make sense.
I'm sure the climate of controversy in Dallas does help explain why Elibiary was considered for a state appointment. But if you think the appointment was wrong, then there's no reason why that explanation should serve as an excuse. It just raises the question of why Perry couldn't resist the pressure.
And, yes, it does get back to Perry himself. Again, does he ultimately run his own show, or not? Funny how you can give him the credit for Texas job growth, but refuse to acknowledge his responsibility for appointments to his own state government.
Also intriguing that you would claim that Elibiary's access to Texas DPS databases comes via his service on a federal committee. You don't think he had this access because of his work as an adviser for ... Texas DPS? If you really think there was screening that should have been done, and wasn't, again you should recognize that this must have been at the Texas level too.
You're trying to (a) support Perry 100% and (b) maintain an argument about supposedly lax standards of participation in Obama's domestic security policy. In fact, you cannot do both of these. Anyone whose main loyalty is to Perry had better hope this whole Elibiary episode just goes away. If it hurts Obama, it will hurt Perry just as much, or even more.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseElibiary reportedly called Dreher “a Klansman without a hood”
Hmm, does that make Elibiary " meridianus-phobic"
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLet me guess:
Already happened, but not discovered yet - a member of this "Homeland Security Advisory Council" has suggested a more intensive, cooperative mutual sharing of strategy, information, etc... with the ISI.
Bet you $1., am I on?
Don't bother to ask, though, "executive privilege" and all.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Sayyid Qutb"
Forget everything else, we need to bomb these places with VOWELS...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou do realize he has 3 vowels and 10 letters in his name while you have 3 vowels and 11 letters?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLocation, location, location...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOf course, Democrats will do and say anything for their unethical greed.
But Perry doesn't need anyone to sabotage him, he does a fine job himself - clearly another Public Sector Player who survived nearly via working in politics and government.
This idea he should have avoided the debates is about as mindless as it gets. So is his BIRTHER revival.
External Link
Again, the fashion amongst the sound side has weakened us, and continues to produce flop after flop.
And it is clear there are those who are so willing to exploit the image/identity game...
Conservative Pundits bear a huge credit for the enormous failure, even today we see Hillary Clinton leading polls, when she is one major disaster after unethical failure after another. And those "operation chaos" gimmicks only enable the sophistry - as does the less then objective vision of those on the sound side.
We have to do better, recognize we too are part of the recipe for this enormous fiasco in Our Government, and focus on removing the Democrats in 2012 before it is too late.
The nonsense will continue, but those who play it will continue to lose credibility, becoming a distant memory.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLeftists are practically collaborating with Islamists to tear down those institutions that guarantee our freedom, and Old Fan only offers the most perfunctory criticism before turning to an off-topic regurgitation of his attack on Rick Perry.
And he still misses the point, confusing principled opposition to Romney with some vague theory about fashion and identity games.
"We have to do better, recognize we too are part of the recipe for this enormous fiasco in Our Government, and focus on removing the Democrats in 2012 before it is too late."
He's right to realize that the GOP bears some responsibility for the state we're in, but he doesn't then conclude that it's simply not enough to remove the Democrats from power: we have to replace them with ACTUAL CONSERVATIVES who will rein in the Leviathan state, but Old Fan supports a progressive Republican who is more likely than most to betray our conservative principles while in office.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhy bother to smear Rick Perry an "Islamophope" when evidence exists that he signed off on giving a political platform at a "Values Voter Summit" to a known sectarian extremist notorious for spewing religious hatred & division targeting Mormons, Catholics, Jews--and Muslims? Governor Perry not only refused to denounce Jeffress he thought his bigoted speech "Hit it out of the park."
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSectarianism isn't bigotry. Religious Jews believe all good men will ascend to heaven, so Jews don't proselytize. Christians believe you only get to heaven through Jesus, and they proselytize because they want us to come along - it's nice of them.
After urging his sect to vote Perry because of his "correct" theology, Jeffries said they should vote Romney over Obama if it came down to that, for the values. Where's the bigotry?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse