by Cal Thomas
President Obama’s appointment of Rashad Hussain, his deputy associate counsel, as special envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the second largest inter-governmental organization after the United Nations, charged with safeguarding and protecting “the interests of the Muslim world,” should be of serious concern to Congress and the American public. Especially since Hussain, a devout Muslim, has a history of participating in events connected with the Muslim Brotherhood, according to the Chicago Tribune, “the world’s most influential Islamic fundamentalist group” whose goal is to create Muslim states throughout the world.
In 1991, a memo written by Mohamed Akram for the Shura Council of the Muslim Brotherhood spelled out the objective of the organization. Akram said the Muslim Brotherhood “must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.” I am unable to find any “revelation” that has repealed that objective. Quite the contrary. Terrorists seem on track for implementing it.
The president proudly announced that Hussain is a Hafiz, someone who has completely memorized the Qur’an, but he did not spell out what qualifies Hussain to meet with foreign leaders at a diplomatic level in a role that approximates that of an ambassador. According to Jihad Watch, a blog directed by American author Robert Spencer, which “aims to bring to public attention the role of jihad theology and ideology in the modern world,” Hussain’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood date back to his days at Yale Law School.
Ask yourself: If you or your group were interested in damaging or destroying the United States, wouldn’t infiltration at every possible level of government and culture be an effective strategy? You would build your schools and mosques, some of which teach and preach Jihad; you would penetrate the government; you would demand special rights because of your religion — such as no body scanners for Muslim travelers at airports and prayer rooms and foot washing facilities at shopping malls; you would seek to change the foreign policy of the United States because you hate Israel and all Jews (and those “cross-worshipping” Christians) and you would dare the U.S. government to monitor your speeches and associations because you want to keep America’s guard lower than it would be for, say, a spy from communist China.
This was roughly the plot of the creepy movie, “The Manchurian Candidate” in which a crazed woman uses her brainwashed son to help her overthrow the U.S. government so that she might impose her ideology on the country. Unlike the film, this plot is real.
As expected, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, described as America’s largest Muslim civil liberties organization, is thrilled with Hussain’s appointment. In a statement, CAIR said Hussain “will be in a position to strengthen positive outreach to the Islamic world and will be able to provide the president with direct access to the views and concerns of Muslims worldwide.” Is there anyone in the dark about those “views and concerns”? Haven’t they been pretty obvious for the last, oh, 40 years? Don’t they regularly tell us in their newspaper editorials, TV commentaries, sermons and actions?
In an age of terrorism when the president’s own chief counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, compares released terrorists who return to Jihad with released American criminals who return to crime, it is unsettling to see someone with Hussain’s background representing the United States to nations that may harbor or fund terrorists and want to destroy Israel and America. Franklin Roosevelt would not have named Charles Lindbergh, a suspected Nazi sympathizer, personal envoy to Berlin.
It is unfortunate that the U.S. Senate is not required to confirm special envoys. Hussain should be asked about his ideology and associations. If he is to represent America, he should represent what America stands for and not a personal ideological or religious agenda that is not just un-American, but anti-American.