The Enemy Within: Islamic Jihadists Controlling U.S. Anti-Terrorism

An astounding interview. For more, see the Holy Land Foundation Trial files, the Muslim Brotherhood's long term strategy memo, and "'To Our Great Detriment': Ignoring What Extremists Say about Jihad." Links in the original:

...PJTV’s Bill Whittle has posted a very disturbing look at how U.S. counter-terrorism efforts are being controlled by the Islamic jihadists. Sources within the intelligence community have stepped forward to present some of the details about the liberal progressive politically-correct mindset that is driving an operational model that directly endangers America. You can watch the interview here but I find the information contained in it so unsettling and important that I took the time to transcribe the interview. Key points have been highlighted.

BILL WHITTLE: Hi, I’m Bill Whittle from PJTV and I’m standing in front of what is very likely the most photographed structure on the face of the earth. Inside the White House sits the President of the United States of America; the most powerful man in the world. The President bears enormous responsibilities, and primary among them is to defend the citizens of the United States of America. We’re here in Washington today to speak to a Department of Defense analyst and counter-terrorism official who, requesting anonymity, has made some very remarkable charges. Charges that both the political and the military structure of the highest levels of our government are infiltrated by the very agents of the enemy against which we find ourselves fighting today.


BILL WHITTLE: Well, you were given an assignment from the Joint Chiefs, essentially from the upper levels of the Pentagon, to understand what the Islamic jihadi enemy’s ideology and operational methods might be. Is that a fair statement?

DoD Analyst: Yes.

BILL WHITTLE: Ok. What did you discover?

DOD ANALYST: Well, I was expecting to find that, well, there was some basis to the jihadi arguments that their jihadist warfare, that there were competing arguments and that we could leverage these competing arguments but because they were claiming Islamic laws as basis for their actions we had to start there. And over a long period of time I ended up collecting a large body of Islamic law, an enormous amount of it available in English, and realized that if Islamic law is the criteria by which you measure legitimacy or illegitimacy you can’t show that the moderates have a doctrinal basis for the position they hold, and you can’t show that on the statement of the law the radicals are wrong. I was expecting to find competing views that had some merit. I was expecting to find that the moderate view would be the dominant view, and we’d have to figure out how to make these arguments so that people in the Middle East would know what it was, and could not find it. Now, I could find that you’re not allowed to fight a jihad you can’t win, and that’s a limiting factor, but when you get to actually what published Islamic law says, it supports the radicals and what they say. And you come to find, after you kind of get a sense for the language of jihad, and the language of how Islamic law works, that it’s pervasive, even in the U.S. Muslim community.

BILL WHITTLE: So you got out, you do this research that you were tasked to do by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Department of Defense; you come back and you say to them, “It’s the radicals that appear to have the doctrinal basis, not the moderates.”

DOD ANALYST: That’s correct.

BILL WHITTLE: Ok. Well, presumably, this would be an interesting piece of information for our Defense department to have. What were the consequences of you coming back with this information?

DOD ANALYST: Shock. Because what my experience brought me to was the complete unresponsiveness to facts that as a practical matter they experience every day. I think that gives way, on a different level, to one that basically has had me believing or holding that if you have no profession…if you have no factual basis to hold a position, you have no professional basis to support it. If you’re professionals, then you have a duty to be competent; that includes the duty to know. And if you are national security analysts who are professionals, you’re in violation of your oath to be competent, you’re in violation of your oath to protect and defend. It just seems they picked up our whole national security apparatus and moved it from a factual legal basis to one that supports the narratives. But it just struck me that when you hit a certain level, and I don’t want to sound too cynical, but at the same time it seemed where the point at which your future promotion was dependent upon toeing a party line as…let me rephrase that; toeing a narrative as opposed to orienting on facts, or I witnessed a complete shutdown. A friend of mine used to call my brief, “the redco brief” or the “guilty knowledge brief”, meaning you see this brief that clearly lays out facts that must be accounted for, and at a certain point they just stopped coming.

BILL WHITTLE: So when officials started telling you, “Hey, we’re not interested in this; we just really don’t care to hear this,” I mean, how pervasive was this attitude? Was it large numbers of people or one or two key individuals? I mean, just exactly what are we looking at?

DOD ANALYST: I can’t give you names and numbers; I have to say, in fairness, there are scores of senior people who got it and were supportive, but it seems that the organizational emphasis, the institutional emphasis, was in the other direction. And so you would get it in terms of people who would come up and tell you, “We really support you but we can only go so far.” You know, I supported some missions where the people who I supported made it very clear to me that using the information I used really brought success in a stunning way. And for a while there I thought that just the sheer force of those successful things would cause some people to do a double look. It didn’t happen.

BILL WHITTLE: Well, immediately after we concluded that interview here in the Mayflower Hotel, a second whistleblower came forward. We received a phone call from another gentleman who’s also extremely concerned about the infiltration of radical Islam into law enforcement and defense. Let’s go upstairs now and listen to parts of our interview with a former special agent for the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

BILL WHITTLE: Ok, can you start by giving me a quick thumbnail of your professional experience?

FORMER FBI AGENT: I spent nearly 15 years working in the government with a primary expertise on the Islamic movement in the United States, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Islamic doctrine.

BILL WHITTLE: And which department did you work for?

FORMER FBI AGENT: The FBI.

BILL WHITTLE: So you were a special agent for the Federal Bureau of Investigation?

FORMER FBI AGENT: Yes.

BILL WHITTLE: Ok. You assert that we’re getting many of our cues on how to react to this terrorist threat from the Muslim Brotherhood, that essentially we’re letting our enemy tell us how to fight them. Now, I think this is a critical point that we really need to make clear: is this speculation on your part? Or is this credible, factual information that you’ve been able to obtain as a former special agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation?

FORMER FBI AGENT: It’s all factual information and it’s open to the public to digest if they so desire. These documents from the Holy Land Foundation trial are available online. All you need to do is Google “Holy Land Foundation”. The documents also show that every major Muslim organization in the United States is a Muslim Brotherhood front, specifically the most prominent organizations. The two most prominent organizations in the United States, or three most prominent, are the Muslim Public Affairs Council, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), and ISNA (Islamic Society of North America). CAIR is a Hamas entity; it is Hamas; and ISA is a huge financial entity for Hamas in the United States. And CAIR and ISNA are the two groups that the U.S. government, including the FBI, DoD, state department, DHS, look to and utilize to do their outreach with the Muslim community in America.

BILL WHITTLE: Can you tell us how these radical Islamic organizations interface directly with the federal government, in terms of the Defense Department, in terms of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, local law enforcement? How exactly do these radical Muslim groups use their connections to suppress the defenses of the United States against these type of activities?

FORMER FBI AGENT: That’s a great question. At the national level, or the FBI and DHS, they actually are invited in by general council’s office of the FBI and DHS to sit in on brainstorming about investigative techniques that FBI agents are using in the field….

BILL WHITTLE: I have to stop you because, frankly, that sounds so absurd that I have to really make sure I’m understanding you correctly. Are you saying that the radicalized Muslim groups are invited in to learn our investigative techniques? That they are invited in to get their feedback on how we’re going to fight against them? Is that…is that what I understood you to say?

FORMER FBI AGENT: Yes. So for instance, in the FBI, the general council of the FBI, Valerie Caproni, invited these Muslim organizations, as well as the ACLU and other groups, in to make sure the investigative techniques and the attorney general guidelines and the way the FBI was going to implement the attorney general guidelines was ok and not offensive to these organizations. As an investigator, and certainly speaking for many others that I know, that is…ummm…that’s nothing short of outrageous. If you can imagine any group, whether it’s the Costa Nostra or the mafia or any kind of organized crime syndicate, certainly the Muslim Brotherhood could loosely fall under that category, certainly it’s much, much more significant than the mafia was, but to invite them in to make sure that our investigative techniques aren’t offensive to John Gotti; I mean, it’s absurd on the face of it but that’s exactly what we’re doing.

BILL WHITTLE: Sure. Because you’re revealing in great detail exactly what your investigative and interrogation techniques are, right? I mean, in a meeting like that you’re giving away the farm, essentially, in terms of how you’re going to be operating in order to make sure that their feelings don’t get hurt. And then you’re essentially giving the enemy all of the details about how you plan to operate against them, right?

FORMER FBI AGENT: Certainly a significant strategic look a how we’re doing things,yes; as well as some specific techniques.

BILL WHITTLE: Well, you’d mentioned earlier that there’s no training; that people ranging from upper-level administrators in the FBI down to some local sheriff’s deputy in some county out in the middle of Arizona, some place local, local law enforcement; you mentioned that there’s no training for these people whatsoever in terms of the real nature of the threat. Why is that?

FORMER FBI AGENT: Well, again, I think there are a lot of pieces to that but number one is when the people advising the assistant directors, the special agents in charge in the FBI, the assistant secretaries, and the Department of Homeland Security, etc., when those are Muslim Brothers you’re not going to get training that discusses Islamic doctrine and who the Muslim Brotherhood is, their history and their influence, and their penetration operations here in the United States. And, to boot, the people who ARE training the FBI are groups like CAIR, which is a Hamas entity and an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism financing throughout the history of the United States.

BILL WHITTLE: Now I have to stop you again because this is virtually impossible for me to process. You’re saying that the training that our counter-terrorism forces get is determined by radical Islamic groups like the Muslim Brotherhood?

FORMER FBI AGENT: No, I’m not saying it’s determined. It’s given by them. They have been in our FBI field offices, they’ve been in our FBI headquarters teaching and training our agents and our employees.

BILL WHITTLE: Is this not too dissimilar to saying that the people who were determining the landing zones for the D-Day invasion of Germany were Nazi S.S. officials giving out information on gunner placements, and where the best places to come ashore are; is it too far-fetched to say that?

FORMER FBI AGENT: It’s not about analogy.

BILL WHITTLE: And then when the plans are finalized and all of the operational details are locked and sealed up in a little envelope, and then it’s handed over to the Gestapo and hopefully they won’t do anything mean with the information.

FORMER FBI AGENT: Right.

BILL WHITTLE: I think that as an average American citizen listening to this information, my first response would be, “How on God’s green earth did this happen? How did this get this far?”

FORMER FBI AGENT: This has happened because the Muslim Brotherhood has a long-term strategy; they are well-organized with hundreds of front groups that support their public relations, their research arms, they’ve insinuated themselves into our largest universities, they have Muslim student’s associations, which is the first Muslim Brotherhood group that formed in the United States in 1963. MSA is on every major college campus in the United States, recruiting people to the Brotherhood in our own campuses.

BILL WHITTLE: So even something as innocuous as a Muslim student association at any American university campus, you can categorically connect those campus groups to the most virulent, radical, anti-American organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood?

FORMER FBI AGENT: I can say that that’s 100% legally and factually true. The evidence entered into the Holy Land Foundation trial demonstrated the Muslim Students Association was the first Muslim Brotherhood entity in the United States formed in 1963 for the sole purpose of being and establishing the Muslim Brotherhood here, and it continues today to be a Muslim Brotherhood entity that has expanded and recruits students on campuses in the United States.

...Until and unless the United States proves capable of appointing and electing officials to the top ranks of our national security leadership who both understand and reject the influence of Islamic jihad groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, our country will be incapable of effective defense against either kinetic or stealth jihad attack. We can do better than this…..much better.