Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump stated that America needs to be “very vigilant” in scrutinizing Muslims regarding matters of security, as it is difficult to separate Islam from radical Islam. He told CNN that Americans “have to be very careful. And we can’t allow people coming into this country who have this hatred of the United States… There’s a sickness going on and you have to get to the bottom of it.”
Donald Trump on CNN March 2016
For her part, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said that America must “empower our Muslim-American communities, who are on the front-lines of the fight against radicalization.”
Are the two positions as far apart as they seem?
Trump has been accused of being an “Islamaphobe” for his position about Muslims and Islam. His call to place a temporary ban on all Muslims applying to enter the United States was roundly criticized by all of the other presidential candidates. Trump argued that America needed more information and better background checks on people that might pose a threat to the country because “Islam hates us.“.
Before Trump made his comments, in September 2015, the US House Committee on Homeland Security released a report about jihadist operations in the U.S. Among the major takeaways of the report were:
- “The jihadist threat in the U.S. homeland is high and has escalated dramatically this year
- ISIS is fueling the Islamist terror wildfire across the globe at unprecedented speed
- Islamist terrorists are intent on killing American law enforcement and military personnel, in addition to innocent civilians”
The report went on to highlight that the state with the highest number of potential jihadists – by a far margin – was Minnesota, at 26% of the total sample set. The report included a sample story about the growing threat of jihadists: “Abdi Nur, only 20-years old when he left Minnesota for Syria last year, is a prime example. Once in the conﬂict zone, he spent months persuading his friends in Minneapolis to join him. His peer-to-peer recruiting nearly worked, as six of his friends attempted to leave the United States for Syria; they were arrested by the FBI this April.”
The newspaper Star Tribune wrote about a Republican reaction to the report: “Republican Rep. John Kline, a member of the House Armed Services Committee and long a hawkish critic of the Obama administration, said the report proves “homegrown terrorism remains a serious issue in Minnesota.” Kline said it also demonstrates the Obama administration “does not have a comprehensive strategy to defeat ISIS and Islamist terrorists.”
Ami Horowitz, a freelance reporter who often produces stories for Fox News, conducted several interviews in May 2015 with Somali Muslim Americans in Minnesota. In his interviews, seen here, Muslim Americans said they were happy and felt welcomed in America. Yet despite those feelings, the Muslims would prefer to live in Somalia, not America. They further believed, that elements of sharia law, such as using the death penalty for anyone that insulted their prophet, should be practiced in the US.
Republicans like Kline and Trump directly pointed to “homegrown terrorism” stemming from the Muslim community. They called for greater scrutiny of those communities to better protect Americans.
The Democrats seemingly suggested a different tactic.
The liberal senator from Minnesota had a very different reaction to the September House report of jihadists in his state. The Star Tribune wrote: “In Washington, U.S. Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn, said the report “only underscores the urgent need for adequate resources to fight terrorist recruitment.” He noted the need to build stronger community outreach programs while refraining from stereotyping. “It’s important that we don’t indiscriminately target members of one community,” he said.”
Just months later, in December 2015, Hillary Clinton addressed a crowd in Minnesota about how to defeat ISIS. One of her points addressed Muslims in America, where her “strategy is empowering Muslim-American communities who are on the front-lines of the fight against radicalization. There are millions of peace-loving Muslims living, working, raising families, and paying taxes in our country. These Americans may be our first, last, and best defense against home grown radicalization and terrorism. They are the most likely to recognize the insidious effects of radicalization before it’s too late, intervene to help set a young person straight. They are the best positioned to block anything going forward.
That’s why law enforcement has worked so hard since 9/11 to build up trust and strong relationships within Muslim-American communities. Here in the Twin Cities, you have an innovative partnership that brings together parents, teachers, imams, and others in the Somali-American community with law enforcement, non-profits, local businesses, mental health professionals and others to intervene with young people who are at risk.
It’s called the Building Community Resilience Pilot Program, and it deserves increased support. It has not gotten the financial resources that it needs to do everything the people involved in it know they can do. And we’ve got to do a better job of supporting it.“
Democrats like Clinton and Franken suggested the solution to dealing with homegrown jihadists is to “empower” that same community that Republicans sought to scrutinize. Their approaches were seemingly polar opposites.
Ignorance and Analysis
In reality, the concerns of jihadist terrorism for Republicans and Democrats are much the same. Republicans feel that the entire Muslim community should be scrutinized as they are not confident in being able to distinguish between the “good” and “bad.” The Democrats want to embrace the good, and get them to both reform and squeal on the “bad.”
Both the Republicans and Democrats advocate intelligence gathering. Clinton wants to use people from within the Muslim community to do the work, while Trump lacks confidence in relying on the community for America’s safety.
Where Trump and Clinton divide is in their basic thoughts about Islam. Trump seemingly believes that Islam is inherently intolerant of western values, so the peaceful Muslims are doing so in spite of their religion. Clinton believes that there is nothing inherently anti-American about Islam, and there are just a small percentage of violent jihadists in the community.
In the end, both Trump and Clinton want to root out homegrown Islamic radicals. Trump just wants to use law enforcement to handle the task and believes that Clinton’s approach allows the fox to guard the hen house.
Related First.One.Through articles
“Jews as a Class”
Political Pinatas: Populist Greed Meets Populist Anger
Half Standards: Gun Control and the Iranian Nuclear Weapons Deal
Subscribe YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/FirstOneThrough
Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis