Well-received by the mainstream media (and predictably denounced by Islamophobe bloggers and right-wing press), it's a much-needed, ground-breaking work. Detailed and comprehensive — though an easy read — it ties together and pinpoints exactly what's being said in the Islamophobe arena, who's being paid to say it, and who's paying them to say it.

But how well does it meet the hopeful expectations placed on it by the Muslim community?

Muslims looking for a quick-fix answer or a magic wand that will make Islamophobia go away will have to look elsewhere. There are no solutions here, but that's a good thing. By purposefully avoiding any bullet-point strategic or tactical recommendations, the report will force Muslim individuals and policy makers to shake their complacency, apply their own creative mental rigour and draw up their own strategies.

That makes it one of the most literally thought-provoking works in the contemporary Islamic discourse in recent years (and a real strength of the report).

Muslim groups in general have a mixed record on rising to meet such challenges — so it remains to be seen how well-leveraged the report will become as a resource tool — but the foundation laid down in the report is immense.

However, it's not an explicit call-to-action piece, and there's a slight down side to the report's approach as well. The hypertight focus of “Fear, Inc.” on the Islamophobia network itself leaves no room to include the Muslim relationship and response to Islamophobia, depriving the report of some potentially useful context and giving it an overtly singular tone. While this almost isolated perspective — deep and thorough as it may be — is what should spur Muslims to find creative solutions for countering Islamophobia, it also allows room for failure: While the report doesn't tell groups how to do it right, by the same token it doesn't document how they've occasionally done it wrong and inadvertently fed the Islamophobia beast. Since the report does highlight some Islamophobia network messaging points and debunks them, it only seems appropriate to examine (or at least mention) any Muslim responsibility or accountability, if applicable, in those points' development or propagation.

Glossing over the Muslim element in any Muslim-Islamophobe analysis also runs the risk of imparting a subtle, subliminal reinforcement of the “victim” mentality, which may not play well to a non-Muslim observer (and altogether a mindset for the Muslim community to avoid).

These drawbacks are minor, however, and don't diminish the report's importance and efficacy. All of it is pertinent, useful and meticulously researched.

But what does it all mean? How do Muslim individuals and organizations begin analyzing and applying this rich infomation? Are Muslims even ready for the task?

To dig a little deeper, I had a couple of very nice e-mail conversations with the tireless Wajahat Ali, lead researcher for the project (among his many diverse activities). We talked about context, racism, internal divisions, what's next for CAP, and his own personal take and observations.

• The Context of the CAP Report
• Audience of Report is mainstream, global audience
• Reaction of Anti-Muslim Bigots
• Muslim Community Response
• Root of Fear Inc. Hatred
• Post-report Scenarios

[Mustafa Stefan Dill]: Can you talk a little bit about why the Muslim community's response to the Islamophobe network wasn't really covered?

[Wajahat Ali]: The report has a tightly focused exposé on the inner-workings of the “Islamophobia network” as we have categorized and identified them. Mainly, we wanted to show how a group of seven funders have empowered a tightly connected, self-reliant and effective network of several individuals and organizations to the tune of $42.6 million over the past 10 years to manufacture fear, hysteria and hate against Muslims.

From the beginning, we realized people will ask us several questions, such as, “How come you didn't mention Europe?” Or, “How come you don't do an academic analysis of Sharia?” and so forth. Of course, the report is not an “end-all-be-all” report on Islamophobia but merely a solid foundational beginning to further explore pertinent issues.

Your question regarding the Muslim community's response to the Network is important and warrants an analysis. However, it was not the focus of this particular report.

I look forward to someone writing it up. I'd very much like to read it.

[MSD]: In the AJE piece, you said it was meant for the general population. Can you expand on that and what you hope the general public will do with this? How would you like to see this best used?

[WA]: I'm not your usual, Washington D.C., “policy wonk.” My background is primarily that of a playwright, attorney, commentator and “accidental” community activist. I told CAP from the beginning that if this report would be one of the millions of reports buried in the cocoon of Washington D.C. under the bureaucratic weight of ineffective, mass produced, policy briefs churned almost weekly by the town, then I don't want to waste my time with it.

Thankfully, CAP agreed and we wrote the report for a mainstream, global audience, with grassroots communities, teachers, students, average Joes and Jibrils in mind. Many times people ignore our fellow citizens, neighbors, co-workers, partners in faith and so forth as simply the “laymen.” But real, effective power in changing minds, thoughts and hearts comes from knowledge and disseminating that knowledge to the people. The report is a fact-based, thoroughly sourced result of a six-month investigation.

We strongly believe it has the ability to expose this divisive network that preys on fear, misinformation and ignorance and convey this knowledge in a clear, easy to understand manner for the mass public to build resilience against such nonsense. So, after reading it, people will say, “We didn't know this 'anti-Sharia' threat was totally manufactured by the Network.” “What? The 'Ground Zero Mosque' was a non-issue that was deliberately hyped by the Network and transformed into an international hysteria which has subsequently threatened our national security?” “These faces I see on Fox News – this is what they've said and written about our fellow Americans who happen to be Muslim, Arab or immigrants? This is vile.”

We are confident the facts in this report will also enlighten several law enforcement officials, politicians, and funders to the true nature, intent and ideology of this Network that has promoted its bias and hate under the guise of allegedly working on national security and counter-radicalization issues.

We hope to end “Islamophobia” because it poisons the communal well of America and advances nothing but division and fear against our fellow citizens, which is utterly un-American and anti-American behavior and completely opposite to our shared values.

We hope this report is a step in steering the national discourse on these important issues towards moderation, civility and common sense.

[MSD]: One of the things I've noticed is that the rhetoric of the professional Islamophobe class gets more and more over the top for fear of profit loss when they get called out or when their arguments get eroded — witness the overall increase in vitriol since the Arab Spring, for example. The response so far to your report seems to bear out this trend. Any take or analysis on their response?

[WA]: Good observation. First and foremost, we can safely say this is a lucrative industry. Islamophobia sells, and it brings home a lot of bacon. Never forget, this is a 24-7, daily job for these people. This is how they earn their daily bread, so they will vigorously defend their dubious occupation, which is quite profitable I might add. I mean, wouldn't you if you were David Horowitz and bringing home $500,000 each year for spreading hate? Or how about the $300,000 that Gaffney pockets. Or, the $200K of Robert Spencer and Brigitte Gabriel.

They simply escalate the “crazy.” The foundation of most their arguments is meritless, so it's easy to expose it as fraudulent and laughable. If there was some shame and honesty here, they would retract their statements and issue corrections. But, an honest, forthright discussion on these important issues is not their priority. They want to continue profiting off this absurd circus they've created, which sadly has gone from fringe to mainstream in the past 10 years and threatens people, communities, families, our national discourse and even our national security.

For example, Gov. Christie of New Jersey recently appointed a thoroughly qualified and well respected attorney, Suhail Mohammad, to Superior Court. Steve Emerson, one of the leaders of the Network, responded by saying Gov. Christie has a tin ear for “radical Islam.” 2012 Presidential hopeful Rick Perry's close ties to the Ishmaeli Muslim community in Texas was revealed. Pam Geller's response? Rick Perry is obviously a pro-Sharia, fifth column president. President Obama and President Bush's administration reached out to Muslim communities – why? Because, obviously, their administration is infiltrated by radical Islam. President Obama's staffmember Valerie Jarrett gave statements at the ISNA conference a few years back, which was enough for the Network to prove that it was coddling “Radical Islam,” since ISNA, a moderate, mainstream Muslim American organization, is obviously a front and incubator for stealth jihad. Surprisingly, the same smears were not made against Evangelical leader Rick Warren, who also spoke at ISNA the same year.

The Conservative Political Action Conference — which is the annual Hall of Fame conservative meet-up featuring all-stars from the right — is accused by Frank Gaffney of being infiltrated by Radical Islam. Why? They invited Muslim American Republican Suhail Khan to speak, as well as Republican, anti-tax reformer, non-Muslim Grover Norquist — who happens to be a married to a Muslim.

So, their strategy is simply to ratchet up the crazy, the paranoia, the smears, the baseless allegations, the character assassinations, and keep feeding their base and funders' “terror” and manufactured “bogeymen” just enough to continue lining up their coffers. Since there is hardly any truth, logic, facts or substance behind their arguments, what do they care if sane, rational people attack it with facts and evidence? Again, they are exploiting fear, uncertainty, ignorance for the sake of promoting their agenda and lucrative career built upon smearing millions of Americans simply due to their faith.

[MSD]: What's been the reaction from Muslim communities to the report so far?

[WA]: The response from all communities has been overwhelmingly positive. It's really rewarding and encouraging to see this report, which is a 130 page policy report released by a think tank, go viral and spread on Facebook, Twitter, the blogosphere, and mailing lists by non-DC folk. I'm talking about students, non-academics, grassroots leaders, community leaders of other faiths and ethnicities, the mass media and so forth.

Many Muslim American communities have said, “Thank you! We've been waiting for someone to do this report for years.” They, of course, are sensitive to these issues because their communities have been attacked by these Islamophobia Network organizations and individuals for years. Now, they have facts, evidence, and the categorization and break down of the Network, along with the money trail, to truly dissect it and understand it. It seems to be an empowering, educational and hopeful report. We are proud of that.

Let's not forget this is simply a remake. Muslims are the current bogeyman. In the past, it was Jews, the Irish Catholics, gays and lesbians, and Japanese-Americans. But, eventually, Americans find their moral compass and wake up eventually smelling something rotten festering in their backyard, and we as a society decide to finally clean house. This is us collectively taking out the garbage that is the Islamophobia network and their ideology of hate.

[MSD]: You're touching on an interesting point. Is the root of the network's hatred based on religious difference or racism? For me, that's the possible elephant in the room. In general, the network seems to not target the African – American Muslim communities, who are a great example of long-standing successful American Islamic acculturation (and IMO need to be more represented in various interfaith and Islamic round tables). The network seems to focus on masaajid or leaders of Middle Eastern or South Asian background, as those racial identifiers subconsciously resonate more with the terrorists that make the news headlines.

On the other hand, hatred is hatred, and on a tactical level, does it even matter to understand their motivation?

[WA]: It's difficult to parse out each of their motivations, but I do believe some possess a deep-seated, vitriolic hate against Muslims as evidenced by their own rhetoric and actions. Brigitte Gabriel's grassroots group ACT! for America exists for no other reason than to combat and marginalize Muslims and Islam, although she accomplished her agenda under the guise of allegedly fighting radical Islam. The Anti-Defamation League reviewed this organization and disagreed, asserting she is in fact advancing an anti-Muslim, conspiratorial agenda. She has also said Arabs and Muslims have no soul. Geller and Spencer also seem to be driven by an exaggerated, irrational fear of Muslims. They have protested the construction of mosques in America, supported racist, neo-Nazi groups such as the English Defense League and notorious Islamophobes Geert Wilders. They seem threatened by any sign of Muslim – American empowerment or mainstream visibility.

Others such as Frank Gaffney and Steve Emerson need a convenient boogeyman to justify their occupation and existence to their funders. Gaffney emerges from the paranoid, Cold War mindset, in which he railed against the Soviet threat during the 80′s. Muslims were the next logical replacement for him beginning in the 90′s and especially after Sept. 11. The Tennessean reported Emerson milks money from his donors by exaggerating the threat posed by Muslims.

For others, such as Rush Limbaugh, I simply think it's good fodder for profit and entertainment. I don't think he has a deep hatred for Muslims.

There is definitely a racial component to this movement. It seems to be heavily interested in marginalizing politically active Arab-Americans. Gaffney, Pipes, Geller, Spencer and others frowned upon President Obama's outreach to Muslim communities and they are deeply against the “Arab Spring,” suggesting that this will bring forth a radical Islamist agenda that they allege has already “infiltrated” America.

However, these Islamophobes, such as David Yerushalmi and David Horowitz, also have a “colorful” history of being racist towards African-Americans. Yerushalmi has written they are a murderous race intent on killing themselves, for example. Congressman West, who is African American, has really rallied around the Islamophobia rhetoric since entering Congress. “Islam is a totalitarian theocratic political ideology, it is not a religion,” said West in August 2010 while running for office. “This radical understanding of Islam has been around since 622 AD. It is totalitarian, it is imperialistic in its designs.”

Then in January 2011, he said in a television interview that Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), an American-born convert to Islam, represents the “antithesis of the principles upon which this country was established.” A surprised Rep. Ellison responded: “Contrary to the views expressed by Congressman West, I work to represent the highest ideals of our great nation—ideals like freedom of worship and respect for all faiths, equal protection under the law as well as a civil and open public discourse.”

So, it seems the network has a lot of hate to spread around, regardless of race.

[MSD]: For me, the detailing of the grassroots strategy by ACT! for America was one of the most illuminating portions of the report. I'll be candid: the Muslim community doesn't seem to have the organizational or cultural will or leadership to mount anything near that scale to implement a counterstrategy. I think there's a number of sociocultural factors for that, but do you think such an effort is possible within the Muslim community? What are the risks?

[WA]: Muslim-Americans are not a monolith. We should not seek “unity” for sake of “unity.” It's a fallacy. It's ineffective, unrealistic and untenable. We are the most diverse religious community in America in terms of race, socio-economic background, religious differences, and so forth.

However, there are enough numbers and money in the community that could easily be invested to create a competent, professional, transparent, grassroots organization that has a clear mission statement and clear objectives that are carried out in a methodical manner by people trained and educated to do just that.

It's not rocket science. ACT! For America used a successful playbook that co-founder Guy Rodgers developed in the 90′s with his work for Pat Robertson's Christian Coalition. Not all Republicans, conservatives or those on the right agree with ACT! For America or are ACT! members, but they have a core following that is aligned by a simple issue –”countering radical Islam” — and they are thoroughly organized at empowering this base and helping them spread the message.

Muslim-American grassroots efforts hopefully will be created to spread positive messages that preach inclusivity, tolerance, respect and selfless conduct for the betterment of all communities. The key is to make sure that organization doesn't hold itself out to be “the representative” of Muslim Americans. It is simply one piece of the giant mosaic. And, again, it needs to simply have competent leadership, vision and execution. It's not impossible – it just needs some thought and careful implementation.

To think otherwise is to play in to the victim mentality.

[MSD]: Care to speculate why hasn't this happened yet? What is it in the American Muslim consciousness that prevents us from reaching out across our own diversity and successfully building those internal coalitions?

[WA]: This is a very important question that really goes to the heart of lingering, deep-seated problems afflicting our communities from within. I think generalizations should be avoided since it's far too reductive and simplistic to use terms such as “immigrant” communities vs. “indigenous/native” communities. This language is used to explain the schism between immigrant South Asian and Arab-American communities and existing African-American communities, as if this is insolvable and inherently doomed to linger for further generations.

I have faith that my generation and specifically the upcoming generation — the post-post 9-11 generation, if you will — shall transcend these differences that have existed due to ignorance, harmful assumptions, classism, lack of communication, and — let's face it — racism, by acknowledging its existence and finding proactive solutions based on mutual respect, understanding and empathy.

The “racial” divide exists. Many Muslim American communities — not all — have made the mistake of living in culturally isolated cocoons, burying our heads in the sand, sealed behind a projected bubble of illusory protection, assuming that if we ignore our problems or simply live in cultural ghettos, we will be “safe.” Obviously, this isolation has escalated problems both within the Muslim American communities and with our fellow neighbors of different faiths.

Mostly, the African-American Muslim community has borne the brunt of other Muslims' ignorance, fear and hypocritical double standards. Imagine a South Asian or Arab-American woman bringing home an African-American Muslim man as a potential husband? Thankfully, it has happening more, but we all know the horror stories that have occurred in the past. I pray we see more biracial Muslim American couples in the 21st century — it's perhaps the most healthy, productive and successful way of healing these divides for our future communities.

We also suffer from this romantic idealization of a “back in the motherland” Muslim utopia that doesn't exist, nor has ever existed. Yet the myth persists, which perpetuates a type of exclusive, exaggerated tribalism. So, we divide ourselves further along ethno-tribal lines: Punjabi Pakistani-American vs. Muhajjar Pakistani-American, or Syrian-American vs. Lebanese-American, and so forth. Again, some communities want to perserve this “identity” by living in a cultural cocoon. This is all fine and dandy, but of course, it only helps to perpetuate the divides, not heal it.

And, good ol' classism, which is prevalent in all ethnic communities, also creates tension. Those who have “achieved” the American dream feel the need to protect it by living behind gated communities. They'll go on the Bay Bridge from the East Bay straight to San Francisco but never bother to stop where “the other people” live in Oakland, which is where we need to invest our talent, resources, money and support to help up-and-coming Muslim American communties who have not tasted professional degrees, privilege or elitism.

Finally, intrafaith problems persist. There are Shia vs. Sunni divides and even multiple divides among those respective religious identities. I am a Deobandi Sunni, but I cannot break bread with you because you are Barelvi, or I am Salafi but you are Sufi, so let's engage in a mutual takfir-off and call each other a heathen and infidel, because, you know, that's the best way to resolve our differences.

I think Muslim American communities can unify on takfiring – we seem to be exceptionally talented at the craft.

There has to be a realization that there has never been nor ever wil be one model “Muslim American identity.” It's a fallacy. A pipe dream resulting from smoking too much pipe. It needs to be abandoned for sake of a more rich, healthy, realistic vision of an America that has existed before our very eyes — one that is vibrant, messy, constantly evolving and representative of the best of both America and Islam's rich diversity.

The tent of Islam in America has to widen to include all communities who claim to be Muslim. You don't have to accept their ideologies, actions or beliefs, but you have to accept their existence and their right to identify as a Muslim. That is key. Instead of closing the tent and excluding some of our best resources –i.e., our fellow Muslims — due to differences in ideology, race, or class, we need to be intelligent, compassionate, strategic and open to seeing how we share similar values and goals, despite our differences.Then we can use that as a foundation in uniting to serve God and our fellow neighbors.

[MSD]: Where does CAP go from here? What do you see as the next piece of research that needs to be done?

[WA]: I cannot speak for CAP. But, the report was intended to create a foundation for further analysis on niche issues. So I see this report as a jumping off point, a stable base which we can use to explore the similarities or differences between Islamophobia in U.S. and Europe. There is definitely a strong trans-Atlantic relationship between both Islamophobia networks and I think that hasn't fully explored in depth and detail.

[MSD]: Any general observations about that relationship, or about Islamophobia in Europe in general, that you can make yet? Any effective counter-responses there that you've noticed?

[WA]: There is a tremendous connection between the Islamophobia network in Europe and the one that has currently risen in the United States. Anders Breivik, the Norwegian mass murderer who killed 76 people (mostly youth) in August, was ideologically inspired by the Islamophobia network in America. He left behind a detailed, meticulous 1,500 page manifesto outlining his reasons for his crime and also as a “training manual” to inspire fellow perverse criminals. He mainly opposed what he calls the Islamization of Europe, multiculturalism, and Muslim immigration to Europe. He cites Robert Spencer's blog and writings more than 162 times, and he cites the Islamophobia network players more than 200 times in total. He shares their same worldview when it comes to seeing Muslims as suspects, threats, anti-”Western” and so forth.

Pam Geller and Robert Spencer, the co-founders of the hate group Stop Islamization of America, were inspired by the European group Stop Islamization of Europe, founded by a marginalized, far right, racist and fascist Islamophobe named Anders Gravers. Geller has called Danish politician Geert Wilders, perhaps the world's most notorious and well known Islamophobe, her “hero.” In turn, Wilders refers to Geller as his “hero.” Wilders has called for a ban on Muslim immigration to Europe, a ban on mosques and a ban on the Quran. Congressman Allen West of Florida refers to him as his “comrade,” and David Horowitz and Brigitte Gabriel have also praised and defended him as well. Wilders was recently invited by the grassroots organizations Tennessee Eagle Forum and TN Freedom Coalition to give a hate-filled screed against Islam and Muslims in front of 3,000 people at Cornerstone mega-church. He parroted all the fears, hysteria and misinformation about Muslims, Islam and Sharia that have been spouted by American Islamophobes. The crowd gave him a standing ovation. David Horowitz's blog condensed his speech into talking points and subsequently praised it.

Individuals have written academic pieces and investigative journalism pieces on this, but we should expect more detailed analysis similar to the CAP report exposing this transatlantic network sometime in the next year.

[MSD]: What other areas do you see needing investigation?

[WA]: I also believe a more focused analysis on the effect, or lack thereof, the Islamophobia Network has on foreign policy is warranted. Another would be the effects this type of rhetoric has on our national security.

I would also love a report to trace the similarities if any of the Islamophobia network's “fear-mongering” playbook deployed against Muslims compared to what other minorities in America have suffered in years past. My research shows the tactics to be eerily similar.

• Mohamed Elibiary is a Dallas-based Texas Muslim community leader and an Advisor to the Homeland Security Enterprise.
• While the recent report by Ackerman on FBI's “Islam training” is troubling, Elibiary provides some contextual insight
• How is the key FBI trainer, Gawthrop, viewed in FBI circles? Who is Coughlin and his relevance?
• Allaying Muslim community concerns & learning from the “Texas model”
• Elibiary's own personal experiences in dealing with the FBI

Insights about the Exposé

Earlier this week, a news story broke and achieved what rarely happens, broad-based scrutiny and indignation towards the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI). In Wired Magazine, Spenser Ackerman' s article exposed FBI Counter-Terrorism training at Quantico as unprofessional and inaccurate. The training manuals were filled with information based on anti-Muslim bigotry or Islamophobia. As a liaison between the FBI and the Muslim community, I can attest that there is nothing new in Ackerman's reporting and could add volumes more to it of FBI wrongdoings; nonetheless, it has been disquieting and demoralizing for someone in my position to watch the ripple effects upon our community's psyche.

In response to this FBI anti-Muslim bigotry training story breaking, a dear friend wrote to me lamenting that “this report goes against almost everything we are working as a community to do to reach out to authorities. It's like we moderate orthodox Muslims are left out to dry, and all of our arguments that there is little to no racism and bigotry within the circles of security agencies in America against Muslims are all bogus!”

The sentiments of this influential national community leader were echoed by another community leader who summed up her community's concerns as “OMG, look at what they are doing to us?”; she continued by relating an example of how many millions were possibly spent in her hometown over the years promoting such ideas. I realize that our communities are scared and outraged but I would like to emphasize the following points as we read reports like Mr. Ackerman's:

Who is Gawthrop? - William Gawthrop, the analyst who authored most of the training in the article, is well-known and detested in many FBI circles. The reason we're seeing his work being made public is because there are agents inside the FBI trying to marginalize him and push him out. If one reads between the lines, even the article's author hints at FBI insiders assisting. These forces are trying to make Gawthrop's tactics public, as it's not easy to fire a federal employee because of all the rules involved.

The Coughlin Factor - I would encourage concerned citizens to study the case of Rtd. Major Stephen Coughlin, who gave his inaccurate understanding of Hanafi, Malaki and Shafi Fiqh as true foundations of terrorism to the Joint Military Chiefs of Staff themselves before having his contract retired and pushed out of the Pentagon.

• For full disclosure, I did not play any role at DOD concerning Coughlin, but did fly up to the Freedom and Justice Foundation office years ago with well-known scholars like Dr. Waleed Basyouni to deeply analyze the arguments in Coughlin's Master's thesis on this topic. I shared that research with some FBI and Homeland Security Intelligence Enterprise allies back then.
• What Coughlin and Gawthrop type analysts are essentially arguing to National Security officials is that violent extremism is a product of religious (theological, not identity) “radicalization” and not sociological, psychological or political. People like Robert Spencer on the outside try to perform the role of echo chamber in order to mainstream such analysis and provide it with a base inside the political system.
• I believe as Coughlin's career was ended, so will Gawthrop's and other less infamous full-time analysts inside the National Security enterprise, due to many factors about our country's resilient value system and scientific inquiry appetite that these individuals hardly understand.

What is the solution? - As counter-intuitive as it sounds, the solution on a national level is not top down but requires that we work city by city and state by state to reorient the system. Even with the portions of my bio I elected to share below, someone in my position very infrequently travels to the White House or engages with the National Security Council Staff on these issues. The real work that needs to be done is at the local city and state levels.  Federalism is a powerful concept, and American Muslim advocacy strategies have yet to be leveraged effectively.

The Tipping Point - When a community working with its local law enforcement partners gets relations at a regional FBI field office to the tipping point, then you'll see local FBI officials push back to HQ and the intelligence community on the ideas that Gawthrop and co. promote. You will also see the top FBI official in a city put out clear messaging to local police executives of what is the true relationship with the local Muslim community, contrary to what politicians like Peter King might message on a FOX opinion show. Accurate and beneficial counter-terrorism law enforcement training will replace bigoted, for-profit, alarmist nonsense that undermines local security by disenfranchising American Muslims allied in countering violent extremism.

Look for good FBI agents - Just like there are bridge burners like Gawthrop, I also know of FBI agents who, out of their own pockets, buy proper Islamic books for office libraries, read Bukhari and Muslim, and confer with community-based allies about training materials HQ instructors have taught them at Quantico.

The bottom line is that we live in a democracy, and, just as we have in this country civilian oversight of the military, we also have civilian oversight of Intelligence, Counter Terrorism and Homeland Security systems. The challenge for the Muslim community has always been simply: how do we “step up our game” and become civic leaders of society around these topics? Or as Mahdi Bray used to say in community fundraisers I attended growing up, raising our children to become “headlights” and not just “taillights”.

Muslim Community Concerns

Sitting one day in a government meeting at DHS-HQ last year, I recall in a briefing we were receiving from a national polling agency on the public's attitude towards various law enforcement agencies that American Muslims generally had a 60% confidence level in the FBI. The numbers broke down a little less for African-American Muslims than other segments of the community but that certainly is expected given the well documented historical experiences there. It has been a long time since I've witnessed a media report resonate across so many segments of Muslim communities as this Ackerman report, so we'll have to wait to see if it produces a long-lasting impact upon the Muslim community's confidence in the bureau.

Those of us who, while informed by the past, are constantly looking forward might then wonder, so what next? How does one size the scale of this problem of inaccurate counter terrorism training at the FBI and across the wider law enforcement community? How does this problem get fixed? How much impact on national security policy development do Islamophobia's promoters really have and which forces can one strengthen to counter and marginalize them?

The reality is that a dissertation can be written about each of these questions, but considering the points mentioned above can help distinguish reality from perception. As Muslims, we know, more than any other segment of society, that the public does not get an accurate understanding of Islam and Muslim issues simply through the media and that personal contact is the more accurate conveyor of reality. Similarly, what's good for the goose is good for the gander in this case, and so replacing FBI for Muslim in the preceding sentence is similarly accurate.

One must engage with the FBI across its various enterprise elements (ex. local Agent, support staff, Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF), supervisors, Special Agents in Charge (SAC), national security branch Asst. SACs Head Quarters Intelligence Analysts, HQ Section Chiefs, Office of Public Affairs (OPA), CT Division, Directorate of Intelligence, Asst. Directors, Exec. Asst. Directors, the Director, previous Directors, retired FBI personnel, FBI whistle blowers, Overseas FBI Legal Attaché Officers, other elements across the National Security Enterprise that engage with various parts of the FBI, etc.) to get an accurate temperature of the organization's policies, attitudes and “culture”.

Learning from the Texas Model

Several hundred Texas Muslim community leaders from each city across the Lone Star State were present at a conference our foundation organized on Homeland Security inside the Texas State Capitol on September 10, 2004. I told them it simply boils down to “Your Rights as Americans, Your Duties as American Muslims.” Yes, surveys show we're patriotic and the majority of us are supportive of law enforcement, but who amongst us wants to have our kids waiting for the FBI to figure out all the Muslim world's complexities all on its own?

In Texas (Dallas & Houston), our community charted a third way over the past decade, not with the National Security hawks who scrutinize every benign social development amongst Muslims globally and not with the big government types who would forsake civil liberties in pursuit of domestic security. We didn't have to throw national community groups or other law-abiding American Muslim leaders under the bus to solve these problems as sell-out Muslims do, but we also didn't elect to sit behind our keyboards and complain that we have no power to act because that's not our deen either.

In Dallas and Houston, where 90% of the Texas Muslim community lives, there are many strong relationships between local Muslim community leaders across dozens of masajid, Islamic schools and local community groups and multiple FBI Special Agents, Joint Terrorism Task Force Supervisors, and Special Agents in Charge & Asst. SACs

National Muslim groups, like CAIR and Muslim Advocates, have issued their press releases and called upon elements within the Department of Justice and FBI to conduct their investigations, so these groups are already taking care of the top-down solution method our community has been employing since the early 90s. We can, in our various cities, enhance these efforts by expanding the grassroots work happening at the city and state levels that the Texas Muslim community has begun to become recognized for at the national level as the “Third Way” model of building a Centrist Environment. For these are the problems that no President can truly solve on his own.

There are 56 FBI field offices, 16 of which in major American cities have 60-70% of the FBI's counter terrorism personnel, about 400 small town resident agency (RA) offices and a handful of agents in LegAt offices in US Embassies oversees. There are way more of us then there are of them, so let's love them with the self-confidence that our religion teaches us that God doesn't put a burden upon a people who can't carry it. I'm not saying to 'move on, nothing to see here' in Mr. Ackerman's work, but instead let's get to work because there's nothing “new” here to anyone already working extensively on these challenges.

My Personal Experience

On Thursday, September 8^th FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III personally handed me the Louis E. Peters Memorial Service Award for 2011 in front of an audience of over five hundred retired Directors (ie. Judge William Webster who was Director of not just the FBI but also the CIA), a couple of dozen national security and law enforcement VIPs and several hundred retired FBI officials.

The Peters Award is the highest honor awarded annually to a civilian by the FBI whose assistance was invaluable in a major investigation. This year signified the first time it was given to someone working in the Homegrown Violent Extremism sphere that the American Muslim community has been struggling with post 9/11.

It was a closed-door ceremony in a banquet hall without media, a bit like the scene in the movie Charlie Wilson's War where the CIA gives him their highest civilian award for all he did to help remove the Soviets from Afghanistan. Two of the cases, in which I played the unique role of having one hand stretched out to the FBI and the other hand stretched out to local Muslim community leadership across multiple cities, were shared.

In both of these cases, like others, involved my being the trusted diplomat in two worlds who from my vantage point are married at the hip for the foreseeable future. Both the FBI and the American Muslim community are riding in the same boat, and should God forbid another disaster like 9/11 befall our country, neither party will be able to save its skin from the wrath of the American people by throwing the other party under the bus.

In the introduction explaining why I was receiving the award, Lester Davis as the Society of Former Special Agents of the FBI stated that “For the past eight years he has been working closely with the FBI and the Muslim community to create a relationship built on trust and respect. Never once has Mr. Elibiary requested any compensation or recognition for his efforts. The work he has undertaken to spot, identify and address radicalization in the United States cannot be understated.”

The FBI continued on their website press release by further stating that “Mr. Elibiary, of Dallas, Texas, was selected as a result of his extraordinary contributions to specific cases in support of the FBI's counterterrorism mission. He has also been a consensus builder between the national Islamic community and the numerous agencies dedicated to the prevention of terrorism.”

One thing I stated in my speech to that audience is that while “the last decades have witnessed a transformation of our FBI into the global intelligence led crown jewel in our nation's security architecture, with such awesome power comes awesome responsibility also of the bureau as the guardian of our civil, democratic fabric.”

In private, I further relayed to the Director that our community is willing and able to help FBI-HQ address homegrown violent extremism challenges more effectively but that in the meantime, we will continue to work at the grassroots level to help build up relationships with field offices. The message was clear and constructive, so as long as we act like empowered citizens and continue then more positive changes are inevitable, God willing.

In every advocacy strategy employed there are foundational assumptions. Though not an activist pre-9/11, nor belonging to a national community organization, I convened a few dozen community leaders at a Dallas hotel about a year after 9/11 to lay out my own foundational assumptions on how “the system” was working and the beginning of a road map for us as Texas Muslims on how we'd address governmental challenges. Over the years, traveling coast-to-coast visiting with all kinds of Muslim community leaders I've learned to appreciate the wisdom behind federalism even more.

As the FBI's own press release highlights, I elected after 9/11 to perform a consensus building role, whether across government security agencies or the national Islamic community. Just like there are good Muslims and bad Muslims, there are good FBI and bad FBI. What the average American Muslim needs to understand is that, while our post 9/11 relationship might have been securitized with our fellow countrymen due to factors beyond our control, if we step up our game and learn how to identify the good FBI, ally with them and stay the course, then it's a simple “we win and they [anti-Muslim Bigots] lose”.

As a father, I asked myself years ago: do I want to pass on these challenges to my kid's generation or do I want them to get a better position in America's bright future? Each one of us has to answer that question for ourselves, get busy working in our cities to engage deeper with the FBI and win this marathon of reorienting America's National Security Enterprise, or we can sit on our hands, complain and hope by some miracle the politicians will fix it for us.

Mohamed Elibiary is a Dallas-based Texas Muslim community leader and an Advisor to the Homeland Security Enterprise. He has served for multiple years on the Training Advisory Board of the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS), and was appointed by DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano to the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC) in October 2010 after his earlier service on the Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) Working Group helping craft the department and broader law enforcement community's framework to addressing Homegrown Violent Extremism (HVE). Mohamed has testified on Homeland Security matters before both the Texas State Legislature and the US Congress (“Working with Communities to Disrupt Terror Plots” – March 2010). He works as a private consultant at Lone Star Intelligence, LLC and speaks often on Homeland Security, Counter Terrorism and Community Partnership matters at law enforcement conferences. Mohamed has assisted multiple offices at the Dept. of Justice to advance Community Oriented Policing methodologies and the Building Communities of Trust (BCOT) Initiative. The Congressional Research Service (CRS) in a report to Congress highlighted how in the previous administration Mohamed assisted the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) Program Manager for the Information Sharing Environment (PM-ISE) to crafter landmark civil liberties protecting guidelines for the Nationwide Suspicious Activities Reporting Initiative (NSI). These landmark federal guidelines for Fusion Centers were expanded upon by a broad-based coalition of faith-based civic groups and DPS and passed by the Texas State Legislature in 2011 as Law enacted through the Texas Fusion Center Policy Council (TFCPC).

Cordoba House “Ground Zero Mosque”: PR & Path Forward Part  1 |  Part 2 | Part 3

Messaging Failures Lead to Tipping Point for Islam in the U.S.

For the first time, I almost believed in the famous “change” that my skepticism has prevented me from embracing. Time and time again, I saw a stark difference between words and action on the part of our nation’s leader. This latest moment was our President backing the Cordoba House Project during his address at the White House Iftar. I thought to myself, principled, bold and decisive leadership in spite of the growing anti-Islam hysteria. Well, as usual, hope was not enough as we now have the sorry display of the amateur hour; “I didn’t mean it and then again well, yes, I meant it,” a flip-flop so quick that John Kerry would be proud.

As disappointed as I am in the President’s leadership, I can’t lay the blame anywhere other than on our own community. Our collective messaging is a cacophony of name calling, alienating stances, special interests and a complete disconnect from the national dialogue that has allowed this issue to morph into a watershed moment for the perception of Islam and Muslims in the U.S. At stake is nothing less then the mass adoption of the clash of civilizations theory by a majority of Americans.

CNN and FOX News polls show a full 68 or 64 percent of Americans (respectively) think it is wrong to build a mosque near ground zero. Then we have the Muslim community’s civil rights and activist organizations resorting to name calling with charges of “bigotry” against a nuanced attack on the project that “this is not about religious freedom, it is about the ‘right’ thing to do” which, effectively places American Muslims against our neighbors with us yet again acting like a entitlement driven special interest rather than a community being victimized by hate and fear-mongering.

Let’s deconstruct some of the core arguments against the Cordoba House. All of which seek to associate the religion of Islam as the cause of the worst terrorist attacks in our nation's history becausee the object being opposed includes a masjid, an Islamic house of worship.

1) It is a “victory” mosque – Is it a victory for Islam that Muslims were among the innocent victims of the attacks? We hear from some pundits attacking the community center about this idea that the Cordoba House will be some kind of trophy. Many of these same pundits utilize the talking point that Muslim terrorists are causing the majority of Muslim deaths overseas when they try to avoid discussions of foreign policy missteps or tragic civilian casualties due to botched military action. Well, why is it okay now to ignore the deaths of Muslim victims of terror? And about this notion of victory mosques, the story of Umar Ibn Al-Khattab (may Allāh be pleased with him) refusing to pray in a church after liberating Jerusalem should be sufficient. For readers who are unaware of the history of the third Caliph of Islam, once the holy city became a part of that dynasty's territory, a delegation from the Christians asked Umar to pray in their church and he declined by saying that he was afraid that in the future Muslims would use his action as a reason to take over that particular church in order to build a mosque in its place.

2) It is a slap to the victims of 9/11 – This sentiment is a slap to the Muslim victims and first responders of the 9/11 tragedy.

3) It is too close to hallowed ground – Did not the blood of the Muslim victims of 9/11 also add to sacredness of the site? Do we really want to ignore that jummah (Islamic Friday congregational services) were held in the twin towers?

As American Muslims we can afford to listen to the concerns of our fellow countrymen. If we continue to dig in our heels, we may win a civil rights battle and lose a opportunity to truly dissipate fear, prejudice and ignorance. We can create the type of change that people so desperately sought during the 2008 elections by building bridges and increasing dialogue. If we don’t, we risk empowering a negative platform built on alienating an entire demographic in the upcoming elections.

Logic will not win the day in this controversy. It is a deeply emotional issue. On one side, you have the trauma of surviving a terrorist attack and on the other side, the added insult of being a victim of that attack combined with the suspicion that your community is somehow responsible for it.

There is a messaging solution. A way to show that the two sides are artificial.  Turn the Cordoba House into a memorial for Muslim victims of terror and the resulting cycles of violence. As American Muslims, the dehumanization of the Muslim victims of 9/11 is an all too familiar feeling. The devaluing of Muslim lives in the reporting of tragedies and conflicts is all too common. Muslim victims are often labeled “collateral damage” in drone attacks or generically by their ethnicity, rarely are they humanized with photos or stories of the survivors who have now lost their loved ones. We hear about them in the press as merely statistics. Many of the victims of 9/11 were my fellow countrymen. They were ALL my brothers and sisters in humanity. All of them. And ALL of them, even the Muslim victims were also yours.

Cordoba House “Ground Zero Mosque”: PR & Path Forward Part  1 |  Part 2 | Part 3

A Public Relations Analysis (Edited)
By Mustafa Stefan Dill

Recently, I came across an interesting blog at www.getreligion.org (GR), a nondenominational eagle-eye squad of journalists keeping a sharp watch on journalism and religion. In two recent articles, which covered Cordoba House: Monday's “Don’t leave Cordoba reporting to pundits” and the earlier “An important Cordoba distinction,” they do a decent job of wading through the thicket of press coverage on the Cordoba House controversy, and the discussions generated via the comments on both articles (despite some occasional minutiae sidetracks).

Between their analysis and references, as well as some independent scouring of my own, several crashing failures from a PR perspective can be gleaned from the Cordoba House controversy. I won't take sides on the debate – that arena is thick with voices already- but GR gets credit again for surfacing one of the few articles on the subject in the Crain's New York Business, that succinctly delineates the debate as “about whether building the Islamic center is 'a right' or 'the right thing to do.'” Pushing aside the rhetoric from all corners, it all boils down to that essence.

Without weighing in on its merits, the PR and web failures of this initiative are exhaustive and severe:

1) One huge hurdle is that there still appears to be some confusion in the public perception over whether (a) the project is a community center, an Islamic center, a mosque, or a mix, which got stuck with the label “Ground Zero Mosque,” and (b) questions about the entire project's organizational structure.

(a) GR writer Mollie Ziegler asserts in one of her article comments that:

It's called the Ground Zero Mosque because that's what the group behind the mosque called it.
Yes, they've backtracked on that in recent weeks. But their plans were riddled with the phrase until then.
If you don't think that the group should consider the location important, that's your beef with them. But as a journalistic issue, it was the billing of this mosque as the Ground Zero Mosque — even more than the close proximity — that got some folks riled up.

I haven't had time to independently confirm Mollie's claim (will do so in the next couple of days, inshā'Allāh). While it might be an accurate assessment, Imam Feisal's opening statement of the press conference of May 20th seems to contraindicate her assertion, unless she's going back earlier. At any rate, any mention of a “Ground Zero Mosque” is absent from both the Park 51 and Cordoba Initiative (CI) websites. What I can't confirm is if such nomenclature was ever officially used.

If the name originated with the initiative, at the very least it shows some poor judgment and lack of forethought or pre-planning on how such a name might resonate. If it was originated by the media, then clear, unequivocal steps should have been taken to correct it at the outset. The failure to control branding early on meant that the damage and perception became firmly entrenched, and Park 51 and CI tweets are now having to continually fight the ingrained erroneous brand, frantically tweeting “It's a community center with a prayer space, not a mosque”.

(b) I'm not sure it's clear to the public what the relationship between Park 51 and the Cordoba Initiative is. The best discussion on this can be found in an interview with Park 51 developer Sharif El-Gamal on altmuslim, which also appeared on beliefnet, but neither altmuslim or beliefnet have the mainstream reach of CNN or MSN or Yahoo (a quick Google and Bing search for El-Gamal doesn't reveal any mainstream media interviews or coverage that I could find; lack of media availability from both El-Gamal and Imam Feisal is an issue I'll address in more detail below).

For those interested in the story -and especially for those who want to follow it via social media- this means there are two separate media paths to keep track of, one for Park 51, the other for CI: two websites, two Facebook pages, two Twitter accounts, etc. Such duplication is burdensome and confusing for both the end user and media professionals, and runs the danger of not being consistent (they're doing reasonably well on that point last I checked , but it's an unnecessary high risk) and sends an overall impression that's not very solid or cohesive.

2) The web and social media outputs of both outfits is a mixed bag of good and bad strategies, good ideas and poor execution or surfacing, lack of detail, and misunderstood and/or underutilized resources.

The respective websites actually do a fairly good job of explaining and articulating their mission, but from a crisis management perspective, they are spending far too much time and effort across the board chronicling articles about outside support and nowhere enough space addressing or responding to concerns or clearly asserting some key positions.

One thing that does work – but falls far short of its potential – is the embedded youtube clip right on the CI home page of Imam Feisal's May 20th press conference. However else they may have lost control of their message, this piece is a succinct encapsulation from the founder about the initiative's purpose. The problem is that they lose huge impact by the generic title for the video, “Imam Feisal Press Conference.” Snooze.

A much more effective approach may have been to headline it with the date of the press conference (important, to indicate this has been their position all along) and the imam's first words: May 20: “This Is Not A Mosque”

Again, it's finding every nuance and opportunity to own and take control of your message from the get-go.

Small details on the site could be improved: The link to the Facebook page from the CI site doesn't work properly, for example. A bigger problem is the link for “Cordoba House NYC” under the “What We Do” drop down menu on the Cordoba Initiative website yields a “The requested page could not be found” message; not a good thing to be absent right now.

I would like to see an embedded Google map somewhere on the site showing the precise location of the center in relation to Ground Zero, since one response CI is touting is that it's not actually right at Ground Zero. For non-New Yorkers, this could be a helpful illustration.

The Cordoba Initiative Blog is an incredible waste of lost opportunity. The blog consists overhwelmingly of links to or reposts of articles from other sources or organizations in support of their initiative, duplicating in large part material that's already severely overrepresented on their main site. Earlier, there are posts detailing Imam Feisal's media appearances but no direct communication or posts from the imam himself, save for one that he co-signed with the CI team but doesn't read like its actually written by him, unless he likes to refer to himself in the third person.

Nowhere, at first glance, is there a sign of direct engagement or correspondence. That's generally a good use of blogs.

The sparse calendar widget makes it hard to tell at first glance if there's an archive index or not. Once found, I discovered three very critical articles by the CI clarifying some positions, buried deep out of quick reach:

• The Cordoba House is not a Mosque
• What is a Prayer Space?
• What is a Community Center?

After a little consolidation and tightening, these pieces should have been, from the outset the main articles readable on the front and center on the CI and perhaps Park 51 home pages. They could still be. All the articles on external support can easily be moved into a headlines index on the home page sidebar.

For their social media output, they're not really responding to questions on their Facebook pages when I last checked, and their Twitter strategy ranges from good (responding to followers, even if their own tone gets a little testy and unprofessional and on the verge of losing their cool) to downright poor; long stretches of tweets with consecutive blanket links to articles of support is in no sense any kind of true engagement or conversation. An occasional tweet to do that would be fine -it's a useful service for your followers in moderation- but at the very least, it should be personalized with a quick intro of a few words then use bit.ly or some other link shortener. Long portions of their Tweet feed look as if an autobot hijacked their Twitter account.

CI's YouTube channel is also grossly underutilized. They have only three self-produced clips: two from their Sudan initiative, and the clip of Imam Feisal's press conference on May 20 regarding the Cordoba House. A simple Flip cam could document any and/or all of the following: Imam Feisal or El-Gamal's responses to some of the more visible outcries and attacks that are proliferating on youtube; sessions with the architect and designers to show where the prayer space is in relation to the rest of the community center's other activities, where the proposed 9/11 memorial will be and renderings of the exterior to show that it wont be a 'mega mosque'; documenting the working sessions with other interfaith leaders; and especially finding stories of Muslims who died in the Sept. 11 attacks and talking with their families (see below). The list and opportunity is endless, and it's painful to see them have only one video up about the current issue.

3) Among the points raised in the comments discussion in both GR articles is that stories of Muslims who perished in the Sept.11 attacks, and what their families think of the Cordoba initiative, are under-reported. Cordoba and Park 51 organizers should have anticipated this and should have had several stories and compelling accounts from family members of Sept. 11 Muslim victims on hand, even if a few of them are opposed to the project. I saw a similar failure after Ft. Hood, where you had to dig deep for stories of Muslims who have given years of service or even their lives in the American military defending this country. While a lot of their word space mentions the fact that Muslims died in the Sept. 11 attacks, there are no stories, no accounts that users can resonate with. The immense value of offering a story versus merely including a sound bite or statistic I've discussed elsewhere.

4) and 5) A seeming reluctance to address some of the concerns raised about the project, coupled with a general lack of media presence or availability by Imam Feisal or El-Gamal, runs completely contradictory to the most basic tenets in any PR crisis management evaluation: be available, and answer your critics. The lack of accesibility and unwillingness to take on questions may be the most damaging course the groups have taken out of everything I've covered.

A rudimentary lesson in any PR crisis management campaign is to monitor the news about you and address the concerns. In this day and age, it's even more critical, since the news about you quickly turns into the conversation about you, shared among many through social media. But CI seems much more interested in flaunting the support that comes their way rather than trying to scrub the media to find concerns that need responding to. That imbalance must be corrected.

While they may be acknowledging the more high-profile flashy rhetoric that's taking potshots (see the Palin quip at the end of the altmuslim article), under their noses are articles that raise legitimate questions that aren't being addressed. Claudia Rosett at Forbes raises questions about the money for the project (her first two questions seem on the level; the third one a bit more snarky), and ups her ante when Imam Feisal is hard to pin down, drawing concerns about the state sponsored trip in a second article.

Good media monitoring would include the comments and discussion components from various articles as well, from where one would glean that 'Why not a 9/11 memorial?' is a recurring question or issue. CI does mention that in the third article from their blog that I singled out (emphasis, mine):

A community center, much like the YMCA (Young Men’s Christian Association) or the Jewish Community Center, is where people from any faith are allowed to use the facilities. Beyond having a gym, the Cordoba House will house a pool, restaurant, 500-person auditorium, 9/11 memorial, multi-faith chapel, office and conference space, and prayer space. After speaking extensively with the residents of lower Manhattan, we found that these were some of the most vital needs for the community.

But again, this material isn't properly surfaced, which tells me they're not paying enough attention to the wider and often legitimate discourse around them. While they're addressing questions to followers on Twitter, had this or any of the pertinent material or answers been placed prominently and early in a proactive stance, they could have nipped a lot of questions in the bud. Since they didn't, they're now mired in a reactive sludgefest.

You don't have to be from Forbes to have questions about the project and find answers hard to get: Muslim blogger Sabrina Enayatulla also had questions about the project and did her own digging, and ran into a few interesting access issues:

According to an outside consultant working directly with Park 51, who agreed to speak about the project on the condition of anonymity…

and later (emphasis, added):

Most of the buzz is due to Cordoba Initiative's Cordoba House, which plans to use space at Park 51 for interfaith classes and a designated prayer space for Muslims. Cordoba House will have separate programs and initiatives targeted toward the Muslim community, but representatives at the Cordoba Initiative did not respond to queries about their role in this project and types of programming they hope to offer at Park 51 by the time this article was published.

She did speak with one Oz Sultan, “PR liaison and programming project manager for Park 51,” according to her article, but anonymous insider sources, PR spokespersons and lack of response don't add up to a reassuring tone and is absolutely the wrong course of action at such a time.

As Rossett says in her second article,

But if Rauf's aim is truly, as he says, to build bridges, reach out and promote harmony in America, then punctuating his Ground Zero project with a summer swing past fonts of Islamic oil money seems an odd way to go about it. With emotions rubbed raw among some families of Sept. 11 victims, with arguments boiling over the “bridge-building” project Rauf himself set in motion, it would seem far more fitting for him to spend his time in America, answering, not least, the many questions he has repeatedly deflected about the money.

LoHud's religion writer Gary Stern also notes the lack of access: “One thing that’s becoming clear is that the Cordoba Initiative, the group seeking to build the downtown center, is doing a poor job of PR,” he writes. “Their leaders need to be out there, explaining who they are, what they’ve done and what they hope to do.”

Imam Feisal and El-Gamal should be appearing on every news and talk show there is, answering the issues and hammering the key points to regain the message. Come prepared with specific stories and human accounts, don't talk incessantly about all the support you have, focus on the concerns and if you dont feel media confident, hire a PR coach to help you with your TV jitters. Blog personally, honestly, and transparently once or twice a week, and keep outside links to support minimal.

Post-Script

Someone pointed me to the excellent NYT article “For Mosque Sponsors, Early Missteps Fueled Storm.” The piece provides some much needed background and timeline about the process leading up to the current debacle.

The article also confirms El-Gamal's continuing reticence to speak about the affair (emphasis, added):

Mr. Gamal said that since May, he had started meeting in private with opponents to explain himself. But he bridled at constantly defending himself publicly. He said he didn't want to tell angry opponents how he had injured his eye handing out water to emergency workers on 9/11.

He didn't feel that he should have to, he said. He refused recently to appear on CNN to debate Rick A. Lazio, the Republican candidate for governor who has come out against the project.

“This is not a debate,” Mr. Gamal said. “I'm an American. I'm a New Yorker. I'm exercising my freedoms in this country.”

Didn't feel that he should have to? With all due respect, Mr. Gamal, guess again — at this stage in the game of public perception for your project, you do have to. Buck up, brother, and do your part to dissipate the heat and hate.

For an organization that says it wants to establish a community open to all, such callous contempt and disregard for those with concerns — the refusal to engage in the very dialogue and openness it claims to offer — is astounding.

How can you want to engage with the community at large and then decide it's beneath you to talk to them? I can't think of a faster, more efficient way to build distrust and suspicion and play right into your detractor's hands.

He has a valid point in not wanting to frame the issues as a debate, but there are ways to keep control of your message for such TV moments, and there are people who specialize in training you for that skill. Call them.

As the public image downgrades daily and the questions mount, the need to be out in public reiterating key mission points and clarifying the misconceptions is urgent. The lack of accessibility is rapidly becoming a huge concern in itself — and could have been so easily avoided.

Get on every news show and start talking, Mr. Gamal (and Imam Feisal, too). Be as open and welcoming as you say you want others to be.

Mustafa Stefan Dill has over nine years experience in media – from radio to web and social media for both print and television – Mustafa Stefan Dill has lectured on online journalism and social change at the Indian Institute of Journalism and New Media, Bangalore, India and has been featured in Online Journalism Review, The Media Center's Morph blog, J-New Voices, motherpie.typepad.com, and participated as a panelist in a national web seminar by the American Press Institute.

Dill covers Muslim and interfaith issues and their relationship to new media, offers social media and PR strategies for the Muslim community and other clients and monitors ongoing developments in journalism and new media in India, South Asia, and the Middle East/North Africa at http://newmedianewmexico.blogspot.com/.

By Anon: Cross-posted from AE

The Tablighis, easy target for criticism,
Attacks against them launched with cynicism,
Politically unaware, intellectually docile,
Painted by some as simplistically puerile

But I must hasten to disagree,
And quote to you some history,
To prove the nature of my claims,
And perhaps to defend their noble aims

When Hinduism was spreading in Mewat,
And Muslims were losing Iman from the heart,
A spiritual man arose who stood apart,
And founded what we now know as Tablighi Jamat

Who knew this spark of love would spread like fire,
For the situation seemed quite dire,
It transformed darkness to illumination,
And rescued the Sunnah from devastation

Empty Masjids cried floods of tears,
As no worshippers made sujud for many years,
And then crowds came back and thronged their floors,
You can see angels smile, and the heavens echo with applause

The dhikr of Allāh is being revived by their crowds,
Throughout the lands jama’ahs travel like rain-bearing clouds,
Bringing much sought for water to thirsty lands,
And turning to luscious green arid desert lands.

Some people may be unaware of this information,
That Mawlana Ilyas was an initiated Sufi master,
But he saw the Mutasawifs and ‘Ulema remaining aloof from their congregation,
Whilst India’s Muslims plunged into great disaster

So he took the da’wah out to the masses,
Like bees flying on journeys making honey in stashes,
Unknown inhabitations became honeycombs sweet,
Where millions of Muslims gather and meet

They left their families and their abodes,
And embarked on difficult dusty roads,
Travelling for the pleasure of the Divine,
To replace the darkness of post-modernity with the Sunnah’s shine

Embryonic change happens in Forty Days,
Strange Indeed are Allāh’s ways,
Dont call this number a reprehensible innovation,
Perchance it be a sign of your lack of academic discrimination

In the way of Allāh each step they tread,
But only for Jihad this should be said?
Open the hadith work of Bukhari- the chapter on JUMU’AH,
Ya akhee fillah,
In that very chapter not about Jihad, it quotes the hadith of the feet being covered with dust fee sabeelillah

How many a former drug addict I have encountered in these lands,
Whose previously injecting hands are enshrouded with ancient sins,
And now he sits in the house of God with a tasbeeh in his hands,
Those same hands make dhikr on those beads of strings

How many a robber who used to steal,
How many a Zani who shamed the earth’s surrounds,
How many a musician singing profane sounds,
Now recounts God’s Jalal - it makes him yell out squeals,
And now the earth begins to smile, as he prostrates and as he kneels….

How many a face – black, white and yellow from every schism,
Sit on a mat and eat together their repast,
Whilst politicians talk of the problems of racism,
“Oh this is not our problem”- a thing of the past.

He makes nadama and in tawbah turns,
His heart with love of Allāh yearns,
God Bless you Oh dearest Mawlana Ilyas,
How beautifully you turned Yaas Into Aas

From the orient to the occident,
And from the south right to the north
Crowds emerge with intentions heavenly bent,
And taking Allāh’s name alone, they come forth

Pakistanis, Caucasians, Malaysians, Africans, and Turks,
Chinese, Eskimo, and Russian faces,
Ethnicities unheard of fill Masjids where traces,

Of their forefathers are written in historical works

Whilst Nations sit before cathode rays,
That titillate their eyes with their enticing ways,
These men rebel against Satan’s zto frustration

They sit of the floor as it indents their knees,
They know not of Nietzsche, Hume, Kant or Socrates,
They couldn’t perhaps recount Ghazzali or Avicenna’s complex kalaam,
But the dhikr of Allāh makes their souls calm

This is not to deny the place of the Mutakallimin,
Without whom we would be in disarray,
But for the masses such complex arguments can lead astray,
So let dhawq and wijdan provide them with yaqeen

They are not by tales of Machiavelli’s prince infected,
The Sahabas‘ stories motivate their lives,
Such dark political ideologies before such heroes stand rejected,
Upholders of truth and self sacrifice

They hold no huge political rallies protesting to creation,
In the nights they stand in prayer before the answer of every supplication,
And with tears flood the floors begging for mercy and rejuvenation,
Once more gifting glory to the Ummah of the best of creation

Don’t approach the worldy kings -they cannot protect,
A pretzel falls into their tracheas, almost suffocating,
Such a small little thing He cannot eject?
How will he give Honour to those who stand outside the White House waiting?

They couldn’t tell you about quantum mechanics or Hawkings,
They couldn’t refute Darwinian thought or the reductionism of Dawkins,
They don’t know that much of Heisenbergs’ principle of uncertainty
For to them the kalimah is a deeply rooted certainty

They might not know Chomsky’s views on Linguistic Bayan,
Or how Steven Pinker’s instincts about neurolinguistics fit,
But they have of a surety read Surah Rahman,
And know that language is from Allāh a merciful gift

And not the product of random forces without end,
Or indeed a blind watchmaker – no my friend,
The blindness is in your hearts – not the maker of harmony
So with Ahsan’l-Qawl..They call to the Absolute with humility

On the Day of Reckoning when the Prophets say nafsi nafsi…
Perhaps Dawkins will smile, albeit, temporarily,
Thinking “Ah my Selfish Gene Thesis was true,”
Even these Prophets are exhibiting ultimately a selfish hue

But then Mustafa shall come and say Ummati Ummati…
Such selflessness which will cause his theory to terminate suddenly,
This is the beloved of Allāh, and this maqam you cannot explain scientifically,
So discard Dawkins Memes for Muhammad’s MEEM (saw)

They fall not prey to materialism or such bakwas,
They see the Divine hand behind each moving leaf,
In fact they are aboard a Noah’s ark constructed by Mawlana Ilyas,
They hold on to the Sunnah with their teeth

Of Freud’s oedipus complex they remain unaware,
Or indeed of changing uncertain paradigms,
Iman, ṣalāh, the 6 points are in the air,
The Kafirs who promote intellectual kufr will pay for their crimes

Qiyamah is before their eyes,
Not mere logical premises philosophers surmise,
But deep rooted convictions that change their lives,
You don’t have to read volumes to be called wise

Those of us who study in intellectual arrogance,
Forget Rumi’s tales of the lover’s simple acceptance,
The intellect is still looking for its transportation,
Love has circled the Ka’ba 7 times in dedication

www.alternativeentertainment.wordpress.com

Photos Raise Questions About Shooting of Cuffed Muslim Leader

Medical Examiner Photos Also Show Deep Lacerations on Face

By BETH TRIBOLET and SHARAF MOWJOOD

April 7, 2010

A fiery Muslim leader who was shot dead during an attempt to arrest him in Dearborn, Mich., was found to have been riddled with 21 shots including one in the back. He also had a broken jaw, broken teeth and his hands were cuffed behind his back, according to an autopsy report.
Autopsy reveals miltant Muslim Leader riddled with 21 shots including one in the back.

A militant Muslim leader who was shot dead in during an attempt to arrest him in Detroit, Mich., was found to have been riddled with 21 shots including one in the back. He also had a broken jaw, broken teeth and his hands were cuffed behind his back. An autopsy photo obtained exclusively by ABC News shows Imam āmīn Abdullah Luqman lying face down on the ground with his hands clearly cuffed behind him.

An autopsy photo obtained by ABC News shows Imam āmīn Abdullah Luqman lying face down on the ground with his hands clearly cuffed behind him.

Additional photos obtained by ABC News also show deep lacerations on Luqman's face that his family believes may have been caused by a police dog.

Federal authorities claim that Luqman, 53, was killed last October in a Dearborn trailer after failing to surrender to police. The day before the raid, federal authorities filed a criminal complaint that alleged conspiracy to commit federal crimes including theft from interstate shipments, mail fraud to obtain proceeds from arson, illegal sale and possession of firearms and tampering with motor vehicle identification numbers. These allegation were made through the use of confidential informants, the documents state.

An FBI officer on the scene of Luqman's death reported that a police dog was sent in when Luqman refused to show officers his hands, and that Luqman shot and killed the dog. However, a press release after the incident from the U.S. Attorney's office in Detroit does not say Luqman killed the dog. It simply states a canine was “killed in the exchange.” The shot allegedly fired by Luqman prompted police to take the gunfire as a threat and they returned fire, according to FBI reports.

Luqman's family says there's no proof he was carrying a gun that day, and the family has submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to get the necropsy report for the dead police dog to determine whether the dog was killed by a police bullet. The request has been declined.

Luqman's son, Omar Regan, asks “How did he shoot the dog if his jaw was broken and there were lacerations on his face?”

Slain Muslim Leader's Fiery Rhetoric

A spokesman for the FBI in Detroit declined to discuss the Luqman case because of ongoing investigations into what happened that day in October 2009. There is an internal FBI investigations into the shooting, as well an investigation by the Dearborn Police Department. In addition, U.S. Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., asked Attorney General Eric Holder earlier this year for a separate review of the FBI's use of confidential informants.

Luqman, according to an FBI affidavit, once said in a 2004 sermon, “Do not carry a pistol if you're going to give it up to police. You give them a bullet rather than surrendering your weapons.”

Luqman and his associates are described as armed and dangerous in the affidavit and complaint filed by federal authorities before the arrest. FBI Special Agent in Charge Andrew Arena said after the shooting that he was comfortable with his agents' actions. “They did what they had to do to protect themselves,” he said.

Dawud Walid, executive director of the Council of American-Islamic Relations in Detroit, asked, “How could he be so sure?”

Walid said that despite Luqman's rhetoric, he was not dangerous. The Imam struggled to pay rent and heat at his mosque in Dearborn, and was evicted from a previous mosque for not paying rent. Walid says the police actions at the Detroit warehouse that day amounted to excessive force, borne out by the condition of Luqman's body when the medical examiner arrived.

The medical examiner's report says the body was cold when he arrived and rigor mortis had set in, so it was impossible to establish time of death. The police dog named “Freddy,” a Belgian Malinois, was airlifted to get medical attention, while Luqman's body was eventually taken by ambulance to the hospital, according to his son. Freddy was later honored with a memorial service.

It remains unclear how Luqman's jaw came to be broken and his face so badly lacerated or when he was handcuffed.

After viewing all the autopsy photos with the Wayne County Medical Examiner, Lena Masri, an attorney for CAIR Michigan, said she believes Luqman's body may have been moved from the original location where he was killed before the medical examiner arrived.

Photos Raise Questions About Muslim Leader's Death

Luqman preached overthrowing the U.S. government and establishing Islamic law, but he was not charged with terrorism. Federal authorities used informants inside Luqman's mosque to gather evidence that he and his associates were dealing in stolen goods, and illegally possessed firearms, among other charges.

Eleven associates of Luqman were subsequently charged with some or all of the following crimes: conspiracy to commit federal crimes, being a felon in possession of firearms, possession of firearm with an altered serial number, tampering with vehicle identification numbers and aiding and abetting. When charged in court, all of the defendants refused to respond to a request to enter a plea, so the court entered a plea of not-guilty on their behalf.

Source: ABC News

U.S. changing way air travelers are screened

By Anne E. Kornblut and Spencer S. Hsu

Washington Post Staff Writer

Friday, April 2, 2010

The Obama administration is abandoning its policy of using nationality alone to determine which U.S.-bound international air travelers should be subject to additional screening and will instead select passengers based on possible matches to intelligence information, including physical descriptions or a particular travel pattern, senior officials said Thursday.

After the attempted bombing of an Amsterdam-to-Detroit flight on Christmas Day, U.S. officials decided that passengers from or traveling through 14 specified countries would be subjected to secondary searches. Critics have since called the measures discriminatory and overly burdensome, and the administration has faced pressure to refine its approach.

Under the new system, screeners will stop passengers for additional security if they match certain pieces of known intelligence.

The system will be “much more intel-based,” a senior administration official said, “as opposed to blunt force.”

In the Christmas Day incident, Nigerian student Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab allegedly tried to ignite explosives sewn into his underwear as Northwest Airlines Flight 253 prepared to land, but the device failed, and he was subdued by fellow passengers. Abdulmutallab has allegedly said he was trained by an al-Qaeda affiliate in Yemen.

Immediately afterward, the administration ordered a significant increase in secondary searches, requiring all passengers from or traveling through Afghanistan, Algeria, Lebanon, Liberia, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia and Yemen to undergo extra security at the airport. Travelers from countries considered state sponsors of terrorism — Cuba, Syria, Iran and Sudan — were subjected to the same screening, including pat-downs and additional bag checks.

Airlines had warned that the measures instituted after the Christmas Day incident would need to be eased before the busy summer travel season. And critics objected that the added scrutiny amounted to a pretext for racial profiling that could potentially affect 675 million people, including American Muslims and religious pilgrims.

Administration officials briefed reporters about the revised policy Thursday. But they did so on the condition that reporters not publicize it or seek reaction to it until after midnight, saying they were still working to notify foreign partners and members of Congress.

The underlying airline security policy of checking passenger names against watch lists will continue to operate, and certain passengers will still be banned from flying or required to submit to additional security based on names in intelligence databases. About 24,000 people around the world are currently on those “no-fly” and “selectee” lists.

Administration officials said the new system will “significantly” reduce the number of passengers chosen for mandatory extra screening, eliminating entire swaths of travelers who had been chosen based on their nationalities.

But it will also broaden the universe of potential targets for secondary searches, expanding the focus from the 14 named countries to dubious passengers from anywhere in the world, a move also designed to outsmart terrorist plotters who knew which countries were affected.

The rules will take effect within the month, the senior administration official said, acknowledging that the system instituted in January presented a severe inconvenience to travelers from the listed countries.

The official offered a hypothetical case to illustrate how the new system will work. If U.S. intelligence authorities learned about a terrorism suspect from Asia who had recently traveled to the Middle East, and they knew the suspect's approximate age but not name or passport number, those fragments would be entered into a database and shared with commercial airline screeners abroad.

The screeners would be instructed to look for people with those traits and to pull them aside for extra searches, the official said, acknowledging that that in some cases, screeners will have to rely on their judgment as they consider the listed traits.

While intelligence officials had fragments of information about Abdulmutallab — including warnings from his father that he was becoming radicalized, and warnings about a Nigerian plot against U.S. interests — those pieces of information were not connected in time to keep him from flying.

Administration officials have said that, in hindsight, the central failure involved inadequate sharing of information. It is not clear whether the new screening measures would have been sufficient to block him.

Source: The Washington Post

This information should benefit anyone involved in Islamic organizations, but it really needs extra attention from those in leadership positions in their communities to start to effect the type of change needed to prevent dysfunction.

The Five Dysfunctions Are

1. Absence of Trust
2. Fear of Conflict
3. Lack of Commitment
4. Avoidance of Accountability
5. Inattention to Results

These are laid out by Patrick Lencioni in his book, The Five Dysfunctions of a Team: A Leadership Fable. While the pertinence to a professional or corporate environment is obvious, these are at the core of the problems faced by Masajid and Islamic organizations across the country.

1. Absence of Trust

The fear of being vulnerable with team members prevents the building of trust within the team.

Understanding trust means refining our notions of the term. Trust means knowing the others around you have good intentions, and that you don't need to shield yourself around them. It is distinct from reliance, which is “trusting” that a peer will perform a given task reliably. Trust is being able to open up, and show vulnerability while knowing that those vulnerabilities won't be used against you.

What we find with many Islamic organizations is that people's actions are dictated by what others will think about them. Think about the person elected to be the Masjid treasurer with no accounting or financial experience whatsoever. This person continues to do this job day in and day out, despite not being able to do it well. Instead, this person is focusing on holding this position for strategic reasons vis-a-vis others within the organization. He is constantly trying to protect himself. If trust existed within the organization, he would be able to display that vulnerability and instead be 100% focused on performing the treasurer duties to the best of his ability.

It is commonplace that the higher ranking members in these organizations are usually the “well-educated” ones (e.g. the “doctor uncle”). One thing we often fail to realize is that these people have been trained their entire lives to be competitive with their peers and constantly outperform them. Personal reputations are at stake. If these instincts cannot be 'turned off' for the betterment of the organization, then a lot of time is invested into managing the fallout. Examples of this include having constant meetings to manage people's behaviors, and seeing a decrease in the willingness of organization members to help one another.

Organizationally, another factor that contributes to a loss of trust is not identifying and utilizing people's skills. How can trust exist in a masjid construction project when a Muslim contractor who has been managing construction projects for a living for over 20 years is sitting around while the organization turns over the masjid construction plans to a pediatrician?

This is the fundamental building block to freeing Islamic organizations of dysfunction, and it is perhaps the hardest because it requires the greatest overhaul in attitude and environment.

Once established however, it can foster constructive conflict.

2. Fear of Conflict

The desire to preserve artificial harmony stifles the occurrence of productive, ideological conflict.

-Important concept to understand: Ideological conflict vs. Personal conflict-

Have you ever met a husband and wife who never had an argument with one another? Have you ever met a parent that never had a disagreement with his or her children? Didn't think so.

Why do we expect that Islamic organizations should operate under some kind of happy-go-lucky utopia? To preserve this naive notion of how things should be, we avoid engaging in any kind of conflict. What ends up happening then is that direct conflict is avoided within the organization, but it is replaced with back-stabbing, personal conflicts, and politics.

You have seen the organization where there may be a body of 7 people. 3 of them meet separately, and 4 of them meet separately. Then they concoct conspiracy theories about how the opposing camp really feels about an issue, and why they are pushing a particular position over another. Then they get riled up, and go out to the community seeking more support for their own side. Next thing you know, it's an all out community conflict with name-calling, people not talking to each other, and the conflict finally erupting at a dinner party at some innocent person's house while the innocent bystanders try to enjoy some chicken biryani.

Muslim organizations simply seem to want to avoid having any healthy conflict (discussion). This is why they all dread meetings that are boring, and where nothing gets done. When organization members trust each other, they can talk freely with one another and debate the merits of different ideas. Sit down and completely hash it out. A certain level of maturity is of course required, so that the debate does not turn personal. The element of trust is what allows people to freely credit or discredit ideas without worrying about hurting someone's feelings (and then later making personal attacks behind their back).

Meetings should be lively and focus on the concepts and ideas being discussed – even if they become emotional. Let people be passionate about why they feel that a certain project is a waste of money, or that the dome of the masjid should be 25 feet in diameter instead of 30 feet, and so on.

This is important because once the merits of an idea have been thoroughly discussed, everyone has had a chance to air their objections or concerns, and people can respond to them. So let the best ideas win. Once that is done, even the people who initially opposed the idea, can support it from an organizational perspective. Contrast this with a board member who unwillingly votes in favor of a certain project, waiting for it to fail, then running around telling the community, “I told you so!”

3. Lack of Commitment

The lack of clarity or buy-in prevents team members from making decisions to which they will commit.

Commitment only comes from the step above – once everyone's perspectives and opinions have been heard, they can all buy into the concept knowing that all ideas have been considered. And of course, that discussion cannot take place without step 1 – establishing trust.

According to Lencioni, the two biggest factors hindering commitment are:

1. Desire for consensus
2. Need for certainty

It seems many Islamic organizations refuse to move forward even one step without both of those being in place. Finding consensus is a nearly impossible task, and consensus is usually sought out of fear of backlash. It seems leaders are unwilling to make decisions without 100% support in case something goes wrong, they can defend themselves. This is unhealthy for the growth of any organization.

People do not need to agree with a decision in order to support it. As long as their ideas have been properly heard (explained in the step above), then they can rally around the decision – even if they disagree with it.

The need for certainty is closely related to the phenomenon of analysis paralysis. Organizations are unwilling to make a decision until a certain amount of data is available to them – at which point it might be too late. They have an innate need to feel like they have made the correct decision. Often times, a decision will need to be made quickly, and without the benefit of having all of the relevant information available. It is important to decide, and move on. Better to go down swinging then not show up at all. We are blessed with istikhārah and shura. Utilize them. Constantly delaying a decision, or flip-flopping back and forth will not help you make the correct choice, instead it will just kill your credibility.

Symptoms of lack of commitment include: ambiguity about direction and priorities, lack of confidence, fear of failure, and revisiting issues over and over for discussion. Islamic organizations need to clearly define their goals, rally around those common objectives, create an environment of learning from mistakes, and moving forward without regret.

The Prophet (sal-Allahu 'alayhi was-Sallam) said the believer is not bitten from the same hole twice. We cannot demand perfection, but we demand the best effort.

4. Avoidance of Accountability

The need to avoid interpersonal discomfort prevents team members from holding one another accountable.

Lack of clarity and direction (as explained in the step above) makes it impossible to hold anyone accountable. How can someone be accountable if they do not know what is expected in the first place?

Successful organizations must have an environment in place where people are able to call each other out for not living up to their standards. This should be the case whether positions are paid or unpaid. People are uncomfortable letting others know that their performance may not be up to the expected standards because they fear losing a volunteer, or perhaps even a friendship. Letting these feelings fester though, will only cause those relationships to deteriorate. It is time for Islamic organizations to stop settling, and demand the best – even if it requires some personal discomfort along the way. Doing this will actually develop mutual respect amongst the people working within the organization because they know they are equally being held to the same high standards by one another.

If this accountability is not there, then people begin to simply look out for their own self-interests over and above the interests of the organization.

5. Inattention to Results

The pursuit of individual goals and personal status erodes the focus on collective success.

Once an organization has clearly defined its goals and objectives, it must focus on meeting them. When an organization loses sight of those results, their attention shifts elsewhere. Lencioni says 'elsewhere' in this case would be team and individual status:

Team Status: For [some], merely being part of the group is enough to keep them satisfied. For them, the achievement of specific results might be desirable, but not necessarily worthy of great sacrifice or inconvenience. As ridiculous and dangerous as this might seem, plenty of teams fall prey to the lure of status. These often include altruistic nonprofit organizations that come to believe that the nobility of their mission is enough to justify their satisfaction … as they often see success in merely being associated with their special organizations.

Individual Status: This refers … [to people focusing] on enhancing their own positions … at the expense of the team.

The collective results must be more important than individual aims and objectives. One important note is the relationship of this dysfunction to the issue of trust (step 1). Individuals getting involved must also cleanse their hearts of any ill intentions such as seeking fame and credit in the community. The eventual breakdown of an entire organization can start from the simplest of individual wants or intentions.

Concluding Thoughts

Lencioni summarized it best:

And so, like a chain with just one link broken, teamwork deteriorates if even a single dysfunction is allowed to flourish.

Another way to understand this model is to take the opposite approach – a positive one – and imagine how members of a truly cohesive team behave:

1. They trust one another.
2. They engage in unfiltered conflict around ideas.
3. They commit to decisions and plans of action.
4. They hold one another accountable for delivering against those plans.
5. They focus on the achievement of collective results.

Please also see: The 90/10 Rule for Masjids

This is the third and final installment in the Islam for Sale series.

Part 1 – Islam For Sale | | Part 2 – Format of Seeking Knowledge | Part 3 – Marketing Islamic Programs

Every single Islamic program nowadays is doing the best it can to showcase itself as the best program on the planet, being as flashy as possible, and utilizing whatever strategies are at its disposal to convince people to attend. In this age of commercialization, some people contend that Islamic knowledge has become a product to be 'pushed' on 'customers' while others argue that as long as results are produced, employ whatever means are at your disposal. Everyone is “marketing” their program – some more successfully than others. While I cannot give a full breakdown of the effective versus ineffective techniques, I do hope that we can discuss general practices we are seeing across numerous organizations and evaluate the positive and negative impacts they are having on our communities.

The 'Islam for Sale' post raised a number of issues that come up in conversation amongst many 'active' Muslims today. It critiqued both the method in which knowledge is sought today, as well as the promotion (or marketing) of seeking that knowledge. After reading it, my personal take on it was that it was a reaction to the perceived over-commercialization of Islamic knowledge – a point that I feel does bear merit.

The marketing, or perceived “commercialization” of Islamic knowledge, has been a huge source of controversy over many a cup of chai for budding Islamic activists.

I want to take the discussion to a more macro level and force us to evaluate how the manner in which we market Islamic programs affects the perception of Islamic organizations, and to some extent 'ilm in general?

The negative points mentioned in the Islam For Sale article do occur, but I think the negative scenarios outlined happen only with a handful of overly energetic volunteers that will do what they think is best to help their cause, and may inadvertently create negative repercussions without realizing it. It is difficult to call this the norm when the experience of many indicates otherwise. However, there are some negative elements that have crept into the promotion of Islamic events that I feel need to be discussed openly, and it is my sincere hope that highlighting some of these issues will allow us to self-evaluate ourselves and make adjustments to our strategy to be even more successful in the long run inshā'Allāh.

Let's first set a premise for what marketing constitutes before continuing further:

Marketing is an integrated communications-based process through which individuals and communities are informed or persuaded that existing and newly-identified needs and wants may be satisfied by the products and services of others. [Mufti Wiki ibn Bedia]

Though we use 'marketing' throughout the article (to stay consistent with the manner people discuss it in), it should be noted that it is slightly different from advertising -

Marketing differs from selling because (in the words of Harvard Business School's emeritus professor of marketing Theodore C. Levitt) “Selling concerns itself with the tricks and techniques of getting people to exchange their cash for your product. It is not concerned with the values that the exchange is all about. And it does not, as marketing invariably does, view the entire business process as consisting of a tightly integrated effort to discover, create, arouse, and satisfy customer needs.” from the Business Directory

In this context then, we are discussing the manner in which people are made aware of Islamic activities, their importance to the individual being 'marketed' to, and finally convincing the individual to commit to the end goal (i.e. registering or attending). Though many of the criticisms may in fact be against “advertising” – for the sake of discussion we'll note the distcintion, but use 'marketing' to make it easier (and more consistent with the way this issue is discussed in our communities).

Marketing is also closely tied to branding – or the perception that people have of your organization. For example, if you run an organization closely tied to youth activities, people's perception of you will always be of being youth focused. Even if you later try to brand yourself as something tailored for adults, it is hard to shed that reputation. Just like Nike may brand itself one way, but people invariably associate its “brand” with sweatshop abuse. The reason this is important to keep in mind is because I strongly believe certain types of marketing practices can brand an Islamic organization one way or another (most often in a negative fashion).

Take the following 4 car commercials. Which of the following do you consider to be reputable , sophisticated, lame, over-the-top, or sleazy? Also consider which of them are marketing the product (i.e. the qualities of the car), and which ones are just marketing a gimmick or a cheap price? Do you leave with a positive or negative impression? These will help illustrate some of the points I make below. Remember, all 4 have the same end goal: selling cars.

Ad #1:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Ad#2:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Ad#3:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Ad#4:

Click here to view the embedded video.

With that in mind, I want to begin by discussing why marketing Islamic programs is important, and then discuss what I feel are inappropriate tactics that have come into play.

What Islamic Marketing Should Be

While some have an aversion to being inundated with flyers and announcements, I believe they play a vital role in our Islamic communities – that of spreading information. When a program or event is taking place, there is a need to inform others about it so they can make plans to attend. This can be accomplished by flyers, phone calls, videos, text messages, facebook, twitter, juma annoucements, posters, internet ads, magazine advertisements, radio shows, and other mediums. Most people would agree though, that these things in and of themselves do not actually bring people in through the door, but what they do is disseminate information about the program. They can also reinforce a perception about the program based on the professionalism (or lack thereof) of these flyers and ads.

I feel that the utilization of these techniques in recent times is a positive trend and has positively impacted the way dawah is done now in our communities. It forces us to raise our level of professionalism and sophistication in regards to our activities. A nice flyer might not convince someone to attend a class, but it does establish a certain set of expectations by showing that this organization is taking what they are doing seriously. The attention to detail gives a strong impression of what the upcoming program should be like. When you contrast this to your gut reaction after seeing a flyer advertising “Come on come all, we our having the good upcoming clas at masjid on Friday,” it becomes even clearer. It should be noted that fancy and professional are not always hand in hand. The important quality is professionalism, however that can be communicated.

One thing that people seem to agree on is that while all of the items mentioned above are good, contribute to the overall dissemination of information, and create perception of the program – the real clincher is 'word of mouth' marketing. You might have the most amazing flyers and marketing in the world, but I probably would not be bothered to pick up a certain book or attend a certain event unless someone I know has given me a personal recommendation. This is why things like user reviews on Amazon are so powerful. I know that these people are giving their own honest feedback without solicitation from the company. When I see that 500 people have given a certain book a 5 star review (as opposed to ten 1 star reviews) then I am more compelled to get that book regardless of the strength or weakness of their marketing efforts.

We also need to keep in mind the goal of what we are promoting. If we are promoting a charitable cause, or an educational cause, then we should be cognizant of some important points. Firstly, in the Islamic community, if I am marketing an academic activity (like a halaqah or seminar) then the people I am speaking to see me as a representative of that cause. If you are promoting such an event, but the community never sees you as taking an active role in education (such as attending other educational activities, helping other programs, or teaching), then how can they take you seriously? Imagine if you have an Imam at your masjid who teaches 3 times a week, but you never attend anything by him. Then you and your organization decide to invite a guest speaker for a one day event. Do you really feel as if you can go up to this Imam and with a straight face ask him to “support Islamic knowledge” in your city by promoting this event? Should he be expected to take you seriously if you have never attended a single class by him or taken part in any other local activity? As marketing expert Seth Godin says, it's very easy to just wrap your idea around a brick and throw it over the transom, but that doesn't always mean that you should,

The internet has made it so easy to wrap your idea/proposal around a brick and throw it that we forget sometimes that just because you can, it doesn't mean you should.

What sort of proposal should you write to be sure that someone who gets it over the transom will read it? You shouldn't.

Instead, spend the time earning the right to make the proposal. Spend the time building a presence that gets you an invitation, or, at the very least, earns you the credibility to walk in the front door. If you want to pitch a great business development idea to a big company you don't already work with, allocate three to six months of focused, patient effort to earn the right to make the presentation in the first place. (source)

If you want to be able to market your programs in your community, make sure you are an active and productive member of that community. One of the goals of the programs we promote is is building and solidifying our communities – show it. I remember in college, there would always be a group of students who were not as “practicing” as others. Some people chose to make dawah to them by randomly showing up at their apartments every few months and yelling at them or laying a guilt trip on them, while others befriended them and were patient with them. The latter group invested time and effort with these individuals, helping them with even mundane tasks such as getting their cars fixed or working on school assignments. You can guess which of the two groups was more successful in eventually making headway with convincing them to begin attending the Masjid more regularly.

We need to look at every program we involve ourselves with in this light. If people do not see me and my project as a serious attempt to make a positive change, then it will not succeed. And for that to happen, it requires a significant investment into the community and its betterment on our own behalf.

The other point that this underscores is that of what you are promoting in the first place. Treat people with intelligence and respect. Give them honest reasons why a program will benefit them. No one likes to see cultish followings around specific individuals or organizations. The more appropriate way to show that love and respect is by telling our own experiences. What do these shuyookh teach, what is the tarbiya that they give, and how has it impacted your own life. Tell people about the content of the program you are promoting, and let them make an intelligent decision to attend or not – and then respect that decision. Personal testimonials are the most powerful way to showcase the importance of something. Have your parents ever told you, “if that halaqah is so good, then how come you don't listen to anything I say?” Well, it's true. Be the example of the positive effect you want others to experience.

Part of respecting a person's decision is respecting the person you are speaking to. Do not treat people like a “potential sale” that you need to “convert”, but treat them as your brother or sister, being the mirror of another believer, being a brick supporting the other brick. Our marketing should be for a sincere desire and betterment of ourselves and others.

Another important tactic is clearly defining the achievable goals. Let people know what the benefits are of the program, and what they will achieve after completing it. A good (and timely) example is that of a Hajj workshop. One person is attending hoping to know the bare minimum of what he needs for hajj, and another is attending thinking he will get a comparative fiqh course contrasting different scholarly opinions and their evidences. No matter how good the program is, without proper marketing of the expectations, the program will be a failure for one of them.

I believe the most important goal to keep in mind is considering yourself and your materials an extension of what you are promoting. If we are promoting coming closer to Allāh (swt) and His Rasool (saw) then it needs to be done in an elegant, sophisticated, and above all professional manner. We are dealing with serious issues and it requires us to give them their due respect.

What Islamic Marketing Should NOT Be

Losing Focus

This is just the opposite of the last point above. Sometimes volunteers get too energetic and lose sight of the core of the class in general and instead just tell you about how “awesome” the class/instructor/experience is without a real tangible qualifier as to why. I remember being asked if I was going to attend a specific class. When I replied in the negative, I was told, “Why not? It's going to be SO AWESOME!” Really? How can someone who hasn't taken the class know this for a fact? The more that programs are marketed by volunteers solely due to it being a specific instructor or organization, the more it will appear as clique-ish to others.

Another mistake that comes from this energy is that we lose focus of the end goal, which is to help bring people closer to Allāh(swt). You may find someone attending or volunteering for one thing, and someone else comes and says, “oh thats nice, but you know, xyz organization is SO AWESOME.” It is the attitude of – what you're doing is nice, but it's just not as good as what I'm doing. Oh yeah, that Imam is ok, but he's nothing like Shaykh so and so. It is ok to be passionate about your project, its a requirement to its success, but we cannot let that passion cause us to discard or degrade other projects. Unfortunately, it has become too common for volunteers of one organization to degrade and boycott others over seemingly minor issues. Show loyalty to  helping people learn, not to one particular vehicle. In my personal (and limited) experience, the brightest students I have met are those who benefit from multiple organizations and activities instead of limiting themselves.

Recently, I spoke to one brother who was being recruited by a particular organization, and they gave him their – for lack of a better term – “orientation packet” that outlined the expectations of their volunteers and their general policies. One of their guidelines was that once you join, you are explicitly not allowed to partake in the activities of any other organization. You are only allowed to involve yourself and promote activities of said organization. This is 'missing the forest for the trees' so to speak. We often forget how to cooperate with one another, expecting every masjid, organization, and email list to promote and announce our own programs, but we become unwilling to return the favor when called upon.

Unfortunately, there is still yet another hindrance to reshifting our focus – price. Let's leave aside the debate of “paying” for classes [separate issue], and instead focus on what ends up happening. Nothing bothers me more than being approached about an Islamic program and instead of being told what it's about, I am given a sales pitch with 38 different ways to get a discount and save 5 dollars. Are we spreading information about a program to bring people closer to Allāh or are we just here to try and figure out which discount or pricing plan best suits their needs? Bring the focus back to what is important.

Lastly, and perhaps one of the most important points, is losing focus of the appropriate religious etiquettes that govern our behaviors. There are a significant amount of respectable scholars (classical and modern) who consider the following two things impermissible: displaying pictures/videos of uncovered women, and music. Whether or not you consider them halal or haram is irrelevant in the context of this marketing discussion. What is important is the perception that is created about your organization should you choose to utilize either of these. If you feel it is ok, and your promotional materials include it, then that is your prerogative. But keep in mind the ramifications of this. Your organization will be 'branded' as liberal, or lax in regards to Islamic fiqh, and you risk of alienating the conservative crowd, or even worse, undermining your own reputation as an Islamic (academic) organization. The better marketing practice would be to tailor your materials to the 'lowest common denominator' of your audience. Let me give you an example to illustrate. Some people consider “outside meat” to be halal, and others consider it not so much. When you cater dinner for the masjid, would you ever cater in McDonald's Big Mac's for everyone? Of course not! It's a disaster waiting to happen. You respect everyone's decision and order halal food from a Muslim restaurant.

Our marketing needs to be the same way. Respect others opinions, and don't lose focus of what you are trying to achieve.

Bully Tactics and Lying

A volunteer from organization X comes to you and asks you to attend a program. You let him know you can't because you have family obligations, other plans, or some other (legitimate) excuse. Response? “You're just not serious about knowledge.” This is one of myriad responses along with others premised around making assumptions as to the 'true' reason someone does not want to attend something. It is not our job to judge others and their level of seriousness. In fact, this is the opposite of the respect portion in the section above. If we show someone that we cannot respect their decision to say no, then they will feel disrespected by us (and by extension the organization we are representing).

This is one example of a bullying tactic, or overly aggressive marketing. It must be noted that there is a fine line between pushing or prodding people, and going overboard. Some people do need an extra push, and extra motivation. They do need to see you as enthusiastic and energetic about your project. But if it reaches the stage where people begin avoiding you because you can't seemingly talk about anything else at any time, then it's most likely an indication that you have crossed that line.

Lying comes into play when our aggressive tactics to get people to attend turn into 'little white lies.' One example is setting artificial caps on the number of people who can attend a program in order to pressure you into coming or signing up quickly. This doesn't really happen that often, but in a few cases I have heard of people 'inflating' things in order to set certain perceptions that were not necessarily true.

Selling a Bentley Like it's a Used Geo Metro

Can you imagine the owner of a Bentley or a Maserati dealership walking up and down his car lot with a shotgun firing out windshields because the down-payments are too high? Didn't think so. We, as activists, have a responsibility to recognize the magnitude of what we are “selling” to people. We have amazing shuyookh, amazing institutes, amazing classes, amazing programs, amazing conferences, and amazing activities in general. They are literally top notch. They are programs of the highest virtue – calling people to learn sacred knowledge of the Qur'an and the Sunnah of the Prophet (sal-Allahu 'alayhi was-Sallam), to live with the akhlaq of the Qur'an, and the holistic life example of the Rasool (saw). When we have this treasure, we want to share it with everyone. But we have to remember to share it in a manner that is befitting the glory and splendor of the treasure we have.

Sometimes out of our zeal to get people to attend programs and benefit from them, we sometimes use strategies that can degrade the noble thing that we are calling to. Seth Godin gives a great explanation of the negative impact of such behavior,

It's very easy to underrate the value of cultural wisdom, otherwise known as sophistication.

Walk into a doctor's office and the paneling is wrong, the carpeting is wrong and it feels dated. Instant lack of trust.

Meet a salesperson in your office. She doesn't shake hands, she's fumbling with an old Filofax, she mispronounces Steve Jobs' name and doesn't make eye contact.

Visit a website for a vendor and it looks like one of those long-letter opportunity seeker type sites.

In each case, the reason you wrote someone off had nothing to do with their product and everything to do with their lack of cultural wisdom.

We place a high value on sophistication, because we've been trained to seek it out as a cue for what lies ahead. We figure that if someone is too clueless to understand our norms, they probably don't understand how to make us a product or service that we'll like.

This is even more interesting because different cultures have different norms, so there isn't one right answer. It's an ever changing, complex task. Cultural wisdom is important precisely because it's difficult.

And yet…

Who's in charge of cultural norms at your organization? Does someone hire or train or review to make sure you and your people are getting it right? At Vogue magazine, of course, that's all they do. If they lost it, even for a minute, they'd be toast.

It's funny that we assume that all sorts of complex but ultimately unimportant elements need experts and committees and review, but the most important element of marketing–demonstrating cultural wisdom–shouldn't even be discussed.

One thing that I personally feel has become common is what Seth Godin mentions about the feel of certain websites. To put it another way, if the website or marketing for an Islamic program immediately conjures up images of infomercials or websites promising to make you millions while you work from home stuffing envelopes – then I strongly feel that we have a serious problem. It's saddening (and uncreative) to see Islamic sites utilizing the same formulaic methods as, for lack of a better term, scam websites and get-rich-quick schemes. These sites are often set up in the same way, with over the top attention grabbing headlines, promises of some pie-in-the-sky lifestyle, a countdown rush before time expires, a hook to get you to either sign up and buy the product, and an email form at the end for you to sign up to get “more information” -  at which point you start getting spammed by an auto-responder email bot.

You have heard the saying, if it walks like a duck, sounds like a duck… If someone visits an Islamic website and it looks like a scam, feels like a scam… Do not let your marketing tactics be the reason that someone writes off a beneficial project. If you utilize a cheap marketing technique, it will make the product (which in this case might be knowledge of the Quran and Sunnah) also look cheap. The counter-argument to this will always be something about the effectiveness of such techniques, but in this case I do not believe the means are justified. Even if it might convince a few more people to 'sign up' you do so at the cost of ruining the reputation of the organization. Just like the videos in the commercials above, they might be successful from a sales point of view, but is that really the reputation you want to establish?

Do not let perceived effectiveness of a marketing tool cheapen the nobility of what you are actually calling people to. Whether we like it or not, when we employ tactics that have negative connotations, those same connotations and conjured emotions will transfer to the project that we are trying to promote.

Parting Thoughts

We have experienced a lot of growth in North America over the past 10-15 years. We have seen the rise of numerous Islamic schools, Islamic institutes (both online and onsite), high quality classes, conferences, youth activities, new organizations, charitable efforts, and other good causes that are too numerous to mention. But while these things are growing, there is an understated negative perception being associated with some due not to the organizations or their leaders – but rather because of us, the volunteers, who lose sight of some of the bigger picture out of our own zeal.

I do not contend that every criticism I have raised is absolutely correct, but I hope that our love for dawah and our love for these projects does not blind us from turning a critical eye at these projects and re-evalauting them and improving them before a bigger need for it arises.

Part 1 – This article | Part 2 – Format of Seeking Knowledge | Part 3 – Marketing Islamic Programs

My greatest complaint about 'Īd prayer is that there aren’t enough trash cans that I can easily get to to chunk all the fliers that are handed to me in the prayer hall. Somewhere in between saying salaam after my prayer to getting done saying salaam to all of my friends, I find my hands filled with fliers for all the Islamic conferences, classes, and events going on. With each postcard I receive, the marketer also delivers a sales pitch before I scurry away:

“Register today and receive a 10% discount!”

“Sign up with 5 friends, get $5 off!”

“Come to the lecture everyone’s talking about!”

Lectures, speeches, lectures, speeches, lectures, speeches. They never end and we should be grateful. We are. But since when did this become our main source of attaining Islamic knowledge? What do I mean? Well…

Purchasing Religion

Our bookshelves at home are caked with dust, but I’m not here to write about how we don’t pick up the Quran and read it enough because there are a stack of books lying beneath the Quran. These books are shut tight because rarely have they been opened. We may not even know their titles. These are tafseer books by Ibn Kathir, aqeedah books by Abu Ameenah Bilal Phillips, and maybe even the Muwatta of Imam Malik. But we don’t pry them open to soak in the comprehensive, profuse amounts of knowledge that are waiting to flood off of the pages and into our minds. And why should we when we can, well, just buy Islam?

We should clear off our bookshelves and make room for the hundreds of fliers, emails, and Facebook invitations we receive about these Islamic knowledge events. I mean, there’s no use in keeping the books we have on there. Right?

My question today is why has our primary route for gaining knowledge of Islam become through classes, conferences, and seminars? Anyone hitch a ride to a Masjid or pay a hundred bucks to attend a class, but not just anyone can and does crack open a book of knowledge. We begin to rely on someone to stand and talk to us. We wait for the knowledge to come to us, we don’t go to it.

Branding Bandwagon

Islam is a religion meant to be easy and therefore Muslims set up organizations to deliver Islam to brothers’ and sisters’ locales. This is all fine until those same brothers and sisters then stop learning Islam on their own because they figure they can just buy it in the form of Powerpoint slideshows, class notebooks, and conference badges – all giving access to wide selections of religious entertainment.

Pretty soon it’s no longer about going to such-and-such seminar to learn about the fiqh of fasting. It’s about going to Organization X’s event for the sake of it being an X lecture with speakers A and B. Fame is in the name.

Umar: Man are you going to that new X event? EVERYONE is going!

Hassan: Oh cool! What’s it about?

Umar: Uhh I don’t know but Organization X is hosting it!

Hassan: … But what are they going to teach us? Praying? Fasting? Hajj? … Marriage?!

Umar: OMG maybe it’s about marriage! I don’t know but it’s X so it’s gotta be good!

Hassan: -_-

Umar: Come on man, don’t you want to learn about Islam FOR THE SAKE OF Allāh? What would you rather do, play basketball??? How are you going to answer for that on the Day of Judgment when you could’ve been learning from speaker A and speaker B!

Hassan: [Feeling guilty] Oh I guess. What are their credentials?

Umar: Credentials? Dude they’re Shaykhs!

Hassan: But where did they learn about Islam from? Do they have PhD’s?

Umar: Why are you questioning our scholars of Islam? These guys do lectures all over Canada, the US, the UK, they’re awesome!

Hassan: Umm… I’m sorry..?

Then we parade behind the banners of all the Organization X’s out there which turn into X Groupies. All other Muslims who feel a little pushed away from these cliques don’t dare to enter an X event and therefore walk away from X with a bad impression. What just happened here? Knowledge of Islam became all about Organization X and Shaykh A and Shaykh B.

Read! Iqra! Paro! Lea! Lire! 阅读!

Slowly we lose sight of the old-fashioned yet effective ways of learning. There’s nothing wrong with being traditional. Why can’t we learn without someone standing in front of us with a mic cracking jokes here and there while explaining the principles of the Oneness of Allāh? Why can’t we simply open a credible book and learn from it? Besides, how did the hundreds of speakers who we study under gain their knowledge no matter which culture, nation, or language was native to them? They read. When Imam An-Nawawi was studying Islam, he had stacks of books towering up to the ceiling of his room!

Of course it isn’t necessary to solely read to enlighten ourselves; we can and should listen to lectures as well. But I’m simply pointing out lectures alone aren’t enough either. We walk into Islamic classes expecting to learn all about how to pray according to the Sunnah by sitting there and listening to a speaker, when in reality we can’t learn all there is on the topic by doing so. There is just so much to our magnificent religion that can’t be covered in a couple of lectures. We have to go home and research on our own. Investigate the different opinions, learn about the fiqh issues involved, and choose to follow the path we find most plausible. When we have questions about what we read, we can always ask those who have more knowledge than us. This is a beneficial middle ground solution for all the Organization X or Shaykh A/B fan boys and girls.

Remember this is how Islam first began. It started with the command to read. It’s how Islam was spread, passing on copies of our Scripture. It’s how Islam will be preserved and carried on forever, imprinted in hearts and pages. Through this action of reading there’s a lot we can gain, perhaps more than what can be sought from only sitting in auditorium seats trying to attend every one of the events on fliers we receive during 'Īd prayer. :)