The FBI envisioned infiltrating mosques and Muslim student associations to look for young Yemenis to serve as informants, according to an internal presentation obtained by The Intercept.
The document suggests that agents scour Facebook “to find individuals who are dramatically increasing their levels of piety — that’s the demographic you want.”
“Since we’re looking for young people re-engaging with their Islamic faith,” it continues, “the local MSA [Muslim Student Association] is a great place to start.”
The 24-slide presentation, prepared for a Source Development Unit in the FBI’s Directorate of Intelligence, is titled “Responding to the Yemeni Threat: Scenarios for CHS Development,” using the bureau’s lingo for informants, which it calls “confidential human sources.”
It’s not clear if the presentation describes a specific program that was put into action or whether it was meant to offer general tips for cultivation of sources who could provide information related to al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, al Qaeda’s Yemen affiliate. The document appears to suggest identifying potential informants solely on the basis of their religious affiliation or national origin, which could violate FBI rules meant to curb profiling and discrimination.
The document is undated, but from references in the text, it appears to have been prepared around 2010 or 2011 by Centra Technology Inc., a company selling intelligence services. Centra Technology has had regular contracts with the FBI since 2008, including for training courses vaguely described in contract records as “analytic tools and techniques.” Centra did not respond to a request for comment.
According to FBI operating guidelines originally promulgated in 2008, agents are allowed to use a variety of tactics when it comes to seeking information to identify potential informants or recruiting particular individuals, including database searches, physical surveillance, and even combing through someone’s trash. Still, the current version of the guidelines state that someone should not be targeted as an informant “based solely on race, ethnicity, national origin, religion or activities protected by the First Amendment, or a combination of only such factors.”
It’s not clear how looking at expressions of piety and attendance at a Muslim student group would not run afoul of that guidance. An FBI spokesman declined to answer specific questions about the document, instead providing a statement saying that the FBI conducts investigations under guidelines that are “intended to ensure that FBI employees act in accordance with the law and the Constitution.” He added that “all Confidential Human Source relationships with the FBI are voluntary.”
According to the FBI’s guidelines, investigations involving academic or religious groups are considered “sensitive investigative matters” and require extra supervision and particular rules for deploying undercover officers or informants, as do investigations of mosques. The presentation does not mention any such sensitivities.
“The FBI’s focus on Muslim student groups does not make anyone safer,” said Ramzi Kassem, a law professor at the City University of New York who directs CLEAR, an initiative that works with communities affected by counterterrorism policies. “It also comes at the expense of students whose college experience is no longer a time for intellectual exploration and the building of lasting friendships but a paranoid nightmare where certain thoughts are taboo and your classmate might be an informant.”
FBI surveillance of mosques and Muslim communities in the past has generated controversy, as has the bureau’s aggressive use of its army of informants — which grew to over 15,000 in the years after the 9/11 attacks. In 2012, the American Civil Liberties Union obtained documents showing that the FBI had used “mosque outreach” programs ostensibly meant to build relationships with Islamic communities in order to collect intelligence. There is a long-running lawsuit over an FBI informant who was sent into mosques in Southern California in 2006 and 2007.
Federal authorities investigating the influence of the Islamic State in the United States have increased their use of informants and sting operations. In the past two years there have been 101 Islamic State-related cases in U.S. courts, and 59 percent of them involved the use of informants or undercover agents, according to a report released in July by the Center on National Security at Fordham Law School.
Many of the individuals who actually carried out attacks motivated by violent Islamic ideologies in recent years were known to authorities, illustrating the difficulty in predicting who may become violent. Omar Mateen, who killed 49 people in an Orlando nightclub this year, had been the subject of an FBI investigation involving informants; the suspect in recent bombings in Manhattan and New Jersey, Ahmad Khan Rahami, was reported to the FBI by his own father.
The Centra Technology presentation obtained by The Intercept is undated but the figures mentioned in it suggest that it was prepared around 2010 or 2011. It focuses on the threat to the United States posed by al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, al Qaeda’s affiliate in Yemen, and mentions the radical Yemeni-American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, and Samir Khan, who published the jihadist magazine Inspire. Both were killed in a drone strike in 2011; the presentation references their influence on would-be terrorists in the United States, but in such a way that it remains unclear if they were still alive when it was written. It also mentions Sharif Mobley, an American citizen who has been in prison in Yemen since 2010. (The FBI interviewed Mobley in 2010 after he was arrested by Yemeni authorities on terror charges, which were later dropped; Mobley’s family denies that he has any ties to extremism.)
The presentation’s authors were especially interested in Salafism, a conservative form of Sunni Islam, and the influence of particular schools in Yemen, including al-Iman University, in Sanaa, and schools they call “DAHN,” perhaps a reference to Dar Al Hadith, a group of Salafist schools where foreign converts studied and in which Western intelligence agencies have long been interested. (The Intercept spoke to one Yemeni-American who was questioned by the FBI in 2011 about both institutions.)
Yet the presentation admits that “institution of study is of limited predictive value” and there is “no systematic way of identifying who has become radicalized.” The only commonalities between the individuals they had identified — presumably referring to people who had left the United States to join AQAP — were that they were all between the ages of 20 and 40, and “‘born again’ Muslims — either converts to Islam or people who had rediscovered their faith in mid-life.”
Muslim youths participate in a community group gathering in Brooklyn in 2011.
Photo: Spencer Platt/Getty Images
“Our ‘threat pool’ consists of born-again muslims who have traveled to Yemen or who intend to do so. However, there are thousands of such people, and very few of them become AQ groupies,” the presentation asks. “How do we weed out the true threats?”
The FBI thought it could get to them by looking for “younger, more devout sources” — specifically, “young Salafists.” They wanted people who had been or were thinking of going to Yemen, or were “in the social circles where travel for overseas study is discussed.” It also suggests that agents “focus on recruiting young Salafists of any ethnic background,” who could serve as “human tripwires — they’re the ones who can tell you when people they know begin to move in the takfir/jihad direction.”
Under headings like “Finding Your Salafis” and “Seducing the Salafis,” the presentation suggests that “existing sources in local mosques should be able to tell you about groups of young Salafis in the community,” and advises that agents take advantage of undercover operations “that capture discussions between Salafis,” study Facebook profiles for signs of increasing “levels of piety,” and target “the local MSA,” or Muslim Student Association.
The goal was “to look for people at the edges who are in the same circles, but not radical enough” to warrant opening an investigation into. The presentation suggests exploiting doctrinal disputes and making appeals to potential sources who may “hold views that strike us as extreme,” but who are not “jihadists of the AQ stripe.”
The focus in the document on young, pious Muslim students echoes a now-discredited effort by the New York City Police Department to monitor Muslim student groups as part of widespread surveillance of Muslim communities and businesses in and around New York. The NYPD sent undercover police officers onto college campuses in the city and across the Northeast, and monitored students’ online interactions. Internal records showed that the NYPD was especially interested in Muslim student associations, which they defined as “a university-based student group, with an Islamic focus, involved with religious and political activities.” Some groups drew NYPD interest because they had invited “salafist speakers,” according to the AP, while another had “students who are politically active and radicalizing.” The program was exposed in 2011 and the department eventually disbanded the unit in charge, admitting that it had never generated a lead.
In 2011, when the Associated Press first reported on the NYPD surveillance, the FBI insisted that its agents were bound by stricter rules, and in fact, that the NYPD’s clumsiness was interfering with the bureau’s investigations. Given that the presentation says the FBI was looking for informants with specific insights into Al Qaeda, it’s possible that the approach would have been more tailored and required more supervision than the kind of blanket surveillance of entire neighborhoods and establishments that the NYPD engaged in. Yet the presentation does suggest broad scrutiny of Yemeni populations, and does not mention rules governing that type of surveillance. The presentation notes that the “FBI has access to thousands of Yemeni immigrants residing in the U.S.” and was “developing strategies for identifying people in the U.S. with familial connections to specific tribes.” The presentation encourages agents to “know where the Yemenis in your [Area of Responsibility] are from,” and to ask their existing sources “to find individuals from the relevant regions.”
A slide from the FBI presentation explains how the FBI planned to court young, pious Muslims as informants.
“I don’t think there is much difference between this approach and what the NYPD was doing, in that it is identifying religious practice or ethnicity as an indicator of association with terrorism,” said Mike German, a former FBI agent and fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law.
The fixation on Salafism was common in both agencies, German said. He pointed to other FBI materials that include references to Salafism “as the foundation from which terrorism arises, which is an inaccurate and simplistic idea.”
The NYPD had produced a heavily criticized report that drew a direct link between commonplace religious activity and terrorism; FBI materials from the same time period also described a simple theory of a line from conversion to jihad, and identified mosques and other associations as places where radicalism might grow. German says that the FBI’s current radicalization theory “tends to be more vague about what indicators they should look for, I think because we know there aren’t reliable indicators” of propensity to violence.
Yet, he said, the FBI is still “looking at the general population and trying to predict where someone will go bad — a broad-brush approach that amounts to profiling — as opposed to looking at where there’s actual evidence.”
Top photo: Muslim women participate in a gathering of a community group in Brooklyn in 2011.
How inside out our government policies are. While the FBI investigates Yemeni Muslims for possible ties to al-Qaeda in Yemen, the Pentagon and Obama administration supports Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and al-Qaeda in Yemen in their fight against the Houthis.
If only these strategies were to be used to focus on the radicalization of Police Officers within their Departments.
I would encourage anyone seeking a personal perspective on Yemen and how the war on Yemen affects its citizens to follow Haykal Bafana on twitter.
https://twitter.com/BaFana3
But if it were only the illegal surveilance and community snitch programs. Governments have waged a profitable war on their own civilians, profitable for Agency Contractors. Using COINTELPRO / STASI techniques and military grade equipment.
DEW’s maim, torture and kill. These weapons are undetectable with plausible deniablity
So, easily identified “others” are the FBI’s/ABC Soup Agencies’ targets du jour – Baby, next week it’s you – for Thought Crimes. Sweet little meme, for the current zeitgeist of Der Homeland’s funding purposes and “terror” driven causes. The Crusades are a pretty f’in old and way obsolete set of The Emperor’s New Clothes, the Gift That Keeps On Givin’ – if you’re considering a career in oppression and security, Kissinger style. Cut military spending 99.9% and put that money into healthcare, education, alternative energy, and feeding people healthy food – then see how much time anyone has to go out looking for made-up, totally fictional Boogeymen.
This is a powerful thing to say:
All in the name of “Responding to the Yemeni Threat “
Yemen! A threat to America?
I’m reminded of the famous poem: “Oh what a tangled web we weave…when we have to deal with the repercussions of an imperialist foreign policy” (or something like that)
I’ve long felt that a nation can’t compartmentalize empire building and democracy. Perhaps in the same way you can’t have both freedom in the north and slavery in the south. Slavery anywhere is a threat to freedom everywhere.
As we saw in the film “12 years a slave”, injustice infects even the part of America that didn’t permit slavery.
Similarly, the injustice of illegal aggression, empire, war crimes, infects continental America. Because when your government policy is a war crime, freedom of thought is a potential enemy.
Of course it makes superficial sense for Obama to target the Yemeni community in America, when America targets Yemen…just as it made superficial sense for the Gestapo to target the Jewish community in Germany. They were a threat. Of course the Nazis were the ones that MADE many Jews become adversaries and contribute to the allied war effort, when Hitler attacked the Jewish community in the first place.
Democracy at home is not only not an excuse for war crimes, it ultimately becomes one of the casualties of the war crimes.
Just as nobody can legitimately elect to become a slave, (human freedom is inalienable)…no war crimes can be made legitimate by their perpetrators having been elected. But, having been elected, and having committed war crimes, the next step following the extinction of rights abroad is naturally the erosion of rights at home, the state having made freedom and justice, the enemy.
The FBI’s mission to stop crime in Yemen is a noble one. In the meantime, Saudi Arabia is bombing Yemen into oblivion. So the FBI’s dream of lucrative private prisons, stuffed full of Yemenis, that reward retired FBI managers with seats on their board of directors, may ultimately fail. However, as the motto of the FBI states: ““Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better.”
“The Shootings you Didn’t Hear Trump Denounce because, not Muslim”
Excerpts:
Read the rest of this article at http://www.juancole.com/2016/09/shootings-denounce-because.html
The author is not pointing out anything that could not have been pointed out by someone else. So the author’s associations with anything should not be an issue.
Moreover, the author is singling out Trump. But it also applies to other politicians, pundits and news networks.
Questions: Does the author have a point? Do I have a point?
I hear you Sufi.
Though it must often feel like a lonely, tireless job, please keep speaking. And thank you for doing so.
Thanks,
My re-appearance is like a bump-in make up after a break up.
I’m not sure if I want to stick around.
The quality of discourse here has generally gone down, and the quality of criticisms of Islam/Muslims — though very small in volume — is amateurish and not scholarly. Most of the time, the criticisms discredit themselves.
Which is a step-up from the ‘mainstream media’ … imo sufi! Nothing much I’ve read in the newspapers lately has been true afaict.
*btw, i’ve often wanted to learn more of ‘your’ views wrt ‘The Shari’at’, among other things, … but can’t seem to find the time.
In a nutshell (no pun intended), Shariah is like the outer shell of an egg — it provides a protective and conducive environment for the embryo to develop into a chick.
Break the egg shell, and the chick will not form.
Similarly, Shariah is the outer form of a path that provides a protective and conducive environment for the self to grow (towards the highest consciousness that is possible for an individual).
Collective outer forms (e.g. laws) should be such that they allow the collectivity to reflect the higher — peace, justice, selflessness, compassion, generosity, selflessness, etc.
Shariahs are fluid, not static, and what is collectively suitable for one (individual or collectivity) is not necessarily suitable for another. Nor is what is collectively suitable for one age is suitable for all ages.
This is a very short summary of my views.
Obviously, there are many other views, some of which I have shared in the past.
Don’t go away (unless you need to, but I would miss you). Do pick your battles. Shun the bigots.
Me, too. That is, I would miss you.
But I understand why it’s hard to stick around.
This description is why your presence here is so valuable. Such nuance, beauty and power in a concept not well understood by the west.
I will miss – have missed – seeing your voice here. I will welcome seeing it whenever you feel up to being here. And I accept – because I cannot possibly know – the difficulties posed by being here.
Thanks,
There are many currents within the world of Islam (as there are within other religious and non-religious paths), whose focus is on grooming the self so that it reflects the higher consciousness, with diverse outer forms (Shariahs), for the ways to the Truth are many (There are as many ways to the highest consciousness as their are hearts.).
To us, outer forms that are not conducive to self-development and actualization (for a person or for a collectivity) do not make the cut, that is, they are not part of our Shariah.
And there are a gazillion pages that have been written on this subject over the past 1400 odd years, something those who rely on Wikipedia will not find.
I wonder if it has occurred to the FBI to send someone to the library, or the Internet, to research the question, “What has driven the development of Salafi-jihadist groups and why do some of them want to attack us?”
Just wondering, of course.
Google will just tell them its because they are so exceptional that people want to kill them
Google is just another instrument of the (un) intelligence agengies
And as we have created an economy of not winning friends and influencing people, Dale Carnegie would make the no-fly list.
Call Oscar Meyer. With all the money we spend on Profayshunall military warmakers we could set up giant BBQ’s and salad until the “enemy” cant stand fighting for fear of missing another great meal. For politicians to deny this solution goes against their own policies.
Hell, why would the FBI be targeting Yemenis in the first place.
*The fact they are targeting Yemenis suggests the FBI already has a clue (The presentation encourages agents to “know where the Yemenis in your [Area of Responsibility] are from,”) Doug.
I agree with rrheard and photosymbiosis below that Saudi Wahhabism must be regarded as equally suspicious if this process is to be sincere.
Instead , they were targeted with barrel/cluster bombs and white phosphorus supplied by the US!! Both generally considered war crimes, especially when used on civilians. But then again, who has ever heard of “winners” being charged with a war crime.
War crimes laws were a conciliatory action to finish the war against nazi germany. Today, war crimes are no longer fashionable, unless the perps are from africa or russian areas. Israel has immunity from war crimes. The US does too. In fact, mr obama couldnt bring himself to have bush and cheney brought to the hague.
If you were to ask why the US isnt charged with war crimes in the middle east, mr obama will say that techinically we are not at war. But if you ask him why we are using bombs missiles drones etc against people in the middle east, he will tell you that we are at war.
as a christian, i never doubted the road to hell was paved with good intentions.
As far as the battle against ISIS & YEMEN goes (it is not a “war”, it is a battle and the war aspect is also quite illegal) we are creating enemies bigtime. The reason is the phenomenological aspect of the passage of time. In the beginning we fought against people who would attack us for their objection to our system or whatever. NOW IT’S DIFFERENT because NOW we have been killing innocent persons for years and THAT has been felt and witnessed by those previously not involved but who are now involved because of the attrocities the US has committed against friends and family. And THESE warriors really hate US.
Want to see their determination and passion for battle? They live to win or die. Here you go. https://www.zerocensorship.com/uncensored/isis/bangladesh-video-features-dhaka-cafe-massacre-terrorists-graphic-327769
In 1776 the british learned that you cannot beat people where they live whom you subjugate. The colonists had the natural desire for independence and self determination as all humans do, we are born with it. The people in syria & yemen are no different. The US foreign policy madness is just that, madness, arrogance, insanity.
Hellary Clinton and her band of wallstreet thieves backing her want to subjugate the planet to the TPP TPIP TISA rulership. THAT’S INSANE. She is quite mad. And believing that people all over the world would bow to this preposterous evil only means that those who do believe this have handed their will to their dark masters.
Thomas Jefferson doesn’t work for ISIS. This over-the-top anti-American rhetoric is offputting and only undermines the cause of decency, regardless of how annoyed people are with these military adventures. The Muslim terrorists were always violent, always a problem. Back in 1990 I first read what I thought was “Russian propaganda” in a commie street newspaper about how the Taliban the U.S. were backing threw acid in the faces of women who didn’t wear a veil. So I don’t want people to have any delusions that that crew of Iraqi government thugs hawking bogus religion and claiming private paydays from the loot are some kind of idealistic cause. They’re NOT.
The problem is simply that the U.S., when attacked, keeps escalating and getting more and more involved. It’s based on some kind of dream that an Islamic society can be reformed if you just kill the most violent, most obnoxious people. But it doesn’t work, because until a society has some overriding idea to inspire people on a different path, simply getting rid of the worst villains merely creates opportunities for others to do what they did. And I never saw an idea you can fit in a bomb.
So are the non-Muslim terrorists.
If you compare the violence committed by the non-Muslims over the past 600+ years with the violence committed by the Muslims, everyone knows very well which one wins by a wide margin.
Your anti-Islam/Muslim crusade is always amateurish.
You know very well that the problem of violence transcends cultural and religious/non-religious boundaries, and has to do with succumbing to the lower self/consciousness, and not the underlying principles of a society — whether it be a traditional religion or democracy or whatever.
(We have seen violence committed by those who claim to be religious as well as by those who claim to adhere to the ideals of democracy).
The violence and atrocities that humanity saw just in WWI and WWII in which millions of civilians were targeted, killed, maimed and so much destruction occurred was not a Muslim/Islam phenomenon — they were essentially non-Muslim “civil wars.”
What the Nazis did is well-known. And they were not Muslims.
As if the “Islamic”*** society has no “overriding idea to inspire people on a ‘different’ path.” I myself have expressed these overriding ideas, which exist in all societies where the Muslims exist. Looks like you have not been paying attention.
The “Islamic” societies have been suffering from external interferences for a fairly long time. No “Islamic” society is totally free to choose its own path, to set its own course and deal with the internal issues and build its own structures based on their own traditions. External forces have been lighting fires in many of these societies and that plays a crucial destructive role.
Yet, there are a lot more reformation is going on than those who learn about these societies and their paths through Wikipedia and spew falsehoods and exaggerations in an amateurish way on a regular basis realize and acknowledge.
—
*** I put “Islamic” within double-quotes — none of the societies in which the Muslims are in majority reflect the ideals of the Islam that can be reasonably derived from Islam’s primary source, the Quran, and the Transformational Islam of (exoteric AND esoteric) traditional Muslims.
The correct way to refer to these societies is “Muslim Societies”.
For example, Saudi Arabia fails miserably because it is essentially based on Puritanical Salafism (the entity that emerged in the middle of the last century as a result of the marriage between Salafism and Wahhabism), which is a deviation from traditional Islam in that it generally bypasses the 1400+ years of traditional scholarship. (See “Reasoning with God”, by Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl, at https://www.amazon.com/Reasoning-God-Reclaiming-Shari‘ah-Modern/dp/0742552322/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1475239968&sr=8-1&keywords=reasoning+with+god ).
The Nazis are the sort of exception that proves the rule. The world’s foremost Jew-haters had some obvious problems with Jesus, and aggressively pushed the reintroduction of old Norse religious motifs. They reorganized their churches to feature Mein Kampf as the centerpiece. Because so much of the population was Christian, they couldn’t change everything right away – remember, the Nazis only went as fast as they could; right after taking power they did little more than picket Jewish businesses! And Christianity was the focus of some residual resistance to them.
Now of course we know that there have been sick phenomena in Christian societies – the Inquisition, the persecution of gays, the burning of witches and so forth. The religion is not a free ticket to perfect behavior. It is merely sincere, when done right, in a world where very little is. And when we see terrible things in the Christian world, whether under Stalin or Hitler, left or right, they are often accompanied by an abandonment of Christianity itself.
I am not convinced that Islam has any of that kind of sincerity. From ‘Asma’ bint Marwan onward, I don’t see Muhammad as an honest speaker but as a censor. I see him as a raider and a pirate of the sands, whose verses are nothing but a weak, plagiarized rehash of things the Jews believed that were not all that great to begin with. And while I understand some of your Sufi commentators want to try to imagine a perfect Islam, it is an Islam that you admit does not exist now!, one that never existed, one that cannot exist but merely invites you to make desperate excuses for things like people getting their hands chopped off. I can’t see a point to it.
NOTE: We are merely sharing our perspectives. There’s no attempt on my part to convince anyone.
That is your perspective.
From another perspective, the Nazis were a Western phenomenon, and ALL sides committed atrocities, e.g., the atomic bombs thrown at largely civilian populations.
And …there have been other wars and destructions.
From that perspective, the West has carried out a lot more violence, subjugation and atrocities over the past, say, 600 years, than the Muslims have.
Violence is a human problem, and there’s nothing unique about this or that culture, tradition, or civilization. As stated earlier, at the core of human action is the human self, which carries out destructive actions when it reflects the lower consciousness.
You are a bonafide anti-Islam. I am sure that you want nothing short of the elimination of Islam, no matter that Islam is not monolithic, that there are many islams in existence, you just don’t like Islam in any shape or form.
Moreover, what you present is what you think Islam is. Others may have a different understanding of what Islam is.
And that is your view, which, I am sure, is based on the sources you have read and trust to be authentic.
Others may disagree with you.
To us, Islam’s primary source is the Quran, which is also its most authentic source. Other sources are secondary and are far less authentic, were not put to memory, like the Quran was, and not written down for quite some time (were based on oral traditions), and were highly influenced by the politics of the day.
We examine them in light of the Quran, while you don’t.
And to us, many things written about him do not fit the circle that the Quran draws.
Moreover, you are not familiar with the “Spiritual Muhammad,” whom the adherents of Transformative Islam know very well, often experientially.
There is no “imagining”.
That Islam has existed since the rise of the Adamic Consciousness, but you are not going to understand it from Wikipedia.
The Quran calls Abraham, Moses and Christ Muslims, by the way.
And a muslim is someone with the inner state of islam, which is when the lower consciousness yields to the higher consciousness.
Then there have been beings, such as ibn Arabi and Rumi.
But it’s okay for you to ignore all of this.
=================
To Anyone Who’s Interested: Suggested Reading to Broaden and Deepen Your Knowledge:
1. “Islam, Fundamentalism, and the Betrayal of Tradition, Revised and Expanded: Essays by Western Muslim Scholars” by Joseph E. B. Lumbard and Seyyed Hossein Nasr
2. “Islamic Spirituality: Manifestations” by Seyyed Hossein Nasr
3. “Sufi Essays” by Seyyed Hossein Nasr
4. “Ideals and Realities of Islam” by Seyyed Hossein Nasr
5. “Islam and the Plight of Modern Man” by Seyyed Hossein Nasr
6. “Traditional Islam in the Modern World” by Seyyed Hossein Nasr
7. “A Young Muslim’s Guide to the Modern World” by Seyyed Hossein Nasr
8. “Islam in the Modern World” by Seyyed Hossein Nasr
9. “The Heart of Islam” by Seyyed Hossein Nasr
10. “The Message of the Qur’an” by Muhammad Asad (Asad was not a Sufi)
11. “Sufi Path of Love: The Spiritual Teachings of Rumi” by William Chittick [Rumi’s poetry is essentially considered a commentary on the Qur’an]
12. “Sufism: A Beginner’s Guide” by William Chittick
13. “Vision of Islam” by William Chittick
14. “Understanding Islam: A New Translation with Selected Letters” by Frithjof Schuon
15. “Dimensions of Islam” by Frithjof Schuon
16. “The Elements of Islam” by Shaykh Fadhlalla Haeri
17. Various Qur’an Commentaries by Shaykh Fadhlalla Haeri
18. “Inner Meaning of Worship in Islam” by Shaykh Fadhlalla Haeri
19. “Living Islam – East & West” by Shaykh Fadhlalla Haeri
20. “Witnessing Perfection” by Shaykh Fadhlalla Haeri
21. “The Search for Beauty in Islam: A Conference of the Books The Complete Collection” by Dr. Dr. Abou El Fadl
22. Various writings of Shaykh Kabir Helminski
23. eBooks at http://www.zahrapublications.com
24. “The Great Theft — Wrestling Islam from the Extremists” by Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl
25. “Introduction to Sufi Doctrine” by Titus Burckhardt
26. “What is Sufism” by William Chittick
27. “The Elements of Sufism” by Shaykh Fadhlalla Haeri
28. “The Underlying Religion” Edited by Martin Lings
29. “Universal Dimensions of Islam” Edited by Patrick Laude
30. “The Elements of Islam” by Shaykh Fadhlalla Haeri
31. “What is Sufism?” by Martin Lings
32. “Divine Love: Islamic Literature and the Path to God” by William Chittick
33. “The Search for Beauty in Islam: A Conference of the Books” by Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl
34. “Reasoning with God”, by Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl
35. Various writings of, and on, ibn Arabi, especially written by William Chittick
============
It’s important to know how a path’s adherents see the path.
When examined through Islamic Philosophy (IP) and metaphysics, even the term “Muslim Terrorist” is an oxymoron, since in IP a “muslim” is someone whose lower self has yielded (submitted) to her higher self (aka consciousness), which results in immense inner peace (the state of “islam”).
But I won’t go into the details of this philosophical discussion.
Here’s a novel thought–if they are really interested in “Salafism” why not investigate the ever living baby bejesus out of everybody in a position of governmental or religious authority in Saudi Arabia, which, no big secret, is the biggest funder and exporter of radical Wahhabism (basically same thing but even more “pious”) all over the globe and particularly in Yemen.
Oh wait, but we wouldn’t want to hurt the fee fee’s of our really super excellent ally the House of Saud and its revanchist supporters.
But for the fact that bombing Mecca and Medina would likely inflame the sentiments of a billion Muslims all over the globe and start a global religious war, the US should have invaded Saudi Arabia after 9-11 and held every single Saudi accountable that had anything whatsoever to do with funding or aiding the 9-11 hijackers, busted up their revanchist regime, and tried a little “nation building” in that backwards revanchist kingdom.
They probably wanted to target their suspects with drone strikes, since any bodies can conveniently be ID’ed as “enemy combatants”, but domestic drone strikes are still just an Obama Administration wish list item.
However, the real source of Salafist Sunni Wahhabism is Saudi Arabia’s government, which generates lots of “takfiris” – people who claim the murder of other Muslims who are of ‘deviant persuasions’ is A-OK. In practice, this helps the Saudi Royals control their population by justifying the imprisonment, torture and murder of anyone calling for their removal from power and replacement by parliamentary systems of government; opposing the divine rulers is religious idolatry and justifies beheading – similar to how ISIS operates, isn’t it? So yes, suspicion of this group seems rather justified.
Just to be fair, the FBI also ought to be investigating the Zionist Israeli spy networks operating in the United States; they’ve taken an unhealthy interest in BDS activism lately, and are probably trying to interfere in US elections.
Here’s a primer on the difference between the real moderates and the fanatics:
Of course, the FBI won’t investigate the Saudi Royals for supporting takfiri ideology because Obama, like Bush, is in favor of close Saudi ties, more arms sales, destabilizing Syria, and hence gives them a pass on financing terrorism and slaughtering Yemeni civilians, all in the name of corporate greed and imperialistic agendas.
http://www.france24.com/en/20120929-how-saudi-arabia-petrodollars-finance-salafist-winter-islamism-wahhabism-egypt