With some exceptions—including the Anti-Defamation League and some liberal groups such as J Street and Americans for Peace Now—the organized Jewish community’s outcry against the bid by Minnesota’s Rep. Keith Ellison’s to head the Democratic National Committee (DNC) has been pretty much universal.
The reasoning for such unanimous revulsion can be attributed to a range of unpalatable behaviors. Whether it is Ellison’s openly anti-Semitic associations, his misleading criticism of Israel as a human rights violator, or his dogged attempt to block critical funding for Israel’s vital Iron Dome missile defense system, he has been a consistent and an abrasive detractor of the U.S.-Israel relationship. This alone—given that the cornerstone of American support for Israel is bipartisan cooperation, and that Republicans and Democrats are seeking pathways to healing around scant opportunities for consensus—should be enough of a reason to disqualify Ellison from the DNC post.
Keith Ellison Loves Groups that Undermine America
Vastly outweighing Ellison’s anti-Israel credentials, however, are his anti-American credentials. Being a convert to Islam does not make Ellison anti-American. But the Minnesota lawmaker, as a visible and a vocal supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood, is supporting an anti-American agenda. The Muslim Brotherhood—in its own words, as evidenced in court documents—calls for “destroying Western civilization from within” and replacing that civilization with a supremacist, sharia law-based autocracy. Even Saudi Arabia has outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood, making it a state-designated terrorist organization.
Ellison also supports the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America, and the Muslim Students’ Association, all of whom—based on well-established public record—are linked to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Having a cheerleader for the Muslim Brotherhood in the top position of the Democratic Party’s center of operations is an ideological anathema. Security concerns aside, Americans are not far from waking up to the obtusely ironic fact that the same party which has invested so much political capital defending LGBTQ activists and women would allow for the ascension of a leader who supports an ideology that so repressively denigrates the human rights of gays and women.
Doing Radical Islam’s Bidding
Proactively embalming political Islamists like the Muslim Brotherhood under First Amendment protections has been a full-time pursuit for Ellison. The mission of CAIR, for which Ellison is an unabashed supporter, is to function as a self-appointed monitor of “blasphemy.” Groups like CAIR serve solely as the gatekeepers of determining what words, ideas, and activities can be classified as being offensive to Islam.
Within that very spirit, President Barack Obama ordered the FBI to purge its training manuals of any references to Islam, and to cease any surveillance or profiling activities that are based on associations with Islam. The word “jihadist” was changed to “extremist.” People with sterling records as counter-terrorism experts, such as the Investigative Project on Terrorism’s Steven Emerson, were immediately banned from providing information to the CIA, FBI, and Department of Homeland Security. There have been nearly 30,000 acts of terror around the world since 9/11. This gross injustice—the whitewashing of radical Islam’s impact—should anger most Americans intensely.
The proof is in the pudding. During the Obama presidency, there were 159 fatalities attributable to Islamic terror. Of the 36 terrorist incidents those fatalities represent, there is strong evidence that eight might have been prevented with more aggressive monitoring. The core question is: What role did Ellison play in shaping policies that ultimately led to the unnecessary breach of American security by radical Islamists?
Judging from his track record, Ellison’s influence as DNC leader would facilitate the validation of a violent supremacist ideology that at its core is rabidly anti-American. How we got to this place is a question Americans need not grapple with any longer. Clearly, Ellison would not be the wisest choice to help lead the nation out of the feckless haze of ambiguity that has, in regards to the question of the legitimacy of radical Islam, been forcefully imposed against many objections.
Given the widely expressed sentiments about radical Islam during the 2016 presidential campaign, unless they are not concerned with sustaining their party Democrats may want to visibly jettison Ellison.