For over a decade, a quiet but significant restriction has shaped the FBI’s interactions with the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). A Justice Department report reveals the bureau largely limited official contact with the organization due to deep-seated concerns about its connections to Hamas.
The restrictions began in 2008, stemming from evidence presented during the landmark Holy Land Foundation trial. This case exposed links between CAIR leaders and Hamas, a group designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the United States. The FBI responded with a nationwide directive, ordering field offices to cease non-investigative engagement with CAIR unless specifically authorized by Washington.
This policy represented a dramatic shift from previous practices, and wasn’t universally accepted within the FBI. Some field office leaders openly resisted the directive, arguing for the continuation of established local relationships and demanding further justification from headquarters.
Despite the clear directive, internal investigations revealed multiple violations between 2010 and 2012. In Chicago, a Special Agent-in-Charge attended an event featuring a CAIR official, an appearance the organization subsequently publicized. In New Haven, agents went further, consulting with CAIR and even allowing them to lead a cultural workshop, directly defying explicit warnings from FBI headquarters.
Philadelphia saw another breach, with a CAIR representative invited to participate in an outreach session after staff followed guidance from the Office of Public Affairs – a clear contradiction of the bureau’s established restrictions. The Office of Inspector General ultimately concluded the FBI’s implementation and oversight of the CAIR-contact restrictions were ineffective.
These internal restrictions, still in place as of 2013, have gained renewed relevance following recent actions in Texas. Governor Greg Abbott designated both CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood as terrorist organizations, effectively barring them from owning property within the state.
Abbott’s decision was based on the assertion that these groups have consistently demonstrated support for terrorism on a global scale. This move echoes findings from a comprehensive report by the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP), which details a long-term, coordinated effort by organizations linked to the Muslim Brotherhood to infiltrate American institutions.
CAIR consistently denies any wrongdoing, maintaining its opposition to all forms of terrorism and accusing critics of relying on unsubstantiated associations. They point to instances of cooperation with the FBI, including providing warnings about potential threats, even crediting their Georgia chapter with assisting in preventing an attack on the White House.
Despite these claims of cooperation, CAIR acknowledges a sometimes adversarial relationship with the FBI, citing legal challenges – including a successful case before the Supreme Court regarding abuses of the FBI’s watchlist. They state their willingness to communicate on public safety matters, but draw a firm line at public displays of collaboration.
The OIG report recommended improved training and stricter enforcement of the CAIR restrictions, emphasizing the need for consistent compliance with headquarters directives. The internal debate and documented violations reveal a complex and sensitive issue at the intersection of national security and civil liberties.
