U.S. torn over whether some Islamists offer insight or pose threat

If you have to ask the question, something is very wrong.

After the worst military base massacre in U.S. history, officials acknowledged that they failed to "connect the dots" – the shooter had been corresponding with an imam tied to al-Qaeda and had condemned the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as a war against Islam.

But Fort Hood gunman Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan wasn't the only one working on a Texas Army base the day of the shooting who had links to radical Islamists.

At Fort Bliss, an experienced military trainer was teaching soldiers about his Muslim faith. He, too, had denounced government counterterrorism efforts, and public records show he and some of his closest associates had ties to terrorism suspects.

But when The Dallas Morning News first inquired about the instructor, Louay Safi, military officials praised him. Only later did they say that Safi had been suspended from working on military bases pending a continuing criminal inquiry.

The Safi affair reveals the deep divisions within the U.S. government over how to combat terrorism and over what constitutes moderate Islam.

Safi was also named by government prosecutors as an unindicted co-conspirator in one terrorism case in 2005. His last two employers were implicated in other government terrorism investigations while he worked for them. He was never charged, nor included among the targets of those investigations.

But Safi has called the widespread raids on Muslim organizations after 9/11 "a campaign against Islam" – a term that 9/11 Commission director Philip Zelikow says is part of "the jihadi narrative."

Yeah, that would be kinda of a code word there if you are not sure the person could pose a threat.