Thursday, February 05, 2009

CAIR Strikes Back

Not long ago I posted an Act for America alert pertaining to the FBI cutting off the advisory role of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

Act for America has sent a related alert about CAIR attempting to strike back by obfuscating CAIR’s relationship with Hamas. As should be expected they are pulling the “I am the poor victim of Islamophobic racism.”

Here is the Act for America email alert sent February 5, 2009 1:22:19 PM:

CAIR Strikes Back

Dear John, In the past seven days, evidence surfaced that the FBI was cutting off its primary contacts with CAIR (the Council on American-Islamic Relations), after CAIR refused to address FBI questions about CAIR’s relationship to Hamas (a designated terrorist organization).

Then, five members of Congress
sent a letter to other members of Congress entitled “Beware of CAIR,” citing the evidence that the FBI had severed ties with CAIR.

CAIR has responded in its predictable fashion – attack the messengers. The commentary below, from the website of SANE (Society of Americans for National Existence), includes the response letter that CAIR sent to Congresswoman Sue Myrick, co-chair of the House Anti-Terrorism Caucus. One line in CAIR’s letter is telling:

    “If enduring these baseless attacks from you is part of God’s price for freedom, we embrace them.”

Playing the victim, or in this case, the martyr, is a common tactic among Islamists. In CAIR’s world, any critique or criticism of it, no matter how reasoned or documented, is anti-Muslim bigotry. For CAIR to claim that allegations against it are “baseless” is, well, baseless.

Why would the FBI finally make the decision it did to sever ties with CAIR if there was no basis for doing so? Why would the Justice Department list CAIR as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing trial if there was no basis for doing so? Why would an FBI agent, testifying under oath during that trial, label CAIR as a front organization for Islamist extremism if there was no basis for saying so?

The answer is they wouldn’t.

JRH 2/5/09

No comments: