What Is CAIR Afraid Of?

[quote]What Is CAIR Afraid Of?

INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY

Posted 3/6/2007

Politics And Islam: The first Secular Islam Summit was a success if for no other reason than it intimidated the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the PR machine of militant Islam.

The Washington-based group that boycotts airlines and bullies radio personalities and politicians into toeing the Islamist line is clearly worried about the message from Muslim reformers.

It dispatched its henchmen to Florida to shout the reformers down at their confab earlier this week. CAIR also posted on its Web site no fewer than four stories bashing the event and its courageous speakers, many of whom are women calling for an end to inequality and mistreatment under radical Islam.

CAIR declared the summit illegitimate because few of the participants are “practicing Muslims,” and those who are, it claims, are merely pawns playing into the hands of “Islamophobes.”

“In order to have legitimate reform, you need to have the right messengers,” asserted CAIR spokesman Ahmed Bedier.

And who might that be? The four CAIR executives who have been successfully prosecuted on terrorism-related charges? The CAIR co-founder who said the Quran should replace the U.S. Constitution as “the highest authority in America”?

True voices of moderation are the delegates to the Secular Islam Summit, who insisted in their declaration that mosque and state should always be separate. They also called for tolerance for non-Muslims, and an end to violent jihad. CAIR should take notes.

So what if many of them are ex-Muslims? They risked their lives to leave Islam and now dare to openly criticize an ideology that everyone else is afraid to criticize. What these brave souls have to say carries far more weight than anything said by CAIR, which couldn’t even bring itself to condemn Osama bin Laden in the wake of 9/11.

Yes, Bedier argued, but the summit’s “funding is coming from the neoconservatives.” An article posted by CAIR suggests “Israeli intelligence” is behind the movement.

In CAIR’s kooky world, the Zionists are behind everything, even 9/11.

But if anyone was behind 9/11, it was the Saudis. And guess who bankrolls CAIR? Right: the Saudis.

Fittingly, CAIR’s Bedier balked when summit delegate Tawfik Hamid, a former terrorist, challenged him to denounce Saudi sharia law for “killing apostates, beating women and stoning women.”

“This is not about Saudi Arabia,” he huffed. “We condemn any nation that misuses Islam, but we’re not going to condemn an entire nation. That’s like condemning London (sic).”

Another CAIR sugar daddy is the ruler of Dubai, which acted as the staging ground for the hijackers and the transit point for 9/11 cash.

Sheikh Mohammed, who before 9/11 requisitioned cargo jets to supply Osama bin Laden’s Afghan camps, owns CAIR’s D.C. headquarters through his foundation, which also holds telethons for Palestinian “martyrs.”

The same foundation recently pledged $50 million to CAIR to boost its operations, which includes a legal shop set up to intimidate critics with vexatious lawsuits.

Radical groups like CAIR have been on the offensive, primarily because counterattacks by moderates have been few and far between.

But the Secular Islam Summit offers a ray of hope. Just a handful of reformers gathered in Florida made CAIR squirm. Imagine if hundreds of moderate Muslim voices rose up and challenged the Saudi-backed Wahhabi lobby.[/quote]

Lawyers, Martyrs and Crooks. :raspberry:

I can’t believe that… why, Condi Rice assured us that the Saudis are moderates and Bush says that Dubai should be managing American ports.

Why shouldn’t a Dubai based corporation be managing our ports? They would actually have the money to invest to make the ports secure.
If anyone on the right says something bad about the Arabs, you guys jump all over them, then you turn around and spew this crap.

[quote=“JMcNeill”]Why shouldn’t a Dubai based corporation be managing our ports? They would actually have the money to invest to make the ports secure.
If anyone on the right says something bad about the Arabs, you guys jump all over them, then you turn around and spew this crap.[/quote]

Because we don’t trust them.

CAIR is a terrorist propoganda machine. It should be suppressed.

Over the 1st amendment’s dead body, which, no doubt, is just a matter of time:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press . . . .”

This antipathy towards free speech illustrates one of the many fundamental differences between conservatism and neoconservatism.

It should be supressed with the truth of what they do then.

Works for me.

Over the 1st amendment’s dead body, which, no doubt, is just a matter of time:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press . . . .”

This antipathy towards free speech illustrates one of the many fundamental differences between conservatism and neoconservatism.[/quote]

I can’t believe Madison ever intended for enemy propogandists to operately freely in our lands. How many more senior officials of CAIR are going to have to be sent to prison before you realize it is an enemy organization?

[quote]Because we don’t trust them.
[/quote]

But of course we trusted the British people who ran it before, just cuz they’re Brits and all. Right.

Clearly CAIR knows how to exploit the “weaknesses” of our Democracy.

[quote=“redandy”][quote]Because we don’t trust them.
[/quote]

But of course we trusted the British people who ran it before, just cuz they’re Brits and all. Right.[/quote]

Dubai’s support of terrorist organizations in Palestine deprives it of the right to operate our ports. Sorry you disagree.

Was that the rationale? Funny how when it happened I mostly heard undefined allegations of a security risk (which is still unknown, since the U.S. Coast Guard and other U.S. agencies would still have maintained control over security), and some mentions of the boycott – which I understand is rather nominal in Dubbai.