As the initial hubbub surrounding the story of Ahmed Mohammed and his “clock” is beginning to die down to a dull roar, it’s worth looking at where exactly the skepticism of his story arrives from. Obviously, the young man, in his NASA T-Shirt and glasses cuts a sympathetic image. But the swift appearance on the scene of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), raises questions. If this was a misunderstanding and overzealous “Zero tolerance” police work, perhaps it has since been manipulated into something more.
In the case of Ahmed Mohammed, the introduction of CAIR into the equation suddenly pivoted the discussion from whether police exercised decent judgment, to accusations that all of the city of Irving, it’s school system, police, and government were islamophobes, and it was their Islamophobia, and not a beeping box filled with strange wires and circuits, that led police to Ahmed Mohammed.
It’s no surprise that an organization like CAIR would target Irving, since its Mayor, Beth Van Duyne, brought attention to an attempt by Muslim Brotherhood (MB) linked Imams to form a Shariah law tribunal in North Texas, and raised a ruckus by supporting the Constitution over the introduction of foreign law. One of the organizations linked to the tribunal runs the mosque attended by the Mohammed family.
Is it possible CAIR is attempting to use this controversy in order to target one of its political opponents? Judging from history, it seems likely.
The Council on American Islamic Relations was formed in response to a 1993 meeting in Philadelphia held by members of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, and took place under the watchful eye of the FBI.
CAIR has always been far more than the civil rights organization it purports to be. Indeed at that very meeting, the members of Hamas, including those who would found CAIR, discussed how they could manipulate civil rights in order to further their interests.
From the testimony of FBI agent Lara Burns discussing the propaganda effort to oppose the 1993 Peace Accord:
Q. Were there additional discussions making presentations to America on human rights?
JONAS: If we can go to Philly Meeting No. 10, Segment G. That is on page 5 of the excerpted portion. If we can put that on the screen, please, the bottom segment.
(BY MR. JONAS) What does this unidentified male say, please?
A. He says, “The first is to make the agreement fail, and this is a public policy and all of us are opposing it. It is the just the media which exaggerated the issue. Second, finding the alternatives. The first step should be taken advantage of by the brothers in — how to make the agreement fail. The national rights, human rights, stuff which will be exploited in order to make you look legitimate while you call on the annulment of the agreement. (Emphasis added)
Thusly CAIR and its antecedents in the Muslim Brotherhood are on record as feigning concerns about civil and human rights in order to achieve their ends.
Skepticism of CAIR and it’s feigned civil rights posture also appeared when federal prosecutors responded to a CAIR and Muslim American Society (MAS) Amici brief in the case United States V. Sabri Benkahla. In that case the prosecutors noted:
In describing themselves in Amici Brief at 1, CAIR and MAS omit reference to a shared background that limits their membership to those of a particular political bent, and undercuts their credibility. (Emphasis added)
The prosecutors go on to describe CAIR and MAS as Muslim Brotherhood entities which the federal government has shown engages in deception in order to further the interest of terrorist organizations.
Since CAIR was first outted by the Federal government for its role in deception operations on behalf of terrorism, CAIR has been caught up in numerous false hate crimes. As Professor Daniel Pipes noted in a 2005 article, CAIR has routinely, and knowingly, claimed as hate crimes events that either did not occur, or where the victim was in fact the perpetrator, such as claims of racist arson when the motive was in fact insurance fraud.
Perhaps most notorious was CAIR’s involvement in the 2006 “Flying Imams” case, where six imams returning from a conference of the North American Imam Federation (a group whose website publicly praises a MB leader Yusuf Al Qaradawi, who issued a 2004 fatwa calling for the death of Americans in Iraq), claimed they were unfairly ejected from a U.S. Airways flight for loudly praying.
As it turned out, those men were ejected from the flight not for prayers, but after passengers and airline employees reported that they had engaged in a number of suspicious behaviors involving swapping seats to take up those known to be favored by hijackers, seeking heavy metal seatbelt extenders which their size did not require, and other activities which even a Federal Air Marshal agreed were telltale signs of alarm.
CAIR intervened with a press conference and a lawsuit against the airline, the employees and even “John Doe passengers.” In that case the public rallied around the passengers, and congress passed a law protecting private travelers from lawsuits, when their good faith suspicions of terrorist activity led to security officials taking action.
Like the situation with the Flying Imams, CAIR’s interjection into this case suggests that it is about much more than the intentions of a young man bringing an odd electronic device to school. One’s positions on zero tolerance policies in school are not the issue of debate. The issue is CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood, and their efforts to keep those who “see something” that seems suspicious from “saying something.” That goes for teachers, airline passengers and mayors.
In early September, demonstrators stormed the Sacramento office of California Governor Jerry Brown, in a raucous protest in support of California AB 953, an “anti-racial profiling” bill. The demonstration was supported by the local and state Council on American Islamic Relations chapters, CAIR-Sacramento Valley, and CAIR-California. During the protest, demonstrators took over the governor’s office chanting slogans, including, reportedly, “This is what a pharaoh looks like.”
While seemingly an odd statement to make in the midst of an American political demonstration, with the presence of Hamas-linked, Muslim Brotherhood front CAIR, the chant takes on a disturbing, and potentially deadly connotation.
For the Muslim Brotherhood, a “pharaoh” denotes a secular dictator, or “taghut”, comparable to the Egyptian rulers from the time of Jahiliyyah, that is the period of pre-Islamic ignorance before the coming of Mohammad and the revelation of the Quran.
This is most simply demonstrated from the words of Khalid Islambouli, the assassin of Anwar Sadat, who yelled, “Death to Pharaoh!” before opening fire. As recently as 2008, Iranian television unveiled a documentary, “Assassination of a Pharaoh” in honor of the killer.
Nor is this the only significant reference to the Muslim Brotherhood using the term. “Return of the Pharaoh,” a prison memoir regarding the suppression of the Muslim Brotherhood under Gamal Abdel Nasser, was authored by Muslim Sister Zainab Al Ghazali, a contemporary of Sayyid Qutb. Al Ghazali’s book remains an important textbook for Muslim Brothers, even in the United States, where it was prominently featured on 2010 Tarbiyah Handbook issued by the Muslim Brotherhood-connected Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA).
The term is also used by chief Muslim Brotherhood jurist Yusuf Al Qaradawi, in his 1990 work “The Priorities of the Islamic Movement in the Coming Phase,” where he writes:
“The most serious danger threatening the Muslim Ummah and the Islamic Movement is the rule of the Pharaohs who believe that their opinion is infallible and is right itself that can never go wrong.” (Qaradawi, pg. 189)
March 10th, 2003, Qaradawi would announce in a sermon, “America is the Pharaoh of the new era, and the greatest deceiver in the world, killing people and assassinating them without properly charging them… ” Ten days later, on March 24th,2003, Qaradawi issued a fatwa legitimating as martyrs those who died fighting Americans in Iraq.
In a 2011 fatwa, Qaradawi invoked Pharaoh while discussing when “moderates” (such as himself) viewed Offensive Jihad as legitimate, saying:
1- To ensure the freedom to propagate the call to Islam, to prevent fitna in the religion (of Islam), and to remove the physical obstacles which prevent the call to Islam from reaching the multitudes of people. This was the reason for the conquests of the rightly-guided (caliphs) and the companions (of the Prophet), as well as those who followed them in righteousness. (They fought) to remove the power of the tyrants who controlled the necks and minds of men, and who said what Pharaoh said (Ed. emphasis added) to those of his people who believed (in Islam): “Have you believed before I gave you permission to believe?” This is the embodiment of the goal expressed in the saying of the Almighty: “Fight them on until there is no more fitna.”
On July 18th, 2013, following the ouster of Muslim Brotherhood president Mohammed Morsi, Muslim Brotherhood Supreme Guide Mohammed Badie labeled Egyptian Army leader Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi, “worse than Pharaoh...” Three days later on July 21st, Qaradawi declared that those who had overthrown Morsi had disobeyed a legitimate Islamic ruler, and could be killed.
The Center for Security Policy has been noting with concern the influence of Muslim Brotherhood-related groups within ongoing anti-police protests, beginning with CAIR’s involvement with the Ferguson protests in November of last year. CAIR officials at the time had compared the events in Ferguson to the FBI shooting which killed Luqman Abdullah, a Detroit area Imam tied to convicted cop killer Imam Jamil Abdullah Amin (AKA H.Rap Brown).
As events in Ferguson reached a fever pitch, a supporter of Al-Amin, Zale Thompson, assaulted two NYPD officers with a hatchet, while another Amin supporter, Jaleel Tariq Abdul-Jabber, was arrested in December for threatening police officers over Ferguson.
CAIR continues to publicly promote its role in the Black Lives Matter movement. In July CAIR National attorney Jennifer Wicks said that BLM was “absolutely intertwined with the Muslim community.”
Law enforcement and intelligence officials should recognize that the phrase “Pharaoh” carries with it significant ideological overtones, and if invoked by a Muslim Brotherhood associated organization may be suggestive of future violence, as demonstrated above.
A Washington State man arrested for issuing interstate threats targeting Ferguson Police officer Darren Wilson may have ties to the radical Islamist group known as “Al-Ummah” led by Jamil Abdullah Amin and Luqman Abdullah, two radical imams recently lauded by a Council on American Islamic Relations representative on a phone conference for the Muslims for Ferguson group as reported by Fox News.
Jaleel Tariq Abdul-Jabber, a Kirkland, Washington man and former convicted felon, was arrested for allegedly threatening to murder police in connection to ongoing protests in Ferguson, Missouri. Abdul-Jabber, whose social media profile indicates that he self-identifies as a Muslim, reportedly wrote numerous threats targeting Ferguson Police officer Darren Wilson, as well as other law enforcement officers. According to press reports the complaint alleges that Abdul-Jabber engaged in making “interstate threats,” including:
“Then we can find where that cop’s child goes to school at and hope that the same can be returned back to that white [racial slur],” he allegedly wrote according to the charging documents. On Aug. 30, Abdul-Jabbaar allegedly reposted a news report claiming video surveillance contradicted the official story of what had happened during the Ferguson shooting, writing “we really need to start killing the police.” Other messages and posts included “I would love to smoke a white motha [expletive] cop,” as well as “We the oppressed people need to kill this white cop” along with a repost of a news story containing Wilson’s address. On Nov. 11, Abdul-Jabbaar allegedly wrote “Are there any REAL BLACK MEN that would love to go down to Ferguson Missouri to give back those bullets to Police Officer [D.W.] fired into the body of Mike Brown. If we’re unable to locate Officer [D.W.], then We’ll return them to his wife and if not her then his children.”
In response to a news article relating the story of two FBI agents shot while serving a warrant in Ferguson, Abdul-Jabber wrote, “this is how you put your work in, thats what the f*** I’m talk’n about.”
“Put in work” is a slang term often used to refer to engaging in illegal or criminal activity, typically on behalf of a crew or gang.
Abdul-Jabber’s social media profile indicates he was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. One of the groups joined by Abdul-Jabber on Facebook is a Philadelphia Mosque, the Majilis Ashura of Philadelphia and the Delaware Valley, which was a co-sponsor of a 2011 event entitled “A CONVERSATION ON THE LIFE AND LEGACY OF IMAM JAMIL ABDULLAH AL-AMIN — The former H. Rap Brown.” A Facebook page established for Imam Jamil Abdullah Amin lists Abdul-Jabber as a friend, while Abdul-Jabber’s Facebook friends list has apparently been purged. A post on the Majilis Ashura Facebook page from November 5th of this year features a youtube video posted by one of the Masjid’s Imams, showing young men conducting firearms drills.
Additionally,Majilis Ashura also lists on its website a connection to the Jawala Scouts, an Islamic paramilitary youth group, which engages in firearms training, survival skills, and hand to hand combat training. A Facebook page established for the Jawala Scouts lists Abdul-Jabber as a friend. The Jawala Scouts are associated with Luqman Al-Haq, aka Kenny Gamble, being registered at the same physical space as his Universal Muslim Movement. Gamble is a famed former musician, but also known for allegedly attempting to create a Muslim-only enclave in Philadelphia. Gamble sits on the board of the Muslim Alliance of North America (MANA), together with the (now deceased) Luqman Abdullah, and Jamil Abdullah Amin was instrumental in the founding of MANA according to webpage dedicated to Amin:
Last month, on a balmy, spring day in Philadelphia, 18 Muslim leaders met and resolved to further the process of establishing a new national organization–the Muslim Alliance in North America (MANA). The purpose of MANA as stated in its mission statement is to pursue an agenda that reflects the points of view and experiences of the indigenous Muslims of North America and one that addresses their needs and aspirations. The effort to form an alliance for indigenous Muslims is not new. MANA is merely part of the continuing struggle to unite Muslims in America. However, this particular initiative began almost two years ago when Imam Jamil Al-Amin made a call for the formation of such an alliance.
In addition to his support for Al-Amin, and ties to the paramilitary Jawala Scouts linked to Gamble, on November 28th, Abdul-Jabbar shared a link to the CAIR-Washington Chapter Facebook Page discussing CAIR efforts to encourage Muslims not to talk to Federal Law Enforcement. A similar story, also by CAIR, was shared on the Muslims for Ferguson Facebook group on the same day that the call discussed the FBI shooting which killed Imam Luqman Abdullah.
Although there is no immediate evidence to suggest that Abdul-Jabber was a participant in the Muslims for Ferguson phone conference (he is not listed as a supporter on the group’s facebook page, although several other members of the Masjid Ashura of Philadelphia facebook group were), there is reason to suspect that Abdul-Jabber may have some connection to the Al-Ummah group. The possibility that Abdul-Jabber may have ties to a group training for future conflict with law enforcement deserved deeper investigation by the appropriate authorities.
The threat of violence from radicalized elements in the African American Muslim community remains present. As we have previously reported, Zale Thompson –who was shot and killed while attacking NYPD officers with a hatchet- also expressed support for the Al-Ummah Imam by featuring multiple Jamil Abdullah Amin videos in a youtube video playlist linked to his account.
Given the willingness and ability of Al-Amin followers to engage in violence, CAIR’s efforts to link Al-Ummah leader Luqman Abdullah with the Ferguson protests continues to represent a very real potential threat to the safety of local, state and federal law enforcement.
The United Arab Emirates has officially designated a list of over 80 organizations as terrorist groups. The list includes a large cross section of organizations connected to the Global Muslim Brotherhood, as well as Brotherhood organizations in the Middle East, Europe and North America, including the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).
While the U.A.E’s decision to list CAIR as a terror group may be ultimate self-serving that doesn’t change the reality that it’s supported by the facts.
And it’s well past time the U.S. followed suit.
Another American has been beheaded by global jihadists associated with the Islamic State. This time, it was an aid worker in Syria who converted to Islam in captivity. Evidently, neither helping Muslims nor adopting their faith trumps the offense of being an American.
On Saturday, there was another signal development regarding the jihadists. The United Arab Emirates published a list of dozens of Muslim groups it has designated as terrorist organizations. Interestingly, among them were two American fronts for the Muslim Brotherhood: the Council on American Islamic Relations and the Muslim American Society. Both groups are indignant and demanding their names be removed.
But the Brotherhood is an organization that has spawned virtually every Islamic terrorist group and that shares their goals. Those associated with it are jihadists, too.
Following on the heels of targeted airstrikes against the Islamic State, the Obama Administration has continued to show a dramatic lack of strategic comprehension by publicly praising an Islamic cleric linked to previous calls to kill U.S. troops in Iraq. The Islamic cleric, Abdullah Bin Bayyah, was the vice president of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, led by Muslim Brotherhood chief jurist Yusuf Al Qaradawi in 2004, when IUMS called for the killing of Americans in Iraq. This is not the first time Bin Bayyah has been close to the White House, having attended a meeting with White House advisors in 2013.
At the same time President Obama was praising Bin Bayyah, the Secretary of the Department for Homeland Security Jeh Johnson was in central Ohio, meeting with representatives of the Al Noor Cultural Islamic Center. This Islamic center has a long history of ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, and extremist activity, as ably chronicled by veteran investigative reporter Patrick Poole. It was made somewhat infamous as being the mosque at the center of the Rifqa Bary case, when a young Muslim teenager converted to Christianity, and fled Ohio, fearing that she would become the victim of an honor killing.
Most notable among those tied to the mosque is its former Scholar-in-Residence Salah Sultan, a long-time associate of Yusuf Al Qaradawi, and like Bin Bayyah, a member of the International Union of Muslim Scholars. Sultan is currently in Egypt, where he held a position under the Muslim Brotherhood dominated government, until its overthrow. The Chairman of the Noor Mosque board, at the time of Sultan’s attendance, was Hany Saqr, the Eastern masul (regional leader) for the North American Muslim Brotherhood, as named in a 1992 phone directory of the North American Muslim Brotherhood, as acquired by Federal prosecutors and entered into evidence at the Holy Land Foundation Trial. While Saqr is no longer Chairman at the mosque, he appears to remain a member of its Executive Council, and chairman of its Khutbah (Friday Sermon) committee.
In yet another coincidence, while these meetings were being reported, other individuals with known ties to the Muslim Brotherhood including the Council on American Islamic Relations, the Islamic Society of North America, The ADAMS Center and the Fiqh Council for North America(of which Salah Sultan was a member), were holding a press conference at the National Press Club, issuing an open letter to AbuBakr Al-Baghdadi (aka Caliph Ibrahim) of the Islamic State, declaring “peace and mercy” upon him, and using Islamic law to supposedly critique his organization’s violence. Among the signatories on the letter was none other than Abdullah bin Bayyah.
The letter criticized ISIS for its behavior, in particular for killing journalists, using the logic (the same given by Jihadists including Al Qaeda) that the journalists were considered emissaries or diplomats and thus not eligible for killing. The letter also disagreed with other elements of ISIS’s practice of Islamic law, including the method by which AlBaghdadi was named Caliph.
While the letter supposedly condemns ISIS’ “offensive jihad”, it nonetheless endorses the very jihad that Bin Bayyah supported against U.S. troops in Iraq, namely a “defensive jihad.” The letter states, “All Muslims see the great virtue” in jihad, and that jihad is a “communal” not “individual” obligation. It also denounces the use of the term Jihad in killing Muslims (although notably not non-Muslims). The letter notes, “Jihad is tied to safety, freedom of religion, having been wronged, and eviction from one’s land.” Under such a rubric, one could see how the Muslim Brotherhood organizations may be denouncing ISIS, but endorsing (or at least not denouncing) other jihadist groups like Al Nusra Front, (which is Al Qaeda’s remaining Syrian unit), and Hamas, itself a part of the Muslim Brotherhood.
It is folly for the Administration to on the one hand bomb IS, as it seeks to perfect an Islamic state under shariah law, while at the same time endorsing, praising and working alongside those equally beholden to shariah.
As was the case with the Cold War, the conflict is principally an ideological struggle. You can not win by promoting and supporting the ideas of the enemy. President Obama could have used the opportunity to provide a full-throated support for what we as Americans believe, and the superiority of our way of life over the values of groups like ISIS, but instead, used his time to promote the very ideas of those like Bin Bayaah, who ultimately support the killing of Americans, as long as it is done under their say so, rather than al-Baghdadi’s. Likewise, we can not win by partnering with organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood, who tell us that the solution to the Islamic state can be found in the application of Islamic law.
Terror-tied Muslim Brotherhood front group the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is hawking a new “resource” to keep journalists from running afoul of politically sanctioned speech codes when reporting on Islam and Muslims.
As with CAIR’s much-heralded “Islamophobia Report” release last October, the only TV news outlet to cover the story–at least the only one CAIR saw fit to post on their YouTube channel–was KSA-2 TV, the official English-language network of the regime of Saudi Arabia, owned and operated by the Saudi Ministry of Culture and Information.
“Islam for Journalists” is co-edited by Lawrence Pintak, whose works include Seeds of Hate: How America’s Flawed Middle East Policy Ignited the Jihad. The journalist primer recommends “Experts” including Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and Daisy Khan, the married duo behind the push to erect a mega-mosque adjacent to Ground Zero (p.274, ASMA).
While a second party produced this guide, CAIR has released many similar publications meant to sanitize speech and render criticism of Islamist activities and goals impossible. They include guides for health care workers, employers and educators.
The guide for employers, meant to create a “culturally-sensitive work-place environment,” is perhaps most disturbing. One need look no further than Fort Hood jihadist Nidal Hassan to see the results of employers and supervisors cowed by political correctness and unable to make the most simple judgments about who or what they deem to be threats to their employees.
The shackles put on journalists, though seemingly less acute, serve to deny policymakers and the public the opportunity to examine the most critical threats to our society and devise policies to counter them. This inability to describe the threat neuters a free citizen’s ability to confront the threat. It seems this is what CAIR is banking on.
The only TV channel to cover CAIR’s new Islamophobia report as a featured story was KSA-2, the official English-language network of the regime of Saudi Arabia.
Despite substantial promotion on CAIR’s part the report received little media coverage, but they posted KSA-2’s flattering 4-minute segment on their YouTube channel. CAIR fails to identify which news outlet produced the segment in the video description, and the reporter’s benign demeanor and American accent suggest some nondescript local news affiliate. But just next to the call sign “KSA-2” on the reporter’s microphone, one can discern crossed sabers reminiscent of the Saudi flag. “KSA” stands for “Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,” and the channel is owned and operated by the Saudi Ministry of Culture and Information.
At the very end the reporter identifies himself as Burton Bollag of KSA-2 Washington. CAIR has been the subject of at least 3 softball segments with Bollag since April, when CAIR used the opportunity to do damage control after Chechen-born jihadists bombed the Boston Marathon.
The release of CAIR’s “Legislating Fear” Islamophobia report was largely overshadowed by a piece of investigative journalism authored by Charles Johnson of the Daily Caller, exposing CAIR’s receipt of millions of dollars from foreign donors using a series of shell organizations. Relevant to the KSA-TV coverage, Johnson’s report noted a donation of $199,980 from “Kingdom Holding Company, Saudi Arabia.” The CAIR Observatory website documents another $1.2 million in donations from Saudi nationals including Princes Alwaleed bin Talal and Abdulla bin Mosa’ad. CAIR Observatory uses open-source data to propose that CAIR’s receipt of funding and direction from, and execution of influence operations on behalf of foreign principles is in violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). Those principles include Saudi nationals, organizations and the government itself.
In the immediate wake of the report’s release, CAIR posted only three clips of media coverage to its YouTube channel, all of them local media items less than one minute in length. In addition, the usual Islamist and far-left fringe outlets echoed the message, but more influential left-of-center cable news and websites declined to partake.
Despite their pretensions to major “civil liberties organization” status, CAIR has a wilting domestic membership and fundraising capability, which necessitates direction and funding from a variety of foreign sources.
Recently the North Carolina legislature passed American Laws for American Courts (ALAC) legislation with broad bipartisan support.
The purpose of ALAC is to protect individual, fundamental constitutional rights in cases involving foreign laws and foreign legal doctrines. Among those fundamental constitutional rights are freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, due process and equal protection under the law.
One of the primary opponents of ALAC legislation is the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), which seeks to supplant US constitutional rights and norms by accommodating foreign laws and foreign legal doctrines, such as Shariah.
CAIR has targeted North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory with a nationwide e-mail and telephone blitz in an attempt to intimidate him into vetoing the ALAC legislation that both the North Carolina House and Senate approved with overwhelming, bipartisan majorities:
As the article linked above explains, promoting Shariah in the US is one of CAIR’s top agenda items. In March 2012, the organization published a tool-kit for promoting Shariah for community organizers across America.
CAIR has attempted to create many misconceptions about ALAC legislation which require correction and clarification.
For instance, CAIR suggests that the purpose of ALAC legislation is to target religious practices. This accusation is baseless.
Anyone who actually takes the time to read the legislation can readily see this. The purpose of ALAC is explicitly spelled out: American Laws for American Courts is designed to protect individual, fundamental constitutional rights against the application of foreign laws and foreign legal doctrines, when the application of a foreign law or foreign legal doctrine would violate any of the parties’ fundamental constitutional rights—including freedom of religion.
In fact, the model ALAC language clearly states that it shall not interfere with ecclesiastical matters or be construed to violate anyone’s religious practice.
Moreover, CAIR’s supposition that ALAC is “unconstitutional” is laughable at best. ALAC has been in force in Tennessee and Louisiana since 2010, Arizona since 2011 and Kansas since May of 2012 and it has never been challenged. That’s because there is simply no legal basis for the embarrassingly contradictory theory that protecting individual fundamental constitutional rights is somehow unconstitutional.
America has an established tradition of allowing people of faith to make agreements and resolve disputes within the parameters of their religion, as long as any resulting contract complies with the US constitution. That is exactly what ALAC is designed to do—as is explicitly stated in the legislation.
CAIR documents have dishonestly portrayed ALAC. For instance, a letter sent by CAIR to the Oklahoma legislature in the spring of 2013 referred to the American Bar Association as being opposed to “such legislation.” This is an important point because it is not true. If you actually examine the American Bar Association literature on this, they were not referring to American Laws for American Courts legislation. In fact, the resolution they passed did not oppose American Laws for American Courts legislation.
CAIR has also created a phantom argument to scare state elected officials into thinking that standing up for individual, fundamental constitutional rights will somehow negatively impact the business community of a state or inhibit commerce in some way. There is absolutely no evidence to support this claim. Not only does ALAC expressly apply to individuals, not businesses, but there has been no negative impact on business or commerce in any of the several states that have passed ALAC since 2010.
The reality of ALAC legislation can be summed up in three points:
1. American Laws for American Courts does not target a religion or religious community.
2. American Laws for American Courts is not explicitly aimed at Shariah.
3. American Laws for American Courts is targeted at safeguarding individual, fundamental constitutional rights and does not impact business or commerce in any way, shape or form. It has had no impact whatsoever on the business or commerce of the several states in which it has already passed.
Since we have taken the time to address the issues CAIR has raised with regard to ALAC, now we will take the time to address the myriad concerns thousands of freedom-loving Americans have about CAIR itself. These concerns are especially relevant given CAIR’s opposition to protecting the individual, fundamental constitutional rights of Americans:
• CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the US v. Holy Land Foundation, the largest terrorism financing prosecution in US history.
• The Holy Land Foundation was a Texas-based charity whose officers were sentenced in May 2009 to between 15 and 65 years in prison for funneling over $12 million to Hamas. One of the sentenced officers, Ghassan Elashi, is the founder of CAIR’s Dallas chapter. Elashi’s illegal activities took place while he was affiliated with CAIR.
• CAIR opened its first office in Washington, D.C. with the help of a $5,000 grant from the Holy Land Foundation.
• In a formal letter to Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona dated 28 April 2009, the FBI stated that during the Holy Land Foundation trial, “evidence was introduced that demonstrated a relationship among CAIR, individual CAIR founders (including its current President Emeritus and its Executive Director) and the Palestine Committee. Evidence was also introduced that demonstrated a relationship between the Palestine Committee and HAMAS, which was designated as a terrorist organization in 1995. In light of that evidence, the FBI suspended all formal contacts between CAIR and the FBI.”
• In March 2011, Muthanna al-Hanooti, one of CAIR’s directors, was sentenced to a year in federal prison for violating U.S. sanctions against Saddam’s Iraq.
• In January of 2011, the CAIR California chapter published a poster promoting a conference called “Know Your Rights and Defend Our Communities.” That poster prominently featured the following slogan: “BUILD A WALL OF RESISTANCE DON’T TALK TO THE FBI.”
• On March 22, 1994, During a panel discussion at Barry University in Florida, CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad said: “I used to support the PLO, and I used to be the President of the General Union of Palestine Students which is part of the PLO here in the United States, but after I researched the situation inside Palestine and outside, I am in support of the Hamas movement more than the PLO.”
• On February 2, 1995, U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White named CAIR Advisory Board member and New York imam Siraj Wahhaj as one of the “unindicted persons who may be alleged as co-conspirators” in Egyptian Islamic Group leader “Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdel Rahman’s foiled plot to blow up numerous New York City monuments.
• On April 19, 1996, in its first published report on alleged anti-Muslim discrimination, titled “The Price of Ignorance,” CAIR cited the arrest of Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman (the Blind Sheikh), the Egyptian cleric serving a life sentence for conspiracy to blow up New York landmarks in 1993, and the detention of senior Hamas leader Musa Abu Marzuq, as “incidents of bias and violence” against Muslims in the U.S.
• On July 4, 1998, former CAIR chairman Omar M. Ahmad, told Fremont, California’s daily newspaper, The Argus, that “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant, he said. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.”
• In October 1998, CAIR demanded the removal of a Los Angeles billboard describing Osama bin Laden as “the sworn enemy.” According to CAIR, this depiction was “offensive to Muslims.”
• In 1993, CAIR spokesperson Ibrahim Hooper told the Minneapolis Star-Tribune that “I wouldn’t want to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future. … But I’m not going to do anything violent to promote that. I’m going to do it through education.”
• In September 2003, CAIR’s former Community Affairs Director, Bassem Khafagi, pled guilty to three federal counts of bank and visa fraud and agreed to be deported to Egypt. Federal investigators said that a group Khafagi founded, the Islamic Assembly of North America, had funneled money to activities supporting terrorism and had published material advocating suicide attacks against the United States. Khafagi’s illegal activities took place while he was employed by CAIR.
• In 2004, CAIR-Northern Virginia director Abdurahman Alamoudi pled guilty to terrorism-related financial and conspiracy charges in 2004, which resulted in a 23-year prison sentence.
• In 2006, the co-founder of CAIR’s parent organization, IAP (Islamic Association for Palestine), Sami Al-Arian, was sentenced to 57 months in prison on terrorism charges for financing Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a designated terrorist organization according to the US State Department.
• On August 12, 2006 CAIR helped to coordinate a number of demonstrations in support of Hezbollah and “resistance” groups fighting American forces in Iraq.
• Randall Todd Royer, who served as a communications specialist and civil rights coordinator for CAIR, trained with Lashkar-I-Taiba, an al Qaeda-tied Kashmir organization that is listed on the State Department’s international terror list. He was also indicted on charges of conspiring to help al Qaeda and the Taliban battle American troops in Afghanistan. He later pled guilty to lesser firearm-related charges and was sentenced to twenty years in prison on April 9, 2004. Royer’s illegal activities took place while he was employed by CAIR.
• Onetime CAIR fundraiser Rabih Haddad was arrested on terrorism-related charges and was deported from the United States due to his subsequent work as Executive Director of the Global Relief Foundation, which in October 2002 was designated by the U.S. Treasury Department for financing al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. Haddad raised money for the Ann Arbor, Michigan chapter of CAIR.
• On April 20, 2002: Nihad Awad addressed an anti-Israel rally in Washington D.C. while standing next to Hezbollah flag.
• On October 12, 2001: Ghazi Kankan, executive director of CAIR’s New York office at the time, defended Hamas’s targeting of Israeli civilians. He told the Jewish Week that, like Hamas, he considered all Israelis over the age of 18 to be “military” because “they are all reserves.”
Given the number of individuals associated with CAIR who have been convicted on terrorism-related charges, as well as the disturbing associations and statements from CAIR and its officials, it is very difficult to take their views on American Laws for American Courts legislation seriously.