The Council for American-Islamic Relations minced no words about the killing of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin by Israel, calling it “an act of state-sponsored terrorism.”
CAIR described the Shiekh as a “quadriplegic” and “the most prominent Palestinian Islamic figure.” That the Sheikh had been a prime strategist in the suicide bombings targeting Israelis was not mentioned.
Once again CAIR rhetoric fails to square with reality. But that’s to be expected from CAIR, a self-described “civil liberties organization.
Any responsible organization that has had officials arrested on charges of terrorism would feel compelled to address the apparent wrongdoing by its associates and to publicly assure Americans that such alleged wrongdoing has no direct or indirect connection with CAIR. The CAIR response is silence.
When Free Congress Foundation Adjunct Fellow Robert Spencer, author of Onward Muslim Soldiers: How Jihad Still Threatens America and the West, posed eight questions to CAIR in a FrontPageMagazine.com article over a year ago, the official reaction from the organization’s chief spokesman, Ibrahim Hooper, was to stonewall.
The questions are as legitimate now as they were then. Not only a few experts on Islam, such as Mr. Spencer, but also the so-called “mainstream” news media should question CAIR.
Number eight of Mr. Spencer’s questions is particularly relevant in the wake of CAIR’s reaction to Yassin’s death: Why, when terrorist groups around the world use the words ‘Islam’ and ‘Jihad’ in their names, are people who ask questions about this fact tarred by CAIR as having an ‘anti-Muslim agenda?’ What is CAIR really doing to sever the worldwide connection between Islam and terrorism?
Recently, Arnaud de Borchgrave stated in The Washington Times that most Americans believed the majority of Muslims living in this country did not hew to a radical Islamist viewpoint.
“No one ever doubted that,” wrote de Borchgrave. “What does CAIR have to say about a New Jersey firm that offered investments to wealthy Muslims, including housing developments in suburban Maryland, raised millions of dollars for what law enforcement authorities describe as a ‘who’s who’ of international terrorists and Islamist extremists?”
For too long, the American news media has given CAIR a pass. This organization has some serious questions hanging over it including its sources of funding. However, CAIR stonewalls its critics.
Now, CAIR is suing an organization called “Anti-CAIR” that operates a website that raises similar questions.
The relentless questioning of CAIR and other Islamist organizations such as the American Muslim Council by knowledgeable experts such as Robert Spencer and Arnaud de Borchgrave is a good sign. Sooner or later their questions are bound to peak the curiosity of an enterprising investigative journalist or TV news producer who will refuse to take CAIR’s “no” for an answer.
If CAIR really cared about the “American Way,” then it would strive to be an open and aboveboard organization, matching its rhetoric with clear-cut actions of openness and accountability. That it has not done. In fact, its own website fails to list the officials of the organizations, its board members, and their backgrounds. Why?
CAIR may be able to run handsome advertisements with smiling faces, but this organization will discover sooner or later that it cannot hide the truth about itself.