In a recent brief appearance on a national news program, a spokesman for the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), a part of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood) asserted that CAIR “condemns terrorist acts, whoever commits them, wherever they commit them, whenever they commit them.” According to a transcript of the broadcast (see source below):
COREY SAYLOR, COUNCIL ON AMERICAN-ISLAMIC RELATIONS: CAIR’s position on terrorism is very clear. We have condemned persistently and consistently, whoever has done it, wherever they do it, whenever they do it.
MILLER: But some critic say CAIR’s PR machine attempts to conceal arrests of former associates, as well as the group being labeled an “unindicted co-conspirator” in a terror related trial.
MILLER(on camera): You sit here now and in just one seasons tell me CAIR condemns Hamas and CAIR condemns Hezbollah.
SAYLOR: I’m telling you in a very clear fashion-CAIR condemns terrorist acts, whoever commits them, wherever they commit them, whenever they commit them.
MILLER: That’s not the same thing as saying you condemn Hamas and you condemn Hezbollah.
SAYLOR: Well, I recognize that you don’t like my answer to the question.
Investigative research, however, reveals that CAIR has a rather weak history on the condemnation of terrorism. A Lexis/Nexis search for media reports from 1995 until September 10, 2001 found no reports of any condemnation by CAIR of terrorism committed by group or individuals acted in the name of Islam. Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, CAIR alone and together with other Islamic organizations, issued condemnations of the attacks and following assertions of conspiracies to blame Muslims issued by the head of CAIR/NY, CAIR National issued a statement in December 2001 acknowledging the role of Osama Bin Laden. In 2005, CAIR signed on to a fatwa against terrorism by the Fiqh Council of North America that has been criticized for it’s lack of specificity about individuals and organizations, the vagueness of it’s definition of terrorism, it’s lack of theological justification, and the weakness of the implied penalties.
A n examination of some of CAIR’s record with regard to terrorism in Israel also demonstrates that rather than condemning such terrorism, CAIR spokesman appear to have supported it. One media report indicates that at the Islamic Association for Palestine’s third annual convention in Chicago in November 1999, CAIR President Omar Ahmad gave a speech praising suicide bombers who “kill themselves for Islam” stating: “Fighting for freedom, fighting for Islam -that is not suicide. They kill themselves for Islam.”
Several reports state that during a November 2001 interfaith event, CAIR/NY Executive Director Ghazi Khankan stated:
“From a religious point of view, [Palestinians] have the right to defend themselves. Such selfdefense cannot be equated with Bin Ladin. The people of Hamas who direct their attacks on the Israeli military are in the correct position. Those who attack civilians are wrong,” He also added: “Who is a soldier in Israel and who is not? Anyone over 18 is automatically inducted into the service and they are all reserves. Therefore, Hamas in my opinion looks at them as part of the military. Those who are below 18 should not be attacked.”
In April 2002, a media report indicates that CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper defended Saudi payments to families of suicide bombers in Israel stating:
“The families of suicide bombers are just as needy as those killed by military attacks, he said.” They want to make it sound like (all the money is for) the families of suicide bombers”
In October 2002 Congressional testimony, CAIR leader Nihad Awad appears to refer to Hamas and other terrorist organizations as “indigenous independence movements” when he stated:
“In the West Bank and Gaza, Israel has used the war on terrorism to step up its brutal suppression on indigenous independence movements.”
In March 2002, CAIR issued a rare condemnation of an attack by Hamas in which a suicide bomber killed 20 and wounded 100 during a Passover celebration in Israel. The statement did not mention Hamas by name and at the same time condemned Israeli actions in greater detail and with far harsher language than the condemnation of the suicide attack:
“We condemn this attack and all other attacks on innocent civilians. Illegitimate and counterproductive tactics must not be used in the legitimate struggle to end Israel’s brutal occupation. This attack is of particular concern coming as it did during a religious observance in which the focus is remembrance of God. We ask the international community to similarly condemn actions by the Israeli armed forces that also target civilians and impose daily humiliation and suffering on an entire population through blockades, home demolitions, assassinations, indiscriminate shooting, torture, land confiscations and a wide variety of Apartheid-like and oppressive practices. To break this cycle of violence and counter-violence, all parties must focus on a political solution based on justice and equality, not force of arms.” CAIR has frequently mentioned this press release as proof of its condemnation of terror.
In a February 2003 TV interview, Ibrahim Hooper was asked about Palestinian Islamic Jihad in connection with terror. He replied: “
Well, obviously, I’m not going to support some tactics of the Islamic Jihad, but they’re in a world apart from al-Qaeda. They’ve never threatened anyone outside of Israel and the occupied territory.”
CAIR was created in 1994 as an out growth of the Hamas infrastructure in the U.S. and the organization has had a long history of involvement in fundamentalism, anti-Semitism, and support for terrorism.
(Source: Fox News Network September 8, 2008 Monday SHOW: FOX SPECIAL REPORT WITH BRIT HUME 6:00 PM EST Political Headlines)
globalmb @ October 9, 2008