Reply With Quote
Are you going draw the distinctions between ISIS and CAIR's endgame or what?
So you do care what is true.
How do you determine what is true, then? What is your method?
Are you going draw the distinctions between ISIS and CAIR's endgame or what?
Financial, ideological, militar, logistical, etc,etc
ISIS, Facing Losses, Releases Recording Said to Be of Leader
The Islamic State on Saturday released an audio recording of a speech purportedly made by the organization’s leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, in which he implored more Muslims to fight on behalf of his increasingly besieged group.
The authenticity of the recording could not be confirmed. It appeared to be Mr. Baghdadi’s first public address since May, and it followed reports that he had been either killed or gravely wounded by airstrikes.
The speech was released on jihadist social media accounts after a string of defeats for the Islamic State in Iraq and amid intensifying bombardment by an American-led military coalition in both Syria and Iraq.
A defeat in Ramadi would be the fourth major loss for the Islamic State in Iraq since April, when Iraqi forces and Shiite militias drove the group out of Tikrit.
Security officials in northern Iraq said on Saturday that Kurdish and American forces had carried out a major assault on Islamic State-held territory west of Kirkuk, in a town called Al Riyadh. Two senior militant leaders were killed and several others were captured, Gen. Sarhad Kadir, a police commander in Kirkuk, said.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/12/27...ader.html?_r=0
Meanwhile the talk-tough-but- less-chicken Repugs...
A Fearful Congress Sits Out the War Against ISIS
The omnibus spending bill Congress passed this month includes several explicit mentions of the military campaign against the Islamic State and a $58.7 billion budget line that will allow the Pentagon to continue fighting the terrorist group in Iraq and Syria with bombs and, increasingly, troops on the ground.
That may be as close as Congress comes to authorizing war against the Islamic State for the foreseeable future. After a couple of halfhearted attempts, the White House and leaders in the House and Senate appear to have given up on drafting a new authorization for the use of military force that would set clear parameters for the escalating conflict.
That may be politically expedient for lawmakers who see no political gain, and plenty of risk, in casting a vote that could come back to haunt them. But by abdicating one of their most important responsibilities under the Cons ution, which gives Congress the exclusive right to declare war, lawmakers are unwisely emboldening the executive branch to overstep its powers.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/12/27...inst-isis.html
I think where people, like TSA and many of them, quite understandably but not justifiably get confused is by their inability to reconcile the idea that fundamentalism =/= terrorism, that you can be an Islamic fundamentalist and not a Jihadist. These are two perfectly reconcilable facts.
The media feeds the idea that Islamic literacy & religiosity are antecedent to Jihadism. Not true. Sometimes it is, but a lot of the times Islam is just d around to justify ethnic (as opposed to religious) views & goals (ie Arab) of oppression and responses to it. It's being "marketed" to disaffected, marginalized, prejudicialized Muslim "youth" in and outside of the ME. It's explains how terrorists draw their ranks from disparate countries. These terrorists are being unified under a different pretense than religion. Religion is the scapegoat. As it usually is.
Fify.
It won't work -- that's what led to ISIS in the first place.
Force will be one of the levers, but it can't be the only one; any lasting political solution will have to be negotiated.
Not really an answer.
You made the claims "CAIR is spreading the exact ISIS propaganda you are opposed to" and "[the] two [are] terrorist organizations"
I asked you to show how that is so. Your claims, your burden of proof. You declined, for whatever reason, my guess is simple laziness.
We then moved to whether you cared about the truth, you said you did, and I asked a more basic question, which you also dodged.
So, at this point it then becomes reasonable assume that you are either lazy and unwilling to answer, or lying when you say you care about the truth, although it is possible to be lazy and lying about that.
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. That is pretty easy.
There is no evidence CAIR is a terrorist organization, nor is there any evidence that it has the same goals or propaganda as ISIS.
Condemning violence seems to be somewhat at odds with claims of CAIR being a "terrorist" organization. I have now provided proof, in the form of direct statements by one of the organizations under discussion. You have not. We can now begin to form some fair model of what is true. Usually when one claim has evidence, and the the other doesn't, a reasonable, honest person will give more weight to the side with evidence.
Maybe you don't understand the word "terrorist"? I would suggest you google the term, if that is the case.
CAIR is Muslim, so rightwingnut robots have been programmed to trash it automatically. Rightwingnut robot programs are immune to facts
Um, not really helping. Those are just nouns. Ponies, puppets, and pandas. That is how we get rid of the "Turkish mafia government".
So you want sanctions on Turkey? A NATO ally?
Do we give up the NATO treaty? Is that what you want us to do? Help me out here. You want the policy, flesh it out, let's see if it stands on its own.
- See more at: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/id....WiLyJ4ma.dpufRecently, a few political scientists have begun to discover a human tendency deeply discouraging to anyone with faith in the power of information. It’s this: Facts don’t necessarily have the power to change our minds. In fact, quite the opposite. In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger.
This bodes ill for a democracy, because most voters — the people making decisions about how the country runs — aren’t blank slates. They already have beliefs, and a set of facts lodged in their minds. The problem is that sometimes the things they think they know are objectively, provably false. And in the presence of the correct information, such people react very, very differently than the merely uninformed. Instead of changing their minds to reflect the correct information, they can entrench themselves even deeper.
“The general idea is that it’s absolutely threatening to admit you’re wrong,” says political scientist Brendan Nyhan, the lead researcher on the Michigan study. The phenomenon — known as “backfire” — is “a natural defense mechanism to avoid that cognitive dissonance.”
These findings open a long-running argument about the political ignorance of American citizens to broader questions about the interplay between the nature of human intelligence and our democratic ideals. Most of us like to believe that our opinions have been formed over time by careful, rational consideration of facts and ideas, and that the decisions based on those opinions, therefore, have the ring of soundness and intelligence. In reality, we often base our opinions on our beliefs, which can have an uneasy relationship with facts. And rather than facts driving beliefs, our beliefs can dictate the facts we chose to accept. They can cause us to twist facts so they fit better with our preconceived notions. Worst of all, they can lead us to uncritically accept bad information just because it reinforces our beliefs. This reinforcement makes us more confident we’re right, and even less likely to listen to any new information.
You are right about that.
Being skeptical, truly skeptical, requires work. Most people, as TheSanityAnnex so aptly demonstrates, are just too lazy to bother.
Communication is triangular so to speak. It involves a message, a messenger and a recipient. True, the recipient may be closed-minded and un-open. It may be just as likely and just as important that the messenger is a head and/or partisan that can't effectively communicate a message.
Here’s how ISIS uses amphetamines to create brainwashed, psychotic killing-machines
officials are reporting that ISIS is supplying its fighters with an amphetamine called “Captagon”. This Adderall for jihadists—or as Stephen Colbert has called it, “Jihadderall”—allows soldiers to fight for days on end without sleep, and instills in them a feeling of invincibility. One captured ISIS militant told CNN that these pills have effects that “make you go to battle not caring if you live or die.” But in addition to powerful side effects that include both auditory and visual hallucinations, scientific studies show that long term amphetamine use can damage areas of the brain that lead to more psychotic behavior, as well as a hindered ability to doubt or resist instruction. As a result, Captagon may be creating an army of brainwashed, psychotic, fearless fighters who won’t think twice about harming others or even themselves.
Courage Pills Or Crazy Pills?
After the ISIS attacks in Paris last month, French police raided a suburb and found needles that were used by the terrorists to inject Captagon, presumably to allow them to keep calm as they carried out the barbaric attack. Reports from Kurdish civilians who escaped ISIS forces in the Syrian city of Kobane described them as drug crazed. “They are filthy, with straggly beards and long black nails. They have lots of pills with them that they all keep taking. It seems to make them more crazy if anything.”
In recent years, the drug has become increasingly popular all over the Middle East, generating millions of dollars in revenue inside Syria alone. Many experts believe that ISIS is also trafficking the drug to help finance their war.
Captagon was originally developed in the 1960s as a drug used to treat hyperactivitydisorders, but was later banned for causing serious hallucinations and being highly addictive. It is much cheaper and easier to make than most amphetamines, and is mass-produced in Lebanon for just pennies. This may allow ISIS to distribute it widely amongst its fighters, but also to make a high profit off trafficking, since the drug is often sold for around $20 a pill in Saudi Arabia.
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/12/here...e+Raw+Story%29
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fenethylline
Last edited by boutons_deux; 12-28-2015 at 05:33 PM.
LOL taking CAIR's statement as truth and presenting that as your evidence.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/p...asp?grpid=6176
CAIR supports terrorist organizations and has top members in prison on terrorist charges, need more evidence?
Co-founder Nihad Awad asserted at a 1994 meeting at Barry University, "I am a supporter of the Hamas movement." Awad wrote in the Muslim World Monitor that the 1994 trial which had resulted in the conviction of four Islamic fundamentalist terrorists who had perpetrated the previous year's World Trade Center bombing was "a travesty of justice."
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 Islamic Group leader Omar Abdel Rahman's foiled plot to blow up numerous New York City monuments.
On June 6, 2006, CAIR's Ohio affiliate held a large fundraiser in honor of Siraj Wahhaj. Following the event, CAIR-Ohio issued a press release heralding the more than $100,000 that Wahhaj had helped raise that evening for the organization’s “civil liberties work.”
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 1998, CAIR denied bin Laden's responsibility for the two al Qaeda bombings of American embassies in Africa. According to Ibrahim Hooper, the bombings resulted from "misunderstandings of both sides."
In September 2003, CAIR's former Community Affairs Director, Bassem Kha i, pled guilty to three federal counts of bank and visa fraud and agreed to be deported to Egypt. Federal investigators said that a group Kha i 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. Kha i’s illegal activities took place while he was employed by CAIR.
In July 2004, Ghassan Elashi, a founding Board member of CAIR's Texas chapter, was convicted along with his four brothers of having illegally shipped computers from their Dallas-area business, InfoCom Corporation, to Libya and Syria, two designated state sponsors of terrorism. That same month, Elashi was charged with having provided more than $12.4 million to Hamas while he was running HLF. In April 2005, Elashi and two of his brothers were also convicted of knowingly doing business with Hamas operative Mousa Abu Marzook, who was Elashi's brother-in-law. Elashi's illegal activities took place while he was employed by CAIR, whose Dallas-Fort Worth chapter depicted the Elashis’ indictment as “a war on Islam and Muslims.”
On September 6, 2001, the day that federal agents first raided Infocom’s headquarters, CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad denounced the U.S. government for “tak[ing] us back to the McCarthy era.”
FBI wiretap evidence which was introduced during the 2007 trial of the Holy Land Foundation (a trial that explored HLF's financial ties to Hamas), proved that Nihad Awad had attended a 1993 Philadelphia meeting of Hamas leaders and operatives who collaborated on a plan to disguise funding for Hamas as charitable donations.
CAIR co-founder and Chairman Emeritus Omar Ahmad was named, in the same 2007 Holy Land Foundation trial, as an unindicted co-conspirator with HLF. During the trial, evidence was supplied proving that Ahmad had attended, along with Nihad Awad, the aforementioned 1993 Philadelphia meeting of Hamas leaders and operatives. Moreover, prosecutors described Ahmad as a member of the Muslim Brotherhood's "Palestine Committee" in America.
The home of Muthanna al-Hanooti, one of CAIR's directors, was raided in 2006 by FBI agents in connection with an active terrorism investigation. FBI agents also searched the offices of Focus on Advocacy and Advancement of International Relations, al-Hanooti's Michigan- and Washington DC-based consulting firm that investigators suspect to be a front supporting the Sunni-led insurgency in Iraq.
Al-Hanooti is an ethnic Palestinian who, according to a 2001 FBI report, "collected over $6 million for support of Hamas" and attended, along with CAIR and Holy Land Foundation officials, the previously cited Hamas fundraising summit in Philadelphia in 1993. Currently a prayer leader at a Washington-area mosque that aided some of the 9/11 hijackers, he is a relative of Shiek Mohammed al-Hanooti, an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Muthanna al-Hanooti formerly helped run an organization called LIFE for Relief and Development, a suspected Hamas terror front whose Michigan offices were raided by the FBI in September 2006, and whose Baghdad office was raided by U.S. troops in 2004.
In March 2011, al-Hanooti was sentenced to a year in federal prison for violating U.S. sanctions against Iraq. According to the FBI, al-Hanooti also raised more than $6 million for support of Hamas and was present with CAIR and Holy Land Foundation officials at a secret Hamas fundraising summit held in Philadelphia during the 1990s.
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. 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.
During the 2005 trial of Sami Al-Arian, who was a key figure for Palestinian Islamic Jihad in the United States, Ahmed Bedier of CAIR’s Florida branch emerged as one of Al-Arian’s most vocal advocates.
In the aftermath of 9/11, federal agents raided the Washington-area home of CAIR civil rights coordinator Laura Jaghlit as part of a probe into terrorist financing, money laundering and tax fraud. Her husband Mohammed Jaghlit, a director of the Saudi-backed SAAR Foundation, is a suspect in the still-active (as of January 2008) investigation.
Abdurahman Alamoudi, one of CAIR's former directors, is a supporter of both Hamas and Hezbollah, and is currently serving a 23-year prison sentence for terrorism-related convictions.
Current CAIR board member Nabil Sadoun co-founded, along with Mousa Abu Marzook, the United Association for Studies and Research (UASR), which investigators consider to be a key Hamas front in America. Sadoun now sits on UASR's board.
Current CAIR research director Mohamed Nimer previously served as a Board Director for UASR.
One of CAIR's founding directors, Rafeeq Jaber, is a supporter of Hezbollah and served as the longtime President of the Islamic Association for Palestine.
CAIR Board member Hamza Yusuf was investigated by the FBI shortly after 9/11 because, just two days before the attacks, he had told a Muslim audience: "This country [the U.S.] is facing a terrible fate and the reason for that is because this country stands condemned. It stands condemned like Europe stood condemned because of what it did. And lest people forget, Europe suffered two world wars after conquering the Muslim lands."
The foregoing affiliations have drawn the notice of numerous commentators:
- Steven Pomerantz, the FBI’s former chief of counter-terrorism, has stated that “CAIR, its leaders and its activities effectively give aid to international terrorist groups.”
- WorldNetDaily quotes an FBI veteran as saying: "Their [CAIR's] offices have been a turnstile for terrorists and their supporters."
- The family of John P. O’Neill, Sr., the former FBI counter-terrorism chief who died at the World Trade Center on 9/11, named CAIR in a lawsuit as having “been part of the criminal conspiracy of radical Islamic terrorism” responsible for the September 11 attacks.
- Terrorism expert Steven Emerson, citing federal law enforcement sources and internal do ents, characterizes CAIR as “a radical fundamentalist front group for Hamas.”
- U.S. Senator Richard Durbin has said, "CAIR is unusual in its extreme rhetoric and its associations with groups that are suspect."
- On September 17, 2003, U.S. Senator Charles Schumer stated that CAIR co-founders Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmad have "intimate links with Hamas." He later remarked that "we know [CAIR] has ties to terrorism."
- According to U.S. Rep. Sue Myrick (R - North Carolina), co-founder of the House Anti-Terrorism/Jihad Caucus: "Groups like CAIR have a proven record of senior officials being indicted and either imprisoned or deported from the United States."
- During September 2003 hearings held by the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology, and Homeland Security, Chairman Jon Kyl noted the connections between such groups as CAIR and the Saudi government, stating: “A small group of organizations based in the U.S. with Saudi backing and support is well advanced in its four-decade effort to control Islam in America -- from mosques, universities and community centers to our prisons and even within our military. Moderate Muslims who love America and want to be part of our great country are being forced out of those ins utions.”
A number of American Muslims have made similar observations:
- The late Seifeldin Ashmawy, who published Voice of Peace, called CAIR the champion of “extremists whose views do not represent Islam.”
- Tashbih Sayyed of the Council for Democracy and Tolerance (CDT) called CAIR “the most accomplished fifth column” in the United States. Jamal Hasan, also of CDT, said that CAIR’s goal is to spread “Islamic hegemony the world over by hook or by crook.”
- According to Kamal Nawash of the Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism, CAIR and similar groups “condemn terrorism on the surface while endorsing an ideology that helps foster extremism,” and adds that “almost all of their members are theocratic Muslims who reject secularism and want to establish Islamic states.”
Well there you go. A copy pasta bit of evidence from someone with an obvious axe to grind. That is at least more than you have done so far, and moderately supportive of your assertion, if one filters the presentation though the obvious bias.
I skimmed it, so I didn't read through it very carefully, so maybe you can help me with something.
How many actual acts of violence have members of CAIR committed or has CAIR claimed responsibility for? I think we can both agree that is a basic function of terrorist organizations.
http://oilpro.com/post/21123/russian...up-turkey-iraq
Russia claims its ISIS oil, Kurds claiming oil is from Kurdish oilfields.
You copy paste a CAIR mission statement and think that was unbiased and passes as proof they don't support terrorist organizations?An honest person who isn't lazily skimming articles can clearly see what side is more heavily weighted with evidence.
Indeed. I would agree. Communication is far more effective generally when one is not a head.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has cut off contacts with the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) amid mounting concern about the Muslim advocacy group's roots in a Hamas-support network, the Investigative Project on Terrorism has learned.
The decision to end contacts with CAIR was made quietly last summer as federal prosecutors prepared for a second trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), an Islamic charity accused of providing money and political support to the terrorist group Hamas, according to people with knowledge of the matter.
CAIR and its chairman emeritus, Omar Ahmad, were named un-indicted co-conspirators in the HLF case. Both Ahmad and CAIR's current national executive director, Nihad Awad, were revealed on government wiretaps as having been active participants in early Hamas-related organizational meetings in the United States. During testimony, FBI agent Lara Burns described CAIR as a front organization.
Hamas is a US-designated foreign terrorist organization, and it's been illegal since 1995 to provide support to it within the United States.
The decision to end contacts with CAIR is a significant policy change for the FBI. For years, the FBI worked with the national organization and its state chapters to address Muslim community concerns about the potential for hate crimes and other civil liberty violations in the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.
But critics said the FBI improperly conferred legitimacy on CAIR by meeting with its officials, even as its own investigative files contained evidence of CAIR leaders' ties to Hamas.
Last autumn, FBI field offices began notifying state CAIR chapters that bureau officials could no longer meet with them until CAIR's national leadership in Washington had addressed issues raised by the HLF trial, according to people with knowledge of the notifications.
CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper declined to comment Wednesday when the IPT called for comment. Before hanging up, Hooper said "We're more than happy to cooperate with legitimate media. But we don't cooperate with those who promote anti-Muslim bigotry."
In one letter obtained by IPT News, James E. Finch, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI's Oklahoma City field office, canceled a meeting of the local Muslim Community Outreach Program, a state-federal program designed to enlist Muslims in terrorism prevention and investigate reports of civil liberties violations.
"Regrettably, due to cir stances beyond my control, the meeting will be postponed until further notice as a result of the planned participation by the Oklahoma chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations," Finch's Oct. 8, 2008 letter to Muslim groups in the Oklahoma outreach program said.
Finch made clear the Oklahoma office valued its relationship with local Muslims. He said the stumbling block to further outreach was CAIR's national leadership.
"[I]f CAIR wishes to pursue an outreach relationship with the FBI, certain issues must be addressed to the satisfaction of the FBI. Unfortunately, these issues cannot be addressed at the local level and must be addressed by the CAIR National Office in Washington, D.C.," the letter said.
A spokesman for the FBI's Oklahoma City office referred questions about the letter to the FBI's national press office. In Washington, FBI spokesman John Miller said, "We've certainly been in contact with CAIR chapters" about the un-indicted co-conspirator designation. "The letter speaks for itself."
Letters with similar wording were sent in other states, people with knowledge of the matter said. It is not known how many letters were issued, but the FBI has had strong working relationships with CAIR chapters in states including Ohio, Michigan, Arizona and Florida.
Hamas was formed in 1987 as the Palestinian wing of the Muslim Brotherhood, the global Islamic political movement that aims to spread the rule of Shariah, or Islamic law, throughout the world.
A North American branch of the Brotherhood supervised HLF, CAIR and other organizations to build political, financial and public relations support for Hamas, evidence at the HLF trial showed.
The U.S.-based Brotherhood formed a Palestine Committee, headed by Hamas official Mousa Abu Marzook, in 1988 during the first intifada uprising in Palestinian territories against Israel. Hamas's stated policy is for the destruction of Israel.
CAIR co-founders Ahmad and Awad were early active members of the Palestine Committee, evidence showed. Wiretaps recorded the two CAIR leaders participating in strategy meetings of the committee in the 1990s, and both were also on a phone list of its members, the evidence showed.
The first HLF trial in Texas ended in a mistrial in October 2007. In November 2008, the second trial resulted in convictions of five former HLF officials on all counts of providing material support to Hamas.
It is unclear what changed between the first and second HLF trials to make the FBI rescind its policy of outreach to CAIR. The un-indicted co-conspirator designations were made on May 27, 2007 in connection with the first HLF trial. Moreover, much of the evidence linking the CAIR officials to Hamas was aired in an earlier public trial in 2006.
CAIR, however, vigorously challenged the un-indicted co-conspirator designation as a violation of its First and Fifth Amendment rights, accusing the government of "demonization of all things Muslim" in a brief filed in the summer of 2007 with the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
The co-conspirator designation is "particularly insidious and ironic as CAIR is an organization dedicated to fostering acceptance of Muslims in American society and protecting the civil liberties of all Muslim Americans," CAIR's brief read.
The government filed a brief on Sept. 4, 2007 opposing CAIR's filing, arguing the group lacked standing to challenge the co-conspirator designation and that the matter was moot, as the evidence was already entered into the public record. The judge never ruled on CAIR's request.
The HLF trial showed that CAIR was formed to covertly influence US opinions of the Palestinian conflict and Islam, but without revealing its connections to Hamas.
For example, prosecutors introduced transcripts of wiretaps from a 1993 meeting in Philadelphia of the Palestine Committee, called to order by Ahmad (see page 10 of the hyperlink) and attended by Awad. In that meeting, Ahmad and others discussed the need to create a new political organization seemingly unconnected to Hamas or the Brotherhood.
In one excerpt, (see page 4 of the link) an unidentified male said: "We must form a new organization for activism which will be neutral, because we are placed in a corner, we are place in a corner. It is known who we are, we are marked and I believe there should be a new neutral organization which works on both sides."
CAIR was founded a year later, in 1994, by Ahmad and Awad. In March 1994, Awad was taped at Miami's Barry University publicly declaring his support for Hamas: "I am in support of the Hamas movement more than the PLO," Awad said.
A July 30, 1994 agenda for the Palestine Committee, seized by federal agents and introduced at trial, showed that "suggestions to develop the work" of HLF, CAIR and other organizations was on the agenda.
Under the heading "The need for trained resources in the media and political fields," the agenda said: "No doubt America is the ideal location to train the necessary resources to support the Movement worldwide."
By 1995, CAIR was conducting public relations work to counter the US detention of Mousa Abu Marzook, the Hamas official and Palestine Committee member who was also head of the Muslim Brotherhood in the US.
A transcript of an August 1995 phone call intercepted by government investigators showed HLF officials Shukri Abu Baker and Ghassan Elashi talking about CAIR's efforts (see page 12 of the link).
Days before the 2001 terrorist attacks, the FBI raided the offices of Infocom, a Texas internet company connected to HLF. CAIR's Nihad Awad appeared at a press conference outside Infocom headquarters to denounce what he called an "anti-Muslim witch hunt."
CAIR remained a vocal player in the public debate after 9/11. It developed relationships with members of Congress. FBI officials frequently attended CAIR fundraising banquets, and CAIR cited such contacts in its own literature and Web site as evidence of its good standing with the government.
http://www.investigativeproject.org/...amas-questions
Muslims hilariously respond to ISIL leader’s call for recruits
http://qz.com/583097/mom-said-no-onl...m_source=atlfb
Read a bit more carefully. I said that their mission statement was "proof". Not "good proof" not "all the proof necessary to evaluate your claim that it was a terrorist organization", but merely "proof". The omission of qualifiers was very deliberate.You copy paste a CAIR mission statement and think that was unbiased and passes as proof they don't support terrorist organizations?
One should be somewhat skeptical of public statements of groups, since those tend to be polished versions of underlying views, although public statements of groups tend to be put out after a lot of vetting and careful consideration.
What is relevant is the official condemnation of violence against civilians. Heartfelt or not, official public statements matter.
Is officially condemning violence consistent with the actions of a "terrorist organization"?
Last edited by RandomGuy; 12-30-2015 at 08:19 AM.
One should also be skeptical of such lists, as there is an obvious methodology of cherry-picking. Once you start seeing things like "in 1994 someone said" and "may have been alleged", you should start discounting the weight of such evidence. Short quotes, out of context are not the hallmarks of someone trying to be intellectually honest.
What you also have are quite a few things by some members, but again, nothing specific or officially endorsed. Again, not overly strong evidence. It is possible for individual members and views to not fully represent an entire organization.
Digging into it a bit, your copy pasta contains an interpretation of CAIR by "terrorism expert Steven Emerson... characterizing CAIR" This is the same guy who claimed that there are places in Europe that are "no-go zones" where Muslims are apparently in complete control.
"In Britain, it's not just no-go zones, there are actual cities like Birmingham that are totally Muslim where non-Muslims just simply don't go in," he said. Leading the British Prime Minister to comment: “Frankly I choked on my porridge and thought it must be April’s Fools Day. This guy is clearly a complete idiot."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...ete-idiot.html
One can't discount other things this guy says completely, but one should start weighing his interpretations of facts much less. The fact that his statements are on your list, further diminishes the credibility of the other characterizations.
That said, you have founders and board members being convicted of things that should give one pause. These are not rank and file members. The most convincing parts though were at the end.
Overall, moderately convincing. Thank you.A number of American Muslims have made similar observations:
The late Seifeldin Ashmawy, who published Voice of Peace, called CAIR the champion of “extremists whose views do not represent Islam.”
Tashbih Sayyed of the Council for Democracy and Tolerance (CDT) called CAIR “the most accomplished fifth column” in the United States. Jamal Hasan, also of CDT, said that CAIR’s goal is to spread “Islamic hegemony the world over by hook or by crook.”
According to Kamal Nawash of the Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism, CAIR and similar groups “condemn terrorism on the surface while endorsing an ideology that helps foster extremism,” and adds that “almost all of their members are theocratic Muslims who reject secularism and want to establish Islamic states.”
http://www.freemuslims.org/about/nawash.php
I gave a bunch of other quotes you seem not to have seen.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions