CAIR Supports Terrorism and Supports HAMAS

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is a Washington, D.C. based 501 (c) 3 which tells Muslims coming into this country to tell Customs Agents that it’s “none of their damn business” where they’ve traveled to or what their travels were about. 


Nihad Awad (second from right), Executive Director and Founder of CAIR, stands to President Bush’s left, when Bush said “Like the good folks standing with me, the American people were appalled and outraged at last Tuesday’s attacks (on Sept. 11, 2001).”  Wikipedia.

Apparently it’s none of the U.S.’s business to know where they are from, what Islamist countries they have come from or what they want to accomplish coming into the U.S.A.

The story by reports that CAIR is calling for Muslim’s to not talk to customs officials while entering the U.S. from Islamist-controlled countries.  The story says CAIR directs Muslims to tell U.S. Customs Agents who ask about their travels, that it’s “None of your damn business” and to chant Muslim prayers loudly, instead. 

The blog article also explains that the longstanding relationship between the FBI and CAIR had been discontinued once a 2008 court case with an Islamist group that CAIR was associated with, called the Holy Land Foundation, was found to have provided material support to the terrorist group, HAMAS.  The Holy Land Foundation was shut down in a raid in 2001. reports;

The FBI cut ties with The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) after  the Holy Land Foundation trial where “CAIR was listed as an unindicted co-conspirator along with its co-founder Omar Achmad as supporters of the terrorist group HAMAS.

The FBI website describes raiding the Holy Land Foundation;

We raided the organization’s Texas headquarters, seized its assets, and shut down its operation. At the time, Holy Land was ranked as the country’s largest Muslim charitable organization.

With this in mind, I ask the question, why is CAIR still in operation?

We may find a similar question answered by Daniel Pipes and Sharon Chadha, who wrote an article published in and online publication, the Middle East Quarterly entitled, “CAIR: Islamists Fooling the Establishment” (2006): 

That the U.S. government, the mainstream media, educational institutions, and others have given CAIR a free pass amounts to a dereliction of duty. Yet, there appear to be no signs of change. How long will it be until the establishment finally recognizes CAIR for what it is and denies it mainstream legitimacy?

Two examples of the White House inviting CAIR representatives are here and here.

CAIR as a nonprofit collects funds from around the world, supports HAMAS, probably is a front charity for terrorism groups especially HAMAS and tells the government that they can’t have any information that may be related to terrorist activities they may have access to but still has 501(c)3 tax status.  This means that since they are recognized as a “charitable organization” here in America, (according to a law group that gives information about starting your own nonprofit here), CAIR’s benefits would include:

  •  Exemption from Federal income tax;
  •  Tax-deductible contributions;
  •  Possible exemption from state income, sales, and employment taxes;
  •  Reduced postal rates;
  •  Exemption from Federal unemployment tax; and
  •  Tax-exempt financing.

Again, how long will we have to endure terrorist-connected charity groups operating in the United States?  Isn’t this anti-American and very dangerous to society and to our way of life.

Americans not supporting terrorist organizations should be shouting from the roof tops that supporting terrorist groups is unlawful and treasonous, and hold the White House and our Representatives in Congress’ feet to the fire.  How this will ever be explained down through history is anyone’s guess.


The Confusion of the Muslim Community: Allah Is Not The Same As Christ Almighty

The words, Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, caught my eye.  I have never heard of them.  As part of my learning about the Muslim faith, I delved into some reading about this “community”, here.

After reading the first two paragraphs, I can see a merging of religions on this page so that all religions are welcome. Some say “Chrislam” is a joining of the two religions, Christianity and Islam but how can two religions be the same?

The One World Order theme also expresses the idea that all roads lead to the same God and this is not true.  Not to believer’s in Christ, that is.

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad.  Photo credit:  Wikipedia

One believes that Jesus is the true Christ, the One True God with the Father (in heaven) and the Holy Spirit, God’s Holy Spirit, given to the followers of Christ.  All three forms are God Himself.  This is God, the one that I believe in.

However, Islam believes that Jesus was a prophet, and not the One True God of the Trinity; The Father, The Son and The Holy Ghost or Spirit, whichever you prefer to call His Holy Spirit.  Often it is called the Holy Ghost which we know means the Holy Spirit.  I prefer to use the Holy Spirit as God when I prefer to His Spirit but Holy Ghost is the same, I believe.

Now, the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community site claims to be the only Muslim faith that believes the Messiah, who is Jesus Christ so there must be some confusion here, came as Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, who is described on their page, in the third paragraph, by their Community as such; 

The advent of The Holy Prophet sa is described metaphorically as the appearance of God Almighty. The Holy Prophet sa became the mirror reflecting Divine Attributes. He was Al- Abd. The Holy Quran calls him Abdullah (72:20) — The Servant of Allah. For the latter days God in His Mercy sent us the servant of The Servant — Ghulam Ahmad as. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani as (Ahmad as) claimed to be The Promised Messiah and Mahdi. Ahmad as claimed to be the metaphorical second coming of Jesusas of Nazareth and the divine guide, whose advent was foretold by the Prophet of Islam, Muhammad sa.

Seeing the Muslim’s of today, it is hard to see the “divine attributes” that they talk about.

It seems the Muslims copy the bible and assert that theirs is the only God who purifies them in the flesh so that they can commit murder against Infadels, have sex with children and perform perversions among the innocent.  They have multiple wives, have no morals and are thugs.  They seem to think they are purified and so can do these things like smack their women and say they are “unclean” and use children for bombings and find women in heaven waiting to do their bidding in sexual matters.  

After all, that’s what God wants, in their religion.

They cover themselves in holiness trying to cover up their sexual perversions and aggression’s toward others.  

They are seventh-century idiots in my opinion.


Are Governmental Officials On Our Side? When We Don’t Do Background Checks of Family Members of the Muslim Brotherhood

Working to uncover the truth, is radical Islam part of the Obama agenda, and how much of a risk we are at in the United States over the radical Islamist agenda that Mr. Obama won’t mention, I offer a speech that examines staff with Muslim backgrounds that have come into question in past years.  

The point being, do high government officials have the right to classified information when their family members have ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and related organizations?


President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton’s aide Huma Abedin

The 2012 article records a speech given by Andrew C. McCarthy to the National Press Club in Washington D.C.  He was invited by the Center for Security Policy.

He said, 

I’ve been writing about this subject: I’ve been writing about the Muslim Brotherhood for a number of years. And for the last couple of weeks, I’ve been writing about the specific topic that we’re here to talk about this morning: the Brotherhood’s influence on our government, and the slings and arrows these five House members have been catching for having the temerity to notice it.

His speech talks about how our government policy seemed to have ” shifted in the direction of avowed enemies of the United States” so that it seemed to be common sense to check the backgrounds of some government officials more thoroughly.

He thought that the five House members making the request to conduct internal inquiries seeking knowledge of potential Islamist influences in governmental agencies, and then reporting back to Congress would be a good idea.

It seemed like common sense then, and it makes better sense today with more Islamist terrorist attacks that have been reported lately, and with more knowledgeable experts openly saying that we should have taken action sooner when we were first hit on 9/11.      

In his speech, McCarthy said at the time, 

I don’t understand why more people in Washington, from both parties, have not rallied to the support of Congresswoman Bachmann and Congressmen Gohmert, Franks, Westmoreland and Rooney.

Top be sure, Mr. McCarthy does give credit to the many good Muslim’s who have actually helped the U.S. fight terrorism on many fronts.  

Pro-American Muslims serve honorably in government, in our military, in our intelligence services, and in our major institutions.

It was then as it is today, that making mention of anyone having done anything wrong and being Muslim or Islam makes you a bigot.  It is the social PC that intimidates and serves to hide the truth, and make a person stop talking.  I suppose that is why McCarthy made a clear distinction between Muslims and Islamists:

When we talk about the influence of Islamists, we are referring to Muslims who are beholden to Islamic supremacism. Islamic supremacism is an ideology, not a religion. 

The concern he raised was being burdened by conflicts of interest if a family member was active having ties with a known terror group.

It is not a question of your patriotism or your trustworthiness. It is about whether you would be burdened by such obvious conflicts of interest that you would be tempted to act on those interests, rather than in the best interests of the United States.

The five house members who wrote letters asking for more background inquiries were smeared  instead of being advised that the findings of Ms. Abedin were of concern.  

In his speech he told his audience that;

the response of the Obama administration, congressional Democrats, and their echo chamber in the Republican establishment has been to attack and smear the messengers.

Why in making a simple request to protect security of the U.S., and in a common sense respectful fashion, would there be raised such a fuss, and such rudeness taken out on the people making the request?

Shouldn’t there be several levels of security inquiries about someone that is to hold high public office and work in high governmental departments that effect policy of the United States and be able to access high security information?  Why wouldn’t we be cautious of spy’s or of persons who could use sensitive information in secret to convey it to the interests of groups that are anti-American and are not our friends?

In the case of Huma Abedin, they found that she has quite a threatening background and connections in her family with a major Muslim Brotherhood member who helps finance al-Qaeda.  Wouldn’t that cause concern in the White House especially?

Their letter to the State Department’s inspector general stated that Ms. Abedin “has three family members — her late father, her mother and her brother — connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations.” It turns out, however, that Huma Abedin herself is directly connected to Abdullah Omar Naseef, a major Muslim Brotherhood figure involved in the financing of al-Qaeda.

There really needs to be some explaining and thorough reporting on the backgrounds of Ms. Abedin as well as members of Congress, their aides, other departments within the United States government to keep our country safe.  

There is no excuse, and this seems to border on criminal offenses, if not poor public policy that would be so lax as to allow such persons with these kinds of backgrounds to operate in our government.

Anyone who disagrees should be seen as a traitor to allow open doors for enemies of the United States to access privileged information.