More detail on this major victory for the good guys from Anti-CAIR:
A $1.35 million libel suit filed by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) against Andrew Whitehead of Anti-CAIR (ACAIR), who called CAIR a “terrorist front organization,” that was “founded by Hamas supporters,” and was working to “make radical Islam the dominant religion in the United States,” has been dismissed with prejudice. According to ACAIR’s Mr. Whitehead, who posts at www.anti-cair-net.org, “I am pleased to report the CAIR lawsuit has been dismissed after the parties reached a mutually agreeable settlement.”Terms of the settlement are confidential. However, no apology was issued, no retraction or corrections made, and the statements that triggered CAIR’s suit remain on the ACAIR website.
CAIR’s suit was filed on March 31, 2004 after Mr. Whitehead posted the following statements:
“Let there be no doubt that CAIR is a terrorist supporting front organization that is partially funded by terrorists, and that CAIR wishes nothing more than the implementation of Sharia law in America.”CAIR is an “organization founded by Hamas supporters which seeks to overthrow Constitutional government in the United States and replace it with an Islamist theocracy using our own Constitution as protection.”
“ACAIR reminds our readers that CAIR was started by Hamas members and is supported by terrorist supporting individuals, groups and countries.”
“Why oppose CAIR? CAIR has proven links to, and was founded by, Islamic terrorists. CAIR is not in the United States to promote the civil rights of Muslims. CAIR is here to make radical Islam the dominant religion in the United States and convert our country into an Islamic theocracy along the lines of Iran. In addition, CAIR has managed, through the adroit manipulation of the popular media, to present itself as the ‘moderate' face of Islam in the United States. CAIR succeeded to the point that the majority of its members are not aware that CAIR actively supports terrorists and terrorist supporting groups and nations. In addition, CAIR receives direct funding from Islamic terrorists supporting countries.”
“CAIR is a fundamentalist organization dedicated to the overthrow of the United States Constitution and the installation of an Islamic theocracy in America.”
CAIR claimed these statements were false, that Mr. Whitehead made them “with knowledge of their falsity,” and that the statements were actionable because “they impute the commission of a criminal offense.” CAIR claimed injury to its “standing and reputation throughout the United States and elsewhere,” and sought $1 million in compensatory damages, $350,000 in punitive damages, plus legal fees and interest.
On June 20, 2005, and following submission of discovery requests by Mr. Whitehead’s counsel, Reed D. Rubinstein of Greenberg Traurig LLP’s Washington, D.C. office, seeking information regarding CAIR’s finances, its relationship to Hamas, and its ties to Saudi Arabia and other Islamic radicals, CAIR dropped nearly all of its original claims. The revised complaint alleged only the following statements to be false and defamatory:
“Let their (sic) be no doubt that CAIR is a terrorist supporting front organization….”“[CAIR] seeks to overthrow constitutional government in the United States….”
Subsequently, Mr. Whitehead’s counsel filed papers demonstrating the extensive links between, and actions taken by, CAIR and its principal leaders with and on behalf of Hamas terrorists, foreign Islamic radicals, and domestic Islamic extremists. Among other things, the pleadings showed how CAIR had used its website to exploit the 9/11 atrocities, funneling money to the notorious Hamas front group the “Holy Land Foundation” (HLF). HLF, organized and operated by a CAIR-Austin, Texas board member who was a close and long-time associate of CAIR’s executive officers, financed Hamas, and was shut down by the United States government in December, 2001. HLF was also shown to have provided funds to CAIR.
Shortly after Mr. Whitehead’s counsel filed these papers, and shortly before a court hearing on Mr. Whitehead’s request for access to CAIR’s financial data and relationship with Hamas and Islamic radicals was to be held, the case was settled and dismissed with prejudice.
Dismissed with prejudice: if I understand correctly, that means that CAIR can never again sue Andrew Whitehead or Anti-CAIR over the items for which they initially sued (which are enumerated above).
Yes, with prejudice means it was dismissed for good reason and plaintiffs cannot bring suit against these defendants on those grounds again. Usually when parties settle with agreed upon monetary damages, they dismiss without prejudice. Big deal here.
...Just in case CAIR is reading....
Nihad Awad and Dougie Hooper - you spineless cowards! You almost got your pack of lies exposed in court and you turned tail? Afraid we'd see through your lies? We're way ahead of you.
Now take a guess WHO educated two radio stations in the central states to make a choice to never again listen to your silky smoooooth taquiyya Mr. Hooper.
;)
Holy stare decisis! Mr. Spencer, you are correct, a lawsuit dismissed with prejudice can not be re-filed on the same allegations.
Andrew Whitehaead can continue to make all of those statements, which CAIR alleged were defamatory, with impunity. Since the allegations of CAIR's lawsuit are public record, and the suit was dismissed with prejudice, third parties can also make the same statements and, if sued for defamation, introduce the dismissal into evidence as an admission against interest.
This is BIG NEWS! Why is it not all over the MSM?
Well, may our judiciary is not totall corrupt, after all.
So, let's shift our focus:
1) Is there even one professor in this country teaching truthful classes about Islam? I believe not.
2) Is there even one official in our permanent government who has spoken out the truth? I believe not.
3) Is there even one MSM reporter who has written or spoken the truth. I believe not.
4) Is there even one member of our sitting government who has spoken the truth about Islam? Yeah, one: Tom Trancredo.
5) Is there even one opinion celebrity in our popular media who has spoken out the truth? Maybe 1 1/2 or two: all right wing radio hosts. That dude from San Diego fits the bill. Also, you can make a very tenuous argument that Savage fits does, too. And maybe Michael Reagan can be thrown in. But these two have big maybes.
GIMME MO MOSLEMS MO MOHAMMEDS I'LL MAKE THEM ANGRY RADIO TALK HOSTS
1 - 5 above amounts to a very low red blood cell count.
So CAIR lost the same fight twice, good. Now who can get them back into the courtroom so they can be beaten again? The MSM will never report on this, it does'nt fit their agenda. The only way something effecting the greater struggle for Dhimmification ever hits the MSM is if they get dragged into the US Supreme Court. And then only maybe.....
Now can't Andrew Whitehead sue CAIR for a frivolous or malicious lawsuit, which is a form of defamation and injury, not to mention the legal expenses, etc? How does that work, lawyers?
Of course the MSM will not mention this. Just doing a cursory search on google news I found the story at:
Connecticut Jewish Ledger, CT
New York Sun, NY
That's it.
Hopefully we can spread this more, as the settlement speaks volumes.
All the best,
Mac
This is BIG NEWS! Why is it not all over the MSM?
Money talks. Get used to our new robed, cruel, and capricious overlords.
I really try to avoid being overly pessimistic. It's not healthy, and usually wrong.
BUT - you probably saw that coming - if history is written by free people after this war, modern leaders will make the Maginot Line look like burning the USS Philadelphia at Tripoli.
The Maginot Line faced the correct enemy. The Maginot Line held out in places. The Maginot Line was not collapsed by twelve Danish cartoons and the orchestrated response which ensued. The Maginot Line was not staffed by Germans in postions of authority.
CAIR is like the Waffen SS recruiting at State U in 1944.
Benjamin,
Now can't Andrew Whitehead sue CAIR for a frivolous or malicious lawsuit, which is a form of defamation and injury, not to mention the legal expenses, etc?
He can sue. The question is whether he can recover and whether the "other" risks are worth it. I think you know what I mean.
CAIR is a bottomless pit of money and terror ties. The best way to get them, legally speaking, is to sue them for wrongful death after their money is linked to a specific terrorist act. Then watch the State Department swoop in to protect them.
The truth is the greatest enemy of Islamic ideology, and the most powerful weapon we have to resist its depradations in the modern world.
Counter suit... counter suit... counter suit... counter suit... counter suit... counter suit... counter suit... counter suit... COUNTER SUIT!!!
********************************************
This makes me long for the original democratic system, that of old Greece. If you brought a suit, and didn't get at least 1/3 of the vote, you had to PAY a nice, stiff fine. So there were three outcomes: guilty, innocent, or so innocent that the bringer of the suit loses some cash.
Of course, we should keep in mind that this IS the system that killed Socrates.
Anyone need a good laugh? Check out the videos over at www.thekidfrombrooklyn.com
KJ
Thank You Andrew!!!
Thank You
There had to be times it was not easy for Andrew Whitehead; but being a man of convictions - he stood his ground - which is more than can be said of the media giants - who have skipped this important good news for all U.S. Constituion law abiding Americans.
The media giants have no right to the blessings of America.
Shame on them!
Thank You Andy!
Beth
Take a look at what the future has in store for islamized France:
http://www.english-france-echos.blogspot.com
Awesome!
Does this settlement imply that:
"CAIR is a terrorist supporting front organization that is partially funded by terrorists, and that CAIR wishes nothing more than the implementation of Sharia law in America.”
“CAIR is a fundamentalist organization dedicated to the overthrow of the United States Constitution and the installation of an Islamic theocracy in America.”
If yes, what evidence does FBI need again to shut down CAIR once and for all.
CAIR within America is far more dangerous than al-qaida, hamas, hezbollah all put together.
Thank you Andrew!!!!!
I'm no lawyer (legal training consists of watching too many episodes of "the People's Court"), but I wonder if in those confidential settlement terms there exists an agreement by Mr. Whitehead to not countersue. Kinda like [CAIR] taking a swing, not connecting, realizing the other guy is gonna kick your ass, and trying to back out of the fight as long as the other guy doesn't try to counterhit.
Don't miss this one:
Defeating Jihad: an interview with Serge Trifkovic.
Any quotation is superfluous, and the article is too rich to be summarized, but just to give a flavour of the directness, precision, and intelligence of the man here is a short quotation:
Compare that to the evasions and dishonesty of the Man of Straw, for example.
Today is a good day in our fight against Islamic oppression and against our cultural annihilation. I am heartened by the clearheaded, calm, relentless application of the truth by Mr. Whitehead and it's profound effect. CAIR dropped its suit because its financial records were about to be exposed? That was a brilliant move by Mr. Whitehead.
It appears that he has exposed CAIR's Achilles heel. And according to the article, "Creating the Online Infidel Library," on Wolgang Bruno's blog at http://wolfgangbruno.blogspot.com/ our most powerful weapon in the fight against Islam is exposure of what it is all about; day in, day out, relentless, neverending application of the truth. The rock is pulled back, the lights are shining and everyday, normal people are waking up.
This, and the 70 degree weather that is coming our way is going to make this a great day!!!
l hope to copy this and send it in to the local rag, they had an editorial comment about a love in with the local immans, and l had a hard time keeping my breakfast down! AND yes where why is not reported, with ABC,CBS,etc.. if it were some Christian group l am sure it would reported!
Congratulations to Andrew Whitehead for his total victory over fascist CAIR.
I am impressed. It is an example that maybe the US still has freedom of speech. In France I don't think that it would be possible to have the equivalent of an anti CAIR, although we have more than one CAIR.
Keep going America. Your are my hope and my consolation. Don't forget that you still can win as you have very few Muslims.
We have 8 millions in France (? + the growing number of converts) and it already makes things very difficult.
Keep fighting. People like me will help you.
a very interesting article by melanie phillips (a bright british journalist) about america against the jihad:
http://www.melaniephillips.com/diary/archives/001654.html
"President George W. Bush is an "aberration," a leader out of sync with his nation's character and no more than a brief nightmare for those who oppose the creation of an "American Middle East." Messrs. Abbasi and Ahmadinejad have concluded that there will be no helicopter as long as George W. Bush is in the White House.
Phillips writes about the "progressive loss of nerve that appears to be gripping America" (but of course her critics go first to England !)
Do you have the feeling that it is true (I mean, when you talk to people around you) ?
"Do you have the feeling that it is true (I mean, when you talk to people around you) ?"
Joiesauvage, considering how many topics are treated in America as legitimate "issues" that fifteen years ago would have been the punchline to a joke, the answer seems pretty obvious. I try not to talk about politics with people around me. Last thing I need is to go to jail for punching out the next pasty little PC idiot who tries to fling the appellation "fascist" at me.
"This is big news, why isn't it all over MSN"
AND BEYOND!!!
"$350,000 in punitive damages,plus legal fees and interest."
interest????????
Isn't interest against the sharia?
Isn't that like Christian Aid suing a large coorporation for unethical practice and asking for child labour as part of the settlement?
can someone explain how a moslem organisation is happy to offend allah with demands for interest?