A likely presidential candidate zeroes in on this deceptive and destructive organization.
I've talked before about the Council on American-Islamic Relations -- most recently because it filed that lawsuit against Americans who reported suspicious behavior by Muslims on a U.S. Airways flight. Better known just as CAIR, the lobbying group has come under a lot of scrutiny lately for its connections to terror-supporting groups. This time, though, The Washington Times has uncovered some very good news about the group.For years, CAIR has claimed to represent millions of American Muslims. In fact, they claim to represent more Muslim in American than ... there are in America. This has alarmed Americans in general as the group often seems to be more aligned with our enemies than us -- which isn't surprising as it spun off from a group funded by Hamas. As you know, Hamas has been waging a terrorist war against Israel and calls for its total destruction. It also promises to see America destroyed. Nowadays, Hamas is busy murdering its Palestinian political rivals.
Even with this history, and CAIR's conspicuous failure to condemn Hamas by name, it has been treated as if represents Muslim Americans by our own government. The good news is that the financial support CAIR claims to have among American Muslims is a myth. We know this because The Washington Times got hold of the group's IRS tax records.
CAIR's dues-paying membership has shrunk 90 percent since 9/11 -- from 29,000 in 2000 to only 1,700 last year. CAIR's annual income from dues plunged from $733,000 to $59,000. Clearly, America's Muslims are not supporting this group -- and I'm happy to hear about it.
Of course, every silver lining seems to have a cloud; and this cloud is that CAIR's spending is running about $3 million a year. They’ve opened 25 new chapters in major cities across the country even as their dues shrank to a pittance. The question is; who’s funding CAIR?
CAIR's not saying. The New York Times earlier this year reported that the backing is from "wealthy Persian Gulf governments" including the UAE and Saudi Arabia. Obviously, we have a bigger problem here than the one with CAIR.
Fred Thompson is obviously not yet on the payroll of an Arab government. How long will he resist?
Get him to support the fair tax and we have a winner here.
I'm a Rudi Guliani man (since Tancredo doesn't have a prayer), but Thompson's stock just rose a thousand percent in my book. He apparently is not clueless.
It's imperative that CAIR be frozen out of the public discourse in America and relegated to the margins where they belong.
Finally. A sign that somebody sees A root to the problem.
Compare this to story at LGF that Bush is contemplating a dialogue w/ the Muslim Brotherhood.
duh. Just saw post at DW.
Great. At last.
A Presidental Candidate who is asking the right questions. I hope the other candidates wise up to this and also start asking similar questions.
It cannot be right for organisations to exist in America who are linked to or funded by groups considered terrorists in other Western countries. And Washington should be suspicious of funding from countries not considered friendly. If CAIR was funded by Hezbollah,Syria,Iran would Washington be concerned?
You can go to "I'm With Fred" and make a comment. I said if he stopped Muslim immigration to the U.S. I'd be voting for him. And that stopping Muslim immigration to our shores is the most important campaign issue to me. Much more important then the Mexicans.
If you feel like it, people - go to "I'm With Fred" and make your feelings known to him.
A forward spring does not a season make.
Still a great thing to hear.
Score a big point for Mr, Thompson.
(but then CAIR could try some black ops and claim him as their candidate)
I recently sent Fred Thompson an E Mail saying; that the President I would vote for had to demonstrate a clear working knowledge of fundamental Islam, and that he should seek out experts in the field as well (not members of CAIR).
How many of you at one time or another thought that Kyl or McCain was your candidate ? Good is as good does.
Still this is a good position by one of the frontrunners.
"However, most Americans feel differently. We understand that the Western world is in an international struggle with jihadists who see this struggle as part of a conflict that has gone on for centuries, and who won’t give up until Western countries are brought to their knees. I agree with this view. I believe that the forces of civilization must work together with common purpose to defeat the terrorists who for their own twisted purposes have murdered thousands, and who are trying to acquire technology to murder millions more."
... from FT's talk at London think tank last week
He's also the only candidate that openly says "talks" with iran are pointless unless we make it clear from the outset that we will do everything in our power, including the use of force, to keep them from going nuclear.
This guy's current profession is acting, but he is far less a role player in real life than Hilary Clinton, Hussein Obama, or the consumate charlatan, John Edwards.
From above comment:
Imagine a Thompson/Tancredo (T'nT) combo. . .both candidates appear to have done a bit of reading about Islam, and Tancredo is strong on border security and immigration controls.
Tancredo speaks out against whitewashes of jihad in textbooks · 9/11 Panel: SA, Pakistan Aided Bin Laden · Singer: Talk straight about jihad ...
The Iconoclast - New English Review
Hugh Fitzgerald Tancredo's comment is the first serious public remark by a Republican Presidential candidate that expresses opposition to Tarbaby Iraq. ...
Wish upon a star
RUN Fred RUN! Oh, and . . .Hugh Fitzgerald for Secretary of State!
I'll take a page out of Thompson's book and sit on the fence, explore how anti-Jihad he really is - and whether he recognizes the threat that is Islam. Until then, I'm still with Romney.
I think Giuliani, Romney and Tancredo would all be credible candidates, although Giuliani tends to parrot the ROP line, his track record shows that he'd take on Islam if the evidence to him pointed that way. McCain is dropping like a rock, and the last IA straw poll that I saw had him @ 6%, 1% higher than Tancredo. Tancredo's performance so far has been abysmal, but I do think he should try and strengthen himself in IA and SC, and target the border states - CA, AZ, NM, TX, FL. Oh, and it seems Newt is unlikely to run, since his American Solutions™ is currently working with Giuliani, Romney and Thomson's campagns on their proposals.
Of all the "tier 1" candidates, Fred is the most un-PC, which gives him the best framework for combating jihad. The fact that he is also going to Israel suggests something . . .
Infidel33,
Fred Thomson was an attorney and prosecutor before he became (a well paid) actor.
I am just skeptical of all politicians, I watched GWB become a flaming liberal.
That's not all, folks.
Fred Thompson truly gets it when it comes to Islamic terrorism, as evidenced by what he wrote below in May (a transcript from his podcast). This is not just a tour through American history, but an instruction on how to act in the present.
The Fred Thompson Report: To the Shores of Tripoli
Read, as they say, it all. (Or listen too)
interestinconundrum;
No argument here. I admit that I have become desperate for any politician who is willing to speak the truth, even if it means villification by the MSM, incurring the hatred and threats of the mahometans, and even if it precludes any possibility of getting on the saudi gravy train. So far, FT and Tancredo are sounding pretty good to me. Please read his remarks to the London Policy Exchange. Bush could have never given a speech like this, or even hired anyone who could have written these remarks. FT is on a different planet than Dubya.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/FredThompson/2007/06/19/fred_thompsons_remarks_to_policy_exchange_in_london
I think it is a great posting.
However, I also think it is inappropriate for ABC Radio to have a person who has publicly stated they are planning to run for presidency doing a news commentary blog.
Fred needs to get off the fence here, this is something that belongs on his campaign website, since he says he plans to run for office.
I just don't know how you do "The Fred Thompson Report" for ABC, and then on the other hand give interview after interview that you plan to run for presidency.
One of America's big problems today is that our news media are so biased in many ways, that is nearly impossible to get a straight story.
Not only does he "get" isalm, he "gets" the loony left and doesn't back down:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdAm6UY4xOE
and illegal immigration:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQLFfTd2l44
he'll let us keep our guns:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sagvVMfAUa4&mode=related&search=
CAIR reminds me of the so-called Italian American Civil Rights league of the 1970's in New York. It was mob front "Civil Rights Council" that was set up by Joe Colombo to claim that his mobsters were being harassed by the FBI because of their Italian-American ancestry. In time, it became an embarrassment to other mobsters and they ended Colombo and the organization with extreme prejudice. Maybe the same thing will happen to CAIR and Ibby "Pig Eyes" Hooper. It's a Joe Colombo style front organization.
http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:JKgUV2BrF6gJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Colombo+joe+colombo,+italian+american+civil+rights+league&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us
Now Thompson has to inject the word "Jizyah" -- he, or Tancredo, or others. That word, and what it means, has to be introduced into the national consciousness -- and merely using it in a speech, or in speech after speech, and explaining its meaning, will do much to rectify the complete failure of the Bush Administration -- from which all Republican candidates, to be successful, should be distancing themselves as noisily and publicly as posisble -- to educate, to instruct, the public about Islam, and instead to continue nattering on not only, here and there, about how splendid Islam itself is (with only a "handful" --oh, they're a handful all right -- of the "radical wing of the Islamist wing of the extremist wing" -- fill up the page, printer, with more of the same -- of those who have "hijacked a great religion" which is why we are apparently, as long as Bush and Rice and others are in power, condemned to being instructed that we are fighting a "war on terror."
Those candidates for President who demand an end to the "payment of the disguised Jizyah of aid," should explain that the forcible diversion of non-Muslim taxpayers' money, by their own government elites (ignorant, confused, not knowing what or how to deal with Islam, either abroad or within the Western world) , that is the diversion of money from non-Muslim states to Muslim regimes and peoples, is exactly the wrong thing. For that aid simply increases the opportunities for corruption, and corruption, in turn, always leads to those who are not in on the corruption to turn to Islam as their solace, and as the belief-system, the only one possible, to serve as a prism through which to view that corruption, and declare it un-Islamic, to which the only answer is not merely “more honesty” but rather “more Islam.” And the answer – of Hamas, of the Ikhwan in Egypt – of “more Islam” always makes things more dangerous for Infidels, whatever its effect within the states of Dar al-Islam. When that aid from Infidels is not only squandered, pocketed by the Arafats and Mahmoud Abbases, the Mubaraks (father and son) and others in the ruling group, this wins no “hearts and minds” among the population, which sees the corruption, and for that matter, wins no hearts and no minds among the corrupt rulers themselves.
There is no gratitude and there cannot be, given the hostility toward Infidels inculcated by the Total Belief-System of Islam, which divides the world uncompromisingly between Believer and Infidel. And the payment of this Jizyah does two other things. It sets up the idea in the minds of Muslims who receive the aid that it is theirs by right, it is owed to them by the Infidels, and they act according to that belief. Just look at the “Palestinian” Arabs using such absurd terms as “embargo” and “boycott” to describe the refusal of Infidel states to give aid to Hamas, or to a Hamas-linked government. What a peculiar definition – though not too peculiar, apparently, for Western media not to repeat without question such words – of a halt in foreign aid that the Muslim recipients have done nothing to deserve, having been on the permanent UNRWA dole for nearly sixty years, with the roles constantly expanding, and exhibiting that bland assumption that they will always be taken care of by others that comes so naturally, as do those long hours of idleness, for hubble-bubble pipes and dominos and endless hours of television, relieved only by marching around and constantly planning attacks, and sometimes carrying them out, against the perfidious Israelis, who without any aid at all before 1967, and taking in millions of impoverished Jewish refugees, from the Arab lands (more Jews fled Arab lands than the reverse), from Russia, from Ethiopia, and several dozen other countries.
And the payment by Inifidels, the further transfer of wealth beyond the ten trillion dollars paid to OPEC Muslim nations since 1973, has a bad affect on the donors, who have come to act, and apparently to believe, that they simply must continue such payments if at all possible, for it is their duty. The absurdity of this, when Saudi Arabia alone takes in, quite undeservedly, nearly one billion dollars a day, when the money piles up in Kuwait and the Emirates and Qatar, and yet the Muslims lift not a finger to help their fellow Muslims except for payments to suicide bombers, and for every kind of weaponry and propaganda campaigns directed against Israel or other Infideel states, needs to be recognized.
Everyone is waiting for a Presidential candidate to start speaking about such things, truthfully. And if he does so while also distancing himself from Tarbaby Iraq, showing why it makes no sense in the larger scheme of things, in the war of self-defense against the Jihad, such a candidate is likely to be unbeatable.
And should be.
Danger: Let's not start to believe that CAIR's shrinking is some sort of scapegoat for Muslims in America. There are many Islamist organizations springing up. CAIR is but one.
Foehammer:
I was thinking the exact same thing, especially now that the organization is an unindicted co-conspirator. I suspect that they would have already adopted a new organization/new name with same old folks except for the fact that the media has CAIR on their collective speed dials.
Fred refuses to officially announce so he doesn’t have to debate his opponents or participate in the process he is quick to criticize.
Fred refuses to field questions from reporters or even his own supporters.
Karl Rove, who is the mastermind behind the amnesty bill, is the one pulling strings and stiff arming people into showing support for Fred.
Matlin/Carville is sending Thompson to Israel and London this month to pad his resume and make it appear Fred has foreign affairs experience, when in reality, he doesn't.
Fred was for abortion before he was against it depending on who is standing in front of him at the time.
Fred was for McCain/Feingold before he was against it.
Fred, after working hand in hand lobbying with Harold Fickes, a Bill Clinton insider, Fred voted NO to impeach Clinton.
Fred is a globalist.
Fred is a lobbyist.
Fred has never held a leadership role.
Fred is a dirty ol man with a fetish for young girls.
Fred has cancer, is in remission, and could die before the end of one term.
“We can not deport 12 million illegal aliens.” Fred Thompson
To Mr. Thompson
Thank you for your comments re CAIR
I work for the US Government. My specialty is the (1) Arab-Israel Conflict and (2) the Theology of Islam (with a focus on Jihad, Taqiyah and Da'awa, etc).
I just finished a very comprehensive study of Hamas. Using open-source and Law Enforcement Sensitive information, it focuses on 20 major US Islamic organizations & 82 major individuals, with another 125 'secondary' organizations & 225 individuals - all operating here in the US.
The report includes detailed information on who is funding CAIR.
It has gone out to the FBI, the US Treasury, ICE (Immigration Customs & Enforcement), all of the US Attorneys (including the team working on the upcoming Holy Land Foundation case in Texas) and CBP HQ in DC. The response has been very strong - I believe that it will do some good.
Just thought you might like to know that there are others out here that are working hard...to row against the current...just like those who could see the truth in Europe in the 1930's.
Thanks again
Freds comment about cair is a start.
But one thing with me that will take alot to over come is his handling of the Chinagate. Thompson was the senator incharge of the committe investagating Clinton's dealings with China. He gave into the demands of "hurry up and tell us what you found" in 2 weeks time. That's worth 2 strike to me.
The bad news however is that CAIR's officials are still terrorists and are still here in America free whilst they should be sitting in US prisons for conspiracy to commit mass homicides.
"Everyone is waiting for a Presidential candidate to start speaking about such things, truthfully. And if he does so while also distancing himself from Tarbaby Iraq, showing why it makes no sense in the larger scheme of things, in the war of self-defense against the Jihad, such a candidate is likely to be unbeatable."
Here's my situation.
Ron Paul is a candidate that would end the Jizyah, though he doesn't think of it or speak of it that way.
He is also the only candidate that, in my opinion, would deal root financial problems of ours that will make fighting against Jihad difficult in the coming decades. This is a HUGE issue for me. Fiat money breakdown coinciding with well-funded Jihad and the West has another fall of Rome, but this time with barbarians that would stamp the West out, not merely morph it.
He's wrong that the Jihadis wouldn't have attacked us if we had minded our own business, but he's right that they cite our military being in places like Saudi Arabia as a reason for their attacks. He never said that our being in their justified the attacks - that was misleading spin. He *did* suggest that we should weigh the gains of policing the world against the risks and costs.
That makes sense to me. I'm not interested in using the military to protect oil interests, or to protect corrupt shieks overseas, or to try to save people unwilling to leave a cult that dooms their society. The military is tax-funded and should be for protecting us. Not saving crazies from themselves. Saving crazies from themselves *is* better done by setting an strong and good example to emulate. I agree with him on that, too.
I want to know what people here think. I'm willing to be talked out of my Paul support if you make a good case. I want Western Civ to survive.
Get him to support the fair tax and we have a winner here.
Posted by: KAOSKTRL
Before you folks get too excited, just remember that he too is in the pocket of corporate America.
After hearing him speak in a no-nonsense manner, I was interested in his voting record. It seems that Mr. Thompson is not only an attorney, but was a former lobbyist.
Lobbyists representing corporations cater to our puppet politicians and get the votes they WANT via campaign contributions, vacations, perks, etc. The ordinary Joe like you and I mean nothing to our representatives in Washington and we cannot afford to be heard at $25,000.00 a meeting! So, big business wins and we lose (open borders for cheap labor, jobs leaving the country and no control on the cost of medicines, etc.)
Mr. Thompson voted AGAINST elderly being able to buy their prescription drugs from Canada. The pharmaceutical industry didn't want folks to be able to afford to eat. Mr. Thompson along with many others in Washington are in the pocket of the pharmaceutical industry. No chance of any real socialized medicine here then.
Having lived in Europe, I can tell you that it's great not to have to pay to go to the doctors. Not to have paperwork a mile high when you're sick. Not to have to FIGHT with the profitable insurance companies (who have HUGE lobbying firms in Washington) just to get them to pay the bills.
Europe is leaving us in the dust. Will ANY of our candidates do a damn thing to help us? I doubt it.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/22/vietnam.us.reut/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
Vietnam president signs a trade pact with the US.
GEE, did any of you ordinary Joes tell your representatives in Washington that you wanted them to send our jobs to Vietnam?
Vietnam, (China is outsourcing there too now), China, Mexico.
Seems corporate America can line its pockets and the rest of us can go to hell.
Ahh, but there are more jobs being created - according to Washington. Yeah, CRAP jobs. Jobs that pay crap and have no benefits and no security. Man, don't you just want to line up and get a couple of them so you can just make ends meet? Sounds lovely huh?
Still, corporate ceo and his washington puppets will be able to line their pockets nicely and the stock market will soar! Yipee!
When we all get too poor to eat and have to work 2 crap jobs EACH to pay for medical insurance, high deductables, gasoline, food, etc., we can all thank our caring 'patriotic' representatives in Washington.
Of course, they won't bother to take our calls but they WILL send us nicely written standard emails thanking us for our comments.
Our borders opened and the dollar falling, wal-mart is getting expensive.
America....the next sweat factory. I think I may well watch SICKO. Maybe Michael Moore isn't totally off base.
A former Republican.
This isn't the place for this... and you sound like a viral marketer... but...
"Mr. Thompson voted AGAINST elderly being able to buy their prescription drugs from Canada. The pharmaceutical industry didn't want folks to be able to afford to eat. Mr. Thompson along with many others in Washington are in the pocket of the pharmaceutical industry. No chance of any real socialized medicine here then."
Uh, yeah, because socialized medicine is what we're supposed to want?
Not me. No thanks. You can take your giant government bureaucracies and move up to Canada if you like.... oh, wait, they require that you have useful skills.
"America....the next sweat factory. I think I may well watch SICKO. Maybe Michael Moore isn't totally off base.
A former Republican."
Socialist. I don't believe for a moment you are a former Republican.
If you were, you'd have some remnant of consideration for WHY we think the Socialism Moore promotes would destroy us.
Yes, lets have the government working in conjunction with the AMA monopoly working in conjunction with the big Pharm all in total control of our healthcare. What could go wrong with that?
Let's see:
No medical innovation.
Ability to refuse medical care can be used as a political weapon.
High taxes weakening economy further.
And so on and so on.
Getting rid of special government benefits for large corporations and opening up markets is the real solution. If that's not possible, at least what we have is better than socializing things.
See also: Mark Steyn, "America Alone", for how the Big Brother nanny state sucks the life out of a people. Adults who are treated like little coddled children don't grow, don't innovate, don't build healthy economies, and don't reproduce.
Putting them at a MAJOR disadvantage for winning against Jihad.
And hopefully that keeps this on topic enough for me to his 'Post'...