New CAIR Generation

[Soldier4Christ]

Spencer, YAF defy CAIR's legal threat

New York Times best-selling author Robert Spencer received several standing ovations while delivering a speech to the Young America's Foundation (YAF) just one day after the Council on American-Islamic Relations demanded the conservative student group cancel the presentation. CAIR had threatened to sue YAF for hosting Spencer at its annual Conservative Student Conference.



In a letter to Young America's Foundation prior to the conference, CAIR claimed Spencer is "a well-known purveyor of hatred and bigotry against Muslims" and "has a history of making false and defamatory statements." However, YAF refused to comply with CAIR's demand, with spokesman Jason Mattera asserting that the pro-Muslim group's "intimidation tactics and bullying" would have no influence on his organization. (See earlier story)

While introducing Spencer on Thursday afternoon, Mattera accused the Islamic lobbying group of trying to stifle free speech. "CAIR, you need to be reminded that this is America -- not Saudi Arabia," he stated. "And in America we have something called the Bill of Rights. We advise you to review Amendments One -- and Two."

In his speech, Spencer detailed CAIR's ties to the Palestinian terror group Hamas and its efforts to advance "the jihadist agenda." And as to the group's threat of legal action, he said the "bully-boy tactics of the left and the Islamist movement" involve accusing all their critics of hatred and bigotry.

"It's good to see that you all are not intimidated [by CAIR], and I am not intimidated by their threats or troubled by their smears because we all know that we do not advocate hatred or bigotry, but a realistic appraisal of the threat that we face as a nation and that involves, in my view, a realistic assessment of the elements of Islam that are giving rise to violence today."

According to Spencer, CAIR is engaged in a concerted campaign to silence any critical examination of the elements of Islam that "jihadists" are using to justify violence. CAIR, he contends, does not want people to investigate the violence that Islamic texts advocate.

"CAIR is trying to stifle that and to make Muslims into a protected class in the United States," he said in an exclusive interview. "Whether they are doing this by design or whether this is just an unintended by-product of their actions, nonetheless this is what all their actions are tending toward -- that Muslims will be placed above criticism."

And given today's political climate, adds Spencer, that will have the "unfortunate by-product ... of giving Islamic terrorists a free hand to operate unhindered."

[Shammu]

CAIR vs. Robert Spencer
By Jacob Laksin and Jamie Glazov
8/9/2007

It is one of the oddities of American politics that the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) can describe itself as a "civil-liberties group" while crusading to crush the free-speech rights of its critics. But that's exactly what happened last week when CAIR deployed its legal arsenal in a bid to stop author Robert Spencer from speaking at a conference of the Young America's Foundation (YAF).

In a letter to YAF dispatched by its lawyer, former Democratic National Committee staff counsel Joseph E. Sandler, CAIR threatened to "pursue every appropriate legal remedy" if Spencer were not immediately silenced. In the event, the YAF honorably refused to yield. The moral of the story: If CAIR disagrees with what you have to say, it'll fight furiously to deny your right to say it. To heck with civil liberties.

CAIR is not a first-time offender in this regard. Indeed, Spencer is only the most recent target of the organization's ongoing campaign to strangle free debate, especially when it turns on Islamic extremism. Other recipients of CAIR's wrath have included scholar Daniel Pipes, conservative columnist Cal Thomas, talk radio host Michael Graham, venerable news pundit Paul Harvey, National Review magazine, Fox's 24, and Andrew Whitehead, the proprietor of the website Anti-CAIR. In a telling example of CAIR's bullying tactics, Whitehead's dogged criticism of the organization got him slapped with a defamation suit. When CAIR's suit was decisively dismissed last year, the victory of an independent critic against the 32-chapter group, with its war chest filled by millions in petrodollars from Saudi royals and Gulf sheikdoms, had a certain David-vs.-Goliath resonance.

Not that CAIR's zeal to sue critics into submission has waned. Most recently, the organization has channeled its energies into harassing Zachariah Anani, a Lebanese Islamist turned Christian activist. For the intolerable offense of speaking out against militant Islam, CAIR's Canadian chapter has worked to have Anani, a Canadian citizen, brought up on hate-crimes charges. Offend CAIR's delicate sensibilities and you, too, can expect to hear from their lawyer.

It's bad enough that CAIR has appointed itself unofficial censor of debate about Islam. Equally galling is that the group routinely engages in the kind of sleazy defamation it so righteously claims to detest. In its letter to YAF last week, CAIR smeared Spencer as a "a well-known purveyor of hatred and bigotry against Muslims." If that's true, though, the organization might have been expected to provide some basis for this ostensibly "well-known" charge. CAIR offered not a shred of supporting evidence.

That is because no such evidence exists. Spencer, who heads the site JihadWatch.org and is the author of a recent biography of the prophet Muhammed, The Truth About Muhammed, is a reputable scholar who draws on Islamic sources to substantiate his work. Contrary to CAIR's objections, Spencer does not engage in theological polemics. He simply reveals what Islamic sources say.

Which calls forth the question: Why would a group that, by its own account, has no truck with Islamic militants, take such heated issue with an authority on Islam who is guilty of nothing more than highlighting those features of that religion that inspire and sanction Islamic terror? If CAIR was genuinely opposed to Islamic terror and wanted to bring Islam into the modern and democratic world, why wouldn't it embrace individuals such as Spencer? After all, Spencer's work equips Muslim moderates and reformers with the knowledge they need to confront the Islamic extremists in their midst. Armed with that knowledge, Islamic reformers who undertake the monumental challenge of liberalizing Islam stand a much better chance. As Spencer himself says: "You can't reform what you won't admit needs reforming."

In the end, it is clear that what CAIR calls "bigotry" and "Islamophobia" is in fact a perfectly defensible historical argument, advanced by Spencer and others, that the roots of modern jihad terrorism can be found in classic Islamic theology. This is a matter of fact, not prejudice: if it is true, policymakers should take it into account, no matter how inconvenient it may be. Unless one thinks, as CAIR evidently does, that any critical analysis of Islam is a form of actionable hatred, the notion that Spencer is a bigot who must be drummed out of polite society looks like what it really is: the intellectually empty bullying of an extremist fringe.

Here one gets closer to the crux of last week's contretemps. Mention of its links to Islamic extremist groups invites effusive indignation from CAIR, but a review of the group's record leaves little room for ambiguity. CAIR's forerunner, the Islamic Association of Palestine, was considered by the FBI a front group for Hamas. CAIR's founder, Nihad Awad is on record supporting Hamas -- and, one may thus reasonably conclude, its terrorist attacks against Israelis. To dismiss these facts as ancient history is to ignore more recent evidence. This June, for instance, federal prosecutors named CAIR an "unindicted co-conspirator" for allegedly aiding an Islamic charity that was busy providing support to Hamas. Given these connections to a terrorist movement committed to the mass murder of Jews, for CAIR to accuse anyone of religious "bigotry" is chutzpah on a breathtaking scale.

That CAIR met with defiance last week is heartening. Still, no one should think that the organization has been chastened. If the past is any guide, those who do not mouth politically correct platitudes about Islamic terrorism will find themselves at the center of CAIR's litigious attentions. At which point, one hopes that they will remind the organization that those who stifle reasonable opposition and ally themselves with actual extremists don't defend civil liberties. They endanger them.

CAIR vs. Robert Spencer

[Shammu]

CAIR Thugs on Islamophobia Patrol: Coming Soon to Your Neighborhood?

By Patrick Poole

Three officials of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in Ohio admit to going unannounced to a man’s home to confront him over a bumper sticker on his car – a testament, they claim, of their tolerance and moderation. The incident occurred last year, but the CAIR trio involved – Ahmad Al-Akhras, CAIR national vice chairman, Asma Mobin-Uddin, CAIR-Ohio president, and Abukar Arman, CAIR-OH board member – have recently recounted this incident to the local establishment media as an example of how they “invite dialogue”.

Others, however, believe the incident is additional proof that CAIR regularly resorts to threats, intimidation and demonization to silence its critics. Earlier this month, attorneys for CAIR sent a letter threatening legal action against the Young Americans Foundation if they allowed NY Times bestselling author and JihadWatch director, Robert Spencer, to speak at their conference on “The Truth of the Council on American-Islamic Relations”. This thuggery is reminiscent of CAIR’s 2004 lawsuit against independent journalist Andrew Whitehead of Anti-CAIR, a suit which was dropped by CAIR in order to avoid responding to required interrogatories about its historic ties to HAMAS and role in terror financing.

The CAIR-OH incident is without known precedent, harassing a private citizen at his home because CAIR officials did not like one of his bumper stickers. One of the trio, Abukar Arman, has described how they set upon their unwitting victim:

Several months ago, a non-Muslim fellow in the inter-faith community brought to the attention of CAIR-Ohio a picture of his neighbor’s truck with a bumper sticker that read “Jesus loves you, and Allah wants you dead”.

Some of us thought that the appropriate thing to do was to get media involved and use this truck owner as a poster-child of the prevalent assertive ignorance that is widening the post 9/11 political divide between Muslims and non-Muslims. Others, on the other hand, saw this as an opportunity for human contact, discourse, and to build bridges of understanding.

The latter opinion prevailed.

Therefore, I had the privilege of being one of three Muslims (2 male and a female with Islamic veil) who paid a neighborly visit to the truck owner.

What ensued was an interesting discourse that I found to be very educational (its final outcome notwithstanding).

The truck owner was a former Marine officer who served in Somalia and Iraq. Initially, as he opened the door, he was visibly apprehensive (and rightfully so).

We greeted him and introduced ourselves. We reassured him that we were only interested to get to know him, address any questions or perhaps grievance that he may have, and to give him a chance to meet and dialogue with ordinary Muslims.

Long story short: in a conversation that took place right outside his door and lasted for over an hour, the former Marine talked about how he was very suspicious of Muslims and how, both in Somalia and in Iraq, he and other Americans who “came to help these two countries had their hands bitten…”  He talked about how he did not believe there were any moderate Muslims and how organizations such as CAIR were deliberately silent about condemning terrorism. He also talked about being alarmed by the growing Muslim population in Central Ohio and how they may be hiding a terrorist who has in his possession a “briefcase nuke”. He said, “I don’t want to see a giant mushroom in Columbus” [I will come back to this point].

Lastly, he talked about his career in the private sector…how he worked as a “corporate anti-terrorism expert” and a “consultant to a numerous multinational corporations”...

Arman admits that the original intention was to make this two-war veteran a “poster-child” of Islamophobia and publicly to vilify the man by enlisting the help of the local media – all because they didn’t agree with the sentiments the man expressed via a bumper sticker. He also admits that the man was visibly leery of his late-night visitors showing up on his doorstep, what they probably would argue is proof of his Islamophobia.

What makes this situation and Abukar Arman’s comments even more appalling is that the former Marine had served in the UN-backed peacekeeping mission in Somalia, Arman’s native country, to protect the people there from the warlords that had taken over the country and who were starving the people by the tens of thousands. Additionally, the former Marine had been reported to CAIR by one of his neighbors who was a friend to the CAIR officials in the “inter-faith community”.

But imagine if the roles in this case were reversed: imagine if Robert Spencer, Andrew Whitehead and myself showed up on the doorstep of any of these CAIR officials - unwelcome and unannounced - to confront them about their repeated statements of support for extremism, bigotry and terrorism: Ahmad Al-Akhras for his public defense of convicted terrorists, including his “long-time friend”, convicted and deported Palestinian Islamic Jihad operative Fawaz Damra; Asma Mobin-Uddin for promoting several hate sites with rabidly anti-Jewish content on her own personal website; or Abukar Arman, for his vocal public support of HAMAS, Hezbollah and the al-Qaeda-backed Islamic Courts Union. Would they see such action as “inviting dialogue”, or would they instead denounce such an “invitation to dialogue” in a flurry of CAIR press releases as a “hate crime” that would merit restraining orders and warrant federal criminal charges?

With their opponents on the working end of this tactic of cultural terrorism, however, they enthusiastically recount this act of intimidation, attempting to paint their “neighborly visit” as a peaceful effort to “engage” non-Muslims. The establishment media has been quick to pick up this twisted narrative. Earlier this month, in a front page Columbus Dispatch article on Mr. Arman, Mobin-Uddin cites this incident of confronting a man at his home as evidence of Mr. Arman’s “kindness”:

"Mr. Arman is a man of the greatest integrity, kindness and responsibility," Mobin-Uddin said.

She recalled a visit with Arman a few years ago to the home of an ex-Marine who displayed an anti-Muslim bumper sticker.

"We stood and talked with the man on his doorstep for an hour and a half. Mr. Arman never raised his voice. He told the man, 'You know, sir, I have four children. I've lived in this country for decades. If I knew someone who was going to put a bomb somewhere, I would be the first one to jump on them.' "

This isn’t the first time, however, that the Columbus Dispatch has pulled out this story as an example of the tolerance and moderation of the CAIR trio and their cohorts.

In an Orwellian-titled article this past April, “Changing Hearts, Minds”, Ahmad Al-Akhras gave his analysis of his and his comrades’ late-night “invitation to dialogue” to an attentive Dispatch reporter:

Changing minds isn’t always as pleasant as sharing some snacks and laughs.

Last year, Ahmad Al-Akhras and two other community leaders knocked on the door of a man whose car bore a bumper sticker that read: "Jesus loves you. Allah wants you dead."

Al-Akhras is president of the Islamic Foundation of Central Ohio and is the vice chairman of the national Council on American-Islamic Relations.

They spoke to the ex-Marine for more than an hour at his doorstep, telling him they had 11 children between them and cared strongly about America’s safety, Al-Akhras said.

"More than 95 percent of the time, we agree on things," Al-Akhras said of Muslims and non-Muslims.

He isn’t sure that visit did any good.

It should be evident that going to a man’s home, particularly someone entirely unknown to you, to confront them about the content of their bumper stickers is not an invitation to dialogue, but jackboot thuggery reminiscent of the Nazi SA Storm troopers. One of them admits that rather than painting a symbol on the man’s house or business to show their disapproval for his religious statements (much as the SA would mark Jewish homes or businesses with a Star of David and the word “Juden”), they considered calling in the media to condemn this two-war Marine veteran and expose him to public scorn all because they didn’t like his bumper sticker.

CAIR has repeatedly demonstrated that their methodology and discourse must rely on increasingly shrill rhetoric to get public attention and publicly attacking anyone who questions their troubling ideology. Nor has CAIR ever hesitated to inflame a situation to further its own agenda to the detriment of the rest of the community, Muslim and non-Muslim alike. As their own supposed constituency continues to abandon CAIR, such now that their membership is less than two thousand nationwide, CAIR will need to resort to more confrontational and escalating tactics to keep the establishment media’s attention in order to disseminate their message of hate, alienation and conflict.

CAIR’s Islamophobia patrols: coming soon to a neighborhood near you.

CAIR Thugs on Islamophobia Patrol: Coming Soon to Your Neighborhood?

[Shammu]

Notice that a neighbor of his called CAIR and put them on it. The bumper sticker stated:

"Jesus loves you, and Allah wants you dead"

It should also include citations that prove its accuracy............

Jesus loves you (John 3:16), and Allah wants you dead (Sura 9:29)

I think I'll have one made up. for my car.

[Soldier4Christ]

CAIR's Ties to Hamas Confirmed Again by U.S. Government...

On Tuesday, the prosecution in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) filed its motion in opposition to the amicus brief filed by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

In addition to picking apart the arguments laid out in CAIR’s brief piece by piece, the government set an important precedent, officially and definitively linking CAIR to Hamas, writing:

    In the instant case, striking CAIR’s name from the attachment to the Trial Brief will not prevent its conspiratorial involvement with HLF, and others affiliated with Hamas, from becoming a matter of public record. That has already occurred as a consequence of the presentation of evidence at trial. (emphasis added)

The government also argues some legal basics, that CAIR has no standing to petition its removal from the list of unindicted co-conspirators since the list is not directly pertinent to the “actual, ongoing controversy” of HLF’s criminal trial, basically that, by filing the brief, CAIR has not acted as a “friend of the court,” but rather only out of self interest, and that, in the brief, CAIR has failed to show any injury as a result of its inclusion on the list of unindicted co-conspirators.

In arguing lack of injury, the prosecution makes similar points outlined in the August 21st blog post by the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), CAIR’s Reputation and Incredibly Fluctuating Membership Roll. The motion states:

    As support for its alleged injury-in-fact, CAIR provided this Court with data solely from a time period prior to the Government’s submission of its Trial Brief, a period when the alleged improper disclosure could not have affected such membership. CAIR alleges that the “negative reaction by the American public can be seen in the decline of membership rates and donations resulting from the government’s publicizing of CAIR as an unindicted coconspirator” (Amicus Br. at 10); that “the donations that they rely on for funding have suffered since the government named them as an unindicted coconspirator”( Amicus Br. at 38); and that “the government’s labeling of them as an unindicted co-conspirator has chilled their associational activity” (Amicus Br. at 51-52). In support for these assertions, however, CAIR relies upon a June 2007 article in the Washington Times, which revealed (by reviewing CAIR’s tax filings) that CAIR’s membership declined 90 percent from 2001 through 2006, down from 29,000 members to less than 1,700. ... The article provides no further factual information regarding CAIR’s declining membership since 2006. Ironically, the very same article, upon which it now relies, was publicly discredited by CAIR executive director, Nihad Awad, who claimed the article was “false and misleading."

Additionally, the motion argues that the relationship between CAIR, HLF and the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP) is already public information, as described in a footnote on page 12:

    The role of CAIR founder Omar Ahmad on the Palestine Committee, and the presence of Ahmad and Nihad Awad at the 1993 meeting of the Palestine Committee in Philadelphia, were described during the public trial of Muhammad Hamid Khalil Salah and Abdelhaleem Hasan Abdelraziq Ashqar in November 1996 (sic). See United States v. Salah, et al., Case No. 03-978 (N.D. Ill. 2006). During that trial, defendant Ashqar was represented by William B. Moffitt, author of CAIR’s current motion for leave to file an amicus brief.

The government also argues that CAIR’s amicus brief should be denied because it lacks both timeliness and usefulness, and, as perhaps a final nail in the coffin, that the brief is wholly irrelevant since both testimony and documentary evidence admitted at trial conclusively demonstrate the conspiratorial relationship between CAIR and HLF.

[Soldier4Christ]

Yet our government continues to allow cair access to the White House.

[Soldier4Christ]

CAIR Wants Detroit to Be Muslim Sanctuary City...

Immigration issue heats up in Hamtramck

City wants to forbid police from questioning status

Michigan's most diverse city is wading into the emotional national debate about what role local police should play in enforcing federal immigration laws.

As Congress mulls what to do with those illegally in the country, Hamtramck officials are preparing an ordinance to forbid police and other city officials from asking anyone about their immigration status unless it's relevant to investigations or during arrest bookings.

Supporters say Hamtramck, which is so diverse 26 languages are spoken in its schools, is no stranger to culture clashes and the law would provide a safeguard for immigrants wary about cooperating with police if they fear deportation or harassment.

"We don't want (local public officials) to go beyond their call of duty to carry out responsibilities of federal immigration officials," said Anthony Mosko, of the Detroit faith-based organization Metropolitan Organizing Strategy Enabling Strength. "There's no way to know that just by looking at somebody if they are documented or undocumented."

Such logic outrages foes who say police are sworn to enforce all laws. The proposal, which council members could consider next month, is modeled after an ordinance Detroit adopted in May and is similar to ones in Los Angeles and Chicago. But it goes against a national trend of municipalities teaming with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to allow cops to identify and report undocumented residents.

"If a police officer snatches someone who is an immigrant from the Mideast or some country that we have known terrorists coming from and they have no papers or documentation, (they) should ascertain who this person is and if they are here legally," said Fred Timpner, director of the Michigan Association of Police.

It's an issue that has resonance in Metro Detroit, where the number of foreign-born residents has spiked 60,000 to 387,000 in the past six years, according to federal statistics.

Ahmed Ismail, 17, was born a U.S. citizen and has lived in Hamtramck all his life with his parents who emigrated from Yemen. But still, he said he's been stopped by police and asked to prove his citizenship.

"It's not fair," said the senior at Frontier International Academy, a charter school in Hamtramck.

A 42-year-old shop owner from Palestine, who asked not to be named, said he is reluctant to approach Hamtramck police after they gave him no assistance last year when he reported his U.S. passport stolen.

"They try to put you down It's like they're dealing with animals," he said. "A citizen, when they come to the police, should feel safe, not like they're hassling the police."

The debate follows occasional incidents in Hamtramck, a 2.2 square-mile city of 23,000 residents that is surrounded by Detroit and is an historic destination for new immigrants.

In 2004, the city was thrust into the national spotlight when the City Council initially refused a mosque's request to broadcast a call-to-prayer before repealing a noise ordinance that forbid it. The city was sued after a 1999 election on allegations officials prevented 40 voters of Arab and Bengali descent from voting.

"Due to the history of that situation happening in Hamtramck, it's good to have such an ordinance on the books," said Dawud Walid, director of the Michigan branch of the Council on American Islamic Relations that supports the measure.

Council members may review the immigration ordinance for months before a vote, said Councilman Robert Zwolak who is sponsoring it. Hamtramck's city attorney is drafting an ordinance based on one approved in Detroit that prohibits profiling, but also forbids inquiring about immigration status unless people are suspects for "criminal offenses" or police are assisting federal immigration officers.

Councilman Abdul Algazali, who is a chiropractor, said the ordinance would not only improve police relations but help welcome foreign-born residents. "We want to be immigrant friendly."

Police Chief James Doyle said officers aren't harassing anyone. He's refusing comment until he sees the proposal, but said anything to "encourage people to work with police (is) positive."

Sometimes, that's an issue for immigrants. And opponents say the proposal would complement due process laws that forbid police from asking questions irrelevant to investigations.

Essam Alsaidi, a Yemeni owner of an electronics shop on Caniff, said police didn't ask about his immigration status when he reported a break-in two months ago, but offered little help.

"They speak to you real tough," he said. "I almost said, 'OK, I did it.' I didn't know what I did wrong."

Rakia Quazi, a Bangladeshi who has lived in Hamtramck for 11 years, said people are sometimes nervous about approaching police, but she said she has never been unfairly drilled about her immigration status.

Zwolak said his neighbors saw a house broken into recently but were afraid to report it to police. He is pushing the measure with Algazali.

"We want to make our immigrants here feel more at ease and more free to acknowledge crime," said Zwolak.

The move comes, however, as communities throughout the United States are beefing up laws to allow local police to enforce immigration laws.

Authorities in Prince William County in Virginia agreed in July to enter a deal with the Department of Homeland Security to allow police to enforce immigration. More than 60 state and local police agencies around the country have also signed up to have their officers trained. More than 22,000 immigrants have been identified for possible deportation through the program.

Councilman Alan Shulgon cast the lone opposing vote last month to researching the Hamtramck law.

"Why do we keep expanding on the rights of people when the laws are already spelled out?" he said. "If (police) come into an investigation and they do find that somebody is breaking the law then they should take action."

[Shammu]

CAIR is using the same tactics, that the muslims used in England.  Course we know the shape England is in now.

[Soldier4Christ]

New CAIR Generation

Much has been written about the Council on American Islamic Relation’s (CAIR’s) connection to the terror group Hamas and Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook. Much has also been said about CAIR’s statements in favor of Hamas and calls for the Quran to replace America’s Constitution. Most of these things centered around CAIR’s national leadership – a cadre of radicals that had previously been involved in CAIR’s parent organization, the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP) – namely CAIR’s Executive Director Nihad Awad, CAIR’s former Chairman Omar Ahmad, and CAIR’s Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper.

While two of the three individuals mentioned still remain in the spotlight [Omar Ahmad has been replaced as Chairman by Parvez Ahmed], a new crop of young CAIR radicals has made its way up the ranks. They arise out of the local chapters that CAIR created.

One of CAIR’s main satellite chapters is the one based in Anaheim, California. It goes by the name CAIR-Los Angeles or simply as CAIR-California. It was started in 1996, just two years after the national office was founded with seed money from the Hamas charity, the Holy Land Foundation (HLF). It is apparent from the actions of the group’s leaders that they are attempting to rival the extremism of their CAIR elders in Washington, D.C.

Hussam Ayloush is the Executive Director of CAIR-California. In the past, he has praised Wagdy Ghoneim – a Hamas operative who has called for attacks on Jews – as a “highly regarded scholar.” Soon after Ayloush’s quote, Ghoneim was deported from the United States to Qatar. Last month, Ayloush posted to his website a threat against President Bush, which was authored by an enemy combatant, Sami Al-ubgone86, who is currently being held in Guantanamo Bay prison. It reads, “America, you ride on the backs of orphans, and terrorize them daily. Bush, beware.”

Affad Shaikh is the Civil Rights Coordinator of CAIR-California. In August, he labeled Senator Joe Lieberman, former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, Vice President Dick Cheney, and Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly and Neil Cavuto, amongst others, “Extremist Right Wing Nut cases.” Earlier this month, Shaikh, borrowing terminology from Al-Qaeda, referred to Americans in Iraq as “Crusaders.”

Asma Ahmad is the managing editor of CAIR-California’s monthly tabloid, In Focus. Under her leadership, in October of 2006, In Focus published an article lauding Hezbollah and its leader Hassan Nasrallah. The piece read, “t was undoubtedly the epic heroism of the resistance fighters that dealt the humiliating defeat to the Anglo-American-backed Zionist forces, but such heroism would not have been possible without the larger-than-life leader to inspire, direct and focus it. Nasrallah’s leadership in war and later has made him into an emblematic figure of long-cherished hope not only to a majority of the Lebanese people but also to the Arab nation as a whole and indeed to the Muslim world.”

Another CAIR chapter that is of much value and has received much support from the national D.C. headquarters resides in Pembroke Pines, Florida. One of the leaders of the group is Ahmed Bedier. Bedier is the Communications Director of CAIR-Florida and the Executive Director of CAIR’s smaller Tampa Bay office.

In December of 2005, on a local Tampa television show, when asked if he believed it was “immoral” for Sami Al-Arian to have been involved in Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), Bedier stated that “before 1995, there was nothing immoral about it.” Last month, Bedier defended Ahmed Abda Sherf Mohamed and Yousef Samir Megahed, two individuals arrested near a South Carolina Naval base and charged with possession of explosive devices (pipe bombs), calling the charges an “overreaction” and stating, “Obviously their heritage and background is playing a major role in blowing this out of proportion.”

The Chicago chapter of CAIR is also one of the group’s prized possessions. Leading the organization as its Executive Director is Ahmed Rehab. In the past, Rehab has vilified Jews, repeating the anti-Semitic conspiracy that there is a “Jewish control over the media” and saying that “Jewish film producers... predate on weak minorities by default.” Recently, both he and CAIR-Chicago’s Civil Rights Coordinator, Christina Abraham, went out of their way to support Hamas operative Mohammad Salah. In July of 2007, after Salah was sentenced to 21 months in prison, Abraham stated, “It’s a sad day for the Muslim community.”

Of course, these three CAIR chapters are not the only ones to house extremists. In fact, there are over 30 (chapters). They are just a taste of the future radical Muslim leadership in America, if our government does not take the necessary steps to shut CAIR down.

This past July, a trial began in Dallas, Texas which named CAIR as an “Unindicted Co-conspirator” in the raising of millions of dollars for Hamas via HLF. How long will the United States wait, before the “unindicted” part of the label is removed from CAIR’s legal status? And how long before CAIR’s new threats and rhetoric become a rallying cry for jihad and the initiation to a violent reality?

[nChrist]

Bluntly and simply, I'll simply say that CAIR is the devil working. After all, anything that stands in the way of a one-world religion from the devil must be disposed of.

[Shammu]

CAIR: Civil rights advocates or radical Islamists?
Muslim lobby group has troubling record of terror arrests
Posted: December 1, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern


© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

The Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, says its aim is "to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding."

Maybe so, but federal prosecutors have also named the group an "unindicted co-conspirator" in a plot to fund the terrorist group Hamas, several of CAIR's leaders have been convicted on terror charges since 9/11, and one of its founders has reportedly declared that America should be governed by Islamic sharia law.

Adding to the controversy over the high-profile lobby group, CAIR is now being sued by radio talk show host Michael Savage over CAIR's attacks on him and what he says constitute illegal use of his broadcasts.

The lawsuit alleges CAIR is a "political vehicle of international terrorism" that seeks to do "material harm to those voices who speak against the violent agenda of CAIR's clients." Filed in U.S. District Court in California, the suit seeks damages equal to the ongoing donations from CAIR supporters "who expect CAIR to act in this manner in exchange for continuing financial support" as well as "actual damages according to proof."

The focal point of the lawsuit is a series of audio clips CAIR has been using in its promotions and fundraisings.

Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for CAIR, told WND the group would not comment on the action until the document had been reviewed.

Although the news media generally have portrayed CAIR as a legitimate civil rights group, the organization has had a hard time maintaining its squeaky clean image.

For instance, as WND has reported, Ghassan Elashi, a board member of CAIR's Texas chapter, was convicted in 2005 of channeling funds to a high-ranking official of Hamas – which the U.S. government officially designates a terrorist organization.

As WND reported in October 2006, Elashi was sentenced to nearly seven years in prison for financial ties to a high-ranking Hamas terrorist and for making illegal computer exports to countries that back terrorism.

Other CAIR figures convicted since 9-11 are Randall Todd "Ismail" Royer, a former communications specialist and civil rights coordinator, and Bassem Khafagi, former director of community relations.

Royer was sentenced to 20 years in prison on charges he trained in Virginia for holy war against the United States and sent several members to Pakistan to join Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Kashmiri terrorist group with reported ties to al-Qaida.

In a plea bargain, Royer claimed he never intended to hurt anyone but admitted he organized the holy warriors after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the U.S.

After his arrest, Royer sought legal counsel from Hamas lawyer Stanley Cohen, who said after 9-11 he would consider serving as a defense lawyer for Osama bin Laden if the al-Qaida leader were captured.

Khafagi was arrested in January 2003 while serving with CAIR and convicted on fraud and terrorism charges.

Current CAIR leaders also have made statements in support of Hamas and the domination of the U.S. by Islam.

As WorldNetDaily reported, CAIR's chairman of the board, Omar Ahmad, was cited by a California newspaper in 1998 declaring the Quran should be America's highest authority.

He also was reported to have said Islam is not in America to be equal to any other religion but to be dominant.

Just this past June, CAIR itself was named, along with two other prominent U.S. Islamic groups, as an "unindicted co-conspirator" in a plot to fund Hamas. Federal prosecutors also cited the Islamic Society of North America and the North American Islamic Trust as participants in a plot with five officials of the defunct Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development.

CAIR is a spinoff of the defunct Islamic Association for Palestine, launched by Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook and former university professor Sami al-Arian, who pleaded guilty last year to conspiracy to provide services to Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

Last March, the House Republican Conference urged House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to cancel an event hosted on Capitol Hill by CAIR, calling the group "terrorist apologists."

And the group's regular meetings with the Justice Department and FBI have prompted complaints from case agents, who say the bureau rarely can make a move in the Muslim community without first consulting with CAIR, which sits on its advisory board.

CAIR has even conducted "sensitivity" and cultural training with federal agencies such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement and with the military. In June of last year, a senior Department of Homeland Security official from Washington guided CAIR officials on a behind-the-scenes tour of Customs screening operations at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport in response to CAIR complaints that Muslim travelers were being unfairly delayed as they entered the U.S. from abroad.

Last year, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., withdrew an award she gave to a local CAIR official, saying she was concerned about some statements by CAIR leaders.

Savage's lawsuit follows a CAIR campaign to influence advertisers to abandon the popular talker's program. CAIR's recent announcement said OfficeMax, a leading office products retailer, had joined "a growing list of companies" withdrawing advertising from Savage's program because of his opinions regarding Islam.

That prompted the group ACT for America to launch an alert suggesting people call OfficeMax to encourage the company to reverse its decision.

"Call the OfficeMax office headquarters … and when you get an operator, in a polite but firm manner, tell the operator you have heard about the company's decision to stop advertising on the Michael Savage program because of the pressure from CAIR. Tell them you will no longer shop at OfficeMax until OfficeMax reverses this ill-advised decision," the advisory said.

"If CAIR can succeed in this effort to silence Michael Savage, consider the chilling effect this will have on every talk radio host in America," wrote American Congress for Truth founder Brigitte Gabriel in the alert.

[Soldier4Christ]

CAIR's Islamist quizzers
featured at prez debates 
Activists posing as ordinary citizens
influencing national security dialogue

Radical Islamist groups are planting activists posing as ordinary Muslim Americans to ask candidates questions at the presidential debates.

Most recently, the controversial Council on American-Islamic Relations, several of whose leaders have been prosecuted on terror-related charges, sent the executive director of its Chicago chapter to take part in the Democratic presidential debate in Des Moines, Iowa, which was supposed to be an opportunity for "ordinary people" to ply candidates with questions.

At Saturday's debate, aired on C-Span, CAIR-Chicago Executive Director Ahmed Rehab stood up and asked Sen. John Edwards if he would help Muslims fight "prejudice" and other "abuses" such as hate crimes.

"It seems we're facing a culture of fear-mongering," Rehab complained.

"Senator, in the '60s, Malcolm and Martin gave up their lives fighting for justice for all," he added. "The civil rights movement is not over. It's not done yet. We're still fighting.

"Senator," he continued, "we would like to know if you will fight with us if elected president."

A number of Muslim activists around Rehab erupted into applause and cheers.

"You've got some fans," Edwards remarked, before vowing to end "profiling" of and "spying" on Muslim terrorist suspects. He also promised to "close Guantanamo" and stop the "torture" of terrorist detainees.

Despite Rehab's assertion that Muslims are victims of hate crimes and other abuses on a "regular basis," the FBI last month released 2006 data showing anti-Islamic crimes have fallen 68 percent since 2001, and represent just 11 percent of all religiously motivated attacks. According to a report in Investor's Business Daily, the overwhelming majority of such crimes – 66 percent – target Jews.

Also, at last month's Republican debate in St. Petersburg, Fla., a former CAIR intern was selected by host CNN to challenge GOP presidential hopefuls about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and complain about the anger they've created in the Muslim world.

Wearing a hijab, Yasmin Elhady complained they've created anger in the Muslim world. "My question has to do with the current crisis in Iraq, as well as the U.S. efforts in Afghanistan," she said.

"After living abroad personally in the Middle East for a year, I realized just how much damage the Iraq war and the perception of invasion has done to the image of America," Elhady added. "What would you do as president to repair the image of America in the eyes of the Muslim world?"

CNN, which claimed to pick questioners at random from a pool of "undecided voters," did not cite Elhady's activist background with CAIR. The network simply identified her as "Yasmin from Huntsville, Ala." (She actually lives in Los Angeles, where she attends college at UCLA.)

Federal prosecutors have named CAIR as an unindicted co-conspirator in an ongoing terror fund-raising case. Moreover, as WND first reported, no fewer than 14 CAIR officials – including the Washington-based group's founder and its executive director – have either been convicted or named in terrorism investigations.

Earlier, at CNN's Democratic debate in Las Vegas, another Muslim activist associated with CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood was handed the microphone.

Again, CNN failed to identify him as anything but an average American Muslim.

"Our next questioner is – Khalid Khan, if you would please stand for a moment," CNN host Suzanne Malveaux said. "You and I spoke very briefly, and you said you have some concerns about racial profiling."

"Yes, I do," Khan said, sternly. "I am an American citizen and have been profiled all the time at the airport. Since 9/11, hundreds of thousands of Americans have been profiled. And, you know, it is like harassment."

Edwards, who fielded the question first, responded that the Patriot Act needs to be "dramatically changed," to which Khan nodded in agreement.

But Khan, an immigrant from Pakistan, is no ordinary American citizen. He's president of the Islamic Society of Nevada, which has its roots with the radical Muslim Student Association. MSA, which was founded by members of the notorious Muslim Brotherhood, is the forerunner of the Islamic Society of North America, an unindicted co-conspirator in the same terror case with CAIR.

Khan runs the largest mosque in Las Vegas, and hired its controversial imam, Aslam Abdullah, former vice chairman of MPAC in Los Angeles.

In June 2004, Abdullah, who heads an Islamic "seminary" in Pakistan, accused President Bush of engaging in "a religious and racist agenda and prejudice against Islam, Muslims and Arabs." He also has likened Marines in Iraq to the 9/11 terrorists, and publicly questioned whether videotapes showing Osama bin Laden gloating over the attacks were authentic.

Abdullah claims to be moderate, even "progressive," but terror expert Steve Emerson says he is in fact an Islamic extremist.

"The record of Aslam Abdullah's comments during the past few years demonstrates an ideology of militant Islamic extremism," Emerson said. "Pretending to be moderate, his radical agenda typifies the deception of groups that falsely assert to be non-extremist."

Khan, who runs several businesses registered at his home address in Henderson, Nev., had his access badge revoked in 2004 by officials at McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas.

The FBI suspects several of the 9/11 hijackers, who met in Vegas before the attacks, may have visited Khan's mosque, Jamia Masjid. The mosque's website links to CAIR's website.

[Soldier4Christ]

Lawsuit seeks source of CAIR funding 
Construction dispute discovery targeting group's financial records

A Christian minister suing to halt the planned construction of a huge Florida mosque says he hopes to gain access to previously undisclosed financial information of the controversial Council on American-Islamic Relations, which though nonprofit has not disclosed complete directories of its staff or advisory boards and has refused to make its federal tax filings readily available to the public.

CAIR describes itself as "a Muslim civil liberties and advocacy group," whose vision is "to promote justice and mutual understanding" based on three goals – "enhancing understanding of Islam, promoting justice and empowering American Muslims."

But U.S. Rep. Sue Myrick, R-N.C., co-founder of the House Anti-Terrorism/Jihad Caucus, says: "Groups like CAIR have a proven record of senior officials being indicted and either imprisoned or deported from the United States." And as WND recently reported, one FBI veteran familiar with cases involving CAIR describes the organization's offices as "a turnstile for terrorists and their supporters."

Most recently, CAIR has been sued by radio talk show host Michael Savage, whose complaint describes the group as a "vehicle of international terrorism."

Now a Christian pastor in Pompano Beach, Fla., has filed a lawsuit to halt construction of a new mosque in a predominantly black neighborhood, a project planned by a local Islamic Center whose work is being supported by CAIR. The lawsuit may be used to access CAIR's financial records.

Rev. O'Neal Dozier, a former NFL player who now is minister at  the Worldwide Christian Center, a church attended by about 600, told WND his lawsuit is over the plans for a nearly 30,000-square foot mosque in his church's neighborhood.

"What we're looking at now is that we have a hearing coming up in January of 2008," he said. "Of course, this hearing is on a motion by the Islamic Center and CAIR to dismiss our case. That's what they're trying to do.

"What we're trying to do right now, is we need to come up with the funds to do an adequate discovery," he said. "We need to do a very good one, depose all of the various persons on the other side, get all of the pertinent information, get their financial affidavits. We want to get copies of their books. We want to be able to get into their bank accounts."

He said the mosque in question, with a membership he estimated in the dozens, already has a facility in Pompano Beach, but the CAIR leaders say it is too small. They say they need the nearly 30,000-square foot facility on land near the Worldwide Christian Center, in the heart of a financially struggling neighborhood of mostly black residents.

Dozier charges that the only reason CAIR needs such a facility is for recruitment of membership into a cadre of citizens who share a hatred of whites and the U.S. government.

"In this area it would be a bad area to have a mosque, because they would have the potential of breeding terrorists," Dozier told WND. "I know them (the community members) well. Many of them are angry. They feel like they've been left out. They're angry at the government. Angry at the white man. It's just a terrible situation if they were to come in here …"

The lawsuit names as defendants the local Islamic Center, CAIR and CAIR Florida Inc.

The city has approved a zoning change to allow the behemoth to be constructed in the neighborhood already served by the Worldwide Christian Center as well as Antioch Missionary Baptist Church.

Islamic leaders have told reporters the issue is nothing more than a difference over religion, a charge that Dozier denies.

"The press wants to make this story something else other than what it is," he said. "This is a homeland security issue."

He told WND the continuation of the case depends on the success of the depositions that need to be done. "We're alleging that the Islamic Center of South Florida and CAIR national and CAIR-Florida all have ties to terrorist groups around the world."

He said he is convinced the documentation he plans to uncover as part of the lawsuit's discovery process will support that.

Dozier, who served on advisory committees for former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, resigned another state position because of publicity over the lawsuit and his concerns over the mosque.

"The only reason I could think of [for building such a large mosque] is for recruitment purposes. They want to fill the mosque with angry black people," Dozier told WND.

That idea was more or less confirmed by Altaf Ali of CAIR, who told local reporters, "They picked that spot because they were sympathetic to the black struggle and believed the feelings were mutual, especially since the persecution after 9/11."

The Islamic center's imam, Hassan Sabri, "has a history of ties to terrorism, and anti-Semitic statements," Dozier said in a statement. "The plaintiff and many others in the community believe that the mosque will be a nuisance and will pose a threat to the neighborhood and its surrounding areas. As well, the plaintiff believes that this is part of a greater scheme to radicalize America."

The lawsuit says associates of Sabri are tied to terrorist groups such as al-Qaida, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

CAIR brands itself as a mainstream advocacy group, but it is a spinoff of the now-defunct Islamic Association for Palestine, launched by Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook and a former university professor in Florida, Sami al-Arian, who pleaded guilty last year to conspiracy to provide services to Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

Several CAIR staffers have been convicted on terrorism-related charges, and CAIR founder Omar Ahmad allegedly told a group of Muslims they are in America not to assimilate but to help assert Islam's rule over the country.

The plans also have generated legal opposition from Rodney L. Wright, who sued, explaining to the Broward Times that the center's representatives told him the city would condemn and take the land he owns near the proposed mosque if he didn't sell it to them.

"They threatened that the city would use eminent domain to take it from us if we didn't accept their offers," he told the newspaper.

Property owners had been told via certified mail that the land was being sought for affordable housing.

"This letter is being delivered, pursuant to Florida Statutes, to notify you that the Pompano Beach Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) intends to acquire through negotiated conveyance or its power of eminent domain, property that is owned by you," the notice said.

A city commissioner, E. Pat Larkins, then told the newspaper that the lots then "could be sold to anyone, including the developers of the mosque."

The Militant Islam Monitor website also noted that CAIR's responses to Dozier's concerns have been evident.

"[Another example] of CAIR's attempts to censor critics of Islam [is] the Rev. O'Neill Dozier, who objected to the building of a mosque in an African American Catholic neighborhood. CAIR vilification of Dozier was aided and abetted by Governor Jeb Bush who made Dozier resign from his judicial nominating committee and Charlie Crist, who removed him from his campaign committee."

[Soldier4Christ]

CAIR, FBI at odds over hate crimes 
Bureau report indicates Muslim group's claims wildly inflated

Two recently released reports highlight the difference between the FBI's calculation of the number of religiously motivated hate crimes and that of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

In CAIR's annual report, "The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in the United States – 2007," the subtitle of which, "Presumption of Guilt," foreshadows the report's main theme, the Muslim lobby group claims the number of hate crimes committed against Muslims has risen each year since 1996. CAIR began keeping track of civil rights violations and hate crimes against Muslims that year because of what the report calls the "anti-Muslim backlash that followed the 1995 attack on the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City."

According to that report, CAIR received 2,467 complaints of civil rights violations in 2006 – 25 percent more than it received in 2005. CAIR also said it received 167 allegations of anti-Muslim hate crimes, up more than 9 percent from last year's 153 complaints.

The report goes on to say that in 2006, "Several key polls indicated that the level of Islamophobia continues to rise today in American society."

But CAIR's report stands in stark contrast to a report released last month by the FBI. In that report, titled "Hate Crime Statistics, 2006," compiled from the input of more than 12,000 law enforcement agencies across the country, FBI figures show that the number of incidents of religious hate crime against Muslims plunged 68 percent since 2001.

According to the FBI report, the Justice Department defines hate crimes as "criminal offenses that are motivated, in whole or in part, by the offender's bias against race, religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity/national origin, or disability and are committed against persons, property, or society."

The FBI's methodology is also explained in its report.

CAIR's 42-page report, on the other hand, does not explain what the organization considers a hate crime. Although CAIR's report contains a "glossary of Islamic terms" – including Allah, ubgone86, hijab, kufi and Ramadan – it does not include a definition of "hate crime."

CAIR did not respond to WND's e-mail or telephone requests for clarification of the organization's use of the term "hate crime" in its annual report.

Even though the CAIR report does not define a hate crime, it does provide a few examples of them, including this one: "September 20, 2006 – A copy of the Quran was found in a toilet at the library of Pace University in New York."

The report goes on to say, "Initially, (the) Pace University administration called the desecration 'vandalism,' but with the collaborative efforts of CAIR-NY, the Association of Muslim American Lawyers, the New York Police Department Hate Crimes Task Force ... and the Muslim Students Association at Pace, university administrators now recognize the incident as a hate crime."

According to published news reports, a 23-year-old former Pace student was arrested last summer and charged with felony hate crimes. The charges carry with them a possible sentence of up to four years in prison.

Critics point to a double standard: Burning an American flag is considered free speech, and the submersion of a Christian Crucifix in urine has not only been called art, but funded by U.S. taxpayers – and yet flushing a paperback copy of the Quran down a toilet is now a hate crime.

Contradicting CAIR's claim that U.S. Muslims are increasingly the target of hate-mongers, the annual FBI report on hate crime has for several years consistently shown that Jews are far more likely to be victims of religious hate crimes than Muslims. In 2006, according to the report, 65 percent of the victims of religious hate crimes were Jewish, while only 12 percent were Muslim.

Of the 6,832 incidents of religious hate crime committed between 2002 and 2006, some 4,627, or 68 percent, were committed against Jews, while 744, or 11 percent, were committed against Muslims.

According to FBI statistics going back to 2000, Jews are more than five times more likely than Muslims to be the victims of hate crimes.

The CAIR report does not mention hate crimes committed against any population group other than Muslims.

One factor that could account for some of the disparity in the number of hate crimes committed against members of the two groups would be a significant difference in the size of their populations. If, for instance, there were five times as many Jews as Muslims in the United States, a five-fold increase in the number of anti-Jewish hate crimes might be expected.

Accurate population figures for religious groups are hard to come by, especially since the U.S. Census Bureau is prohibited from asking respondents about their religion. But according to several recent estimates, including a 2007 survey, Jews in the United States of America number approximately 6 million.

CAIR claims the U.S. Muslim population numbers at least 6 million.

However, in May, Investor's Business Daily took CAIR to task on that figure based on a recently released and exhaustive study by the Pew Research Center, called "Muslim Americans: Middle Class and mostly Mainstream."

The Pew study, the methodology for which was also exhaustively explained, estimated the adult Muslim population in the United States to be 1.5 million, with a total Muslim population of 2.35 million, less than half the number claimed by CAIR, which has attacked the validity of the Pew study.

Just after the study was released, Investor's Business Daily called CAIR's estimate of 6 million American Muslims a "wildly inflated guess" based on "fuzzy math."

"Politicians in Washington are intimidated by the figure," the newspaper said, "which CAIR uses as a cudgel to help advance its Islamist agenda."

Politicians and business executives have for years caved in to pressure from CAIR, the newspaper said, because they feared the repercussions from the organization's millions of voters and consumers. But, the article concluded, the bloated population figure was "the Wahhabi lobby's big lie. CAIR couldn't deliver even 2 million voters if it tried. ... There is no big Muslim lobby, just CAIR's big, hollow PR machine."

Regardless of whose estimate is correct as to the number of Muslims in the U.S. – CAIR's 6 million or Pew's 2.35 million – they are not outnumbered five-to-one by Jews.

An additional finding of the Pew study was the revelation that 26 percent of American Muslims younger than 30 expressed support, under at least some circumstances, for suicide bombings in defense of Islam. CAIR denounced that Pew finding as well.

[Soldier4Christ]

AutoZone: CAIR wrong about Michael Savage ads
Says longtime policy bans sponsorship of all radio talk shows


The Council on American-Islamic Relations claims a raft of companies have stopped advertising on Michael Savage's top-rated radio talk show in response to a CAIR-instigated boycott campaign, but several of the cited companies say they don't know what the Islamic lobby group is talking about.

In a recent announcement claiming Universal Orlando Resorts "drops 'Savage Nation' ads," CAIR stated:

"Advertisers that have already stopped airing, or refuse to air commercials on 'Savage Nation' include AutoZone, Citrix, TrustedID, JCPenney, OfficeMax, Wal-Mart and AT&T."

But now AutoZone has told WND the CAIR campaign had nothing to do with its advertising decision, and it had chosen not to advertise on any radio talk shows – of all parts of the spectrum – years before the CAIR effort.

CAIR officials declined to respond to WND queries about why it is listing companies as part of its boycott campaign that say they have not participated in the boycott.

But Talk Radio Network officials also confirmed that companies including AutoZone and JCPenney never advertise on such programs.

"We do not sponsor syndicated radio talk shows," AutoZone spokesman Ray Pohlman told WND. "We have customers of all shapes and sizes and political persuasions. For us to sponsor [any radio talk shows] wouldn't make any sense."

But that policy is years old, and wasn't changed at all by CAIR's effort, he said.

"What I will tell you is the CAIR organization did, in fact, contact the marketing department [of AutoZone.] We responded with our full advertising policy which clearly states that we do not advertise on radio talk shows," he told WND.

He said the only way for an ad to have appeared would have been for a programmer at a radio station to make a mistake and put it on the air without permission.

Pohlman said CAIR apparently took the company's response to mean it was instituting a specific ban on advertising on the Savage show, when in fact the policy covers all such radio shows, and is not even a new policy.

The announcement about Universal was made by the Hate Hurts America Community and Interfaith Coalition, of which CAIR is a prominent member. It said Universal Orlando Resorts "has joined a growing list of advertisers that have stopped advertising or refuse to place their ads on Michael Savage's 'Savage Nation' Radio program."

The campaign also has triggered a lawsuit by Savage against CAIR over its alleged misappropriation of Savage's radio broadcast material. In the lawsuit, Savage depicts CAIR as a "vehicle of international terrorism."

CAIR says it is challenging Savage's "hate speech," and referenced Savage comments such as:

    "I'm not gonna put my wife in a hijab. And I'm not gonna put my daughter in a burqa. And I'm not getting' on my all-fours and braying to Mecca. And you could drop dead if you don't like it. You can shove it up your pipe. I don't wanna hear any more about Islam. I don't wanna hear one more word about Islam. Take your religion and shove it up your behind. I'm sick of you."

Another major company CAIR claims has joined the boycott of Michael Savage is JCPenney. But as with AutoZone, JCPenney officials told WND readers they were not making any special provision in their advertising policy that would make them part of a protest campaign, but officials did not respond directly to WND inquiries.

"JCPenney did not 'pull' advertising from the show. JCPenney has had a long standing policy about not advertising on any show that can be construed as controversial. An error in upholding this policy was made by a few local stations, and it has now been clarified," the company told a WND reader.

"Wal-Mart does not sponsor or advertise on the Michael Savage show. We have asked radio networks to ensure that Wal-Mart ads do not run in programming that we deem controversial and are sending out content guidelines reminders to radio networks and stations," said that company.

Savage's lawsuit alleges copyright infringement by CAIR, which the lawsuit says seeks to do "material harm to those voices who speak against the violent agenda of CAIR's clients."

Filed in U.S. District Court in California, the suit seeks damages equal to the ongoing donations from CAIR supporters "who expect CAIR to act in this manner in exchange for continuing financial support" as well as "actual damages according to proof."

A spokesman for Savage indicated the top-rated talk show host would have no further comment, saying the text of the lawsuit itself would answer questions.

The focal point of the lawsuit is a series of audio clips CAIR has been using in its promotions and fundraising efforts.

Those comments from Savage's show include his criticisms of Islam and Muslims. The lawsuit maintains such comments, taken in context, are Savage's verbal expression of the feelings of many Americans.

"The audience of 'The Savage Nation' expects this type of from-the-heart outrage and when it is directed at a murderer such as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his ilk, the piece is far more understandable and far more American mainstream. While the strength of the outrage is remarkable and a hallmark of 'The Savage Nation,' the sentiment is shared by a huge number of Americans," the lawsuit said.

Ibrahim Hooper, communications director for CAIR, told WND when the lawsuit was filed the group would not comment on the action until the document had been reviewed.