CAIR Cares for Terrorists Not Infidels Like You

Hoping for Virgins Someday

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Executive Director, Nihad Awad, believes Anwar al-Awlaki should have been given his Constitutional rights rather than being eliminated of his job working for al Qaeda as a terrorist recruiter--a recruiter simply looking for a few good jihadists.  In a column that appeared in USA Today, Awad (pronounced "Dickwad") takes the position that Anwar al-Awlaki, and others like him, should be accorded constitutional protections such as due process.  That is, Awlaki should have been afforded all of his Constitutional rights, in spite of the fact that after he moved to his parents' homeland of Yemen, he returned to the USA to attend college under the false pretense that he was not an American.  He did this in order to obtain a J-1 Visa and attend school for free while we taxpayers handled the bill for this vermin. So it was okay for him to be an American when he needed to be one, and a Yemeni when it suited his needs. He was a terrorist of the worst sort--the kind of terrorist who is responsible for having people killed by recruiting the killers, but not having the courage to do it himself.
 

"And you get 72 virgins"

Awad is wrong. Awlaki was an enemy of the USA and  “enemy combatants” are not entitled to constitutional protections. How do we judge this? Easy--jihad is, by definition, a "holy war," and since they have declared this war about 1400 years ago, we should oblige them and  treat these dirtbags as enemy soldiers.

It should tell you something about CAIR, an unindicted co-conspirator with the Muslim Brotherhood in the Holy Land Foundation trials.  CAIR  quickly rallies for the “rights” of scum like al-Awlaki while saying nothing in support of the Iranian Christian, a former Muslim, who currently faces the death penalty for being an “apostate.” Islam is like the mafia--if you leave, you die--and CAIR offers no opposition to this--it's called sharia.

Below is the article Awad wrote to further the speedbumps and litigation that gets in the way of justice:

Opposing view: Uphold America's founding principles
By Nihad Awad 

Let's start where we agree. Anwar al-Awlaki was a propagandist for violence and extremism. His repeated calls to kill Americans cannot be denied or underestimated. The extent of his actual involvement in terrorist operations is something the public is not privy to. He was an Internet personality, not a scholar on Islam. He lacked the authority to issue religious verdicts and rulings. Real Muslim scholars refuted his twisted interpretations, but they lacked his charisma and slick publishing apparatus. American Muslims condemned his video messages endorsing the killing of Americans. But now to the more difficult issue. The Fifth Amendment states, "No person shall … be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." We should reject any domestic or foreign policies that diminish constitutional protections. While the killings of Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan by a U.S. drone strike may be popular with many, times and enemies have a tendency to change. If we accept that the president can order the killing of any American without due process of law, the Constitution is rendered meaningless. Even in the post-9/11 era, our leaders and military personnel have a duty to uphold the Constitution. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has advocated for hundreds of American Muslims denied due process when placed on no-fly or watch lists. Citizens of all faiths and political persuasions should know that their constitutional rights could be similarly denied in some future national crisis. We join the ACLU and other groups in urging Congress and the courts to take up this issue. Numerous studies show that drone strikes fuel anti-American anger and boost recruiting for al-Qaeda. There is little evidence that the attacks decrease the terror threat or make America any safer. In fact, the opposite may be true. Our nation's war on terror will not be won through force of arms. It will be won when we are shown to be a nation in which respect for the law transcends fear, and hostility toward today's enemies does not cause us to forget our founding principles. America's enemies can never win on the field of battle. Their only hope of an American defeat is one we inflict on ourselves.

Awad tries to minimize Awlaki's influence in the Muslim world by saying he wasn't a scholar, and that real scholars "refuted his twisted interpretations." He then went on to say that "American Muslims condemned his video messages endorsing the killing of Americans."  I challenge Awad to name three Imams who openly condemned Awlaki, and American Muslims to do the same. Let's face it, American Muslims, statistically speaking, tend to identify with being Muslim, not American. This is also true of Muslims in other parts of the world, like England, the Netherlands, Norway, and France, just to name a few nations where Islam has begun its infestation of their cities and transformed neighborhoods into sharia ghettos that are referred to as 'no go zones' because of the danger faced by a non-Muslim trying to walk through that neighborhood.

Do not allow people like Awad to trick you into believing that Islam is a religion of peace, or that what Awlaki did was condemned by most Muslims. Even those who do not participate in the violence, participate in it by standing idly by and doing nothing. That is the norm.

Tweet