February 16, 2014
Is CAIR a RICO case?
By Mathew Hurwitz
The Council on American Islamic Relations, CAIR, claims to be an anti-defamation organization. In fact, as we shall see, it is anything but.
CAIR was founded in 1994 by Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmed, who had ties with the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), which was established by the terrorist organization Hamas. Therefore, it is an outgrowth of the IAP. It opened its first office in Washington, D.C. with a donation from the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, the largest Islamic charity in the U.S. CAIR should be, but is not, registered as a foreign agent. Only 1% of its total revenue comes from membership dues; the balance of its sponsorship is from such foreign sources as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. One of CAIR's unspoken objectives is the Islamification of America.
CAIR funnels money to various nefarious causes. It justifies its criminal money-laundering by comparing its actions to those of AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. They liken AIPAC's open support of Israel to CAIR's secret backing of Israel's enemies. CAIR is a Muslim-American outfit whose key officials were convicted of passing money to Hamas and Hezb'allah, two terrorist organizations dedicated to jihad (holy war) against Israel.
Immediately following 9/11, CAIR placed on its website a plea for donations to its New York and Washington, D.C. emergency relief fund. It accepted money that it diverted to the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, the very Islamic charity which has subsequently been shut down by the FBI for its ties to Hamas. The FBI has declared CAIR a front organization for Hamas. In 2002, federal prosecutors brought charges against the organization for funding Hamas.
CAIR influences government policy, individuals, and private businesses by aggressive lawsuits, threats of civil rights litigation, boycotts, demonstrations, and propaganda promulgated by the politically correct liberal news media. It was the fear of lawsuits by CAIR that prevented our military from expelling Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan, even though they knew of his un-American leanings. Owing to CAIR's threats of anti-discrimination lawsuits, an overly sensitive military failed to weed out a traitorous Islamic jihadist in its midst, and Hasan killed 12 soldiers and wounded 29.
CAIR sued John Doe passengers who alerted an airline crew that a group of six Muslims were acting suspiciously. Clearly their behavior was intended to intimidate the passengers and crew, and the captain put them off the flight. The Six Imams, who are Muslim and whose backgrounds range from Arab to Albanian, allege that U.S. Airways, the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC), various agents and employees of U.S. Airways, MAC, and the FBI intentionally discriminated against them solely on the basis of their race, religion, and national origin. U.S. Airways is being sued on grounds that it discriminated against the imams because of their practice of their Muslim faith. MAC, an FBI agent, and state officials are being sued because they violated the constitutional rights of the imams.
This suit fits in with CAIR's anti-profiling campaign, which has had a chilling effect on airlines and the Federal Transport Safety Administration. Travelers are less secure because of politically correct anti-profiling policies.
The FBI has cut off all contacts with CAIR. These relationships were instituted by the Obama administration in the name of improved Islamic relations. Obama directed the FBI to mount an outreach program with CAIR in cases of alleged civil rights violations.
This short-lived alliance broke down over mounting concerns with CAIR's roots in Hamas and its refusal to renounce the terrorist organization. The FBI has named CAIR an unindicted co-conspirator in one of the largest finance cases in U.S. history, alleging that CAIR acted as a front in a conspiracy with the Muslim Brotherhood, a parent of al-Qaeda and Hamas, to infiltrate U.S. institutions. The ultimate intent was to impose Saudi-style Islamic law in America.
In a pending case, CAIR stands accused of plotting to influence members of Congress by infiltrating their staffs with Muslim interns. In this connection, a senator and five congressmen urged the IRS to investigate CAIR. The FBI maintains that CAIR does not qualify as a nonprofit organization like the NAACP and AIPAC.
However, the fact of the matter is that CAIR is a front for Hamas and the radical Muslim Brotherhood; therefore, it should not be tax-exempt.
CAIR claims that U.S. policy is dictated by Zionist extremists. It mounts a relentless propaganda campaign to influence the American government to disclaim Israel's status as a special ally. The organization is an advocate for the destruction of Israel and the occupation of its territories by the Palestinians.
A year before CAIR's founding, Niwad Awad and Omar Ahmad conspired with Hamas leaders in a 1993 meeting in Philadelphia to disguise funding for Hamas as charitable donations. Since the money for such transactions originates with its Arab patrons, CAIR's ongoing diversion of donations to Hamas is clearly a case of money-laundering. To date, the organization has been able to get away with this, and it continues to fund terrorist and jihadist causes.
There are documented violations by CAIR of America's Iranian Assets Control Regulations imposed by executive orders of prior presidents including Reagan, Bush 41, Clinton, and Bush 43. The regulations prohibit essentially all commercial dealings and cash transfers with Iran by U.S. citizens, corporations, and organizations. Violations of this act are punishable by steep fines, civil penalties, and imprisonment.
Cofounder Omar Ahmad said: "Islam isn't in America to be equal to other faiths, but to become dominant." He went on to say: "The Koran should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth."
In the late 1980s, Ihsan Bagby, professor of Islamic studies at the University of Kentucky and a CAIR board member, stated that "Muslims can never be full citizens of the US because there's no way we can be fully committed to the institutions and ideologies of this country."
Clearly, CAIR is a foreign-sponsored subversive organization comparable to the American Communist Party when it was Soviet-controlled.
Therefore, CAIR should be handled under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) enacted by Congress in 1970.
Originally intended to deal with the Mafia, RICO's scope was expanded in the 1980s to provide civil remedies with treble damages to any person injured in their business or property by reason of a RICO violation. By the late 1980s, RICO was one of the most commonly-asserted claims in federal court.
Due to over-litigation, the Supreme Court limited the use of RICO in civil cases. Today RICO is applied to criminal prosecution of individuals, businesses, political protest groups, and terrorist organizations. It is used in cases involving conspiracy, coercion, subversive activity, tax evasion, and money-laundering.
CAIR's activities from its founding in 1994 to the present day clearly qualify this organization to be prosecuted and convicted under the RICO act.