Kathianne
07-16-2008, 09:19 PM
CAIR has less than 1700 members in US, note in the second snippet, they are the source, look at how they claim to be the largest Muslim civil liberties group in US. Interesting they don't advocate the use of the ACLU, they are not looking for civil rights, but Sharia Law-one standard for Muslims, another for the rest.
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/are-muslim-defendants-getting-special-treatment-in-court/
July 16, 2008 - by Patrick Poole
An otherwise unremarkable hearing in the Fairfax County, Virginia, general district court last Thursday marked an ominous trend with respect to the cherished American judicial principles of the rule of law and equality before the law. The hearing on four misdemeanor charges against Dr. Mustafa Ahmed Abbasi featured all of the usual players — judge, bailiff, clerks, prosecutors, police officers, criminal attorneys, and defendant — but with one notable addition to the judicial drama, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
CAIR’s intervention in the Abbasi case is a manifestation of a larger campaign against law enforcement to use political alliances and legal threats to intimidate police in cases involving Muslim defendants and to establish separate and preferable treatment for Muslims in the American legal system....
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20080715/pl_usnw/cair_calls_new_yorker_obama_cartoon__inflammatory
CAIR Calls New Yorker Obama Cartoon 'Inflammatory'
Mon Jul 14, 7:01 PM ET
To: POLITICAL EDITORS
Contact: Corey Saylor, CAIR National Legislative Director, +1-202-384-8857, csaylor@cair.com, Ahmed Rehab, CAIR Strategic Communications Director, +1-202-870-0166, arehab@cair.com, or Amina Rubin, CAIR Communications Coordinator, +1-202-341-4171, arubin@cair.com
WASHINGTON, July 14 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A prominent national Islamic civil rights and advocacy organization today called a satirical cartoon on the front cover of the New Yorker magazine inflammatory for its depiction of Barack and Michelle Obama intended to portray them as Muslim, militant, pro-terrorist, and anti-American.
SEE: Magazine's 'Satirical' Cover Stirs Controversy (AP)
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jNPgefV9BiTHTv8K2VaxcvZbkjAQD91TLR0G0
In a statement, the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) said:
Unfortunately, the New Yorkers front cover cartoon failed to achieve its stated goal of exposing and lampooning right-wing caricatures of the Obamas. These inflammatory images and spurious associations will only serve to reinforce the racism and anti-Muslim stereotypes that the magazine says it is out to challenge.
CAIR, America's largest Islamic civil liberties group, has 35 offices and chapters nationwide and in Canada. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.
CONTACT: Corey Saylor, CAIR National Legislative Director, +1-202-384-8857, csaylor@cair.com, Ahmed Rehab, CAIR Strategic Communications Director, +1-202-870-0166, arehab@cair.com, or Amina Rubin, CAIR Communications Coordinator, +1-202-341-4171, arubin@cair.com
SOURCE Council on American-Islamic Relations
http://www.crosswordbebop.com/?p=1539
...An encouraging development is that the media was present at the hearing. Bob McNaney from Channel 5, Jim Walsh of the Star-Tribune, and David Hanners of the St. Paul Pioneer-Press were present.
Omar Mohammedi, attorney for the imams, and President of the Board of Directors for the New York Chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, went first. His motion was for the judge, Arthur Boylan, to compel US Airways to divulge its training manuals, and information on its security procedures, so that they could show that the security procedures were not followed down to the last jot and tittle when the imams were removed from US Airways Flight 300 on November 20, 2006.
Those of you who are following this case closely might be thinking “Arthur Boylan? What happened to Ann Montgomery?” The PACER database reports that Ann Montgomery is the presiding judge, and Arthur Boylan is a referral judge. Ann Montgomery will still be the judge at the trial in 2009.
When I realized what Mohammedi was asking for, I was briefly dazed, as I heard the sound in my mind’s ear of a thousand bloggers screaming something to the effect of “Ok, let me get this straight. A group of imams led by a fundraiser for a Muslim charity (the Holy Land Foundation) which was shut down by the Treasury Department for its connections to Hamas, is asking a judge to compel an airline to divulge its security procedures. And everyone’s OK with that?!?”
This reveals yet another purpose of the Flying Imams attack, to extract information regarding airline security in a way that’s much faster and cheaper than traditional espionage or a series of probing attacks.
Dane Jacques mentioned that the TSA has regulatory authority over the security procedure documents, and consider granting the release of these documents on a document-by-document basis. Judge Boylan looked at Jacques with a slightly quizzical look and a raised eyebrow and said “So, what happens if I order you to release a certain document?” A discussion of the relationship between law, regulatory authority, and court orders ensued.
There wasn’t much discussion about what US Airways wanted the judge to compel the imams to divulge, but it became clear as Omar Mohammedi was answering questions from David Hanners, Jim Walsh and myself after the hearing ended. US Airways is asking questions about the exact extent of the involvement of Saudi-funded radical Islamic front group CAIR in the bringing and support of the lawsuit, something I consider to be a highly encouraging development.
Omar Mohammedi was clearly not interested in answering questions about CAIR’s involvement in the lawsuit. He mentioned that CAIR is a client of his law firm, and thus communications between him, the imams, and CAIR are protected under attorney-client privilege, but he was much more interested in changing the subject. His final remark to the three of us was “As far as we’re concerned, this a racial profiling case,” as if to say that CAIR’s involvement wasn’t really relevant to the proceedings.
Ibrahim Hooper of CAIR informed me that I should talk to Omar Mohammedi regarding the involvement of CAIR in the lawsuit, so I was pleased that the opportunity presented itself. I walked and talked with Mohammedi for about a block. He went to great length to emphasize that the national CAIR and the New York Chapter of CAIR were entirely different organizations, and that he didn’t speak for the national CAIR at all, not even a little bit....
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/are-muslim-defendants-getting-special-treatment-in-court/
July 16, 2008 - by Patrick Poole
An otherwise unremarkable hearing in the Fairfax County, Virginia, general district court last Thursday marked an ominous trend with respect to the cherished American judicial principles of the rule of law and equality before the law. The hearing on four misdemeanor charges against Dr. Mustafa Ahmed Abbasi featured all of the usual players — judge, bailiff, clerks, prosecutors, police officers, criminal attorneys, and defendant — but with one notable addition to the judicial drama, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
CAIR’s intervention in the Abbasi case is a manifestation of a larger campaign against law enforcement to use political alliances and legal threats to intimidate police in cases involving Muslim defendants and to establish separate and preferable treatment for Muslims in the American legal system....
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20080715/pl_usnw/cair_calls_new_yorker_obama_cartoon__inflammatory
CAIR Calls New Yorker Obama Cartoon 'Inflammatory'
Mon Jul 14, 7:01 PM ET
To: POLITICAL EDITORS
Contact: Corey Saylor, CAIR National Legislative Director, +1-202-384-8857, csaylor@cair.com, Ahmed Rehab, CAIR Strategic Communications Director, +1-202-870-0166, arehab@cair.com, or Amina Rubin, CAIR Communications Coordinator, +1-202-341-4171, arubin@cair.com
WASHINGTON, July 14 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A prominent national Islamic civil rights and advocacy organization today called a satirical cartoon on the front cover of the New Yorker magazine inflammatory for its depiction of Barack and Michelle Obama intended to portray them as Muslim, militant, pro-terrorist, and anti-American.
SEE: Magazine's 'Satirical' Cover Stirs Controversy (AP)
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jNPgefV9BiTHTv8K2VaxcvZbkjAQD91TLR0G0
In a statement, the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) said:
Unfortunately, the New Yorkers front cover cartoon failed to achieve its stated goal of exposing and lampooning right-wing caricatures of the Obamas. These inflammatory images and spurious associations will only serve to reinforce the racism and anti-Muslim stereotypes that the magazine says it is out to challenge.
CAIR, America's largest Islamic civil liberties group, has 35 offices and chapters nationwide and in Canada. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.
CONTACT: Corey Saylor, CAIR National Legislative Director, +1-202-384-8857, csaylor@cair.com, Ahmed Rehab, CAIR Strategic Communications Director, +1-202-870-0166, arehab@cair.com, or Amina Rubin, CAIR Communications Coordinator, +1-202-341-4171, arubin@cair.com
SOURCE Council on American-Islamic Relations
http://www.crosswordbebop.com/?p=1539
...An encouraging development is that the media was present at the hearing. Bob McNaney from Channel 5, Jim Walsh of the Star-Tribune, and David Hanners of the St. Paul Pioneer-Press were present.
Omar Mohammedi, attorney for the imams, and President of the Board of Directors for the New York Chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, went first. His motion was for the judge, Arthur Boylan, to compel US Airways to divulge its training manuals, and information on its security procedures, so that they could show that the security procedures were not followed down to the last jot and tittle when the imams were removed from US Airways Flight 300 on November 20, 2006.
Those of you who are following this case closely might be thinking “Arthur Boylan? What happened to Ann Montgomery?” The PACER database reports that Ann Montgomery is the presiding judge, and Arthur Boylan is a referral judge. Ann Montgomery will still be the judge at the trial in 2009.
When I realized what Mohammedi was asking for, I was briefly dazed, as I heard the sound in my mind’s ear of a thousand bloggers screaming something to the effect of “Ok, let me get this straight. A group of imams led by a fundraiser for a Muslim charity (the Holy Land Foundation) which was shut down by the Treasury Department for its connections to Hamas, is asking a judge to compel an airline to divulge its security procedures. And everyone’s OK with that?!?”
This reveals yet another purpose of the Flying Imams attack, to extract information regarding airline security in a way that’s much faster and cheaper than traditional espionage or a series of probing attacks.
Dane Jacques mentioned that the TSA has regulatory authority over the security procedure documents, and consider granting the release of these documents on a document-by-document basis. Judge Boylan looked at Jacques with a slightly quizzical look and a raised eyebrow and said “So, what happens if I order you to release a certain document?” A discussion of the relationship between law, regulatory authority, and court orders ensued.
There wasn’t much discussion about what US Airways wanted the judge to compel the imams to divulge, but it became clear as Omar Mohammedi was answering questions from David Hanners, Jim Walsh and myself after the hearing ended. US Airways is asking questions about the exact extent of the involvement of Saudi-funded radical Islamic front group CAIR in the bringing and support of the lawsuit, something I consider to be a highly encouraging development.
Omar Mohammedi was clearly not interested in answering questions about CAIR’s involvement in the lawsuit. He mentioned that CAIR is a client of his law firm, and thus communications between him, the imams, and CAIR are protected under attorney-client privilege, but he was much more interested in changing the subject. His final remark to the three of us was “As far as we’re concerned, this a racial profiling case,” as if to say that CAIR’s involvement wasn’t really relevant to the proceedings.
Ibrahim Hooper of CAIR informed me that I should talk to Omar Mohammedi regarding the involvement of CAIR in the lawsuit, so I was pleased that the opportunity presented itself. I walked and talked with Mohammedi for about a block. He went to great length to emphasize that the national CAIR and the New York Chapter of CAIR were entirely different organizations, and that he didn’t speak for the national CAIR at all, not even a little bit....