The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is not living up to it’s name. It is an organization that does nothing to endear Muslims to the United States, or to enhance the US-Muslim relationship.

It exists solely to foment discontent - always looking hither and yon for religious descrimination or civil rights violations. When George Bush referred to terrorists as “Islamic Fascists”, the CAIR spokesmouths got their knickers in a twist at the mere thought that anyone would use such a term.

I say, “If the shoe-bomb fits, wear it.”

Calling them “Islamic Fascists” is kind of like Muslims calling Americans and Israelis “Zionist Crusaders”, “the Crusader Jew Alliance”, “The Zionist Entity”, “The Great Satan” or any of the other pejoratives they constantly use to describe the US or Israel.

Bin Laden hinted in a declaration of jihad that we could escape the sword if we converted to Islam. Looking at the definition of fascism, I don’t see much to argue with.

Bush wasn’t referring to all Muslims, only the throat-cutters, jihad mongers and baby blower-uppers.

CAIR is associating all Muslims with fascists, not Bush. Then they turn around and say that it is wrong for Bush to make the association. Enemy propaganda, plain and simple. I see nothing wrong with Bush’s statement, nor should any American. If we don’t prepare for the coming asymmetrical onsolaught from these animals and stop worrying about everyone’s feelings, they are going to send multiple passenger aircraft plummeting to the ground in gigantic fireballs and kill hundreds of innocent people.

The sky will rain body parts. The only thing left will be a few teeth. All because pulling the 4-man suicide squad out of line to give them a 10 second pat-down and ask them a few questions was totally off limits.

Every time a terrorist plot is uncovered, the rats from CAIR ascend from the sewer and issue a press release that is short on disavowing terrorism and long on calls for us to use restraint. They always start with a repudiation of terror or violence, but inevitably stray into admonitions to us not to be vigilantes, not to commit hate crimes and not to rush judgment. They have the unmitigated gall to host a (now defunct) petition criticizing the US government for not calling for an immediate cease fire in Lebanon, without one single syllable to take note of, describe, disavow or explain how the crisis got started in the first place.

• Not one single call for the aggressors to release hostages and stop raining Katyushas down on Haifa.
• Not one single call for Iran’s Ahmedinejad to stop meddling, and arming the aggressors.

Let me make something very clear:

Anyone who disavows violence against the US, but then urges us not to stereotype, rush to judgment or engage in hate crimes in the same breath, is part of the problem, not the solution. That’s what I call the double talk. More aptly, it is described as Moral Relativism. They’re not really disavowing the violence. It’s kind of like saying: “Yeah, a Muslim did something pretty bad, but rednecks who commit hate crimes against Muslims in retaliation are pretty bad too.” It’s a poor-man’s justification for Muslim violence.

When Naveed Haq - a Muslim - killed Pam Waechter and wounded 5 others at the Seattle Jewish Federation on July 28th, 2006, CAIR issued no statement that I am aware of. You see, when they can point to an incident from a distance, such as contrived Israeli genocide in Lebanon; something that cannot be truly verified unless you are on the ground; they will issue a statement criticizing the United States and possibly inflaming the anger of Muslims here in the US who may listen to them.

But when a single, identifiable, Muslim perpetrator goes on a cold-blooded killing spree in Downtown Seattle, in his own words, because of Israel, they say absolutely nothing.

After all, how can you defend the defenseless and maintain even a shred of credibility?