|
|
Yes, awful pun, I know.
CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, claims to represent Muslim America. Thanks to the (ridiculously biased and far-right, but who's counting?) Washington Times, however, we now have a reasonably accurate membership count of dues-paying CAIR members: 1,700.
I'm going to make the reasonable assumption that all of us here support Muslim Americans against the hatred and bigotry that *is* out there in America today, and has already claimed innocent lives.
That said, does that mean we should be supporting CAIR?
CAIR has had substantive ties to terrorist groups such as Hamas, their funding sources are shady and/or ill-documented, and they often seem to do more harm in advancing Muslim American interests than good due to their ties to extremism.
Now, according to their tax returns, they don't even represent more than a tiny, tiny fraction of the Muslim American community.
To give a sense of comparison - the forum goons at SomethingAwful.com outnumber CAIR, for cryin' out loud.
Is it time to jettison CAIR as the 'go to' group on Muslim American issues and look for a more reasonable partner organization?
It's not a pun, douche. it's a play on words.
-If they give to CAIR, with its reputation, they're accepting association with what might be considered tainted goods (though I think the accusations against CAIR are mostly overblown smears--call me a skeptic, but I remember thinking when Sami al-Arian was arrested that the "t" word was tossed around pretty flippantly on little to no actual evidence, and that certainly seems to have been the case).
-If they start a competitor group, they have to identify themselves and associate publically, also likely to draw the attention of the feds, Jihadwatch, or other right-wing extremists.
-If they don't give to CAIR, even if they agree with the group's aims, then you can say that CAIR doesn't represent most of them.
Presumably, a lot of people who are sympatico with CAIR are cheering them on but keeping their distance. Likewise, a lot of people would like to see an alternative group, but the startup costs of establishing such an alternative would entail high personal prices and risks.
It seems like a catch-22: either they put themselves at risk by siding with CAIR or starting a new, similarly focused group, or they remain at risk without a political advocate defending their cause in a hostile climate.
The best hope is probably the broadening of a current "community" group that's not primarily political toward a more political focus - a lot of Jews who've been having issues with AIPAC have been looking at groups like the Union for Reform Judaism (URJ, formerly the Union of American Hebrew Congregations) as alternative venues for giving - and those groups are then stepping up to the plate more politically as a result.
I don't know enough about what groups do or don't exist for Muslim Americans to offer any useful ideas as to what should be done. I'd imagine places like Dearborn, Mich. would have a lot of grassroots community activism going on that would expand nationally. I just saw a facebook invite the other day for an organization called "Eteraz" (Eteraz.org) that's trying to support Muslim moderates, but I don't know enough about them to give any opinions.
The question of an individual or an organization representing a movement is aptly raised by your post -- not in regard to CAIR but to a progressive who claims to represent other progressives by quoting the Washington Times and casting aspersions on an organization with nothing more substantial than adjectives to back up the charge.
When you have the evidence, post again.
From the slightly more credible New York Times:
"A small band of critics have made a determined but unsuccessful effort to link it to Hamas and Hezbollah, which have been designated as terrorist organizations by the State Department, and have gone so far as calling the group an American front for the two."
Further on:
"Of all the groups, there is probably more suspicion about CAIR, but when you ask people for cold hard facts, you get blank stares,'' said Michael Rolince, a retired F.B.I. official who directed counterterrorism in the Washington field office from 2002 to 2005."
Link
http://select.nytimes.com/sear ch/restricted/article?res=F70D 11FF3B5B0C778DDDAD0894DF404482