Who is CAIR? Unindicted coconspirator in the Holy Land Foundation Court Case

Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va),on the floor of the House last Friday, asked a very simple question: who is CAIR?
[Congressional Record: June 12, 2009 (House)]
[Page H6669-H6676]




COUNCIL ON AMERICAN-ISLAMIC RELATIONS--CAIR

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 6, 2009, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) is recognized
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
Mr. WOLF. Madam Speaker, as ranking member on the Commerce, Justice,
Science Appropriation Subcommittee, which last week considered the
fiscal year 2010 appropriations bill, I have a keen interest in and
oversight responsibility for a host of counterterrorism and related
initiatives.
The bill which is expected to come before the full House next week
includes $7.7 billion to support the work of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, the FBI, whose top priorities include protecting and
defending the United States against terrorism and foreign intelligence
threats.

{time} 1315

The FBI was intimately involved in a 15-year investigation, which
culminated last fall in the Holy Land Foundation and five of its former
organizers being found guilty of illegally funneling more than $12
million to the terrorist group Hamas.
A Department of Justice press release issued May 27, 2009, reported,
``U.S. District Judge Jorge A. Solis sentenced the Holy Land Foundation
for Relief and Development and five of its leaders following their
convictions by a Federal jury in November 2008 on charges of providing
material support to Hamas, a designated foreign terrorist
organization.'' The sentences range from 15 years to 65 years in
prison.
According to the Department of Justice, ``From its inception, the
Holy Land Foundation existed to support Hamas. The government's case
included testimony that, in the early 1990s, Hamas' parent
organization, the Muslim Brotherhood, planned to establish a network of
organizations in the U.S. to spread a militant Islamist message and
raise money for Hamas. The defendants sent Holy Land Foundation-raised
funds to Hamas-controlled zakat committees and charitable societies
West Bank and Gaza.''
Among the unindicted conspirators in the case is an organization
which, over the last several years, has been granted access to the
highest levels of the U.S. Government--an organization which is
routinely elevated in the press as a voice of mainstream Muslim
Americans. This organization is the Council on American-Islamic
Relations, or CAIR.
Tawfik Hamid, according to his bio, is an ``Islamist thinker and
reformer and onetime Islamist extremist from Egypt. He was a member of
a terrorist Islamic organization, Jemaah Islamiyah, with Dr. Ayman al-
Zawahiri, who became later the second in command of al Qaeda.
On May 25 of 2007, in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, Hamid wrote the
following, ``In America, perhaps the most conspicuous organization to
persistently accuse opponents of Islamophobia is the Council of [sic]
American Islamic Relations.'' The observations of Mr. Tawfik, himself a
Muslim, are particularly relevant in light of recent news reports.
On January 30, 2009, Fox News reported that the FBI was ``severing
its once close ties with the Nation's largest Muslim advocacy group,
the Council on American-Islamic Relations, amid mounting evidence that
it has links to a support network for Hamas.''
Given that Hamas is on the current list of U.S.-designated foreign
terrorist organizations, this was obviously a serious claim and one
which, if true, would rightly inform a shift in FBI policy. However,
the Fox News piece left me with some unanswered questions, questions
which, given the seriousness of the report, necessitated further
inquiry. Such questions of the executive branch are a common
congressional practice and, in fact, are the responsibility of the
legislative branch of government and are the intended purpose of our
system of checks and balances.
For 6 years, from 2001-2006, I served as chairman of the
appropriations subcommittee which has oversight of the FBI. This year,
I resumed a leadership role as the lead Republican on the subcommittee.
According to the Congressional Research Service, ``Congressional
oversight refers to the review, monitoring and supervision of Federal
agencies, programs, activities, and policy implementation. It is an
integral part of the American system of checks and balances.''

[[Page H6670]]

A young Woodrow Wilson, before becoming President, put it this way.
He said, ``Quite as important as legislation is vigilant oversight of
administration.''
Needless to say, I take very seriously the responsibility of
congressional oversight, especially in matters with potential national
security implications. In this spirit of oversight, I wrote to the FBI
on February 2, seeking additional information and clarification
regarding the Bureau's decision about its relationship with CAIR.
For the Record, I submit a copy of the letter.
Congress of the United States,


House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, February 2, 2009.
Mr. Michael J. Heimbach,
Assistant Director, Counter Terrorism Division, Federal
Bureau of Investigation, Washington DC.
Dear Mr. Heimbach: I write regarding the bureau's position
on meeting with the Council on American Islamic Relations
(CAIR). Over the weekend I saw a FOX News report (enclosed)
that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has cut off
ties with CAIR ``amid mounting evidence that it has links to
a support network for Hamas.'' Given that Hamas is on the
current list of U.S. designated foreign terrorist
organizations, this is obviously a serious claim, one which
would rightly inform a shift in FBI policy.
In response to this report, I request answers to the
following questions:
Has the FBI severed ties with CAIR? If so, how is the FBI
planning to formally notify Members of Congress and other
government officials of this decision?
If FBI policy has changed with regard to CAIR, is there any
indication that this decision is being revisited by the new
administration? If so, what new evidence would justify a
change in course?
Is CAIR's national office still in contact with the FBI?
The report quotes Assistant Director John Miller from the
FBI Office of Public Affairs as saying: ``The FBI has had to
limit its formal contact with CAIR field offices until
certain issues are addressed by CAIR's national
headquarters.'' What specifically are the ``certain issues''
which you have raised with CAIR? Is there still informal
contact with any field offices? If so, what is the
distinction between formal and informal and why is there a
distinction between field offices?
To your knowledge, does CAIR receive financial
contributions from foreign sources? If so, which ones and how
much?
I look forward to your timely response, and to working with
you in the days ahead in my new role as ranking member of the
House Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations subcommittee.
Best wishes.
Sincerely,
Frank R. Wolf,
Member of Congress.

The Fox News piece, which prompted my initial interest, quoted the
assistant director of the Office of Public Affairs at the Bureau as
saying, ``The FBI has had to limit its formal contact with CAIR field
offices until certain issues are addressed by CAIR's national
headquarters.''
I found this statement to be vague. While perhaps sufficient from a
public affairs vantage, I believed it to be an insufficient explanation
for Members of Congress, none of whom, to my knowledge, had been
informed of this policy shift, and it was just that--a policy shift.
The FOX piece noted later that the FBI has ``long been close to CAIR.
The agency has previously invited CAIR to give training sessions for
agents and used it as a liaison with the American Muslim community.''
I was one of several Members of Congress, both Democrat and
Republican, who wrote the Bureau in the days following this report.
Some, such as Republican Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona and Democratic
Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, voiced their support for the
Bureau's decision, which was a step further than my initial letter; but
they, too, desired to ``understand the situation more fully'' as
Senators Kyl and Schumer wrote.
When I received a response from the FBI on March 9, only 1 of the 10
questions I posed was answered, which prompted me to send a second
letter restating the original questions and pressing the FBI for a
timely and detailed response.
I submit a copy of that letter for the Record.
Congress of the United States,


House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, March 9, 2009.
Mr. Michael J. Heimbach,
Assistant Director, Counter Terrorism Division, Federal
Bureau of Investigation, Pennsylvania Ave., NW,
Washington DC.
Dear Mr. Heimbach: I was deeply disappointed with the FBI's
response--hand-delivered to my office last Friday--to my
letter of February 2 inquiring about the Bureau's position on
meeting with the Council on American Islamic Relations
(CAIR). It took the Bureau more than a month to respond, and
the letter I received provides only a partial answer to one
of the 10 questions I posed.
In 1998 I authored the legislation that created the
National Commission on Terrorism. Regrettably its
recommendations were not implemented until after the attacks
on 9/11. I take seriously the responsibility of congressional
oversight, especially in matters with potential national
security implications. For six years I served as chairman of
the appropriations subcommittee with jurisdiction over the
FBI and count myself among the Bureau's strongest supporters.
Having resumed a leadership role this year as ranking member
on the Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations subcommittee,
it is important to me that the FBI provide timely and
detailed responses. And so again, I request answers to the
following straight-forward questions:
Has the FBI severed ties with CAIR? If so, how is the FBI
planning to formally notify Members of Congress and other
government officials of this decision?
If FBI policy has changed with regard to CAIR, is there any
indication that this decision is being revisited by the new
administration? If so, what new evidence would justify a
change in course?
Is CAIR's national office still in contact with the FBI?
The FOX News report I referenced in my original letter
quotes Assistant Director John Miller from the FBI Office of
Public Affairs as saying: ``The FBI has had to limit its
formal contact with CAIR field offices until certain issues
are addressed by CAIR's national headquarters.'' What
specifically are the ``certain issues'' which you have raised
with CAIR? Is there still informal contact with any field
offices? If so, what is the distinction between formal and
informal and why is there a distinction between field
offices?
To your knowledge, does CAIR receive financial
contributions from foreign sources? If so, which ones and how
much?
I would like these questions fully answered by this Friday,
March 13, and by someone who works on counter-terrorism,
rather than a public affairs officer. Other members of
Congress, both House and Senate, have expressed interest in
and additional information about the Bureau's position as it
relates to CAIR. I would think the Bureau would be
embarrassed to send the insufficient response I received.
Best wishes.
Sincerely,
Frank R. Wolf,
Member of Congress.
Days after my second letter, CAIR launched a public attack against
me, claiming in a March 12 press release that I ``abused'' my
``office'' by ``seeking to pressure the FBI to produce negative
information'' about the organization.
Those assertions are patently untrue and would not even warrant a
response were they not symptomatic of what I believe to be a larger
pattern of intimidation undertaken by CAIR--intimidation which is of
great consequence given the national security matters at stake.
As my letters to the FBI indicate, I was seeking to better understand
the Bureau's position and access information about what led to this
decision. It is a conclusion which--and I agree with my Senate
colleagues--is absolutely appropriate based on reports I have read for
years but which, again, marks a change in course for the Bureau and, as
such, deserved further explanation.
It is noteworthy that, on April 28, following my initial
unsatisfactory reply from the Bureau, Senator Kyl received a more
substantive response from the FBI to his letter. In the letter to
Senator Kyl, the Bureau was more detailed in explaining and in
validating the original news report regarding its relationship with
CAIR.
The letter reads, ``As you know, CAIR was named as an unindicted
coconspirator of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development in
the United States v. Holy Land Foundation, et al.
``During that trial, evidence was introduced that demonstrated a
relationship among CAIR, individual CAIR founders, including its
current president emeritus and its executive director, and the
Palestinian committee. Evidence was also introduced that demonstrated a
relationship between the Palestinian committee and Hamas, which was
designated a terrorist organization in 1995. In light of that evidence,
the FBI suspended all formal contacts between CAIR and the FBI.
``The FBI's decision to suspend formal contacts was not intended to
reflect a wholesale judgment of the organization and its entire
membership. Nevertheless, until we can resolve

[[Page H6671]]

whether there continues to be a connection between CAIR or its
executives and Hamas, the FBI does not view CAIR as an appropriate
liaison partner.''
I submit a copy of the Bureau's response to Senator Kyl for the
Record.
U.S. Department of Justice,


Federal Bureau of Investigation,

Washington, DC, April 28, 2009.
Hon. Jon Kyl,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Kyl: This responds to your letter to Director
Mueller dated February 24, 2009, regarding your interest in
reports that the FBI has severed its liaison relationship
with the Council on Islamic Relations (CAIR). I apologize for
the delay in responding to your inquiry. For your information
an identical letter has been sent to Senator Schumer and to
Senator Coburn, M.D.
As you know, CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator
of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development in
United States v. Holy Land Foundation et al. (Cr. No. 3:04-
240-P (N.D.TX.). During that trial, evidence was introduced
that demonstrated a relationship among CAIR, individual CAIR
founders (including its current President Emeritus and its
Executive Director) and the Palestine Committee. Evidence was
also introduced that demonstrated a relationship between the
Palestine Committee and HAMAS, which was designated as a
terrorist organization in 1995. In light of that evidence,
the FBI suspended all formal contacts between CAIR and the
FBI.
The FBI's decision to suspend formal contacts was not
intended to reflect a wholesale judgment of the organization
and its entire membership. Nevertheless, until we can resolve
whether there continues to be a connection between CAIR or
its executives and HAMAS, the FBI does not view CAIR as an
appropriate liaison partner. It is important to note,
however, that although the FBI has suspended all formal
outreach activities with CAIR at this time, CAIR, its
officers, and members have been encouraged to report any hate
crime, violation of federal civil rights or suspicious
activity to the FBI.
The FBI made its own decision vis-a-vis outreach activities
with this particular group. Any questions regarding broader
executive branch outreach activities would be better answered
by the Administration.
Please do not hesitate to contact my office if we may be of
additional assistance.
Sincerely yours,

Richard C. Powers,

Assistant Director, Office of
Congressional Affairs.
____

R 221435Z MAY 06
FM AMEMBASSY ABU DHABI
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 5272
INFO AMCONSUL DUBAI

UNCLAS ABU DHABI 002127
SENSITIVE
FOR NEA/ARP, NEA/PPD; INFO NEA/FO, R

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: KISL, SOCI, PHUM, PGOV, KDEM, AE
SUBJECT: VISIT BY COUNCIL ON AMERICAN ISLAMIC RELATIONS
(CAIR) TO UAE
1.(U) On May 21, the Council on American Islamic Relations
(CAIR) paid a courtesy call on the Ambassador to discuss the
organization's issues, outreach strategies, and its visit to
the CAE. The UAE press has reported that Sheikh Hamdan bin
Rashid al-Maktoum, Deputy Ruler of Dubai and UAE Minister of
Finance and Industry, ``has endorsed a proposal to build a
property in the U.S. to serve as an endowment for CAIR.''
DCM, PAO and MEPI Regional Director also participated in the
meeting.
2.(U) The group expressed ideas about countering negative
stereotypes about Muslims in the U.S. (``Islamophobia'') and
addressing anti-Americanism in the Middle East. They
mentioned previous meetings with State Department officials,
U/S Karen Hughes and A/S David Welch, their attendance at the
Secretary's Iftar, and spoke of a possible meeting with
President Bush in the future.
3.(U) Mr. Don Myers, representing Washington, D.C. public
relations firm Hill & Knowlton, provided a short
demonstration of a PR campaign designed to support CAIR's
overall organizational objectives defined as: 1) political
empowerment of Muslims, 2) grassroots effort by CAIR to
improve community relations with non-Muslims, 3) launching of
an effective, long-term (5 year) advertising/outreach
campaign to counter negative stereotypes about Muslims.
4.(U) Members of the CAIR delegation included: Hon. Larry
Shaw, Senator (North Carolina General Assembly); Hon. Paul
Findley, Former U.S. Representative; Don Myers, Washington,
D.C. public relations firm Hill & Knowlton; Nihad Awad, CAIR
Executive Director and Co-Founder; Cary (Ibrahim) Hooper,
CAIR Communication Director and Co-Founder; Dr. Parvez Ahmed,
CAIR Board Chairman; and Dr. Nabil Sadoun, CAIR Board Member.
5.(U) CAIR delegation also paid a call earlier in the day
on Sheikh Sultan bin Muhammad al-Qassimi, Ruler of Sharjah,
which was covered in the press.
6.(U) Sheikh Ali al-Hashemi, UAE Presidential Adviser on
Islamic affairs, is hosting a reception at his house this
evening, May 22, in honor of the CAIR group; Ambassador and
PolOff to attend. Al-Hashemi also thanked the Ambassador for
receiving the CAIR delegation.
7.(SBU) Comment: CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad told us
that while they were pleased with the results of the meeting
with Sheikh Hamdan bin Rashid, they had no concrete
information on the size of the endowment or when it might be
forthcoming. Awad also mentioned that the Bin Hamoodah Group,
a $500 million/year trading company, founded by three Emirati
brothers and representing Halliburton, IBM, FMC Corporation
and General Motors, is CAIR's main benefactor in the UAE. One
newly-rich stock trader, Talal Khoori (UAE national of
Iranian origin), is believed to have donated one million
dollars to CAIR.
Sison.
P 281502Z JUN 06
FM AMEMBASSY RIYADH
TO SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 9065
INFO GULF COOPERATION COUNCIL COLLECTIVE
AMCONSUL JEDDAH

UNCLAS RIYADH 005172
SENSITIVE

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: SCUL, KDEM, KISL, PGOV, PHUM, SOCI, SA
SUBJECT: VISIT BY COUNCIL ON AMERICAN ISLAMIC RELATIONS
(CAIR) TO SAUDI ARABIA
REF: ABU DHABI 2127

1.(U) Following up on a similar visit to the UAE in May
(reftel), a delegation from the U.S.-based Council on
American Islamic Relations (CAIR) visited the Kingdom of
Saudi Arabia (KSA) in June. On June 22 the group paid a
courtesy call on the Embassy to discuss the organization's
issues and outreach strategies. In the Ambassador's absence,
DCM received the group, along with the PA Counselor and
Poloff (notetaker).
2.(SBU) Prior to coming to Riyadh, the CAIR group visited
Mecca and Jeddah. Although they apparently were not received
at the highest levels of the SAG, the group assured the
Embassy that ``King Abdullah knows CAIR very well'' and
receives regular updates on the group's projects. After
recalling the success of their visit to the UAE in May, the
group predicted that they would be back in the region by fall
to visit Kuwait and Qatar. The group also mentioned that they
had been well-received in Washington by senior State
Department officials, including Secretary Rice and
Undersecretary Hughes.
3.(U) The core delegation consisted of CAIR Board Chairman
Dr. Parvez Ahmed, Executive Director Nihad Awad, and
Communications Director Cary (Ibrahim) Hooper. Accompanying
them were former U.S. Representative Paul Findley and Don
Myers, a former DoD official now with Hill and Knowlton
public relations.
4.(U) During their hour-long meeting in the Embassy, the
group presented various projects that CAIR is working on to
counter negative stereotypes about Muslims in the U.S.
(``Islamophobia''), linking their work to concern over
growing anti-Americanism in the Middle East. One of the
current CAIR projects they discussed was the presentation of
``accurate books about Islam'' to schools and libraries in
the U.S.
5.(SBU) Mr. Don Myers, representing Hill and Knowlton, gave
a short demonstration of a CAIR-funded media campaign to
support CAIR's overall information outreach effort. According
to Myers, this private campaign will emphasize both
grassroots outreach to improve American non-Muslim
understanding of Muslims and the encouragement of political
engagement by American Muslims. The multi-year broadcast and
print campaign is to be entitled ``Let the Conversation
Begin'' and is aimed at countering negative stereotypes about
Muslims within the broad American public.
6.(SBU) One admitted reason for the group's current visit
to the KSA was to solicit $50 million in governmental and
non-governmental contributions. PA Counselor noted that
private outreach activities can provide valuable support to
USG efforts to build mutual understanding overseas but
cautioned that USG Public Diplomacy (PD) funds cannot be used
or associated with efforts to target American audiences. The
delegation was interested to hear of the Embassy's PD
exchange and activities within the KSA and offered to help
support them in any appropriate way. The group did not share,
however, any details of their success or lack thereof in
fundraising within the KSA.
Oberwetter.
____


American Muslims Commend FBI for Rejection of CAIR

Thirty years have passed since the Iranian revolution and
29 years since the first Islamist murder in the U.S.--that of
`Ali Akbar Tabataba'i in a Washington, D.C., suburb. More
than seven years ago, America received a wake-up call, on
September 11, 2001, about radical Islam. However
straightforwardly evil these events, they left U.S.
authorities mostly baffled by extremism among American
Muslims.
One disturbing example of this confusion has involved the
Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Council on American-
Islamic Relations (CAIR).
Almost from CAIR'S founding in 1994, the FBI has worked
with the organization, which successfully presented itself as
the ``Muslim NAACP,'' letting CAIR train bureau personnel and
serve as a liaison to the American Muslim community. CAIR
concentrated on terror-related law enforcement such as
sensitivity in investigating extremist suspects and
allegations of profiling.

[[Page H6672]]

Now, at last, the FBI-CAIR relationship has changed.
In a letter dated March 9, 2009, FBI Assistant Director
John Miller wrote to U.S. Rep. Frank R. Wolf (R-Va)
confirming that the bureau has ``suspended any formal
engagement with Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)
field offices around the country.'' He explained that this
adjustment ``comes in part as a result of evidence gathered
through FBI investigation and presented in connection with
the Holy Land Foundation trial. CAIR was listed as an
unindicted co-conspirator in that case.''
Miller referred to the Holy Land Foundation, or HLF, having
been convicted of terror financing in November 2008.
CAIR and its allies in the ``Wahhabi lobby'' reacted
aggressively to the FBI's decision to distance itself from
CAIR. Ten extremist Muslim groups announced on March 17,
2009, that they are ``considering suspending outreach
relations with the FBI'' based on vague claims that
``American mosques and Muslim groups have been targeted.''
CAIR's supporters included American Muslims for Palestine,
the Islamic Circle of North America, and the Muslim Students
Association, as well as the leading pro-Iranian Muslim
element in America, the Islamic Educational Center of Orange
County, Ca.
We, the undersigned American Muslims, have long known the
true character of CAIR and its allies. Therefore:
We observe that they denounce ``terrorism'' in general
terms but not the specific actions of Islamist groups like
Hamas or Hezbollah. They denounce violence but not the
ideologies behind it.
We observe their commitment to radical aims, their attempts
to chill free speech by calling critics of radical Islam
``Islamophobes,'' and their false, ugly accusations against
moderate American Muslims who disagree with their agenda.
We reject any claim that CAIR and its supporters are
legitimate civil liberties advocates or appropriate partners
between the U.S. government and American Muslims.
We congratulate the FBI for adopting a firmer attitude
toward CAIR, as a defense of Americans of all faiths from the
menace of radical Islam, including Muslims of all
backgrounds--Sunni, Shia, Sufi, secular, etc.
We call on the U.S. Department of Justice to affirm and
continue this decision.
We call on the entire United States government to follow
suit in rejecting relations with the Council on American-
Islamic Relations.
Dr. Kemal Silay, President, Center for Islamic Pluralism,
www.islamicpluralism.org;
Supna Zaidi, Assistant Director, Islamist Watch,
www.islamist-watch.org;
M. Zuhdi Jasser, American Islamic Forum for Democracy,
www.aifdemocracy.org;
Imaad Malik, Fellow, Center for Islamic Pluralism;
Dr. Ahmed Subhy Mansour, International Quranic Center,
www.ahl-alquran.com;
Khalim Massoud, reformislam@gmail.com;
Nawab Agha Mousvi, American Muslim Congress and Center for
Islamic Pluralism;
Kiran Sayyed, Council for Democracy and Tolerance, http://
cfdnt.com/;
Stephen Suleyman Schwartz, Executive Director, Center for
Islamic Pluralism;
Shia.Protest@yahoo.com;
Dr. Jalal Zuberi, Southern U.S. Director, Center for
Islamic Pluralism.

I plan to take the remainder of my time to explore many of these same
concerns and talk about why everything I've read, studied and observed
has led me to believe that the Bureau's decision is not only defensible
but advisable and that it ought to, in fact, inform the actions of
other public officials, policymakers and the press, many of whom
consistently--and I would argue mistakenly--look to CAIR to speak for
mainstream Muslim Americans.
Zhudi Jasser, himself a Muslim and president of the Islamic Forum for
Democracy, makes a critical distinction between ``Islam'' and
``Islamism.'' ``Islam'' is, of course, a faith which has an estimated
worldwide following of over 1 billion people. ``Islamism,'' however,
according to Mr. Jasser, is ``a coercive governmental and political
construct that seeks to impose shar'ia--Islam jurisprudence--upon
society.''
In 2007, in the publication Family Security Matters, Jasser wrote
that CAIR uses ``the protection of religion when the facts are not on
their side. They use the discourse of politics when they want to push
forth their Islamist agenda with the presumption of speaking for all
Muslims. They will delve into the political only on their own terms in
both foreign and domestic policy, but when they are on the receiving
end of political criticism, they run for cover under the guise of
victimization.'' A dispassionate look at CAIR's public posture shows
that Mr. Jasser's observations ring true.
In 1998, I authored the legislation that created the National
Commission on Terrorism. That same year, in CAIR's own words from a
press release, it ``asked Muslims to contact leaders of a House-Senate
conference committee and urge them to amend or eliminate new
legislation that would create a National Commission on Terrorism.''
This was a misguided lobbying effort at best. Fortunately, it was
unsuccessful, and the bipartisan commission was authorized to conduct
its work.
A Congressional Research Service report described the main finding of
the commission this way: ``It calls on the U.S. Government to prepare
more actively to prevent and deal with a future mass casualty,
catastrophic terrorist attack.'' Regrettably, the commission's
recommendations, sent to Congress in June 2000, were generally ignored
until after the attacks of September 11, 2001, when 3,000 people were
killed, including 30 from my congressional district.
Following the commission's public report, CAIR's executive director,
Nihad Awad, said in a June 4 press release, ``The fight against
terrorism is one that should be undertaken, but that struggle should
not be based on stereotypes, false assumptions or the political agendas
of foreign governments. If the past is any indication, all or most of
these new provisions will be used to target Muslims in this country and
worldwide. It is American Muslim groups whose fund-raising will be
restricted. It is Muslim students who will be monitored.''
Indeed, the FBI has restricted the fund-raising of some Muslim
groups, but only when those organizations have been found to be a cover
for terrorist financing, as was true most notably with the Holy Land
Foundation.
When the Holy Land Foundation was shuttered 3 months after 9/11, CAIR
warned in a December 4, 2001, press release that this was an ``unjust
and counterproductive move that can only damage America's credibility
with Muslims in this country and around the world and could create the
impression that there has been a shift from a war on terrorism to an
attack on Islam.'' This purported ``attack on Islam'' proved to be
baseless in the face of the Holy Land Foundation verdicts.
A November 25, 2008, Department of Justice press release following
the initial verdicts in the foundation case quotes Patrick Rowan,
Assistant Attorney General for National Security. He says, ``For many
years, the Holy Land Foundation used the guise of charity to raise and
funnel millions of dollars to the infrastructure of the Hamas terrorist
organization. This prosecution demonstrates our resolve to ensure that
humanitarian relief efforts are not used as a mechanism to disguise and
enable support for terrorist groups.''
As I noted earlier, CAIR was named as an unindicted coconspirator in
the Holy Land Foundation case, which makes its cautionary word about
the ``injustice'' of closing the ``charity'' suspect.
In a Federal court filing from December 2007, Federal prosecutors
described CAIR as ``having conspired with other affiliates of the
Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists.'' The government also stated
``proof that the conspirators used deception to conceal from the
American public their connections to terrorists was introduced'' in the
Holy Land Foundation trial.

{time} 1330

In a footnote, government prosecutors pointed out: ``From its
founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other
affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists.''
Further, according to Senate testimony, CAIR received a $5,000
donation for the Holy Land Foundation. Initially, in written testimony
submitted September 10, 2003, to the Senate Subcommittee on Terrorism,
Technology and Homeland Security, CAIR denied that this was the case.
Specifically, Mr. Awad said claims to the contrary were ``an outright
lie. Our organization did not receive any seed money from the'' Holy
Land Foundation. But when confronted with the IRS form on which the
Holy Land Foundation disclosed the contribution, Mr. Awad changed his
position in supplemental testimony submitted to the subcommittee saying
that the amount in question was a donation like any other.
CAIR ultimately filed an amicus brief seeking removal from the list
of unindicted coconspirators in the Holy Land Foundation case. In
September of 2007, prosecutors made several arguments in favor of
maintaining CAIR

[[Page H6673]]

status, saying: ``CAIR has been identified by the government at trial
as a participant in an ongoing and ultimately unlawful conspiracy to
support a designated terrorist organization, a conspiracy from which
CAIR never withdrew.''
The Holy Land Foundation trial revealed more about CAIR than simply
its ties to that particular entity. Rather, the trial brought to light,
in the public square, the genesis of the organization. According to an
October 14, 2008, Dallas Morning News story: ``Testimony has suggested
that CAIR's founder Omar Ahmad and it's current executive director,
Nihad Awad, participated in a 1993 meeting of purported Hamas
sympathizers. Some Holy Land defendants attended the Philadelphia
meeting, bugged by the FBI.''
A day later, the Dallas Morning News reported that FBI special agent
Lara Burns testified during the Holy Land Foundation case that CAIR
``was formed in the aftermath of a 1993 meeting by Palestinian
activists in America who brainstormed ways to spread pro-Hamas messages
here without attracting too much attention.''
A Department of Justice press release issued on November 24, 2008,
when the Holy Land Foundation verdicts came down: ``The government case
included testimony that in the early 1990s, Hamas' parent organization,
the Muslim Brotherhood, planned to establish a network of organizations
in the U.S. to spread a militant Islamist message and to raise money
for Hamas. . . . HLF became the chief fundraising arm for the Palestine
Committee in the U.S. created by the Muslim Brotherhood to support
Hamas. According to a wiretap of a 1993 Palestine Committee meeting in
Philadelphia, former Holy Land Foundation President and CEO Shukri Abu
Baker spoke about playing down Hamas' ties in order to keep raising
money in the U.S. Another wiretapped phone call included Abdulrahman
Odeh, Holy Land Foundation's New Jersey representative, referring to a
suicide bombing as `a beautiful operation.' ''
According to a National Review article in the pre-CAIR days, both
Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmad were top officers in the Islamic Association
for Palestine. Former FBI counterterrorism chief Oliver ``Buck'' Revell
called Awad's former employer, the Islamic Association for Palestine,
``a front organization for Hamas that engages in propaganda for Islamic
militants.''
A September 24, 2001, L.A. Times story described the connection
between the Islamic Association of Palestine and the Holy Land
Foundation this way: ``The IAP and the Holy Land were founded and
funded by Mousa abu Marzook. . . . He's also the political leader of
the terrorist group Hamas.''
Andrew McCarthy, a formal Federal prosecutor who led the 1995
prosecution against Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, the ``blind sheik'' who
was found guilty of planning the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, in a
National Review article notes that there are ``several persons
connected to CAIR who have been convicted of Federal felonies including
terrorism.''
McCarthy includes in the group Ghassan Elashi, one of the founding
members of CAIR's Dallas-area chapter, and also co-founder and former
chairman of the Holy Land Foundation. According to July 9, 2007, Dallas
Morning News report, Elashi was sentenced to ``nearly 7 years in prison
for doing business with a terrorist and violating export laws.'' In a
1994 forum discussion videotaped at Barry University, CAIR's Mr. Awad
said, ``I'm in support of the Hamas movement.'' CAIR has subsequently
sought to discredit his video on his Web site by saying this quote was
in response to a specific question and that Hamas was only designated a
``foreign terrorist organization,'' in January 1995 and did not commit
its first wave of suicide bombings until late 1994 after Mr. Awad made
the comment. It is noteworthy that Hamas' 1988 covenant describes
itself as ``one of the wings in the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine''
and says that ``the day of judgment will not come about until Muslims
fight Jews and kill them.''
CAIR's defense and Mr. Awad's quote based simply on chronology is
wanting in light of Hamas' founding principles which clearly embrace
violence. As the Washington Post's Richard Cohen wrote in April of
2009: ``Read the Hamas charter. It is not some uplifting cry of a
downtrodden people seeking its freedom but a repellant anti-Semitic
screed.''
CAIR's mission statement focuses on protecting the civil rights of
Muslims in America and on improving Islam's image. But CAIR's action
under the umbrella of civil rights raises troubling questions.
In November 2006, US Airways removed six imams from a flight
following passenger reports of unusual behavior. An Investor's Business
Daily piece described the imams' action this way: ``At the gate before
boarding, they angrily cursed the U.S. Then they bowed to Mecca and
prayed `very loud' shouting `Allah Allah, Allah' according to the gate
agent and another witness. On the plane, they didn't take their
assigned seats and instead fanned out to the front, the middle, and the
rear of the plane. . . . Some ran back and forth speaking to each other
in Arabic. Adding to suspicions, most of them asked for seatbelt
extensions even though they didn't need them--or even use them.
``Following the incident, the imams and CAIR filed a lawsuit against
US Airways, the Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Airports Commission
and `John Doe' passengers,'' meaning the passengers on the plane.
Omar Mohammedi, the New York attorney who represented the imams, was
a former president for the board of directors for CAIR, New York. The
suit charged that the John Doe passengers ``may have made false reports
against plaintiffs solely with the intent to discriminate against them
on the basis of their race, religion, ethnicity and national origin.''
CAIR subsequently called on the Department of Justice to investigate
violations of civil liberties for the six religious leaders taken off
the plane.
The then-president of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a
Washington, DC public interest-based law firm protecting the free
expression of all religious traditions, wrote the following letter to
CAIR regarding suit against the John Doe passengers:
``This is a first for us. We have never opposed someone else's claim
for religious discrimination but this tactic of threatening suit
against ordinary citizens is so far beyond the traditions of civil
rights litigation in the United States that we must oppose it to defend
the good name of religious liberty itself.''

It is noteworthy that the Becket Fund has successfully argued cases
for Muslims including securing a place for Muslim public school
students in Texas to pray. In March of 2007, the Arizona Republic
called the suit against ordinary citizens ``intimidation by lawsuit.''
On April 9, 2007, the San Francisco Chronicle reported that CAIR's
Ibrahim Hooper had a notably different take: ``It is wrongheaded for
observers to be suspicious of innocent behavior. Praying or asking for
a seatbelt extension--simply because a Muslim `That Muslim is wearing a
tie,' Hooper scoffed. `He can take it off and strangle someone.' ''
The U.S. Department of Transportation conducted an investigation
following the passenger complaints and found that US Airways did not
discriminate against the six imams when it removed them. In a letter to
CAIR's acting legal director, the assistant general counsel for
Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings wrote the following: ``We find the
decision to remove the imams from the aircraft was based on information
available to the captain at the time and was reasonable . . . it
appears that the captain decided to remove the imams because of
security concerns as a result of the sum of the imams' actual and
perceived behavior, not their race or ethnicity. The fact that the
captain's concerns were not borne out in hindsight does not make the
action that he took discriminatory.''
CAIR's approach in this case was not simply an inconvenience. Rather,
it had potential security implications as well. Airports nationwide
implore travelers to report suspicious activities. Signs on major
highways, bridges and tunnels throughout America do the same. New York
Metropolitan Transit Authority introduced an ad campaign which has been
adopted by municipalities around the country as part of their own anti-
terrorism campaign. The ad features the following admonition: if you
see something, say something.

[[Page H6674]]

But CAIR would have had Americans thinking, If you see something,
think twice before you say something, lest you get mired in a lawsuit.
USA Today editorialized in the days following the imams' suit and said:
``This legal tactic seems designed to intimidate passengers willing to
do exactly what authorities have requested--say something about
suspicious activity.'' The paper went on to report that ``the imams
want to know the names of an elderly couple who turned around to watch
and then made cell phone calls presumably to authorities.''
In a response to the incident at the Minneapolis Airport, Congressman
Peter King, the ranking member on the House Homeland Security
Committee, and Congressman Steve Pearce first moved to provide immunity
to those on public transportation who report suspicious activity
through a recommittal motion to the Rail and Public Transportation
Security Act of 2007, which the House overwhelmingly passed in March
2007 by a vote of 304-121.
Later in the 110th Congress, despite CAIR's public lobbying effort,
Mr. King and Senator Joe Lieberman were successful in adding a section
to the 9/11 Commission Implementation Act, Public Law 11053, which
provides legal immunity to individuals who report terrorists or
suspicious activity which they see on trains or planes to law
enforcement.
In what has become a familiar refrain, Nihad Awad, on FOX News, March
31, 2007, said that Peter King's legislative efforts were encouraging
Islamophobia. In fact, the bill language had the potential to encourage
other John Does who encounter suspicious activity to report it to
authorities.
CAIR's funding is also a source of interest. Apart from the financial
link with Holy Land Foundation, there is much that is unclear as to
whether and to what degree CAIR is receiving contributions from foreign
governments. In a March 2007 interview with the Chicago Tribune, Ahmed
Rehab, CAIR-Chicago's executive director, said, ``Neither CAIR chapters
nor the national office solicits or accepts money from any foreign
government.''
A January 2007 open letter on CAIR's Web site says they are ``proud
to receive support of every individual, whether Muslim, Christian,
Jewish, or of another faith background, who supports the mission of
promoting justice and mutual understanding as long as they are not an
official of any foreign government and there are no strings attached to
the request.''
Yet in a sensitive, but unclassified, May 2006 State Department cable
which was brought to my attention, U.S. embassy staff in Abu Dhabi
cabled that the UAE press was reporting that ``Sheikh Hamdan bin Rashid
al-Maktoum, deputy ruler of Dubai and UAE Minister of Finance and
Industry has `endorsed a proposal to build a property in the U.S. to
serve as an endowment for CAIR.'''

{time} 1345

In another sensitive, but unclassified, June 2006 State Department
cable, U.S. Embassy staff in Saudi Arabia reported the following after
meeting with a CAIR delegation. The cable said, ``One admitted reason
for the group's current visit to the KSA (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) was
to solicit $50 million in governmental and nongovernmental
contributions.'' I submit both cables for the Record.
According to the June 2006 cable, ``The core delegation consisted of
CAIR Board Chairman Dr. Parez Ahmed, Executive Director Nihad Awad, and
Communications Director Cary (Ibrahim) Hooper.'' On an MSNBC talk show
with Tucker Carlson in September 2006, just 3 months after the trip,
Ibrahim Hooper claimed, ``To my knowledge, we don't take money from the
Government of Saudi Arabia.''
I want to make it clear that it is important to understand that
American Muslims, like all Americans, are entitled to organize,
advocate, and engage in the political process; such are the makings of
a vibrant democracy. They have taken advantage of the opportunity
America provides for every background. They are teachers, doctors,
policemen, they are mothers and fathers and neighbors.
I am reminded of a young Pakistani American who is Muslim that I had
the privilege of meeting during one of my visits to Walter Reed
Hospital. I met him when he was in the midst of his physical therapy,
therapy that was necessary because he had lost both legs while in
combat in Iraq. Despite his tremendous sacrifice, he was committed to
the hard work of rehabilitation, in part because he hoped to go back to
Iraq. He was a patriot of the sort that ought to give us pause and
ought to make us proud.
I want to be absolutely clear that concerns I have with CAIR are
specific to the organization and not to the Muslim faith. Even a
passing glance at my record in Congress should put any thought to the
contrary to rest.
In Sudan, Chechnya, China, Bosnia, and Kosovo, I have spoken out in
defense of people of the Muslim faith. I have been to Sudan five times,
including leading the first congressional delegation to Darfur, where
nearly all the victims of the genocide are Muslim.
I was the only Member of Congress to visit Chechnya during the
fighting in 1995. When I returned, I condemned the violence against the
Chechen people, most of whom were Muslim, and called for a cease-fire.
I was one of the only Members to visit Muslim men in a Serb-run
prisoner of war camp in Bosnia, where I saw evidence of a modern-day
Holocaust taking place. And very early on, I began speaking out against
the ethnic cleansing and the culture of genocide against the Bosnian
people. I spoke out in favor of lifting the arms embargo against Bosnia
so that the Muslim Bosnian Government could defend itself. I have
visited Kosovo five times, and I voted and spoke out on the floor to
approve the bombing campaign to stop the Serbian atrocities against
Muslims in Kosovo.
I was one of the first Members to raise concerns about the
persecution of Muslims in China, and continue to speak out when few
others do.
Further, I was the author of the International Religious Freedom Act
which created the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom as
well as the International Religious Freedom Office at the State
Department. Central to the act was the assertion that ``freedom of
religious beliefs and practices is a universal human right and
fundamental freedom.'' The legislation, and ultimately the offices it
created, strengthens the United States' advocacy on behalf of
individuals persecuted in foreign countries on account of religion,
which, of course, includes persecuted Muslims.
America is an imperfect Nation, but a great Nation, a ``shining city
on a hill'' as described by our Founders, a beacon of hope for
persecuted and oppressed people. For centuries, the ``huddled masses''
depicted in the iconic poem at the base of the Statue of Liberty have
arrived on these shores seeking a better life for themselves and their
families.
My grandparents immigrated to America from Germany. My father served
in World War II. Part of the reason he did so was that he felt a need
to show that his loyalty was to America. Even though my grandparents
were both native German speakers, when World War I broke out, my
grandmother decided from that day forward only English would be spoken
in their home.
I share this bit of personal history to illustrate that I am
sensitive to the challenges facing new immigrants, especially during
times of war. There have been instances in our Nation's history,
especially when our country has been under attack, where the civil
liberties of certain groups of people have been violated because other
people were afraid. This is inexcusable. But this is the exception, not
the rule.
Our experiment in self-governance has been marked by an unwavering
commitment to basic freedoms for all people, among them the right to
worship according to the dictates of your conscience. Many American
Muslims left countries where such freedom is unimaginable; however, in
a pluralistic society like ours, these principles are paramount. To
silence or otherwise repress people of faith is inimical to the
American way. In a public discourse, to accuse someone of religious
bigotry or intolerance is a sure way to stifle debate.
On October 4, 2008, the editorial page editor of The Columbus
Dispatch spoke to CAIR's bent toward accusation as a means of muzzling
debate. They said, ``For many years, CAIR has waged a campaign to
intimidate and silence

[[Page H6675]]

anyone who raises alarms about the dangers of Islamic extremism. CAIR's
rationale is that discussions of Islamic extremism lead to animosity
not just toward those who twist Islam into a justification for
terrorism, but toward all who practice Islam.
``CAIR's concern is understandable, but its response is
unreasonable.'' They went on to say, ``The group acts properly when it
hammers home the point that only a small number of Muslims support
religiously motivated violence, and that targeting law-abiding Muslims
is wrong. Where CAIR errs is in labeling anyone who discusses Islamic
terrorism a bigot and hatemonger, an Islamophobe, to use CAIR's
favorite slur.'' Ironically, some of CAIR's most pointed attacks have
in fact been aimed at other Muslims who dare to have differing views.
In a 2006 Philadelphia Inquirer piece, CAIR's Hooper is quoted as
saying Zuhdi Jasser, President of the American Islamic Forum for
Democracy, who has been critical of CAIR, was ``providing others with
an opportunity to advance an agenda that is hostile to the American
Muslim community.''
Given CAIR's genesis, its associations with known terrorist entities
and individuals, and its tactics--namely, attempting to discredit
anyone who dares to speak out against its organization--their cries of
victimization and accusations of religious bigotry appear disingenuous.
And given the dangerous world in which we live today, any attempt to
literally silence honest discourse about the nature of the threats
facing our country is intolerable and must be addressed.
I stand today with other elected officials who have raised questions
about CAIR. Senator Schumer describes CAIR as an organization ``which
we know has ties to terrorism.'' Democratic Senator Dick Durbin has
said that CAIR is ``unusual in its extreme rhetoric and its association
with groups that are suspect.''
Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer withdrew an award she gave to an
official at a local CAIR chapter because she ``had concerns about
statements by some CAIR officials and about claims of financial links
to terrorism.'' And other Senators, including Republicans Jon Kyl and
Tom Coburn, have voiced support for the FBI's actions in severing ties
with CAIR.
I stand today with counterterrorism experts, including Steven
Pomerantz, the FBI's former chief of counterterrorism, who has stated,
``CAIR, its leaders, and its activities effectively give aid to
international terrorist groups.''
And perhaps most importantly, I stand with thousands of American
Muslims for whom CAIR does not speak. In June, 2007, the Washington
Times published a report which analyzed CAIR's tax documents and found
that CAIR's membership has declined by 90 percent since 9/11. Zuhdi
Jasser of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy was quoted in the
article as saying, ``This is the untold story in the myth that CAIR
represents the American Muslim population. They only represent their
membership and donors.''
In 1999, the Islamic Supreme Council of America, ISCA, issued an open
letter to all Muslims after Shaykh Kabbani, Chairman of the ISCA, spoke
at a State Department open forum on Islamic extremism and subsequently
came under public attack by several organizations, including CAIR. In
the open letter, ISCA says the organizations attacking Kabbani, among
them CAIR, ``have not quoted a single statement of Shaykh Kabbani in
full or in context. Moreover, the statements were augmented with
emotionally charged words like `promoted and generalized an
allegation,' `outrageous statements,' and `Islamophobic,' thereby
thwarting his original intention and message.'' The letter goes on to
say, ``In their action alerts, CAIR has a chronic tendency to
negatively juxtapose Islam and Americans.''
Consider, too, the words of Dr. Hedieh Mirahmadi, then general
secretary of the Islamic Supreme Council of America, quoted in a 1999
ISCA press release following this same incident. She remarked, ``The
carefully orchestrated and calculated plot to intimidate Shaykh Kabbani
into retracting his statements only goes to prove the unwillingness to
tolerate differences of opinion and belief, as well as the extent to
which they would go to silence the voice of opposition.''
Or consider the testimony of Zeyno Baran, a prominent Turkish
American scholar who is presently a senior fellow at the Hudson
Institute. In July of 2008, speaking before the Senate Committee on
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, she stated that she
believed CAIR ``was created by the Muslim Brotherhood to influence the
U.S. Government, Congress, and NGOs, along with academic and media
groups'' and lamented that, ``despite being founded by leading
Islamists, CAIR has successfully portrayed itself as a mainstream
Muslim organization over the past 15 years and has been treated as such
by many U.S. Government officials.''
Or most recently, an April 2009 advertisement in Weekly Standard
authored by ``American Muslims,'' applauded the FBI for rejecting CAIR.
The signatories included representatives of six different
organizations, and I submit a copy of the ad for the Record. The
signatories wrote, ``We observe that they (CAIR) denounce `terrorism'
in general terms, but not the specific actions of Islamic groups like
Hamas or Hezbollah. They denounce violence, but not the ideologies
behind it.'' Further, the group acknowledged CAIR's ``attempts to chill
free speech by calling critics of radical Islam `Islamophobes.' ''
Finally, I would like to close my speech by recognizing the men and
women of the FBI and the hard work they do every day to keep this
country safe, and to restate the FBI's own words, ``Until we can
resolve whether there continues to be a connection between CAIR or its
executives and Hamas, the FBI does not view CAIR as an appropriate
liaison partner.''
I completely agree.
R 221435Z MAY 06
FM AMEMBASSY ABU DHABI
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 5272
INFO AMCONSUL DUBAI

UNCLAS ABU DHABI 002127
SENSITIVE
FOR NEA/ARP, NEA/PPD; INFO NEA/FO, R

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: KISL, SOCI, PHUM, PGOV, KDEM, AE
SUBJECT: VISIT BY COUNCIL ON AMERICAN ISLAMIC RELATIONS
(CAIR) TO UAE
1.(U) On May 21, the Council on American Islamic Relations
(CAIR) paid a courtesy call on the Ambassador to discuss the
organization's issues, outreach strategies, and its visit to
the UAE. The UAE press has reported that Sheikh Hamdan bin
Rashid al-Maktoum, Deputy Ruler of Dubai and UAE Minister of
Finance and Industry, ``has endorsed a proposal to build a
property in the U.S. to serve as an endowment for CAIR.''
DCM, PAO and MEPI Regional Director also participated in the
meeting.
2.(U) The group expressed ideas about countering negative
stereotypes about Muslims in the U.S. (``Islamophobia'') and
addressing anti-Americanism in the Middle East. They
mentioned previous meetings with State Department officials,
U/S Karen Hughes and A/S David Welch, their attendance at the
Secretary's Iftar, and spoke of a possible meeting with
President Bush in the future.
3.(U) Mr. Don Myers, representing Washington, D.C. public
relations firm Hill & Knowlton, provided a short
demonstration of a PR campaign designed to support CAIR's
overall organizational objectives defined as: 1) political
empowerment of Muslims, 2) grassroots effort by CAIR to
improve community relations with non-Muslims, 3) launching of
an effective, long-term (5 year) advertising/outreach
campaign to counter negative stereotypes about Muslims.
4.(U) Members of the CAIR delegation included: Hon. Larry
Shaw, Senator (North Carolina General Assembly); Hon. Paul
Findley, Former U.S. Representative; Don Myers, Washington,
D.C. public relations firm Hill & Knowlton; Nihad Awad, CAIR
Executive Director and Co-Founder; Cary (Ibrahim) Hooper,
CAIR Communication Director and Co-Founder; Dr. Parvez Ahmed,
CAIR Board Chairman; and Dr. Nabil Sadoun, CAIR Board Member.
5.(U) CAIR delegation also paid a call earlier in the day
on Sheikh Sultan bin Muhammad al-Qassimi, Ruler of Sharjah,
which was covered in the press.
6.(U) Sheikh Ali al-Hashemi, UAE Presidential Adviser on
Islamic affairs, is hosting a reception at his house this
evening, May 22, in honor of the CAIR group; Ambassador and
PolOff to attend. Al-Hashemi also thanked the Ambassador for
receiving the CAIR delegation.
7.(SBU) Comment: CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad told us
that while they were pleased with the results of the meeting
with Sheikh Hamdan bin Rashid, they had no concrete
information on the size of the endowment or when it might be
forthcoming. Awad also mentioned that the Bin Hamoodah Group,
a $500 million/year trading company, founded by three Emirati
brothers and representing Haliburton, IBM, FMC Corporation

[[Page H6676]]

and General Motors, is CAIR's main benefactor in the UAE. One
newly-rich stock trader, Talal Khoori (UAE national of
Iranian origin), is believed to have donated one million
dollars to CAIR.
Sison.
P 281502Z JUN 06
FM AMEMBASSY RIYADH
TO SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 9065
INFO GULF COOPERATION COUNCIL COLLECTIVE
AMCONSUL JEDDAH

UNCLAS RIYADH 005172
SENSITIVE

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: SCUL, KDEM, KISL, PGOV, PHUM, SOCI, SA
SUBJECT: VISIT BY COUNCIL ON AMERICAN ISLAMIC RELATIONS
(CAIR) TO SAUDI ARABIA

REF: ABU DHABI 2127

1.(U) Following up on a similar visit to the UAE in May
(reftel), a delegation from the U.S.-based Council on
American Islamic Relations (CAIR) visited the Kingdom of
Saudi Arabia (KSA) in June. On June 22 the group paid a
courtesy call on the Embassy to discuss the organization's
issues and outreach strategies. In the Ambassador's absence,
DCM received the group, along with the PA Counselor and
Poloff (notetaker).
2.(SBU) Prior to coming to Riyadh, the CAIR group visited
Mecca and Jeddah. Although they apparently were not received
at the highest levels of the SAG, the group assured the
Embassy that ``King Abdullah knows CAIR very well'' and
receives regular updates on the group's projects. After
recalling the success of their visit to the UAE in May, the
group predicted that they would be back in the region by fall
to visit Kuwait and Qatar. The group also mentioned that they
had been well-received in Washington by senior State
Department officials, including Secretary Rice and
Undersecretary Hughes.
3.(U) The core delegation consisted of CAIR Board Chairman
Dr. Parvez Ahmed, Executive Director Nihad Awad, and
Communications Director Cary (Ibrahim) Hooper. Accompanying
them were former U.S. Representative Paul Findley and Don
Myers, a former DoD official now with Hill and Knowlton
public relations.
4.(U) During their hour-long meeting in the Embassy, the
group presented various projects that CAIR is working on to
counter negative stereotypes about Muslims in the U.S.
(``Islamophobia''), linking their work to concern over
growing anti-Americanism in the Middle East. One of the
current CAIR projects they discussed was the presentation of
``accurate books about Islam'' to schools and libraries in
the U.S.
5.(SBU) Mr. Don Myers, representing Hill and Knowlton, gave
a short demonstration of a CAIR-funded media campaign to
support CAIR's overall information outreach effort. According
to Myers, this private campaign will emphasize both
grassroots outreach to improve American non-Muslim
understanding of Muslims and the encouragement of political
engagement by American Muslims. The multi-year broadcast and
print campaign is to be entitled ``Let the Conversation
Begin'' and is aimed at countering negative stereotypes about
Muslims within the broad American public.
6.(SBU) One admitted reason for the group's current visit
to the KSA was to solicit $50 million in governmental and
non-governmental contributions. PA Counselor noted that
private outreach activities can provide valuable support to
USG efforts to build mutual understanding overseas but
cautioned that USG Public Diplomacy (PD) funds cannot be used
or associated with efforts to target American audiences. The
delegation was interested to hear of the Embassy's PD
exchange and activities within the KSA and offered to help
support them in any appropriate way. The group did not share,
however, any details of their success or lack thereof in
fundraising within the KSA.
Oberwetter.



____________________

Master Sgt. Juan Lopez, operations chief, for the One /Eight Security Detachment, with son, Cpl. Jared P. Lopez, Comm Co. 2nd MLG serving America at Camp Al Taqaddum, Iraq.Photo CPL. M.M.Bravo

Byline
Cpl. Bobbie A. Curtis —When Cpl. Jared P. Lopez joined the Marine Corps in September 2006, he always knew there would be a possibility that he would deploy at the same time as his father, who has served in the Marine Corps for nearly 20 years—but he didn’t think that they would end up on the same base in Iraq.

Much to his surprise – that’s just what happened. In February 2009, Master Sgt. Juan Lopez, the operations chief for the 1st Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment Security Detachment, arrived at Camp Al Taqaddum, Iraq, where his son had already been serving for a month.

Both Marines agreed that having family near them on the deployment has made it easier on them and the rest of their family.

“I can always talk to him if I have any questions,” stated Cpl. Lopez, a data/wire technician with Communication Company, 2nd Marine Logistics Group (Forward). “It’s good to have a mentor that knows about life and the military.”

He said that his father helps him through everyday life and gives him advice on the military that he has learned during his long career.

“You can define leadership but I think there’s a difference as far as the military and civilian sides of it,” Lopez continued, pointing out his father’s well-rounded knowledge. “He has given me good insight.”

Master Sgt. Lopez said the best part of having his son serving with him in the still relatively dangerous country, is the positive impact it has had on Cpl. Lopez’s mother.

“His mom’s doing well,” the senior Lopez said. “She’s very happy with her husband and son over here at the same time. It makes her feel a lot more comfortable.”

The younger Lopez said he thought about following in his father’s footsteps many years before their faithful uniting in Iraq.

“I always wanted to join since I was young,” he explained.

Lopez said that after high school he decided that college was not the path he wished to initially follow.

“I took some college, like two classes … I said I’d rather put my time in, join the Marine Corps and serve my country, and that way set myself up for college at the same time.”

One of Master Sgt. Lopez’s other three sons, Cpl. Dane Lopez, an intelligence analyst with 1st Radio Battalion, 1st Marine Division, was originally scheduled to deploy to Iraq at the same time as his father and brother, before sudden changes were made. His father remembers having a good hunch that his two sons may join the Corps, recalling some good indicators from their childhood.

“I just knew that this was probably something they would do,” he said. “They were always talking to Marines, wearing Marine gear and doing Marine things.”

For Cpl. Lopez, growing up as a ‘military brat’ and then joining the Marine Corps shed some light on all the things he observed while living with his father through much of his long career as an infantryman.

“Experiencing the Marine Corps first hand was different,” he explained. “As a dependent all you had to worry about was school. I knew my dad was going to deploy, be in the field, and be gone for two weeks at a time for training.

“After witnessing the fleet, I understand more and more … where his certain mannerisms came from and why he was the way he was,” he continued. “When he said he was worn out and had to wake up early, now I see why he went to bed.”

Recently, Lopez beat out about 50 of his peers to win honor graduate at the 2nd MLG (Fwd) Corporal’s Leadership Course here. He explained that having his father in the Marine Corps contributed to his success and pushed him to excel at everything he does.

“He definitely inspires me to give everything my best,” he said.

Lopez said that he is still deciding if he is going to make the Marine Corps a career as his father did. He added that he may follow in his father’s footsteps by doing the same special duty as him.

“I love being a Marine,” he said. “Now that I am getting closer and closer to the end [of my first term], I want to do MSG (Marine Security Guard Duty). If that takes me into the next enlistment, that is fine.”

Both Marines said they have been grateful for the opportunity to serve side-by-side with their family members.

"I think it's an honor to be able to serve with your family," said Cpl. Lopez. "It's definitely made things a little easier."

A Great Speech by PM Netanyahu

Sure to be rejected outright by anyone whose prime directive is the complete and total annihilation of Israel, this speech by Prime Minister Netanyahu is a masterpiece of raising the ante and putting your money where your mouth. If the Palestinians want peace then peace shall reign through out the land. What could be simpler.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's speech at the Begin-Sadat Center at Bar-Ilan University:

Honored guests, citizens of Israel.

Peace has always been our people's most ardent desire. Our prophets gave the world the vision of peace, we greet one another with wishes of peace, and our prayers conclude with the word "peace."

We are gathered this evening in an institution named for two pioneers of peace, Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat, and we share in their vision.

Two-and-a-half months ago, I took the oath of office as the prime minister of Israel. I pledged to establish a national unity government - and I did. I believed, and I still believe, that unity was essential for us now more than ever as we face three immense challenges - the Iranian threat, the economic crisis and the advancement of peace.

The Iranian threat looms large before us, as was further demonstrated yesterday. The greatest danger confronting Israel, the Middle East, the entire world and human race, is the nexus between radical Islam and nuclear weapons. I discussed this issue with President [Barack] Obama during my recent visit to Washington, and I will raise it again in my meetings next week with European leaders. For years, I have been working tirelessly to forge an international alliance to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Confronting a global economic crisis, the government acted swiftly to stabilize Israel's economy. We passed a two-year budget in the government - and the Knesset will soon approve it.

And the third challenge, so exceedingly important, is the advancement of peace. I also spoke about this with President Obama, and I fully support the idea of a regional peace that he is leading.

I share the president's desire to bring about a new era of reconciliation in our region. To this end, I met with President [Hosni] Mubarak in Egypt and King Abdullah in Jordan to elicit the support of these leaders in expanding the circle of peace in our region.

I turn to all Arab leaders tonight and I say: Let us meet. Let us speak of peace and let us make peace. I am ready to meet with you at any time. I am willing to go to Damascus, to Riyadh, to Beirut, to any place - including Jerusalem.

I call on the Arab countries to cooperate with the Palestinians and with us to advance an economic peace. An economic peace is not a substitute for a political peace, but an important element to achieving it. Together, we can undertake projects to overcome the scarcities of our region, like water desalination, or to maximize its advantages, like developing solar energy, or laying gas and petroleum lines, and transportation links between Asia, Africa and Europe.

The economic success of the Gulf States has impressed us all, and it has impressed me. I call on the talented entrepreneurs of the Arab world to come and invest here and to assist the Palestinians - and us - in spurring the economy.

Together, we can develop industrial areas that will generate thousands of jobs and create tourist sites that will attract millions of visitors eager to walk in the footsteps of history - in Nazareth and in Bethlehem, around the walls of Jericho and the walls of Jerusalem, on the banks of the Sea of Galilee and the baptismal site of the Jordan.

There is an enormous potential for archeological tourism, if we can only learn to cooperate and to develop it.

I turn to you, our Palestinian neighbors, led by the Palestinian Authority, and I say: Let's begin negotiations immediately without preconditions.

Israel is obligated by its international commitments and expects all parties to keep their commitments.

We want to live with you in peace, as good neighbors. We want our children and your children to never again experience war: that parents, brothers and sisters will never again know the agony of losing loved ones in battle; that our children will be able to dream of a better future and realize that dream; and that together we will invest our energies in plowshares and pruning hooks, not swords and spears.

I know the face of war. I have experienced battle. I lost close friends, I lost a brother. I have seen the pain of bereaved families. I do not want war. No one in Israel wants war.

If we join hands and work together for peace, there is no limit to the development and prosperity we can achieve for our two peoples - in the economy, agriculture, trade, tourism and education - most importantly, in providing our youth a better world in which to live, a life full of tranquility, creativity, opportunity and hope.

If the advantages of peace are so evident, we must ask ourselves why peace remains so remote, even as our hand remains outstretched to peace? Why has this conflict continued for more than 60 years?

In order to bring an end to the conflict, we must give an honest and forthright answer to the question: What is the root of the conflict?

In his speech to the first Zionist Conference in Basel, the founder of the Zionist movement, Theodor Herzl, said about the Jewish national home, "This idea is so big that we must speak of it only in the simplest terms." Today, I will speak about the immense challenge of peace in the simplest words possible.

Even as we look toward the horizon, we must be firmly connected to reality, to the truth. And the simple truth is that the root of the conflict was, and remains, the refusal to recognize the right of the Jewish people to a state of their own, in their historic homeland.

In 1947, when the United Nations proposed the partition plan of a Jewish state and an Arab state, the entire Arab world rejected the resolution. The Jewish community, by contrast, welcomed it by dancing and rejoicing.

The Arabs rejected any Jewish state, in any borders.

Those who think that the continued enmity toward Israel is a product of our presence in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, is confusing cause and consequence.

The attacks against us began in the 1920s, escalated into a comprehensive attack in 1948 with the declaration of Israel's independence, continued with the fedayeen attacks in the 1950s, and climaxed in 1967, on the eve of the Six Day War, in an attempt to tighten a noose around the neck of the State of Israel.

All this occurred during the 50 years before a single Israeli soldier ever set foot in Judea and Samaria .

Fortunately, Egypt and Jordan left this circle of enmity. The signing of peace treaties has brought about an end to their claims against Israel, an end to the conflict. But to our regret, this is not the case with the Palestinians. The closer we get to an agreement with them, the further they retreat and raise demands that are inconsistent with a true desire to end the conflict.

Many good people have told us that withdrawal from territories is the key to peace with the Palestinians. Well, we withdrew. But the fact is that every withdrawal was met with massive waves of terror, by suicide bombers and thousands of missiles.

We tried to withdraw with an agreement and without an agreement. We tried a partial withdrawal and a full withdrawal. In 2000 and again last year, Israel proposed an almost total withdrawal in exchange for an end to the conflict, and twice our offers were rejected.

We evacuated every last inch of the Gaza strip, we uprooted dozens of settlements and evicted thousands of Israelis from their homes, and in response, we received a hail of missiles on our cities, towns and children.

The claim that territorial withdrawals will bring peace with the Palestinians, or at least advance peace, has up till now not stood the test of reality.

In addition to this, Hamas in the South, like Hizbullah in the North, repeatedly proclaims its commitment to "liberate" the Israeli cities of Ashkelon, Beersheba, Acre and Haifa.

Territorial withdrawals have not lessened the hatred, and to our regret, Palestinian moderates are not yet ready to say the simple words: Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people, and it will stay that way.

Achieving peace will require courage and candor from both sides, and not only from the Israeli side.

The Palestinian leadership must arise and say: "Enough of this conflict. We recognize the right of the Jewish people to a state of their own in this land, and we are prepared to live beside you in true peace." I am yearning for that moment, for when Palestinian leaders say those words to our people and to their people, then a path will be opened to resolving all the problems between our peoples, no matter how complex they may be.

Therefore, a fundamental prerequisite for ending the conflict is a public, binding and unequivocal Palestinian recognition of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people.

To vest this declaration with practical meaning, there must also be a clear understanding that the Palestinian refugee problem will be resolved outside Israel's borders. For it is clear that any demand for resettling Palestinian refugees within Israel undermines Israel's continued existence as the state of the Jewish people.

The Palestinian refugee problem must be solved, and it can be solved, as we ourselves proved in a similar situation. Tiny Israel successfully absorbed tens of thousands of Jewish refugees who left their homes and belongings in Arab countries.

Therefore, justice and logic demand that the Palestinian refugee problem be solved outside Israel's borders. On this point, there is a broad national consensus. I believe that with goodwill and international investment, this humanitarian problem can be permanently resolved.

So far I have spoken about the need for Palestinians to recognize our rights. In a moment, I will speak openly about our need to recognize their rights.

But let me first say that the connection between the Jewish people and the Land of Israel has lasted for more than 3,500 years. Judea and Samaria, the places where Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, David and Solomon, and Isaiah and Jeremiah lived, are not alien to us. This is the land of our forefathers.

The right of the Jewish people to a state in the Land of Israel does not derive from the catastrophes that have plagued our people. True, for 2,000 years, the Jewish people suffered expulsions, pogroms, blood libels and massacres which culminated in a Holocaust - a suffering which has no parallel in human history.

There are those who say that if the Holocaust had not occurred, the state of Israel would never have been established. But I say that if the state of Israel had been established earlier, the Holocaust would not have occurred.

This tragic history of powerlessness explains why the Jewish people need a sovereign power of self-defense.

But our right to build our sovereign state here, in the land of Israel, arises from one simple fact: This is the homeland of the Jewish people, this is where our identity was forged.

As Israel's first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, proclaimed in Israel's Declaration of Independence: "The Jewish people arose in the Land of Israel, and it was here that its spiritual, religious and political character was shaped. Here they attained their sovereignty, and here they bequeathed to the world their national and cultural treasures, and the most eternal of books."

But we must also tell the truth in its entirety: within this homeland lives a large Palestinian community. We do not want to rule over them, we do not want to govern their lives, we do not want to impose either our flag or our culture on them.

In my vision of peace, in this small land of ours, two peoples live freely, side-by-side, in amity and mutual respect. Each will have its own flag, its own national anthem, its own government. Neither will threaten the security or survival of the other.

These two realities - our connection to the Land of Israel, and the Palestinian population living within it - have created deep divisions in Israeli society. But the truth is that we have much more that unites us than divides us.

I have come tonight to give expression to that unity, and to the principles of peace and security on which there is broad agreement within Israeli society. These are the principles that guide our policy.

This policy must take into account the international situation that has recently developed. We must recognize this reality and at the same time stand firmly on those principles essential for Israel.

I have already stressed the first principle - recognition. Palestinians must clearly and unambiguously recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people. The second principle is demilitarization. The territory under Palestinian control must be demilitarized with ironclad security provisions for Israel.

Without these two conditions, there is a real danger that an armed Palestinian state would emerge that would become another terrorist base against the Jewish state, such as the one in Gaza.

We don't want Kassam rockets on Petah Tikva, Grad rockets on Tel Aviv, or missiles on Ben-Gurion Airport. We want peace.

In order to achieve peace, we must ensure that Palestinians will not be able to import missiles into their territory, to field an army, to close their airspace to us, or to make pacts with the likes of Hizbullah and Iran. On this point as well, there is wide consensus within Israel.

It is impossible to expect us to agree in advance to the principle of a Palestinian state without assurances that this state will be demilitarized.

On a matter so critical to the existence of Israel, we must first have our security needs addressed.

Therefore, today we ask our friends in the international community, led by the United States, for what is critical to the security of Israel: Clear commitments that in a future peace agreement, the territory controlled by the Palestinians will be demilitarized - namely, without an army, without control of its airspace, and with effective security measures to prevent weapons smuggling into the territory; real monitoring, and not what occurs in Gaza today. And obviously, the Palestinians will not be able to forge military pacts.

Without this, sooner or later, these territories will become another Hamastan. And that we cannot accept.

I told President Obama when I was in Washington that if we could agree on the substance, then the terminology would not pose a problem.

And here is the substance that I now state clearly: If we receive this guarantee regarding demilitarization and Israel's security needs, and if the Palestinians recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people, then we will be ready in a future peace agreement to reach a solution where a demilitarized Palestinian state exists alongside the Jewish state.

Regarding the remaining important issues that will be discussed as part of the final settlement, my positions are known: Israel needs defensible borders, and Jerusalem must remain the united capital of Israel with continued religious freedom for all faiths.

The territorial question will be discussed as part of the final peace agreement. In the meantime, we have no intention of building new settlements or of expropriating additional land for existing settlements.

But there is a need to enable the residents to live normal lives, to allow mothers and fathers to raise their children like families elsewhere. The settlers are neither the enemies of the people nor the enemies of peace. Rather, they are an integral part of our people, a principled, pioneering and Zionist public.

Unity among us is essential and will help us achieve reconciliation with our neighbors. That reconciliation must already begin by altering existing realities. I believe that a strong Palestinian economy will strengthen peace.

If the Palestinians turn toward peace - in fighting terror, in strengthening governance and the rule of law, in educating their children for peace and in stopping incitement against Israel - we will do our part in making every effort to facilitate freedom of movement and access, and to enable them to develop their economy. All of this will help us advance a peace treaty between us.

Above all else, the Palestinians must decide between the path of peace and the path of Hamas. The Palestinian Authority will have to establish the rule of law in Gaza and overcome Hamas. Israel will not sit at the negotiating table with terrorists who seek their destruction.

Hamas will not even allow the Red Cross to visit our kidnapped soldier Gilad Schalit, who has spent three years in captivity, cut off from his parents, his family and his people. We are committed to bringing him home, healthy and safe.

With a Palestinian leadership committed to peace, with the active participation of the Arab world, and the support of the United States and the international community, there is no reason why we cannot achieve a breakthrough to peace.

Our people have already proven that we can do the impossible. Over the past 61 years, while constantly defending our existence, we have performed wonders.

Our microchips are powering the world's computers. Our medicines are treating diseases once considered incurable. Our drip irrigation is bringing arid lands back to life across the globe. And Israeli scientists are expanding the boundaries of human knowledge.

If only our neighbors would respond to our call - peace, too, will be in our reach.

I call on the leaders of the Arab world and on the Palestinian leadership, let us continue together on the path of Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat, Yitzhak Rabin and King Hussein. Let us realize the vision of the prophet Isaiah, who in Jerusalem 2,700 years ago said: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, and they shall learn war no more." With God's help, we will know no more war. We will know peace.

Company D, 3rd Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, busy sweeping and clearing Iraq's western desert ISO orcs

Two LAR War Pigs from Company D, 3rd LAR speed across the Iraqi desert toward Al Qaim. The Marines of Company D operating in support of the 7th Iraqi Army Division conduct a route clearance operation in the desert of western Al Anbar province.



by Lance Cpl. Jason Hernandez

AL ANBAR PROVINCE, Iraq – Sand blows in small funnels across a narrow, deserted Iraqi highway. Minus the roadway itself and distant high-tension wires, there is not a single identifiable feature, only silence and the blowing sand. That is until the silence of the barren, unforgiving desert landscape gives way to the distant hum of vehicle engines.

The roar of 250-horsepower Detroit 6V53T engines powering two Marine light armored vehicles may have made the sound, but the first vehicles to emerge from the swirling dust and sand were two Iraqi army tactical vehicles. Within minutes, these Iraqi vehicles are joined by LAVs and a small convoy of other tactical vehicles.

This was no ordinary Sunday drive. Instead, operating under the bright Iraqi sun and a cloudless blue sky, soldiers from the 7th Iraqi Army Division and members of Company D, 3rd Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, Regimental Combat Team 8, were busy sweeping and clearing Iraq's vast western desert.

The mission was the latest undertaken by the 7th IA Division, who are now in the lead of securing their sector of the Al Anbar province. In doing so, and as forces from Multi-National Force - West step further back from frontline combat and counterinsurgency duties, the Iraqis are increasingly demonstrating they can secure and safeguard their own country.

Though the Marines of Company D, nicknamed the 'Dragoons,' made their presence known during the two-day mission, the entire operation was planned, organized and set in motion by the Iraqis.

"Our role on this [mission] is simply support, nothing more," yelled 1st Sgt. Larry Buenafe from the turret of his command variant LAV. The senior enlisted Marine from Company D was covered from head to toe in the dust constantly boiling up from the road and ground. "The Iraqis are the ones who got the ball rolling on this one."

When they weren't busy clearing roadways, the Iraqi troops searched the open desert and swept through a long-abandoned compound that had once been used by the Saddam Hussein regime. While the searches were underway, other Iraqi soldiers and the Marines stood nearby providing security or chatting and trading military rations for loafs of fresh bread.

The Iraqi army, a fighting force of seasoned, yet still learning, professionals is seeking to restore order and the rule of law to every corner of Iraq. This operation and its results are but another chapter in a new Iraqi history.

After securing and clearing the former regime compound, the units moved out across the open Iraqi desert. As they moved in an orderly manner across the soft desert sands, Capt. Andrew J. Kressin, the Company D commanding officer, used the featureless landscape to teach an Iraqi army colonel the fundamentals of map reading.

By the end of the operation, the Iraqi colonel understood how to effectively navigate the near-featureless terrain using a global positioning system and more importantly the age-old map and compass method.

"At the Basic School they teach us everything we need to know to be an infantry officer; then they teach us how to teach someone else," said Kressin, "so I took the time to teach their commanding officer how to read a map and navigate accordingly."

For the junior Marines participating in the operation, the experience was a little more personal.

"I think operations like this really give us the opportunity to understand who the guys we're supporting out here really are," said Lance Cpl. Dustin A. Wilson, a rifleman with Company D. "It's funny how no matter how different the parts of the world we come from are, people are still pretty much the same."

Wrapping up their first day with a road cleared and a compound secured, the Marines and soldiers of the combined force stopped and set up camp in the center of the desert, posted a guard force, and grabbed a few hours of sleep.

Afterward, the Dragoons and IA soldiers pushed on to the next objective of their mission – an abandoned oil-pumping station. Once the building was cleared and determined to be free of insurgent presence, the units packed up and rolled out, heading back to Al Asad Air Base with another successful and incident-free mission under their belts.

Once they reached Al Asad, the Marines stopped to take stock of what they'd accomplished, or for that matter, what they'd witnessed the Iraqis accomplish – three major highway routes cleared, a former regime compound secured and an oil-pumping facility identified for possible future use by the Iraqi people.

Standing beside their LAV-25s, the Dragoons looked at one another and didn't talk about how they felt about having supported such a mission, what interesting stories they'd have to tell their children some day or even how they felt about being partly responsible for rebuilding a nation. No, looking back at one another, then up at the yellow, dust-filled sky, Lance Cpl. William Sewell said all that needed to be said, "Let's go grab some chow and get ready for tomorrow."

The Fort Apache Gambit will be Petraeus opening moves in his Afghanistan counterinsurgency strategy against orcs entrenched in the high mountain hot spots.

"You don't live among the people in Afghanistan," he said. "First of all, there's no empty houses. Second, the villages particularly in the rural areas tend to be small." Instead, he said, U.S. troops will establish outposts on high ground from which they can oversee nearby villages as well as roads leading in and out.

This approach, which Petraeus called both "culturally and operationally correct," will reduce the likelihood that the presence of U.S. forces will draw the fighting into rural communities, which would lead to more civilian casualties. WaPo

The additional troops may prevent the fate of Fort Margha where the orcs bypassed the high ground fort and continued to behead and intimidate the villagers.

Bermel

Taliban fighters rule the day and the night in the Bermel district, using threats and atrocities to control the civilian population, Afghans in the valley told a visiting reporter in interviews over two weeks. Accompanied by Arab and Chechen advisers, they behead civilians or sever their hands to force their cooperation. One of the latest Taliban edicts is a ban on cutting trees, so that insurgents can hide and lay ambushes for foreign troops

.

POTUS Barack Hussein Obama II Grants Miranda Rights To Orcs In Afgan

Stephen F. Hayes at the TWS blows the cover off the news story that has been flying under the radar: Captured Orcs now have Miranda Rights thanks to POTUS Obama. The right to be silent is granted to a captured enemy combatant. What could go wrong. The country is in the very best of hands:

"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney, and to have an attorney present during any questioning. If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be provided for you at government expense."

More Problems with the Flying Gold POS Osprey

Crikey! WTH Now? Not much. Except the flying gold POS is also a flying fire starter. The Osprey, the black hole of Marine Corps Budgets is a pyromaniac at starting fires where ever it lands. Even Ships? Yes. Even ships:

"It was discovered that on smaller deck amphibious ships, heat from the downward-pointing nacelles could potentially warp the stringers underneath the deck plates. “We’re concerned with heat on the LPD and LSD decks because the steel is so thin,”
"It was discovered" it was discovered...excusemeeeeee! 72 million dollars of taxpayer money and it was discovered that you can not land the the gold brick anywhere for fear of either melting the deck or starting a forest fire.

An MV-22 Osprey made a precautionary landing Wednesday night in a national game land after one of its engines ran low on fuel, officials said. The pilot landed about 7 p.m. in a field in Holly Shelter Game Land in Pender County, which is south of the air station. After the Osprey was fueled, it was ready to take off until the grass underneath it caught fire from the heat exhaust.

“The grass fire was quickly extinguished by the crew chief, but caused an undetermined amount of heat damage to the aircraft exterior,” the Marine statement said.

Money well spent.

Evan Thomas, Newsweek Editor Calls Half White Half Black POTUS a GOD

June 6, 2009: “Well, we were the good guys in 1984, it felt that way. It hasn’t felt that way in recent years. So Obama’s had, really, a different task We’re seen too often as the bad guys. And he he has a very different job from Reagan was all about America, and you talked about it. Obama is ‘we are above that now.’ We’re not just parochial, we’re not just chauvinistic, we’re not just provincial. We stand for something I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above above the world, he’s sort of God.”

Oh geez the Nickel drops...finally.....your scare me ..dear President Obama....because

AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA From Lou Pritchett

Dear President Obama:

You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me.

You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.

You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.

You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.

You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.

You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don't understand it at its core..

You scare me because you lack humility and 'class', always blaming others.

You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail.

You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame America' crowd and deliver this message abroad.

You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.

You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.

You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.

You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.

You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics against certain banks and corporations.

You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals.

You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.

You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient.

You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do.

You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O'Relllys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.

You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.

Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in

8 years.

Lou Pritchett

WTF!? A Disturbance in the Force Field? Rep. Eric Cantor R. Va Comments? Not in Agreement with the Young Ph....

In his long-awaited address to the Muslim world in Cairo on Thursday, President Obama spoke hopefully about "A world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own." Ironically, the speech is likely to prolong - not hasten - the arrival date for this new world order.

It was heartening to hear the President describe America as a place where all are equal under the law, and where all, including Muslims, can prosper in freedom and work to achieve their dreams. Republicans should credit him for reaching out to Arabs and Muslims around the world. But on the topic of fostering Mideast peace, we wish he hadn't tried to ingratiate himself with the Arabs at our democratic ally Israel's expense.

Once again, President Obama painted the "natural growth" of Israeli "settlements" in the West Bank as a main stumbling block that "undermines efforts to achieve peace." This for the most part is a gratuitous fight. The natural growth in question takes place in confined Jewish population blocks that will undoubtedly be a part of Israel once a two-state solution is implemented (based on the precedents set in the peace offering at Camp David in 2000 and later by the Bush Administration). Should the Israelis not be allowed to maintain an adequate infrastructure to accommodate their growing population within those communities? Why the outrage?

President Obama's comments on such building activity may sound innocuous to the casual observer. In reality, they are anything but.

With the whole world watching, President Obama confirmed that he is willing to squeeze the Israelis without getting anything in return from the Palestinians. This is devastating for peace prospects. It gives the Palestinian Authority incentive to double down on their strategy to wait on the sidelines rather than step up and honor their obligations under the Road Map.

Entertaining illusions that the natural growth of Israeli West Bank communities bears significant responsibility for the conflict is an exercise in self-deception. The root of the problem is the recalcitrance of the Arab people, whether in Gaza or in the West Bank or in Cairo, to accept that the Jews have a right to live in their historical homeland. Israeli governments have always proven ready to make the necessary sacrifices assuming there is a reasonable chance for peace.

Unfortunately, since 1948 Israel has never had that peace partner. A sustainable peace will only come when a Palestinian leadership steps forward that recognizes Israel's right to exist, moves forcefully against the terrorist infrastructure in its midst and builds a functioning civil society.

This was the lesson of the Gaza "disengagement" four years ago. In an effort to kick-start the peace process, Israel unilaterally withdrew its military and all of its citizens from the Gaza Strip. The move didn't engender any of the good will the international community had hoped for, largely because ineffective Palestinian leadership squandered the opportunity.

Instead, terrorists used the evacuated Jewish communities to fire thousands of deadly rockets and mortars into southern Israel. In July 2007, the terrorist group Hamas ruthlessly expelled Fatah from the territory and stepped up its cross-border attacks on Israel. The attacks continue to this day.

If the administration truly wants to bring about Mideast peace, it should be doing everything in its power to goad responsible Palestinian leadership along. Far too often the Fatah Party in control of the West Bank has shown itself to be corrupt and unable to police its own territory. With President Obama turning the world's gaze back onto Israel, don't expect that to change.

The President tried to make history by taking his message to Muslims into the heart of the Arab world. We can only hope it will have a positive impact. But on the issue of Mideast peace, his dance around the true source of the problem will only make genuine peace more elusive.

The Real World Intrudes into the Young Pharaoh's Dream of Obama Land...

Guo Shuqing, the chairman of state-controlled China Construction Bank (CCB), also said he is exploring (AKA make it so) the possibility(you want those weakshit yankee dollars or our strong balls up YUAN) of issuing loans to trading companies in yuan, allowing Chinese and foreign companies to settle their bills in yuan rather than in dollars.

The head of China's second-largest bank has said the United States government should start issuing bonds in yuan, rather than dollars, in the latest indication of the increasing importance of the Chinese currency.

You No Account Bitter Clingers Listen Up: Attorney General Eric Holder Has Sum Wds For Ya'

Just in case you people did not understand the Young Pharaoh's Message in his Cairo/World Speechifying/For All Eternity/ and the true meaning of what it means to you bitter clingers the Attorney General of these Here United State of America has therefore issued these here words for you that you may read, listen and take heed:

Statement of Attorney General Eric Holder on Department of Justice’s Outreach and Enforcement Efforts to Protect American Muslims

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder released the following statement relating to President Obama’s historic speech today in Cairo, Egypt:

"The President's pledge for a new beginning between the United States and the Muslim community takes root here in the Justice Department where we are committed to using criminal and civil rights laws to protect Muslim Americans. A top priority of this Justice Department is a return to robust civil rights enforcement and outreach in defending religious freedoms and other fundamental rights of all of our fellow citizens in the workplace, in the housing market, in our schools and in the voting booth.

"There are those who will continue to want to divide by fear - to pit our national security against our civil liberties - but that is a false choice. We have a solemn responsibility to protect our people while we also protect our principles."

I will remind you stiff necked bitter clingers that the Attorney General of these here United States doesn't want to here any belly aching crap about Muslim Americans doing any killing at recruiting stations.

D-Day Point-du-Hoc Normandy, France Ronald Reagan Remarks

We're here to mark that day in history when the Allied armies joined in battle to reclaim this continent to liberty. For four long years, much of Europe had been under a terrible shadow. Free nations had fallen, Jews cried out in the camps, millions cried out for liberation. Europe was enslaved and the world prayed for its rescue. Here, in Normandy, the rescue began. Here, the Allies stood and fought against tyranny, in a giant undertaking unparalleled in human history.

We stand on a lonely, windswept point on the northern shore of France. The air is soft, but forty years ago at this moment, the air was dense with smoke and the cries of men, and the air was filled with the crack of rifle fire and the roar of cannon. At dawn, on the morning of the 6th of June, 1944, two hundred and twenty-five Rangers jumped off the British landing craft and ran to the bottom of these cliffs.

Their mission was one of the most difficult and daring of the invasion: to climb these sheer and desolate cliffs and take out the enemy guns. The Allies had been told that some of the mightiest of these guns were here, and they would be trained on the beaches to stop the Allied advance.

The Rangers looked up and saw the enemy soldiers at the edge of the cliffs, shooting down at them with machine guns and throwing grenades. And the American Rangers began to climb. They shot rope ladders over the face of these cliffs and began to pull themselves up. When one Ranger fell, another would take his place. When one rope was cut, a Ranger would grab another and begin his climb again. They climbed, shot back, and held their footing. Soon, one by one, the Rangers pulled themselves over the top, and in seizing the firm land at the top of these cliffs, they began to seize back the continent of Europe. Two hundred and twenty-five came here. After two days of fighting, only ninety could still bear arms.

And behind me is a memorial that symbolizes the Ranger daggers that were thrust into the top of these cliffs. And before me are the men who put them there. These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. These are the men who took the cliffs. These are the champions who helped free a continent. And these are the heroes who helped end a war. Gentlemen, I look at you and I think of the words of Stephen Spender's poem. You are men who in your "lives fought for life and left the vivid air signed with your honor."

I think I know what you may be thinking right now -- thinking "we were just part of a bigger effort; everyone was brave that day." Well everyone was. Do you remember the story of Bill Millin of the 51st Highlanders? Forty years ago today, British troops were pinned down near a bridge, waiting desperately for help. Suddenly, they heard the sound of bagpipes, and some thought they were dreaming. Well, they weren't. They looked up and saw Bill Millin with his bagpipes, leading the reinforcements and ignoring the smack of the bullets into the ground around him.

Lord Lovat was with him -- Lord Lovat of Scotland, who calmly announced when he got to the bridge, "Sorry, I'm a few minutes late," as if he'd been delayed by a traffic jam, when in truth he'd just come from the bloody fighting on Sword Beach, which he and his men had just taken.

There was the impossible valor of the Poles, who threw themselves between the enemy and the rest of Europe as the invasion took hold; and the unsurpassed courage of the Canadians who had already seen the horrors of war on this coast. They knew what awaited them there, but they would not be deterred. And once they hit Juno Beach, they never looked back.

All of these men were part of a roll call of honor with names that spoke of a pride as bright as the colors they bore; The Royal Winnipeg Rifles, Poland's 24th Lancers, the Royal Scots' Fusiliers, the Screaming Eagles, the Yeomen of England's armored divisions, the forces of Free France, the Coast Guard's "Matchbox Fleet," and you, the American Rangers.

Forty summers have passed since the battle that you fought here. You were young the day you took these cliffs; some of you were hardly more than boys, with the deepest joys of life before you. Yet you risked everything here. Why? Why did you do it? What impelled you to put aside the instinct for self-preservation and risk your lives to take these cliffs? What inspired all the men of the armies that met here? We look at you, and somehow we know the answer. It was faith and belief. It was loyalty and love.

The men of Normandy had faith that what they were doing was right, faith that they fought for all humanity, faith that a just God would grant them mercy on this beachhead, or on the next. It was the deep knowledge -- and pray God we have not lost it -- that there is a profound moral difference between the use of force for liberation and the use of force for conquest. You were here to liberate, not to conquer, and so you and those others did not doubt your cause. And you were right not to doubt.

You all knew that some things are worth dying for. One's country is worth dying for, and democracy is worth dying for, because it's the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man. All of you loved liberty. All of you were willing to fight tyranny, and you knew the people of your countries were behind you.

The Americans who fought here that morning knew word of the invasion was spreading through the darkness back home. They fought -- or felt in their hearts, though they couldn't know in fact, that in Georgia they were filling the churches at 4:00 am. In Kansas they were kneeling on their porches and praying. And in Philadelphia they were ringing the Liberty Bell.

Something else helped the men of D-day; their rock-hard belief that Providence would have a great hand in the events that would unfold here; that God was an ally in this great cause. And so, the night before the invasion, when Colonel Wolverton asked his parachute troops to kneel with him in prayer, he told them: "Do not bow your heads, but look up so you can see God and ask His blessing in what we're about to do." Also, that night, General Matthew Ridgway on his cot, listening in the darkness for the promise God made to Joshua: "I will not fail thee nor forsake thee."

These are the things that impelled them; these are the things that shaped the unity of the Allies.

When the war was over, there were lives to be rebuilt and governments to be returned to the people. There were nations to be reborn. Above all, there was a new peace to be assured. These were huge and daunting tasks. But the Allies summoned strength from the faith, belief, loyalty, and love of those who fell here. They rebuilt a new Europe together. There was first a great reconciliation among those who had been enemies, all of whom had suffered so greatly. The United States did its part, creating the Marshall Plan to help rebuild our allies and our former enemies. The Marshall Plan led to the Atlantic alliance -- a great alliance that serves to this day as our shield for freedom, for prosperity, and for peace.

In spite of our great efforts and successes, not all that followed the end of the war was happy or planned. Some liberated countries were lost. The great sadness of this loss echoes down to our own time in the streets of Warsaw, Prague, and East Berlin. The Soviet troops that came to the center of this continent did not leave when peace came. They're still there, uninvited, unwanted, unyielding, almost forty years after the war. Because of this, allied forces still stand on this continent. Today, as forty years ago, our armies are here for only one purpose: to protect and defend democracy. The only territories we hold are memorials like this one and graveyards where our heroes rest.

We in America have learned bitter lessons from two world wars. It is better to be here ready to protect the peace, than to take blind shelter across the sea, rushing to respond only after freedom is lost. We've learned that isolationism never was and never will be an acceptable response to tyrannical governments with an expansionist intent. But we try always to be prepared for peace, prepared to deter aggression, prepared to negotiate the reduction of arms, and yes, prepared to reach out again in the spirit of reconciliation. In truth, there is no reconciliation we would welcome more than a reconciliation with the Soviet Union, so, together, we can lessen the risks of war, now and forever.

It's fitting to remember here the great losses also suffered by the Russian people during World War II. Twenty million perished, a terrible price that testifies to all the world the necessity of ending war. I tell you from my heart that we in the United States do not want war. We want to wipe from the face of the earth the terrible weapons that man now has in his hands. And I tell you, we are ready to seize that beachhead. We look for some sign from the Soviet Union that they are willing to move forward, that they share our desire and love for peace, and that they will give up the ways of conquest. There must be a changing there that will allow us to turn our hope into action.

We will pray forever that someday that changing will come. But for now, particularly today, it is good and fitting to renew our commitment to each other, to our freedom, and to the alliance that protects it.

We're bound today by what bound us 40 years ago, the same loyalties, traditions, and beliefs. We're bound by reality. The strength of America's allies is vital to the United States, and the American security guarantee is essential to the continued freedom of Europe's democracies. We were with you then; we're with you now. Your hopes are our hopes, and your destiny is our destiny.

Here, in this place where the West held together, let us make a vow to our dead. Let us show them by our actions that we understand what they died for. Let our actions say to them the words for which Matthew Ridgway listened: "I will not fail thee nor forsake thee."

Strengthened by their courage and heartened by their value [valor] and borne by their memory, let us continue to stand for the ideals for which they lived and died.

Thank you very much, and God bless you all.

Obama--Still Clueless After All This Time

If you try to keep up with the ongoing conversation on the Cairo Speech you will get swamped. Ibrahim cuts down to the brass tacks and nails it right down to the ground. Obama did not address nor understand the problem.

Criticism and Conciliation-Raymond Ibrahim National Review Online June 4--

Though he early indicated that this would be an honest, heart-to-heart talk — "we must say openly the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors" and "let me speak as clearly and plainly as I can about some specific issues that I believe we must finally confront together" — Obama did not follow through.

A heart-to-heart talk revealing what is "said only behind closed doors" would have included any number of issues pitting the Islamic world on a collision course with the West—from that business of jihad and enmity for infidels, to sharia law and dhimmi status of non-Muslim minorities, etc. — issues that have led to a majority of Americans having a negative view of the Muslim world.

Instead, for every mild admonishment directed at the Islamic world, Obama immediately followed by several admissions of American mistakes, including reactions to 9/11, which "in some cases, led us to act contrary to our ideals." That's to say nothing of the constant adulation he offered the Muslim world.

This double-standard is typified by the way he equivocated on the topic of Muslim persecution vis-à-vis religious minorities, while repeatedly gushing over how he's helping American Muslims fulfill their zakat obligation and Muslim women wear the hijab vis-à-vis a non-friendly American system.

All fine platitudes, including his talk of "hope" and "change" (yes, he managed to sneak those hackneyed words in, forgetting he's not talking to Americans) — but will any of it be effective? Probably not — since he did not have the heart-to-heart he promised, but, once again, sought to placate and humor, under the delusion that the problem between the Islamic world and the West revolves around temporal issues that can be easily ameliorated.

In the long run, of course, nothing Obama said today makes any difference. After all, he — and the naive notion he embodies that all conflict is a product of "misunderstanding" and the need for "mutual respect" — is but a dot in that long continuum of stark history, one that he neither addressed nor understands.

Another Birthday:The CSquare is Five Years Older Today

Five years ago today, I started posting in a new fangled blog which I called the CSquare. The Csquare is what what my number one son called the command center for his unit, the Marine Light Armored Reconnaissance. The blog and I followed my young Marine through his two tours of Irag and safe home again. You want to know something, I did not sweat my 13months with the Marine Corps in Vietnam one goddam bit as much (even though it included Tet when General Võ Nguyên Giáp thought he could kick our ass out of Vietnam) as much as his two tours. Funny how that is once you get old.

Silver Star for Navy Corpman Juan M. Rubio for Actions On Euphrates River

photo/story Bill W. Love
Naval Hospital Corpus Christi Public Affairs

U.S. Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Juan M. Rubio, 32, of San Angelo, Texas, was awarded the Silver Star Medal April 27 for conspicuous gallantry against the enemy Jan. 1, 2005, while serving corpsman with 4th Platoon, Small Craft Company, 1st Marine Division.

The citation accompanying his Silver Star Medal detailed how a well-emplaced and determined enemy ambushed Rubio and members of his team along the Euphrates River in a complex attack. As Rubio and an assault element swept through the ambush site, insurgents detonated an improvised explosive device. Rocket-propelled grenades and machine gun and small-arms fire followed immediately after the explosion, wounding three Marines.

Realizing the severity of the Marines’ wounds, and bleeding profusely from his own, Rubio low-crawled across open terrain, exposing himself to enemy fire to provide triage. Simultaneously taking care of three urgent surgical casualties, Rubio coached his fellow Marines who were assisting other casualties as incoming enemy fire intensified.

After stabilizing the wounded for casualty evacuation, Rubio directed the platoon to provide covering fire as he and several Marines began moving the casualties towards safety.

Without regard for his own life, he once again exposed himself to the heavy and accurate enemy fire, moving the Marines from the ambush site to the shoreline.

Rubio’s Silver Star Medal elevates him to a distinctively exceptional category of valor among Navy corpsmen since the commencement of Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. Only two others have been awarded the Silver Star, none have received the Medal of Honor, and only one hero has been presented the Navy Cross.

Years After Riverine Craft Ambush, Marine Capt. Jonathan F. Kuniholm, Scales New Heights

Army Lt. Col. Marc Hoffmeister, top left; Army Spc. Dave Shebib, top right; retired Marine Capt. Jon Kuniholm, bottom left; and retired Army Sgt. 1st Class Matthew Nyman -- all wounded veterans -- are attempting to summit North America's highest peak, June 1, 2009. Courtesy photo

By Samantha L. Quigley American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, June 3, 2009 – The loss of his right arm while serving in Iraq made something as simple as eating a challenge for retired Marine Capt. Jonathan F. Kuniholm, who recently set out with three other wounded veterans to conquer Mount McKinley, also known as “Denali” because it’s located in Alaska’s Denali National Park and Reserve. “Following the loss of my right arm in Iraq on New Year’s Day 2005, the most basic of things became a challenge -- writing my name, putting on a pair of pants in the morning, tying my shoes, cutting a steak,” he said. “After putting up a ceiling fan that spring with my 5-year-old son, I realized that as long as I was patient enough, I could do whatever I wanted.” By the end of that year, Kuniholm had resumed many of the things he’d done before his injury, though he finds some activities difficult enough that he doesn’t pursue them much, including playing the guitar or sports with his son. In fact, it’s affected just about every other area of his life as well. “All of it is impacted in some way, from the moment I get up in the morning,” he said. “I can do many things, … and many take much longer or I do inexpertly.” Kuniholm was dismounted from a riverine craft on the shore of the Euphrates River south of Haditha, Iraq, when insurgents used a homemade bomb to initiate what he described as a sophisticated ambush on the platoon. The platoon, which was not his assigned unit, handled the ambush effectively, but three servicemembers suffered serious injuries and one was killed. One sailor, Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Juan Rubio, earned a Silver Star during the engagement. Kuniholm had played his guitar the night before in a talent show. He described himself as pretty rusty, since he hadn’t played in months. In retrospect, he said, it was interesting, considering what would happen the next day. “It took about a year before I was done with surgeries, fitted with prostheses, and ready to get back to my life,” Kuniholm said. “Prosthetic arms are, as I discovered, still very much a work in progress, and if you want to call that part of my rehabilitation, my work to improve prosthetic arms continues.” This, he said, has become his new calling in life. Realizing the deficiencies in prosthetic arms, he began working as an engineer on the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency’s Revolutionizing Prosthetics 2009 program. He also started Open Prosthetics Project, a nonprofit group, to further innovations in arm prosthetics. “While my professional goal is to improve the technology amputees all over the world use to replace their arms, I have a new personal goal as well,” Kuniholm said. Human beings are incredibly resilient and capable of nearly anything they set their minds to, he said. “People with disabilities have a greater set of challenges, and while the road may be longer and harder, [we] have just as few limits to what we can achieve,” he said. “Climbing Denali is a task that many able-bodied folks would never undertake. By being part of a team tackling that task while sharing the additional challenges of disability, I hope to inspire others with similar challenges. “I hope as well to remove the limits placed on their expectations of what they can achieve,” he added. “This won’t make getting dressed, eating, or anything else any easier, but it’s my hope that it will make any challenge seem possible and less of a chore to undertake.” Kuniholm already has started to set an example for others who have disabilities and big dreams. With the help of his flight instructor, he recently renewed his pilot’s license and has returned to flying as a private pilot. Earning a private pilot’s license is possible for those with disabilities who have never flown before, he said. The successes occasionally are tempered by the public’s reaction, which he said his cousin likened to being out and about with a pregnant woman. “It’s undeniable [that I’m missing an arm], and many people assume that this fact means you want to talk about it,” Kuniholm said. “As you might imagine, being involved in prosthetic arm research, I’ll always talk about prosthetic arms, but I have had that conversation before, and sometimes it’s nice to talk about something else.” Kuniholm lives in Durham, N.C., with his wife, Michele, and son, Sam, 7. He served as the engineer officer and platoon commander of the 2nd Platoon, 4th Combat Engineer Battalion, attached to the 1st Battalion, 23rd Marines, in Iraq’s Anbar province from Aug. 17, 2004, until his injury. He is part of a seven-member team -- four wounded veterans, two mentors and one guide – whose attempt to reach North America’s highest peak began this week.

Fruit Cake Nation POTUS Barack Hussein Obama the II Must Do List

TO DO LIST

1. Declare USA one of the largest Muslim countries in the world
   
2. Iran may have some right to nuclear energy _ provided it is for good and not evil.
3. Invite Iran to 4th July cook out.
   
4. Start showing off my Muslim roots
   

Convert To Islam Kills One U.S Army Recruiter Wounds another In Little Rock

Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad aka Carlos Leon Bledsoe a recent convert to Islam drove up to the recruiting center in Little Rock and opened fire as two Army recruiters were standing outside. "William Long, 23, of Conway, was killed on the Army-Navy Career Center and Quinton Ezeagwula, 18, of Jacksonville, was wounded and in stable condition. When arrested Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad had over a hundred rounds of ammo, two pistols and an SKS rifle. From the White House, a deafening silence. No words of condolence. No words of condemnation for this heinious Jihadi attack on U.S. soil. Nothing. Business as usual for POTUS Barack Hussein Obama II who has more on his agenda than the murder and wounding of two of our men in uniform. From the slobbering media, Jeffery Golderg noticed a Conspiracy of Euphemism wherein the media reports the attack but then goes on to conclude--- the shooting may have "religious motivations" as in, for example, the shooter could have been a Druid, a mad dog Amish, even a Catholic, you never know, could have been anyone, anyone except a Muslim on a Mission from God.
link

On GITMO: POTUS Barack Hussein Obama The II Is All Hat and No Voters

On closing Gitmo, POTUS Barack Hussein Obama The Second, is sucking wind pretty hard as voters unambiguously say " no way ray" with a bitch slap rejection of his plans to close Gitmo down and move the Orcs to Super Max prisons in the U.S.

"By more than 2-1, those surveyed say Guantanamo shouldn't be closed. By more than 3-1, they oppose moving some of the accused terrorists housed there to prisons in their own states."USAToday/Gallup Poll

• By the numbers:65%-keep Gitmo Open
  
• 32 % shut it down
  
• 91% Republicans oppose closing
  
• 68% of independents oppose closing
  
• Democrats: 53 % shut it down - 42 % keep Gitmo open WashEX

This is an astonishing damage report on the good ship Obama and on the same week he sails on his mi culpa trip to the German city of Dresden where he will, doubtless, apologize, for the evils of American Victory, as he did in Strasbourg. oy vey, already.

POTUS For Life Obama--Repeal of the 22nd Amendment Term Limits on President Proposed

From GovTrack comes this jaw dropper:Democrat U.S Representative,Jose Serrano, 16the District, from New York has introduced HJRes 5 to abolish term limits on the Presidency. Apparently, we are to have a dictator but at least it will be done legal and proper. Hussein may even run for votes but with ACORN running point for the young pharaoh that should not be a problem. PDF

Text of H. J. Res. 5: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second amendment aka term limits on POTUS

HJ 5 IH

111th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. J. RES. 5

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 6, 2009

Mr. SERRANO introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

‘Article--

‘The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.’.

Cracking the Whip-- Obama Restrictions on the First Amendment

This is straight from the HORSES MOUTH, (a 1920 expression, meaning this expression alludes to examining a horse's teeth to determine its age and hence it's betting worth) or in our blog meaning holy omg caca! we actually found this head shaking WTF! info at the "White House President Barack Obama", whose middle name, never to be spoken, is HUSSEIN. And it makes sense. When you are the boss of bosses and running a successful political machine, not only do you have to take care of the servants behoden to the ObamaMan, the Young Pharaoh, but you have make sure that those few future trouble makers, not part of the machine, begin to get the CORRECT word. Therefore, lets drink to that and receive the word from theTHE Blog, the White House Blog, (click on the link you unbelievers) you are hereby notified that until further notice there will be "restrictions" on your First Admendment Rights here is :Another update from Norm Eisen, special counsel to the president for ethics and government reform, in the spirit of transparency as always:

"First, we will expand the restriction on oral communications to cover all persons, not just federally registered lobbyists. For the first time, we will reach contacts not only by registered lobbyists but also by unregistered ones, as well as anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program."

You got that! "in the spirit of transparency as always" : Too late to shovel, boys, grab your hip boots and run! I just love that bullshit of "this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program." Don't you?
We are only thinking of you. We're only thinking of you! You are the reason we are doing this....you want the stimulus program to work don't you? And of course you are too dumb to have read Hayek's , The Road to Serfdom. Of course, to all my dumbshit liberal friends, who thought I was howling for the mothership to come get me when I warned them the end of Our Constitution was near....HOW DO YOU LIKE HIM NOW!

Belated Birthday Greetings to Sgt Daniel Thornhill From the CSquare

Sgt Thornhill had a birthday May 17 recuperating in Fisher House after being wounded in Iraq. He lost both legs above the knee and suffered burns over 30% of his body. His mom and brother are with him and he is doing Ok. Send him a birthday card and a Texas Howdy at this address:

SGT Daniel Thornhill
Fort Sam Houston Fisher House
3623 George C. Beach Rd
Fort Sam Houston, Texas 78234

Palin at work in Ak

Governor Sarah Palin with Ron Siebels,
Department Commander of the Alaska Chapter of the Military Order of the Purple Heart, after the Purple Heart presentation ceremony at VFW Post 10252.

You Might Be Too Dumb To Run a Newspaper If....

You pass on and publish a classified ad without noticing the historical connection between "Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley and Kennedy!" Humm. What could these four U.S. Presidents have in common. Warren Times Observer Publisher John Elchert currently apologizing profusely here. Dinosaurs newspapers. All of them. Dollars to doughnuts says those miserable hardys don't even read their own paper much less history books.

The Fix is in---The Chicago Way--Takes Care of His Own

The Washington Times reported today that Obama toadies overruled DOJ lawyers and let Black Panther Thugs intimidating votes go free as a bird:

"Justice Department political appointees overruled career lawyers and ended a civil complaint accusing three members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense of wielding a nightstick and intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place last Election Day, according to documents and interviews.

The incident — which gained national attention when it was captured on videotape and distributed on YouTube — had prompted the government to sue the men, saying they violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act by scaring would-be voters with the weapon, racial slurs and military-style uniforms."

The purpose of the Obama administration is not to help American citizens but to reward the servants who maintain the political machine. A little payback here and there, even at the cost of a couple outraged bloggers is not going to hurt the reelection efforts and will go a long way making sure the word on the street gets out; Obama takes care of his own.

Innovate, Innovate, Innovate--Orcs Improvise and Attack Army Base

Orcs, wrapped in outdoor camping space blankets to cancel out the thermal imaging cameras, climbed a 400 foot escarpment in the dark right up to helicopter pad to fire their RPG greetings into Fort Margha, and disappear "like ninjas into the night." Fort Margha may keep its troops safe but does squat for the people in the valley below. Down there the Orcs rule by day and night. Philip Smucker writing for the McClatchy Newspapers has the entire bullshit rules story.

LGF-the Fail Issue and Attitude From Bitter Gun-Clingers

"To me, the issue is very simple — almost blindingly simple, in fact: openly wishing for political opponents to “FAIL!” is horrendously bad politics." Charles LGF response to Ace of Spades What Has Happened to Little Green Footballs?

So simple I still don't get it. First of all:Politics is a contact sport. Last of all: Politics is a contact sport. What part of CONTACT don't you understand. Wishing your political opponents to "Fail" never bothered Democrats when they Borked Bork or clothesline Clarence Thomas or ridiculed Palin. When Democrats spouted their version of “I want you to fail!” song and dance routine it sure as hell wasn't a giant turn-off to a large segment of the American population. Shoot. You'd think it would have, at the very least cost them the black vote at the sight of the white Senate Judiciary Committee doing the Rodney "can we all get along" King tap dance on Thomas. But no, it sure was not just bad politics — or stupid, self-defeating politics considering who is in the White House now because , of course, The Young Pharaoh ran on a "platform of sheer positive messages.
Wonderful light and love messages like this:

“You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them,” Obama said. “And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.” Huffington Post

Yead buddy. Bitter church attending Gun clingers like moi will continue to openly wish Obama and his Supreme Court nominee, Puerto Rico's own Sotomayor, the very best “fail” and if that makes us bitter clingers, mean-spirited, negative, and hands ammunition to our political enemies, well, then just get the hell out of our way. I , for one, do not intend to go politely into that dark fascist night when the yankee government lets the common folk own their own business but then dictates the size of your paycheck on Friday. Nope. I am with Ace on this one:

The Young Pharaoh Must Fail.

Netanyahu:Gird your loins, O'Israel " Who will eliminate it? It is us or no one."

"And David put his hand in his bag, and took thence a stone, and slang it, and smote the Philistine in his forehead, that the stone sunk into his forehead; and he fell upon his face to the earth." The future foretold for Iran although Netanyahu did not name Iran he did say:

Israel is not like other countries," Netanyahu told his Likud faction in a meeting which came one week after his meeting with President Barack Obama at the White House. "We are faced with security challenges that no other country faces, and our need to provide a response to these is critical, and we are answering the call." "My job is first and foremost to ensure the future of the state of Israel ... the leadership's job is to eliminate the danger. Who will eliminate it? It is us or no one."

"These are not regular times. The danger is hurtling toward us?The real danger in underestimating the threat," Netanyahu said, addressing the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran.Haaretz