From this article in the June 12, 2007 Washington Times:

Membership in the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has declined more than 90 percent since the 2001 terrorist attacks, according to tax documents obtained by The Washington Times.The number of reported members spiraled down from more than 29,000 in 2000 to fewer than 1,700 in 2006. As a result, the Muslim rights group’s annual income from dues dropped from $732,765 in 2000, when yearly dues cost $25, to $58,750 last year, when the group charged $35.The organization instead is relying on about two dozen donors a year to contribute the majority of the money for CAIR’s budget, which reached nearly $3 million last year.

[...]

CAIR listed contributors in its Form 990 filings with the Internal Revenue Service, but the IRS redacted all the names before releasing the documents.

In 2001, 26 contributors gave more than $1.6 million; in 2002, 26 gave more than $2.6 million; in 2003, 24 gave more than $2 million; in 2004, 20 gave more than $1.4 million; in 2005, 19 contributed $1.3 million.

One has to wonder who those deep-pocketed donors are and if those donors have anything to do with the following:

In 2004, a federal grand jury returned a 42-count indictment against the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development and seven officers for raising money for Hamas, money laundering and falsifying tax returns. The Holy Land trial begins July 16 in Dallas, and CAIR is listed among 300 new co-conspirators filed May 29 [2007] in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.According to the government’s trial brief, filed May 29, CAIR is an entity “who are, and or were, members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee and/or its organization.”Mousa Abu Marzook, a former CAIR official, “has been since 1995, a specially designated terrorist and Hamas leader,” the brief said.

Predictably, CAIR is complaining:

Mr. Ahmed called the Justice Department’s brief “a McCarthyite political move that allows the government to smear major American Muslim groups, including hundreds of mosques representing hundreds of thousands of ordinary Muslims nationwide, without any evidence being offered in a court of law and without legal recourse for those defamed.”“It is unfortunate that the Justice Department apparently violated its own guidelines, which indicate that such lists are to remain sealed to prevent unfair and un-American labeling of those who are not facing any criminal charges,” Mr. Ahmed said.

Apparently, CAIR represents few American Muslims, despite the organization’s being quite prominent on news interviews and as advocates for Muslim rights in certain cases (i.e., that of the six praying imams). The above-cited article also contains information indicating that CAIR is full of taqiyya, although the Washington Times doesn’t use the term:

CAIR constantly notes in its press releases that it cooperates with federal law-enforcement activities and claims to conduct sensitivity training for Homeland Security officials. A February press release from CAIR’s Chicago office says it met with Homeland Security immigration officials and made an agreement to “conduct sensitivity training to [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] officers and possibly prison personnel.”Homeland Security officials deny such claims and a check of the Office of Management and Budget Watch database of government contracts since 2000 shows CAIR has never been awarded a grant or a government contract.
“The department does not have a formalized relationship with that particular organization,” said one Homeland Security official speaking on the condition of anonymity.

Might a not-formalized relationship be an informal one? After all, government officials and representatives from federal law-enforcement sometimes attend CAIR banquets and other events at which CAIR provides sensitivity training. Also, consider this, from May 7, 2007, as listed on CAIR’s web site:

CAIR-CT TRAINS FBI AGENTS ON ISLAM(NEW LONDON, CT, 5/7/07) - Representatives of the Connecticut chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-CT) recently offered diversity and sensitivity training on Islam and Muslims to officials at the New Haven office of the FBI.The hour-long training included information on basic Islamic beliefs and practices.

The above is just one example. Here are some more, with links for CAIR chapter involvements (According to CAIR a partial listing including Florida, Maryland, Ohio, Michigan, New York, Arizona, California, Kentucky, St. Louis, and San Antonio) and the following bulleted list:

• Recently received a letter from the commissioner of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement highlighting the positive working relationship between the department and CAIR-FL
• Conducted sensitivity trainings for the FBI in Orlando and Jacksonville
• Held a joint press conference with the FBI and several other law enforcement agencies seeking information on a person wanted for questioning
• Participated in an 8-week Police Community Relations Leadership Program with the Miami Dade Police Department
• In collaboration with the FBI, FDLE, BSO and several other law enforcement agencies, coordinated a forum with state Islamic leaders
• Participated in several town hall meetings with FBI, FDLE, and U.S. Attorney’s office discussing the issues of security and liberty

Uncontracted relationships, I suppose. Then, again, the information comes from CAIR’s web site, which isn’t exactly the epitome of veracity.

From this source, on June 4, 2007:

Federal prosecutors have named three prominent Islamic organizations in America as participants in an alleged criminal conspiracy to support a Palestinian Arab terrorist group, Hamas.

Prosecutors applied the label of “unindicted co-conspirator” to the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Islamic Society of North America, and the North American Islamic Trust in connection with a trial planned in Texas next month for five officials of a defunct charity, the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development.

While the foundation was charged in the case, which was filed in 2004, none of the other groups was. However, the co-conspirator designation could be a blow to the credibility of the national Islamic organizations, which often work hand-in-hand with government officials engaged in outreach to the Muslim community.

A court filing by the government last week listed the three prominent groups among about 300 individuals or entities named as co-conspirators. The document gave scant details, but prosecutors described CAIR as a present or past member of “the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee and/or its organizations.” The government listed the Islamic Society of North America and the North American Islamic Trust as “entities who are and/or were members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.” [...] Spokesmen for CAIR did not respond to messages seeking comment yesterday. Efforts to contact the North American Islamic Trust were unsuccessful.

The identification of the alleged co-conspirators could aid prosecutors when the Holy Land Foundation and five of its officials, Shukri Abu-Baker, Mohammad El-Mezain, Ghassan Elashi, Mufid Abdulqader, and Abdulraham Odeh, go to trial on July 16 in Dallas. Statements by and about co-conspirators are exempt from rules barring hearsay.

[...]

CAIR, in particular, has faced persistent claims that it is soft on terrorism. Critics note that several former CAIR officials have been convicted or deported after being charged with fraud, embargo violations, or aiding terrorist training. Spokesmen for the group have also raised eyebrows for offering generic denunciations of terrorism but refusing to condemn by name specific Islamic terrorist groups such as Hamas or Hezbollah.

In addition, one of the Holy Land Foundation defendants, Ghassan Elashi, founded CAIR’s Texas chapter. CAIR’s Washington office was also set up in 1994 with $5,000 in seed money from the foundation, according to congressional testimony by a researcher into Islamic extremism, Steven Emerson.

Last year, Senator Boxer of California, a Democrat, withdrew an award she gave to an official at a local CAIR chapter. She said she had concerns about statements by some CAIR officials and about claims of financial links to terrorism….

Read the entire article.

[Hat-tip to Raven, who emailed me the above info]

To Recap:

Passengers have a right and a duty to report suspicious behavior on airlines, but that right is under attack by a CAIR lawsuit from the 6 flying imams incident. We have information below on CAIR’s legal and PR strategies, and we need your help in analyzing it. Suggestions for next steps in educating the public and our legislators are especially needed.
Vigilant Freedom received a recording from the April 27, 2007 CAIR briefing on the 6 Imams, given at the Muslim ADAMS Center in Virginia. CAIR advertised the meeting as “Cair Hosts Town Hall Meeting on Airport Profiling.” The speakers were Nihad Awad, CAIR Executive Director, Khadija Athman, CAIR Civil Rights Manager, and Imam Magid from the ADAMS Center.

Below are links to the audio files, and (mostly) complete transcriptions. We’ll add our analysis as an update to this post, and we ask for your help analyzing CAIR’s strategy in the comments section or at your own blogs or websites.

1. Awad’s first presentation on difficulties in generating reports of discrimination (transcription, just the first half of this audio file previously posted here):

Audio Transcription

2. Major presentation by Nihad Awad on CAIR’s arguments for the 6 imams lawsuit:

Audio Transcription

3. Additional legal strategies, by Khadija Athman (audio includes excerpt from #2 above):

Audio Transcription

4. Question and Answer session with Awad and Athman:

Audio Transcription

What are your rights as an airline passenger?

Are they just consumer rights - compensation for cancelled flights, overbookings, lost luggage?

Before 9/11, that’s what passenger rights meant. For some post-9/11 Democrats, “a flyers’ bill of rights” still means the simple things - access to food and water and getting off the plane if it’s delayed.

But your right to self-defense is the ultimate passenger right. Passengers need the right to report suspicious behavior that foreshadows a terrorist attack, without being sued by CAIR and other Islamist groups. And Congress tried to give passengers that right last month. A bi-partisan, common-sense coalition of 109 Democrats and 199 Republicans passed a motion to prohibit suits against “John Doe” airlline passengers who report suspicious behavior in good faith.

The legislation was in response to the 6 imams’ suit against U.S. Airways that names “John Does” (passengers, flight attendants, airport personnel). The imams had been removed from a November 20, 2006 flight after carefully presenting behavior known to be associated with taking over a plane. The imams followed a careful script of suspicious behaviors that would require a response from airline personnel; and when that response came, they claimed it was due to their religion. Their script was a set-up to get the End to Racial Profiling Act (ERPA) passed.

But the original ERPA doesn’t threaten civilians with lawsuits. Going after the “John Does” was a new twist. Sure, CAIR amended the lawsuit to threaten only passengers who reported “with the intent to discriminate,” with CAIR acting as the thought-police to discern intent. The chilling effect is unchanged.

CAIR is not going to stop unless we stop them. You will need the bi-partisan John Doe motion to protect your right to self-defense. A month ago it seemed like a sure thing, but now it’s in serious danger.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), who met with the fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt last month, has threatened to bar the John Doe motion when the bill it is part of goes to conference with the Senate. Republicans sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) saying “We cannot afford to wait any longer to protect individuals who seek to do the right thing by speaking up to prevent a terrorist attack.”

In answer, Hoyer’s spokeswoman Stacey Bernards said that the motion to protect passengers was in part “a restatement of current law, and some things are just about political point-scoring that does not have any real substance to them.”

Stacey is wrong. Here’s why:

We are told that it is our duty as citizens to be vigilant. Indeed, that very vigilance is expected, included in the government’s own plans for our defense. As evidence by 2005 testimony of Assistant Secretary for the TSA Kip Hawley before the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation:

Then, on the aircraft:

1. Thousands of Federal Air Marshals fly undercover on a very significant number of flights, both domestic and international.
2. Thousands of pilots who undergo special training and become Federal Flight Deck Officers are authorized and ready to protect the cockpit with firearms.
3. Other local, State, and Federal law enforcement officers travel armed as part of their normal duties.
4. Hardened cockpit doors prevent unauthorized access to the flight deck.
5. And, sitting quietly on every airplane, are passengers who remember the courage and commitment of the men and women on United Flight 93.

Passenger, stay alert: the US government is relying on you as the final layer of defense for commerical aviation. And if the John Doe amendment fails, a leg of that security plan will be knocked out. Says Hawley:

The reason is that we have many independent, interlocking layers of security that reinforce each other. Any one of them can be beaten, but together, they are formidable.

To be formidable, America depends on its foundation, where the common sense of its citizens forms the final determinant of their collective security. TSA personnel have a guide that could be a model for citizens to defend themselves - to know the behaviors and signs that give an indication of a terrorist threat: Screening of Passengers by Observation Technique (SPOT)

The SPOT program utilizes behavior observation and analysis techniques to identify potentially high-risk passengers. Individuals that exhibit suspicious behaviors, such as physical and physiological reactions, may be required to undergo additional screening.

The SPOT program serves as additional layer of security and is highly beneficial to all modes of transportation security in that it maximizes the effectiveness of TSOs already deployed, and requires no additional specialized screening equipment.

We need a SPOT for passengers, so we know the real signs of suspicious behavior (and yes, the 6 imams would have fit this profile). So far, I can’t find anything for airline passengers, who are both prime targets and the last layer of security.

I can find detailed, and colorful information, including wallet sized cards, telling you what to do if you are a school bus driver, or motor coach driver, or truck driver. There’s even one on suspicious behavior in purchasers of Rental Trucks. But if you’re an airline passenger, nothing.

We need to fix this fast. We have plenty of experts out there who can prepare a simple checklist for passengers. If training is needed, we can develop that - think how many civilians train for CPR every year through the Red Cross. We don’t need every civilian trained - just enough to make it harder for would-be terrorists to pass undetected.
We need a real Passenger Bill of Rights that includes our right to report suspicious behavior.

And we need the bi-partisan John Doe amendment to pass Congress and protect all passengers from CAIR’s lawsuit jihad against the American public.