Fox Haters Carrying Water for CAIR

Ryan Mauro is a fellow with the Clarionproject.org, the founder of WorldThreats.com and a frequent national security analyst for Fox News Channel. He can be contacted at ryanmauro1986@gmail.com.


The Council on American-Islamic Relations Announces Educational InitiativeFor some progressive writers, it’s more important to bash Fox News than to expose American Islamist groups’ rejection of liberal values. In recent weeks, the Council on American-Islamic Relations has aggressively promoted articles by Fox haters who are more concerned with smearing CAIR opponents as anti-Muslim bigots than addressing facts and evidence.

The U.S. Justice Department says CAIR is a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity and labeled it an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas-financing trial. Federal prosecutors said in a 2007 court filing that CAIR uses deception to “conceal from the American public their connections to terrorists.” CAIR’s documented record should alienate every progressive.

Part of those efforts is taking advantage of writers with influence in the media. Don’t take my word for it. Look at what CAIR Vice Chair Sarwat Husain said at another terror-tied conference:

“Media in the United States is very gullible, ok? And they will see that if you have something, especially as a Muslim, if you have something to say, they will come running to you—and take advantage of that.”

In a presentation by CAIR Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper, he told supporters how to manipulate reporters. One of the slides was titled “Characteristics of a Journalist” and said, “They will expect you to do their work. Let them.”

CAIR also said to exploit the fact that journalists do “little primary research,” are “under extreme deadline pressure” and “fea[r] charges of inaccuracy.” This is especially true of CAIR’s media allies that choose political ideology over all else.

On February 20, CAIR distributed a Media Matters hit piece by Michelle Leung describing me as “Fox’s Newest Anti-Muslim ‘National Security Analyst,’” even though I am neither anti-Muslim nor “new” on Fox. If she had checked her own website’s archives, she would have seen a hit piece from 2011 about an appearance. The premise of that article is that I am not a credible speaker on Libya because I opposed the Ground Zero Mosque.

My appearance was about the Clarion Project’s disclosure of a jihadist enclave in Texas run by Jamaat ul-Fuqra/Muslims of the Americas. Her article didn’t even mention the topic I was discussing because that might wake readers up as to why this was a story worth covering.

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Vice Chair of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security, said the discovery is “appalling.” Despite Leung’s description of Clarion and me as “anti-Muslim,” around a dozen Muslim organizations in the U.S. and Canada endorsed a statement calling on the U.S. government to label Jamaat ul-Fuqra as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

As evidence of my “Islamophobic” agenda, Leung cites my segment about ul-Fuqra and Islamist patrols in London, a segment about Al-Qaeda recruiting among Somali refugees in the U.S. and one where I mentioned that Syrian jihadists belong to an anti-American alliance in the region. Every single one was about events that indisputably happened. If that’s anti-Muslim, then reporters and analysts who cover shootings must hate gun owners.

Then on March 6, CAIR promoted another ridiculous article by NewsHounds, where the author seemed determined to prove her wit by including as many fact-free insults as possible. This time, CAIR and its ally said I was “fomenting fear of Islam” by talking about the U.S. military’s decision to again hire chaplains endorsed by the Islamic Society of North America. You can watch the segment here.

We emphasized that I was not criticizing the use of Muslim chaplains, but rather the use of ISNA as the endorser. Like CAIR, the Justice Department labeled ISNA as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land trial and a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity. ISNA’s Fiqh Council is dominated by Islamists with radical histories. The charitable status of ISNA’s Canadian affiliate was revoked because of its links to Pakistani terrorists and accounting discrepancies.

The Clarion Project also discovered that the U.S. Air Force paid ISNA almost $5,000 of taxpayer money for two advertisements in its magazine with the purpose of recruiting chaplains. NewsHounds described that as “whining.”

NewsHounds also criticized my previous segment about ul-Fuqra and its communes in America, which was largely based on a declassified FBI document from 2007 that we obtained. The author disingenuously selected a single quote from the file stating that ul-Fuqra’s Texas site “may” be involved in terrorism and criticized my “unfounded fear.” She made a conscious decision to mislead her readers by leaving out the other incriminating quotes.

The FBI document reports that ul-Fuqra members in the U.S. have taken part in at least 10 murders, one disappearance and seven bomb plots. It states:

“The documented propensity for violence by this organization supports the belief the leadership of the MOA extols membership to pursue a policy of jihad or holy war against individuals or groups it considers enemies of Islam, which includes the U.S. Government. Members of the MOA are encouraged to travel to Pakistan to receive religious and military/terrorist training from Sheikh Gilani.”

The criterion for being an “Islamophobe” is not to actually be an anti-Muslim bigot. It’s to be a critic of CAIR and Islamism. It wasn’t being used years before 9/11. They even claim that practicing Muslims like Zuhdi Jasser and the American Islamic Congress are part of the “Islamophobia” conspiracy. Despite that logical fallacy, Michelle Leung’s article at Media Matters even called Jasser “anti-Muslim.”

Former U.S. Muslim Brotherhood member Abdur-Rahman Muhammad says he was at an Islamist meeting in the 1990s where they conceived of a strategy of using the term “Islamophobia” to neutralize opponents. In September, multiple Muslim activists decried the “Islamophobia” strategy.

“Any time you condemn them, any time you point out their machinations or their deceit, they are going to label you an Islamophobe and who wants to be that? It is just a technique to stigmatize their critics,” Muhammad says.

Media Matters and NewsHounds parrot the “Islamophobia” line because their primary goal is to attack FOX News Channel, even if it means declining to defend their own liberal-progressive values from Islamists.

This article was sponsored by the Institute on Religion and Democracy.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • Toa

    Of course these people take up for the Muslims; its a classic (failed) strategy: “chickens” siding up with bullies in the hopes that it will keep them safe.

  • Hass

    The Lefties romancing with Muslimes have no idea of the inevitable consequences that’s coming their way. And I mean the inevitable.

  • Elizabeth Cape Cod

    It’s one thing for leftists to support crazy islam over conservatives, But after leftists are through empowering Islam in America and they think they have a hard time dealing with Christianity, just wait until islam is shoved down their throats.

  • Ax2root

    Islams god is the devil and the devil is ” the father of lies”..bible

  • TopAssistant

    Excellent work! Now research Cultural Marxism i.e. political correctness and the constant pandering for votes and dollars it brings to politicians. The stigma it brings if you oppose any group that has crawled into the slimy pit and how they replaced our Constitution, especially the part about our national government is to “provide for our common defense.”

    Our Constitution says three things about the responsibility of the federal government for our national defense. First, “provide for the common defense” is our national government’s top priority; second, our national defense is the only mandatory function of the national government; finally, national defense is exclusively the function of the national government. However, what happens when our national government, especially our politicians ignore their Oath of Office and our Constitution when it comes to our national defense, our homeland security and the preservation of our Constitution and replace it with a 1923 Marxist program they initially tiled Cultural Marxism and later changed the title to what we now know as simply political correctness or PC for short?

    • kikorikid

      HOT! HOT! HOT!
      Now, Let’s try to follow the Founders footprints.
      DOWN WITH THE KING!!!

  • ObamaYoMoma

    than to expose American Islamist groups’ rejection of liberal values.

    First of all, the Islamist groups in America only exist within the recesses of this writer’s mentally handicapped mind. Nevertheless all Islamic groups without exception reject liberal values, because not rejecting liberal values constitutes blasphemy and blasphemy in Islam is a capital offense. Indeed, Muslims of all stripes and configurations never ever assimilate and integrate into infidel society for the same reason.

    Sorry a third of the first paragraph is all I could get through this article because I suddenly remembered how incompetent this writer is on the subject of Islam. He’s absolutely awful.

  • Schmitty

    I just can’t understand how the media defends these cavemen. If these people were in power the first to go would be the free press. This would be the same as Jews defending the Nazis. It just makes zero sense.

  • popseal

    DHIMMIs while have their day, as every dog does.