I've talked before about the Council on American-Islamic Relations -- most recently because it filed that lawsuit against Americans who reported suspicious behavior by Muslims on a U.S. Airways flight. Better known just as CAIR, the lobbying group has come under a lot of scrutiny lately for its connections to terror-supporting groups. This time, though, The Washington Times has uncovered some very good news about the group.
For years, CAIR has claimed to represent millions of American Muslims. In fact, they claim to represent more Muslim in American than ... there are in America. This has alarmed Americans in general as the group often seems to be more aligned with our enemies than us -- which isn't surprising as it spun off from a group funded by Hamas. As you know, Hamas has been waging a terrorist war against Israel and calls for its total destruction. It also promises to see America destroyed. Nowadays, Hamas is busy murdering its Palestinian political rivals.
Even with this history, and CAIR's conspicuous failure to condemn Hamas by name, it has been treated as if represents Muslim Americans by our own government. The good news is that the financial support CAIR claims to have among American Muslims is a myth. We know this because The Washington Times got hold of the group's IRS tax records.
CAIR's dues-paying membership has shrunk 90 percent since 9/11 -- from 29,000 in 2000 to only 1,700 last year. CAIR's annual income from dues plunged from $733,000 to $59,000. Clearly, America's Muslims are not supporting this group -- and I'm happy to hear about it.
Of course, every silver lining seems to have a cloud; and this cloud is that CAIR's spending is running about $3 million a year. They’ve opened 25 new chapters in major cities across the country even as their dues shrank to a pittance. The question is; who’s funding CAIR?
CAIR's not saying. The New York Times earlier this year reported that the backing is from "wealthy Persian Gulf governments" including the UAE and Saudi Arabia. Obviously, we have a bigger problem here than the one with CAIR.
As long as I am endorsing Fred for President, I might as well endorse a true bad-ass for V.P. I call on Michael Ironside to be Fred's running-mate. Yes he's from Canada, and yes his real name isn't Michael, but who cares? Mr. Ironside will stomp your face in the dirt for looking at him the wrong way, film himself fucking your mother and sisters, and then force you to pay admission to watch it. Michael Ironside once went to Chuck Norris place, and fucked him up big time over a can of tuna. You can't fade this guy, I'm telling you.
This week, former CBS Evening News presenter Dan Rather blamed the producers for the plummeting ratings of his former news show because they have been "dumbing it down” and “tarting it up." Ha! The last time the Evening News was top dog is when the Iran-Contra Affair was burning up the wires.
Of course these horrid ratings have nothing to do with the blatant liberal bias, the poor production, or the fact that Katie Couric makes Jimmy Olson from Superman look like Bob Woodward. Nawww. You know what the real reason is? Americans are SEXIST!
“I’m sort of surprised by the vitriol against her. The number of people who don’t want news from a woman was startling,”
I suppose the fact that nearly all, if not all, local network news casts in the United States are co-anchored by a man and woman(this is a tried and true formula) matters. It seems to me that Moonves and Kaplan are trying to GUILT the American public in to watching their news program, they have become so desperate. Bernie Goldberg had it sooo right when he wrote Bias.
It gets even better… Rather goes on FOX NEWS to deliver his reply. FOX NEWS! The evil neo-con propaganda machine, and HQ of the Neo-NAZI's, and the KKK:
Kaplan Strikes Back when he brings up the “Memogate” affair that was more likely than not the push that propelled Halliburton Bush to victory in 2004. I imagine that CBS and Dan feel like soccer players that kicked a goal for the other team. Rather himself to this day still claims that the forged documents were genuine, even though they were certainly not. CBS used to back him, but in light of his comments, would they now throw him under the bus? Of course:
"We had to build back from when Dan left,"
Interesting.I thought M.C. Rove was behind that. Huh