I love the "argumentation by gov'mint" argument: "Whul, the gov'mint don't know nothin' about it, so it ain't re-ul!" Sorry: which part of the gov'mint did this refer to? What's their portfolio? Who? Is it the one retired FBI official mentioned by name? Well, brilliant. Got me there.
The only person here talking like a redneck is you. You're the unsophisticated one, not me, so stop projecting.
In fact, the government knows quite a lot about CAIR. Trust me that no one at CAIR lies awake because of your ill-formed diatribes against them. They have members of Congress who oppose them...none of whom can make a charge of wrongdoing stick, which is why CAIR still exists, and has not been shut down.
If you have evidence against CAIR, then take it to the authorities...but you don't. If you had it, then so would others, and CAIR, which is, again, extremely well scrutinized, would have been destroyed and many of its members in jail. They're not. The authorities don't respond to innuendo and bigotry.
You ask me which government agencies I was writing about, but it doesn't work that way. I would have to prove a negative to show that CAIR is not under criminal investigation. On the other hand, if you allegations are correct, then no doubt you can show which *are* investigating them. Much like your own posts, the complaints against them are all just bitching, with no sustained
action ever being taken. That is why CAIR has been around so long, despite having been a pet target of many conservatives since the mid-1990s. Face facts, if your allegations were correct CAIR would have been shut down years ago.
Worse for your case, speaking at a CAIR event, does not mean "in league with CAIR." Speaking at an event is not the same as an endorsement, and CAIR is a large forum as Muslim organizations go, and usually draws respectably sized crowds as I understand it.
You also never answered my question: Are there any Islamic organizations of which you approve? It's perfectly reasonable to wonder if you are being unbiased if there is no Muslin Group in all of America that you consider itself respectable.
The first half of your sentence was ungrammatical, but comprehensible. I suppose I could hardly give a shit about your pre-existing bias, Pandi, but that would be saying too much. It's perfectly reasonable to wonder about the associations people make, and I'm certain it's not something you consider unethical when done by you for whatever purposes you possess.
First, please use my full screen name. You have not earned the right to call me by pet names, sweetie. Denigrating me by using a pet name and criticizing my argument's supposed grammatical flaws do not strengthen your position, they just highlight how thin the substance of your comebacks are.
That you talk about bias is laughable...since you are the one seeking to abridge the freedom of Muslims to build a mosque on land they control, all in compliance with the laws. My point is "live and let live", so I am happy to late history decide which side of the debate was biased.
It is perfectly reasonable to wonder at the associations people make, but you have no proof of wrongdoing on ether side, just guilt by association. Linking two weak arguments of wrongdoing together does not transform them into one solid argument for wrongdoing.
:facepalm:
