 |
He is wrong. A cursory study of American history shows that “enemy combatants” are not entitled to constitutional protections. Anwar al-Awlaki was an “enemy combatant”—not just “any American” as Awad claims.
It’s revealing that CAIR wastes no time rallying to the “rights” of people like al-Awlaki while remaining conspicuously silent as an Iranian Christian, a former Muslim, faces the death penalty for being an “apostate.”
There’s a reason for this. CAIR has an agenda—the advance of sharia law. And in sharia law, the penalty for an adult male who leaves Islam is death.
Whenever CAIR speaks out about “rights” under our Constitution, remember that CAIR’s co-founder (Omar Ahmad) and CAIR’s current communications director (Ibrahim Hooper) have both made statements of support for Islamic law to reign supreme in America—which would obliterate the rights and freedoms we now enjoy.
Nihad Awad is the last person who should be lecturing American leaders about their “duty” to uphold the Constitution, given his organization’s support for sharia law and its vicious and dishonest attacks on anyone who dares to uphold the Constitution by opposing sharia law.
There is one thing Awad said with which we agree: “Their [our enemies’] only hope of an American victory is one we inflict on ourselves.”
And that self-inflicted wound begins with refusing to see who CAIR really is and believing the propaganda put out by CAIR and its fellow travellers.
Opposing view: Uphold America's founding principles
By Nihad Awad
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/story/2011-10-02/CAIR-Awlaki-Constitution-terrorism/50637334/1
| Let's start where we agree. Anwar al-Awlaki was a propagandist for violence and extremism. His repeated calls to kill Americans cannot be denied or underestimated. The extent of his actual involvement in terrorist operations is something the public is not privy to. He was an Internet personality, not a scholar on Islam. He lacked the authority to issue religious verdicts and rulings. Real Muslim scholars refuted his twisted interpretations, but they lacked his charisma and slick publishing apparatus. American Muslims condemned his video messages endorsing the killing of Americans. But now to the more difficult issue. The Fifth Amendment states, "No person shall … be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." We should reject any domestic or foreign policies that diminish constitutional protections. While the killings of Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan by a U.S. drone strike may be popular with many, times and enemies have a tendency to change. If we accept that the president can order the killing of any American without due process of law, the Constitution is rendered meaningless. Even in the post-9/11 era, our leaders and military personnel have a duty to uphold the Constitution. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has advocated for hundreds of American Muslims denied due process when placed on no-fly or watch lists. Citizens of all faiths and political persuasions should know that their constitutional rights could be similarly denied in some future national crisis. We join the ACLU and other groups in urging Congress and the courts to take up this issue. Numerous studies show that drone strikes fuel anti-American anger and boost recruiting for al-Qaeda. There is little evidence that the attacks decrease the terror threat or make America any safer. In fact, the opposite may be true. Our nation's war on terror will not be won through force of arms. It will be won when we are shown to be a nation in which respect for the law transcends fear, and hostility toward today's enemies does not cause us to forget our founding principles. America's enemies can never win on the field of battle. Their only hope of an American defeat is one we inflict on ourselves. |
No comments:
Post a Comment