The group that received preferential treatment? CAIR. CAIR supports the criminalization of speech critical of Muslims.
From this source:
...[I]n June 2012 … in plenty of time to get voters recruited and registered for the November 2012 election … and during the time that the IRS was targeting conservatives … the IRS miraculously sent a letter to the CAIR-Foundation indicating that the group had regained its tax-exempt status, with the spokesperson indicating all filed paperwork had been completed and filed. Concerned groups researched the claims and have shown that NOT to be the case however. In fact, the 2007-2010 returns cannot be produced, and CAIR filed an extension for 2011....Read the rest HERE.
CAIR has ties to Hamas, yet was considered worthy of having 501(c) status restored. More about CAIR HERE at Anti-CAIR.
What should we make of CAIR's restored 501(c) status? That the restoration is more of Obama's outreach to Muslims?
CAIR also has strong ties to the Democratic Party:
...Though Democrat-connected CAIR did not officially endorse Obama, many of its staffers helped turn out the Muslim vote for his re-election. CAIR boasted that its own polling showed more than 85 percent of Muslim-Americans voted for Obama....We shouldn't be surprised that CAIR's 501(c) status was restored. Under our present government, "Some animals are more equal than others" — particularly those animals that would revise the principles upon which our nation was founded. We are living in Orwellian Times.
Coincidentally — or not — George Orwell's dystopian novel 1984 was published sixty-four years ago yesterday.
Well, we tried to warn others now didn't we? Little comfort to say we told you so, yet,- We told you so and you mocked us. They can thank us bitter clingers that they know anything.
ReplyDeleteWe’ve had this problem for a while now, AOW. A long list of leftist organizations have been granted 501(c) status … including American United for Change, whose purpose is to “amplify the progressive message.” Americans United spent $4.7 million in one-year “redefining” common sense and providing advocacy and education about public policy issues.
ReplyDeleteAlso, the Ruckus Society, which is part of the Occupy Movement, a George Soros funded organization providing “environmental, human rights, and social justice —which involved criminal trespass.
Women’s Action for New Directions, another George Soros brainchild, which dates back to the days when the Soviet Union was funding anti-nuclear energy movements among the least bright of our citizens.
The New World Foundation, intending to use money from industrialists to destroy capitalism by supporting community organizers around the world.
Fierce is a Saul Alinsky model organization supporting the queer community and its rabid activists.
The Black Alliance for Just Immigration, advocating administration changes to visa regulations—as if it isn’t easy enough to gain entrance to our largest cities; Boston comes to mind.
Brennan Center for Justice, whose coordinating strategies involve election fraud.
And of course, the Center for American Progress and Move On (leading the charge against America in the Sustainability movements) … both granted tax-exempt status. And yes, CAIR … whose purpose is not so different from the communist organizations mentioned above.
I love how members of congress put on their shocked face whenever a new scandal earns a headline.
ReplyDeleteThis country is done. I wonder how long it will take most Americans to figure this out.
Paraphrasing Orwel, some humans are more equal than others.
ReplyDeleteI wish some of these meatier comments would be shared at my blog and at Progressive Eruptions when my friend, Ms Shaw Kenawe posts items insisting the IRS Scandal is nothing more than a right-wing canard designed to thwart and befuddle the Left.
ReplyDeleteA sober, rational exchange of responsibly-collected DATA such as Mustang provided above is something to which leftists need exposure.
Calling them names, cursing at them or stupidly typing endless variations of "You and your kind are no damned good," does actual harm to the conservative cause, but when you have good information, it's really a SIN just to keep it among ourselves.
The Echo-Chamber phenomenon is not only tiresome it's very WASTEFUL.
So, please don't be shy -- or disdainful -- there's no one on earth who couldn't benefit from exposure to accurate information -- and RESPECTFUL disagreement.
Huh. Only 5 comments? It's a good thing I stopped by to fatten the list.
ReplyDeleteI have to give you credit, as abusively confrontational as you are in your responses to those you disagree with, you don't hold a candle to Shaw Kenawe. Now, there is one serious barracuda. I'm not convinced that she actually believes all the far out crap that she espouses, in fact I've come to think that she probably has taken a leaf out of your own book and run amok with it, in that she makes claims and statements so far to the left that they border simultaneously on insanity and stupidity.
Then, when anyone offers a counter to her ravings, she attacks them personally, rabid-dog style, flecks of spittle flying in all directions, pretty much like you nice folks do, rather than enter into any discussion of the actual subject.
You should be proud. You have a wonderful student there. Never debate the issues, always viciously and personally attack those who disagree with you, instead. With any luck, you can get them so pissed off that they'll keep coming back for more, and really liven up your blog.
Oh, what jolly good fun.
To clarify the above, so no one misunderstands, you people believe the stuff you say. It's just your idea that you have to piss people off to keep the blog comments going, that's screwed up.
ReplyDeleteBut with Shaw, I highly doubt that she believes her bullshit. It's just her end goal that's the same as yours, to get people to disagree so she can insult them and get them into a verbally abusive dialogue.
Sick, really.
FT,
ReplyDeleteDo you really think that Shaw wants any of us to present cogent arguments at her blog? I looked at a recent thread there; cogent arguments that do not support Obama are clearly unwelcome.
You have maintained a good relationship with Shaw. I haven't been able to do so; therefore, although I frequently read material at Shaw's site, I no longer comment there (except recently when I corrected a commenter who misquoted me).