By Joseph Puder
FrontPageMagazine.com | April 26, 2007
Andrew Whitehead, a former serviceman with the U.S. Navy has a website named Anti-CAIR on which Whitehead accused CAIR of partially funding terrorist organizations. CAIR routinely tries to intimidate the likes of Whitehead in the hope of stifling any criticisms and/or allegations made against it.
On March 31, 2004 CAIR filed a lawsuit against Andrew Whitehead in the Virginia Beach Circuit Court demanding $1 million in damages from Whitehead for what it called "libelous defamation." The lawsuit, scheduled to begin in the summer of 2006 was dismissed in April 2006.
Last Thursday, April 12, 2007, the Philadelphia/South Jersey chapter of the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) under the leadership of Regional Director Scott Figelstein, hosted a program with Reed Rubinstein, Esq. of the Washington, DC-based law firm of Greenberg Taurig. The RJC serves as a liaison between the Jewish community and Republican decision makers.
Reed Rubinstein, with the backing of his law firm, provided pro-bono counsel for Andrew Whitehead in the CAIR v. Whitehead lawsuit. Rubinstein is credited with defeating the defamation suit "by an Islamic extremist group against the U.S. Navy enlisted man."
The "false and defamatory" statements irking CAIR officials made by Whitehead were: CAIR is a "terrorist front organization that is partially funded by terrorists"; CAIR is an "organization founded by Hamas supporters which seeks to overthrow the constitutional government in the U.S"; and, "Why oppose CAIR? CAIR has proven links to, and was founded by, Islamic terrorists…CAIR is here to make radical Islam the dominant religion in the U.S…In addition, CAIR receives direct funding from Islamic terrorist-supporting countries."
Whitehead, not easily intimidated, responded by filing over 300 separate interrogatories, requests of documents and requests for admission. CAIR then filed an amended "motion for judgement" dropping the allegations regarding CAIR's ties to Hamas and terror were false and defamatory, some discovery answers, and a motion for protective order. Whitehead then filed a motion to compel, seeking a court order obligating CAIR to answer his information requests.
In court, CAIR was asked to admit that "Hamas murdered innocent civilians" to which it replied: "Objection, calls for legal conclusion…" Questioned as to whether CAIR has had "one or more communications with Abu Musa Marzook?" The Plaintiff's reply was, "To be subject to Plaintiff's motion for Protective Order…", restricting the response to Whitehead's counsel.
Called to confirm Article Seven of the Hamas Charter which states that "the Hamas has been looking forward to implementing Allah's promise whatever time it might take. The Prophet, peace be upon him, said: The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews, until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!" CAIR again refused to respond by stating: "CAIR objects because the Hamas Charter speaks for itself and because the Plainiff is without means to obtain current, accurate, and reliable copy of the Hamas Charter."
Shortly before the court hearing on the motion to compel the case settled. There was no apology, and no retraction. The "false and defamatory" allegations remain posted on Whitehead's website. CAIR simply did not wish to supply the requested documents.
Why did CAIR drop its lawsuit against Andrew Whitehead? Apparently it feared exposure that would reveal its leaders connections to terrorist groups like Hamas. If that is the case, namely, CAIR's fear of exposure, why has the media been silent on this matter? Rubinstein explained, "CAIR is protected by the mainstream media," which he said, "has studiously ignored a decade of evidence, and has, instead, adopted a 'see no evil, speak no evil' stance."
Read the whole thing. And then email the link from FrontPage to all of your contacts.