U.S.-based Islamist groups are pushing for rules that would shield Muslim political leaders and clerics from being charged with supporting jihad terrorism.
The demands are being pushed by the Council on American-Islamic Relations, just before Obama is slated to headline three days of White House meetings this week on federal efforts to mitigate the jihadi violence that is emerging from the growing population of Muslim immigrants.
Justice Department “policies should make clear that those who intervene to [stop attacks] should not suffer for it by being subjected to prosecution, watchlisting, or surveillance because of their association with a potential violent extremist,” said a CAIR statement.
“The Department of Justice should issue guidelines … to protect those who act in good faith to prevent violent extremism by engaging with [Muslims] considering it in order to dissuade them,” CAIR demanded.
CAIR will repeat its demand for more autonomy in a Tuesday press conference in Minneapolis, Minn., with a group of self-described leaders of the immigrant Somali population.
More at The Daily Caller
Now wait a minute… if the DOJ planted informants within the mosques, wouldn’t they merely report that there was no violent extremism being promoted or planned? One would think this would be what CAIR would want, to prove the peaceful innocence of Muslims.
Per CAIR’s plan, we are not allowed to infiltrate into the Muslim community and take their word for it that there is no conspiring going on. Which, of course, could be assumed to be true since any violence that is produced would be “random” and not associated with Islam in any way.
Perhaps they should instead explain why they think it is that they would “need” an exemption from anti-jihad prosecution.
If you have no intent towards supporting terrorism, there is no need for you to be exempted from prosecution from a crime you wont commit. You would only need such exemption if you are planning to support terrorism, but want to ensure you can’t be indicted as a co-conspirator.