The Council on American-Islamic Relations on March 31, 2004 "condemned the mutilation of those killed in Iraq," a reference to the four American civilian contractors in Falluja who, in CAIR's words, "were ambushed in their SUV's, burned, mutilated, dragged through the streets and then hung from a bridge spanning the Euphrates River." CAIR's press release then went on to cite a Hadith report (namely, an account concerning the sayings or deeds of the Prophet Muhammad) that prohibits Muslims from mutilating bodies. A close reading of this carefully-worded statement finds that CAIR condemns the mutilation but not the killings themselves.
According to Jeffrey Gettleman in today's New York Times, religious leaders in Falluja two days later issued a religious edict "condemning the mutilation of the bodies of four American civilians killed this week, but they stayed silent about the attack itself." Gettleman goes on to explain how this distinction fit the mood of the city: "The imams' message, blasted from the minarets of blue-domed mosques, was well received by townspeople, many of whom expressed satisfaction and even pride in the deadly ambush but shame in its aftermath."
Is it not interesting that CAIR, which claims to be an "Islamic civil liberties group," has precisely the same views as those in Falluja who "expressed satisfaction and even pride in the deadly ambush"? Here's more proof, if more were needed, that CAIR is "on the wrong side in the war on terrorism" and should be shunned by all who seek to defeat the terrorists. (April 3, 2004)