Every Muslim in Congress Demanded America Pay Reparations to Muslims for 9/11

While the resolution did not specify which “community-based organizations” that “center the experiences and demands of Arab, Muslim, Middle Eastern” and others would have benefited from Congress “allocating resources”, potentially millions of dollars, the official endorsees of the resolution included the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) which was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in an Islamic terrorist funding trial raising the possibility of these 9/11 ‘reparations’ going not just to Islamic groups, but even to those linked to Islamic terrorism.

Other Islamic groups that endorsed and could have potentially benefited from the ‘9/11 Muslim reparations bill’ including Muslim Advocates, the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), Muslims for Just Futures and the Muslim Justice League had their own ties to unindicted co-conspirators in terror funding. These include CAIR and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) where key figures had championed violence and whose former officials included an unindicted coconspirator in the World Trade Center bombing as its former vice president raising the troubling possibility that ‘9/11 reparations’ money could have benefited advocates and organizations tied not only to Islamic terrorism but even to the original WTC attack which had been carried out by the nephew of the mastermind of the September 11 attacks.

The four Muslims in Congress at the time had joined forces to equate the Americans killed in the 9/11 attacks with the Muslims, including Al Qaeda terrorists, they claimed had suffered at the hands of the United States of America. The congressional resolution complained about “overreaching policing, surveillance, and criminalization policies”, “discriminatory searches and seizures of Arab, Muslim, Middle Eastern” and others, as well as “torture at Guantanamo Bay to extrajudicial drone strikes” against Al Qaeda members.

While the Muslim reparations resolution claimed that innocent Muslims were wrongly targeted, the text of the resolution included Al Qaeda terrorists and made no distinction between them.

Beyond “resources”, the resolution also called for dismantling counterterrorism measures, both private and public, arguing that “Joint Terrorism Task Forces Preemptive Prosecutions, Countering Violent Extremism Programs, Suspicious Activity Reporting, Watchlists” continue to “profile and unfairly target Arab, Muslim, Middle Eastern” and others, and called for an “independent commission to work with community-based organizations to review these government policies, investigate and document their impact, and provide recommendations to dismantle those policies.”

These “community-based organizations” could potentially have included unindicted terrorism co-conspirators and Islamic organizations that partnered with terror-linked groups and who would be put in charge of dismantling counterterrorism measures and asked to “create alternatives to law enforcement” which would have meant applying police defunding to national security defenses against terrorism.

Finally, much as studies were conducted on the health of police officers and firefighters who were at Ground Zero, the resolution called for the National Institutes of Health to study the ”impact of hate, government targeting, political rhetoric, and profiling” on the health of Muslims as if they had been breathing ash, instead of complaining about negative media coverage.

The insulting premise of the resolution that Muslims suffered after 9/11 and deserved reparations was based on a series of lies. The Muslim 9/11 reparations resolution claimed that “Waqar Hasan in Dallas, Texas, and Adel Karas in San Gabriel, California, were killed on September 15, 2001” as evidence of some large American campaign of hate against Muslims.

Adel Karas, a Christian, and Waqar Hasan were killed in attacks by criminals on stores.

Muslims insisted that the Karas murder was Islamophobic because his store was a block away from a mosque. In reality, Karas was a Coptic Christian who had fled Egypt because of the Muslim persecution of Christians. Homicide detectives believed that the storeowner had been targeted in an extortion attempt and identified the killers as Latino gang members who had previously threatened him. Despite that, the murdered Christian store owner’s name continues to be falsely listed as evidence of an American “climate of hate” after September 11.

Hasan was one of two store personnel, one Muslim and one Hindu, killed in a series of armed robberies in Texas. Mark Stroman, who committed his first armed robbery at only twelve years old, had an extensive criminal record and had ordered a Hindu man working the counter to “open the register or I’ll kill you”. The case became famous because Stroman, a career criminal, mistakenly thought the authorities would let him get away with it by claiming that he had done it out of “patriotism” and to avenge his imaginary sister who died in the World Trade Center.

In reality, there was never any sister and Stroman wasn’t a racist Neo-Nazi: his wife was actually Hispanic. Despite that, the media, activists, and politicians spent the next 10 years helping Stroman keep the lie alive. A documentary was filmed about Stroman getting over his racism and the media covered the campaign by one of the Muslim clerks whom he shot, but who survived, to forgive him and spare him the death penalty.

Skeptics wondered whether this was because Stroman was more useful while alive. The propaganda campaign went on with Supreme Court appeals and press interviews until the serial robber was finally executed.

If there really were a campaign of violence targeting Muslims after 9/11, lies like these wouldn’t have been necessary. The victimhood narrative peddled by Islamic groups, some of whom continue to support Islamic terrorism, is out to erase the horrific crimes carried out by Muslim terrorists against Americans on September 11 by claiming that Muslims were the real victims.

Americans deserve reparations and apologies for the crimes committed against them by Islamic terrorists whose motivations were derived from the Koran and from Islamic law, and which were backed and enabled by Muslim governments including Pakistan, Afghanistan, Qatar and Iran.

Instead of offering an apology or a statement of heartfelt contrition for the 9/11 attacks, Muslim members of Congress arrogantly demanded reparations from Americans for September 11.

The congressional resolution supported last year by every Muslim in Congress spat in the faces of every American who was murdered on September 11 and did it on the anniversary of their murders while arguing that the real victims of 9/11 were the terrorists locked up in Gitmo.

What will they do this year?