Staff Reports
It appears the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has released a guide on navigating America for those with questionable ties. The email in question, sent by CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper, details how campus agitators and non-citizens can avoid the long arm of the law under the Trump administration. While ostensibly aimed at promoting “travel and free speech guidance,” the implications are clear—it’s less about rights and more about dodging accountability.
The email’s main advice? Keep a low profile and fly under the radar. For those facing possible deportation or who are living here under dubious circumstances, CAIR suggests deleting potentially incriminating digital evidence—pictures, apps, anything that might raise a flag with law enforcement. This safety-first approach draws on a case involving Dr. Rasha Alawieh, who experienced the consequences of keeping problematic material on her phone. Having attempted to return to the U.S. after attending the funeral of a Hezbollah leader, she learned the hard way that her photos were more than just innocent memories—they became her ticket out of the country.
In a world where common sense seems to be dwindling, the question arises: why would anyone feel compelled to delete evidence of their anti-American beliefs? CAIR’s response to this dilemma is to advocate for the use of burner phones or backup devices. Apparently, “outsmarting” immigration enforcement involves a little extra preemptive planning. According to CAIR’s own rhetoric, it’s better to engage in clandestine behavior than to comply with the law of the land.
Ban CAIR and deport all the protestorshttps://t.co/Bvued0LPN1
— PatPeters,PhD. (@PatVPeters) March 28, 2025
Moreover, the guide takes a rather curious stance on expired visas. Instead of encouraging non-citizens to fix their immigration status, CAIR advises them against returning to their home countries for necessary stamps—implying it’s preferable to remain in the shadows indefinitely. This perspective raises eyebrows about their actual commitment to lawful behavior and sound immigration practices. For CAIR, the priority appears to be shielding those who exploit the system rather than promoting the integrity of American borders.
The increased vigilance by the Trump administration against foreign agitators has clearly ruffled some feathers at CAIR. Their cries of “unfairness” seem less a defense of civil liberties and more an attempt to protect those who come here to undermine national security. The real takeaway? This episode reflects a broader question about who is allowed to be in America and why. Instead of enabling the misbehavior of those who disrespect the country’s laws, perhaps the focus should be on ensuring that individuals who truly wish to contribute positively to society receive the attention they deserve.
