Prince Talal's Gift to CAIR

By Jawad Ali

We were actually happy to hear about Saudi Prince Walid Ibn Talal’s $500,000 gift to CAIR.

But before we get into our reasons, quick, every body take a little quiz.

Match the following blue-blooded true American heroes/tycoons/philanthropists with their actual nationality (yes, their names give them away; no, don’t send in your answers)*:

• The Vanderbilts --- Dutch
• The first Du Ponts --- French
• Carnegie --- Scot
• The first Guggenheim --- Swiss Jew
• The first Astor --- German

We have always wanted to see rich Arabs spend their money on worthy causes. Although hookers and casinos are good projects, we always wanted them to support some cause close to *OUR* heart, rather than some obscure madresa in Nigeria. The money could not have gone to a more worthy cause than CAIR, and it could not have come from a better source than Talal.

Maybe we're wrong. Maybe Muslims would have been better served had he spent the cash on a pair of gold doors for his new chopper, like the Sultan of Brunei, or a boob job for his wife.

We concede that CAIR is a political beast, and not just an outreach outfit. We also feel that money could possibly corrupt and coerce them, so let's keep a close eye on them.

Here are a few other things that we should consider.

Al Jazeera. A good analogy is the Qatari satellite news station. The initial project was launched by the dreaded BBC and the equally evil house of Saud. But they picked the right crew, for when the deal fell through, the same crew got the Amir of Qatar to pony up the cash. The rest is broadcasting history. Sure the royal family has a corrupting influence on Al Jazeera, and they seem to be above serious critique. But Al Jazeera remains one of the most exciting institutions to come out of the Islamic world in modern times. Talal is likely even more savvy than the Qatari royals in how the modern world operates.

Let's also not forget the great contributions that were made by Islamic scholars, artists, scientists, writers, poets, etc. that were supported by philanthropy. Omar Khayam comes to mind. Mirza Ghalib (what, you don’t know Mirza?) even had to depend on a stipend from the British. That just made him a little extra caustic when it came time to critique the white man in India.

Guilt by Association 1. Let's be careful about this kind of bigotry. Need we say more? Being a Saudi citizen is not a crime.

Guilt by Association 2. Capitalism Talal invests in the Fortune 500. Its not just Citibank; its Disney, Apple and AOL also, and many more. From the capitalist point of view, he makes money the old fashioned Smith Barney way, and not through extortion and other crimes against humanity. He is probably a lot cleaner than Bush, Clinton and Cheney. The only guy who is completely free of capitalism is the dude making tea for “Brother” Osama in the bat cave. Maybe he should cast the first stone, since he’s got plenty of those in the cave.

Oh my God, what would the rednecks say? This is another fallacious argument. The rednecks will make a stink about foreign Arab influence. Their emphasis is on Arab and not foreign, otherwise they may stop and discuss the Israeli ownership of Congress and the White House. It’s naive to think that they will not make a stink about Arab American money (Cynthia McKenny, Hello!). The best way to combat rednecks is to go on the offensive and tell them to back off and stop spreading bigotry. Running off to cater to the whims of the rednecks is probably not very wise. I have been seeing this type of argument in the recent spate of articles that claim that even though Muslim organizations have condemned terrorism, they have not said enough to satisfy the rednecks. Who cares? It's OK for CAIR to be a global organization. Let's not have the other side keep us parochial, or isolate Muslims from each other.

(*Quiz answer. They are already matched up. I got this out of Michael Parenti's book "History as Mystery". Its a history of history itself; about who has written what passes for history today, and why.)