The Hamas-founded Council on American-Islamic Relations and the anti-Shariah, grass-roots movement Act for America are squaring off over the suspension of Fox News host Jeanine Pirro.
The network punished Pirro for raising the question of whether or not Muslim Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., puts Shariah, or Islamic law, above the U.S. Constitution or any other law, as do millions of Muslims worldwide.
Pirro, who was publicly rebuked by Fox News, reasoned that the question should be asked because Omar’s wearing of a head covering is a symbol of compliance with Shariah. The freshman congresswoman recently was rebuked by her Democratic Party leadership for a series of anti-Semitic remarks that led to a watered-down resolution in the House condemning hateful speech of all kinds.
CAIR is an unindicted conspirator in a terror-funding case and was designated by an Arab Gulf nation as a terrorist organization. The group, founded by operatives of the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, is promoting a boycott of Fox News advertisers to force the network to fire both Pirro and prime-time host Tucker Carlson.
“Fox News must clearly state that Jeanine Pirro will not be allowed back on the air after her long history of Islamophobic hate rhetoric and the network must also take similar action against other Islamophobic hosts like Tucker Carlson,” CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad said in a statement.
“All existing advertisers should drop their ads on Fox News to ensure that they are not associated with the promotion of hate,” he said.
Act for America, meanwhile. is urging members to write to Fox News CEO Suzanne Scott to complain about Pirro’s absence, the Associated Press reported.
The group said on its website regarding Pirro’s suspension that Fox News “caved to pressure from the radical left.”
“Jeanine Pirro did nothing wrong,” the group’s leader, Brigitte Gabriel, said via Twitter. “People should be outraged.”
Gabriel’s group said more than 20,000 people have responded to its request to email Scott.
Pirro said on her March 10 show: “Think about this: She’s not getting this anti-Israel sentiment doctrine from the Democrat Party. So if it’s not rooted in the party, where is she getting it from? Think about it. Omar wears a hijab, which according to the Quran 33:59, tells women to cover so they won’t get molested. Is her adherence to this Islamic doctrine indicative of her adherence to Sharia law, which in itself is antithetical to the United States Constitution?”
Pirro issued a statement through Fox News saying she did not call Omar un-American and that “my intention was to ask a question and start a debate, but of course because one is Muslim does not mean you don’t support the Constitution.”
‘Incompatible with constitutional rule’
Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch pointed to the confusion about Islam displayed in the response to Pirro’s connection of the wearing of a hijab with Islamic law.
He said in a FrontPage Magazine column that even people who should know better demonstrated a lack of knowledge, citing media critic John Nolte.
Nolte wrote via Twitter: “Does a Jewish man who covers his head put the Torah above the Constitution? Does a Catholic woman who covers head put the Pope above the Constitution? What a stupid thing to say.”
Spencer reacted to Nolte’s tweet: “No in both cases, because in both cases the headwear in question is not part of a larger system that is incompatible with Constitutional rule. However, the hijab is part of such a system, and that’s all Pirro was saying.”