Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

By: Fern Sidman – Jewish Voice News

A new controversy has engulfed the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s most prominent Muslim advocacy organization, after its newly launched political arm — CAIR Action — appeared to show social-media activity originating in Turkey. The revelation, made possible by a recently introduced geo-location feature on X (formerly Twitter), has ignited fierce scrutiny about potential foreign involvement in the group’s operations.

CAIR swiftly rejected any claims of foreign ties, telling The Algemeiner on Tuesday that speculation about connections to Turkey or overseas coordination is “categorically false.” According to the group, the only reason CAIR Action’s account appears to have a Turkish origin is because its director “regularly visits his family in Turkey and set up CAIR Action’s account while he was there using a local phone.”

But the explanations have done little to stem the political firestorm. The swirling questions about CAIR Action’s geo-location are landing precisely as CAIR faces one of the most consequential challenges in its history: Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s decision last week to designate CAIR as a terrorist and transnational criminal organization — a move he justified by directly linking CAIR to the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, and the ideological project of political Islam.

The unfolding controversy, according to the information provided in The Algemeiner report, reveals a complex mix of domestic politics, foreign influence allegations, counterterrorism policy, and the battle for public perception surrounding one of the United States’ most polarizing civil-society institutions.

The origin of the controversy stems from a small but powerful new feature on X: the platform now discloses the country from which user accounts were created. Over the weekend, observers quickly noticed that the CAIR Action account — which describes itself as a U.S.-based civic-engagement organization focused on American Muslims — appears to be based in Turkey.

Screenshots circulated widely, prompting speculation that CAIR’s political arm might be operating from or coordinating with Turkish networks. On social media and in political circles, critics immediately drew connections to Turkey’s close relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood, as well as Ankara’s well-documented support for Islamist political movements throughout the Middle East.

CAIR, however, was unequivocal in its denial. In a statement to The Algemeiner, the organization insisted that “there are no institutional ties to Turkey whatsoever,” stressing that the geo-location issue was merely a technical byproduct of its director visiting family.

Still, analysts quoted in The Algemeiner report noted that the appearance of any proximity to Turkey — particularly in the context of a newly formed political operation — was certain to draw scrutiny.

The Turkish government under President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is one of the Muslim Brotherhood’s most active international patrons, hosting exiled Brotherhood figures and supporting affiliated organizations. Given that both CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood are frequently connected in U.S. political discourse, the optics of CAIR Action appearing to originate in Turkey proved combustible.

If the social-media revelations stirred the fire, Governor Greg Abbott poured gasoline on it. On the heels of the geo-location controversy, Abbott issued a sweeping proclamation categorizing CAIR — and the Muslim Brotherhood — as terrorist and transnational criminal organizations under Texas law.

In remarks quoted by The Algemeiner, Abbott declared: “The Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR have long made their goals clear: to forcibly impose Sharia law and establish Islam’s ‘mastership of the world.’ These radical extremists are not welcome in our state and are now prohibited from acquiring any real property interest in Texas.”

The designation bars CAIR from purchasing property in Texas and opens the door to further legal constraints. It marks the first time a U.S. state has taken such a dramatic step against CAIR.

CAIR responded by filing a lawsuit, arguing that Abbott’s order violates its constitutional rights and threatens its ability to conduct political advocacy and community organizing. The group insisted to The Algemeiner that the designation was driven by Islamophobia rather than factual evidence.

But Abbott wasn’t finished. On Monday, he took to X to reiterate his position, writing: “CAIR’s X account is routed through the Turkish App Store. This sure seems like an international operations link between CAIR and a country tied to the Muslim Brotherhood. I designated CAIR a terrorist and transnational criminal organization because of ties like this to that group.”

Abbott’s messaging tied the geo-location controversy directly to broader ideological claims — and once again underscored the centrality of Turkey and the Muslim Brotherhood in the political narrative surrounding CAIR.

The Texas designation coincided with a major policy announcement from President Trump, who signed an executive order directing his administration to evaluate whether certain chapters of the Muslim Brotherhood should be formally designated as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) and Specially Designated Global Terrorists (SDGTs).

As The Algemeiner reported, Trump long considered designating the Brotherhood during his first term but encountered internal resistance from national-security officials. Now, with fewer bureaucratic constraints and a foreign-policy team more aligned with his worldview, the administration appears to be moving ahead aggressively.

The White House’s decision further raises the stakes for CAIR, whose critics have for decades accused the organization of functioning as a political wing of Hamas and the Brotherhood — accusations CAIR denies.

CAIR’s purported ties to Hamas — the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood — remain the most contentious and politically potent aspect of its history.

As The Algemeiner has reported, these allegations are not merely speculative. They are rooted in both the Justice Department’s findings in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism-financing trial and extensive testimony, court filings, as well as documentation collected over the past three decades.

In the mid-2000s, CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case, the largest terrorism-financing prosecution in American history. The designation was based on evidence presented in federal court suggesting that CAIR had ties to Hamas-linked organizations.

In 2010, as Politico noted — and as The Algemeiner report highlighted — U.S. District Court Judge Jorge Solis determined that the government had presented “ample evidence to establish the association of CAIR with Hamas.”

CAIR disputes these findings and repeatedly stresses that “being labeled an unindicted co-conspirator carries no legal implication.” Indeed, in its statement to The Algemeiner, CAIR argued that the designation “does not require the Justice Department to prove anything in a court of law.”

Still, watchdog groups remain unconvinced. According to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL)L “Some of CAIR’s current leadership had early connections with organizations that are or were affiliated with Hamas.”

CAIR vehemently denies the allegation and asserts that it “unequivocally condemns all acts of terrorism,” including those committed by Hamas.

But the situation became far more volatile in the wake of Hamas’s October 7, 2023 massacre, when the terror group murdered 1,200 Israelis and kidnapped hundreds more in the deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust.

In statements and speeches uncovered by The Algemeiner, several senior CAIR officials publicly expressed support for Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack, calling it an act of liberation.

The most shocking remarks came from CAIR co-founder and executive director Nihad Awad, who proudly declared at the American Muslims for Palestine conference in Chicago: “And yes, I was happy to see people breaking the siege… walk free into their land.”

The description of Oct. 7 — characterized by mass rape, torture, the murder of families, and the burning of civilians alive — as a moment of “happiness” was condemned across the political spectrum. About a week later, the executive director of CAIR-LA, Hussam Ayloush, delivered a sermon claiming that Israel “does not have the right to defend itself” and asserting that Palestinians experience their own version of Oct. 7 “every single day.”

These comments — documented in detail in The Algemeiner report — intensified the perception that CAIR is ideologically aligned with Hamas, even if it denies organizational ties.

Launched earlier this year, CAIR Action describes itself as a political advocacy group dedicated to mobilizing Muslim voters, training new political leaders, and influencing policy at local, state, and federal levels.

On its website, the organization says it aims to “enhance civic engagement,” “support candidates aligned with its priorities,” and “champion policy priorities” for Muslim communities.

Though CAIR insists that CAIR Action is legally and financially distinct from its charitable arm, the two entities remain tightly intertwined in branding, leadership, and mission.

As analysts told The Algemeiner, the timing of CAIR Action’s launch — in an election year, amid rising Muslim political mobilization — suggests a strategic effort to increase CAIR’s influence in U.S. politics.

But the geo-location incident, combined with Abbott’s designation and Trump’s executive order, threatens to overshadow the group’s civic ambitions.

Why has the controversy escalated so quickly? According to experts interviewed by The Algemeiner, several factors have converged that include Turkey’s central role in global political Islam. Turkey is widely viewed as a sanctuary for Muslim Brotherhood exiles and Hamas affiliates. Anything linked to Turkey is easily politicized in U.S. debates about extremism.

Decades of allegations, court documents, and public statements have created an aura of suspicion around the group. The open praise for Hamas’s massacre shocked even some of CAIR’s previous defenders. By designating CAIR a terrorist organization, Greg Abbott created a state-level precedent with cascading political implications. The Trump administration’s move to consider a federal designation elevates the stakes significantly.

The Turkish geo-location — even if innocuous — feeds narratives about foreign influence.

The controversy surrounding CAIR Action’s apparent Turkish origins is not merely a social-media hiccup. It is the latest inflection point in a decades-long debate over CAIR’s role in American political life, its ideological bearings, and its relationship to Islamist movements abroad.

As The Algemeiner report noted, the coming months will reveal whether CAIR’s denials can withstand heightened political, legal, and public-relations scrutiny.

For now, the organization finds itself navigating a state-level terrorist designation in Texas, a federal review of Muslim Brotherhood affiliates, renewed media attention to earlier Hamas-related controversies and growing skepticism about the origins and aims of its new political arm. The stakes could not be higher.

The outcome will shape not only CAIR’s future — but the future of Muslim political advocacy in the United States, the contours of American counterterrorism policy, and the broader debate over foreign influence in domestic civic life.

For CAIR, CAIR Action, and their critics alike, this is no longer a policy disagreement. It is a battle over legitimacy — legal, ideological, and moral — unfolding under the sharp and unyielding gaze of the public.