BILL O'REILLY AND COUNCIL ON AMERICAN ISLAMIC RELATIONS

What is it with Bill O'Reilly? No, seriously. He continues to have people on his show like Marc Lamont Hill, who is a known supporter of at least two cop killers, despite his boss Rupert Murdoch firing Hill as a Fox News contributor over the revelations. Then last week, O'Reilly had CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper on his program to debate the profiling issue.

I addressed this on my January 10th SHOW. Personally, I don't have a problem with O'Reilly having Hooper on the show and while he debated him vigorously, he didn't get to the heart of the issue by challenging Hooper on his group's affiliations with the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. By keeping the debate in the arena of profiling exclusively, O'Reilly was able to appear confrontational and challenging while being anything but.

WND is addressing the issue of O'Reilly calling Hooper a "Stand-up guy" after the segment, along with the larger issue of why Fox News is giving CAIR a pass:

Long a reliably patriotic media source in the war on terror, Fox News may now be among news outlets who have fallen under the spell of the Council on American-Islamic Relations' propaganda machine.

"We own the media," CAIR National Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper privately brags, according to a source currently working inside the aggressive Islamist lobby group.

Fox News host Bill O'Reilly last week invited the TV-savvy Hooper on his show to debate passenger profiling, the second guest appearance by the CAIR spokesman in a month. At the end of the segment, O'Reilly thanked Hooper and called him a "stand-up guy," sending shockwaves through the conservative blogosphere.

As a sidebar here, I have personal first hand knowledge that former Muslim terrorist Walid Shoebat is not being allowed to appear on O'Reilly's program despite several attempts to do so. The question is, why would someone leading a group with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic terrorism be allowed on the top-rated cable news show while not being challenged on those affiliations when a man who would offer an opposing view is basically being shunned? WND makes a good case for the reason being Saudi Arabian money.

Given CAIR's proven ties to terrorism – which O'Reilly failed to mention – why would Fox offer the group's top executives a virtually uncritical forum on prime-time cable TV? Saudi Arabian money may be a factor.

It turns out that the same billionaire Saudi prince who owns a major stake in Fox's parent company also bankrolls Washington-based CAIR. And sensitive State Department records reveal Hooper – despite his repeated public denials – has personally solicited cash from the prince and other members of the ruling Saudi royal family during recent trips to the kingdom.

Playing a big role in exposing CAIR has been the blockbuster book, Muslim Mafia, which WND also features in the story.

I realize that the issue of CAIR getting both a forum and a pass on O'Reilly's program may be bigger than O'Reilly himself but based on these indisputable facts, O'Reilly should do one of two things.

1.) Resign
2.) Stop saying he's "looking out for the folks"

Read the entire WND piece - SHOCKING.