CAIR has responded to the president's speech with their usual disingenuousness. They continue to ignore the fundamental issues, and they continue to ignore the sick culture at work in the territories, and the Arab world at large. If they want to promote "American-Islamic relations," this isn't the way to do it.

"The speech was a step in the right direction, but it fell short of offering a clear vision of the ultimate destination. Core issues such as the status of Jerusalem and existing Israeli settlements, final borders and the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes, were not addressed in a way that offers hope for a just and comprehensive settlement to the Middle East conflict. It was the failure to address these vital issues that brought us to the current impasse.

No, it was a failure on the part of the Palestinian "leadership" to negotiate these issues like civilized human beings, instead choosing to send children to bomb other children (and often babies) with poisoned construction fasteners, as a means of achieving unattainable goals, that brought us to the current impasse.

"The right to freedom should never be conditioned on the whims of a hostile party and must not face a veto by any individual, group or government opposed to peace. It is up to the Palestinians themselves to choose their leaders in a free and independent political process. That leadership should reflect the hopes and aspirations of all Palestinians.

Sorry, but no. Not when those "hopes and aspirations" include (as demonstrated in their own textbooks, public statements, web sites, radio addresses, etc.) the goals of the destruction of the state of Israel, and the murder of its citizens.

"Our policies in the Middle East should be based on American national interests and on universal values of freedom and justice, not on the political and religious agenda of an influential domestic lobby for a foreign government."

Ahhh, it didn't take them long to trot out the old, "the American policy is in thrall to the evil Jews" argument. It's deniable, since they won't be specific about what the "domestic lobby" is, or who the "foreign government" is, but most of us are capable of reading between the lines, as they intend. Unfortunately for them, some of us are capable of reading between the lines between the lines, which they didn't intend.

Awad thanked the president for his statements in praise of Islamic culture and its contributions to world civilization. He said those comments were particularly significant given the current atmosphere of anti-Muslim rhetoric.

The "current atmosphere of anti-Muslim rhetoric"? What atmosphere would that be? The only rhetoric I hear is anti-Islamic-terrorist. Does Mr. Awad think that it's over the top to criticize people who glorify the murder of innocents in the name of his religion? If not, I'm waiting for him to say so, and to join in the criticism.