I remmber u used 2 work 2gether with American Islamic Congress.

This is a common misconception. I never worked for or with AIC. I attended two of their conferences, just like many other people did, who also eventually saw them for who they really are and kept their distance. I have not been associated with their work in any way for years.

Normally, grant-giving organizations (especially those federally funded) do follow up with the recipient org, so it is surprising to me that AIC was able to so bodly claim ownership with no one checking that fact.

Which is why there is a slight possibility that the money was returned, and that no one bothered to update the site accordingly. However, we care about that, because our credibility is on the line here. There are several emails that have been sent, and I was too busy today to make a phone call. But I have people on top of this case and we’ll get it sorted.

Plus, AIC’s name in itself is very attractive

That may be the case in the USA, but they are amongst the least credible sources in the Middle East, and its Executive Director is extremely close to the Bush administration and has been known to praise U.S militarism in the region (very easy to do when you’re living comfortably in Washington DC.) No one here trusts or likes them, and it’s not impossible to see why. To be associated with such group is frankly an insult.

Esra’a, have you thought about applying for a grant from USIP yourself?

No, we try to stay away from these types of institutions. We are applying mostly to media-related, or European based grant-givers, in order to guarantee our total independence. For example, an American media organization whose mission is the empower people through the web, is something we apply for. But a politically charged organization is something we never allow ourselves to get involved with.

Finding funding is easy, like my colleague Tori says, “if you rely on money from the state department, you get fat really fast.” That’s why AIC is a $1million+ organization, and I am confident they don’t have any freedom at all to do what they want. Finding responsible funding, where you are still the boss of your own organization, is incredibly challenging. We have a code of ethics and will stick by it, that means having to stay away from funders like USIP.

I’d rather get 100k a year than 100 million a year and wake up every morning knowing that I’m doing my job sincerely instead of having to serve anyone’s petty agenda. Sadly AIC can’t say the same. Maybe that’s why they steal things.

Normally, grant-giving organizations (especially those federally funded) do follow up with the recipient org, so it is surprising to me that AIC was able to so bodly claim ownership with no one checking that fact.

Also, as for as why a $1 mil foundation would apply for grants, that’s simple – why not? If there is money available even largest organizations will still apply, and many times the org giving the money wants proof of fiscal responsibility – so unfortunately small orgs have a hard time starting out while larger orgs already have a foot in the door. Plus, AIC’s name in itself is very attractive, quasi-governmental (or even private non-religious or interfaith orgs) would jump at the chance to “prove” they are not anti-Muslim.

Esra’a, have you thought about applying for a grant from USIP yourself? This is one very simple, cheap way to directly show USIP that you, and not AIC, are responsible for the content of the sites. I understand the problems associated with actually taking grant money from USIP, but you could always decline it if offered. Either way, someone on the other end would be reading your information and would hopefully realize the truth.

This is not only a quesiton of copyright infringement, but also of fraud. USIP is funded by American taxpayers, so if enough US citizens write to their Congressman complaining about grants given to AIC on this basis, something might – just maybe – change.

Even if you can’t get a lawyer, I think you are still able to press charges. As an organization with only $1 million, they are not going to want to spend money on a lawyer who charges $500 an hour. The lawyer would start drying up their revenue stream in a matter of weeks – not to mention the bad publicity.