Peter King Hearings

Muslim Speaker Mike Ghouse

2011-04-14T19:57:00.001-07:00

NURTURING PLURALISTIC VALUES EMBEDDED IN ISLAM

A Muslim Speaker, thinker, organizer and an activist committed to building cohesive societies with a belief that what is good for Muslims has got to be good for the world and vice versa to sustain peace, harmony and prosperity.

To be a Muslim is to be a peace maker, one who constantly seeks to mitigate conflicts and nurtures goodwill for peaceful co-existence of humanity. God wants us to live in peace and harmony with his creation; Life and Matter. Over 1000 articles have been published on a range of topics in Islam and Pluralism. Insha Allah, a book outlining the Muslim vision is on the horizon.

In defense of Islam, pursuing a civil dialogue

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/columnists/steve-blow/20100919-In-defense-of-Islam-pursuing-9397.ece
Over and over you hear it said: If Muslims oppose terrorism, why don't they stand up and say it?

If that has been you, Mike Ghouse ought to be your hero.

It is hard to imagine that anyone has worked harder than the Carrollton resident to demonstrate the peaceful and moderate side of Islam.

And that effort includes personally visiting Dallas' First Baptist Church last Sunday just to put a friendly face on the "evil, evil religion" that the Rev. Robert Jeffress denounced a few weeks before.

"It was wonderful," Ghouse said of the visit. "We were so warmly received."
He hopes a quick chat with Jeffress will be the start of deeper discussion about Islam and the importance of respect between religions.

"I want to have a dialogue with him, not to say he is wrong but to share another point of view," Ghouse said.

The 57-year-old Muslim was born in India and has lived in the United States for 30 years. He owns a small property management firm. But most of his day is devoted to building bridges between people of different faiths.

"It is my passion," he said in his distinctive raspy voice.

He has been a guest a dozen times on Sean Hannity's TV and radio talk shows. "I don't like the way Sean cuts me off, but I have to honor him for giving the American public a semblance of another point of view."

Ghouse said he can understand fear and criticism of Islam because he went through a time of similar feelings. As a teen, he was troubled by passages of the Quran. He called himself an atheist for a while.

But he said deeper study led him to realize the Quran had been purposely mistranslated down through history.

In the Middle Ages, European leaders commissioned a hostile Quran translation to foster warfare against Muslim invaders.

Later, Muslim leaders produced another translation to inflame Muslims against Christians and Jews.

"It was all for politics," he said.
Ghouse said he hopes to present Jeffress with a modern, faithful translation and challenge him to find evil verses.

"If he can, I will convert. I will join his church," Ghouse said. "If he can't, I will call on him to retract his statements and become a peacemaker."

Ghouse acknowledges that deep problems persist within Islam. "Three steps forward, two steps back," he said with a sigh.

And he agrees that mainstream Muslims have not done enough to counter violent images of their faith.

"That is very true," he said. "But part of it is that many Muslims have given up hope that we will ever be heard."

He said repeated denunciations of terrorism seem to fall on deaf ears.

And some efforts have backfired - like the proposed Islamic information center in New York. He said it should be hailed for furthering the moderate Muslim cause.
Instead, it has deepened hostility toward Muslims.

I have been astounded by the amount of anti-Islam propaganda that circulates via e-mail. Tons of it has come my way in the last few weeks.

One theme is that people like Mike Ghouse can't be trusted, that Islam encourages deception.

But Ghouse says actions speak louder than words. And he points to elections in Muslim nations.

More than half of Muslims live in countries with some degree of democracy. And time and time again, Islamist parties are overwhelmingly rejected in favor of secular, mainstream parties.

"The religious parties don't get more than 3 percent of the vote," Ghouse said.
Polls show deep mistrust of Muslims. "But the most important question in those surveys is: 'Do you know anything about Islam?' " Ghouse said. "Most people say no."
What keeps him going is faith in Americans, he said.

"The majority of Americans, if they know the truth, they will change their minds."

# # #

Mike Ghouse is a speaker, writer, thinker, futurist and an activist of Pluralism, Islam, India and Civil Societies passionately offering pluralistic solutions on issues of the day.

He is a commentator at Fox News on the Hannity show, nationally syndicated Radio shows along with Dallas TV, Print and Radio networks and occasional interviews on NPR. He has spoken at international forums including the Parliament of Worlds Religions in Melbourne, Middle East Peace initiative in Jerusalem, International Leadership conference in Hawaii, Washington and elsewhere.

Concerned by the divisiveness, he saw the need to bring Americans together and founded America Together Foundation committed to building a cohesive America, indeed it is in response to ACT America which is bent on pitching one American against the other. We will be holding series of educational programs, conferences and workshops to address the issues that divide us such as Civil Right, GLBT, Quraan, Abortion, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, Racial Profiling and Stereotyping.

The Annual Unity Day USA is in its 7^th year now, it is a purposeful event to bring Americans together, on this Unity Day, we the people of the United States of America of every faith, race, ethnicity, culture and background will gather to express our commitment to co-existence, unity, prosperity and wellbeing of our nation.

Thanksgiving Celebration is in its 15^th year showcasing cultural diversity.

The 5^th Annual Reflections on Holocaust and Genocides is to learn and to acknowledge and reflect upon the terrible things we have inflicted upon each other and commit to avert such tragedies. Through this event non-Jewish people have consciously learned about Holocaust for the first time, it was also for the first time that people of 14 faiths came together to join in to commemorate the Holocaust that commemorated within the Jewish Community for years. They are not alone anymore in their anguish, we are all in it together with them, and it is a Muslim initiative to effect a positive change.

The programs, seminars and workshops conducted by the Foundation for Pluralism have become a part of the America Together Foundation. While the Foundation for Pluralism continues championing the idea of co-existence through respecting and accepting the otherness of other, the commitment to nurturing the pluralistic ideals embedded in Islam through the World Muslim Congress continues.

# # #

Full Profile at: http://www.mikeghouse.net/MuslimSpeaker.MikeGhouse.asp

Mike is working on two books scheduled to be released this year; The American Muslim Agenda and My Journey to Pluralism.

Mike has written over 1000 Articles on Pluralism, Islam, India, Peace & Justice and civil societies published in a wide spectrum of Newspapers and Magazines around the world.

Locally, he is a panelist at Dallas Morning News's and writes weekly on a range of issues facing the nation. Washington Post, Huffington Post and other news papers and sites regularly publish his work.

Mike is available to speak on Pluralism, Islam, Civil Societies, and Peace & Justice at your place of worship, school, work place, seminars, workshops or conferences. His work is reflected at three websites & twenty two Blogs listed at http://www.MikeGhouse.net/

Hearing focused on faith versus extremism

2011-03-17T21:29:00.000-07:00

Wednesday, March 16, 2011
By KEITH PHUCAS
Times Herald Staff

WASHINGTON - At a controversial Congressional hearing Thursday, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser likened "political Islam" to a disease that slowly infects vulnerable Muslims in America who become violent extremists and believes if the country is going to cure its problem of homegrown radicalization, a proper diagnosis and treatment is needed.

Jasser, a devout Muslim, medical doctor and former U.S. Navy Lieutenant Commander, is a rare public voice of reason in the typically polarized debate surrounding Muslims and Islamic extremism. He founded the American Islamic Forum for Democracy in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks to counter the Islamists who have hijacked his religion.

Over the past four years, there has been a rise in United States citizens becoming radicalized, and arrests have followed bomb plots or shootings: In New Jersey a plot was uncovered to attack Fort Dix; in Detroit, Michigan an airline passenger had a bomb in his underwear; a car bomb was found in New York City's Times Square; at Fort Hood Army base, a military psychiatrist shot and killed 13 people; in Pennsburg, Pennsylvania "JihadJane" hatched plans to support violent jihad in Europe; in Portland, Oregon in November a man planned to bomb a Christmas tree-lighting ceremony.

Jasser told House Homeland Security Committee members that Islamic extremism grows and festers in susceptible individuals over time, such as Nidal Hasan, the Army psychiatrist whose radicalism resulted in the Fort Hood massacre.

"He didn't become radical overnight, and if you look at his resume, it's frighteningly similar to mine," Jasser said. "But something happened to him over years."

The physician said American Muslims don't just wake up one morning as jihadists.

"Pathology creeps up over time, and just as we see in alcoholism, there are enablers," he said.

The "cancer" of radicalization of American Muslim youth occurs only in small number of mosques around the country, and counteracting this effort can only be achieved with Islamic reform toward modernity and "the separation of mosque and state," the doctor said.

He claimed many Muslim organizations in the U.S. have been allowed to define Muslim identity exclusively through religion and not by fundamental American principles. And the solution to this problem rests with Muslims.

"I'm a Muslim, and I realize it's my problem, and I need to fix it," he said. "It is a problem (only) we can solve," Jasser said. "Christians, Jews and non-Muslims cannot solve Muslim radicalization."

Republican Congressman Patrick Meehan, of Pennsylvania's Seventh District, is a member of the House committee, and heard compelling testimony Thursday from two men whose family's have personally experienced Islamist radicalization.

Melvin Bledsoe testified that his son, Carlos Bledsoe, had become radicalized at a Nashville, Tennessee mosque. Carlos, who had traveled to Yemen, was charged for the Little Rock, Arkansas shooting at a military recruiting station that killed one man and wounded another.

Abdirizak Bihi, a Somalian Muslim who lives in Minnesota, testified to being ostracized after complaining to religious leaders about his nephew and dozens of other youth who had been radicalized at a local mosque and now are in Somalia, a notorious terrorist state.

Sheriff Leroy D. Baca, of the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department, testified about Muslim outreach programs that have been successful in the city.

While some of Meehan's colleagues criticized the hearing's exclusive focus on Muslims to the exclusion of non-Muslim extremists, such as the Ku Klux Klan, he agreed with Jasser that the U.S. was experiencing an increased terrorist threat from Islamist radicals from within its own borders and less from abroad.

"This is how al-Qaeda and its affiliates have changed the nature of the threat," Meehan said in an interview Thursday.

America's anti-terrorism measures, including overseas military operations, have made it more difficult for foreigners outside the country to pull off major attacks here.

"Instead we're seeing individuals - lone wolves - operating, and we have seen more of it in just the last couple of years," he said.

At Thursday's hearing, Meehan suggested what made people uncomfortable about the hearing was the singling out one religion as the cause of terrorist violence, while the real culprit is "political Islam," which overshadows the ordinary practice of the faith that occurs peacefully across the country every day.

"It's into an area between this elephant in the room we're not supposed to be talking about: religion and jihadism," the congressman said.

When Meehan asked the doctor to define this key concept in more detail, Jasser said political Islam is a movement that wants to create a theocratic state based on Shari'ah law, which is the antithesis of America's founding principles, especially the First Amendment of the Constitution.

"But that antagonism (exists) between this country's understanding of the establishment clause, and the beauty of liberty versus political Islam, which wants to put into place Islamic states like Iran, or like the Taliban had in place or Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia," he said.

Jassar said is essential for Americans to make the distinction between the practice of his religion, and radical fringe players who have perverted his "beautiful faith."

"And until you treat this diagnosis, what's called political Islam, spiritual Islam will continue to suffer, our faith community will continue to suffer and our (national) security will continue to suffer," he said.

What to make of Rep. Peter King's hearings

2011-03-15T16:54:00.000-07:00

Texas Faith - What to make of Rep. Peter King's hearings into Muslim American radicalization?
Sam Hodges, Dallas Morning News

Rep. Peter King, R-New York, last week held the first of a series of hearings into what he describes as Muslim American radicalization. He says he wants to do everything he can to prevent a recurrence of the 9-11 attacks. He has faced criticism from Muslims and others for singling out Islam. But at least one Muslim commentator welcomed the hearings as a chance for educating about the faith and addressing head on the fears many Americans have about it.

We asked our Texas Faith panelists for their reaction to the whole idea of King's hearings. Then we asked: Whether or not you support them, what advice would you give to make such hearings as responsible and constructive as possible?

Here's what they said
Ten panelists have shared their opinion, here is mine and all of them are at:

http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/03/texas-faith-what-to-make-of-re.html#

MIKE GHOUSE, President, Foundation for Pluralism, Dallas

We should be concerned about the hearings and pray that Mr. King would be honest, sincere and fair. We hope he will not destroy the fabric of our nation and pit one American against the other.

King's hearings are reflective of sheer political desperation. The right-wing Republicans rode in with a thumping majority in mid-term elections, and now their goal is to win the Senate and the White House. These hearing are to augment that process.

They do not have an honest reason to win in 2012, so they manufacture "Sharia", "Caliphate" and other devils. They frighten the crap out of constipated men and women and guarantee them that they will defend their rights and keep the bogeymen out. In reality nothing really will change; no one gets hired or sees the prosperity. We hope that Americans will not be duped into believing there has been a win against the imaginary enemy.

I trust our systems and the moral goodness of our nation. If Mr. King takes the wrong step, the American people will not put up with it. They have turned around Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq wars; supported Roe V. Wade, civil rights, gender equality and laws against discrimination, including anti-Semitism. We will continue to guard America from anyone tearing its fabric.

Acknowledging that "some of our own" are a security threat to our nation is the right thing to do. Muslims have nothing to fear and nothing to worry about; let the man fall flat on his face if he resorts to untruths. What if he turns out to be honest and finds guys like Shehzad? Then we owe him gratitude - not just Muslims, but the whole nation.

Rightfully, Muslims do not want to legitimize this kind of singling out; neither should anyone. But given the ride the right wingers are cherishing in Oklahoma, Tennessee and elsewhere, Muslim must welcome this and take this as a God-sent opportunity for America in general and Muslims in particular to clear the mine fields.

It is our duty to keep law and order and faithfully guard the safety of every citizen. Hate is one of the many sources of disrupting peace in a society, and it is our responsibility to seek the source of such hate and work to mitigate and find lasting solutions.

If nothing else comes from the hearings, one thing is for sure. Muslims are not a monolithic lot. Four Muslims in America have welcomed the hearings: Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, Dr. Akbar Ahmed, Ms. Asra Nomani and me. It is not an easy thing, but thank God Muslims have made it easy for us. The American values of democracy flow through their veins; they appreciate the freedom and value the differences, and have learned to respect the otherness of others. We thank God for this opportunity to put the doubts and nagging behind for good so we can continue to participate in and contribute towards the well-being of America, our homeland.

# # #

Mike Ghouse is president of Americans Together and Muslims Together Foundations and is committed to building cohesive societies offering pluralistic solution on issues of the day. He will speak at your work place, place of worship or seminars and conferences on the subjects of pluralism, cohesive societies, Islam, interfaith, India and Peace; he is a speaker thinker and a writer on the topics. His work is indexed in 4 websites and 27 Blogs at http://www.mikeghouse.net/

Major Muslim Groups Condemn 'Religious McCarthyism,'

2011-03-14T19:19:00.000-07:00

Major Muslim Groups Condemn 'Religious McCarthyism,'

Express Solidarity with CAIR

Washington, D. C. 03/13/2011:

The American Muslim Taskforce on Civil Rights and Elections (AMT***), a national coalition of major Muslim organizations, today repudiated Congressman Peter King's "religious McCarthyism" and expressed its "full support for and solidarity with the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR)."

Commenting on the observation made by a Washington Post staff writer that "If King's hearing was about anything, it was about trying to empower a different group of Muslim leaders," AMT Chair, Dr. Agha Saeed said: "People can always tell who their real leaders are, even when Nelson Mandela is imprisoned on the charges of 'terrorism' and Chief Mangosthu Buthelezi is appointed as the chief minister of the Bantustan of KwaZulu."

AMT said in a statement:

"It is obvious that Congressman King's hearing was intended to malign CAIR. We repudiate all such attempts and stand in solidarity with CAIR.

"We thank fellow Americans, notably Los Angeles County Sheriff Leroy Baca, Rep. Bennie Thompson, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, Rep. Loretta Sanchez, Rep. Laura Richardson, Rep. Al Green, Rep. John Dingell, and Rep. Danny Davis, for their courage of conviction in rejecting Congressman King's religious McCarthyism. His agenda-driven hearing was a planned assault on the U.S. Constitution that failed.

"While the vacuity of these hearings has been summed up by the Washington Post in its headline: 'Rep Peter King's Muslim hearing: Plenty of drama, less substance,' the discriminatory nature of these hearings was highlighted by the New York Times as 'Terror Hearing Puts Lawmakers in Harsh Light.'

"It was pointed out by several members of congress that these hearings were not based on any independent scholarly research on the subject and the witnesses did not possess any expertise to qualify their generalizations.
"Past efforts to marginalize target groups have always included a number of key elements, including seeking to replace authentic leadership with handpicked individuals, undermining legitimate major institutions and organizations, controlling agendas, promoting internal divisions, and denying access to mainstream media and government institutions.

"While we reaffirm our opposition to all forms of individual, group and state terrorism, and while we reiterate our commitment to help keep America safe, we also want to unequivocally state that it is for Muslim Americans to decide who their leaders are. No one else -- neither the U.S. Congress nor the FBI -- has the legal or moral right to make those decisions for us."

*** AMT is an umbrella organization that includes American Muslim Alliance (AMA), American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), Muslim Alliance in North America (MANA), Muslim American Society-Freedom (MAS-F), Muslim Legal Fund of America (MLFA), Muslim Ummah of North America (MUNA), National Association of Imams (NAIF) and United Muslims of America (UMA).
Contact: AMT Chair Dr. Agha Saeed: aghaksaeed@yahoo.com

Hearings on Radical Islam Falls Short on Substance

2011-03-14T12:51:00.000-07:00

First Day of Hearings on Radical Islam Falls Short on Substance

Written by Daniel Sayani

Monday, 14 March 2011 13:01

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/congress/6682-first-day-of-hearings-on-radical-islam-falls-short-on-substance

The first day of congressional hearings on the radicalization of the American Islamic community (being led by House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Rep. Peter T. King, R-N.Y.) proved to be one that was emotionally-charged and riddled with controversy, revealing the true attitudes and intentions of many liberal Democrats on Islamic radicalization in the United States.

The first round of hearings, entitled “The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community's Response,” exposed sharp divisions within American politics, and also demonstrated that the American Muslim community is not as monolithic on the issue as liberal Democrats portray them to be. However, an analysis of the hearings shows that they were heavy on semantics and drama, but light on substance. The high point of the hearings occurred when Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), the first Muslim elected to Congress, testified before the Homeland Security Committee. Ellison's testimony before the committee was marked by sheer emotionalism, tears (what some considered to be little more than “crocodile tears”), and references to patriotic Muslim-Americans
— an apparent attempt to shame and discredit Rep. King, who has vociferously stated that he is not judging the Islamic faith, and has repudiated the claim that all Muslims are to blame for the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Ellison was an unusual witness in his own chamber, testifying about his religion in a committee hearing that examined radicalization among American Muslims. He recited the tragic story of 23-year-old Mohammed Salman Hamdani, a New York City police cadet and brave first responder who rushed to aid his fellow countrymen as the twin towers at the World Trade Center burned on September 11, 2001. Breaking into tears, Ellison decried "some people" who "tried to smear [Hamdani's] character solely because of his Islamic faith":

Some people spread false rumors and speculated that he was in league with the attackers only because he was Muslim. It was only when his remains were identified that these lies were fully exposed. Mohammed Salman Hamdani was a fellow American who gave his life for other Americans. His life should not be defined as a member of an ethnic group or a member of a religion, but as an American who gave everything for his fellow citizens.

However, Ellison’s citing the example of Hamdani’s heroism is irrelevant, given the broader context of what the hearings hope to accomplish and King’s own statements indicating that he is not seeking to demonize Islam. Further, many people, including National Review columnist Matthew Shaffer, point to objective evidence debunking Ellison’s claim that Hamdani was the victim of any religious or ethnic prejudice in the aftermath of 9/11 — demonstrating that Ellison is exploiting Hamdani’s memory for the sake of advancing a political agenda. Shaffer observed:

In fact, six weeks after the September 11 attacks — before Hamdani’s remains were identified, which Ellison implies to be the turning point of public perception — Congress signed the PATRIOT Act into law with this line included: “Many Arab Americans and Muslim Americans have acted heroically during the attacks on the United States, including Mohammed Salman Hamdani, a 23-year-old New Yorker of Pakistani descent, who is believed to have gone to the World Trade Center to offer rescue assistance and is now missing.” That is, Hamdani was actually singled out for particular high honors among the thousands of victims of the September 11 attacks.

Hamdani was singled out for honors by the United States’ executive and legislative branches with those lines in the PATRIOT Act that immortalized his story.

Then, he had scholarship funds named after him, was honored by Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Ray Kelly (both of whom went barefoot to honor Muslim practice) at his funeral, and has been celebrated over and over again by the media.

The belief that Mohammed Salman Hamdani was a victim of anti-Muslim bigotry was never based in reality. It was manufactured by the Left as a rhetorical prop, exploited as a bludgeon against people who want to talk seriously about terrorism.

Ellison believes that King is wrongly implicating the broader Muslim community, and that his very coordination of the hearings is a misguided approach that will alienate the American Muslim community as a whole.

Ellison — who adheres to a collectivist mentality that falsely assumes that all individual members of a particular racial, ethnic, or religious community must sacrifice their individual personhood in favor of a collective set of talking points — makes one crucial error, however. He falsely assumes that all American Muslims are opposed to Rep. King’s efforts to investigate radical Islamist elements, which advocate violence and terror in the pursuit of a politicized Islam, as they adhere to the dangers of Salafism and Wahhabism.

In ignoring this reality, Ellison brands King as a bigot, while he himself adheres to a collectivizing condescension, which discounts the reality that many American Muslims also support the hearings. The Muslim World Congress, for example, wholeheartedly endorses the hearings, according to its president, Mike Ghouse:

As Muslim Americans, it becomes our individual and collective responsibility to participate in ensuring the safety of every American, and we welcome the hearings. We hope it will lead us to find the sources and causes of such erratic behavior, and perhaps point out areas of concerns to be addressed and find lasting solutions. We have to identify the criminals who are individually accountable for their actions, and need to punish them expediently according to the law.

In addition, M. Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, declared that "paralysis" over the issue has seized the nation's leaders and urged the Muslim community to confront what he called an "exponential increase" in the number of Muslim radicals in the United States. "The U.S. has a significant problem with Muslim radicalization," affirmed Jasser, who is Muslim. "It is a problem that we can only solve."

Rep. Ellison falsely claims that he is speaking on behalf of all American Muslims, despite the fact that many Muslims disagree with his posture against the hearings. It should also be noted that King himself has a record of positive interactions with Muslims in his Long Island district, especially throughout the 1990s. He often gave speeches at the Westbury Islamic Center, hired Muslim interns and congressional staffers, and supported military intervention in Bosnia and Kosovo, a position supported by groups such as the Muslim American Policy Council.

Because King was one of the only Republicans who supported U.S. intervention in Kosovo, and because of his work in the Balkans, the mosque presented him with an award. Many of its leaders regularly contributed to King's campaigns, often paying $500 a person to attend his fundraisers. King was even the main guest of honor on the day of greatest pride for the community: the 1993 opening of its long-awaited $3 million prayer hall, which many proudly note was built completely with locally-raised funds. For years, a picture of King cutting the ceremonial ribbon hung on the bulletin board by the mosque's entrance.

According to Habeeb Ahmed, chairman of the mosque, King would even come to weddings in the mosque and eat in the homes of mosque members, and when King’s books were released, the mosque held book signings and invited King to give speeches.

In addition to Dr. Jasser, other Muslim supporters of the congressional hearings include those who have experienced the perils of radicalization on a first-hand basis, including Abdirizak Bihi, a Somali Muslim from Minnesota who testified regarding his nephew, who was recruited into a terrorist group, a phenomenon that Bihi lamented is all too common in his community. Bihi added:

The Somali community wants to be heard. My community wants to be heard. I would ask you to look and open investigations as to what is happening in my community. We are isolated by Islamic organizations and leaders who support them."

Nonetheless, Democrats at the hearing assumed an obstructionist pose. Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the ranking Democrat on the Homeland Security Committee, declared that Muslim extremists would exploit the hearings and spin them into propaganda, while Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) evoked a more hostile response.

Lee insisted that the hearings played into the hands of terrorists and were an offense against the Constitution and religious Americans (an irony, considering her liberal voting record that is often at odds with the Constitution and Judeo-Christian religious values, such as the right-to-life and traditional morality). She also quoted herself in the third person, to the delight of her political adversaries — merely a continuation in a string of gaffes, including asserting that Vietnam is still divided, claiming that Algeria, Afghanistan, and China honor equal rights for women, and accusing constitutionalists of racism.

While Rep. King is no friend of constitutionalism (he is an advocate of gun control, labor unions, unmitigated military interventionism, Cash for Clunkers, CAFÉ standards, federal universal health coverage for children, an increased minimum wage, and was only one of four Republicans to vote against impeaching Bill Clinton), his hearings serve at least one legitimate purpose. They are an attempt to at least understand the threat of Islamist terrorism and develop a cohesive knowledge of the enemy and what motivates terrorists — an approach endorsed by experts such as Michael Scheuer and Rep. Ron Paul.

Unfortunately, however, the hearings seem to fall short on substance and continue to ignore the true nature of anti-American terror, which entails the collusion of Islamists and the global left.

Photo: Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, listens during a hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, March 10, 2011: AP Images

Legitimizing Islamic Radicalization

2011-03-13T13:11:00.000-07:00

Legitimizing Islamic Radicalization

Prompted by Marylou’s search for the truth.

As a civil society, we must resist the temptation to blame their family, nation and religion for the acts of the individuals, and we must not give them the cover to hide under a religious label for their evil acts.

Indeed they quote the scripture and instead of eagerly accepting them, we must open Quraan and find the truth. There is a successful experiment on the subject and it was a neglected story in the media.

In 2008, a judge in Yemen challenged the Al-Qaida inmates to find the verses in Quraan that justify their acts, he gave them three months to find, if you find it, he said I'll join your movement or would you reject it if you don’t find it? They in fact were outraged for being duped and have become hunters for the Al-Qaida men.

Same story was repeated in Dallas, Pastor Robert Jeffress called Quraan an evil book written by a false prophet, I asked him to find three verses in Quraan that are evil and I will give up my faith and join his. He chickened out and the media did not bother to follow up with him. Then we produced the Quraan conference in Dallas with non-Muslim clergy to evaporate the lies the right wingers had propagated. Full story and video, TV interviews at www.Quraanconference.com

Finding the truth is a responsibility, the society would be better off by freeing themselves from suspicion and anxieties from our hearts and finding peace within.

Mike Ghouse is the founder of America Together foundation, committed to building cohesive societies offering pluralistic solution on the issues of the day. His work is indexed in 4 websites and 21 Blogs at http://www.mikeghouse.net/

# # #

Mike, you say below: Phrases such as "Islamic radicalism" are oxymoron and must be avoided to uphold our civility. What would be a your term? I think the term "Islam" is used because they quote scripture to justify. Perhaps you could give some clarity on this. Thanks. Blessings, M.

Re: http://peterkinghearings.blogspot.com/2011/03/muslims-welcome-hearings-by-congressman.html

Mr. King’s Sound and Fury - Editorial NY Times

2011-03-11T21:46:00.000-08:00

Editorial, New york Times

Published: March 11, 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/12/opinion/12sat2.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Representative Peter King demeaned the crucial issue of homeland security — and himself — building a Congressional hearing around his foolish, provocative and hurtful claims of widespread radicalization of Muslim Americans.

Domestic Terrorism Hearing Opens With Contrasting Views on Dangers (March 11, 2011) Mr. King, chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security, offered not a scintilla of substantiation for his charges that more than 80 percent of American mosques are run by radicals — “an enemy living amongst us.” Nor did he offer any evidence to support his assertions that “law enforcement officials throughout the country told me they received little or — in most cases — no cooperation from Muslim leaders and imams.”

Instead the New York Republican offered fresh variations on his sound and fury — first taking care to praise the “vast majority” of Muslim Americans, then impugning their patriotism in archly demanding, “moderate leadership must emerge from the Muslim community.”

He ignored a study indicating that in a hefty 40 percent of domestic extremist plots that were thwarted, law enforcement had help from Muslims. And he completely avoided the more complex and worthy issue of threats to the nation from a wide array of homegrown militants that law enforcement officials must deal with, from neo-Nazis to wannabe jihadists.

Despite his claims of insider law enforcement knowledge, Mr. King didn’t call a single police witness to testify. The Democratic minority did, allowing Sheriff Leroy Baca of Los Angeles to tell of close cooperation from concerned Muslim Americans, who, he said, “are just as independent, just as feisty, just as concerned about safety,” as all other sensible Americans. “They certainly don’t want their homes or their mosques blown up.”

Mr. King had no large established Muslim American organizations testify. He preferred to feature two aggrieved witnesses offering anecdotal tales about radicalized relatives, as if that proved his case.

By the end of hearing, Mr. King was claiming personal courage in defying “political correctness.” There is nothing courageous about pandering or sowing hatred and fear.

The only good news is that Congressman King’s main success was how he punctured his own bloviations. This is small comfort to patriotic Muslim Americans, whom Mr. King unfortunately is promising to further bedevil at more hearings.

Hearing is good, I trust our system

2011-03-11T14:16:00.000-08:00

Watch the #1 listed video Mark Potac
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvZtSwwpVfk
I am glad this hearing is going on.

I trust our Systems and the moral goodness of our nation, if Mr. King takes the wrong step, the American people will not put up with it, as they have done that time and again. I trust the Americans, the moderate Americans who are a majority and have supported and turned around Vietnam War, Iraq war, abortion issues, civil rights and other issues.

I welcome the hearings, Muslims have nothing to fear and nothing to worry, let the man fall flat on his face “if” he resorts to untruths. What if he turns out to be honest and finds guys like Shehzad? Then we owe him gratitude, not just Muslims but the whole nation.

Just as we produced the Quraan conference in Dallas to evaporate the lies the right wingers had propagated, this will perhaps become the first nail in their coffin and hope they will stop pitting one American against the other to have political gains.

Solutions abound.

If nothing else comes from the hearings, one thing is for sure. Muslims are not a monolithic lot and they are no different than any of the 301 million of us. Each one of has a different thumb print, eye print, DNA, different sizes, shapes and colors, political affiliations. Let there be different faiths or no faiths as well. That is God’s universe.

Mike Ghouse
http://www.mikeghouse.net/

Muslims and McCarthyism, A witch-hunt

2011-03-10T23:01:00.000-08:00

A witch-hunt on one side, denial on the other, as the threat of home-grown terrorism rises

Mar 10th 2011 | from the print edition

IS A new Joe McCarthy strutting his stuff up on Capitol Hill? You might think so, to judge by the abuse that has thundered down on the head of Peter King, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, following his decision to start hearings on “The Extent of Radicalisation in the American Muslim Community and that Community’s Response”. Even before the first one took place this week, the very idea of the hearings came under withering fire from liberal America. They were “fuel for the bigots”, said Richard Cohen, a columnist at the Washington Post. “To focus an investigative spotlight on an entire religious or ethnic community is a violation of everything America is supposed to stand for,” echoed Bob Herbert in the New York Times. “Security hearings that focus exclusively on Muslim Americans serve only to amplify the rumblings of Islamophobia that seem to become louder and crazier by the day,” concurred Eugene Robinson, another of the Post’s columnists.

It is indeed hard to find much to like in Mr King. The representative for Long Island has approached this most sensitive of subjects with the delicacy of a steamroller, plus an overactive imagination and a generous dollop of prejudice. To be clear: he may not be prejudiced against America’s Muslims (the “overwhelming majority” are “outstanding Americans”, he says) but he long ago prejudged the question his own hearings are supposed to answer, being already firmly of the view that the country’s Muslims are doing too little to counter radicalisation within their ranks. He is the author of a novel, “Vale of Tears”, in which a heroic version of his thinly disguised self busts a home-grown al-Qaeda cell at a Long Island Islamic centre. His own attitude to terrorism, though, is conveniently elastic. In the 1980s this Irish-American Catholic sympathised strongly with the Irish Republican Army, going so far as to compare Gerry Adams, the leader of Sinn Fein, the terrorist group’s political wing, to George Washington.

Beyond these objections to his person, prejudices and past, most of the available evidence suggests that Mr King’s central thesis is overblown, if not flat wrong. Muslim co-operation with the authorities is not perfect, but by most accounts—including those of Robert Mueller, the director of the FBI, and Eric Holder, the attorney-general—the community has in general worked hard to expose terrorist plots in its midst. In one prominent case last year, for instance, five men from northern Virginia who had travelled to Pakistan in search of jihad were convicted after their families tipped off the FBI. The Triangle Centre on Terrorism and Homeland Security, a research group affiliated with Duke University and the University of North Carolina, reported recently that 48 of the 120 Muslims suspected of plotting terror attacks in America since the felling of the twin towers in 2001 were turned in by fellow Muslims.

With the inflammatory Mr King planted on one side of the quarrel and pretty much all liberal opinion arrayed indignantly on the other, the hearings are expected to produce heat, not light. But it is worth noting that the liberal side has a defect of its own. Many say that Mr King’s exclusive focus on Islam is misplaced, since terrorism can arise from any group or grievance (Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City bombing of 1995 are suddenly much cited). But this is to let political correctness obscure a troubling development that America’s terrorism experts had started to worry about well before Mr King announced his hearings. It is true that not all terrorism takes an Islamist form, but Islamist terrorism is the clear and present danger—and al-Qaeda has lately shown an unexpected ability both to recruit American Muslims and to move its battle back to American soil.

The Americanisation of al-Qaeda

Two experts on al-Qaeda, Peter Bergen and Bruce Hoffman, pointed out in a study last year that Americans have occupied some senior positions in al-Qaeda. Anwar al-Awlaki, an al-Qaeda leader in Yemen, grew up in New Mexico. Adnan Shukrijumah, probably al-Qaeda’s director of external operations, is a Saudi-American who grew up in Brooklyn and Florida. David Headley, from Chicago and now in custody, scouted targets for the attack on Mumbai in 2008 that killed more than 160 people.

America is producing followers as well as leaders. When a bunch of Somali-Americans from the Minneapolis-St Paul area started turning up in Somalia to wage jihad, the authorities hoped that this was a one-off. But the phenomenon turned out not to be confined either to Minnesota or to Somalis. In November 2009 Major Nidal Malik Hasan, a Palestinian-American, killed 13 people at Fort Hood in Texas, and a few months later Faisal Shahzad, a Pakistani-American, tried to set off a car bomb in Times Square in New York. “The American melting pot”, Mr Bergen and Mr Hoffman concluded, “has not provided a firewall against the radicalisation and recruitment of American citizens and residents, though it has arguably lulled us into a sense of complacency that home-grown terrorism couldn’t happen in the United States.” The White House is worried too: Barack Obama’s National Security Strategy, published last May, promised to invest in efforts to counter radicalisation at home.

The subject, in short, is a real one. It merits frank discussion, not least in Congress. But Mr King’s clumsy approach to it risks feeding the sense of beleaguerment and outrage many American Muslims have come to feel in the face of the recent scaremongering over the so-called “ground zero” mosque in New York and the Republican Party’s paranoid fantasy about Islamic sharia law taking over America by stealth. As it happens, Mr King was in the forefront of the trumped-up objections to the Manhattan mosque. What folly to let such a man chair the Homeland Security Committee of the House of Representatives.

Economist.com/blogs/lexington

The King hearings: Is CAIR a 'terrorist organization'?

2011-03-10T21:35:00.000-08:00

Calling CAIR an unindicted co-conspirator is perhaps another lie by the Bush Administration, and we should reject that phrase unless they present the proof. Our judicial system is one of the best in the world where you are considered innocent until proven guilty, we cannot let go of the essence of American justice, we cannot go wrong following it. I am surprised Representative King was using it so loosely and there was no one to question it.

Thank God, Sean Hannity of Fox TV agreed that CIA and Mossad have lied to us over the years, they have cooked up information to remain in their jobs or to please President Bush. It's time to clean out the remnants of what was bad in America.

Mike Ghouse

The King hearings: Is CAIR a 'terrorist organization'?

By Glenn Kessler

Updated 7:20 p.m.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2011/03/the_king_hearings_is_cair_a_te.html

The House Homeland Security Hearings on Islamic radicalization, chaired by Rep. Peter King, have featured a number of assertions that have lacked context or may be confusing to viewers. So we are going to take a look at some of the claims and also provide links to the studies and documents that form the basis for claims by lawmakers and witnesses.

***********************
"CAIR [The Council on American-Islamic Relations] was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the terrorist financing case involving the Holy Land Foundation. In the lead-up to this hearing, I found it shocking and sad that the mainstream media accepted CAIR's accusations as if it were a legitimate organization."
--Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.)

"Among the unindicted co-conspirators in the case was CAIR. CAIR is routinely, and I believe mistakenly, elevated in the press as the voice of mainstream American Muslims. And they have been granted access to the highest levels of government at times."
--Rep. Frank Wolf (R.-Virg.)

"My question is, sir, basically you're dealing with a terrorist organization, and I'm trying to get you to try to understand that they might be using you, sir, to implement their goals. "
--Rep. Chip Cravaack (R-Minn.) to Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca

These claims lack context. CAIR is an aggressive Muslim civil liberties organization, modeled on the Anti Defamation League, that has made it a target for criticism. It was indeed named as an "unindicted co-conspirator or joint venturer" in the Holy Land Foundation case--an Islamic charity that in 2008 was convicted of funding Islamic militant groups. But CAIR was not alone in that designation; nearly 250 other organizations and individuals were also named.

The federal government said the organizations were included on the list in order to produce evidence at the trial, but the district court and a federal appeals court later ruled that it had been a mistake to make the list public.

As the appeals court summed up last year, "The court held that the Government did not argue or establish any legitimate government interest that warranted publicly identifying [one of the organizations] and 245 other individuals and entities as unindicted co-conspirators or joint venturers, and that the Government had less injurious means than those employed, such as anonymously designating the unindicted co-conspirators as 'other persons,' asking the court to file the document under seal, or disclosing the information to the defendants pursuant to a protective order."

However, federal Judge Jorge A. Solis denied CAIR's request that its name be publicly striken from the list. He said that the government "has produced ample evidence" to establish the association of CAIR and other organizations with entities such as the Holy Land Foundation, the Islamic Association for Palestine and with the Hamas militant group. Solis acknowledged CAIR's claim that evidence produced by the government "largely predates" the official designation of these groups as terror organizations but he said the "evidence is nonetheless sufficient to show the association of these entities with HLF, IAP, and Hamas."

The appeals court, in a ruling involving another Muslim organization on the list, criticized Solis for this statement, saying it "went beyond what was relevant to any hypothetical evidentiary issue and may have obfuscated the underlying Fifth Amendment issue."

Under pressure from Wolf and other lawmakers, the FBI has distanced itself from dealings with CAIR. But as Baca pointedly noted, CAIR itself has never been charged with criminal activity. "We don't play around with criminals in my world," he told Cravaack. "If CAIR is an organization that's a, quote, 'criminal organization,' prosecute them. Hold them accountable and bring them to trial."

The repeated references to CAIR being an "unindicted co-conspirator" is one of those true facts that ultimately gives a false impression.
********************

"According to the Congressional Research Service, there have been 43 home-grown jihadist terrorist plots and attacks since 9/11, including 22 plots or attacks since May, 2009."
--Rep. Wolf

"According to the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), utilizing information provided by respected organizations such as the Congressional Research Service, the Heritage Foundation, and Southern Poverty Law Center, there have been 77 total terror plots by domestic, non-Muslim perpetrators since 9/11. In comparison, there have been 41 total plots by both domestic and international Muslim perpetrators during the same period."
--Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.)

Ellison's numbers are a bit off, or at least out of date: The report actually says 80 plots by non-Muslim perpetrators and 45 by U.S. and foreign-originated perpetrators. Wolf correctly quotes the CRS report.
The data are a little different, given when the reports were written. But they are interesting examples of how politicians can use similar data and reach different conclusions.

Wolf is emphasizing the increase in jihadist plots in recent years, while Ellison is trying to put the numbers in context, comparing the number of jihadist plots to non-jihadist terror plots.

*************************

"But there are realities we can't ignore. For instance, the Pew poll, which said that 15 percent of Muslim American men between the age of 18 and 29 could support suicide bombings. This is the segment of the community Al Qaeda is attempting to recruit."
--Rep. King

"The RAND Corporation, a highly respected research organization, released a report last year that states the following, quote: 'Given a low rate of would-be violent extremists, about 100 amongst the estimated 3 million American Muslims, suggests that the American Muslim population remains hostile to jihadist ideology and its exhortations to violence.'"
--Rep. Ellison

Again, it is a matter of context. Ellison, citing this Rand report, is trying to show how few American Muslims actually become terrorists, while King, citing the Pew survey, wants to focus on the potential sympathy for terrorism.

King neglected to mention a salient point in the Pew survey: "Absolute levels of support for Islamic extremism among Muslim Americans are quite low, especially when compared with Muslims around the world" and that "very few Muslim Americans - just one percent - say that suicide bombings against civilian targets are often justified to defend Islam." Higher percentages of acceptance for suicide bombing were found in Britain, France and Spain.

The Pew survey also found that "although many Muslims are relative newcomers to the U.S., they are highly assimilated into American society. With the exception of very recent immigrants, most report that a large proportion of their closest friends are non-Muslims.On balance, they believe that Muslims coming to the U.S. should try and adopt American customs, rather than trying to remain distinct from the larger society."

By Glenn Kessler | March 10, 2011; 4:25 PM ET

Two Pinnochios for Peter King

2011-03-10T21:24:00.000-08:00

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2011/03/peter_kings_claim_about_radica.html?tid=wp_featuredstories
By Glenn Kessler

"The only real testimony we have on it was actually from Sheikh Kabbani, who was a Muslim leader during the Clinton Administration, he testified, this is back in 1999 and 2000, before the State Department that he thought over 80 percent of the mosques in this country are controlled by radical Imams. Certainly from what I've seen and dealings I've had, that number seems accurate."

--Rep. Peter King, Jan. 24, 2011
Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, plans to hold controversial hearings Thursday on Islamic radicalism. King jokes that these hearings may make him famous "for a week," but he has already become well known for an assertion he once made that "80 to 85 percent" of the mosques in the United States are controlled by radical imams.
King now dismisses the comment as inconsequential, saying in an interview that he has no idea if the estimate is correct.
"I don't think it matters that much" because, according to Islamic leaders King said he has spoken with, imams do not have as much influence among the faithful as do priests or rabbis and because a relatively small percentage of American Muslims attend mosques.
"This is not that important to me," he said, adding: "I do think there is an inordinate amount of radical influence in mosques."
King added that he believes he made this comment on his own only once, and since then has simply responded to questions when interviewers raise it, such as in the quote above, when Raymond Arroyo, a guest host on radio's "Laura Ingraham Show," brought it up.
Nevertheless, this has become one of the most recognizable quotes associated with King. It has been repeated often in news reports about the upcoming hearings, so a casual listener might think there is a basis in fact. Let's look at the roots of this figure.
The Facts
This all started with a State Department forum in early 1999 on Islamic extremism that attracted virtually no media attention. That is, until a few months later, when virtually every major Muslim organization in the United States issued a joint statement condemning the remarks by Sheikh Hisham Kabbani as "unsubstantiated allegations that could have a profoundly negative impact on ordinary American Muslims."
With the passage of 12 years, Kabbani's comments -- made more than two years before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks -- look both remarkably prescient and somewhat off the wall.
Kabbani, who practices Sufism, warned that "there are 5000 suicide bombers being trained by [Osama] bin Laden in Afghanistan who are ready to move to any part of the world and explode themselves."
But Kabbani also said that bin Laden's organization had been "able to buy more than 20 atomic nuclear heads from some of the mafia in the ex-Soviet Union, in the republics of the ex-Soviet Union, and they traded it for $30 million and 2 tons of opium." He added that they were breaking up "these atomic warheads into smaller partitions, like small chips, to be put in any suitcase."
As part of this discourse, Kabbani said that "Muslims, in general, are peace-loving and tolerant" but that 80 percent of the mosques in the United States are "being run by the extremist ideology, but not acting as a militant movement."
Kabbani offered no evidence to support this assertion and has provided little evidence since. In 2001, he told The New York Times that he had visited 114 mosques in the United States and "ninety of them were mostly exposed, and I say exposed, to extreme or radical ideology" -- through speeches, books and board members. "He said that a telltale sign of an extremist mosque was a focus on the Palestinian struggle," the Times reported.
In the interview, King said he did not rely just on Kabbani's statement but also on testimony before a Senate panel in 2003 by Stephen Schwartz, a Muslim convert who at the time was affiliated with the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. Schwartz has been a prominent opponent of Wahhabi Islam -- a strict sect of Islam described by some as extremist -- and he testified, "Shia and other non-Wahhabi Muslim community leaders estimate that 80 percent of American mosques -- out of a total ranging between an official estimate of 1,200 and an unofficial figure of 4-6,000 -- are under Wahhabi control."
Schwartz did not identify these community leaders, though before this appearance he had previously attributed this estimate to Kabbani's statement at the State Department. In an email, he said he "heard it from Kabbani but also heard it from the leaders of the main Shia mosques in the U.S." and that having attended services in the U.S. and other Western countries he believes "Sunni mosques in the U.S. are still, in 2011, overwhelmingly dominated by fundamentalists." He added: "Fixing a quantitative level is difficult but 75-80 percent still seems right to me."
Meanwhile, there have been efforts to actually measure the sentiment in American mosques.
University of Kentucky professor Ihsan Bagby in 2004 published a study of Detroit mosques that concluded that approximately 93 percent of mosque participants endorse both community and political involvement and more than 87 percent of mosque leaders support participation in the political process. Most were registered to vote and "because of these moderate views, mosque participants cannot be described as isolationists, rejecters of American society or extremists." (Some conservatives have noted that the study also found strong support for universal health care, affirmative action and Islamic law in Muslim-majority nations, as well as deep concern about immorality in the United States.)
King said he was unaware of the Detroit study.
The Pinocchio Test
The persistence of this "80 percent" statistic is mystifying. It is based largely on a single observation by one Muslim cleric 12 years ago, who has offered no evidence to make his claim. The one other possible source is the personal observations of Schwartz but as far as we can tell it has not been confirmed by any documented study.
The Fact Checker was inclined to award King quite a few Pinocchios before he came to the phone and essentially took it back. But he has a responsibility to clear the air and say that, in the absence of other evidence, he no longer thinks this 12-year-old "fact" has any relevance. He says that he was not planning to bring up this statistic in his hearing, but the very public platform he has Thursday morning would be a good place to clear the air.
In the quote above, King correctly noted that there was a single source and that it dates back to 1999. But then he went on to say the "number seems accurate," lending credence to the figure and giving a misleading impression that there is more to back it up.
Two Pinocchios

(About our rating scale).
Follow the Fact Checker on Twitter and friend us on Facebook.

Peter King hearing shows 'sharply polarized' attitudes toward Islam

2011-03-10T18:31:00.000-08:00

Americans who are older, conservative in their religion and politics, and Republican are more likely to be wary of Muslims in this country, according to polls conducted before Rep. Peter King's hearing on 'radicalization' among American Muslims.

Samira Hussein, of Montgomery County, Md., listens to the House Homeland Security Committee hearing on 'the extent of the radicalization' of American Muslims, Thursday, March 10.

J. Scott Applewhite / AP

Enlarge

By Brad Knickerbocker, Staff writer / March 10, 2011

Public attitudes towards American Muslims – highlighted by the House hearing this week led by Rep. Peter King (R) of New York – are deeply divided and sharply defined, according to new opinion polls.

Americans 'sharply polarized'

“The large partisan gulf in some of these attitudes … underscores the sharply polarized way in which Republicans and Democrats view the world today – even in their subjective characterizations of religious groups,” writes Gallup Editor-in-Chief Frank Newport in an analysis of the poll. “Less than half of Republicans believe that Muslims in the US are supportive of the United States, while a clear majority of Democrats do. And, most relevant to the current debate, while Republicans strongly support the appropriateness of the King hearings, less than half of Democrats agree.”

Another new national survey – by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press – finds the American public evenly split – 40 percent agree, 42 percent disagree – on whether “the Islamic religion is more likely than others to encourage violence.”

As with the Gallup poll, Pew finds important distinctions among those surveyed.

While 58 percent of those younger than 30 say Islam does not encourage violence more than other religions, a plurality of those 50 and older (45 percent) says it does. White, evangelical Protestants are more likely to see Islam as potentially violent (60 percent) than do mainline Protestants (42 percent) or Roman Catholics (39 percent).

Tea partyers associate Islam with violence

“Political and ideological divisions are even wider,” reports Pew. By roughly 3 to 1 (66 percent to 21 percent), conservative Republicans say Islam encourages violence more than other religions. The numbers are virtually reversed for liberal Democrats. Of those who agree with the tea party movement, two-thirds say Islam is more associated with violence.

Political inclinations aside, public worries about Muslims in the US have grown in recent years, as threats of terrorist attacks tied to radical Islam have increased and some attacks (such as the Fort Hood shootings) have succeeded.

In March 2002 – six months after the massive attacks of 9/11 – just 25 percent of those surveyed by Pew saw Islam as more likely to encourage violence while twice as many (51 percent) disagreed.
While the country was still reeling from the attacks in New York and at the Pentagon that had killed thousands, then-President Bush, as well as other political and religious leaders, stressed that Islam itself – and certainly the great majority of American Muslims – should not be blamed for terrorism.

It was a point strongly made by FBI Director Robert Mueller in his 2008 testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.

Today, after nearly a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the arrest of some American Muslims charged with plotting attacks, and concerns about Muslim Brotherhood ties to political turmoil in several Arab countries, the percentage of the US public associating Islam with violence has gone from 25 percent to 40 percent.

IN PICTURES: Behind the veil

Related stories

Peter King was an IRA supporter

2011-03-10T17:14:00.000-08:00

Republican senator dismisses critics' attempts to draw a parallel with al-Qaida, arguing the IRA never attacked on US soil

Suzanne Goldenberg
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 10 March 2011 21.57 GMT
Article history

Peter King was a long-term supporter of the IRA who served as an important channel for talks that led to the Good Friday agreement. Photograph: Alex Wong/Getty Images

Peter King, the force behind the hearings into homegrown Islamist terrorists on US soil, has offered repeated pronouncements over the threat posed by al-Qaida since 9/11.

But as one Democrat slyly reminded the New York Republican during the committee hearing, King too faces accusations of aiding extremist organisations.

King is a long-time supporter of the IRA, and in the 1980s proclaimed: "If civilians are killed in an attack on a military installation it is certainly regrettable, but I will not morally blame the IRA for it."

King gained further notoriety for his support for the IRA when he was kicked out of a Belfast courtroom during a murder trial. The judge called him an "obvious collaborator", according to an account this week in the New York Times.

King has admitted to few regrets about his support for the IRA, and has likened the group to the ANC in South Africa or the Irgun group fighting the British mandate over Palestine before the second world war.
"It was a dirty war on both sides," he told the New York Times.

King went on to serve as an important channel in talks that led to the Northern Ireland peace deal.
However, the congressman dismisses attempts to draw a parallel between IRA and al-Qaida, arguing that the IRA never carried out attacks on US soil, and that his only loyalty was to the US.

Dr Zuhdi Jasser, innoculating Liberty

2011-03-10T16:09:00.000-08:00

Indeed, we need to inoculate ourselves with the liberty cells. The sense of liberty has not caught on with a few of the immigrants and unfortunately they are the ones acting out as guardians of the religion.

Libert is an issue with Muslims in particular, but humanity in general. The Muslim immigrants carry that baggage, if you study the organizational behavior of some these “men”. The Presidents or heads of the organizations right here in the United States, you will find their proclivities to hang on to their seat, for God’s sake it is a non-profit organization and not a kingdom. They act like Gaddafi, Mubarak and their ilk and eventually get forced out as the opposing group “take over” the Kingdom. I have witnessed this over and over again.

On the other hand there are numerous examples of Muslims who have found themselves in full tune with the ideals of democracy. They serve their term and happily train the next one and turn it over. It is a beautiful transition unlike the other, where hostility for the previous servers continues, as they were taken over.

By acknowledging that “our own” are a security threat to our nation, we will do the right thing.

By God if those guys like Shehzad were successful, you and I would have a whole lot to answer to our children and fellow Americans. We do have extremists among us, and those few who know about them, do not have the guts to turn them in and endanger not only the lives of 300 Million Americans, but 6 Million Muslims as well.

Let me be fair, that is the case with Americans too, they will not stop at an accident or even a rape in process because they do not want to be involved. This has to change.

Solutions abound.

If nothing else comes from the hearings, one thing is for sure. Muslims are not a monolithic lot. It also proves that Muslims believe in democracy and differ on issues. A few organizations are pushing to be one voice - that is very undemocratic; those oppressive ideas are fading from even the Muslim nation but the Republican right wingers are in that mode in Wisconsin.

Amazingly, Islam teaches free will and non-compulsion. The behavior has nothing to do with religion, but the training they have had growing up, which ought to change by engaging in civil dialogue, again Quraan offers the best course on Civil dialogue. http://quraan-today.blogspot.com/2008/07/sura-kafirun-un-believers.html

However, I must be critical of a few points that Dr. Jasser made; he broad brushed Muslim organizations, suggested government to fund organizations and attacked CAIR unjustly. Calling CAIR an unindicted co-conspirator is perhaps another lie by the Bush Government and we should not value that phrase unless they present proof of it. Our judicial system is one of the best and its value, that you are innocent until proven guilty needs to be valued, we cannot go wrong with that.

I respect and support many an items that Dr. Jasser proposes. Its time for the right wing Muslims and right wing Republicans to get that inoculation.

# # #

Mike Ghouse is a speaker, thinker and a writer. He is committed to building a cohesive America through the America Together Foundation, within it, the Foundation for Pluralism champions the idea of co-existence through respecting and accepting the otherness of other, and World Muslim Congress is committed to nurturing the pluralistic ideals embedded in Islam. Mike is available to speak on Pluralism, Islam, Civil Societies, and Peace & Justice at your work place, place of worship, school, seminars or conferences. He is a media commentator offering pluralistic solutions on issues of the day. Mike's work is reflected at three websites & twenty seven Blogs listed at http://www.MikeGhouse.net/

Muslim hearings in US Congress dismissed as 'equivalent of reality TV'

2011-03-10T14:47:00.001-08:00

Muslim hearings in US Congress dismissed as 'equivalent of reality TV'

Organisers say hearing is vital to US security, but critics say it raises spectre of McCarthy witch-hunts

Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 10 March 2011 21.35 GMT
Article history

The Republican senator Peter King (centre, back) chairs congressional hearings on the radicalisation of US Muslims Photograph: Alex Wong/Getty Images

A congressional hearing into home-grown Islamist terrorism opened with scenes of high emotion today as tears were shed by the first Muslim elected to Congress.
The much anticipated hearing was claimed by its organisers to be crucial to national security but generated little new information or insight into how or whether al-Qaida was actively recruiting on US soil or how grave a potential threat that might be.
Yvette Clarke, a New York Democrat, dismissed the proceedings as congressional theatre. "It's the equivalent of reality TV," she said.
There was certainly drama. In the hearing's tense opening moments, Keith Ellison, a Democrat from Minnesota, broke down as he recalled a young Muslim paramedic who died during the 9/11 attacks.

"Mohammed Salman Hamdani was a fellow American who gave his life for other Americans," Ellison said, his voice muffled by tears. "His life should not be defined as a member of an ethnic group or a member of a religion, but as an American who gave everything for his fellow citizens."

The congressman then gathered his papers and was gone.
Ellison's loss of composure was a reminder of the passions generated by a hearing focused solely on the threat posed by the radicalisation of America's five million Muslims and the response of community leaders to that threat.
Peter King, the pugnacious Republican from New York who chairs the homeland security committee, had faced multiple calls to cancel the hearing.
Protesters said the very title – "The Extent of Radicalisation in the American Muslim Community and that Community's Response" – reeked of a McCarthyite witch hunt against America's Muslims.
King intends the hearing to be the first in a series of examinations on the rise of Islamist extremism within America. The hearings – even more controversially – are also exploring whether the Muslim community at large is refusing to co-operate with police.

Even the White House warned against the danger of tarring an entire community. "In the United States we don't practise guilt by association," said spokesman Jay Carney. "We believe Muslim Americans are part of the solution."

King was unmoved by the appeals. "I am well aware that these hearings have generated considerable controversy and opposition," he said. "But to back down would be a craven surrender to political pressure."
He rejected the charge that the hearings were a 21st-century version of McCarthyism, or were inciting hatred with their specific focus on the response of the entire Muslim community. "There is nothing radical or un-American in holding these hearings."
On a wet and dreary day, campaigners and members of the public began converging on the congressional office building at about 7am. A few had placards reading: "Today I am a Muslim too."
Inside the packed committee room, however, the proceedings appeared to be in little danger of generating any insights into al-Qaida operations or threat levels on US soil.
Much of the testimony offered up by witnesses was highly personal, anecdotal or a rehashing of FBI reports. The committee heard from the relatives of two young men who had been recruited by extremist networks, and the leader of a small community organisation who is a frequent commentator on Fox News; and Melvin Bledsoe described how his son, Carlos, accused of killing a soldier at an army recruiting centre in Arkansas, was manipulated by extremists at the local mosque in Nashville.
"Carlos was captured by people best described as hunters," his father said.
The sole security expert called was Lee Baca, sheriff of Los Angeles County, who told the committee that evidence from the Muslim community had helped thwart seven of the last 10 planned attacks.
Response from members of Congress followed party lines. Democrats warned of the dangers of stigmatising an entire community, saying the committee should also investigate other extremists – white supremacists, the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis, eco-warriors; Republicans tried to explore whether mass-membership Muslim organisations were front groups for terror organisations.
Members from both parties discussed their own faith traditions, and recounted their friends in the Muslim community.
At one point, Sheila Jackson Lee, a veteran Democratic member of Congress from Texas, exploded. "There is no redeeming factual information that any of us will receive today," she said. "It has already been tainted, this hearing. There is no loud sign of reasoning coming out of this hearing."

Most Americans are OK with Muslim hearings

2011-03-10T14:09:00.000-08:00

Most are OK with Muslim hearings

Radicalization focus of Congress panel

By Alan Gomez
USA TODAY

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20110310/1amuslims10_st.art.htm

A new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds most Americans do not believe U.S. Muslims are too extreme in their religious beliefs, yet a majority also find it appropriate that Congress examines the radicalization of some members of the Muslim community.

A hearing today before Rep. Pete King's House Homeland Security Committee will look at the threat posed by U.S. Muslims being radicalized by terrorist groups, and whether the Muslim-American community is doing enough to help law enforcement capture those who are becoming radicalized.

The hearing has prompted angry reactions from some of the 2.6 million Muslims living in the USA and a host of civil rights groups, including the ACLU and the Council on American-Islamic Relations, who say the community is being unfairly singled out.

The new poll finds that 52% of Americans say the hearing is appropriate, and 38% believe the hearing is inappropriate. Ten percent have no opinion.

The poll also found that more Americans think Muslims living in America are committed to their religion than think they are supportive of the United States. A majority of Americans do not believe, however, that Muslims in America are too extreme in their religious beliefs or sympathetic to the al-Qaeda terrorist organization.

Rep. Keith Ellison, one of two Muslim members of Congress, said the poll's findings show that Americans still harbor inaccurate, suspicious views of their Muslim neighbors — a problem that can only be worsened by King's hearing.

"People's civil rights cannot be a popularity contest," said Ellison, a Democrat from Minnesota. "What percentage of Americans would say it's OK to intern Japanese people in 1941?"

Others believe hiding from Muslim radicalization amounts to political correctness run amok. Debra Burlingame's brother, Charles "Chic" Burlingame, was the pilot of American Airlines Flight 77, which was taken over by hijackers and crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11. She said the hijackers on her brother's plane were supported by 14 Muslims in seven different U.S. mosques.

"That's something we can't ignore," she said. "The American people are not buying the politically correct line that Washington is trying to put out, as if what we suffer from is extremism in general."

King, a Republican from New York, said in an editorial response in today's USA TODAY (8A) that three top U.S. national security officials have said the nation faces a significant terrorist threat from radicalization inside the USA.

"The administration is saying it: Al-Qaeda is targeting and attempting to radicalize Muslims within the U.S. — and it is focusing its efforts on the American Muslim community. This is the most significant homeland security issue we face."

Muslim Americans wonder why members of other religions aren't being investigated as well since they also participate in terrorist acts.

"This country's come a long way in race relations, and Rep. King is taking us back," said Abed Ayoub, legal director for the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee.

Hearings on Muslims: Unfair and Dangerous

2011-03-10T14:06:00.000-08:00

Today, the House Committee on Homeland Security, led by Rep. Peter King (NY), began hearings on “The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community's Response.” Please urge your representative to speak out against these alarmist and unfair hearings.

Congress has a responsibility to conduct its affairs in accordance with the Constitution and in a manner that will not create an immediate and lasting danger for a significant number of people in the United States. Not only is it inappropriate for Congress to inquire into the teachings and practices of any religion, but the frame of these hearings encourages people to think of American Muslims as dangerous radicals, putting them at increased risk of threats and violence. Muslim women, who are easily recognized by their dress, could be particularly at risk.

In fact, the majority of terrorist acts committed in this country in recent decades have been committed by people with other or no religious roots. Congress should inquire into criminal actions and plans that are detrimental to the United States, but to single out a particular religious group for this inquiry is unfair, dangerous, and in conflict with the protections of the First Amendment.

Take Action

Contact your representative to let her or him know that you are opposed to the incendiary and alarmist frame of these hearings. Urge your representative to speak out against these hearings and to contribute to a positive conversation that builds bridges of understanding among the many different faiths that make up our nation.

Ask five friends to write as well.

More on FCNL’s Response

On Tuesday, FCNL sent a letter to all members of the House Committee on Homeland Security urging them to “reject the premise for the hearings” that Representative King is holding.

FCNL also signed the ACLU’s letter to Representative King expressing concern about the hearings, which “risk chilling fundamental First Amendment freedoms of religion, speech, and association.”

FCNL and the Friends Meeting of Washington recently welcomed Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf to Washington, where he spoke at an interfaith gathering about building bridges of understanding between different religious faiths. As FCNL’s Sandy Robson writes, “Imam Feisal spoke out of the silence, and sparked a conversation that gets to the heart of the matter—that our greatest challenge is to bridge the gaps between the peace-loving moderates of all countries and faiths, and the radicals that threaten to divide us.”

King will hammer the first nail on right wing coffin

2011-03-10T14:01:00.001-08:00

This blog will list published opinions on the subject. If you know a good piece that is not posted on this blog, you may consider sharing it. You can post the link in “YOUR COMMENTS” Link and it will be post if it adds significantly to the understanding of the situation.

Peter King has made statements that are repulsive, and have no foundation or sources to it. He pulls things out of thin air or acts out of the seat of his pants.

We are concerned about the hearings and hope and pray that Mr. King would be honest, sincere and fair, although his record is marred with bigotry. We hope he will not destroy the fabric of our society and pit one American against the other.

If he takes the wrong step, the American people will not put up with it, as they have done that time and again. I trust the Americans, the moderate Americans who are a majority and have supported and turned around Vietnam War, Iraq war, abortion issues, civil rights and other issues.

We have sadly elected the Republican Majority, which I had advocated as an individual all along, instead the right-wingers rode in on the “hate agenda” and shamelessly a majority of the Good-for-nothing-Republican Party is letting them carry it, and evil continues to perpetuate. If they don’t get their act together we have to dump the leadership and fix them.

I am a Republican and will stay one, and I am committed to attend the key meetings for the next season and I will be questioning and demanding proof for their non-sense. I hope other Republicans will have the spine to speak up against what is wrong with the Republican leadership; they are letting the hate mongers become their mascot.

I welcome the hearings, Muslims have nothing to fear and nothing to worry, let the man fall flat on his face. Just as we produced the Quraan conference to evaporate the lies the right wingers had projected, this will perhaps become the first nail on their coffin.

Mike Ghouse is a speaker commited to building a cohesive America. His work is reflected at three websites and twenty seven blogs indexed at http://www.mikeghouse.net/

Your comments at:
http://peterkinghearings.blogspot.com/2011/03/peter-king-hearings.html#comments

# # #

A Political Spectacle that Perpetuates Prejudice

2011-03-10T12:33:00.000-08:00

http://blog.beliefnet.com/news/2011/03/a-political-spectacle-that-per.php#ixzz1GEMmpDii

(RNS) House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter King is intent on doing a foolish thing that even former President George W. Bush -- himself no slouch in fighting terrorism -- consistently refused to do.

On Thursday (March 10), King will open the first hearings on the problem of "radicalization" among American Muslims. Ever since 9/11, King has been troubled by what he believes is a failure of American Muslim leaders to combat extremism. "The leadership of the (Muslim) community is not geared to cooperation," he recently told Politico.

In 2004, he complained that Islamic fundamentalists control 85 percent of U.S. mosques: "This enemy is living among us," he said then. Now, he wants to expose the supposed enemy in public.

Most experts agree some forms of violent extremism in this country have found inspiration and legitimacy in Islam. Most citizens agree the government, whose primary job is to protect its citizens, has a need to know which communities might be hatching terrorist plots against its citizens and their institutions. Law enforcement, too, must be vigilant -- aware of the extent of violent radicalism, informed about its causes, and active in combating its worst effects.

Congressional hearings can be an important instrument in ensuring the security of the homeland and its citizens. There can be no objection in principle to public discussion of the relationship between religious communities and extremism, including violent extremists within Islam.

But King's hearings are likely to have the opposite effect and undermine that security. They will also demean millions of upstanding American Muslim citizens in the process. Here are the realities:

The structure of the hearings indicates that we will be no wiser after the hearings than we were before -- either regarding the extent and causes of radicalization, or American Muslims' response to it. No government or non-government experts on Islam or terrorism are invited, only non-experts. We will have witnessed only a public display of a merely alleged danger. As someone who grew up under the thumb of communist authoritarianism, the hearings smell a bit like a democratic version of the infamous show trials.

At a minimum, the hearings will cast a shadow of suspicion over all American Muslims, both the leaders and the rank-and-file. A 2007 Pew Research Center study found that the vast majority of Muslims in this country are "decidedly American": they identify with America as a nation and embrace American democratic ideals. Yet against clear and uncontestable facts, many Americans still harbor prejudices against Muslims. The hearings will strengthen this propensity, and may even help bolster what might be described as a "green scare" that's analogous to the "red scare" of some 60 years ago.

There is no more effective way to radicalize American Muslim youth than for political leaders to make public displays of prejudice against all Muslims. Suspicion will undermine their sense of identification with America and alienate some from both the culture and from politics. Treated as potential enemies, some may be more likely to become actual enemies; the hearings are more likely to produce traitors than to rat them out.

In short, the hearings will be a political spectacle, not an instrument of truth finding. They will perpetuate prejudices and perpetrated injustices against Muslim communities, and will only serve to undermine our national security.

Devout Muslims seem to be a particular concern to King. But in the case of devout Muslims -- maybe especially in their case -- we can build on common values.

"A Common Word," a widely publicized 1997 document of impeccable and broadly accepted Muslim authority, argues that what binds Muslims to Christians and religious Jews is a shared commitment to love God and neighbor. What's more, as many great Christian teachers through the centuries have recognized (including the Second Vatican Council's "Nostra Aetate"), Muslims and Christians worship the same God. True, they understand God somewhat differently, but the similarities in their convictions about God are much greater than are the differences.

As a consequence, Muslims share with Christians (and Jews, on this score) a set of fundamental values, including some version of the Golden Rule -- a principle that compels you to treat others as you would want to be treated. Reaffirming such common values, and holding each other accountable to them, would do much more to improve Americans' safety than will the King hearings.

Though the hearings may give Chairman King some partisan advantage, they will ultimately diminish his stature as a political leader (as the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations did in the case of Sen. Joe McCarthy). Much worse, the hearings will neither expose wrongdoing nor help rectify a social condition (as the Watergate hearings did), but instead perpetrate a wrongdoing and undermine national security.

We as a community of citizens, of all faiths and traditions, believers and non-believers, can do much better than this unjust, dangerous and self-defeating political charade.

- MIROSLAV VOLF, Religion News Service

(Miroslav Volf is the author of the new book, Allah: A Christian Response. He is the Henry B. Wright Professor of Theology at Yale Divinity School, and the Founding Director of the Yale Center for Faith and Culture.)

Press Release from ISNA

2011-03-10T12:24:00.000-08:00

Source: ISNA

(Plainfield, IN March 10, 2011) This morning at 9:30 AM, Rep. Peter King, Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, called the first six witnesses in the Congressional Hearings: "The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and That Community's Response." The witness list can be found online.

"While we share the Committee's commitment to ensuring the security of our nation, we strongly believe that there is a better way to ensure our national security than singling out one faith community. The hearing as it is currently structured proposes holding a public scrutiny of one specific community on the basis of religion; such institutionalized generalizations have not been seen since the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II.

We will continue to do our part to prevent terrorism, and we ask that the Committee on Homeland Security continue to do its part as well. Rather than emphasizing our differences, our safety as a nation would be better enhanced if the Committee instead united us, so that all the diverse communities of America can work together for our nation's security," said ISNA in written testimony to the hearings.

In preparation for these hearings, and the discriminatory nature of their approach, ISNA organized with national interfaith leaders and members of the ISNA "Shoulder to Shoulder Campaign: Standing with American Muslims to Uphold American Values," to publicly denounce their format and scope.

Today, at 1PM, ISNA President Imam Mohamed Magid was joined by ISNA leadership and representatives from 23 national religious organizations (members of the "Shoulder to Shoulder" campaign) to hold a Press Conference at the Cannon Building in Washington DC, where a joint statement, entitled, "Religious Leaders Stand Shoulder-to-Shoulder Against Extremism of All Kinds in Support of American Values" was shared with the community.

The religious leaders today made it clear that there is a better way to unite and secure our nation than by marginalizing an entire religious group in America based on the actions of a few. An excerpt from today's statement is found below, with the full statement found online by clicking here.

As the House Committee on Homeland Security convenes hearings on the putative "radicalization" of American Muslims, our obligation takes on renewed urgency...All of our faith communities share a powerful prohibition against bearing false witness, with the understanding that destroying a person's reputation is tantamount to destroying his or her life. To assert that Muslims as a broad group are not deeply devoted to America's safety and the peaceful interaction of its entire citizenry - that is false witness. By subjecting American Muslims to such scrutiny, we weaken our more perfect union, and we harm the national vision of our common good that is a witness to the nations. We encourage all citizens of this country to honor freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution that enable the free exercise of religion across our great land.

In addition to the press conference, members of ISNA's "Shoulder to Shoulder" campaign will meet with representarives of Congress and the White House throughout the day to introduce them to the campaign and express their direct concerns with the format of the King hearings.

Contact:

Sarah Thompson

ISNA Communications Coordinator

sthompson@isna.net

317-839-1816

The King of Irony

2011-03-10T07:15:00.000-08:00

The King of Irony

Post by Jack Fertig, Matt Glaser and Laury Silvers

http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/guest_bloggers/4353/the_king_of_irony_/

Peter King, an Irish-American representing a district with a heavily Jewish constituency, has taken on an unwittingly ironic role: a crusader against what’s characterized as a foreign religion being brought into America by people from backwards countries threatening our American way of life.

As Americans of mixed heritage, we grew up hearing stories about how our Jewish grandparents faced similar prejudice in the early 20th century and how our Irish ancestors faced more of the same when they arrived in the mid-19th century. Chinese workers faced even harsher legal restrictions with the Chinese Exclusion Act and Japanese-Americans were interred through World War II. Countless others have been through similar treatment. And these are willing immigrants and their descendants; African and Indigenous Americans have suffered much worse.

Up into the 1930s, Republicans attacked the Democrats as “the party of rum, Romanism, and rebellion,” and a Democratic president’s heritage was questioned with sneers at “Franklin Rosenfeld.” Haven’t the American people learned? King is perpetuating an American tradition, but one that should have been sent the way of Jim Crow segregation, not to preserve as part of our “American way of life.”

King complains that Muslim community leaders are not cooperating with law enforcement. We have to wonder what sort of cooperation he is looking for. If an Imam says, “We have none of that here,” it is more likely a statement of fact than an evasion. Or in some cases those susceptible to violent acts keep it secret from their community. Last December when Mohamed Mohamud was drawn into what he believed to be an al-Qaeda cell he never told anyone at his mosque, knowing they would disapprove, as nearly all Muslims would.

As with the young Somali, the FBI has been far more successful in recruiting Muslim malcontents into sting operations than al-Qaeda has been in carrying out the real thing. Whether on an urban street corner or at a Tea Party rally, finding angry, alienated young men who can be talked into foolish acts is no great challenge. It was angry young men in earlier days who donned white hoods to protect “good, Protestant Americans” not just from the “menace” of racial integration, but the “dire influence” of Catholics and Jews. We have seen the same anger and alienation in films of racist hate rallies, whether in anti-Semitic rallies in Germany in the 1930s, in Alabama in the 1960s, or in Yorba Linda this February.

What kind of “cooperation” does King want? In reporting instances of planned violence, Muslims have been not just cooperative, but proactive. The Nigerian would-be airplane bomber was reported by his own father. The attempted Times Square bomber was first identified by a Muslim street vendor. Would that Ted Kaczinsky and Timothy McVeigh had lived in such alert communities!

King’s hearings are a signal to Muslims that we are not accepted as a part of American society. This can only promote more alienation and anger. He is not only exploiting Islamophobia to build a political base of fear and prejudice; his message of divisive suspicion also will undermine Muslim efforts to integrate into our society, to enrich America as our Catholic and Jewish ancestors did, not by abandoning their religion, but by bringing it into the American mainstream.

We are American Muslims dedicated to democracy and pluralism; we support women’s equality and GLBT rights. We recognize that there are religious extremists in our religion as there are in others and we struggle with prejudices within our community and without. We see bridges between peoples and inclusion leading to integration and mutual cultural enrichment as evidenced by our own mixed backgrounds.

We are American Muslims of mixed Irish and Jewish backgrounds, and have great faith in the strength of cultural diversity. But just when we would like to think that racial and religious prejudices have been left in the past, we see frightening new repetitions of old patterns. We ask Peter King and his constituents to recognize the language of hatred and fear, to remember how our families endured humiliation and abuse, and to offer Muslim Americans, native and immigrant, the friendship that our Irish and Jewish ancestors and so many other new Americans should have enjoyed.

Extremists on Extremism: Peter King and the Sharia Scam

2011-03-10T07:01:00.000-08:00

John Feffer.Co-director, Foreign Policy In Focus
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-feffer/extremists-on-extremism-p_b_833148.html

Muslims are rising up against tyranny throughout the Arab world. They have ousted autocrats, consistently called for democracy, and inspired people from Beijing to Madison to rally for justice.

And yet, for some here in the homeland, Muslims are still the problem. Consider two campaigns recently launched from Washington, DC. The first is the upcoming Homeland Security Committee hearing on Muslim radicalism, sponsored by Rep. Peter King (R-NY). The second is a campaign against sharia law, spearheaded by the Center for Security Policy. Both suggest the American empire needs an enemy -- not only abroad -- but at home as well.

In November, more than 70 percent of Oklahomans who voted in the mid-term elections supported a referendum banning sharia law, a "totalitarian socio-political doctrine," according to the neoconservative Center for Security Policy. Oklahoma is not exactly the center of the Islamic world -- less than one percent of the population is Muslim. More than a dozen states are now gearing up to introduce similar anti-Islamic initiatives. According to the promoters of this campaign, radical Islam threatens to take over not just Egypt or Tunisia. The Muslim Brotherhood and its ilk are perilously close to cladding Lady Gaga in a burqa and bringing a radical mosque to every main street.

Not surprisingly, the promoters of this state legislative campaign know next to nothing about sharia. The sponsor of the Alabama bill couldn't define the word when asked by a local reporter. Nor could he point to any examples of sharia being used either in Alabama or anywhere else in the United States.

The average American hears the word sharia and thinks only of the stoning of adulterers. But sharia translates into, roughly, "rule of law" in the Muslim world. To be sure, the Taliban in Afghanistan, with their public floggings and discrimination against women, certainly gave sharia a bad name. But as legal scholar Noah Feldman points out in The Fall and Rise of the Islamic State, sharia has a distinguished history with considerable appeal to those living in lawless societies: sharia promises "a just legal system, one that administers the law fairly - without bias, corruption by the rich, or government interference." Given the proliferation of autocrats in the region -- Mubarak, Ben Ali, Gaddafi -- sharia starts to look like a reasonable alternative.
Regardless of how sharia is interpreted in the Muslim world, the notion that sharia "threatens" the U.S. legal system is as ludicrous as the Cold War fantasies that communists were taking over the school system or poisoning the drinking water.

In a recent 172-page report, Shariah: The Threat to America, the Center for Security Policy cites exactly one case of sharia law playing any role in the U.S. legal system. In 2009, a New Jersey Superior Court judge refused to grant a restraining order to a woman who testified that her Muslim husband forced her to have non-consensual sex, ruling the husband's actions were consistent with his beliefs and practices. The appellate court overruled him. The non-Muslim judge did not reference sharia, nor did shadowy Muslim organizations conduct any campaign to support the husband and turn the case into a precedent. One minor case, with the most slender connection to sharia, does not translate into an imminent threat.

"The people who are saying 'no sharia'? It's like they're saying, 'we want no unicorns,'" playwright and political commentator Wajahat Ali told me in an interview we'll publish later this week at Foreign Policy In Focus (FPIF). "People get upset about the threat of unicorns. They galvanize their base. They try to amend the law. And if they're successful, they say, 'See we protected America from unicorns!' Any sane person would say, 'Yes, but there are no unicorns in America.'"

The man behind this extraordinary scam is Frank Gaffney, a right-winger so out there that he's been banned from speaking at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). In addition to continuing to insist that President Obama is a Muslim, Gaffney has accused CPAC members Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan of ushering the Muslim Brotherhood into CPAC through the backdoor. Such accusations should get Gaffney banned from not just CPAC but from the mainstream media as well. But Gaffney is the Charlie Sheen of political analysts: CNN's Anderson Cooper and others just can't resist his intemperate rants.
Nor it seems can Peter King, the congressman from Long Island who has brought Islamophobia back to Capitol Hill. On Gaffney's radio show earlier this year, King declared that Muslims were not cooperating with law enforcement officials to fight terrorism. King had just recently announced that as the new chair of the Homeland Security Committee, he would hold hearings on the threat of Muslim radicals in America, disingenuously claiming these would improve relations with the Muslim community. Of course, some Muslim American radicals have planned or engaged in acts of extremism. But King has had a rather difficult time explaining how stigmatizing an entire community as the primary source of extremism in America, calling a range of non-experts to testify on an extraordinarily sensitive topic, and ignoring the statistic that Muslims provided tips in 48 out of 120 terrorist cases in the United States, will somehow make Muslim Americans feel all warm, fuzzy, and patriotic.

Nor is King the best person to ask in the first place about improving relations with the Muslim community. At one time, he supported U.S. military intervention on the side of predominantly Muslim Bosnia and Kosovo and maintained close ties to Muslims in his district. But since 9/11, he has become one of the lead propagators of Islamophobic myths. He has claimed that "85 percent" of mosques in America have radical leadership - an allegation reminiscent of Joe McCarthy's imaginary list of 205 communists in the State Department - and complained that there are "too many mosques in this country." He has written a novel, Vale of Tears, in which his literary alter ego Sean Cross (also a Long Island congressman) foils a radical Muslim plot to blow up New York. King seems to be having some difficult distinguishing between fact and fiction. As he told New York magazine, "I guess you can say that the book I wrote, some of the things I worried about then, are happening now."

As a result of his statements, his self-aggrandizing fiction, and his spectacularly ill-timed hearings, King's relationship with the Muslim community has precipitously declined. Recent protests by Muslim Americans in his district have been joined by Long Island clergy and other people of faith. Over the weekend, hundreds of people attended the "I Am a Muslim, Too" rally in Times Square in an attempt to force a cancellation of the hearings. Everyone from Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough to New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has tried to marginalize King.

Peter King is not entirely to blame, of course, for the resurgence of Islamophobia. Liberals have played a role, too. "The right-wing hardliners set the framework that Muslims are a backwards, evil, anti-American group, then the liberals say that some of the Muslims are nice, some of them don't oppress their women," explains Raed Jarrar in an interview with him and Niki Akhavan in the FPIF special focus on Islamophobia. "This is like one person saying, 'I think all black people are thieves' and another person says 'I don't believe that all black people are thieves.' If you are using that as a reference point, then you are actually reaffirming the framework."

Meanwhile, King asserts he will not back down. He affects a brave stance, just as he did when he supported the IRA in the 1980s and called Michael Jackson a "lowlife" after the pop star's death in 2009. His hypocrisy on the issue of extremism and his obvious lack of cultural diplomacy skills should automatically disqualify him from holding a hearing on extremism in the Muslim American community. King soldiers on nonetheless. Like the character in his novel, he will save the world all by himself if necessary.

By standing with Frank Gaffney, with the protestors who mocked a Muslim praying in front of the White House last week, and with the hate-filled jeerers at an Islamic fundraiser in Orange County last month -- Peter King is not brave at all. Brave are the Muslims who are standing up for their freedom in the Arab world and the Muslim Americans who are asserting their rights in the face of rising Islamophobia. In comparison, Peter King is a chicken.

Peter King, Islamic Terror and Islamophobia

2011-03-10T06:57:00.000-08:00

Brad Hirschfield.Rabbi, Author and Expert on Religion and Public Life
.Peter King, Islamic Terror and Islamophobia
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-brad-hirschfield/peter-king-islamic-terror_b_833309.html

With Rep. Peter King beginning hearings Thursday, hearings that will examine the issue of radicalization within the American Muslim community, two things should be stated very clearly: Islamic terror is real and so is Islamophobia. Denying the former is a deadly error, but addressing that real and pressing problem in no way necessitates or justifies the latter.

These hearings, if conducted properly, could surface both of those realities, which are rarely acknowledged in the same places and at the same time. Too often, in my own experience with religious and communal leaders in both the American Muslim community and in the community at large, those who are prepared to deal with the problem of Islamic terror, minimize or altogether ignore the ugliness of Islamophobia, while those who would have us focus on combating hatred of Muslims, downplay the linkage between Islam and terror in the world today.

What we need are people who have the bravery, honesty and compassion to address both at the same time. At the very least, it would be helpful if those lining up on both sides of these hearings would focus our attention on that challenge rather than simply defending King, who has said any number of outrageous things about Muslims and Islam, or suggesting that these hearings are simply an excuse for whipping up hatred against Muslims.

While it's certainly true that these hearings could become the "witch hunt" about which some are concerned, the claim that merely holding the hearings constitutes an Islamophobic hunt is inappropriate. Not to mention that not holding such hearings because we fear what they may become places those who take that view in the same boat with those who fear pretty much all Muslims because of the fear of what they may become.

As is so often the case, in politics as in life, those most opposed to each other are very much alike. In this case, each mobilizes around a fear of what might be, rather than calmly addressing something that actually is.
Raising questions, however uncomfortable, does not constitute bias against the group to whom those questions are addressed, but it does make demands upon those who raise the questions. They will have to prove that their interest lies not in showing how a particular faith community is inherently dangerous or problematic. They will have to demonstrate a willingness not only to see radicalization about which they are concerned, but also to see where it is absent and the extent to which the fight against it from inside the Muslim community has been successful.

If these hearing proceed properly, many people whose knee-jerk reaction is to defend Islam and Muslims as a group, will find themselves uncomfortable, and so will those people who believe that to see any Muslim is to see a threat, rather than simply seeing a fellow American who happens to be Muslim. If the overly simplistic picture typically portrayed by one side or the other is simply confirmed, then Rep. King will have failed and should be held accountable for his failure.

Former Counterterrorism Chief Says Muslims Cooperate

2011-03-10T06:55:00.000-08:00

By Omar Sacirbey
Religion News Service
Former Counterterrorism Chief Says Muslims Cooperate

(RNS) A former FBI counterterrorism director on Tuesday (March 8) rejected allegations by the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee that Muslim Americans don't cooperate with law enforcement in terror investigations.

Rep. Peter King, a Long Island Republican, will open hearings on Thursday about Muslim radicalization that critics say unfairly singles out Muslims.

"I will tell you in no uncertain terms that the community has on multiple occasions come forward and assisted law enforcement," said Michael Rolince, who headed the Counterterrorism Division in the FBI's Washington field office between 2002 and 2005.

Rolince said the hearings and heated "rhetoric" from politicians attacking Muslims undermine that cooperation, and said smart counterterrorism strategy requires engaging with Muslim Americans.

"You talk to everyone and then you figure out who's going to be helpful, who's going to be harmful, and who's not going to be a factor," said Rolince, speaking in a conference call sponsored by Muslim Advocates, a civil rights group in San Francisco. "This is not easy.
Anyone who thinks you can just snap your fingers and everyone's going to go along and understand both sides of the equation is in the wrong line of work."

Despite his criticism of the King hearings, Rolince said he hoped some good would come of the controversial hearings. "I think this is going to be a great conversation after the hearings," he said.

Muslim Advocates used the call to announce a new website, www.whatunites.us, where people are asked to sign a pledge "against fearmongering." Current signatories include 9/11 Families For Peaceful Tomorrows, the Sikh Coalition, the North Carolina Council of Churches and the American Muslim Law Enforcement Officers Association.

51 Organizations Tell Congress that Hearings are divise

2011-03-09T23:00:00.000-08:00

http://www.muslimadvocates.org/latest/51_organizations_tell_congress.html

51 Organizations Tell Congress that Hearings Targeting American Muslims Are Divisive

Following are the organizations that Signed up on the statement;

American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee

American Pakistan Foundation

Amnesty International USA

Arab American Institute

Arab Community Center for Economic and Social

Services

Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty

Center for Constitutional Rights

Council on American-Islamic Relations

EMERGE-USA

Human Rights First

Indian Muslim Relief & Charities

Interfaith Alliance

Islamic Medical Association of North America

Islamic Networks Group

Islamic Society of North America

Japanese American Citizens League

Muslim Advocates

Muslim Public Affairs Council

National Network for Arab American Communities

Open Society Institute

Pakistani American Public Affairs Committee

Sikh Coalition

South Asian Americans Leading Together

Tanenbaum Center for Interreligious Understanding

Unitarian Universalist Service Committee

Association of American Muslim Lawyers

American Muslim Law Enforcement Officers Association

Arab American Association of New York

Asian Law Caucus

Bay Area Association of Muslim Lawyers

Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago

DRUM - Desis Rising Up and Moving

Florida Muslim Bar Association

The Freedom and Justice Foundation

Georgia Association of Muslim Lawyers

Houston Shifa Services Foundation

Inner-City Muslim Action Network

Islamic Shura Council of Southern California

Majlis Ash-Shura of Metropolitan New York

Michigan Muslim Bar Association

Muslim Alliance of Indiana

Muslim Bar Association of Chicago

Muslim Bar Association of New York

Muslim Bar Association of Southern California

Muslim Consultative Network

Network of Arab American Professionals - NY

New England Muslim Bar Association

New Jersey Muslim Bar Association

Northern California Islamic Council

Ohio Muslim Bar Association

Somali Community Services - San Jose, CA

Here is the Full statement:

terrorism.â€1

If Chairman King proceeds with these hearings, please urge him to address all

forms of violence motivated by extremist beliefs and to do so in a full, fair, and objective way.

Today, American Muslims reflect every race and ethnicity that comprise our nationâ€™s rich

heritage. In fact, Muslims have been an integral part of America since its founding when the

first slave ships arrived on its shores. Muslims serve our nation as teachers, business owners,

factory workers, cab drivers, doctors, lawyers, law enforcement, firefighters, members of

Congress, and members of the armed forces. Their research and innovation adds to the progress

of our nation in science, business, medicine, and technology. They contribute to every aspect of

our nationâ€™s economy and society. The essence of our country is e pluribus unum: out of many,

practicing their faith freely and contributing each in their own way, comes a strong, unified one.

The hearings planned by Chairman King, however, are inconsistent with this vision of

America. Singling out a group of Americans for government scrutiny based on their faith is

divisive and wrong. These hearings will inevitably examine activities protected by the First

Amendment, an affront to fundamental freedoms upon which our country was founded. It

harkens back to hearings held in the 1950s by then-U.S. Senator Joe McCarthy. That dark

chapter in our history taught us that Congress has a solemn duty to wield its investigatory power

responsibly.

1 Peter King, Whatâ€™s Radicalizing Muslim Americans?, Newsday, December 17, 2010.

The Honorable John Boehner

The Honorable Nancy Pelosi

February 1, 2011

Page 2 of 3

In the course of justifying the focus of the hearings, Chairman King has made broad and

unsubstantiated assertions about the American Muslim community. For example, he continues

to perpetuate the myth that 80% of mosques in America are run by extremists,2 implying that

they are hotbeds of extremism. To the contrary, experts have concluded that mosque attendance

is a significant factor in the prevention of extremism.3 In addition, during a recent interview,

Chairman King made a statement insinuating that American Muslims are not American:

â€œWhen a war begins, weâ€™re all Americans. But in this case, this is not the

situation. And whether itâ€™s pressure, whether itâ€™s cultural tradition, whatever, the

fact is the Muslim community does not cooperate anywhere near to the extent that

it should. The irony is that weâ€™re living in two different worlds.â€4

If Chairman King is suggesting that American Muslims are somehow less American â€“

simply by virtue of their faith â€“ then that is an affront to all Americans.

Providing a public, government platform for these erroneous and offensive views has

consequences. The American public takes cues from government officials. These hearings will

almost certainly increase widespread suspicion and mistrust of the American Muslim community

and stoke anti-Muslim sentiment. During 2010, we saw an increase in anti-Muslim hatred in

public discourse, as well as hate crimes and violence targeting American Muslims, and those

perceived to be Muslim, including vandalism and arson of mosques, physical attacks, bullying of

children in schools, and attempted murder. No American should live in fear for his or her safety,

and Congress should not help create a climate where it is acceptable to target a particular faith

community for discrimination, harassment, and violence.

Furthermore, a hearing that demonizes the American Muslim community will not go

unnoticed by Muslims around the world and will contribute to perceptions of how the U.S.

government treats Muslims. Equal treatment and respect for all faiths are among our nationâ€™s

greatest strengths and are essential to a free and just society.

Our nation faces serious threats, both foreign and domestic. Violence motivated by

extremist beliefs is not committed by members of one racial, religious, or political group. The

Committee on Homeland Security should focus on keeping us safe, rather than engaging in fearmongering

and divisive rhetoric that only weakens the fabric of our nation and distracts us from

actual threats.

2 The Laura Ingraham Show, January 24, 2011.

3 See David Schanzer, Charles Kurzman, Ebrahim Moosa, Anti-Terror Lessons of Muslim Americans, Duke

University, January 6, 2010, at 28-29.

4 Secure Freedom Radio With Frank Gaffney, January 6, 2011.

The Honorable John Boehner

The Honorable Nancy Pelosi

February 1, 2011

Page 3 of 3

We strongly urge you to object to the hearings in their current form. If Chairman King

wishes to address violent extremism, then we hope you will ensure that he examines violence

motivated by extremist beliefs, in all its forms, in a full, fair and objective way. The hearings

should proceed from a clear understanding that individuals are responsible for their actions, not

entire communities.

Thank you for your attention to the issues raised in this letter. We look forward to

hearing from you.

Sincerely,

February 1, 2011

The Honorable John Boehner

Office of the Speaker

H-232 The Capitol

Washington, DC 20515

The Honorable Nancy Pelosi

Minority Leader

235 Cannon HOB

Washington, DC 20515

Dear Speaker Boehner and Leader Pelosi:

The undersigned community organizations and groups concerned about civil and human

rights and national security strongly object to the hearings on violent extremism recently

announced by the Chair of the Committee on Homeland Security, Congressman Peter King.

Chairman King has characterized the hearings, tentatively scheduled for February 2011, as

focusing exclusively on the â€œradicalization of the American Muslim community and homegrown

Coalition urges halt to House hearings on Muslim radicalization

2011-03-09T22:58:00.000-08:00

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/03/nation/la-na-congress-muslims-20110203

Religious and civil rights groups say the hearings headed by Republican Rep. Peter T. King will demonize Muslim Americans. King remains unmoved.

February 03, 2011|By Richard A. Serrano, Washington Bureau

Reporting from Washington â€” A coalition of 51 religious and civil rights groups is calling on congressional leaders to stop upcoming hearings on Muslim extremism in the U.S. or have the investigation refocused to include other hate groups.

The coalition, working with the San Francisco-based Muslim Advocates legal organization, said the March hearings led by Rep. Peter T. King (R-N.Y.), chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, would demonize Muslim Americans and persuade many of them not to cooperate with police.

"Our first preference is for him to kibosh the whole thing," Farhana Khera, executive director of Muslim Advocates, said Wednesday. "As it is framed now, the hearings are targeting an entire faith community, and that's not a proper exercise of congressional authority."

The ranking Democrat on the panel, Rep. Bennie G. Thompson of Mississippi, wrote to King on Tuesday suggesting that he broaden the scope of the investigation to look at other violent groups, such as neo-Nazi organizations.

"In the final analysis," he told King, "the ideology of a bomb-maker matters less than the lethal effects of his creation."

But King remained unmoved. Asked whether he would respond to a letter Muslim Advocates sent to House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco), King said: "I don't believe it warrants an answer.... I am too busy preparing for the hearings."

King appears to have Boehner's support. Michael Steel, a Boehner spokesman, said the speaker would not respond to the letter from Muslim Advocates. "Rep. King is chairman of the Homeland Security Committee," Steel said.

In an interview last month defending the hearings, King said "it would be irresponsible of me not to have this investigation" because, he believes, Muslim Americans are becoming increasingly radicalized and often do not cooperate with police.

But the letter from Muslim Advocates argues otherwise. It was endorsed by groups such as the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, Amnesty International and the Muslim Bar Assn. in Southern California and Chicago.

"The Committee on Homeland Security should focus on keeping us safe, rather than engaging in fear mongering and divisive rhetoric that only weakens the fabric of our nation and distracts us from actual threats," they wrote.

Also Wednesday, family members of those killed in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks said they were "appalled" that King would not broaden the hearings.

"Muslim Americans are just that: members of our American family," said the group September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows. "Singling them out for scrutiny is not only poor policy, it is un-American."

A study by a terrorism watchdog group showed the number of Muslim Americans who committed or were arrested for terrorist acts declined sharply from 47 in 2009 to 20 last year.

"These crimes are being perpetrated by a handful of people whose actions are denounced and dejected by virtually all the Muslims living in the United States," said David Schanzer, director of the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security, which wrote the study.

richard.serrano@latimes.com

Twice As Many Plots Since 9/11 From Non-Muslim Terrorists

2011-03-09T22:37:00.000-08:00

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/09/king-muslims-plots-terrorists/

Twice As Many Plots Since 9/11 From Non-Muslim Terrorists

Tomorrow, Rep. Peter King (R-NY), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, will hold hearings singling out the Muslim American community for supposedly aiding and abetting domestic radicalization and terrorism.

When asked why he is singling out the Muslim American community and refusing to investigate other forms of terrorism, King has responded by saying that “it makes no sense to talk about other types of extremism, when the main threat to the United States today is talking about al Qaida.”

Yet as a January 2011 terrorism statistics report — compiled using publicly available data from the FBI and other crime agencies — from the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) shows, terrorism by Muslim Americans has only accounted for a minority of terror plots since 9/11. Since the attacks on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, Muslims have been involved in 45 domestic terrorist plots. Meanwhile, non-Muslims have been involved in 80 terrorist plots.

In fact, right-wing extremist and white supremacist attacks plots alone outnumber plots by Muslims, with both groups being involved in 63 terror plots, 18 more plots than Muslim Americans have been involved in. Here is a breakdown of attacks by group, along with a few examples of plots by some of these groups:

Anti-Government/Anti-Tax Extremists: There have been 36 plots by right-wing extremists since 9/11. These attacks include Joseph Stack’ssuicide attack on a Texas IRS building and Joshua Cartwright, who became enraged after the election of Barack Obama and “believed thatthe US Government was conspiring against him.”

KKK/NeoNazi/White Supremacist: There have been 27 plots by white supremacists since 9/11. These attacks include a 2004 letter bombing of the Arizona Office of Diversity and Dialogue that injured three employees.

Unknown/Miscellaneous: There were five attacks that federal crime officials did not categorize.

Christian Extremists/Anti-Abortion: There were three attacks by anti-abortion extremists and Christian extremists. The killing of abortion provider George Tiller is the most prominent of these attacks.

Black Supremacist Cults: There were two plots by black supremacist cults.

Jewish Extremists: There were two plots by Jewish extremists. The most prominent of these was a plot by Robert Goldstein to attack a local Islamic center with home made C4 and other explosives.

Extreme Anti-Immigrant: There were two plots by anti-immigrant extremists. One of these was the attack by Shawn Forde, who murdered a Queens deli clerk and was motivated by racist and anti-immigrant feelings.

Anti-Jewish: There was one plot by an anti-Semitic extremist. Norman Leboon made anti-Semitic threats against Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA).

Anarchist: There was a single plot by an anarchist. Joseph D. Konopka “wreaked havoc in 13 counties by setting fires, disrupting radio and television broadcasts, disabling an air traffic control system, selling counterfeit software, and damaging the computer system of an Internet service provider.”

Given the fact that non-Muslim terrorists account for almost twice as many plots as Muslim terrorists in the United States since 9/11, King’s justification that he is targeting Muslims because they represent the primary threat seems hollow.

Additionally, King’s hearings come at a time when Muslim American terrorism and involvement in extremism has actually plummeted in the past couple years, according to a Duke University study put out last month. Moreover, nearly 4 in 10 Al-Qaida related plots in the United States have been broken up thanks to intelligence provided by the Muslim community themselves and 70 percent of recent terror plots in the United States have been foiled by help from Muslim Americans.

UPDATEOn the eve of King's hearings, authorities have named a white supremacist as the suspect in the case of an attempted bombing of an MLK rally in Spokane, Washington.

Terrorism by Muslim-Americans dropped

2011-03-09T22:32:00.000-08:00

CHAPEL HILL, NC: A new study released today by the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security shows that the number of Muslim-Americans who perpetrated or were arrested for terrorist acts declined sharply in 2010. The study, “Muslim American Terrorism Since 9/11: An Accounting,” reports that while 47 Muslim-Americans committed or were arrested for terrorist crimes in 2009, the number dropped to 20 this past year.

The author of the study, Charles Kurzman, Professor of Sociology at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, said, “Of course, even a single terrorist plot is too many. But this trend offers a challenge for the American public: If we ratchet up our security concerns when the rate of terrorism rises, should we ratchet down our concerns when it falls?”

The study also reported that:

The number of Muslim-Americans engaged in terrorist acts with domestic targets declined from 18 in 2009 to 10 in 2010.
75% of the Muslim Americans engaged in terrorist plots in 2010 were disrupted in an early stage of planning. This is consistent with the pattern of disruption since 9/11 (102 of 161 plots – 63% -- were disrupted at an early stage of planning).
Less than one-third of the perpetrators did not come to the attention of law enforcement until after an attack was executed. However, a large majority of these Muslim American terrorist activities (35 out of 46 individuals) took place outside the United States.
Domestic plots by Muslim-Americans are more likely to be disrupted than foreign plots. 48 of 69 individuals that plotted against domestic targets were arrested at an early stage of their activities.
Eleven Muslim Americans have successfully executed terrorist attacks in the United States since 9/11, killing 33 people. This is about 3 deaths per year. There have been approximately 150,000 murders in the United States since 9/11. According to the FBI there were approximately 15,241 murders in the United States in 2009.
Tips from the Muslim American community provided the source of information that led to a terrorist plot being thwarted in 48 of 120 cases involving Muslim Americans.

David Schanzer, Director of the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security, said, “this study puts into perspective the threat presented by domestic radicalization of Muslim Americans.” Schanzer noted, “Is this a problem that deserves the attention of law enforcement and the Muslim American community? Absolutely. But Americans should take note that these crimes are being perpetrated by a handful of people who actions are denounced and rejected by virtually all the Muslims living in the United States.”

The full report is available here.
The author of the report, Charles Kurman, can be reached at kurzman@unc.edu
The Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security is a consortium between Duke University, the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, and RTI International.

Islamophobia Can Create Radicalization

2011-03-09T22:12:00.000-08:00

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-zogby/peter-king-note-islamopho_b_831790.html
Let me state quite directly: Islamophobia and those who promote it are a greater threat to the United States of America than Anwar al Awlaqi and his rag-tag team of terrorists.

On one level, al Awlaqi, from his cave hide-out in Yemen, can only prey off of alienation where it exists. Adopting the persona of a latter-day Malcolm X (though he seems not to have read the last chapters of the Autobiography or learned the lessons of Malcolm's ultimate conversion), he appears street-smart, brash, self-assured and assertive -- all of the assets needed to attract lost or wounded souls looking for certainty and an outlet for their rage. Like some parasites, al Awlaqi cannot create his own prey. He must wait for others to create his opportunities, which until now have been isolated and limited -- a disturbed young man here, an increasingly deranged soldier there.

Islamophobia, on the other hand, if left unchecked, may serve to erect barriers to Muslim inclusion in America, increasing alienation, especially among young Muslims. Not only would such a situation do grave damage to one of the fundamental cornerstones of America's unique democracy, it would simultaneously rapidly expand the pool of recruits for future radicalization.

I have often remarked that America is different, in concept and reality, from our European allies. Third generation Kurds in Germany, Pakistanis in the UK, or Algerians in France, for example, may succeed and obtain citizenship, but they do not become German, British, or French. Last year, I debated a German government official on this issue. She kept referring to the "migrants" -- a term she used to describe all those of Turkish descent, living in her country, regardless of the number of generations they had been there. Similarly, following their last election, a leading British newspaper commented on the "number of immigrants" who won seats -- without noting that many of those "immigrants" were third generation citizens.

America has prided itself on being different. Being "American" is not the possession of a single ethnic group, nor does any group define "America." Not only do new immigrants become citizens, they also secure a new identity. More than that, as new groups become American and are transformed -- the idea of "America" itself has also changed to embrace these new cultures.

Within a generation, diverse ethnic and religious groups from every corner or the globe have become Americans, dramatically changing America in the process. Problems remain and intolerant bigots, in every age, have reared up against new groups, but history demonstrates that, in the end, the newcomers have been accepted, incorporated and absorbed into the American mainstream.

This defines not only our national experience, but our defining narrative, as well. When immigrant school children in Europe learn French, German or British history -- they are learning "their host's" history. In the U.S., from the outset, we are taught that this is "our new story" -- that it includes all of us and has included us all, from the beginning.

It is because new immigrants and diverse ethnic and religious communities have found their place and acceptance in the American mainstream that the country, during the last century, survived and prospered despite being sorely tested with World Wars, economic upheaval and bouts with internal strife. During all this time we had to contend with anti-black, anti-Asian, anti-Catholic, anti-Jewish, anti-immigrant, and anti-Japanese movements. In the end, after creating their moment of pain, these efforts have always lost.
They lose, but they do not always go away. The Islamophobia we are witnessing today is the latest campaign by bigots to tear apart the very fabric of America. We know the groups promoting it. First, there is the well-funded "cottage industry," on the right, of groups and individuals with a long history of anti-Arab or anti-Muslim activity. Some of the individuals associated with these efforts have been given legitimacy as commentators on "terrorism," "radicalization" or "national security concerns" - despite their obvious bias and even obsession with all things Arab or Muslim (in this, they remind me of good old-fashioned anti-Semites who never tired of warning of Jewish threats or conspiracies or who while always claiming to like individual Jews, rallied against any and all Jewish organizations).

If these "professional bigots" have provided the grist, the mill itself was run by the vast network of right-wing talk radio and TV shows and websites and prominent preachers who have combined to amplify the anti-Muslim message nationwide. Their efforts have done real damage. They have tormented descent public servants, created protests that have shuttered legitimate institutions, fomented hate crimes and produced fear in the Muslim community.

In just the past two years, we have seen a dramatic upsurge in the activity of these bigots. More ominously, their cause has been embraced by national political leaders and by elements in the Republican Party -- who appear to have decided, in 2010, to use "fear of Islam" as a base-building theme and a wedge issue against Democrats for electoral advantage.

In the past only obscure or outrageous members of Congress (like: North Carolina's Sue Myrick who expressed nervousness and insecurity because of "who was owning all those 7/11's"; or Colorado's Tom Tancredo who once warned that he "would bomb Mecca") were outspoken Islamophobes. After the National Republican Congressional Campaign Committee embraced opposition to Park 51 as a campaign theme, it is hard to find a leading Republican who has not railed on some issue involving Islam or Muslims in the U.S.

The net impact here is that this current wave of Islamophobia has both played to the Republican base, while firming up that base around this agenda. The polling numbers are striking and deeply disturbing. Fifty-four percent of Democrats have a favorable attitude toward Muslims, while 34% do not. Among Republicans, on the other hand, only 12% hold a favorable view of Muslims, with 85% saying they have unfavorable views. Additionally, 74% of Republicans believe "Islam teaches hate" and 60% believe that "Muslims tend to be religious fanatics".

The danger here is that to the degree that this issue has become a partisan and, in some cases, a proven vote getter for the GOP, it will not go away any time soon. The longer we are plagued by this bigotry, and the displays of intolerance it breeds (the anti-mosque building demonstrations or the anti-Sharia law efforts now spreading across the country) the longer young Muslims will feel that the "promise of America" does not include them -- and they will feel like aliens in their own country.

It is this concern that has prompted many inter-faith religious groups and leaders and a diverse coalition of ethnic and civil rights organizations to so vigorously oppose Congressman Peter King's (R-NY) hearings that will deal with the radicalization of American Muslims later this week. They know, from previous statements made by King, of his personal hostility to American Muslims. They also know that what King is doing will only aggravate an already raw wound, creating greater fear and concern among young Muslims -- who have already witnessed too much bigotry and intolerance.

What they should also know, is that in the process of targeting a religion in this way and engaging in this most "un-American activity" King and company are, in fact, opening the door for increased alienation and future radicalization. Al Awlaqi must be smiling from inside his cave.

Dr. James J. Zogby is the author of (Palgrave Macmillan, October 2010) and the founder and president of the Arab American Institute (AAI), a Washington, D.C.-based organization which serves as the political and policy research arm of the Arab American communityArab Voices: What They Are Saying to Us, and Why it Matters.

Enver Masud Writes

2011-03-09T21:35:00.000-08:00

December 17, 2010

The Honorable Pete King

United States House of Representatives

339 Cannon House Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20515-3203

Dear

Rep. King:

We support your call for an inquiry into Muslim “radicalization” open, and addresses its real causes.

The enclosed book shows that much of what we’ve been told about that tragic September 11, 2001 is false. I had the pleasure of presenting this book to Iran’s President Ahmadinejad at a dinner for Muslim leaders on September 20, 2010.

My varied work experience has taught me how to sift through complex, conflicting facts and opinions to arrive at defensible conclusions. I challenge the 9/11 Commission to defend theirs.

I managed the National Power Grid Study (directed a couple of dozen, multidisciplinary teams — total 150 persons), and the National Electric Reliability Study for the U.S. Department of Energy. I also set up and directed the Operations Review Division at the Iowa Commerce Commission. I’ve consulted for the U.S. Agency for International Development, and the World Bank — in Albania, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, Indonesia, Latvia, Pakistan, Russia, and Tanzania.

I was recently on a three week lecture tour of South Africa speaking before hundreds every day, interviews on radio and television, etc. Virtually all who listened came away sharing my conclusions. The U.S. embassy declined an invitation from SAfm to rebut me.

Should you have questions, please call me on 202-xxx-xxxx.

Sincerely,

Enver Masud

Founder, The Wisdom Fundprovided it is fair,9/11 Unveiled is an Executive Summary of several years of research, and

THE WISDOM FUND

PO Box 2723 wisdom@twf.org

Arlington, VA 22202 www.twf.org

USA

Mike Ghouse notes, Muslims and Peter King Strategy

2011-03-09T21:24:00.000-08:00

Part of the following response was shared with the key Muslim leadership in

America

and as the questions come up, I will be sharing my responses in the comment section below. I hope to address all the questions thrown on the issue.

Peter King has made statements that are repulsive, and on the top of it they have no foundation or not sources to it. He pulls things out of thin air or acts out of the seat of his pants.

We are concerned about the hearings and hope and pray that Mr. King would be honest, sincere and fair, although his record is marred with bigotry. We hope he will not destroy the fabric of our society and pit one American against the other. If he goes wrong, the American people will not put up with it, as they have done that time and again. I trust the Americans, the moderate Americans who are a majority and have supported and turned around Vietnam War, Iraq war, abortion issues, civil rights etc.

We have sadly elected the Republican Majority, which I had advocated all along; unfortunately it turned out to be a disaster. The right wings among them are riding on “hate agenda” and shamelessly the majority of the Good for nothing Republican Party is letting them carry it and evil thoughts continue to perpetuate.

The Republican Party rode to power in 2010 on hate agenda, shame on us to put them-in for their hate and not for addressing our issues. If they don’t get their act together we have to dump the leadership and fix them. I am a Republican and will stay one and count on me to attend the meetings, questioning and demanding proof for their non-sense and I hope many Republican will have the spine to speak up against what is wrong with their leadership.

# # #

About 1:00 PM on Tuesday, March 8
Muslims and Peter King strategy

There are a lot of things we can do; a conference on Sharia, Quraan and other issues facing the nation to build cohesive societies. Get people to participate and for God’s sake attend the interfaith meetings, go the churches, synagogues and temples as a part of the learning.

Let’s develop a group of Muslims to go speak about Islam in churches; they are hungry to hear us out, they are eager to have friendship. We are not doing our part.

Check these sites out:
www.QuraanConference.com ,
www.Unitydayusa.com,
www.HolocaustandGenocides.com
and teach Muslims to stand for others,
for every American and that is the right thing to do.

Plan on July 4^th Barbeque in Mosque parking lot, I will write more about it, but we must do it, it builds relationships, and we become part of the American story.

Are we a part of the American Society?
http://wisdomofreligion.blogspot.com/2009/04/are-muslims-part-of-american-story.html

I am working on doing a talk on Sean Hannity show on the above topic, contrary to what he has been in the past and I see the improvement and desire in him to present another point of view. If I get the time, I will put videos clips together – he is not condemning Sharia out rightly anymore, at least he asks the other guests is this the Sharia Mr. Ghouse talks about or the Iranian Sharia? He asks me about

Egypt

, “Michael, what if you are wrong?” that element of doubt is good and intellectualism is taking root in him. He grudgingly acknowledges, he even agreed that CIA and Mossad have provided false information to

America

.

Though it is difficult, in every show, I have been able to get a few key points out. Insha Allah, if I get the time, I will put the analysis together.

Today, Dallas Morning News and Huffington post will publish my articles about Federal debt and Evolution – it is a main stream article but I have included Islam into the conversation, it easy for the reader to absorb tid-bits here and there than a full talk on Islam.

We need to put our heads together and bring about a positive change.
# # #

Guess what! I stopped at 1:05 and now it is 1:22, I was on Hannity Radio a nationally syndicated show against Brigit Gabrielle – The clear points I made are:

1) Muslims have condemned 9/11, condemned Osama, just Google it or check out World Muslim Congress website or American Muslim website, the list is there.

2) Muslims believe in justice and they are happy with the American laws and very few entertain Sharia Laws in

America

3) Imam Anjem Choudhary is radical, his views are as representative of Muslims as Pat Robertson representing Christians.

4) She misquoted Quraan and I corrected her, she said Prophet Muhammad divided the world in Dar al harb and dar al Islam, I corrected her, prophet Muhammad did not do that, it was done by the kings later on for their own political reasons

5) I may lose you on my take on Abrogation theory, you may disagree with me, that is Ok, I believe God did not screw up by saying one thing and then coming back and saying “what I said before is negated what I am saying now.” The Non-Muslims are confused with this idea, so what do we believe, what is abrogated and what is not…

6) … I will attach the radio link on my site, that was 15 minutes of talk and I said Sean that as a Muslim, I will stand with him to protect him if that Choudhary guy has threatened him.

Mike Ghouse
Muslims together nurturing pluralistic values embedded in Islam.
www.WorldMuslimCongress.net
http://www.mikeghouse.net/

Muslims welcome hearings by Congressman Peter R. King

2011-03-09T21:00:00.000-08:00

PRESS RELEASE

Mike Ghouse, president of the World Muslim Congress welcomes the initiative by Congressman Peter King, chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security to hold the hearings on Islamic radicalism.

It is our duty to keep law and order and faithfully guard the safety of every citizen. Hate is one of the many sources of disrupting the peace in a society and it is our responsibility to seek the source of such hate and work to mitigate it.

Indeed, the last few attempts to mess with our nation’s security has come from men flaunting the Muslim label, and as Muslim Americans, it becomes our individual and collective responsibility to participate in ensuring the safety of every American, and we welcome the hearings. We hope it will lead us to find the sources and causes of such erratic behavior, and perhaps point out areas of concerns to be addressed and find lasting solutions.

We have to identify the criminals who are individually accountable for their actions, and need to punish them expediently according to the law. As a civil society, we must also resist the temptation to blame their family, nation and religion, and not fall for and legitimize their attempts to hide under a religious label for their evil acts. The use of phrases such as Islamic Radicalism is oxymoronic and must be avoided to uphold our civility.

As Americans together and Muslims together, we are planning to organize conferences and workshops on terrorism, anti-Semitism, Sharia, Quran, GLBT, racial profiling, Islamophobia and other issues which pit one American against another. We hope to separate realities from myths to help find solutions.

Published at:

FURTHER RESPONSE TO THE COMMENTS:

I welcome hearings on Islam

Dallas Morning News

We all should be concerned about the hearings and hope and pray that Mr. King would be honest, sincere and fair, although his record is marred with bigotry. We hope he will not destroy the fabric of our society and pit one American against the other.

Acknowledging that “some of our own” are a security threat to our nation is the right thing to do; Mr. King is not the right one to do that with his own bias and his support for IRA terrorism. We Muslims should have done it ourselves, since we did not, we have to accept the bad choice of Mr. King.

I trust our Systems and the moral goodness of our nation, if Mr. King takes the wrong step, the American people will not put up with it, as they have done that time and again. I trust the Americans, the moderate Americans who are a majority and have supported and turned around Vietnam War, Iraq war, abortion issues, civil rights and other issues.

Solutions abound.

Hearing is good, I trust our system

http://peterkinghearings.blogspot.com/2011/03/hearing-is-good-i-trust-our-system.html

Inoculating Liberty
http://peterkinghearings.blogspot.com/2011/03/dr-zuhdi-jasser-innoculating-liberty.html

King will hammer the first nail in right-wing coffin

http://peterkinghearings.blogspot.com/2011/03/king-will-hammer-first-nail-on-right_10.html

Muslims should have taken this approach,

http://peterkinghearings.blogspot.com/2011/03/mike-ghouse-notes-muslims-and-peter.html

As a civil society, we must also resist the temptation to blame their family, nation and religion and not legitimize their attempts to hide under a religious label for their evil acts.

Phrases such as "Islamic radicalism" are oxymoron and must be avoided to uphold our civility.

Mike Ghouse, President

World Muslim Congress

King: Hearings on Muslims in America will be fair

2011-03-09T20:50:00.000-08:00

King: Hearings on Muslims in America will be fair
http://www.ksro.com/news/article.aspx?id=3016577

The Republican congressman who has organized controversial hearings into radical Islam called Muslims "part of the mosaic" of America Wednesday and said they shouldn't feel threatened or intimidated by his inquiry.

"If there is going to be animosity, I would blame it on my opponents," Rep. Peter King said in a nationally broadcast interview.

King, who heads the House Homeland Security Committee, has come under withering criticism for the hearings scheduled to begin Thursday. Protests have already started, and comparisons to McCarthyism and the era of communist witch hunts are being heard.

In one appearance on morning television, King was asked if he was singling out the Muslim community rather than focusing on a more generalized terror threat against America.

"It might be politically correct, but it makes no sense to talk about other types of extremism, when the main threat to the United States today is talking about al Qaida," King said. He noted that Attorney General Eric Holder has said there have been some 50 homegrown terrorists arrested in this country and that Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said the threat has never been higher.

"It would diffuse and water down the hearings" to broaden the line of inquiry, King said. The congressman said the hearings are aimed at protecting Muslims from being pressured to commit terrorist acts.

Before coming to Congress, King had been an outspoken supporter of the Irish Republican Army. The then-comptroller of Nassau County, N.Y., told a 1982 pro-IRA rally on Long Island that he supported the IRA's "struggle against British imperialism in the streets of Belfast and Derry," The New York Times reported in Wednesday's editions.

Three years later, it said, King declared, "If civilians are killed in an attack on a military installation, it is certainly regrettable, but I will not morally blame the IRA for it."

King on Wednesday called the article distorted said he wasn't worried that his actions "were wrong."

In 2005, as a member of Congress, King called on the IRA to disband, saying it was a major impediment to peace in Northern Ireland. He accused the outlawed IRA of making a string of bad decisions that had sewn hostility within Irish-American circles.

King told The Associated Press in an interview Tuesday that the IRA and al-Qaida are very different and that the IRA never attacked America.

Of the hearings this week, Rep. Keith Ellison on Wednesday faulted his colleague for inviting only a single law enforcement witness. The Minnesota Democrat, and lone Muslim member of Congress, also accused King of prejudging his committee's inquiry, saying the controversy surrounding the hearings are setting "a tone of blame" even before the inquiry is gaveled to order.

"What we want to do is build cooperation and trust and open lines of communication," Ellison said.

King promised to "run a good hearing. I will run an honest and fair hearing."

"As an example of my good faith, I invited Congressman Ellison to testify at this hearing," King said. "If I was somehow trying to ram the hearing through, I certainly wouldn't have invited Keith Ellison."

Mike Ghouse, president of the World Muslim Congress, welcomed the hearings.

"It is our duty to keep law and order and faithfully guard the safety of every citizen," he said in a statement. "Hate is one of the many sources of disrupting the peace in a society and it is our responsibility to seek the source of such hate and work to mitigate it."

King said he hoped his critics would embrace his inquiry and put aside "all this yelling and screaming that's going on."

The congressman told The AP that radical Islam is a distinct threat that must be investigated regardless of whose sensibilities are offended.

"You have a violent enemy from overseas which threatens us and which is recruiting people from a community living in our country," King said. He said that's what the hearing is all about.

King and Ellison appeared on ABC's "Good Morning America," and King also was interviewed on CBS's "The Early Show," NBC's "Today" show and on CNN.
___
A REQUEST FOR COPYRIGHT PERMISSION IS SENT
(Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)

CAIR Asks Americans to Reject Rep. King's 'Fear-Mongering'

2011-03-09T20:45:00.000-08:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CAIR Asks Americans to Reject Rep. King's 'Fear-Mongering'

(WASHINGTON, D.C., 3/9/11) -- A coalition of civil rights and Muslim organizations held a press conference this morning in Washington, D.C., to challenge misinformation that may be repeated in the first of a series of hearings on Muslim "radicalization" to be held tomorrow by Rep. Peter King (R-NY). [CAIR will be monitoring Thursday's hearing and will be available to respond upon its conclusion.]

[MEDIA NOTE: Separately, CAIR called on the Obama administration and Congress today to provide oversight for what a new report says is widespread anti-Muslim bias in the training of law enforcement and security personnel nationwide. The report, titled "Manufacturing the Muslim Menace: Private Firms, Public Servants, & the Threat to Rights and Security," released today by Political Research Associates (PRA) details a systemic failure to regulate content in counterterrorism training. SEE: CAIR Seeks Oversight of Anti-Islam Bias in Law Enforcement Training]

At the packed news conference (more than 30 television cameras), a representative of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) urged "fellow Americans not to succumb to Rep. King's fear-mongering."

SEE: Video: King Hearings May Serve to Demonize Islam (CAIR) (ABC)
U.S. Muslim Groups Slam Radicalization Hearings (CNN)
CAIR, Muslim Groups Label King's Hearing a 'Political Stunt' (ABC News)
Civil Rights Groups Protest Upcoming Congressional Hearing (NY1)
Groups: US Lawmaker Probing Islam is New 'McCarthy' (AFP)

Since Representative King announced his plan to hold hearings on the "radicalization" of American Muslims, more than 250 organizations have written to him questioning his statements and allegations. Hundreds of leaders from across the nation, including more than 80 interfaith representatives from King's home of Long Island, New York, have similarly expressed concerns.

Speakers at the press conference included CAIR's National Executive Director Nihad Awad, Michael Macleod-Ball of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Alejandro Beutel of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), Naeem Baig of the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), Shahid Buttar of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee (BORDC), Imam Johari Abdul-Malik of the Council of Muslim Organizations, Rafi Uddin Ahmed of the Virginia Muslim Civic Coalition, Muhammad Salim Akhtar of the American Muslim Taskforce on Civil Rights and Elections (AMT), Mohammad Dawood of the Muslim American Society (MAS), and Nagla Fetouh representing My Faith, My Voice. CAIR National Legislative Director Corey Saylor moderated the news conference.

The speakers challenged Rep. King to offer facts to back up his false claims that "80 percent" of mosques in his state and nationwide are run by "extremist leadership" and that law enforcement officials receive little cooperation from American Muslim leaders.

SEE: Has Rep. Peter King Met His Terrorist Sympathizing Past Self?
In his statement, CAIR's Nihad Awad said: [Note: These quotes are from a prepared statement. The spoken comments may have differed slightly.]

"There is no denying that people of evil intent covet the opportunity to recruit Americans, including those of the Islamic faith, and to pull them away from the straight path of Islam to the deviated path of violent extremism.
"CAIR and the mainstream Muslim community are natural enemies of those who promote violent extremism.
"There is also no denying that - except for a tiny minority -- violent extremists have not found fertile ground in America. Many individuals and institutions, including law enforcement, homeland security personnel, and the leaders and members of the American Muslim community, deserve a share of the credit for this. ...
"Tomorrow, Congressman King will have the spotlight. We sincerely hope that he and his witnesses abandon false allegations, personal agendas and irresponsible rhetoric in favor of a sober and objective hearing.
"A disturbing number of religious, ethnic and racial minorities - including African-Americans, Asian-Americans, Jewish Americans, Catholics, Mormons, and many others -- have been singled out for discrimination at various times in our history. American Muslims would be doing a disservice to the sacrifices of minorities before us if we do not stand up for ourselves now.
"We ask our fellow Americans not to succumb to Rep. King's fear-mongering. We ask our fellow Americans to reject his false and unsubstantiated allegations. And we thank the many political and religious leaders who have spoken against King's divisive hearing.
"America was not built for any one religion, race or ethnicity. It was built on a set of principles. One of those principles is respect for pluralism. We hope Congressman King will remember that and work to unite, not divide our nation. "

CAIR will also provide real-time Twitter commentary on the hearing at @CAIRNational. Tune in to the conversation at #KingHearings. The hearing will begin at 9:30 a.m. (Eastern) on March 10.
CAIR is America's largest Muslim civil liberties and advocacy organization. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.

- END -

CONTACT: CAIR National Legislative Director Corey Saylor, 202-384-8857, E-Mail: csaylor@cair.com; CAIR National Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper, 202-744-7726, or 202-488-8787, E-Mail: ihooper@cair.com; CAIR Communications Coordinator Amina Rubin, 202-488-8787, 202-341-4171, E-Mail: arubin@cair.com

Senator Reid , we must be in it together

2011-03-09T20:42:00.001-08:00

For Immediate Release

Date: Tuesday, March 8, 2011

CONTACT: Jon Summers, (202) 224-2939

REID: WE MUST FACE SERIOUS CHALLENGE OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM TOGETHER, NOT DIVIDED BY RELIGION

Washington, D.C.—Nevada Senator Harry Reid released the following statement regarding hearings on ‘The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community's Response’ initiated by Rep. Peter King:

“I take the threat of terrorism very seriously, and no one is more committed to hunting down terrorists and bringing them to justice, wherever they live, than I am. But I am deeply concerned about these hearings, which demonize law-abiding American Muslims who make important contributions to our society, as I would be about Congressional hearings to investigate Catholics, Jews or people of any other faith based solely on their religion.

“It is vitally important that we have a conversation about the serious challenge of domestic terrorism and how we can all work together to keep each other safe. But that conversation must be a collective one, not one that divides us based on religion.

“Among this country’s founding principles is the freedom of religion. However, any person who misuses religion – no matter what faith they follow – as an excuse for violence or to commit a crime betrays that principle.”

Why Our Community Needs the King Hearings On Radical Islam

2011-03-09T20:31:00.001-08:00

An American Muslim's View -- Why Our Community Needs the King Hearings On Radical Islam

By Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser

Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, a medical doctor and a former U.S. Navy Lieutenant Commander, is the founder and president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy based in Phoenix, Arizona.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/03/09/america-needs-king-hearings-radical-islam/

FoxNews.com

Representative Peter King’s (R-N.Y.) decision to hold hearings on American Muslim radicalization has presented an incredible opportunity to American Muslims.

The course of radicalization over the past two years makes it exceedingly difficult for anyone to assert with a straight face that America is immune to the global Muslim radicalization problem. American Muslims must take the lead in creating solutions to the radicalization of our own. These hearings will provide the long overdue platform for us to step away from the standard denials and apologetics in order to reclaim our Muslim identity from the terrorists and redefine ourselves within the framework of the American pantheon.

The attacks of 9/11 brought the fight to our shores and woke us up to the reality of the global threat to American security and our very way of life. The attacks also redefined what it meant to be an American Muslim.

For me, the attacks led to the creation of our American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) and mobilization of a lifelong mission to contribute to building the future of Islam for our children through liberty and freedom and the separation of mosque and state. The biggest obstacles to that legacy for American Muslims are Islamists, domestic and foreign advocates of the platform of political Islam. It is time for our diverse Muslim communities to reclaim our faith from the control of Islamists.

Without a paradigm shift in the way we address the issues of Islamist terror and ideology, I am ever more fearful of what lies ahead for American Muslims. Radicalization and terror are but a symptom of an underlying ideological conflict between modern western liberal democracy and the false dream of the Islamic state and its instrument of shar’iah law.

Most Muslim organizations seem to have spent the past decade building the American Muslim identity on a collectivization of American Muslims portrayed as victims of American racism instead of benefactors of American freedom.

They have fed into the global narrative that America is at war with Muslims and Islam. They are obligated to do that with their allegiance to the myopic platform of political Islam and the collectivization of Muslims.

American Muslim communities have suffered one of the greatest cases of identity theft in U.S. history. American Muslims are allowing their identity to be hijacked by Islamists including the radicals, the victimologists and contrarily to a growing anti-Islam movement. The sad part is that the first two are from within our own community and give credibility to the third. Congressman King’s hearings may finally present the opportunity to demonstrate the ideological diversity of American Muslims.

We have seen a tremendous surge in the number of attacks from Islamist radicals on US soil. American Muslims need to view the attacks of 2009 and 2010 as just as earth shattering as 9/11. The continuum of radicalization in America is hard to miss with acts of treason by Faisal Shahzad, Mohamed Osman Mohamud, and Umar Abdulmuttalab, and the massacre at Fort Hood committed by Major Nidal Hasan.

We have also seen the breakup of terrorist cells in every corner of the United States from Los Angeles to Baltimore. American Muslim communities need to seize the opportunity that was missed with 9/11. We need to reclaim our identity and define for ourselves a continuum of liberty that is the only way to counter the separatism of political Islam that ultimately ends in radicalization.

As the contest of ideas grows in the struggle for the very souls of Muslims, the continuing acts of Muslim radicals make me fear for the future that my children will inherit. Americans are still waiting to see a palpable counter-Islamist movement from within the House of Islam. If their patience wears too thin, the response may turn visceral and further constrain reform activism.

That movement must build institutions that advocate and disseminate ideas that provide a liberty-based alternative to Islamism. Those ideas must be the substance of our paradigm shift toward internal change.

I believe that the “silent majority” of American Muslims are here to embrace the freedom that America guarantees and reject the ideology of political Islam, its theocracy, and shar’iah that at its core threatens the very existence of American freedom. This silent majority must define a Muslim identity rooted in freedom of thought, separation of mosque and state, and disavow the entire construct of the Islamic state and the necessity for shar’iah in government.

We must transmit to our children a love for America and its founding principles in addition to a love of God and our personal faith of Islam. Muslims can better practice Islam in an environment that universally protects the rights of every individual to practice their faith as they choose much better than one labeled by man as “Islamic”. Universal religious freedom is an absolute requirement for the free practice of all faiths.

While shar’iah means God’s law too many Muslims, the reality is that when it is applied by government it is manmade law. We must convince Muslims that governments and legal systems based in reason and the separation of mosque and state are preferable to those based in shar’iah.

No matter how “democratic” a shar’iah based system is presented, its entire foundation is predicated on a supremacist ideology, familiar only to Muslims, that is incompatible with the US Constitution and universal religious freedom. The purest practice of Islam is one in which Muslims have complete freedom to accept or reject any of the tenants or laws of the faith.

Defining the Muslim identity as an Islamist, a salafist, a jihadist or a wahhabist can no longer be acceptable to a moderate Muslim at home with American liberty. We Muslims must step away from history and redefine the moderate Muslim to our youth as someone who embraces Islam and liberty.

The future of American Security depends upon Muslims mustering the courage to dissect the Islamic ideas that fuel volatile separatism from a modern Islam that we want to leave our children.

Representative King’s hearings are the springboard American Muslims have needed. This platform will set the stage to begin the hard work of internal reform necessary to defeat the ideology of Islamism that is the root cause of radicalization.

Muslims are part of American Family

2011-03-09T20:30:00.001-08:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

NAT'L SECURITY ADVISOR STRESSES MUSLIMS AS PART OF 'AMERICAN FAMILY' DURING SPEECH AT ADAMS CENTER

Source: ISNA

(Plainfield, IN March 8, 2011)
The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Muslim Public Affairs (MPAC) today welcomed a speech by Denis McDonough, President Obama's Deputy National Security Advisor, on Sunday, March 6th at the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS). Ahead of Rep. Peter King's (R-NY) controversial hearing on "radicalization within the Muslim American community, McDonough's recognition of Muslim Americans as part of the "American family" and focus on the importance of community partnerships are an important message for all Americans.

The speech, a first-of-its-kind in a mosque by the Obama administration, outlined the important roles all Americans of faith are playing in contributing to a vibrant pluralistic society and in keeping our nation safe. McDonough also outlined the positive contributions of the Muslim American community in all walks of life and stressed that the Muslim American community is seen by the Administration and Americans as part of the "American family," as stated by President Obama in his most recent State of the Union address.

"This is a place where Americans come together - not only to practice their faith, but to build stronger communities, with people of many faiths ...

You create jobs and opportunity as small business owners and executives of major corporations. You enrich our culture as athletes and entertainers. You lead us as elected officials and Members of Congress. And no one should ever forget that Muslim Americans help keep America safe every day as proud soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen. Indeed, some of these heroes have made the ultimate sacrifice for our nation and now rest in our hallowed national cemeteries."

As Imam Mohamed Magid, President of ISNA and Executive Director of the ADAMS Center, said during his opening remarks, "It is this belief, of being one family, that makes our public servants serve every member of society, and not single out any member of any community for discrimination or isolation. My friends, it is this belief of being one family that makes America a great country, full of diversity and respectful of minorities."

As the President's top advisor on national security, McDonough also broadened the discussion and stressed that the relationship between communities and the government transcends the prism of national security. He stressed that all communities, regardless of faith, share a civic responsibility to ensure that our country remains safe and secure:

"We must resolve that, in our determination to protect our nation, we will not stigmatize or demonize entire communities because of the actions of a few. In the United States of America, we don't practice guilt by association. And let's remember that just as violence and extremism are not unique to any one faith, the responsibility to oppose ignorance and violence rests with us all ......

But we've also recognized that this engagement can't simply be about terrorism. We refuse to "securitize" the relationship between the government and millions of law-abiding, patriotic Muslim Americans and other citizens. We refuse to limit our engagement to what we're against, because we need to forge partnerships that advance what we're for - which is opportunity and equal treatment for all."

McDonough also highlighted some of the Administration's strategies to continue outreach to the Muslim American community and include members of all faiths in the strategy to counter terrorism. In the coming weeks, the Administration will unveil the entirety of its new national strategy to address the issue of violent extremism. McDonough stressed that this strategy will be broad in nature and not single out any group of people based on religion or race. He highlighted how Muslim American institutions, both locally and nationally, have been key in ensuring that communities are places where faith and civic life flourish and where extremism is unacceptable.

While some elected officials exclude Muslims from dialogue and stereotype an entire religion based on the mis-guided actions of a few, Mr. McDonough's speech at the ADAMS Center underscores the importance for all Americans, regardless of their faith, to be able to critique or disagree with both domestic and foreign policy:

"We must resolve not to label someone as an extremist simply because of their opposition to the policies of the U.S. government or their strong religious beliefs. Under our Constitution, we have the freedom to speak our minds. And we have the right to practice our faiths freely knowing that the government should neither promote nor hinder any one religion over the other."

McDonough also acknowledged the involvement of the ADAMS Center and Imam Mohamed Magid, its executive director and the President of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), with fostering strong relationships with interfaith leaders and law enforcement.

The Muslim American community is a diverse, contributing, vibrant part of the American community. It is our belief that a partnership of trust is the most crucial component in a relationship between our government and its citizens. The Deputy National Security Advisor's speech confirmed that this is the approach of our government as it seek to keep our country and communities safe and secure

A full transcript of Mr. McDonough's speech can be found here. You will also find the full transcript of ISNA President Imam Mohamed Magid's remarks by clicking here.

-End-
Contact:
Sarah Thompson
ISNA Communications Coordinator
sthompson@isna.net
317-839-1816

How should Muslims respond to the hearings?

2011-03-09T20:28:00.001-08:00

Rep. King's Hearings on the Radicalization of Muslims

How should Muslims respond to the hearings?

On March 10, 2011, Representative Peter King, R-N.Y., of the Department of Homeland Security Committee will hold hearings on the radicalization of Muslims in America. Not surprisingly, most Muslim organizations have accused Representative King of pursuing an anti Muslim agenda and of being a hypocrite since he was a strong supporter of the Irish Republican Army, which the United States labeled a terrorist organization. Representative King has fired back that the Muslim community has not done enough to assist law enforcement in fighting terrorism and that 85 percent of Muslim Mosques are controlled by radicals or the Muslim Brotherhood. Consequently, a controversy has erupted around the hearings and King's allegation that the Muslim community has a problem with extremism has received more media attention than any rational Muslim leader could possible want.

The Free Muslims Coalition does not know the intention of Representative King but we do know that the response of traditional Muslim organizations, in opposing the hearings, has done a disservice to the Muslim community.

It is a well known fact that American Muslims are perceived as extreme and radical by many Americans. Even if Representative King is insincere and has bad intentions, Muslim leaders should embrace the hearings and take the lead in understanding and eliminating the cause of radicalization, to the extent that it exists among Muslims in America. When Muslims take the lead in the fight against radicalism, extremism and terrorism then it will be difficult for their critics to cast the blame on all Muslims or Islam for the actions of a few deranged lunatics.

For this reason, the Free Muslims Coalition salutes Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, a devout Muslim and Chairman of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, for taking the lead in the fight against extremism. We can only hope that other Muslim leaders learn from Dr. Jasser's initiatives.

To respond to this article, please post your comment at: http://freemuslims.org/blog/?id=119

In defense of Peter King's Muslim hearings

2011-03-09T20:26:00.001-08:00

In defense of Peter King's Muslim hearings
By Asra Nomani
The Washington Post
http://onfaith.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/2011/03/in_defense_of_peter_kings_muslim_hearings.html

When I heard that Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) was going to hold hearings on the issue of radicalization inside our American Muslim community, I thought: It's about time.

As those hearings begin on Thursday, all of us need to grab a front row seat. This is a discussion we desperately need to have as a nation because for far too long we have lived in a culture of denial, fueled in part by Muslim community leadership that--like just about any community tends to do until prodded--denies our problems rather than admits them.

I arrived in this country in 1969 as a four year old from India and, after 42 years as an American-Muslim, I can say without a doubt: an ideology of extremism has crossed across our borders, and radicalization is a real threat inside our communities in the U.S., often times unchallenged because members of our Muslim community are intimidated to speak out against it. We have brave leaders and activists who do, but usually at great cost to their social standing in the community.

To me, the hearings are not a "witch hunt." Rep. Peter King is not a 21st century Joe McCarthy, the senator who led hearings on communism in the 1950s. I believe he is an American, like so many, frustrated and annoyed by the largely recalcitrant posture of our community to admitting our problems. In Congress, we have had honest debate about everyone's dirty laundry--from BP to the Big Three automakers. There has been discussion in the halls of Congress about "Jewish extremists," "white supremacists," the Ku Klux Klan and clergy sexual abuse in the Catholic Church. Muslims should not be exempt from critical examination, just because its lobby takes a defensive posture--just like all special-interest groups tend to do.

If we have any doubts, as Muslims, about our divine injunction to truth-telling, even about our own community, we need look no further than the Qur'an, which states:

Oh ye who believe!
Stand out firmly
For justice, as witnesses
To God, even if it may be against
Yourselves, or your parents
Or your kin

- "Al-Nisa" (The Women),

Qur'an, 4: 135

Instead of circling the wagons with a public relations campaign of victimization, Muslims should rise to the occasion and honestly discuss what we all know: there is a very real interpretation of Islam inside our communities that threatens to convert our youth and others to extremism. It is expressed through publishing houses, imams, YouTube videos, websites and arm-chair ideologues.

We need to have an open conversations about how extremist Islam gets into the heads of Muslims such as would-be Time Square bomber Faisal Shahzad, Fort Hood shooter Major Nidal Hassan and so many others. We need to own up to the fact that some within Islam have a problematic interpretation, and we need to have the moral courage to be honest about it. We will not shame ourselves. We will not shame Islam. There is no shame in honesty. In fact, I think we would engender more good will--and invite less anger and rage by folks frustrated by our stonewalling.

Like most Muslims, I've seen rigid, puritanical interpretations creep into the American Muslim community, starting in the 1970s with the exportation of the dogmatic Wahhabi ideology from Saudi Arabia, fueled by the oil money that gave the Saudis a largess from which to pump its ideas into the world. In my hometown community of Morgantown, W.V., I saw the Saudi ideology express itself with mandates that women and men sit strictly segregated from each other at our community potluck dinners, rather than the family style arrangements we'd been enjoying. I felt a crisis of faith and didn't think there wasn't a place for me as I came of age as a fierce, strong-willed girl.

For most of my life I quietly bypassed traditions instead of directly challenging them. I distanced myself from the Muslim community, just like many of us do when we see dangers in our community that seem easier to ignore than challenge. With 9/11, I had my wake up call; then, on Jan. 23, 2002, my friend, Wall Street Journal bureau chief Daniel Pearl, was kidnapped by Muslim militants in Pakistan and later beheaded by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the self-described 9/11 mastermind.

I recognized that the stakes were huge for how Muslims expressed themselves in the world. Muslims like me sat silently while militants wrenched the religion from us and declared they were the protectors of the faith. I went on the pilgrimage to Mecca, and, in Saudi Arabia, I saw first-hand the exit ramp that told "non-Muslims" that they couldn't enter Mecca. In Mecca, I realized how far we had departed from the Islamic principles of social justice, women's rights or tolerance that my parents had taught me.

My immersion into darkness and my experience in the light of the hajj transformed me. It made me recognize that we each have a role in standing up to the extremists in my religion who try to intimidate us into respecting and following them. Starting in 2003, at my mosque in Morgantown, my family and I challenged the interpretations of Islam that assigned women the back door and led our imam to tell us we couldn't be friends with the Jews and the Christians. When my family and I challenged the community to tackle our problems with radicalization, what happened? The men at the mosque voted to put me on trial to be banned from the mosque, they fired my father from the board and other families disinvited our family from potluck dinners. Today, as part of a Pray In movement, other women and I are thrown out of mosques in the Washington, D.C., area because we refuse to pray in the second-class areas reserved for women.

For far too long, our nation has had a politically correct stance when it comes to the question of militancy, extremism and radicalization inside Islam. In the name of interfaith dialogue, we have pulled our punches on the very serious and real issues of extremist interpretations of Islam, issuing feel-good statements such as, "Islam is a religion of peace." We try to be polite and not offend. So many well-intentioned people who are critics about issues inside their own faiths are joining the bandwagon, trying to defend Islam and Muslims, as if the faith and the community are monolithic, but our best defense, I believe, is honesty about the good, bad and ugly.

The purpose of religion is to inspire in us the best of human behavior. That includes truth-telling.
-------
Asra Q. Nomani is the author of Standing Alone: An American Woman's Struggle for the Soul of Islam. Her struggles in the hometown mosque in West Virginia are featured in the PBS documentary, "The Mosque in Morgantown." She teaches journalism at Georgetown University.

Fair to Muslims?

2011-03-09T20:25:00.000-08:00

Fair to Muslims?

By AKBAR AHMEDPublished: March 8, 2011

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/09/opinion/09ahmed.html

MANY American Muslims are fearful and angry about the Congressional hearings on Islamic radicalism that will start Thursday, with some arguing that they are a mere provocation meant to incite bigotry. But as a scholar, I view the hearings, to be led by Representative Peter T. King, the chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, as an opportunity to educate Americans about our community’s diversity and faith.

The topic is urgent, and the hearings overdue. It is undeniable that the phenomenon of homegrown terrorists appears to be increasing in frequency. A successful attack would set back relations between Muslims and non-Muslims for many years. The backlash would effectively sweep away the slow but steady progress in interfaith dialogue that has been achieved since 9/11.

Muslim leaders must acknowledge that many Americans are fearful of religiously motivated terrorism. Simply to protest the hearings and call for them to be canceled, as some have done, strikes many non-Muslims as uncooperative, or as intended to conceal dark secrets or un-American behavior.

Instead, Muslims should embrace the chance to explain their beliefs fully and clearly. We have nothing to hide. But members of Congress also need to act responsibly. They should avoid broad accusations, and be aware that the hearings will be closely followed worldwide. The actions of both groups will shape America’s relationship with Islam, and the relationship of American Muslims with their country.

To better understand the Muslim community and its attitudes toward American identity, I spent much of 2008 and 2009 traveling the United States. My research assistants and I visited 75 communities, from Dearborn, Mich., to Arab, Ala., and 100 mosques around the country. We conducted hundreds of interviews, and compiled some 2,000 responses to a long questionnaire.

We discovered that well before the debate last year over a proposed Islamic center in Lower Manhattan, American Muslims felt under siege. We heard heartbreaking stories: schoolchildren assaulted as “terrorists,” women wearing the hijab attacked, and mosques vandalized and firebombed.

Adding to their sense of being unfairly singled out were commentators in the news media talking as if it were open season on Muslims. Bill O’Reilly compared the Koran to Hitler’s “Mein Kampf,” and Tom Tancredo, a Republican who was then a congressman from Colorado, said the United States could respond to a future terrorist attack by bombing Mecca.

But I also saw much to encourage me during my travels. Muslims told me in the privacy of their homes that this country was “the best place in the world to be Muslim.” A Nigerian in Houston said he placed Thomas Jefferson “at the top of my heart.” The bearded leader of a major Muslim organization called Jefferson, a defender of religious freedom, a role model.

In Paterson, N.J., an elderly woman from Cairo who got an education in America after her Egyptian husband deserted her told us, “America saved my life.” In the only mosque in the small city of Gadsden, Ala., we met a Muslim man who had lived in the area for decades and married a Christian woman. In a distinctively Southern accent, he summed up his identity as “Muslim by birth, Southern by the grace of God.”

The Muslim community in America is not a monolith. Very broadly, it comprises three groups: African-Americans (many of them converts), immigrants (largely from the Middle East and South Asia) and white converts. And Muslims from every part of the world study and work in the United States.

Yet the diversity of the Muslim community is frequently obscured by ignorance and mistrust. We were often asked by non-Muslims whether Muslims could be “good” Americans. The frequency with which this question was asked indicated the doubts that many harbored. Too many Americans acknowledged that they knew virtually nothing about Islam and said they had never met a Muslim.

Representative King, the New York Republican who has called the hearings, has raised the issue of Muslim cooperation with law enforcement agencies. On our journey, especially in mosques, we confronted an underlying unease and suspicion toward these agencies. Frequently, even while we were being welcomed and honored, people would ask us with a nervous laugh whether we were working for the F.B.I. The community complained that crude attempts by the agencies to “study” them were both insulting and ineffective. They believed that thinly disguised informants who claimed to be converting to Islam were acting as provocateurs.

In a Texas mosque dominated by the Salafi school of thought — widely equated with religious fundamentalism — the congregants condemned terrorism. They complained that the agencies had used clumsy infiltrators instead of simply talking to congregants. “Homeland Security and F.B.I. put us under surveillance, asking people, ‘Where are the terrorists?’” one interviewee, a Salafi who professed nonviolence, told us. “We know exactly where they are!”

Readers' Comments

Share your thoughts.

· Post a Comment »

· Read All Comments (9) »

At times, we did see evidence of the kind of extremist beliefs the hearing is intended to scrutinize. In one of the first mosques we visited in the Midwest, after I gave a talk advocating interfaith dialogue, I was accosted by members of the congregation who vehemently disagreed and dismissed my fieldwork because I had “white kids” with me. Later we learned that these men had threatened and assaulted other congregants who did not agree with them.

In our review of cases involving radicalized American Muslims, we learned that many homegrown terrorists said their actions were grounded in American foreign policy, particularly when it resulted in the deaths of women and children, rather than in their interpretations of Koranic precepts. In public statements, they expressed anger about American military and intelligence intervention in Iraq, Afghanistan and other Muslim countries. For example, Faisal Shahzad, the Pakistani immigrant who confessed to the attempted car bombing in Times Square last May, was motivated by a desire to avenge drone strikes in his native province.

If a civil, respectful level of discussion and debate is not maintained in these hearings, and if a demonization of Muslims results, the news coverage in the Muslim world could feed into the high levels of anti-Americanism in countries like Afghanistan and Pakistan. This would play against the interests of American diplomats and troops in Muslim nations who have advocated the winning of Muslim hearts and minds.

To better inform the public debate, Representative King should invite religious and social leaders who have credibility in their communities. Equally important, he should include scholars who could present empirical findings and analysis with neutrality and integrity. Unfortunately, some of the names who have been associated with the hearings so far have neither research nor credibility to support them.

At the same time, Muslims must realize that to be truly accepted as “good” Americans, they need to more explicitly embrace American identity, culture and history — from political debates like Representative King’s hearing to the ideals of this country’s founders.

America

, in turn, must realize its best aspirations by better understanding Islam. No appreciation of the founders is complete without an acknowledgment of their truly pluralist vision.

Akbar Ahmed, professor of Islamic studies at American University, is the author of “Journey Into America: The Challenge of Islam.”

Peter King Hearings

2011-03-09T19:41:00.000-08:00

Test Message
You are welcome to leave your message here.

Mike Ghouse

Peter King Hearings

Muslim Speaker Mike Ghouse

In defense of Islam, pursuing a civil dialogue

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/columnists/steve-blow/20100919-In-defense-of-Islam-pursuing-9397.ece Over and over you hear it said: If Muslims oppose terrorism, why don't they stand up and say it?

Hearing focused on faith versus extremism

What to make of Rep. Peter King's hearings

Major Muslim Groups Condemn 'Religious McCarthyism,'

Hearings on Radical Islam Falls Short on Substance

Legitimizing Islamic Radicalization

Mr. King’s Sound and Fury - Editorial NY Times

Hearing is good, I trust our system

Muslims and McCarthyism, A witch-hunt

A witch-hunt on one side, denial on the other, as the threat of home-grown terrorism rises

The King hearings: Is CAIR a 'terrorist organization'?

The King hearings: Is CAIR a 'terrorist organization'?

Two Pinnochios for Peter King

Peter King hearing shows 'sharply polarized' attitudes toward Islam

Related Stories

Americans 'sharply polarized'

Tea partyers associate Islam with violence

Peter King was an IRA supporter

Dr Zuhdi Jasser, innoculating Liberty

Muslim hearings in US Congress dismissed as 'equivalent of reality TV'

Muslim hearings in US Congress dismissed as 'equivalent of reality TV'

Most Americans are OK with Muslim hearings

Hearings on Muslims: Unfair and Dangerous

Take Action

More on FCNL’s Response

King will hammer the first nail on right wing coffin

A Political Spectacle that Perpetuates Prejudice

Press Release from ISNA

The King of Irony

Extremists on Extremism: Peter King and the Sharia Scam

Peter King, Islamic Terror and Islamophobia

Former Counterterrorism Chief Says Muslims Cooperate

51 Organizations Tell Congress that Hearings are divise

51 Organizations Tell Congress that Hearings Targeting American Muslims Are Divisive

Coalition urges halt to House hearings on Muslim radicalization

Twice As Many Plots Since 9/11 From Non-Muslim Terrorists

Twice As Many Plots Since 9/11 From Non-Muslim Terrorists

Terrorism by Muslim-Americans dropped

Islamophobia Can Create Radicalization

Enver Masud Writes

Mike Ghouse notes, Muslims and Peter King Strategy

Muslims welcome hearings by Congressman Peter R. King

King: Hearings on Muslims in America will be fair

CAIR Asks Americans to Reject Rep. King's 'Fear-Mongering'

Senator Reid , we must be in it together

Why Our Community Needs the King Hearings On Radical Islam

Muslims are part of American Family

How should Muslims respond to the hearings?

Rep. King's Hearings on the Radicalization of Muslims

How should Muslims respond to the hearings?

In defense of Peter King's Muslim hearings

Fair to Muslims?

Fair to Muslims?

By AKBAR AHMEDPublished: March 8, 2011

Peter King Hearings

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/columnists/steve-blow/20100919-In-defense-of-Islam-pursuing-9397.ece
Over and over you hear it said: If Muslims oppose terrorism, why don't they stand up and say it?