Muslim group denounces Santorum for promoting religious profiling - TheHill.com

Muslim group denounces Santorum for promoting religious profiling - TheHill.com

1957: Eisenhower at Dedication of Islamic Center

President Eisenhower at the dedication of an Islamic Center in Washington, DC

June 28, 1957

Eisenhower before he became president.

Mr. Ambassador, Dr. Bisar, Governors of the Islamic Center, and distinguished guests: It is a privilege to take part in this ceremony of dedication.

Meeting with you now, in front of one of the newest and most beautiful buildings in Washington, it is fitting that we re-dedicate ourselves to the peaceful progress of all men under one God.

And I should like to assure you, my Islamic friends, that under the American Constitution, under American tradition, and in American hearts, this Center, this place of worship, is just as welcome as could be a similar edifice of any other religion. Indeed, America would fight with her whole strength for your right to have here your own church and worship according to your own conscience.

This concept is indeed a part of America, and without that concept we would be something else than what we are.

The countries, which have sponsored and built this Islamic Center, have for centuries contributed to the building of civilization. With their traditions of learning and rich culture, the countries of Islam have added much to the advancement of mankind. Inspired by a sense of brotherhood, common to our inner most beliefs, we can here together reaffirm our determination to secure the foundation of a just and lasting peace.

Our country has long enjoyed a strong bond of friendship with the Islamic nations and, like all healthy relationships; this relationship must be mutually beneficial.

Civilization owes to the Islamic world some of its most important tools and achievements. From fundamental discoveries in medicine to the highest planes of astronomy, the Muslim genius has added much to the culture of all peoples. That genius has been a wellspring of science, commerce and the arts, and has provided for all of us many lessons in courage and in hospitality.

This fruitful relationship between peoples, going far back into history, becomes more important each year. Today, thousands of Americans, both private individuals and governmental officials, live and work-and grow in understanding-among the peoples of Islam.

At the same time, in our country, many from the Muslim lands-students, businessmen and representatives of states-are enjoying the benefits of experience among the people of this country. From these many personal contacts, here and abroad, I firmly believe that there will be a broader understanding and a deeper respect for the worth of all men; and a stronger resolution to work together for the good of mankind.

As I stand beneath these graceful arches, surrounded on every side by friends from far and near, I am convinced that our common goals are both right and promising. Faithful to the demands of justice and of brotherhood, each working according to the lights of his own conscience, our world must advance along the paths of peace.

Guided by this hope, I consider it a great personal and official honor to open the Islamic Center, and I offer my congratulations to its sponsors and my best wishes to all who enter into its use.

Thank you very much.

Newsweek/Daily Beast: Mitt’s Muslim Problem

Newsweek/Daily Beast: Mitt’s Muslim Problem
by McKay Coppins

(Saylor note: You can read my defense of Romney after an attack on his faith here.)

After a prominent Baptist minister proclaimed last week that Mormonism is a non-Christian “cult” that would ideally disqualify adherents from the White House, Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney enjoyed a full-throated defense from people all over the political spectrum who considered the pastor’s remarks an ugly example of religious bigotry. But Romney, a practicing Mormon, may soon find himself facing allegations of intolerance from another religious minority: American Muslims.

The Daily Beast has learned that the nation’s leading Muslim advocacy group sent a letter to the Romney campaign late Tuesday calling for the ouster of the candidate’s recently appointed foreign-policy adviser, Walid Phares. In the letter, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) refers to Phares as “an associate to war crimes” and a “conspiracy theorist,” citing ties to a violent anti-Muslim militia. Scholars and leaders throughout the Islamic community are adding pressure on Romney to drop the adviser immediately. (The Romney campaign and Phares did not immediately respond to requests for comment.)

The controversy comes at an awkward time for the campaign. Hours before CAIR’s letter was sent, Romney called on primary rival Perry to “repudiate” the anti-Mormon remarks made by the Rev. Robert Jeffress, who has endorsed the Texas governor, and touted the importance of tolerant discourse. “I just don’t believe that kind of divisiveness based on religion has a place in this country,” Romney said at a New Hampshire press conference.

Yet Phares is a divisive figure in the minds of some leading U.S. Muslims. To admirers, Phares is a well-regarded scholar who has testified before the Defense and State departments, and has worked as a terrorism expert for professional news outlets such as NBC and, most recently, Fox News.

But to critics, Phares has long been a lightning rod for charges of Islamophobia and outright aggression toward Muslims. According to CAIR, Phares, who was born in Lebanon, worked as an official in the Lebanese Forces, a Christian militia that reportedly took part in “the 1982 massacre of civilian men, women, and children at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps.” In 1984, another Lebanese militia with which Phares was allegedly associated rounded up a group of men for questioning and then slaughtered them with guns and grenades, according to a news report. (There is no indication that Phares was directly involved in the violence; his roles in the organizations are reported to have been administrative.)

When he emigrated to the United States in the 1990s, Phares positioned himself as an expert on Islam and Middle East relations, allying himself with conservative think tanks and appearing frequently on television. Throughout his career as a pundit, he has warned that some Muslims are plotting a secret takeover of American institutions with the end goal of imposing Sharia.

This history of inflammatory rhetoric has drawn scorn from many corners of the American Muslim community, and CAIR’s concerns were echoed by a chorus of Islamic scholars reached by The Daily Beast.

“[Phares] is hostile to Muslims and Romney has adopted an expert who is going to alienate him from a good section of the voting public,” said Ebrahim Moosa, a Duke professor of Islamic studies.
“Frankly, it is a pathetic reflection on Governor Romney to have surrounded himself with such a person for advice on the Middle East and Islam,” said Omid Safi, a professor of Islamic studies at the University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill. “It would be akin to turning to [former KKK member] David Duke to get advice on race relations.”

Correy Saylor, legislative director for CAIR, is willing to give Romney the benefit of the doubt and assume he was largely unaware of Phares’s past. Saylor credits Romney with showing an increased sensitivity to Islam over the years.

During his 2008 presidential candidacy, Romney reportedly told supporters in a private meeting that he would not appoint a Muslim to his cabinet. But he later walked back that comment, and in this election cycle he has occasionally found himself defending Islam against his opponents’ intolerance. Saylor cited an early primary debate during which Herman Cain hypothesized that appointing a Muslim to his cabinet could open the door to the implementation of Sharia in the U.S. Romney dismissed the paranoid theory, insisting that “people of all faiths are welcome in this country.”

“He’s getting better,” Saylor concluded. “But this appointment is a step in the wrong direction.”

Fiqh Council of North America: On Being Faithful Muslims and Loyal Americans

Resolution of the Fiqh Council of North America
Adopted in its General Body Meeting held in Virginia on September 24-25, 2011

On Being Faithful Muslims and Loyal Americans

Like other faith communities in the US and elsewhere, we see no inherent conflict between the normative values of Islam and the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Contrary to erroneous perceptions and Islamophobic propaganda of political extremists from various backgrounds, the true and authentic teachings of Islam promote the sanctity of human life, dignity of all humans, and respect of human, civil and political rights. Islamic teachings uphold religious freedom and adherence to the same universal moral values which are accepted by the majority of people of all backgrounds and upon which the US Constitution was established and according to which the Bill of Rights was enunciated.

The Qur’an speaks explicitly about the imperative of just and peaceful co-existence, and the rights of legitimate self-defense against aggression and oppression that pose threats to freedom and security, provided that, a strict code of behavior is adhered to, including the protection of innocent non-combatants.

The foregoing values and teachings can be amply documented from the two primary sources of Islamic jurisprudence – the Qur’an and authentic Hadith. These values are rooted, not in political correctness or pretense, but on the universally accepted supreme objectives of Islamic Shari’ah, which is to protect religious liberty, life, reason, family and property of all. The Shari’ah, contrary to misrepresentations, is a comprehensive and broad guidance for all aspects of a Muslim’s life – spiritual, moral, social and legal. Secular legal systems in Western democracies generally share the same supreme objectives, and are generally compatible with, Islamic Shari’ah.

Likewise, the core modern democratic systems are compatible with the Islamic principles of Shura – mutual consultation and co-determination of all social affairs at all levels and in all spheres, family, community, society, state and globally.

As a body of Islamic scholars, we the members of FCNA believe that it is false and misleading to suggest there is a contradiction between being faithful Muslims committed to God (Allah) and being loyal American citizens. Islamic teachings require respect of the laws of the land where Muslims live as minorities, including the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, so long as there is no conflict with Muslims’ obligation for obedience to God. We do not see any such conflict with the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. The primacy of obedience to God is a commonly held position of many practicing Jews and Christians as well.

We believe further that as citizens of a free and democratic society, we have the same obligations and rights of all US citizens. We believe that right of dissent can only be exercised in a peaceful and lawful manner to advance the short and long term interests of our country.

The Fiqh Council of North America calls on all Muslim Americans and American citizens at large to engage in objective, peaceful and respectful dialogue at all levels and spheres of common social concerns. We call upon all Muslim Americans to be involved in solving pressing social problems, such as the challenge of poverty, discrimination, violence, health care and environmental protection. It is fully compatible with Islam for Muslims to integrate positively in the society of which they are equal citizens, without losing their identity as Muslims (just as Jews and Christians do not lose their religious identity in doing the same).

We believe that emphasis on dialogue and positive collaborative action is a far better approach than following the paths of those who thrive on hate mongering and fear propaganda. Anti-Islam, anti-Semitism and other similar forms of religious and/or political-based discrimination are all forms of racism unfit for civilized people and are betrayal of the true American as well as Islamic values.

May the pursuit of peace, justice, love, compassion, human equality and fellowship prevail in the pluralistic mosaic that is the hallmark of our nation.

Corey Saylor at Forum on Myth of 'Creeping Sharia'

On Christian Asia Bibi

CNS News interviewed me about Asia Bibi. See the video here.

Thomas Jefferson’s Iftar

From the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State:

In 1805, Thomas Jefferson hosted what some consider the first iftar at the White House.

“Ramadan,” said President Obama at a White House iftar dinner in 2010, “is a reminder that Islam has always been a part of America. The first Muslim ambassador to the United States, from Tunisia, was hosted by President Jefferson, who arranged a sunset dinner for his guest because it was Ramadan — making it the first known iftar at the White House, more than 200 years ago.”

The dinner to which the president referred took place on December 9, 1805, and Jefferson’s guest was Sidi Soliman Mellimelli, an envoy from the bey (chieftain) of Tunis who spent six months in Washington. The context of Mellimelli’s visit to the United States was a tense dispute over piracy on American merchant vessels by the Barbary states and the capture of Tunisian vessels trying to run an American blockade of Tripoli.

Mellimelli arrived during Ramadan, and Jefferson, when he invited the envoy to the president’s house, changed the meal time from the usual hour of 3:30 p.m. to “precisely at sunset” in deference to the man’s religious obligation.

Jefferson’s knowledge of Islam likely came from his legal studies of natural law. In 1765, Jefferson purchased a two-volume English translation of the Quran for his personal library, a collection that became, in 1815, the basis of the modern Library of Congress.

(This is a product of the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/iipdigital-en/index.html)

Read more: http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/inbrief/2011/07/20110729153019kram0.3508199.html#ixzz1U5GI39PI

Catholic News Service: Interfaith relations seen as both better, worse, since terror attacks

From Catholic News Service:

Corey Saylor, a Muslim layman who is spokesman for the Council on American Islamic Relations, concurred.

"Most people were introduced to the Islamic faith on Sept. 11 when planes began to fly into buildings," he said. "Media coverage has highlighted a warped version of Islam," he added. "The good guys doing the work aren't getting the coverage."

The American Muslim community, according to Saylor, is "totally indebted to people in the Christian, Jewish and other interfaith dialogues for people who have been very vocal in standing up for American principles. I don't know how long it will take us to repay that debt."

Islam, U.S. Courts and state sponsored discrimination

(During the Islamic Society of North America's recent convention I was part of a panel discussing various legislative attempts to pass laws that would single out the Islamic faith for treatment different than other faiths in our country. An attendee sent the below questions were to me afterward. Muneer Awad of CAIR-Oklahoma contribute to both answers.)

Question # 1: How can the Islamic sharia be effective in any American court. (For example: is there any judge who gives a decision basing on the Islamic sharia.)

Answer #1: The U.S. Constitution is the law of the land. Individuals may enter into agreements based on their faith. Such practices are reasonably common. However, any such agreement must comply with U.S. law. So if I choose to finance my house with a sharia-compliant company, the resulting contract must be within the boundaries of standing law.

Here are some examples of how Islamic principles can come into play in a US court:

Agreements and Contracts
Judges may be asked to enforce the terms of an agreement, or the terms of an arbitration decision, that was based on Islam/Sharia. Consider the numerous documents Muslims agree to that are based on our faith:

• Enforce the terms of a will
• Enforce the terms of a divorce or marriage contract
• Enforce the terms of Islamic financing agreement
• Enforce terms of an arbitration agreement that compels mosque employees to take grievances with regards to mosque governance to a local Islamic shura council before taking legal action.

The Constitution does not necessarily cover such issues, but like all agreements, can never violate the constitution.

Victims of Discrimination  

In a discrimination case, a Muslim must introduce evidence of his or her religiously held beliefs. If Islamic principles are banned in certain courts, then

• How can I introduce evidence to a judge about the nature of hijab?
• How can I introduce evidence to allow a judge to balance between my beard and my work?
• How can I introduce evidence to allow a judge to consider my need for halal food in the cafeteria?

Question #2: How will these new bills affect the Muslims?

 Answer #2: Depends on the form the final law takes, each state is considering their own version. Essentially, though, such laws could result in state-enforced discrimination against Muslims.

Let me examine two:

Oklahoma’s amendment to its state constitution would ban courts from considering sharia or international law. This means if your marriage contract contains a Mahr, the court could not act on it during a legal dispute such as divorce. If your will is based on Islamic principles such as instructions for being buried facing Mecca, the court could not consider it. Similarly, since a sharia-compliant loan is based on Islamic principles, a judge would be compelled to rule it inadmissible in court proceedings.

The Tennessee bill said, “’Sharia’ means the set of rules, precepts, instructions, or edicts whichare said to emanate directly or indirectly from the god of Allah or the prophet Mohammed…” and “Any rule, precept, instruction, or edict arising directly from the extant rulings of any of the authoritative schools of Islamic jurisprudence of Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanbali, Ja’afariya, or Salafi, as those terms are used by sharia adherents, is prima facie sharia without any further evidentiary showing…”

It then said two or more people practicing sharia would be in violation of the law. Since the above definition encompasses all of Islam the bill would have made it illegal to practice Islam in the state of Tennessee. Fortunately, the bill did not pass.

See here for some more information.

CAIR’s executive director in Oklahoma, who filed the lawsuit that has so far successfully challenged the anti-Muslim amendment to that state’s constitution, adds this to my answer to the second question:

I would include the fact that Islam, and Islam alone is the target. If we acknowledge, as many legal experts have already, that these amendments are unnecessary then we must acknowledge that the only goal is to target American Muslims. These amendments will permanently label Muslims as a threat to the state.

If we listen to any of the rallies behind these amendments, or the words of supporters and authors of these amendments, then we understand that these amendments are rooted in Anti-Muslim bigotry, and will serve the purpose of supporting Anti-Muslim bigotry. 

Bar Faith Minorities from Running for President?

(Over at CNN, producer Jay Kernis published an interview with Tricia Erickson who asserts, "an indoctrinated Mormon should never be elected as President of the United States of America." Erickson also implies that Muslims should also be barred from running. Kernis kindly added my thoughts to the discussion. My response to Erickson's position is below.)

Tricia Erickson’s arguments sound remarkably like anti-Catholic attacks directed at John Kennedy during the 1960 presidential campaign. Many remember him as among the better president’s to ever serve our nation. Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, also known as the law of the land, says, “…no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any office or public Trust under the United States.”

Romney and other candidates for public office should win or lose based on the solutions they offer to the issues confronting all Americans.

Thank God followers of minority faiths, such as Muslims like me, have the wisdom of the Founding Fathers enshrined in the Constitution to protect us from people like Tricia Erickson, who seem to think a person’s choice of a faith other than hers should relegate them to second-class citizen status.

CNN: "Corey Saylor: Concern that Islamophobia is trending toward the mainstream in the U.S."

Corey Saylor: Concern that Islamophobia is trending toward the mainstream in the U.S.

ONLY ON THE BLOG: Answering today’s five OFF-SET questions is Corey Saylor, National Legislative Director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

On Thursday, June 23, 2011 CAIR and the University of California Berkeley’s Center for Race and Gender is releasing the first-of-its-kind annual report on the growth of Islamophobia in the United States during 2009 – 2010. The report is titled, “Same Hate, New Target.” How do CAIR and the Berkeley Center for Race and Gender define “Islamophobia?”

Islamophobia is close-minded prejudice against or hatred of Islam and Muslims.

It is not appropriate to label all, or even the majority of those, who question Islam and Muslims as Islamophobes. Most are simply misinformed about the Islamic faith.

When I talk about Islamophobes, I am speaking about people whose words or actions indicate that they rigidly view Islam as monolithic, static, authoritarian and primitive compared with the West. Such people view all Muslims as manipulative and devious. It is the kind of classic intolerant attitudes we have seen directed at any number of minorities in the past.

According to those interviewed for the report, on a scale from 1 (best situation for Muslims) to 10 (worst possible situation for Muslims), Islamophobia in America stands at 6.4. What is your interpretation of that standing? How Islamophobic is the United States?

I am concerned that Islamophobia is trending toward the mainstream, but to date our nation’s commitment to pluralistic values has kept that from happening. The revulsion expressed by most Americans in August and early September 2010 over a proposed Quran burning in Florida is evidence of that fact.

Polls consistently show that a sizable number of Americans hold prejudiced views toward Muslims. For instance, in late November 2010, the Public Research Institute found that 45 percent of Americans agree that Islam is at odds with American values.

A TIME magazine poll released in August 2010 found, “Twenty-eight percent of voters do not believe Muslims should be eligible to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court. Nearly one-third of the country thinks adherents of Islam should be barred from running for President….”

This spring, as numerous states sought to pass legislation that in many cases would have resulted in government sanctioned discrimination against Muslims we came close to mainstream acceptance of Islamophobia.

Fortunately, Muslims and other supporters of the Constitution’s protection of free religious exercise pushed back against these bills and excepting Oklahoma, nothing of significance passed.Oklahoma’s constitutional amendment, passed last fall that targets Muslims is on hold after a Federal judge ruled that it likely violates the Constitution.

The report spotlights individuals, groups and institutions for pushing back against Islamophobic trends. Among others, you name New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Rachel Maddow. What did these people do to deserve recognition?

Generally, they acted in line with the values we all learned in civics classes in school. They refused to smear an entire group based on the actions of a few aberrant individuals. They used their public platforms to remind people, often with humor, that Americans judge people on individual merit, not based on crass stereotypes.

You also name some people who promoted Islamophobia: Pamela Geller and Stop the Islamization of America; Robert Spencer and Jihad watch; Newt Gingrich and others? What did they do?

In the case of Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, who co-founded the organization Stop the Islamization of America, both the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors hate groups in America, have issued their own concerns about the discriminatory nature of their rhetoric and actions.

Generally, those who promoted Islamophobia poisoned our public discourse, appealing to fear and stereotypes. They promoted conspiracy theories such as the idea that Muslims are here to remove the Constitution or that our faith compels us to wage endless war against America. They are the new face of the old hate that targeted other minorities throughout our nation’s past.

Recently, a group of GOP presidential candidates met in New Hampshire in a debate carried by CNN. Did you hear what you consider Islamophobic remarks during the debate?

Herman Cain reiterated his position that he would treat Muslims differently than members of other faiths. Cain and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich echoed far-right hysteria about 'sharia' replacing the Constitution.

Since the U.S. Constitution is the law of the land, there is no question of any other body of law replacing it. People who choose to have disputes resolved using the traditions of their faith should have the right to do so as long as such agreements comply with American law.

CAIR was encouraged by former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney's response to other candidates' fear mongering about Sharia, or Islamic principles, replacing the Constitution. Romney seemed to dismiss that scenario, and reaffirmed that "people of all faiths are welcome in this country."

Given that the United States is approaching the tenth anniversary of 9/11 – and the connection in some minds between terrorism and Islam – what does the study recommend to tackle the growth of anti-Muslim prejudice?

For this report, we focused on making recommendations to American Muslims, as we recognize that the primary burden of pushing back against anti-Muslim attitudes falls on our shoulders.

The core recommendation is get out and interact with your neighbors, get involved in local improvement programs, get involved in local politics. Our research shows that when people get to know Muslims as individuals it breaks the stereotypes.

On Piers Morgan Tonight on Afghanistan Murders (Friday, 4/01/2011)

This is PIERS MORGAN TONIGHT.

(MUSIC)

MORGAN: Good evening.

A day of deadly violence across the Middle East today.

(VIDEO CLIP PLAYS)

MORGAN: Libya despite talk of a possible cease-fire, battles are still raging. Gadhafi's heavily armed forces outnumber rebels by about 10 to one. And there's still no sign of the fighting ending any time soon.

(VIDEO CLIP PLAYS)

MORGAN: And in Syria, at least seven people are dead and dozens injured after attacks by government troops on demonstrators. We'll have the latest from CNN's Nic Robertson and Mohammed Jamjoom.

Meanwhile, in Afghanistan, at least 12 people are dead after an attack on a U.N. building. The attacks sparked by protests against the burning of a Koran by a Florida pastor last month.

President Obama spoke out today condemning the violence.

And now, I want to bring in Corey Saylor, the director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

Corey Saylor, terrible scenes in Mazar-e-Sharif. Do you condemn them?

COREY SAYLOR, COUNCIL ON AMERICAN-ISLAMIC RELATIONS: Absolute tragedy, Piers. And we condemn it utterly.

MORGAN: To bring viewers up to speed with the Florida pastor Terry Jones. There was an initial incident with him in which he said he would burn the Koran and then didn't. But a few days ago, he then conducted a trial of the Koran. It was found guilty apparently, and he and his fellow church members in Florida burned one copy of the Koran. And it's that that sparked what happened today in Afghanistan.

Pretty serious repercussions for what many are saying was an act of pure bigoted idiocy.

SAYLOR: Well, Terry Jones deserves to be ignored 100 percent. And by no means does what he did allow anyone within the faith of Islam to go out and hurt other people. And that should be condemned utterly.

I mean, Muslims -- Muslims, the example is Prophet Mohammed. There's a famous story that every Muslim knows, Prophet Mohammed went to a city called Ta'if, he preached, he was chased out of the city by people throwing rocks at him. When he got out of the town, he was bleeding profusely. And angel came to him and essentially offered him to have the town destroyed. And he said, no.

That's the example right there. Part of the explanation that he gave, I'm paraphrasing here, is we don't know what these people's descendants are going to be like.

So, when he was abused, he met it with patience and tolerance. And I would advise my brothers and sisters around the world to remember that example. Patience and tolerance is how we meet bigots like Terry Jones.

MORGAN: Given that context, was it sensible of the various imams and mullahs who called for a day of anger and protests of the Koran burning -- was that sensible? Was it right? Would you condemn them for calling for those protests?

SAYLOR: I think unfortunately it's going to put more fuel on the fire that was already lit today. And we just simply don't need any more of that. What we need is what we saw immediately after when Terry Jones burned the Koran last week. He was met with absolute silence. Nobody paid any attention to him. And that is what he deserves.

He certainly does not deserve any more attention. And, certainly, no one is doing the religion of Islam a service by calling for a day of rage.

MORGAN: Where will this end, do you think, Corey?

SAYLOR: Well, unfortunately, think all too often extremists on both sides, the violent extremists that did the attack today, the extremists down in Florida, Terry Jones, control this conversation. And what has to happen is that those in the center who want a reasonable conversation have to continue to assert ourselves strongly. We don't accept what Terry Jones does. We don't accept anything like what happened in Afghanistan today.

And those of us that are leaders have to remind the people who follow us about the teachings of our own faiths. Jesus did not teach violence. Prophet Mohammed did not teach to respond to these things like violence. And that message has to be made clearly in unison with representatives of all face.

MORGAN: It would be helpful if Terry Jones realizes there are consequences to acts of a kind of idiocy that he's been perpetrating the last week.

Corey Saylor, thank you very much.

SAYLOR: Thank you.

Rep. Peter King Should Apologize to Muslim 9/11 Victim's Mother

By Corey Saylor

Rep. Peter King (R-NY) should personally apologize to Talat Hamdani, whose son Mohammed was killed as he responded to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack.

This week, in an interview opposing a hearing on protecting American Muslim civil rights, King told Fox News that the hearing advances, “the myth that somehow Muslims are the victim of September 11.”

Congressman, all Americans, Muslims included, were the victims of the 9/11 terror attack. As Al-Qaeda was murdering our fellow citizens, they also murdered at least 32 Muslims.

Mohammed Salman Hamdani, was a part-time ambulance driver and a police cadet. After witnessing the attack, he ran to assist victims. His remains were identified six months later; his medical bag was found next to his body.

Rep. King knows Hamdani’s story because Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) read it aloud during a recent hearing King held. If Rep. Ellison’s tears during the hearing were not enough to move King’s conscience, maybe a reminder the Hamdani was honored in Title 1, Section 102 of the USA Patriot Act, which King voted for, might be.

Al-Qaeda, not Islam, murdered Americans on 9/11. They did not care about their victim’s faith. Every American was a target.

Al-Qaeda has continued to slaughter Muslims since 9/11. After reviewing a 2009 report titled Deadly Vanguards: A Study of Al-Qaida’s Violence Against Muslims, Ralph Peters, wrote in New York Post, “Al-Qaeda does one thing extremely well: killing Muslims.”

President Obama echoed this conclusion at a White House Ramadan fastbreaking reception in 2010 when he noted, “In fact, al Qaeda has killed more Muslims than people of any other religion — and that list of victims includes innocent Muslims who were killed on 9/11.”

Mr. King, it is time to find your sense of shame and apologize, sir.

Muslim Civil Rights Group Opposed to Radical Extremism Hearings

Update: The interviewer felt that my concern over the threat of white supremacists was not relevant to today's environment. They just arrested a white supremacist for attempting to blow up a parade on Martin Luther King Day. All violent extremism need to be examined and focused on.

Saylor: Rep. Peter King can do some real damage with congressional Muslim hearings

Saylor: Rep. Peter King can do some real damage with congressional Muslim hearings


As published in The Statesman
Saturday, March 5, 2011

Rep. Peter King's fumblings around his planned hearings on Muslim "radicalization" may one day raise amused eyebrows. However, since he is positioned to do some real damage, his inept handling of the hearings raises nothing but alarm.

As chairman of the U.S. House Homeland Security Committee, King announced his hearings by reciting his allegation that "over 80 percent of mosques in this country are controlled by radical imams." In January, he said he will "stand-by" that number.

When asked, King points to no authoritative source for his 80 percent allegation.

Instead he cites a speech given at the U.S. Department of State in the late 1990s by Hisham Kabbani, a figure who is unknown to most U.S. Muslims.

One man's opinion. Kabbani to this day does not respond to inquiries about his source for this allegation.

A person in King's position should seek higher quality evidence than one person's unsubstantiated allegation. Such lax "one person's opinion" standards led to bad things during the Salem witch trials and the McCarthy hearings.

(King, by the way, also believes "there are too many mosques in America.")

Next, Politico reported that according to King, Ayaan Hirsi Ali was a potential witness at the hearing.

During the course of a single 2007 interview with Reason Magazine Ali said, "I think that we are at war with Islam" and called for Islam to be "defeated." Later in the interview, Ali suggested that the U.S. Constitution should be amended to allow for discrimination against Muslims.

Once such facts became public, Ali was dropped.

Most recently, a National Review article -- posted on the House Homeland Security Committee's website so presumably King felt it was accurate -- announced that Walid Phares was a planned witness for the hearings.

Phares is a former official with a Christian militia implicated, by Israel's official Kahan inquiry and other sources, in the 1982 massacre of civilian men, women and children at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Lebanon.

In the late 1990s, leading members of Phares' World Lebanese Organization included the deputy commander of a group known for systematically torturing prisoners. Another leading member headed a militia known for atrocities during the Lebanese civil war.

Once such facts became public, Phares was dropped as well. Even after learning of Phares' past associations, King issued a statement saying he will rely on Phares "for his advice and counsel as these hearings go forward."

King could have saved himself, his committee and his party a lot of embarrassment by doing a basic internet search on either of these extreme individuals. Even more embarrassment could have been saved by checking the factual basis of any allegations before casually tossing them out in public.

The threat of violent extremism, from whatever source, to our nation is a profoundly serious issue.

However, King's baseless allegations and extremist witnesses raise reasonable questions about the credibility of the hearings as a force to oppose the threat.

It is time for House Speaker Boehner and other Republicans to rein King in. King's fumbling is not only embarrassing, but distracts from a serious issue.

Corey Saylor is national legislative director at the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). Contact him at csaylor@cair.com.

Interview with Fox's Bill Hemmer on King Hearings

Here is the video.

BILL HEMMER, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Congressman Peter King now, new chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee responding to critics of his plans for hearings from the -- on the threat from Islamic terrorism in America.

He's a New York Republican. He said this last hour here in AMERICA'S NEWSROOM with Martha. Roll this:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. PETER KING, R-N.Y., HOMELAND SECURITY COMMITTEE: My goal, first of all, is to make it known and make the public aware and to begin a public debate on the fact that al Qaeda is actively recruiting within the Muslim community.

This isn't just me saying this. There's Attorney General Eric Holder, a very liberal attorney general, by the way, said just about five weeks ago that he can't sleep at night because of the number of young Muslim men who have been radicalized to take up arms against their country. These are American citizens. People living here, legally in this country, are taking up arms against their country.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

HEMMER: All right. So Peter King is not backing down.

Corey Saylor is with CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
And sir, good morning to you.

SAYLOR: Good morning, Bill.

HEMMER: Peter King, you heard it. He said his goal is to make the public aware that al Qaeda is working to recruit Americans. What's wrong with that? Trying to figure that out.

COREY SAYLOR, COUNCIL ON AMERICAN-ISLAMIC RELATIONS: Well, he's actually changing his talking points. How he started off -- and you can go back and check his interview with Bill O'Reilly -- is saying that 85 percent of American Muslim leadership in this country is an enemy living amongst us. And even yesterday he acknowledged to FOX News that that number comes from one individual who'd never provided any documentation to back it up.

And that's where my real concern comes. I have facts -- Rand Corporation, Congressional Research Service, Duke University -- that offer contradictory evidence to what Congressman King is saying.

HEMMER: And part of the reason you hold these hearings --

SAYLOR: And yet he wants to keep throwing out --

(CROSSTALK)

HEMMER: Part of the reason you hold these hearings is to figure out what the facts are. Are you denying that al Qaeda is not recruiting Americans?

SAYLOR: Well, I think any attempt by anyone to recruit Americans, even one individual, is something to be concerned about. But, again, if these hearings were going to be sober and objective I wouldn't have a concern.

HEMMER: Well, they haven't happened yet.

SAYLOR: Hang on, Bill. Hang on, Bill.

(CROSSTALK)

HEMMER: They might be. Go to his point about Muslim --

SAYLOR: They might not be, Bill. And that's the point.

HEMMER: Yes. Are -- King is worried about Muslim leaders not speaking out about the issue. Are Muslim leaders and mosques across America holding back?

SAYLOR: Once again, King has said there are too many mosques in America. He recently implied that -- that Muslims may not be Americans on a radio show. I can show you in these reports that I'm holding up, instances in which Muslim leadership have cooperated with law enforcement, have reported people of concern, and yet Congressman King does not want to acknowledge that.

HEMMER: I understand that. But again that's why you hold --

SAYLOR: He continues to advance allegations that have no substance.

HEMMER: That's why you hold a hearing and he told Martha last hour that he would allow law enforcement to testify during these hearings, do we'll take him at his word. But back to my two questions. Is al Qaeda recruiting in America, yes or no?

SAYLOR: Absolutely. We know that. But what you have to do is make sure we have a sober and objective understanding of that. Not Congressman King's lashing out --

HEMMER: OK. It's a yes. Now do you believe --

SAYLOR: People with pitch forks, 85 percent, which he cannot substantiate, and American Muslims may not be Americans. In his view. Eighty-five percent of the leadership is not cooperating. That's just absolutely unsubstantiated.

HEMMER: So, Mr. Saylor, yes -- but you just said, you know, al Qaeda is recruiting in America and we have examples. A kid drives from Denver, Colorado, into New York, to bomb the city. And you could go on many from there. On Muslim leaders --

SAYLOR: And we have --

(CROSSTALK)

HEMMER: Are Muslim leaders in America --

SAYLOR: Sure.

HEMMER: -- saying enough to help their fellow Americans to stop this before one of these guys is successful?

SAYLOR: Well, let me just give you a couple -- personal examples, Bill. In 2006 I went to Baghdad to appeal for the release of a journalist who had been kidnapped. More recently some families came to us from Virginia, told us about their concerns, about some of their family members, and we connected them with the FBI.

But also, keep in mind, in 2008 our Los Angeles office reported somebody of concern to the FBI. A year later that person turned out to be an FBI informant.

HEMMER: Wow.

SAYLOR: So I'm convinced that our community is doing the right thing.

HEMMER: OK. And that -- I think that's good.

SAYLOR: I'm not convinced of -- hang on. What I'm not convinced of is the fact that Peter King is going to hold sober and objective hearings based on statements like there are too many mosques in America.

HEMMER: OK. I got it. Corey Saylor, thank you for coming in today. That's why they hold hearings. We will watch it very closely and while it happens or after we'll bring you back on and get you to respond again. OK. Appreciate you coming on.

SAYLOR: Thanks so much, Bill and Martha.

HEMMER: Thank you, out of Washington.

February 9, 2011

Islamophobia and Beyond, 1/15/2011

Part one of a multi-part video. Many thanks to civil rights lawyer and executive director of the Bill of Rights Defense Committee Shahid Buttar, essayist and playwrite Wajahat Ali, Foreign Policy in Focus contributor Fouad Pervez, and vice president and editor of ThinkProgress at the Center for American Progress Faiz Shakir.

Constitutionally-Informed Cooperation with Law Enforcement (also known as trust, but verify)

Video: CAIR Rep Discusses King's Plan to Target Muslims (O'Reilly Factor)