Here is a new piece by DC Watson, on "Islamophobia":
Merriam-Webster: “pho-bia”: an exaggerated, usually inexplicable and illogical fear.
In January 2005, Muslim groups reportedly met with U.S. State Department officials to discuss issues related to American foreign policy.
They presented State Department officials with a proposal for cooperative efforts to challenge both “Islamophobia” and anti-Americanism.
The proposal stated that "by challenging anti-Muslim bigotry, we can help reduce anti-American attitudes in the Islamic world."
Certainly the Muslim world takes issue with the United States over many aspects of our foreign policy, particularly the Israeli-Palestinian situation. But what will changing our policies on these issues accomplish, either internationally or domestically? Have we somehow missed another low budget bin Laden video, telling Americans to be kind to Muslims, and in return, he’ll command the Islamic world to love the United States? No. For the record, Muslim Americans' median household income of about $70,000 is comfortably above the national average. If "anti-Muslim bigotry" were as rampant as is claimed by these groups, how did American Muslims attain to this comfortable standard of living? Several Muslim physicians I work with will attest that "anti-Muslim bigotry" is actually at quite a low level in the United States.
Could the true reason for this State Department meeting be stemming from the recent Cornell University survey, which reported that 44% of Americans would curtail Muslim civil liberties?
The following statements have been extracted from published columns. They were made by prominent so-called moderate Muslims living in the United States of America. Some of these same prominent so-called moderate Muslims attended this meeting with the U.S. State Department, or are involved with groups that were represented there.
Some of these same prominent so-called moderate Muslims are on record labeling millions of Americans as ignorant, biased, bigoted, hateful “Islamophobes,” incapable of understanding Islam.
This is an open invitation for the peaceful and decent people among the Muslims in America to consider this question: do you realize who is speaking on your behalf?
We’ve all heard a radical statement here, or a threatening statement there. But the comments below are tied together by an obvious common agenda -- an agenda that calls for the destruction of this nation as a philosophical, economic, and legal entity.
1992. Siraj Wahaj, New Jersey: “If only Muslims were more clever politically, they would take over the United States and replace its constitutional government with a Caliphate” [Islamic leadership body]. “If we were united and strong, we would elect our own leader and give allegiance to him. Take my word, if the 6 to 8 million Muslims unite in America, the country will come to us.”
1994. Nihad Awad, at a Barry University forum: “I am in support of the Hamas movement.”
1998. Omar Ahmad, at a Flamingo Palace Banquet Hall event in California: “Muslim institutions, schools and economic power should be strengthened in America.” “Those who stay in America should be “open to society without melting (into it)”
“Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran . . . should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth.”
Look for the reference to a newspaper article entitled “American Muslim Leader Urges Faithful to Spread Word,” by Lisa Gardiner, San Ramon Valley Herald, July 4, 1998. Five years after this story appeared, Ahmad denied saying this, but Gardiner sticks by the accuracy of her reporting.
November 2000. Abdurrahman Alamoudi, at a rally against Israel, Lafayette Park, across from the White House: “Hear that, Bill Clinton! We are all supporters of Hamas. I wish they added that I am also a supporter of Hezbollah. Anybody support Hezbollah here?”
1993. Ibrahim Hooper, Minneapolis Star Tribune: “I wouldn’t want to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future....But I’m not going to do anything violent to promote that. I’m going to do it through education.”
Omar M. Ahmad: Suicide bombers “kill themselves for Islam” and so are not terrorists”.
Nihad Awad also wrote in the Muslim World Monitor that the World Trade Center trial, which resulted in the 1994 conviction of four Islamic terrorists, was "a travesty of justice." That's despite the fact that some of the perpetrators confessed to involvement in the 1993 attack.
Anis Shorrosh, author of Islam Revealed, has published an "analysis of the Islamic invasion of America, the agenda of Islamists and visible methods to take over America by the year 2020." He asks: "Will Americans continue to sleep through this invasion as they did when we were attacked on 9/11?"
Method number 1: Terminate America's freedom of speech by replacing it with statewide and nationwide hate-crime bills.
Method number 4: Nominate Muslim sympathizers to political office to bring about favorable legislation toward Islam and support potential sympathizers by block voting.
Method number 5: Take control of as much of Hollywood, the press, TV, radio and the Internet as possible by buying the related corporations or a controlling stock.
Method number 7: Yell "Foul, out-of-context, personal interpretation, hate crime, Zionist, un-American, inaccurate interpretation of the Qur’an" anytime Islam is criticized or the Qur’an is analyzed in the public arena.
Imam Siraj Wahaj calls for the replacing the American government with a caliphate, warning that America will crumble unless it “accepts the Islamic agenda.”
August 2003: Ibrahim Hooper on President Bush’s appointment of Dr. Daniel Pipes to the United States Institute of Peace: “This back-door move by the president is a defeat for democracy and an affront to all those who seek peace. Pipe’s appointment calls into question all of President Bush’s previous statements claiming that the war on terrorism is not an attack on Islam and shows disdain for the democratic process.”
Other Muslims, however, expressed an opposite point of view regarding Pipes’ appointment:
Ms. Fatima Sayyed: “Many moderate American Muslims, frustrated by and angry at the extremist policies of militant Islamist organizations in the US and their efforts to portray themselves as the sole voice of Islam, have welcomed the nomination of Daniel Pipes.”
Tashbih Sayyed, President of Council for Democracy and Tolerance: “The United States of America has welcomed Muslims with open arms, irrespective of their sect and ethnicity, and it is the duty of all American Muslims to condemn these representatives of Islamist extremism.”
Dr. Younus Mansour, an Egyptian scholar and author: “Daniel Pipes is doing a service for the Muslims by warning America against the designs of CAIR, MPAC, and their ilk. These organizations want to divide American society. Any country that supports freedoms and democratic values is our friend and all those who work against the American interests are the enemies of American Muslims.”
April 2004: UC Berkeley Lecturer Hatem Bazian calls for an Intifada in the United States during a San Francisco Peace Rally: “We’re sitting here and watching the world pass by, people are being bombed, and it’s about time that we have an Intifada (uprising) in this country that change fundamentally the political dynamics in here”. “They’re gonna say some Palestinian being too radical, well, you haven’t seen radicalism yet!”
And yet after all this, American Muslim advocacy group leaders still have the audacity to talk about "Islamophobia." In December 2004, Nihad Awad said: "Elected representatives, government officials and other opinion leaders must finally recognize that Islamophobia is a growing phenomenon in American society that must be urgently addressed"
It's true: there are issues that must be urgently addressed. The statements I have quoted above confirm that. Those statements should be addressed by our elected officials, and by anyone who shares a deep respect for this nation, its culture, and all it offers.
If the individuals who made the statements above while on American soil are wondering why so many Americans have negative views of Islam, all they have to do is look at their own words.
These statements must be addressed so that these groups will not succeed in their aim (which they hope to attain by waving a phony race card) of placing limitations on Americans' right to free speech. Americans are free thinkers. The Muslims who made the statements above should have the spine to stop running to the government crying "Islamophobia" when Americans react negatively to such words, and explain their remarks publicly. But of course, crying "Islamophobia" seems to be all part of their plan.