Muslims speak out against NPR’s political correctness

Muslims speak out against NPR’s political correctness

Caroline May
The Daily Caller
Oct. 21, 2010

While a Muslim advocacy group, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), was instrumental in getting National Public Radio (NPR) to fire Juan Williams, some Muslims are speaking out against succumbing to the censorship of political correctness.

Tarek Fatah, founder of the Muslim Canadian Congress, took issue with those who wrap themselves in feel-good sensitivity, while denying the fact that the majority of terrorists are Muslim.

Indeed, the threat is real enough even for Fatah, a liberal Muslim, who looks at women in burkas with skepticism. “I am scared when I see women in burkas, how do I know what is behind that?” Fatah said, noting that many Muslims share his concerns.

“We are victims of these guys. A number of suicide bombers who have attacked have killed people [while] wearing the burka,” Fatah said. “This is the truth, we should be speaking the truth rather than what people expect us to say. ”

Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, told The Daily Caller that though Williams could have been more tactful, his ouster is symptomatic of the problems Americans continue to face when discussing Islam.

“As much as the way he said it was poorly chosen, the era we find ourselves — of political correctness — we are not able to address what this fear is,” Jasser said. “Anybody that starts talking about this fear gets shut down.”

Fatah agreed, saying that he did not believe that anything Williams’ said was terrible enough to lose his job. “I think it is another expression of political correctness. I didn’t find anything that he said that he deserved to be fired,” he told TheDC.

According to Jasser, the fact that the vast majority of national security threats emanate from the Muslim world makes Williams’ fear reasonable. Without open discussion, however, those concerns will never be conquered.

“I think that ultimately what we find when many thought leaders try to talk about it, [they say] ‘well there are some common elements to those who threaten national security,’ and the only one so far they have been able to nail down is that they come from some form of Islamic theology,’” Jasser said. “And because we have not become skilled in discussing theo-political threats, you’re having a lot of these little skirmishes happening.”

Jasser stressed that he was not defending Williams’ comments, but that the need for discourse trumped compromising to hypersensitivity.

“I think it is very sad that Juan got fired. But I am not surprised because they have probably been looking for an opportunity to fire him because of all his exposure on Fox, while he is also working at NPR,” he said.

“So I think they probably exploited the opportunity. I personally don’t think what he said rises to the level of being fired,” Jasser concluded, noting that an apology would suffice.

Stephen Schwartz, executive director of the Center for Islamic Pluralism, echoed Fatah and Jasser. Schwartz told TheDC that he and his organization opposed NPR’s reaction to Williams’ comments.

“Mr. Williams is basically an opinion journalist and he offered an opinion based on an undeniable reality: American Muslims have so far failed in our duty to prevent negative perceptions among our non-Muslim neighbors, and many, unfortunately, have taken the existing concerns among non-Muslims as a challenge to assert Muslim identity more aggressively, through forms of dress as well as speech that are often extravagant and excessive,” Schwartz wrote in an e-mail to TheDC.

“Mr. Williams spoke to this reality in an understated, candid way. He did not express hatred or incite violence against Muslims. He should not have been dismissed.”

Now THIS is how leaders within the Muslim community should respond if they are serious about addressing the concerns of non-Muslims in this post-9/11 world, and about building better understanding and relationships with non-Muslims.

That CAIR is taking responsibility for getting Juan Williams fired only speaks to an agenda that has nothing to do with fostering better relations between Muslims and non-Muslims. This makes one wary of that agenda, and factually, CAIR is one of those organizations that actually fuel suspicion and mistrust of Muslims due to their aggressive and overtly activist and defiant stances on a wide variety of fronts.

CAIR likes to position itself as the leading voice of American Muslims, but not only is this not true, it is a huge disservice to the American Muslim community.

cable2 wrote:Unnecessary comment deleted!

Your tepid response doesn't surprise me or anyone else in here.

cable2 wrote:there are always Uncle Tom's in any group.. who sell their own people out

That is a disgusting and uncalled for pejorative and just the sort of behavior I would expect of you. Why should it come as no surprise to anyone here that you would side with CAIR on this issue, rather than the reasonable and moderate voices of Islam in America and Canada?

A little background on CAIR for those uninitiated in the truth about this organization:

CAIR operatives have repeatedly refused to denounce Hamas and Hizballah as terrorist groups. Several of its former officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror. Two of CAIR’s other officials have made Islamic supremacist statements. In 1998 Omar Ahmad, CAIR's co-founder and longtime Board Chairman, said: "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."

CAIR founders Omar Ahmad and Niwad Awad (who still serves as CAIR's executive director) were present at a Hamas planning meeting in Philadelphia in 1993 where they and other Hamas operatives conspired to raise funds for Hamas and to promote jihad in the Middle East.

Several former CAIR officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror:
Ghassan Elashi, founder of CAIR's Texas chapter, in 2009 received a 65-year prison sentence for funneling over $12 million from the Islamic charity known as the Holy Land Foundation to the jihad terrorist group Hamas, which is responsible for murdering hundreds of Israeli civilians

Mousa Abu Marzook, a former CAIR official, was in 1995 designated by the U.S. government in 1995 as a "terrorist and Hamas leader." He now is a Hamas leader in Syria.

Randall Royer, CAIR's former civil rights coordinator, in 2004 began serving a 20-year prison sentence for aiding al-Qaida and the Taliban against American troops in Afghanistan and recruiting for Lashkar e-Taiba, the jihadist group responsible for the 2008 Mumbai jihad massacres.

Bassem Khafagi, CAIR's former community relations director, was arrested for involvement with the Islamic Assembly of North America, which was linked to al-Qaida. After pleading guilty to visa and bank fraud charges, Khafagi was deported.

Rabih Haddad, a former CAIR fundraiser, was deported for his work with the Global Relief Foundation (which he co-founded), a terror-financing organization.

It is of little surprise that Cable would side with the militant views of CAIR, after all, he has already attempted to repeatedly legitimize the terrorist organization Hamas.

There is no defense for your behavior here Cable... none at all. You defame honest, caring, Muslim organizations who HONESTLY want to build real relationships with their non-Muslim neighbors by casting the most despicable aspersions on them because they aren't militant enough for you, as though being militant were actually going to win non-Muslim hearts and minds in creating trusting relationships between Muslims and non-Muslims.

I find your views repulsive in the extreme.

Let's not forget Ibrahim Hooper, the spokesman for CAIR, statement in an interview with the Minneapolis Star-Tribune in 1993;

"I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like 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."

The point here is that Cable would use such a disgusting and dishonest pejorative to defame Muslims who actually want to build better relations with non-Muslims and stand in defense of a radical and militant organization that sides with terrorists.

I think we can safely say that his agenda is exposed. Law and order have nothing to do with his objections to anything - as far as I'm concerned that is a completely blown cover.

That statement of his above reveals something deeply troubling.

Duly noted.

TexasBlue wrote:Let's not forget Ibrahim Hooper, the spokesman for CAIR, statement in an interview with the Minneapolis Star-Tribune in 1993;

"I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like 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."

how is that view any different from a Christian's wishing for the same.. a United States as a Christian nation ?????

cable2 wrote:

TexasBlue wrote:Let's not forget Ibrahim Hooper, the spokesman for CAIR, statement in an interview with the Minneapolis Star-Tribune in 1993;

"I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like 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."

how is that view any different from a Christian's wishing for the same.. a United States as a Christian nation ?????

Ever defending the militant view. The fact is, Christians in this country have NEVER, EVER "wished" for Christian theocracy, but that is exactly what CAIR would like to see, a Muslim theocracy. That is precisely what the Qu'ran demands. The militants in CAIR aren't satisfied with just being free to practice their religion, as we can see from their own words, which is a LOT more evidence than you are making for your case here.

Rather, they, their militant terrorist allies in Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, and other of their ilk, want to subjugate America and Americans under Qu'ranic rule and Sharia law. And it would seem you have no problem with this at all.

Rather than commending the Muslim leaders in the article above for their reasonable stances on the Juan Williams flap, and saying that they can understand how the kind of political correctness motivating William's dismissal, actually serves as a barrier to productive and helpful communications between Muslims and non-Muslims, you insult them with the most vile of pejoratives effectively slapping them in the face for even daring to stand against the sort of aggressively militant and violent brand of Islam that seems to be your preference.

Apparently you have no interest in improving communications between Muslims and non-Muslims. Apparently these Muslim leaders aren't militant enough for you, you'd rather take CAIR's slash-and-burn approach to free speech.

And then you erect the "Christian nation" straw man argument to misdirect us from my earlier post, a post you completely ignored, including all those points on CAIR.

Care to actually engage in debate? Address my actual post! Stop avoiding me when I make a point you cannot address.

dblboggie wrote:The point here is that Cable would use such a disgusting and dishonest pejorative to defame Muslims who actually want to build better relations with non-Muslims and stand in defense of a radical and militant organization that sides with terrorists.

I think we can safely say that his agenda is exposed. Law and order have nothing to do with his objections to anything - as far as I'm concerned that is a completely blown cover.

That statement of his above reveals something deeply troubling.

few Americans can be innocent from knowing just how much the Uncle Tom's have sold out their people, black, white or religious.. but this thread is not about black or white but a religious group.. yes extreme right wing friendly Muslims can be pulled out to voice extreme right wing friendly views.. one only has to think about the New York mosque or the Koran Burning or the Murfreesboro mosque.. each time extreme right wing friendly Muslims are pulled out to talk against the majority of American Muslims.

my support for the suppressed American Muslims in no way dents my heart felt view that the rule of law must be the basic world view.. in fact my support for the suppressed American Muslims makes my heart felt view that the rule of law must be the basic world view more relevant.

one only has to read the hate poured out on the forum each and every time the situation of American Muslims are raised how they are suppressed.

TexasBlue wrote:Let's not forget Ibrahim Hooper, the spokesman for CAIR, statement in an interview with the Minneapolis Star-Tribune in 1993;

"I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like 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."

cable2 wrote:how is that view any different from a Christian's wishing for the same.. a United States as a Christian nation ?????

dblboggie wrote:Ever defending the militant view. The fact is, Christians in this country have NEVER, EVER "wished" for Christian theocracy.

Is we talking about the same nation... U.S.A, the country where extreme right wing Christians work to put their followers in to office.. G.W.Bush to name but vast number

cable2 wrote:

TexasBlue wrote:Let's not forget Ibrahim Hooper, the spokesman for CAIR, statement in an interview with the Minneapolis Star-Tribune in 1993;

"I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like 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."

how is that view any different from a Christian's wishing for the same.. a United States as a Christian nation ?????

Those types a very small minority. In my 47 years, i've never met a Christian who said they would prefer a theocracy. There's no major religious organization in this country that has called for a theocracy.

And remember.... i'm no champion of Christian causes.

cable2 wrote:few Americans can be innocent from knowing just how much the Uncle Tom's have sold out their people, black, white or religious....

my support for the suppressed American Muslims....

in fact my support for the suppressed American Muslims....

one only has to read the hate poured out on the forum each and every time the situation of American Muslims are raised how they are suppressed.

Stop with the Uncle Tom reference right now! There are other (and better) terms to use.

There are no "suppressed" American Muslims. They exist in your mind only.

There is no hate being poured out in this forum. I've seen actual hate towards Muslims in my local newspaper's forums. There's nothing remotely close to that in here. Nobody in here hates Muslims or Islam in general.

cable2 wrote:

dblboggie wrote:The point here is that Cable would use such a disgusting and dishonest pejorative to defame Muslims who actually want to build better relations with non-Muslims and stand in defense of a radical and militant organization that sides with terrorists.

I think we can safely say that his agenda is exposed. Law and order have nothing to do with his objections to anything - as far as I'm concerned that is a completely blown cover.

That statement of his above reveals something deeply troubling.

few Americans can be innocent from knowing just how much the Uncle Tom's have sold out their people, black, white or religious.. but this thread is not about black or white but a religious group.. yes extreme right wing friendly Muslims can be pulled out to voice extreme right wing friendly views.. one only has to think about the New York mosque or the Koran Burning or the Murfreesboro mosque.. each time extreme right wing friendly Muslims are pulled out to talk against the majority of American Muslims.

You have not the slightest clue what you are talking about here. You have absolutely not a hint of our history, or the history of the pejorative you so freely toss about.

You call these Muslims cited in the article "extreme right wing friendly Muslims" and this is just a blatant lie because you know NOTHING about these Muslim leaders.

The only thing that galls you is that they are not the militant, terrorist supporting, types that CAIR is comprised of. You offer no proof, no corroborating evidence of any kind as to the political leanings of these Muslim leaders. You make blanket statements without a SHRED of ANYTHING support those statements.

This is a pathetic attempt to avoid my post on CAIR's RADICAL, TERRORIST connections.

cable2 wrote:my support for the suppressed American Muslims in no way dents my heart felt view that the rule of law must be the basic world view.. in fact my support for the suppressed American Muslims makes my heart felt view that the rule of law must be the basic world view more relevant.

one only has to read the hate poured out on the forum each and every time the situation of American Muslims are raised how they are suppressed.

Again, nothing but naked deception! You clearly could care less about the rule of law. You have expressed NO support of the so-called "suppressed American Muslims" - which is yet another LIE told without any substantiation.

Rather, you have repeatedly proclaimed your support for organizations like Hamas, who are nothing more than a cabal of criminals and cutthroats.

The only hate pouring forth on this forum is from you!

I respect those Muslims cited in the article above because they took a stand that was completely in the interest of fostering better relations between Muslims and non-Muslims. They took a position that their more militant and radical counterparts reject, a position which actually makes them a target for criminals like CAIR and Hamas, and the Muslim Brotherhood.

These decent Muslims aren't interested in fomenting even more hate, fear, mistrust, and anger. They want to live peaceably among their non-Muslim neighbors, but organizations like CAIR make their jobs a living nightmare. And people like you slander their names and good works because they aren't "down for the struggle," they're not militant enough for you.

A very sad commentary on your loyalties... which are most certainly not to the "rule of law."

cable2 wrote:

TexasBlue wrote:Let's not forget Ibrahim Hooper, the spokesman for CAIR, statement in an interview with the Minneapolis Star-Tribune in 1993;

"I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like 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."

cable2 wrote:how is that view any different from a Christian's wishing for the same.. a United States as a Christian nation ?????

dblboggie wrote:Ever defending the militant view. The fact is, Christians in this country have NEVER, EVER "wished" for Christian theocracy.

Is we talking about the same nation... U.S.A, the country where extreme right wing Christians work to put their followers in to office.. G.W.Bush to name but vast number

Get a dictionary, look up the word "theocracy" get back to me when you actually have a clue what you are talking about. Otherwise, you are a waste of time.

TexasBlue wrote:Let's not forget Ibrahim Hooper, the spokesman for CAIR, statement in an interview with the Minneapolis Star-Tribune in 1993;

"I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like 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."

cable2 wrote:how is that view any different from a Christian's wishing for the same.. a United States as a Christian nation ?????

TexasBlue wrote:Those types a very small minority. In my 47 years, i've never met a Christian who said they would prefer a theocracy. There's no major religious organization in this country that has called for a theocracy.

And remember.... i'm no champion of Christian causes.

have you forgotten so soon of the many debate you where part of.. on the other site where the question of America being a Christian nation was argued.. for American Christians call for a Christian nation is just a small minority.. for American Muslims to talk of the same they are wicked anti-Americans.