|
Chronology of Islam in America (2011)
By Abdus Sattar Ghazali
June 2011
Illinois House passes Green Ramadan resolution
June 1: The Illinois House today passed the Green Ramadan resolution allowing the ninth month of the Islamic calendar as a “Green Month” for all faith communities in Illinois. “It is a great day for people of faith and for Illinois’s Muslim. Illinois is the first state in the nation that recognizes the month of Ramadan, the month of fasting in Islam, as the month of protecting our environment and our earth for all faith groups.” said Dr. Zaher Sahloul, Chairperson of the CIOGC. “It is incumbent on us to translate the great teachings of Islam, especially during the month of Ramadan, into serious and practical steps to address the challenges that are facing our world like poverty, hunger, wars and global warming. Let us reflect during the month of fasting, not only on how to decrease our calories, but on how to shrink our carbon prints.” (Muslim Matters)
American Muslim denied passport by embassy in Kuwait
June 2: After the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait confiscated Aziz Nouhaili’s passport, an official told him he should no longer consider himself as a U.S. citizen, Associated Press reported today. Nouhaili, a naturalized U.S. citizen from Morocco, has been trying for nearly four months to get home from Kuwait, where he worked for several years as a military contractor. So far, U.S. officials have continued to keep him in Kuwait while they consider revoking his citizenship over a decades-old passport problem. Nouhaili's lawyer with the Council on American-Islamic Relations wrote a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton requesting that Nouhaili be given his passport so he can return home. Kuwaiti officials have made clear they will allow Nouhaili to leave only if he has a valid U.S. passport.
The letter to Secretary Clinton from CAIR Staff Attorney Gadeir Abbas stated in part: "Mr. Nouhaili's account raises concerns that the United States is unlawfully attempting to effect an extrajudicial denaturalization of an American citizen. Because Mr. Nouhaili is an American citizen and has the documentation to prove it, these actions amount to a gross deprivation of Mr. Nouhaili's Fifth Amendment right to due process as well as a violation of his absolute right as an American citizen to return to the United States. Simply stated, there is no lawful basis upon which the United States can deny Mr. Nouhaili the ability to return to his country of citizenship. American citizenship is too important to be subject to the whims of low level bureaucrats. If there are any concerns about my client's citizenship, he has the right to have those concerns addressed through the judicial process once he returns to the United States. Indeed, the Supreme Court made clear in Fedorenko v. United States that in order to denaturalize a citizen the United States must provide in federal court 'evidence justifying revocation of citizenship [that is] 'clear, unequivocal, and convincing.' Until that happens, Mr. Nouhaili retains all the rights of a citizen, which include the right to return to his country of citizenship."
The hitch appears to be a passport problem that Nouhaili had more than two decades ago, before becoming a citizen. Nouhaili admits he provided false information to try and obtain a passport. But he cooperated with an investigation and was never charged. He became a U.S. citizen in 1999 after marrying a citizen. He lived in New York and later in Eugene, Ore., until 2004 when he took the job in Kuwait. He planned to return home earlier this year and start a new job in Las Vegas. His wife and youngest daughter, who were with him in Kuwait, were allowed to return to the U.S. and did so. They are now in Tunisia, where the wife has family. (AP-CAIR)
Embassy Returns Passport to U.S. Muslim Stuck in Kuwait
On June 6, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) announced today that an American Muslim citizen stuck in Kuwait had his passport returned by U.S. embassy officials who had seized it in February. Aziz Nouhaili, a naturalized American citizen, received his passport following CAIR's intervention on his behalf with the U.S. Department of State. Last week, CAIR sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton seeking the return of Nouhaili's passport and calling its seizure a form of "extrajudicial denaturalization." In an April meeting with an embassy official, Nouhaili was reportedly told he "should stop thinking of himself as an American" and indicated that it would be more accurate to "consider himself denaturalized." "We welcome this news and hope that it serves as a reminder that American Muslims have the same right to due process as other citizens," said CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad. "I want to thank the staff at CAIR who worked on to help Mr. Nouhaili with this issue. The incident needs to be investigated thoroughly to find out if proper procedures were followed and whether this particular American citizen was targeted due to his faith or national origin." (CAIR)
Reports of 'stoning' death of Ukrainian girl turn out to be false
June 2: The circumstances around the death of Kateryna Korin, a 19-year-old Ukrainian student on the Crimean peninsula, appeared to point to a made-for-tabloid tragedy: a young beauty-pageant contestant brutally killed by her admirer, a radical Islamist who chose to stone her to death under an unforgiving interpretation of Islamic law. There was just one small problem: They weren't true. Law-enforcement officials in Crimea have responded to the reports of Korin's killing by saying the tragedy was an "absolutely routine crime" that involved neither stoning, Shari'a law, nor any religious motive. "The killing of the girl that took place in the Sovietskoye district of Crimea does not have any underlying reasons like religious, national, or interethnic motives," Olha Kondrashova, a spokeswoman for the Crimean division of Ukraine's Interior Ministry, told RFE/RL's Ukrainian Service. "A young man has been detained as a suspect, and an investigation is under way." The suspect is believed to be Bilyal Gaziev, a 16-year-old native of the same northern Crimean district and a classmate of the victim's at a local college. He has been charged with premeditated murder, according to law-enforcement officials quoted by Ukrainian media.
So how did a routine -- albeit tragic -- crime of passion turn into a frightening story about a Shari'a-sanctioned stoning? Some activists describe it as a campaign to incite religious hatred against Crimean Tatars, a predominantly Muslim ethnic group on the Crimean peninsula. Some Ukrainian websites, including ukra.news, point the finger at Russian media allegedly seeking to manipulate religious sentiments to destabilize Crimea. Crimean Tatars say the whole affair has provoked anti-Muslim sentiment" and have called for an investigation. "It looks like an informational diversion," says Rifat Chubarov, a Crimean Tatar community leader. "Taking into account that in recent days this information was spread by many mass media outlets, I demand that our Ukrainian Security Service launch an investigation to find out the source of this false information." Locals in Crimea's Sovietskoye district are clearly troubled by the brutal crime but don't link it to religion, judging by interviews by RFE/RL's Crimea correspondent. Until now, Islamic radicalism has not been an issue in Crimean villages. But that might just change if unscrupulous media continue to play the religious card. (Radio Free Europe)
Virginia Senate candidate sticks with church that allows Muslims to pray
June 2: U.S. Senate candidate George Allen of Virginia is sticking with his Alexandria church despite rumblings within the congregation over the church's decision to allow Muslims to pray there on Fridays while a nearby Mosque is being renovated. A handful of people have left the Aldersgate United Methodist Church to protest use of the church by Muslims. But a church spokeswoman said the public response has been overwhelmingly positive and the move is in keeping with Christian values. In a statement, Allen said: "With so many families anxious about gas prices, losing their jobs, their homes, and fearful the rising national debt will rob our children of the opportunities we had growing up, it's disappointing to Susan and me that our family's church would become an issue in this campaign." Chesapeake Bishop E.W. Jackson, one of several candidates seeking the GOP nomination along with Allen, criticized the church's decision. "While we have a biblical mandate to love them as human beings, no pastor or Christian should cooperate or assist Muslims in their worship practices," he said. (Washington Examiner)
Erie County judge apologizes for anti-Muslim e-mail joke
June 4: Tuesday (5/31) was a depressing day to be in Erie County Judge Michael E. Dunlavey's courtroom, Dunlavey said. So when someone e-mailed Dunlavey a joke on Wednesday that riffed on Eddie Murphy's "Saturday Night Live" Buckwheat skits -- which Dunlavey had enjoyed -- he quickly forwarded it to court colleagues who, he thought, might need a dose of humor. The joke read: "It was announced today that Buckwheat, of Our Gang fame, has converted to the Muslim faith and changed his name to Kareem of Wheat. I just hope he doesn't become a cereal killer." Dunlavey said he now realizes the joke, which contained a reference to Islam, might not have seemed funny, particularly to Muslims. He sent an apology to the joke's recipients on Thursday (6/2). "Although I have not heard from anyone who may have been offended by it, in reflection I can see where it may have been. For those who may have been or were offended, please accept my sincere apologies. That certainly wasn't the intent and it was designed to lighten the mood after a contentious and often frustrating series of hearings the day before," he wrote. (Erie Times-News)
Right-Wing media hype mosque study co-written by anti-Muslim activist
June 8: Right-wing media figures have recently promoted a study co-written by David Yerushalmi claiming in part that more than 80 percent of U.S. mosques feature texts that promote or support violence. However, as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has noted, Yerushalmi has "a record of anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant and anti-black bigotry." Frank Gaffney: Study By "Formidable Authors" "Describes An Ominous Jihadist Footprint Being Put Into Place Across The Nation:" Entitled "Shariah and Violence in American Mosques," this paper describes an ominous jihadist footprint being put into place across the nation. It is made up of ostensibly religious institutions, entities that, therefore, enjoy constitutional protection. According to the data examined by this study, most mosques in the United States are actually engaged in - or at least supportive of - a totalitarian, seditious agenda they call Shariah…..Still, according to this study's two formidable authors - my colleague, David Yerushalmi, one of the nation's foremost non-Muslim experts on the totalitarian Islamic doctrine known as Shariah, and a highly respected Israeli academic and expert on Islam and Arabic culture, Mordechai Kedar - on-site investigations of a random but representative sample of American mosques in 14 states and the District of Columbia produced chilling insights into the threat posed by many such institutions….Mr. Yerushalmi and Mr. Kedar found: More than 80 percent of U.S. mosques advocate or otherwise promote violence. "Of the 100 mosques surveyed, 51 percent had texts on-site rated as severely advocating violence; 30 percent had texts rated as moderately advocating violence; and 19 percent had no violent texts at all." [The Washington Times, June 7, 2011]
Andrew McCarthy of National Review Online Hypes "Important Study:" These are the principal takeaways from an important study just competed by Israeli academic Mordechai Kedar and David Yerushalmi of the Center for Security Policy in Washington. As detailed in a just-published Middle East Quarterly essay, "Shari'a and Violence in American Mosques" (available here), the authors' "Mapping Sharia" project surveyed 100 randomly selected mosques across the United States. Onsite, fully 81 percent of the mosques featured Islamic texts that advocate violence. In nearly 85 percent of the mosques, the leadership (usually an imam or prayer leader) favorably recommended this literature for study by congregants. Moreover, 58 percent of the mosques invited guest lecturers known for promoting violent jihad. [NRO, June 8, 2011]
Pam Geller wrote: "An Overwhelming Number Of American Mosques Teach, Advance, Promote Violent Jihad As Dictated By Islamic Teaching:" The empirical evidence is deeply disturbing, but not surprising. An overwhelming number of American mosques teach, advance, promote violent jihad as dictated by Islamic teaching. Is it any wonder that Muslim Brotherhood-tied groups like CAIR are pursuing legislation and policy to restrict law enforcement infiltration of mosques?....This widely ignored problem must be addressed, and patriots in small towns (like Sheepshead Bay) fighting Muslim Brotherhood super-mosques must be helped in stopping this hostile invasion. [Atlas Shrugs, June 7, 2011]
Big Peace post titled: "81% Of US Mosques Promote Jihad:" Publication of the "Sharia and Violence in American Mosques" study provides irrefragable evidence that the overwhelming majority of American mosques--consistent with mainstream Islamic doctrine and practice since the founding of the Muslim creed--are inculcating jihadism with the goal of implementing Sharia here in America. [Big Peace, June 5, 2011]
However the Study's Co-Author Has History Of Extreme Anti-Muslim, Racially Charged Rhetoric
ADL: Yerushalmi Has "A Record Of Anti-Muslim, Anti-Immigrant And Anti-Black Bigotry." From a March 25, 2011 Anti-Defamation League (ADL) release: One of the driving forces behind Shari'a-related conspiracy theories and growing efforts to ban or restrict the use of Shari'a law in American courts is David Yerushalmi, an Arizona attorney with a record of anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant and anti-black bigotry.
Other Hostile Views
Yerushalmi's main instrument, SANE, is also openly hostile to undocumented migrants in the United States. It advocates somehow sealing all American borders and building "special criminal camps" to house undocumented migrants, where they would serve a three-year detention sentence, then be deported. SANE also argues that the "immigration debate" should take into account that America was "founded and made strong by immigrants from western European countries with Judeo-Christian roots."
Yerushalmi has also claimed, as he wrote in a 2006 article, that the United States is in trouble because it "rejected its Christian roots, the Constitution and federalism," and because it "embraced democracy" and multi-culturalism. This has rendered it "incapable" of "overcoming the World State ideology of the Liberal Elites." These beliefs have caused Yerushalmi to defend people accused of anti-Semitism such as Mel Gibson and Pat Buchanan because they "have the potential to save the West from itself and from Islam." Liberal Jews, on the other hand, according to Yerushalmi are "the leading proponents of all forms of anti-Western, anti-American, anti-Christian movements, campaigns, and ideologies," and to argue otherwise one would have to be "literally divorced from reality." Liberal Jews, according to Yerushalmi, have also destroyed "their host nations like a fatal parasite."
Nor has Yerushalmi neglected the subject of race. Articles Yerushalmi has written for the SANE Web site argue that the "most of the fundamental differences between the races is genetic." In a 2006 essay for SANE entitled, "On Race: A Tentative Discussion," Yerushalmi claimed that "some races perform better in sports, some better in mathematical problem solving, some better in language, some better in Western societies and some better in tribal ones." He also contended that African-Americans are a "relatively murderous race killing itself." For Yerushalmi it was obvious: "If evolution and the biologists who espouse the theory are correct, then the idea that racial differences included innate differences in character and intelligence would[,] it seem[,] be more likely than not." [ADL, March 25, 2011] (Media Matters)
Herman Cain would require Muslim appointees to take a special loyalty oath
June 8: In March, formers Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain burst onto the presidential scene when he told ThinkProgress that he “will not” appoint Muslims in his administration. Under intense pressure, Cain’s campaign walked back the candidate’s words, saying that he would appoint “any person for a position based on merit.” However, the next week, Cain hedged his retraction, telling the Orlando Sun Sentinel that he would only appoint a Muslim who disavowed Sharia law, but that “he’s unaware of any Muslim who’d be willing to make such a disavowal.” On the Glenn Beck Show today, the host asked the Georgia Republican about his refusal to appoint Muslims. Cain told Beck that he would be willing to appoint a Muslim only “if they can prove to me that they’re putting the Constitution of the United States first.” Beck followed up by asking if he was calling for “some loyalty proof” for Muslims. Cain said, “Yes, to the Constitution of the United States of America.” When Beck then asked “Would you do that to a Catholic or would you do that to a Mormon?” Cain told the host, “Nope, I wouldn’t.”:
Cain’s call for a loyalty oath targeted at a specific segment of the population is a historical relic that ought to be confined to the past. Forcing a subset of Americans to prove their loyalty to the United States was as wrong during the era of McCarthyism as it is today. Cain’s requirement that Muslim nominees take a loyalty oath while Catholics and Mormons would be exempted is not only bigoted, it’s also ironic considering that the same suspicion was once levied at Catholics. During the 1960 presidential election, anti-Catholic sentiment held that if then-Sen. John F. Kennedy were elected president, his Catholic faith would make him beholden to the Pope rather than the United States. Such views were abhorrent when directed at Catholics 50 years ago, and they are abhorrent when directed at Muslims today. (Think Progress)
FL GOP leader says Sharia is nation’s biggest threat
June 9: Whether he speaks to a newly formed Tea party group or the Orlando Young Republicans, Adam Hasner always warns about what he sees as one of America's biggest threats - Sharia law. Hasner feels passionately about this issue whether he is speaking publicly or privately. "Today there is an enemy and that enemy has a name and a defined mission. That enemy is Sharia compliant Islam," Hasner told a Tea party gathering last month. "And we cannot allow political correctness, multiculturalism or appeasement to cripple our defenses at home or abroad. Because this is a threat that not only exists on foreign soil, this is also a threat that exists from those who seek to destroy us from within." He concluded with "Sharia law is not compatible with the constitution of the United States of America."
Marc Stern, a religion law expert at the American Jewish Committee, told NPR last year "that is no different from how religious laws and customs are already applied. "And just as the Catholic Church didn't take over law when large numbers of Catholics [came] to the U.S., and Jewish law doesn't govern Jewish citizens, Sharia law is not going to govern, except voluntarily, the rights and responsibilities of Muslim citizens of the United States," Stern said. He says when there's a conflict, U.S. law always wins. For example, when Orthodox Jews have asked judges to enforce their laws on divorce, the courts have refused to do it; they won't be involved in interpreting religion. In the same way, the government won't enforce Kosher food standards because it would violate the separation of church and state.
Our nation has long allowed religious beliefs to seep into our laws. Consider the Christian-led battle over the consumption of alcohol which led to a constitutional amendment and Prohibition.Even today, Florida still has five dry counties. And not too many years ago, Blue Laws forbid shopping on Sundays because it was the Lord's Day. In 1916, the Rev. Sidney Catts was elected Florida governor on an anti-Catholic platform. He didn't think much of Jews or blacks either but anti-Catholicism was all the rage. At one point, it was said that Catts was telling folks that the Pope might invade Florida. One could imagine that Catts would feel quite at home in the 2012 Florida U.S. Senate race. (Crowley Political Report)
The sharia myth sweeps America
June 12: If you are not vitally concerned about the possibility of radical Muslims infiltrating the U.S. government and establishing a Taliban-style theocracy, then you are not a candidate for the GOP presidential nomination. In addition to talking about tax policy and Afghanistan, Republican candidates have also felt the need to speak out against
the menace of "sharia." Former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum refers to sharia as "an existential threat" to the United States. Pizza magnate Herman Cain declared in March that he would not appoint a Muslim to a Cabinet position or judgeship because "there is this attempt to gradually ease sharia law and the Muslim faith into our government. It does not belong in our government." The generally measured campaign of former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty leapt into panic mode over reports that during his governorship, a Minnesota agency had created a sharia-compliant mortgage program to help Muslim homebuyers. "As soon as Gov. Pawlenty became aware of the issue," spokesman Alex Conant assured reporters, "he personally ordered it shut down." Former House speaker Newt Gingrich has been perhaps the most focused on the sharia threat. "We should have a federal law that says under no circumstances in any jurisdiction in the United States will sharia be used," Gingrich announced at last fall's Values Voters Summit. He also called for the removal of Supreme Court justices (a lifetime appointment) if they disagreed. Gingrich's call for a federal law banning sharia has gone unheeded so far. But at the local level, nearly two dozen states have introduced or passed laws in the past two years to ban the use of sharia in court cases. Despite all of the activity to monitor and restrict sharia, however, there remains a great deal of confusion about what it actually is. It's worth taking a look at some facts to understand why an Islamic code has become such a watchword in the 2012 presidential campaign.
Take Gerald Allen, the Alabama state senator who was moved by the danger posed by sharia to sponsor a bill banning it — but who, when asked for a definition, could not say what sharia was. "I don't have my file in front of me," he told reporters. "I wish I could answer you better." In Tennessee, lawmakers sought to make following sharia a felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison — until they learned that their effort would
essentially make it illegal to be Muslim in their state. During last year's Senate race in Nevada, GOP candidate Sharon Angle blithely asserted that Dearborn, as well as a small town in Texas, currently operate under sharia law. And Minnesota congresswoman Michele Bachmann used the occasion of Osama bin Laden's death to tie the terrorist mastermind to the word: "It is my hope that this is the beginning of the end of Sharia-compliant terrorism." The anti-communist Red Scare of the 1950s made broad use of guilt by innuendo and warnings about shadowy conspiracies. If GOP candidates insist they are not doing the same thing to ordinary Muslims, they can prove it by explaining what they believe sharia is and whether they're prepared to ban the consideration of all religious codes from civil arbitration. Anything less is simply fear mongering. (By Amy Sullivan USA TODAY)
Naperville Islamic center, Ill, suit continuing
June 12: The lawsuit naming DuPage County, Illinois, for its refusal to allow an Islamic prayer center just east of Naperville is moving ahead after attempts to settle the issue apparently fell short. Representatives for the Irshad Learning Center and DuPage County State’s Attorney Bob Berlin will appear before U.S. District Court Judge Rebecca Pallmyer Aug. 17, launching the formal fact-finding phase of the case. The Islamic organization’s board members, most of whom live in Naperville or Lisle, retained the Chicago chapter of the nonprofit Council on American-Islamic Relations to pursue an appeal after the County Board in January 2010 turned down their request for a conditional use permit to operate a religious institution on a three-acre site facing 75th Street just east of the city line. Neighbors of the property, which was formerly used for a preschool, staunchly opposed the plan. They asserted it would hinder their quality of life. Some said they did not believe the planners’ claims on the permit application that the site would be used by no more than 100 people, and on a limited schedule. When the plan was spurned, Irshad’s suit contended the group’s rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments had been violated. (Sun Times)
F.B.I. agents get leeway to push privacy bounds
June 12: The Federal Bureau of Investigation is giving significant new powers to its roughly 14,000 agents, allowing them more leeway to search databases, go through household trash or use surveillance teams to scrutinize the lives of people who have attracted their attention. The F.B.I. soon plans to issue a new edition of its manual, called the Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide, according to an official who has worked on the draft document and several others who have been briefed on its contents. The new rules add to several measures taken over the past decade to give agents more latitude as they search for signs of criminal or terrorist activity. The F.B.I. recently briefed several privacy advocates about the coming changes. Among them, Michael German, a former F.B.I. agent who is now a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, argued that it was unwise to further ease restrictions on agents’ power to use potentially intrusive techniques, especially if they lacked a firm reason to suspect someone of wrongdoing. “Claiming additional authorities to investigate people only further raises the potential for abuse,” Mr. German said, pointing to complaints about the bureau’s surveillance of domestic political advocacy groups and mosques and to an inspector general’s findings in 2007 that the F.B.I. had frequently misused “national security letters,” which allow agents to obtain information like phone records without a court order.
Some of the most notable changes apply to the lowest category of investigations, called an “assessment.” The category, created in December 2008, allows agents to look into people and organizations “proactively” and without firm evidence for suspecting criminal or terrorist activity. Under current rules, agents must open such an inquiry before they can search for information about a person in a commercial or law enforcement database. Under the new rules, agents will be allowed to search such databases without making a record about their decision. Mr. German said the change would make it harder to detect and deter inappropriate use of databases for personal purposes.
The new rules will also relax a restriction on administering lie-detector tests and searching people’s trash. Under current rules, agents cannot use such techniques until they open a “preliminary investigation,” which — unlike an assessment — requires a factual basis for suspecting someone of wrongdoing. But soon agents will be allowed to use those techniques for one kind of assessment, too: when they are evaluating a target as a potential informant. Agents have asked for that power in part because they want the ability to use information found in a subject’s trash to put pressure on that person to assist the government in the investigation of others. (New York Times)
Continued on next page
2011 January February March April May June
July August Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.
|
