Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Critics Condemn Islam Hearings as Witch Hunts
WASHINGTON - On the eve of a controversial hearing by lawmakers on extremist Islam in the United States, civil rights and Muslim- American groups are warning of its potential repercussions, which they say may undermine the very intent of the proceeding.
TODAY, I AM MUSLIM, TOO
Protesters gather at the 'Today, I Am A Muslim, Too' rally to protest against a planned congressional hearing on the role of Muslims in homegrown terrorism, Sunday, March 6, 2011 in New York. The chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., says affiliates of al-Qaida are radicalizing some American Muslims and that he plans to hold hearings on the threat they pose to the U.S. (AP Photo/Henny Ray Abrams) The House of Representatives' Committee on Homeland Security, spearheaded by Republican Peter King, will meet here Thursday morning to discuss the "The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community's Response" in the first of a series of contentious hearings about home-grown terrorist threats.
"His [King's] approach is going to radicalize the young people," said Muhammad Salim Akhtar, head of the American Muslim Taskforce on Civil Rights and Elections, at a press conference Wednesday, which included 11 Muslim-American and civil liberties groups.
"The focus of the hearings should be of greater concern for the message they send overseas as well as to communities at home," echoed Paul Pillar, director of graduate studies at Georgetown University's Security Studies Program and a former CIA analyst for the Middle East and South Asia, in a blog post Tuesday.
"They will be widely read as an indication that U.S. postures and policies that are ostensibly aimed at combating terrorism are really more about combating Muslims," he warned in the 'National Interest'. "And that reading will in turn stir more anti-Americanism among Muslims."
President Barack Obama's administration dispatched deputy national security advisor Denis McDonough to the All Dulles Area Muslim Society on Sunday, where he made statements that seemed designed to counter these potential readings.
"[O]f the violent extremists we've captured or arrested, and who falsely claim to be fighting in the name of Islam, we know that they all share one thing: They all believe that the United States is somehow at war with Islam, and that this justifies violence against Americans," he told the audience of about 200.
"[W]e are actively and aggressively undermining that ideology," McDonough declared. "We're exposing the lie that America and Islam are somehow in conflict. That is why President Obama has stated time and again that the United States is not and never will be at war with Islam."
Stoking Xenophobia
"[I]nstead of condemning whole communities, we need to join with those communities to help them protect themselves as well," McDonough continued. "We must resolve that, in our determination to protect our nation, we will not stigmatize or demonize entire communities because of the actions of a few."
Critics have called Thursday's meeting "inappropriate", "counterproductive" and a "witch-hunt".
Alejandro Beutel, Government and Policy Analyst for the Muslim Public Affairs Council, said at the same press conference Wednesday that the hearing was "political theater rather than actual problem-solving", with King "putting an entire religion on trial".
Critics fear that the hearings will fuel the rising tide of xenophobia that has flooded the nation recently, which last year contributed to highly-publicized hostility against an Islamic community center to be built near Ground Zero, malicious attacks against mosques throughout the country and the proposal of a "Burn the Koran Day".
"[The] hearings, as currently proposed, do a disservice to the seriousness of the topic of 'domestic terrorism' and are likely to contribute to a public backlash against Muslim Americans," wrote the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights – a coalition of over 200 organizations – in a letter to King dated Feb. 4.
In prior statements and in a series of media interviews leading up to Thursday's hearing, King has erroneously claimed that 80 to 85 percent of mosques are controlled by radical Islamists – a claim that has been widely debunked. He has also alleged that Muslim community leaders are uncooperative with law enforcement and impede the process of finding and exposing potential extremists.
"Our community organizations have, for a long time, been playing a frontline role," countered Beutel. Instead of rhetoric, "[w]e need to let the data lead the discourse," he argued, citing a joint Duke University and University of North Carolina report that found that 40 percent of terrorist suspects apprehended since the Sep. 11, 2001 attacks were reported to authorities by fellow Muslims.
"We believe that these [King's] baseless accusations…will put the Muslim population in danger," Naeem Baig, vice president of Public Affairs for the Islamic Circle of North America, told reporters Wednesday.
Misplaced Priorities
Many groups have urged that the hearings be canceled. Instead, Akbar Ahmed, professor of Islamic studies at American University, argued in the New York Times Tuesday that the proceedings should take place and be used as "an opportunity to educate Americans about [the Muslim] community's diversity and faith".
"Muslims should embrace the chance to explain their beliefs fully and clearly. We have nothing to hide," Ahmed said. "But members of Congress also need to act responsibly. They should avoid broad accusations, and be aware that the hearings will be closely followed worldwide."
"We're not in denial in our community that something is going on…There are bad elements in every community" explained Imam Johari Abdul-Malik, representing the Council of Muslim Organizations in Wednesday's press conference. The issue is King's approach, the speakers contended.
"Congress simply has no business examining Americans' religious or political beliefs in official hearings – even if these beliefs are considered 'radical' by some," 42 civil liberties and free speech organizations wrote in a letter to King and other leading lawmakers dated Tuesday.
"Fear and misunderstanding should not drive our government policies," asserted the rights groups, which included the ACLU, Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and Friends of the Earth.
Meanwhile, accused of scape-goating and fear-mongering, King defends the hearings as "essential", while supporters claim they are overdue.
"It should…be no surprise that such [critical] groups have been aggressively vilifying the chairman as a 'racist' and 'bigot', assailing his choice of witnesses, including an authentic Muslim reformer, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, and denouncing the whole hearing enterprise as an example of 'Islamophobia' and McCarthyism," wrote Frank Gaffney, president of the Center for Security Policy, in the 'Washington Times' Tuesday.
26 Comments so far
Show AllThis is another tool to distract the public from the real problems in this country and serves to support our anti-Arab (the people, not the autocratic governments) foreign policy.
Not only do these hearings show the extent of conservative Republicans bigotry toward an entire religion, Islam, but shows their failure to denounce and hold anti-abortion, anti-reproductive rights terrorists in check.
What are the motives of these conservatives? Much of their motives are politics as anti-Muslim politics and rhetoric is disturbingly common and popular among socially conservative Republicans. The other major motive of conservative Republicans is religion and theocratic mindset which wants to impose a right-wing Christian world-view on our constitutional democracy...this right-wing evangelical Christian world-view has little if no respect and tolerance for other religions or moral views...sadly this applies especially to Islam.
In trying to think about what they are trying to do with this hearing, I wanted to comment on the use of the term "radicalization" in the hearing's title: "The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community's Response." In addition to targeting the Muslim American Community, are they also targeting the process of radicalization? Why not use the words "extreme violence" instead of radicalization? Would it be hypocritical for our nation, which has yet to give up violence in its foreign policy and prison systems? My understanding of radicalization is akin to consiensatize-ation, or coming to develop a an aware perspective that differs, perhaps radically, from the endorsed and practiced norm. This coming to consciousness is more often than not non-violent (unlike US foreign policy). The (un)thinking reflected here in the use of language creates equation like this: US foreign policy = benign and radicalization = violence.
"The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007" includes the word "violent." Why did the drop this qualifier for this hearing? Are they assuming it in the case of Muslims?! That is called racism. One can tell they are "trying not to be racist" with the qualifiers they put around Muslim, but for what? What are they trying to do? Are they thinking?
Shouldn't the hearings be about the CIA's long and well documented history of funding, arming and training al Qaeda? We have no evidence that ever stopped after the Soviets left Afghanistan, and quite a lot of evidence shows it did not.
As historian Nafeez Ahmed writes in The Hidden History of 9-11:
"Bin Laden’s “Al-Qaeda” network was never external to the US covert operations apparatus, deriving its infrastructure, weapons, advanced training, and core recruits under the careful tutelage of Western military intelligence. The term “Al-Qaeda” was coined not by Islamists, but by the CIA to designate a computer database of mujahideen operatives, cells, and groups affiliated principally through this Western military intelligence heritage."
Moreover, former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds claims that the US maintained “intimate relations” with Bin Laden and the Taliban, "all the way until that day of September 11." These “intimate relations” included using Bin Laden for operations in Central Asia, including Xinjiang, China.
"I have information about things that our government has lied to us about. I know. For example, to say that since the fall of the Soviet Union we ceased all of our intimate relationship with Bin Laden and the Taliban - those things can be proven as lies, very easily, based on the information they classified in my case, because we did carry very intimate relationship with these people, and it involves Central Asia, all the way up to September 11..."
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7332
Interesting. I think the hearings should be about how the U.S. can turn back the rising tide of Islamophobia in this country. That could be done by presenting the facts concerning how Muslims are helping protect us from extremists and how followers of Islam, notwithstanding unpleasant scriptural passages in the Koran similar to those in other major religions, like Christianity, should be afforded full and equal citizenship and freedom to practice their religion.
exactly...........why all the paranoia?
Those proceedings should be expanded to include all religions.
Such a investigation should expose where the roots of much hatred starts.
As soon as King mentioned the New York Times being critical (in another artlcle) he tipped his "politically motivated" hand. As for his claim he's receieved threats I wonder if this is hype. I'm sure he's received compalints and objections.
Plus there are lots of hate groups in this country and they aren't Muslims.
Ah yes, those Muslims did (not) carry out the 9/11 attacks, who did (not) carry out the anthrax attacks, who did (not) carry out the underwear bomber attacks, and so on. Get on their backs and get on the backs of working people: anything to turn attention away from the true criminals.
McCarthyism 2.0
King: "Are YOU now, or ever have been a follower of Islam?"
The collective american brain is so fertilized with bullshit any GM seed planted there takes root. Imagine, if you can, an atheist, native american, lesbian/gay candidate for any position in the land of the free. Bigots are elected by other bigots. King is merely feeding the sharks.
Peter King should know better, especially from experiences around Northern Irish issues--
particularly how the behaviour of the British government radicalized thousands of Irish Nationalists/Republicans (in the occupied territory of Northern Ireland) to arms, for many many years.
What is really needed is hearings on the radical right wing Tea Party; the radical extremely, dangerous Christian Fascists; Americans for Prosperity; the inside job of 911; Bush, Cheney and Obama as war criminals; and of course, the Wall Street criminals. That would be a good start, but will probably never happen unless there is a non-violent revolution. This witch hunt for so called "radical" Muslims is nothing but a red herring to distract the American public from the real American, terrorists such as Peter King and his fellow Repugs!
Again, the parameters of this debate are complete, utter, total, BULLSH*T and YOU ALL KNOW IT.
You KNOW why Muslims in general don't like the attitude, action, and responses of Americans.
You know deep down that they have every right to become 'radicalized' because we have illegally invaded several Muslim nations and have been killing the citizens of those nations FOR OVER A DECADE NOW.
Are you all BLIND?!
The debate should not be about how angry Muslims are, or how scary that anger may be, the debate SHOULD be about how do we leave these people the hell alone, get the hell out of their countries, and never ever EVER commit the war crime of invading countries like the goddamn nazis EVER AGAIN!
To Rep. Peter the Prick,
Let's round up members of Obama's extended Moozlin family in Kenya just in case there are radicals lurking there.
What the hell does that have to do with anything I just wrote? Thanks for nothing.
King, with his "the others are bad" and "we are good" hearings already has destroyed what he claims to be fighting for--the diversity and freedom that the U.S. says it has represented since the founding fathers. "in our determination to protect our nation, we will not stigmatize or demonize entire communities because of the actions of a few." King's accusations are based on fabricated data, which he will decline to release to the public. This is much the way Joe McCarthy operated in the early 1950s--and he failed because the U.S. was strong and knew a charlatan when it saw one. Now, the U.S. is near a failed state and doesn't know talent like Frank Sinatra from Justin Bieber.
Critics have called Thursday's meeting "inappropriate", "counterproductive" and a "witch-hunt," just as McCarthy's hearings were in the 1950s. However, back then we had Edward R. Murrow to risk his job and a network to expose the spotlight seeking McCarthy. Now we have Fox news, funded by the Koch brothers and other moneyed charlatans. And our news anchors are 30something with bouncy personalities instead of 50something with solid, serious, intellectual personalities like Murrow and Cronkite.
"Alejandro Beutel, Government and Policy Analyst for the Muslim Public Affairs Council, said at the same press conference Wednesday that the hearing was 'political theater rather than actual problem-solving,' with King 'putting an entire religion on trial.' The U.S. has been the safe haven for outcasts fleeing religious and physical persecution since 1789. Now, our Christian Fascist Republican party and its Democratic money-freaks don't want anyone without the entrance fee of $1 million. So, we persecute a religion as a means of keeping out the diversity and talents that Islamic people could bring to our nation. King already has lost--not just for himself (as he will be made the fool like McCarthy), but for his children (and his grandchildren) who will starve or live in a desolate world wrecked by his money-freak brethren.
McCarthyism is archetypal and is human exploitation and hate by another name. Joe is dead, but human hate lives and ironically now takes the name "King." This "King" is no Martin -- just a real Peter among other low-life peters who now take the sad, sick stage of exploitive politics that seek to divide rather than unify humanity!
Ah, for those whimsical days of the balloon boy when the ignorant were diverted with cartoonish frauds.
Now we have Republican Congressman Peter King channeling Republican Sen. Joseph McCarthy in a new round of bigotry, racial profiling and ignorance. One might imagine with all this Congressional time, money and media wasted on these hearings, that AmeriKKKa's economy, education, health care and infrastructure systems have not crumbled under the weight of corporate corruption and greed.
God damn AmeriKKKa!
General strikes, boycotts, non-violent direct action. NOW!
Sickening how rampant islamaphobia plays right into the hands of those who continue our illegal, imperialistic wars and occupations. Meanwhile, the same bigots divide the working class by convincing the rest of us that it's the public employees who are the enemies.
Mohammed Ali said "no VietCong ever called me n----r." Well, no muslim ever threatened my profession or bankrupt the middle class. These right-wingers, and tea partiers as well as their pathetic Democrat enablers are the real enemies.
By far the best analysis I have read on these hearings is by Justin Raimondo on Anti-war.com.