Showing posts with label anti-Islam. Show all posts
Showing posts with label anti-Islam. Show all posts

Sunday, March 13, 2011

Legitimizing Islamic Radicalization

Legitimizing Islamic Radicalization
Prompted by Marylou’s search for the truth.

As a civil society, we must resist the temptation to blame their family, nation and religion for the acts of the individuals, and we must not give them the cover to hide under a religious label for their evil acts.

Indeed they quote the scripture and instead of eagerly accepting them, we must open Quraan and find the truth. There is a successful experiment on the subject and it was a neglected story in the media.

In 2008, a judge in Yemen challenged the Al-Qaida inmates to find the verses in Quraan that justify their acts, he gave them three months to find, if you find it, he said  I'll join your movement or would you reject it if you don’t find it? They in fact were outraged for being duped and have become hunters for the Al-Qaida men.

Same story was repeated in Dallas, Pastor Robert Jeffress called Quraan an evil book written by a false prophet, I asked him to find three verses in Quraan that are evil and I will give up my faith and join his. He chickened out and the media did not bother to follow up with him.  Then we produced the Quraan conference in Dallas with non-Muslim clergy to evaporate the lies the right wingers had propagated. Full story and video, TV interviews at www.Quraanconference.com

Finding the truth is a responsibility, the society would be better off by freeing themselves from suspicion and anxieties from our hearts and finding peace within.

Mike Ghouse is the founder of America Together foundation, committed to building cohesive societies offering pluralistic solution on the issues of the day.  His work is indexed in 4 websites and 21 Blogs at http://www.mikeghouse.net/


 # # #

Mike, you say below:  Phrases such as "Islamic radicalism" are oxymoron and must be avoided to uphold our civility.    What would be a your term?  I think the term "Islam" is used because they quote scripture to justify.  Perhaps you could give some clarity on this.  Thanks. Blessings, M.


Thursday, March 10, 2011

Peter King hearing shows 'sharply polarized' attitudes toward Islam

Americans who are older, conservative in their religion and politics, and Republican are more likely to be wary of Muslims in this country, according to polls conducted before Rep. Peter King's hearing on 'radicalization' among American Muslims.

Samira Hussein, of Montgomery County, Md., listens to the House Homeland Security Committee hearing on 'the extent of the radicalization' of American Muslims, Thursday, March 10.
J. Scott Applewhite / AP
Enlarge

By Brad Knickerbocker, Staff writer / March 10, 2011
Public attitudes towards American Muslims – highlighted by the House hearing this week led by Rep. Peter King (R) of New York – are deeply divided and sharply defined, according to new opinion polls.
In general, Americans who are older, conservative in their religion and politics, and Republican tend to be wary of Muslims in this country. In particular, most of those who identify with the tea party movement say they believe that Islam is more likely to promote violence than other religions.

By contrast, Americans who are younger, more liberal in their religion and politics, and Democrat, are less likely to be concerned that American Muslims are a threat to national or personal security.


The first group generally supports Representative King’s Homeland Security Committee hearing with its controversial title: “The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and that Community's Response.” The second group generally disagrees with King’s effort – some going as far as to liken it to a new era of McCarthyism.

A new Gallup poll finds that, when averaged together, about half of all Americans approve of hearings being held on radical Islam in the US, but that breaks down along party lines: 69 percent of Republicans and just 40 percent of Democrats support the idea of the hearings. Republicans also are much more inclined than Democrats to believe that Muslims in the US are “too extreme in their religious beliefs” (50 percent and 25 percent, respectively) and “sympathetic to the Al Qaeda terrorist organization” (38 percent and 24 percent).

Americans 'sharply polarized'

“The large partisan gulf in some of these attitudes … underscores the sharply polarized way in which Republicans and Democrats view the world today – even in their subjective characterizations of religious groups,” writes Gallup Editor-in-Chief Frank Newport in an analysis of the poll. “Less than half of Republicans believe that Muslims in the US are supportive of the United States, while a clear majority of Democrats do. And, most relevant to the current debate, while Republicans strongly support the appropriateness of the King hearings, less than half of Democrats agree.”

Another new national survey – by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press – finds the American public evenly split – 40 percent agree, 42 percent disagree – on whether “the Islamic religion is more likely than others to encourage violence.”

As with the Gallup poll, Pew finds important distinctions among those surveyed.

While 58 percent of those younger than 30 say Islam does not encourage violence more than other religions, a plurality of those 50 and older (45 percent) says it does. White, evangelical Protestants are more likely to see Islam as potentially violent (60 percent) than do mainline Protestants (42 percent) or Roman Catholics (39 percent).

Tea partyers associate Islam with violence

“Political and ideological divisions are even wider,” reports Pew. By roughly 3 to 1 (66 percent to 21 percent), conservative Republicans say Islam encourages violence more than other religions. The numbers are virtually reversed for liberal Democrats. Of those who agree with the tea party movement, two-thirds say Islam is more associated with violence.

Political inclinations aside, public worries about Muslims in the US have grown in recent years, as threats of terrorist attacks tied to radical Islam have increased and some attacks (such as the Fort Hood shootings) have succeeded.

In March 2002 – six months after the massive attacks of 9/11 – just 25 percent of those surveyed by Pew saw Islam as more likely to encourage violence while twice as many (51 percent) disagreed.
While the country was still reeling from the attacks in New York and at the Pentagon that had killed thousands, then-President Bush, as well as other political and religious leaders, stressed that Islam itself – and certainly the great majority of American Muslims – should not be blamed for terrorism.

It was a point strongly made by FBI Director Robert Mueller in his 2008 testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.

Today, after nearly a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the arrest of some American Muslims charged with plotting attacks, and concerns about Muslim Brotherhood ties to political turmoil in several Arab countries, the percentage of the US public associating Islam with violence has gone from 25 percent to 40 percent.

King will hammer the first nail on right wing coffin


This blog will list published opinions on the subject.  If you know a good piece that is not posted on this blog, you may consider sharing it. You can post the link in “YOUR COMMENTS” Link and it will  be post if it adds significantly to the understanding of the situation.   

Peter King has made statements that are repulsive, and have no foundation or sources to it. He pulls things out of thin air or acts out of the seat of his pants.

We are concerned about the hearings and hope and pray that Mr. King would be honest, sincere and fair, although his record is marred with bigotry. We hope he will not destroy the fabric of our society and pit one American against the other.

If he takes the wrong step, the American people will not put up with it, as they have done that time and again. I trust the Americans, the moderate Americans who are a majority and have supported and turned around Vietnam War, Iraq war, abortion issues, civil rights and other issues.
We have sadly elected the Republican Majority, which I had advocated as an individual all along, instead the right-wingers rode in on the “hate agenda” and shamelessly a majority of the Good-for-nothing-Republican Party is letting them carry it, and evil continues to perpetuate.   If they don’t get their act together we have to dump the leadership and fix them.

I am a Republican and will stay one, and I am committed to attend the key meetings for the next season and I will be questioning and demanding proof for their non-sense. I hope other Republicans will have the spine to speak up against what is wrong with the Republican leadership; they are letting the hate mongers become their mascot.

I welcome the hearings, Muslims have nothing to fear and nothing to worry, let the man fall flat on his face. Just as we produced the Quraan conference to evaporate the lies the right wingers had projected, this will perhaps become the first nail on their coffin.   

Mike Ghouse is a speaker commited to building a cohesive America. His work is reflected at three websites and twenty seven blogs indexed at http://www.mikeghouse.net/

# # #

Press Release from ISNA

Source: ISNA
(Plainfield, IN March 10, 2011) This morning at 9:30 AM, Rep. Peter King, Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, called the first six witnesses in the Congressional Hearings: "The Extent of Radicalization in the American Muslim Community and That Community's Response."  The witness list can be found online. 

"While we share the Committee's commitment to ensuring the security of our nation, we strongly believe that there is a better way to ensure our national security than singling out one faith community.  The hearing as it is currently structured proposes holding a public scrutiny of one specific community on the basis of religion; such institutionalized generalizations have not been seen since the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II.

We will continue to do our part to prevent terrorism, and we ask that the Committee on Homeland Security continue to do its part as well.  Rather than emphasizing our differences, our safety as a nation would be better enhanced if the Committee instead united us, so that all the diverse communities of America can work together for our nation's security," said ISNA in written testimony to the hearings.

 In preparation for these hearings, and the discriminatory nature of their approach, ISNA organized with national interfaith leaders and members of the ISNA "Shoulder to Shoulder Campaign: Standing with American Muslims to Uphold American Values," to publicly denounce their format and scope.

Today, at 1PM,  ISNA President Imam Mohamed Magid was joined by ISNA leadership and representatives from 23 national religious organizations (members of the "Shoulder to Shoulder" campaign) to hold a Press Conference at the Cannon Building in Washington DC, where a joint statement, entitled, "Religious Leaders Stand Shoulder-to-Shoulder Against Extremism of All Kinds in Support of American Values" was shared with the community. 

The religious leaders today made it clear that there is a better way to unite and secure our nation than by marginalizing an entire religious group in America based on the actions of a few.  An excerpt from today's statement is found below, with the full statement found online by clicking here.

As the House Committee on Homeland Security convenes hearings on the putative "radicalization" of American Muslims, our obligation takes on renewed urgency...All of our faith communities share a powerful prohibition against bearing false witness, with the understanding that destroying a person's reputation is tantamount to destroying his or her life. To assert that Muslims as a broad group are not deeply devoted to America's safety and the peaceful interaction of its entire citizenry - that is false witness. By subjecting American Muslims to such scrutiny, we weaken our more perfect union, and we harm the national vision of our common good that is a witness to the nations.  We encourage all citizens of this country to honor freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution that enable the free exercise of religion across our great land.

In addition to the press conference, members of ISNA's "Shoulder to Shoulder" campaign will meet with representarives of Congress and the White House throughout the day to introduce them to the campaign and express their direct concerns with the format of the King hearings. 

Contact:
Sarah Thompson
ISNA Communications Coordinator
sthompson@isna.net
317-839-1816

Peter King, Islamic Terror and Islamophobia

Brad Hirschfield.Rabbi, Author and Expert on Religion and Public Life
.Peter King, Islamic Terror and Islamophobia
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-brad-hirschfield/peter-king-islamic-terror_b_833309.html

With Rep. Peter King beginning hearings Thursday, hearings that will examine the issue of radicalization within the American Muslim community, two things should be stated very clearly: Islamic terror is real and so is Islamophobia. Denying the former is a deadly error, but addressing that real and pressing problem in no way necessitates or justifies the latter.

These hearings, if conducted properly, could surface both of those realities, which are rarely acknowledged in the same places and at the same time. Too often, in my own experience with religious and communal leaders in both the American Muslim community and in the community at large, those who are prepared to deal with the problem of Islamic terror, minimize or altogether ignore the ugliness of Islamophobia, while those who would have us focus on combating hatred of Muslims, downplay the linkage between Islam and terror in the world today.

What we need are people who have the bravery, honesty and compassion to address both at the same time. At the very least, it would be helpful if those lining up on both sides of these hearings would focus our attention on that challenge rather than simply defending King, who has said any number of outrageous things about Muslims and Islam, or suggesting that these hearings are simply an excuse for whipping up hatred against Muslims.

While it's certainly true that these hearings could become the "witch hunt" about which some are concerned, the claim that merely holding the hearings constitutes an Islamophobic hunt is inappropriate. Not to mention that not holding such hearings because we fear what they may become places those who take that view in the same boat with those who fear pretty much all Muslims because of the fear of what they may become.

As is so often the case, in politics as in life, those most opposed to each other are very much alike. In this case, each mobilizes around a fear of what might be, rather than calmly addressing something that actually is.
Raising questions, however uncomfortable, does not constitute bias against the group to whom those questions are addressed, but it does make demands upon those who raise the questions. They will have to prove that their interest lies not in showing how a particular faith community is inherently dangerous or problematic. They will have to demonstrate a willingness not only to see radicalization about which they are concerned, but also to see where it is absent and the extent to which the fight against it from inside the Muslim community has been successful.

If these hearing proceed properly, many people whose knee-jerk reaction is to defend Islam and Muslims as a group, will find themselves uncomfortable, and so will those people who believe that to see any Muslim is to see a threat, rather than simply seeing a fellow American who happens to be Muslim. If the overly simplistic picture typically portrayed by one side or the other is simply confirmed, then Rep. King will have failed and should be held accountable for his failure.

Former Counterterrorism Chief Says Muslims Cooperate

By Omar Sacirbey
Religion News Service

Former Counterterrorism Chief Says Muslims Cooperate 

(RNS) A former FBI counterterrorism director on Tuesday (March 8) rejected allegations by the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee that Muslim Americans don't cooperate with law enforcement in terror investigations.

Rep. Peter King, a Long Island Republican, will open hearings on Thursday about Muslim radicalization that critics say unfairly singles out Muslims.

"I will tell you in no uncertain terms that the community has on multiple occasions come forward and assisted law enforcement," said Michael Rolince, who headed the Counterterrorism Division in the FBI's Washington field office between 2002 and 2005.

Rolince said the hearings and heated "rhetoric" from politicians attacking Muslims undermine that cooperation, and said smart counterterrorism strategy requires engaging with Muslim Americans.

"You talk to everyone and then you figure out who's going to be helpful, who's going to be harmful, and who's not going to be a factor," said Rolince, speaking in a conference call sponsored by Muslim Advocates, a civil rights group in San Francisco. "This is not easy.
Anyone who thinks you can just snap your fingers and everyone's going to go along and understand both sides of the equation is in the wrong line of work."

Despite his criticism of the King hearings, Rolince said he hoped some good would come of the controversial hearings. "I think this is going to be a great conversation after the hearings," he said.

Muslim Advocates used the call to announce a new website, www.whatunites.us, where people are asked to sign a pledge "against fearmongering." Current signatories include 9/11 Families For Peaceful Tomorrows, the Sikh Coalition, the North Carolina Council of Churches and the American Muslim Law Enforcement Officers Association.

Wednesday, March 9, 2011

Twice As Many Plots Since 9/11 From Non-Muslim Terrorists

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/09/king-muslims-plots-terrorists/

Twice As Many Plots Since 9/11 From Non-Muslim Terrorists 

Tomorrow, Rep. Peter King (R-NY), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, will hold hearings singling out the Muslim American community for supposedly aiding and abetting domestic radicalization and terrorism.

When asked why he is singling out the Muslim American community and refusing to investigate other forms of terrorism, King has responded by saying that “it makes no sense to talk about other types of extremism, when the main threat to the United States today is talking about al Qaida.”

Yet as a January 2011 terrorism statistics report — compiled using publicly available data from the FBI and other crime agencies — from the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) shows, terrorism by Muslim Americans has only accounted for a minority of terror plots since 9/11. Since the attacks on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, Muslims have been involved in 45 domestic terrorist plots. Meanwhile, non-Muslims have been involved in 80 terrorist plots.

In fact, right-wing extremist and white supremacist attacks plots alone outnumber plots by Muslims, with both groups being involved in 63 terror plots, 18 more plots than Muslim Americans have been involved in. Here is a breakdown of attacks by group, along with a few examples of plots by some of these groups:

Anti-Government/Anti-Tax Extremists: There have been 36 plots by right-wing extremists since 9/11. These attacks include Joseph Stack’ssuicide attack on a Texas IRS building and Joshua Cartwright, who became enraged after the election of Barack Obama and “believed thatthe US Government was conspiring against him.”

KKK/NeoNazi/White Supremacist: There have been 27 plots by white supremacists since 9/11. These attacks include a 2004 letter bombing of the Arizona Office of Diversity and Dialogue that injured three employees.

Unknown/Miscellaneous: There were five attacks that federal crime officials did not categorize.

Christian Extremists/Anti-Abortion: There were three attacks by anti-abortion extremists and Christian extremists. The killing of abortion provider George Tiller is the most prominent of these attacks.

Black Supremacist Cults: There were two plots by black supremacist cults.

Jewish Extremists: There were two plots by Jewish extremists. The most prominent of these was a plot by Robert Goldstein to attack a local Islamic center with home made C4 and other explosives.

Extreme Anti-Immigrant: There were two plots by anti-immigrant extremists. One of these was the attack by Shawn Forde, who murdered a Queens deli clerk and was motivated by racist and anti-immigrant feelings.

Anti-Jewish: There was one plot by an anti-Semitic extremist. Norman Leboon made anti-Semitic threats against Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA).

Anarchist: There was a single plot by an anarchist. Joseph D. Konopka “wreaked havoc in 13 counties by setting fires, disrupting radio and television broadcasts, disabling an air traffic control system, selling counterfeit software, and damaging the computer system of an Internet service provider.”

Given the fact that non-Muslim terrorists account for almost twice as many plots as Muslim terrorists in the United States since 9/11, King’s justification that he is targeting Muslims because they represent the primary threat seems hollow.

Additionally, King’s hearings come at a time when Muslim American terrorism and involvement in extremism has actually plummeted in the past couple years, according to a Duke University study put out last month. Moreover, nearly 4 in 10 Al-Qaida related plots in the United States have been broken up thanks to intelligence provided by the Muslim community themselves and 70 percent of recent terror plots in the United States have been foiled by help from Muslim Americans.

UPDATEOn the eve of King's hearings, authorities have named a white supremacist as the suspect in the case of an attempted bombing of an MLK rally in Spokane, Washington.

Terrorism by Muslim-Americans dropped

CHAPEL HILL, NC:  A new study released today by the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security  shows that the number of Muslim-Americans who perpetrated or were arrested for terrorist acts declined sharply in 2010.  The study, “Muslim American Terrorism Since 9/11:  An Accounting,” reports that while 47 Muslim-Americans committed or were arrested for terrorist crimes in 2009, the number dropped to 20 this past year.

The author of the study, Charles Kurzman, Professor of Sociology at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, said,  “Of course, even a single terrorist plot is too many. But this trend offers a challenge for the American public: If we ratchet up our security concerns when the rate of terrorism rises, should we ratchet down our concerns when it falls?”

The study also reported that:
  • The number of Muslim-Americans engaged in terrorist acts with domestic targets declined from 18 in 2009 to 10 in 2010.
  • 75% of the Muslim Americans engaged in terrorist plots in 2010 were disrupted in an early stage of planning. This is consistent with the pattern of disruption since 9/11 (102 of 161 plots – 63%  -- were disrupted at an early stage of planning).
  • Less than one-third of the perpetrators did not come to the attention of law enforcement until after an attack was executed.  However, a large majority of these Muslim American terrorist activities (35 out of 46 individuals) took place outside the United States. 
  • Domestic plots by Muslim-Americans are more likely to be disrupted than foreign plots.  48 of 69 individuals that plotted against domestic targets were arrested at an early stage of their activities.
  • Eleven Muslim Americans have successfully executed terrorist attacks in the United States since 9/11, killing 33 people.  This is about 3 deaths per year.  There have been approximately 150,000 murders in the United States since 9/11.  According to the FBI there were approximately 15,241 murders in the United States in 2009.
  • Tips from the Muslim American community provided the source of information that led to a terrorist plot being thwarted in 48 of 120 cases involving Muslim Americans.
David Schanzer, Director of the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security, said, “this study puts into perspective the threat presented by domestic radicalization of Muslim Americans.”  Schanzer noted, “Is this a problem that deserves the attention of law enforcement and the Muslim American community?  Absolutely.  But Americans should take note that these crimes are being perpetrated by a handful of people who actions are denounced and rejected by virtually all the Muslims living in the United States.”

The full report is available here.
The author of the report, Charles Kurman, can be reached at kurzman@unc.edu
The Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security is a consortium between Duke University, the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, and RTI International. 

Islamophobia Can Create Radicalization

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-zogby/peter-king-note-islamopho_b_831790.html
Let me state quite directly: Islamophobia and those who promote it are a greater threat to the United States of America than Anwar al Awlaqi and his rag-tag team of terrorists.

On one level, al Awlaqi, from his cave hide-out in Yemen, can only prey off of alienation where it exists. Adopting the persona of a latter-day Malcolm X (though he seems not to have read the last chapters of the Autobiography or learned the lessons of Malcolm's ultimate conversion), he appears street-smart, brash, self-assured and assertive -- all of the assets needed to attract lost or wounded souls looking for certainty and an outlet for their rage. Like some parasites, al Awlaqi cannot create his own prey. He must wait for others to create his opportunities, which until now have been isolated and limited -- a disturbed young man here, an increasingly deranged soldier there.

Islamophobia, on the other hand, if left unchecked, may serve to erect barriers to Muslim inclusion in America, increasing alienation, especially among young Muslims. Not only would such a situation do grave damage to one of the fundamental cornerstones of America's unique democracy, it would simultaneously rapidly expand the pool of recruits for future radicalization.

I have often remarked that America is different, in concept and reality, from our European allies. Third generation Kurds in Germany, Pakistanis in the UK, or Algerians in France, for example, may succeed and obtain citizenship, but they do not become German, British, or French. Last year, I debated a German government official on this issue. She kept referring to the "migrants" -- a term she used to describe all those of Turkish descent, living in her country, regardless of the number of generations they had been there. Similarly, following their last election, a leading British newspaper commented on the "number of immigrants" who won seats -- without noting that many of those "immigrants" were third generation citizens.

America has prided itself on being different. Being "American" is not the possession of a single ethnic group, nor does any group define "America." Not only do new immigrants become citizens, they also secure a new identity. More than that, as new groups become American and are transformed -- the idea of "America" itself has also changed to embrace these new cultures.

Within a generation, diverse ethnic and religious groups from every corner or the globe have become Americans, dramatically changing America in the process. Problems remain and intolerant bigots, in every age, have reared up against new groups, but history demonstrates that, in the end, the newcomers have been accepted, incorporated and absorbed into the American mainstream.

This defines not only our national experience, but our defining narrative, as well. When immigrant school children in Europe learn French, German or British history -- they are learning "their host's" history. In the U.S., from the outset, we are taught that this is "our new story" -- that it includes all of us and has included us all, from the beginning.

It is because new immigrants and diverse ethnic and religious communities have found their place and acceptance in the American mainstream that the country, during the last century, survived and prospered despite being sorely tested with World Wars, economic upheaval and bouts with internal strife. During all this time we had to contend with anti-black, anti-Asian, anti-Catholic, anti-Jewish, anti-immigrant, and anti-Japanese movements. In the end, after creating their moment of pain, these efforts have always lost.
They lose, but they do not always go away. The Islamophobia we are witnessing today is the latest campaign by bigots to tear apart the very fabric of America. We know the groups promoting it. First, there is the well-funded "cottage industry," on the right, of groups and individuals with a long history of anti-Arab or anti-Muslim activity. Some of the individuals associated with these efforts have been given legitimacy as commentators on "terrorism," "radicalization" or "national security concerns" - despite their obvious bias and even obsession with all things Arab or Muslim (in this, they remind me of good old-fashioned anti-Semites who never tired of warning of Jewish threats or conspiracies or who while always claiming to like individual Jews, rallied against any and all Jewish organizations).

If these "professional bigots" have provided the grist, the mill itself was run by the vast network of right-wing talk radio and TV shows and websites and prominent preachers who have combined to amplify the anti-Muslim message nationwide. Their efforts have done real damage. They have tormented descent public servants, created protests that have shuttered legitimate institutions, fomented hate crimes and produced fear in the Muslim community.

In just the past two years, we have seen a dramatic upsurge in the activity of these bigots. More ominously, their cause has been embraced by national political leaders and by elements in the Republican Party -- who appear to have decided, in 2010, to use "fear of Islam" as a base-building theme and a wedge issue against Democrats for electoral advantage.

In the past only obscure or outrageous members of Congress (like: North Carolina's Sue Myrick who expressed nervousness and insecurity because of "who was owning all those 7/11's"; or Colorado's Tom Tancredo who once warned that he "would bomb Mecca") were outspoken Islamophobes. After the National Republican Congressional Campaign Committee embraced opposition to Park 51 as a campaign theme, it is hard to find a leading Republican who has not railed on some issue involving Islam or Muslims in the U.S.

The net impact here is that this current wave of Islamophobia has both played to the Republican base, while firming up that base around this agenda. The polling numbers are striking and deeply disturbing. Fifty-four percent of Democrats have a favorable attitude toward Muslims, while 34% do not. Among Republicans, on the other hand, only 12% hold a favorable view of Muslims, with 85% saying they have unfavorable views. Additionally, 74% of Republicans believe "Islam teaches hate" and 60% believe that "Muslims tend to be religious fanatics".

The danger here is that to the degree that this issue has become a partisan and, in some cases, a proven vote getter for the GOP, it will not go away any time soon. The longer we are plagued by this bigotry, and the displays of intolerance it breeds (the anti-mosque building demonstrations or the anti-Sharia law efforts now spreading across the country) the longer young Muslims will feel that the "promise of America" does not include them -- and they will feel like aliens in their own country.

It is this concern that has prompted many inter-faith religious groups and leaders and a diverse coalition of ethnic and civil rights organizations to so vigorously oppose Congressman Peter King's (R-NY) hearings that will deal with the radicalization of American Muslims later this week. They know, from previous statements made by King, of his personal hostility to American Muslims. They also know that what King is doing will only aggravate an already raw wound, creating greater fear and concern among young Muslims -- who have already witnessed too much bigotry and intolerance.

What they should also know, is that in the process of targeting a religion in this way and engaging in this most "un-American activity" King and company are, in fact, opening the door for increased alienation and future radicalization. Al Awlaqi must be smiling from inside his cave.

Dr. James J. Zogby is the author of (Palgrave Macmillan, October 2010) and the founder and president of the Arab American Institute (AAI), a Washington, D.C.-based organization which serves as the political and policy research arm of the Arab American communityArab Voices: What They Are Saying to Us, and Why it Matters.