People talk about extremism all the time these days, but because the term isn't defined clearly, it has come to mean just about anything. These days, it is increasingly become synonymous with Islam, leaving Muslims in the US constantly accused of tolerating, harboring, or even being extremists themselves. The Oxford Dictionary describes an extremist as "a person who holds extreme or fanatical political or religious views, especially one who resorts to or advocates extreme action."
By this definition, the accusation that the Muslim community is made up of people who tolerate, harbor, or are themselves extremists falls flat. To whatever extent that extremism exists in the Muslim American community, it has been disowned by our organizations, given no refuge in our mosques (particularly after 9/11 and 7/7), and is relegated to the margins of our community and the Internet. In the few mosques that have been linked to extremism, individuals have used the facilities to conceal their activities from worshippers and the public at large. For all the complaints that people have about extremism among Muslims, you'd be hard pressed to find one that will unabashedly declare their views to all.

However, the same is not true when it comes to those whose unabashed hatred of Muslims lead them to defile the very foundation of this country.

When right-wing pundit Dennis Prager penned a column that said that newly elected Muslim congressman Keith Ellison (D-MN) "should not be allowed" to take his oath of office on the Qur'an, he revealed something disturbing about himself and the thousands that rallied to his side. Because the Constitution strictly prohibits "religious tests" being used on elected representatives, and the Bill of Rights has a strict protection of the freedom of religion, this issue pits the legal and moral foundations of this country against irrational hatred. Praeger and his supporters have chosen the latter, and we now have thousands of people who claim to not be held to the tenets of the Constitution and Bill of Rights when it comes to the pursuit of their Muslim foes. (Thankfully, many thoughtful conservatives - despite having no love for Islam or Muslims - have defended the rights of Muslims in this case.)

Ultimately, Muslim extremists in the US are few and marginalized, with both Muslim and non-Muslims united against them. To think that elected Muslim representatives, or a population making up some 1% of America, could enforce sharia law by surprise - as some prophesize - is laughable. But the real extremists, who seek to discard the legal foundation of this country and set up a Taliban-style "morals police" to enforce fealty to a state religion, are getting stronger each day. Which one is more of a threat to our society?

Some pundits, unable to find actual Muslim extremists in the US to argue with, seem intent on manufacturing them. CNN�s host Glenn Beck warns that if Muslims aren't "lining up to shoot the bad Muslims in the head", then they will end up "behind razor wire." Put another way, Beck issued an extremist threat against Muslims if Muslims don't engage in extremist actions against extremists. If this were actually to happen, it is reasonable to assume that Beck would respond by claiming it as proof of the maxim that Muslims don't believe in civil society and rule of law, and resort to violence first. How could this ever be taken seriously? But as Beck's ratings will attest to, it is.

It is easy to find bloggers, commentators, radio talk show hosts, and many others who state very clearly that Islam should be "dealt with" or "confronted". They are on some of the most-listened to radio shows, the most-read op-ed columns, and the blogs with the highest traffic. But what do they mean by this? Tellingly, each can speak or write forever about the "threat" that Muslims in the US pose, but they have hardly a word about the "solution". (It would be informative if the media, when bringing these people on the air, would ask that simple question.) They leave no room for "moderate Muslims", no respect for Islam as a legitimate faith, and do not want Muslim Americans - more than half of whom were born in America and know no other home - as neighbors. Perhaps they haven't yet bothered to take their rhetoric through to its logical conclusion (the amount of time they devote to this obsession makes it unlikely). They are only responsible for whipping people into a frenzy. What happens next is in the domain of the lynch mob. And we all know where that gets us.

Again, what is the more extremist threat in America? The Muslim bogeyman in America that everyone talks about but nobody can seem to find? Or the thousands of Americans who daily declare their intent to fight their Muslim neighbors with no shame or guilt, and accompanied by silence on the part of our fellow Americans? I believe in the goodwill of Americans, and truly believe that the vast majority would not allow Muslims to be swept aside in violation of the laws that make our country special. What worries me, however, is that it may take many innocent Muslims being put behind razor wire - or worse - for the country to wake up to the threat of the real extremists among us.

Well written. The crazy right wing wishes to flush the constitution down the toilet in order to get rid of Muslims. In Europe right wing parties are making a come back because people there feel threatened by Muslims.

Salam: I was recently wondering whether a Holocaust against Muslims could happen in this country, which is the most religiously and ethnically diverse on the planet. After reading a news item today in CAIR's latest newsletter, I think so. It's a very small incident, but the fact that others watched as a Muslim woman in Hijab was verbally attacked and almost run over by a man at a Walgreen's pharmacy in Ohio speaks volumes about the level of rising hatred. May God protect us and guide us to reach out to others in the best way.

The extremist profile is a media driven monster that needs to be dismantled in the media itself.

Muhammad Ali and Malcolm X are as much American as every other anti-establishment mouthpiece who is a citizen in the US.

And the strength of the global Ummah grows with every passing second. We are weaved into the global economic and political realities of the world and can't just be washed away in egomaniacal protest.

>> speaks volumes about the level of rising hatred

This shouldn't be. Muslims are at the front of dialogue in the country. It seems to me that the more a community is seen in the US media, speaking as Americans do and have i.e. for their God given right to liberty and freedom, the more the nation will accept them.

Salam: that's a pretty good point. Congressman Keith Ellison was in Chicago for a Muslim fundraising dinner recently which I attended, and he said that whenever a community stands up to defend itself and preserve its rights, as the Muslim community in the US is now doing, that automatically broadens the scope of the struggle for everyone, benefiting all in the end. The civil rights movement led by African-Americans is a good example. It led to the changing of America's laws on immigration, which allowed many of the parents of today's American Muslims to enter this country, whereas previous to that, there was a color bar.

""most would agree that anyone who advocates an absolutist political or social view and wishes to impose it outside the framework of the law (i.e. through coercive, illegal, or violent means) would, in fact, be an extremist..."

I find this a bit a a 'Strawman' argument.

In that it excludes those with absolutist views but who do not want to impose by 'Violent oce' or coercision.... Yet

Rather, lets say, most Muslims want Sharia Law. But at 2% of the population, they realize this, even by force, isn't likely.

So are those who want to change Americas Legal system, and it's Capitalist/Interest-based economic system "Extremists"?

I say 'Yes they are' even tho they don't advocate violent overthrow of the Government. - they advocate conversion and demographic means as in process Right Now in Europe to Fundamentally change the character of Western Society.

Pretty extreme.

Reply 2

" Because the Constitution strictly prohibits "religious tests" being used on elected representatives.."

Alas Islam is different than other religions, in that is is NOT just another religion, a 'Sunday' thing.

Islam is a Religous AND Political total life construct, and there is a question therefore, if they can be held separate it's adherents.

they advocate conversion and demographic means as in process Right Now in Europe to Fundamentally change the character of Western Society

So does the Christian Right. Is it extreme when they do it?

I don't agree with the Christian Right or any 'Religionists' and their doctrine.

The differeence however, is that Christianitiy's vision of America is generally consistent WITH America (and democracy and Capitalism), and that the USA was founded by New Testament adherents. Ones who had the good sense, to separate Church and state. (and no Dhimmis or Jizyah tax)

The differeence however, is that Christianitiy's vision of America is generally consistent WITH America

Not true. The religious right has many complaints with American society and seeks to impose its morality and religion on the rest of us. This movement does not respect the separation of church and state, and rails against it every chance they get.

And unlike Muslims, who have stated no such agenda, the Christian right is mobilized, well-funded, and much closer to achieving its goals.

I'm afraid it's all true, despite the fact you only pick and choose from my posts.
(So let's number them)

1. Most Muslims want Sharia Law, a completely diffrent Construct.
1a. The Vast Majority of Christians (even the 20% known as 'Religous right'). Want our current system.
Constitution, laws etc.
They feel slightly diffreently on the Interpretation of some clauses of that constitution, but want IT, NOT Sharia.

And of course most Christians,not mentioned above unlike MOST Muslims, aren't even Holy Book Literalists.


1b. "separation of church and state" is a Western Concept, antitheical to Islam, which as I said, is a Religous AND Politcial life construct.

2. Similar to above/with Economic systems.




3.