MORE ON ANTI-MUSLIM RHETORIC

I didn't expect to return to the anti-Muslim issue so soon (see previous post) but the beat goes on.

The most recent headline news was the firing of National Public Radio (NPR) analyst Juan Williams. He was fired for his statement on a Fox News program that he gets nervous when he sees people wearing Muslim clothing on a plane, once again giving support to those who equate being a Muslim with being a terrorist. The reason for his firing was that he was contracted by NPR as an analyst, not to give his personal opinion on issues via the media. He was quickly hired by Fox to a multi-year contract.

The real and broader point of the Williams firing, stripped of the "analyst" vs. "opinion" terminology, was the further example it gave of anti-Muslim stereotyping that occurs more than we like to think or acknowledge. In this case, stereotyping emerged in a very public way. It was not unlike the "racial profiling" issue that broke out earlier this year when the state of Arizona passed a law to have its own enforcement procedure against undocumented residents, in this case Hispanics. In the Arizona case, the core parts of the state law were nullified by a federal court judge who ruled that Arizona had overstepped its authority by intruding into federal jurisdiction over immigration matters.

But something far less public nationally than the Williams firing is a case argued in a local court in Murfreesboro, Tennesssee. This involved the proposed plan of a local Islamic Center to build a new mosque to replace the existing one in an industrial building wedged between a pipeline company and a warehouse. The proposed construction site hit the news a few weeks ago when some construction equipment was set on fire. The case at issue this week is an effort by opponents of the mosque to block the construction on the grounds that the public was not properly notified about the meeting when the construction plans were considered. But what broke out at the court hearing took the anti-Muslim rhetoric found around the country to a new level of stupidity (or pretended stupidity) and bigotry.

The lawyer for the opponents sought, according to the Associated Press, to prove that Islam is not a real religion, but rather a militant movement trying to impose an Islamic code of moral law on the United States. The charge that Islam was not a religion was made despite a filing made by the U.S. attorney that Islam is indeed a recognized religion and as such it is protected under the Constitution. At one point the attorney for the opponents went on to accuse one member of the Islamic Center's board of calling for a religious jihad as shown by a phrase over the board member's front door. The phrase was "Allahu Akbar" which means "God is Great".

The next day a local resident opposing the mosque said, according to the news report, that "she was convinced that Muslims want to overthrow the U.S. government." When asked under cross examination whether there should be no mosques in the country, she responded, "That would be wonderful".

With such displays of legal ignorance and such evidence of an anti-Muslim attitude by a local resident, it is hardly any wonder that there is fertile ground for anti-Muslim, anti-Islamic rhetoric among some political candidates and talk show cheerleaders such as Bill O'Reilly on whose show Williams made his stereotyping statement. O'Reilly himself was involved in a recent controversy over his anti-Muslim remarks on a non-Fox talk show.

It is uncertain where all of this might lead to in terms of converting such stupidity and toxic rhetoric into public policy at the national, state, or local levels, but it does seem evident that equating the Islamic religion with terrorism will extend the anti-Muslim poison further into our body politics and cause us continued problems at home and abroad.