To the editor:
Christy Kennedy (Public Forum, Aug. 21) claims “a few … fanatical individuals or groups who happen to be Muslim” are the problem, while those opposing the Ground Zero Mosque “rely on fear- and emotion-based, inflammatory and flawed arguments that lack substance.”
I admit I’m fearful. I’d feel better if:
• Islamic texts didn’t preach the goal of worldwide Islamic dominance,
• more Americans knew that Islam it isn’t just a religion but also a political ideology and war doctrine,
• more true Muslim reformers were speaking out, and didn’t have to fear execution as apostates,
• the doctrine of taqqiyah didn’t promote lying to non-Muslims to advance the spread of Islam,
• so many “moderate” Muslims hadn’t said one thing to Western audiences and the opposite to Middle Eastern ones,
• the Muslim Brotherhood hadn’t adopted a strategy of using mosques and Islamic centers in the West as incubators of “radical” Islam,
• the “moderate” Council on American-Islamic Relations wasn’t an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holyland Foundation terror-funding case, with former leaders and staffers now in federal prison,
• CAIR wasn’t pushing for European-style “defamation of religion” laws, used to silence speech critical of Islam,
• “moderate” Imam Rauf didn’t want sharia law for the U.S.,
• the press hadn’t been so wrong about much-touted “moderates” Imam al-Awlaki (now an al-Qaida commander) and Muzzammil Hasan (New York founder of moderate Muslim “Bridges TV” with his wife, whom he has since beheaded),
• more Americans knew what dhimmi status means.
• tolerance wasn’t so often synonymous with ignorance.