AbuMubarak
26-04-04, 11:28 AM
By Richard H. Curtiss
http://www.mpacuk.org/mpac/data/fef27fa1/fef27fa1.jsp
"The first years of new administrations have traditionally seen U.S.
peace initiatives in the Middle East. Re-election time is still
three years away…The president and his advisers will soon learn that
the domestic price is too high to pay. An organized, articulate, and
vocal interest group operating in America's democratic system can
cause the executive branch of government a lot of headaches if
aroused."
—Jerusalem Post, Oct. 11, 1977.
The excerpt above from a 1977 Jerusalem Post article advises Israeli
readers not to worry too much about the zeal of newly elected U.S.
President Jimmy Carter to settle the Israeli-Arab dispute because
the American Jewish community, directed by Israel's Washington, DC
lobby, can cause his administration "a lot of headaches." Note its
description of that community as "an organized, articulate and vocal
interest group." Those words are a challenge to American Muslims.
But then note, also, that American Muslims do not want to cause U.S.
administrations "headaches" in foreign policy. Instead they want to
free U.S. presidents and members of Congress to support traditional
American concerns for human rights, self-determination and fair
play.
The reason the U.S. is not following even-handed policies in
Palestine, Lebanon, Syria or Kashmir is the influence of Israel's
principal lobby in Washington, DC, the American Israel Public
Affairs Committee (AIPAC). AIPAC has molded the 52 groups
represented in the Council of Presidents of Major American Jewish
Organizations into just such an "organized, articulate and vocal
interest group."
The challenge to America's Islamic community and to Christian Arab
Americans, therefore, is to offset that interest group, freeing U.S.
policymakers to pursue U.S., national interests, which call for
stability in international relations around the globe, and
productive and friendly relations with all of the countries of the
Islamic world.
Some U.S. Muslims say that in seeking to ease the entrance into
American life of their co-religionists, whose basic interest is to
raise and educate their children in accordance with the principles
of Islam while living in harmony with their fellow Americans, the
last thing they should do is antagonize the Israel lobby. In fact,
the leader of one of the established Arab-American groups
recommended this year that in entering the U.S. political system
Arab Americans would be well advised to avoid the Palestinian issue.
Similarly, the leader of a new, fringe Islamic group in the U.S.
seems to be saying the same thing.
The Israel lobby sees American Muslims as the most serious threat to
Israel's hold on U.S. foreign policy.
So far as this writer can determine, however, leaders of all of the
other Muslim- and Arab-American political organizations disagree
with that recommendation. They believe that until the Israel lobby
is neutralized, it will be working tirelessly to ensure that neither
Muslim Americans nor Arab Americans will be accepted into American
political life.
The reason is that the Israel lobby sees American Muslims, whose
numbers are growing rapidly through immigration, conversion, and
steady birthrates, as the most serious threat to Israel's hold on
U.S. foreign policy. This is true because the 6 to 8 million U.S.
Muslims, even without the additional 1.5 to 2 million Christian Arab
Americans, already outnumber America's five million Jews. And this
disparity is growing because the Jewish community has a very low
birthrate, a 50 percent intermarriage rate, and because more
unaffiliated Jews are dropping out of participation in the Jewish
community than are entering it.
Muslims should realize that the United States has absorbed many
different ethnic and religious communities in the past, to the
benefit both of the country and the communities. Since American
Muslims are strictly enjoined by their co-religionists not to
discriminate against others, to cooperate with their neighbors for
the good of the communities in which they live, and to take care
with the upbringing and education of their children, they should
have even fewer problems than some of the communities that have
preceded them. It is on these matters, not religion or ethnicity,
that Americans judge their neighbors.
American Muslim "Problems"
But if these are the requirements for acceptance, why are American
Muslims encountering problems that are not being experienced by
other groups today? For example, in the aftermath of the Oklahoma
City bombing and the accidental crash of TWA Flight 800 off Long
Island, self-described "terrorism expert" Steven Emerson, who has
close connections with Israel and pro-Israel institutions in the
United States, immediately sought to implicate Muslims, although
they had nothing to do with either tragedy.
And, in practice, the secret evidence being used by the Immigration
and Naturalization Service in attempts to deport resident aliens is
being used almost exclusively against Muslims. Further, the
confiscation of assets of an American citizen, based upon secret
evidence and an executive order signed by President Clinton, is
being used against Mohamad Salam, a Muslim from the Chicago area,
apparently based solely upon evidence provided by Israel. So far as
this writer knows, no other U.S. citizen is suffering similar
persecution by the FBI solely on "secret evidence." And, in general,
it has been more difficult to get permits to build mosques and
Islamic schools than it is for other religious communities to do the
same things.
It seems that whatever Muslims do or don't do, they are targets of
an ongoing defamation campaign orchestrated by the Israel lobby in
the United States. The principal offender, besides AIPAC, is B'nai
B'rith's Anti-Defamation League, which has been caught conducting
illegal surveillance and using stolen police files for possible
illegal use against private individuals. But other Jewish
organizations, notably the Zionist Organization of America, and pro-
Israel elements in the mainstream American media also have
participated in smear campaigns and other acts of intimidation
against Muslims and their allies.
All of these despicable acts are contrary to the traditions of
individual American Jews, who in the past have tended to identify
with the victims of persecution, not the persecutors. But they are
happening because the Israeli government feels that its expansionist
policies can be maintained only by driving wedges overseas between
the United States and the Islamic countries, and at home between
Muslim-Americans and their neighbors. The clear purpose of these
tactics is to prevent American Muslims from obtaining political
power commensurate with their growing numbers.
So long as the Israeli-Palestinian problem remains unsettled in the
Middle East, Islam is going to be slandered, even in otherwise
respectable media, in the United States. And there are going to be
attempts to make the words "Muslim" and "terrorist" virtually
synonymous.
It is therefore futile to address the problems of civil rights for
Muslims in isolation from the problem of the Israel lobby's current
disproportionate influence on the U.S. political system. It would be
equally simplistic to seek to address the problem of Kashmir in
isolation from the Palestine problem, because it is the unofficial
alliance between Israel and India that is having such a negative
impact on presentation of the Kashmiri case for self-determination
in the U.S. media.
So what should American Muslims be doing in 1999? One thing they
already have done is coordinate the efforts of the American Muslim
Political Coordination Council (AMPCC) with the Council of
Presidents of Arab American Organizations. These two roof
organizations for political action groups within both overlapping
communities already are working on two projects for the second half
of 1999.
They are encouraging all eligible members of their communities to
register to vote. They also are working with members of Congress to
repeal secret evidence provisions in the Anti-Terrorism and
Effective Death Penalty act of 1996.
As for the Muslim groups alone, it is not too early for delegations
from the AMPCC to be formulating the topics they should discuss with
prospective presidential candidates for the 2000 election. In 1996
they made few requests of the Clinton and Dole campaign committees:
support Muslim civil rights; acknowledge that the U.S. today has a
Judeo-Christian-Islamic heritage; be open to negotiations with all
Muslim countries; and support fair and even-handed policies in the
Middle East.
At this writing there are eight candidates remaining in the year
2000 race for the Republican presidential nomination, and two
candidates competing for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Judging from their stands on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process,
Muslims who are registered Democrats are more likely to support Bill
Bradley than Al Gore, and Muslims who are registered Republicans are
more likely to support George W. Bush, Elizabeth Dole, Pat Buchanan
or Lamar Alexander than Gary Bauer, Steve Forbes, Alan Keyes or John
McCain.
Nevertheless, it would be prudent for AMPCC delegations to begin
seeking appointments with every one of the candidates. The visit
would acquaint the candidates and their campaign directors with the
huge Muslim presence in such key electoral states as California,
Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Virginia and Florida. And
it would enable Muslims to present their concerns to the candidates,
and then to assess what effect the meetings have had on their
campaign rhetoric.
In arranging the meetings, the Muslim leaders must remind themselves
that the object is not to try to pick a winner, but to try to pick
the best qualified candidate by Islamic standards to recommend to
Muslim voters. It is the candidate, not the community, that is on
trial.
Out of this activity should emerge a recommended Democratic and a
recommended Republican nominee by the end of the year. Because of
the early dates of the key presidential primary elections, the party
nominations probably will have been decided by the end of March
2000. If Muslims are to have a role in this nominating process, they
must start preparations this summer to select one recommended
candidate from each party.
There is no need yet to choose one party over the other. That can
wait until each party has finally selected its nominee. Then it will
be time for another visit by Muslim leaders to each of the two
remaining nominees before a final joint recommendation is made for
the November 2000 presidential election.
There is one other caution. There are Muslims who already are
Republican or Democratic activists. Hopefully they are working from
inside for changes in the respective party platforms to attract the
Muslim vote. That's good.
But after listening to the arguments of Muslim activists in both
parties, it is essential that Muslim leaders who are not tied to
either party make the final recommendation for a bloc vote.
If Muslim leaders demonstrate that they can turn out the entire
community to vote, and that they are unified enough to agree on a
recommendation when one candidate clearly is better qualified than
another when judged by Islamic criteria, they will put the Islamic
community indelibly on the American political map, and thus take a
giant step toward neutralizing the lobby that would like to keep
Muslim and Arab Americans on the margins.
The best way for American Muslims who want to support their leaders
and participate personally in this historic effort is to affiliate
with at least one of the four national groups comprising the AMPCC.
These are the American Muslim Alliance (AMA), American Muslim
Council (AMC), Council for American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), and
Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC).
See the box for their addresses, and watch upcoming issues of this
magazine for the information readers need to make election year 2000
the turning point for Arab and Muslim Americans.
Richard H. Curtiss is the executive editor of the Washington Report.
http://www.wrmea.com/backissues/0999/9909021.html
============================================
Austin Muslims Archives: http://egroups.com/messages/Austin_Muslims
============================================Fight the System, "by any means necessary"
http://www.infowars.com
http://www.jihadunspun.net
http://www.ummah.net/dajjal
http://www.prisonplanet.com
"For those whose eyes are open"
PRINCIPLES GOVERNING THIS NEWS-GROUP:
"The greatest weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the
oppressed." - South African activist & martyr, Stephen Biko
"The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people
who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about
it." - Albert Einstein
"Fear not the path of truth for the lack of people walking on it." -
Arabic Proverb
"Minds are like parachutes...they work best when open." - Anonymous
"First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out because
I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I
did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came
for the Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then
they came for me...and there was no one left to speak for me." -
Pastor Martin Niemoller, regarding the Nazi reign.
http://www.mpacuk.org/mpac/data/fef27fa1/fef27fa1.jsp
"The first years of new administrations have traditionally seen U.S.
peace initiatives in the Middle East. Re-election time is still
three years away…The president and his advisers will soon learn that
the domestic price is too high to pay. An organized, articulate, and
vocal interest group operating in America's democratic system can
cause the executive branch of government a lot of headaches if
aroused."
—Jerusalem Post, Oct. 11, 1977.
The excerpt above from a 1977 Jerusalem Post article advises Israeli
readers not to worry too much about the zeal of newly elected U.S.
President Jimmy Carter to settle the Israeli-Arab dispute because
the American Jewish community, directed by Israel's Washington, DC
lobby, can cause his administration "a lot of headaches." Note its
description of that community as "an organized, articulate and vocal
interest group." Those words are a challenge to American Muslims.
But then note, also, that American Muslims do not want to cause U.S.
administrations "headaches" in foreign policy. Instead they want to
free U.S. presidents and members of Congress to support traditional
American concerns for human rights, self-determination and fair
play.
The reason the U.S. is not following even-handed policies in
Palestine, Lebanon, Syria or Kashmir is the influence of Israel's
principal lobby in Washington, DC, the American Israel Public
Affairs Committee (AIPAC). AIPAC has molded the 52 groups
represented in the Council of Presidents of Major American Jewish
Organizations into just such an "organized, articulate and vocal
interest group."
The challenge to America's Islamic community and to Christian Arab
Americans, therefore, is to offset that interest group, freeing U.S.
policymakers to pursue U.S., national interests, which call for
stability in international relations around the globe, and
productive and friendly relations with all of the countries of the
Islamic world.
Some U.S. Muslims say that in seeking to ease the entrance into
American life of their co-religionists, whose basic interest is to
raise and educate their children in accordance with the principles
of Islam while living in harmony with their fellow Americans, the
last thing they should do is antagonize the Israel lobby. In fact,
the leader of one of the established Arab-American groups
recommended this year that in entering the U.S. political system
Arab Americans would be well advised to avoid the Palestinian issue.
Similarly, the leader of a new, fringe Islamic group in the U.S.
seems to be saying the same thing.
The Israel lobby sees American Muslims as the most serious threat to
Israel's hold on U.S. foreign policy.
So far as this writer can determine, however, leaders of all of the
other Muslim- and Arab-American political organizations disagree
with that recommendation. They believe that until the Israel lobby
is neutralized, it will be working tirelessly to ensure that neither
Muslim Americans nor Arab Americans will be accepted into American
political life.
The reason is that the Israel lobby sees American Muslims, whose
numbers are growing rapidly through immigration, conversion, and
steady birthrates, as the most serious threat to Israel's hold on
U.S. foreign policy. This is true because the 6 to 8 million U.S.
Muslims, even without the additional 1.5 to 2 million Christian Arab
Americans, already outnumber America's five million Jews. And this
disparity is growing because the Jewish community has a very low
birthrate, a 50 percent intermarriage rate, and because more
unaffiliated Jews are dropping out of participation in the Jewish
community than are entering it.
Muslims should realize that the United States has absorbed many
different ethnic and religious communities in the past, to the
benefit both of the country and the communities. Since American
Muslims are strictly enjoined by their co-religionists not to
discriminate against others, to cooperate with their neighbors for
the good of the communities in which they live, and to take care
with the upbringing and education of their children, they should
have even fewer problems than some of the communities that have
preceded them. It is on these matters, not religion or ethnicity,
that Americans judge their neighbors.
American Muslim "Problems"
But if these are the requirements for acceptance, why are American
Muslims encountering problems that are not being experienced by
other groups today? For example, in the aftermath of the Oklahoma
City bombing and the accidental crash of TWA Flight 800 off Long
Island, self-described "terrorism expert" Steven Emerson, who has
close connections with Israel and pro-Israel institutions in the
United States, immediately sought to implicate Muslims, although
they had nothing to do with either tragedy.
And, in practice, the secret evidence being used by the Immigration
and Naturalization Service in attempts to deport resident aliens is
being used almost exclusively against Muslims. Further, the
confiscation of assets of an American citizen, based upon secret
evidence and an executive order signed by President Clinton, is
being used against Mohamad Salam, a Muslim from the Chicago area,
apparently based solely upon evidence provided by Israel. So far as
this writer knows, no other U.S. citizen is suffering similar
persecution by the FBI solely on "secret evidence." And, in general,
it has been more difficult to get permits to build mosques and
Islamic schools than it is for other religious communities to do the
same things.
It seems that whatever Muslims do or don't do, they are targets of
an ongoing defamation campaign orchestrated by the Israel lobby in
the United States. The principal offender, besides AIPAC, is B'nai
B'rith's Anti-Defamation League, which has been caught conducting
illegal surveillance and using stolen police files for possible
illegal use against private individuals. But other Jewish
organizations, notably the Zionist Organization of America, and pro-
Israel elements in the mainstream American media also have
participated in smear campaigns and other acts of intimidation
against Muslims and their allies.
All of these despicable acts are contrary to the traditions of
individual American Jews, who in the past have tended to identify
with the victims of persecution, not the persecutors. But they are
happening because the Israeli government feels that its expansionist
policies can be maintained only by driving wedges overseas between
the United States and the Islamic countries, and at home between
Muslim-Americans and their neighbors. The clear purpose of these
tactics is to prevent American Muslims from obtaining political
power commensurate with their growing numbers.
So long as the Israeli-Palestinian problem remains unsettled in the
Middle East, Islam is going to be slandered, even in otherwise
respectable media, in the United States. And there are going to be
attempts to make the words "Muslim" and "terrorist" virtually
synonymous.
It is therefore futile to address the problems of civil rights for
Muslims in isolation from the problem of the Israel lobby's current
disproportionate influence on the U.S. political system. It would be
equally simplistic to seek to address the problem of Kashmir in
isolation from the Palestine problem, because it is the unofficial
alliance between Israel and India that is having such a negative
impact on presentation of the Kashmiri case for self-determination
in the U.S. media.
So what should American Muslims be doing in 1999? One thing they
already have done is coordinate the efforts of the American Muslim
Political Coordination Council (AMPCC) with the Council of
Presidents of Arab American Organizations. These two roof
organizations for political action groups within both overlapping
communities already are working on two projects for the second half
of 1999.
They are encouraging all eligible members of their communities to
register to vote. They also are working with members of Congress to
repeal secret evidence provisions in the Anti-Terrorism and
Effective Death Penalty act of 1996.
As for the Muslim groups alone, it is not too early for delegations
from the AMPCC to be formulating the topics they should discuss with
prospective presidential candidates for the 2000 election. In 1996
they made few requests of the Clinton and Dole campaign committees:
support Muslim civil rights; acknowledge that the U.S. today has a
Judeo-Christian-Islamic heritage; be open to negotiations with all
Muslim countries; and support fair and even-handed policies in the
Middle East.
At this writing there are eight candidates remaining in the year
2000 race for the Republican presidential nomination, and two
candidates competing for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Judging from their stands on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process,
Muslims who are registered Democrats are more likely to support Bill
Bradley than Al Gore, and Muslims who are registered Republicans are
more likely to support George W. Bush, Elizabeth Dole, Pat Buchanan
or Lamar Alexander than Gary Bauer, Steve Forbes, Alan Keyes or John
McCain.
Nevertheless, it would be prudent for AMPCC delegations to begin
seeking appointments with every one of the candidates. The visit
would acquaint the candidates and their campaign directors with the
huge Muslim presence in such key electoral states as California,
Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Virginia and Florida. And
it would enable Muslims to present their concerns to the candidates,
and then to assess what effect the meetings have had on their
campaign rhetoric.
In arranging the meetings, the Muslim leaders must remind themselves
that the object is not to try to pick a winner, but to try to pick
the best qualified candidate by Islamic standards to recommend to
Muslim voters. It is the candidate, not the community, that is on
trial.
Out of this activity should emerge a recommended Democratic and a
recommended Republican nominee by the end of the year. Because of
the early dates of the key presidential primary elections, the party
nominations probably will have been decided by the end of March
2000. If Muslims are to have a role in this nominating process, they
must start preparations this summer to select one recommended
candidate from each party.
There is no need yet to choose one party over the other. That can
wait until each party has finally selected its nominee. Then it will
be time for another visit by Muslim leaders to each of the two
remaining nominees before a final joint recommendation is made for
the November 2000 presidential election.
There is one other caution. There are Muslims who already are
Republican or Democratic activists. Hopefully they are working from
inside for changes in the respective party platforms to attract the
Muslim vote. That's good.
But after listening to the arguments of Muslim activists in both
parties, it is essential that Muslim leaders who are not tied to
either party make the final recommendation for a bloc vote.
If Muslim leaders demonstrate that they can turn out the entire
community to vote, and that they are unified enough to agree on a
recommendation when one candidate clearly is better qualified than
another when judged by Islamic criteria, they will put the Islamic
community indelibly on the American political map, and thus take a
giant step toward neutralizing the lobby that would like to keep
Muslim and Arab Americans on the margins.
The best way for American Muslims who want to support their leaders
and participate personally in this historic effort is to affiliate
with at least one of the four national groups comprising the AMPCC.
These are the American Muslim Alliance (AMA), American Muslim
Council (AMC), Council for American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), and
Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC).
See the box for their addresses, and watch upcoming issues of this
magazine for the information readers need to make election year 2000
the turning point for Arab and Muslim Americans.
Richard H. Curtiss is the executive editor of the Washington Report.
http://www.wrmea.com/backissues/0999/9909021.html
============================================
Austin Muslims Archives: http://egroups.com/messages/Austin_Muslims
============================================Fight the System, "by any means necessary"
http://www.infowars.com
http://www.jihadunspun.net
http://www.ummah.net/dajjal
http://www.prisonplanet.com
"For those whose eyes are open"
PRINCIPLES GOVERNING THIS NEWS-GROUP:
"The greatest weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the
oppressed." - South African activist & martyr, Stephen Biko
"The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people
who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about
it." - Albert Einstein
"Fear not the path of truth for the lack of people walking on it." -
Arabic Proverb
"Minds are like parachutes...they work best when open." - Anonymous
"First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out because
I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I
did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came
for the Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then
they came for me...and there was no one left to speak for me." -
Pastor Martin Niemoller, regarding the Nazi reign.