Absolutely must read.  Any critique or expose’ of Islam is usually met with name-calling (e.g., “Islamophobia”) from Islamists and their enablers, rather than rational or factual responses and rebuttals.  Please don't miss the embedded URLs in this posting to see the video of what is described here.  See why I say political correctness kills.  Muslim Brotherhood

There are at least two reasons for this.

First, sharia law does not provide for nor protect free speech. Criticism of Islam, Allah or Mohammed is a criminal offense. When Muslims attempt to suppress free speech critiques of Islam they are abiding by sharia law, and insisting that we non-Muslims bow before sharia law as well. They frequently get furious when we refuse to do so.

Second, as two examples below will attest, public discourse and debates about radical Islam reveal the truth that Islamists don’t want Americans to see. Hence, they rant, rave, and name call in the hopes of demonizing those who dare to expose the truth so as to keep the truth from the American people.

Two recent events reveal why Islamists and their enablers avoid genuine debate.

Small wonder we see so few Muslims willing to step forward and defend sharia law and the ideology of radical Islam!! Truth and the facts are stacked so heavily against them they can only hope to “win” by suppressing speech that exposes the truth.

A Forum on Being an American Muslim
A Report by Stephen M. Kirby
ACT! for America Chapter Leader, Des Moines, IA

Thanks to the hard work and perseverance of ACT! for America member Stanley Richards, a unique forum took place on October 7, 2010 in the Sheslow Auditorium of Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa. The forum was titled “What it means to be an American Muslim,” and the four panelists and the moderator were all Muslim Americans. They were: 

• Mahmoud Hamad, Moderator, Assistant Professor, Politics Department, Drake University
• Luai Amro, President of the Islamic Cultural Center of Des Moines
• Bill Aossey, President of Midamar Corporation
• Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, MD, Founder and President of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy
• Dr. Saima Zafar, MD, Member of the Iowa Campaign Ethics and Disclosure Board

The panelists each made a number of comments about their experiences as Muslims in America. There was an interesting contrast between two of the panelists. Dr. Jasser talked about the idea of a reformation in Islam that would include a separation of mosque and state, an ideological battle by American Muslims against Radical Islam, and a modernization of Islamic teachings. On the other hand, Luai Amro said that Islam did not believe in the separation of mosque and state and did not need to be changed. Amro said that Islam was a timeless way of life that needed to be understood and followed by Muslims.
As the forum continued, an eye-opening moment came when the panelists were faced with an issue involving our First Amendment right to free speech.

The First Amendment “is not relevant”

I was among the first to get up to ask a question of the panel. Here is what I said: 

Molly Norris used to be the editorial cartoonist for the Seattle Weekly. She came up with the idea earlier this year of Everybody Draw Muhammad Day. Because of threats of death from people who said they were Muslims and from a particular Muslim, Anwar Al Awlaki, and advice from the FBI, Molly Norris is now in hiding and has changed her name. What I would like to do is offer the panelists, being Muslims in America, the chance to show that the First Amendment has significance. I’d like, I’d like our panelists to go on record and say that everybody in the United States has the First Amendment right to criticize Muhammad and to draw a picture of Muhammad if they’d like. And two, to also, to also condemn anybody who says they’re a Muslim who threatens death or physical harm to anybody exercising that First Amendment right.

The moderator started saying “thank you” before I had ended the last sentence. I walked back to my seat expecting to hear an interesting panel discussion about the First Amendment versus Sharia Law. However, even before I had arrived at my seat the moderator had already gone on to the next person in line to ask a question. I sat down and soon realized that my comments to the panel were not even going to be addressed.

A few minutes later we found out why the moderator had ignored my comments. Dr. Jasser had been asked a question about the separation of mosque and state. At the end of his response to that question Dr. Jasser said: 

Our moderator said that the question on Molly Norris is not relevant. I can’t tell you how relevant I think it is. I think American Muslims should stand up ---

Jasser got no further because at this point the moderator actually took the microphone out of Jassers’s hand, said something that was unintelligible to me but which made many in the audience laugh, and went on to the next person who wanted to ask a question. Sadly, there was no comment about this from any of the other panelists.

The issue involving Molly Norris comes down to the question of which takes precedence now in the United States: our Constitutional right to freedom of speech, or Sharia Law’s ruling that to revile Muhammad is apostasy, which is punishable by death? Luai Amro had earlier talked about the obligation for Muslim Americans to say what they believed and to say who they really were, and this was the panelists’ opportunity to do both. It was troubling to see that by the actions of the moderator and the inaction of the majority of the panelists, it appeared that for them Sharia Law took precedence over our First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

With your continued help and support, ACT! for America won’t let them.