Gaddafi’s death clearly marks an opportunity for Libya to flourish

Statement

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

The United States needs a principled approach in supporting liberty-minded secular democracies in the fledgling governments of the new Middle-East

Adobe PDF Version


PHOENIX (October 21, 2011) – Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, a devout Muslim and the president and founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) issued the following statement regarding the death of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi:

“The American Islamic Forum for Democracy stands in solidarity with the people of Libya who are at last free from the oppressive and barbaric rule of Muammar Gaddafi and his family. It is exhilarating that another Arab fascist dictator has fallen and another country has the opportunity to chart its course to liberty and freedom. Gaddafi’s death will more clearly mark the end of this brutal era and allow the Libyan people to turn the page to the hard work of true societal transformation toward secular democracy.

In the long term I am hopeful for Libya as with the right help and influence from the west they can build institutions that will facilitate liberalism and the rule of law. But we should not be deluded into thinking that Gaddafi’s death automatically means an ally and free Libya. There is a lot of hard work to be accomplished. As we experienced in Iraq, in the short term there will be significant hurdles to overcome that will probably include an Islamist winter, sectarian violence (recent reports for example showed Sunni Islamists destroying graves and mosques of moderate spiritual Sufi sects in Libya), and some chaos as the only groups that were organized were radical Islamists that evolved in the Darwinian environment of Gaddafi for 42 years.

The Gaddafi thuggery is well entrenched and It remains to be seen in the next few months whether the corruption, violence, and oppression of the Gaddafi era is completely gone or whether elements of the military and society that defined Libya for decades will continue and resurface. This is the ultimate challenge in the Middle East transformations happening- Democracies can only be successful if they are founded by citizens that are moral and value human rights, equality, and the rule of law. It will take a while for Libya to get to that point – it certainly is not a light switch that that can simply be turned on.

The United States needs to adopt a principled position with regard to whom and what we will support in the transformations in the Middle East. Senator Lieberman’s position in the Wall St. Journal today regarding supporting the Islamist party Ennahdha in Tunisia is extremely concerning considering that Senator Lieberman is usually one of the more informed Senator’s on the issue. Even if Ennahdha is non-violent and modern in their treatment of women, an Islamist organization by definition is directly opposed to the ideals of liberty and freedom that America is supposed to represent and the Libyan people are endowed with by their creator. I agree with the Senator’s recommendations about Millennium Funds and small business stimuli and even with the concept of engaging Islamist organizations, but that engagement should be limited to the battle of ideas and should not be extended to supporting their involvement in government. Banning these organizations is counterproductive, but openly supporting a role for them in government opens the door to the Islamitization of these fledgling democracies.

The battle on the ground and the contest of ideas is not only non-violence vs. violence but it is western secular democracy vs. Islamism. Helping democracy touting Islamists is like helping non-violent communists or socialists in the cold war. We need leadership that will have the courage to limit our support to truly liberty-minded groups in the new Libya and across the Arab Spring.

In the short term (6mo-2 years) we may see Libya devolve into chaos with the dictator gone. But in the long term (5-20 years) I am hopeful with the right amount of “muscular liberalism” (using PM Cameron’s term) we can see a true secular democracy evolve. So-called Islamic democracies (i.e. Turkey) will never be real allies with the United States since their world is Islamocentric and supremacist no matter how “democratic” they appear. “

About the American Islamic Forum for Democracy

The American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) charitable organization. AIFD’s mission advocates for the preservation of the founding principles of the United States Constitution, liberty and freedom, through the separation of mosque and state. For more information on AIFD, please visit our website at http://www.aifdemocracy.org/.

MEDIA CONTACT:

Gregg Edgar

Gordon C. James Public Relations

gedgar@gcjpr.com

602-690-7977

####


SAVE SYRIA NOW! PRESS RELEASE: Syrian spy in Virginia latest manifestation of the Syrian Global Culture of Fear


Statement

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Save Syria Now! applauds effort to break Assad regime’s strangle hold on Syrians around the world

Adobe PDF version

PHOENIX (October 19, 2011) – Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser of Save Syria Now! issued the following statement regarding the arraignment Tuesday, October, 18, 2011 of Mohamad Soueid of Leesburg, VA who is accused of spying on Syrian expatriates in the U.S. on behalf of the regime of President Bashar Assad:

“The arrest of Mohamad Soueid for spying on Syrian expatriates publicly validates what Syrian-Americans have been living with for years. The regime of Bashar Assad has employed agents around the world as part of their expansive diplomatic network and covertly as part of the “Syrian-expatriate” network who are explicitly tasked with reporting to Damascus any and all activities of Syrians who live abroad.

Yet, despite the wisdom of the indictment, the U.S. Magistrate Judge T. Rawles Jones bizarrely commented that “”There is no evidence that he is a trained operative.” He oddly ignored the fact that Syrian Intelligence used the information that Soueid collected and transmitted to them to identify and torture family members of Syrian-Americans who are still imprisoned behind the borders of Assad’s Syria. Rawles comments and subsequent decision to release Soueid demonstrate a profound lack of understanding of the threat that Syrian intelligence poses to Syrian Americans and their families inside Syria.

Similarly, comments from Soueid’s attorney Haytham Faraj, as reported by AP, “that it’s ludicrous to think that Soueid’s alleged activities, which consisted primarily of videotaping and recording anti-Assad protests in the U.S., would be of any value to Syrian intelligence,” plays Americans for fools. It is common knowledge among Syrians that Syrian intelligence (Mukhabarrat) are ever-present within American Syrian communities and attempt to penetrate every family possible in collecting information on Syrians abroad and domestically . Willing agents of the Syrian regime have been conducting these types of operations for decades on our soil and globally. And a video that is focused on the faces of the protestors put together with an operative who collects personal information such as family names, timings, groupings, and cliques, can do significantly more harm than a random YouTube video of even the same event.

Any comments against the interests of the Assad regime by any Syrians around the world have long been a threat to close or even distant family members inside of Syria. The regime has exacted reprisals including imprisonment and torture simply as a result of a vocal family member in the U.S. or outside of Syria. This has created a global culture of fear within the Syrian expatriate community. Regimes like Assad’s know full well of the impact which any global, especially an American policy to isolate his government can have upon his longevity.

As we have seen with the Arab Spring, more Syrian Americans have gained the courage to step out from behind this curtain of tyranny and confront the brutalization that is taking place in their homeland. That has brought cases like Mohamad Soueid’s out of the shadows and into the public eye. But these cases need competent jurists who understand what is at stake.

Unfortunately Mohamad Soueid is just one of many. In May, Save Syria Now! highlighted a similar threat that exists in Orange County, California from the Honorary Syrian Consul General Hazem Chahabi. The son of Hafez Assad’s long time Syrian Army Chief of Staff, Hikmat Chehabi, Hazem Chahabi is also an American citizen whose loyalties are divided as an honorary general consul for the rogue nation of Syria. Chahabi has close connections to the Assad regime and was accused by other Syrian Americans in California of having staff from the consulate video record protests in Southern California. Chahabi’s connections to the Assad regime and his efforts on US soil since April are frightening, but nothing has been done to hold him account for those actions.

The reality is that the US has foreign agents working on our soil to intimidate and control Syrian American opposition as a battlefront in their ongoing massacre against the Syrian people. Those that escaped Syria know all too well that the ruthlessness of an evil regime like Assad’s can be overwhelming and paralyzing to all free speech.

The arrest of Mohamad Soueid was an important first step by our government to help Syrian Americans step past that fear and do all that we can to help the brave protesters in the streets of Syria. But if we are unable to hold these people to account, because a judge does not understand the complexities of the threat, the Syrian people are in grave danger.

The United States must continue this effort by demanding that Syria remove all of its agents and diplomats from our shores and by finding and prosecuting anyone who engages in efforts to squelch the free speech of Syrian Americans through fear and intimidation.”


About Save Syria Now!

Save Syria Now! is a group of Americans of Syrian descent organizing to put pressure on the United States to call for immediate action to be taken against the regime of Bashar Assad of Syria and to bring true liberty to the people of Syria. We stand with the Syrians protesting in the streets to end the tyranny of the Assad family. For more information please visit our website at http://www.savesyrianow.org/.

MEDIA CONTACTS: Gregg Edgar

Gordon C. James Public Relations

gedgar@gcjpr.com

602-690-7977

####

Hajj Settlement is a Dangerous Precedent

Statement

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Department of Justice should never have intervened in Safoorah Khan’s case against Berkeley, Ill School District

PHOENIX (October 19, 2011) – Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, a devout Muslim and the president and founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) issued the following statement regarding the settlement of U.S. vs. Board of Education, Berkeley School District 87, Cook County, Illinois:

“The decision announced on Thursday, October 13, 2011 of the Berkeley Board of Education to settle a lawsuit with the Department of Justice (DOJ) will have implications that reach far beyond the case of Safoorah Khan, a non-tenured computer math lab teacher who had worked for the district for just a little over one-year. In her suit Ms. Khan alleged that the district forced her to choose between her religion and her livelihood when it denied her request for three weeks of unpaid leave to perform Hajj in 2008. The board denied the request twice because it did not meet the requirements of the union contract which gave uniform standards for leave that applied to all employees.

While AIFD believes religious freedom is a cornerstone of American constitutional civil liberties the adjudication of the conflict between an arbitrary demand of an employee that cloaks themselves in religion and an employer who must treat all employees equally is a critical fault line in the battle between theocracy and secular society.

While I am sure the pressure on the board to settle was immense with DOJ’s involvement, it is lamentable because it creates a dangerous precedent by lowering the threshold of what merits action for civil rights abuse.

In Ms. Khan’s case the federal government has taken the wrong side. By championing Ms. Khan’s case which stepped outside of the contract that she and all other certified staff signed with the Berkeley School District, DOJ is essentially making Muslims a privileged class. The interpretation this case demands speaks contrary to the very principle of “ensuring that workplaces are free of bias,” that Jacqueline A. Berrien, Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) claims to promote.

The DOJ and their choir of Islamist groups have deceptively positioned that Muslims like Ms. Khan “should not have to choose between their religious practice and their livelihood.” Contrarily, I believe that employers should not have to choose between the threat of intimidation from Islamists or the federal government and honoring the onerous and ultimately limitless demands of any single faith group or individual as a privileged class.

By forcing this settlement the DOJ is empowering an Islamist mindset that demands special consideration above all others which is unacceptable in a society where all are equal before the law.

Further the terms of the settlement are chilling in their Orwellian dictate that Berkeley provide mandatory training on religious accommodation to all board of education members, supervisors, managers, administrators and human resources officials who participate in decisions on religious accommodation requests made by its employees and prospective employees. It is incredulous to us that the Government is now entering into the business of teaching which versions of religion are politically correct and which ones are not.

Ms. Khan’s request was outside the scope of the Union Contract she signed. The Berkeley officials treated her as an equal to her peers and have now lost a civil rights case for that equal treatment. It seems completely contradictory to the intent of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which this case was filed under. With Ms. Khan, DOJ has essentially reconstituted a separate but equal status for American Muslims.”

About the American Islamic Forum for Democracy

The American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) charitable organization. AIFD’s mission advocates for the preservation of the founding principles of the United States Constitution, liberty and freedom, through the separation of mosque and state. For more information on AIFD, please visit our website at http://www.aifdemocracy.org/.

####

MEDIA CONTACTS: Gregg Edgar

Gordon C. James Public Relations

gedgar@gcjpr.com

602-690-7977

Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) calls out White House for handling of Jasser appointment to US Advisory Commiission on Public Diplomacy

Death of Anwar Al-Awlaki should be cause for celebration in American Muslim Community

STATEMENT

For Immediate Release

AIFD believes that there is a long road ahead but Al-Awlaki’s death removes threat to American Muslim youth
PHOENIX (September 30, 2011) – Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, a devout Muslim and the president and founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) issued the following statement regarding the death of Imam Anwar Al Awlaki in Yemen:
“The death of Imam Anwar Al Awlaki marks the removal of one of the most significant threats to America and to American Muslim youth in particular. While his death will not mark the end of Al Qaeda or the threat that exists from militant Islamists, Al-Awlaki’s death is an important step in the process. AIFD congratulates our military and intelligence apparatus for ensuring that this threat was removed.
Al-Awlaki has repeatedly proven a desire to commit violent acts of war against the American people. He has attacked our homeland on several occasions, the most successful of which was his influence on Nidal Hasan and the Fort Hood Massacre. There was no reason to be believe that Al-Awlaki would stop trying to inflict harm on the American people.
AIFD applauds the Administration’s where-with-all to maintain its focus on Al-Awlaki, even in the face of pressure from its own advisors such as Mohamed Elibiary who sits on the Homeland Security Council and argued on Foxnews.com in April that ‘it’s a mistake to assassinate Anwar Al-Awlaki. The President made the right decision in removing Al-Awlaki
Now the Administration needs to look at rebooting the nation’s strategy in dealing with counterterrorism. We must begin to focus on the ideological root of militant Islamist radicals and engage in the war of ideas or we simply face another Anwar Al-Awlaki down the line.”
About the American Islamic Forum for Democracy
The American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) charitable organization. AIFD’s mission advocates for the preservation of the founding principles of the United States Constitution, liberty and freedom, through the separation of mosque and state. For more information on AIFD, please visit our website at http://www.aifdemocracy.org/.
####

AIFD Analysis: The Power of the Pulpit: An American Muslim’s struggle to define faith in an American perspective for his children

The following analysis posted also at the Arizona Republic blog gets to the core of AIFD’s mission which centers on strengthening the American Muslim identity free of the separatism of Islamist ideologies. This in depth analysis of a recent local sermon by Anas Hlayel during our recent holiday of Eid Al-Fitr is the type of constructive critique we hope to see American Muslims around the country engage in publicly with their local imams.— AIFD

The Power of the Pulpit: An American Muslim’s struggle to define faith in an American perspective for his children

By: M. Zuhdi Jasser, American Islamic Forum for Democracy

Posted by Zuhdi Tue Sep 27, 2011 04:53:43 MST
Viewed 38 times
0 responses 0 comments

The attacks of September 11, 2001 were a personal call to action and a tug of responsibility to fix the underlying problems that have placed a strangle hold on my faith and led a few of my co-religionists to unimaginable brutality. It is a mission that is driven by my desire to raise my children as orthodox Muslims who embrace the unparalleled freedom that is guaranteed for them in the United States Constitution.

While this effort is often paradoxically and bizarrely criticized as “Islamophobic” and I myself have been labeled an “Uncle Tom or traitor to Muslims, the truth is I have a deep seated fear of what version of my faith will influence my children and of what will happen should another devastating attack occur and Muslims are not seen as leading the fight against the cancer within our faith. There is the spiritual, moral, and profoundly humble and personal journey of Islam to God and then there is the version of Islam based in the Islamic state and political Islam. My work is to champion the former while exposing and defeating the latter.

The vast majority of American Muslims believe in and hold dear the liberties that America has codified for all people. But we cannot ignore the fact that radicalization occurs within our faith communities. We also cannot ignore the fact that this radicalization does not occur in a vacuum. Nidal Hasan did not wake up one morning and decide to be a radical. He over time was exposed to an ideology that led him down the path to radicalization.

There is a continuum that begins with a non-violent separatist, Islamist narrative and ends with an adherence to a violent militant ideology that believes in the supremacy of the Islamic faith. That does not mean that every Muslim travels the full continuum, but it does mean that a narrative that is common place in Muslim communities is the starting point. That narrative preaches a victim mindset and a separation of Muslims from American society. It is a narrative that is preached by supposed moderates and radicals alike. It is a narrative that as a Muslim father I do not want to ensnare my children.

A common retort from Muslim organizations in the United States is that American Muslims should not have to be bear the guilt of 9/11 or any terror incident. This stifles any acknowledgement by Muslim leaders of the reality that it is only Muslim communities that can counter those ideologies that ultimately radicalize. Guilt is certainly an overcharged premise, but certainly Muslim responsibility for change against the Muslim ideas that fuel Islamist terror is key– and cannot be denied. The reality is that while Muslims are less than 2 percent of the population, American Muslims make up more than 80 percent of terror arrests in the United States.

Critiquing ideas of our leaders is not personal: It comes from tough love

While ALL Muslims are not responsible for 9/11, ALL Muslims share a responsibility for repairing the models that are breeding radicals.

In the national discourse about Muslims and Islam ten years after 9/11, I have always felt that the most telling exchanges are those between Muslims who are put in positions of leadership, and the general Muslim population. These exchanges give crucial insight into what these Muslim “leaders” believe about their own responsibility for the past and the future of America, for our security, and for the general welfare of Muslims who live here.

My organization, the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD), and all of our Muslim supporters and colleagues have always called upon Muslims to be the solution and to lead reform toward modernity, holding our imams accountable for their teachings and their ideas. Critiquing sermons and the messages they give our families is one of the most vital ways of doing this. But we must also understand that critiquing their words as thought leaders is certainly not a personal attack upon our imams or upon our communities as Muslims but rather part of the honest and open discourse necessary to come to terms with the good and the bad ideas that influence our children and our communities. To look upon my work with AIFD in exposing the ideas of imams as anything but tough love is simply an effort to avoid real Islamic intellectual engagement and deceive Muslims that AIFD is anti-Muslim when in fact there is nothing more pro-Muslim and pro-Islam than critiquing the ideas of our leaders.

It is interesting that many of those (i.e. Islamists and their apologists) who try to subvert my work do so by saying that my ideological analyses like this are personal attacks which they are not. They then hypocritically run away from any substantive ideological arguments while having no qualms in using deep personal attacks against me like labeling me anti-Muslim or an Uncle Tom.

Our own mosque’s holiday sermon on Eid Al-Fitr

This year I and my family attended services at my mosque on August 30, 2011 as we always do for our holiday of Eid Al-Fitr which commemorates the end of the holy month of Ramadan. At the outset, I had no intention of publicly addressing the content of his sermon. I have actually tried to steer clear of too much public critique of my own mosque for obvious reasons. But when Imam Anas Hlayel’s colleagues (a jmukarram, oddly affiliated with a “Jamaat Islah ul Muslimeen”) proudly posted it on YouTube as an exemplary sermon, this opened the ethical need and their obvious receptiveness to a public response from Muslims in our local community.

The sermon was a stark reminder of the subtle and not so subtle pervasiveness of many Islamist ideas that permeate leading narratives delivered to our communities. The service is typically a short group prayer followed by a sermon, which, in the highest tradition, carries a community spiritual message of renewal, after the long month of fasting. This year, as our holiday fell very close to the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, I prayed that imams across America would use this opportunity to demonstrate a distinctly American Muslim leadership. My hopes at least from my experience were not realized.

In the spirit of freedom, tough love and transparency, I offer the following review of my concerns regarding the sermon proffered by Imam Anas Hlayel at our local mosque.

Some in our community will try to inappropriate say that I am trying to attack Imam Hlayel personally or cause division within our community. I would simply ask that they look at the substance of this analysis and realize that respectful substantive public debate about the content of a sermon is in the highest Islamic tradition of the Prophet Muhammad and our faith that we love. Imam Hlayel is free, if not obligated, to respond to these ideas he posted for the world on YouTube as representing our Scottsdale community. But that is a healthy process, not a destructive one as many Muslims who attack me and AIFD try to insinuate.

The simple objective of this analysis is to begin a conversation on how supposedly innocuous statements from Muslim leaders can easily feed the Islamist, anti-American, narrative and whether deliberately or not, serve to separate Muslims from their American identity.

This process of public critique is essential if we are to ever hold imams and our boards accountable for their messages to our families. What was covered and what was not speaks to his agenda and the agenda of his colleagues. AIFD has posted the full video (22 min) of Imam Hlayel’s entire sermon (which was actually originally proudly posted by his colleague on YouTube by “jmukarram”). AIFD has also posted a full transcript of the entire sermon online for full review. The exact time (location in the 22 min video) of the sections we have highlighted are also noted in the critique below.

To his credit, Imam Hlayel, who also serves as executive director of the local Arizona chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR-AZ) conveyed some of the very appropriate post-Ramadan messages of spiritual renewal, atonement, education (or “school” as he called it) and moral “unity.” He aptly reminded us of our humility, our need to avoid arrogance, and overreaction. But by far, the predominant message of his sermon was infected with toxic ideas and insinuations that reek of denial, obsessive victimology, and separatism. The fringe nature in comparison to mainstream American thought of some of his comments and the avoidance of Muslim culpability in the Islamist threat spoke volumes to the pathological mindset present in Muslim leaders that accept the Islamist narrative.

Analyzing the content and substance of Imam Hlayel’s sermon

Ten years after 9/11, who could imagine a sermon in a prominent American mosque in the Phoenix Valley, in affluent Scottsdale, would end with these thoughts, to American Muslims:

Now don’t take me wrong, I’m not saying that we accept what they say about us. We (Muslims) are not guilty of 9-1-1 and we have to be clear about it. We do not accept guilt by association. Also, we are not satisfied with all of the investigation that has gone so far. We need a more thorough investigation of what happened on 9-11. We should be clear about that, so the truth comes and we see who exactly did it. We are not saying that we should forget about that. At the same time, we have to be wise and we have to share this moment of sorrow with the people. We should not act like outsiders. We are a part of this society.
Any many of us were so happy when we got our citizenship. Well this is part of it. So let’s make sure that we are wise, we walk in the middle, we don’t go to either extreme. One extreme that says, you know, I live here, but I don’t really consider myself from this country. I hate these people, I hate the government, and I, you know, I want to just rebel. And the other side who says, you know, Muslims should swallow it, we are guilty, all of us are guilty, just because we are Muslims and we just should listen to Fox News and believe them and you know, listen and obey. We should be inshallah in the middle. Muslims have their own opinion. We should not follow either camp. We should make our own opinion in this country. And we should be proud of it. And, and with the lessons we learn from the month of Ramadan, inshallah we can walk through this fine line in the middle and will be successful with the help of Allah. [20:25 to 22:00] –excerpt of sermon (video/transcript lines 203-228) given on August 30, 2011 by Anas Hlayel, executive director of CAIR’s Arizona Chapter (Council on American Islamic Relations)

This concluding train of thought left a distinctly bad feeling in the pit of my stomach as I and my family left the mosque for the Eid celebrations. Emotionally, as an American and as a former Naval officer, it was like being hit over the head with a 2 by 4. I couldn’t believe I did not hear some departing prayers for our fellow Americans who died senselessly on 9-11. I could not believe I did not hear some departing supplication for those Muslim and non-Muslim dying senselessly against their Muslim oppressors in Syria as we try to celebrate Eid.

Instead we heard this “wacky” conspiracy theory fit for a 9-11 Truther convention. He preferred to leave us all with yet another useless attempt to deny that militants of our faith committed the acts of 9-11. How removed from the sentiment of the rest of America he and thus our mosque leadership was? Quite a different sentiment from the leadership I knew in 2002 of the same mosque which on 9-11-02 on the one year anniversary paid for a newspaper advertisement that I helped write which sent a far more forthright, honest, realistic and prayerful message to our fellow Americans across Arizona. A different time and different leadership.

Imam Hlayel’s underlying message of “Us vs. Them” or “Muslims vs. Americans” demonstrates a dangerous collectivization and separation of Muslims from American society. While he is not preaching violence, he ends his sermon by leaving Muslims with the groundwork for an Islamist mindset where Muslims view their connection to America in a confrontational mold.

Nidal Hasan, Faisal Shahzad, and Naser Abdo all referenced that they viewed themselves as part of the Ummah or nation state, not as Americans. Though all were American citizens their loyalty to the “us as Muslims” (Ummah) outweighed their loyalty to the “Them” (United States).

Rather than admitting head-on the ideas that fuel the radicalization of Muslims around the world, Imam Hlayel chose to use his pulpit to propagate one of the most toxic myths, that is central to that radicalization process: that the 9/11 attacks were not perpetrated by Muslims, but rather, by “someone else,” whom he did not have the courage to identify. There can be little doubt as to his insinuation, though that he wanted to further inculcate the belief among the Muslims in attendance that they are victims of another bigoted conspiracy.

Leading into this incomprehensible discussion on 9/11, Imam Hlayel invoked a story before that excerpt, from the time of the Prophet Mohammed, in which he compassionately spared the annihilation of “non-believers” (or “kuffar”) in Mecca, who “hated Muslims and Islam”:

One time, an angel came to the Prophet pbuh. We know the people of Mecca and how much they tortured the Muslims. And they gave a hard time to the prophet and his companions…:
Now the angel came to the Prophet pbuh and he said, you know what, I’m going to do something here, and tell me what you think. He said, I’m going to bring these two mountains of Mecca, bring them together and crush everybody in between. I’m going to get rid of all these kuffar. I’m going to get
id of all these criminals, all these people who are making fun of you, those people who are mocking you, I’m going to crush them. I am going to extinguish them. And it is so convenient in Mecca, you know it is surrounded by mountains, it is like the Valley here, except that it is closer. It was easy. You know the answer of the Prophet pbuh? He could have said, I want to retaliate, like some Muslims today. I want to seek revenge. You know, I’m going to go after these people. This is, you know, the best time now. I’m going to see my enemies die in front of me.
He said (Arabic). He said rather, I would rather see that from their progeny, I see some people who come out and they worship Allah. I don’t want to kill these people. What if they, you know, if they don’t become Muslims themselves, maybe their children, maybe their grandchildren will be Muslims and they will worship Allah and not associate anyone with Allah.[17:52 to 19:52] –excerpt of sermon (video/transcript lines 180-201) from Anas Hlayel, CAIR-Arizona

Hlayel uses this to story to set the stage for his conclusion which bases the relationship of Muslims and Americans as a challenge where Muslims are victimized by the non-believers. His underlying message here is that Muslims must accept the challenge and not take revenge on the “Kuffar” (non-believers) because the prophet said::

“that this culture is of life, I want them to live. So I see some people from their descendants, their progeny, who worship Allah.” [20:10 to 20:20] –excerpt of sermon (video/transcript lines 206-207)

By this description non-Muslims are not valued for their individual rights and human qualities, but rather they have value mostly as potential future Muslims. Imam Hlayel bolstered that message when he told our audience that the Kuffar were spared in order to give Muslims time to “deliver Islam.” He also basically labels Fox News and all “those people” (presumably here conservatives and security arms of the government) that “blame” or “defame” Muslims for 9/11 as “enemies” of Muslims. (at 16:10-17:40) To invoke repeatedly terms like “enemies” is hardly a spiritually uplifting or moderating influence as American Muslims! He said::

It says all of a sudden those people that we have enmity with. There are some people who want to be enemies with you. It says then when you do this, what’s going to happen, the enemy will turn into a dear friend, a dear close friend, when you initiate the good action. When you initiate the good thought, the Quran is telling us the enemy will turn into a friend. Now that’s not easy sometimes when people are insulting you and defaming you. It is not easy, but that is the challenge. That is why it is a challenge, because it is not easy. So let us try to do it in shallah the month of Ramadan. I tell you the vast majority of this country are very nice. But we have to know how to approach them. How to deliver Islam. How to explain Islam to them in a beautiful way. And inshallah only good will happen, because this is the message of the Quran. [16:10-17:20 Video/transcript line 164-174]

One cannot help but fear that Imam Hlayel here is teaching us and our children who joined us for this sermon that “those Americans,” like the supposedly evil enemies at Fox News and those evil conspirators in the government, are Muslims’ enemies – and that they want to be our enemies. Again a message of “Us vs. Them”.

Sadly, rather than leading Muslims into acceptance of the fact that the root cause of terrorism is the supremacism of political Islam, he actually continues with the exact same denial and accusations typical of political Islam and its collectivism which prevents any admissions as to the harm of political Islam. Mr. Hlayel’s message actually equates the hate and violence of Al Qaeda with the belief system of millions of Americans and his supremacist fixation on the conspiracy theory that Muslims did not do 9-11.

Imam’s like Hlayel and his mother organization CAIR as well as so many other Muslim Brotherhood legacy groups equate the hatred of Al Qaeda to a contrived and exaggerated anti-Muslim bogeyman who forces otherwise peaceful Muslims into a primitive, tribal response of circling the wagons and claiming victimization. This allows them to avoid any acknowledgement whatsoever that al Qaeda comes not out of Islamophobia, but rather out of the ideologies of Islamism and its supremacist constructs of the Islamic state and its anti-western identity for Muslims.

Given all this, it is grimly ironic that while Imam Hlayel is the senior official of CAIR’s Arizona office, CAIR itself steadfastly denies that it bears any responsibility for contributing to the radicalization of American Muslims.

And one cannot dismiss Imam Hlayel as an ignorant individual – he is a well-educated engineer. So his absurd conspiracy theories and stereotyping of Fox News and the U.S. government is both Islamist, and strategic.

I wish I could tell you that after that closing, the mosque’s president and its board of directors added an apology for the offense he gave our sensibilities. And I wish I could tell you that CAIR’s national office apologized for the bizarre ideas expressed on the pulpit by the director of their Arizona office. Instead, for the weeks following the sermon, both the mosque’s and CAIR’s leadership have remained silent and his sermon remains proudly displayed.

This sermon through the eyes of our children

My children were with us at this sermon. Thank God, they are too young yet to really understand much of the nonsense spewed by Imam Hlayel (and other apologists like him). But the foundations of the Islamist narrative are being laid each time my children come to pray at our Mosque. Soon they will be of an age where this Imam and those that follow will have impact on the way my children identify themselves as Muslims and as Americans.

As we left the mosque, I thought about how my oldest son, only 9 years of age now, or any of my younger children for that matter, may react later in a few years after being exposed to a similar diatribe. Will they internalize these ideas? Since they know that I am in conflict with the imam’s ideals will they have the strength of character to question the imam or I pray to at least give me the opportunity to respond to their thoughts. Perhaps, once they are older, they will ask me questions like these:

  • “Dad, Imam Hlayel portrayed Fox news, where I often see you defend Islam against Islamists all of time and portrayed conservative Americans, which most of our American and Muslim friends are, as enemies of Muslims? How can that be true? If so, why did he say so many Americans hate us? Why are we still living here if that’s true, dad?”

  • “Dad, what does Imam Hlayel mean when he says ‘We need to find out the truth behind who did 9/11’? Why can he not accept that Bin Laden and Al Qaeda did this horrific act to our country? And why does he think that I would be afraid as an American Muslim to commemorate this attack on my people by going to a 9/11 ceremony. He said::

    As we all know, in a few days we are going to have the 10th anniversary of 9-11. And I know many Muslims are a little bit scared. They don’t know what to do. Do we participate? Do we participate in services commemorating 9-11? Some people are afraid that maybe the Islam hatred and Islamophobia will increase. Maybe some Muslims will be attacked. We don’t know. We ask Allah SWT to spare every Muslim. We ask Allah SWT to protect every Muslim and Muslima. But there are challenges and we have to be up to the challenge.[14:10-14:50 Video/transcript line 143-150]
  • “He even prayed for our protection if we go to these commemorations – like we were going into battle, possibly to get shot by our fellow Americans. Why would we need to be so afraid, and need his prayer of protection against all my American friends on 9/11? He told me that we are citizens and should be proud – then turned around and told me to be afraid of Americans. Are we under attack Dad? We are commemorating 9/11 at school, and he made me scared now, when I wasn’t before.

  • “Dad, he said, ‘Muslims should make our own opinion in this country and be proud of it.” .[21:45 Video/transcript line 225-226]. Will he be upset if I choose to believe that Muslims attacked us on 9/11 or does he expect that we all should think alike? He said ‘We are part of this society,’ as citizens. Yet he said ‘Muslims should form our own opinion,’ as if we are a monolith, as if we all think alike, and our political opinions were tied to being Muslim? How can this not be confusing? If I am Muslim do I have to forfeit my individualism and conform to a Muslim collective?

  • “Dad, he began early in his sermon by saying that we need to pray for all Muslims, and to unite and not argue. Shouldn’t we pray for everyone? He confused me when he used the European Union as an example of unity citing how over 70 million died in World War II in Europe, yet now they are unified under the EU::

    We all know in the last century what happened in Europe. There were 2 major wars and the first war, 15 million people died. 15 million. In the 2nd war about 55 million people died. A total of 70 million people. What do we have today? We have the European Union. You are able to get over the differences. Europeans fighting each other, country vs. another. And nowadays we have one big country. We call it the EU or the European Union. Within a few decades, they were able to get over the differences. Can’t we do that as Muslims? Inshallah we can. [9:48-10:51 Video/transcript]. .[9:48-10:51 Video/transcript line 104-110]
  • “Dad, those are nation-states that separate church and state, which came together to form a union – a federation. If we apply that to our own Muslim context, is he saying that we should come together as Muslims around the world and form a global Islamic state based in his version of shariah law, like a Caliphate? If he didn’t mean that, is he naïve enough to believe that we would not interpret it that way? This is not to mention that the EU is a complex union that has maintained each individual nation’s identity and sovereignty. How can we defeat the Islamists’ dreams of the Islamic state, if our imam keeps invoking nation-state examples to teach us about Muslim unity?

  • Dad, he mentioned enemies of Muslims here on TV and in society, but our families escaped from the dictatorship in Syria where I thought our real enemies were actually killing our people? Now we see and hear of Syrian citizens being slaughtered daily since their peaceful uprising on the streets in March. Why didn’t he use those examples of “kuffar” to talk about the Assad regime? Why didn’t we pray for all the citizens of Syria bravely dying for freedom that we have here and he takes for granted here? What is wrong with his priorities?


These are just a few of the questions that our children and other young Muslims may ask, upon leaving such sermons – and they deserve thoughtful answers. They most importantly deserve an exposure as to what ideas exactly Imams like Hlayel are actually pedaling.

When reviewing the ideas of Muslim leaders, we must start looking at how the gullible, fertile minds of our youth would take these ideas of clerics and activists like Imam Hlayel, and asking ourselves: will his ideas lead them toward loving and identifying with Western secular democracy (as in America) – or conversely towards needing and loving the Islamic state? His sermon to our community missed far too many opportunities, and instead, demonstrated a pathological mindset of victimization which remains the greatest liability for Muslims, and for American security today.

The only way to change the damage that is being done to the Muslim community, and particularly to our youth, is to demand transparency and accountability, and to have an open, honest debate over what is preached at American mosques and what exactly is the real ideology, self-identity, and agenda of Muslim speakers and leaders like Hlayel.

M. Zuhdi Jasser, MD is the founder and President of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy based in Phoenix Arizona. He is also a former US Navy Lieutenant Commander and is a physician in private practice. He can be reached at info@aifdemocracy.org