Having drawn condemnation from both Muslim community organizations and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) for his call to purge Muslims from the U.S. military, Tennessee State Rep. Rick Womick (R-Mufreesboro) decided to double-down on his anti-Muslim message in an interview with the American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer.

Womick told Fischer that unless the Muslim community “gets its act together” on Shariah, “they can go back to where they came from.”

The comments, reported by RightWingWatch.org, would indicate that Womick is rejecting the ADL’s call to repudiate his “shameful, deeply disturbing” remarks.

Womick attempted to clarify the remarks he made to ThinkProgress on Veterans Day but only seemed to dig himself in deeper. He said:

WOMICK: My point is, this is my opinion, this is what they asked me, that day on Veterans Day. ‘What do you do about it?’ [I said] well, I can’t tell who the good Muslim is and who the bad Muslim is. And political correctness is not working. What choice do I have? My solution is, and I guarantee you this will work, you don’t let any Muslims serve in the military. You force the Muslim community to get its act together and clean its house and step up and speak out against Shariah law or they’re not a part of not only our military but since they want [inaudible] on our constitution, they can go back to where they came from.

Listen to it:

What exactly Womick means by calling on Muslim Americans to “clean their house” is unclear. A recent Gallup poll found that Muslim Americans are most likely (89%) to reject violent attacks by individuals or small groups on civilians versus any other U.S. religious group.

Perhaps more importantly, a January pew poll showed that 35.5% of Muslims in the U.S. are native born and by 2030, that percentage is projected to increase to 44.9%. Womick’s suggestion that Muslim Americans are all foreign born or can be sent “back to where they came from” ignores the over 200 hundred year history of Muslims in the U.S.

At a press conference in Florida today, GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain — whose foreign policy maxim is “peace through strength and clarity” — attempted to clarify his stance on Libya following his epic whiffing of a question on the country this week. Unfortunately for the former pizza executive, he only muddled things further today. First he attempted to blame the interviewer for not being “specific” enough and for supposedly selectively editing Cain’s response. (Over five uncut minutes of his remarks are visible on the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel’s website.) Then, Cain erroneously claimed that the Taliban has taken control in Libya:

Do I agree with siding with the opposition? Do I agree with saying that Qadhafi should go? Do I agree that they now have a country where you’ve got Taliban and Al Qaeda that’s going to be part of the government? … Do I agree with not knowing the government was going to — which part was he asking me about? I was trying to get him to be specific and he wouldn’t be specific.

Watch it:

Of course, the Taliban exists in Afghanistan and Pakistan, not Libya.

Watch ThinkProgress’ video on Cain’s foreign policy gaffes HERE: “Herman Cain: Still Not Ready To Be Commander-In-Chief,” produced by Jeff Spross.

On Tuesday, Prince Turki al-Faisal al-Sa’ud of Saudi Arabia spoke at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. Included among the topics he discussed were womens’ rights in Saudi Arabia.

During the question-and-answer session, journalist Sam Husseini aggressively questioned the prince about the monarchy’s rule, questioning the legitimacy of Saudi Arabia’s unelected leaders. At one point, the prince simply concluded that Saudi Arabia needs time to change, as the United States did not allow women to vote until 1910:

HUSSEINI: There’s been a lot of talk about the legitimacy of the Syrian regime, I want to know what legitimacy your regime has sir. You come before us, representative of one of the most autocratic, misogynistic regimes on the face of the earth. Human Rights Watch and other reports of torture detention of activist, you squelched the democratic uprising in Bahrain, you tried to overturn the democratic uprising in Egypt and indeed you continue to oppress your own people. What legitimacy does you regime have — other than billions of dollars and weapons? [...]

TURKI: After how many years since the establishment of the United States did women get to vote in the United States? Does that mean that before they got the vote that United States was an illegitimate country? According to his definition, obviously. So, until, when was it — 1910 when women got to vote — from 1789 to 1910 United States was illegitimate? This is how you should measure things, by how people recognize their faults and try to overcome them.

HUSSEINI: So are you saying that Arabs are inherently backward?

MODERATOR: Sam, that’s enough — this lady to the right, you’re next.

Watch it:

Shortly after the event, Husseini received an email from the Press Club informing him, “We are suspending your membership for two weeks, effective immediately, due to your conduct at a news conference held at the National Press Club.” It is alarming that the organization was so offended by Husseini’s aggressive questioning that they suspended his membership.

But it’s worth pointing out that Turki’s defense of his country’s record on women’s rights is logically flawed. Turki talked about how America slowly evolved to granting women rights. Yet America’s evolution not only occurred centuries in the past — and there is no reason to hold Saudi Arabia to such a standard — but also occurred democratically. Americans got together and decided that it was unfair for women to not have rights. Saudi Arabia is a monarchy where the general citizenry — unlike princes — gets little say over the laws. Saudi Arabia is the only Muslim country, for example, where women are denied the right to drive. The state of womens rights in Saudi Arabia does not have to do with the slow evolution of Muslim or Arab thinking, it is about a monarchy deliberately imposing an oppressive philosophy on its people.

Frank Gaffney, a former official in the Reagan administration, has distinguished himself as a leading voice for the tight-knit anti-Muslim movement among conservatives. Although Gaffney has placed us among David Petraeus and Barack Obama in his pantheon of Islam-influenced individuals, he has taken the time to sit down and chat with us on multiple occasions.

We were hoping to speak again with Gaffney at the “Preserving Freedom Conference” in Nashville, Tennessee, a gathering of other opponents of Islam, last Friday. Initially, Gaffney agreed to speak to us and said he would grant an interview after his book signing.

As we waited, several security personnel hovered around. When he finished signing the last book, Gaffney promptly stood up, and walked out of the conference, refusing to make eye-contact with us. Five security guards, all wearing bullet-proof vests under their suits, quickly surrounded Gaffney and physically blocked us from approaching him. We followed him into the parking lot to ask if had forgotten about us, but Gaffney refused to acknowledge our presence. Instead, one of the conference’s burly security men moved to ensure we couldn’t come within several yards of the neoconservative activist. After a few minutes of confusion, we turned on our camera to try to record what was going on. And just before he got into his car, Gaffney responded, “I gotta go”:

FANG: Uh, Undersecretary Gaffney, you said you’d give us a few comments after the event?

CLIFTON: Undersecretary, you have two minutes?

GAFFNEY: I gotta go.

FANG: Any reason you have five security guards protecting you here? We’ve interviewed you in the past!

Watch it:

Gaffney’s retreat from ThinkProgress seemed bizarre, but similar hostility was evident throughout the conference. Lou Ann Zelnick, a failed congressional candidate and activist involved in protesting the construction of a mosque in nearby Murfreesboro, yelled at us without provocation.

Later in the evening, towards the end of the conference, we encountered three additional security guards. The new guards, who paced near us at times, had handguns displayed in their holsters.

On Wednesday night, comedian and right-wing pundit Dennis Miller appeared on Fox News’s The O’Reilly Factor to talk about various political issues. At one point, Miller explained that on a flight from Los Angeles to New York, he was sitting next to a Muslim man. He told O’Reilly that he fantasized about assaulting the man if he stood up:

MILLER: Billy, I just flew five hours from L.A. to New York next to Islamic kid who was in his 30s. I couldn’t even watch the movie. I just fantasized [about] hitting him in the head with an elbow if he went up.

Watch it:

“You’re doing the Juan Williams thing!” O’Reilly responded to Miller, apparently laughing off his remarks. Miller’s comments come at a time when Islamophobia continues to be pervasive on the far-right. Last week, Tennessee state Rep. Rick Womick (R-Murfreesboro) told ThinkProgress that he thinks Muslims should be banned from the military, earning a rebuke from the Anti-Defamation League.