In an age where the blackhole of Islamophobia threatens to engulf reasonable discourse, the Park51 proposal is undoubtedly its singularity. The mere mention of a possible Islamic community center near Ground Zero in New York City whips the right wing into apoplectic rants about Muslim Nazis and “spooky mosques” that create a “hot bed” for militants.

Manipulating visceral prejudices into a national platform, no right-wing fringe figure has succeeded more in turning hyperbole into a career than conservative blogger and “provocateur” Pamela Geller. Leading the anti-Park51 rallies in New York this September, Geller’s once-fringe vitriol has earned her a national spotlight, a place among mainstream conservatives, and now, an award named after Annie Taylor — the first American to survive a trip over the Niagara Falls — for “her efforts in defense of Judeo-Christian civilization.” Never missing an opportunity to elevate her incendiary rhetoric, Geller used her acceptance speech at David Horowitz’s Restoration Weekend conference last Friday to claim that not only is the proposed center a “triumphal mosque,” it is “the second wave of the 9/11 attack“:

GELLER: You have to understand that we’re in a war. We are at war now. It’s not coming. It’s not around the corner. We’re at war now. The GZM is the second wave of the 9/11 attack.…We are under attack. Obviously, the violent jihad, the academic jihad, the sociological jihad, the cultural jihad, the academic jihad, we have been infiltrated at the senior level of the DOD. …This is not a conventional war. Each one of you must fight this war…you’re each activated….We have not yet recovered the bodies from 9/11 and we’re under attack with ground zero mega mosque. And make no mistake, Cordoba, iconic of Islam’s conquering of the West, it’s quite deliberate….It’s a triumphal mosque. Because one shmuck in New York says “it’s a mosque of healing” doesn’t make it so. It’s ridiculous, it’s insulting.

Watch her speech:

This thoughtless comparison appears to be a new rallying cry for Geller. Reacting to news that Park51 applied for federally-funded grants, Geller called the request the “latest Islamic attack on the American people in the second wave of the Ground Zero mosque.”

Hearing the pied piper, many other GOP lawmakers like Rep. Michele Bachmann (MN) and Rep. Pete King (NY) followed suit, declaring the application “outrageous” and an “affront to all those who were murdered on 9/11.” Unfortunately, while her rhetoric wreaks havoc on civil discourse and tolerance, there is no indication that she will stop. As her Muslim-bashing ally Robert Spencer pointed out, “even Annie Taylor said nobody should ever do that again. But the winner of this award keeps on doing it.”

Just days after 9/11, President Bush delivered a speech at an Islamic center in Washington, DC to remind Americans that the terrorists that carried out the attacks on New York and Washington did not represent Islam. “The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That’s not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace. These terrorists don’t represent peace. They represent evil and war,” he said.

“You did something that a lot of people thought was a real effort to unite. You reached out to the Muslim world” after 9/11, NBC host Matt Lauer told Bush this morning during a live interview. Referring to the right-wing-ginned-up controversy surrounding the Islamic community center near Ground Zero this year, Lauer said, “If I look at your words there, it makes it seem to me as if that you’re saying that the rights of Muslims should not be denied for the sake of the sorrow of others, is that fair?” But Bush said he wouldn’t get dragged into the debate. When Lauer then asked Bush to comment on the recent spate of Islamophobia in the U.S., the former president offered a fairly weak response:

LAUER: Well without saying whether they should build the community center or not are you disappointed by the increase in anti-Muslim rhetoric in this country that we’ve seen recently?

BUSH: I think most Americans welcome freedom of religion and honor religions. I truly do. And the problem with the arena today is a few loud voices can dominate the discussion and I don’t intend to be one of the voices in the discussion.

Watch it:

The Islamophobia that has dominated American political discourse over the past two years is more than just “a few loud voices.” GOP members of Congress, Tea Party leaders, and conservative pundits — including those who were once top advisers to President Bush — have recently promoted anti-Muslim rhetoric and advanced the ridiculous and non-existent fear that somehow Sharia law will take over America.

In November 2001, Bush seemed to pre-empt the narrative many progressives put forth in the uproar and Islamophobia surrounding Park 51 Islamic center. “We respect people of all faiths and welcome the free practice of religion,” Bush said, adding, “our enemy wants to dictate how to think and how to worship, even to their fellow Muslims.”

Our guest blogger is Charlie Eisenhood, a student at New York University and the Editor-in-Chief of the New York City-based blog NYU Local.

This morning, New York GOP Gubernatorial candidate Carl Paladino spoke and answered questions from political journalists at a breakfast forum hosted by Crain’s New York Business. Paladino locked up the Republican primary largely by stoking anti-Muslim hate. He spent much of his campaign loudly attacking the Park51 community center planned for lower Manhattan as a “monument to those who attacked America.”

After winning the nomination, Paladino reiterated his opposition to the Muslim community center and absurdly said he feared that it would bring “sharia law to America.” ThinkProgress asked Paladino this morning if he would consider appointing Muslim judges if elected to office. Paladino stopped for a moment, then said, “oh please,” as he ignored the question and walked away:

TP: Mr. Paladino, I’m a student journalist. If you’re elected governor would you appoint Muslim judges?

PALADINO: Oh, please.

TP: Mr. Paladino, why won’t you answer my question? Mr. Paladino, are you concerned with sharia law?

Watch it:

While Paladino has made a name for himself confronting reporters and speaking his mind on controversial topics, he refusal to answer a simple question may speak volumes about his about treatment of the Muslim American community. Paladino has said that he would regulate the construction of community centers based on religion. Would he also select judges based on how they worship God?

At WorldNetDaily’s Take Back America 2010 conference in Miami this weekend, ThinkProgress spoke to William Murray, the chairman of a group organizing protests against the proposed Park51 community center in lower Manhattan. Murray recently ran an advertisement against building mosques in America.

During our interview, Murray noted that Frank Gaffney, a well-funded anti-Muslim activist, actually provided Newt Gingrich with the idea for Republicans to ban sharia law in the United States. Asked why some Republican leaders, like Mitt Romney, have been relatively quiet on his crusade against Park51, Murray suggested that Romney might reveal “similarities between Islam and Mormonism” if he became vocal. He added that such a connection would be “false logic”:

MURRAY: I don’t know with the case with Mitt Romney. It could be because of some similarities between Islam and Mormonism, to be very frank with you, and his fear that any criticism of Islam, that those arguments could then be construed or used against Mormonism. I think that is some false logic. Also there is the issue of Mitt Romney being purely an economic conservative, not a social conservative.

Watch it:

Murray echoed his broadside against “economic conservatives” in his remarks to the WND audience. At one point, he attacked Grover Norquist for opposing the recent right-wing effort to demagogue against Muslims. Murray even assailed Norquist for supporting gay conservatives and for “marrying a Muslim woman.” Listen here:

Murray, who meets regularly with Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) and Rep. Joe Pitts (R-PA) through the “Values Action Team” caucuses in Congress and maintains his own influential political action committee, has long opposed the libertarian wing of the conservative movement. Murray’s ally Frank Gaffney staged a high profile attempt to purge Norquist from the movement several years ago.

Later during the interview, Murray noted that openly criticizing Islam was difficult during the Bush-era because Bush had said Islam is a “religion of peace.” With Bush choosing to remain silent on the issue, Murray and his cohorts are on the rise within the conservative movement.

This afternoon, hate pastor Terry Jones said his church is canceling its planned event to burn the Quran this Saturday. According to Jones, he made the decision because Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf told him that he would move the planned Park51 community center away from Ground Zero in New York. Watch the press conference:

However, a Yahoo News reporter says a Park51 spokesperson said the group has no plans to move the Muslim community center.

One of the chief arguments critics have employed against the construction of the proposed Islamic center near Ground Zero in New York is that the center would be “insensitive” to the families of the victims of the 9/11 terror attacks. “[T]he overriding concern should be the sensitivities of the families of the victims,” wrote Abe Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League, who surprised many by coming out against the Islamic center. “The question here is a question of sensitivity, people’s feelings,” said former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani. Some 9/11 families “are crying over this,” he added.

But now a “key” 9/11 victims’ families group is breaking with the mosque opposition movement, demanding that an anti-mosque protest planned for September 11th be rescheduled, “and, if it isn’t, that participants back out.” In an email to members reposted by Politico, Dennis McKeon (who started the group Where to Turn as a clearinghouse of information about the attacks and subsequent plans to redevelop Ground Zero) wrote that any protests planned for the ninth anniversary of the attacks “disrespect the memories of our loved ones on this sacred day at this sacred site”:

As most of you probably know there is a proposed protest rally against the mosque being planned for 9/11. There are also reports that there is a pro mosque rally in the works for 9/11 as well. … We have always stood against any rallies scheduled for September 11th and we will do so again with these events.

We will be joining other 9/11 organizations in asking that the organizers change the date for these events. If they refuse to change the date we will also ask those scheduled to appear to withdraw from the events.

Over the past 9 years more and more of what’s been going on at Ground Zero has excluded the families. …
We will never support such activities that disrespect the memories of our loved ones on this sacred day at this sacred site.

Indeed, while conservative critics have attempted to co-opt the families of the 9/11 victims for political purposes, painting them as monolithically opposed to the proposed community center, in reality, their opinions are split, much like those of other New Yorkers.

The September 11th protest is to be the biggest yet, featuring former U.N. ambassador John Bolton, right-wing media tycoon Andrew Breitbart, and Dutch Parliamentarian Geert Wilders, a proud hater of Islam. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was scheduled to deliver a video address, but canceled under mysterious circumstances. The protest is being organized by anti-mosque crusader Pamela Geller, who has organized other demonstrations against the proposed center, and uses her blog Atlas Shurgs to pump out new smears against the project’s organizers every day.

While virtually every Republican and conservative leader has come out strongly against the construction of the proposed Park 51 Islamic community center near Ground Zero in New York City, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) strongly defended the organizers’ right to build the center today, saying, “what made this country great is we have religious freedom.” In an interview with Fox 13 News in Salt Lake City, Hatch — who has long been a proponent of religious liberty — said it shouldn’t “make a difference” that the majority of Americans don’t support the center’s construction, because religious freedom is too important, and noted that the proposed site is actually “a few blocks away” from Ground Zero.

And countering those on the right who have implicated Islam in terrorism, or who have tried to paint it as anything less than a legitimate religion, Hatch said that “there are Muslims killed on 9/11 too,” and said, “we know [Islam is] a great religion”:

HATCH: Let’s be honest about it, in the First Amendment, religious freedom, religious expression, that really express matters to the Constitution. So, if the Muslims own that property, that private property, and they want to build a mosque there, they should have the right to do so. The only question is are they being insensitive to those who suffered the loss of loved ones? We know there are Muslims killed on 9/11 too and we know it’s a great religion. … But as far as their right to build that mosque, they have that right.

I just think what’s made this country great is we have religious freedom. That’s not the only thing, but it’s one of the most important things in the Constitution. [...]

There’s a question of whether it’s too close to the 9/11 area, but it’s a few blocks away, it isn’t right there. … And there’s a huge, I think, lack of support throughout the country for Islam to build that mosque there, but that should not make a difference if they decide to do it. I’d be the first to stand up for their rights.

Watch it:

In defending Muslims’ right to build the community center, Hatch, who is Mormon, noted that his religion has faced its own opposition the building its houses of worship. Nonetheless, fellow Mormons like Fox News host Glenn Beck, and disappointingly, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) have come out against the mosque in New York. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who is also Mormon, has been “noticeably absent” from the mosque debate.

The Muslim cab driver who was stabbed earlier this week in a likely hate crime met with Mayor Michael Bloomberg yesterday, telling the mayor that despite the hateful incident, he is still proud of New York and its multicultural tolerance. While he said he is haunted by the incident, the driver — Ahmed Sharif — told Bloomberg that he still believes “this is the city actually [for] all colors, races, religion, everyone“:

But the Bangladeshi immigrant said he’s still glad to be a New Yorker.

“I feel like I belong here,” he said. “This is the city actually [for] all colors, races, religion, everyone. We live here side by side peacefully.” [...]

“From my back, he attacked me,” Sharif said. “It still is very sad, and it shocked me. And sometimes, I feel very lonely and unsafe.”

Sharif’s stabbing comes in the midst of the ugly and emotional debate taking place in NYC over the proposed Park 51 Islamic community center near the site of Ground Zero. Asked during a press conference with Sharif if he believed the attack was related to the mosque debate, Bloomberg said he wasn’t sure. Appearing on the Daily Show later that day, Bloomberg scorned the hateful tone of the opposition to the mosque, saying, “This is plain and simple people trying to stir up things to get publicity and trying to polarize people so that they can get some votes.” Still, he defended the opposition’s right to speak out, saying free speech is “what’s great about America.”

In their attempt to stop the construction of an Islamic center near Ground Zero in New York City, right-wing opponents of the mosque have voraciously attacked the motives of Feisal Abdul Rauf, the imam behind the project, demonizing him as a radical and a terrorist sympathizer.

But in an interview with the editorial board of the Sioux City Journal, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) — who supports moving the mosque to a new location — attempted to ignore the ugly attacks against Rauf and his supporters, saying none of the mosque’s critics have suggested there is “any ill intent” behind the proposed center:

Said Grassley: “I doubt there was any ill intent by Muslims in wanting to place that there. I don’t have any evidence, I don’t think any of the critics have said there was any ill intent, and constitutionally you can’t question their right to do it. But I hope, on second thought — and we also sometimes have to have second thoughts about initial decisions, even well-thought-out initial decisions — that it is insensitive and unwise to do it.”

In fact, the right-wing echo chamber has done little else but smear Rauf and question his “intent” in recent days. In a campaign ad, New York Republican gubernatorial candidate Rick Lazio warned, “Now a terrorist-sympathizing imam wants to build a $100 million mosque near Ground Zero. Where is this money coming from? Who’s really behind it?” Fox News host Bill O’Reilly said Rauf “is no friend to America,” because his “radical” views are “very disturbing.” Fellow Fox host Glenn Beck falsely claimed Rauf is “connected to” Hamas, and that Rauf employs an antisemitic imam.

Meanwhile, Pamella Geller, a key organizer of the mosque opposition, has completely dedicated her blog Atlas Shrugs to pumping out smear campaigns against Rauf. She’s argued that the mosque is all about “stealth Jihad,” that Rauf is a supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood, that Rauf “supports homicide bombers,” and that he has even “prais[ed] Hitler’s antisemitism.”

Of course, Rauf is no radical — he and his wife “are actually the kind of Muslim leaders right-wing commentators fantasize about: modernists and moderates who openly condemn the death cult of al-Qaeda and its adherent.” The Bush administration understood this, sending Rauf on a diplomatic mission, and having him work with the FBI on counter-terrorism efforts. Even Beck understood this in 2006, suggesting Rauf was a “good Muslim,” like those who make up the “vast majority” of Islam’s believers.

Yesterday, ThinkProgress reported news that a Muslim cab driver in New York City had been assaulted by a passenger simply because of his faith. The passenger, 21-year-old Michael Enright, asked the cabbie if he was a Muslim and “when the driver said yes,” Enright “pulled a knife and slashed him in the throat, arm and lip.”

Today on Fox News, right-wing blogger Michelle Malkin discussed the incident and argued that the real story is not about the hate crime, but rather, the progressive blogosphere. “Something really ugly happened,” she said. “Time and again, when something like this happens — any random incident of violence — there are people on the left with a knee-jerk impulse to indict the right.” As evidence, Malkin pointed to comments left on ThinkProgress:

MALKIN: Within an hour of this thing happening, people not really knowing fully who the perpetrator was and as details did come out, you know, this is no right winger, there’s no evidence whatsoever that he’s identified with the Tea Party and yet if you look at the comments and headlines of some of these blogs, let me read some. [...]

[T]he bilge spewing commenters at ThinkProgress immediately indicted Newt Gingrich, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and yes, right here it says, “Thanks Fox.”

Watch it:

On her blog, Malkin also indicts TP for statements left by “bilge-spewing commenters.”

In our story, ThinkProgress never mentioned anything about Enright being a right winger or a member of the Tea Party. The original post simply reported the facts that were known at the time and continually updated as new information about the story became available.

It’s odd that Malkin would indict “the left side of the blogosphere,” and ThinkProgress in particular, for comments posted on our website because Malkin herself, on her own blog, absolves herself from any association with what her commenters may say:

I do not own your comments and I expressly disclaim any and all liability that may result from them. By commenting on my site, you agree that you retain all ownership rights in what you post here and that you will relieve me from any and all liability that may result from those postings.

ThinkProgress has a similar policy, allowing commenters regardless of their political persuasion to write and post comments that agree or disagree with our perspective.

But to recap: Malkin is not liable for what her commenters write, but she feels that it is perfectly appropriate to attack the entire progressive blogosphere based on comments from one blog. Salon’s Glenn Greenwald once called this “one of the lowest and most dishonest tactics,” attempting “to smear and demonize…by exploiting statements left on the blog by commenters despite the fact that the comments have no relationship to the arguments made by the blogger.” It’s a “[s]tandard tactic on the Right,” Greenwald tweeted today referencing Malkin’s Fox News appearance, “(1) use commenters to impugn liberal blogs; (2) screech when done to them.”