Why do some people fear Muslims, Mosques and Islam?

Fear is a response to a perceived threat. It is a basic survival mechanism occurring in response to a specific threat of danger {W]. Fear is based upon facts and the unknown. Following the attack on the United States by 19 radical Muslim terrorists on 9-11-2001, Muslims, mosques and Islam itself came under a cloud of suspicion that prompted many Americans to take a closer look at something that had already become part of their lives. What follows is a small glimpse of a few parts of this issue. There is literally enough information available on the Internet about this subject that could fill an entire library. The research I am including herein tells me that there is reason for great concern and it is something every American needs to become more familiar with. Here are some pertinent questions for Muslims and non-Muslims about Islam and how Muslims and former Muslims reveal their point of view. Several definitions used here have been extracted from topics on Islam found in Wikipedia identified by [W].

Q: Do you know what Islam is?
A: Islam is more than a religion, it is an entire political system that encompasses religious worship, cultural dictates, family law, legal and military obligations. Islamic law (Arabic: شريعة Šharīah) touches on virtually every aspect of life and society, encompassing everything from banking and warfare to welfare and the environment [W].

Q: Is Islam today any different than it was when the Prophet  Muhammad was alive?
A: No, it is not. Islam literally translates from the Arabic to mean “submission”. The Qur’an remains, today, unchanged from its original text written 1400 years ago. Muslims believe the Qur'an to be the perfect word of God, and as such it cannot contain any errors or contradictions, and must be perfectly compatible with science. Muslims believe it to be so perfect that readers must conclude it is of divine, rather than human, origin. It is so perfect only as revealed in the original Arabic [W]. It is repeated by rote by non-Arabic speaking people in words they often do not understand the meaning of. Muslims are not permitted the freedom to choose only those passages from the Qur’an they approve of and reject the rest.

Q: Is Islam practiced differently in other countries than it is in America?
A: The difference depends on the percentage of population of Muslims and non-Muslims. In England, which has a ratio of Muslims about twice that in America, there is widespread unrest where Muslims are making ever-increasing demands to have laws changed to conform to Islamic Sharia Law. Here are a few pictures taken outside the Parliament Building that illustrate this unrest.

Also, in American cities with sizable Muslim populations, such as Dearborn, Michigan, similar Muslim influence is occurring regarding Islamic Sharia Law.

Q: What is moderate Islam?
A:  Many former Muslims as well as Islamic scholars all agree there is no such thing as ‘Moderate’ Islam, there is only Islam.


Source: Former Muslims United

Exposing the Myth of Moderate Islam

by Ali Sina, FaithFreedom.org, March 14, 2010

I have always maintained that “moderate Muslim” is an oxymoron. We have two kinds of Muslims: Terrorist Muslims and ignorant Muslims. The former are those who know Islam well and live by its dictums. The latter have no clue about their religion and have an idealized image of Islam that has no bases in facts.

Source: Amil Imani

Moderate Islam Is No Islam
Amil Imani, 15 July 2007

Many people have asked me why I have put my life in harm’s way by tangling with Islam and why I do what I do. Born in a Muslim family and having witnessed first-hand the horrors and indignity that Islamofascism visits on people it subjugates, I have taken it upon myself to do my part in defeating this ideology of oppression, hate and violence. Islam is wrapped in deception as a spiritual dogma or religion and is more dangerous than Nazism, Communism and Fascism.

Nowadays we hear from the non-Muslim world about the moderate version of Islam and moderate Muslims. In my view, being a Muslim and not being radical is simply not possible. I never thought that it would be easy to reason with Muslims. They don't understand that freedom has a price. Freedom lets a person make choices and be up-front about it. And that's where I part with those who would prefer to be sheep and have sheepdogs hem them in.

Many non-Muslims are obviously very well-meaning with regard to Islam, but they are also extremely naïve and ignorant of the facts. They seem to think that Islam is just another religion of love and peace and Muslims should be given full freedom to practice their religion. Do they also believe that thieves, misogynists, rapists, child-molesters and any and all manner of practicing evils should be given complete carte blanche to carry on with what they value and believe? These well-meaning simpletons are just as deluded as the fanatic jihadists by refusing to acknowledge the fact that one cannot be a Muslim and not abide by the dictates of the Quran.

There is no such thing as moderate Islam. There is no such thing as secular Islam or a secular Muslim. How can you possibly secularize a shark or a snake? You can’t. It’s the nature of the beast. There are numerous sects within Islam. One and all are extremes and not in the least amenable to change. Keep in mind that Islam claims that it is the perfect eternal faith for mankind. Splits have occurred and will continue to occur in Islam. Yet, reformation has not happened in nearly 1400 years and is not going to happen. Islam is carved in granite, just the way it is. No change. Allah's book is sealed.

There are indeed some Muslims who are moderate in the way they practice their religion. These people, for the most part, are culturally Muslims. They don't practice Islam the way it is mandated. They pick and choose. Therefore, "moderate Islam," is no Islam at all. It is not possible. The only way to deal with the menace of real Islam, the Islamofascist varieties, is to fully dismantle it and relegate it to the confines of museums.

The Islamists have created fear not only in a non-Islamic world, but in the hearts and minds of those who consider themselves to be Muslims. The Islamists wage their war under the name of Islam. They receive immense direct and indirect support from the rank-and-file of ordinary Muslims. It is this support of moderate Muslims that keeps the Islamists alive. And it is the Islamists who are intent on showing no mercy to any and all who do not share their ideology, be they Muslims or not.

This is why there is truly no such thing as a “moderate” Muslim.  Moderate Muslims, or in other words “non-practicing Muslims”, are moderate by default only. Like millions of Iranians who were born into a faith they did not choose, a faith that was “inflicted” upon them by invaders of a foreign culture, a faith that forbids them to leave or revert to their pre-Islamic heritage and other Iranian religions, they remain Muslims in name only.

Source: Claremont Independent

In an interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali, ex-Muslim, and activist for truth at Claremont College on 2-14-2009, Aditya Bindal, from the Claremont Independent asked about moderate Muslims:

Aditya Bindal: While we rarely see moderate Muslims speak out against the violence within Islam, they always seem to do that from a kind of relativism, cosmopolitanism and it almost seems to be saying that extremism is a problem, radicalism is a problem. They seem to fall into a kind of pacifism. As opposed to your principled stand that says Islam is violating fundamental human rights, why do you think the moderate Muslims go in this direction and how can we get them to see things your way?

Ayaan Hirsi Ali: I want to say this: there is no moderate Islam. So talking about the moderate Muslim doesn’t help in any way. You have Islam and you can practice it in varying degrees. You can say that this is someone who calls himself a Muslim but doesn’t practice at all and thinks like a Western person. This is what I did from 1992, when I went to Holland, until 2001. I called myself a Muslim, but lived the life of a liberal Dutch. I didn’t pray or fast. Compare this to the other extreme, where we find an individual struggling to obey all the rules of Islam. Those are the one’s we call fundamentalists, radicals, and extremists, and so on. In between, we have people you (sic> who) just pray, who fast only in the month of Ramadan, and people who become more political. So there’s no moderate Islam. There are practicing Muslims, there are non-practicing Muslims, and there are those who practice a little bit.

Source: Interview with Nonie Darwish, co-founder of Former Muslims United. “There Is No Such Thing as ‘Moderate’ Islam.” Continued Conversations with Nonie Darwish.

Nonie Darwish was born in Gaza when it was under Egyptian control and she grew up in Cairo. She is also the author of a previous book: Now They Call me Infidel. Why I Renounced Jihad for America, Israel, and the War on Terror. Nonie is no longer a practicing Muslim. No American can afford NOT to read this book. Sharia law, which governs every area of Muslim life, is now increasingly infiltrating the West. Europe may be lost, America is now under siege. With profound bravery, Darwish documents the history and nature of Sharia law which is invariably mis-represented and mis-understood, both by its followers and by “infidels.” In her words, “the non-Muslim world must have no illusions

Nonie Darwish:
“The term “moderate Muslim” was created in the West. In the Muslim world there is nothing called moderate or radical Muslims or moderate or radical mosques. You are either a Muslim or not. For the term “moderate” Muslim to be legitimate, we must have something called “moderate Islam” vs. “Islam.” What the West terms as Moderate Muslims are the good and peace loving Muslims who are not necessarily taking their religion very seriously and many of whom have never read a Sharia book.”

 “…. Muslims and non-Muslims have different rights in the Muslim State. There are many orders to mistreat, humiliate, subjugate and even kill non-Muslims. The only way for non-Muslims to protect themselves from Muslims is by accepting living in the Muslim state as second class citizens, obeying Islamic Sharia law, and never promoting or preaching their religion. Even slavery has never been abolished by Islam and Muslim law books are full of laws regulating the ownership and treatment of slaves. Sexual slavery for war captive women is allowed by Sharia and was practiced by the prophet Muhammad himself.”

Q: What is the Qur’an?
A: The Qur’an is a book containing 114 suras (chapters) with a combined total of 6,236 verses containing the preachings of the Prophet Muhammad. The chronologically earlier suras, revealed at Mecca, are primarily concerned with ethical and spiritual topics. The later Medinan suras mostly discuss social and moral issues relevant to the Muslim community. The Qur'an is more concerned with moral guidance than legal instruction, and is considered the "sourcebook of Islamic principles and values". Muslim jurists consult the hadith, or the written record of Prophet Muhammad's life, to both supplement the Qur'an and assist with its interpretation [W].

Example of Qur’an instruction to Muslims (University of Southern California - three translations)
[note: Believers = Muslims; Unbelievers = non-Muslims]
Surah 008.012
YUSUFALI: Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): "I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them."
PICKTHAL: When thy Lord inspired the angels, (saying): I am with you. So make those who believe stand firm. I will throw fear into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Then smite the necks and smite of them each finger.
SHAKIR: When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.

Q: Who wrote the Qur’an?
A: The Qur’an was reportedly written down by Muhammad's companions while he was alive, between the years 610 and 632, during the last 22 years of his life. Muslims are told to believe that the verses of the Qur'an were revealed to Muhammad by God through the archangel Gabriel [W]. They were in fact solely pronouncements made by Muhammad to his followers during his lifetime. The earlier passages were meant to convince non-Muslims to convert to Islam and follow Muhammad and were laden with messages of peace. The later passages were dictates about war, conquest, torture and the slaughter of Jews and Christians who were described as unbelievers and the “followers of the book” (Bible).

Q: What is the Hadith?
A: Hadith are Muslim traditions relating to the Sunna  (words and deeds) of Muhammad. They are drawn from the writings of scholars writing between 844 and 874, more than 200 years after the death of Mohammed in 632. In general, for Muslims the hadith are second only to the Qur'an in importance, although some scholars put more emphasis on the perpetual adherence of Muslim nation to the traditions to give them credibility, and not solely on hadith. Most of our knowledge about the life of Muhammad comes from the hadith, many of which were biographies of Mohammed. Many Islamic practices (such as the Five Pillars of Islam) are drawn from the hadith [W].

Q; What is Sharia – Islamic Law?
A: Mainstream Islamic law does not distinguish between "matters of church" and "matters of state".  Islamic law covers all aspects of life, from matters of state, like governance and foreign relations, to issues of daily living. The Qur'an defines hudud  as the punishments for five specific crimes: unlawful intercourse, false accusation of unlawful intercourse, consumption of alcohol, theft, and highway robbery. The Qur'an and Sunnah also contain laws of inheritance, marriage, and restitution for injuries and murder, as well as rules for fasting, charity, and prayer [W].

Q: What is Islamism?
A: Islamism which means "Political Islam") is a set of ideologies holding that Islam is not only a religion but also a political system; that modern Muslims must return to their roots of their religion, and unite politically. Leading Islamist thinkers emphasized the enforcement of Sharia (Islamic law); of pan-Islamic political unity or caliphate. Pan-Islamism (اتّحاد الاسلام) is a political movement advocating the unity of Muslims under one Islamic state — often a Caliphate [W].

The concept of mujahideen volunteer Islamist fighters is closely related to pan-Islamic thought. Mujahideen may come from all over the Islamic world to assist in a conflict that they deem to be religiously important [W].

Islamism, as viewed by non-Muslims, is often considered to be Islamofascism.  The term Islamofascism is a neologism which draws an analogy between the ideological characteristics of specific Islamist movements from the turn of the twenty-first century on, and a broad range of European fascist movements of the early twentieth century, neofascist movements, or totalitarianism [W].

The public use of the term Islamofascism has also elicited a critical response from various Muslim groups. The terrorist funding front group CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) says that the use of the term "feeds the perception that the war on terror is actually a war on Islam".

CAIR was dealt a significant blow to its reputation in the United States after it was named an unindicted co-conspirator by U.S. prosecutors in a Hamas funding case in Dallas, Texas in 2007. The FBI no longer works with CAIR outside of criminal investigations due to its status as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case [w]. In spite of this damaged reputation, the news media today continues to rely on CAIR spokesmen on all opinions regarding Islam or Muslims or mosques. There are several page entries to read on The Holy Land Terrorist Funding trial in the Dallas Morning News web site.

In April 2008, Associated Press reported that US federal agencies, including the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security, were advised to stop using the term 'Islamo-fascism' in a fourteen-point memo issued by the Extremist Messaging Branch, a department of another federal body known as the National Counterterrorism Center. Aimed at improving the presentation of the "War on Terrorism" before Muslim audiences and the media, the memo states: "We are communicating with, not confronting, our audiences. Don't insult or confuse them with pejorative terms such as 'Islamo-fascism,' which are considered offensive by many Muslims."[W].

Q: Are all Muslims terrorists?
A: The following was written by a Muslim on May 20, 2001, 3½ months before 9-11 and found on an English/Arab web site www.Muhammadanism.org.

“Most Muslims are not terrorists. Many of them reject the actions of their Muslim brethren around the world. Unfortunately, since Islam teaches world domination, these moderate Muslims rarely raise their voices in protest. If Israelis bomb a Hezbollah camp in Lebanon, Muslims in Western countries will organize vocal demonstrations. Israel has never killed as many Muslims as Saddam Hussein has, but Muslims generally turn a blind eye to violent acts when it is Muslim on Muslim violence. But getting Muslims to condemn the terrorist actions of their brethren, say of those in Sudan, Egypt, Algeria, Afghanistan, or Iraq is like pulling teeth. While the Muslims world wide continually condemn Israel, few Muslims have ever raised their voices in protest over Saddam Hussein's genocidal war upon the Kurds. Why has Bin Laden failed to help the Kurds? Instead, reports on Bin Laden have shown that he has worked together with Saddam Hussein. Furthermore, why did the Muslim nations of Iran and Iraq oppose Western military action to stop the genocide of Muslim Kosovars?”

“Muslims condemn Western sanctions of Iraq. But, they forget that Western nations were their saviors when Iraq conquered Kuwait and made threats toward Saudi Arabia. These Muslim countries appealed to non-Muslim nations to free Muslim Kuwait from Muslim conquest and to halt Iraq’s military advance upon the land of Mecca and Medina. If Western countries were so evil, why did Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, the land of Muhammad, have to appeal to the West to protect them from their own Muslim brethren? Why did non-Muslims have to stop the fighting between Muslim brethren and to protect the land of Mecca from Saddam Hussein, a Muslim despot? Was not Allah able to protect them? Even though all these events are historical facts, Muslims freely criticize Western involvement in the Middle East.”

“What does the future hold for Islam in Western countries? One thing I am certain of; it holds terrorism. I've studied Islamic viewpoints on the Western world, especially America. The majority of Muslims today view America as the last great wall that stops Islam. In their mind, America must be destroyed or brought down, by any means necessary. This is what motivated Sheik Rahman to blow up the New York towers. This is what motivates Muslims throughout America to speak of a day when America will fall to Islam's power. Make no mistake about it, Muslims have murdered Americans in America, and will continue to do so. It is not a question of "if", it is a question of "when."“

“Once again I say, most Muslims in America are not terrorists. Many of them are good people. But the seeds of terrorism are planted deep within the theology and psyche of Islam. This theology, when free to grow and blossom, will show itself in the actions of Muslims who are faithful to the example of Muhammad. And as was demonstrated in "Not Without My Daughter", who knows when a peaceful, liberal or moderate Muslim will turn to fundamentalism and embrace the violence of Islam?”

“Often there is a strange transformation in the viewpoint of some Muslims who seek to immigrate to a Western nation. At first, these Muslims complain to immigration officials about their native country and its lack of opportunities, human rights, religious liberties, and intellectual freedom. However, once they settle in a Western nation and enjoy its liberties, some turn against their host nation and begin to praise the virtue’s of an Islamic state. They seem to have forgotten their pleadings with immigration officials to accept their application. They would be upright, and certainly more honest, if they would strive for human and religious rights for the non-Muslim minorities who suffer under Islamic rule. And, if they truly believed that Islam is the answer, why didn't they seek asylum in Afghanistan, Sudan, Iraq, Iran, or Pakistan?”

Q: Are Muslims more loyal to Islam than to America?
A: The answer seems to be evenly split depending on where you look. The web site Muslims For America  has several stories on various aspects of this subject. Many Muslims who responded to them took opposite positions. Contradicting those mixed views was found in a survey done on an authoritative Muslim web site The Middle East Media Research Institute published on August 12, 2010.


The Board of Directors of the Middle East Media Research Institute, according to its web site consists of:

MEMRI’s Board of Advisors and Directors comprises a group of distinguished figures in government, media, law and academia.  Among them are former prime ministers; attorneys-general; justice ministers; leading legal and counterterrorism experts; and recipients of the most prestigious awards, including the Nobel Peace Prize, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and the United States Congressional Gold Medal.  This group also includes former United States government officials, such as the director of the CIA; Secretary of the Navy; Director of Operations with the FBI; Ambassadors to the United Nations, Iraq, the European Union, and Romania; Secretary of Education; Deputy Defense Secretary; and head presidential counsel.  Members of MEMRI's Board of Advisors are bipartisan and have honorably served Presidents Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama.

The question posed to its leading scholars encompassed whether a true Muslim could serve in the U.S. military putting them in a position of having to fight other Muslims in a Muslim country. The overall majority of opinions agreed that it would be a violation of Islamic Law for any Muslim to give aid to a government waging war against Muslims. Here are a few quotes from the respondents:

English-Language Fatwas Concerning Aiding or Joining the Military

Conflicting views regarding cooperation with the U.S. security forces, and the joining of these forces, can also be found in rulings issued on the Assembly's English-language website, in response to readers' questions. Following are excerpts from some of the rulings, in the original English:

Dr. Salah Al-Sawy, who was asked whether it is permissible to work as a teacher at a Canadian military college, answered: "There is nothing wrong with working as a civilian teacher in a military college in Canada, especially since Canada is not one of the many countries currently at war with the Ummah, as long as you always remember that you are a man with a cause, that you do not forget your role in telling people about the Prophet".

The Assembly's permanent fatwa committee was more cautious in responding to the following question: "Is it… permissible to join the U.S. Navy if you choose to be stationed in a non-Muslim country, like Japan or China?" In this case, the committee did not issue a ruling, but advised the enquirer to call "and speak directly to one of our scholars, because the answer requires more detail and information."

Another jurisprudent, Dr. Ma'in Khalid Al-Qudah, said it is permissible for a Muslim to serve in the U.S. military, providing he does not fight his coreligionists: "The only thing you must consider in this regard is to make sure not to be involved in fighting, harming, or even bothering Muslims at all. [Other than this], defending your country would be a noble job of which you could be proud."

The ruling given in response is ambivalent. On one hand, the committee states that a Muslim must not participate in "unjust battle," or to give assistance to an army waging such battles, thereby implying that joining the U.S. military at present is forbidden. On the other hand, the ruling states that it is permissible to assist all oppressed groups, whether Muslim or non-Muslim. As an example, he mentions that the Muslim ummah came out against Saddam Hussein when he invaded Kuwait. This seems to imply that the fatwa committee does not rule out service in the U.S. armed forces altogether. The following are excerpts from the Fatwa:

{NOTE: A fatwā (Arabic: فتوى‎; plural fatāwā Arabic: فتاوى‎) in the Islamic faith is a religious opinion concerning Islamic law issued by an Islamic scholar. [w]} Illustration of a written Fatwa:

Another question raised on the Middle East Media Research Institute was about whether a true Muslim could be part of any law enforcement agency in America.

Pros and Cons of Enlisting in U.S. Forces and Working for the Police

Khatem Al-Hajj, an Egyptian cleric residing in Minnesota, referred (the question) to a detailed 23-page document drawn up by Al-Hajj for the fifth annual convention of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists in America, which was held in Bahrain in November 2007. The document discussed the legitimacy of Muslims serving in the police forces of non-Muslim countries, particularly in the U.S.

Al-Hajj also presented the harmful aspects of Muslims on the police force in a Western country – the foremost of which could be Muslim policemen being obligated to "impose laws that are not the laws of Allah," in addition to the weakening of Muslims' faith, thus leading to sin, saying, "[The policeman] is likely to renounce many of his religious beliefs and fall prey to many sins, such as the ban on gender mixing," and more.

Al-Hajj then devotes four pages to the principle of rejecting jurisdiction that is not according to the laws of Allah – that is, man made laws that do not follow Islamic law (al-hukm bi-ghair ma anzal Allah). To this end, he reviews statements by Islamic jurists on the matter, including Abu Muhammad Ali Ibn Hazm, Ibn Taymiyya, Ibn Kathir, Ahmad Shaker, Muhammad bin Ibrahim Aal Al-Sheikh, and Muhammad Amin Al-Shanqiti – all scholars generally affiliated with the stricter Sunni schools.

Al-Hajj qualifies the position that serving in the police force means subjugation to a system of man made laws, stating that if a Muslim policeman recognizes the supremacy of Islam, he is sinning but is not an apostate. Therefore, he says, the fundamental question is whether such service means subjugation to man-made laws, which is tantamount to a sin, or whether it is permitted as the lesser evil. 

The following are Al-Hajj's arguments for prohibiting Muslims from police work:

1.      Ostensibly, serving on the police force is forbidden, because police work is based on laws that are not the laws of Allah – that is to say, they are heretical: "The abovementioned evidence concerns the prohibition against jurisprudence which is not according to the religion of Allah, and concerns the heresy of anyone who engages in it, whether as judge or as litigant. A member of the police force who implements the laws of these [infidel, non-Muslim] rulers is necessarily enforcing a law which is not the law of Allah." Al-Hajj counters this, saying that these laws are divided into two categories: laws compatible with the goals of the shari'a, such as traffic or drug laws, and laws which contradict the shari'a, but which the policeman has no choice but to enforce. He said that not all policemen deal with enforcing the second kind of laws – on the contrary, a large number of policemen deal with enforcing laws that serve the public interest, in a way that is compatible with the spirit of Islam, like traffic cops, narcotics agents, etc.

2.      Serving on the police force also constitutes "aid to perpetrators of crimes and aggression. [Muslim] policemen [in Western countries] might participate in incriminating a Muslim who has been done an injustice." Al-Hajj notes that "the Muslim communities in the West often talk about cases filed arbitrarily against their members or their institutions," and adds that "most of those who seek [to join the police force] want the salary and the rank, and do not stand up for the truth or help the oppressed."  

3.      Police work involves espionage, but "shari'a forbids espionage as long as there is no [reasonable] suspicion... There should be no spying against anyone who has not been proven to be wicked. But [the authorities] spy on Muslims in those diasporas [in the West] because of the suspicion and the doubts that they have about those diasporas, and they bug the[ir] mosques, homes, cars, and phones."

4.      "The Sunna contains explicit bans on working as a policeman for an oppressive and corrupt regime." However, Al-Hajj qualifies this by saying that many Western countries do not have such a regime.

5.      A policeman is obliged to undergo violations of modesty, such as "licentious mixing between the sexes, seclusion with someone of the opposite sex, and the like."

Al-Hajj then discussed arguments for why Muslims should be allowed to engage in police work. He wrote that such permission is based on the principle of doing the least evil – that is, finding the golden mean between the ideal and reality, in accordance with which each Muslim deals with the reality in which he finds himself in a positive way and strives to change it to the Muslims' benefit.

Al-Hajj also raises the possibility that Muslims can be allowed to engage in police work despite the violations of shari'a that it entails, based on the principle of preventing worse outcomes for Islam and the Muslims. Beyond that, he presents two proofs permitting taking on positions for infidel governments from the Islamic tradition. The first of these is the story of Joseph, who worked for Pharaoh, and the second is the tradition about the Muslims who emigrated to Ethiopia in the time of the Prophet Muhammad, and fought in the army of the Ethiopian monarch against his enemies, even though he was not Muslim - an example also mentioned by the permanent members of the website's fatwa committee, as mentioned above. 

Al-Hajj's conclusions were:

1.      It is forbidden to work for the FBI or for U.S. security services because these harm Muslims; furthermore, working for these bodies involves spying on Muslims.

2.      It is permitted to work for bodies acting for the general good, such as agencies charged with fighting drugs, alcohol, guns, and the like, and it is also permitted to work for bodies that preserve public order.

3.      With regard to city and state police, Al-Hajj explains that there is some fear that a Muslim who works for these bodies could be forced to arrest a Muslim because of false complaints, and thus each situation must be examined individually and carefully by jurisprudents.

In sum, it can be understood from this document that Muslims are prohibited from joining the military – if it is forbidden to spy on Muslims for criminal and security reasons, it is all the moreso forbidden to enlist or aid active warfare against them.

In plain language, all of the above scholarly opinions seem to indicate that true Muslims are required to hold a higher allegiance to the authority of Islam than to the United States. The web site The Religion of Peace summarized the question: “Can Muslim citizens be loyal to a non-Muslim government? “ by saying: 

“Many Muslims are loyal to the non-Muslim countries in which they live, of course, but it is in spite of Islamic teaching. Unlike other faiths, Islam is not just a religion but a political system as well. The state is intended to be inseparable from religious rule. Islamic law, or Sharia, is complete and not designed to coexist with or be subordinate to other legal systems.

Muslims are not meant to be ruled by non-Muslims. The Qur'an is very clear that they are to resist unbelievers by any means until Islam establishes political supremacy.  This doesn't mean that everyone must be forced to become Muslim, but rather that everyone must submit to Muslim rule.” And followed it with numerous quotes from the Qur’an that support the argument.

My conclusion is there is justification for fear. Fear may sometimes be based on the unknown but for all of the available information there is little left for the imagination.