Does Time magazine want to create anti-mosque phobia?

Time magazine's recent cover displays Islam's crescent moon and star fitted with the United States flag. The magazine asks the question, "Is America Islamophobic?" The question is generating quite a buzz.

"What the anti-mosque uproar tells us about how the U.S. regards Muslims," is the cover's subtitle for the question. On page 20, the title for the piece reads, "Islam in America. It's part of the fabric of life, but protests reveal a growing hostility to the religion of Muslims."

In the middle of the piece, Time provides its readers with a timeline on "A Brief History of Intolerance in America," complete with photographs.

Time's portfolio of propaganda in its Aug. 30 issue is certainly provocative, maybe as provocative as Imam Rauf's mosque proposal. But I don't think the purpose of the Time editors was simply to provoke. I think it was primarily to invoke fear -- the fear of peer pressure.

Ironically, the question which asks Americans to evaluate a potential phobia of Islam is a means to strike fear in the hearts of those opposing the ground zero mosque. I know I'm not supposed to say "ground zero mosque," so let me say the proposed mosque and Muslim center to be housed in a building damaged by the 9-11 attack, just 600 feet from the former twin towers.

The media leftists play off the fear of being labeled "intolerant," or as a hater of Muslims. If the elitists in the media are successful in their public opinion campaign, many weak-kneed moderates will become fearful of opposing the ground zero mosque.

Though they may not be fearful of Muslims in any unhealthy way, they will become fearful of being labeled "Islamophobic" or "intolerant" -- much the same way people are terrified of being labeled "homophobic," for speaking out against homosexual practice.

The words "phobic" and "intolerant" are loaded terms. We are taught that being "Islamophobic" is a bad thing. "What reason could anyone possibly have for opposing the mosque, other than a bare animus toward Muslims?" the editors in "mainstream" newsrooms across America ask themselves. After all, the groupthink-journalists unanimously support it. "Supporting the mosque shows the strength of our diversity and religious freedom. There is no reason to fear. Irrational fear is the result of ignorant hatred; so to fear is to hate," reason the media elitists.

Of course, there are reasons to have apprehension about the ground zero mosque other than hate, intolerance and irrational phobia. Abdur-Rahman Muhammad, an actual moderate Muslim, says this:

The mainstream media has deliberately ignored the fact that there is legitimate basis for fear of mosques - as it is a demonstrable fact that mosques and Muslims have been disproportionately connected to terrorism in this country and around the world, a fact that the media won't report. Moreover, in the examples of opposition to specific mosques chosen by the media as evidence of popular "bigotry," the media has selectively ignored the openly available evidence showing unambiguously that these mosques or their officials are connected to or supportive of the radical Muslim Brotherhood (the parent of al-Qaeda), Hamas, and other radical Islamic fundamentalist organizations.

Having no fear of moderate Muslims is one matter. But it would be unhealthy to not have some level of apprehension concerning those who carry out or support the violent fundamentals of Islamic teachings.

Abdur-Rahman even suggests a rational basis for fear of mosques. Why? They are the seedbeds for Islamic terrorism. Not all mosques produce terrorists, but how does one know which ones are the safe ones? That's a problem, especially when auditing and investigation prior to construction, as with the proposed ground zero mosque, is considered a violation of religious freedom.

If you experience technical problems, please write to