[E Rocc]

When have any so-called mainstream Christian or Jewish leaders seriously talked about wishing to impose religious law on this country?

Where does it say that that's what the II wants to do? Examples of legitimate goals covered by the description would include opposing profiling or other laws perceived as unfair to Moslems, preserving for mosques the same legal rights as churches, and opposing anti-Islamic statements by politicians and other public figures.

When was the last time followers of either religion brutally and savagely attacked this nation in the name of their religion?

Meaningless. Just because an organization attacks us on behalf of a certain cause does not mean they represent the entire cause. What Norquist opposes is anti-Muslim agitation similar to the anti-Catholic agitation of the 19th Century or the anti-Jewish legislation of the early 20th. This does not mean he supports terrorism.

Just because it likely won't happen doesn't mean that certain people who would very much like to do so aren't gaining access to the highest levels of power in this country, thanks to certain self-aggrandizing creeps, such as the subject of this thread.

Most Muslims who live in this nation live here to avoid the oppressive laws found in nations under sharia. Few if any wish to enforce their views. Even those who are devout are not "fundamentalist" in this regard. This is why Mohammed Atta et al avoided Muslim communities in the US. With their observant lifestyle and their fundamentalist rhetoric they would have stood out.

Muslim Americans have just as much cause as any other group to form groups to look out for their political interests. Considering some of the rhetoric of recent years, perhaps more. Like any other political group they will have enemies, and their enemies will try to tar them with bad associations.

-Eric

[NYC GOP Chick]

What Norquist opposes is anti-Muslim agitation similar to the anti-Catholic agitation of the 19th Century or the anti-Jewish legislation of the early 20th. This does not mean he supports terrorism.

Then why does he hang around with and agitate on behalf of such upstanding representatives of the Religion of Peace? Why doesn't he associate himself with the putative moderates? Why does he choose to hang with the most virulently Jew-hating, anti-American elements?