Islam in Oklahoma Category

Last Saturday, January 24, 2025, I was on Tulsa Beacon Weekend with Jeff Brucculeri. The weekly public affairs show, sponsored by the Tulsa Beacon newspaper, airs every Saturday from noon to 1 pm on AM 970 KCFO. Jeff and I talked about the City of Tulsa's incoherent response to homelessness and a bit about the Broken Arrow zoning case involving a proposed mosque. It was a fun conversation, and the time flew by.

As part of the discussion of homelessness, I mentioned City of Hope Outreach, a ministry to street people led by Jon Maust. City of Hope seeks out and works with the homeless who don't go to the shelters.

We have a simple, but life-changing mission: Identify those members of the homeless community who desire to put the streets behind them. We Connect those individuals with a local church and a mentor in order to Equip them with the tools and assistance needed to fully reintegrate; and then Follow Through with them until their reintegration is complete.

As I said on the show, if the City of Tulsa were serious about addressing homelessness, the committee that's deciding how to spend the $75 million taxpayers approved would include people who work with the homeless and understand the root causes, people like Jon Maust of City of Hope and Steve Whittaker of John 3:16 Mission. Instead, that money is going to provide employment for gender-studies majors in non-profit organizations.

Bruce and Leta Wilbanks of the Marriage and Family Initiative were Jeff's guests in the first half hour of the show, and they spoke about upcoming marriage-related events coming up over the next month or so.

We recorded on Thursday the 22nd, so I was safe and burrowed in at home when the show went out on Saturday. With all the preparations for last weekend's snow storm, I neglected to get word out about this in time so you could listen live; sorry about that. Although the episode has already aired, you can listen again until this coming Saturday via the KCFO app and the KCFO website. Click this link, then click Tulsa Beacon Weekend. (The most recent episode of Joe Riddle's Old Time Radio Theater is also on the app for your listening enjoyment.)

Here's a direct link to the audio of the episode.

By now you've heard that the application to rezone a parcel for a mosque from Agricultural to Commercial General was denied by the Broken Arrow City Council by a vote of 4-1. Broken Arrow city councilor Justin Green moved to deny the mosque rezoning, seconded by Lisa Ford, supported by Mayor Debra Wimpee and David Pickel. Vice Mayor Johnnie Parks was the lone vote for the mosque rezoning. @Snarkio_ on X has a clip of the vote.

Here is the 4-hour livestream of the Broken Arrow City Council meeting. This link is cued to the applicant's rebuttal following public comment, which is followed by council discussion and the vote. Councilor Lisa Ford asked to cut off the public hearing and proceed to council discussion and a vote. At Ford's request to stop public comments, there were shouts about freedom of speech from the audience. I'm not sure which side these people were on. Based on many years of attending zoning hearings, I'm amazed that the council allowed comments to go on for hours. Typically there are not only time limits for individual speakers but an overall cap on comments on either side of an issue. Thirty minutes each side would be generous.

At that point, the applicant's representative explained why the mosque has joined NAIT, but also stated (to my surprise) the mosque would not hesitate to disengage from NAIT if the federal or state government required that. He said that Islamic Society of Tulsa is also part of NAIT, with a local board that runs the programs, raises funds for operating the mosque, but "NAIT's role is custodial, very minimal role," that he characterized as asset protection, continuity -- the property can't be sold, the mosque remains a place of worship, "because that's what the donors have funded this for," and legal stability: "When the founders pass away, there's no dispute on where the mosque goes.... But so far it is the only nationally-established support org [for mosques] that is similar to any church structure."

As I mentioned in the post about NAIT's ownership of the proposed mosque site, national control of the property of local religious congregations is a problem for Christian churches, too. What happens when the national organization is taken over and taken in a completely hostile direction? Do local leaders have the freedom to leave and keep the property? I started writing more about this, but it belongs in a separate post.

The applicant's representative defended the changes that were made after the planning commission hearing, in response to public concerns. He also stated that the architect recommended getting the zoning approval before proceeding with costly engineering work on stormwater, sewage, and site preparation. This is the typical sequence; no point in spending money on engineers if you won't be able to build there.

At 3:56:15, She made a few comments, followed by Councilor Justin Green, who offered a few thoughts and put forward the motion to deny the application.

Here's what Councilor Ford had to say on Facebook after the meeting:

Tonight I cast a vote that I knew would not make everyone happy, and I want to be clear about why.

My decision was not about religion, hate, or disagreement with anyone's beliefs or way of life. I know and respect many good people on all sides who call Broken Arrow home.

As a City Councilor, my responsibility in development cases is to evaluate the proposal itself. This was a rezoning request, and the questions are always the same:

Does it meet city requirements?

Is the infrastructure adequate?

Does it align with our comprehensive plan and ordinances?

In this case, it did not. Because of that, the only responsible vote was no. That decision would have been the same regardless of who brought the proposal forward or what type of project was proposed for that property.

Broken Arrow should always be a place where all citizens can enjoy their families, freedoms, and quality of life. This vote was based solely on zoning, infrastructure, and long-term planning--not on people or religion.

I also want to thank everyone who reached out. I personally responded to every email, phone call, and message. Your civic engagement matters, and your voices are valued.

Lastly, thank you to law enforcement, the fire department, and city staff who put in extra time and effort to ensure this special City Council meeting ran smoothly. Your professionalism and dedication to our community do not go unnoticed.

Special thanks to OFFICER Gibson and OFFICER Keech for taking care of me tonight.

I couldn't have said it better. Thank you Lisa Ford for BA City Council Ward 2. Broken Arrow is--and should always be--a community where all citizens can enjoy their families, freedoms, and quality of life. This vote was based solely on the facts and feasibility of the proposed project, not on people, religion, or any particular way of life. I'll also add I have dear friends who are Muslim, so again this vote was not about the particular place of assembly as many tried to make it on both sides.

I will add a reminder our municipalities run on sales tax revenue, we are unlike any other state in that aspect. So my first desire would be to have commercial on any piece of property that available. However, even straight commercial development on this site would not be appropriate at this time, as the surrounding infrastructure--particularly directly in front of the property--is not sufficient to support any project currently.

Logistics of last night's meeting...I could not be more proud of our city team and public safety departments for your incredible efforts to accommodate our citizens and to keep everyone safe. The behind the scenes efforts were most impressive!

Finally thank you to NSU for hosting last night! Your partnership in all things BA is truly appreciated.

On Monday, January 12, 2026, at a special meeting at the NSU-BA Administrative Services Building, the Broken Arrow City Council will consider a zoning amendment that would allow construction of a development that would include the Tulsa area's fourth mosque and the first in a Tulsa suburb. Many citizens are upset about it and want to see the council deny the application, but it's important to understand the technicalities of the zoning process and what discretion the City Council has.

The City Council does not have to accept the recommendation of planning staff and can weigh many different factors when deciding to change the zoning ordinance. On the other hand, the appearance that the decision was arbitrary and capricious or illegally discriminatory can expose the council to lawsuits, and a legal judgment against the city would be repaid from the sinking fund, which would be replenished by a property tax increase. Here is a description of municipal zoning powers from an article on the Oklahoma Bar Association website:

There are some very basic legal standards to consider when advising a planning commission, governing body or private client. One of the most important is that the Oklahoma Supreme Court has consistently held that unless a zoning decision of a municipality is found not to have a substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals or general welfare or to constitute an unreasonable, arbitrary exercise of the police power, its judgments will not be overturned by the district court. Also, courts may not substitute their judgment for that of the municipal legislative body. The court's duty will be to determine whether the restriction on the use of the property is a reasonable exercise of power under the zoning statute. When the validity of a legislative classification for zoning purposes is fairly debatable, legislative judgments must be allowed to stand.

One significant case upholding this principle is Clary v. Oklahoma City, in which the Oklahoma Supreme Court affirmed the district court's ruling that upheld the city's decision to deny rezoning a single-family home in a residential area for commercial use, finding the question of appropriate zoning as "fairly debatable" and therefore within the city's discretion.

On December 18, 2025, the Broken Arrow Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the zoning change and the conditional-use permit for a place of assembly, file number 25-1766. (Video of the meeting is available here. After public comment, the discussion among the planning commissioners starts about four-and-a-half hours into the meeting. The vote is at about 4 hrs. 50 mins.) The proposal would rezone a 15-acre parcel on the east side of Olive just south of the Creek Turnpike from AG (Agricultural) to CG (Commercial General) and FD (Floodplain), and then would grant a conditional-use permit to allow a place of assembly on a CG-zoned parcel. The two issues are separate, but the second issue is dependent on the first: The zoning change could be granted and the conditional-use permit denied. The Planning Commission voted 4-1 to recommend the rezoning to CG (Robert Goranson, Jason Coan, Jaylee Klempa, Jonathan Townsend voting yes, Mindy Payne, voting no). The conditional-use permit passed 3-2, the three men (Goranson, Coan, Townsend) voting yes and the two women (Klempa and Payne) voting no; Goranson added a stipulation against broadcasts and announcements on the exterior of the facility (public safety excepted) to his motion to approve the Conditional Use Permit. From the Planning Commission agenda item:

BAZ-002469-2025 is a request to change the zoning designation of 15.08 acres from AG (Agricultural) to CG (Commercial General) and FD (Floodplain). The property is located approximately ½ mile north of Tucson Street (121st Street) and just east of Olive Avenue (129th E. Avenue). The Creek Turnpike and its interchange with Olive Avenue is north of this property.

The proposed development will have access from Olive Avenue. This property is Comprehensive Plan Level 6, which supports a rezoning to CG. The proposed development includes a commercial retail center along the frontage of the property, the Islamic Center in the center portion. The rear portion of the property is partially floodplain and is planned for a retention pond and vacant land. A Conditional Use Permit for a place of assembly is also a part of this item for consideration.

Parking requirements for places of assembly are 1 parking space per 4 seats in assembly area or 1 per 100 sq ft in meeting area without seats. The conceptual development layout details 726 total parking spaces, however, the final number will be determined and approved in the site plan review process for both the Islamic Center and the retail
development....

According to FEMA's National Flood Hazard Layer, the rear portion of the property features an area of 100-year flood plain. That area is planned to remain undeveloped currently. All developments will follow floodplain development requirements as set forth by the City of Broken Arrow and FEMA.

All surrounding properties are currently zoned AG. Immediately to the south is Walnut Grove Church, pastored by David Ingles, founder of the Oasis Radio Network. The other surrounding parcels are vacant and wooded. The driveway to The Property Event Center is right across the street.

City planning staff, who review each zoning amendment, recommended approval of the proposal.

Recommendation:

Based upon the Comprehensive Plan, the location of the property, and the surrounding land uses, Staff recommends that BAZ-002469-2025 and SP-002526-2025 be approved subject to the property being platted.

Reviewed by: Jane Wyrick

Approved by: Rocky Henkel

The Broken Arrow Comprehensive Plan Future Development Guide Map designates the parcel as Level 6, Regional Employment/Commercial, while the areas to the south are Level 3, Transitional. The conceptual site plan, which is not binding in any way, shows the existing pond remaining, with a septic field next to it. The 20,700 retail strip along 129th East Avenue is shown as "future," while the 23,764 sq. ft. mosque is "Phase 1."

The description of Level 6:

Level 6 represents an opportunity to develop regionally significant and highway oriented commercial and employment nodes in Broken Arrow. The Level 6 classification is for a mixture of medium to high intensity commercial and employment uses in the vicinity of major transportation corridors. Nodes along Elm Place, Aspen Avenue, and Kenosha Street, as well as key interchanges along the Broken Arrow Expressway and the Creek Turnpike, are all appropriate areas for Level 6 development. Typical uses could include large shopping centers, big box retailers, commercial, automotive, and office/employment centers.

The Future Development Guide Map shows a half-mile-wide, 2.5-mile-long swath of Level 6 along the Creek Turnpike, extending to both sides, from Florence (111th Street S.) at about 121st East Ave to Elm Place (161st East Ave). This area already includes a Walmart Supercenter, Regal Warren Theater, Reasor's, and a collection of fast-food restaurants. The obvious intention is to have a continuous corridor of car-oriented sales-tax generating businesses along this high-capacity corridor to serve and encourage residential development on Broken Arrow's south side. I've outlined the site of the proposed mosque development in red.

The Transportation Plan Map shows a frontage road that would parallel the turnpike on the south side and allow more of the corridor to be developed commercially; it would likely cut through the property. This road has been cited as a reason to deny the rezoning. (If Broken Arrow wants the possibility of building this road in the future, they had better begin acquiring the right-of-way.)

While there is a church just to the south, it is in the Level 3 transition area, and not in Level 6, and it is well south of the proposed frontage road. Those subtle differences would warrant somewhat different treatment.

At the Planning Commission meeting, State Sen. Christi Gillespie, a member of the Broken Arrow City Council prior to her election to the State Senate last year, argued for denial based on land use planning, transportation planning, and economic development concerns. She posted video of her remarks on Facebook.

Gillespie reminded the planning commissioners that the staff recommendation for approval did not bind their freedom to exercise their own judgment. The same thing is true for the City Council: The Planning Commission has made a recommendation for approval, and the City Council has the discretion to deny.

Gillespie pointed out that, "Everything we depend on in Broken Arrow to have quality of life depends on sales tax." The Olive (129th East Ave) exit is the first BA exit on the Creek Turnpike when coming from the west, which makes it a strategic location for highway-visible retail businesses to capture dollars from south and east Tulsa residents.

Regarding the conditional use permit required to allow a place of assembly on the site, Gillespie noted that there would be three places of assembly within a quarter-mile -- Walnut Grove to the south and The Property Event Center to the west, making three large parcels at this key exit that would not be generating sales tax. The future "measly 20,000 square foot strip center would not begin to offset sales tax lost to this development. Honestly, the applicant -- they acted that they didn't even want to do it, and it wasn't even their idea." I suspect either their land-use attorney or BA planning staff suggested adding the retail strip to the drawing to improve the application's chances for approval.

Gillespie reminded the commissioners that Broken Arrow has a precedent for not permitting concentrations of places of assembly. A commenter on Gillespie's video named Clint Babb stated that when a church sought to occupy the former Reasor's on the east side of Elm south of New Orleans (101st St.), the city council denied their application, despite the church including a strip of small shops across the frontage of the building. The city had invested a considerable amount of money into reviving the vintage 1980s retail node now known as New Orleans Square, and they didn't want to see yet another large retail space (originally a 72,000 sq. ft. K-Mart, which opened in 1979) at the intersection occupied by a non-sales-tax-generating use. (I subsequently learned that this was Millennial Church, according to State Sen. Dana Prieto, a member of the church.)

The septic field shown on the concept drawing, and no plan to connect to the city sewer system, was another red flag for the state senator.

Finally, Gillespie called attention to the Creek Turnpike frontage roads shown on the Comprehensive Plan. This proposed development wouldn't allow that road to be built. If the frontage road is blocked, there will be no access from Olive to any business that wants to locate on the S side of the highway; it will have to be accessed from Tucson (121st Street South), putting traffic pressure on that road and on the 121st Street & Olive intersection.

Gillespie concluded: "My goal is to ensure we have a common-sense economic development plan for my district. This development does not comply with the Comprehensive Plan, nor does it make business sense for the inevitable growth between Aspen and Olive. It's for these reasons that you have no choice but to vote no."

This case against the zoning proposal is not a pretext to discriminate against a particular religion but stands on its own based on the city's interest to encourage and not impede retail development along this strategic corridor. Sen. Gillespie said that even if it were her own church proposing to build on the site, she would oppose it for the reasons stated.

It's been too long ago to find the case, but circa 1991, when Christ Presbyterian Church sought to plant a satellite campus in Broken Arrow, they attempted to rent space in the retail strip on the NE corner of Aspen and Albany (145th East Ave. and 61st St.). The city rejected their permit because a church in that location would have made the cocktail lounge at the Holiday Inn (now the Clarion) illegal because of spacing requirements around a church.

A concerning aspect of the proposed Broken Arrow mosque is its ownership. In a later entry, I'll get into the technicalities of the zoning amendment process and the grounds on which the Broken Arrow City Council might plausibly deny it, but the organization that owns the land is a topic that we explored almost 20 years ago here at BatesLine, in connection with the hostility endured by an anti-terrorist Muslim immigrant from Pakistan from the leaders of Tulsa's Islamic community.

The 15-acre property on the east side of Olive Street (129th East Avenue) just south of the Creek Turnpike has been owned by the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) since 2014. The Islamic Society of Tulsa (IST) purchased the land from the Clarence E. Brooks Trust for $625,000, then later in 2014 transferred the title to NAIT, "to have and to hold said described premises unto GRANTEE as perpetual trustee (in Waqf)."

NAIT is also the owner of record of the former Robert Louis Stevenson Elementary School at 46th and Irvington, which is now home to a mosque and Peace Academy (a private school). The property on which the Muslim Student Association mosque at 4th Place and Florence sits is owned by the University of Tulsa; by contrast, the neighboring religious student ministry buildings on the same block are owned by the Roman Catholic Diocese of Tulsa and the Wesley Foundation, respectively.

September 19, 2014 Journal Record story about the construction of Masjid as-Salam mentions plans for a future Broken Arrow mosque:

The mosque serves about 1,000 Muslims each week, roughly double 1999 levels. Siddiqui said holiday activity now exceeds capacity, leading the Islamic Society to buy 15 acres in Broken Arrow for future development.

A 2006 controversy over claims of American Muslim support of international terrorism called public attention to Tulsa Muslim connections to an influential network of Islamic organizations.

Jamal Miftah wrote an op-ed, published in the October 29, 2006, Tulsa World, condemning terrorism in the name of Islam and calling on Islamic leaders in the US to join in that condemnation. He noted the complicity of some American Muslim organizations in financing worldwide terror:

Even mosques and Islamic institutions in the U.S. and around the world have become tools in [Al-Qaeda's] hands and are used for collecting funds for their criminal acts. Half of the funds collected go into the pockets of their local agents and the rest are sent to these thugs.

For his courage, he was confronted at the Islamic Center of Tulsa by the imam and the leader of the operating council and banned. The situation received national attention. That conflict came to mind recently when Helen Pluckrose called upon liberal and reforming Muslims (that is, those who believe in freedom of conscience and don't demand the conversion or subjugation of all humans to Islam) to speak out against violent behaviors by their co-religionists. I called her attention to Miftah's experience to explain why more Muslims don't speak out.

I encourage you to read through that entire category of BatesLine articles, which expanded to include Gov. Brad Henry's barely-camouflaged attempt to give Islamic leaders in Oklahoma a special seat at the state government table.

As the story developed we learned that the Islamic Society of Tulsa is affiliated with NAIT and ISNA, part of a network of organizations that increasingly dominate Muslim community life in the US. Critics say that the organizations have roots in the Muslim Brotherhood and that significant funding from Saudi Arabia through these organizations has worked to shape the practice of Islam in America after the image of the strict Wahhabi sect of Sunni Islam.

The name of one particular Tulsan illustrates the close connections between various national Muslim organizations and the Tulsa Muslim community: Mujeeb Cheema. At the time, Cheema was executive director of NAIT. He is currently listed as a board member of NAIT. Cheema is also currently on the board of the American Halal Institute. He was an incorporator of the Islamic Society of Tulsa at its founding in 1997. In 2003, as chairman of the Islamic Society of Tulsa, he hailed the construction of the Muslim Students Association mosque on the University of Tulsa campus as possibly "the first building constructed on an American college campus for the specific purpose of serving as an Islamic mosque."

In 2006, the NAIT website said about itself (emphasis added):

The North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) is a waqf, the historical Islamic equivalent of an American trust or endowment, serving Muslims in the United States and their institutions. NAIT facilitates the realization of American Muslims' desire for a virtuous and happy life in a Shari'ah-compliant way.

NAIT is a not-for-profit entity that qualifies as a tax-exempt organization under Section 501(c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code. NAIT was established in 1973 in Indiana by the Muslim Students Association of U.S. and Canada (MSA), the predecessor of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). NAIT supports and provides services to ISNA, MSA, their affiliates, and other Islamic centers and institutions. The President of ISNA is an ex-officio member of the Board of Trustees of NAIT.

NAIT holds titles to mosques, Islamic centers, schools, and other real estate to safeguard and pool the assets of the American Muslim community, develops financial vehicles and products that are compatible with both the Shari'ah (Islamic law) and the American law, publishes and distributes credible Islamic literature, and facilitates and coordinates community projects.

A February 8, 2004, front-page feature story in the Chicago Tribune recounts a battle over the Bridgeview, Illinois, mosque, which was founded in the 1950s by Palestinian immigrants, but taken over by newcomers, funded by Kuwaiti donors and Saudi and UAE governments, and deeded to NAIT in the 1980s, over the objections of long-time members. (Here is the article on Newspapers.com: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3)

Beitunia farmer Khalil Zayid arrived in 1939 and rented a room along 18th Street in the heart of the Arab community on the South Side.... Like many in the Islamic world at the time, Zayid and the other Beitunia immigrants practiced a form of Islam that allowed Muslims to socialize freely.

They viewed their religion as an important part of life, but not all of life. Men and women could mingle. The women wore short sleeves and did not cover their hair. The men sometimes ran liquor stores even though many Muslims believed Islam forbade selling alcohol. While they wanted to succeed in America and fit into society, they also wanted a place of their own to practice their religion and hold on to their culture.

But in all of Chicago, there was no real mosque or official religious leader for Arab Muslims. In 1954, about 30 families from Beitunia, including Zayid's, decided that something needed to be done. They formed the Mosque Foundation and started raising money for a formal place of worship. Zayid stepped forward to become the group's first prayer leader, holding services in a storefront. He had no formal Islamic training, but he considered himself a religious man....

Most of the Beitunia immigrants who had dreamed of their own mosque are now gone.

The congregation's first prayer leader, Khalil Zayid, worshiped there until he died in 1988. He was never allowed to lead prayers at the new mosque. Many of the early leaders' children attend other mosques or pray at home. Leila Diab, the daughter of a founder, rarely prays in Bridgeview. She said she tried to meet with Sheik Jamal several years ago, but he insisted that she cover her hair, and she refused....

Sheik Jamal and other [Bridgeview] mosque leaders still pursue a controversial agenda. In March 2002, the mosque hired a new assistant prayer leader--the same man who had run the local office of an Islamic charity until it was closed by the federal government for alleged terrorism ties. Even a few board members questioned whether he should have been hired so quickly. At a prayer service last May, Sheik Jamal raised $50,000 for Palestinian activist Sami Al-Arian, a former professor at the University of South Florida who is charged with being the U.S. leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

To rally donors, the sheik called Israel "a foreign, malignant and strange element on the blessed land." Al-Arian denies the charges against him. Oussama Jammal, the mosque president, defended the fundraising for Al-Arian. "We raised for his legal defense. That's allowed under U.S. law," he said.

"If people were against this, they wouldn't have paid." In December, at an Islamic conference in Chicago, Sheik Jamal said that Muslims should not listen to contemporary music and that women should not travel long distances without chaperones. He also praised Sayyid Qutb, whose writings helped lay the foundation for Muslim Brotherhood beliefs. The mosque remains so conservative, several former leaders said, because more and more mosque officials are Brotherhood members. Mosque leaders declined to comment on the Brotherhood, but director Bassam Jody noted that most of the mosque's 24 directors belong to the Muslim American Society--a group with strong ties to the Brotherhood. The mosque vice president runs the society's local chapter.

Stephen Schwartz, an academic, a journalist, and a follower of Sufism, testified in 2003 before the Senate Homeland Security subcommittee about the spread of Wahhabi influence in the American Muslim community through NAIT and related organizations:

Wahhabi-Saudi policy has always been two-faced: that is, at the same time as the Wahhabis preach hostility and violence against non-Wahhabi Muslims, they maintain a policy of alliance with Western military powers -- first Britain, then the U.S. and France -- to assure their control over the Arabian Peninsula.

At the present time, Shia and other non-Wahhabi Muslim community leaders estimate that 80 percent of American mosques are under Wahhabi control. This does not mean 80 percent of American Muslims support Wahhabism, although the main Wahhabi ideological agency in America, the so-called Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) has claimed that some 70 percent of American Muslims want Wahhabi teaching in their mosques.1This is a claim we consider unfounded.

Rather, Wahhabi control over mosques means control of property, buildings, appointment of imams, training of imams, content of preaching -- including faxing of Friday sermons from Riyadh, Saudi Arabia -- and of literature distributed in mosques and mosque bookstores, notices on bulletin boards, and organizational solicitation. Similar influence extends to prison and military chaplaincies, Islamic elementary and secondary schools (academies), college campus activity, endowment of academic chairs and programs in Middle East studies, and most notoriously, charities ostensibly helping Muslims abroad, many of which have been linked to or designated as sponsors of terrorism.

The main organizations that have carried out this campaign are the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), which originated in the Muslim Students' Association of the U.S. and Canada (MSA), and CAIR. Support activities have been provided by the American Muslim Council (AMC), the American Muslim Alliance (AMA), the Muslim American Society (MAS), the Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences, its sister body the International Institute of Islamic Thought, and a number of related groups that I have called "the Wahhabi lobby." ISNA operates at least 324 mosques in the U.S. [as of 2003] through the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT). These groups operate as an interlocking directorate.

In a 2002 Q&A with National Review, Schwartz had this to say about Wahhabist influence over American mosques (emphasis added):

Unfortunately, the U.S. is the only country outside Saudi Arabia where the Islamic establishment is under Wahhabi control. Eighty percent of American mosques are Wahhabi-influenced, although this does not mean that 80 percent of the people who attend them are Wahhabis. Mosque attendance is different from church or synagogue membership in that prayer in the mosque does not imply acceptance of the particular dispensation in the mosque. However, Wahhabi agents have sought to impose their ideology on all attendees in mosques they control.

How many mosques are held in trust by NAIT is hard to determine. The list on their website is empty. NAIT's self-proclaimed role as a guarantor would allow it to step in should local mosque leadership choose to reject Wahhabism and embrace a more liberal, American-flavored version of Muslim life. This is a similar dynamic to that of liberal Christian denominations who owned local church property; conservative congregations seeking to leave a liberalizing denomination like the Presbyterian Church USA and the Episcopal Church, because of their objections to the denominations' embrace of left-wing ideology and rejection of the Bible, were forced either to abandon their long-time homes (e.g., Falls Church, Virginia) or to pay a hefty ransom to retain the facilities built with the sacrificial gifts of local members (e.g., Tulsa's Kirk of the Hills).

A current NAIT webpage describes the organization's power to override local mosque leadership when the property is held by NAIT in waqf:

In the United States, corporate culture has permeated all spheres of life, and religious world in to immune to its influence. Under the influence of this prevalent corporate culture, most mosques are governed by a Board of Trustees/Directors. Such a governing board may be tempted to act as if its reach of governance is unfettered to the extent that it can change the use of the property, use it as a collateral for a loan, prohibit some universally accepted mode of worship, permit an un-Islamic activity, etc. None of such actions would be feasible if the property is part of the NAIT Waqf Family of Islamic Centers.

On a different (newer?) website, NAIT mentions a Tulsa situation in passing as it describes the benefits of waqf:

In addition to this main goal, being a part of the NAIT family of centers provides a platform for the unity of Muslims, which Islamophobic forces are aiming to subvert. The centers might benefit in other ways when it entrusts its property to NAIT. Such benefits include the fact that center's assets are protected from liabilities arising from its organizational activities, such as lawsuits by a disgruntled individual or due to the mistakes of its officers.

NAIT has advanced millions of dollars in interest-free loans to centers to complete their infrastructure projects. Relationship with NAIT (e.g. the case of Tulsa, Oklahoma) can help in inducing the signing of construction contracts in the face of limited immediate availability of construction funds. Affiliation with NAIT helps in obtaining and renewing property tax exemption, and in dealings with the IRS.

Discover the Networks has detailed and lengthy articles on the North American Islamic Trust and its parent organization, the Islamic Society of North America, carefully and precisely documenting their connections to terrorist-linked organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood and the Holy Land Foundation.

A financial subsidiary and "constituent organization" of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) was founded in 1973 in Indiana by members of the Muslim Students Association of the U.S. & Canada. NAIT is a tax-exempt nonprofit endowment that not only subsidizes the construction of new mosques in the United States, but presently claims to hold the mortgages on more than 325 existing mosques, Islamic centers, and Islamic schools in 42 states. Some sources indicate that NAIT holds the mortgages to about 27% of all U.S. mosques, which is roughly consistent with the Trust's own claim; other sources place the figure much higher, at somewhere between 50% and 79%.

Because NAIT controls the purse strings of these many properties, it can exercise ultimate authority over what they teach and what activities they conduct. Specifically, the Trust seeks to ensure that the institutions under its financial influence promote the principles of Sharia Law and Wahhabism....

At the 2007 trial investigating allegations that the now-defunct Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development had engaged in the illegal financing of terrorism, both NAIT and ISNA were named as "unindicted co-conspirators" and as "entities who are and/or were members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood." Prosecutors presented copious evidence that ISNA had used NAIT to divert funds to leading Hamas officials like Mousa Abu Marzook, and to a number of Hamas-run institutions (such as the Islamic University of Gaza and the Islamic Center of Gaza, the latter of which was founded by the late Hamas leader Ahmed Yassin).

The designation of NAIT as an "unindicted co-conspirator" was upheld in 2009 by a federal judge, though that judge ruled against the previous public disclosure of the designation. Many media outlets have repeatedly mischaracterized this as a lifting of the designation.

There is one non-NAIT mosque in Tulsa: The Tulsa Islamic Foundation, located on 61st Street east of Mingo, is a Shia mosque affiliated with Imam Mahdi Association of Marjaeya and Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani of Najaf, Iraq.

Urban Tulsa Weekly reporter Brian Ervin digs deeper into the controversy over the Governor's Ethnic American Advisory Council (GEAAC) and its gift of a special centennial edition of the Koran to state legislators. As BatesLine first reported back in May, the Governor's Ethnic American Advisory Council was created by executive order of Governor Brad Henry. Its meetings are held in state office buildings and its activities are supported by taxpayer-funded employees of the state's Office of Personnel Management. Unlike the Baptist General Convention of Oklahoma, which offered centennial editions of the Bible to legislators, the GEAAC is a government agency, not a private religious group.

Ervin provides, for the first time in print, the full text of the e-mail from GEAAC chairman Marjaneh Seirafi-Pour to legislators offering "the holy book of Quran." He also provides the full text of State Rep. Rex Duncan's response, also for the first time in print. (Chris Medlock had it online previously.)

Ervin saved the biggest news for last. After Henry's spokesman denied knowing whether the GEAAC was exclusively Muslim -- "I do not know if all members are Muslims because we do not ask appointees to any board to disclose their religious affiliation." -- and denied knowing the reason that Henry chose the awkward name for the group, Ervin asked Seirafi-Pour about the reason for the name:

"The name wasn't of my choosing, but we were happy with it. You'd have to ask the Governor why we're called that," she said.

She offered her best guess, though.

"The thing is, Islam is not limited to the Middle East--there are Muslims of West African descent and other nationalities from around the world," said Seirafi-Pour.

"If it had been called the 'Middle Eastern American Advisory Council,' it would have limited membership to Muslims of Middle Eastern descent," she added.

MORE: There are videos on YouTube of the press conference held at the Islamic Society of Tulsa (IST) in response to the centennial Koran controversy. The user who posted them has disabled embedding so you'll have to follow the links below to watch the video.

It was more of a rally than a press conference. No questions from the press were allowed. Speeches were given by representatives of the Tulsa Interfaith Alliance (the anti-evangelical lobby group), the Tulsa Metropolitan Ministry, the Oklahoma Conference for Community and Justice, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR, the PR arm of the Wahhabi lobby in the United States), Say No to Hate, the Islamic Society of Tulsa, and the Jewish Federation of Tulsa.

Here is part one and here is part two.

From their remarks, it seemed that none of the speakers had read Rep. Duncan's complete e-mail, despite it being only three sentences long.

It's interesting that the OCCJ spokesman acknowledged that the GEAAC was "made up of American Muslims of Middle East countries," a fact that was omitted by mainstream coverage of the press conference. (That's about 20 seconds into part 2.)

I imagine Jamal Miftah finds it ironic to hear all these people talking about tolerance at the Islamic Society of Tulsa.

UPDATE: Jamal Miftah's wife, Nageena Shahnaz Miftah, sent me an e-mail with her reaction to the Islamic Society of Tulsa press conference, with a message to each of the participants, including one from her daughter to Allison Moore, a leader in IST who had been her daughter's Sunday school teacher prior to Jamal Miftah's expulsion from IST. (I've added some identifying notes in square brackets for the speakers she addresses.)

Here is my message to all the participants of this drama; Please come and talk to us and find out why my husband was declared anti-Islamic, anti Muslim in the very same place (the so called Al Salam Mosque) where Mr. Duncan and his fellows are now being condemned for refusing to accept Q'uran because of the passiveness shown by the Muslim leadership when it comes to condemn terrorism or take practical steps to stop terrorist activities.

My responses to each of the speakers is as under:

1- Mrs. Sandra Rana is probably the same lady, who didn't even had the courage or decency to speak truth about my husband's situation to a fellow Christian, Mr. James Mishler back in 2006.

2- Mr. Marlin Lavanhar [of Tulsa Metropolitan Ministry]: Please investigate to find out about the unapologetic bigotry of IST, CAIR and ISNA toward my husband. The way the leadership of these organization reacted (or remained silent) to my husband's op-ed piece condemning terrorism is suggestive of their real objective which appears to be promotion of violence and siding with terrorism.

3- Mr. [Keith] McArtor [of Tulsa Interfaith Alliance] please; who are you giving all these good lessons to?! the IST leadership? Please find out what they did to my husband when he had come peacefully to offer his prayers to the so called peace mosque on November 18th, 2006.

Sir, they have two faces: one is when they want to fool American people with beautiful faces and voices of people like Sheryl Siddiqui, Sandra Rana, Allison Moore etc. The other one is for their own members where they use the street gang sort of tactics through other leaders of the so called mosque to suppress the voices of moderate muslims against terrorism like the one of my husband.

4- Now to Justice Waidner, Say No to Hate. Ma'am you are in the wrong place and with the wrong group. Please don't waste your time on their face saving maneuvers. Come talk to me.

5- Mr. [Oliver] Howard [of Oklahoma Conference on Community and Justice], although me and my family are saddened with Mr. Duncan's refusal to accept the gift of Quran, we understand the obvious reason; hypocrisy of muslims' leaders around the world in the west and the US and especially within the leadership of IST, CAIR and ISNA.

5- Mr. [Razi] Hashimi [of Council on Islamic American Relations], where were you hiding when my husband Jamal Miftah was expelled from the so called Al Salam Mosque where you are lectuing on peace. what was his fault? Condemning Terrorism!

6- Mr. David Bernstein [of Jewish Federation of Tulsa], you are in the wrong place you should have come here and heard the prayers for destruction of Jews and Christians by the then Imam of this so called Mosque, Ahmad Kabbani, during the period of war between terrorist of Hizbullah and Hamas with Israel. When my husband refused to participate and agree with those prayers, the said Imam single him out in an attempt to ridicule him.

7- Now for Allison Moore, my daughter Syeda Mufleeha Miftah who used to go to Sunday school to her classes prior to November 18th, 2006:

"Ms. Moore, I was very disappointed when I heard from my friends that you lied about my father's article by saying that he has written in his article that Tulsa mosque is supporting terrorism. This was in fact a misinformation campaign about my dad started by IST leaders to which you were a party. Why are you now complaining about misinformation? What you sow so shall you reap."

The reason that my husband was expelled from Tulsa mosque is he was not giving the IST leadership the free hand to work in gray areas by laws of the land and laundering money to people/organizations of dubious credentials for which he has documentary evidence besides letters sent to the IST leadership during the year 2005 through certified mail. He would not let them use the mosque to preach hatred to the community members and has always condemned terrorism by his words and deeds.

Would all the speakers, minus the hypocrites, come and talk to us?

Sincerely,
Nageena Shahnaz Miftah

State Rep. Mike Reynolds is putting the focus in the recent Centennial Koran uproar where it belongs: Why did Gov. Brad Henry create a state agency devoted promoting the interests of the Muslim religion, and why does it exist under a misleading name? I refer, of course, to the Governor's Ethnic American Advisory Council.

Reynolds has called on Henry to modify the membership or scrap the board, according to the McCarville Report Online:

"Governor Henry, why would you have an 'Ethnic Advisory Council' that includes members from only one ethnic group?" asked Reynolds, R-Oklahoma City. "The council should either be reformed to reflect its apparent mission or preferably disbanded."

Actually, I think they do have multiple ethnic groups, although not reflective of the diversity of ethnic groups in Oklahoma. There are members from Pakistan and Iran as well as Arabs of various countries of origin. What they all seem to have in common is religion. We're still waiting on Gov. Henry to identify any of the members of this group who are Christians or Jews, despite the presence of many Jews and Christians of Middle Eastern or Near Eastern origin in Oklahoma.

Reynolds is wondering, too, about the reaction from GEEAC chairman Marjaneh Seirafi-Pour to legislators who declined the Korans:

Seirafi-Pour has complained that some lawmakers were rude, he noted, when they declined the Quran: "I don't understand why she rushed to the media and acted outraged that we turned her down," Reynolds said. "What was the point of asking us if we wanted a copy? I contacted her last week and she could not provide me with any mean-spirited responses. In fact she agreed to forward all of the e-mails on Saturday, but I have yet to receive them.

"I know that I have nothing to hide," Reynolds said."Apparently, that's more than the members of the Ethnic American Advisory Council can say. Why else would they and the Governor choose a name that disguises their Muslim identify?"

In related news, Rod Dreher has a story about a group who protested Six Flags over Texas sponsoring a special Muslim day at the theme park in conjunction with the Islamic Circle of North America. A Muslim legal group is suing the protest organizer for defamation:

Khalil Meek, board president of the Muslim Legal Fund of America, said the Muslim groups support the protesters' right to voice their opinions. What they object to, he said, is their allegation that the Muslim organizations, and therefore Six Flags, support terrorism.

The groups have filed a lawsuit accusing the protest organizer, Joe Kaufman, of defamation and slander and have obtained a temporary restraining order that prohibits him from harming, threatening or inciting violence against them.

From that same story, the city council of Carrollton, a Dallas suburb, deleted from a list of board appointees the name of a man who participated in the protest. Paul Kramer was denied appointment to the Construction Advisory and Appeals Board because he was visible in a newspaper photo of the protest.

Dreher notes that lawsuits have been used in other American cities against critics of Islam, pointing to a 2006 column by the Boston Globe's Jeff Jacoby. The Islamic Society of Boston sued a Muslim reformer, along with "journalists, a terrorism expert, and the founder of the American Anti-Slavery Group, plus the Episcopalian lay minister and the Jewish attorney who together with [Ahmed] Mansour [the Muslim reformer] formed the interfaith Citizens for Peace and Tolerance in 2004." Doesn't exactly sound like a group of fire-breathing Islamophobes, does it? But they were sued by the Islamic Society of Boston for calling attention to their connections with terrorism advocates and other extremists, for reporting on the presence of hate-filled Arabic literature at the ISB's mosque in Cambridge, and for raising questions about the city's selling land for the society's mosque at a bargain basement price. While the lawsuit was dismissed, it served the purpose of harassing and intimidating critics of extremist Islam.

You need to read that Jacoby column. Ahmed Mansour calls himself a progressive Muslim, and he suffered for his opinions back in his native country of Egypt:

He had learned the hard way that Muslim reformers who speak out against Islamist fanaticism and religious dictatorship can indeed end up in prison -- or worse. It had happened to him in his native Egypt, which he fled in 2001 after receiving death threats. He was grateful that the United States had granted him asylum, enabling him to go on promoting his vision of a progressive Islam in which human rights and democratic values would be protected. But would he now have to fight in America the same kind of persecution he experienced in Egypt?...

He holds three degrees from Cairo's Al-Azhar, the foremost religious university in the Islamic world, where he was appointed a professor of Muslim history in 1980. He would probably be there still if his scholarship hadn't gotten in the way. The deeper Mansour delved into the history of Islam, the clearer it became to him that the faith had been perverted into a ''false doctrine of hate" -- a doctrine that has been spread across much of the Muslim world and that has fueled great cruelty and bloodshed.

His mounting opposition to Wahhabist radicalism drew the wrath of the powerful Al-Azhar sheiks, who removed him from his classroom and tried him in a religious court. For two years, he says, he was pressured to recant. In 1987 he was fired. Then the Egyptian government imprisoned him for two months.

Undeterred, Mansour continued to write and speak out against radical Islam. He has authored 24 books and more than 500 articles, many of them denouncing as heretical any Muslim creeds that ''persecute and kill peaceful humans and violate their human rights." The real infidels, he has argued, are those who share ''the traits of Osama bin Laden and his followers." Before fleeing for his life, he worked with Egypt's leading human-rights activists, promoting democratic values, funneling assistance to persecuted Christians, and advocating for the reform of religious education.

This is the Islamic Society of Boston's idea of an anti-Muslim conspirator? Then what, one wonders, is its idea of Islam?

We've been asking the same question here about the Islamic Society of Tulsa, whose leaders called Jamal Miftah anti-Muslim for expressing in a newspaper op-ed sentiments similar to those expressed by Mansour about those who persecute and kill in the name of Islam.

(You can read more about the ISB lawsuit here, here, and here.)

After dismissal of the ISB lawsuit, Jacoby wrote:

What the lawsuit was really about, it seems to me, was intimidation -- intimidation of anyone inclined to raise questions or express concerns about the Islamic Society's leaders and their connections to radical Islam. Libel suits have become a favorite tactic of Islamists, who deploy them to silence their critics. In yet another document produced during discovery, the head of the Islamic Center of New England advises Abou-allaban to "thwart" Fox 25 with a lawsuit. "If Fox is being sued for this story," he writes, "it stands to reason that they will be prevented from reporting on the story further while the case is in court."

Sad to say, such legal intimidation works. Once the lawsuit was filed, Fox 25 and the Herald essentially ended their investigative reporting into the Islamic Society's radical connections.

So while the Islamic Society's lawsuit was without merit, that doesn't mean it was without effect. Serious questions remain about the Saudi-funded mosque going up in Boston. Will journalists, public officials, and concerned citizens insist on getting answers? Or will they choose instead to look the other way, unwilling to run the risk of predatory litigation and bad-faith accusation?

Dreher points out that many states have anti-SLAPP laws, which can be used to block such predatory litigation designed to shut down public debate, and links to a Judith Miller column in City Journal explaining how such laws have been deployed in situations like the ISB lawsuit.

The common theme: The use of lawsuits and other means to shut down criticism or scrutiny of the activities and associations of Wahhabist Islamic organizations in America.

In the Washington Times, columnist Diana West considers the press reaction to the
decision by a growing number of legislators not to accept a Koran from the Governor's Ethnic American Advisory Council (GEAAC):

Of course, it's the rejection of the Korans that's making headlines, not their state-sealed if privately funded distribution. No one asks what the Koran has to do with Oklahoma's centennial, for Pete's sake; or why a government organization is proselytizing about "the exact words" of Allah; or how those words in that book sound to non-Muslims leery of Islam's age-old message to convert, submit or die. In our weird world, it's not the Islamic message that's branded hateful or even insensitive; it's the person who rejects it. This is the technique that usually shuts people up.

In digging into the GEAAC, West covers much of the same ground I did (see "GEAAC is back" (from last week) and "Is there only one kind of Ethnic American in Oklahoma?" (from May), but West also found this in the Islamic Society of Tulsa's October newsletter -- the quote is on page 9, but the story that contains it begins at the bottom of the front page.

Meanwhile, local Muslim advocates display utter bewilderment that anyone could construe Islam as anything but "very peaceful, very inclusive." To enlighten them, someone might bring up the key Koranic concept of jihad, or maybe ask a Muslim "apostate" in fear of his safety for leaving Islam, or a persecuted Christian or Jew in fear of his safety living under Islam, to explain.

Or, to keep things local, someone might ask Allison Moore, an Oklahoma Muslim quoted in recent stories, for elaboration. Why? Ms. Moore works on a newsletter published by the Tulsa Islamic Center. I downloaded the October issue and read an article that compares consorting with lax Muslims, ex-Muslims and non-Muslims -- "people of religious innovation and misguidance, those who abandon the sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) and advocate other beliefs" -- to nothing short of "doom itself" and "taking poison."

The article continues: "A man with any intellect should not sit in their assemblies nor mix with them. The result of doing so will either be the death of his heart, or, at the very best, its falling seriously ill." This is... how shall I put it?... not very inclusive.

Meanwhile, Chris Medlock is exposing the distortions in the way the media has been covering what State Rep. Rex Duncan said and did regarding the Commemorative Centennial Koran and the way they haven't been covering Rex Duncan's background.

A few days ago I wrote about OETA's scheduled program "Islam in Oklahoma," which aired Friday night, and about whether the people invited to participate in the discussion would provide a balanced and complete view of the topic. (Because of unexpected family schedule complications, I didn't get to see the show.)

A reader contacted OETA to raise the question directly and got a reply that began:

Thank you for sharing your concerns about Islam in Oklahoma. Please note that OETA worked with the Oklahoma Governor's Council on Ethnic Diversity to select the panelists and to ensure a balanced panel.

I assumed from the name that this council had representatives from the Hispanic-, Asian-, African-, and other hyphenated-American communities. Oklahoma has had influxes of many different ethnic groups over a century of statehood: Lebanese, Russian Jews, Czechs, Italians, Chinese, Koreans, Vietnamese, Hmong, to name just a few.

In Googling for mentions to "Islam in Oklahoma," I found this reference on the Oklahoma Women's Network blog

As a followup to PBS' recently aired "America At A Crossroads" series, OETA has taped a program featuring Oklahoma Muslim leaders. I urge you to watch this program on Friday, May 4th at 9:00 p.m on your OETA channel....Two of the many outstanding women leaders in Oklahoma's Muslim community are Sheryl Siddiqui, Director of Community Relations and American Outreach with the Islamic Society of Tulsa, and Marjan Seirafi-Pour, Chairperson of the Governor's Ethnic American Advisory Council.

That's interesting, I thought. I knew who Sheryl Siddiqui was, and that she was slated to be a panelist on the program, but I'd never heard of Marjan Seirafi-Pour. And I thought it was interesting that a Muslim leader was the head of this Ethnic American Advisory Council, given the relatively small number of Muslims in Oklahoma compared to other ethnic groups.

So I Googled Marjan Seirafi-Pour and hit this agenda for the Governor's Ethnic American Advisory Council from August 2005. Here is the list of council members:

Dr. Sandra Kaye Rana, Chair
Marjaneh Seirafi-Pour, Vice-Chair/Secretary
Dr. Riaz Ahmad
Malaka A. Elyazgi
Mohammad Farzaneh
Dr. Basel S. Hassoun
Dr. Mohammad Karami
Karen E. Bak
Dr. Fayyaz H. Hashmi

The membership doesn't seem very diverse or very representative of Oklahoma's ethnic heritage. Where are the Czechs from Prague, Italians from Krebs, and Russians from Hartshorne? Where are the Greeks and Filipinos?

According to the Governor's web page about the Governor's Ethnic American Advisory Council (GEAAC), the monolithic membership is intentional. "Ethnic" appears to be a euphemism for something different:

On May 27, 2004, Governor Brad Henry issued Executive Order 04-21, which created the Governor's Ethnic American Advisory Council. The purpose of the Council, which is to be made up of from five to 15 representatives of Ethnic Americans of the Middle East/Near East community of the state of Oklahoma, is to:

1. Provide advice and assistance to the Governor on the development and implementation of policies, plans, and programs relating to the needs and values of the Ethnic American community;

2. Provide advice and assistance to the Governor in matters involving civil liberties, equal rights protection and freedom of religion of the Ethnic American community;

3. Develop, coordinate and assist other public and private organizations with understanding problems concerning the Ethnic American community;

4. Conduct training programs for community leadership;

5. Cooperate with the Department of Education in advising and assisting school districts concerning Ethnic American issues; and

6. Secure appropriate recognition of Ethnic American accomplishments and contributions to the state of Oklahoma.

All Council members are appointed by the Governor.

Here is the current list of members:

Chair
Marjaneh Seirafi-Pour

Vice-Chair / Secretary
Vacant

Members
Dr. Riaz Ahmad
Malaka A. Elyazgi
Mohammad Farzaneh
Dr. Fayyaz H. Hashmi
Dr. Basel S. Hassoun
Dr. Mohammad Karami
Dr. Sandra Kaye Rana
Wes Salous

Let's strip away the silly "Ethnic American" euphemism and take the detailed information at face value. The council is to be "made up of from five to 15 representatives of Ethnic Americans of the Middle East/Near East community of the state of Oklahoma." If they really mean Middle East/Near East, there should be some Oklahomans of Israeli heritage -- Israel is in the Middle East -- perhaps some Armenian Christians, Lebanese Christians, Coptic Christians from Egypt, maybe someone from an old-line Lebanese merchant family like Bayouth or Beshara or Coury or Elias or Saied. The French teacher from my high school is Jewish and from Morocco and has lived in Oklahoma for at least 30 years. Wouldn't he be a good pick for such a council?

I may be wrong, and I haven't checked every name on the list, but I'd be willing to bet every one of the board members is a Muslim. Here are a couple who are for sure. I'll check the other names and add info here as I find it.

Dr. Riaz Ahmad, a biology professor at University of Central Oklahoma, is quoted in a departmental newsletter: "We have also been to Mecca, Saudi Arabia twice to do pilgrimage."

Malaka A. Elyazgi's husband Mohamed was quoted as a spokesman for the mosque in Norman following the October 1, 2005, suicide bombing on the OU campus. He was a business partner in a small shop in Oklahoma City with Mufid Abdulqader, who was indicted as a fundraiser for the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, of which Abdulqader's half-brother is the supreme political leader.

(Abdulqader's story is frightening. He was a civil engineering student at OSU, worked at the Oklahoma Department of Transportation and then went to work as an engineer with the City of Dallas. In his spare time, his rock band performed at Hamas fundraisers, where he sang lyrics like, "With Koran and Jihad, we will gain our homes back, hey, hey, hey! My precious eyes are for Palestine, the agony of death is precious, killing Jews . . . Death to Jews, is precious. Jews will not fear threats, only action. So Hamas, hit them with the shoe bottoms of Islam and Hamas!")

So why would Gov. Brad Henry issue an executive order to set up a special council for Muslims, giving it a name designed to hide its true purpose?

Some further Googling turns up a story in Wednesday's Oklahoman explaining why OETA is airing "Islam in Oklahoma," and suggesting that I'm right in my assumption that the GEAAC is really all about Islam:

State Muslims challenge TV show
By Judy Gibbs Robinson
Staff Writer

Oklahoma Muslim leaders will respond this week to what they say were some inaccuracies in the recent public television series "America at a Crossroads."

The Governor's Ethnic-American Advisory Council requested a chance to set the record straight after previewing the series before it ran on the Oklahoma Educational Television Authority from April 15 through 20.

"We thought there were a couple of segments that did not put Islam in a positive light," said Marjaneh Seirafi-Pour, the council's chairman.

OETA Director John McCarroll agreed to let council members preview the series and gave them 30 minutes of air time starting at 9 p.m. Friday to respond.

"They were concerned there might be a backlash in Oklahoma because most of it did deal with Islamic extremists," McCarroll said.

Feedback to discussion

The station invited viewers to submit questions and comments and got about a dozen each day, McCarroll said. Those responses will form the backbone of a panel discussion by Sheryl Siddiqui of Tulsa, Imad Enchassi of Oklahoma City and David R. Vishanoff of Norman. OETA's Gerry Bonds will moderate.

Siddiqi is director of outreach/community relations for the Islamic Society of Tulsa. Enchassi is president of the Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City. Vishanoff is a professor of Islamic studies at the University of Oklahoma.

The series

The Public Broadcasting Service series "America at a Crossroads" consisted of 11 documentaries exploring challenges confronting the United States in a post-9/11 world. Topics included the war on terrorism, conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the experience of American troops serving abroad and the struggle for balance in the Muslim world.

(Hat tip to American Infidel.)

The story has GEAAC speaking on behalf of the Islamic faith. GEAAC "requested a chance to set the record straight," because they "thought there were a couple of segments that did not put Islam in a positive light."

Next Friday night at 9, OETA, Oklahoma's public television network, will air "Islam in Oklahoma":

Oklahoma is home to more than 30,000 Muslim Americans. Join leaders from Oklahoma's Muslim community as they address the questions and issues raised by America at a Crossroads, Friday May 4 at 9 p.m.

(Is it just me, or does the background of that title image look more like Hebrew than Arabic?)

OETA says more panelists will be announced, but for now they only list Sheryl Siddiqui, a leader in the Islamic Society of Tulsa, Imam Imad Enchassi, Ph.D., president of the Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City, and Dr. David Vishanoff, Associate Professor of Islamic Studies, University of Oklahoma.

The facilities of the Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City and of the Islamic Society of Tulsa are owned by the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), which is part of a network of Saudi-funded organizations working to extend the influence of Wahhabism in the US. (There's more detail about NAIT and its related organizations -- the Wahhabi lobby -- in this post I wrote some months ago.)

There's a name that ought to be on that list of panelists discussing Islam in Oklahoma -- Jamal Miftah. His name belongs on the list for his eloquent condemnation of terror in the name of Islam. But it also belongs there because of the response that he received from the leaders of the Tulsa mosque, who confronted him angrily in the prayer hall and in the corridor of the mosque, saying that because of his column he was anti-Islamic, a label that could be heard by others as a thinly veiled incitement to violence against him.

Just this week, two more threatening comments targeting Miftah were posted from a Pakistan IP address at JunkYardBlog, simply because he condemned those who use their religion to justify their acts of violence.

If OETA spends an hour talking to two leaders of Wahhabi-connected mosques, without hearing any other Muslim voices, viewers will not get the complete story of Islam in Oklahoma. If you agree, drop a line to info@oeta.tv. OETA says they want input on the show's content, so let 'em (politely) have it.

UPDATE: A reader sent the following note to OETA:

I have always thought of OETA as an educational channel that was fair. However; regarding the upcoming program on "Islam in Oklahoma", Oklahomans deserve an unbiased discussion. If OETA has two leaders of Wahhabi-connected mosques on the discussion panel without hearing any other Muslim voices, viewers will not get the complete story of Islam in Oklahoma. Please do the right thing in providing a fair and balanced program by inviting other Muslims such as Jamal Miftah.

Oklahomans are not stupid, please don't portray us as such.

Here's the reply from OETA public information manager Ashley Barcum:

Thank you for sharing your concerns about Islam in Oklahoma. Please note that OETA worked with the Oklahoma Governor's Council on Ethnic Diversity to select the panelists and to ensure a balanced panel.

We do have a non-Muslim academic on the panel, Dr. David Vishanoff, who is Associate Professor of Islamic Studies at the University of Oklahoma. He will be on hand to provide an objective viewpoint. Due to the short time of the program, the producers would like to keep the panel limited to the three panelists, which includes Dr. Vishanoff.

Please note the panel discussion will primarily involve a discussion of the experience of Muslims in Oklahoma. What the program intends to do is provide a look at the local experiences of those practicing one of the state's minority religions. It is an ongoing conversation sparked by the recent PBS series America at a Crossroads.

In addition, the program will be moderated by Gerry Bonds, a veteran broadcast journalist.

Please let me know if you have additional questions or concerns.

Why, that makes it all better, doesn't it? The governor says these two Muslims are representative of the diversity of Oklahoma Muslims so it must be so. Never mind the ethnic diversity within Islam -- Arab, Pakistani, Indonesian, Turkish, North African. Never mind that there are other views than the Wahhabi view, even if those other views aren't as well funded.

And how can you have a panel discussion about local experiences of practicing Muslims while ignoring a very local, very recent experience of an Oklahoma Muslim that made national news?

Notice that the website statement that there would be additional panelists has been contradicted by Barcum, who now says that those three are it.

MORE about "America at a Crossroads," the PBS series to which "Islam in Oklahoma" is a follow-up: Okie on the Lam had this entry on April 9 about PBS's decision to suppress one of the films in the series. The film was called "Islam vs. Islamism: Voices From The Muslim Center." It was one of 34 proposed films for this series selected for a research and development grant by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Here's the description in the list of grant awards:

Islam vs. Islamism (Martyn Burke, Frank Gaffney and Alex Alexiev, ABG Films Inc., Los Angeles) will explore how Islamic extremists are at war with their own faith, and how the consequences of their ambitions and policies devastate the socio-economic potential and well-being of the Muslim world. The filmmakers will follow the stories of several Muslims who have been victimized by the radicals and who are fighting back.

Sounds like a story that needs to be told, right? The CPB thought so, because it then selected the film for one of 20 production grants -- the money needed to get the film made.

But now PBS is refusing to broadcast the film. One of the film's executive producers, Frank Gaffney, explained why in an April 12 Washington Times op-ed:

As it happens, I was involved in making a film for the "America at a Crossroads" series that also focused on, among others, several American Muslims. Unlike Mr. MacNeil's, however, this 52-minute documentary titled "Islam vs. Islamists: Voices from the Muslim Center," was selected through the competitive process and was originally designated by CPB to be aired in the first Crossroads increment.

Also unlike Mr. MacNeil's film, "Islam vs. Islamists" focuses on the courageous Muslims in the United States, Canada and Western Europe who are challenging the power structure established in virtually every democracy largely with Saudi money to advance worldwide the insidious ideology known as Islamofascism. In fact, thanks to the MacNeil-Lehrer film, the PBS audience soon will be treated to an apparently fawning portrait of one of the most worrisome manifestations of that Saudi-backed organizational infrastructure in America: the Muslim Student Association (MSA). The MSA's efforts to recruit and radicalize students and suppress dissenting views on American campuses is a matter of record and extremely alarming.

In an exchange with me aired on National Public Radio last week, however, Robert MacNeil explained why he and his team had refused to air "Islam vs. Islamists," describing it as "alarmist" and "extremely one-sided." In other words, a documentary that compellingly portrays what happens to moderate Muslims when they dare to speak up for and participate in democracy, thus defying the Islamists and their champions, is not fit for public airwaves -- even in a series specifically created to bring alternative perspectives to their audience.

The MacNeil criticism was merely the latest of myriad efforts over the last year made by WETA and PBS to suppress the message of "Islam vs. Islamists." These included: insisting yours truly be removed as one of the film's executive producers; allowing a series producer with family ties to a British Islamist to insist on sweeping changes to its "structure and context" that would have assured more favorable treatment of those portrayed vilifying and, in some cases, threatening our anti-Islamist protagonists; and hiring as an adviser to help select the final films an avowed admirer of the Nation of Islam -- an organization whose receipt of a million dollars from the Saudis to open black Wahhabi mosques is a feature of our documentary. The gravity of this conflict of interest was underscored when the latter showed an early version of our film to Nation of Islam representatives, an action that seemed scarcely to trouble those responsible for the "Crossroads" series at WETA and PBS.

You can read an independent perspective on the dispute here. The film may yet air, but there are no guarantees.