War of words, waged on small battlefields

But more often they unfold on smaller battlefields. Recent examples include:

In Detroit, the city transit system is locked in a legal struggle with groups who sought to use advertising space on the sides of buses for controversial messages on “honor killings” of Muslim women. After the city rejected the ads as too political, the groups behind the ads — Stop Islamization of America and the American Freedom Defense Initiative — sued the city, and won. Detroit is appealing.

·         In Temecula, Calif., a group called Citizens Concerned about the First Amendment this month held a protest outside the local high school, where they handed out fliers that labeled the teaching of Islam in the school’s social studies program as “brainwashing.” The fliers offered links to national anti-Islam groups.

·         In Texas, the board of education passed a resolution last September to reject the purchase of textbooks that include “pro-Islamic, anti-Christian half-truths and selective disinformation.” The debate is expected to resurface with the review of new textbooks this year.

·         At least 20 states are considering “anti-Shariah” measures, which in various ways prohibit the courts from considering Islamic law in their decisions. Muslim advocates say the measures are legal gibberish that promote fear and hatred, while drafters portray them as a bulwark against creeping Islamization.

No one is immune from the theological tug-of-war, as administrators learned last week at a small Washington community college sandwiched between the Puget Sound and the Cascade Mountains that decided to run a special lecture series called “Islam in America.”

Since it launched the series in January, Everett Community College has been battered by forces far beyond its normally quiet campus.

“I knew it would be controversial, but I thought it was going to be more internal,” said Craig Lewis, dean of communications and humanities at the school. “I had no idea we were going to get national attention.”a

Where Islam is discussed, controversy follows.

Though the 9/11 attacks by Islamic extremists are almost 10 years past and al-Qaida boss Osama bin Laden is dead, the American debate over Islam is still raging, as evidenced by numerous conflicts over public events around the country.

The battles — a kind of holy war for American hearts and minds — feature a changing cast of players, but they typically array some of the dozens of groups dedicated to exposing the threat of radical Islam in the U.S. against dozens of others established to protect the rights of Muslim Americans and defend their religion as peaceful.

Charles Kurzman, a professor of sociology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, says the clashes over Islam point to two powerful prevailing currents.

“One trend is heightened alarm and suspicion on the part of people concerned about domestic security,” he said. “The other trend is increased assertiveness and political activism on the part of Muslim Americans.”

At a national level, the conflict played out in controversial congressional hearings in April, which featured testimony from witnesses warning of a threat posed by Islamic radicals within the United States. Meanwhile Muslim leaders and civil rights groups — who were largely excluded from the proceedings — held press briefings comparing the hearings to red-baiting of the McCarthy era.

1 arrest as BP bars door to Gulf Coast protesters

 Scuffles between protesters and security guards marred BP's first annual shareholder meeting since the Gulf oil spill Thursday, as investors registered their disapproval with sizable protest votes against company directors.

Five Gulf Coast residents who had planned to tell investors about the loss of their livelihoods and health problems after the spill were denied access to the meeting, prompting confrontations with police and security guards outside the building.

Diane Wilson, a fourth-generation fisherwoman from Seadrift, Texas, was arrested after evading security to enter the foyer of the building, where she covered herself in a dark syrup to represent oil.

"I've come all the way here from the Gulf Coast," Wilson said. "My community is gone, and they won't let me in." Police later said a 62-year-old woman was arrested for breaching the peace.

Inside the venue, hundreds of BP PLC investors who have watched the company lose a quarter of its market value — about $55 billion — over the past year and lost their dividend payments questioned board members about excessive executive pay packets and a lack of transparency on safety improvements.

Preliminary voting results released by the company showed significant disgruntlement among shareholders.

Around 25 percent of investors who voted before the meeting, representing 60 percent of shares, voted against the re-election of the head of BP's safety committee, William Castell.

About 7 percent voted against the re-election of chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg, who has been criticized for his soft response to the spill, and just over 11 percent voted against the company's remuneration report because of bonuses awarded to Iain Conn, BP's head of refining and Chief Financial Officer Byron Grote for work not related to the oil spill.

Former CEO Tony Hayward also grabbed headlines with a $17.9 million pension, $1.6 million payoff and about $13 million in share options despite a series of public gaffes that led to his ceding the CEO post to Bob Dudley, the first American to head the London-based company.

The results contrasted with data from Pirc, the investor advice service, which show British company directors were, on average, last year re-elected with less than 2 percent of the vote against them.

Still, some shareholders were clearly ready to move on, with frequent smatterings of applause for Dudley, including for his opening statement that "BP remains a great company with a great history and I believe a great future."

"Not every company gets such an opportunity and we don't intend to squander it," he added, referring to lessons learned from the Gulf disaster.

As a mark of respect for the upcoming anniversary of the Macondo well explosion, Dudley read out the names of the 11 men killed in the April 20 incident, which has cost BP around $40 billion so far.

Dudley attempted to appease major institutional shareholders, including Calpers, the biggest U.S. public pension fund, and the Florida State Board of Administration, which are unhappy about a lack of transparency over safety improvements at the company.

He said that management intended to recommend to the board the appointment of an external expert to implement the recommendations of an internal report into the spill — as it did after the deadly Texas City refinery explosion in 2005 in which 15 people died.

"We're finding it isn't so easy to find someone," Dudley said. "We want to make sure that person is independent and experienced."

Dudley stressed the company's three priorities post-spill as strengthening safety, winning back the company's reputation and restoring long-term value for shareholders, but he also insisted the company would press ahead with deepwater drilling and would double its exploration efforts.

Why One Security Expert Chooses NOT to Fly

I fly an average of 40 segments on commercial airliners each year. Like most Americans, I have watched with increasing alarm and dismay the disjointed, draconian and ineffective "security" measures put in place by the inept powers to be at the TSA.

Unlike most Americans, I have spent the last 35 years of my adult life training security personnel and assessing security weakness and vulnerabilities across the United States and for a wide variety of environments.

On October 20th I was subjected to the new "pat-down" procedure not once-but twice prior to boarding my flight. The TSA officer who conducted the pat-down obviously had no prior experience conducting a physical search. While reciting a memorized list, the guard ("officer" implies a degree of training and professionalism) failed to make eye contact with me once, never listened to my responses to his questions, never observed my body language.

At the conclusion of the examination, a supervisor stepped in and told him to "do it again" which he proceeded to do, while a third TSA representative removed my wallet from my pocket and walked away with it without a word. When I turned to see where the guard was taking my wallet, I was told to "keep my eyes front". When I informed them I wanted to keep an eye on my wallet I was told "nothing has ever gone missing". Remember the date? October 20th? In less than an hour, the news would report multiple indictments of TSA representatives including a supervisor for theft.

Capricious searches that have no foundation in either intel or observed behavior continue as crying children, embarrassed nuns, and humiliated senior citizens are subjected to clumsy, painful poking and prodding with no defined or discernable value by improperly trained guards while the overwhelming volume of luggage and cargo is loaded into the belly of the plane without evaluation, review, or inspection.

A percentage of my work involves interviewing inmates in State and Federal Prisons across the United States and including "Super Max" facilities and death row inmates. The screening procedure to enter these facilities is less intrusive, yet more effective.

The TSA continues to ignore the advice of experienced security experts like Rafi Ron with a proven track record for making airports and airliners safe and secure. Indeed, when I spoke at length with the TSA supervisor after my free medical exam, I was stunned to discover that he had never seen a presentation by Ron or any other number of experts who had practical experience in operating effective, incident free airport facilities.

The myriad "holes" in current airport security are glaringly obvious to a trained professional and it would be unethical and improper for me to list them here. Suffice it to say, that current measures implemented by the TSA are "eyewash" security ie: measures that have little or no real or substantive value, but are rather, intended to reassure an uninformed public that all is well.

A comprehensive "tiered" approach to security is critical in order to protect the perimeter, exterior and interior of our transportation hubs, as well as reasonably reducing the probability of a terrorist event in flight.

Until such time as meaningful and effective strategies and measures are put in place to protect the traveling public, I choose to avoid flying whenever possible.