Contrary to Nickels' claim, I have no qualms with freedom of speech. In fact, I am obligated to exercise my First Amendment right to refute your letter. The overriding concern remains that when misguided words are used to defame all of Islam, it creates an intensifying cycle of bigotry and that needs to be countered.

Larry Nickels letter, “MDH Should Research Islam” (Morris Daily Herald, Sept. 17) is an example of how ignorance incites hate.

The Associated Press article "Soap opera shakes customs of Arab married life" (July 28) was a nice change from the usual stories that only show Muslims in the context of political oppression and warfare. Unfortunately, the article is still guilty of conveying gross generalizations of Arab and Muslim people

I wish to inform you that I go to a madrassa. There I said it. No really, I go to a madrassa. Before you call the FBI, though, consider that just as "escuela" means "school" in Spanish, "madrassa" means "school" in Arabic.

Dalia Mogahed and John Esposito recently asked one of the most pertinent questions of our time: Who speaks for a billion Muslims? I won't tell you the answer because I recommend that you read their book. But I will give this away: the answer is not Edward Luttwak.

Too often, the news is filled with impersonal or sensational stories. So, I was pleased to read the article 'An Ancient Art.'

It was great to read how Brittany Whitfield’s perspective on Arabs changed for the betteras a result of studying the Arabic language. (More CPS students can learn Arabic, May 2, 2008).

I was surprised to read in the column by Ray Hanania, "Don't let violence sabotage efforts toward peace," that Christians, Muslims and Jews have "never lived together in peace."

Leonard Pitts' editorial "Even if Obama were a Muslim, so what?" (Jan. 29) addresses an issue that the Muslim community faces on a daily basis: the presupposition that there is something wrong with being a follower of Islam.

Tuesday's front page article on "hate Web sites" does a poor job of differentiating between Chicago's own respected community institution, Radio Islam on WCEV 1450 AM, and the foul fringe website masquerading by the same web name and featured in the article.

Goering's piece on the new Australian Burqini' was an eye-opener even for an already modesty-minded Muslim woman such as myself (*a burqa is a loose outer robe that some Muslim women wear to cover their bodies or heads). A spinoff of the word burqa and bikini, it’s swimwear that allows the entire body to remain clothed.

In these times of turmoil it is all too common to hear voices of fear and hatred shouting the loudest. That is why it made me so happy to read Margaret Ramirez’s excellent article, “Islam’s diverse faces take center stage” (6/22/07).

Kathleen Parker’s Article, “When Topic is Terror, Surveys Are Misleading” is in fact itself a very misleading interpretation of the recent Pew Research Center survey that found American Muslims to be largely moderate and mainstream.

Here is an interesting point to ponder: what if Don Imus had referred to a mostly-white woman's basketball team as "dumb blonde ho's," would it have been any less racist or sexist than the "nappy-headed ho's" comment he used against a mostly black team?

Reading the work of Kathleen Parker one might get the impression through her conspicuous intellect and confident voice that she speaks with academic authority on the issues for which she writes.

In her April 4 column, "Ignore them, and be spared the drama," (Commentary) Kathleen Parker makes it clear that what bothers her most about the backlash to the chocolate Jesus exhibit is that it makes people in this country look a little too much like the Big Bad Muslims.

Apparently, Parker believes that people do not have the right to be offended by offensive material. Although I am no advocate of Donohue or the Catholic League, I do firmly believe that all sane and civilized people - be they Muslim, Christian, Jewish, atheist, or otherwise - should be respectful of the beliefs and values cherished by others.

Richard Haling's opinion "Fight Them in Iraq, Not Here." (Dec.29) is an embarrassment to American pluralism. Haling's article shows a disturbing confusion regarding the difference between Muslims and terrorists.

I am disappointed that the Chicago-Tribune chose to print Victor Hanson's "Why the Rise of Radical Islam?" Hanson's commentary is characterized by selective slicing of history and simplistic suggestions for solutions to the problem of a global rise in extremism.

It is hard to understand why there is a growing editorial tendency toward willful ignorance and Islamophobic extremism. It is growing at the expense of intellectual honesty and moral reason.