How that workin’ out for them?
The Cordoba Institute that wants to construct the community center has been in that neighborhood, (Tribeca, where the WTC stood), since 1997, so it is not as though they are “moving in.” In fact, there is a Muslim community that has been located in Tribeca for years. Feisal Abdul Rauf, the founder of the Cordoba Institute has been the Imam of the local mosque in that neighborhood since 1983–twenty years prior to the WTC attack. What “better location” would you suggest than the place where they have already been located for nearly thirty years?
Possilby. On the other hand, the coordinator, Abdul Rauf, has actually worked with the FBI on building community relations and has been cited by the FBI as one who provided a good communication bridge between the FBI and the Muslim community during the investigations of the WTC attacks.
Given the paranoia regarding all things Muslim or Middle Eastern following the WTC/Pentagon attacks, (to say nothing of all the accusations that the FBI dropped the ball in not detecting and preventing it), I am pretty sure that the FBI would be rather reluctant to enlist the aid of a Muslim with a Middle Eastern name to help them without thoroughly checking him out ahead of time.
So, basically, your position is that Muslims who wish to engage with Western or American society should move away from their established locations to do so and that we should simply not trust anyone with a Muslim connection or a Middle Eastern name simply becuse you cannot be bothered to actually look at the facts? That should go a long way toward encouraging more Muslims to reject extremism.
Maybe he was the most moderate guy they could find. Rauf did say on 60 Minutes that the US was an accessory to 9/11 and that the rise of bin Laden was the US’s fault. I guess that’s moderate compared to blowing up a bus, but it doesn’t bode well for some sort of rapprochement.
I distrust the Cordoba Institute because of what I do know, not because of what I don’t know.
Frankly, I don’t think Islam has anything to offer the United States (do you, and if so, what?) I think Islam is as fundamentally at odds with American principles as any belief system ever has been. The more “dialogue,” the more people will realize this. Rauf would be better to let sleeping dogs lie, i.e. let those in the US with “COEXIST” bumper stickers, believing Islam means “peace” and not “submission,” go on their merry way instead of arousing their curiosity as to what it’s really all about.
I don’t really think Christianity brings anything to America either. Many if not most strains are at odds with American principles.
Have you ever read his exact words–all of them–in context? He was not claiming that the U.S. was an actual accessory to the attack, but that the actions of the U.S. in the Middle East were often ham-handed, causing many in that region to distrust and hate the U.S. While there are contingent of “the U.S. can do no wrong” people who would deny that, most observers would note that there is a fair amount of truth in the statement. Even those, such as I, who consider the WTC/Pentagon attacks to be wholly unjustified are going to include people who recognize that the U.S. has not been particularly brilliant in its dealings in the Middle East.
As to bin Laden, he got his first experience fighting alongside the proto-Taliban in Afghanistan as one of the people the U.S. used as proxy fighters against the U.S.S.R.
You may not like that news, but Rauf was hardly incorrect in his observations. You appear to just want to shoot the messenger.
Your view of “Islam” has nothing to do with actual Islam. You appear to conflate the Wahabbism of bin Laden with all the myriad separate groups throughout the world. Throughout history, different groups of Muslims have been noble and vile, educated and opposed to knowledge, enlightened and depraved. Lumping them all together with an emphasis on what you perceive as bad simply means that when you encounter one who could be a friend, you alienate him or her with your prejudice.
I make no claim that “Islam” has anything to offer this country–any more than does Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Atheism, or any other system of belief or unbelief. I do note that, just as members of all those other groups, Muslims are already here and they are not going away. I prefer to see groups that are working to encourage peaceful cooperation not be condemned out of unthinking hatred.
This snippet has been making the rounds of right-wing media lately, but it seems pretty disconnected from the actual meaning of the statements. Here’s a transcript of the 9/30/2001 60 Minutes interview by Ed Bradley of Faisal Abdur-Rauf and other prominent American Muslims. The relevant part of the dialogue is as follows:
Condemning Islamic-extremist terrorism and violence, which AFAIK Faisal has always done, is in no way incompatible with thoughtful analysis of how US policies have sometimes unintentionally encouraged Islamic-extremist terrorism and violence. To suggest that articulating such an analysis is even on the same spectrum of hostile activities as “blowing up a bus” is, frankly, kind of disgusting.
In any case, the only kind of “rapprochement” that these anti-mosque Islamophobes appear willing to accept is a full-scale renunciation of the religion of Islam in any form by all self-identified Muslims. They have made up their minds that the real problem is not Islamic-extremist fanaticism and violence, but rather Islam per se.
No amount of professed or demonstrated secularism or tolerance or liberalism or peacefulness on the part of self-identified Muslims will dislodge the Islamophobes’ conviction that Islam is innately evil and dangerous. They’ve wound up on the same page as the hate-filled fanatics they’re obsessed with: beyond the reach of rational discourse.
Never mind, Tom and Kimstu said it better while my preview function was failing it.
I have no interest in the fine points of Islamic theology, only in what actual self-identified Muslims say and do. No, not all Muslims are bent on destroying the West. But too many are, and it’s hard to tell who is who until after the fact. Let them work out their differences, then approach us for “dialogue”. I am sorry that this may mean turning our backs on Muslims who have the best of intentions, but as has been said in other contexts, the Constitution is not a suicide pact.
They didn’t just appear, they arrived as a consequence of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. The same bunch that passed that bill now demands tolerance of practices totally alien to American traditions. That’s like setting my house on fire and then criticizing me for not calling the fire department fast enough.
Letting black people vote was totally alien to American traditions once.
How many of our freedoms will you surrender in the name of this crusade, then? And how many will you have to before the United States is a meaningless concept, not worth “saving”?
And didn’t one of the founding fathers have something pithy to say about that anyway?
You do realize that this is nothing but a feeble excuse for blanket condemnation of an entire group based on the actions of some subset of the group, right? How would you feel if the same reasoning were applied to other categories?
“I have no interest in the fine points of Republican/conservative ideology. Not all Republicans/conservatives are rabid racist loons who think Obama is a closet Kenyan Muslim communist fascist, but too many are. Let them work out their differences and then approach us for bipartisan compromise.”
“I have no interest in the fine points of Christian doctrine or practice on homosexuality and pedophilia. Not all Christians are gay-bashing child-molesting scum, but too many are. Let them work out their differences and then approach us for ecumenical respect and understanding.”
Your rationale for indiscriminately lumping all Muslims into the same category of suspected threat, and paying no attention to differences in the actual views or actions of different Muslim groups or individuals, is the very definition of bigotry.
It is not at all hard to tell the difference between Wahabbist extremists and the majority of Muslims. Of course, one needs to actually pay attention to what they say and do, rather than putting one’s fingers in one’s ears and shouting “LA LA LA ISLAM LA LA LA,” but most of us are capable of actually engaging in that behavior.
Which, of course, is the same argument used against German and Irish Catholics and, later, Italian Catholics, and Confucian and Buddhist Chinese, and Buddhist Japanese and any number of other groups.
It is nothing but Nativism in the worst sense and a return to the “ideals” of the Know Nothing party. OOOOOH!They are DIFFERENT! Their very presence is identical to burning down my house!*
(And just for the record, how many Congresscritters from 1965 are now demanding that the U.S. tolerate terrible acts and what acts are they demanding we tolerate? Or are you just quoting inflammatory rhetoric from some bigoted loons?)
- In this case, in miniscule numbers .
I think this bears repeating. With Muslims currently about 0.6% of the adult population of the U.S., I can’t bring myself to worry at all.
Let me know when they grow to 10% through apparent deliberate effort, then I’ll worry. Hell, at current average growth rates they’re not even going to hit 1% before 2050, and that’s being generous (the rate of growth of Muslims in America is falling at present.)
It really doesn’t seem all that hard to me.
I suppose the question is, to what extent are we under the burden of educating ourselves? Because, you know, I’m not a Muslim, but if someone said to me “Oh, you might be one of those evil bastardly types, but I can’t be arsed to find out. Sort it out amongst yourselves!” my response would not be “What a reasonable and open people. They are well worth emulating.” If you want to attract people to your way of life, you can’t do that by acting unpleasantly in actual ways and then pointing to abstract concepts as proof of our excellence. If in my house I have beautiful paintings, lovely furniture, and witty and warm guests, I can’t expect a neighbour to come to like me if I turn the lights off and pretend i’m not home when they come calling. You can’t claim abstract ideals of great American traditions whilst foregoing them so easily; the reason traditions become traditions, and stay traditions, is because they are practiced.
Fixed that for you.
They are one part of what will erode our country. You are forgetting that this is an inside job. We already allow Sharia banking… What the hell? Is Sharia what… “We The People” stand for? Look up Sharia and what it means to do Sharia banking. There is nothing free or equitable about it. Lets give Iranian mortgages to terrorists so they can buy up our land and build fortresses, mosques. So they can build their own schools which follow their faith, Islam. What ever happened to the separation of church and state? It doesn’t matter if your a Muslim? Not all Muslims are bad people, just the terrorist ones…?
They have the money and our banks will work with them on their terms not on ours for their money. Why is our Country ignoring it’s own Constitution for Muslims in the US? Not all of them are bad but they should be forced to live like Americans and bank like Americans if they want to live in our country.
Sharia is not a religion it is a cult like Jihad is. If you love the United States Of America it is time to take a stand. Turn off the tv and read or do research online while you still can. Erosion is not an overnight process but in time just as the ‘Old Man On The Mountain’ fell off in NH so will we.
if you watch the series, “It’s The End Of The World As We Know It” on Utube.You can see that even though Muslims only have .06 of our population now at the rate they have children it will grow very fast. US birth rates are down because we use birth control. Muslims don’t. It’s math.
Really, do you think the fall of New Hampshire’s “Old Man Of The Mountain” was just a natural accident? The original “Old Man Of The Mountain” was Rashid ad-Din Sinan, “one of the leaders of the Syrian wing of the Hashshashin sect and a figure in the history of the Crusades.” I’m amazed that you missed this very obvious conspiracy! The Taliban destroyed giant statues in Afghanistan–a source of hashish! A mere coincidence? I think not.
No, I’m not being serious. Serious responses to** Perciful** are only possible in The Pit.
Shorter Perciful:
If you love the United States of America, stand up and repudiate one of the cornerstone tenets of our entire existence!
Jesus Christmas, Perciful…go find a bunker and cower in (hopefully, silent) fear and cowardice there. You’re the kind of person who kills your own kids by shooting before you verify what you’re shooting at because you’re so frantic with panicked terror, aren’t you?
Maybe I’m being kneejerk, but this kind of irrational bigotry does that to me. This whole thread (well, one side of it) has had me gnashing my teeth in frustration over the blanket stereotyping.
Um… yes? Is this a trick question? Have you been taking your medication?
Ignorance AND paranoia, a lovely combination, (not that it is rare).
“Sharia” banking is simply a way for Muslims to engage in modern capitalist practices while not violating their own religious traditions. (This is very much in keeping with Western traditions in which the prohibited practice of usury was supplanted by the permitted practice of interest. In both cases, a law arising in a barter society intended to prevent one person from harming another, economically, was recast in a way to permit the development of markets and trade in a money economy through the use of investments.)
Sharia is not some monolithic entity that is being used to conquer the world. It is a philosophical approach to law and, as with many philosophical views, there are multiple traditions of Sharia that compete with each other in the marketplace of ideas, often conflicting with each other on various points. To pretend that Sharia is some all-encompassing single set of laws that is merely a tool for world conquest is to display a serious ignorance both of the various traditions of Sharia, but also of the actual history of Islam.
(And there is no way that either “Sharia” or “Jihad” can be identified as “cults.” Where are you getting this nonsense?)
Then, of course, we have the Conspiracy Theory. “Someone” on the “inside” is apparently working to bring about this terrible plot to destroy someone or something.
If Sharia banking actually violated any laws, it would already have been shut down by the various governments for its violations. To insist that there is some massive plot to destroy the West using that form of banking, one needs to believe that every government, (including multiple antagonistic administrations), in every industrialized nation is working in cooperation with the Muslims to undermine their (the various governments’) own power. So, for example, in the U.S. we have the Clinton administration tolerating or promoting something that jeopardizes its power, followed by GW Bush’s administration going along to further the actions of the Clinton crowd and, now, the Obama adminstration promoting the same power-destroying actions of GWB. (I realize from some of your remarks that you probably believe the idiocy of the claims that Obama is a secret Muslim, but the Sharia banks were operating in the U.S. during the Bush administration–Obama did not start the process.) Also, given your own background, you might be interested to know that the Vatican has suggested that Sharia banking is a good thing.
Finally, we get to the classic “they are going to outbreed us!” hysteria. This, of course, is exactly the same claim lodged against Catholic immigrants in the U.S., (and we never managed to pull that off). It is also the claim lodged by the really silly white supremacists against blacks. It is a particularly pernicious form of xenophobia that uses bad math in conjunction with raw hatred to instill fear that something bad, (and wholly improbable), is going to happen. Next we will hear that we need to protect our womenfolk. (Oh, right, we have already had that one.)