Nothing was conquered. Saddam was removed and they created their own government.
More nonsense. We rewrote their laws according to our right wing ideology, we’ve abused them and exploited them at every turn. We were not invited, they do not want us there and never did. It was a war of conquest and nothing else, without the slightest shred of good intentions to it.
TWEEET!
Enough of the Iraq war hijack. (And my apologies for joining in.)
Drop it.
[ /Modding ]
Thanks
I think I understand furt’s point and agree to a limited extent. I think we can take some pride in the fact that this whole mess hasn’t descended into riots in the streets and burning Mosque’s because of the atmosphere of civil liberties and peaceful protest in America.
Still, I think we can see some facts that are reason for legitimate concern. A profit driven media engaged in the very definition of rabble rousing and soooo many people buying into it.
We are currently in a sensitive era with Muslims all over the world. Imam Rauf is one that believes the civil liberties we embrace here are in harmony with the spiritual principles of Islam and that’s the message he wants to share with Muslims in other countries. Our response seems to be to ask him to surrender those civil liberties under some severely misguided sense of propriety. In the process we accept bigotry and the labeling of 1.5 billion people as proponents of terrorism. I think the issue has shown us there’s still things to work on and room for improvement.
Are you suggesting the Muslims trying to build a community center in Manhattan are connected to those terrorist?
If your point is that both sides have a responsibility I agree. What are our responsibilities here at home regarding civil liberties vs. an emotional response that gives rise to latent bigotry?
Depends on how you define “common.” The most recent complete year reports show 1,144 anti-Jewish hate crimes. The majority are nonviolent.
No doubt we have bigots who hate different groups. I never claimed anti Muslim sentiment is far worse than any other. IMO bigotry directed at any group is cut from the same cloth. An act of bigotry against a Jew, a Muslim, a Catholic, a Protestant, and Atheist, a black American, an Asian American, a Latino American, is all part of the same poison pill. When I object to anti Muslim bigotry it reflects a distaste for bigotry anywhere. Are we clear on that?
So we have
- a dude pissing on a carpet
- another dude yelling “no mosque.”
Sorry, this is everyday life in the big city. This is the reality of what humans do to each other every day. Sectarian tension is not not “ok” anymore than a fatal car accident or a pregnant teenager is “ok.” I nonetheless accept that a certain amount of all three are inevitable consequences of human nature, and that “even once is too much” is not a anything more than a pipe dream.
Y’know, every time Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin open their silly pieholes, I hear all this handwringing about “inflammatory rhetoric that might cause violence.”
Yet often when there’s actual, real violence committed, like say this or this or this or this … nobody gets all worried about what inflammatory rhetoric caused it. Wonder why? I mean, if one of Palin’s people bit off a chunk of finger, it would be news; after all, you’re upset about a soiled carpet. But somehow I’m guessing none of those incidents give you deep worries about inciteful rhetoric.
Don’t worry, we can soon stop discussing all the “alleged” anti-Muslim sentiment in this country. The first hint of “Season’s Greetings” or “Happy Holidays” and the War on Christmas will be upon us. Now that’s some anti- shit we can really sink our teeths into … am I right?
Sure. My point is that people can be selective about what kind of bigotry they choose to get het up about.
To repeat:
Yep, there’s a segment of mouthbreathing redneck America that lives in terror the Mooslims are gonna kill us all, and conservative media and pols cater to them.
There’s also a segment of urban sophisticate America that lives in terror of mouthbreathing redneck America, and liberal media and pols cater to them.
Are the protests a media creation? To a certain extent, yes.
But the fear you and others have is ALSO a media creation. There is no evidence of any uptick in violence. There was no significant wave of anti-muslim violence after 9/11. The specter of American hillbillies running loose attacking innocent Muslims is a myth, a fabrication, a boogeyman fantasy with no serious grounding in reality, told to play to the fears and passions of liberals, exactly the way Obama-is-a-secret-Muslim stories are told to play to the fears and passions of conservatives.
Sure about that?
Yep…here we are with the, “But, but, but it’s is only TWO!”
You avoided my question.
Note that those two occurred within a day or two of each other. I also seriously doubt there has been a regular occurrence of people entering mosques, pissing on the rugs and yelling “Terrorists!” prior to this atmosphere.
As for the guy being accosted on the street by a mob (that assumed he was a Muslim which he wasn’t) has that happened much that you recall? That was quite explicitly a result of this atmosphere being ginned up by FOX & friends.
So, I have shown two instances in the last week alone where the atmosphere being created is causing real problems.
I’ll ask again. How many more do you need before you care? What will it take for you to agree that this rabble rousing is having an additional effect beyond the usual background noise of violence in the US?
Yes, your link does not rebut that. Hitchens has a bit on an alarmist, Islamophobic streak to him. It’s one of his less attractive qualities. I’m sure we can all agree with him that the arguments against the mosque are “so stupid and demagogic as to be beneath notice,” though.
]
You seem to be referring only to overt violence. I’m concerning about heading it off before that. What would you call the protests of Mosques in other cities. The rise of groups directed solely at demonizing Islam. The scheduled Koran book burning and the number of Christians including prominent TV evangelist spreading their vision of a holy war against Islam?
I’m not suggesting we run down the road screaming Alarm alarm. I’m only suggesting we need to actively oppose bigotry in action.
Sure about that?
[/QUOTE]
and what does that mean exactly? I’m taking Rauf at his word for now, based on what I’ve read so far. I certainly agree with this
That’s the challenge , the ongoing effort and debate. We stand for our principles even when its hard and we continue to examine and redefine the boundaries. The includes the boundaries of what compromises we make for any religion.
Christianity has been here since the beginning and we still have believers trying to impose their beliefs into our legal system. IMO Muslims in America will help relations if we embrace them as equal citizens, not more, not less. That includes speaking out against well publicized anti Muslim sentiment and media who profits by fear mongering.
Hitchens hates Islam as much as he hates every other religion.
I don’t completely discount the concern that dogmatic Muslims might try to pressure governments both local and national, to accommodate their beliefs. We’ve been dealing with that in Christianity since this country began, and so far have done fairly well. I don’t think it’s impossible some might try. I just don’t give them much likely hood in succeeding.
There is an emotional connection between Islam and radical Islamic terrorism. The mosque’s location was not chosen at random nor was the project’s name. It screams insensitivity. It would be like a Japanese “cultural bridge building project” called Nanking located in Pearl Harbor. The objections of allowing the development would not be directed at all Japanese construction endeavors. There is Japanese real-estate investment in Hawaii just as thee are many many mosques in New York. The same claim could be made that the people building it had nothing to do with the attack yet it would still be considered insensitive.
-There is no financial benefit to the city for a non-profit organization in this location
-There is no community benefit to the mosque to locate in a business district.
-The building has direct historical links to the event of 9/11.
Without any benefit to the city there is every reason to deny permits to locate something that the citizens don’t want. It could just as easily be a park or a hot dog stand or an art museum. It’s a simple statement to make to say that the city welcomes a new mosque but not at this location.
Oh, please. It was Islamic people in Iran who held candlelight vigils over 9-11. And these people have as much connection to the people who committed 9-11 as the Quakers do to the Spanish Inquisition. Islam simply isn’t the monolith that you desperately want everyone to pretend it is.
I’ve posted many links by Muslims around the world who see the building as a Cordoba trophy Mosque. Their opinion has more weight than does yours.
For values of “many” which equal “two”, yeah.
That’s exactly right. The name of that emotional connection is bigotry.
I don’t see how it can be anything else. It’s normal, and it’s human, but it’s not the best way to make judgment calls about civil liberties.
But you’re imposing your motives on both those choices. You are not a mind reader. Have they lived in Manhattan for 20 years? isthis true,
or are we only supposed to believe the negative?
based only on your first sentence.
A false comparison. If it was an actual Mosque actually at ground zero you might have a valid argument. It never has been. It’s very hard to argue that 2 blocks away is too close while 4 blocks away is okay. It’s hard to argue that them worshiping in that building for months and months is fine but improving their own property is insensitive.
I don’t know the tax structure in NYC do you? Regardless, a community center that brings more traffic probably means more income for other local business and possibly improvements to other buildings in that area. The purchase of an abandoned building is a benefit. Long term improvement construction is a benefit.
I’ve been to Manhattan several times. It’s a short subway ride to residential.
which do not matter at all in this discussion.
I don’t know what permits they need but the plan has been in the works for months and already approved. You haven’t shown there’s no benefit to the city while I’ve listed several realsitic , even obvious ones. I tend to think being true to the civil liberties in our Constitution is a benefit in itself, even if people, manipulated by for profit media, don’t think so.
If you have a reason not based in bigotry. You really don’t. There is no part of the opposition argument that isn’t traced directly back to fear mongering profit driven rabble rousing media and bigotry. IMO that’s a fail all the way around and that kind of emotion should not triumph over the principles of our civil liberties and equal consideration for American citizens. Isn’t ta major point of our Constitution to not let the majority deny equality to the minority?