On the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, and 50-some days before the midterm elections, hate-filled rallies at the World Trade Center site, and elsewhere, were staged against the “Ground Zero mosque.” The New York rally was organized by right-wing blogger, author of Obama Adminstration’s War on America. And the keynote speaker was Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders who supports banning the Koran and elsewhere has described Islam as not a religion, but as “the ideology of a retarded culture.” Nice memorial to 9/11 victims, right?
Media Matters gives a longer, depressing litany of intolerant quotes from anti-mosque commentators, and their intention is clear. They are exploiting 9/11 to create political advantage in the upcoming fall elections, based on fear during this time of great economic upheaval. Fear and hate is a tested and sadly, all too often, effective tactic that wins elections.
All of the usual distortions were part of the rallies:
1. Misrepresentation of facts (it is not a “mosque,” but a cultural center; it is not “at” Ground Zero but several blocks away, in an area currently shared with pizza parlors and porn shops).
2. The invocation of closed-minded absolutist religious views—the certainty that their version of Christianity is correct, as well as their distorted views of Islam.
3. Their explicit desire to break down one of America’s greatest political historic achievements—religious tolerance (this is an achievement that always needs protecting—among many, many examples, Georgetown University was formed because Catholics were not admitted to Harvard and Yale.)
These 9/11 rallies add hate to fear: hate towards Muslims or those who support their exercise of constitutional rights, and fear evoked by the 9/11 terror.
These spectacles are a part of a larger ideological assault. Recently, Glenn Beck held a religious festival at the Lincoln Memorial to simultaneously take over the memory of both Abraham Lincoln (who recommended behaving “with malice towards none, with charity for all”) and Martin Luther King, Jr. (who supported national health care, massive reductions in military spending, and redistribution of income to the poor). Beck held off on his usual invective for that one day, but returned to form the next day, presenting his own distorted interpretation of Obama’s religious and political beliefs, and then claiming “It’s a perversion of the gospel of Jesus Christ as most Christians know it.”
As I watched this theater of fear and hate; I remembered a day when I felt deeply patriotic. In August 2009, after Senator Edward Kennedy died, his coffin was flown from Boston to Washington for burial at Arlington Cemetery. The funeral cortege stopped on the way, at the U.S. Capitol, where the public and hundreds and hundreds of former Kennedy staffers had gathered on the steps of the East Front to pay their respects.
It was broiling hot that day in D.C., and the funeral procession was very late in arriving; you could see people affected by their sweat and fatigue. Surprisingly, you could hear coming from the staffer crowd a muffled, then loud and clear “God Bless America” and “America the Beautiful.” I confirmed from my friend who was there that the song just started somewhere among the group, and within a few lines, everyone was singing. My friend felt good singing, moved by the powerful emotions, but later angry that Senator Kennedy’s patriotism—as well as that of liberals and progressives—was, and are still, attacked by conservatives. “I’m sick of these right-wingers lecturing me on how to be patriotic,” he fumed.
So on this day after 9/11, memorialize the people who died on 9/11 —Christians, Muslims, Jews, atheists, and others. And work hard to defend a tolerant and diverse America: a core value at the beginning. George Washington memorably described it in a letter to a Jewish congregation in Newport, Rhode Island, envisioning an America where “every one shall sit under his own vine and fig tree, and there shall be none to make him afraid.”
Washington’s words challenge the hate and division on view yesterday and throughout the campaigning: “For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection, should demean themselves as good citizens.”
35 Responses to On Manufacturing Hate: Remembering 9/11
livefreeordie2 - September 12, 2010 at 11:12 pm
First, let me just say that on the day Kennedy was buried, I, too, felt sadness. . . sadness at the realization that the pathetic coward who left Mary Joe Kopechne to die in Poucha Pond would never be brought to justice. If I believed in such things, I’d hope that he is rotting in hell. Now. Who is it that is manufacturing hate? What religion breeds hate in this country and around the world? So Media Matters has a list of hateful quotes. How’s this, Theresa? I can come up with a list of hateful, murderous acts committed by Muslims in the name of Allah. But rather take up a lot of space, let me refer you and CHE readers to an informative web site – http://www.thereligionofpeace.com I like their Ramadan 2010 Scorecard. According to their count, there were 226 Islamic terror attacks resulting in the deaths of over a thousand people. And that’s just during the 30 days of Ramadan. And while I realize that Muslims have been able to rack up a very impressive death toll overseas, let’s not forget those who died in the Fort Hood Massacre. And how much greater would the death toll have been in the US had that Muslim idiot succeeded in detonating his vehicle filled with explosives in Times Square. This isn’t about freedom of religion. No one cares how Muslims worship – it’s not a big deal. What is a big deal is the desire of many Muslims to impose a despotic and corrupt political and judicial system on the rest of the world – including the US. And since they’ve demonstrated over and over, nearly every day, that they are willing to use terror and violence to impose their will on anyone who opposes them, it’s not hate that you are hearing from so many Americans. . .it’s common sense. You may not think they are the enemy, but Muslims think that about you. . .and me. You say it’s not a Mosque, rather, it’s a cultural center. Sorry, that’s worse. They would impose a backwards, 7th century theocracy on the world and it’s time to take a stand against such nonsense. That building near Ground Zero, that building close enough that the landing gear from one of the airplanes went through the roof, that building is a good place to start.
megginson - September 13, 2010 at 7:35 am
It was particularly interesting to read livefreeordie2′s comments right after returning from Washington, DC where I visited the Renwyck gallery and saw their current exhibit on artwork done by Japanese-Americans who were held in U.S. internment camps during World War II. I certainly know of and share a disgust for the atrocities committed by the Japanese military during that war, and my father fought against them in south and southeast Asia. But abstracting the well-justified anger about the sneak attack by a nation on Pearl Harbor and undeserved assault on America into a stereotyping hatred of an entire people was not one of the bright and shining moments of our country, and as a nation we eventually ended up having to apologize for it. Incidentally, when the friends and neighbors of the internees objected, the standard response from others tended to be, “You may not think they are the enemy, but be assured that they think that about you…and me.” Let’s not go down that road again.
punkassninja - September 13, 2010 at 9:02 am
Live Free or Die just doesn’t get it. America is not about hate, but his comments drip with it. You are EXACTLY who Ms. Ghilarducci is discussing so please realize that she doesn’t agree with your invective and you are not going to convince her spouting more of it. And as to your “impressive” list of sources about Muslim hate, I can say the same about any religion. All religions have their small minorities of zealots who pervert the message of their faith. The Crusades, anyone? As a CC professor, it is sad to see people being enthusiastically ignorant out of fear and I see it daily in my classrooms. Education is the only way to illuminate and free people from this Pavlovian response to anything “other”, but most are not willing to take that first step toward understanding.
livefreeordie2 - September 13, 2010 at 10:08 am
megginson #2 – Despite the left’s constant refrain that anyone opposed to the mosque is a racist, this has nothing to do with race and everything to do with ideology. Not religious faith – ideology. The Japanese were rounded up by Democrat President and left wing hero Franklin D. Roosevelt precisely because of their race (Democrats have a long history of racism). This is about confronting an ideology that leaves innocent dead in its wake on a daily basis. No one, certainly not I, is suggesting rounding up and incarcerating American citizens who practice the Islamic faith – that’s something only a liberal would do. That said, I will not support a group of people whose main goal is to destroy western civilization, demean women, and replace millennia of human rights advances with a theocracy. punkassninja #3. You can certainly say that about all religions, but let’s try to keep the discussion somewhere in the last 250 years. For you to suggest that we turn a blind eye to the threat posed by Islamic fundamentalists (and the silent submission of Islamic “moderates”) is foolish. A small number of zealots? Do you not read the news? An idiot preacher in Florida threatens to burn the Koran and tens of thousands protest resulting in injuries and deaths. What’s wrong with that picture? A cartoonist mocks a religion and tens of thousands protest resulting in injuries and deaths. What’s wrong with that picture? Thanks for asking. . . I’ll tell you!Free people should not be intimidated by mobs. In this country, we put religious symbols in bottles of urine and call it art. Yet we already see a trend towards appeasing these theocratic thugs. The Secretary of Defense, for cryin’ out loud, called this preacher and asked him not to do it – out of fear. That’s right, fear of the response of people who think it’s okay to deprive women of education and, essentially, an identity. People who think it’s okay to imprison those who don’t believe in the same religion they do. People who think that those who believe differently must be destroyed. We should give up our right to free expression – and like it or not, that’s what burning the Koran is all about – because of an Islamic mob? Would you so quickly give up your right to burn the American flag? You want all of us to cower in fear? No thanks. This has nothing to do with race – it has to do with not appeasing an ideology, the goal of which is to destroy our way of life. You say, well, not all Muslims believe that way. Great! Let me hear it from them! Where are the rallies of American Muslims demonstrating their disgust? Where are the voices of Muslim moderates demanding that this nonsense stop! Sorry. . . when I listen for the voices of Muslims opposed to world-wide theocratic domination, all I hear for the most part is crickets. You are going to “illuminate and free people?” Good luck. Those you defend would darken the world and free all of us from the human rights in which I still believe. Fear of anything “other?” When the “other” has a body-count as high as Islam, it isn’t fear that drives the response, it’s the desire to defend freedom and human rights.
stinkcat - September 13, 2010 at 10:10 am
I once saw a bumper sticker that said: “Ted Kennedy has killed more people with his car than I have with my assault rifle.” I think it is a fitting rememberance of Teddy.
11121641 - September 13, 2010 at 10:58 am
Welcome to AD 1009. When is the next Crusade shipping out to rescue the Holy Land from the Infidels?
macheath - September 13, 2010 at 2:06 pm
livefree posts the following screed:”First, let me just say that on the day Kennedy was buried, I, too, felt sadness. . . sadness at the realization that the pathetic coward who left Mary Joe Kopechne to die in Poucha Pond would never be brought to justice. If I believed in such things, I’d hope that he is rotting in hell. Now. Who is it that is manufacturing hate?…”You are. See your post quoted here.
princeton67 - September 13, 2010 at 2:29 pm
In response to the first comment: the fanatics of any religion are defined by their heinous acts. “livefreeordie2″ cites Muslims.Ok, let’s pick Catholic, and apply livefree’s own condemnations.1. “a list of hateful…. acts committed by Muslims”. And the thousands of children raped, brutalized, and tortured by the Catholic Clergy, protected by their Church? 2. “Let’s not forget those who died in the Fort Hood Massacre.” Let’s see: 13 died at Food Hood. And the 168 who died in the Oklahoma City Bombing, by Timothy McVeigh, a Catholic? Let’s not forget them either.3. “..impose a backwards 7th century theocracy on the world…”. How about a 1st century also all-male theocracy?So: do we insure sure there’s no Ground Zero Church?No: Because every religion has human members, every religion has its share of evildoers.
optimysticynic - September 13, 2010 at 4:08 pm
While I very much doubt that Washington ever suggest we “demean” ourselves (final sentence of original article), I think we do exactly that by letting fear overtake reason. The deeply fearful probably need comfort and reassurance, addressing their emotional state, more than they do information and historical lessons (requiring a calm and open mind to assimilate.)
droslovinia - September 13, 2010 at 4:30 pm
Folks, you’re wasting your time. People like “live free” and “stinkcat” already know the “Truth” and don’t want you challenging them by actually thinking or challenging the lies that they tell themselves on a daily basis. When you’ve decided to dehumanize imaginary “liberals” and Muslims, you can say whatever you want about them and feel totally justified in your own eyes. At the end of the day, when we’ve allowed people to make us so afraid that we are no longer able to reason, we see more, rather than fewer, people who have to adopt such a defensive attitude, if only for their own emotional survival. Don’t argue with such people. Stand your ground, lest you become like them, and weep for the loss of civility and kindness that would cause someone to hate so much that they would rejoice at the thought of someone’s passing.
stinkcat - September 13, 2010 at 4:33 pm
“People like “live free” and “stinkcat” already know the “Truth” and don’t want you challenging them by actually thinking or challenging the lies that they tell themselves on a daily basis”Ok, tell me, what is the truth that you think I am missing? Did Ted Kennedy not kill someone with his car? Is that what you are trying to suggest? Is this an issue that is still up for debate? I said nothing about Muslims or liberals.
_perplexed_ - September 13, 2010 at 5:26 pm
Re #9: Washington did use the word “demean” (in the sense of “demeanor”) as he was exhorting us to conduct ourselves as good citizens. We might all follow the link, read the full letter, and ask ourselves whether Washington would be proud of our stance on this issue.
johnbrangenberg - September 13, 2010 at 8:18 pm
George Washington’s quote is actually a quote from the Bible found in the book of the Eighth-Century Prophet Micah in Chapter 4 verse 4.
jcisneros - September 14, 2010 at 9:31 am
de mortuis nil nisi bonum. (of the dead speak only good)Never speak ill of the dead, they can no longer hurt anyone and cannot defend themselves…Of course, kicking dead people in the chops is a sport these days.JC
trendisnotdestiny - September 14, 2010 at 9:35 am
While I appreciate the article here and very many of Dr. Ghilarducci’s thoughts. However, it is important not to get too distracted by any one event. When we put together 9/11 with that of other economic, global-cultural and historial pieces, we are able to see exactly what the powers-that-be wanted to create.It makes sense. A world that has reached ‘peak’ resource extraction is ripe for volatility (war, oppression, market based solutions, gutted and corrupt governments). Looking at this list below, it is not hard to imagine that the owners of resources will be calling the shots…. Their lackeys who buy into You’re On Your Own ideology get positions in this society to maintain and administer their wealth while everyone else’s bottom lines erodes away like a foreclosed home, a toxic drilling site or an african country raided for its minerals. 9/11 is a story that helps foment this downspiral. And you have morons like livefree who believe in the created myths and propaganda narratives megaphoned by anti-intellectual profiteers…. Maybe we should concentrate on the bigger picture of how colonization and globalization have led to leaders in every country emulating US economic policies that we all know fail to succeed for workers, but benefit themselves. Maybe we should be talking about how many bases we have overseas to protect our financial interests? Maybe we should be talking about how violent our society has become? Maybe we should be talking about doing something about it.I found this on the Progressive Review: Domestic Critique http://prorev.com/indicators.htmTHINGS THAT HAVE GOTTEN WORSE Record Levels:1) % of homeowners behind on their mortgage (sets record)2) % of Americans on food stamps3) Housing Starts4) Trust in Government (I would add industry here — PPP)5) Average TemperatureWORSE SINCE THE 1990′s1) Consumer Credit debt2) Child Poverty Levels3) Marijuana Arrests4) Summer Employment for Teens5) Small Businesses that Provide Health Plans6) Childhood Morbidity(Global Rank)7) US share of the world’s tourist marketWORSE SINCE THE 1980′s1) Personal Bankruptcies2) Unemployment3) Numbers in Prison4) Middle Class debt (house, healthcare, college)5) Time children spend playing6) Increase in the wealth of the 10 richest senators7) Number of workers with defined benefit plans8) Number of Black owned TV stations9) Media Control (A few Monopolies/Oligopolies)10) Income of America’s wealthiest to the average11) Housing Foreclosures12) Foreign Debt13) Number of Failed or Problem Banks14) Student Loan Debt15) Per Capita spending on prisons, schools, and infrastructure16) % of people put in prison on drug charges17) Number of friends (reported as a survey)18) Police SWAT deployments19) # of Americans attending cultural or art eventsWORSE SINCE THE 70′s1) Real Income of Americans2) Top 1% of share of all income3) Ratio of CEO’s pay to that of an average worker4) Mortgage Delinquency %5) Number of Public Hospitals Down6) Infection rates in hospitals7) % with no health insuranceWORSE SINCE THE 60′s1) Childhood Obesity2) Births to Unwed Mothers3) Decline in Teachers who eat lunch with their students4) Delince in the number of public elementary schools
mavprof - September 14, 2010 at 10:05 am
The Beck rally a “theater of fear and hate”? Really, Ms Ghilarducci, what p-p-precious partisan-pitched rubbish, “Media Matters” included.
livefreeordie2 - September 14, 2010 at 10:39 am
princeton67 #8 – I’m not sure I get your point. Are you suggesting that I would excuse Catholics who commit crimes while focusing on Muslims? If so, you couldn’t be more wrong. No. Wait. I get it! It’s okay for Muslims to carry out a daily, world-wide terror campaign because Catholic priests molested children and McVeigh blew up the Federal building for reasons not related to his religion! Sure! That’s a great idea! Look. I remember the morons who wouldn’t vote for JFK because they feared he would take orders from the Pope. But the Pope never presided over a flock, some of whom attempted or carried out atrocities in the US and the majority of whom then celebrated those atrocities. And for you to compare the celibacy of Catholic priests to the Islamic desire to create a world-wide Caliphate and impose Sharia Law is, quite frankly, ridiculous.droslovinia #10 – Your comment defines the problem. You say we don’t wish to be challenged, yet you have made no effort to challenge anything I’ve written. And in fact, you suggest that I rejoiced at Kennedy’s passing which is patently false. I would have loved to see him live to 110, spending most or all of it in prison. And you and macheath might call that “hate” (and it’s about the funniest stretch I’ve ever seen a liberal make, btw), but I’ll bet Mary Jo Kopechne’s parents, relatives, and friends wouldn’t think so.Let me be real clear. This is the United States of America. We believe in freedom of religion – that includes Muslims worshiping at the mosque of their choice. I would stand shoulder to shoulder with anyone of the Islamic faith opposing attempts at the violent imposition political and judicial (as opposed to religious) systems of Islam, just as I would stand shoulder to shoulder with any religious person in opposing world political and judicial domination by Catholics, Baptists, Hindus, or any other religious group. But anyone who wants to deprive me or my friends and family of those freedoms is my enemy. And anyone who will not take a public stand against those who deprive women of dignity and independence, wish to impose their religion on others, and are willing to use terror and violence to achieve their ends, is certainly no friend of mine. I don’t get it. The threat to human rights, to freedom of speech and religion, as well as to individual liberty, is on display in almost every country where Islam dominates. Would you want to live in Iran? Or Saudi Arabia? How about it, ladies? Liberals are supposed to be great sentinels of human rights and unfettered freedoms – precisely the opposite of Islamic doctrine. Are you folks suffering from Hate Bush Syndrome gone nuts? Do you just hate the USA and it’s a case of the enemy of my enemy is my friend? Which one of you would look Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani in the eye and tell her that those who oppose not the religion, but the Islamic secular systems that would have her stoned to death are “manufacturing hate?” Martin Niemoeller has been dead for more than 25 years, but in his grave he must be wondering why so many people learned nothing from the experience of dealing with the Nazis. . .
luther_blissett - September 14, 2010 at 11:31 am
The main problem with livefree’s initial comment is its tu quoque logic: the anti-American hate expressed by the anti-Park51 crowd is far better than the hate expressed by Islamic fundamentalists.But that’s a pointless piece of moral equivalency. First, we expect Americans to play by American rules, which means not opposing the free expression of religion. We don’t expect non-Americans to play by American rules, as much as we might like them to or believe they’d be better off if they did. Second, there’s little evidence that the Park51 group wants to turn America into an Islamic theocracy. So justifying the anti-Park51 protests as protests against radical Islam falls prey to a ridiculous red herring fallacy. It’s like, say, opposing an anti-immigration rally by calling them Nazis or opposing a labor rally by calling them Commies. So, livefree: no one here is defending radical Islamic attempts to impose Sharia law, so stop criticizing them. You’re simply off topic and using a red herring to distract from the real conversation started by the initial blog post. If you have good evidence that the Park51 group seeks to impose Sharia on NYC, then present it in a logical fashion. If not, zip it.
livefreeordie2 - September 15, 2010 at 8:04 am
luther_bissett #18 – First, I don’t concede that those who oppose the location of the Islamic cultural center are spewing hate. That is the tired canard you and others on the left use whenever someone disagrees with you. Why? Because you are factually wrong and have nothing else to say. The Tea Party? Hate. The Republicans? Hate. Anyone opposing Obamacare? Hate. So, the minute you resort to that as your argument, you’ve already lost any debate. That said. . . If it was hate, your right that there’s no moral equivalency. Why? It’s a hell of a lot less deadly since the “hate” from the anti-mosque crowd has a body count of zero and the Islamic faith is somewhere in the thousands, if not tens of thousands in just the last 10 years. And I really got a chuckle out of your accusation that I’m off topic. Why’s that, Luther? Because I’m right? The blog entry accused a group of people of hate and it’s off topic to defend them and point out that it is, in fact, hate that they oppose?And the folks on the Cordoba project, they don’t believe in Islamic doctrine? And if so, why would it be incumbent on me to prove that they don’t support their own doctrine? Wouldn’t it be their job to convince me? Here’s the problem, Luther. . . if it was a Nazi group proposing to build a shrine to Hitler next to the holocaust museum, you’d scream bloody, blue murder! If they said, oh no! We reject anti-Semitism and the murder of millions, we’re just celebrating the fact that he made the trains run on time, would you take it at face value? Something tells me you’d be protesting your brains out and to hell with any rights they might legally have. . . I know, other than the fact that the Nazis would purify race by killing all non-Aryans and the Muslims would purify religion by killing all infidels, there’s absolutely no comparison, it’s a red herring, and completely off topic. BTW, feel free to respond or not. Your choice. I’m not so insecure in my beliefs that I have to try to win the day by telling others to “zip it.”
pianiste - September 15, 2010 at 8:31 am
test
pianiste - September 15, 2010 at 8:34 am
In a response of almost 400 words, Livefreeordie2 did not offer any evidence at all that the Park51 group seeks to impose Sharia law on New York City. Luther Blissett’s point would seem to stand.
luther_blissett - September 15, 2010 at 9:24 am
Again, livefree, you’re off topic. I’m not talking about Republicans or the Tea Party. I’m talking about a group of anti-Park51 protesters who are filled with anti-Muslim hate. Even if they hate all Muslims because they hate Sharia law, they are still spewing hate (in part because not all Muslims like Sharia law, in part because there’s still no evidence that the Park51 project is about Sharia law).Defending a hate group by saying they oppose hate is a tu quoque fallacy. If the Klan attacked some hate-filled black nationalists, we can’t justify the Klan. Finally, there’s no such thing as “Islamic doctrine,” any more than, on the ground, there’s Catholic doctrine or Protestant or Jewish doctrine. Every group of believers believes differently. I work with nuns who don’t seem to care about abortion policies or the Church’s stance on homosexuality. They don’t think those are the central issues facing humanity, even if the Church takes a strong stance on them.
livefreeordie2 - September 15, 2010 at 10:25 am
luther_blissett #22 – And what group would that be, Luther? Are you saying that anyone who opposes the Cordoba project is, ipso facto, filled with anti-Muslim hate? There were thousands of people protesting. Are they all members of this “hate group?” How about the 9/11 survivor families that oppose it? Are they members of the hate group? Over 70% of Americans oppose the project. Are they members as well? Who, exactly, is in this “hate group” you are talking about? And once we’ve established membership, what evidence do you have that they are “filled with anti-Muslim hate?” If they are offended by the location of the Cordoba project, is that “hate?” If you strongly support all the other mosques in New York or even the whole US, but disapprove of just this project, are you “filled with anti-Muslim hate?” And for that matter, reference my earlier comment, just exactly what do you consider “hate?” Because from where I and tens of millions of other Americans sit, “hate” is pretty much defined as disagreeing with anything a liberal believes, no matter how fanciful.
mavprof - September 15, 2010 at 11:20 am
I suppose luther blisset can claim livefreeordie2 is “off topic” if the “topic” of this thread is merely to repeat slanders against any and all those opposed to the “Cordoba House” (now renamed the “Park51″) project as hate-filled bigots. This baseless charge would include a number of American Muslims like Dr Zuhdi Jasser of the American Muslim Forum for Democracy, who clears the fog about the project: “Make no mistake, this Islamic center is not a spiritual statement but a global political one in the name of Islam.”
goxewu - September 15, 2010 at 11:54 am
* Dr. Zuhdi Jasser has a nicely Muslim-sounding name, and the American Muslim Forum for Democracy sounds, well, American and democratic. But a little more about him and his organization would be welcome. (Is it the American Muslim political equivalent of Jews for Jesus? Does it represent a significant number of American Muslims? From what I can gather from its rather vague website, it rather uncritically supports American military interventions and “American interests throughout the world.”)* “Make no mistake, this Islamic center is not a spiritual statement but a global political one in the name of Islam” doesn’t do anything in the way of “clear[ing] the fog.” It’s simply another editorial assertion with, at least as far as #24 is concerned, no accompanying evidence.* Other anti-mosque commenters on this and other threads contend–sometimes literally and sometimes by innuendo–that Islam is ipso facto an enemy of the United States and that, following this premise, there can be no such thing as a devout Muslim who is not, at bottom, an enemy of the United States. How does Dr. Zuhdi Jasser’s contention that he is both a devout Muslim and a patriotic American sit with these commenters?* Once one accepts the idea that Dr. Zuhdi Jasser can be both a devout Muslim and a patriotic American, one accepts the idea that there is a range of Muslims from “moderate” to “fanatic” and that the “moderate” ones can be trusted not to be seeking to impose Sharia law on New York City and America as a whole. And once one accepts that premise, then it becomes incumbent on the likes of mavprof to give some specific evidence other than summary quotes from Dr. Jasser that the particular Muslims working for the construction of the mosque in downtown Manhattan are not sufficiently of the “moderate” variety.
_perplexed_ - September 15, 2010 at 11:57 am
“Because from where I and tens of millions of other Americans sit, “hate” is pretty much defined as disagreeing with anything a liberal believes, no matter how fanciful.”– And so, of course, these tens of millions of Americans are beyond all hate. They are conservatives, and god smiles on them and them alone.
mavprof - September 15, 2010 at 2:24 pm
goxewu is quite disingenous about the vagueness of Dr Jasser’s site. It includes essays, interviews, televised exchanges, and even a speech he delivered in Oslo in setting forth the AIFD’s mission. One also easily finds “8 Questions with Zuhdi Jasser of the AIFD,” which discusses the founding and aims of his organization. His short remarks on Imam Rauf (“Questions for Imam Rauf from an American Muslim” WSJ 9/10/2010) are also worth reading. A number of other Muslim voices against the Park51 project include Raza Aslan and Tarek Fatah of the Canadian Muslim Congress, Stephen Schwartz of the Center for Islamic Pluralism, Abdur-Rahman Muhammad, to name a few.
goxewu - September 15, 2010 at 3:29 pm
Lots of stuff on a website doesn’t make it not vague as to its membership and purpose. Readers of this thread can go to http://www.aifdemocracy.org and judge for themselves.mavprof has nothing to say about the AIFD’s members and purpose, either. Nor did he/she answer any questions about the contradiction between the no-such-thing-as-a-moderate-Muslim tack of many (and some on this thread) who are against the building of the mosque, and the AIFD and Dr. Jasser. Nor did mavprof supply any evidentiary elaboration of Dr. Jasser’s assertion, “Make no mistake, this Islamic center is not a spiritual statement but a global political one in the name of Islam.” In my experience, “Make no mistake…,” “Let me be perfectly clear about that…,” etc. are simply rhetoric.One of the more common tropes of American politics is the “Democrats for McCain” or “Republicans for Obama” gambit. One can always find more than one Democrat for McCain and more than one Republican for Obama. It would, therefore, be illuminating to know more about Dr. Jasser and his organization. And if we’re going to play “follow the money” with the mosque’s supporters, let’s do it with such as the AIFD, too. Since mavprof brought Dr. Jasser and AIFD into the discussion as somehow authoritative, perhaps he/she could shine some light.
livefreeordie2 - September 15, 2010 at 4:09 pm
_perplexed_ #26 – Not at all… For instance, I’m conservative, and yet I’m not beyond hating morons who intentionally misrepresent other people’s words AND I doubt that there is a God who can smile on anyone. So… you’re wrong. goxewu #28 – How odd. . . you are expressing far more interest in the background of this Dr. Jasser than anyone supporting the project on this site has ever expressed regarding the background of Imam Rauf…
goxewu - September 15, 2010 at 5:09 pm
Here are, BTW, the questions in, and core paragraph of, Dr. Jasser’s piece, “Questions for Imam Rauf from an American Muslim,” in the September 10, 2010, issue of The Wall Street Journal.The questions are: “Where is your sense of fairness and common decency?” “For what do you stand–what’s best for Americans overall or what you think is best for Islam?” “What have you said and argued to Muslim-majority nations to address their need for reform?” “How will it in any way aid counterterrorism efforts or keep one American any safer?”The first question is classic have-you-stopped-beating-your-wife, and might as well be the declarative sentence, “You have no sense of fairness or decency.” The second question is a version of HYSBYW and echoes what (as I remember) at least a few million Americans asking about JFK during the 1960 Presidential campaign: “For what do he stand–what’s best for Americans overall or what he thinks is best for Catholicism?” (As you may know, all American Catholics take orders directly from the Vatican, have to confess even state secrets to their priests and cannot, therefore, reliably serve in elective office.) For fun, you might try asking a similar question to your Christian friends of whatever denomination: “For what do you stand–what’s best for Americans overall, or what you think is best for Christianity?” If they answer “best for Americans overall,” you’ll know that Christianity isn’t their deepest belief; if they answer “Christianity” or “they’re the same,” you’ll know you’re dealing with a theocrat. You also might ask some Catholics wanting to build a church what they’ve said and argued to reform rampant priestly sexual abuse in Ireland or Beligum and expect an answer satisfactory to you before they’re allowed to go ahead. And if you ask practically any religious group wanting to build a church, synagogue, tempole or mosque what it’ll do to help counterterrorism or keep one American safe, they’ll probably have to answer, “Not much–we’re not against counterterroism or keeping Americans safe, but that’s not what this place is really for.”To be sure, radical Islam is a greater blight upon the nations of the earth than is the Catholic church. But, as luther_blissett pointed out, these are American Muslims who should be able to expect to play by American rules, i.e., not have to prove themselves innocent–as members of other religions in America do not–before they build a religious center. They should not have to answer for the sins of Muslims elsewhere in the world before they can proceed in their own country.The core paragraph is this: “Imam Rauf may not appear to the untrained eye to be an Islamist, but by making Ground Zero an Islamic rather than an American issue and by failing to firmly condemn terrorist groups like Hamas, he shows his true allegiance.”"Untrained eye” is clever; it implies that the opponents of the mosque (Dr. Jasser in particular) are “trained” whereas the supporters of the mosque are credulously untrained in spotting an untrustworthy Muslims on sight. Imam Rauf has not made Ground Zero an Islamic issue. First, the mosque is not Ground Zero, nor is it on Ground Zero. Second, it’s the opponents of the mosque who’ve made it an “Islamic issue” by saying, in effect, “You shouldn’t be able to build the mosque because it’s Islamic, period.” (Saying, “It’s not just because it’s Islamic, it’s because it would be ‘insensitive,” only prompts the follow question, “Why would it be ‘insensitive’?” and the answer is again, of course, because “it’s Islamic, period.”) And I can think of no issue more American than trying to practice one’s Constitutionally protected religion by building a building for the purpose where–given adherence to the zoning, health, construction, etc., regulations other insitutions must follow–one wants. The demand that Imam Rauf condemn Hamas, i.e., have an approved foreign policy, before he can build his mosque is like requiring a Rabbi leading the building of a synagogue to condemn the Iraeli occupation of the territories before he can proceed. “…shows his true allegiance” is especially sneaky. Dr. Jasser leaves “to [what]” dangling, but the implication–with absolutely no evidence whatsoever–is that Imam Rauf’s “true allegiance” is to Islamist terrorism.If American Muslims–all six million of them, in the opinion of a couple of commenters–are automatically guilty of being anti-American unless they proactively prove themselves innocent, then it follows that American Muslims enjoy fewer rights (including the right to build mosques with the same freedom that other religions build churches, synagogues and temples) than other Americans. And if they enjoy fewer rights, those who are simply Muslims who fail to condemn what others want them to condemn, might reasonably be expected to have, say, restricted driver’s licenses, special vulnerability to stop-and-frisk simply for wearing skullcaps or headscarves, guarded enclaves in which they must live, and perhaps a special curfew and restrictions on gathering on streetcorners. Perhaps Manzanar can be retro-fitted for some new occupants.
goxewu - September 15, 2010 at 5:10 pm
Lots of typos. Long post. Sorry.
mavprof - September 15, 2010 at 6:37 pm
testing
mavprof - September 15, 2010 at 8:27 pm
Tried to get a few posts through in the above comments section, but no go today. Oh well, another time perhaps. I’ll try once more below.
12052592 - September 16, 2010 at 3:42 pm
What if Israel was an enemy of the U.S.? Would it be justified to question the loyalty of U.S. Jews? After all, their theology specifically says their loyalty to Israel must always be first.
dank48 - September 16, 2010 at 5:10 pm
For what it’s worth, while it seems to me the First Amendment means they can build their unwanted, unwelcome, cosmically insensitive building, a lot of people would benefit from a reading of Max Frisch’s play “Biedermann und die Brandstifter” (“The Firebugs”). Hey, you rent your attic to a couple fellows, so they have the right to furnish it as they like, right? So what if they seem to be filling it with cans of gasoline and stacks of firewood? Is that your business? After all, the law is on their side. . . .