University of Colorado—Boulder law Professor Paul Campos wrote another interesting and provocative opinion piece a few days ago. He begins by pointing out the creepy obsession that many right-wingers still have with the attacks of 11 Sept 2001:
When Stu Bykofsky, a columnist for The Philadelphia Daily News, wrote a column last week in which he openly hoped that America suffers “another 9/11,” he merely had the poor judgment to say what many a right-wing politician and pundit is thinking.
Evidence for this is everywhere: in the fact that Bykofsky was invited to appear on the GOP’s unofficial network, Fox News, to “explain” his comments; in the keen disappointment that ripples throughout the right-wing blogosphere every time the collapse of a bridge or a steam pipe explosion turns out not to have been the work of Scary Brown People Who Hate Our Freedoms; and in predictions such as that made by former Sen. Rick Santorum, that the GOP’s electoral fortunes will improve as soon as there’s another terrorist attack.
Indeed, at this point one can practically see these people wringing their hands in frustration at the apparent inability of “the terrorists” to kill a few Americans somewhere (preferably in a solidly red state, although New York or California would do in a pinch), so as to once again give war a chance.
On a local scale, we saw this same right-wing virtual adrenaline rush with salivation a little over a year ago when an American of Pakistani descent, Naveed Afzal Haq, forced his way into the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle and killed one woman and wounded five others.
Matt Rosenberg was quick to label the act one of “terrorism.” He suggested this might be the outcome of…
growing advocacy of “individual terrorism” by jihadist opinion leaders….
Whether he drew inspiration from online jihadist preachers is of interest, but not necessarily crucial to the definition of individual terrorism.
This definition of “individual terrorism” is a right-wing substitute for the left-wing term “hate crime.” But right-wingers feel they get more political mileage out of it by including the term “terrorism.” Why? Because it brings back fond memories of an immediate post-9-11 period when Americans came together and didn’t ask critical questions of their political leaders. George Bush’s approval took a 35% point jump upward to 85%. Congress handed Bush almost everything he wanted, and Americans, in their collective post-9-11 foggy daze, offered no dissent.
The Haq incident initially offered right-wingers an opportunity to sell “give war a chance,” re-establish a fear of brown-skin peoples who practice that funny religion, and renew their offer to protect Americans in exchange for political power (and a few civil rights here and there).
The truth about Haq was a little more complex. The day after the shooting, it was revealed that Haq had recently converted to Christianity, going so far as to being baptized. Furthermore, Haq’s serious mental illness problems were revealed. (I couldn’t resist rewriting the hyperbolic “Islamic terrorist” script into an equally outrageous “Christian terrorist” satire.)
As an aside, the Haq incident resurfaced in the news this week, when Patrick Syring, a 20-year career Foreign Service officer was indicted for harassing and threatening employees of the Arab American Institute with phone messages and emails. Page 4 of the indictment attributes this email to Syring:
From: Pat1425@yahoo.com
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006, 12:13 AM
To: James Zogby Helen Samhan, Nidal Ibrahim, Valerie Smith, Rebecca Abou-Chedid
Subject: AAI murders in Seattle on July 28I condemn James Zogby and the AAI for perpetuating the murder and shootings at the Jewish Federation in Seattle on Friday July 28 (as well as the killings in Israel).
You wicked evil Hezbollah-supporting Arabs should burn in the fires of hell for eternity and beyond. The United States would be safer without you.
God Bless the State of Israel
God Bless America,Sincerely,
Patrick in Arlington, VA.
Of course, the Arab American Institute had nothing whatsoever to do with the shooting. Haq isn’t an Arab. In fact, his family isn’t even from the Middle East. And Haq had renounced Islam in his conversion to Christianity. But I digress.
Campos ends his piece with the controversial point that…
[9-11] didn’t “change everything,” and it didn’t (and doesn’t) justify the Iraq war, indiscriminate spying on Americans, extrajudicial renditions, torture, or any of the other immoral actions that continue to be done in its name.
It’s high time to stop wallowing in our obsession with what is becoming the most overblown and shamelessly exploited event in American history.
I am afraid it will be a long time before the political right can relinquish the “promise of terrorism” for achieving their political aims. But while we’re waiting, can we at least get over this nonsensical fear of carrying liquids onto planes?
Darryl
If I may make joke, “Only a Christian could believe a little water would make a profound change.” I know you are well read and realize that Haq’s baptism did not mean he was no longer a Muslim. He was obviously a confused person, but he had spent most of his life as a Muslim.
As for Mr. Syring, I think you are using him as a demon to support your argument, JUST as others might use Mr, Haq to make their points, It is no better to pretend there is NO problem than it is to overplay it.
I think you make a very important point that we have had remarkably little problem in the US. We all deserve credit for that. There is even a jont Jewish-Muslim cmap going on this weekend as we speak, lets applaud the kids for participating! Two weeks ago at the Arab festival, a Palestinian group was selling olive oil made by a joint Israeli-Palestinian venture!
STILL, there are real issues and the education that led Haq to his atrocity is a very real concern.
“Of course, the Arab American Institute had nothing whatsoever to do with the shooting. Haq isn’t an Arab. In fact, his family isn’t even from the Middle East. And Haq had renounced Islam in his conversion to Christianity.”
C’mon Darryl, you know darn well that wingnuts never let FACTS get in the way of bigotry and hate spew.
George W. Bush is what government of rednecks, by rednecks, and for rednecks looks like. Never again.
“I think you make a very important point that we have had remarkably little problem in the US. We all deserve credit for that.”
You mean historically, or now? We’ve had plenty of problems with how we treated Indians, Chinese, Japanese-Americans, and African-Americans, not excluding lynchings.
And, what do you mean “we” deserve credit for such tolerance as exists in our country? Only some of us deserve that credit … the rest are the problem.
@1 James Byrd, for one …
SeattleJew,
“If I may make joke, “Only a Christian could believe a little water would make a profound change.” I know you are well read and realize that Haq’s baptism did not mean he was no longer a Muslim.”
Yes and no. Obviously, he is still culturally Muslim. But he hadn’t practiced Islam for some 10 years and renounced the religion when he converted to Christianity. Most importantly, his conversion was extremely hurtful to his family and the significance of that should not be downplayed. As far as your “a little water” comment: cute, but not based in reality. Adult baptism in almost all Christian churches comes only after a fairly extensive period of schooling or group study. It is rarely done on a whim.
“As for Mr. Syring, I think you are using him as a demon to support your argument, JUST as others might use Mr, Haq to make their points…”
Then you missed my point entirely. If I had used him just as others used Haq, I would have referred to him as Zionist terrorist or some such thing. Next I would have call for a crackdown on Zionist terrorist cells. I didn’t. I only referred to him as someone under indictment. At worst, he is a criminal and at best he is mentally ill (we’ll let the courts decide which).
“…it is no better to pretend there is NO problem than it is to overplay it.”
I’ve not said that there is no problem. The exaggeration of the threats from terrorism and the political response to it has been far more harmful to America than the threat of terrorism. And unfortunately, the actions of the Bush administration have actually increased risk of terrorism.
“STILL, there are real issues and the education that led Haq to his atrocity is a very real concern.”
Oh?????? And what education was it that led Haq to commit his crime (I mean, besides training as a security guard for Walmart)? Is that the same education that allowed him to write an essay that was awarded a United States Institute of Peace scholarship?
Roger Rabbit says:
George W. Bush is what government of rednecks, by rednecks, and for rednecks looks like. Never again.
When you live in Seattle, its understandable how you may think that way. Not that I’m a fan of Bush, but your pathetic juvinile stereotypes are going to be the end of you. you really should get outside the Seattle city limits more.
On a local scale, we saw this same right-wing virtual adrenaline rush with salivation a little over a year ago when an American of Pakistani descent, Naveed Afzal Haq, forced his way into the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle and killed one woman and wounded five others.
No no no. Haq was a self confessed life long liberal who finally snapped. The left knew this and used the fact of his recent baptism as a cover. He killed not in the name of Christianity, but in extreme liberalism. He even said so after the shooting.
Anybody know what species Rather is?
Rufus @ 8
“Haq was a self confessed life long liberal…”
Wrong.
…who finally snapped.”
Correct.
“The left knew this and used the fact of his recent baptism as a cover.”
Wrong.
“He killed not in the name of Christianity…”
Correct.
“…but in extreme liberalism.”
Wrong.
“He even said so after the shooting.”
Wrong.
Wow! Two correct out of six! The new meds must be working for ya, Ruf.
Let’s not overlook our own homegrown whackjob, GOP legislative candidate Mark Griswold a.k.a. FullContactPolitics,* who posted on Sucky Politics:
“Congratulations Speaker Pelosi, now let the bombs fall where they may. My prediction: terror attack on domestic soil passenger aircraft within the next six months. Casualties in the 2-300 range. AND, UNFORTUNATELY, MAYBE THAT’S JUST WHAT WE NEED. It’s obvious people don’t remember what happened 5 years ago. Posted by FullContactPolitics at November 8, 2006 10:52 AM
http://blog.usefulwork.com/cgi.....ry_id=7430
[Emphasis added]
* ID made by HA Ace Detective Richard Pope
Roger Rabbit Commentary: Wingnuts accuse the liberals on HA of over-the-top comments, but at least we don’t go around wishing for terrorist attacks to kill Americans in hopes of doing better than Mr. Griswold’s miserable 85%-15% ass-whompin’ at the polls! What an unpatriotic fuck. And yes, this is the kind of shit you find in the comments on Stefan’s pathetic little blog.
Have any of these idiots ever had an original thought? The Stu Bykofskys of the world do all of their thinking for them!
@8, 10 At the heart of every wingnut argument lies one or more falsehoods.
I wonder how many of the 15% who voted for that pathetic piece of shit Griswold would rethink their vote if they knew Griswold advocates terrorist attacks against U.S. airliners as a GOP campaign tactic?
I don’t think Frank Chopp has anything to worry about from this guy.
If you wonder why career pols like Frank Chopp stay in office for life, all you have to do is look at who the Goppers run against them.
I almost feel sorry for Luke Esser. It’s gotta be tough to find candidates when you’re WSRP chair. Everyone in his party is fucking nuts.
@9 cockroach
“Haq was a self confessed life long liberal…”
Wrong.
Well in the Seattle Times we have the following quote from Haq close friend:
Haq’s friend said he couldn’t believe the timid, “geeky” man he knew from the tutoring center was capable of such violence.
“Are you sure we’re talking about the same person?” he said Sunday………….
He said Haq was not a devout Muslim and often complained that the Tri-Cities were too politically conservative.
“I’m beginning to think I was his only friend in the Tri-Cities. I don’t recall him hanging out with anybody else.”
The problem with liberal facts is that they are all lies. You can try to rewrite history, but is the end you will be exposed. hehehehe Too easy.
Googling “We need another 9-11”
The Bykovsky abomination–
http://www.philly.com/dailynew....._9_11.html
Also (trying to eliminate obvious sarcasm as when followed by “like a hole in the head”)–
http://www.nwanews.com/adg/News/191942
http://prophecies.us/yabb/YaBB.pl?num=1184121826
Crackpot bloggers–
http://eforum.reviewjournal.co.....hp?t=17469
http://republicanjen.blogspot......peech.html
http://weblogs.chicagotribune......jacke.html
http://www.blogskinny.com/Out.cfm?ID=31237
Also pretty creepy–
http://www.prisonplanet.com/ar.....terror.htm
The Star article discusses a new study which surmises that military invasions since World War 2 that require cooperation of the population of a country to succeed hold only a 17% chance of success.
In a paraphrased quote attributed to Delaney, he concludes that “The key to bolstering Western resolve is another terrorist attack like 9/11 or the London transit bombings of two years ago.”
“If nothing happens, it will be harder still to say this is necessary,” adds Delaney
@4 Rabbit
BY “we” I mean our society. Demonization of elements of that society is a bad thing. When liberals do it to all fundies, that is no bwetter than repricans making similar stuipid remarks.
The amazing thing, so far, about the war on terror is thta there really has been very little “pin the tail” in the Arab. Some has happened, but by and large Muslims function well in the uS. Indeed that may be why we3 are not in the sad states that the Europeans are in.
@6 a little water .
Darryl WADR, as profound an event as a some within the Christian community may see baptism, I think you are naive if your think it is used with great care.
I also understand, from the reports about Mr. Haq, that he was very confused about his religous identity and was not an active Christian. Finally, under Islamic law one cannot renounce Islam,
I really do not want to argue with you about the issues of what Muslims are taught about my people. I have read the Koran and at least two very good commentaries on it. There are real problems there. If you want some night lets get together with a Muslim and discuss passages.
By the way, your post related the conviction of Mr. Syring to the Seattle issue, that is only peripherally true. He was very concerned about other things he had seen while serving in Lebanon. Why do you say he is Jewish? I My understanding is that the State Dept. tries not to use Jews in Arab countries.
It seems to me the real issue here is the one you have rightly pointed to. The fact that there has been little islamofanatacism in the US, is hidden by the promoters of the bUsh agenda. The take folks like Haq and magnify what he did into a far greater issue. It seems to me that you are doing the same for Mr. SDyring. In the spirit that you yourself show, I wouild like to point out the very good interactions Seattle’s Jews and Muslims have taken to avoid exactly the issues you raise.
Anytime you want to meet with an Iman I am sure we can find one on campus!
Rufus @ 18,
A second-hand claim that he thought “the Tri-Cities were too politically conservative” is hardly the same thing as being a “life-long liberal,” you retarded moron! I know conservatives who think the Tri-Cities are too politically conservative!
We know from Haq’s own writing that he (1) was largely apolitical, (2) leaned slightly to the left politically. In other words, like the vast majority of other Americans, he was a slightly left-leaning moderate.
His own words hardly justifies calling him a “life long liberal,” nor does it suggest he was part of any “extreme liberalism.”
(Oh…except in your warped little noggin, of course.)
Man, Rufus, you Wingnuts hear some Right-wing talk radio bullshit and you gobble that shit right up!
@22
Life Long Liberalism Not a Disease, UW Doctors Find
(SJ News Service 18 August)
Dr. Susan DeurF, an assistant Professor of Psychgenetics at the University of Witwaterstand has complete a whole genome linkage study on 3000 white south africans. To her surprise, liberal tendencies were linked to a number of gnetic loci, at least ine fo which has been implicated in the origin of religion in the common human ancestor, some 100,000 years ago.
SeattleJew @ 21
“Darryl WADR, as profound an event as a some within the Christian community may see baptism, I think you are naive if your think it is used with great care.”
No…you are incorrect if you believe that adult baptism is offered whimsically. (But what do I know, I only went through the process and was baptized as a teen, have a grandfather who was a Baptist minister, a mother and stepfather who are both ordained ministers and M.Div.’s.). The only caveat I’ll add is that Haq was Baptized in a non-denominational church, so the specific standards prescribed by particular denominations may not have been applied.
“I also understand, from the reports about Mr. Haq, that he was very confused about his religous identity and was not an active Christian.”
He was baptized in December and, According to the P-I article, he had been “attending weekly men’s spiritual group meetings, only to stop coming a few months after his baptism.” So…he stopped attending his church in about March before the July shooting.
“Finally, under Islamic law one cannot renounce Islam,”
That is completely irrelevant. Whether “legal” in Islam or not, Haq disavowed Islam and converted to Christianity (as reported by a friend of his via the P-I).
“By the way, your post related the conviction of Mr. Syring to the Seattle issue, that is only peripherally true.”
I am not sure what you are trying to say here. I mentioned it as an aside because reading the indictment brought out the Haq incident, and reminded me of the way people jumped to conclusions because Haq came from a Muslim family.
“He was very concerned about other things he had seen while serving in Lebanon.”
That doesn’t seem particularly relevant…his “blinded by terror” thinking caused him to blame a shooting rampage by a non-Arab, non-Muslim, non-Middle Eastern shooter on the AAI.
“Why do you say he is Jewish? I My understanding is that the State Dept. tries not to use Jews in Arab countries.”
I am not sure what you are talking about…I never said, or even hinted, that Syring is Jewish. I have no idea whether he is or not, and could not care less. I only care that he no longer works for the Government, should he be convicted.
“…The take folks like Haq and magnify what he did into a far greater issue. It seems to me that you are doing the same for Mr. SDyring.”
Nonsense. I made factual statements based on the text of an indictment against Syring because it was relevant to my post. Where is the “magnification” in that? As I pointed out before, I WOULD be guilty of the same order of magnification if I ranted about Syring being a Zionist terrorist because of his threatening emails and letters. I did no such thing.
Haq was a mentally ill baptized Christian – like DOOFUS.
Before I forget…
Exclusive
Was the child rapist a conservative idiot or just another right-wing creep?
like DOOFUS of course..
“Indeed that may be why we3 are not in the sad states that the Europeans are in.”
Com’on, SJ. You appear to be a very earnest liberal type, and I applaud you for that. You appear to see the issues of Palestine mostly from the zionist\Israeli perspective, and that’s understandable. But for fucking Christ’s sake, just what the fuck do you mean by what you wrote above? Just what, exactly, is so fucking ‘sad’ about the ‘states’ that Europe is in? If I didn’t want to think otherwise, I would view this as just more right wingnut hackery.
Give it a go. I know you will.
I, for one, would not be suprised at all if the next act of terrorism in this country is planned and conducted by (a.) eliminationist right wing elements in an alliance with some (b.) political nutcases in the current administration in the vain hope of sparking (c.) a GOP resurgence in the fall of ’08.
After all, we’ve already had several instances of (a.) and given the current extremist nature of the current GOP, (b.) does not appear to be far behind.
If you are a republican, you should be afrain. Be vary afraid. Unless you take measures to pull your party from the brink, the GOP faces extinction, and (c.) will be only a wet dream for the forseeable future.
A second-hand claim that he thought “the Tri-Cities were too politically conservative” is hardly the same thing as being a “life-long liberal,” you retarded moron! I know conservatives who think the Tri-Cities are too politically conservative
No they are not conservatives, they are moombats. Anyone living in the Tri-cities and complaining it is too liberal is either a moonbat or metally ill… well they go hand in hand.
We know from Haq’s own writing that he (1) was largely apolitical, (2) leaned slightly to the left politically. In other words, like the vast majority of other Americans, he was a slightly left-leaning moderate.
What writings are those? Did he write a book? His diary? Please explain.
Rufus @ 28,
“No they are not conservatives, they are moombats. Anyone living in the Tri-cities and complaining it is too liberal is either a moonbat or metally ill… well they go hand in hand.”
Time for your meds again…we were talking about people calling the TriCities area CONSERVATIVE, you idiot!
“What writings are those? Did he write a book? His diary? Please explain.”
Did you notice the slightly discolored text in one sentence of comment 22? That is called a “link.” You click on said link to go to that web page. So, READ THE FUCKING LINK.
What writings are those? Did he write a book? His diary? Please explain.”
Did you notice the slightly discolored text in one sentence of comment 22? That is called a “link.” You click on said link to go to that web page. So, READ THE FUCKING LINK.
haahahahahahahhahaahhahahahahahahahha
Yeah, his writing in Friendster. hahhahahahahahahhaha
hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehhe
Leave it to a moonbat to cite a blurb from a singles dating site. heehhehehehehehehehehehehehehhehe
Ah that’s rich. hehehehehehhehehehehehhehehehhehe
Darryl, admit it. You googled this guys name right after the shooting and came up with his add in Friendster. Knowing he mentioned he leaned left you wrote that BS story about his baptism being the cause of his tirade. Damage control for your fellow libs got you nailed. hehehehehehehehehe The gig is up.
No, Rathernot.
Your time is up. The End of an Error is at hand.
tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick……..
Rufus @ 30,
“Leave it to a moonbat to cite a blurb from a singles dating site.”
Wait…wait. Let’s see if we have this straight.
You, essentially, invent the statement that Haq was a “a self confessed life long liberal” and that he killed in the cause of “extreme liberalism.”
I provide a link to Haq’s own description of his politics.
Yes…rich, indeed!
You see Ruf, someone describing his politics—even on a “dating site”—is far more authoritative than you simply pulling shit out of your ass!
Darryl
sighhhhh
The Rosenberg post, on a blogosphere site read by a few huyndred folks at bes, says that a person aiised in Islam, calling for death of the Jews, invaded a Jewish office, sprayed bullets and that this was an act of terrorism.
1. err ahhh, what would you call this? A random act of nuttery? Sorry dear friend, but anytime someone comes in and tries to kill a bunch of folks because they are Jewish there is reason to be concerned.
2. Your post makes it appear that there was some major reaction to the Haq affair by the “right” in Seattle. Really? Where? Sound politics??
I saw a great effort by the Jewish community and Muslim community to assure that this did not get out of hand. Frankly, I would have liked to see more discussion of what there is in Islam that leads to this sort of thing, to my knowledge there was no such discussion.
3. Baptism
We should have that discussion somewhere else. I must admit that your belief in the probity of Xtian conversions surprises me. Have you ever read Ruth Benedict in the subject of conversion of pueblo people?
4. Haq’s religion
As far as Haq is concerned, as your own post says, he stopped attending Christian gatherings and only did that for a short time. I somehow doubt that you know what he considered himself when he went on his shooting spree yelling that we the Jews deserved it. Having been raised a Muslim, he would certainly know that there is no valid way for a Muslim to convert from Islam.
5. antisemitism
I greatly like your argument that this issue can be overstated. But, the wonderful level of mutal respect we experience in the USA is no more reason to hide form real problems any more than Condi Rice means there is no longer racism amongst conservatives or even that an Obama presidency would mean that Dr. King’s dream has been fully realized.
Do you really beiieve there is no problem of antisemitism in Islam? How about in the NOI? Are you aware of the great effort of John XXIII to eliminate antisemitic texts from the catechism? Is it such a bad idea to hope that others would do this too? In the past I cited materials that at least a couple of years ago were widely used un Islamic schools to teach antisemitism .. do you have some reason to fell haq was not exposed to them?
The issue is simple …balance. We can all do better, no?
5. Mr. Syring vs. mr. Haq.
to quote: “If I had used just as others used Haq, I would have referred to him as Zionist terrorist or some such thing. Next I would have call for a crackdown on Zionist terrorist cells. I didn’t. I only referred to him as someone under indictment. At worst, he is a criminal and at best he is mentally ill (we’ll let the courts decide which). “
Hmmm, I interpreted your post differently. The reference to Zionists seemed to me to imply that this would have made the same sense as it would if folks called Haq a Muslim terroist. I still do not see the comparison.
a. one guy harassed folks by phone and email. The other guy attempted murder of a lot of folks.
b. Haq, whatever you want to call him, was raised as a Muslim and unless you want the rest of us (moi) to accept that his baptism erased that education, was a Muslim and did something Muslim terrorists do all over the world. T
Let me try a different tack. Where is the correct balance? What aspects of bigotry should we tolerate because it is called religion?
You, essentially, invent the statement that Haq was a “a self confessed life long liberal” and that he killed in the cause of “extreme liberalism.”
I provide a link to Haq’s own description of his politics.
No. I cited a Seattle Times story that interviewed one of Haq’s few friends who was quoted “Haq was constantly complaining that the Tri cities were too conservative” Notice the use of the word “constantly” in his quote. Sounds like a pretty good indictment that Haq was a moonbat to me. A hell of a lot more insightful than your blurb from the dating site. Give it up Darryl, you’ve been exposed. heheheheehe
hahahaahahahahahaahahaha The only person here pulling shit of his ass is Darryl. hehehehehehehhehe
Darryl ..
may I humbly suggest that the issue of @36 is off topic.
SeattleJew,
“The Rosenberg post, on a blogosphere site read by a few huyndred folks”
I linked to a post on uSP, not Rosenberg’s blog. That has a considerably larger readership.
“1. err ahhh, what would you call this? A random act of nuttery? Sorry dear friend, but anytime someone comes in and tries to kill a bunch of folks because they are Jewish there is reason to be concerned.”
I would call it a crime and maybe a hate crime. Using the term terrorism add a “political statement” to the crime. But, whatever you call it, there is no evidence it was connected with any international or domestic terrorist movement. Rosenberg tried to suggest otherwise.
“Your post makes it appear that there was some major reaction to the Haq affair by the “right” in Seattle. Really? Where? Sound politics??”
My post pointed to a post on Sound Politics and did not generalize more widely about Seattle (aside from the Syring episode).
“I must admit that your belief in the probity of Xtian conversions surprises me. Have you ever read Ruth Benedict in the subject of conversion of pueblo people?”
As an anthropologist, I’ve read plenty of Ruth Benedict some 25 years ago, but I don’t recall reading about conversion of Pueblos (I just pulled down my copy of An Anthropologist at Work: Writings of Ruth Benedict, but didn’t see anything. I presume that she was describing a missionary thing. I am not talking about mission work, I am taking about a person in mainstream America joining a church and converting to Christianity. I am pretty familiar with that process. It is, typically, pretty involved.
“As far as Haq is concerned, as your own post says, he stopped attending Christian gatherings and only did that for a short time. I somehow doubt that you know what he considered himself when he went on his shooting spree yelling that we the Jews deserved it.”
I don’t think it is relevant to the post. He wasn’t acting as a Christian or a Muslim—he was acting as a mentally ill person. I do disagree with your assertion that Islam, as practiced by Americans, is inherently violent. Essentially, you have no evidence whatsoever that his violence stemmed from his Islamic upbringing.
“Having been raised a Muslim, he would certainly know that there is no valid way for a Muslim to convert from Islam.”
Your argument is absurd, since he actually, really did convert to Christianity, regardless of what another religion says. Clearly, if he learned that conversion was “invalid” he chose to ignore it.
“Do you really beiieve there is no problem of antisemitism in Islam?”
All religions involve bigotry. Even so, BIGOTRY ISN’T ILLEGAL IN AMERICA. You can hate whoever you want for whatever reason you want and you have the Constitution backing you up. What is illegal is infringing on the rights of other (you know, like killing someone).
“I cited materials that at least a couple of years ago were widely used un Islamic schools to teach antisemitism .. do you have some reason to fell haq was not exposed to them?”
I don’t know, but I consider it largely irrelevant to the issue of terrorism (which is, after all what the post was about). (And, yeah, I strongly disagree with the suggestion that Islam, as practiced in America, teaches the use of violence as good. Ain’t so.)
“Hmmm, I interpreted your post differently. The reference to Zionists seemed to me to imply that this would have made the same sense as it would if folks called Haq a Muslim terroist. I still do not see the comparison.”
a. one guy harassed folks by phone and email. The other guy attempted murder of a lot of folks.
b. Haq, whatever you want to call him, was raised as a Muslim and unless you want the rest of us (moi) to accept that his baptism erased that education, was a Muslim and did something Muslim terrorists do all over the world.”
The degree of crimes Haq or Syring committed is irrelevant. You claimed I was “using [Syring] as a demon to support [my] argument, JUST as others might use Mr, Haq to make their points.” My use of the Syring example was confined to a factual description of what was contained in his indictment. If I had used the same kind of hyperbolic attack against Syring—the way he used Haq to attack Zogby et al.—I would have called Syring a Zionist terrorist. BUT I DID NOT DO SO AND I DO NOT BELIEVE SYRING IS A ZIONIST TERRORIST. Does that clear it up?
“Let me try a different tack. Where is the correct balance? What aspects of bigotry should we tolerate because it is called religion?”
Legally, the first amendment answers that clearly—we permit all bigotry. People are completely free with respect to “matters of concience.” The legal answer doesn’t stop us from attempting to offer more acceptable social values, and hope people will adopt them.
Personally, I deplore bigotry and do what I can to enlighten people away from the path of bigotry. But, we cannot legislate it away. It is a social movement, not a legislative agenda.
Rufus @ 35
“I cited a Seattle Times story that interviewed one of Haq’s few friends who was quoted “Haq was constantly complaining that the Tri cities were too conservative” Notice the use of the word “constantly” in his quote. Sounds like a pretty good indictment that Haq was a moonbat to me. A hell of a lot more insightful than your blurb from the dating site. Give it up Darryl, you’ve been exposed.”
Actually, Rufus, the Seattle Times story said “often” not “constantly.” But I quibble. Again, we must examine the evidence:
1. From the Seattle Times: A friend says Haq “often complained that the Tri-Cities were too politically conservative.” (Second-party evidence.)
2. From Haq’s web site comes the statement that “[b]eing opinionated is not me but I lean on the liberal side.” (Direct [first-person] evidence.)
Whether we accept one or both statements, neither of these statements justify your claims that Haq was:
Clearly he never “confessed” to being a “life long liberal” and there is no evidence that his killing rampage was a result of “extreme liberalism.”
Since your claims are not tangibly supported by the actual evidence, the most parsimonious explanation is that the claims you made were a fiction of your own imagination.
In other words, shit yanked from your ass.
Do you understand now, or did I use too many polysyllabic words for you?
@38 Darryl
Common Ground
1. You make a good point, the term “terrorist” is misused a lot. The same is true for “el Qaeda.”
2. Out government is not allowed to interfere in free speech or or religion.
Conflict
1. Language is tricky. While I do not equate Haq’s acts with any sort of international crimes, there is a continuity between his hate crime and Islamic Terrorism.
Where we differ is in how big this issue is. I do not think we should use tis event as a causus belli. I do think we should use it as an imppetus to know what is happening in Islam in the USA AND to encourage the kind of cap that happened last weekend.
2. What Muslims are taught. It seems to me you and I are argueing by I say he says, For my part I can point to some data that supports my concern .. polls amongst Muslims, speaches by leaders of NOI, the Freedom House study, and my own reading of the Quran. You say I am wrong. Well we both know it is hard to prove a negative.
What is the practical outcome of your view vs. mine? I want more of an effort to open contacts between US Islamj and US Judaism (inter alia). I want an hoest assessment by all of us of bigotries in our reigions.
4. All religions are bigotted. I simply do not see this. I know something about Judaism and Hinayyana Buddhism .. less about Shinto, indigenous American religions, Zorastrianism, etc. None of these have engaged in relgious war. Jews esp are taught that non Jews are to be respected if they klead good lives as mORE ethical tha Jews.
Frankly this assertiom, oftem ade by liberals, seems to me to be part of the Chrsitina inability to accept criticism by spreading the blame. Has ANY Christian sect ever accepted guilt for its own atrocities?
5. The KKK, NOI, etc are free to be as bigotted as they want .. but only in so far as government suppression.
The government itself has an obligation ot promote tolerance and respect for fact. As individuals we certainly have the freedom to criticize religions.
6. Ruth Benedict .. from almost 50 year perspective. I beleive the material I referred to was in Patterns of Culture. She discussed the Zuni and how the matriarchs had rejected Christianty.
Unfortunately, I met a Zuni leader a few years ago and he told me of the Christian’s progress in erasing Zuni culture. His own sons had gone to Christian school because that was the only way they could get jobs. Do you suppose the Church has any concern for destroying a culture?
And Bringing it Together
I suspect we are not all that far apart, esp. if we talk about what should be done,
I also meant my offer. Have you read Resa Aslan? I would love to have him in Seattle. He would be an awesome Walker Ames speaker.
@40
Steve,
I have no idea why you continue to insist that Haq was “taught” to hate Jews. Either present some factual evidence from Haq’s life or stop attempting to slander people from this area’s Muslim community.
Lee
I am not slandering* anyone, (You might look up the word next time you use it),
I am saying that Islam itself teaches antisemitism, That is a reality. It is also true that the gospel of Mathew is antisemitic, that the catechism before John XXIII was antisemitic. The Southern Baptist Church is openly anitsemitic too.
Haq was/is an antisemite, whether this is part of an illness or rational I will leave to the courts. He was raised in a mulium education that almost certainly included Wahabe materials (most mosques during his youth relied heavily on these materials). So, what I have said is that when folks are raised in such that environment and then slaughter the dirt yids, it seems unreasonable not to associate the education the bigot got with the actions of the adult.
*FWIW here is the definition as I understand it: Oral defamation by speaking or uttering false and malicious words in the presence of a person, other than the person slandered, which prejudices another person’s reputation and character.
What have I said that is false about Haq?
+he is antisemtic, no?
What have I said that has malicious intent?
+If it is malicious to relate the story of Yathrib?, then most commentaries on the Quran are malicous.
+same comment about the new Pope’s reinstatement of an antisemitic mass.
Is my intent malicious?
+What do YOU think I am trying to achieve?
+exactly what have I said that you see as intended to hurt Mr. Haq or the Muslim community? On the contrary I have praised the Seattle Muslim community for its responses. That said, I would like to be reassured that they no longer distribute antisemitic materials and would very much like to know what their children are taught. Is that malicious?
@41 Leaving Haq aside since he is not from Seattle, what people do you think I am slandering?
I suggest you re-read the section in Aslan on Yathrib. He does a good job of trying to justify what happened there, BUT even this cool guy says some unfortunate things … intimating that the Yathribi may not have been “real” Jews … whatever that is, and avoiding the decision to ethncially cleans Arabia of ITS INDIGENOUS JEWS! That persists to today, BTW.
Let me try to turn the tables, what is YOUR concern? I think highly of you but I honestly do not see why you feel that I am being unfair by advocating that Muslims and others NOT teach bigotry.
Be specific my friend and I will be happy to learn I am wrong. Until then, I am concerned with the Freedom House report, the polls, and the rabid antisemitism in the countries Mulsims come from.
@42 and @43
I am saying that Islam itself teaches antisemitism, That is a reality.
No it doesn’t. This is a lie. And I dare you to ask Reza Aslan whether you’re right or not about this.
In fact, let’s make this interesting. I will bet you $1,000 that I’m right and I will let Aslan be the judge. I will send an email to him with you on the CC: line asking him to confirm or deny the accuracy of the statement.
Deal?
@42 and @43
Let me try to turn the tables, what is YOUR concern? I think highly of you but I honestly do not see why you feel that I am being unfair by advocating that Muslims and others NOT teach bigotry.
My concern is that you are taking an incident where there is ZERO proof that Haq’s hatred of Jews was influenced by people of Muslim faith and you’ve continually tried to tie it to Islam. People hate Jews (and Israel) for reasons other than religion. Can you, at the very least, accept that very basic fact?
@42
What have I said that is false about Haq?
You have said that he was taught to hate Jews. YOU DO NOT KNOW THAT!!
@42
*FWIW here is the definition as I understand it: Oral defamation by speaking or uttering false and malicious words in the presence of a person, other than the person slandered, which prejudices another person’s reputation and character.
Exactly, and considering that Haq’s parents run the Islamic center where Haq’s religious education took place, you’re slandering them by accusing them of teaching their son hatred. Got it?
@46Lee
I do not think that I have said Haq was “taught to hate Jews”… are YOU using slander or just sloppy citation? Since I do not believe I ever used those words I would very much appreciate it if you can point them out.
If you do not think Haq’s Islmaic teachings were a source of his hatred for us, do you know what led this man to his hatred. Or do you think folks randomly pick up guns and shoot Jews while yelling antisemitic slogans?
Nor have I met his parents, nor did I sit in his classes.
Nor have I made any extreme statements demeaning muslim people or Islam itself, other than that it is a real problem when any: religion teaches that people of other religions are to be mistreated.
As you know, I feel the same way toward the gospel of Mathew, the writings of Paul, and the decisions of the Southern Baptists. I would make much the same claim about Islamic intolerance of Hinduism and Buddhism or Chinese Communist intolerance of Catholics and Jews. Have you read V,S, Naipal on this? Do you think he is an extremist too?
Like most Jews, I also abhor the teaching of hatred thathas occured in some jewish sects. As you know at least one party, Kach, is banned form Israel for just this sort of hatred. As you also know, PeaceNow supports Jewish-Islamic joint education to avoid exactly this. I love to see similar efforts by Islam and there are a few tentative such efforts.
What I do know and have said, is that there are many sources of evidence, including the Quran itself, self criticism by liberal muslims, polls, and the Freedom house report that Islam teaches antisemitism in SA and via Wahabeism around the world.
Bottom line, I have made specific cites, what exactly do you dispute? Rather than vague accusations and miscites, why not focus on what can be done to make things better as you do so well in re the drug issue?
@44 $100 stacked bet??
YOU are going to write words, attribute them to me and then ask Resa Aslan if I am right????? Sounds like stacked deck.
No. but I am happy to sit down with you any time and read the relevant sections of his book or other parts of the Quran and then we can both write him our interpretations.
I also repeat my offer to join me for a visit to the Seattle Mosque at their convenience.
@49
YOU are going to write words, attribute them to me and then ask Resa Aslan if I am right????? Sounds like stacked deck.
I copied and pasted those words from your comment in #42. What the hell are you talking about?
I also repeat my offer to join me for a visit to the Seattle Mosque at their convenience.
Can I bring a list of all the anti-Islamic things you’ve written on your blog to show them?
@48
If you do not think Haq’s Islmaic teachings were a source of his hatred for us, do you know what led this man to his hatred.
Anger over Israeli foreign policy. That’s what leads a large number of anti-Semites to their hate. And when Haq was arrested, he specifically referenced this.
@51
I do not think that I have said Haq was “taught to hate Jews”… are YOU using slander or just sloppy citation?
From comment #1, this is what you wrote:
STILL, there are real issues and the education that led Haq to his atrocity is a very real concern.
Are you ready to stop lying now?
@51 Lee, read what I wrote my friend. It says, and I still say, that “the education that led Haq to his atrocity is a very real concern.” That seems to me at least to be quite different than he was taught to hate.
As for my BLOG, if you can find something in there that is bigoted toward Islam or inaccurate, PLEASE point it out to me.
There is more to say, BUT, I your other post may suggest where we are diverging. You say that “Anger over Israeli foreign policy ,,,, leads a large number of anti-Semites to their hate. And when Haq was arrested, he specifically referenced this.” Here we are pretty close to agreement. Haq DID say that. Did you suppose he got these ideas as a result of his baptism?
The core issue here is how does one separate irredentist opposition to Israel from anti-semitism. I
f it is not too nuanced, let me suggest that I support and sympathize with Jimmy Carter’s recent book. I also condemn the all to easy charges Dershowitz made that Carter was being antisemitic.
However, the line is a very difficult one. In my opinion a large part of the poison that prevents peace is due to horrid teachings. For example, I would bet that a majority of our mutual non Jewish friends think the Palestinian Arabs are an indigenous people descended from the Cannani. From what I have seen of Muslim instructional materials this is pretty common. Gee, that makes the Jews the crusaders!
Another example of teachings that foster antisemitism is the claim that the Prophet dream of an ascent from Jerusalem and therefore that city is now consecrated to Islam. If you grow up being taught this nonfact, how does it affect your attitude toward Jews who want to be able to pray at that site? How does the negative view of Jews in the Quran affect your opinions?
Muslims, like Xtians are also taught that Jesus was remanded for crucification by the Pharisees, invalidating the last 2000 years of Jewish history … inlcluding the claim to have maintained a presence in Israel for all that time. Even TJ accepted this horrid bit of bigotry. How would you suppose, believing in this, HW would have judged the conflct?
So. maybe my ideas are a bit complex, I support (nad send $$ to) Mr. Carter and PeaceNow because I want peace. I also see a large part of criticism of Israel as rooted in the rotten log of Islamic and Christina prejudice.
@51 Lee
I am a human but I accept the mitzvah of truth. I never knowingly lie. If you find a mistake in what I write I will apreciate it.
@51 Lee, read what I wrote my friend. It says, and I still say, that “the education that led Haq to his atrocity is a very real concern.” That seems to me at least to be quite different than he was taught to hate.
No it’s not. It’s the exact same thing. There is no other way to interpret that. If you believe that Haq’s actions were a result of “education”, then you absolutely believe he was taught to hate. You’re dissembling because I’ve caught you. Just admit it.
As for my BLOG, if you can find something in there that is bigoted toward Islam or inaccurate, PLEASE point it out to me.
/2006/07/he-killed-jews.html
“Islam is today an evil religion. The evil is not confined to primitive madrassa in Pakistan or the bizar goldened robed Wahabi congregations in modern Medina. It is endemic and will be until, one must hope, a new Islam .. a Quaker movement, a movement like Hassidism, or perhaps a return to the too brief teachings of Akbar the Magnificent rule of India.”
When we visit the mosque together, I will show that quote to everyone at the mosque and I’ll have them tell you directly whether or not they think that’s bigoted.
There is more to say, BUT, I your other post may suggest where we are diverging. You say that “Anger over Israeli foreign policy ,,,, leads a large number of anti-Semites to their hate. And when Haq was arrested, he specifically referenced this.” Here we are pretty close to agreement. Haq DID say that. Did you suppose he got these ideas as a result of his baptism?
Absolutely not. Why on earth would you even ask that?
The core issue here is how does one separate irredentist opposition to Israel from anti-semitism. If it is not too nuanced, let me suggest that I support and sympathize with Jimmy Carter’s recent book. I also condemn the all to easy charges Dershowitz made that Carter was being antisemitic.
I’ve read, and mostly agree with, Jimmy Carter’s book as well. And yes, Dershowitz is dead wrong to call Carter anti-Semitic
However, the line is a very difficult one. In my opinion a large part of the poison that prevents peace is due to horrid teachings.
I strongly disagree. The horrid teachings are a result of the situation. They did not cause it. As the land grabs and the settlements and the overall occupation continue, the likelihood of people being raised in that part of the world to hate Jews will increase. But to blame that trend is to confuse the symptom for the root issues.
For example, I would bet that a majority of our mutual non Jewish friends think the Palestinian Arabs are an indigenous people descended from the Cannani. From what I have seen of Muslim instructional materials this is pretty common. Gee, that makes the Jews the crusaders!
What planet are you on? A majority of our mutual non-Jewish friends don’t know a Palestinian from a Turk from a Saudi from an Algerian. One of the biggest problems you have in approaching this issue is that you’ve convinced yourself that everyone is a scholar of biblical history and is compelled by ancient philosophy. People are not that complicated, extremely few people live their lives in accordance with any religious text, even in the Middle East. They may be religious, and follow customs, but what they do is not shaped by the words in the Koran as much as it’s a natural reaction to the circumstances of their daily life.
I’m not even going to paste in your next two paragraphs here because they’re irrelevant. For example, you wrote this:
Another example of teachings that foster antisemitism is the claim that the Prophet dream of an ascent from Jerusalem and therefore that city is now consecrated to Islam.
If you really think that this alone makes people hate Jews, you really don’t understand any of this. Hatred for Israel comes from things that are happening on the ground in the West Bank. It comes from the bombs that were dropped on Lebanon last summer. It comes from elements of the Arab world who see the Israelis as bullies taking land from the Palestinians. It comes from the inability to establish a Palestinian state. Whether those complaints are justified rationally is irrelevant. They are the reasons. Not because of some prophet’s dream. Do you really think someone like Naveed Haq, who had so little interest in Islam he converted to Christianity, had any knowledge of that crap.
So. maybe my ideas are a bit complex, I support (nad send $$ to) Mr. Carter and PeaceNow because I want peace. I also see a large part of criticism of Israel as rooted in the rotten log of Islamic and Christina prejudice.
I don’t doubt that you want peace, but as long as you keep lying about how you’ve slandered Haq’s parents, I don’t believe that you value justice. And you’ll never have peace without justice. You’re making the same mistake (in a microcosm) that the entire state of Israel has been making – that you believe that peace can only exist by limiting the freedoms of those whose religion you don’t trust.
I think some things are more clear. I do see what you are saying.
The3 issue is the strength of the word I chose.
Just to give you ammo, I will state again. Contemporary Islam is flawed, If the word “evil” is too strong, I would agree that that word is inflammatory.
Would I use it again. I am not sure. You may have noted that I avoid a lot of the epithets folks here use. I write to have an effect and starting out by calling folks idiots, asshoels, wingnuts, moon bats, is .. well locker roomj worthy rather than conference table effective.
So, why use this word “evil.” I chose it, as I assume you choose some fo the epithets you use, to make a point about an issue that is too often hidden under the rug. I tried, in context. to temper the term with admiration for the concept of Ummaya, Islamic devotion to charity, and (compared with Christianity) historic periods of progress including tolerance surpassed only by the enlightenment.
I chose it because I feel there is am iddle path between O;Reilly’s invective and the politically correct attitude that religions shuld be tolerated.
I would also suggest that my choice of words belongs in the context of who I am. My words are far more moderate than the words of the Pope, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Salman Rushdie, or (esp recently) Chrsitopher Hitchens. Let me take two of these people and focus on them. Rushdie and Ali, both born Muslims, have both had death threat for writing that Islam has serious flaws. I have had Muslims here in Seattle tell me that Ali SHOULD be killed. Do you think that this sort of thing makes a religion … evil? What do you suppose is taught in the Mosque about the satanic verses? about the ethnic cleansing of Arabia, about the Jews. BTW, if you want some insight into what is taught in East Africa, read Ali’s book.
OK?
I now have a much more clear idea of where you atand. Am I wrong that you feel that Islamic antisemitism is largely a result of the Israeli conflict and that the fault here is on the Israeli side?
I think that is a valid POV, but disagree.
First, Islamic antisemitism certainly did not begin in the 1800s with Zionism, Indeed until the Prophet brought Islam to Arabia, that area was an object lesson on religous co-existence. Semites following different religions lived together NATURALLY. Just as divers religions existed in Hndu India for millenia, in the Americas, etc. Reigous bigotry is largely the result of Christianity and Islam, although the former insist on blaming that too on the Jews.
Long before Zionism, the Quran misstated much of Jewish history and denigrated the Torah as falsified. Long before zionism, blood libel was wide spread, Jews lived under various restrictive rules, and of course, on the orders of the Prophet, Arabia .. the ancestral home of ALL semites, was made Judenfrei. This is NOT a benign history.
Second, do I think the Muslim myths about Jews matter in regard to the origin of a antizionism? Yes. The effect of this is to put Israeis in the same contaminated pot as the Protestants in Ireland, Chinese in Tibet, Russians in the Baltic, and yes you and I in the Americas. That myth is taught to Muslim children and is at least part of the irredentism over the existence of Israel.
Moreover, these myths did not arise by chance. The blood myth was intentionally promulgated before zionism by Turkish extremists, Nasser and Arafat consciously created the Cannani/Palestinian myth AND an education system that t6 this day fosters that myth, the Wahabes made antisemit6tism intrinsic to their effort to spread their view of Islam as early as their collab with the Sauds and the Brits led to the current regime.
I have to go now, but let me return t Mr. Haq. You and I 100% agree that his antisemitism was anti-zionist. He felt that HIS fellow muslims, members of the Umaya, we being killed etc by Jews and he retaliated. Is that fair to say? Where do you think he got these ideas?
Here is a multiple choice test:
1. The Israelis displaced and indigenous people. T/F
2. The modern Palestinians arabs are the descendants of the indigenous people of this area going back how far:
80 yearsm 160 years, 1300 years, 2000 years, more
3. The Israelis represent a population that had been absent from this land for how many years beforte zionism?
1300, 1900, never, 150
4. Of the three cities claimed to be holy by Islam, which were occupied by Jews at the time of the Prophet?
Mecca, Medina, Jerusalem.
5. The best solution to the antisemitism of Islam is:
a. criticize the Jews for it.
b. criticize the Prophet for it
c. encourage Muslim/Jewish mutual education that is forbidden by the Quran.
d. encourage a modernization of Islam.
e. evacuate Israel.
6. The identification of the term Palestinian with an arabic people dates from:
a. Roman times
b. Turkish times
c. 1948
d. 1963
Try it.
@55
Well, I’m glad you’re backing away from your earlier comments. My next Mutinyblogging post (my series of longer posts that I write about 2-3 times a year) will be about why this statement:
I chose it because I feel there is am iddle path between O;Reilly’s invective and the politically correct attitude that religions shuld be tolerated.
Is wrong. And it’s wrong for the same reason that it’s wrong to make personal drug use a criminal act. You’re mistaking a symptom for a root cause and trying to fix a problem by using collective punishment. All religions should be tolerated. The only excpetion comes when the religion is solely established in order to commit criminal acts.
I have to go now, but let me return t Mr. Haq. You and I 100% agree that his antisemitism was anti-zionist. He felt that HIS fellow muslims, members of the Umaya, we being killed etc by Jews and he retaliated. Is that fair to say? Where do you think he got these ideas?
One can never know for sure, but it’s significantly more likely that he got those ideas from seeing the plight of the Palestinians today than by reading the Koran.
I have no interest in taking your meaningless quiz. It’s completely irrelevant to why there’s so much anger towards Israel and Jews today.
@55
I have had Muslims here in Seattle tell me that Ali SHOULD be killed. Do you think that this sort of thing makes a religion … evil?
In the original post, Patrick Syring implies that James Zogby SHOULD be killed. Does that make his religion evil?
I have no idea what religion Mr. Syring follows so how can I answer YOUR question?
For all I know he is a druid.
Lee ..
I have not backed away from my earlier comments. Along with Aslan, Ali, Rushdi and a lot of others who respect the core ideas of Islam, I find today’s Islam fightening.
Last night there was a confab o4 four interesting folks on Larry King to discuss the Wed. special on militant religion. The three non-Muslims, including Barry Lynd (sp?) were really thougthful. The Muslim guy had a real problem because he could not address the issue of whether antisemitism was intrinsic to Islam.
You worry me because you want to blame Israel for all this. I do not think you would find much support for that view from any of the Muslims I mention above. Rather one sided blame for Israel seems to me to be a cross between Chamberlain’s “Peace in Our Time” Mantra and Durrenmatt’s vision of the hero killed by his neighbors desire to get help from the hateful old lady. Do I think, like Chamberlain’s critics, that militant Islam is bent on world conquest, no. Do I think Israel may succumb to a second holocaust because of people concerned for oil and terrorized by islamic violoence? Yes. Do I think the world needs a more tolerant Islam, yes again.
Finally Lee, if you do not want to play the quiz game, at least answer one factual question about your own beliefs: who do you consider the authentic indigeeous people of that area and why do you believe that?
@59
I have not backed away from my earlier comments. Along with Aslan, Ali, Rushdi and a lot of others who respect the core ideas of Islam, I find today’s Islam fightening.
But Islam itself is not evil. What is evil is the way it has been used recently to incite violence. You backed off by clarifying this and now I agree that your take is not inherently bigoted.
You worry me because you want to blame Israel for all this.
All of what? Israel is certainly to blame for a lot of things, but they do not stand alone in the blame department, not by a longshot.
Finally Lee, if you do not want to play the quiz game, at least answer one factual question about your own beliefs: who do you consider the authentic indigeeous people of that area and why do you believe that?
My answer to that is that it’s irrelevant. And that by believing that the answer to that question has any meaning, you are a very big part of the problem.
@56
Sorry for the typos, but we could not disagree more on this. I do not believe ALL religions should be tolerated. That border needs to close when religions foment intolerance or promote human abuse.
The Christian dogma from Mathew, restored in some part by the current Pope, OUGHT to be decried by decent people.
The Quranic story of Yathrib and the ethnic cleansing of Arabia, ought to be seen as a bad part of Islam.
Frankly, I do not see any difference between religious intolerance and the racism or imperialism of bad political systems. I see no more reason to be tolerant of bigotry because it is called religion than because it is called politics.
Sorry for the typos, but we could not disagree more on this. I do not believe ALL religions should be tolerated. That border needs to close when religions foment intolerance or promote human abuse.
So, are you saying that because Christianity promotes intolerance of homosexuals, it should be banned?
The Christian dogma from Mathew, restored in some part by the current Pope, OUGHT to be decried by decent people.
So, should the people who follow that be arrested and put in jail?
The Quranic story of Yathrib and the ethnic cleansing of Arabia, ought to be seen as a bad part of Islam.
Are you sure you’ve read Aslan’s book?
Frankly, I do not see any difference between religious intolerance and the racism or imperialism of bad political systems. I see no more reason to be tolerant of bigotry because it is called religion than because it is called politics.
I certainly agree – because you can’t very easily separate the two.
@61
Continued…
Frankly, I do not see any difference between religious intolerance and the racism or imperialism of bad political systems. I see no more reason to be tolerant of bigotry because it is called religion than because it is called politics.
Just to be clear, I still have a problem with your use of the term “tolerant” here. Being tolerant of something does not imply that you have to like it. It simply means that you accept it as part of the human reality. By being intolerant of other people’s religions, you become what you’re fighting against.
Lee,
Firsy it is good to be having a discussion, I appreciate that a lot.
I utterly disagree about tolerance for religions. I see no difference between religions and other “isms.” There are, as we both no, a community of Christians whose religion is indiscriminable form Nazi-ism, should I tolerate that? The same Pope who declared himself infallible, ruled that a Jewish child could be kidnapped, sprayed with holy water and then MUST never be returned to her parents. Should I tolerate that? Islam, TODAY, teaches that the Torah is a forgery and therefore Jews must be treated as inferiors. Should I tolerate that?
Are you really tolerant of religions? A small but real group of Jews consider the WestBank a gift of God to the Jews. Are you tolerant of that religion? Rushdie has a fatwa on his head issued by the theocracy in Pakistan, are you tolerant of that? Pope Benedict recently rules that a prayer condemning the Jews should be reinstated in the Mass. Should I be tolerant of that?
The greast majority of Americans consider aetheism so abhorrent that in eff3ct atheist in this country do not have full civil rights. Are you tolerant of that?
Fundie Christians believe that evolution is wrong, should we tolerate their beliefs by keeping science out of the schools?
The KKK, Father Siera, the missionaries of BC who ruled out the Potlach, the missionaries today who require Pueblo children to attend their schools if they want an education … should we tolerate this?
Have you read Ali’s Infidel with its stories of what East African Islam teaches about Jews and women I admire her intolerance esp. in the face of Islamic fatwas ordering her murder.
What about the caste system? A wide Hindu tols his son, asn aspiring Buddhist, that Buddha’s opposition to castes was good for Buddha but not for the wise man. Do you agree? Should Gandhi have tolerates the Brahmin assignement of people to casts?
None of thi9s is any diferent from other human —isms. Hitler’s racism was not religous .. does that mean it is OK to oppose Hitler but not oppose the Prophet who ALSO made his homeland Judenfrei?
Sorry, but I see no difference between Pat Robertson and Enron. Relgions can be good or bad. Unlike Chris Hitchins I do see a value in belief in God. His examples of religons as hateful are, unfortunately valid.
My idea of tolerance extends to respecting what others believe that leads them to humanistric values or at worst, to an introverted state that does not hurt others.
@62 You always take anything I say and bring it to its extremes, no of course Christianity ought not to be banned. Nor ahev I ever advocated laws limiting free speech.
BUT, Christianity should be subjected to the same moral tests we do all other philosophies, political systems and human organizations. For example, the Gospel of Matthew should be read with respect, BUT anyone who buys into its worst ideas, should be recognized as a bigot just as we SHOULD read Mein Kampf the the Protocols.
Frankly, I am not even sure Nazism should be banned in Germany or Kach in Israel.
@64
I think our disagreement centers around the use of the word “tolerant”. When you say that we can’t tolerate something, to me you’re implying that we criminalize it. I think that’s the common meaning of that word.
Of course a line needs to be drawn to say that others can not impose their religious belief on others.
Should I tolerate that? Islam, TODAY, teaches that the Torah is a forgery and therefore Jews must be treated as inferiors. Should I tolerate that?
Well, yes. You don’t have to like it, but in order for justice to really exist, you have to tolerate it. But if you tell them that they can’t think that way, then you’re imposing a religious belief on others (in other words, you become what you’re fighting against).
Ok
We are close. Of course I accept their right to believe in whatever they want .. just as I accept the rights of Nazis, druids, creationists, etc. If that is what you mean by tolerance, I am 100% tolerant. I do not even believe Israel should have banned Kach.
BUT, I also feel that tolerance is far more than a legal issue, it is societal. Just because Nazi’s are to be tolerated, I do not feel it would be right to not talk about their beliefs or require that I employ a Nazi.
The problem comes when we mix law and morality/ethics. I assuem you and I would abhor someone who refuses to hire San Savage as an Editor because Dan is gay? However, suppose that same person would not hire a known Nazi? The lines of legalism are hard to draw,
OTOH, I believe that a lot of this can be solved by education. Much that Muslims are taught about Jewish beliefs is not true to what Jews believe and vice versa. Catholics .. accept for J XXIII, have never understood how their catechism affected the Jews. The more honesty we have, I have faith, the more we can decide the edges of tolerance.
I also believe that “outing” religion while tolerating it and understanding it, will lead to reform. Where is the quakers come from, the orthodox Jews??? Father Drinan? John XXIII. Why was TJ an antisemite?
So, when it comes to Islam in America, I think we would all be better off if Islam were to have to solve its own incontestability in an atmosphere that is tolerant in the legal sense you promote and, I suspect would agree even more important in an open way that accepts people’s ability to change.
@68
I agree with absolutely everything you said in that comment. The larger point that I’m making is that you go down a dangerous path when you assume that those who commit violent acts against others were “taught” to hate. Some people, who are prone to radicalism, are not taught to hate. They simply react to world events with an extremist zeal that allows for the acceptance of killing civilians.
The reality is that some people are taught to hate within a religious framework, others are taught to hate within a political/nationalist framework, and others hate based upon their own life experience. And those in the latter category are certainly more susceptible to eventually buying into the teachings offered by the first two categories (as we’re seeing with the massive growth of al Qaeda sympathies in Iraq).
A statistic that I’ve found interesting is that in polling, a higher percentage of Americans believe that the killing of innocent civilians can be a justifiable act than the percentage of people in any Muslim country in the world (except for Nigeria). While I don’t doubt that there are parts of the Quran that can easily be interpreted to allow for the killing of innocent civilians, people in Muslim countries appear to reject that thought much more readily than Americans do. The lesson to be learned is that people are not as driven by religion as they are by their experience and their upbringing.
That was supposed to be a response to #67, I keep doing that…
@68
You are hitting a hard point. To what extent is the American support for Bush a result of our education system?
One of the most difficult issue I know is HOW to teach tolerance without crossing over people’s rights. I believe, for example, that comparative religion should be taught alongside the rest of culture, The problem is WHO would do the teaching? Teachers are not robots and the likelihood that an Oral Roberts, Oklahoma raised 24 year old can teach com res fairly is not very good. So, if you decide to support what seems obvious ..tech religion as part of culture and history, for a lot of kids this is going to end up being about how Jesus is best.
I do not know a correct answer. My wife feels religon should be excluded while I want to see all kids learn about each other’s religions. Yet when I have seen the SPS try, in a well meaning way to do this, even ikn Seattle they screw up. For example, ther eis the Xmas “problem,” So as to allow the majority to celebrate this pervasive holdiay, the schools also celebrate Kwanza, Hannukah, and maybe eve the druse midwinter fest. Fine enough except Hannukah is not only unrelated to Xmas, it is antithetical in emkssage to the core message of love and peace celebrated by Christians. So, I tried to work with the schools to give us equla time for our most important family holiday, in my opinion this is Passover. No way Jose. Why? Because adding Pesach to the curriculum would be special attention to a Jewish issue and come at a difficult time in their curriculum. Makes sense, I guess, So what to do? Barb’s answer is to remove Xmas from the schools. I don’t think that makes sense.
Actually this is a good segue to our discussion about Islam. I try when I have a Muslim employee or colleague to pay attention to Ramamadan and el Fietr. How. without offending Muslims’ desire for exclusion, can one make the concept of this holiday understandable to other kids?
I believe that all problems should be approached by asking are there bits of this I can fix? In this case I think it would be possible in Seattle or any other divers city to put the major holidays of each group on the school calendar and at least acknowledge they are going on and explain the context. Seems easy.
@70
You are hitting a hard point. To what extent is the American support for Bush a result of our education system?
I think it’s minimal. The larger reason is a fear of modernization and globalization.
I actually had a very good teacher in high school who taught about the origins of different religions. But even she screwed up by teaching us that Sunnis were “the good Muslims” and that Shiites were “the bad Muslims”. There was no justification for that at all.
People are not all robots who are programmed by their religious upbringing or their education to exhibit certain behaviors throughout life. They are motivated much more by sex, fear, power, and other human traits. You spend way too much time trying to analyze people’s actions through the prism of religious upbringing when that actually plays a major role for very few people.