Archive for the ‘Islam’ Category

What He Said II

Thursday, February 28th, 2013

Saw this the day after I wrote the last post. Once again Jon Stewart says it better than I can. Starts a little slow. Excoriation begins at 2:19.

Protests Grip Libya, Yemen and Bahrain

Saturday, February 19th, 2011

Here’s Juan Cole again, on the spreading Middle East protests.

The politics of Bahrain are particularly interesting. It’s a Shiite majority country that is ruled by a Sunni royal family and has had sporadic flare ups of political protest with a sectarian edge since the 1990′s.

While the country’s citizens are majority Shiite, there are actually more expatriates than citizens in Bahrain and many of them are Sunni Arabs, Pakistanis or South East Asians.

Once again, the United States’ rhetorical support of democracy is colliding with it’s national security interests. The US Fifth Fleet, which provided critical logistical support for the Iraq war as well as all other Persian Gulf operations, is headquartered in Manama, Bahrain.

This Week Forum: Should America Fear Islam?

Tuesday, October 5th, 2010

Riveting forum on ABC’s This Week.

Worth watching the whole thing. We could all benefit from more TV like this.

Meacham: Let Islamic Reformation Begin at Ground Zero

Thursday, September 23rd, 2010

I know that the Ground Zero Mosque is so two weeks ago, but wanted to pass this on from Jon Meacham’s last Newsweek Note From the Editor.  

Central to his point is that Islam is a religion that is in real need of a reformation. As Meacham notes,

The attacks of September 11—and subsequent bombings in London, Madrid, and elsewhere—embody the most repulsive of human instincts, the will to power at the price of the lives of others. Elements of Islam were responsible for these deaths of innocents, and extreme interpretations of the Quran have provided—and, inevitably, will provide again—inspiration and justification for terrorist violence.

But he cautions against “indict(ing) a faith for the sins of a few.”  As Meacham notes, “large parts of the Christian universe have managed to adapt to modernity in ways that have at least discouraged the worst excesses of religiously motivated believers” and Islam needs to make similar strides.

It doesn’t mater how many bombs we build, how many fighter jets we have or how much we spend on Homeland Security, the real decrease in our vulnerability will come with sea changes in the way many Muslims view their religion. For non-Muslim Americans we have to face the fact that we have little control over the future of the Muslim faith. The most important thing that we can do is to encourage this dialogue to take place and elevate moderates within the Muslim community to begin this dialogue. 

To me this is the best argument for the Community Center in Lower Manhattan. Despite the smear attempts by Republican politicians and media personalities, all indications are that Feisal Abdul Rauf is someone who has dedicated to his life to an inclusive, tolerant and accepting interpretation of Islam. Islam needs people like him and we need more people like him if we want a more tolerant and less violent strains of Islam to flourish. As Meacham concludes:

In the end, the right thing to do, in my opinion, is to build the center on the site its organizers and the mayor favor, and hope that those who go there to worship (and to swim, for that matter) do their part to reform their religion. There is little more important in the war on terror.

Newt’s Cynical Calculation

Monday, September 20th, 2010

A few years ago, my conservative uncle signed me up to receive newsletters from the conservative website, Human Events. I used to read them for entertainment and to know what the enemy was thinking, but this got old fast, so I requested that they not send me any more e-mails. I guess they still have my info because last week they sent me this Newt Gingrich plug for his new movie.

I don’t want to dismiss the entire article since I think he makes some valid points about the need to be clearer about the danger of violent Islamic extremism, but the whole “stealth, Radical Islamist” thing is obviously another way to increase paranoia among people who are already paranoid. Apparently Newt is trying to win the 2010 award for the politician who most uses 9-11 as a way to gain political advantage (which I’m pretty sure Rudy Giuliani has won every year for the last 9–with the exception of 2002-3 when Bush & Cheney made it seem like Saddam & Bin Laden were in a coalition government together). To this end, Newt debuted his 9-11 exploitation movie on September 11th this year. The movie is intended to scare the shit out of you and make it look like Obama is in league with the terrorists. As discussed before, Newt has also been the leading Republican voice in the campaign to distort the truth and rile everyone up about the  Not at Ground Zero Mosque.

Lisa Miller had a good piece in Newsweek about the “stealth jihad” construction and the way that Newt and his allies have used it to distort the truth and generally try to gin up the Islamophobia for political gain.

Just to put a cherry on top of his disgraceful demagoguery around 9-11 and the Not at Ground Zero Mosque,  Newt followed up by commenting (at his movie premiere) that he agreed with right wing pseudo-intellectual Dinesh De Souza’s idea that Obama was channeling the ambitions of his absentee father that he never knew:

What if [Obama] is so outside our comprehension, that only if you understand Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior, can you begin to piece together [his actions]…. That is the most accurate, predictive model for his behavior.

This a person who is fundamentally out of touch with how the world works, who happened to have played a wonderful con, as a result of which he is now president.

Instead of an extended comment, I’ll just point out the obvious. As Robert Gibbs noted a few days after Newt’s comments, this is just a see through attempt to take advantage of the ignorance of Birther Republicans who think the President of the United States is a secret foreign agent. Maureen Dowd had a great piece on this,  and I’m also glad to see the White House finally pushing back (start at around the 7 minute mark of the clip). Colin Powell also took on Newt and all of the Birther BS point-by-point on Meet the Press yesterday.

The bottom line is that this guy is a cretin: an extremely intelligent man who is preying on a small segment of Americans’ fears and paranoia in order to advance his own political career. Hopefully his recent comments about Obama’s “Kenyan anti-colonial behavior” will show Republicans what a huckster he is and how he will spare no opportunity to use the same cynical, opportunistic arguments for his own political gain. 

If Newt rides to the Republican nomination with this fear, ignorance and paranoia based strategy, then the country and the Republican party are in worse shape than I thought they were (and that’s sayin something).

Gingrich & Co Follow a Well Worn Path

Monday, August 30th, 2010

When I was a graduate student in Poli Sci at UC San Diego, I worked for a quarter as a Teaching Assistant for an Intro to Comparative Politics class. We taught a unit on ethic conflict and the main takeaway we wanted students to get from this section was that ethnic conflict is not indigenous (or primordial, as older political scientists used to argue), but that it is usually a result of political leaders who bring latent ethnic tensions to the fore as a way to gain or increase their political power. 

For instance, as in any multi-ethnic society, there were always some latent prejudice in the Balkans between the Serbs, Croats and Bosnians, but for 45 years of after World War II (and indeed during the World War II period when multi-ethnic groups fought against the Nazi’s), Tito’s Communist Party was able to keep Yugoslavia together and tamp down any ethnic strife by stressing the commonalities between the different ethnicities and not tolerating ethnic conflict. After the fall of Communism, politicians like Slobodon Milosevich and others filled the political vacuum and began to sew the seeds of conflict with divisive appeals to Serbian nationalism and political speech and action that exacerbated already existing tensions between ethnic groups. The rest, as they say, is history. 

As I watched the national freakout over the planned Muslim community center in Lower Manhattan,  I thought back to this theory as I heard Newt Gingrich rail against the “Ground Zero Mosque.”  Among the would-be- president’s  greatest hits we heard over the last few weeks were the following: “There should be no mosque near Ground Zero in New York so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia.” …and…allowing the Islamic community center to be built near Ground Zero “would be like putting a Nazi sign next to the Holocaust Museum.” In addition to these outrageous statements, Gingrich has proposed a Federal Law which would ban any court from using Sharia law as a replacement for American law (since this is such a burning issue in America).

I won’t spend the time deconstructing these statements because they are outrageous on their face. What I will point out is that Gingrich is engaging in a cynical ploy to gain favor in an increasingly small, insular and  Nativist Republican party in an attempt to blaze a path to the 2012 presidential elections. Similarly, perennial loser Rick Lazio, facing an impossible race for the Governorship of New York against Andrew Cuomo has made opposition to the community center his number one issue in the campaign, regularly appearing on national media to smear the imam and demand that there be an “investigation of the funding” for the development.

There is increasing evidence that the Republican party as a whole are taking advantage of  latent American Islamophobia to gain political advantage. While people like  former Congressman Joe Scarborough and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie have been notable voices of tolerance, many other Republicans have eschewed George Bush-like rhetoric about Islam and joined the chorus of religion baiting. Unfortunately,  Obama’s initial statement in favor of the mosque has played right into the Republican’s hands, handing them yet another cultural issue to use against the Democrats.  

Whatever you thought of George W. Bush (and I thought he was a terrible president), he did get one thing right. Even as his Administration went to war with two Islamic countries and took advantage of American ignorance about the Muslim world to conflate Bin Laden with Saddam Hussein, he consistently made it clear that we weren’t at war with Islam and that Islam was a religion of peace. Whether you believe that last statment or not, that kind of national leadership was a critical component in tamping down ethnic tensions in the wake of 9-11 when many Americans were looking for revenge and ready to strike back at the people who perpetrated the attack on America. To a large degree, this effort worked. Although there was a big spike in anti-muslim hate crimes just after September 11th,  in the following years, these incidents subsided.   

Conservatives such as Charles Krauthamer and Jonah Goldberg have pointed to the liberal outrage about Islamophobia as yet another example of the liberals crying racism when their positions are not supported by Americans. According to these conservatives, the “Ground Zero” conflict is really just a debate about the location of the Lower Manhattan mosque, not whether Muslims can build places of worship. Certainly that’s true for some, but that argument loses some credibility when often vicious protests break out from Tennessee to Florida to Southern California over mosques that are being built within local communities.

Is the United States on the verge of some new Nazism or a Bosnian type ethnic cleansing with Newt Gingrich playing the role of Slobodan Milosevic?

Of course not. Despite the increase in incidents and protest against Muslims practicing their religion, most Americans are a generally tolerant and good people, and I’m hopeful that our better angels will prevail.  But when politicians pander to our worst prejudices and intolerances in an attempt to gain and keep political power, it tears at the fabric of American society, divides good Americans against each other and generally takes us further away from the ideals of tolerance and religious freedom that have made America great. This issue might help Newt win a few Republican primaries, but what he and others are doing is bad for the country.