Go Back   Bloggingheads Community > Diavlog comments
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Notices

Diavlog comments Post comments about particular diavlogs here.
(Users cannot create new threads.)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-11-2010, 04:14 PM
Bloggingheads Bloggingheads is offline
BhTV staff
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,936
Default Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-11-2010, 05:13 PM
Salt Salt is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 344
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Unfortunately for these two, spokesmen like Rauf go on 60 Minutes in the immediate aftermath of 9-11 and claim the USA was "an accessory to 9-11", . . . excuse me, "USA policies" (second point, Americans don't like figures who try to hide their rhetoric behind semantics). Now currently, Rauf goes and tries to build a Ground Zero Mosque. What would Abdullah and Hussein think of the Canadian muslim spokeswoman who denounced the Ground Zero Mosque as a "slap in the face" to all Americans on O'Reilly? It seems like they might agree with her. If they do agree with her, then they would understand what an uphill battle they are fighting. Bonne chance.

Last edited by Salt; 09-11-2010 at 05:16 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-11-2010, 06:13 PM
harkin harkin is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,169
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

As to the question "Why are Muslims urged to denounce terror so often?" - I would change the wording to "when will Muslim denunciations of terror be sufficient?"

They will be when Danes can print cartoons, preachers can burn Korans and Americans can protest Ground Zero Victory Centers without threat of death.

Good luck dealing with the world's largest (and ever-growing) protective racket.

If We Donít Build It, They Will Kill You?

Political Correctness Is Silencing an Important Debate

and Obama And The Right To Burn A Koran

"The president seemed oblivious to the contradiction between his pressure on Jones and his view, repeated at Friday's press conference, that the U.S. must strictly follow the Constitution when prosecuting terrorism suspects -- lest the terrorists win by getting us to curtail liberty.....

........Instead, the president of the United States broadcast his fear that a U.S. citizen's exercise of his liberty will provoke Muslim violence -- without even calling upon Muslims to refrain from such attacks, much less declaring that they would be completely unjustified, and correspondingly resisted."
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-11-2010, 07:28 PM
DenvilleSteve DenvilleSteve is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,460
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by harkin View Post
As to the question "Why are Muslims urged to denounce terror so often?" - I would change the wording to "when will Muslim denunciations of terror be sufficient?"
I agree with them on that one. Jews and some conservatives are always demanding that muslims denounce Hamas as a terror organization. Like when has Hamas ever attacked the US or anyone outside of Israel? Hamas and Israel are at war with each other. Americans should not have to condemn either side. It is not our fight.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-16-2010, 08:02 PM
Starwatcher162536 Starwatcher162536 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,658
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

I'm with Hitchens on this one. Making accommodations in how your society is governed in order to appease a group of people* that go batshit over something as trivial as the cartoon shown below is ill-advised. You can't reason with crazy people.

*I assume said group is only a tiny sliver of practicing Muslims.

__________________
Six Phases of a Project: (1)Enthusiasm (2)Disillusionment (3)Panic (4)Search for the Guilty (5)Punishment of the Innocent (6)Praise and Honors for the Non-Participants
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-11-2010, 07:21 PM
DenvilleSteve DenvilleSteve is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,460
Default people have a right to a country of their own

nice fellows, but gosh, they must be aware that people in the US are concerned they are losing their country to immigrants. Not that they dislike the newcomers. It is just that they like the way the country was and they would like to keep what remains of it.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-13-2010, 12:23 PM
stephanie stephanie is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,921
Default Re: people have a right to a country of their own

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenvilleSteve View Post
nice fellows, but gosh, they must be aware that people in the US are concerned they are losing their country to immigrants. Not that they dislike the newcomers. It is just that they like the way the country was and they would like to keep what remains of it.
I usually think you are just playing a game because it's amusing to you personally. Sometimes I think you are a liberal playing at being a nutty conservative based on ridiculous stereotypes. Right now I'm leaning toward the latter.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-11-2010, 07:42 PM
Dilan Esper Dilan Esper is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Denville:

Do not assume that because you think immigration is the most important issue in the world that everyone else does, or that they are as fervent as you do.

I have seen no evidence that outside of some very paranoid corners of the right, Americans see immigration or the presence of Muslims as an existential issue. They may have concerns about jobs and worry about immigrants who take Americans' jobs, and they may have concerns about terrorism and worry about Muslims who might do harm to America, but this idea that Americans are worried about the reconquista or the impending caliphate is just crazy talk.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-11-2010, 08:09 PM
DenvilleSteve DenvilleSteve is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,460
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dilan Esper View Post
Denville:

Do not assume that because you think immigration is the most important issue in the world that everyone else does, or that they are as fervent as you do.

I have seen no evidence that outside of some very paranoid corners of the right, Americans see immigration or the presence of Muslims as an existential issue.
And all of that upset coming from Arizona last month, was that just a disgruntled few going over the top? The tea party demonstrations? People don't see the immigrants much so they don't get worked up about it. I think it is very much on their minds.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-11-2010, 08:28 PM
chiwhisoxx chiwhisoxx is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,490
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenvilleSteve View Post
And all of that upset coming from Arizona last month, was that just a disgruntled few going over the top? The tea party demonstrations? People don't see the immigrants much so they don't get worked up about it. I think it is very much on their minds.
The tea party almost literally nothing to do with immigration.
__________________
She said the theme of this party's the Industrial Age, and you came in dressed like a train wreck.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-11-2010, 10:37 PM
ohreally ohreally is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 666
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Such decent fellows. I wish they'd said more about poetry. The little I know about Persian poetry has made a big impression on me. Or I wish they talked about Iranian cinema, one of the best in the world today -- certainly head and shoulders above Hollywood's crap.

Too bad they had to be so defensive about Islam, though. I guess they feel they have no choice, with all the hatred around. But, still, it's sad.

Not sure what it means for America to be the most sharia-compliant nation on earth. Is killing Muslims by the hundreds of thousands, a US specialty lately, part of the compliance? I wonder.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-11-2010, 11:26 PM
JonIrenicus JonIrenicus is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,606
Default Points taken, but...

I take and accept the points about not needing to spend every waking moment denouncing radical muslims. And yes, knowing and working muslims personally goes a long way towards making one more at ease.


But with all of that, as long as muslims are carrying out violent acts, in the name of Islam, it is going to place a cloud and suspicion on the religion and its practitioners.


And frankly, empirically there are more issues within muslim societies of violence justified by some conceptions of the faith, more often than not against other muslims.

Until that reality changes, the stigma will linger. And it should, to say it shouldn't would be like asking us to reject an empirical observations of peoples beliefs and how they effect their society. What should never be done is to apply group perceptions based on observations (NOT useless and baseless), and apply that to individuals. That is a no go, and wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-12-2010, 12:44 AM
opposable_crumbs opposable_crumbs is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 504
Default Re: Points taken, but...

Quote:
Until that reality changes, the stigma will linger. And it should, to say it shouldn't would be like asking us to reject an empirical observations of peoples beliefs and how they effect their society.
Just as long as you don't mind that thinking being applied to westerners.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-11-2010, 11:57 PM
Mari Dupont Mari Dupont is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 38
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

I think Muslims would be more effective in their outreach if they focused on
1st Amendment issues; the curtailment of free speech is what I find most troubling.

When Comedy Central yanked the Southpark episode, not because they feared a boycott, but because they feared for the lives of their employees, it would have been rather impressive if Muslim groups would have said "We hate the episode, we find it repellent, but AIR IT ANYWAY."
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-12-2010, 01:09 AM
chiwhisoxx chiwhisoxx is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,490
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mari Dupont View Post
I think Muslims would be more effective in their outreach if they focused on
1st Amendment issues; the curtailment of free speech is what I find most troubling.

When Comedy Central yanked the Southpark episode, not because they feared a boycott, but because they feared for the lives of their employees, it would have been rather impressive if Muslim groups would have said "We hate the episode, we find it repellent, but AIR IT ANYWAY."
But they'd never say that. And this is part of what people have been finding troubling about Islam: the inability to accept any sort of satire or criticism without flipping out and threatening to (or actually) decapitating someone.
__________________
She said the theme of this party's the Industrial Age, and you came in dressed like a train wreck.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-12-2010, 11:07 AM
Don Zeko Don Zeko is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Exiled to South Jersey
Posts: 2,436
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiwhisoxx View Post
But they'd never say that. And this is part of what people have been finding troubling about Islam: the inability to accept any sort of satire or criticism without flipping out and threatening to (or actually) decapitating someone.
There's a pretty big distinction between reacting violently to critical speech, finding the speech distasteful but letting it be, and actively encouraging speech that you find offensive, which is what Mari Dupont is suggesting Muslims should do.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-12-2010, 12:13 AM
cacimbo cacimbo is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 41
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Antepli speaks of how varied Islam is. Fair enough. I for one would like to see some formal lines of separation drawn within the faith. Not just Sunni vs Wahabi but based on degree of fundamentalism, similar to the way within the Jewish faith you have Reformed and Hasidic. Then Americans would be able to start differentiating.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-12-2010, 12:27 AM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by cacimbo View Post
Antepli speaks of how varied Islam is. Fair enough. I for one would like to see some formal lines of separation drawn within the faith. Not just Sunni vs Wahabi but based on degree of fundamentalism, similar to the way within the Jewish faith you have Reformed and Hasidic. Then Americans would be able to start differentiating.
You seem to be asking for the tail to wag the dog.
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-12-2010, 12:40 AM
opposable_crumbs opposable_crumbs is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 504
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by cacimbo View Post
Antepli speaks of how varied Islam is. Fair enough. I for one would like to see some formal lines of separation drawn within the faith. Not just Sunni vs Wahabi but based on degree of fundamentalism, similar to the way within the Jewish faith you have Reformed and Hasidic. Then Americans would be able to start differentiating.
That's a terrible idea, and on a practical level doesn't really work. We had a group that where pretty well defined and separate, they were called Al-Queda.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-12-2010, 01:01 PM
PreppyMcPrepperson PreppyMcPrepperson is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 714
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by cacimbo View Post
Antepli speaks of how varied Islam is. Fair enough. I for one would like to see some formal lines of separation drawn within the faith. Not just Sunni vs Wahabi but based on degree of fundamentalism, similar to the way within the Jewish faith you have Reformed and Hasidic. Then Americans would be able to start differentiating.
It's not like when you meet a Jewish American you know immediately what kind of Judaism they practice. You might know--from patterns of dress--if they are a very strict practicing Orthodox Jew, but everything else you would only know if you asked, or if you know what synagogue they attended, etc. And that basically goes for Islam too: at the congregational level, the lines are pretty formal, and any given mosque belongs quite specifically to one subset, one sect of the faith; at the level of individual practice, you have to ask.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-12-2010, 02:29 PM
preslove preslove is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 12
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by cacimbo View Post
Antepli speaks of how varied Islam is. Fair enough. I for one would like to see some formal lines of separation drawn within the faith. Not just Sunni vs Wahabi but based on degree of fundamentalism, similar to the way within the Jewish faith you have Reformed and Hasidic. Then Americans would be able to start differentiating.
Uh, there ARE formal lines of separation drawn within the faith. If you new ANYTHING about Islam you would know this. Ever heard of Sufism? No? Google it.

Just because you don't know something exists, doesn't mean it doesn't.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-15-2010, 02:23 AM
piscivorous piscivorous is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,593
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

So we should use some form of approved labels. I'm sure the FDA could be of valuable assistance in that.

The labels actually exist and are self defined within the various sects. spend a little time, don't imagine it would take all that long to gather a basic understanding of the general differences; yes it could take a life time to understand the nuances of all the major sub groups, but relabeling them would lead to no further clarity.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-12-2010, 05:50 AM
BornAgainDemocrat BornAgainDemocrat is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: near Chattanooga
Posts: 826
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Abdullah and Hussein ask why they should always be expected "to apologize" for Ben Ladenism when of course what is wanted are disavowals and condemnations of Ben Ladenism, not apologies. It only takes a minute to disavow a person or an idea. You would think these two would welcome every opportunity to do so to non-Muslim Americans wherever they meet them. And of course they should address them in English. The suggestion that this would somehow take away from their time speaking to their own co-religionists doesn't make any sense.

It's hard not to conclude that either these two Muslim Americans are conflicted on the topic under review or else they have absolutely no sense of public relations. Maybe it's a cultural thing, their notion that apologies are what the public expects. So let them repeat after me: Repitition is good. Some things can't be said often enough. Apologies are not one of them. Apologies aren't even in order. Disavowing violence and condemning terror are.

Last edited by BornAgainDemocrat; 09-12-2010 at 06:47 AM.. Reason: Don't apologize, disavow.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-12-2010, 11:04 AM
Don Zeko Don Zeko is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Exiled to South Jersey
Posts: 2,436
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BornAgainDemocrat View Post
Abdullah and Hussein ask why they should always be expected "to apologize" for Ben Ladenism when of course what is wanted are disavowals and condemnations of Ben Ladenism, not apologies. It only takes a minute to disavow a person or an idea. You would think these two would welcome every opportunity to do so to non-Muslim Americans wherever they meet them. And of course they should address them in English. The suggestion that this would somehow take away from their time speaking to their own co-religionists doesn't make any sense.
I don't much care whether Antepli or Rashid have enough time to make sure everyone is aware that they detest Al-Qaeda; the trouble is that your attitude here is foolish and unreasonable. Requiring Muslims to constantly inform the rest of us that they don't support terrorism implies that it's reasonable to suspect that they might, purely because they are Muslim. It would be like expecting Catholic politicians to assure us that they won't take marching orders from Rome in order to be considered by the electorate; if our society isn't harboring unsupported prejudices, then such "disavowals" are unnecessary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BornAgainDemocrat View Post
It's hard not to conclude that either these two Muslim Americans are conflicted on the topic under review or else they have absolutely no sense of public relations. Maybe it's a cultural thing, their notion that apologies are what the public expects. So let them repeat after me: Repitition is good. Some things can't be said often enough. Apologies are not one of them. Apologies aren't even in order. Disavowing violence and condemning terror are.
Ta-Nehisi Coates has a good phrase for this sort of thing: he isn't interested in "proving his humanity" via semi-political argument. Bornagain, you and I are both from states that were part of the Confederacy. Wouldn't you find it insulting if non-Southerners constantly demanded that we denounce secession and racism every time we entered the public square, and then concluded that we must be sympathetic to white supremacy if we didn't spend most of our time doing so?
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-12-2010, 12:51 PM
BornAgainDemocrat BornAgainDemocrat is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: near Chattanooga
Posts: 826
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Zeko View Post
Requiring Muslims to constantly inform the rest of us that they don't support terrorism . . . would be like expecting Catholic politicians to assure us that they won't take marching orders from Rome.

Precisely. That used to be a major issue. But as Catholicism changed and we learned more and more about where Catholic loyalties lay, it ceased being one.

Since 9/11 Americans have legitimate reasons to be suspicious of Islam and its practitioners. Therefore, Islam's practitioners have a responsibility to themselves and the American people to explain who they are. It will speed their acceptance into American society.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-12-2010, 01:02 PM
harkin harkin is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,169
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BornAgainDemocrat
Abdullah and Hussein ask why they should always be expected "to apologize" for Ben Ladenism when of course what is wanted are disavowals and condemnations of Ben Ladenism, not apologies. It only takes a minute to disavow a person or an idea.
Brevity and clarity, and common sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Zeko View Post
I don't much care whether Antepli or Rashid have enough time to make sure everyone is aware that they detest Al-Qaeda; the trouble is that your attitude here is foolish and unreasonable. Requiring Muslims to constantly inform the rest of us that they don't support terrorism implies that it's reasonable to suspect that they might, purely because they are Muslim. It would be like expecting Catholic politicians to assure us that they won't take marching orders from Rome in order to be considered by the electorate; if our society isn't harboring unsupported prejudices, then such "disavowals" are unnecessary.

Ta-Nehisi Coates has a good phrase for this sort of thing: he isn't interested in "proving his humanity" via semi-political argument. Bornagain, you and I are both from states that were part of the Confederacy. Wouldn't you find it insulting if non-Southerners constantly demanded that we denounce secession and racism every time we entered the public square, and then concluded that we must be sympathetic to white supremacy if we didn't spend most of our time doing so?
Ridiculous (or as you say, foolish and unreasonable) - Bornagain said "it would only take a minute" and you turn this into "requiring Muslims to constantly inform".

Nobody is asking muslims to spend their waking hours denouncing terrorism; what many of us are asking is why there is almost no publicized condemnation of violence for 'offenses to Islam'. The Cartoon Network is a great example, they blacked out a freaking cartoon muhammed (in an episode btw where jesus was shown to have projectile diahrea and craps on everything from George Bush to the american flag if memory serves) because they feared death/mayhem. As Mari Dupont points out, the void of muslim support for freedom of speech was unimpressive (but telling, IMO)

And your analogy to racism and secession is specious. It might have validity if southerners had threatened riots and violence over the election of a half-black president. The liberal meme that anybody against Obama's policies is a racist has pretty well been debunked everywhere outside The NYTimes, The Nation and MSNBC.

Here's the question most people don't seem able to contemplate yet: what happens when the death/mayhem is threatened against a particular election result? or against forthcoming publc policy? Doesn't anyone realize that enabling those who threaten violence only encourgaes more of the same and sets an example for those who are not violent and feel their grievences are not getting enough attention? This truly is our future if the non-violent sectors of these groups don't do enough to quell it.

I just got done watchig Reliable Sources where just about everything uttered about the Koran burning by Howard Kurtz and David Corn was idiotic, including the most obvious fact that the 'burning' was the program's lead story and huge photos of Jones holding a Koran formed the backdrop. A tape of Meredith Viera was shown as an example of a 'tough' interview of T Jones; Viera put all the blame for any violence on Jones and the poor idiotic preacher didn't have the wherewithall to point out that he would be merely burning a book, not killing out of outrage for perceived offense.

Great job this week Patraeus, Obama and the MSM!
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-12-2010, 07:45 PM
whburgess whburgess is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,202
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Zeko View Post
Bornagain, you and I are both from states that were part of the Confederacy. Wouldn't you find it insulting if non-Southerners constantly demanded that we denounce secession and racism every time we entered the public square, and then concluded that we must be sympathetic to white supremacy if we didn't spend most of our time doing so?
I'm glad you brought up the being southern thing. I was born and raised in the south myself, although I haven't lived there in years. But I think you raise a good analogy but I would apply that analogy to the Park51 project this way: most southerners who are also proud of their heritage and may have some reverence for the confederate flag as a symbol of that heritage----are not white supremacists and do not support slavery. They will admit those things are immoral, but they don't view southern heritage as being defined by those things alone but by much more that they can be proud of.

Now-when an issue arrives about the confederate flag being flown over a statehouse, I, as a southerner can completely sympathize with black people who see the confederate flag as a symbol of white supremacy and do NOT want to see it flying over the statehouse. However, I would not go on tv and claim that these black people are stereotyping all white southerners as white supremacists and call them haters of all southerners. I realize that any black person who objects to the confederate flag--and in fact HATES southern heritage, is not therefore a bigot against all southern white people. In fact, I bet if you ask most black people who HATE 'southern heritage' if they think all displays of the confederate flag by white southerners is being done by a racist--I'd bet most of them would say "of course not". They understand that that flag represents something different for them then it does for the white southerner.

I don't really have strong emotions about whether Park51 project should be moved. But I very strongly resent it when everyone who opposes the location of Park51 near ground zero is stereotyped in the media and by Muslims (such as the Imams wife) as haters. It makes me support those who are opposing the mosque when otherwise I might would actually support the mosque builders. Just as blacks have a right to find symbols of the southern confederacy offensive without being accused of hating southern white people, so should people whose only experience or most defining experience of Islam is when their families and neighbors were murdered in its name---so should they have a right to take offense to symbols of Islam being erected on the site of that destruction without being accused of hating all Muslims and believing that all Muslims are terrorists.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-13-2010, 12:54 PM
stephanie stephanie is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,921
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Zeko View Post
Ithe trouble is that your attitude here is foolish and unreasonable. Requiring Muslims to constantly inform the rest of us that they don't support terrorism implies that it's reasonable to suspect that they might, purely because they are Muslim.
Yes, which is why I differentiate the matter of principle from the pragmatic response. It's not reasonable to suspect them unless they reassure us. But, it also would probably be useful if they did (and in a quick and dismissive way, sure).

Quote:
It would be like expecting Catholic politicians to assure us that they won't take marching orders from Rome in order to be considered by the electorate; if our society isn't harboring unsupported prejudices, then such "disavowals" are unnecessary.
Such a disavowal wasn't unnecessary -- it basically had to take place before people got over the idea (and people aren't entirely over the idea, in part due to actions by the Catholic Church, which is why Catholic politicians do face and have to address similar issues). This is worth noting in part because I think the situation that Catholic politicians face here is separate from any lingering prejudice against Catholics (for the record, I am Catholic). It has to do with debates within Catholicism about the role of the Church, etc. It's somewhat fair (if often presented in an uninformed and obnoxious way) for people to ask politicians how they deal with these questions, even though it does mean that Catholics face some questions and hurdles that non-Catholics won't (again, sometimes unfairly).

Quote:
Ta-Nehisi Coates has a good phrase for this sort of thing: he isn't interested in "proving his humanity" via semi-political argument.
And that's an absolutely fair position for an individual to take. It can be exhausting, I'm sure, to feel you are playing the role of educator always, and in ways that are frustrating.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-12-2010, 11:20 AM
Don Zeko Don Zeko is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Exiled to South Jersey
Posts: 2,436
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BornAgainDemocrat View Post
And of course they should address them in English.
Why? What is the purpose of such a denunciation, anyway? Expecting it to be in English suggests that the relevant argument isn't going on within Muslim societies about terrorism, but is in fact a discussion within the United States about whether or not Islam is consistent with American Democracy.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-12-2010, 02:30 PM
preslove preslove is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 12
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

They do disavow it, you bigot.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 09-13-2010, 12:45 PM
stephanie stephanie is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,921
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BornAgainDemocrat View Post
Abdullah and Hussein ask why they should always be expected "to apologize" for Ben Ladenism when of course what is wanted are disavowals and condemnations of Ben Ladenism, not apologies. It only takes a minute to disavow a person or an idea. You would think these two would welcome every opportunity to do so to non-Muslim Americans wherever they meet them. And of course they should address them in English. The suggestion that this would somehow take away from their time speaking to their own co-religionists doesn't make any sense.
I have mixed feelings on this. As a matter of principle, I think they are right -- it's wrong for us to demand that American Muslims constantly say they don't support offensive things or be suspected first of doing so. I can't entirely relate to what that's like, as I'm not expected to do so (in most circles anyway) for any of the groups I am part of, but it would be bothersome and seem wrong and offensive, I'm sure.

That said, though, as a pragmatic matter, it just seems that it would be simpler to say "of course I don't agree with bin Laden -- or whoever's -- interpretation of Islam that" [insert issue here]. Not because it's reasonable for me or anyone else to fear that all Muslims agree with bin Laden -- that seems pretty stupid -- but because there is an ongoing debate over what Islam means because some other Muslims are trying to hijack Islam to mean something that people like these bloggingheads find offensive and untrue.

And, yeah, I know some arguments seem best addressed in the group (that's usually how I think of intra-Christian arguments, even, and arguments about what being American means and so on), but there's also just an unescapable fact that in some situations you will be a (not the) public face for a group, and it's important to state clearly your understanding on key issues, however obvious to you. (And I do think that there are analogous situations that most people can think of having to do this or wanting to, even if not so much that you share the understandable frustration and defensiveness that I did sense somewhat.)

And I agree that it wouldn't take long to do (and also that it's been done quite a bit -- the claims that it doesn't happen just seem odd to me), so long as the rest of us also were willing to not use it as an excuse -- which is what I think is feared -- to make the entire discussion about that topic and move on. For example, if I wanted to talk about some interfaith venture and every interview devoted the majority of time to getting me to comment on, say, Terry Jones or the like, it would feel like a diversion and I'm sure one would lose patience. That the media doesn't really address all this sensibly, though, from the perspective of someone wanting a deep discussion and understanding of a religious tradition is hardly new or limited to Islam, though (or religion).

Quote:
It's hard not to conclude that either these two Muslim Americans are conflicted on the topic under review or else they have absolutely no sense of public relations. Maybe it's a cultural thing, their notion that apologies are what the public expects. So let them repeat after me: Repitition is good. Some things can't be said often enough. Apologies are not one of them. Apologies aren't even in order. Disavowing violence and condemning terror are.
I see no reason to assume they are conflicted -- they said nothing to suggest that. But the question becomes why they need to disavow violence, etc., and I don't, even if we are talking about the same topic. That is unfair and presumes group responsibility in a way we don't for the groups we are more familiar with.

However, it's also true that there does seem to be a genuine debate within Islam on these topics so that even though I think it's offensive to assume that someone like these men would support violence based on their religion, it's also helpful and not pointless for them to identify clearly their understanding of Islam in a way which would -- with merely a word or two -- address the concerns of people. I don't think it has to be such a step away from what they want to talk about as described.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 09-12-2010, 07:20 AM
kezboard kezboard is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Great Moravia
Posts: 1,117
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Oh, my. Are these actual Muslims talking about Islam? What a novel idea!
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 09-12-2010, 08:05 AM
whburgess whburgess is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,202
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Very good conversation. I learned a lot from this. Thanks guys.
I think a big problem with most Americans is the only time they ever see a Muslim, as such, is when they are protesting cartoons, burning effigies, saying 'death to America' etc. Most Americans don't know any muslims--especially Americans outside cities. I don't know any Muslims. I've never had a Muslim friend.

I was moved watching you two speak. I see you are good men, I see your dilemma and as a typical non-college educated American--I want to help. I think the first thing you should do is LOSE the words "Islamaphobia" and "Hate". Never use them again. I am a blue collar worker, if hate of muslims was a significant problem, I really think it would be most prevalent among my less educated peers. They don't think of themselves as haters. I very rarely hear a hateful word about Muslims among them. If the subject does come up, it is in the context of middle east affairs, and someone will say something like 'they're always killing each other over there and always will". But the word Muslim is never used. Occasionally the word 'Arab' is used. I can only think of one man I have ever met who specifically would name "Muslims" in a hateful way. And he made people uncomfortable.

So, you really need to stop it with the idea that there is a Muslim hating problem in this country. Americans don't like to be called haters, especially when they don't know any haters and don't like haters. A hater is a bully; Americans hate bullies and resent being called a bully.

As an American, I take it personally when I hear there is a hate problem in America and out of the hundreds of people I know and work with in the construction field, I don't know any people who hate muslims. Keep in mind that most of my peers are just like me, the only Muslims they ever see are the ones acting like a crazy mob on tv. Yet, just like me they have heard Bush and Obama and every talking head on tv tell us that most Muslims are peaceful people. Since we don't know any Muslims, we take them at their word that most of them are peaceful good people.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 09-12-2010, 01:02 PM
BornAgainDemocrat BornAgainDemocrat is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: near Chattanooga
Posts: 826
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by whburgess View Post
Very good conversation. I learned a lot from this. Thanks guys.
I think a big problem with most Americans is the only time they ever see a Muslim, as such, is when they are protesting cartoons, burning effigies, saying 'death to America' etc. Most Americans don't know any muslims--especially Americans outside cities. I don't know any Muslims. I've never had a Muslim friend.

I was moved watching you two speak. I see you are good men, I see your dilemma and as a typical non-college educated American--I want to help. I think the first thing you should do is LOSE the words "Islamaphobia" and "Hate". Never use them again. I am a blue collar worker, if hate of muslims was a significant problem, I really think it would be most prevalent among my less educated peers. They don't think of themselves as haters. I very rarely hear a hateful word about Muslims among them. If the subject does come up, it is in the context of middle east affairs, and someone will say something like 'they're always killing each other over there and always will". But the word Muslim is never used. Occasionally the word 'Arab' is used. I can only think of one man I have ever met who specifically would name "Muslims" in a hateful way. And he made people uncomfortable.

So, you really need to stop it with the idea that there is a Muslim hating problem in this country. Americans don't like to be called haters, especially when they don't know any haters and don't like haters. A hater is a bully; Americans hate bullies and resent being called a bully.

As an American, I take it personally when I hear there is a hate problem in America and out of the hundreds of people I know and work with in the construction field, I don't know any people who hate muslims. Keep in mind that most of my peers are just like me, the only Muslims they ever see are the ones acting like a crazy mob on tv. Yet, just like me they have heard Bush and Obama and every talking head on tv tell us that most Muslims are peaceful people. Since we don't know any Muslims, we take them at their word that most of them are peaceful good people.
Well said. And my experience exactly.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 09-12-2010, 01:06 PM
PreppyMcPrepperson PreppyMcPrepperson is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 714
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by whburgess View Post
Very good conversation. I learned a lot from this. Thanks guys.
I think a big problem with most Americans is the only time they ever see a Muslim, as such, is when they are protesting cartoons, burning effigies, saying 'death to America' etc. Most Americans don't know any muslims--especially Americans outside cities. I don't know any Muslims. I've never had a Muslim friend.

I was moved watching you two speak. I see you are good men, I see your dilemma and as a typical non-college educated American--I want to help. I think the first thing you should do is LOSE the words "Islamaphobia" and "Hate". Never use them again. I am a blue collar worker, if hate of muslims was a significant problem, I really think it would be most prevalent among my less educated peers. They don't think of themselves as haters. I very rarely hear a hateful word about Muslims among them. If the subject does come up, it is in the context of middle east affairs, and someone will say something like 'they're always killing each other over there and always will". But the word Muslim is never used. Occasionally the word 'Arab' is used. I can only think of one man I have ever met who specifically would name "Muslims" in a hateful way. And he made people uncomfortable.

So, you really need to stop it with the idea that there is a Muslim hating problem in this country. Americans don't like to be called haters, especially when they don't know any haters and don't like haters. A hater is a bully; Americans hate bullies and resent being called a bully.

As an American, I take it personally when I hear there is a hate problem in America and out of the hundreds of people I know and work with in the construction field, I don't know any people who hate muslims. Keep in mind that most of my peers are just like me, the only Muslims they ever see are the ones acting like a crazy mob on tv. Yet, just like me they have heard Bush and Obama and every talking head on tv tell us that most Muslims are peaceful people. Since we don't know any Muslims, we take them at their word that most of them are peaceful good people.
This was well put.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 09-12-2010, 01:37 PM
harkin harkin is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,169
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by whburgess View Post
Very good conversation. I learned a lot from this. Thanks guys.......

..........I was moved watching you two speak. I see you are good men, I see your dilemma and as a typical non-college educated American--I want to help. .
If you really want to help, you would do best by educating yourself to reality. Look to polls of muslims in the UK and while you and I harbor no hate to a person based solely on their religion, there is a significant percentage of one religion (the 'religion of peace') that harbors more than a healthy share of hate for non-believers:

according to recent polls of muslims in the UK:

March 2004 -13 percent support terror attacks on the US.

July 2006 - 16 percent support the "cause" of the London bombers.

August 2006
24 per cent agreed or tended to agree that the 7/7 bombings were justified.
36 percent said they wanted Sharia law in the UK
50 percent said British people who insult Islam should be arrested and prosecuted.
Almost 80 per cent said those who published cartoons of the prophet Mohammed should be punished.

Sometimes these polls show that many muslims think the UK government is not doing enough to supress radicalism among muslims. The political correctness practiced and labeling of anyone pointing out the obvious as racists and xenophobes only seems to exascerbate the problem. There appears to be a real struggle (often between young and old) as to which direction islam in the UK will go.

Jan 2007 poll of young muslims
37 percent of young British Muslims want Sharia law in Britain.
36 percent of young British Muslims think apostates should be killed.
13 percent of young British Muslims said they "admired" Al Qaeda.

July 2008 Poll of muslim students in the UK
40 percent support the introduction of sharia for British Muslims.
33 percent support a worldwide Islamic caliphate based on sharia.


Kumbaya!

Last edited by harkin; 09-12-2010 at 01:41 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 09-12-2010, 02:47 PM
preslove preslove is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 12
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

What do the beliefs of UK Muslims have to do with US Muslims?
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 09-12-2010, 03:58 PM
harkin harkin is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,169
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

Quote:
Originally Posted by preslove View Post
What do the beliefs of UK Muslims have to do with US Muslims?
So you say that there is no correlation between the realities of a growing muslim population in a western democracy such as the UK and the future of the same thing in the US?

Are we to ignore the realities of Holland, Belgium and France also?

Which growing muslim population would you point to as a shining example of adopting democratic principals and stifling radicalism?

Even Australia and UC Irvine are not safe.

The only way people can get a good idea as to how a larger muslim population will conduct itself is to look where it already happening.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 09-12-2010, 02:19 PM
opposable_crumbs opposable_crumbs is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 504
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

That's rather encouraging. It was briefly mentioned how just knowing a muslim in a personal capacity seems to influence the answers given when polled about issues such as the New York mosque. Prior to 9/11 the most high profile muslim I could think of was Muhammed Ali, how distant that representation seems now.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 09-12-2010, 01:30 PM
chrisn chrisn is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 57
Default Re: Values Added: American Muslim (Abdullah Antepli & Hussein Rashid)

I think I understand why many on the BH comment board might support the small minority Muslim population, mainly to extend the ideas of diversity which politically and ideologically aligns with their interests. I think both men are shrewd enough to realize that they will be put on the "diversity" shelf by many of these folks (but it's better than nothing). Some good may come of apportioning our universities as "world" universities (full of happy pluralistic interfaith dialogue). But that's my quarrel with the State building left, not these men.

What about the following?:

1. In Muslim societies, it's not politically nor socially (let alone within the religion) to discuss the existence of Allah, and Mohammed as his prophet, and every word of the Quran as true. We're having the debate here.

2. Much of the Muslim world has non-representative governments, lousy economies, and highly youthful, disaffected populations. It is not merely the fault of the over-reacting, colonial, domineering West (and my view of politics is such that every group of people wants security and to dominate others below the surface, with rare exceptions and people in them). What are Americans to do but act in their own interest against a violent conflict between the Wahabbis and the House of Saud...or the twisted vision of Al Qaeda? You can't control these men, so some of them keep trying to come over here and kill us...so shouldn't we keep acting out of our own interests to frustrate terrorism and prevent safe haven...

3. I've been friends with many Muslims (visited a few Mosques in the Seattle area) and found much to respect in the religion, especially the kindness of its people...but so far that compatibility question is still unanswered for me. The religion commands certain things as I've seen it practiced, and those things really are not up for debate.

So, kudos to you gentleman for doing the work that you do. Keep at it, but the BH crowd (and the academic scene) isn't all there is to America, as you probably know.
Reply With Quote
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.