What happens when you mix real journalism and right-wing paranoia?
pretty amazing. really attests to cooper's patience and fairness.
Cooper did a superb job in fielding this moron, but
But what!??? Is it that there really isn't anything one can say to defend this "terror baby" nonsense?
No. Its just that here we have one crazy Republican in the above video and suddenly a broad brush ("right-wing paranoia") is used to paint an overexaggerated picture of Republican concerns about the Obama administration's deficient efforts to secure our country from the Islamic threat. In fact, his support of a mosque at the 911 site pretty much confirms what has always been suspected… that Obama Hussein Barack is an Islamic sympathizer.
Oh my… So giving an example of right-wing paranoia is being unfairly used to, what, give evidence for right-wing paranoia? Have I ever said that all Republicans are paranoid? No. I haven't. But this is as good an example as any of the growing problem of right-wing paranoia among mainstream Republicans – Gohmert is, after all, a sitting member of Congress. I'm not the only one who thinks so either. Will you loosen up a bit if I acknowledge that left-wing paranoia exists? It does, it's just that I don't see it affecting the Democrats policies – if I do, I'll post on it. But it's paranoia that is driving the GOP to actually support changing the Constitution for a non-problem. What does it mean that "Obama Hussein Barack" (wtf? you know the order of his name, right?) is sympathetic to Islam? Do you mean he's sympathetic to Islamic terrorism? If so that's ridiculous and also an amazing example of right-wing paranoia. Reality keeps getting in the way of that delusion. Here's the front page article of the NYT's today: "The attack offered a glimpse of the Obama administration’s shadow war against Al Qaeda and its allies. In roughly a dozen countries — from the deserts of North Africa, to the mountains of Pakistan, to former Soviet republics crippled by ethnic and religious strife — the United States has significantly increased military and intelligence operations, pursuing the enemy using robotic drones and commando teams, paying contractors to spy and training local operatives to chase terrorists."Do you mean that he's just congenial to the religion of Islam or is actually secretly Muslim? That latter suggests that you hold the same paranoid delusions as many in the right, the former doesn't seem like a major problem at all. George Bush also tried to decouple peaceful muslims from Al-Qaeda types – I don't really see the problem in that; it seems diplomatically/strategically advantageous at least if one were to be somewhat cynical about it. Do I sympathize with Islam in the same way since I oppose infringing on the 1st amendment and local property rights of American citizens? I've certainly never been accused of that. I even write blog posts criticizing moderate muslims for giving rhetorical cover for jihadists.
I think it is pretty amazing how people are blowing Obama's statements on the mosque out of proportion. He is defending the right to build an Islamic community center on private property. I think far too many people are missing the fact that the sort of muslims that made 9/11 happen HATE the kind of muslims that want to build this community center. Dave pointed out in another post that this community center is actually a royal FU to the fundamentalists. But people still insist on lumping all Muslims in together. And to top it all off, this inability to differentiate apples from oranges is to the detriment of basic American values like the right to buy property and build on it. Even if you think the mosque is in bad taste, since when does America penalize people for that? Hmmm? This is about upholding basic American values and not applying them only when it is convenient. This is about non-discrimination. And it is about not giving into the ignorance that ties moderate AMERICAN muslims who put up with incessant hostility to extremists who would chop off Abdul Rauf's head and mail you the video if they got the chance.
@Zach:Uh, I don't think so. In March, Rauf stated in Arabic: “I don’t believe in interfaith dialogue.”In May, Rauf gave an interview to Sa’da Abdul Maksoud (on the well-trafficked Hadiyul-Islam website)and stated: "Throughout my discussions with contemporary Muslim theologians, it is clear an Islamic state can be established in more than just a single form or mold. It can be established through a kingdom or a democracy. The important issue is to establish the general fundamentals of Sharia that are required to govern."Rauf’s statements in Arabic directly contradicted his statements to English speakers when he stated: "New laws were permitted after the death of Muhammad, so long of course that these laws do not contradict the Quran or the Deeds of Muhammad … so they create institutions that assure no conflicts with Sharia." Rauf is also an ICC (Islamic Cultural Center)permanent trustee. Until Sept. 28, 2001, the ICC employed Imam Sheik Muhammad Gemeaha, an Al-Azhar University envoy to the U.S., who stated that “only the Jews” could have perpetrated September 11. If Americans knew, they would have done to Jews what Hitler did. Allah says Jews disseminate corruption in the land and spread heresy, homosexuality, alcoholism, and drugs" I'm not so willing to believe that there is is substantive divide between moderates and fundamentalist Muslims. Why? Because as Daniel alluded to, there has not been a broad and consistent moderate stand against the atrocities of Islamic fascism. Moderates would understand that building a mosque in lower Manhattan is affront. Non-Muslims are supposed to be sensitive to the fact that cartoons of Muhammad offend Muslims, but they (the Muslims) cannot find it within themselves to be sensitive about the fact that families of 9/11 victims are offended by a mosque so close to the ashes of 9/11.Double standard by the left & their radical Muslim buddies.
@ PatI hope it pleases you to know that soon (I hope in the next day or two) to post on what you call the "double standard" and people's sensitivities.
@ patThe ICC employed a guy who said argument is not credible and detracts from what you are trying to convey. This is a simple logical fallacy.As a member of what you would call the left, I find your radical Muslim buddies statement pretty disturbing. It also detracts from your credibility. What double standard by the left? The only double standard you point to is the cartoons and the community center! Where does the American left play in with the cartoons? Once again, another logical fallacy. This time, however, we're dealing with an association fallacy in two steps. First you associate the community center people with the cartoon folks without presenting any real evidence (or fake evidence for that matter) and then you associate the American left to them. I live in France and can get good swiss cheese whenever I want. So throw your insulting swiss cheese arguments in the trash and try again. I am not a terrorist sympathizer or their "buddy".
Zach…but you do believe that there are moderate Muslims even without witnessing any of them unequivocally denouncing terrorism, the 9/11 attacks, Osama Bin Laden, Hamas, Hizbolla, forced sharia law, etc.??I’d be curious what your reaction would be to a militia group opening up an ostentatious new office headquarters right across from the site of the demolished Murrah building in Oklahoma City.
PatMuslims all over the world have denounced the attacks and terrorism in general. I am friends with Muslims who think terrorism is horrible and disgusting. I have discussed every topic under the sun with Muslim friends who are fantasic upstanding people. So yes, I believe there are moderate Muslims. I don't understand why you would feel comfortable assuming I haven't "witnessed any of them unequivocally denouncing terrorism…". May I pose an honest three-pronged question out of curiosity? Do you know any Muslims, are you friends with any, or have you been to a country with a Muslim majority?A quick little google search led me to this long but not exhaustive list of Muslim leaders, organisations, and normal people that have publically denounced the attacks, most on the basis that the attacks were unislamique. http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.phpIn response to your militia scenario… I recognize the right to bear arms and for militias to exist. If a militia wants to set up an office in Oklahoma City, that is fine with me as long as it is within their rights to do so. Of course, I would hope it would be done in such a way as to educate citizens that the word "militia" does not imply "domestic terrorist organization". I'd like to note that the Cordoba Initiative seeks to improve dialogue between the Muslim world and the West. This is their stated goal. If you haven't been to their website already, I would recommend it. We appear to be dealing with quite progressive Islam here. We're talking about outspoken advocates of women's empowerment, opponents of violent extremism, proponents of improved relations between the West and the Muslim world. How you could possibly feel comfortable linking these people to Al-Queda is beyond me.
Zach,I work with a few Muslims and they are good hardworking people. However, despite their strict conservative religiosity, they surprisingly embrace the American Democratic party (ironically, so do most of the Jewish people I work with) and are very quick to condemn the "evils of capitalism". This never meshed well with me and when challenged, it is the lack of conservative values in America that these Muslims seem to abhor! When I ask them why then they support liberalism they simply denounce George Bush. This makes me a bit suspicious. When pressed harder I begin to pickup on their antisemitism and their unreasonable dislike of our anti-terrorism policies (particularly under George Bush). Hence my personal belief that the term "moderate Muslim" is just a matter of degree. They may not strap a bomb to their back, but nor are they actively trying to stop terror either. "Moderate" is an overused word by the left who desperately tries to convince the west that Islam is not a problem. But beliefs matter and when people believe in Jihad and martyrdom there are going to be suicide bombings. The Koran is a war manual- and people think it's the word of God. To ignore the role that religion (now and historically) plays in politics is foolish. You don't see Tibetan Buddhists bombing time square because of our support for China.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.