I wish I could honestly believe this is a parody by the South Park guys, but unfortunately I have seen how some of my fellow New Yorkers are disgracing themselves these days. So I find it hard to even pretend this is a joke.
It’s too bad that every cute-kitten video and movie trailer on YouTube is matched by an example of hatred and bigotry. Or maybe it just feels like there’s that much hatred and bigotry on YouTube at the moment.
(h/t Ken)
YouTube has everything, or nearly so. The parts where you can find things like this video are the sections I tend to avoid.
One of the many far better things to watch on YouTube currently is this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0uuemEJDGU (And in case anybody was wondering: No, this one does not feature Rick Astley.)
Sounds kinda like “Somebody’s Baby” by Jackson Browne, which is just weird.
No, sir, you really don’t.
No, they don’t have to stop it. Legally, they can’t do shit.
It’s not a mosque. Mosques are holy places where only prayer is allowed. This place will have a basketball court and a culinary school.
It’s not at Ground Zero.
They’re wrong three times in one sentence. I think that deserves congratulations.
Shadowen, you’re only scratching the surface on why the forces of ignorance and intolerance are having such a field day with this.
Of course you’re correct on all three of your points, but through the magic of fear-based thinking, all those points only end up strengthening the hand of the fearmongers.
Yes, legally the project can’t be stopped, and that is GREAT news for the intolerant. They get to keep beating the drums of fear, all the way through Election Day in November and beyond. If they’re very lucky, the project will still be around to scare the fearful during the 2012 election cycle, too.
True, the building proposed is not a mosque. But the mindset of bigotry interprets any argument based on definitions as an evasive confession of weakness. By emphasizing that this isn’t a mosque, you “admit” that a mosque would be a bad thing! You also “admit” that Muslims will pray in this building, which makes it similar to a mosque, and by the alchemy of contagion, makes it also a bad thing.
The same twisted logic applies when you point out that it’s not “at” Ground Zero. Such a fact is easily evaded by arguing that it’s “too close,” no matter what the actual distance might be.
I wish my understanding of the vicious tactics in this propaganda campaign could make me more effective at opposing it. So far, none of these insights have helped me at all, since I have no interest in becoming yet another evil bastard who gets rich on talk radio.
“We don’t want a terrorist head quarters at Ground Zero!”
Or anywhere else, in fact.
I understand that being a New Yorker and closer to the events of 9/11 would mean one is a lot more sensitive about things like this, but can’t the people behind that video see that:
A: building a mosque near Ground Zero is the PERFECT way to respond – ie: show the world just how much America respects people of all backgrounds and religions. Respond to the targeted violence of a minority with acts of compassion and inclusiveness to the community at large.
B: this song is really unintentionally funny. As MaryAnn said, it sounds exactly like something Trey Parker and Matt Stone would dream up.
I realise I’m preaching the choir, but alas felt the need to comment anyway.
[blockquote]True, the building proposed is not a mosque. But the mindset of bigotry interprets any argument based on definitions as an evasive confession of weakness. By emphasizing that this isn’t a mosque, you “admit” that a mosque would be a bad thing! You also “admit” that Muslims will pray in this building, which makes it similar to a mosque, and by the alchemy of contagion, makes it also a bad thing. [/blockquote]
Victor Plenty, this is a great way of putting what I’ve been thinking for a while.
Too few people see why this is a bad argument to make: “All Americans should be free to practice their religion. Muslims are no exception. And anyway it’s not a real mosque anyway!”.
Another pundit (I think at Huffington Post) wrote that building a mosque right on Ground Zero would be a preventive measure against another attack. In fact, he said the Freedom Tower is the world’s biggest “Come and Get Me” marker since FDR put the fleet at Pearl Harbor.
Slightly off-topic: All religious people should read Richard Dawkins’ book The God Delusion. Puts things in perspective, you know. Makes you think about God (or whatever name you give him/her in your own particular set of religious ideas). Or watch the film The Invention of Lying, and think again about how important this religious stuff all is to you.
I see your point, Kate. It should not make a difference whether or not it’s actually a mosque, because even if it were, there would be no good reason to oppose it.
But the fact that it is not a mosque, and not at “Ground Zero,” but is being called the “Ground Zero Mosque” anyway – a label that’s still being repeated by some major news outlets that should know better – demonstrates that this protest movement is based on a complete lie. The opponents of this project know that their case sounds much weaker if they call it “a Muslim community center several blocks away from, and well out of sight of Ground Zero.” Much easier to scare the sheep if you suggest that there will be minarets casting a menacing shadow over the site of the attacks.
Language matters, and this is an especially ugly example of its significance.
@Victor Plenty: Thanks for posting the Fareed Zakaria video. He’s the kind of political thinker we need more of in the US. I had already seen Keith Olbermann’s much more strident comments on MSNBC — most of which I do agree with, though I’m not fond of him in general — but Mr. Zakaria states his case with quiet grace and integrity. Unfortunately, I fear that many of those who oppose the Park 51 project will dismiss Mr. Zakaria as well, and for the worst possible reasons.
We must stop the Muslims from building a Community Center with a Coffee Shop and Pool Hall and a Prayer Room! And you know why?
That Pool Hall!
You got trouble Folks! Right here in River City Manhattan. Trouble with a Capital T and that rhymes with P and that stands for POOL.
Oh, I’m sure you folks will enjoy a fresh cup of coffee, but think of the children! Tempted by the… temptations of an easy game of pool! You want Muslims sitting around five times a day praying toward Mecca, no problem? But get them betting on games of Eight-Ball, wasting their hard earned money from the unemployment benefits they get because of the 10 percent unemployment we’ve got nationwide, why that’s Bad! That’s ASKING for Trouble! Trouble with a Capital T and that rhymes with P and that stands for POOL!
…damn, this might be my finest in free verse I’ve ever posted… ;-)
Stellans: I think that’s actually unlikely.
Well meaning the poster may be, but they are making the same mistake bigots are; the belief that Islam is like a denomination, as opposed to a religious category.
In orther words: “Hah, those Protestant terrorists will NEVER attack a tower with a Catholic diocese office in it!”
There are multiple sects and spinoffs within Islam, just as with Christianity. That we demand every muslim everywhere to denounce the actions of a smallish group of muslims (Al Queda or the Taliban) makes as much sense as demanding the Methodists disavow the Catholic pedophilia scandal, or that the Greek Orthodox church should hold responsibility for the FLDS.
I’ve personally known several Muslims who, while continuing to identify and practice their religion, are as westernized as any other native-born individual, and can be as selective about their practices as any “cafeteria catholic”. The monolithic cult of the bigots fevered imagination is just that; imaginary. It’s no different than the “The Chinese/Mexicans/Jews refuse to integrate” myths of the past.
Except we really don’t.
Doesn’t that remark tar all Americans with the same brush, in the same way that some people are trying to lump all Muslims together? It’s true that some Americans – maybe even most, but I hope not – do not respect people of all backgrounds and religions. But the founding principles of the USA set forth that ideal, and over time, we have indeed absorbed many different people and religions into our social fabric, even though there have always been some very loud people who aren’t eager to roll out the welcome mat.
Republicans are a pack of nihilistic assholes. Newt Gingrich, Eric Cantor, et al. know full well that they have no legal leg to stand on to block this “mosque.” This is entirely about humiliating democrats, who predictably tuck their tails and cower.
And then there’s this astonishing bullshit. This dude is running for Governor of Florida, and he has a whole campaign ad devoted to the mosque. What the hell does the governorship of Florida have to do with building codes in New York? If the electorate had any sense they’d laugh him out of the race.
Given the amount of persecution that the Sufi branch of the Islamic faith has endured under the Taliban and the fact that Al Qaida seem to think that the Sufis are not “proper” Muslims, opposing this site makes even less sense. It would be the religious equivalent of forbidding the Quakers from building a centre a few blocks away from a site of a past IRA bombing!
Look, here’s the thing.
With all the hoopla, if they go through with it and build it, there are so many people against it that I don’t know if anyone would want to work or worship there for fear of reprisal from those people.
1) ‘Merica!
2) Most voting majority of South Florida are New York transplants.
That candidate in question is Rick Scott, a former Health Care CEO who got driven out of his job due to one of the biggest fraud cases in the health care industry. And this is a guy the Republicans can offer up to run our state’s governorship/agencies/budgets. /facepalm
What is horrifying is that under normal circumstances an openly scandal-prone jerkass like Scott wouldn’t have a chance in any primary at any level (even dogcatcher). But because Scott is playing to the Teabagger crowd – espousing tax cuts for the rich, God In Every Garage, and “Obama is a Secret Kenyan Muslim” crap – he’s actually running neck-and-neck with the more traditional political candidate in McCollum (it doesn’t help that McCollum’s attempts to coddle the Far Right went over like a lead balloon).
Today is actually primary day in Florida, and this is one of the more closely watched campaigns across the nation. I guarantee you one thing: if Scott wins, the next governor of Florida is Alex Sink. At least it better be: If Scott wins (OHGODNO) Florida may well beat California to the distinction of being the first state to be declared bankrupt.
Every citizen must have freedom of religion, or none have it. If we are going to deny Constitutional rights to Muslims because of the acts of a small group of violent extremists, then we need to ban Catholic churches (remember the IRA), fundalmentalist Christian churches (murdered doctors) etc.
I just have to share this link to a picard facepalm-worthy reaction by the “anti-mosque” demonstrators. This is truly some double rainbow crazy.
http://gawker.com/5619136/
This video is pretty goofy and I can’t really imagine it changing anybody’s mind. That being said, how is it bigoted or hateful to oppose the construction of an Islamic center on the site of a building that was damaged during an attack by Islamic terrorists. I wouldn’t have a problem if the group wanted to build a small memorial to the muslims who had been killed in the attack but building a thirteen story Islamic center at the site does seem insulting to me.
David, it’s bigoted and hateful to assume that the people who want to build the “Islamic center” must be on the same side as the “Islamic terrorists” who carried out the attacks. In reality, these are people who have specifically and repeatedly declared their opposition to all terrorism, their hostility to the terrorists’ ideology, and their determination to rescue their religion from the grip of the terrorist movement.
In reality, the terrorists probably consider these people apostates who should be killed at the earliest opportunity. If we really want to win the war against terrorism, we should be building alliances with this kind of Muslim. We should be helping them to drive the violent extremists further out into the fringe of Islamic culture. This is the best way to deprive the terrorists of the support they depend on to continue their twisted campaigns.
Instead, a few opportunists in our own society have scented blood in the water and seized this moment to seek more power for themselves and more attention for their false claims. They are promoting the absolutely ludicrous and hateful lie that all Muslims, or even any significant percentage of them, want to kill everybody who refuses to convert to Islam.
These fear-mongers have already dealt us all a serious setback in the global struggle to defeat terrorism. If they continue to get so much popular support in the West, history will remember them as having started us down the road to massive strategic errors. The result of that will almost certainly include thousands of additional deaths of Americans, and of our allies across the world.
With all this, I haven’t even started to explain the insult being dealt to our own Constitutional principles by these fear-mongers. They aren’t just insulting Islam. They are insulting the United States of America.
And those are just a few of the reasons it’s bigoted and hateful to oppose the construction of a cultural center by people who have committed no crime, done nobody any harm, and posed no threat to anyone at any time.
Why don’t we just call this what it is?
Ethnic cleansing.
@Victor Plenty and Ted M: you speak the truth. this is a disgraceful time for americans — and a good day for the “know nothings.” i wonder how many people opposed to the islamic center also believe that Obama is a Muslim and that he wasn’t born a US citizen? the confluence of these idiotic ideas is killing me. i dread picking up a newspaper or turning on the news. i am completely boycotting Fox News (either 5 or the cable channel).
I’m a militant atheist and don’t like the idea of ANY religion snatching real estate away from sane people. But by the same token I respect the Constitution, so I can’t side with the protesters.
Remember, even Genghis Khan allowed freedom of religion in his empire. The least we can aspire to be is as good as Genghis Khan.
wait…are we *sure* this isn’t making fun of the protesters? i mean, this is almost too stupid to be real.
@Bill: Today, I drove past a small group of people who had set up a folding table and a small gazebo. On and around that table, they had placed a variety of posters calling for President Obama’s impeachment. Their signs, apparently for sale, were based on the following theme:
Fluorescent background.
Picture of Obama with a Hitler ‘stache.
“Impeach Obama! He’s NUTS.”
Squirrel.
This video is not too stupid to be real.
I figured, like many of you, that this might be a parody or satire or something please GODS BELOW let it be something other than genuine. So I visited wooTV, the originating site. I am now absolutely assured that I would perhaps like to be Canadian.
@Orangutan: You have inspired in me the desire to simply use the sentence “Squirrel.” to express that a particular notion is lacking merit, ridiculous, or so bat-guano-loco that I cannot believe it has been spoken.
Tell me Victor Plenty: Was it bigoted and hateful towards gun owners for the families of the children lost at Columbine High school to denounce and protest the NRA for holding a pro-gun rally in Denver? Was the Simon Wiesenthal center assuming that all Catholics supported the Holocaust when it denounced the building of a convent at Auschwitz? Here’s a hypothetical, is it an expression of hatred to pro-lifers if people protested their decision to build a political command center across the street from the site of an abortion clinic bombing?
This issue is not about tolerance or religious freedom, it’s about good sense and decency. Except for a few whackos the overwhelming majority of the approximately 70% of Americans fully acknowledge the first admendment rights of muslims to practice their religion. We are not trying to get the government to ban the building of Mosques. What we are doing is exercising OUR first admendment rights, through nonviolent means, to let this group know that we find their decision to build this center at this site to be insulting and distasteful.
But it’s not just at this site, david. If it’s just Ground Zero that’s a sensitive location, surely people would be okay with mosques being built in, say, Brooklyn or Staten Island.
Or in New Jersey.
Or in Illinois, or Georgia, or Arizona, or Tennessee, or Southern California.
Surely people are perfectly fine with allowing mosques to be built in all these places, right?
Nope. Apparently not.
Why is that, do you think?
David, it’s bigoted and hateful when you ignore every point I made, and instead of addressing anything at all in what I wrote, throw a pack of unrelated examples and red herrings into the argument.
In view of your refusal to discuss this issue in any reasonable way, and in response to your bogus claim that the vicious public figures opposing this project have any connection to “good sense” or “decency,” there is only one appropriate response:
Squirrel.
The overwhelming majority of approximately 70%? I think I need a Cartesian graph and an abacus.
So, hypothetically speaking, if you personally had the power to prevent this group from building this center at this location, you would, despite your distaste, still allow them to build it?
That was not my intention. The Constitution may protect freedom of religion, but very clearly, there are more than a few people who call themselves American who do not understand what “America” stands for. That is some seriously fucked up shit, that we are unable to educate even our own citizens to a basic understanding of what it means to be American.
I’m not tarring all individual Americans, but I don’t think it’s unfair to tar the American system, which is falling apart in more ways than one.
But only someone who believed that some people should not be free to practice their religion peacefully and within the law would find a mosque in any particular place to be insulting and distasteful.
Either freedom of religion is absolute, or it doesn’t exist.
Perhaps all the people who think that the likes of Osama Bin Laden hate us “for our freedoms” believe they’ll stop hating us if we take all those freedoms away?
Dear Victor, let me respond to your response-
No, it isn’t. At worst it’s stupid and obnoxious. Bigotry and hatred are very powerful words and should not be thrown around lightly. This was the whole point of my response. I was pointing out how wrong it was for you to claim that all people opposing this building are bigots just as it’s wrong to assume that all muslims are bent on world domination (although there are some who are).
I did in fact respond to what I interpreted as the central part of your comment, that is that opposing the center is an expression of bigotry which, for the most part, I don’t think it is.
Actually there are several appropriate responses. Unlike some people I actually read more than one side before I form an opinion on an issue and can believe that people can have disagreements without one side or the other being evil. Here are some counterarguments that I feel are perfectly legitimate even though I don’t necessarily agree with them:
“David, it was not my intention to label all of the people who are upset by this project as hateful of muslims. However, I worry that a lot of muslims will see this opposition and feel isolated and that they will be alienated from mainstream America at a time when we need to make muslim allies.”
Or
“David, it was not my intention to label all of the people who are upset by this project as hateful of muslims. I am worried that certain politicians and demagogues are cynically exploiting this for their own political purposes.”
Or even
“David, it was not my intention to label all of the people who are upset by this project as hateful of muslims. I just feel that they are being counterproductive. Allowing this center to be built would be a monument to American tolerance and our greatness as a people and that is why I support in.”
Or if you need more inspiration, watch the following episode of the daily show
http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/tue-august-17-2010-dick-armey
If I were Mayor Bloomberg, I would absolutely support their legal right to build it. But I would urge the group to alter their plans. For many of those who have studied Islamic history the plan to build a $100 million dollar 15 story structure on the site of the Burlington coat factory that was damaged by landing gear on 9/11 seems disturbingly similar to the historic practice of tearing down churches and replacing them with mosques in territory that had been conquered by the Muslim empires. My solution, to avoid any appearance of Triumphalism would be to instead build a two to three story memorial to the muslims who had been killed on 9/11 and also to the muslims who have been killed by Radical Islamist all over the world. Don’t try to promote the historical achievements of Islam or any kind of political advocacy because this is not the place for that. Instead, simply include verses from the quran that forbid the killing of civilians, compulsory religion, that encourage mercy and tolerance along with photos and facts of Muslim victims of terrorism. That to me would be a beautiful and simple expression that all freedom loving people are on the same side. I would gladly stand by them for that.
David, you make a good show of sounding reasonable, but by quoting me out of context in order to twist the meaning of my words into the opposite of what I actually said, you demonstrate a type of dishonesty that undermines any possibility of constructive conversation.
Bloomberg doesn’t have the power to stop it, and if he were inclined to try he would lose in federal court.
There are two ways to stop the building of this center. One is Constitutional Amendment, which ain’t gonna happen. The other is some combination of shame and intimidation, which is what you’re going for.
“I know you have the right ***airquotes*** to religious freedom, but some people who share your religion have done evil things. Don’t you think that, morally speaking, their actions obligate you to get back in your box and play nice? By the way, I get to define the boundaries of your box and what playing nice means.”
Prettying it up with words like “beautiful” and “freedom loving” is not convincing. Not at all.
What’s amazing is that in a discussion where we are forced to appropriately have the courage to confront our irrational and knee jerk reactions of fear and intolerance to that which is different from us, a comment like, “Republicans are a pack of nihilistic assholes.” is tolerated and goes unchallenged. It seems that no matter what forum one finds themselves in, tolerance and respect seem to extend only as far as those who think and talk like those in our own likeminded circles.
You just challenged it, but only for being mean, not for being wrong. Since I am far more concerned with being right than with being nice I feel no need to walk it back. Prove me wrong and I’ll eat all the crow you can shovel down my throat.
New York City has not been conquered by a Muslim empire. No one is tearing down a church. The U.S. is not at war with a Muslim empire.
What any of this has to do with the U.S. Constitution and American ideals is beyond me.
You are wrong because you are judging and treating people based on nothing but their class or category.
You are wrong because you are judging and treating people based on something other than the content of their character.
And it’s not as if Christians have, historically, built their churches on the sites of other religious sites, have they?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianised_sites
Christianity even went one step further and appropriated other culture’s festivals. Christmas was fashioned from the Winter Solstice and Easter from the Harvest festival.
and christian churches taking over druid and pagan and norse worship sites and building a cathedral over them (as is the case at Chartres at the very least, and probably usurping the sites of mosques all over medieval spain and portugal), or razing inca temples and settlements to the ground, or and most likely and site in the british isles… if one wants to play the blame game on institutional religions, there are plenty of examples for just about every single religion or philosophy current or extinct. it has been 9 years since 9/11. i’m a native new yorker, still living and working in new york city… there has been no rampaging of muslims, no christian churches taken over by force, no burning of christian books, or attacks on jews, or any other violent and forceful act. an islamic *center* where perhaps everyone could find out more about this complex religion and culture would hurt no one, least of all the dead. there is no such thing as the sacred dead… and i’m sick of this whole cult of victimization. only the needs of the living should count. and only going forward and tolerance should be encouraged.
What is political affiliation based on if not content of character? Is Republicanism a genetic trait? Is crass controvery-stirring an immutable biological drive? You’re not making any sense.
Exactly. A point I’d want to raise as a self-proclaimed atheist is that I’m sure that if a plane full of atheists were to crash land on a deserted island, they’s probably end up doing horrible things to each other. It’s not a problem with religion, it’s a problem with people and power, and religion is all about people with power.
I’m reminded of the Stanford Prison Experiment where people were split up into two groups and told to role play as ‘prisoners’ and ‘guards’. The experiment was stopped after 6 days because of the sadistic punishments the guards gave the prisoners.
That’s the strangest part to me. I can understand being afraid of being blown up by terrorists. That’s something that could happen, even though it’s extremely unlikely. I can’t understand the fear expressed by many that Muslims in America will somehow impose Shariah law on America. How would they possibly pull that off? It really doesn’t make any sense- it’s not as if they’re taking over the government or something (Obama being a secret Muslim aside). What is the basis of that fear?
Let’s be honest: at the time, there was a pretty good reason for that. When it started, they weren’t stealing other faith traditions, but using them as a cover to protect themselves from genuine persecution. Once the old religions died out, Christians had been practicing those traditions for generations, so naturally they became part of the celebrations.
All I can imagine is that this fear is being voiced by those who themselves wish/want/intend to impose Christian-based law upon the U.S. They believe it’s reasonable that their religious prejudices can be encoded in supposedly secular law (and why shouldn’t they believe it? it’s already the case in many instances, as with anti-gay marriage laws), so they believe it would also be doable for Muslim religious laws to be similarly encoded. These people are happy to impose their religion upon others, but don’t want someone else’s religion imposed upon them.
You think they’d get the hint, but they don’t.
You don’t have to be religious to appreciate the value of the Golden Rule — Do unto others as you’d have them do unto you — but this does seem to be a basic belief that many Christians profess for themselves. So where is it here? Where is the Christian notion of brotherhood and friendship?
This is yet another illustration of the problem I have with many religious people (not all, but a whole lot of them): They don’t appear to practice the religion they profess to believe in. Most of the atheists I know would appear, judging by their behavior, to be better at following the examples of Jesus than many of the Christians I see. In fact, I can count on the fingers of one hand the Christians I know personally who appear to actually *try* to live by the dictates of Jesus. Most Christians, as far I can see, go through the motions but seem to fundamentally misunderstand what their faith is supposed to be about.
Are any of these protestors asking themselves, Would Jesus protest a Muslim community center? And where the hell are all the not-bigoted, not-anti-Muslim, inclusive, tolerant, brotherhood-loving Christians in this fight? (I don’t mean in this comments thread. I mean in the world at large.) If living the values of Jesus were really of importance to these people, why aren’t they out there counterprotesting, holding up signs welcoming the Muslim community center to the neighborhood? Jesus cast the moneychangers out of the temple. Where are Jesus’ followers casting the bigots out of lower Manhattan?