American Islamophobia

Host nations? Is that like the dog as host to the flea, or the alder as host to the Virginia creeper?

This action is not aimed at affecting foreign policy; rather, it's about raising mobs against a large, long-established minority of of US citizens. Everywhere, they (the same kind of evildoers who dreamed up this little clambake) are inciting people against their Muslim neighbours, protesting the building of mosques and cultural centers, spouting slander and lies on mass media. Pretty soon, it will be necessary to offer Muslim Americans a choice between protective custody behind barbed wire and a ticket offshore. I wonder who'll be next.

Fidel wrote:

Freedom has a new sound. It's the sound of shock and awe over Islamic and oil-rich countries, The religious right in the US is doing a good job of demonizing the new and improved colder war enemy. Fascists tend to identify ordinary people in general as the enemy and never the industrialists or bankers, monarchs or other members of the ruling class. We are supposed to learn to fear and loathe other ordinary people in order to justify US style spending on military in Canada.

Washington D.C. public transit poster, 2005

[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v697/rabblerabble/us_propaganda-36.jpg...

Oh look, there is a token African-American at the very back of the [s]bus[/s] poster. Let's see, 2007 estimates break down the population of Washington as 55.6% "black or African-American" (down from a high of 70% in 1970).... I wonder what peculiar historical circumstances make it less likely that they are using public transport than the red-headed woman or sandy hair/blond chappie in the front (the same 2007 estimates peg the "white" population at 36.3%)

[before tagging "flag as offensive", please ensure that your sarcasm detectors are properly engaged]

Hmmm, stylisticly it reminded me a lot of New Deal/WPA murals [lots of images here] although the vertical grab rail does indeed look a lot like a flag pole.... the red background is a hoot.

6079_Smith_W wrote:

I could see the satire going right over the heads of the bureaucrats who approved it, but I have a hard time believing that the graphic designer could draw it without realizing the obvious homage to fascist/soviet realism (in a pastel motif for the modern starbucks crowd).

I think they've been dealing with Hollywood similar to the way Goebbels and the propaganda wing used film shows to demonize enemies. Everywhere we go we are exposed to violent themes of war in movies and video games. Nowadays a blockbuster movie tends to depict destruction of cities on a scale of Stalingrad or Horoshima and Nagasaki. I think we're being conditioned to accept the ultimate solution to the latest crises of capitalism. They already have a plan written up to attack Iran.

Ramadan kareem for those who are observing and celebrating!

I don't want ito appropriate another culture, so let me start by saying I'm not a believer, but Mr. Ripple is Muslim. I like celebrations and tolerance. He is from Iraq - Kurdish and Sunna ([sarcasm] not one of those good muslims that Green Bone directed us to [/sarcasm]).

We have been on a cleaning jag for several days. Our home sparkles, the laundry's done, the good dishes have been hand-washed and air dried, polished to a shine by a clean, dry tea towel. The pantry, fridge and freezer are stocked (as much as possible local, organic, humanely raised, fairly traded). My bottle of Glenlivet has been relegated to the garage for the month.

It's a long fast when Ramadan falls during the summer months. Imsak (the start of the fast) was about 4am this morning and Iftar (the breaking of the fast) is not until after 8:30pm. I don't fast, but try to be respectful of Mr. Ripple as he does. We had breakfast at 3:30am - eggs, bread, yogurt, fruit, cucumbers, olives, spinach and feta pies, and some cold homemade pizza from yesterday. Lots of water. No tea or coffee, because we went back to bed after prayer. The kids didn't get up with us this morning, but I imagine they will from time to time over the next month.

We've spent the day together, called family around the world (55 degrees in Baghdad today - how's that for global warming? - with electricity running one hour on, five hours off), watched a movie. I watched as my husband, son, and daughter prayed together (really quite beautiful, actually). We read and discussed a couple of surahs from the Quran.

We've strung some Ramadan lights (it's an Egyptian tradition, but it plays well at our house) and are cooking up a feast. The house smells delicious. When fasting, it's not just food and drink, but mean words and anger so Mr. has been nothing but sweetness and love.

Al salamu alaykum (Peace be upon you).

Geez, Ripple, post more often, will you?

Fidel wrote:

[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v697/rabblerabble/us_propaganda-36.jpg...

LOL... thats got to be a gag or joke of some kind.

The Islamophobia cropping up in the USA is not...

Hi Green Bone, that's anti-Islam prejudice and doesn't belong on babble. I know you haven't had a chance to read your last warning I gave you here, so I won't ban you yet. But don't post racist shit like that again.

Catchfire wrote:

Hi Green Bone, that's anti-Islam prejudice and doesn't belong on babble. I know you haven't had a chance to read your last warning I gave you here, so I won't ban you yet. But don't post racist shit like that again.

There really is a double standard here. The people on this forum are free to attack Christians as religious wackos, Jews as Zionist-imperialists, Falun Gong practitioners as some sort of anti-Chinese CIA plot...but you fawn over Islam, even in its most fundamentalist, mysogenistic and homophobic forms, tossing off cute Ramadan greetings. You dismiss the criticisms of people who have actually lived under Islamic law (e.g., Aayan Hirsi Ali), deny stories of women and girls killed for apostacy, and refuse to admit that things like murdering your daughter because she won't wear a bag over her head is something that never happened in Canada before large-scale Muslim immigration. You never take radical Muslim clerics like Aly Hindy, Syed Soharwardy and Mohammed Elmasry to task for their antisemitism, gross gender biases and mysogeny, homophobia, anti free-speech actions and far-right sociopolitical views. You traffic in tinfoil hat-crazy conspiracy theories about 9/11, refusing to admit the fact that a plot launched from a mosque in Hamburg lead to the mass murder of nearly 3,000 civilians--in the name of Islam. You call our troups "war criminals," but laud the Tamil Tigers--a group responsible for suicide bombings, extortion, drug running and child soldiers.

Despite the fact that increasing the population (duh!) means building more housing, using more water and producing more garbage, Catchfire et al. cling to the nonsense that urban sprawl and water shortages can be prevented by New Urbanist planing and low-flush toilets. You cling to the idea that all Canadian immigrants are poor people, when the Immigrant Investor/Entrepreneur and middle-upper classes are what represents the norm. You practise Doublethink by believing that adding over a quarter million people to Canada anually (100,000 to Toronto alone) isn't causing urban sprawl, or stress on local water supplies. And you hide your heads in the sand, when the fact that 71% of population growth is due to immigration. You people are merely parroting the corporate (banks, real estate income trusts, developers, construction firms) line that there is somehow magically no connection between population growth--most of which comes from immigration--and urban sprawl.

And the people here confuse "racism" with legitimate criticism of culture: mysogeny, homophobia and religious intolerance, something you don't consider "racist" when it comes to criticizing Christians, or non-minority Canadians and Americans. "Racism" has crept into an all-encompassing censor word for anything that challenges your anti-western, antisemitic, Christophobic and culturally self-loathing narrative. You find "sexism" under every tree...except when it's in the form of burqas, niqabs, honour killings, child brides and female genital mutillation. And you bristle at "hate facts"--things like the reality that people in developing countries have birthrates many times higher than people in the developed world, something which is not environmentally or economically sustainable. And there was nothing "racist" in my point about host cultures and tolerance: I was merely pointing out that, historically, intercultural friction has been a reality whenever there was a large influx of people from a different culture, including between non-Christian "people of colour" (what a nauseatingly neo-Jim Crow term) like the Buddhist Sinhalese and Hindu-Muslim Tamils. (Non-white, non-Christian people hating other non white people?! How is that possible?) The "no hate-facts" climate of censorship here stifles any level of intelligent discourse, turning this whole forum into an internet era version of a politically correct 1990s university campus.

Please feel free to kick me off of 'Rabble.' This forum pretends to be a place to debate issues, but its nothing more than a sad collection of old Trotskyists, tinfoil-hat Truthers and anti-occidentalists, all "discussing" issues within a sliver-thin ideological wedge.

Um... Greenbone, I don't know where you live, but on the prairies where I do there is actually room for a lot more people, particularly if we make economic choices to focus on settling people outside of cities, something that will help reduce that urban sprawl. And the fact remains Canada still has one of the lowest population densities in the world. So your argument (which properly belongs back in the thread where I made these points once already) is a little thin.

Excuse me if I don't thank you for the demonstration of insulting Islam and a number of other things, including reducing people here to a bunch of cookie cutter forms. Sorry, but I don't fit any of the molds you mentioned.

I have another stereotype for you: people who get pissed off and decide to make the biggest stink they can as they flounce out the door, thinking they're making a great blow for freedom. I have seen it a few times, in quite a few places.

I guess if you're resigned to getting the boot you can be as rude as you want, but there are better ways of sharing your ideas, especially in the middle of someone's holiday.

Green Bone wrote:

In other words, everything you hate about Fundamentalist Christianity, but ramped up a hundredfold. Quit being such dhimmwits [sic].

Not exactly a hundredfold. All those barbaric rules in Islam were actually copied from the old testament.  Same God, same rules.

Quote:

That's a big IF that isn't gonna happen. In places like Grande Prairie, they've already leapfrogged the Power Center they built ten years ago for a newer Power Center further out of town. They're already building a bypass for their bypass. That's the prairies, where there is, allegedly, a lot more room for more people.

You've basically described what's happened to Saskatoon over the last 15 years. We have clover leaves exiting onto other clover leaves without any of them really going anywhere. I call it "Edmonton Envy," or sprawl for sprawl's sake. The city planners claim that the citizens demand hideous new subdivisions, while the mayor thinks expansion makes the town look like a hapennin' place, which in turn attracts business to make us all wealthy.

It's bloody madness, if you ask me.

Ripple wrote:

Ramadan kareem for those who are observing and celebrating!

I don't want ito appropriate another culture, so let me start by saying I'm not a believer, but Mr. Ripple is Muslim. I like celebrations and tolerance. He is from Iraq - Kurdish and Sunna ([sarcasm] not one of those good muslims that Green Bone directed us to [/sarcasm]).

We have been on a cleaning jag for several days. Our home sparkles, the laundry's done, the good dishes have been hand-washed and air dried, polished to a shine by a clean, dry tea towel. The pantry, fridge and freezer are stocked (as much as possible local, organic, humanely raised, fairly traded). My bottle of Glenlivet has been relegated to the garage for the month.

It's a long fast when Ramadan falls during the summer months. Imsak (the start of the fast) was about 4am this morning and Iftar (the breaking of the fast) is not until after 8:30pm. I don't fast, but try to be respectful of Mr. Ripple as he does. We had breakfast at 3:30am - eggs, bread, yogurt, fruit, cucumbers, olives, spinach and feta pies, and some cold homemade pizza from yesterday. Lots of water. No tea or coffee, because we went back to bed after prayer. The kids didn't get up with us this morning, but I imagine they will from time to time over the next month.

We've spent the day together, called family around the world (55 degrees in Baghdad today - how's that for global warming? - with electricity running one hour on, five hours off), watched a movie. I watched as my husband, son, and daughter prayed together (really quite beautiful, actually). We read and discussed a couple of surahs from the Quran.

We've strung some Ramadan lights (it's an Egyptian tradition, but it plays well at our house) and are cooking up a feast. The house smells delicious. When fasting, it's not just food and drink, but mean words and anger so Mr. has been nothing but sweetness and love.

Al salamu alaykum (Peace be upon you).

وعليكم السلام  wa 3alaykom Essalaam!

Ramadhan Mubarak, Ripple! Mahmud is fasting but not Mrs Mahmud, who is non-Muslim.  Thank you for the reminder that fasting is not only abstaining from food, drinks (and for those who don't know) smoking and sex, but also from mean words, gossiping and anger.  

Reading what you had for breakfast (Souhour) made my mouth watering. 

If an "artist" took a shit on a Koran and put it in a Gallery in NY would it be better, worse, the same?  Would anyone here defend an artist\s right to do that?  Are some religions symbols off limits or all of them or is it only about who's doing it and why they are that matters?

Catchfire wrote:

Too bad they couldn't simply denounce it as a violent, fascist action that has no place in a democracy.

Fascist indeed.  But "violent"?

Sven: yes, violent. Words and actions can be violent even if they inflict no physical pain. Make no mistake: this action intends to cause harm to a large population. Violent indeed.

Snert: that's an interesting question, I think. My short answer would be probably, but only if fascism was alread operating in some way in the culture at large. At any rate, I called the action fascist, which it is. And much of America (and the West) is complicit in it. I was fliping by Keith Olbermann last night and he was making a big deal about all the Republican politicians who were silent about how this Qu'ran burning would harm the troops--that is, he was using it to score partisan points rather than denounce it unequivocally as a racist act of violence. The line from the White House  and pentagon too focuses on the "troops" rather than the damage this is doing to the social fabric of the nation. And of course, you can't extricate this action from the campaign of violence and aggression the West has waged against Muslim nations for a decade (or half century, take your pick) and the systemic, casual Islamophobia saturating Western media.

So General Petraeus spoke out against the buring

Quote:

Images of the burning of a Quran would undoubtedly be used by extremists in Afghanistan — and around the world — to inflame public opinion and incite violence. Such images could, in fact, be used as were the photos from Abu Gharyb. And this would, again, put our troopers and civilian in jeopardy and undermine our efforts to accomplish the critical mission here in Afghanistan.

(if there was a real concern about riling up extremists they wouldn't be over there in the first place, or at least they wouldn't have let places like Abu Gharby happen, but that's a topic for another time I suppose.)

The "good" Pastor yesterday said he still thought it was the right thing to do but he would "pray on it".

Today it seems his praying has yielded some results ... "Jesus would burn Korans"

Quote:

But artistic freedom is not a blanket excuse to do whatever you want. After all, no one has the freedom to throw a can of gas on someone and light a match as an expression of art.

I would think that has more to do with causing grave material harm to someone, yes?

But here's the question, and sadly it's a "Yes" or "No" question: should art be allowed to offend?

Catchfire wrote:

VanGoghsEar wrote:

If an "artist" took a shit on a Koran and put it in a Gallery in NY would it be better, worse, the same?  Would anyone here defend an artist\s right to do that?  Are some religions symbols off limits or all of them or is it only about who's doing it and why they are that matters?

Show me an artist who does this and a NY gallery that will show it and we can talk. Otherwise, this is just diversive, reactionary nonsense. Yes, context matters, as always. It's a question of power and effect.

yes I know no Gallery wouold show this - that's the point.

This clown is trying to get attention and it's working - the only thing similar I can think of now is when Marilyn Manson said he was going to rip us a bible on stage in some southern city.  He also got attention and people with picket signs, ect.

 They're not destoying these books to keep people from reading them - they are destroying them as symbols, like burning a flag or some other items symbolic of something - in the end it's just a thing.

So despite the hateful nature of this 2 bit carny preacher and his little group , the right to protest in whatever way, including destroying sacred symbols should be allowed.

Catchfire wrote:

Sven: yes, violent. Words and actions can be violent even if they inflict no physical pain. Make no mistake: this action intends to cause harm to a large population. Violent indeed.

I guess you have a much more elastic definition of "violence" than I do.

If offending people is a species of "violence," then gawd help us.

6079_Smith_W wrote:

@ VGE #39

I don't think it is a matter of rights, because I don't think anyone is actually trying to take legal steps to stop him.

That said, I think it's a terrible, offensive thing to do. It is also completely mis-directed; he's using the spectre of a terrorist attack to whip up religious hatred.

But, I think some people would consider this "a matter of rights" -- specifically, that this joker does not (or at least should not) have any right to do this.

Every person on this thread agrees that what this asshat is planning on doing is odious.  But, when this planned action is characterized as being "violence", that characterization at the very least hints at the idea that this act should therefore be prevented (i.e., this guy does not have the right to do what he is planning because it is "violence" -- and society has every right to stop individuals from engaging in violence).

There is a massive difference between a well-established, upper-middle class Indian-British author born into a Muslim family commiting an act of blasphemy against Islam in a complex narrative and the consequent controversy which was due more to the specific historical moment than the blasphemy itself, and some imaginary "artist" defecating on a Qu'ran and then finding some "gallery" to display this "art." Any connection of these two events--one real and one utterly abstract--betrays an apalling ignorance for how art is conceived, produced, disseminated and digested.

Indeed, while it is perhaps conceivable that someone--even a Muslim artist--would attempt to produce such a piece, call it art, and attempt to get it shown at galleries, it is astonishing to me that such an absurdly hypothetical incident would be brought up in some attempt to explain or account or even excuse the violent, racist and dangerous actions of this idiot pastor, the enabling MSM and the architect of the entire conflict and its discourse, the war machine of the United States.

Catchfire wrote:

Nowhere have I said that this asshole does not have the "right" to do what he is doing. (Although, imo the discourse of "rights" rarely favours the interests of the oppressed and marginalized.) If anything, I condemn the media for their "fair and balanced" reportage of this fascist action, and I vigourously applaud the actions of those who are standing up and speaking up against the side-effects of a racist, toxic system.

So, then, it appears that we pretty much agree on this matter (i.e., this planned action should be condemned in the strongest possible terms -- but not governmentally prevented).