By John Ballard
I am deeply dismayed that so much politics is being played with this issue and that the result is increased feelings of hostility toward Islam and Muslims. American Muslims, who would be the primary users of this center, did not fly those planes on 9/11. I fail to see how they should be blamed or forced to suffer unfair consequences.
The most distressing fact coming from this is that the new intolerance is coming from both Republican and Democratic parties and candidates. Arguments against the center, for example, have come from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reed, a Democrat. As a member of a religious minority (Mormons) that has, in its history, suffered from popular and governmental intolerance, one would think he�d know better. A member of a different minority�Rep. Jerrold Nadler, who is Jewish and who just happens to represent this part of New York City�on the other hand, calls for the center to be built.
President Obama has not helped to clarify the issues at stake. While he made a strong statement of support one night�at an Iftar�the next day he �clarified� by backing off that support.
A couple of days ago, I received an e-mail from the Republican Party in the county in which I live. The e-mail asked that I take part in a poll about whether or not the center should be built. I did not. Instead, I contacted the Party and told them that they should be ashamed to even ask the question. The point was to incite anger at Muslims and no American political party should be doing that, whether or not it gave them some advantage in upcoming elections.
I�m deeply unhappy to find that writers and friends whom I had respected have shown themselves to be simply insane on this issue. Balderdash about �sacred ground� (there are already bars and strip joints equally distant from �Ground Zero�) or �sensitivity toward those who died� (Some 9/11 families support the center; some don�t) or the sheer lunacy of �giving into Islamic triumphalism� is truly depressing.
There were times in my career as a Foreign Service Officer, representing my country and its policies, where I was not thrilled with particular policies, but nevertheless had to find ways to make them understandable, if not palatable. This, though, is a far more difficult challenge. Too many Americans seem to have forgotten what this country and its constitution are about. That is depressing.
Park51, none of my business. My country has its own similar problems when grasping, bigot loving, political parties (here it's the conservatives right now) individuals or interest groups demonize some group of humans as "others" in order to control, or influence a time, or situation. You have people demonizing Muslims. We right now, have our federal conservatives demonizing Tamil refugees.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I doubt anything anyone writes or says will change the opinion of the vast majority of "ordinary" citizens re either building a community centre or accepting refugees. I do find this depressing but know it is really just history repeating itself yet again. I'd hope I might miss any more major new outbursts of this insanity in North America but I guess not.
What has been really disturbing with the community centre, for me, has been the reaction of a few individuals I'd thought might have given a better account of themselves. Here I'm thinking of Obama and Howard Dean. Richard Kim,at The Nation, summed up Obama's performance best in this sentence:
"This honour roll [those standing up for Muslims as full US citizens] even included, for a brief moment, President Obama, who is now twisting himself into knots trying to retract his retraction of his refudiation of the smear." (link: http://bit.ly/cDinhr )
What is with the guy? He seems to have never seen a principle he wouldn't shave so thin it disappears. After this fiasco not much use in paying any attention to him.
Then there is Howard, who could have kept his mouth shut but spoke instead which must mean he does actually believe what he is saying. For Howard, as it seems for David Paterson, it's a matter of decorum. David's position, being black is a bit of a mystery to me, while Howard's I find offensive. Why a mystery and offensive? Because the faux decorum position seems to me to be simply a variation of the trade mark "uppity" stance usually "used by racist old white Southerners to refer to any black person who looks them in the eye".