. Reid my lips: the Downtown mosque

Great link, WCW!

Read WCW's proffered link. Great effort by that blogger!

It blows my mind that Americans act as if Islam is some exotic foreign religion new to our shores. MANY of the Africans brought to this land as slaves were Muslim. And we aren't talking about a pittance; I mean MANY. Also, lest we forget, one of America's beloved heros -- a man that stood up to white supremacy with his audacious self - Muhammad Ali - is a Muslim. He gets on his knees and prays to Allah too. And, lest we forget, Malcolm X - El Haj Malik Shabazz -- he too was a Muslim, as is another great American, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, as are and were some of the founders and developers of the wonderful classical music form we know as Jazz. Listen to Coltrane's 'A Love Supreme' three times and tell me what you hear....

9 years ago I went to school not too far from the World Trade Center. Quite nearby on Church Street there is a great restaurant called Pakistani Tea House. Ask practically ANY New York city cab driver to take you there; they all know where it is. It's owned and operated by Muslims -- as are at least 30 percent of all the food places on Church street -- mere feet away from the World Trade Center site. In fact, I recall as shortly as a week after that horrible day I made my way to the Pakistani Tea House to get something to eat but I couldn't get by the police blockade. The cops were gracious enough to allow the Muslim proprietors to come to the police blockade -- a BLOCK away -- and take food orders. People waited in line a block away from the store to buy the food; what a New York moment. It gives me chills just recalling it now.

Years later, working in corporate America in the Wall Street area I would buy fruit from a Pakistani brother right at the corner of Broadway and Center Street. Working right beside him -- to this day -- is a Senegalese brother who makes his living selling African art, and 'I Love New York' t-shirts. I have NO DOUBT that they both DO love New York. And, if I happened to be downstairs, I would often find them AND OTHERS facing east, on their mats, a mere BLOCK away from the World Trade Center site (i.e. 'Ground Zero') paying spiritual homage to Allah Supreme... And as they do this New Yorkers pay homage and respect themselves by walking by unobtrusively, not skipping a beat, nor blinking a judging eye; again, goosebumps. A wonderful New York moment.

To hear the rest of the country rant and rave about the threat of Muslim extremism near 'Ground Zero' is understandable; they don't live here. But Hamilton's cross-eyed rhetoric doesn't have that handicap. He has little excuse. He is of the belief that our government should somehow intervene and prevent the Islamic center from existing on Park Place; just because he [and others] doesn't like the idea of it. This rubs me the wrong way primarily because amidst the context of the Brooklynian, I have some experience with how power, manifested unfairly, curdles into threat...

Hamilton, it's all there in the the first Amendment dude -- written 220 years ago!
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or PROHIBITING the free exercise thereof or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

At the same time, a point made in the Financial Times two weeks ago in a letter to the editor made a great point about the building of an Islamic center so close to a site where the perpetrators of violent acts claimed the defense of Islam as their rationale. The writer said that just as he thinks the builders of this center have every right to build, so would followers of the Shintoist faith have the right to build a shrine in close proximity to Pearl Harbor. Many of the Kamakaze Japanese fighter pilots were Shintoists... The fact is that it is ARGUABLY in poor taste to build the mosque so close to the World Trade Center site, and I think that is what Hamilton is struggling to express. But this is America, and while we might take a moral stance against something, that doesn't mean that something that most of us deem wrong should concomitantly be made illegal. There is due process for the sane here....

Well said.

MHA wrote:
Years later, working in corporate America in the Wall Street area I would buy fruit from a Pakistani brother right at the corner of Broadway and Center Street. Working right beside him -- to this day -- is a Senegalese brother who makes his living selling African art, and I love New York t-shirts. I have NO DOUBT that they both DO love New York. And, if I happened to be downstairs, I would often find them AND OTHERS facing east, on their mats, a mere BLOCK away from the World Trade Center site (i.e. 'Ground Zero') paying spiritual homage to Allah Supreme... And as they do this New Yorkers pay homage and respect themselves by walking by unobtrusively, not skipping a beat, nor blinking a judging eye; again, goosebumps. A wonderful New York moment.

Beautiful, stirring post, MHA. It reminded me of what is *great* about this country. As well as this city.

MHA wrote:
The writer said that just as he thinks the builders of this center have every right to build, so would followers of the Shintoist faith have the right to build a shrine in close proximity to Pearl Harbor. Many of the Kamakaze Japanese fighter pilots were Shintoists...

Well, and that's the thing, though. The "muslims" that killed thousands aren't the Muslims that want to have this community center. If there are many factions of Christianity it is safe to assume there are many factions of the Muslim faith.

Why don't people get that???

Edited to add- LOVE Pakastani Tea House!

....or so the person who looks like the offensive person wants to believe.

It's all a mental game of saying to yourself "that person does not speak for me".

We all do it. I play that game when I see people who look a heck of lot like me express views that I disagree with.

From 40 feet away, I could pass for Glenn Beck, or that young guy who just slashed a muslim taxi driver....

well for me, it is a matter of survival. I'd end up angry all of the time if I thought I was responsible for what some white males said. [instead, I "only" ended up with a mild case of anomie]

...on occasion, I perceive the need to tell myself and others that I am nothing like them. And lately, I've found myself hoping and fearing that others do not perceive me as being like "them" simply because I look like "them".

Like everyone else in the world, I'd like to be thought of as an individual.

Thankfully, I'm not often blamed for the actions of people who look like me.
Unlike muslims, I do not feel as if I have to go around stating "I am not a radical", "I am not like them" to everyone I meet.

(It really sucks to go thru life being blamed for the actions of others. The fact that such accusations often come from people who don't know you just compounds the issue).

So, what is to be done about the Hamiltons of the country? Hamilton states a sentiment that I can find no logic to support. He is arguing that public policy should not allow this mosque to be built because a sizable portion of the country has no regard for Islam, muslims, and Arab-looking people (hereafter IMA). The 'Hamiltonians' have a visceral, averse reaction to IMA. All the logic in the world, all the talk about the Constitution and the First Amendment does not change their sentiment, or what they want to do. Let's be clear here. The Hamiltonian desire to prevent the Islamic center from existing is anti-intellectual. It is biased. He has every right to hold that opinion, but he cannot illustrate how the law, as enumerated by the Constitution, justifies his actions. Hamilton and the Hamiltonians are un-American.

So I stand by my initial claim that he holds a biased view predicated on race and creed.

As a country, we've tried many things based on the theory that "familarity destroys contempt and fear".

Busing
affirmative action
the civil rights act of 1964
lots of cheesy bumper stickers that read "celebrate diversity" or "coexist"
international food festivals
an education curriculum that teaches about others traditions and history

All come quickly to mind.

I tend to view the issue as being an understandable, but certainly not desirable, response to fear. It is natural to fear people that we know nothing about, or whom we have been told to fear.

The community center could dispel such fear, but it would have to be really well done.

The LDS and the national mosque in Malaysia (see above) were two places I've seen in my life that really attempted to present people we have been told to "fear or dislike" in a way that made the attendee stop and think. Both were constructive, well financed operations that were professionally run.

... But sometimes the best we can do with people is make sue they do not act on thier thoughts violently.... The hate groups in Idaho and elsewhere come to mind.

Note, my post avoids discussing Hamilton per se. I have no idea why he believes what he does, or whether he is capable of violence. People take time
to heal from traumatic events.... Some longer than others. However, I take the position that society can not wait for them to heal (or "understand") if it means someone's civil rights will be denied.

MHA wrote: I do think it's disengenuous that the Muslims who want to build this center did not anticipate that there would be some backlash against it because of its close proximity to the World Trade Center site. They had to know that there would be uproar about it. Also, let's be clear here. The fact that there is discourse about this says something about the grand nature of the United States of America. For the sake of not stepping on toes, why can't the prospective builders of this site make attempts to build it somewhere else? Is no one going to say here that it's in poor taste to build it so close? Really? No one sees how this could be deemed insensitive, though absolutely legally valid?

I don't see how it's "insensitive" at all, unless one holds all Muslims responsible for the actions of the handful of terrorists responsible for 9/11.

But could it be "deemed insensitive"?

If some members of the Shintoist faith built a comunity center with a Shintoist shrine in close proximity to Pearl Harbor, isn't it possible that family members of U.S. soldiers who died might take offense? Might deem it insensitive?

Five minutes after I painstakingly clean the incredibly smudged glass of the doors to my apartment building, my neighbor, who CONSTANTLY sees me doing this, comes out of his cave and puts his greasy paws all over it. He has every right to do that. He lives here. He pays his rent just as I do. Can his behavior be 'deemed insensitve'? Can't I say, 'Now you MUST know that I would find your actions upsetting.'?

Similarly, all Muslims cannot be held responsible for the actions of a handful of zealots, but the ones that want to build this center in such close proximity to the site where the zealots used an Islamic rationale to kill thousands must be aware of how there actions will be interpreted, no?

If I approach my neighbor, you know what he'll say? "Why do you think I did it? And even IF I did, don't you think it's predjudice of you to jump to conclusions and think it's disrespectful of me to put my hand on the glass you made clean? To assume I did it WITH INTENT to upset you? Why can't you think that I had NO INTENT behind putting my hand on the glass?''

You want to know what my response would be? "Motherfucker YOU saw me cleaning the glass!" How could you NOT KNOW this is important to me? It's YOUR actions which intimate disrespect, and not my reaction to your dirty ass hand on the glass I just cleaned five minutes ago..."

Similarly, how could this 'we are the world' loving moderate Muslim Imam not know this would cause an uproar? He has EVERY right to build it his center there, but I'm sorry, it's in poor ass taste.

Hmmm, Sweet Tea, I read an Op-ed piece or two in the times criticizing Mr. Beck. I don't recall a 'this should be stopped' theme. I will have to take another look. But yeah, Glenn Beck was in poor taste and must've known his demonstration would upset people.

I think the Islamic Center placement is an act of power. As was Glenn Beck's demonstration. As are my neighbors greasy paw prints. They are all doing it because THEY CAN; and that's the bottom line.

For all, underneath the innocent veneer IS a sneer and the silent retort, 'What are you gonna do about it?'

Perhaps.

But I think someone (or group) could say similar things of a lot groups. Examples:

Yes, gay people should have all of the rights as us, but do they have to insist upon calling it marriage?

Yes, black people should be able to vote, but I think they elected Marion Barry again just to piss me off.

Yes, you have freedom of religion, but the idea of you baptizing dead Jewish people so they can go to heaven really is obnoxious.

.....civil rights are hard. Yes, there are people out there who use them in a manner to deliberately provoke ....as an act of power.

It sucks that rights are an absolute, and can't be waived in situations like I mention. When society tells a group of people that they are hated, sometimes they respond by finding a way to say "well, we hate you back, and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it".

All I can tell you is that I believe a society without basic rights is far worse.

I'll tolerate the occasional group that won't accept what I consider to be their "responsibilities to be polite" rather than live in a society in which I have no inherent rights.

.....if I had no opinions, or felt that I was always going to be in the majority, I might focus more on a democratic approach. I'd also waive rights for people I did not like if I thought it would not begin a quick process in which EVERYONE'S rights would soon be at risk.

My iPhone is acting up and won't let me edit my post above.

Please edit " in situations like I mention" to instead read "in situations people may find actions insensitive or offensive"

...the prior version could be misinterpreted

I go further than WCW. I argue that not even my immediate community has the right to curtail my rights.

Note: .....private entities are not the same as communities.