(Saylor note: Could not have said it better myself.)
Letter to the Editor written by John Selvidge, Oklahoma City
Published: December 8, 2010
The Oklahoman
Leonard Pitts Jr.'s “Mourning the loss of America's mind” (Commentary, Dec. 3) is much appreciated for injecting a dose of common sense into the hysteria over Oklahoma's recent anti-Sharia referendum. Regardless of what the measure's backers might wish us to believe, the Constitution does, in fact, provide for the protection of religious freedoms and against the legislative singling out of any religious group for official censure by the government.
U.S. District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange was right to issue an injunction against the referendum. Her decision was rooted squarely in constitutional principle, not some fuzzy notion of political correctness, and represents fundamental American values more truly than those who would seek to label her an “activist judge” for her ruling.
Fears that the most egregious offenses against a free society, such as those practiced under Taliban rule or other hard-line theocratic Islamic regimes, could somehow gain a legal foothold in our country or our state remain unfounded. Balanced and well-considered rulings like this one are a good part of the reason. The real danger lies in the anti-American efforts of demagogues like the legislators who whip up and exploit anti-Muslim sentiment in the name of a false patriotism. We don't need incoherent, pre-emptive campaigns against “the law of Islam,” whatever the referendum's authors take this to mean.
We should place trust instead in the principles of honest debate, tolerance and fair treatment before the law that set our society apart from those who would rather govern by fear and terror.
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Monday, November 15, 2010
Elibiary: Muslims Can be Patriots, Too
Opinion
Muslims Can Be Patriots, Too
By Mohamed Elibiary
Published November 12, 2010
I was recently appointed a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC) and had the honor of swearing an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”
Some of my track record over the past several years helping to confront foreign-inspired threats to our homeland has recently been made public. That same patriotic track record, however, was met with outrage in what I can only call the "keyboard crusader" corner of the blogosphere. Why? Because a Muslim was appointed to such a position.
What is becoming more obvious daily is that here at home we have some of our fellow citizens here at home have an unevolved view of the clash of civilizations. This self-righteous camp claims to be fighting to counter Bin Laden’s ilk by broadening the enemy category to the religion of Islam and/or casting broad suspicions on all Muslims.
It’s accurate to diagnose the American people as a confused bunch. After all, we are still debating who attacked us on 9/11 and what their ideology was. On the one hand, there are those see our enemy, post-9/11, as Al Qaeda and the global pseudo-jihad movement it spearheads. Then, there are others who believe in a "conveyor belt" theory of sorts. They feel that "Islamism" or the merging of one’s religious identity and nationalism is a gateway to extremism. -- Just as marijuana is considered by some as a "gateway" to harder drugs.
Currently the majority of academics and center-left think tanks view non-violent Islamists as the largely benign Muslim version of Evangelical Christians and therefore natural allies in countering Al-Qaeda and expanding democracies. That view is opposed by right-wing think tanks and security hawks who view non-violent Islamism as merely a pre-cursor stage to violence and an eventual threat to U.S. foreign policy objectives in the Middle East. All these groups and their viewpoints enrich our public discourse and generally welcome nuanced analysis of their point of views in a civil public discourse.
Finally however there is a unique category that views the circle of threat as not pseudo-jihadists or Islamists, but instead as the religion of Islam itself. They’re quick to classify any action by any public Muslim figure as “deception” in the pursuit of an ultimate goal to “subvert our Constitution” and impose a “Caliph” guided by the Koran in its place.
Many of our fellow citizens have spent the greater part of the past nine years confused as to whom our country’s enemy is and in response lash out harmfully at a great number of innocent fellow citizens. We must remember that one can’t listen while he’s shouting, nor discern while conflating broadly into global conspiracies, and only dialoging with sell-out “moderate” Muslims willing to reinforce what we want to believe is not patriotism but simply pouring Novocain upon our paranoia.
The intelligence field is basically about collecting information and producing analytical products to inform government’s policy making process. The counter-intelligence field is basically about playing defense against others trying to steal our national secrets or advance subversion operations against us. Our collective challenge therefore is to identify who America’s enemies are, what their plan is and where to draw the line between “us” and “them” so we stop suffering from fratricide.
An important step down the path of consensus and true service to our country is to settle our post 9/11 public conversation on who exactly “belongs” as an American. We can achieve that by not attempting to outsmart our common sense and adopt separate standards for separate religions and groupings of Americans in our public discourse about security topics. Simply put if we can't substitute the word "Jew" or "Christian" when speaking of Muslims then we should be wise enough to know that’s not the proper way to state a perspective.
There is no valor in being ugly or debasing our democracy’s public discourse in a bullying manner, just evil cowardice.
As Martin Luther King Jr. said, “When evil men plot, good men must plan. When evil men burn and bomb, good men must build and bind. When evil men shout ugly words of hatred, good men must commit themselves to the glories of love…”
Mohamed Elibiary is a national security expert and an advisor to several government agencies and American Muslim community groups. His e-mail address is melibiary@texasintel.org.
Muslims Can Be Patriots, Too
By Mohamed Elibiary
Published November 12, 2010
I was recently appointed a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC) and had the honor of swearing an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”
Some of my track record over the past several years helping to confront foreign-inspired threats to our homeland has recently been made public. That same patriotic track record, however, was met with outrage in what I can only call the "keyboard crusader" corner of the blogosphere. Why? Because a Muslim was appointed to such a position.
What is becoming more obvious daily is that here at home we have some of our fellow citizens here at home have an unevolved view of the clash of civilizations. This self-righteous camp claims to be fighting to counter Bin Laden’s ilk by broadening the enemy category to the religion of Islam and/or casting broad suspicions on all Muslims.
It’s accurate to diagnose the American people as a confused bunch. After all, we are still debating who attacked us on 9/11 and what their ideology was. On the one hand, there are those see our enemy, post-9/11, as Al Qaeda and the global pseudo-jihad movement it spearheads. Then, there are others who believe in a "conveyor belt" theory of sorts. They feel that "Islamism" or the merging of one’s religious identity and nationalism is a gateway to extremism. -- Just as marijuana is considered by some as a "gateway" to harder drugs.
Currently the majority of academics and center-left think tanks view non-violent Islamists as the largely benign Muslim version of Evangelical Christians and therefore natural allies in countering Al-Qaeda and expanding democracies. That view is opposed by right-wing think tanks and security hawks who view non-violent Islamism as merely a pre-cursor stage to violence and an eventual threat to U.S. foreign policy objectives in the Middle East. All these groups and their viewpoints enrich our public discourse and generally welcome nuanced analysis of their point of views in a civil public discourse.
Finally however there is a unique category that views the circle of threat as not pseudo-jihadists or Islamists, but instead as the religion of Islam itself. They’re quick to classify any action by any public Muslim figure as “deception” in the pursuit of an ultimate goal to “subvert our Constitution” and impose a “Caliph” guided by the Koran in its place.
Many of our fellow citizens have spent the greater part of the past nine years confused as to whom our country’s enemy is and in response lash out harmfully at a great number of innocent fellow citizens. We must remember that one can’t listen while he’s shouting, nor discern while conflating broadly into global conspiracies, and only dialoging with sell-out “moderate” Muslims willing to reinforce what we want to believe is not patriotism but simply pouring Novocain upon our paranoia.
The intelligence field is basically about collecting information and producing analytical products to inform government’s policy making process. The counter-intelligence field is basically about playing defense against others trying to steal our national secrets or advance subversion operations against us. Our collective challenge therefore is to identify who America’s enemies are, what their plan is and where to draw the line between “us” and “them” so we stop suffering from fratricide.
An important step down the path of consensus and true service to our country is to settle our post 9/11 public conversation on who exactly “belongs” as an American. We can achieve that by not attempting to outsmart our common sense and adopt separate standards for separate religions and groupings of Americans in our public discourse about security topics. Simply put if we can't substitute the word "Jew" or "Christian" when speaking of Muslims then we should be wise enough to know that’s not the proper way to state a perspective.
There is no valor in being ugly or debasing our democracy’s public discourse in a bullying manner, just evil cowardice.
As Martin Luther King Jr. said, “When evil men plot, good men must plan. When evil men burn and bomb, good men must build and bind. When evil men shout ugly words of hatred, good men must commit themselves to the glories of love…”
Mohamed Elibiary is a national security expert and an advisor to several government agencies and American Muslim community groups. His e-mail address is melibiary@texasintel.org.
Monday, October 4, 2010
North American Muslims Stand for Free Speech
Credit to Sheila Musaji, founding editor of The American Muslim for initiating the below statement on free speech. I endorse it.
Follow this link to see the full list of endorsers.
A DEFENSE OF FREE SPEECH BY AMERICAN AND CANADIAN MUSLIMS
We, the undersigned, unconditionally condemn any intimidation or threats of violence directed against any individual or group exercising the rights of freedom of religion and speech; even when that speech may be perceived as hurtful or reprehensible.
We are concerned and saddened by the recent wave of vitriolic anti-Muslim and anti-Islamic sentiment that is being expressed across our nation.
We are even more concerned and saddened by threats that have been made against individual writers, cartoonists, and others by a minority of Muslims. We see these as a greater offense against Islam than any cartoon, Qur’an burning, or other speech could ever be deemed.
We affirm the right of free speech for Molly Norris, Matt Stone, Trey Parker, and all others including ourselves.
As Muslims, we must set an example of justice, patience, tolerance, respect, and forgiveness.
The Qur’an enjoins Muslims to:
* bear witness to Islam through our good example (2:143);
* restrain anger and pardon people (3:133-134 and 24:22);
* remain patient in adversity (3186);
* stand firmly for justice (4:135);
* not let the hatred of others swerve us from justice (5:8);
* respect the sanctity of life (5:32);
* turn away from those who mock Islam (6:68 and 28:55);
* hold to forgiveness, command what is right, and turn away from the ignorant (7:199);
* restrain ourselves from rash responses (16:125-128);
* pass by worthless talk with dignity (25:72); and
* repel evil with what is better (41:34).
Islam calls for vigorous condemnation of both hateful speech and hateful acts, but always within the boundaries of the law. It is of the utmost importance that we react, not out of reflexive emotion, but with dignity and intelligence, in accordance with both our religious precepts and the laws of our country.
We uphold the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Both protect freedom of religion and speech, because both protections are fundamental to defending minorities from the whims of the majority.
We therefore call on all Muslims in the United States, Canada and abroad to refrain from violence. We should see the challenges we face today as an opportunity to sideline the voices of hate—not reward them with further attention—by engaging our communities in constructive dialogue about the true principles of Islam, and the true principles of democracy, both of which stress the importance of freedom of religion and tolerance.
Follow this link to see the full list of endorsers.
A DEFENSE OF FREE SPEECH BY AMERICAN AND CANADIAN MUSLIMS
We, the undersigned, unconditionally condemn any intimidation or threats of violence directed against any individual or group exercising the rights of freedom of religion and speech; even when that speech may be perceived as hurtful or reprehensible.
We are concerned and saddened by the recent wave of vitriolic anti-Muslim and anti-Islamic sentiment that is being expressed across our nation.
We are even more concerned and saddened by threats that have been made against individual writers, cartoonists, and others by a minority of Muslims. We see these as a greater offense against Islam than any cartoon, Qur’an burning, or other speech could ever be deemed.
We affirm the right of free speech for Molly Norris, Matt Stone, Trey Parker, and all others including ourselves.
As Muslims, we must set an example of justice, patience, tolerance, respect, and forgiveness.
The Qur’an enjoins Muslims to:
* bear witness to Islam through our good example (2:143);
* restrain anger and pardon people (3:133-134 and 24:22);
* remain patient in adversity (3186);
* stand firmly for justice (4:135);
* not let the hatred of others swerve us from justice (5:8);
* respect the sanctity of life (5:32);
* turn away from those who mock Islam (6:68 and 28:55);
* hold to forgiveness, command what is right, and turn away from the ignorant (7:199);
* restrain ourselves from rash responses (16:125-128);
* pass by worthless talk with dignity (25:72); and
* repel evil with what is better (41:34).
Islam calls for vigorous condemnation of both hateful speech and hateful acts, but always within the boundaries of the law. It is of the utmost importance that we react, not out of reflexive emotion, but with dignity and intelligence, in accordance with both our religious precepts and the laws of our country.
We uphold the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Both protect freedom of religion and speech, because both protections are fundamental to defending minorities from the whims of the majority.
We therefore call on all Muslims in the United States, Canada and abroad to refrain from violence. We should see the challenges we face today as an opportunity to sideline the voices of hate—not reward them with further attention—by engaging our communities in constructive dialogue about the true principles of Islam, and the true principles of democracy, both of which stress the importance of freedom of religion and tolerance.
Friday, October 1, 2010
Islamophobia and Critical Race Theory
UC Berkeley's Center for Race and Gender Islamophobia Research and Documentation Project will be hosting a program on October 12 to discuss the phenomenon.
Learn more about the event.
Is America Islamophobic? No. Anyone who watched the general revulsion over the planned Florida Quran burning, along with subsequent copycats, will acknowledge that fact.
Is there an Islamophobic element in America? Yes. Bigotry directed against a religion is nothing new in our nation. Just ask the Catholics, Mormons and Jews. Those groups, among others, have much to teach Muslims about overcoming the bias that some have directed toward them.
If you cannot go to in person, the UC Berkeley event will hopefully be streamed.
Learn more about the event.
Is America Islamophobic? No. Anyone who watched the general revulsion over the planned Florida Quran burning, along with subsequent copycats, will acknowledge that fact.
Is there an Islamophobic element in America? Yes. Bigotry directed against a religion is nothing new in our nation. Just ask the Catholics, Mormons and Jews. Those groups, among others, have much to teach Muslims about overcoming the bias that some have directed toward them.
If you cannot go to in person, the UC Berkeley event will hopefully be streamed.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Saylor's Recent Media Appearances
A number of media appearances lately. Here are three of them.
NPR's On the Media from Saturday, September 10, 2010, talking about a series of public service announcements (PSAs) recently produced by the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
Muslim-American Public Service Announcements
On CNN, also talking about the PSAs.
Finally, on MSNBC's Countdown to discuss growing anti-Muslim hysteria.
NPR's On the Media from Saturday, September 10, 2010, talking about a series of public service announcements (PSAs) recently produced by the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
Muslim-American Public Service Announcements
On CNN, also talking about the PSAs.
Finally, on MSNBC's Countdown to discuss growing anti-Muslim hysteria.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
