Forums dot lukpac.org

A place to discuss music and Mallard Fillmore
It is currently Wed Feb 21, 2018 3:51 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Dear Harry Reid...
PostPosted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 12:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:28 am
Posts: 421
Location: Blueberry Hill
lukpac wrote:
Jeff T. wrote:
Even Cat Stevens' statement after 911 (if he was quoted correctly) was off-putting. He said that the beliefs of those involved in the 911 attacks was not that of the majority.


Umm, this one?

"I wish to express my heartfelt horror at the indiscriminate terrorist attacks committed against innocent people of the United States yesterday.

While it is still not clear who carried out the attacks, it must be stated that no right thinking follower of Islam could possibly condone such an action: the Qur'an equates the murder of one innocent person with the murder of the whole of humanity.

We pray for the families of all those who lost their lives in this unthinkable act of violence as well as all those injured; I hope to reflect the feelings of all Muslims and people around the world whose sympathies go out to the victims at this sorrowful moment.

Yusuf Islam"

http://web.archive.org/web/200109200042 ... l?id=00174

I fail to see how there is *anything* "off-putting" about that. Or even:

"British Muslims feel nothing but sympathy for those families who lost loved ones in this awful tragedy we've all just witnessed in the US. This is why, today, along with most Muslims in Britain, we should make it clear that such acts of horrific carnage as we've seen on TV and in the newspapers have nothing to do with the beliefs of most Muslims. The Koran specifically declares: "If anyone murders an (innocent) person...it will be as if he has murdered the whole of humanity." It goes on: "And if anyone saves a person it will be as if he has saved the whole of humanity.""

http://web.archive.org/web/200109200029 ... evens.com/

If somebody has a problem with any of that, it's because they are specifically *trying* to have a problem with it.


I only heard his comments (voice) on radio and they basically editied it down to my "not the majority" quote.

But there seems to still be an image problem with blame cast where there should not be.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dear Harry Reid...
PostPosted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 12:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:58 am
Posts: 333
Location: Parma, OH
Jeff T. wrote:
But there seems to still be an image problem with blame cast where there should not be.


That isn't an image problem. That's xenophobia and stereotyping. Pure and simple. If people can't separate an entire faith from the acts of a heinous few, then there's no hope for anyone.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dear Harry Reid...
PostPosted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 1:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:28 am
Posts: 421
Location: Blueberry Hill
David R. Modny wrote:
C'mon, Jeff. This is pure nonsense. For starters there are plenty of Muslims "coughing up money for the poor" and "denouncing terrorism." It isn't the responsibility of a religion that's been around 1500 years to have to go on some kind of PR blitz so people who may not belong to that faith can sleep a little better at night.


I thought that they had been around far longer than 1500 years, but long enough anyway. And of course not a real PR blitz is in order, or expected. But some kind of work is in order, you can suggest who does this work if you have ideas. And I believe it is not simply people who may not belong to that faith who have trouble sleeping at night, but members of that faith (to be exact) who might be (or are) sleeping in fear. Fear of having no place left to go, and feeling a wave of hate coming over them in this country.

So it is not up to them to do any PR at all. Luke says those who should be enlightened are least likely to want to be enlightened.

So what now, wait for divine enlightenment?


Last edited by Jeff T. on Wed Sep 08, 2010 1:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dear Harry Reid...
PostPosted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 1:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:28 am
Posts: 421
Location: Blueberry Hill
David R. Modny wrote:
If people can't separate an entire faith from the acts of a heinous few, then there's no hope for anyone.


I am also not sure how few the Taliban are, I had better read up and find out about the size of their membership before I comment on numbers. Al-Qaeda, again I am not sure about (few) numbers. But if you say "few" and I can't come up with any exact numbers, then I shall accept it as very few.

But point is taken, there is not much if any hope then.

With NYC, London, Tokyo, etc. all the major cities hit by Al-Qaeda acts of terror except one, Los Angeles (where I just happen to live), you know LA is next right?

Should I be on edge and fear only those nutjobs who hate muslims, and their false placed hatred?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dear Harry Reid...
PostPosted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 1:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:58 am
Posts: 333
Location: Parma, OH
Jeff T. wrote:
David R. Modny wrote:
C'mon, Jeff. This is pure nonsense. For starters there are plenty of Muslims "coughing up money for the poor" and "denouncing terrorism." It isn't the responsibility of a religion that's been around 1500 years to have to go on some kind of PR blitz so people who may not belong to that faith can sleep a little better at night.


I thought that they had been around far longer than 1500 years, but long enough anyway. And of course not a real PR blitz is in order, or expected. But some kind of work is in order, you can suggest who does this work if you have ideas. And I believe it is not simply people who may not belong to that faith who have trouble sleeping at night, but members of that faith (to be exact) who might be (or are) sleeping in fear. Feat of having no place left to go, and feeling a wave of hate coming over them in this country.

So it is not up to them to do any PR at all. Luke says those who should be enlightened are least likely to want to be enlightened.

So what now, wait for divine enlightenment?



No, not wait for divine enlightenment, because all the "image repairing" in the world isn't going to change the opinions of those who don't want their opinions to be changed. THAT'S what Luke is saying.

Rather, how about shaming the people who decide to stereotype and make fools of themselves, because that's what needs to be done. For example, was it up to all African-Americans to "repair their image" in the early to mid 20th century simply because the country was filled with seething racists? No. It was up to responsible people to point out exactly who the racists were and figure out a way to restore rights to the people who deserved them. If any law abiding group has to live in fear, then it's time to go after the people causing it! And that means legally.

As I pointed out in my (slightly) edited original reply, this has as much to do with self-righteous indignation than anything else. These are the people who need to look in the mirror when they talk about image. Not the other way around.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dear Harry Reid...
PostPosted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 1:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:58 am
Posts: 333
Location: Parma, OH
Jeff T. wrote:

I am also not sure how few the Taliban are, I had better read up and find out about the size of their membership before I comment on numbers. Al-Qaeda, again I am not sure about (few) numbers. But if you say "few" and I can't come up with any exact numbers, then I shall accept it as very few.


Few, in terms of the BILLIONS of Muslims worldwide. That's a few.



Quote:


Should I be on edge and fear only those nutjobs who hate muslims, and their false placed hatred?


Not only, but yes. Because they're the real terrorists. Just like Al Qaeda, the Ku Klux Klan, or anyone who chooses to harm others for no reason other than their own personal hatred.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dear Harry Reid...
PostPosted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 2:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:28 am
Posts: 421
Location: Blueberry Hill
David R. Modny wrote:
No, not wait for divine enlightenment, because all the "image repairing" in the world isn't going to change the opinions of those who don't want their opinions to be changed. THAT'S what Luke is saying.

Rather, how about shaming the people who decide to stereotype and make fools of themselves, because that's what needs to be done. For example, was it up to all African-Americans to "repair their image" in the early to mid 20th century simply because the country was filled with seething racists? No. It was up to responsible people to point out exactly who the racists were and figure out a way to restore rights to the people who deserved them. If any law abiding group has to live in fear, then it's time to go after the people causing it! And that means legally.

As I pointed out in my (slightly) edited original reply, this has as much to do with self-righteous indignation than anything else. These are the people who need to look in the mirror when they talk about image. Not the other way around.


I see your point and agree with you of course. But, you are heading into the exact same area I was in my mind, but had not yet stated. And that is we are not simply taking about religion here, but about race. Race, religion, etc. You can include gays in that group who are not a religion nor a race. Hispanics I would like to include and Jews as well if I may. And the reason I include these last three groups of minorities is because they have each managed to somewhat (arguably) overcome their disenfranchised status. And if this is true, how did they do this? I'll tell you how I think that they did this, they each did it in a different way, but money was a part of it.

Jewish community, saved their cash pooled together got educated and got rich. Rich = power. They did not wait for someone else to work it for them in the name of legality.

Hispanics, grew in numbers stuck with their families until they became more politically powerful, over coming their negative image. Blacks seemed to have missed out of these advances, I have ideas why, but that is another thread topic, or maybe not.

Gays, took their money, bought into the nice areas of the ratty parts of cities, fixed it into high priced real estate, got rich and pooled their political money. Image makeovers, PR consultants likely, and adopted or had their own kids.

Ok, none of these groups waited around for "responsible people to point out exactly who the racists were" but rather got together and made it happen for themselves. Even against a backdrop of hatred, these groups were able to thrive. Even gays in an age of rampant aids were able to make advances not thought possible ten years earlier.

Ok, I think I might have made sense with limited writing skills....

Anyway, back to religion, I believe that religion)(s) were either created by politicians who want to control groups of people, or was highjacked by politicians who want to control people. And I believe that there really is no higher power that one can get next to and chat with. That higher power that created us is far far beyond what any human can comprehend. Like a dog or cat can appreciate a full dish of fresh food, but can't quite get their little heads around how exactly how it was made, or how it came to be in that package. That higher power is beyond our pea brain intelligence like cat food is to a cat. Yet religion serves a purpose for those that can't believe that we are born - have some good times (hopefully) and then die, and more often die alone.

So all this killing in the name of God has turned me off to it all. That "higher power calling" has ruined a lot of people and killed a lot of people. So my comment about PR (blitz) might seem insensitive, and even wrong to suggest it. But if Jews, Hispanics, and Gays can get their act together enough to make major strides including changing of laws and levels of acceptance, then I'd say the same can be done for Muslims. But it will have to be done by them the same way those other minorities had to buckle down and get their shit together. Because if they do not, then there will be the Al-Qaeda & Taliban groups doing the PR BLITZ for them. It is up to them to decide who is the spokesperson for their religion.

btw, I'm with Albert Einstein and Steven Hawking, Einstein said in all his studies that he never saw anything to suggest that there was a divine being behind this universe, and that the randomness is about equal to anything else, or something like that. Hawking recently come out and said God is not necessary for the universe to exist. He has pretty much come to the conclusion that there ain't no God in the form that so many want to believe in and that many will kill for, or try and hurt in the name of. I also think it's a fucking sham put up to try and keep us under control.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dear Harry Reid...
PostPosted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 7:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:58 am
Posts: 333
Location: Parma, OH
Jeff T. wrote:

Ok, none of these groups waited around for "responsible people to point out exactly who the racists were" but rather got together and made it happen for themselves. Even against a backdrop of hatred, these groups were able to thrive. Even gays in an age of rampant aids were able to make advances not thought possible ten years earlier.


Jeff,

You're missing a key point in your rapidly diverging post. Muslim-Americans *are* already thriving in all sectors of life and "making it happen." They're our fellow Americans. Businessmen. Firemen. Policemen. Teachers. Members of the military. This isn't about a group of people who have laws against them that they're trying to change. There are no legal discriminatory doctrines against Muslims in this country -- as much as some sad souls just might wish. The "African-American/racist" analogy was only to show what is to be done when *any* law-abiding citizen's freedom is being in threatened in this country. That is, you expose the perpetrator and protect the victim and their rights. You don't ask for a makeover or a rehabilitation.

Your original post dealt with one subject. You felt that Muslim-Americans needed to "improve their image." I'm telling you that a) no law-abiding group is required to repair their image simply because somebody else doesn't like them or fears them, and b) you can't change someone's opinion who doesn't want to have their opinion changed in the first place. If you read that NYT article that Luke posted a link to earlier, you'll see what drives this whole sad, piece of media nonsense, and how it applies to the latter.

Furthermore, what may be your and my opinion as to the usefulness or validity of religion has nothing to do with any of the above or your original thesis. This isn't about what we think of religion. It has to do with *freedom* of religion. That's unshakeable in this country.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dear Harry Reid...
PostPosted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 8:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:58 am
Posts: 333
Location: Parma, OH
David R. Modny wrote:
...what is to be done when *any* law-abiding citizen's freedom is being in threatened in this country.


"...is being threatened in this country," that is.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dear Harry Reid...
PostPosted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 2:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:28 am
Posts: 421
Location: Blueberry Hill
David R. Modny wrote:
Jeff T. wrote:
I'm telling you that a) no law-abiding group is required to repair their image simply because somebody else doesn't like them or fears them, and b) you can't change someone's opinion who doesn't want to have their opinion changed in the first place.


I didn't say anyone was "required" to change their image did I? And you or anyone stating that people who don't want to have their opinions changed never change is simply your opinion. Your assumption that people never change in that way. It is not a fact, just your feelings.

Oh, btw, this just in: NY Imam Breaks Silence on the 'Ground Zero Mosque'

http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/n ... s/19624687

For some odd reason, under no obligation, and no "requirement" is seems a statement is now coming down the wire. Why bother David? If you can't change people's mind, why make any statement at all?

This quote here:

In his op-ed, Rauf said support for his planned Islamic center "seriously undermines the ability of anti-American radicals to recruit young, impressionable Muslims by falsely claiming that America persecutes Muslims for their faith." And he called on Americans to commemorate the terror attacks' anniversary "by pausing to reflect and meditate and tone down the vitriol and rhetoric that serves only to strengthen radicals and weaken our friends' belief in our values."

Seems to me that there is indeed a type of PR campaign going on, in an effort to change people's perceptions. You can call it otherwise, but I call it PR which is not a bad thing.

Oh and this little tidbit, I found interesting, a Jewish community leader had a statement that goes right along with my previous (you felt) diverging comments: "We know what it is like when people have attacked us verbally, have attacked us physically, and others have remained silent. It cannot happen here in America in 2010," said Rabbi David Saperstein of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism.

I see no difference David, racial or religious hatred.

So it looks to me like there are PR type considerations in all of this. And like it or not, it is necessary and needed. And the struggle IS in fact similar to what Jews (and the other I mentioned) have been going through even if there are a very few differences.

Someone has to stand up and try to enlighten people who need it. I am glad to read this article this morning. It might make a difference, and do just that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dear Harry Reid...
PostPosted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 4:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:58 am
Posts: 333
Location: Parma, OH
Jeff T. wrote:

I didn't say anyone was "required" to change their image did I? .


You stated that they "they need a PR makeover badly." You also stated that "it is UP TO THEM to step up and make a stand for everyone." If that isn't a requirement, then I don't know what is! Is obligation a better word?

Whether they choose to give interviews, do commercials, have a love-in, etc. is their business. And, who ever said it wasn't? I'm simply telling you, again, that they are under no obligation to do so. For us or for them. Neither is Christianity or Judaism in this country as an entire entity. And, you *are* speaking of Muslim-Americans as an entire entity when you say "they" need a PR makeover.



Quote:

And you or anyone stating that people who don't want to have their opinions changed never change is simply your opinion. Your assumption that people never change in that way. It is not a fact, just your feelings

Oh, btw, this just in: NY Imam Breaks Silence on the 'Ground Zero Mosque'

http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/n ... s/19624687

For some odd reason, under no obligation, and no "requirement" is seems a statement is now coming down the wire. Why bother David? If you can't change people's mind, why make any statement at all?



I NEVER said that people "never change." I (and Luke) said that people WHO DON'T WANT TO CHANGE, OR HAVE ANY INTENTION OF CHANGING, AREN'T GOING TO CHANGE. **BIG** difference. Of course, there's people whose opinion can change! I try and do it every day whenever I talk to someone who tells me that "they're against this mosque." But, this is done by information. By fact. By logic. I'd also reckon that when the Imam gives an interview to a magazine this is exactly what his intentions are -- to lay out the facts. To state his case. Now, if some group of Muslim-Americans decide that they want to make a commercial telling everybody how "they're not scary people." More power to them. That's their choice. But, again, this is based on satisfying non-Muslims own self-righteous indignation more than anything else. We're only treating the symptom, not the cause. And, that's truly a shame.


Quote:

This quote here:

In his op-ed, Rauf said support for his planned Islamic center "seriously undermines the ability of anti-American radicals to recruit young, impressionable Muslims by falsely claiming that America persecutes Muslims for their faith." And he called on Americans to commemorate the terror attacks' anniversary "by pausing to reflect and meditate and tone down the vitriol and rhetoric that serves only to strengthen radicals and weaken our friends' belief in our values."


Seems to me that there is indeed a type of PR campaign going on, in an effort to change people's perceptions. You can call it otherwise, but I call it PR which is not a bad thing.



How is simply stating the obvious "PR?" Telling people that terror, violence and hatred sucks is PR? How about being a member of the human race! Ironically, when Cat Stevens did the exact same thing after 9-11, you accused him of "not taking a stand."


Quote:

Oh and this little tidbit, I found interesting, a Jewish community leader had a statement that goes right along with my previous (you felt) diverging comments: "We know what it is like when people have attacked us verbally, have attacked us physically, and others have remained silent. It cannot happen here in America in 2010," said Rabbi David Saperstein of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism.


Once again, this is simply stating what's right and what's obvious. There are scores of these statements made every week by people of religious and civic power. Sorry, but that doesn't make it a "PR campaign."

Quote:

I see no difference David, racial or religious hatred.


Neither do I. I'm simply telling you that a minority fighting to overturn some sort of legal doctrines, or establish a legal identity, is not what we're talking about in this debate. It never was. We're talking about a PR campaign of a religious organization that already has their rights in this country. Those rights are a given (a necessity -- as I've already stated).


Quote:

So it looks to me like there are PR type considerations in all of this. And like it or not, it is necessary and needed. And the struggle IS in fact similar to what Jews (and the other I mentioned) have been going through even if there are a very few differences.

Someone has to stand up and try to enlighten people who need it. I am glad to read this article this morning. It might make a difference, and do just that.



You're confusing *not remaining silent* with giving one's self a PR makeover. They couldn't be further apart. The *former* is done to enlighten. The latter to simply appease.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dear Harry Reid...
PostPosted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 5:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:28 am
Posts: 421
Location: Blueberry Hill
David R. Modny wrote:
Jeff T. wrote:

I didn't say anyone was "required" to change their image did I? .


You stated that they "they need a PR makeover badly." You also stated that "it is UP TO THEM to step up and make a stand for everyone." If that isn't a requirement, then I don't know what is! Is obligation a better word?

Whether they choose to give interviews, do commercials, have a love-in, etc. is their business. And, who ever said it wasn't? I'm simply telling you, again, that they are under no obligation to do so. For us or for them. Neither is Christianity or Judaism in this country as an entire entity. And, you *are* speaking of Muslim-Americans as an entire entity when you say "they" need a PR makeover.

Quote:

And you or anyone stating that people who don't want to have their opinions changed never change is simply your opinion. Your assumption that people never change in that way. It is not a fact, just your feelings

Oh, btw, this just in: NY Imam Breaks Silence on the 'Ground Zero Mosque'

http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/n ... s/19624687

For some odd reason, under no obligation, and no "requirement" is seems a statement is now coming down the wire. Why bother David? If you can't change people's mind, why make any statement at all?



I NEVER said that people "never change." I (and Luke) said that people WHO DON'T WANT TO CHANGE, OR HAVE ANY INTENTION OF CHANGING, AREN'T GOING TO CHANGE. **BIG** difference. Of course, there's people whose opinion can change! I try and do it every day whenever I talk to someone who tells me that "they're against this mosque." But, this is done by information. By fact. By logic. I'd also reckon that when the Imam gives an interview to a magazine this is exactly what his intentions are -- to lay out the facts. To state his case. Now, if some group of Muslim-Americans decide that they want to make a commercial telling everybody how "they're not scary people." More power to them. That's their choice. But, again, this is based on satisfying non-Muslims own self-righteous indignation more than anything else. We're only treating the symptom, not the cause. And, that's truly a shame.


Quote:

This quote here:

In his op-ed, Rauf said support for his planned Islamic center "seriously undermines the ability of anti-American radicals to recruit young, impressionable Muslims by falsely claiming that America persecutes Muslims for their faith." And he called on Americans to commemorate the terror attacks' anniversary "by pausing to reflect and meditate and tone down the vitriol and rhetoric that serves only to strengthen radicals and weaken our friends' belief in our values."


Seems to me that there is indeed a type of PR campaign going on, in an effort to change people's perceptions. You can call it otherwise, but I call it PR which is not a bad thing.



How is simply stating the obvious "PR?" Telling people that terror, violence and hatred sucks is PR? How about being a member of the human race! Ironically, when Cat Stevens did the exact same thing after 9-11, you accused him of "not taking a stand."


Quote:

Oh and this little tidbit, I found interesting, a Jewish community leader had a statement that goes right along with my previous (you felt) diverging comments: "We know what it is like when people have attacked us verbally, have attacked us physically, and others have remained silent. It cannot happen here in America in 2010," said Rabbi David Saperstein of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism.


Once again, this is simply stating what's right and what's obvious. There are scores of these statements made every week by people of religious and civic power. Sorry, but that doesn't make it a "PR campaign."

Quote:

I see no difference David, racial or religious hatred.


Neither do I. I'm simply telling you that a minority fighting for one's legal rights is not what we're talking about in this debate. It never was. We're talking about a PR campaign of a religious organization. The former is a given if their legal rights are indeed being trampled on.


Quote:

So it looks to me like there are PR type considerations in all of this. And like it or not, it is necessary and needed. And the struggle IS in fact similar to what Jews (and the other I mentioned) have been going through even if there are a very few differences.

Someone has to stand up and try to enlighten people who need it. I am glad to read this article this morning. It might make a difference, and do just that.



You're confusing *not remaining silent* with giving one's self a PR makeover. They couldn't be further apart. The *former* is done to enlighten. The latter to simply appease.


You are the one who said the Jew's (etc.) struggle was not similar, I disagree. I see you hate the term PR used in this context, get over it. A PR makeover can be used for any reason, not simply to appease, there is not limited reason(s). It is used in politics every day of the year, good bad, neutral whatever.

Rabbi David Saperstein's statement was quoted by me not because I felt it simply a PR statement, but because he saw the parallel of the Jewish struggle. I made a similar point in previous post and you decided it was a different situation because Muslims are in every walk of life and successful in their pursuits, not needing (or certianly not required) to make any changes, as they are established as is. My point was it is the same struggle like it or not.

I see an image problem for them, a perception of them, and I said already where this image comes from remember. Image is everything you may have heard, and you may not even agree with that idea. But that is a fact, and this image issue is distorting people's view.

So, a lot of work is in order even if you feel that the work load is not deserved, obligated, or required. You don't have to tell me who is obligated or not to take that stand. I think it is needed, and I think people's perception can change even when they don't want to change. Who are you to tell me that they won't change?

Who are you to say that the Jewish, Hispanic or gays struggles is just so different? The economics might be different, locations maybe, but same struggle of correcting a distorted image. And no, they don't have to change their image or project any different ideas to the uninformed and ignorant.

But there is power in numbers. I keep reading articles about how frightened Muslims are in this country, the feeling is that they have no place else to go, and that it is also bad elsewhere. That there is a DESPERATION that many feel, like they have run out of places to go and live, and not just places in the USA.

Ok, if it is that bad, time to take a stand, as a group, and attempt to fix the problem. I'm not sure if opening an Islamic center just down the way from ground zero is the way to do this, I don't know. But they have that right, and maybe it will bring out publicly the goodness in these people. You know, get it in the press, image, PR, whatever you want to call it. This topic is getting some press coverage you might have noticed. I say take that coverage, turn to to your advantage, use it to change people's perception.

Or just do nothing because they are under no obligation to do anything? I think it is getting out of hand now, and something is needed.

Or you may say that this is not the topic at hand, a different thread. Oh well, get over that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dear Harry Reid...
PostPosted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 5:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:58 am
Posts: 333
Location: Parma, OH
Jeff T. wrote:
David R. Modny wrote:
Jeff T. wrote:

I didn't say anyone was "required" to change their image did I? .
http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/n ... s/19624687

For some odd reason, under no obligation, and no "requirement" is seems a statement is now coming down the wire. Why bother David? If you can't change people's mind, why make any statement at all?



I NEVER said that people "never change." I (and Luke) said that people WHO DON'T WANT TO CHANGE, OR HAVE ANY INTENTION OF CHANGING, AREN'T GOING TO CHANGE. **BIG** difference. Of course, there's people whose opinion can change! I try and do it every day whenever I talk to someone who tells me that "they're against this mosque." But, this is done by information. By fact. By logic. I'd also reckon that when the Imam gives an interview to a magazine this is exactly what his intentions are -- to lay out the facts. To state his case. Now, if some group of Muslim-Americans decide that they want to make a commercial telling everybody how "they're not scary people." More power to them. That's their choice. But, again, this is based on satisfying non-Muslims own self-righteous indignation more than anything else. We're only treating the symptom, not the cause. And, that's truly a shame.


Quote:

This quote here:

In his op-ed, Rauf said support for his planned Islamic center "seriously undermines the ability of anti-American radicals to recruit young, impressionable Muslims by falsely claiming that America persecutes Muslims for their faith." And he called on Americans to commemorate the terror attacks' anniversary "by pausing to reflect and meditate and tone down the vitriol and rhetoric that serves only to strengthen radicals and weaken our friends' belief in our values."


Seems to me that there is indeed a type of PR campaign going on, in an effort to change people's perceptions. You can call it otherwise, but I call it PR which is not a bad thing.



How is simply stating the obvious "PR?" Telling people that terror, violence and hatred sucks is PR? How about being a member of the human race! Ironically, when Cat Stevens did the exact same thing after 9-11, you accused him of "not taking a stand."


Quote:

Oh and this little tidbit, I found interesting, a Jewish community leader had a statement that goes right along with my previous (you felt) diverging comments: "We know what it is like when people have attacked us verbally, have attacked us physically, and others have remained silent. It cannot happen here in America in 2010," said Rabbi David Saperstein of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism.


Once again, this is simply stating what's right and what's obvious. There are scores of these statements made every week by people of religious and civic power. Sorry, but that doesn't make it a "PR campaign."

Quote:

I see no difference David, racial or religious hatred.


Neither do I. I'm simply telling you that a minority fighting for one's legal rights is not what we're talking about in this debate. It never was. We're talking about a PR campaign of a religious organization. The former is a given if their legal rights are indeed being trampled on.


Quote:

So it looks to me like there are PR type considerations in all of this. And like it or not, it is necessary and needed. And the struggle IS in fact similar to what Jews (and the other I mentioned) have been going through even if there are a very few differences.

Someone has to stand up and try to enlighten people who need it. I am glad to read this article this morning. It might make a difference, and do just that.



You're confusing *not remaining silent* with giving one's self a PR makeover. They couldn't be further apart. The *former* is done to enlighten. The latter to simply appease.


You are the one who said the Jew's (etc.) struggle was not similar, I disagree. I see you hate the term PR used in this context, get over it. A PR makeover can be used for any reason, not simply to appease, there is not limited reason(s). It is used in politics every day of the year, good bad, neutral whatever.

Rabbi David Saperstein's statement was quoted by me not because I felt it simply a PR statement, but because he saw the parallel of the Jewish struggle. I made a similar point in previous post and you decided it was a different situation because Muslims are in every walk of life and successful in their pursuits, not needing (or certianly not required) to make any changes, as they are established as is. My point was it is the same struggle like it or not.

I see an image problem for them, a perception of them, and I said already where this image comes from remember. Image is everything you may have heard, and you may not even agree with that idea. But that is a fact, and this image issue is distorting people's view.

So, a lot of work is in order even if you feel that the work load is not deserved, obligated, or required. You don't have to tell me who is obligated or not to take that stand. I think it is needed, and I think people's perception can change even when they don't want to change. Who are you to tell me that they won't change?

Who are you to say that the Jewish, Hispanic or gays struggles is just so different? The economics might be different, locations maybe, but same struggle of correcting a distorted image. And no, they don't have to change their image or project any different ideas to the uninformed and ignorant.

But there is power in numbers. I keep reading articles about how frightened Muslims are in this country, the feeling is that they have no place else to go, and that it is also bad elsewhere. That there is a DESPERATION that many feel, like they have run out of places to go and live, and not just places in the USA.

Ok, if it is that bad, time to take a stand, as a group, and attempt to fix the problem. I'm not sure if opening an Islamic center just down the way from ground zero is the way to do this, I don't know. But they have that right, and maybe it will bring out publicly the goodness in these people. You know, get it in the press, image, PR, whatever you want to call it. This topic is getting some press coverage you might have noticed. I say take that coverage, turn to to your advantage, use it to change people's perception.

Or just do nothing because they are under no obligation to do anything? I think it is getting out of hand now, and something is needed.

Or you may say that this is not the topic at hand, a different thread. Oh well, get over that.



Jeff,

I'm beginning to think that you have a serious reading comprehension problem. What I told you in this thread is that we can't make religious groups that have established rights in this country feel as if they need to rehabilitate their image, simply because the masses fear them or don't like them for WHATEVER reason. (and that includes Jews and Christians as I stated IN MY PREVIOUS POST). Where on earth do you come up with some mumbo-jumbo about me saying that the "Jews and Muslims struggles are NOT SIMILAR"" I just told you that Christians, Jews and Muslims have no obligation, as an entire entity, to put forth some sort of public relations makeover simply because their image is suffering. That makes them VERY SIMILAR to me! Go back, and read each and every one of my posts, word for word, again if you need to.

Secondly, I just told you that OF COURSE people can change, and that I do everything in my power to try and do that!!!! What I and Luke originally said, and are STILL saying, is that there are a certain contingent of people who don't WANT to change in any way, shape and form. These are people who speak of outrage, yet are simply masking their own stereotyping and xenophobia. Did you even read that NY Times article to see the machine behind this madness, and how they play on the worst fears of humanity to stir this kind of stuff up? These orchestrators and their henchmen have no intention of changing! The difference is that I'm telling you that I believe we need to treat the cause and not the symptoms. A PR campaign only does the latter. On the contrary, we need to expose and call out those who claim this false umbrage, and exhibit this xenophobia, as a way of spreading their own version of hatred. Nothing more, nothing less. We do this through actual information, facts and logic -- aimed squarely at the perpetrators.


Instead, you've gone and created some fantasy situation about what I'm saying or what I've told you. I can't debate that. I quote you and show you what you said. On the other hand, you tell me I'm "not equating the struggle of Jews and Muslims," or I've said something about the struggle of "Gays and Hispanics." You're dreaming this up. I give up.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dear Harry Reid...
PostPosted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 7:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:28 am
Posts: 421
Location: Blueberry Hill
David R. Modny wrote:
Jeff,

I'm beginning to think that you have a serious reading comprehension problem. What I told you in this thread is that we can't make religious groups that have established rights in this country feel as if they need to rehabilitate their image, simply because the masses fear them or don't like them for WHATEVER reason. (and that includes Jews and Christians as I stated IN MY PREVIOUS POST). Where on earth do you come up with some mumbo-jumbo about me saying that the "Jews and Muslims struggles are NOT SIMILAR"" I just told you that Christians, Jews and Muslims have no obligation, as an entire entity, to put forth some sort of public relations makeover simply because their image is suffering. That makes them VERY SIMILAR to me! Go back, and read each and every one of my posts, word for word, again if you need to.

Instead, you've gone and created some fantasy situation about what I'm saying or what I've told you. I can't debate that. I quote you and show you what you said. On the other hand, you tell me I'm "not equating the struggle of Jews and Muslims," or I've said something about the struggle of "Gays and Hispanics." You're dreaming this up. I give up.


David R. Modny wrote:
Jeff T. wrote:

Ok, none of these groups waited around for "responsible people to point out exactly who the racists were" but rather got together and made it happen for themselves. Even against a backdrop of hatred, these groups were able to thrive. Even gays in an age of rampant aids were able to make advances not thought possible ten years earlier.


Jeff,

You're missing a key point in your rapidly diverging post. Muslim-Americans *are* already thriving in all sectors of life and "making it happen." They're our fellow Americans. Businessmen. Firemen. Policemen. Teachers. Members of the military. This isn't about a group of people who have laws against them that they're trying to change. There are no legal discriminatory doctrines against Muslims in this country -- as much as some sad souls just might wish.

The "African-American/racist" analogy was only to show what is to be done when *any* law-abiding citizen's freedom is being in threatened in this country. That is, you expose the perpetrator and protect the victim and their rights. You don't ask for a makeover or a rehabilitation.

Your original post dealt with one subject. You felt that Muslim-Americans needed to "improve their image." I'm telling you that a) no law-abiding group is required to repair their image simply because somebody else doesn't like them or fears them, and b) you can't change someone's opinion who doesn't want to have their opinion changed in the first place. If you read that NYT article that Luke posted a link to earlier, you'll see what drives this whole sad, piece of media nonsense, and how it applies to the latter.


The highlighted section above is where you point out that there is a difference here, or appears to me that you see a difference. I see no difference in that struggle, laws or no laws, the struggle is the same. I point this out, and then you claim I have some fantasy version of what was written.

Furthermore, obligations and/or laws of discrimination, or laws to protect against discrimination, all those so-called laws - tell it to the suffering blacks who are discriminated against in their daily lives today. It's nearly the same thing David with or without laws. The side issue concerning this new center being built near ground zero, and the discrimination against a religious group is not really about laws is it. It is about a mindset as you know. So you can keep repeating that no group should be required (IN A PREFECT WORLD) to change anything, least of all a public image. I never said we need to make make religious groups feel as if they need to rehabilitate their image did I? You don't like my suggestion that it might be a good idea (because it has been used in other struggles), that suggestion, but it was not stated as a requirement. But those other struggles I just read, you see differently because of laws passed? Read your own words again, and see the bolded sentences, they are hard to see on my screen, but you'll see. I just reread the bolded comment, and I still read it as you saying that there is a difference (Muslims vs. other struggling minorities) due to laws.

Where on earth do you come up with some mumbo-jumbo about me saying that the "Jews and Muslims struggles are NOT SIMILAR""

well right here David:

"This isn't about a group of people who have laws against them that they're trying to change."

Why did you say this? This was in response to my comment about some minorities and their very similar struggles. I need not mention laws, I see no need, for the perpetrators care not about laws either, their hatred is beyond laws. AND just because their are laws does not mean that those laws are just. So why are you bringing up laws? I don't get that.

If you are not saying that there is a difference, what are you saying in the bolded sentences?

What part of my reading your written posts is fantasy?

You say it should never be a requirement to correct distorted images. Ok fine! Please find a fresh angle here, you are going in circles. Never a requirement ok, ok!

But you know something, there are watchdog groups who go after the media when these negative stereotypes are presented. They have a purpose, and I would tend to think that they are effective. They are effective. They demand that the images presented be correct. This is about images like it or not. And the PR words you do NOT!

You simply do not like that (my) suggestion that powerful Muslims speak out and show that they are the same as everyone else, because they have the right not to if they choose. I see it as a need, not requirement. More role models needed.

But I still think that everyone must do their own work and make the sacrifices, we can sit around and let you inform everyone who will listen, and try and enlighten people. But change is possible.

You may not know the struggles personally. Hell I may be 1/2 Hispanic, 1/2 back, and gay. Having seen it, or still seeing the struggle. But I do know that laws themselves will not cut it. It takes changes in attitudes, one person at a time if need be. And positive role models and images are a key part in changes of perception, and even if you think that is a very unfair expectation, it is a fact.

ok, take it David, and have that last word. Thanks for the good debate.

here in a nutshell: "That is, you expose the perpetrator and protect the victim and their rights. You don't ask for a makeover or a rehabilitation. "

What if I am a Muslim, and I have this as my idea and way for me and my family to deal?

Just because you are a victim does not mean you need not do something about it, and simply let the perpetrators be exposed for who they are. There are more active roles than just that. Sorry you don't like my action course.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dear Harry Reid...
PostPosted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 9:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:58 am
Posts: 333
Location: Parma, OH
Jeff T. wrote:
Ok, none of these groups waited around for "responsible people to oint out exactly who the racists were" but rather got together and made it happen for themselves. Even against a backdrop of hatred, these groups were able to thrive. Even gays in an age of rampant aids were able to make advances not thought possible ten years earlier.

Jeff,
You're missing a key point in your rapidly diverging post. Muslim-Americans *are* already thriving in all sectors of life and "making it happen." They're our fellow Americans. Businessmen. Firemen. Policemen. Teachers. Members of the military. This isn't about a group of people who have laws against them that they're trying to change. There are no legal discriminatory doctrines against Muslims in this country -- as much as some sad souls just might wish.

The "African-American/racist" analogy was only to show what is to be done when *any* law-abiding citizen's freedom is being in threatened in this country. That is, you expose the perpetrator and protect the victim and their rights. You don't ask for a makeover or a rehabilitation.

Your original post dealt with one subject. You felt that Muslim-Americans needed to "improve their image." I'm telling you that a) no law-abiding group is required to repair their image simply because somebody else doesn't like them or fears them, and b) you can't change someone's opinion who doesn't want to have their opinion changed in the first place. If you read that NYT article that Luke posted a link to earlier, you'll see what drives this whole sad, piece of media nonsense, and how it applies to the latter.

The highlighted section above is where you point out that there is a difference here, or appears to me that you see a difference. I see no difference in that struggle, laws or no laws, the struggle is the same. I point this out, and then you claim I have some fantasy version of what was written.


No, Jeff, the highlighted version is exactly what it states.

That is, that Muslims are a functioning, living, breathing, 1500-year-old religion with established rights in this country. They're not trying to CHANGE THAT -- just survive as they always have. Whereas, other groups *still may be struggling* for those basic rights and yet to have that identity formed (only to have it thrown back in their face as Muslim-Americans currently are experiencing).

That is, I was simply stating that we're talking about a group that was under the impression that these religious rights were the same as any other other religious group in this country -- Christian, Jew, Mormon, etc, etc. No qualifiers, restrictions or special conditions. I don't feel ANY law abiding ethnic, religious, sexual preference, etc., group should have to "makeover" their image simply because others feel uncomfortable or are "offended" by them -- the latter being the self-righteous indignation I reference. That includes Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hispanics, Gays...anyone who is being persecuted. Haven't I made that clear time and time again? Any other assumption is yours.

Quote:


Furthermore, obligations and/or laws of discrimination, or laws to protect against discrimination, all those so-called laws - tell it to the suffering blacks who are discriminated against in their daily lives today.


Nobody on sane earth is denying that blacks are still discriminated upon? What does this have to do with any kind of public relations thing????




Quote:

I never said we need to make make religious groups feel as if they need to rehabilitate their image did I?


You stated this. This sure sounds like a plea to me!

Quote:
"And it is up to them to step up and make a stand for everyone. Speak up on Charlie Rose, cough up a few billion dollars for US charities for the poor, denounce terrorism at ever chance."





Quote:

Where on earth do you come up with some mumbo-jumbo about me saying that the "Jews and Muslims struggles are NOT SIMILAR""

well right here David:

"This isn't about a group of people who have laws against them that they're trying to change."

Why did you say this? This was in response to my comment about some minorities and their very similar struggles. I need not mention laws, I see no need, for the perpetrators care not about laws either, their hatred is beyond laws. AND just because their are laws does not mean that those laws are just. So why are you bringing up laws? I don't get that.




Since you repeated that same quote...see above, Jeff. It was putting the Muslim religion in context with other religions in this country. Nothing more, nothing less. You made that other leap yourself. The fact that I came right out and flat-out said that Muslims should be under no different obligations than Jews and Christians should have made that perfectly clear to you.


Quote:



You say it should never be a requirement to correct distorted images. Ok fine! Please find a fresh angle here, you are going in circles. Never a requirement ok, ok!


For the love of.......I said that groups that are having their rights trampled on SHOULDN'T FEEL OBLIGATED TO MAKEOVER THEIR OWN IMAGE!!!!! I told you time after time that I believe it's possible to change opinions, those so-called "distorted images," myself! But, it's the going after the *cause* where we need to focus our attentions. Not have some trampled-on-group have to "rehabilitate" and sell themselves.The notion of a "public relations makeover" conjures up images of groups having to defend themselves, prove their worthiness, prove that they're not a threat. In a nutshell, assimilate, while the other side does nothing but judge the outcome. Those groups are of perfect right to do that or anything else they want, but that still doesn't *make* it right.

Quote:
What if I am a Muslim, and I have this as my idea and way for me and my family to deal?

Just because you are a victim does not mean you need not do something about it, and simply let the perpetrators be exposed for who they are. There are more active roles than just that. Sorry you don't like my action course.


Being that you've gone and completely warped nearly everything I've stated, I'll only repeat this one last time:

Muslim-Americans have the right to do whatever they want. Yet, saying that they should rehabilitate or makeover their image still doesn't *make* it right.

Quote:

ok, take it David, and have that last word.


I'll continue to attempt the "last word" as long as you continue to put words in my mouth or distort my meaning.


Quote:

Thanks for the good debate.


Indeed.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group