A few weeks ago, six imams were removed from an USAIR flight originating from Minneapolis where they had just been attending a conference of Imams held at the Mall of America on building bridges. Their suspicious behavior? Praying out loud while they waited and asking for seatbelt extensions. (Here’s an argument that their behavior was truly suspicious and here’s an argument saying it wasn’t). Coulter: Profiling Muslims is … like profiling the Klan
Before they knew it, airport police swarmed onto the plane, and the six imams were herded out, handcuffed and interrogated for hours… After the FBI cleared them, US Airways still refused to allow them to fly. The imams bought tickets on Northwest Airlines and flew back to Phoenix… [Link]
The event has produced widely differing reactions. Ann Coulter piped up to argue that it is good to profile Muslims and Arabs (she makes little distinction), saying:
After the attacks of 9/11, profiling Muslims is more like profiling the Klan. [Link]
<
p>
Washington DC area talk show host Jerry Klein went the other direction, staging an event to demonstrate how deep bigotry towards Muslims was. First he suggested that “all Muslims in the United States should be identified with a crescent-shape tattoo or a distinctive arm band,” a suggestion that was supported by manycallers. One went further, saying:
… that tattoos, armbands and other identifying markers such as crescent marks on driver’s licenses, passports and birth certificates did not go far enough. “What good is identifying them?” he asked. “You have to set up encampments like during World War Two with the Japanese and Germans…” [Link]
<
p>At the end of the hour long show, where many people had called in to argue that visual identification of Muslims would make other Americans safer, the host turned the tables on his callers:
Klein revealed that he had staged a hoax. … “I can’t believe any of you are sick enough to have agreed for one second with anything I said,” he told his audience … “For me to suggest to tattoo marks on people’s bodies, have them wear armbands, put a crescent moon on their driver’s license on their passport or birth certificate is disgusting. It’s beyond disgusting.
“Because basically what you just did was show me how the German people allowed what happened to the Jews to happen … We need to separate them, we need to tattoo their arms, we need to make them wear the yellow Star of David, we need to put them in concentration camps, we basically just need to kill them all because they are dangerous…” [Link]
<
p>This same debate about difference and disloyalty has now mutated and cropped up in the debate about the swearing in of the first Muslim congressman, Keith Ellison, coincidentally of Minnesota:
When America’s first Muslim congressman, a Democrat from Minnesota, let it be known he will carry a Koran to his swearing-in ceremony on Jan. 4, conservative pundit Dennis Prager called it “an act of hubris … that undermines American civilization.”
In a web column, the talk-show host said, “Insofar as a member of Congress taking an oath to serve America and uphold its values is concerned, America is interested in only one book, the Bible. If you are incapable of taking an oath on that book, don’t serve in Congress…” [Link]
What makes this position so interesting is that it is both irrelevant and unconstitutional. It is irrelevant because congressmen do not take an oath on any book at all:
In Congress, newly elected representatives do not put their left hands on any book. They raise their right hands, and are sworn in together as the speaker of the House administers the oath of office. Some do carry a book, according to House historians, and some choose to photograph a private swearing-in afterward with their hand on the Bible. One senator is known to have carried an expanded Bible that included the Book of Mormon. [Link]
So for the purpose of being sworn in you could carry a dictionary with you, it doesn’t matter. The book is just for the photo op. It’s unconstitutional because:
The Constitution says: “The senators and representatives … shall be bound by oath or affirmation to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States…” [Link]
Prager may or may not know that, but that’s besides the point. The debate here and above seems to be largely about symbolic loyalty, what it takes to be considered American.
The irony is that in 2000, there was a great pan-conservative movement, created in part by activists like Grover Norquist, where conservative Christians, Jews and Muslims had all found common cause in the Bush Presidency. Six years ago, cultural conservatives would have had less of a problem with Ellison’s actions, as long as he carried a holy book at all. Now, however, lines have been redrawn and the same conservative Muslims who were once seen as allies in the fight against secular humanism and sex education, are now seen as outsiders. To me it just shows how insincere their inclusion was in the first place.
Do you use “razib” or some other variation to post on conservative sites? How do they take it? (This is a serious question not an attempt at a dig)
i don’t post on many sites. i guess deanesmay’s site is the closest, and they get really pissy when i reject the idea that iran is ‘totalitarian,’ or that ‘eurabia’ is an idiotic empirical idea. but i run two weblogs, and a lot of the readers are right-wing. they get really angry if i tell them to f**k off if they repeat stuff talking points but most adjust or leave. my websites are politically diverse, i’ve done surveys, any political post simply can’t repeat mantras because a substantial minority on either side will come out with knives to chop it to threads.
i mean ‘stupid talking points.’ and a major issue is that people don’t make their background assumptions explicit but assume them. on a liberal blog liberals don’t need to explicate their background assumptions and vice versa on a right-wing blog. but if you are a minority you need to use different tactics because all your assumptions are disputed. on my own weblogs you need to go both ways since the readership is politically mixed and there’s no agreement on assumptions (e.g., about equal numbers of kerry and bush voters in 2004 from what i recall).
So what exactly is the “center-right” view on racism that the site should be promoting?
it then becomes an either with us or against fight, and so i feel discouraged to support your position when my reasoning is different because no one will listen.
I’m not sure what right wing or left wing is anymore. Is there some sort of fun test I can take? All I know is, the parrot gets annoying… you repeat dumb right-wing talking points a lot
Crime against a group is probably a more telling piece of data as to how people feel about a religion than someone answering a question on a phone about their “feelings”.
I thought the best way to find out how someone feels is to ask them. Just because not everybody is running around painting swastikas on walls doesn’t mean there isn’t anti-semitic sentiment in a community. A lot of those crimes are committed by squirts who haven’t a clue of the repercussions of the symbol or act.
So what exactly is the “center-right” view on racism that the site should be promoting?
i don’t think anyone is saying any view “should be promoted.” you’re putting words in vikram’s mouth, but that’s OK. the key is that people have subjective views. the majority of posters and readers are to the left of center and i perceive that the repeat standard opinions about the extent of racism in our society and its effects, as well as giving slack and the benefit of the doubt to the left position. i will give you one example: back when there were bombings in bombay i believe abhi posted that there was relative silence in the blogosphere. but it seemed empirically accurate to admit that the silence was far greater on the left blogosphere than the right. it is probably correct that the right blogosphere didn’t give jack about india, but were interested in the muslim angle, but that doesn’t refute the fact that this quantitative imbalance existed and it seemed that the site authors attempted to soft-pedal this. in contrast if the reaction was inverted and the left took more interest i am assuming there would have been some imputation of right-wing lack of interested in things outside of this country or brown folk.
but that’s fine. biases exist, and this is a site run by authors. my only attempt is to offer an alternative perspective and assert that reasonable people can disagree.
American is truly paranoid. Now they started grounding flights literally because someone farted. It’s rumored that the phantom farter was Ann Coulter.
Not sure if this will summarize the way this blog works… if an Iranian-American student at UCLA is tazered in a library, he gets hundreds of posts lamenting “racism” and “bigotry”. But an Iranian-American student at UNC who uses his SUV to ram a dozen pedestrians to “punish America” and call 911 to confess as much, isn’t worth discussing. Odd wouldn’t you say ?
context: they lit a match. fire causes issues in the air.
if an Iranian-American student at UCLA is tazered in a library, he gets hundreds of posts lamenting “racism” and “bigotry”. But an Iranian-American student at UNC who uses his SUV to ram a dozen pedestrians to “punish America” and call 911 to confess as much, isn’t worth discussing. Odd wouldn’t you say ?
well, another sort of issue. when taz stated that browns were underrepresented at UCLA law school when this seemed a strange assertion (she mixed up some data) some people assumed she was right and started making up stuff about how asian americans were underrepresented in colleges and what not. that’s just empirically so false that it hurts.
anyway, i didn’t want to threadjack. my only point is that the imam story is not black & white. even some muslims, like at ali eteraz’s site, weren’t down with how they behaved.
I got one simple explanation for that. Abuse of power by authority is far more dangerous than say a hatred held one person. Do you not see a difference?
Razib, I really do appreciate that! I wasn’t trying to put words in Vikram’s mouth, but he chose an odd example to try and illustrate the “biases” of this site. I was just trying to figure out what he thought the site should say regarding race if it were being less “liberally biased”.
As for the Bombay blasts, the silence on it pissed me off too. I don’t know if the cynical manipulation of the events on the right (“see, the ragheads even blow up the dotheads!”) was much better, but there’s no denying that the American media really dropped the ball. However, I will say that DailyKos WAS full of diaries and news items regarding the bombing, and generally did a much better job of keeping attention on them than any of the mainstream news sources that usually “feed” the blogs. So that’s something.
And if it was a Christian/Jew/Agnostic who rammed a group of Muslim students, do you think it would have been ignored on this blog ?
I think the Imam issue is mostly much ado about very little. Muslims in America are facing some very serious problems and being yanked off planes isnÂ’t one of them. Overzealous prosecutors using the ‘terror’ angle to get guilty pleas is a far bigger and serious threat to Muslims living in the US. I know of more than a handful cases where prosecutors have used non-existent ‘terror’ angle to force defendants to plead guilty to non-terrorism related charges. Also non existent terror charges have been used to deny bail, impose lengthier sentences, use immigration administrative warrants to interrogate/search etc as a way to circumvent the search/seizure constitutional protections and a whole litany of prosecutorial misbehavior.
Of course thatÂ’s not sexy to talk about. Self promoting charlatans at various Muslim organizations around the country use these plane discrimination cases to (1) Bring attention to their own organizations (2) Raise money (3) Gain political power.
It is dumb to assume that information that ANYONE is giving you is accurate without at least checking out their links yourself. Anyone who does that (especially on a blog) is just asking to be misled. So if there was a swarm after that I don’t think it would be particularly “conservative” to argue against it. But I mean, even on blogs like DailyKos and Tapped, ideologically sympathetic commenters will rip into frontpage posters who put up inaccurate or misleading data. That shouldn’t be a “conservative” or “liberal” issue. Yeah there are always some followers, but this seems like more of a human nature thing than a ideology thing.
All that said, I love it when people question assumptions on blogs. That kind of logical thinking is not practiced enough in news consumption and debate.
Vikram — I guess my response to that would be that a social institution exercising power is important in a way that one bigoted asshole isn’t. But I wouldn’t get upset if I saw a post or news link to a story like that (although it is a little weird to draw an equivalence between the entire City of Los Angeles Police Department and one student at UNC). HOWEVER, given the conservative commentary I’ve seen on places like RedState or FreeRepublic, the problem is very often generalized to “this individual did a terrible thing, therefore ALL Muslims are violent”. That kind of post would upset me because it’s doing nothing but perputating a stereotype and it’s not backed up by data.
That’s some serious shit. But still I don’t think the post should be taken as a defense of muslim actions in general.
Do you think people who come here to seek a better life think (or should think) of their contribution to the American foreign policy? Not to support the comment to which you were responding but I just don’t see how that is an argument.
Why not just create a Muslim airline? Call it Bismallah airways or something and problem solved. You serve halal meat and have a imam fly the thing. Over a billion potential customers and maybe more because I would most likely fly on it because what terrorist is going to blow up the thing? There you go people, I gave the idea and now go and implement the thing and go make a billion dollars. I have loads of other billion dollar ideas to, like the “boilet” a bed/toilet. Why should people have to get up in the middle of the night to go to the bathroom. I know, I know, I am a bloody genius.
It is dumb to assume that information that ANYONE is giving you is accurate without at least checking out their links yourself.
confirmation bias is normal. everyone does it. ideological diversity helps to tamp down on it because you are skeptical of facts which go against your previous model.
How much are we willing to compromise our ethics and values in the name of safety?
There is a really bad after school special called The Wave that illustrates the point of how easy it is to condem prejudice and racism, but at the same time how quickly we as a society are willing to persecute those who provide a perceived threat (rather rational or irrational) based simply on the fact that they appear different than us.
America is an imperfect country, no better or worse than the majority of nations out there.
Ok, if you want to hold on that as a distinction. About a month ago this incident was posted on this blog. So a racist attack on a Muslim by Jewish teenagers is also worth blogging. But a dozen intentionally injured by a Muslim that got national headlines is not. Now do you see a pattern ?
That’s a point (if at all). If there was such an incident we could probably dissect to see the difference and make some conclusions.
I am not sure if the Seattle shooting of a Jewish Museum by a South Asian Muslim also made it to this blog. Technically speaking it had a desi angle. Even though the ‘Iranian student at UCLA’ incident was not really desiworthy, it made it here. And I have absolutely no problem with it. If indeed it was an abuse of power it was noble on the part of blogger to post it. The question is are these incidents really examples of bigotry/abuse of power? How would we know since there’s never a follow up post on these issues as to what the results of enquiry were.
I’d request Ennis to keep on top of this issue and post a follow up post once the results are out. I’ll then have learned something including probably how a reputable newspaper allows uncorroborated op-eds.
I meant to say Jewish lady at the community center. I am just headed out to a museum now ( how does one make that smiley face? )
Vinay –
“Do you think people who come here to seek a better life think (or should think) of their contribution to the American foreign policy?”
Yes, I do. Esp, the educated class who are well aware of the deeds that made this nation so rich and powerful.
p.s. the “better life” or “better opportunity” when translated always means better or more money.
hahahahahahahaha!
Shallowthinker,
That shit is damned funny!
Vikram, I count exactly five comments into that thread before people start questioning whether it’s relevant, or whether the facts bear out the conclusion the author wants the readers to draw. I think that’s a pretty good example of critical thinking, actually.
Now I mean sure, it’s kind of natural to want to read about things happening to people who look/act/think/are identified with you. That makes up 99% of the material on most ideological blogs, as well as most identity politics-type blogs (whether in terms of race, ethnicity, religion, gender, or whatever). Everyone thinks everyone hates them these days, and conservatives are NOT an exception (“War on Christianity”?). I actually think this site does a better job than most “identity” sites at highlighting negative aspects of “our” experience — there are tons of articles about crimes committed by South Asians, caste issues, political divisions, corruption, and other unflattering issues sprinkled in to the posts about the latest brown face on TV.
I guess my original question still stands: how would a site like this have to change to not be considered “liberally biased”? Would it have to trumpet every example of religious minority misbehavior? Just Muslims? Would it ignore examples of religious violence on South Asians or Arabs? Where would you draw the line if you were designing a site that matched up with your political beliefs?
Briefly, since I’m between meetings.
Why did we post on stories in LA and Brooklyn and not others? Because the bloggers in question happened to be in LA and NYC, so these were local stories for them, and were very much in their face.
I’m surprised that people are seeing this story as leftist b/c of the discussion of the Imam’s removal. I’m agnostic about the whole thing, it’s why I posted links to both sides and moved on. What I found more interesting was the way in which it revealed feelings that Muslims are inherently not members of the polity, culminating in an attempt by a right wing columnist to propose something unconstitutional – namely that Ellison be forced to “swear an oath” on the Bible.
Does it make me a leftist to defend the constitution? If so, what are rightists defending?
I wonder what she thinks about 50 years of American foreign policy …
I think more have died American foreign policy mandated inaction than when America acted.
Notwithstanding Vietnam and Iraq, I think a case can be made for the above.
Thank you Ennis for blogging about this issue. To me, the story you linked to about the man who was asked to remove his T shirt is even more disturbing, because he was clearly and indisputably not doing wrong. Also, I think it’s hard to say whether the imams were truly engaging in suspicious behavior or not, but the Washington Times is basically a tabloid, and a right wing one at that.
A few months ago a couple of British nationals were removed from a flight, and all they were doing was speaking in a foreign language.
Does it make me a leftist to defend the constitution? If so, what are rightists defending?
there is an enormous sample space of stories which illustrate a particular principle. the question that vikram brings up is that the selection out of this sample of stories might illustrate underlying values. to wit,american liberals who look at religious persecution in china often focus on tibetan buddhists, while conservative christians tend to look to the evangelical house churches. both are cases of religious persecution and fundamentally interchangeable, and yet i have seen a repeated tendency for a strong bias from the “left” and “right” to select a particular set of cases which correlate with tibet vs. house churches. this discrepancy surely illustrates a particular bias of priorities even though both liberals and conservatives in america tend to agree that people shouldn’t be forced to not believe or practice their religion.
i’m not one to criticize the authors of this blog for having biases or particular interests which color their acceptance of general universal principles of liberty, freedom, equality, etc. we all have biases.
The bias of this site is whatever the people paying the bills for it want it to be, and in this case that happens to be a strong liberal bias. I just find it amusing that many people posting here seem to think that the blog somehow does not have a bias and that all views are equally appreciated.
Vikram’s right. I generally dismiss comments from him, Kritic, and Manju for example because I am biased against them and their values.
Wow, I thought I was the only one who knew about “The Wave.” 🙂 That special actually originated out of a young adult novel of the same name. My class read it in 6th grade and I found it to be a very powerful illustration of how a “herd” mentality can bring average people to a point where their behavior mimics a terrible movement in history. When my class read The Wave, it was in the context of studying the Holocaust and the point was to understand that if we are not mindful of our own behavior and of the behavior of our communities and society at large, history is capable of repeating itself. It certainly inspired me (as a young teen) to always strive to inform my thinking and value independant thought. Anyhoo, I still recommend the book even though it is directed at teenagers.
I don’t know why people feel the need to quantify bigotry. Of course there is bigotry towards Jews, and there is bigotry towards Muslims, but drawing attention to one doesn’t diminish the other. It’s not a contest. It’s like the whole Holocaust vs slavery discussion. People nearly tore each other to shreds over it when I was in college, but does it really matter which one is worse? They were both horrible and people suffered a lot as a result of both.
My husband is Jewish, and in today’s climate, he is wary not of appearing obviously Jewish, but of the fact that he looks like an Arab and is frequently mistaken for one by both whites and Muslims (usually non Arab Muslims–desis and Moroccans). We have traveled a lot since 9-11 and he is very careful about what he reads on airplanes and how he dresses. He always makes sure to shave. He frequently gets his bags searched, and we’ve had some weird comments from airport officials. Ironically, this happens more to him when I’m NOT with him, so it’s his appearance, not mine, that is suspect. Fortunately we haven’t been pulled off a plane yet, but all it would take is one person to say they were uncomfortable with his appearance, and we’d be screwed.
… in an attempt by a right wing columnist to propose something unconstitutional – namely that Ellison be forced to “swear an oath” on the Bible. Does it make me a leftist to defend the constitution? If so, what are rightists defending?
UPDOWNIST. That is what I am.
Seriously, my view of the world/events is influenced by my chidhood/culture and study/training. Darwin’s evolution is spot on and so is Hayek. Just because the right wing columnist and I admire R Reagan, are you saying that I am calling for anarchy ? Using one person to tar others is not cool.
usually non Arab Muslims–desis and Moroccans
most moroccans are arab. a minority are berber, though i think they tend to be more rural, so i am guessing you’d see more arab moroccans here in the USA cuz of our immigration policies.
What I’m trying to say is, I don’t see the bias you’re talking about, and it would be nice to see a counterexample. If you were designing a website that looked at Desi issues, what would you include or exclude to make it more “friendly” to a center-right perspective?
I mean the only other way I’ve seen to look at these issues are either to a) ignore them (as done on most mainstream liberal websites) or b) exploit them in a completely xenophobic way (as done on most far-right websites). I’m uncertain how a “center-right” view that eschewed xenophobia but still critically looked at issues of religious violence would look.
If you were designing a website that looked at Desi issues, what would you include or exclude to make it more “friendly” to a center-right perspective?
more posts by vinod 🙂
btw neal, i don’t think you can eliminate bias on a site like this. people have viewpoints, that’s straight up. my comment toward vikram was to state that those of us who offer minoritarian views have to back our shit up to a far greater degree than those in the majority. those are the rules of the game.
Don’t change! Liberal bias is a good thing, especially as the national media moves towards the right. I read this blog because I like what the bloggers write about and for the most part I agree with their viewpoints. I don’t see why they should blog about something just because it was in the mainstream media. To me, this blog is interesting because it is about things not brought up in the mainstream media. I don’t see why it’s content needs to be responsive to its readers or be about anything other than what the bloggers want to blog about. If you want to draw attention to something, write about it on your own blog.
<
blockquote> I don’t know why people feel the need to quantify bigotry. Of course there is bigotry towards Jews, and there is bigotry towards Muslims, but drawing attention to one doesn’t diminish the other. It’s not a contest. It’s like the whole Holocaust vs slavery discussion. People nearly tore each other to shreds over it when I was in college, but does it really matter which one is worse? They were both horrible and people suffered a lot as a result of both.
<
blockquote>
Absolutely true, so one should be impartial when pointing out cases of bigotry and racism, irrespective of the religion of the victim. But that is not the case on this blog.
And if it was a Christian/Jew/Agnostic who rammed a group of Muslim students, do you think it would have been ignored on this blog ?
Vikram, I’ve seen you do this crap before on the Is 9-1-1 a joke in my town? post.
Here’s one of your little jewels from that thread:
Why shouldn’t we care about Persians being tasered, Pakistanis being beaten in NYC,
Yes, because we know that Persian & Pakistani blogs would have 100s of sympathetic posts if an Indian or Sri-Lankan was tasered or abused…
Why do this comparison? It does nothing to further your argument? Should everybody quit their day jobs to satisfactorily blog evenly about everything for you?
I agree 100%.
Actually, there is a great deal of debate over the ethnic makeup of Moroccans. USAID uses “Berber-Arab” in its population statistics, as do several other international agencies. Most of the Moroccans we met were actually in Morocco–both urban and rural– and many of them were, or self-identified as, Berber.
Have you seen Persian/Pakistani blogs sympathize over a Sikh being beaten up ? Somehow I doubt they share this one-way sense of solidarity of the “browns”. You are free to disagree with me. Just ignore what you disagree with and move on. It is that simple.
@ 89: the National media trends to the right? Holy freakin canolis! Actually, bias of the media is so 1999. I’d like to lead the charge, with razib, for more statistical literacy among the reportorati! And, among, me, while we are at it. I so didn’t pay enough attention in our one meager statistics course in med school, so maybe I should just shut it.
As for this incident? Oh, I don’t know. I’d sure hate to let a fear of seeming bigoted keep me from being vigilant about my surroundings, though…..how vigilant you ask? Well, that is the 64,000 dollar question. Everything is easy in retrospect. Hmm, anymore cliches I can trot out? Is it human nature to trend toward the freak-out part of the curve, safety-issue wise?
The problem with liberals today is that they are always trying too hard to be intellectually sound. Statistically accuracy doesn’t win elections. And statistics and data can be twisted to prove pretty much anything you want them to. Plus right wing bias in the media is my personal opinion, I don’t need statistics to back it up. I was merely expressing the opinion that a left-leaning blog was not a bad thing in this world of Ann Coulters and Fox News.
Oh, I don’t know about that. First of all, free speech is fine with me, so liberal blogs, Ann Coulter. Fox, Air America, Michael Moore, it’s all good. Well, it’s not all good, but you know what I mean. Second, data is important. The interpretation of said data is difficult, but it doesn’t make it a useless excercise.
Vikram: virtually every account of that attack by Taheri-azar (the UNC muslim student driver who ran down 9 students) states that the guy was mentally unstable, and had had a previous history of psych problems. It was certainly not even the first time that a person has used a car to run folks down (either they’re really old, or they’re really crazy). This bit of news got way more news than was newsworthy, just because he was a muslim. i, for one, am real glad sepiamutiny didn’t blog about this. sounds to me, vikram, like you just plain old don’t like muslims. why not just be honest about it?
I think given the potential for destruction that can be caused by even one security slip-up, such measures are reasonable. Anything less would be foolish.
You’re giving lip-service to someone whose sole purpose for existence is to sell books. I’d rather hang out with the klan than give credence to any of her arguments.