Earlier this week, Mazen Asbahi, whom the Obama campaign had appointed on July 26 to be their national coordinator for Muslim American affairs, announced that he had resigned his position.
Rany Jazayerli, my friend and colleague at Baseball Prospectus, knows Mr. Asbahi, and wrote me a long e-mail detailing his perspective on the matter. I asked him whether he'd be willing to share his perspective with the readers of FiveThirtyEight, and he graciously agreed. The following are Rany's words, unedited, and pulling no punches.
On Mazen Asbahi
by Rany Jazayerli
If you’re a politics junkie – and if you’re reading this, you are – you may have read the report in the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday that Mazen Asbahi, who just 10 days before had joined Senator Barack Obama’s presidential campaign as national coordinator for Muslim American affairs, “stepped down Monday after an Internet newsletter wrote about his brief stint on the fund’s board, which also included a fundamentalist imam.”
Mazen Asbahi is one of my best friends. I introduced him to his wife 12 years ago, which was payback after his wife (a childhood friend) introduced me to my wife the year before. When I attended medical school in Michigan, where he grew up, his parents would invite me over for dinner regularly. Our kids play together and we dine together at least once a month. We’re close. And now, thanks to the work of some racist jerkwads, his reputation has been sullied from coast to coast. Nothing that has been inflicted on the Muslim community in America has made me remotely as angry as what has transpired over the last 72 hours. (Except for 9/11, of course. But I know those guys are getting what’s coming to them.)
The news that Mazen had been offered the position - and that he took a leave of absence from his law firm to work in an unpaid capacity – was celebrated not just among his circle of friends, but throughout the Muslim community in Chicago and nationally. Mazen had spent his adult life preparing for this kind of opportunity. He’s worked for a number of Chicago law firms since graduating from law school, and while most of his legal work has been in the corporate setting, he has always been most passionate about the work he did, much of it pro bono, on behalf of various charitable and social organizations. The opportunity to represent Obama’s campaign, one he strongly supports, to a Muslim community that knows and trusts him, was an immensely fulfilling task for him.
So I'm crushed for him as a friend, but I’m furious as a Muslim because what has happened is that Mazen was forced to resign because of a smear campaign that targeted him for the sin of being Muslim: nothing more, nothing less.
Let's parse the original Wall Street Journal column, if you don’t mind:
“In 2000, Mr. Asbahi briefly served on the board of Allied Assets Advisors Fund, a Delaware-registered trust. Its other board members at the time included Jamal Said, the imam at a fundamentalist-controlled mosque in Illinois.”
‘I served on that board for only a few weeks before resigning as soon as I became aware of public allegations against another member of the board,’ Mr. Asbahi said in his resignation letter. ‘Since concerns have been raised about that brief time, I am stepping down...to avoid distracting from Barack Obama's message of change.’”
Where do I start? Let’s start with Jamal Said, “the imam at a fundamentalist-controlled mosque”. The consensus of the vast majority of Muslims in Chicago is that the mosque is not a fundamentalist anything, which is why it has such a large membership. Some of the mosque’s more recent projects include donating a riverfront garden to the city of Chicago (here’s a picture of major Richard Daley at the ribbon-cutting ceremony) and becoming the first mosque in the country to run on solar power.
Said has never been convicted of any crime, or arrested for any crime, or indicted for any crime. He has been accused of supporting Hamas, but has never been found guilty of anything. I’m not here to defend Said; I don’t know him, and unlike the people who wrote this column I prefer to not render judgments about people I don’t know anything about. But the point is that Said is not a convicted criminal, or a mafia don that walks the streets while people cower in fear.
What he is, is the imam of the largest mosque in the Chicago area. Mazen is an active member of the Muslim community here in Chicago. It would be almost impossible for him to be active and not have some contact with Said.
So Mazen happened to serve on the board of an investment fund with Said, until he learned about allegations that Said had been involved in raising funds for Hamas, at which time he quit the board. In 2000. Before 9/11, before Iraq, before the US government shut down Muslim charities such as the Holy Land Foundation after accusing them of funneling money to Hamas and other designated terrorist groups. (Incidentally, the case against the Holy Land Foundation ended in a mistrial.) But in 2000, before our own government felt that these charitable activities were illegal, Mazen decided to dissociate himself from even the hint of impropriety. That doesn’t support accusations that he’s a terrorist sympathizer; it refutes them.
“Other Web sites, some pro-Republican and others critical of fundamentalist Islam, also have reported on the background of Mr. Asbahi. He is a frequent speaker before several groups in the U.S. that scholars have associated with the Muslim Brotherhood.”
Those groups “associated with the Muslim Brotherhood” include ISNA, the largest Muslim organization in the country, whose annual convention draws over 10,000 people. Other prominent speakers at past conventions include radicals such as Karen Hughes. Last year's convention was co-sponsored by the Department of Justice. The other group Mazen was involved with was the MSA, also known as the Muslim Students Association, which exists on every college campus. I was part of the MSA when I was in college; pretty much every Muslim who goes to college is. It serves the religious needs of students on campus in the same way that Campus Crusade for Christ or Hillel might.
“The Justice Department named Mr. Said an unindicted co-conspirator in the racketeering trial last year of several alleged Hamas fund-raisers, which ended in a mistrial. He has also been identified as a leading member of the group in news reports going back to 1993.”
Pardon my Arabic, but what the f**k is an unindicted co-conspirator, and why is our government using this phrase? Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? And whatever happened to the notion that indictment is just the first step towards a guilty verdict? A prosecutor is supposed to be able to indict a ham sandwich, so what does it say that they’ve never been able to indict Said? (Maybe that’s his secret: Muslims don’t eat pork.)
In that racketeering trial – which, again, ended in a mistrial – the government listed close to 300 Muslim organizations as “unindicted co-conspirators”, which is tantamount to saying “we think some of them are terrorists, and since we don't know who, we’ll just blame them all.” So much for innocent until proven guilty. This isn’t even guilty until proven innocent – it’s guilty with no recourse to prove you’re innocent. How can you defend yourself against an indictment which doesn’t exist? Said is guilty by association. Which makes Mazen, apparently, guilty by association with someone who’s guilty by association. It's McCarthyism squared.
I’m so angry that I don't know where to direct my anger. I’ve fervently supported Obama’s campaign up until now, having just donated to his campaign again last week, but I’m not sending him another dime until I see some evidence that he’s willing to take a principled stand against this kind of bigotry. If Obama won't stand up to the flimsiest of accusations linking someone in his campaign, however remotely and ridiculously, to terrorists, then I’m not sure what he'll stand up against. I realize this kind of feckless approach worked so well for Michael Dukakis and John Kerry, Barack, but could you act like a man for once and grow a pair? Maybe Hillary will lend you hers.
If Obama doesn't want to stand up for Mazen on principle, how about standing up for him on pragmatism? Maybe he doesn't feel he needs to, since it's not like Michigan is a tipping point state in this election or anything. And it's not like Michigan has one of the highest concentrations of Muslims of any state in the union. And it's not like Mazen is from Michigan and his resignation is certain to depress turnout in the state from one of the Obama campaign's most reliable demographic bases. Seriously, who made this decision? Karl Rove?
I suppose I should credit the Obama campaign for having the courage to appoint a Muslim coordinator in the first place. In which case I have to ask, how stupid were they to not expect this kind of attack in the first place? The first thing I said to Mazen after he was hired – after “congratulations” – was “you know they’re going to come after you now, right?” He nodded, and we both knew who “they” were.
“They” are the racists who made these accusations and forced the Obama campaign to respond to them. They came after Mazen with everything they got, and all they landed was a feather punch – only to have the Obama campaign throw the towel in the ring anyway.
What they’re saying is that Mazen Asbahi has a link to people suspected of terrorism. What I’ll tell you is this: Mazen is not a terrorist. He’s not a fundamentalist. He’s not an Islamist. He’s neither a supporter of, nor a subscriber to the ideology of, the Muslim Brotherhood. The only thing he is guilty of, like the witch-hunted Debbie Almontaser, is being a Muslim and being an active member of the Muslim community. If he wasn’t, he wouldn’t have been qualified for the position in the first place.
As Ahmed Rehab put it in today’s Chicago Tribune, the headline should read “Muslim liaison for presidential campaign resigns after connections to Muslim community are found.” Mazen could not have been qualified to do this job without being associated, in some tenuous fashion, to someone like Jamal Said – just like Obama could not be a part of the political community of Chicago’s South Side without being associated with someone like, say, William Ayres.
Oh, and you know who else is associated with Said? As Jake Tapper pointed out, the board that Mazen and Said both sat on was the Allied Asset Advisor Funds, a subsidiary of the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT). NAIT is an adviser to the Dow Jones Islamic Fund.
Dow Jones. Which publishes the Wall Street Journal. Which broke the story that forced Mazen’s resignation. We’re officially through the looking glass, people.
If Mazen Asbahi is a terrorist, then I'm a terrorist. And if I were named to the same position, I'm sure they would have found a way to label me a terrorist as well. (I’m sure that if you scour my writings over the last 12 years, you’ll find that at some point I’ve threatened grievous bodily harm to a few members of the Kansas City Royals.)
And that’s what this is about. The same people who claim there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim will do everything in their power to slander people like Mazen Asbahi – the very epitome of a moderate, modern, integrated, tolerant, patriotic American Muslim – as an extremist. They will set their sights on any Muslim who seeks to be a part of the political process, and will pick them off, one by one, until there are no more targets left.
The world is at war right now, but it’s not a war of Christian vs. Muslim. It’s a war of moderates vs. extremists, and the two groups are battling it out in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. But they’re also battling here in America. This week, the extremists won. But I’ll be damned if I’m going to let them continue to win without a fight.
Rany Jazayerli is a physician, and co-founder of Baseball Prospectus. He lives in Naperville, Illinois
8.08.2008
A Perspective on Mazen Asbahi
by Nate Silver @ 3:23 PM...see also controversy, obama
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

74 comments
[toc]
Damn. That's one angry Muslim.
Someone should call DHS.
[/toc]
This is a terribly sad story, and thanks very much to Nate for posting it.
That being said...it's politics. Three months before an election isn't the time for a fight like that; there are a lot more important battles to win. If every Muslim who was qualified for the position could have a WSJ story like that written about them...it probably wasn't a good idea to create the position in the first place.
And yes, that is a terrible judgment on society and the media. But we win elections with the media we have.
God bless America. The founding fathers would be so pleased to see how far we've come.
Gah... "[toc]" should be "[tic]".
But yeah, this is equal parts sad, infuriating and weird. It should also be expected that the WSJ, now under NewsCorp management would put out a hit like this.
Very very sad.
But we know why the Obama campaign couldn't take this stand. It would have given talking points to Hannity, O'Reilly, and more, and its been shown in this election that RUMORS can have more power than TRUTH.
See the idea that Obama is a Muslim, now supplanted by the idea of him as Anti-Christ.
The Obama campaign HAD to do this, and it sucks. You don't control the cards you are dealt. You control how you play the hand.
And the best move, not the right move, was folding.
Shameful unfounded attacks.
I live in Naperville too!
Condolences to Mazen.
Rany, I hear you loud and clear. I say this as a devout and practicing Christian. The hatred and McCarthyist witch hunts which Muslims are subject to is a disgrace to not only our leaders, but our society as a whole. If nothing else, wasn't Obama's campaign for change supposed to energize forces of equality and injustice? This continues to show that despite all statements to the contrary, the job of political parties is to win elections not to change the world for the better. I hope all the best for your friend and offer my condolences and my prayers.
It sounds like Asbahi's an admirable man, and it sounds like the Obama campaign would have done better not to accept his resignation, from the little I know about the case.
One impression worth correcting: "unindicted co-conspirator" isn't a made-up piece of Bush-administration smear-lingo, though Lord knows we've seen plenty of such lingo these days; "unindicted co-conspirator" is a standard piece of language used by lawyers, especially prosecutors, and by their spokespeople, to describe people named in indictments as members of alleged conspiracies, but not charged. (Google the term if you like.)
Utterly depressing and utterly predictable, and so doubly depressing that Obama's campaign wasn't smart enough to see this coming.
For everyone who said this was a smart move, or a necessary one, didn't we support Obama to create different types of moves than this one? Didn't we vote for him for a different brand of politics? Yet every single time he has had a chance to stand up for what is right, he simply folds. Each f*cking time. From energy pandering (Kevin Drum was right on that one) to FISA (and TPM was right in why that was sad) to this, I'm curious what to expect from this administration. I went from thinking we had someone who was slightly better than a Clinton to someone I can say, "Well, they may be a coward, but at least Obama's a democrat."
Seriously, this is where I've gotten at?
Gah, why is it every four years I feel like I am selling my soul in supporting the democratic politician. You think if he loses, he will come out like Gore and Kerry and say that he wished he had fought harder, and fought the good fight?
"This continues to show that despite all statements to the contrary, the job of political parties is to win elections not to change the world for the better."
It's to do both. But you don't change the world by losing elections.
"For everyone who said this was a smart move, or a necessary one, didn't we support Obama to create different types of moves than this one? Didn't we vote for him for a different brand of politics?"
If by a different brand of politics, you mean Hannity and Limbaugh spending every day from now until November going on about Obama's Muslim connections, that doesn't sound very different to me.
The number one reason why low-information voters who might otherwise vote for Obama wouldn't is because they're afraid he's one of those "scary brown people". You simply can't do anything to give people a chance to rehash that. You can't. He knows this, and I know this.
If he runs the positive campaign you want him to and ignores every smear thrown his way by having people like that on his staff, he loses. Plain and simple. Even if he fights back with great eloquence, the stories in the paper all have Obama and Muslim in them. He loses. The end.
What you can expect from this administration is compromise to get things done. I don't know why you thought you were expecting a fiery progressive crusader, but you ascribed that to Obama, he didn't tell you that.
The perfect is the enemy of the good. He knows that, and you should know it too.
Isotopeblue-
The point that the author makes addresses that concern. Namely, any Musilm that is "active" in the Muslim community will have these kinds of tangential associations.
Scu-
What good is fighting the good fight if you lose and someone even worse than a middle-of-the roader gets in. I've supported BHO because I think he's demonstrated himself to be intellegent, well-organized and a masterful arm-twister. Getting cops to back a videotape rule because it will make the confessions stick better? You don't see jujitsu like that outside of the Octagon.
What do you expect from Barack Hussein Obama. He is about one thing, GETTING ELECTED PRESIDENT, and he doesn't care who he has to ditch to do it.
You're mad at the wrong people dude! Obama threw your man off the train without blinking an eye, and if needed he would have beheaded him first.
Welcome to the Barack Obama that I have seen. The ONE who has changed positon on almost every major issue, all in about one month. The ONE who threw his grandmother under the train, not just off the train.
What infuriates me about your post dude is that you are blaming the Wall Street Journal for bringing up ties that your man apparently had/has with a mosque. If it was not a big deal, then all of your anger should be going to OBama for not standing by his man. I think you and your MUSLIM buddy have hitched yourselves to a man with a serious character flaw
By the way, I'll list your paragraph here, "As Ahmed Rehab put it in today’s Chicago Tribune, the headline should read “Muslim liaison for presidential campaign resigns after connections to Muslim community are found.” Mazen could not have been qualified to do this job without being associated, in some tenuous fashion, to someone like Jamal Said – just like Obama could not be a part of the political community of Chicago’s South Side without being associated with someone like, say, William Ayres."
You shouldn't compare your friend to William AYRES. He is an admitted Terrorist!!!!! He has openly admitted to wishing he had set off more bombs and killed more people. Your frind sounds like a decent guy, who stepped into the political arena and got his bell rung. By the way, I think Obama could have been part of the Chicago Political society without being around ARYES. I don't think Presidents or Presidential wantabes should be associating with terrorists, old or new!! I look at that as a bad character flaw, and your friend should have as well.
If he really wants to help in the campaign, he should associate himself with a man of proven courage, JOHN MCCAIN.
In solidarity, support and anger.
Let the landslide in November be our revenge, and our position as engaged citizens who keep those in government accountable be the source of the change we need.
I found the post sad and infuriating, but the comments here just compound the effect. I'm hearing a stirring, soulful chorus of "Suck it up, loser!" to our friend Rany, disappointed that a candidate he believed in just crapped all over his close friend. I suppose Rany should console himself with the warm, fuzzy thought that the crapping will serve the Greater Good in the Most Important Election Evah. Party on, "liberal" dudes!
Thank you for sharing. I wouldn't have known otherwise. While I understand the Obama campaign's problem on this, it isn't right. They need to at least make a statement or something and clear this man's good name.
-Rhode Island X
I would also like to thank you for sharing.
Obama shouldn't have accepted his resignation. I think it is time for Obama to stand up for the Muslim community.
It is time for Christians, Atheist, and Democrats to stand up for the Muslim Community. I demand my freedom of religion
"I suppose Rany should console himself with the warm, fuzzy thought that the crapping will serve the Greater Good in the Most Important Election Evah."
Well...to be frank, yes, he should. The guy resigned because he knew getting Obama elected was more important than making a stand about Muslims not being bad guys. He knew the issues at stake were a lot bigger and more important than that. So while this really sucks, he knows he did what he had to do. Blame Rove and Fox for making that what he had to do.
Jack:
You misspelled a five-letter name two different ways and still couldn't get it right. The rest of your post isn't worth responding to, except to say that you should be equally disappointed with all the lobbyists and right-wing pastors McCain denounced, then embraced, then denounced again. Some courage! Also, try posting in a coherent manner that doesn't seem like your face is beet red with anger, and someone might actually read it.
Adam @ 3:18 -
Would you mind choosing a slightly different name? I post here somewhat regularly, and wouldn't want there to be any confusion. Thanks.
This is sad.
This is sad, yes, but it's still politics. It's simply too easy to get thrown off the side of the boat (see: Eliot Spitzer, John Edwards, ED MUSKIE), and the situation we're in now makes Muslims doubly vulnerable.
Should Obama have stuck it out? Of course; he's had connections to far scarier-sounding people than what seems to be Generic Muslim Leader, and he's survived them. But he didn't, because it's easier to dump that kind of baggage than try to justify it. It's sad, but not surprising.
As much as it pains me to say it, making a big issue out of this would have been like having a Gay Pride Parade three days before an election where a "Defense of Marraige" law was on the ballot.
Dude should sue the WSJ for libel.
"Blame Rove and Fox for making that what he had to do."
Nope, I blame him. Last time I looked, Obama is a living, breathing human being with free will and agency, and no one "makes" him do anything. He chose to do this. If that makes him look like a gutless panderer, that's a consequence of his choice, and blaming the Big Bad Conservative Boogey Man instead of holding a politician responsible for his own choices is silly.
It is amazing how our civil rights are being held hostage by ignorance.
Equality and logic are being thwarted because a large group of Americans are too lazy to investigate the veracity of the constant barrage of baseless right-wing smears.
And by the way, "Jack Black", this is a discussion site for polls and campaign tactics, not a place to trumpet your candidate's ideology, or propagate untruths and conjecture that you heard on Limbaugh or Hannity.
there are plenty of sites that cater to that kind of "thought".
And stop soiling the name of a great entertainer, who would oppose everything you state.
"Nope, I blame him. Last time I looked, Obama is a living, breathing human being with free will and agency, and no one "makes" him do anything. He chose to do this."
That's fine. He did choose to do it. He also chooses to win an election. He chooses to not have every Fox News commentator and who knows how many WSJ editorials go on about his Muslim connections and what he's hiding and why he's a strange foreign man.
Now, you may want a candidate who deals with those inflammatory headlines designed explicitly to scare off undecided voters from him by continuing the argument that he can never possibly win, and very possibly losing the election and screwing the country in the process.
I prefer a winner. Someone who realizes that sometimes, idealism is bad and you have to do things you don't like to do because it's the best thing to do for the greater good. You may not, but you don't have to win elections by winning low-information voters, do you?
Dear Adam,
Just like a left wing loon. Your guy has a bad character flaw, and your sweating bullets. One mad Muslim posting on this blog, leads to 10,000 not voting.
Face it your guy is an empty suit waiting to to be flushed down the sewer of history.
By the way, are people still standing around staring at you while you take a shit. I mean really, does it come out with a halo or a smiling face that says, Hi everyone, I'm Adam and I'm THE ONE. By the way, did you get my earlier post, on this date in history-I did it just for you because YOU ARE THE ONE this board has been waiting for.
Seriously, we should start a campaign. "If Mazen Asbahi is a terrorist, then I'm a terrorist." Let's get T-Shirts made, post it on every website -- let's make it a media spectacle. This has gone far enough, we need to make like Denmark with the Star of David before any more innocent Muslims are slandered. This should be an outrage to any honest American!
"I prefer a winner. Someone who realizes that sometimes, idealism is bad and you have to do things you don't like to do because it's the best thing to do for the greater good."
So after he sells out and gets elected, THEN he'll do wonders for the "greater good?" I suppose we'll all have to hope for that, then. Cheers!
"So after he sells out and gets elected, THEN he'll do wonders for the "greater good?" I suppose we'll all have to hope for that, then."
Yes...we do. I don't know if you've noticed, but Rove has turned politics into a horrificly ugly endeavor. There are *only* two options. Fight back when you must and head off stuff like this before it blows up, or play the idealist and do everything you would do in a perfect world and lose. That's it. You keep wanting to think there's a third option, but you haven't been around politics at all if you really believe that.
He's doing the best he can in the environment we're in. Trying to play the purist is what loses Democrats election after election, and while the people up in ivory towers are satisfied with running the good race, the country suffers. You should know exactly who to blame for bringing politics into this state.
I'm a Chicago Muslim (convert), also a military officer. This is disheartening, to see the old moral dilemma raise its head here again. Accept the resignation, and work towards the ultimate goal of the Presidency to help fix the hate speech and over-vetting of innocent people, or fight now and risk the future due to smears and braying of loud-mouthed asses.
It's actually funny. Hell, I've probably gone to the mosque in question on a random Friday prayer, and like I said, Naval officer. Spent time as an aviator, still trusted with a lot of information and gear. So it's okay for me to be a politically active Muslim, but not that election volunteer? That position is just TOO DAMN RISKY I suppose!
This stupid over-vetting situation, where insinuation leads to decrying, crisis, and guilt by association. All before any wrongdoing is even ascertained. Sigh.
Good luck to Rany/Mazen, and go White Sox insha'Allah.
"There are *only* two options. Fight back when you must and head off stuff like this before it blows up, or play the idealist and do everything you would do in a perfect world and lose. That's it. You keep wanting to think there's a third option, but you haven't been around politics at all if you really believe that."
What a sadly limited view of politics and human possibility. The other side can do anything it wants and gets to define our choices, which are "only" two. Perhaps we might consider aggressively advocating our views and defending our friends rather than running every time they're (falsely) challenged. Ordinary human voters respect people who stand up for what they believe in and are unapologetic about it. And they have very finely tuned noses for cowardice. You say that I want a "purist" or an "ivory tower idealist," rhetorically wrinkling your nose while you say it. I want something much simpler - a fighter who defends his beliefs and his friends instead of deserting them when it's hard. And I don't think that's too much to ask for.
Jack Black-
Empty suit? Really? At least when Darien call him a socialist he's a little closer to reality than this empty, pathetic charge. Dude's got way more going for him in the empty-vs-full suit department than you or I will ever have.
Besides... Who flushes suits down the toilet, anyway? That much fabric will clog the pipes something fierce. Stupid metaphor.
"The other side can do anything it wants and gets to define our choices, which are "only" two."
Yes, I'm really ashamed and embarrassed that that's the case. Regardless, it is. Look around if you don't believe me.
"Perhaps we might consider aggressively advocating our views and defending our friends rather than running every time they're (falsely) challenged."
If you really think our nominee should be spending his time defending Muslims and keeping the story in the news and in the minds of swing voters, then you really have no clue whatsoever how to win an election.
"Ordinary human voters respect people who stand up for what they believe in and are unapologetic about it."
No offense, but you don't actually know any "average voter", do you? I'll give you an example: my mother. Or anyone in my family. They're incredibly suspicious that this man Hussein Obama is a secret Muslim, and you'll never in a million years convince them Muslims aren't all evil. I'm sorry, but they're closeminded ignorant people that will never change. I've spent years trying.
Now, do you *really* think he should reinforce the stereotypes all these voters have of him by appearing in news story after news story defending his "Muslim friends" and lose any chance at ever getting their vote? You really think that's a good strategy? Because, ya know, I'd kind of like to have a Democratic president. But maybe that's just me.
"I want something much simpler - a fighter who defends his beliefs and his friends instead of deserting them when it's hard. And I don't think that's too much to ask for."
I want the same thing. But we nominated a black man named Hussein Obama. If you really want him to defend his Muslim friends then you're more interesting in doing what's right in this one case than winning the election and doing what's right in a thousand more cases that would otherwise go much, much more wrong.
Pander has it exactly right in his first paragraph. Open your eyes to the stupidity and ignorance around you. It doesn't change overnight, and this isn't the time to play Custer.
What do you expect from Barack Hussein Obama. He is about one thing, GETTING ELECTED PRESIDENT, and he doesn't care who he has to ditch to do it.
Jack,
You amaze me sometimes. Even in the course of blaming Obama for not standing up to an anti-muslim slur, you still can't help but make an anti-muslim slur. Yes, he has a muslim name. That isn't a crime. I think that was the whole point of this article. You seem to be simultaneously agreeing and disagreeing with the article. Whatever makes Obama look the worst, I'll do. I'll criticize Obama for one thing and the exact opposite at the same time. We're Republicans. We don't need to be consistent.
One mad Muslim posting on this blog, leads to 10,000 not voting.
Perhaps but I really hope not. Yes, Obama shouldn't have given in to prejudice. I know that disappoints many of us. But ultimately, muslims must realize that if Obama is defeated it will represent an enormous victory for anti-muslim prejudice. Even if you don't want to vote for Obama, you have to vote against the Republicans. It would be an absolute disaster if this tactic is allowed to work.
I'm sorry to hear about what happened to you friend Mazen, and wish him well. He sounds like quite a guy. It's Bull$&!#, and Obama would've scored a lot of points with me and I think with a lot of people if he'd stood up for him through a media firestorm.
I have no idea which decision would work out better for Obama in practice, but I can understand his aversion to controversy shortly before election day. I can only take heart that this isn't the last and only word in the fight against this kind of stuff. Just like gays rightfully weren't happy with "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" when Clinton made that the high-water mark in the military. It was a disappointing half-measure, but years later, I think it's moved the debate in favor of gay rights.
One of my favorite things Martin Luther King Jr. said was "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." Maybe cold comfort right at this moment of total BS, but I think we're on our way. Thanks so much for writing this, and Nate for posting it here.
Amazing how many anti-Obama people so easily blame Obama. Are you oblivious to the fact that the one and only reason Obama cannot stand up in these situations is because John McCain will run an endless string of attack ads to convince Americans that Obama is a Muslim/Terrorist Sympathizer/?
If Obama had an honorable opponent (both in terms of McCain, the RNC and 527s) he would not have to cower in the face of these manufactured controversies. But the truth is he is black and has a foreign name - and please don’t act dumb about this – you KNOW the right will do everything in their power to make Obama out to be an ‘other’ that Americans should fear. They have already been doing so. They thrive on these controversies, no matter how false or contrived, because they know it is the easiest way to beat a black guy with the middle name Hussein.
Scott-
Put bluntly: A fight on this subject is a dumb fight to have right now, because it's a fight Obama would lose. It's slanderous. It's scandalous. It's stupid. It's wrong, but there is nothing good that could come from Obama puting his arm around someone that the 24-hr "news" channels have branded a terrorist. That's right: a terroist. Don't kid yourself - the electorate isn't that smart. One in ten think Obama is a Muslim, and if the news calls this dude a terrorist, it doesn't matter if he is or not. Furthermore, it doesn't matter what Obama says or not. The label would stick, and this would drag the candidate down with him. McCain wouldn't touch it, but you can bet your ass a GOP 527 would. Discresion is the better part of valor.
"I can only take heart that this isn't the last and only word in the fight against this kind of stuff. Just like gays rightfully weren't happy with "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" when Clinton made that the high-water mark in the military."
You're absolutely right, and that's what Scott's afraid of too. I think we all are. He triangulated away his presidency, and none of us want that to happen again. Obama himself said that it's the responsibility of all of us to keep his feet to the fire on progressive issues after he's elected. I take him at his word that he's not a triangulating phony, because that's all we can do. But nothing good can ever come unless he wins.
"This week, the extremists won. "
Easy there, champ... you're not gonna have any adjectives left when something actually, you know... extreme happens...
Adam said:
"I take him at his word that he's not a triangulating phony, because that's all we can do. But nothing good can ever come unless he wins."
The tough part is figuring out where compromise (a nescessary part of the political process) ends and tirangulation begins. For him, and for us.
I only hope Obama's administration is worth Mazen's sacrifice.
Guilt by association is a powerful weapon used everyday by both Democrats and Republicans.
I hear McCain filled up at an Exxon station yesterday. He must be a price gouger!
Finally, I'd just like to say that John McCain has a comprehensive economic plan that will create millions of good American jobs, ensure our nation's energy security, get the government's budget and spending practices in order, and bring relief to American consumers. Furthermore, There are serious issues at stake in this election, and serious differences between the candidates. And we will argue about them, as we should. But it should remain an argument among friends; each of us struggling to hear our conscience, and heed its demands; each of us, despite our differences, united in our great cause, and respectful of the goodness in each other.
(What do I win, Senator McCain? What do I win? Is it a hovercraft?! Oh boy, I've always wanted a hovercraft!)
http://blog.indecision2008.com/2008/08/07/this-blog-will-not-tolerate-john-mccains-blogola-scheme-unless-we-win-something/
Thanks for posting this, Nate. The rights and dignity of a few being trampled diminishes all of us. I am ill that a good person has been demonized and that the Wall Street Journal is now just a tool for propaganda. We have a lot of work to do in this country and we must elect Obama. We must also not forget was has been done to Mr. Asbahi because good people should not have to fear being of service to others.
I appreciate this article. I wish America were a more tolerant place (and I'm a conservative evangelical pastor). I wish I didn't suspect Obama will be less free than even Bush has been to promote racial diversity, work toward peace, and focus on the strengths of America. He'll have to do so without bipartisan support, which luxury was afforded to Bush on the few occasions he chose to head in that direction (e.g., PEPFAR).
Thank you for posting this. I wish that this story would get more play in the press. Like many who follow politics I read the story as I read so many other stories and then put it aside without much thought about what it means. I am glad that I read this so I can have a better view of what really went on. I think it is deplorable and unfair and racist and terribly, terribly sad. Thanks again for posting this well-thought and well-written letter.
This episode really calls into question whether Obama stands for anything worth caring about. Just as his FISA vote did. Guess not.
Will still have to vote for him as McCain is worse, but no love lost here.
"man of proven courage, JOHN MCCAIN"
If by "man of proven courage" you mean "worst Republican nominee in decades" then I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU!
Pro-life? Pro-abortion? Pro-drilling? Anti-drilling? Pro-amnesty? Anti-amnesty?
So is John McCain!
I think you and your MUSLIM buddy have hitched yourselves to a man with a serious character flaw
What the f-? Replace MUSLIM with JEW. And this kind of shit is acceptable discourse here? Pathetic.
For the benefit of those of you who are not familiar with Rany Jazayerli (and some of whom clearly do not understand the meaning of tolerance), here's a link to an earlier publication by Jazayerli.
This is Rany's "Plea for Tolerance", which he published on ESPN's "Page 2" shortly after the 9/11 attack.
Wow...I don't even know what to say.
I completely understand the outrage, but I also understand what Obama has to work with. And he can't begin to change anything if he isn't elected. It's beyond sad and infuriating that some groups are unable to partake in the poltiical process without slander.
I live in Naperville too!
I grew up in Bolingbrook!
As (almost) always, Rany's right.
I say that in almost unqualified manner, before I must force myself to admit that I would not be overly pleased with a member of Campus Crusade for Christ as President of my country, which in my college experience was more like Chabad than like Hillel.
I particularly want to agree with this:
The world is at war right now, but it’s not a war of Christian vs. Muslim. It’s a war of moderates vs. extremists, and the two groups are battling it out in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. But they’re also battling here in America. This week, the extremists won. But I’ll be damned if I’m going to let them continue to win without a fight.
It's a conflict I became convinced 40 years ago I would see in my lifetime. My Dad always said WWIII would be between the haves and the have nots. I now think the conflict is both.
Great post. Thanks to Dr. Jazayerli and Nate.
As far as Obama's actions and apparent appeasement on several issues. I do think some are compromises he is wlling to make. I also wonder what makes some people think that Obama can bring about some of the change before getting the bully pulpit. Major changes take years, decades and longer, to bring about. Some periods in history have involved a lot of change in a short time and we are certainly set up for the necessity of major changes, quickly.
Obama has stood out for me because of his insistence that he expects us to stay involved after the election. It is long past time for Americans to take a little time away from their favorite outlets (TV, sports, etc) to keep track of what is going on in DC. Obama cosponsored a bill regarding federal programs to be accessible on the internet. He plans to expand it when he is president to make it even easier to find out what legislation is in the mill on whatever interests you. He has made it a policy to get ideas from supporters.
I don't think it is at all risky to think that once in the office, he will be more proactive. That said, you can push some things too fast. The country is ready for gays in the military to be open now. In '93 it was Clinton's debacle over the right thing at the wrong time. Didn't help the '94 mid-terms, unless you were GOP. Even Lincoln was reluctant to abolish slavery because of what had happened in England when it had been forced there by law.
Eventually, the mind and mood of the people changes enough you can challenge the country into setting the bar higher. Depends on how good you are at giving inpirational speeches that are full of good insights and information.
That's is number two on the list of people to re-integrate into the Obama administration. The other is Ms Power, the economist. This gotcha stuff is the worst of politics.
Even when it's the bad guys I don't like it. And when the casualty is from baiting on religion, the hypocrisy is intolerable.
This continues to show that despite all statements to the contrary, the job of political parties is to win elections not to change the world for the better.
How can a political party, or Obama, change the world if they don't win the election?
Everyone here blaming Obama is either a Republican agent or a moron.
Had it been anybody but Obama then I would agree with winning the election first, then sort out the problems.
I think Obama is making a Moral & tactical mistake.
He has the chance here to take the problem face on and make another of his speaches.
He would bring the fact of his not being a Muslim to the forefront of the news, which would be a good thing.
He would apear principled, which would be a good thing.
He would be seen to be defending minorities, which would be a good thing.
Played right support for moderate Muslims should even boost his appeal to Jews. He will gain points as an "honest broker" in peace initiatives, and some might recall that when racism wins the Jews tend to loose rather badly.
Thanks Nate for demonstrating what being an a good neighbor is all about.
It is truly sad that America seems to have traded its past last great prejudice, anti Catholicism for anti Islam.
Dialogue is the key to solving this issue and I appreciate that we as members of this society can still engage in it and that Nate has graciously offered up this forum for this purpose.
This whole thing is sad.
It may have revealed a small flaw in the Obama organization. With the shear size it has become, how do you properly vett the volunteers to make certain that you play proper defense up front?
A press release up front that said, "Mazen Asbahi is being appointed to the position. We know his background and that he is involved in such and such a mosque, where such and such a person was an unindicted co-conspirator in such and such a case. Even though he has these tenuous associations, he is the best man for the job because A, B, and C. Despite his limited prior associations, he left that position when he found out X, and within days of finding out. There is no sign he has ever done anything wrong or even questionable."
Release the news before WSJ can. You had to know it was coming. You had to know the press would search. The position itself, while extremely admirable, is high risk. Any life long muslim from the Detroit, Dearborn, area is going to have associations. Being from the area its almost impossible not to.
An acquaintance in Northern Michigan who for a few short weeks attended an ultra fundamentalist Christian Church, when they ran for office were accused of associating with and attending services with X (I forget who X was its a long time ago) an unindicted co-conspirator of Timothy McVeigh in the Oklahoma City Bombing. They tried to explain, but it was too late. They ended up just dropping out of the race.
Maybe Asbahi could have fought it, but its admirable to drop out and not distract, and not put your family and friends through the scrutiny that comes with fighting this sort of slime.
One of my best friends from law school, married a Muslim doctor from Dearborn. He is Iraqi in descent, although he was born in the US, and never been to Iraq. He has a great uncle who was a higher up many years ago in Saddam Hussein's military regime. Under the Asbahi rule, her entire extended family, and maybe even me for being a close friend would be prevented from holding political positions.
Skip, how dare you say John McCain is the worst nominee in decades. How soon you forget the sacrificial lamb Bob Dole. His only other employment since running for president has apparently been Viagra and Pepsi commercials. Wouldnt be a bad money maker for McCain if he wasnt a Senator any longer and needed money (which he doesnt, see Cindy).
It is truly sad that America seems to have traded its past last great prejudice, anti Catholicism for anti Islam.
I just want to point out that I don't think there's anything wrong with having a prejudice against an ideology (such as Catholocism, Islam, Wiccanism, socialism, conservatism, fascism, etc).
What's wrong is having a prejudice against people (Catholics, Muslims, Wiccans, socialists, conservatives, fascists, etc).
In other words, you can be opposed to what someone believes, but that doesn't allow you to infringe on that person's rights.
One can be opposed to Islam, and still treat Muslims with respect, while nevertheless hoping to convert them to your own religion. One can be opposed to Marxism yet still treat Marxists with respect, while hoping they come to recognize the benefits of the open market. One can be opposed to conservatism and still treat conservatives with respect, even while trying to persuade them of the advantages of progressivism.
I would hope this is obvious, yet all too often, we see people crying bigotry in the wrong circumstances (and often demanding apologies).
A person who says all Muslims are stupid is a bigot, and owes an apology. But a person who says all Muslims are misled in their worldview is not a bigot, and owes no one any apology.
I hope that all makes sense.
Thank you for sharing your friend's email, Nate.
The smear on Muslims in this country is despicable. One would never confuse the USA as a nation of compassion.
I am so sorry for your friend and his friend. Being on the receiving end of bigotry is a horrible experience.
First to Peterbilt: Here's a link of Obama speaking about your Martin Luther King, Jr. "arc of the moral universe" comment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K_ntZEPlHI&eurl=http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/31/23310/2199.
Pretty moving stuff -- and it would be easy to say that, given Obama's acceptance of Mr. Asbahi's resignation, he is supportive of such causes more in words than in gestures. But I think that would be short-sighted.
At the end of the day, there is still fighting to do: in terms of justice for gays, ethnic minorities, immigrants, and as Mr. Jazayerli has so eloquently written, religious minorities (or, at least minority in this country.)
It's going to take fighting both from politicians within the system, and citizens who are not office holders, to bring about justice. There two sides of the same coin and we need both.
We should be both supportive of Obama, who as a dark man with a funny name, has become an unlikely proxy for the Muslim community, just as he has for my Hindu community. But at the same time, we need people like Mr. Jazayerli, calling out Mr. Obama and the rest of the political establishment; forcing the issue when justice is lacking.
I don't think Mr. Jazayerli's comments should be dismissed because it is an election season, just like I don't think we necessarily have to approach Obama's predicament without understanding. Instead, I think we have to understand the forces at play, encourage political activism in the Muslim community, and hope that one day, their community is able to organize like the Jewish community was able to twenty years ago, and the gay and American Indidan community will able to in the next ten years -- where they are a political force, and that their issues are catered to by both political parties as a means to win votes and increase campaign coffers.
Should Obama have dumped him before it became a problem? Yes. A problem would have been inevitable, had he kept this guy. Can you imagine how far the worst people would have gone with this? With terrorism, given the climate Obama's already in, he cannot afford to take any chances. And the fact that there is even less substance to claims that Obama is a terrorist has not shielded him yet. Voters are immune to fact.
This election is about doing the best we can with what we have, not about correcting every false impression the most ignorant among us hold.
You know as much as I feel for the Muslim guy who was jettisoned from the Obama campaign. I can't help but also feel that Obama had no choice. Obama himself had to resign membership from Trinity because of the same 'guilt by association' accusations.
So, he did nothing to the Muslim guy that he himself had not had to endure the same personal sacrifice for the same scurrilous reasons.
Unfortunately, the Muslim faith around the globe is causing conflict in numerous countries. No other faith is setting off conflict and engaging in murder-suicide terrorism like Muslims are GLOBALLY. We have seen these horrific actions in Pakistan, Holland, London, France and the USA.
So, there is significant reason for individuals to be highly suspect of individuals of Muslim faith. World incidents are hard factual evidence to support that as a reasonable response. Moreover, they establish a global PATTERN with one key common variable the Muslim faith.
I do not know if Christiane Amanpours piece titled 'God's Warriors' can be considered propaganda or not. The piece seemed to be very balanced journalistic in terms of identifying the 'moderates vs. extremists' Muslims. What I know is that, I came away with the message that the Muslim faith is imperiling the several continents and countries with western values/morals. That so outrage Muslim fanatics they are willing to kill innocent people for their 'moral' beliefs. Without regard to murder and killing being amoral.
The emphasis on killing to assert moral fundatmentalist values is jarring and frightening. It is the abortion clinic bombing fanatics in the USA on a global stage with steroids!
I came away from that series wanting to ban the Muslim faith as well as the female public garb in all Western countries. I think we are at risk of not taking seriously enough the threat of the religion based on our Bill of Rights. But even Freedom of Speech is curtailed and delineated when the individuals rights do not supercede the group danger i.e. 'yelling fire in a croweded theatre'
I am a minority so to me the thought of imposing this type of religious restraint is pretty radical and shocking to my individual beliefs yet I am ready to support any such legislation as I feel it will halt mass murder of innocents.
The manner in which people are willing to uphold the Muslim faith is disingenuous as best and very frightening and dangerous at worse.. It is terrorizing. Folks who understand that the KKK is a terrorizing group do not willing wear Klan robes in public. I feel that is how responsible moderate members of the Muslim faith should respond to demonstrate their repudiation of the extremism in their faith. The rules and tenets of the Muslim extremists support murder and suicide and should be unacceptable.
In fact, it is the reason we have HATE crime laws in this country. When people attack others based on race, religion or gender..they are seeking to terrorize an ENTIRE GROUP solely based on their race, religion or gender. That makes it more than an individual crime it is a crime against a group who through no individual action are targeted on the basis of being a member of the 'hated' group.
Ergo, I feel that the Muslim faith has demonstrated that it is a faith of HATE and the extremists are too numerous for the moderates to balance.
I support banning Muslim faith in schools, public squares and businesses.
It may be unAmerican but the Muslim faith is dangerous for many and this imposing of Shariah Law in public schools in Dearborn MI..is a terrifying example of that.
Obama took the right course of action.
"So I'm crushed for him as a friend, but I’m furious as a Muslim because what has happened is that Mazen was forced to resign because of a smear campaign that targeted him for the sin of being Muslim: nothing more, nothing less."
That is just such a lie but its been repeated often enough. Nobody forced Asbahi to resign. Rather, he resigned immediately after receiving a single query from the Wall Street Journal about his background. Before that, there wasn't a single thing written about his background (check Google Blog/News searches if you don't believe me) so if there was a "smear campaign", it must have been invisible. The furor over Asbahi erupted AFTER the Journal had already written about him as could be expected.As for being targeted "for the sin of being a Muslim", why is it that not a word was said about his replacement who also happens to be a Muslim naturally?
Sorry, but throughout the affair, there was a legitimate concern about Asbahi who was part of the leadership of many organizations that were tied to the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood. Those organizations would like us to believe that they represent ALL U.S. Muslims so any concern about them automatically means that all U.S. Muslims are being targeted.
情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,
^^ nice blog!! ^@^
徵信, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 感情挽回, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, 通姦, 通姦罪, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 捉姦, 監聽, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 外遇問題, 徵信, 捉姦, 女人徵信, 女子徵信, 外遇問題, 女子徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 徵信公司, 徵信網, 外遇蒐證, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 外遇沖開, 抓姦, 女子徵信, 外遇蒐證, 外遇, 通姦, 通姦罪, 贍養費, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 女人徵信, 外遇
徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵信網, 外遇, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 女人徵信, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,
^^ nice blog!! thanks a lot! ^^
徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 離婚, 外遇,離婚,
徵信, 外遇, 離婚, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信社, 征信, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,
Hi. I just heard you on NPR and I was quite annoyed by something.
First, you start off defending Jamal Said in an odd way. You say to start with that most chicago Muslims wouldn't consider him a fundementalist. I don't see how muslims get to have the final word on that.
Then you add that it's the biggest mosque in Chicago, the implication being that therefore the form of Islam practiced there must be mild because it's the majority kind. It has not been shown that Muslim majorities are necessarily tolerant and non-fundamentalist either.
After that you add building a park and using solar cells, which has exactly nothing to do with the Imam or the mosque's ideology.
Now I don't know anything about this Mosque or Imam either so I won't attack or defend them, but I know when I'm being lied to with sleight of hand. If you wanted to convince me of how non-fundamentalist he is you should have told me what he thinks the proper punishment is for apostates or adulterous young women. You've implied that the mosque must not be fundamentalist because it's big, Muslims say it's not, and because of parks and solar cells. These are all non-sequiturs.
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
Post a Comment