Paul McInerny Charged With International Crime

Arrogant American
by Paul D. McInerny


How's that for a headline? Talk about tabloid journalism, but if the Saudi-based Organization of Islamic States (OIC) found the following blog offensive, I could be imprisoned or executed for the international crime of Blasphemy Against Islam. You read correctly. An international crime for blasphemy or ridicule of Islam. This blog entry is an observation and opinion to address some key issues:
1. Imam Rauf's remarks concerning the arrogance of Americans
2. Research regarding author's Nina Shea and Paul Marshall
3. The Saudi-based Organization of Islamic States (OIC) and their goals

The article does not address issues regarding:
1. Christianity vs. Islam
2. Controversy at Ground Zero


1. Imam Rauf: The Arrogance of Americans
While America and the rest of the world remain on the alert for gun toting, bomb carrying radical, Islamic terrorist, evidence suggests a more subtle approach may be occurring. A smoke screen of misdirected blame and anger renders the world near-sighted to the bigger picture.

The following introduction to Imam Rauf was taken from the CNN web site: Feisal Abdul Rauf is chairman of the nonprofit organization Cordoba Initiative and imam of Masjid al-Farah, a mosque in Lower Manhattan, and he is a planner of the proposed Islamic community center near ground zero. He gave the talk above in October 2009. Below is an excerpt from his book, "What's Right With Islam.”

“Americans must outgrow the unbecoming arrogance that leads us to assert that America somehow owns a monopoly on goodness and truth -- a belief that leads some to view the world as but a stage on which to play out the great historical drama: the United States of America versus the Powers of Evil.”

Ouch. Unbecoming arrogance. Imam Rauf lectures Americans as if he were a father scolding his insolent children. Unbecoming arrogance? There probably isn't a country in the world that isn't viewed by someone as arrogant, so how should one interpret Imam Rauf and his words? What countries or what part of the world views Americans as arrogant? Perhaps Americans are viewed as arrogant because our governments position after 9/11 was that you were either with us or against us. Merriam-Webster defines arrogance as an attitude of superiority manifested in an overbearing manner or in presumptuous claims or assumptions.

American’s do possess a certain attitude, but also know that they do not have a monopoly on goodness and truth. Is it arrogance or could it be pride? While not perfect by any means, America is a country that is constantly evolving. It is a country like no other, in that it was literally created by its people. When it stood defiantly against England and declared its independence, the founding fathers chose a government that was run by the people. They did not choose a dictatorship or monarchy, but rather a government that represented the common man.

America, like most countries, has a past. Indeed, its expansion was a brutal acquisition of land from its native inhabitants. America enslaved an entire race of people and suffered a civil war. During World War II, it interned American born Japanese and later, denied basic civil rights to African Americans. America is fluid in that it is capable of change and has evolved to where it is today.

Despite its sordid past, America is the country that appears to be admired by most of the world. People came to America and still come to America for a better life. Imam Rauf chose America as his home when he came in 1965 and became a citizen approximately 15 years later. Parents from other countries send their children here for quality education, to study at our colleges and universities.

Imam Rauf talks of America's "...historical drama: The United States versus The Powers of Evil." He says that as if it were something bad and appears to diminish or tarnish the United States and her role in the world. Imam Rauf is an American now, and perhaps he has glossed over parts of our history that he considers "historical drama." Maybe it has all been just historical drama when America helped her friends in time of need. She was there in World War I and the conflicts in Korea and Vietnam. After the surrender of Japan in World War II, America provided assistance to Japan to help them rebuild their war torn country. It was America and her allies that responded to the call for help from Kuwait and chased the invaders away. Historical drama, indeed.

Some evil appears in a different form. It could be pride from the fact that it is America that usually is the first to provide aid to any country suffering from catastrophic events such as tsunamis, earthquakes, floods and other natural disasters.

Americans are proud of their heritage and the standard of freedom that allows debate, challenges to the status quo, and the freedom to criticize its leaders and call them to the carpet. Americans are proud of their ability to travel unrestrained throughout this great country. They are proud of a government that functions by a set of laws and not the whim of any one person.

It is in America that one can burn the American flag and draw unflattering cartoons of the president of the United States. It is America where one can belong to or make light of the many, many religions flourishing in the country. It is in America, Imam Rauf, and not an Islamic based country, where people can actually have a critical debate on religion or politics. It is in America and not an Islamic based country, where one can feel free and unthreatened to put words to paper such as these.

Perfect? Absolutely not. One of the best countries in the world? Absolutely.

Because of our standard of living and our leadership in the free world, we have enemies who want to destroy us simply because our values do not coincide with theirs. They are intolerant of the United States. Americans just honored its 9th memory of the horrific events of September 11, 2001. The events that unfolded that day were caused by Islamic terrorists; a group of men who subverted the teachings in the Quran to justify their hatred toward Americans. Presidents Bush and Obama reminded us that we are not at war with Islam. September 11, 2001, was the result of evil, Islamic extremists.

2. Nina Shea and Paul Marshall
3. The Organization of Islamic States (OIC)
Imam Rauf is said to be a man of peace and that Islam, like most religions, is a religion of peace. Yet, there is a certain air of arrogance and intolerance on a segment of the Muslim world concerning the religion of Islam and they are not what one would immediately identify as extremists. Remember the Merriam-Webster definition that arrogance is an attitude of superiority manifested in an overbearing manner or in presumptuous claims or assumptions.

Let us look at “overbearing manner.” Pastor Terry Jone’s threatened to burn the Quran and many Muslims and non-Muslims found the idea offensive. The governments of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Sudan not only perceived the threat as offensive, but also a deliberate act of blasphemy, punishable by imprisonment or even execution. These countries and others belong to the Saudi-based Organization of Islamic States (OIC).

Nina Shea and Paul Marshall, Senior Fellows with Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom and co-authors of the forthcoming book “Silenced” wrote an article detailing what a reasonable person could construe as an over bearing manner. The OIC is increasingly intolerant of those who would dare speak ill of Islam. Nancy Gibbs, Senior Editor for Time Magazine wrote, "Intolerance comes in many forms; arrogance is one of them, as is dismissing one's opponents as being ignorant or bigoted rather than drawn deeply to different principles or priorities."

Since Feb. 14, 1989, when Iranian Ayatollah Khomeini pronounced Salman Rushdie a blasphemer and ordered his murder, the OIC lobbied Western governments to repress ridicule and critique of Islam, and dissent within Islam, in ways analogous to the repression already existing in many of its own countries.

So now we have governments, not demented individuals, intolerant of any ridicule or critique of Islam. The OIC lobbied to silence critics of Islam and is making progress toward that goal. This appears to be arrogant and over bearing.

For example, in the United Nations, the OIC has for over a decade successfully sponsored annual resolutions calling for the creation of an international crime against "defamation" of Islam. This demand that Western governments use state power to coerce compliance by their own citizens with Islamic blasphemy strictures is therefore relatively new.

The OIC wants an international crime against the defamation of Islam. While Imam Rauf talks of dialogue and tolerance, the OIC demands that any critique of Islam should be criminal throughout the world. The OIC has been successful for over a decade sponsoring resolutions toward an international crime. If you have listened to any of the news channels lately, almost all of their guests and some of the hosts would be guilty of blasphemy against Islam.

Western Europe, Canada and Australia have reacted to this demand largely ad hoc; they are beginning to deploy racial and religious hate-speech bans to serve as proxies for Muslim blasphemy laws.

Most Americans and probably the rest of the world are unaware of the repercussions the OIC’s demands have had on free speech.

Politician Geert Wilders is now on trial in the Netherlands for his statements, and for his film "Fitna," in which he sharply critiques the Quran and calls on Muslims to destroy it. In Germany, a man was recently convicted for the sacrilegious treatment of the word "Quran," not the Islamic sacred text itself. Since the mid-1990s, prosecutors in Finland, Canada and the Netherlands have trawled the websites of anti-immigration advocates looking for anti-Islamic comments.

In France, Canada, Norway and Italy, publishers, editors and authors – such as Mark Steyn – have been tried for inciting religious hostility and insulting religious sensibilities with their critiques of Islam and Muslim immigration.

It should come as no surprise then that former French actress Brigitte Bardot “has been convicted and fined five times under hate-speech laws for denouncing Islamic slaughter practices and making other derogatory statements concerning Islamic practices.”

Authors Shea and Marshall say that so far the United States is an exception, “with its strong protections of free speech under the First Amendment. In the United States, neither blasphemy nor hate speech are violations of the law. ("Hate crimes" simply provide for enhanced penalties when traditional crimes are directed against certain protected groups).”

As applied in OIC states, blasphemy rules can touch on every area of human endeavor. At stake are the freedoms of religion and expression that lie at the heart of our liberal democracy.

“The late Indonesian president Abdurrhaman Wahid warned that such efforts "play directly into the hands of fundamentalists, who wish to avoid all criticism of their attempts to narrow the scope of discourse regarding Islam, and to inter 1.3 billion Muslims in a narrow, suffocating chamber of dogmatism."

America and the rest of the world have concerned themselves with the extremist-those that would do us immediate and physical harm. While the extremists are banging on the front door, moderates are quietly coming in through the rear door. There are many good, decent and well meaning Americans who are opening that rear door. Perhaps they do not understand or refuse to believe the intentions of the Organization of Islamic States regarding Islam.

Final Word
Imam Rauf talks of the arrogance of Americans and our opposition to evil. In the context of this article, evil arrogance and intolerance is the belief criticism of Islam is punishable by imprisonment or execution. Evil arrogance and intolerance is the belief criticism of Islam should be an international crime. Evil arrogance and intolerance is the belief Islam should be the only religion above reproach, critique, discussion and questioning. Finally, arrogance is lecturing to your fellow Americans that our "great historical drama" is some how to blame for the events of 9/11. An evil, demented and intolerant ideology of extremists was the basic cause of 9/11.

Let us not succumb to intolerance, panic or hate because one follows Islam, but let us not close our eyes to the OIC and its goals for the sake of tolerance. There are governments who would have Americans feel guilty for all the ills of the world, but Americans have every right to be proud of their country and the ideals by which it was founded. We have stumbled, picked ourselves up, dusted off the dirt and marched forward. We have recognized and acknowledged our weaknesses, but are buoyed by our basic philosophy of decency and freedom that most of the world respects while members of the OIC detest.

Extremism for any ideology rarely has a productive outcome. Extremism renders one blind and deaf to discussion, new ideas and growth. All Americans, including Imam Rauf, should be aware and follow the agenda of the OIC. Not in a paranoid state of hysteria, but in a rational, methodical and vigilant manner to ensure madness does not rule the day for either side of the spectrum.

Although Americans do not have a monopoly on goodness and truth, they do possess an attractive piece of the market. Arrogance? Maybe its just well deserved and earned pride, Imam Rauf.

PS - You can disagree vehemently with this article without fear of punishment, imprisonment or execution. The author, on the other hand, may have just signed his death warrant with the OIC.

Baldo - Say It Isn't So!

Baldo
by Paul D. McInerny

As a prelude to what you are about to read, the following may sound like the ranting of an ultra-conservative, paranoid, white male who is a card carrying member of the Tea Party, KKK and the Aryan Brotherhood. I concede that I am a white male.

Our Sunday paper carries the comic strip Baldo which I enjoyed reading, primarily because of the quality of the art. The story centers on the Bermudez family and normally covers non-political subjects. Until recently, it was one of my favorites.

This past Sunday (July 20, 2010) Baldo and his family sat at the dinner table and had the following discussion:

Graci: Papi, what is cultural assimilation?

Papi: Hmmm…let me try to explain.
Acculturation is where a group of people, usually ethnic minorities, keep some parts of their culture while adapting parts of the dominant culture.

In assimilation, a group is completely absorbed into the dominant culture, giving up their customs and traditions over time. The smaller group eventually becomes indistinguishable from the dominant group.

The next panel shows comic characters from other strips such as Lucy, Blonde and the dad from Family Circle, all sitting together. Not coincidentally, all the characters were Caucasian. Baldo and Gracie are seen thinking and reflecting that assimilation would mean becoming Caucasian in appearance.

Graci: I think I prefer acculturation
Baldo: Can you pass the jalapeno jam?

What disturbed me was that, according to the illustrators of Baldo, Hector D. Cantu and Carlos Castellanos, to assimilate in America, one had to be “indistinguishable from the dominant group” in this case, Caucasians.

Perhaps I am being overly sensitive, but allow me the opportunity to explain my sensitivity complex. In recent news, there was a video of King Samir, a member of the New Black Panther Party advocating the killing of “cracker babies.” This was the same member, who in November 2008 stood in front of a polling booth with a club yet, the justice department declined to prosecute (see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU).

Although New Black Panther Party Chairman Malik Zulu Shabazz denounced the actions of a single member of his organization, in a July 9, 2010 interview, he stated, “King Samir is back in our organization, and in good standing within our organization.”

I recall the story where Congressmen Andre Carson and John Lewis claimed racism against the Tea Party. Seems the good congressmen “staged a walk through the Tea Party crowd in front of the capitol the day before the health care vote and claimed they were threatened by a violent mob and were subjected to the vile N word slur fifteen times.” Writer Andrew Breitbart offered a $100,000.00 reward he would donate to the United Negro College Fund if anyone could produce video or audio evidence that this actually occurred. Despite the number of cell phones with camera’s and recorders and the presence of news media, no evidence was ever presented.

Then there was the MSNBC attempt to show racism at a Tea Party meeting because one member had what appeared to be an assault rifle strung across their back (turned out the member was an African-American).

OK, thank you for allowing me to vent and explain my delusions of persecution. I was a bystander in the civil rights movement of the 1960’s and remember well the struggle and sacrifice of the activists, both of color and well, non-color. I know from my service in the army and a 30-year career in law enforcement that bias and prejudice are not exclusive to any particular race, but normally the Sunday comic strips allow me to escape the madness. I also know, as Columnist Tommy Christopher wrote, “The idea that whites are being persecuted is an irresistible notion to many Americans, an absolution from the need to take the full measure of our nation’s complicated racial history.”

I now return to Baldo. Gracie’s question to her father had to do with assimilation and so I thought I would turn to Merriam-Webster for guidance. The dictionary defines assimilate as the following:

a: to make similar
b: to alter by assimilation
c: to absorb into the culture or mores of a population or group

I identified three key words from Merriam-Webster: similar, alter and absorb. From the definition of assimilate, the words “similar” and “alter” do not imply the total abdication of one’s culture for another. In fact, the word similar is defined in part as;

1: having characteristics in common: strictly comparable

2: alike in substance or essentials.

To take components from one culture and alter or make them similar to another culture does not make them indistinguishable. In fact, the components from one culture can have the same characteristics or be alike in substance.

Baldo illustrators, Hector D. Cantu and Carlos Castellanos, would have one believe that to assimilate is wrong. To underscore their contempt for assimilation, they chose to define assimilation as the inheritance of the physical characteristics of a Caucasian. Baldo and his family soundly reject the concept of assimilation in favor of acculturation. So I turned once again to Merriam-Webster for assistance in the definition of acculturation:

1: cultural modification of an individual, group, or people by adapting to or borrowing traits from another culture; also: a merging of cultures as a result of prolonged contact

The word modification is synonymous with alter, which appeared in the definition of assimilation. Neither assimilation nor acculturation provides a choice of one culture over the other, but rather a merging of cultures. So, I am left wondering why Cantu and Castellanos, two talented illustrators, chose Caucasian comic characters to signify that any notion of assimilation would mean Baldo and his family would no longer be Hispanic.

Now to be fair about this discussion of assimilation, I did indeed find the following definition that would support the notion of Cantu and Castellanos:

A process by which members of an ethnic minority group lose cultural characteristics that distinguish them from the dominant cultural group or take on the cultural characteristics of another group (The Free Dictionary).

I am sure that Native American’s would agree with this definition as a result of the method in which we settled this country, but despite the cruelty and the hardships of reservation life, the Native American was still able to retain ancient customs unique to their culture.

Jingwei, from the City College of San Francisco, Tolerance wrote, “Usually, people who belong to different cultures have different ways to do things and solve problems. If people don't understand cultures other than their own, they may not understand what other people are doing or why they do in different ways. That's the misunderstanding between races. Conflicts emerge. Therefore, immigrants' assimilation into new cultures is very important to the society.”

12 years ago, William Branigin of the Washington Post, did a story on assimilation and interviewed Maria Jacinto. Jacinto became a U.S. citizen, but said she did not feel like an American. In fact, she was resistant to the idea of assimilating into U.S. society. "I think I'm still a Mexican," she said. "When my skin turns white and my hair turns blonde, then I'll be an American."

When her skin turns white and her hair turns blonde then she will be an American?! She is a citizen of the United States, yet considers herself a Mexican. In almost any city in America, local governments pride themselves on their diverse population. Cultural diversity is a descriptive title to recognize the multiple ethnic composition of a company or a city.

Tory King wrote about the Irish assimilation into American Culture during the 19th and 20th centuries and noted it was anything but easy. Irish immigrants, especially Irish Catholics were regarded as inferior to their Protestant counterparts already established in the United States. Irish Catholic immigrants were considered unskilled and worked in manual labor positions. The result was a general disdain for both Ireland and anything Irish and it is from this cultural and political attitude that the infamous phrase arose: “No Irish need apply” (BellaOnline, The Voice of Women).

Hispanics and Irish were hardly unique in the challenges of assimilation. Asians, particularly American born Japanese, had a difficult time following December 7, 1941. The prevailing attitude was American born Japanese would be loyal to Japan, even though many had never been to Japan.

From Asian-Nation: One reason why some immigrants assimilate faster than others is because of class differences. Some ethnic and immigrant groups on the whole have higher levels of education, job skills, and English proficiency than others. This in turn gives them specific advantages in achieving socioeconomic success faster than others by allowing them to get jobs that are higher-paying, more stable, and that offer higher status. As a result, they are able to achieve socioeconomic mobility and success faster than other groups ("Assimilation & Ethnic Identity" Asian-Nation: The Landscape of Asian America. ).

Peter D. Salins, Reason Magazine, wrote that in America, assimilation does not necessarily mean repudiating immigrant culture. Assimilation, American style has always been much more flexible and accommodating and, consequently, much more effective in achieving its purpose--to allow the United States to preserve its "national unity in the face of the influx of hordes of persons of scores of different nationalities," in the words of the sociologist Henry Fairchild.

Or, as our national motto so eloquently reads, “E Pluribus Unum (From Many, One).

Assimilation is not evil. It does not mean one becomes blonde haired and blue eyed. It does not mean being indistinguishable from each other. It does not mean having one religion or a master race. Perhaps the illustrators of Baldo should have shown a more diverse group in the panel and included comic strip characters from Watch Your Head, Candorville, The Boondocks, or Luther.