JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
1
Why do Japanese change their attitude when they communicate with foreigners?
-
2
Confrontation
-
3
U.S. Navy investigating how parts fell off aircraft near Atsugi
-
4
California court to decide if SeaWorld whales are illegal 'slaves'
-
5
Kuroki reported pregnant 2 weeks after denying relationship with Akanishi
-
- Assistant Language Teacher (ALT) in Kanto region
- RCS (RCSコーポレーション), Kanto
- Salary: ¥180,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month includes performance bonus
-
- Assistant Language Teacher - TOKYO - late-March start
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥230,000 ~ ¥255,000 / Month
-
- Assistant Language Teacher - Kanagawa Prefecture - late-March start
- Interac, Kanagawa
- Salary: ¥230,000 ~ ¥255,000 / Month
0
SezWho2
This is not quite true. The law is no more on the side of Islam than it is on the side of any other religion. What would be more accurate is to say that the law is on the side of those who plan the construction and on the side of those who favor and support the construction.
No, it isn't. If the objections were against altering any building within a certain radius of Ground Zero so that we could enshrine a certain area, the proposed construction would be contrary to the wishes of the majority but not in bad taste. If the objections were against building any faith-related structure within a certain radius, the same would be true. But those aren't the objections. The objection is that it is "that" religion. If anything is in bad taste, it is the objection.
I'm not sure that I would call those Islamic ideals any more than I would call the intolerance of homosexuals and "the Godless" Christian ideals. Be that as it may, how, pray tell, can anyone say that those precepts "will be preached" at this particular site? They are preached by some Muslims somewhere. It does not follow that they are preached by all Muslims everywhere.
This is just silly. Islam enjoys no more protection for hate speech than does any other religion. I doubt that anyone can find a shred of evidence to support this claim. As far as I can see in this matter, those who are indulging in hate speech are those who oppose the construction and who do not scruple to make wild and preposterous claims about the nature of the people who want to build. I hear no hate coming from American Muslims.
I think they are mostly criticized when they themselves employ hate speech to slander and malign others. If people turned out in mass carrying simple signs that said "PLEASE DON'T BUILD HERE!" or "THIS HURTS OUR FEELINGS!", it would at least give the appearance that the agenda was one of taste. But that really is not the tenor of the argument against the construction. The argument against the construction is rife with hate.
Posted in: Rallies over mosque near ground zero get heated
0
SezWho2
I think most of the protesters are protesting the size of the construction, its proximity to Ground Zero, the fact that it is Islamic and the idea that prayers to Allah would be accepted there. The fact that it will eventually contain a mosque is irrelevant. Even if there were only a prayer room, my guess is that they would call it a mosque. It's just so much better for rousing the rabble.
The planned construction does include a mosque. However, there will be no minarets, no domes, nothing that tastelessly calls attention to its Muslim character. It will not be visible from Ground Zero. If you were at Ground Zero and did not know where to go look for it, it would take you some time to find it.
What the protesters mostly want is their own anger and hatred. The construction of this center would not "rub salt into their wounds" so much as it would serve notice to them that American was not going to be guided by their anger and hatred. After nine years and two ongoing and useless wars to salve our wounded pride, it is high time that we find a better guide.
Posted in: Rallies over mosque near ground zero get heated
0
SezWho2
OneForAll, I think it is true what I have said about New York. I don't know about popularity among those in New York State, but NYC breaks down according to the poll numbers at Marist. All demographic sectors oppose except for Manhattan. Staten Island, where people forced the abandonment of a mosque construction project in a disused convent, rated lowest among the boroughs, together with Queens.
http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content/misc/nycpolls/c100728/BloombergRV/ConstructionofMosqueNearWorldTradeCenterSite.htm
I'm very much in favor of respecting the rights of those who have lost loved ones. However, except for their right to some financial compensation, they have no more rights than American Muslims. Again, some of them are American Muslims. One can respect families' rights and respect their feelings without acceding to their wishes. While acting contrary to another party's wishes may be attended with disrespect it does not imply disrespect.
Posted in: Obama says Muslims have right to build mosque near ground zero
0
SezWho2
Which New York? The government of New York City has approved the construction. According to popular opinion, in Manhattan only a minority oppose the planned construction. Elsewhere, in New York City a scant majority oppose. I would guess New York State is more like the rest of the nation.
As the wars drag on in Iraq and Afghanistan, as the Afghanistan conflict widens into Pakistan, as we talk about bombing Iran and and as we continue to side with Israel against the displaced Palestinians, I wouldn't count on time or good will to "heal the wound". Your argument pretends that there is natural healing for something like this. With anti-Islamic sentiment increasing in the US, there is no guarantee of a natural remedy.
Respecting the families of those who have lost loved ones (which, by the way, includes Muslim families) is not what it is all about. It is much more about what kind of country we are going to be--a country that respects Constitutional rights and the rule of law, or a country which is going to let itself use its "feelings"--even if unprejudiced, which is in doubt--to strong-arm others into giving up their rights. What would truly show maturity is for the American people to recognize that American Muslims are not extremists, that American Muslims had no part in 9/11, and that hurt feelings--whether in Alaska or Staten Island--do not justify calling upon Muslims to be less than they can be.
So they want to build something that is modestly grand. So what?
Posted in: Obama says Muslims have right to build mosque near ground zero
0
SezWho2
Well, as I said, I disagree with Kaplan.
Otherwise, while we are not going to agree on the cultural center, that doesn't mean that I don't get where you're coming from. It just means that I think that it is far more important for America--and Americans--not to hold American Muslims responsible for the actions of Middle Eastern Muslim extremists, not to hold them hostage to the feelings of some family members of the victims or to vague notions of what is Ground Zero, and not to raise barriers based on a remote possibility of future danger which requires the assumption of the failure of our security systems.
Posted in: Obama says Muslims have right to build mosque near ground zero
0
SezWho2
Anything? Those like me? I have called specific actions bigoted and paranoid. You would suggest that this is what I call everything. Pointless generalization.
We have for several years now trumpeted our ability to foil plots made by ice-cream vendors and pizza delivery men. I don't see the need to do anything that we are not already doing. This much is for sure, though. If we are incapable of foiling extremists at a highly visible Islamic center in lower Manhattan, we haven't a prayer of foiling them in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc.
Equally simply there is nothing inappropriate about American Muslims building a community center on a site that they have owned and used for a year.
The likes of me? You would gain more traction if you would just speak to the ideas instead of beating your fists against the opinions of one as you have invented him.
However, when realists unburden themselves of this "political correctness" that you talk about and reveal themselves to be bigots and paranoids, then, yes, bigots and paranoids is what I tend to call them. It seems to me, though, that the people you are talking about are not actually realists. They are only people who believe themselves to have a clearer vision than anyone else.
Incidentally, just to illustrate how fraught the term "realist" is, Robert D. Kaplan writing in The Atlantic in April or May referred to the people who brought us the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as "idealists". Those opposed to the wars? "Realists." Kaplan himself seems to support the wars. He thinks we should emulate the tactics we used in pacifying the American west. I disagree with Kaplan but I don't consider him to be either paranoid or a bigot.
Posted in: Obama says Muslims have right to build mosque near ground zero
0
SezWho2
Very, very silly. I have never assumed that it could not be infiltrated. On the contrary, I have acknowledged that it could be infiltrated and I have said that I am not overly worried about that.
I don't think a mosque would serve as a "rallying cry", but I do think it could serve as a rallying point if the nation that attacked Afghanistan, attacked Iraq and spent a trillion dollars fighting Muslim extremists "over there" decided to neglect fighting them "at home". Again, I am not overly worried about this and I think you have raised an intellectual bogeyman. If it is your point that this "could" "at some point" happen, yes, it could at some point. However, the fundamental objection has been one of appropriateness, not one of danger. The danger is fairly small in my opinion.
What is not my opinion is the difference between a realist and bigots and paranoids. Realists look at the world as it is and attempt to divest themselves off illusions. Bigots and paranoids both see things that do not exist and they live in a world populated with figments of their imaginations. Quite different.
Posted in: Obama says Muslims have right to build mosque near ground zero
0
SezWho2
Your assumption is that such is my assumption. I have made no such assumption. So, I guess I could say that I find your opening paragraph extremely presumptuous.
It is possible that extremists will become involved, but to say so merely invokes a specter. You'd have to say a little bit more about what you imagine the shape of "involvement" to be or the consequences of it. There is always a danger of extremism and an organization does not have to be religious to be subject to that danger. With all the publicity that it has received, the planned community center might be a juicy target, but a smaller Muslim worship center might be much more difficult for the FBI to penetrate. So I don't see any particular escalation of extremist danger on this account.
Furthermore, this strikes me as being not really to the point. Potential danger from (Muslim) extremists speaks to objections about building any Muslim facility at any place and at any time. You can add this to the list of objections to the center if you like, but the core objection here is not the danger of infiltration but the alleged lack of respect for families of victims and for the alleged insensitivity to the memory of 9/11. In my estimation those allegations are prejudicial and, to a certain extent, nonsensical. For we can respect people and we can be sensitive to people's feelings without capitulating to their wishes.
I think there's a fairly great--almost definitional--difference between being a realist and being bigoted and paranoid. And I don't think the difference becomes any less by adding intolerance into the mix.
Posted in: Obama says Muslims have right to build mosque near ground zero
0
SezWho2
I doubt that you are sincere in this. However, if you want to erect statues to Adolph or rename bridges in his honor, I wouldn't seek to stop you. I see you that you have played the Hitler card but I'm afraid you have played out of turn and without thinking. If your objection is that the center is a monument to the destruction of the Towers and to those who destroyed it, you are mistaken. If your objection is that it is a monument to Muhammad, then you are inconsistent with your second paragraph.
It doesn't have to be near Ground Zero. In my opinion, however, there are no compelling reasons why it should not be. The site has been in use by Muslims without much notice until they announced plans to build there. And there have been many comments from Muslim leadership in charge of the project. If you would like to hear them first-hand, why don't you start with the project's web site?
Posted in: Obama says Muslims have right to build mosque near ground zero
0
SezWho2
I'm almost never happy exchanging ideas with someone who substitutes snideness for argument or who abandons sincerity in favor of sarcasm. However, I am even less happy to see Americans celebrate mawkishness and to invent reasons why their prejudices are correct. It has been nearly 9 years since the Towers were destroyed. It is time to move on.
There are no arguments against the notion of supporting the grieving families of 9/11 victims, just as there are no arguments against God, mothers or apple pie. In my opinion, however, it is a vast perpetration against the victims of 9/11 to use their families' grief as a pretext for attempting to stop the construction of a building being planned by Americans who happen to follow a faith which Americans are, in large part, prejudiced against. It would be much better to allow the Muslims to build as they wish and to commemorate ground zero with a simple stone marker.
The fact that many Americans disagree may prove to be politically relevant but it is not morally relevant. As a moral argument it is fallacious.
Posted in: Obama says Muslims have right to build mosque near ground zero
0
SezWho2
sailwind, you could if you want, read what they have actually committed to in their mission statement here:
http://www.park51.org/mission.htm
This mission statement says nothing at all about serving Muslims in lower Manhattan. It does, however, provide us with an idea of who the developers think are going to use the center.
Posted in: Obama says Muslims have right to build mosque near ground zero
0
SezWho2
To accuse someone of "selective liberal spin" without specifying what you think the spin is a poor substitute for an argument. Gentlemen do not do that. Gentlemen do not use pejorative terms against their interlocutors.
No, we don't agree on the mosque issue. After reading the arguments on this board, I am more convinced that it would be a good thing if it were built. Apparently Americans need to understand a lot more about American Muslims.
Posted in: Obama says Muslims have right to build mosque near ground zero
0
SezWho2
bass4funk said:
I'm not even sure what you're trying to say here. I'll assume that you are saying that the vast majority of Americans object to the location, that I should stop spinning and that there is no purpose to the building of the center.
Yes, the vast majority of Americans say they object to the location but not to the building of a mosque somewhere. We don't know what the vast majority of Americans object to--only what they say they object to. They may have antipathies to any building of a mosque anywhere as far as we know, but constitutionally they know that they have no basis for saying that. As far as we know, the "close-to-Ground-Zero-have-compassion-for-the-families" argument provides pseudo-moral cover for an extremely deep-seated prejudice. In a Gallup poll taken in January of this year, 43% of Americans admitted to having at least a little prejudice against Muslims--more than twice as much as against any other religion. Admitted!
I don't think I've been spinning anything. You asked why Harry Reid said what he said. Well, I don't know the answer and I doubt that you do either. I only observe that he's up for re-election. And I really believe he wants to be re-elected. He was forced to declare himself and taking a principled stand against the majority of Americans on a visible hot-button issue in August is probably not the best way to win an election in November. Could it be his real opinion? Yes, it could be. He could also have found a convenient way to throw the Muslims under the bus. So, now, what "spinning" are you talking about?
As for there being no purpose, according to nihilistic philosophers you are absolutely right. Even Lear said it: "Reason not the need. The basest beggar is in his poorest need superfluous." What was the purpose for Trump Tower? What was the need to have it where it is located? I think, however, that the purpose of the center has been rather well articulated by its planners and, while they could have located such a center somewhere else, there was no need to remove themselves from a site that they were already using.
Again, I have trouble with this sentence. Apparently you think you did point out the alleged holes. I seldom avoid a fight, so it's probable that I didn't understand what you were saying. So, try rephrasing. But here's a hint: neither you nor the vast majority of Americans objecting to the mosque or, for that matter, objecting to my argument constitutes a hole.
So what? 19 people flew the planes into the Towers. None of them were American Muslims.
What's up with you saying that you know I will try to skew the facts? What facts do you think I have skewed? Specify.
The main thing is not the honoring of the families and their wishes. In the first place, not all 9/11 families object to the planned construction. So, it's a question of whether we honor all their wishes--which isn't possible--or just the wishes of the majority. Then the next question becomes one of how long the Muslims must continue to understand and respect the families feelings. Until the last family forgives? Until families in favor of construction become the majority? No. American Muslims should not be held hostage to the feelings of 3,000 families that cannot or will not forgive.
The important thing would be for the families to forgive American Muslims for that which they did not do and to try to seek reconciliation. This is probably not going to happen anytime soon, particularly with 70% of the American population supporting the families in feelings of continued bitterness. Absent the ability to make good on what would be the important thing, what the important thing is to respect the Constitution and the freedoms enshrined in it. And the second important thing is like unto the first: not to make up moral imperatives that apply to only one group at one time and in one place.
Posted in: Obama says Muslims have right to build mosque near ground zero
0
SezWho2
There is no provocation here. There is only umbrage being taken by people who are willing to convince themselves that they are being provoked. It's the imply/infer thing.
American Muslims who have committed no crimes cannot and should not have to wait on 3,000 families deciding when it is OK to forgive them for something they have not done. American association of Ground Zero with anti-Muslim sentiment is pathological.
Posted in: Obama says Muslims have right to build mosque near ground zero
0
SezWho2
bass4funk, you said:
...but didn't really bother to explain what was illogical. As far as I can see it's illogical because you object to it. Harry Reid is a politician and he's going to be careful not to throw any votes away. In an election year he's not going to tell people what he really thinks. Very few politicians ever do. Islam is not a nation, but it is supposed to be tolerant. America is a nation and it, too, is supposed to be tolerant. America's tolerance is enshrined in its Constitution. You ask Muslims to be tolerant and understand. Muslims can ask Americans the same.
There is no plan to build a mosque on Ground Zero. None. Nada. El Zippo. There is a plan to build a new building at the site that is already in use as a Muslim facility. Despite your claim that there was no attempt to factor in the feeling of the community, I think that if you read how the center is designed it is quite obvious that there was such an attempt. To suggest otherwise is, quite frankly, unbelievable. They're Muslims, not idiots. But they certainly do appear to have misjudged the promise of America. Why would they ever think that other Americans would say to them that America would "allow" them a mosque, but only if they vacate the premises they now use?
There may be holes in my arguments, but you haven't troubled yourself to point them out. I will agree, however, that this is purely about imposing. And those who seek to do the imposing are those who seek to deny the Muslims the right to build.
I'm sure the majority of Americans disagree with me. But so what? I'm all in favor of respecting the grief of the families of victims. And I'm also all in favor of having those families respect the rights of others. Ditto for the other 70% of Americans. I see you are giving the Muslims a familiar piece of advice. It reminds me of a Nina Simone song. I can hear the refrain, now: "Go slow".
Posted in: Obama says Muslims have right to build mosque near ground zero
0
SezWho2
sailwind, I don't think you are following my logic at all. To follow your logic, though, it would seem that you would ridicule the notion that your finding a mosque offensive could merit my accusation that you were prejudiced against houses of worship.
I, too, find that somewhat ridiculous. I'm quite OK with establishing a zoning ordinance that forbids houses of worship in some area around Ground Zero. That would be fair and even-handed. However, objecting to a mosque because it is an Islamic house of worship (and not because it is a house worship) is prejudicial.
Posted in: Obama says Muslims have right to build mosque near ground zero
0
SezWho2
bass4funk, you say:
If anything is absurd, it is that statement. The opinions of 3,000 are ignored every day. If you were to have your way and the State were to interfere with the construction of the mosque, I daresay you would be ignoring the feelings of 3,000 Muslims. You seek to make Ground Zero a shrine to the martydom of 3,000 people and you fall in with those whose argument against a mosque is that it would be a shrine to the martydom of the 19 perpetrators.
My sarcasm really wants to come out here. Trying to keep it in check, I would observe that it is already a few blocks away. You would allow them to have a mosque, but tell them where they can and cannot build. If any argument does not hold up, it is yours. You claim that a majority of Americans are "for building a Mosque", but this is not quite true. A majority of Americans are against building a particular mosque at a particular place. Tell me where the majority of Americans believe that this 13-floor culture center should be built.
"These people"? What people? Why do you say that they have not factored in the feelings of the families affected by 9/11. How could you even know that? I find that statement incredible. I think it more likely that they did factor in those feelings when they planned for an interfaith facility within the cultural center. If there is anything they did not factor in it might have been the rabidity of talk radio and the power of ideologues to stir things up.
I quite agree that this issue has nothing to do with Idaho, Staten Island or anywhere else. It even has nothing to do with opinion polls. It is a matter of appropriateness. In my view, and considering the new facilities as they have been designed, the planned center is a perfectly appropriate improvement to the prayer center that is already there. What is inappropriate are the objections to it, no matter how many Americans agree. The reason I keep talking about prejudice and intolerance is that there is more than a little represented on this board.
Posted in: Obama says Muslims have right to build mosque near ground zero
0
SezWho2
Of course there is an issue of taste or tact. I think that has been well-recognized here. And of course one can question taste without necessarily being anti-Islam. One can. It's possible. And in those cases I would expect the objections to be couched simply as objections of taste or tact without the additional accompaniment of arguments about the victory mosque, about Saudi Arabia's evil schemes, about the ultimate plan for Islamic world dominance, about US security issues and so on.
As far as I can see, the only people putting stock in opinion polls are those who are using the polls to argue that "the American people" are against this. I think that's a fair and accurate argument if the polls are correct. As your comments suggest, opposition takes many forms and I think this also has been well-recognized here. You'll have to decide for yourself what form the current thread's opposition has taken.
Posted in: Obama says Muslims have right to build mosque near ground zero
0
SezWho2
I quite understand that you do not want a mosque built there. You'll pardon me, however, if I do not believe that you would have the same objections to a cathedral, church, synagogue, temple or Bank of America. You care that it's a mosque. And you seem to care because you choose to hold, or cannot help yourself from holding, an entire religion culpable for the actions of a few. This is a prejudicial assignment of blame. And publicly exercising your objections rather makes you an agent of intolerance.
You'll also forgive me if I do not believe that no one cares if they build a mosque in New York. I think there are plenty of people who don't want a mosque in their back yard. Witness the furor over the plan to build a mosque on the site of a disused convent on Staten Island. Now there are Islamic centers on Staten Island. S I suppose you could make an argument that people don't care about building mosques, but only a mosque on a former Catholic site. But my point is that while you may say that people don't care, they do. They care very much. And I daresay it's prejudicial.
Posted in: Obama says Muslims have right to build mosque near ground zero
0
SezWho2
Writing in Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria says this:
OK. We can respect their feelings. But to the extent that those feelings are rooted in prejudice we can also ignore them. We should not be led by the nose by the feelings of 3000 families.
But what about the others? the 70% of Americans who are not families of the victims? Should we sacrifice Constitutional protections and legal rights to their opinions even if their opinions are uninformed or prejudiced? Again, no.
I think the argument that Muslims would have done better to select a different site would have held at least some sway--if they were not already using the site on which they plan to build. To deny them the right to build on that site is to tell them that they have to get out if they want to improve their facilities--either that or to require them to maintain two facilities. Popular opinion which knows but ignores this is oblivious to the prejudice which underlies it.
Or, if we must go by popular opinion, why not accept the popular opinion in the borough where the center is planned. I think that only about 36% of the residents in Manhattan oppose it. Or would the 73% of the Staten Island folks who oppose the construction be happier if the building were constructed in--gulp!--Staten Island? No? ...didn't think so.
And what must the folks in Idaho think? And how much should we value that opinion?
No. The real shame here is two-fold: first, that there are so many uninformed opinions and that they are given equal weight with informed ones and, second, that are so many who are willing to exploit the devastation of 9/11 to pursue an angry, bigoted and hateful agenda.
Posted in: Obama says Muslims have right to build mosque near ground zero