Friday, October 2, 2015

Islamaphobia, Coming to a HoCo Near You

I said in September I would get back to 2-3 times a week but here’s my problem:  Nominations and budgets and hyper-local things have been flowing onto the page, but I want, desperately sometimes, to talk about the bigger and harder issues.  Every time I do, though, it feels somewhat incomplete, choppy, and stunted.  I’ve contemplated shelving these issues, but they are too important to wait for better writing. 

So shortly after I posted about Ahmed Mohammed, the kid who was arrested for making a clock, I read about this. A “far-right patriot group” is hosting a protest outside Howard County’s very own Dar Al-Taqwa because, as they put it, “WE ARE INVOKING OUR 1ST AMENDMENT RIGHT ABOUT OUR FEELING OF ISLAM IN AMERICA”.

The first thing I thought about when I saw this was all of the (mostly national) Republicans who demanded moderate Muslim leaders vociferously denounce radical Muslims and Muslim terrorists.  This argument is bunk for too many reasons to count, but I couldn’t help but be overwhelmed with a healthy dose of quid pro quo.   I want to demand that more mainstream conservatives actively and publicly denounce this radical arm of their ideology lest they be accused of being complicit.  In Howard County Dar Al-Taqwa is in the districts of Greg Fox, Trent Kittleman, Warren Miller, and Gail Bates.

The argument is bunk when applied to “moderate Muslim leaders” and so it’s not fair to apply it to those elected officials mentioned above, unless they themselves have called on moderate Muslim leaders to denounce radical Muslims.  Additionally, I’m not fond of over politicizing this, this should be an opportunity to stand up against hate across party lines.  I also have little doubt that the abhorrent reception Dar-us-Salaam received from our community when they proposed moving into Woodmont Academy spread across the political spectrum.[1] 

It is also worth contemplating, although important to admit that it is just speculative contemplation, whether or not this is another example of the community at large reaping what we sow.  Of all the mosques in America or even in the DC area, why did this group pick Dar Al-Taqwa?  Is it possible that they believed, based on the opposition to Dar-Us-Salaam, that they might receive support from the community?

On how we should respond as a community, I am truthfully torn.  On the one hand I feel like this group should just be completely ignored.  Their viewpoints and their little rally are so far out of mainstream society that doing something in response gives them a level of validation they do not deserve.  Additionally, it’s likely what they are hoping for because then they will get attention, which is clearly a primary goal for the group.

On the other hand, does ignoring them send a message to their targets that we do not care or even do not disagree with their hate?  Should we instead organize a counter rally in support of Dar Al-Taqwa with political leaders, civic leaders, and religious leaders gathering as one to surround Dar Al-Taqwa with love instead of hate?

The answer must lie with the leaders of Dar Al-Taqwa.  My hope is that all of the above mentioned leaders would reach out to them in the next week and show them love and support and ask them how they want us to proceed.  Simply put, this is their call and any well-intentioned move done without their leadership nearly defeats the point.


[1] Two things worth noting about this article.  The first is that the lawyers for the group fighting Dar-Us-Salaam were Joan Becker and Paul Skalny and the quoted member of the group is David Yungmann.  All of them are noted Howard County Republican activists.  The second thing is that everyone in this article (and others) stay pretty much on message that the issue is traffic and such and to be sure this was a legitimate concern.  However, if you attended any of the meetings or hearings the Islamaphobia was, at best, thinly veiled.

13 comments:

  1. Really trying to loop Dar-Us-Salaam in with this? Wow... If you knew anything about Western HoCo zoning issues (you don't) you would know that pretty much any sort of development gets vehemently opposed there. The difference this time is that the proposal was so ludicrous that it inspired even more support than usual. I'm sure there was a subset of idiots who just simply didn't wan't "those damn Muslims" to move in, but, by and large, it was opposed by normal people who didn't want a ridiculous mega complex shoved down their throats. Anyway, just go ahead and run with whatever fits your narrative.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes and I do so unapologetically. Look, I’ve been on the same side with my fair share of people who are fighting for the same things for all the wrong reasons and I am no way saying that everyone who fought Dar-Us-Salaam were categorical Islamaphobists. However, the number of times the proposal was referred to (semi-publicly) as an Islamist compound and a madrasa with the potential to turn into a terrorist training facility were too numerous to simply dismiss as an irrelevant minority. I heard it with my own two ears and countless more in slightly (only slightly) more coded language. That fight and this “protest” are not the same thing, but there was enough Islamaphobia in the Dar-Us-Salaam fight to put them on the same cricket pitch.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wow, did you really just do what I think you did in that footnote. Not smart.

    Making inferences about people by name and then not having the stones to admit who you are.....

    ReplyDelete
  4. From David Yungmann. I'm sure you heard anti-Islamic things from some of the thousands of people who opposed the project, but did you ever hear them from me? Did you ever hear them from the two others you mentioned by name? Do you even know how I feel about these issues? Using your blog to create lies about people who have the guts to get involved in local issues without hiding their identity as you do here, potentially hurting their reputation and business, is the work of a very small person.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. David,

      If you think what I was doing was creating lies about you then I apologize for that. Sincerely I do. However, I think you are dramatically downplaying the Islamaphobia that was endemic to the fight against Dar-Us-Salaam. It was not a few bad eggs among thousands as you state and I am not now, nor was I when I wrote the piece, inferring that you and the other leaders are in fact Islamaphobes. That being said, the fact that conservative leaders from our area were at the front of a campaign that had rampant Islamaphobia in it is clearly relevant to a story about ultra conservative right wing zealots coming to Howard County to relay their hate and fear. Also relevant, at least to me, is that you spent zero time mentioning how vile the organizers of the “global rally for humanity” are and instead saved all your venom for me.

      Delete
    2. You are an anonymous flame thrower. Accept the venom. You are a part of the same vile rail of politics that you claim to be against. You are on borrowed time on the anonymous front though my friend and I will leave it at that.

      Delete
    3. That’s fine Ox, I’ve said from the beginning that I knew my anonymity was temporary either through my own doing or others but that is a distraction from my point. There is a group using a mosque in our community as a target for a message of hate. This group occupies the same side of aisle as you do, albeit a much MUCH darker corner of it. This comment thread has now brought me to a second point. You, David, and the others have taken every opportunity here to attack me rather than the hate mongers attacking those within our community. That’s not me throwing flames, that is me expressing sadness.

      Delete
    4. The reason you are being "attacked" is because you are nothing more than an internet troll. You are implying that respected members of our community are racist, while hiding behind your anonymity.

      You should reread Tom Coale's post on HoCoRising from May 5th, 2015. He wrote about you in the comments, "I think that so long as you are remaining anonymous, you should be extra cautious, if not circumscribed, about what you say about others who do not have the benefit of anonymity. Words carry weight and I think there is a temptation with anonymity to ignore that weight because "heck, it doesn't come down on me" without considering that it does come down on those you address. If your name is attached to those words, and you are wrong or unfair in your comments, you bear the responsibility for having made such statements."

      This raises another issue. Where are Julia McCready and Bill Woodcock on this whole HoCoRudkis anonymity controversy? They both sure were quick to criticize the anonymity of conservative internet posters. I'd love to see their opinions on the anonymity of HoCo Rudkis.

      Delete
    5. Dang, my head is spinning at this tired strategy. Being anonymous alone does not make one a troll. Also, repeating an accusation that I have done something I clearly have not doesn’t make it true. The only people I have implied/stated are racist are the organizers of the hate event aimed at Dar-Al-Taqwa. Additionally I said that there was rampant Islamaphobia within the opposition to Dar-Us-Salaam. There is no place where I accused respected members of our community of being racist. None. Also just so we don’t lose track, that is I believe the 5th opportunity to condemn hate mongers attacking members of our own community passed up in order to take a shot at me.

      Delete
    6. Also just to save them the headache of chiming in, Julia, Tom, and I believe Bill (and Jamie Howard) have all publicly expressed criticism of my anonymity. I talk about that here http://hocorudkusreport.blogspot.com/2015/05/in-defense-of-anonymity-for-now.html
      You cited Tom's post about it, but Julia's is here:
      http://villagegreentownsquared.blogspot.com/2015/05/my-brush-with-anonymity.html

      Delete
    7. I did not express criticism of your anonymity, but rather your lack of originality.

      Delete
  5. Rudkus, you've gone off the deep end on this one. By creating this non-sequitur you come across as way more racist than anyone involved in the protest against excessive development.

    Watch what I can do: At the County Council meetings a few months ago many people testified in favor of legislation that would remove many items from vending machines. Many of those items that are being removed are certified kosher. Obviously, the people testifying in favor of the legislation hate kosher items and everything kosher represents. These rage-filled anti-semites should be ashamed, and you should be ashamed for not calling out these hate-mongers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I’m just going to let this silliness sit here for a little bit. I suppose I’ll respond at some point to show how ridiculous that metaphor is but for now, I’m just going to let it sit there like the bruise I got on my forehead from walking into a glass door.

      Delete