Earlier today I posted a diary that caused some consternation.
I apologize to those in this community who were upset by it, and also appreciate those who took my question seriously and offered a response.
It was always meant to be deleted, (as I stated in the diary itself) and after I read through the comments, I did delete.
An explanation and some thoughts:
I had received one of those "Obama is a Muslim" emails but this time from a close family member who cited it having been forwarded from a person he greatly respects. And it quoted (or misquoted) some things that made it seem particularly pernicious, which is why I diaried about it.
Now, you may question my motives for sharing it with you. But I can tell you this family member shared it with me as part of a much longer dialogue we have been having since Obama ran for office and I supported his candidacy.
His positions on politics are often eye-rollingly offbase (for me) but as I tend to stick to the facts and figures, I usually prevail (I try to do this graciously and he is just as gracious). He thinks I am a little naive but is mostly quite proud of me. And I am proud of him and what he has accomplished in his life.
In short, our exchanges are probably fairly typical and not unique to anyone who is progressive with friends and family who aren't.
Now, I could just shout him down, question his motives, and attack his character when I disagree with him. Because he is sometimes way off base. But he is family. If he weren't family, this would be a lot easier. I wouldn't be troubled and my rightness in political viewpoint would be unchallenged. The problem is this: we're all family. Ultimately. If not him, then his neighbor. Or mine. Or yours. (And many of these neighbors vote.)
What passes for mainstream political dialogue in my greater family at the moment is not merely a difference in political philosophy among informed people.
What we are more often combating in the mainstream currently is a mix of malicious and well-intended ignorance plus fear, badly sourced "reasoning", poor logic, bad frames, plus an overload of chest-thumping passion, and a dearth of communication tools and skills for reasonable discussion.
We cannot fight it all at once. We can only fight it one person, one bad idea, at a time. As progressives I believe we can, and will, and collectively are, upping our game to fight bad ideas on many fronts. I just don't think shouting down and ad hom attacks ever serve very much. Even for the best causes in the world.
Anyway, here is the response that I wrote back, with the help of this community. (You know who you are. ;-))
The facts for the sources for the article you sent me don't check out. I was just pilloried on a liberal blog for even asking the question, lol.
But here's what I found out:
The Israel Today link goes to a PDF that is corrupted and cannot be opened. Don't try because it may contain viruses that will launch on your PC but not on my Mac.
The site for Israel Today isn't even remotely impartial --- it's a very strongly Pro-Israel Anti-Palestine site that shows extremely strong bias in its reporting and stories.
The article references the Egyptian Foreign Minister appearing on "Round Table" on Nile TV -- a program that doesn't exist. http://en.wikipedia.org/...
If someone finds actual video I will follow up but I doubt it exists...
The blog Atlas Shrugs which originated the post your friend sent to you, is written by blogger Pamela Gellar who is known for being rabidly anti-Islam as well as for just plain making stuff up.
So far, it is not very credible. I will keep an eye on whether any real news appears on this but so far, I don't think this claim has legs.
My earlier, pre-DKos letter to him had this to say:
On the matter of all the 'evidence' amassed in the article purporting to show the President's pro-Muslim slant, I have to say that I disagree with the tone and intention and yes also the facts as they are presented. It assumes two things: that Obama is a secret Muslim or is somehow aligning or permissive of Islamic terrorists. And that Islam = Terror. That is utterly ridiculous and irresponsible speech when we are still cleaning up the messes of the previous President. It is a string of facts and semi-facts twisted and presented to paint a very ugly and disturbing picture that is just a big lie.
[Addressing the article's claim that Obama is making the EU admit Turkey over the protests of 'Europeans'] For example, Turkey has been a candidate for the EU since 1999. Turkey is a secular nation, a NATO member country, and a long time Cold War ally in the region for the United States. We've had missile sitting there pointed at Russia for decades. They traditionally have a more antagonistic relationship with neighboring countries, but it is Turkey improving relations with its surrounding neighbors --- particularly with the Iraqi Kurds --- that is helping to ease tensions in the region. We need them to be stable, to succeed, and to continue to transform their relationship and role in the region. For them and for us. (I was just reading about this two days ago. I cannot find the original article but this is the site that I was reading: http://www.gmfus.org/... that emphasizes trilateral diplomatic solutions.)
It is really important that we understand this kind of complexity, rather than use the President's support of Turkey membership into the EU as somehow nefarious.
That was just one item. I know the list is a lot longer than that, and I could debunk, probably pretty successfully, why the list is either not true or not relevant, but the basic underlying assumption is this:
The authors of Atlas Shrugged think that anything that is good for people who happen to be Muslim is evidence of support for terrorists. And this is just a false argument, and we need to do better than this.
I also cannot help but feel if it was White American doing the exact same things he would get a complete pass. Bush had extensive ties to the House of Saud, and the majority of the 911 attackers were Saudi Arabian. None of them were Iraqi, and yet we invaded Iraq and left Saudi Arabia alone. I swear it's like we got in a fight with one guy, but punched the little guy standing next to him instead. Because he was the one we could reach. Bleah.
I am catagorically against an unnuanced view of Islam. It is simply as a matter of intellectual honesty and moral responsibility. And I think the President's doing a helluva job.
I offer this to those who may be interested to know where I am coming from. I understand people being upset by the earlier diary, and I hope this one proves more useful.
Peace out.
** UPDATED: I heard back from the family member who is glad I took the time to respond, and is forwarding my reply back to the others he received it from. I find that heartening. Not every American reads the same stuff we do on DailyKos, especially older Americans who can get swayed by a wall of words. Amazing what you can accomplish when you just talk to folks respectfully, armed with facts and reason.