Re: [blind-democracy] My Response to Bill Clinton: On (My) Liberty and (Your) America

Bill Clinton, the epitome of the White, Privileged, Member of the
Establishment. Of course he can tell the Muslim Americans how to
behave. After all, he is on top. And that is what we are taught to
do when we have all the marbles.
During the last of the "Red Scare", we piled into the old family bus
and headed to Corvallis, Oregon to visit my aunt and uncle. Bob was a
professor at Oregon State College(university). Bob was a believer in
God and the American Ruling Class, never questioning either great
power. He was busy filling out a packet of questions provided to him
by the Corvallis city council, demanding to know how he spent his
personal time. My dad was startled that anyone would willingly accept
such an invasion into their private affairs. The final question, of
course, was, Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the
Communist Party? Bob had never been further Left than the Republican
Party. But anyone foolish enough to say, "Yes", would have been
looking for another job. My dad said, "Are the city councilmen
filling out this questionnaire?" That question surprised my uncle.
"Why, no! They are the city council. They prepared the
questionnaire."
But then uncle Bob also believed that the Earth was only five thousand
years old, created by God, creating Man and taking one of his ribs to
create an help mate.
I never dared ask Bob if he thought the Earth was flat. I was afraid
of his answer.
But this is what Muslim Americans are up against. This mindless
acceptance by the privileged white man, without question.
Learned behavior, or DNA?

Carl Jarvis


On 8/3/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
> My Response to Bill Clinton: On (My) Liberty and (Your) America
> Published on
> Wednesday, August 03, 2016
> by
> Common Dreams
> My Response to Bill Clinton: On (My) Liberty and (Your) America
> by
> Ramzy Baroud
>
> Former President Bill Clinton speaks during the second day of the
> Democratic
> National Convention in Philadelphia , Tuesday, July 26, 2016. (Photo: AP/J.
> Scott Applewhite)
> Donald Trump wants to keep us out of the country altogether. But Bill
> Clinton, former president and husband of a Democratic presidential nominee,
> does not mind us staying, as long as we, Muslims, behave ourselves.
> Welcome to America where racial profiling is the country's most popular
> idea, and where citizenship is now conditioned on blind obedience.
> This is what Clinton said at the Democratic National Convention (DNC) on
> July 26: "If you're a Muslim and you love America and freedom and you hate
> terror, stay here and help us win and make a future together, we want you."
> If this is America's new social contract, I refuse to sign, and I think
> millions of Muslims-and non-Muslims, for that matter-should refuse to
> endorse it, too.
> Oddly, the Democrats were meant to juxtapose Republican rhetoric-racist,
> anti-Muslim, anti-black, anti-everyone else who does not look or sound like
> them-with a more conciliatory language.
> Yet this is the best that Bill Clinton could come up with.
> But what if we, Muslims and others, entirely disagree with Clinton's
> definition of 'terror'? And what if the 'freedom' he is offering us is
> deceptive doublespeak? What if we want to take part in building an America
> that has no space for corrupt politicians like him and his wife?
> Does it follow that millions of us are simply not wanted in this country?
> To
> leave and, regardless of who wins in November, to never come back?
> The crowd roared when Clinton recited his denigrating conditions on Muslim
> citizenship, and, notably, this is the more 'progressive' segment in
> American society.
> How is this going to help the already charged situation, anyway?
> According to the results of a recent Economist/YouGov poll, a majority of
> Americans believe that Islam, more than any other religion, encourages
> violence. Republicans are particularity anti-Muslim (74 percent shared
> these
> views) but a sizable number of Democrats (41 percent) hold such toxic ideas
> about Islam and its followers, as well.
> Sure, one can understand how the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001
> contributed to this massive misconception. But is it fair to forget that
> millions of Muslims have perished in America's seemingly endless wars,
> interventions and foreign policy debacles, decades before that date?
> Bill Clinton's own legacy has proven most deadly to Muslims. The Iraq
> sanctions, which he sustained, in addition to his constant bombing of that
> country, has caused hundreds of thousands of Muslims to perish.
> Yet, instead of apologizing to Muslims, this conceited millionaire
> politician had the audacity to condition the presence of American Muslims
> in
> their own country on a laundry list of slogans.
> Did Bill Clinton know that the majority of victims of terrorism are, in
> fact, Muslims?
> His speech writer should have at least checked on the US government's own
> records. According to a 2011 report issued by the US government's National
> Counter-Terrorism Center (NCTC), "Muslims suffered between 82 and 97% of
> terrorism-related fatalities over the past five years."
> In fact, with the advent of so-called ISIS (which was spawned from al-Qaeda
> and which materialized in Iraq only after the US invasion of that country
> in
> 2003) the percentage of Muslim victims must be far higher.
> As if American Muslims have not already suffered tremendously. They have
> been victims of racial and religious discrimination and violence for years.
> The media has been nothing but a hate fest targeting them, their core
> values
> and loyalty to their own country. Many of them are constantly being singled
> out as if they do not belong or cannot be trusted.
> This is not an issue of mere societal perception based on media
> disinformation but is, in fact, cemented in US law, starting with the
> 'Secret Evidence' law in 1996, and the USA Patriot Acts that followed.
> The unfortunate fact is that Muslims are victims of terrorism in more ways
> than one, including when their countries are attacked and destroyed by
> western interventions (Iraq, Libya, Syria); when they fall victim to
> revengeful, misguided violence (Nearly one third of Nice, France attack
> victims were Muslims); and when they are wholly victimized and stereotyped
> by western media as the source of terror.
> This sad, vicious cycle keeps on occurring every single day, and innocent
> Muslims are paying the highest price for it. It is no surprise, then, that
> many American Muslims were disheartened by Bill Clinton's disingenuous
> 'counter offer' for Muslims to stay in 'his' country.
> But the danger in Clinton's discourse goes beyond Muslims, into the kind of
> intellectual tyranny that was also espoused by George W. Bush after
> September 11, 2001. "Either you are with us or you are with the
> terrorists,"
> he had said.
> Both Clinton and Bush used the pronoun 'us' in their ultimatums. But since
> 'they' represents powerful, rich families who command massive, unrelenting
> war machines, not only Muslims but everyone else should be very concerned.
> In a broader sense, these ultimatums do not only target Muslim Americans
> but
> any independent thinking non-conformist as well.
> "In this age, the mere example of non-conformity, the mere refusal to bend
> the knee to custom, is itself a service," wrote influential philosopher
> John
> Stuart Mill in 'On Liberty'.
> America's political elites never cease referencing old script of
> intellectual giants that influenced their country but, in reality, they
> live
> by entirely different standards.
> Clinton's statement at the DNC was, in fact, a call for conformity, along
> with an ominous subtext:
> "If you're a Muslim and you love America and freedom and you hate terror,
> stay here and help us win and make a future together."
> And since the Democratic Convention had little room for dissent or
> nonconformists, no one had the chance to respond to Clinton's statement,
> right there and then. Nonetheless, this is my response:
> Dear Bill Clinton,
> Yes, I am a Muslim, but I don't love the America you stand for and
> represent, but an America that is both peaceful and inclusive.
> Yes, I love freedom, too, but not your freedom which violates international
> law, continues to wage war at will, to further increase the income
> disparity
> between rich and poor, to violate the sanctity of an elected office and to
> wreak havoc upon an already devastated, suffering world.
> Yes, I hate terror, including the terror that you have inflicted upon the
> world: your 'clean war' in Kosovo, your 'Operation Desert Fox' in Iraq and
> Hillary's war on Libya.
> If I stay, I have no intention of helping you build a future for the rich
> and powerful at the expense of the poor and abandoned, but demolish your
> own
> doing of a past and present that are rife with bloodletting abroad and
> inequality at home.
> If I leave, I will seek a world that does not condition my being, my very
> liberty and right not to conform, on ultimatums and blind loyalty to a
> system so corrupt that it is willingly destroying itself for the sake of
> money and the fleeting illusion of power.
> This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0
> License
> Ramzy Baroud
>
> Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net) is an author and editor of
> PalestineChronicle.com. His work has been published in many newspapers,
> journals and anthologies around the world. His is the author of The Second
> Palestinian Intifada: A Chronicle of a People's Struggle (Pluto Press,
> London). His latest book is My Father Was a Freedom Fighter:
> Skip to main content
> //
> . DONATE
> . SIGN UP FOR NEWSLETTER
>
>
> Wednesday, August 3, 2016
> . Home
> . World
> . U.S.
> . Canada
> . Climate
> . War & Peace
> . Economy
> . Rights
> . Solutions
> . Rev. William J. Barber
> . Bernie Sanders
> . Jill Stein
> . Hillary Clinton
> . Donald Trump
> My Response to Bill Clinton: On (My) Liberty and (Your) America
> Published on
> Wednesday, August 03, 2016
> by
> Common Dreams
> My Response to Bill Clinton: On (My) Liberty and (Your) America
> by
> Ramzy Baroud
> . 11 Comments
> .
> . Former President Bill Clinton speaks during the second day of the
> Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia , Tuesday, July 26, 2016.
> (Photo: AP/J. Scott Applewhite)
> . Donald Trump wants to keep us out of the country altogether. But
> Bill Clinton, former president and husband of a Democratic presidential
> nominee, does not mind us staying, as long as we, Muslims, behave
> ourselves.
> . Welcome to America where racial profiling is the country's most
> popular idea, and where citizenship is now conditioned on blind obedience.
> . This is what Clinton said at the Democratic National Convention
> (DNC) on July 26: "If you're a Muslim and you love America and freedom and
> you hate terror, stay here and help us win and make a future together, we
> want you."
> . If this is America's new social contract, I refuse to sign, and I
> think millions of Muslims-and non-Muslims, for that matter-should refuse to
> endorse it, too.
> Oddly, the Democrats were meant to juxtapose Republican rhetoric-racist,
> anti-Muslim, anti-black, anti-everyone else who does not look or sound like
> them-with a more conciliatory language.
> Yet this is the best that Bill Clinton could come up with.
> But what if we, Muslims and others, entirely disagree with Clinton's
> definition of 'terror'? And what if the 'freedom' he is offering us is
> deceptive doublespeak? What if we want to take part in building an America
> that has no space for corrupt politicians like him and his wife?
> Does it follow that millions of us are simply not wanted in this country?
> To
> leave and, regardless of who wins in November, to never come back?
> The crowd roared when Clinton recited his denigrating conditions on Muslim
> citizenship, and, notably, this is the more 'progressive' segment in
> American society.
> How is this going to help the already charged situation, anyway?
> According to the results of a recent Economist/YouGov poll, a majority of
> Americans believe that Islam, more than any other religion, encourages
> violence. Republicans are particularity anti-Muslim (74 percent shared
> these
> views) but a sizable number of Democrats (41 percent) hold such toxic ideas
> about Islam and its followers, as well.
> Sure, one can understand how the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001
> contributed to this massive misconception. But is it fair to forget that
> millions of Muslims have perished in America's seemingly endless wars,
> interventions and foreign policy debacles, decades before that date?
> Bill Clinton's own legacy has proven most deadly to Muslims. The Iraq
> sanctions, which he sustained, in addition to his constant bombing of that
> country, has caused hundreds of thousands of Muslims to perish.
> Yet, instead of apologizing to Muslims, this conceited millionaire
> politician had the audacity to condition the presence of American Muslims
> in
> their own country on a laundry list of slogans.
> Did Bill Clinton know that the majority of victims of terrorism are, in
> fact, Muslims?
> His speech writer should have at least checked on the US government's own
> records. According to a 2011 report issued by the US government's National
> Counter-Terrorism Center (NCTC), "Muslims suffered between 82 and 97% of
> terrorism-related fatalities over the past five years."
> In fact, with the advent of so-called ISIS (which was spawned from al-Qaeda
> and which materialized in Iraq only after the US invasion of that country
> in
> 2003) the percentage of Muslim victims must be far higher.
> As if American Muslims have not already suffered tremendously. They have
> been victims of racial and religious discrimination and violence for years.
> The media has been nothing but a hate fest targeting them, their core
> values
> and loyalty to their own country. Many of them are constantly being singled
> out as if they do not belong or cannot be trusted.
> This is not an issue of mere societal perception based on media
> disinformation but is, in fact, cemented in US law, starting with the
> 'Secret Evidence' law in 1996, and the USA Patriot Acts that followed.
> The unfortunate fact is that Muslims are victims of terrorism in more ways
> than one, including when their countries are attacked and destroyed by
> western interventions (Iraq, Libya, Syria); when they fall victim to
> revengeful, misguided violence (Nearly one third of Nice, France attack
> victims were Muslims); and when they are wholly victimized and stereotyped
> by western media as the source of terror.
> This sad, vicious cycle keeps on occurring every single day, and innocent
> Muslims are paying the highest price for it. It is no surprise, then, that
> many American Muslims were disheartened by Bill Clinton's disingenuous
> 'counter offer' for Muslims to stay in 'his' country.
> But the danger in Clinton's discourse goes beyond Muslims, into the kind of
> intellectual tyranny that was also espoused by George W. Bush after
> September 11, 2001. "Either you are with us or you are with the
> terrorists,"
> he had said.
> Both Clinton and Bush used the pronoun 'us' in their ultimatums. But since
> 'they' represents powerful, rich families who command massive, unrelenting
> war machines, not only Muslims but everyone else should be very concerned.
> In a broader sense, these ultimatums do not only target Muslim Americans
> but
> any independent thinking non-conformist as well.
> "In this age, the mere example of non-conformity, the mere refusal to bend
> the knee to custom, is itself a service," wrote influential philosopher
> John
> Stuart Mill in 'On Liberty'.
> America's political elites never cease referencing old script of
> intellectual giants that influenced their country but, in reality, they
> live
> by entirely different standards.
> Clinton's statement at the DNC was, in fact, a call for conformity, along
> with an ominous subtext:
> "If you're a Muslim and you love America and freedom and you hate terror,
> stay here and help us win and make a future together."
> And since the Democratic Convention had little room for dissent or
> nonconformists, no one had the chance to respond to Clinton's statement,
> right there and then. Nonetheless, this is my response:
> Dear Bill Clinton,
> Yes, I am a Muslim, but I don't love the America you stand for and
> represent, but an America that is both peaceful and inclusive.
> Yes, I love freedom, too, but not your freedom which violates international
> law, continues to wage war at will, to further increase the income
> disparity
> between rich and poor, to violate the sanctity of an elected office and to
> wreak havoc upon an already devastated, suffering world.
> Yes, I hate terror, including the terror that you have inflicted upon the
> world: your 'clean war' in Kosovo, your 'Operation Desert Fox' in Iraq and
> Hillary's war on Libya.
> If I stay, I have no intention of helping you build a future for the rich
> and powerful at the expense of the poor and abandoned, but demolish your
> own
> doing of a past and present that are rife with bloodletting abroad and
> inequality at home.
> If I leave, I will seek a world that does not condition my being, my very
> liberty and right not to conform, on ultimatums and blind loyalty to a
> system so corrupt that it is willingly destroying itself for the sake of
> money and the fleeting illusion of power.
> This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0
> License
> /author/ramzy-baroud
> /author/ramzy-baroud/author/ramzy-baroud
> Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net) is an author and editor of
> PalestineChronicle.com. His work has been published in many newspapers,
> journals and anthologies around the world. His is the author of The Second
> Palestinian Intifada: A Chronicle of a People's Struggle (Pluto Press,
> London). His latest book is My Father Was a Freedom Fighter:
>
>
>