Television seems more comfy back in the day
'Grim Reaper' PSA (Australia, 1987)
I can hardly believe what happened tonight
My muslim neighbor came at my father with a hammer, and tried to bash down the front door to get at him. With the door shut, my father grabbed a mattock from the garage in order to protect himself.
They took this opportunity to record my father holding the mattock on their phone, and claimed that my dad took a swing at their kid or something along those lines. A foolish action on their part, because the recording showed my father defending himself in his own hallway!
Not even standing on the doorway as you might expect, but inside the home. You can see the damage on the outside of the door made by the hammer - which are clearly not the kind of indentation made a mattock.
Despite this, it was only my father who was arrested. The muslim neighbors were not arrested, not even the man who wielded the hammer (and stated to police he had done so!). At least a dozen police arrived - no surprises here as to why, with all the tensions in relation to muslims recently.
My father was released without charge just a few hours later, but the bias infuriates me. I cannot help but suspect that they were not arrested, and my father was, due to sensitivities in regards to muslims. You hear about this kind of thing, but now I’ve witnessed it first hand.
The violence has truly come home.. what kind of man goes on the attack with a hammer against an unarmed old man standing behind his own door in his own house?
This event has made me feel even more indignant about ‘Islamophobia’.
I just want to live in my own house in peace. My father did nothing wrong; did not leave his property; and did not even cause physical harm to anyone. We have done nothing against these people, except to respond, through words, that they have no right to claim part of our property or trespass upon it (they have threatened to literally claim our land, through a cadastral survey - though if they actually carried it out, it would actually be in our favor!).
The last thing I want to hear is some big brawny bearded man dressed in a thawb loudly yelling and bashing on the front door with a hammer. At first I thought it might have been a thief, and that was enough to scare me. Can’t I live in peace?
Charles Dunbar Burgess King (12 March 1875 – 4 September 1961) was a politician in Liberia of Americo-Liberian and Freetown Creole descent (his mother was an Americo-Liberian). He served as the 17th President of Liberia from 1920 until 1930.
He was challenged in the presidential election of 1927 by Thomas J.R. Faulkner. According to an official statement King had received 234,000 votes; however, at the time Liberia had only 15,000 registered voters. This won King the dubious achievement of being listed in the Guinness Book of Records 1982 for the most fraudulent election reported in history.
The mandatory use of Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was introduced by FIFA in 2009 for the FIFA Under-17 World Cup to help ascertain whether players are over age or not. MRI is considered to be 99% accurate until the age of 17, after which it becomes harder for medical professionals to calculate a person’s age.
Not everybody was pleased by the introduction of MRI, Nigeria had lost 15 players after they were proven to be over-age. Nigeria’s Football Federation President Sani Lulu said: “I’ll not use the MRI to disqualify my players”. He felt that FIFA had sprung their decision to use MRI upon the nations. Lulu wanted to invite the parents of the national under-17 players to verify their sons’ ages. Nigerian Sports Minister Sani Ndanusa dismissed the parent verification system and stated the “whole world has gone digital and we’re following suit. We’re no longer in the analogue era.”
Whenever the debate turns to ‘But what should muslims do?’, as it invariably does, it is often put forward that they should openly reject these ‘extremist’ voices (to ‘speak out’) and make it clear which side they are on.
This creates a dilemma for muslims however, because whilst they are legitimately against jihadism and would be only too willing to declare themselves against it, they do not feel they should be held to account for the actions of jihadists which they neither affiliate with nor have any real power to stop.
It is an insult that ferments resentment and cynicism. Many muslims are already prone to feeling disaffected and stigmatized, and it doesn’t take much to transform covert distrust into willful disobedience. Even those who do not feel this so strongly; who have more trust in their society and their government, nonetheless feel themselves torn at the possibility of being the Judas who is selling their fellow muslims out. What raises more alarm than to find your trusted friend might actually be a deceptive enemy? And so even the representatives of mainstream muslims now speak tentatively and with caution against action either way.
It is this tentative caution that can be easily mistaken for underlying sympathy for jihadists. So begins the vicious cycle of making even greater demands upon muslims to show their ‘true colors’, which has the unintended effect of leading to an even greater silence. It is not very difficult to understand all of this as a non-muslim, if you think about it from a suitable perspective. In my local area, there has been a recent attempt to set alight a newly constructed muslim shop, with the walls bearing anti-muslim graffiti. While this could be another case of self-sabotage, there have been several similar incidents recently in different areas. Is it our responsibility as non-muslims to reject these acts? It goes without saying that we condemn these acts internally, but to express it would be of no consequence - the people committing these crimes do not share our convictions and we have no power to stop them. It is not difficult to imagine beyond this, a predominantly muslim society which would then condemn us for our inaction, and what our reaction would be.
Perhaps we non-muslims need to realize that the answer to the question ‘But what should muslims do?’ is ‘nothing’. I think the reason we do not currently say this is because we do not want to put ourselves or others in a powerless situation. But by demanding action on their part, no matter how insignificant, we inadvertently criticize muslims for their very existence rather than the existence of the ideologies they follow. It is easy to tie these two together, but the fact is that they are not tied; no more than a white man is bound to holding a racist perspective. But without allowing people to untie themselves from their own misguided beliefs, we risk ‘throwing out the baby with the bathwater’ - if only the violent imagery of that phrase would still be potent so to understand it without ambiguity.
Jihadist ideology is not the only Islamic ideology that should be denounced, and we should not resort to saying foolishly it is ‘un-Islamic’. Even ‘moderate’ Islamic ideology should be denounced, because, for instance, it prohibits homosexuality. Even without the punishment that goes with it, this is a belief that has no place in a free society. Only what remains in the mind, and does not manifest itself in action or law, can be what remains of this belief in a society that operates according to the principle of liberalism, as established by social contract.
Q:How's your girlfriend?
I don’t have a girlfriend