Just build the NYC cultural center and mosque

Any person or group can build anything, anywhere (within the law of city ordinances).

Unlike Charles Krauthammer, I don't believe that the actions of al-Qaeda crazies speak for the majority of Muslims. The actions of al-Qaeda don't even speak for those Muslims who may considered themselves Islamist. In fact, what al-Qaeda does speak for is a crazed band of murderers who are holding a Holy Book in one hand and a weapon in the other. That so many people are willing to, and allowing themselves to, associate al-Qaeda with over a billion other people is dumbfounding.

The Islamophobia gripping this country (as well as Western Europe) is getting a bit out of hand. France is instituting dress codes (not to mention deporting Roma), and the United Kingdom is having a fantastic time installing security cameras in predominately Muslim neighborhoods. According to polls, 60 to 70 percent of people in the United States disagree with building the cultural center-cum-mosque in NYC (this was in a Washington Post Metro Express paper on 20 August).

And do you know what else? There already is a mosque within a half mile (between 4 and 5 blocks) from the former site of the World Trade Center. Masjid Manhattan (masjid = mosque in Arabic) has been in the area since 1970. Of course, I don't know if they've occupied the same space, but I'm sure a tax revenue database search will clear that up. On a side note, it's sad that the masjid finds it necessary to state that it is not affiliated with any organization "to build anything new in the area of downtown Manhattan." Further, it's sad that they must also state two paragraph later that they, and their members, "condemn any type of terrorist acts." Perhaps the websites of catholic churches should carry similar disclaimers; that their resident priests are not pedophiles (St. Patrick's in D.C. does not). Or perhaps members of Congress should carry disclaimers stating that they are ethical).

Which brings me to my last point: this is an election year, congressional midterms. So rather than proposing new plans for growing jobs AND the economy, or for "winning" Afghanistan, nationalist strategists (both Democrat and Republican) would rather make electoral issues based on victimizing "the others." Between "illegals" and "Muslims," the nationalists have plenty to gripe about.

An Open Letter to Joel Stein

Joel,

Your recent article (Time magazine: My Own Private India) is inflammatory and bigoted. Your article is peppered with racist and ethnocentric generalizations: "for a while we assumed all Indians were genuises," "I question just how good our schools were if 'dot heads' was the best racist insult we could come up with for a group of people whose gods have multiple arms and an elephant nose," and "disbelief that anyone can eat food that spicy."

It is less a musing or remembrance of some small town lost to history and more of a targeted attack vilifying a minority (though visible) community. Some quick facts:

1. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Edison (Census Designated Place) NJ had a population of 88,680 in 1990. Of that 70,492 (79.5%) claimed to be of the "White" race. 12,166 (13.7%) claimed to be of the "Asian" race. Of these Asians, 6,076 (6.8%) claimed to be "Asian Indian." In the 1990 Census there were more persons claiming to be "Asian Indian" than persons claiming to be "Black." In fact, "Indians" were the largest minority in Edison, NJ in the 1980s. (1990 Decennial Census)
2. Fast forward a decade. The population of Edison CDP is now 97,687. Persons claiming to be "White" are now 58,116 (but still the majority, 59.5%). "Asians" now number 28,425 persons (29.1%). Persons claiming to be "Asian Indian" have more than doubled to 16,898 (17.3%). Of note, persons claiming to be "Black" numbered 6,728 and "Chinese" numbered 5,589 (up from 2,561 in 1990). (2000 Decennial Census)
3. Now, into the present, or at least 2006 through 2008. According to the American Community Survey's 3-year estimates there are 105,050 persons in Edison CDP (give or take about 4,000). The population claiming to be "White" has continued to fall 50,960 (but still the most prevalent, 48.5%). Those claiming to be "Asian" number 38,004 (36.2%). Of those, 26,954 persons (25.7%) claim to be "Asian Indian," 10,959 claim to be "Black," and 6,093 claim to be "Chinese." (2006-2008 Decennial Census)

The point is that the "mostly white suburban town" that you left is still mostly "White." The Indian and Indian-American community is less than half of the township's total population. Presenting the story as only one of "immigration" is only a half-truth. Yes, "Asians" have immigrated, but "Whites" have also left, in large numbers. Nonetheless, the Indian and Indian-American communities are visible.

And they community should be visible. The story of the Indian and Indian-American communities does not start in 1965. It starts a century earlier in 1865, when the "Hawaiian Board of Immigration sends labor agent William Hillebrand to China to recruit laborers, instructing him to proceed from China to the East Indies... twenty years later, Asian Indians suddenly began appearing in the lumber towns of Washington and the agricultural fields of California. By 1920, some sixty-four hundred had entered the United States." (Takaki, Strangers from a Different Shore, 294)

Perhaps, Joel, you would find a friend in Samuel Gompers whose statues mocks me on my way to work "Sixty years' contact with the Chinese, and twenty-five years' experience with the Japanese and two or three years' acquaintance with Hindus should be sufficient to convince any ordinarily intelligent person that they have no standards... by which a Caucasian may judge them" he said, in 1908. (Takaki, 296)

Perhaps, Joel, your inspiration came from a 1910 Forum magazine article by Herman Scheffauer who wrote "this time the chimera is not the saturnine, almond-eyed mask, the shaven head, the snaky pig-tail of the multitudinous Chinese, nor the close-cropped bullet-heads of the suave and smiling Japanese, but a face of finer features, rising, turbaned out of the Pacific and bringing a new and anxious question... [a] Hindoo invasion [of this] dark and mystic race." (Takaki, 297)

Finally, Joel, your xenophobic and reactionary rambling has no place in the immigration debate, much less in a serious discussion of integration and citizenship. Your last paragraph is most perplexing of all, in one fell swoop, you denigrate and marginalize two distinct communities. Your immutable view of "culture" belongs to an earlier century, what you fail to see is that Edison has changed - but you have not. You acknowledge that Chelsea has changed, yet you seem unable to cope with the demographic and geographic change of your hometown.

The worst part, Joel, is that you do not acknowledge the duality, the hyphenation, of this community. It is not simply "Indian," although many will claim it to be as such, it is something new (yes, more new than 1885). It is an Indian-American community with links to India and roots in the U.S. Our sons, daughters, brothers, and sisters fight, and have probably died, in the military that allows you to publish such articles.

Letter to the President

Mr. President (and staff):

Bangla Nation just learned from the Bangladeshi newspaper, The Daily Star, that Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina of the Awami League has been invited to New York for a meeting with other heads of government from UN troop contributing nations.

Bangla Nation thoroughly applauds and supports this invitation. Resolving ongoing and future conflicts will require a great deal of cooperation between those financing peacekeeping missions and those who contribute the manpower. Moreover, Bangla Nation believes this forum will be a wonderful chance to figure out the capability shortfalls that Bangladesh suffers in terms of equipment and training for these missions.

This meeting will also provide an opportunity to establish a more positive relationship with Bangladesh, a country of 160 million Sunni Muslims that, while enjoying substantial human development over the past few decades, still lags behind in positive governance and economic/occupational development. With an ongoing militant and political Islamist threat, the United States' attention on Bangladesh would be well received.

With humble regards,

Bangla Nation

F*CK the BBC

Evidently the latest form of Western imperialism takes the form of ridiculous news articles on some less developed countries (LDCs). The recent articles represent the height of irresponsibility, ethno-centrism, and tabloid journalism.

Bangla Nation must ask is the BBC nothing more than an American tabloid? In its drive to gain readers it must report the most ridiculous and outlandish topics from various countries?

Here are three articles, Bangla Nation will not give the links because it will NOT be responsible for promoting traffic to this sad degenerate of a former news powerhouse.

"Red faces as Bangladesh papers fall for US moon landing 'hoax'", BBC, 4 Sep 2009
"Dressing Down - Bangladesh suit ban to save power", BBC, 2 Sep 2009
"Bangladesh police an arresting sight after beautician's tips", BBC, 25 Aug 2009

To be fair, the BBC also ran 2 article on the Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) mutiny case and 1 article on the awarding of hydrocarbon exploration rights to US and Irish firms.

"Bangladesh guards in fair trial plea", BBC, 27 Aug 2009
"Elusive truth", BBC, 27 Aug 2009
"Oil firms win Bangladesh rights", BBC, 25 Aug 2009

Bangla Nation finds it hard to believe that the BBC can find no other newsworthy items in the whole of Bangladesh. However, if Bangla Nation's allegation is correct, it is not that hard to believe that the correspondent never leaves Dhaka.

Bangla Nation believes that the heart of politics and economics may be the primate city, but the very soul of Bangladesh is in the hinterlands. That is where the "news" is.

Short-term expediency maims in the long-term

Bangla Nation believes this is some sort of rule for Bangladesh. Political expediency driving a decision which eventually returns to maim the democratization process, or worse inflict violence on the Bangladeshi populace. As far as Bangla Nation is concerned the worst form of political expediency has been the co-opting of political Islamists, in particular Jamaat-e-Islami, by the political parties. More importantly, it is the usage of Islamic idioms, symbols, and phrases in official government discourse (obviously Bangladesh is far from the only political system guilty of this). Bangla Nation believes that the Awami League should return its roots, secularism (though without the authoritarianism). A move towards this ideal would involve the cessation of colluding with Islamist political parties and devolving local administration to the upazila parishads.

Curiously, the Awami League government decided to promote awareness of the H1N1/Swine Flu (of which Bangladesh has over 250 cases) by engaging local imams in raising awareness (Daily Star). While, this may be a good idea in the short-term, the Awami League government must not devolve local administrative tasks to religious leaders - this only promotes their accumulation POLITICAL and RELIGIOUS power.

Rather the Awami League government should remain true to its electoral pledge of devolving some power to the local administrations. This has not happened despite a upazila (sub-district) election over six months ago, the local administrations are still beholden to the districts (Daily Star).

Bangla Nation believes that the Awami League should honor the pre-Independence vision of its founder Sheikh Mujibur Rahman by not accommodating the Islamists. By the same time, the Awami League should honor its current pledge to strengthen local governance. Bangla Nation believes that by doing so information on the H1N1/Swine Flu will reach the populace's ears through government representatives, not religious leaders.

At present, the Awami League is doing little more than surrendering local governance.