Muslims For Bush
Ali Hasan
Muhammad Ali Hasan talks to Vibes Editor-in-Chief Aisha F. Sarwari about the Patriot Act and why Muslims should vote for Bush.
President Bush has a long history of having close Muslim friends, including a Palestinian suitemate from Yale. So even without the Hasan family, Muslims will always get wonderful things from President Bush.
- Bush with an Iraqi refugee
VIBES: Why should Muslims vote for Bush when they have seen their civil rights infringed upon under a McCarthist anti-Muslim propaganda after 9/11?
ALI HASAN: Great question, as this concern is often the leading cause of anxiety among all American Muslims today. Let us get one fact straight though. As of right now, we can only count one American Muslim citizen who is being held under the Patriot Act. Yes, that is one too many, and surely we are pushing for his trial to take place, but he is currently the only Muslim that is being held under any type of secret evidence.
With that in mind, we feel that President Bush’s management of civil rights has been extremely responsible, considering the terrorist attacks that took place, especially when you compare it to how the Japanese Americans were treated after World War 2. Our fear lies within John Kerry, who wrote parts of the Patriot Act, fought for it upon the Senate Floor, and voted for it. In order for Kerry to improve upon the Patriot Act’s management, he would have to let go of the one American Muslim currently being held, and not arrest anyone else.
Considering that John Kerry wants to make the Patriot Act stronger than even President Bush wants it to be(1), we feel that Kerry’s management of the Act will be horrible for Muslims.
Under President Bush, we truly feel that under his leadership, civil rights are getting better everyday. Let us not forget that President Bush was the first President to ban all forms of racial profiling at a Federal Level(2).
VIBES: Many Muslims, find themselves locked up simply on suspicion. Explain what safeguards Muslims have in terms of Bush looking out for Muslim interests in the future? - Why do you pin the draconian patriot act on Kerry, and not the Bush Administration under which it is implemented?
ALI HASAN: Many Muslims find themselves locked up on suspicion? That is news to us. We have vigorously looked for cases, in which, Muslims are being held without evidence. As mentioned above, we only know of one John Doe case, in which an American Muslim citizen is being held with secret evidence. The idea that there. are 1,000’s of Muslims being held, without evidence, is not true. However, we are always concerned about such things, as we do not support the parts of the Patriot Act that infringe upon civil rights. In turn, if anyone hears of a Muslim that is imprisoned, without evidence, then feel free to contact us at MuslimsForBush@mac.com, where we can present that case to the administration.
As mentioned above, we blame John Kerry for the Patriot Act, more than President Bush, mainly because he wrote parts of it, fought for it on the Senate Floor, and voted for it. Let us not forget that almost every single Democrat and Republican voted for this Act. So to blame Republicans for this Act alone, would be a mistake. Yes, there were some politicians who voted against it, like Democrat Senator Feingold, which further begs the question of why liberals like John Kerry felt compelled to vote for it?
- Muslim women with Laura Bush
In that regard, we feel that civil rights will improve, on a day-to-day basis, under President Bush. Nothing is going to become perfect overnight, but in time, it will. In constantly meeting with Muslim groups and leaders, President Bush has already showed a tenacity of wanting to reach out the Muslim community. I believe it was right after the first rounds of the immigration checks that the Bush Administration invited many American Muslim leaders into the White House, for the purposes of consulting with them on how the immigration checks could be better handled next time – the next round of checks saw zero arrests.
On the other hand, John Kerry has no Muslim staffers, his only meetings with Muslims have been over campaign contributions and endorsements, and his outreach has been dead, at best. Senator Ted Kennedy, himself, is proof that you can be friendly with Muslims, and still be extremely popular in Massachusetts and the Democratic Party. If America’s most liberal Senator refuses to outreach with us as a Senator, then what exactly will be his response to us as a President?
VIBES: Why are student, professional and visitor visas being denied to people from Muslim countries, if Bush is sincere about promoting education and modernity in the Muslim world?
ALI HASAN: Once again, the question above is news to us. Yes, there certainly were some immigration problems, right after the horrible attacks of 9-11. However, today, we are back at the normal immigration levels of before.
Government statistics show that levels of deportation increased after 9-11, but have now dropped significantly. The number of new United States citizens has remained equal. And most shocking, the number of denied citizenship applications has decreased by fifty percent(3). So to say that America has become less immigrant friendly under President Bush would be a complete lie.
However, as we mentioned above, with his lack of outreach and his hardline stance towards wanting to punish the Muslim World, we have deep fears that Senator Kerry could put a stop to much Muslim immigration. We have seen what four years of President Bush holds. Immigration and civil rights have been just fine. Why take a risk with Kerry?
VIBES: Why do you stand by language that demeans Muslims, when Bush uses terms such as "Axis of Evil" and "crusade"? Don't you feel this "them vs. us" culture is propagating the wrong message and increasing anti-Americanism?
ALI HASAN: We agree that such language is more alienating than it is uniting. Which is why President Bush deserves even more credit, in this case. Terms like “crusade†and “Axis of Evil†were used once and never used again. Clearly, the President realized a mistake was made
and he did his very best never to use terms like that again.
If we really want to judge President Bush, based upon the things he has said, then clearly, there is not a more Pro-Muslim, American, politician within our country today! President Bush has repeatedly called Islam a “religion of peace,†in addition to speaking of the fact that Christians and Muslims worship the same God. And many of his statements are aimed more at his constituency of right wingers, than they are at Muslims.
Senator Kerry, on the other hand, has often alienated Muslims even more terribly with his words. In one debate, he offered the solution of sending more “Muslim speaking†soldiers to Iraq. In the first Presidential Debate, he referred to terrorists, not as terrorists, but as “Islamic Muslims.†Unfortunately, we here at Muslims For Bush question whether Kerry even made a mistake or not?
VIBES: "Muslims for Bush" is accused of being a "Hasans for Bush" campaign, where only one rich family is getting the limelight for making a handsome contribution. Can you explain in real terms what values Muslims get out of contributing to Bush as your family has done?
ALI HASAN: We have never had to worry about appeasing President Bush, with regards to Muslims. President Bush has a long history of having close Muslim friends, including a Palestinian suitemate from Yale. So even without the Hasan family, Muslims will always get wonderful things from President Bush.
However, at this point in time, many Republicans and Democrats are wary of Muslims. Contributing to anyone’s campaign sends a strong message. In that way, it is important for all Senators and Congressmen/women, on both sides of the aisles, to see contributions coming in from Muslims. And most importantly, they need to see Muslims going to the polls to vote!
Such actions are the only ways we will be included within legislation writing, not just in the White House, but in the House and Senate, as well.
VIBES: Do you think you have an edge over the "Muslims for Kerry" campaign?
ALI HASAN: The beauty of the World Wide Web is that everyone has a website. I encourage our readers to visit all political websites of interest, thus empowering your readers with the chance to decide who has the “edgeâ€.
VIBES: Your booth was vandalized at the ISNA convention. Why do you think people are so infuriated at your endorsement of a candidate Muslims bloc voted for last time?
- Bush with American Muslims
ALI HASAN: First off, I do not want the good people of ISNA to be characterized as belligerent people, who refused to be open minded towards all political thought. The mass majority of the people at ISNA came to pick up our editorial, seek more information, and voice their concerns to us. Yes, some people were angered, but certainly, I would never allow anyone to think that “infuriated†people constituted as the majority at ISNA. The majority were extremely friendly, very open minded, and only guilty of further educating themselves upon the issues of this election.
With regards to the question though, it is easy to be alienated, as a Muslim, when there are two wars taking place in Muslim countries. However, we are confident that history will prove that the right decisions were made.
A world without Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and the Taliban are all wonderful things; and had those people continued to stay in power, we genuinely feel that the number of future Muslim casualties would far exceed the current figures.
Let us not forget that it is John Kerry who promotes having wars against Iraq and Afghanistan, but continually votes against sending aid to the people of those countries. Whether you agree with war or not, we can all agree that President Bush did the right thing by sending aid to both countries and sending his promises of rebuilding. Our fear is that John Kerry Presidency would officially signal the end of aid to the Muslim World.
At this point in time, it is Senator John Kerry who voted against sending $18 billion in aid to Iraq, voted against sending $2 billion in aid to Afghanistan, wrote the act to sanction Syria, and now, wants to punish Pakistan.
VIBES: Do you think your efforts will be fruitful in terms of getting Bush reelected based on the Muslim Vote? Aren't Muslims too marginal and politically inactive a community to be counted?
ALI HASAN: It was this wonderful website, Naseeb.com, which published my article ‘American Muslims – The Ultimate Battleground State.’ I am convinced that American Muslims will be deciding who wins this election, mainly because most of us are undecided. We have gigantic populations in every battleground state, and our voting bloc is in a position now to decide who wins.
The most important statistic on election day though is the following: how many American Muslims voted? Every member of Congress and Senate will be seeing those numbers, and their policy decisions will certainly keep that in mind.
I have always remained true to this fact – I do not mind if anyone votes for Kerry or Nader, but please make that decision after visiting MuslimsForBush.com. Even if we cannot convince you, we still want you to vote.
As far as being fruitful, we are flying sky high! We are receiving emails from people whose minds are changing, both Muslim and non-Muslim. The truth is getting out there, thanks to all the folks out there who are continuing the debate, causing discussion, and doing their best to educate others. We have a few more weeks to go – let us make sure that our voting decisions are based upon truth and not trend. Doing so will guarantee that the best person is elected!
VIBES: In a nutshell, why should Muslims to vote for President Bush?
ALI HASAN: Who do we want in office? The candidate who has built an alliance with Pakistan, speaks of creating Palestine, gives record amounts of aid to Muslim countries, and has responsible management of the Patriot Act – or John Kerry, who speaks of punishing Pakistan, promoting Israel over Palestine, stopping aid to Muslim countries, and ‘strengthening’ the Patriot Act, beyond what President Bush wants it to be? President Bush is right for Muslims on every single issue.
Footnote: (1)www.muslimwakeup.com/elections/archives/001105.php
(2) DOJ Press Release, "Justice Department Issues Policy Guidance to Ban Racial Profiling," 06/17/2003
(3)http://uscis.gov/graphics/shared/aboutus/statistics/msrsep03/index.htm
The opinions expressed in this article are of the author and not necessarily of Vibes.
Related Articles
Enjoy this article?
Categories
Recent Posts
- Why divorce ratio is increasing alarmingly?
- Problems faced by Muslim couples after Marriage
- How to Have a Happy Marriage Life
- This Ramadan, Let’s Pledge To Say NO To Forced Marriages
- Why Should I Read my Nikah Nama?
Archives
- November 2012
- October 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- August 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- April 2004
- January 2004
- December 2003
- November 2003
- October 2003
- March 2003
- February 2003
- November 1999
November 18, 2004 2:21am
Iraq - $18 Billion in aid Afghanistan - over $2 billion in aid Pakistan - $3 billion in aid forgiving debts to Iraq and Pakistan, and encouraging Euro countries to do the same BEFORE BUSH --- Iraq - nothing Afghanistan - nothing Pakistan - nothing no debt relief to any Muslim countries Dragon ---- Last I checked, I believe that 18+2+3 is MUCH more than 2 ---- if you wanna boil it down to an argument of who gets more, between the Muslim World and Israel, then Bush is clearly your man If you still hate Bush, then I would challenge you to defend Kerry's 100% Israeli voting record, along with Edwards' And lastly, you questioned that he's the most Pro-Palestinian President ever, however, you did not argue against ANY of my earlier points....... instead, you settled to end your argument with 'how much are you getting paid to say this' Let's put it this way ---- the amount I'm getting paid is equivalent to the amount of points that you refuted against my argument.... being that you did not even bother to refute any of my points, and settled for personal insults..... well..... you do the math ;)
November 5, 2004 8:02pm
I see your point about supporting both parties but this time Muslims were determined to see Kerry in power and each vote in the US counted despite our electoral system. Granted, when it does come for us to get our voices across, Bush and his croonies won't want to listen to us because we did not vote for him. But still, it's not like he did much for Muslims in general. A visit to a mosque and calling "Islam a religion of peace." That's all lip service. Courting the Republican Party might be beneficial; after all what better way to get the people who don't agree with to do something you want unless you scratch their back? Yes, I don't think we should do say away from them which is very different from voting for them. I will make a confession here, I do support Kay Granger, a Republican here in Texas because she has done an excellent job for the city I live in. I also did support a Republican Judge with whom I worked (helped in his campaign) because he was the better candidate. He might one day run for Governor of Texas. The point is that these are the exception to the rule of current day Republican candidates. These people I support are liberals in Republican suits ;)
November 2, 2004 1:40am
Basically Bush winning would be good for me personally, being a physician. But morally I can never support Bush, let alone use less than honest means to get other people's support for him.
November 2, 2004 1:44am
My uncle was killed in Iraq under Bush and his war waged under false pretenses. If you have ANY respect for any of the dead or dying, you would vote against Bush. If you have ANY respect for those still alive who live under the constant fear of death, you would vote against Bush. But you have no respect. On top of it all, you have the audacity to claim that more people would have died under Saddam's regime. My uncle was alive for a good 15 years living in Iraq under Saddam. His life was never threatened. It's only when your beloved Bush entered the picture that he was shot down on his doorstep in front of his wife and 4 kids. My uncle's blood and the blood of the thousands of other Iraqi civilians is on Bush's hands, whether directly or indirectly. And you still insist on voting for him. You should be ashamed of yourself. And as a side note, as a Palestinian, I am offended and appalled by your response to Tariq: {Okay.... that above statement had ZERO analysis of how Bush's policy is bad for Palestine.... rather, it had an attack against me, and a 'claim' by BBC.... why don't you look into the Palestine-Israel issue and get back to me on it} You don't need to be as big of an idiot as Bush himself to see how ANY kind of support for Sharon and Israel is bad for Palestine. I suggest you wake up out of your little dream world and face reality.
November 2, 2004 2:28am
You got your interview. You said what you wanted to say. People are going to write comments... that's the purpose of this little section. You are not impressing anyone by defending your previous statements with repetition. Some words come to mind... let it go. If you're going to put yourself out there and go against an idea that's 89% popular, why are you so shocked that you're getting negative feedback? I fail to see the patience and maturity that you claim to have had when your stand got bashed as ISNA. Have some dignity, man... this is why everyone is upset with your interview. Your behavior is supporting the claims that you are inexperienced, immature, and have no right being interviewed on this site. Stop acting like a child because not everyone likes you. -Ohms- Tomorrow should prove to be an exciting day.
November 2, 2004 3:15am
Hassandaddy, Unfortunately tariqf is merely obfuscating in the entire matter (maybe he has been taken in by election furore)... which is sad because he usually is rather enlightened in his responses. His post addressed to me was quite out of character. His classification of Republicans as "rich whites, right-wing conservative Christian fundamentalists, the NRA, and so on" is another one of those generalizations that have cost us historians so dear. Perhaps the most famous republican president Richard Nixon doesn't fit this profile... he led an administration that was decidely pro-minority ... The Republican Party also has jews, blacks, muslims, women's rights activists, and centre right elements ... and surely the Condoleeza and Collin are not white... ofcourse then there is the extreme right wing christian fundamentalist, the NRA (who Kerry was wooing the other day ironically) ... but they need to be marginalized... I can tell you the best position is the centrist position... so how do you do this ? Should you put all your eggs in one basket and let the Republican Party be dominated by the extreme right instead of the centre right (which is actually the ideological position of most Muslims, though not me ... I think of myself as centre left)... Similarly ... Democrat party has had its share of wackos... look no further than the civil rights era, and some of those who voted against de-segregation and against Lyndon Johnson's initiative, were Southern State democrats... No party or movement is a monolith... that is the real naivety to color something into a monolith. -YLH
November 2, 2004 6:57am
i can't even play into this by giving a long winded response. just read what others have said in reply. i just wanted to bring up something quick. there are soo many other issues as well that indicate why Bush is not the president for us, muslims and americans of all backgrounds. Let's pick Education. What is the best way to control a people? By depriving them of education right? Yes, its very simple, history will show you that. Just look back at the churches to see how they dealt with education among the masses. Anyways, this little thing known as the No Child Left Behind Act is just such a tool, a tool to limit access to education. For who you may wonder, the poor and the minority. And what happens when the poor and the minority are denied education, they continue to be marginalized. Who made the most radical changes to the 1965 Education Act that is now known as the NCLB Act. Changes that are so beautifully disguised in a 1000 page document that even some of today's top civil rights lawyers needed time to digest and process before they fully realized what it was they were reading. The Education act that was passed in 2001, one of the first acts of the year actually, was the work of our wonderful president. Hundreds of thousands of children are suffering because of him, being pushed back to the streets, being denied education, being denied a chance to have a good life. So even if we were to somehow forget about everything else that Bush has done that is detrimental to the world, how can we overlook the work of a man who is punishing students from the 3rd grade to the 12th grade because of their socio-economic status. thats 8 yrs old man. who is fighting for them? not Bush. But I can tell you that Kerry will. Go Vote Today please. And Please just make as informed a decision as possible.
November 2, 2004 2:57am
Tariqf, I am afraid you didn't even try and see the point in my post. Agreed that life under Bush after 9/11 has been gruesome, (though I lived there after 9/11 and didn't see it personally, but I am willing to give everyone a benefit of a doubt)... agreed that Kerry is not in a position to make pro-Muslim statements (I remember the Hillary-AMA fiasco from the year 2000)... agreed that as a Pakistani I know little about your domestic politics (though we do get FOX News out here), but don't you think this enmasse bloc voting will in the end make Muslims suffer? My questions: Did Kerry not vote to wage war on Iraq? Was he not party to passing of the Patriot Act? Will Kerry scrape the Patriot Act if he comes in? Would life have been different had Kerry been in charge in the aftermath of 9/11? Is Kerry not running on a personally conservative agenda? Whats with all the duck-goose hunting and shooting in public all about? I am not asking you to vote for Bush or for Kerry... all I am saying is that vote according to party lines and not imagined emotional issues... Know that Bush and Kerry may differ on some issues, but it is the establishment that decides the real issues, and US has for a long time come under the sway of the neo-con lobby, which will stay whether we have a democrat in the white house or a Republican. What the Muslim community needs to do is establish itself as a political force... join the Republican party or the Democrat Party and then vote according to those divisions instead of guessing who is going to be more pro-Muslim... depend on your inherent strength and trust no one. This is politics.... So while on the face value your selective quote from my post might prove my naivety, your refusal to see the point actually exposes your naivety in the matter. Regards YLH
November 1, 2004 3:56am
Hey folks! Thanks for reading the interview I wanted to share the following link - www.muslimsforbush.com The above link is a message that was sent from GeorgeWBush.com ---- it was sent to 7 million Republican subscribers, including all politicians, RNC members, and grassroots supporters I think it is a wonderful demonstration of Bush's continual committment to American Muslims be well all! Happy voting! MUSLIMS FOR BUSH LOVES YOU ALL!!!!
November 1, 2004 4:02am
I think everyone can agree that neither candidate is anyone that we would like to see in office. With that said, I do understand the accusations you are making about John Kerry, however i personally dont think his actions as a senator can compare to the actions of Bush as a president. Yes Kerry might have voted on certain bills, etc. however he did not have the influence or the power to singlehandedly change laws, go to war, etc ,etc. There can be no doubt about the fact that Bush as a president has more responsibility over what went wrong in the past 4 years. Anyways...thats my 2 cents....
November 1, 2004 4:31am
hasan it's the second time .... ur writing this pro-bush vibe...... whats the matter with u??? do u really want us to believe in some interviews????? do u think they really mean what they say in those interview... i just hope one day they deport u and send u to iraq... then u would see why we living outside ur bushy lil world.... feel bad about ur dear friend mr.bush!!!!
November 1, 2004 4:35am
its funny that someone who supports bush should have play with facts just as much... -i know for a fact that kerry has had muslim staffers(i know one personally) -dont forget about guantenamo(sp?), yasser hamdi, john walker lyndh -check out amnesty int'l reports about CIA prisons and interrogations in Iraq(there are still quite a few ppl unaccounted for) -bush handed "our policy" on israel/palestine completely over to ariel sharon by the way, he still didnt answer satisfactorily why this isnt a Hasan's for Bush party? also for your own sake, get a new picture up there chief, this one looks kinda ridiculous In short, hey we appreciate your bumbling attempts to make a name for yourself politicaly but we're fine really. Find something else to do with the play money. Go make some more movies, buy a yacht, maybe a world tour. I dont know, but I can be certain theres better ways of spending money and time.
November 1, 2004 4:46am
Yeah, trying to invade as many Muslim countries as possible just shows the strong committment to American Muslims (or Muslims in general).
November 1, 2004 6:07am
The Election news has become rather entertaining recently. I did watch parts of the debates. Anyone can beat the incumbent in them. Due to American stances on supporting dictatorial regimes that suppress democratic institutions from taking root, it doesnt really matter who wins in that sense. But there is another aspect to this election that does sway me toward one side. Recently read about the tours of legendary musicians Bruce Springsteen, Pearl Jam, REM and the Dave Mathews Band among others. They all want Bush out! And they are supporting Kerry to help bring about that outcome. I recall (though vaguely) an interview of Bruce Springsteen a couple of years ago on ABC. Elegant, intellectual, quite, down-to-earth, and tremendously talented are the words that come to mind. I dont want to place any significant meaning in it, but unlike the long-hair, drug-addicted stereotypical rockers, it is someone like Bruce Springsteen who is the real soul of rock music. One can even go further and say that Springsteen has in him the soul of America and its possibilities. That we now see these living music legends come out and take a political stance means way too much for me. It makes the choice so much easier...and obvious. I mean, there is no contest between choosing a politician or musicians like the above! Heck, I cant even open my mouth to make the case for a politician in this case! Whether the musicians succeed in swaying the votes or not is irrelevant. Theyve openly come out and stated their case. As one recalls their songs, they reveal the words that carried their message on the backs of notes. Weve heard them, sung them, been inspired by them and they have helped us form a more tolerant view of the world. The current activist political stance of the musicians seems to be a natural corollary of that music.
November 2, 2004 8:05am
cough cough...DON'T VOTE FOR BUSH....cough cough
November 2, 2004 8:21am
www.bushrelativesforkerry.com
November 1, 2004 9:25am
Dear Ali Hassan, Don't mind your detractors. Unfortunately Muslims are a herd of sheep really... and I am really sorry to use this phrase... I was part of the 2000 as a member Gore/Leiberman Campaign, and every Muslim without exception if I was a sell out. Now it is the other way around. The fact of the matter is that as things stand, Bush is better for the US and the world than Kerry... he is better for Muslims as well... but once again Muslims have put all their eggs in one basket... Muslim vote is so cheap for the Americans... Kerry has not taken a single stance that seems to favor any Muslim issue, yet a whoppin' 89% have decided to vote in his favor... because of their supposed disenchantment with Bush, who in 2000 was the best thing to happen for the Muslim community supposedly. My advice for American Muslim voters: ... vote on issues, rather emotional rhetoric... forget what appeals your community leaders are making... vote as Americans and according to your own ideals... that is what will count in the next 4 years... as for Iraq... Kerry will be as big a disaster as Bush if not worse... -YLH
November 2, 2004 8:22am
Hassandaddy means well I think, but he knows squat about politics, local or geo. I guess that is what an Occidental/Chapman education gets you.
November 1, 2004 10:36am
Sorry Brother Hassan, you really didnt answer the questions. You haven't heard of visas being refused, innocent people locked up. Ummmm Tariq Ramadhan, Yusuf Islam ring a bell. I personally know of several Muslims who were held on green card violations, treated so harshly compared to other green card violators (non-Muslim). So to say that the Patriot act has been inacted responsibly is just false. I am not one to support Democrats just because. I definitely agree with Republicans on some issues (health care, support of small busines, lower taxes) and I do hate that Muslims only make decisions based soley on foreign policy issues when there are other domestic issues at hand. That being said, the invasion of Iraq is one of the big reasons I do not like the current administration. Putting innocent American and Iraqi lives at stake just because Neo-cons have this vision of revamping the Middle east in the image of WWII Germany and for the protection of Israel. I can't see how a Muslim can look at this invasion and want to support the President. I know Kerry is not much better. He is a politician and is just going to do what it takes to keep his job. But I dont believe a Democrat would have taken us into this disatarous war. And of course for those true conservatives, Bush's out of control spending, tax cuts when we are at "war", huge deficit. I just dont see how anyone, can support Bush, especially a Muslim.
November 1, 2004 10:57am
I never heard Kerry speak of punishing Pakistan or doing the other things you talk about. I never voted for Bush last time either so I am not following the herd. I am voting on issues. On domestic and foreign policy I believe Kerry is better. Before he even spoke in the debates, I believed that the Bush administration used too much of American resources to fuel the war in Iraq, and a not so precise war on terrorism. Kerry spoke more to this point. I am concerned that Kerry isn't vocal about independant states for Palestine or Kashmir, but I think he is more passive on issues concerning Muslim countries. When naseeb asked him about Palestine he said the exact same thing as Bush - he wants a Palestinian state under a leader who is truly committed to stopping terrorism. Both of them want to protect Israel, but Kerry is very conscious of the large porportion of Jewish Democrats. Bush is conscious of the large number of Muslims who voted for him. Kerry is someone, who if elected, we have to keep in constant dialogue with. I Think it is a positive sign that he changes his position b/c it indicates a willingness to learn. Finally, I like the left leaning democratic party more. It has a social ideology that is strong and does not only include partnerships with rich people. America did better under Clinton. The problem is how they deal with Muslim countries - Bush administration is aggressive whereas the Democrats have been passive, preferring sanctions and delaying war.
November 1, 2004 11:18am
Why did everyone vote for Bush in 2000? Because Lieberman (a Jew) was running on the other ticket. We didn't have our fingers crossed thinking that Bush was the best thing that ever happened. We just feared that the Muslim world would have suffered worse if Gore had been elected. You can consider that the behavior of a herd of sheep, but most would consider it justified. I think that most Muslims are voting for Kerry for the same reasons. There have only been pro-Muslim words from this president. I have yet to see any promising gestures. He says that Islam is a religion of peace, but he obviously doesn't believe it. The only reason the administration is sympathetic to Pakistan is because Pakistan is cooperating. America did the same thing years ago, but when they had no use for Pakistan anymore, they were tossed aside. You can say that the world is a better place without Saddam, but you are being foolish if you think the means of extraction were justified. Muslim countries are being targeted. Of course we're going to hate him. Do you think that he did the Iraqi people a favor? He has wreaked havoc on the Muslim world since 9/11. He is allowing Israel to erect a wall much like the one we asked Gorbachev to tear down not so long ago. Kerry would probably allow the erection of the wall as well, but don't tell me that Bush is trying to help the Palestinians. If he were so concerned, why has he allowed Israel to continuously shell refugee camps? The Muslim countries he sends aid to didn't need them before he dropped bombs on them. If he were to get the majority of the Muslim vote, what kind of message would we be sending? Please send more bombs? Please draw some blueprints of my native country? -Ohms-
November 1, 2004 11:35am
Khuda Hafiz Bush Sahib:)
November 1, 2004 11:44am
Sadeya, I didn't mention Pakistan at all... infact I will say that Pakistan is the least of our worries. I personally don't care if Bush wins or Kerry wins really... but what bothers me is that Kerry hasn't said or done substantially different from Bush, and yet 89% of the Muslims are ready to vote for him simply because they hate Bush... It is the team that matters. I don't see too many enlightened faces in the democrat camp right now... infact too many democrats seem to be confused and without a clear agenda about the world. Bush and Kerry are immaterial... my question is: who will replace Christina Rocca? or Collin Powell?? Sure we want to see Ashcroft leave... but still are we ready for the alternatives? The Muslims of America are about to take a plunge once more. All I am saying is that don't vote on your perceived position of Bush/Kerry wrt the world of Islam... Be a democrat or Republican... vote according to your conscience, because in foreign policy vis a vis the Muslim world it is only going to be downhill.
November 1, 2004 1:06pm
I completely agree with Hamdani - if you are going to vote, vote on issues that matter to you domestically. Foreign-policy wise, it will not make much of a difference, apart from perhaps a more inclusive and coalition building approach. But there will certainly not be much difference at all with respect to 'Islamic' issues as both leaders have yet to demonstrate clear blue water between them. I personally loathe Bush for many reasons (Iraq, stemcell research, civil liberties etc) but at least you know unequivocally where he stands on these issues. There will be less double-talk. But all the same, PLEASE vote Kerry!!! Muslimmomma: the UK elected a centre-left Government in 1997. If you would have said to most people in this country that our Prime Minister would lead us into an illegal war they would have thought you were mad. But this is what happened, such is politics.
November 1, 2004 1:07pm
People need to remember that there were going to be strong repurcussions post 9/11 despite whoever was in office at the time. And all of you people are ignoring the fact that Kerry is seeking to marginalize American Muslims for generations to come....basically devaluing us. Kerry plans on attacking Iran, strengthening the Patriot Act, and further pumping Israel......which means hes not such a great candidate after all! Muslims pretty much seem to ignore good strategy every time. I think its great that there is strong muslim representation in ALL parties....this is better for American Muslims overall...Our play should be sought in every American political arena. Oh, by the way, if Dennis Miller, Bill O'reiley, PBS, NPR and the BBC think Ali is worth an interview, than I dont think Naseeb vibes should mind too much. ;D
November 1, 2004 1:11pm
I think it is a little idealistic to expect either of the candidates to say something about these countries, particularly before the election. It would be like handing dynamite to the oppostion...
November 1, 2004 1:26pm
Let me explain why Bush should not be voted back. Mr. Ali, are you telling all of us that it is news to you that human rights were not infringed, or innocent people were captured and were not allowed to seek help from the courts because they were in detained in Cuba, or the fact that under Bush a war was declared in Iraq when we had a chance to stop the maniac like Usama Bin laden from destroying inncoent lives. Are you telling us that the human rights record or the environmental record of this administration is news to you. Are you telling us that you have no news of muslims being attacked during Bush's administration. I am surprised to see that a Muslim living in America is oblivious to what is really happening around him. If you wanna do some good go and help people who deserve help rather than marketing yourself and your stupid site. You must be either really ignorant or arrogant (not much difference there anyway). by the way tell me how rich are you? Because usually the rich have no sense of where the world is going. And one last thing, telling people that Pakistan will get F-16s from Bush is a pipe dream. First those F-16 are paid for and he will not do any ehsaan to Pakistan and secondly if he was going to give Paksiatn the planes he should have done that a long time ago. So stop worrying about Bush and how you will finally have to pay more taxes. Remember this is not Pakistan where rich people and politicians wnna-be like you are sucking everyone's blood. This is America....
November 1, 2004 1:26pm
dude ashcroft is not the only rotten apple on that tree...rumsfeld, rice, cheney. The only one worth keeping is powell and he looks as if hes going to have a nervous breakdown any moment. They really broke his spirit. i think richard clarke and wes clrak would make excellent cabinet members. its definitely a possibility. Now youre the one who's simply running from the unexplored option hamdani. I think the muslim world is really beggining to hit a turning point right now. After Beslan, media are actually dencouncing terror. There is a change happening. The question is whether this change is allowed to nurture in a favorable environment (kerry's diplomacy) or curtailed (bush/cheney/rumsfeld's war-mongering)
November 1, 2004 1:29pm
Muslims for Bush want for us to forget the curtailing civil liberties by this administration but its not gonna be as simple as falsely stating that only ONE Muslim has been affected by the Patriot Act. This statement is complete manipulation of the truth, something that underlies the complete foundation of the Bush Administration. Youd have to be completely mindless not to realize this tyrant administration that Bush runs is on the verge of Fascism. Everything Bush says is composed of lies to achieve political gain without consideration of any repercussions he might face. Since when did leading a nation allow you to be completely indifferent to decent moral principles? Muslims for Bush are a bunch of serve only to enforce Pro-Pakistani propaganda at the risk of ensuring another four years of this downward spiral for the people of the US. Its this kind of nationalism that is tearing apart our Muslim Ummah. Even as practicing Muslims, we have a responsibility to the county in which we live. Yes, it might be true that keeping Bush in office further strengthens the Pakistani economy and theres nothing wrong with wanting to see that continue, but I lose respect for that notion when its at the expense of blatant disregard for the wellbeing of Muslims worldwide. Lets not forget the horrendous struggles and appalling living conditions of our brothers and sisters in Iraq, not to mention Palestine. Priorities people. Lets step aside from the ethnocentric view Muslims are known to have and realize what impact voting for Bush is going to have on us simply as Americans. There is no sense behind the Bush administrations $100 Billion budget to overthrow Iraq, not to mention a $400 Billion Military budget YEARLY when we cant afford to pay school teachers decent wages, and cant afford to keep pubic libraries open, or have centralized heating systems available in public schools. Theres a problem when you can find better healthcare programs in 3rd world nations or when police departments have telemarketers call your house to beg for handouts. Dont we all pay taxes? Bush has consistently proven his disregard for the environment, international relations, and liberties of all American constituents- let alone Muslim American constituents. How is the fact that 90% of the rest of the world disagrees with US foreign policy not supposed to mean anything? How are you supposed to trust a leader who succeeded in instilling secrecy and disclosure for the sake of security? Political Leaders arent supposed to be this BAD. Prior to Bush, things were relatively good. If were ever going to regain the reverence that the US somewhat had in the past, it needs to start with getting rid of this baboon. We should hold the leaders of our nation to a higher standard. Not only as American Muslims, but as Americans, and advocates of impartial moral ethics.
November 1, 2004 1:37pm
Muslims for Bush want for us to forget the curtailing civil liberties by this administration but its not gonna be as simple as falsely stating that only ONE Muslim has been affected by the Patriot Act. This statement is complete manipulation of the truth, something that underlies the complete foundation of the Bush Administration. Youd have to be completely mindless not to realize this tyrant administration that Bush runs is on the verge of Fascism. Everything Bush says is composed of lies to achieve political gain without consideration of any repercussions he might face. Since when did leading a nation allow you to be completely indifferent to decent moral principles? "Muslims for Bush" serve only to enforce Pro-Pakistani propaganda at the risk of ensuring another four years of this downward spiral for the people of the US. Its this kind of nationalism that is tearing apart our Muslim Ummah. Even as practicing Muslims, we have a responsibility to the county in which we live. Yes, it might be true that keeping Bush in office further strengthens the Pakistani economy and theres nothing wrong with wanting to see that continue, but I lose respect for that notion when its at the expense of blatant disregard for the wellbeing of Muslims worldwide. Lets not forget the horrendous struggles and appalling living conditions of our brothers and sisters in Iraq, not to mention Palestine. Priorities people. Lets step aside from the ethnocentric view Muslims are known to have and realize what impact voting for Bush is going to have on us simply as Americans. There is no sense behind the Bush administrations $100 Billion budget to overthrow Iraq, not to mention a $400 Billion Military budget YEARLY when we cant afford to pay school teachers decent wages, and cant afford to keep pubic libraries open, or have centralized heating systems available in public schools. Theres a problem when you can find better healthcare programs in 3rd world nations or when police departments have telemarketers call your house to beg for handouts. Dont we all pay taxes? Bush has consistently proven his irresponsibility in dealing with to the environment, international relations, and liberties of all American constituents- let alone Muslim American constituents. How is the fact that 90% of the rest of the world disagrees with US foreign policy not supposed to mean anything? How are you supposed to trust a leader who succeeded in inilling secrecy and disclosure for the sake of security? Political Leaders arent supposed to be this BAD. Prior to Bush, things were relatively good. If were ever going to regain the reverence that the US somewhat had in the past, it needs to start with getting rid of this baboon. We should hold the leaders of our nation to a higher standard. Not only solely as Muslims, but as Americans, and advocates of impartial moral ethics.
November 1, 2004 3:59pm
Well first of all, I agree with the interviewee's plea for Muslims to get more involved in American politics. But I disagree with his views on Bush. There are many incorrect facts stated above (Bush having used the expressions "crusade" and "axis of evil" just once, Muslims being largely undecided, etc.) and other deceptive statements and claims (only one Muslim American CITIZEN--might as well make it Muslim American Citizen Ventriloquist Gymnist to reduce the number further, portraying Kerry as more responsible for the Patriot Act than Bush, Bush's love for Muslims). Also there are many references to the emotionally charged subject of 9/11. In summary it is the same deceptive rhetoric that you hear from Bush/Cheney representetives all the time. As far as reasons not to vote for Bush, there are many. One of the most compelling is that his actions have caused over 100,000 civilian deaths in Iraq (Lancet). That is approximately 35 times the civilian deaths that OBL was responsible for on 9/11. And this person (GWB) is being passed off as a great friend of the Muslims? You can find over 1500 additional reasons not to vote for Bush at this web site: www.thousandreasons.org
November 1, 2004 4:16pm
Salams Gang, Neither candidate has me sold on their stance on foreign policy, thus it comes down to the lesser of 2 eveils for us as muslims unfortunately. Yes, we all did vote for Bush cuz of the fears of having Lieberman only a heartbeat away...at that point, we did vote for the lesser of the 2 evils then as well. So this year, we have Bush and Kerry...and although Kerry is not particularly great for muslims, he can't be much worse than what Bush has proven to be. In an ideal world, Nader would be the man to vote for, but since that would only take votes away from Kerry as it did in 2000 taking away votes from Gore, we have to vote for Kerry and pray that he's not nearly as bad as his predecessor...oh how I miss Bill:)
November 1, 2004 4:53pm
...and some other improbable groups: Jews for Hitler Troops for Sadam Zionists for Palestine Franklin Graham for Islam Muslims for Sharon 9-11 Families for Osama Neocons for Kerry Ali Hasan for the Truth about Bush
November 1, 2004 5:58pm
Do u even know that: President Bush thinks that God talks to him in the White House and it was God that asked him to get rid of Saddam Hussein??
November 1, 2004 6:25pm
Bush and his gang are all a bunch of nutcases if you ask me. they hav a warped sense of the world and believe that might is right. they use fear to make the US population accept wotever decisions they want to make. the war on terror is a pretext, because any person with common sense can see that carrying out such controversial wars can only lead to more hate of america. Please americans, wake up and vote this guy out!
November 1, 2004 8:09pm
"Oftentimes, we live in a processed worldyou know, people focus on the process and not results." Bush, speaking on the Middle East peace process Source: Public Papers of the Presidents, "Interview With Print Journalists," June 2, 2003 "I said you were a man of peace. I want you to know I took immense cr*p for that." Bush, speaking to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon Source: Washington Post, "Bush Sticks to the Broad Strokes," Glenn Kessler, June 3, 2003 "The consultation process is a positive part of really allowing people to fully understand our deep concerns about this man, his regime and his desires to have weapons of mass destruction. Last questionand then I've got to go chip and putt for a birdie. It was a good drive." Bush, interrupting an Aug. 10 golf game in Waco, Texas, for a Q & A discussing possible U.S. military action against Iraq. Source: The Washington Post, "White House Veteran to New Guy: Oh, Beha-aaa-ave!," Lloyd Grove, Aug. 13, 2002 "The world is more peaceful and more free under my leadership." Source: The Boston Globe, Oct. 29, 2003 It's obvious. Bush just wants your vote. What in substance has he done for the Muslim world? The peace process is in shambles, according to recent reports 100,000 people have died in Iraq and in this country many American citizens have been detained under the Patriot Act. Though Kerry has not embraced the Muslim vote, at least we know that he isn't wooing Muslims just to get their vote. Perhaps in order to give respect to Muslims in American and abroad he has appeal to the masses now in order to get into the office that will allow him to make a difference for the Muslim community here and abroad. It is called political strategy. Politicians are tricky, don't fall into the trap.
November 1, 2004 8:52pm
I think its great that 89% of Muslims are voting for Kerry. Not because I think Kerry is great or will be any better, but if he wins because of Muslim votes, that in itself will speak volumes for the next election. Getting politically involved and eventually getting what you want takes time. Muslims just have to keep at it and in another decade or so, Presidential ccandidates will start catering to our needs as well.
November 1, 2004 9:36pm
Hamdani, your comments ("Muslims are a herd of sheep really") reek of haughty disdain for Muslims. Muslims in America have lived in the Patriot act and have every right to vote for the candidate and Party who they feel will safeguard their civil liberties. Since you have not lived through this, it's a bit unfair of you to insult them for choosing the candidate that they have chosen. People. Let's stop and think for a second. The argument that "Kerry has not taken a single stance that seems to favor any Muslim issue" smacks of a complete lack of understanding of domestic politics in this country. Does anyone here WATCH Fox News? Anyone who is living in the U.S. now and watches the media knows d*mn well that Kerry can't too eagerly court the Muslim/Arab vote without quickly finding himself the subject of insinuations that he is 'weak on terror' - a ridiculous notion that Americans already seem to oddly believe. Politicians are, by definition, limited in what they can say. That is the REALITY - get used to it and start being insightful and looking DEEPER at the parties and the surrounding personalities. One party's base is comprised of not just whites, but blacks, jews, indians, asians, gays/lesbians, native americans, and other diverse communities. It is also comprised of academics and civil rights activists and academics. The other is comprised of rich whites, right-wing conservative Christian fundamentalists, the NRA, and so on. GEE UHH ... I wonder which one will be more likely to protect the rights of us, Muslims, a minority group in the U.S. who is clearly not in favor now? Forget the Bush spin and just do the math! Think critically about this. It's not that hard. Ali Hasan's article is so intentionally misleading on some stats ("one citizen victim of patriot act") that it's clear to me that he doesn't think critically about issues, analyze evidence, and then come to a conclusion. Rather, he reaches his conclusion first ("Bush is good"), and then grasps to distort every stat possible to support that conclusion.
November 2, 2004 9:33am
Dear Sadaf, First of all I am not part of the Muslims for Bush nor am I republican ideologically or otherwise. If anything the only party I have been part of in the US is the Democrat Party in the 2000 elections. Once again, because there are a bunch sensitive egos out here, you have assumed that I am canvassing for Bush. All I am saying is that for you people (Muslim Americans) one thing is certain... America is a two party democracy, and the hatred and bigotry that you face transcends party line. Please refer to the antics of one Frank Pallone from New Jersey who is a democrat congressmen, especially those that aim to target Muslims. You are going back to Lincoln... I mentioned Nixon who was 30 odd years ago... Republican Party is not a monolith, just like Democrat party is not a monolith. It can be argued that currently the extreme right wing has come out on top but that does not make the Republican party as a whole a reactionary party.... It is still the party of Senator McCain, Jeff Johnson, and Collin Powell... This is by no means a pitch for Republican Party... what I am trying to say is that Muslims should not just become part of one party, but should as an organized attempt, become part of both, which will mean that regardless of whatever party that wins, Muslims will have a voice in the Government... Simply: Don't put your eggs in one basket. -YLH
November 1, 2004 10:28pm
Tariq - with all due respect, you have failed to isolate a single point that I have taken out of context To address your concerns 1. Yes, we should be concerned over Kerry and the Patriot Act because he wrote the bill, fought for it, and voted for it Now, Kerry wants to STRENGTHEN the Patriot Act, beyond what even President Bush wants it to be --- look here for the info - www.muslimwakeup.com 2. Yes, there currently is only ONE American Muslim citizen being held under the Patriot Act, with secret evidence If you know of other Muslim suspects being held, then you are confusing them as being held under Military Tribunal, with evidence --- there's a difference between the two ------ Personally, with his lack of outreach, and his wanting to strengthen the Patriot Act, to me, John Kerry is worse on civil rights In addition, President Bush has said he's against internment camps, but Kerry has not said he's against it here's a link for that - www.muslimwakeup.com So Tariq --- please clear up YOUR OWN facts before accusing me of not thinking critically of the issues, analyzing them properly, and coming to a solid conclusion Kerry voted against aid to Afghanistan Kerry voted against aid to Iraq Kerry voted for war against Afghanistan Kerry voted for war against Iraq Kerry wrote the Patriot Act Kerry wants to strengthen the Patriot Act Kerry has not recognized Palestine Kerry wrote the bill to sanction Syria Kerry wants to punish Pakistan ---in contrast--- Bush gave $18 billion to Iraq Bush gave $2 billion to Afghanistan Bush gave $1.5 billion to Pakistan Bush has recognized Palestine (and promised them aid) Bush reduced Israel's aid from $2 billion to $4 billion game.set.match you analyze the above and tell me about your 'conclusion'
November 2, 2004 9:35am
Bismillah This message is directed to Mr. Bush and every member of the Skull and Crossbones society. After today you will or will not be President. I pray you won't be. Allah Hu Alam. But today I come for Geronimo the red holy father. I come in his name because you Mr. Bush still have his skull along with Pancho Villa's skull. Mr. President you claim to fight "terrorism," all over the world and yet you refuse to condemn your grandfather for the crimes he committed towards Guyateh and his people. You call Falasteeni, Iraqi, Chechen, people "Terrorists," for the killing of innocents. But did not your grandfather do the same? Who are you to judge Mr. President? Sir, I call you to remember the evil of Prescott Bush for the murder of tomb-guardians at Guyateh's place of rest. Then the subsequent robbery of his skull by you who created the secret society. . CALL TO MIND MR BUSH: of the evil deed that was done and you still proudly proclaim. IF THE ENTIRE WORLD FORGETS WHAT YOU DID TO OUR RED FATHER I WILL NEVER!!!!!!!! Return it back Family of Bush. Remember Skull and Crossbones, every skin who reads this walks with me against you. I AM NOT ALONE. Why do you still perform your sick, sadistic, juvenile, demonic, rituals on the skull of the red father??????? What do you gain by such things? Do you ever think of Geronimo's family? How they have suffered in silence for over 80 years? Only because you continue to dishonor his memory? YOU COULD NEVER KILL HIM IN REAL LIFE SO NOW THIS IS WHAT YOU DO? YOU ARE COWARDS SKULL AND BONES. I ask you Mr. Bush, with respect and humility, because of being Muslim, How would u like your grandfather's skull to be treated in the same fashion? How would you like strangers to urinate on the skull of Prescott Bush as you with the skull and bone do? DO NOT ANSWER ME, ANSWER THE APACHE PEOPLE. Answer the Chirikawa nation. Ask the people who make prayer to Youlsun EVERYDAY to bring back his skulls back. You kow where they are. Please do not say I am speaking false things. You know this is truth. You know where the skulls of both Pancho Villa and Geronimo. I call to your mind Mr. Bush the verses of scripture you read just LAST SUNDAY: "You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me," Repent Mr. Bush. I ask you to repent in the same way I told your man Donald Rumsfeld last he came here for the crimes you still commit. Ask him if I speak wrongly. TAKE THESE WORDS TO MR. BUSH AND ASK IF I AM SPEAKING WRONGLY. Mr. Bush: We call on you to remember favors the original peoples of this land gave to you IN 1854, 1868, 1905, 1918, 1921, AND LASTLY 1936. Is this how you repay people who helped you? But your fathers AND mothers betrayed. Return back what is not yours. Return to the sacred grounds what your grandfather took and U still hide. MR BUSH AND YOUR FAMILY, I call on you with respect to end your evil practices against the family of the Guyakala chief. Let him rest. Let his skull find peace rested in lands of four rivers. In the land where the mountains are grey. Where blue stones are holy. Let his skull be laid to rest next to his wife and children, whom you know he loved dearly. Yolsun has not forgotten the cries of Geronimo. For Yolsun has manifested them into this form. Red is East, Blue is West, Black, is North and Yellow is South. YOU WHO FOLLOW THE SKULL AND BONE. REMEMBER: MUHAMMAD'S ARMY IS MARCHING ON MECCA WITH 10,000. Remember and repent before it is too late.I come in Geronimo's spirit and in his name.
November 2, 2004 1:46pm
stop talking about the jews this or that, we need to focus on our community and the ideals of our community. i want a president who puts education first, who holds big business acountable, who protects the environment and who can think with his brain before his gun.
November 2, 2004 2:56pm
Just because many people are voting for Kerry doesn't mean its blind. I was a democrat in 2000 and I am a democrat now. We've had four years to see what Bush can do. Here is why I am for Kerry: 1. He's the most liberal Senator - 2. He changes positions - meaning he is teachable and not as stubborn as Bush. He learned from the Vietnam war and became anti-war at that time too. 3. I prefer his stance on Iraq and it is in accord with points one and two. 4. He is concerned with healthcare for all and a better US economy instead of fueling an expensive, imprecise war 5. He has the exact same stance on Palestine as Bush does. You can read it on his Naseeb vibe. 6. Civil rights and immigration haven't been fine. With any president, Muslims would have to raise their issues independantly. In fact, the first one I heard say "Let's not forget our American Muslim Brothers and Sisters" after 9/11 was Al Gore. Clinton also was the first one to have an Eid Dinner in the White House. 7. Kerry is the closest thing to Ralph Nader or Howard Dean. 8. Bush has been stubborn and short sighted. Although he may be sincere in his values and Christian beliefs, he has been pretty closed to the views of the international community, the Democratic opposition to the war on Iraq, and to the advice of experts on whether to wage a war. This amounts to a degree of self-righteousness, which is the trend with right wingers. Hamdani I wasn't even referring to your response, I was referring to the article above. Don't be threatened by lil ol' me.:)
November 1, 2004 11:12pm
i hope bush wins, and i hope he cheats to win too.
November 1, 2004 11:14pm
While it is true that John Kerry wrote some of the parts of the Patriot Act dealing with money laundering, he wanted stricter oversight of aspects of the Patriot Act that threatened civil liberties. The parts of the Patriot Act that Kerry wants to strengthen are things like information sharing between different intelligence agencies, not the parts that infringe on civil rights such as the right to privacy and due process. In fact he wants to reform these things. The need for reform has become especially apparent after the Bush administration, especially Bush's attorney general John Ashcroft, have extensively abused the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act can be thought of like a gun, which in its present form can be used for good or evil. Bush's administration has used it for evil quite a bit. Kerry wants to modify it so it is a stronger weapon for good, and harder to use for evil purposes. Just on a personal note, when I moved to the U.S in the early 80's, we used to hear scary things about the "evil" Russians--things like, in Russia, people can have their phones tapped, and people can be arrested without any apparent cause. I do not know if that was ever a reality in the Russia of 20 years ago, but unfortunately, under the Bush administration, that has become a reality in the present-day U.S.
November 1, 2004 11:23pm
The claims Mr. Hasan puts forth are completely misleading--for ex. he's right that only one person has been put in jail because of the Patriot Act--only one person was put in jail, because all the others that were held and detained were NOT GUILTY! Countless Muslims have been profiled in a racist fashion--subjected to harassment and interrogation--only to be shown to be completely innocent. I find it extremely offensive, that Mr. Hasan can turn around and laud this as a success of the Bush administration--this belittles the suffering the community has experienced under Bush. The racist profiling the Bush government has undertaken--putting innocents in jail--and later coming back to say that the Muslim community was not hurt by the Patriot act--is the precise reason we should no longer have him in office. He's dishonest, and he deals in dishonest politics.
November 1, 2004 11:36pm
Even though I've lost all most all hope of any sort of decency from most of the people posting on naseeb, after my last encounter with a very rude sister. But here goes, for the first time in your lives vote for who you think is right dont let these lobbyist who have much to gain and little to lose tell you what to do. Common for once dont be a cliché, Mullah says dont vote for Bush you vote for Kerry, Hassan says vote for bush and tells you some stuff so you vote for Bush. Be an individual do what you think is right, put your own mind to the task. Push for individuality rather than mass confusion. The most important aspect of all this is that you vote doesnt matter for whom as long as at the end of the day you can say you did the right thing. Let it be known tomorrow if you already havent.
November 2, 2004 12:02am
HasanDaddy - to briefly respond, I did actually isolate a point that you used deceptively, and that was the point about the number of people who are victims of the Patriot Act, in which you cunningly said "Americans" knowing well that that leaves all sorts of Muslims on green cards/visas in the U.S., as well as Muslims from other countries (Britain, other European countries, and God help the ones from Muslim countries). I know PERSONALLY two people whose rights were infringed directly by the Patriot Act. They weren't Americans. So what? You can defend it how you want but it's a ridiculous point and apparently everyone else posting here thinks so too. But more importantly, the rest of your points are honestly a complete joke. Even Bush's campaign wouldn't attempt to trick Muslims with such complete nonsense. Let's see: -Bush "gave $18 billion to Iraq". Gee HasanDaddy, did you forget to mention that they killed 100,000 civilians? Nothing is free, huh? -"Kerry wrote the Patriot Act" ... uhh yeah, somehow that seems a bit deceptively written, don't you think? First you argue he wrote a "portion" of it, then he just "wrote it" (implying he was THE main author). Is this seriously a joke? No, no seriously? Is it? What part did he write? And furthermore, anyone who knows a tiny bit about law knows fully well that laws can be interpreted and enforced in different ways -- Kerry has repeatedly made the point that the Patriot Act can be enforced in NON-Ashcroft way such that it does not impede as grossly on civil liberties. -"Bush reduced Israel's aid from $2 billion to $4 billion" - how do you reduce something from a smaller number to a greater one? Good work, Ali Hasan. That's the Bush math that led to "tax cut and spend" and the largest deficit buildup in US history. -"Kerry voted against aid to Iraq". That is the blatantly idiotic argument on the $89 billion aid package that Bush uses on a daily basis. Kerry voted for it when it was being paid for by a repeal of the tax cuts for the rich. When the funding for the bill was changed such that it was NOT being paid for by a tax cut, Kerry voted against in protest (and I fully support that). It was not meant against Iraq, but against Bush protecting his precious tax cuts for the rich. -To you, "Kerry is worse on civil rights". That's why the ACLU supports him right HasanDaddy, because he's worse on civil rights? GET A LIFE! -"Bush has recognized Palestine". If you think that Bush's policy (described as "unquestioning support for Sharon" by the BBC) can considered as kind to the Palestinians, so much so that it's a selling point to Muslim voters, you smoke crack. -"Kerry voted for the war on Iraq". Kerry was with the 70% of Americans misled by NOT just CIA evidence, but more importantly DOCUMENTED efforts by the Whitehouse and Pentagon to distort, hide, suppress, and manipulate evidence to support the case for war. And by the way - why is that a weakness for Kerry and not for your commander-in-chief who spearheaded the effort? Does ANYONE in the country honestly make the point that the mess in Iraq should not be blamed on Bush but rather on one individual senator who, like most of the rest, was misled into voting for the war? Does even Fox News try to make such a ludicrous jump? Ali Hasan, this is ridiculous, and you know it, I know it, and everyone reading this knows it. I could go on all day, but some of us have jobs, and all of your points were just as incomplete, misleading, and foolish as the five or six I quoted above. It's not worth my time. In fact, it's not worth ANYONE'S time. The real issue here is that it is completely ridiculous that Naseeb thinks that this should have been an interview. They got Kerry, and once Bush couldn't be bothered instead they got ... a 24 year old with NO qualifications WHATSOEVER and NO BASIS for offering any kind of election insight? Is this some kind of joke? Game.Set.Match. The only reason that this article didn't get rated one star is that it can't be rated because it's an "interview".
November 2, 2004 12:46am
-"Bush reduced Israel's aid from $2 billion to $4 billion" - how do you reduce something from a smaller number to a greater one? Good work, Ali Hasan. That's the Bush math that led to "tax cut and spend" and the largest deficit buildup in US history. I am ROLLING on the floor LAUGHING! Thank you for a great laugh in these grimm times. Lets hope Kerry wins tomorrow so I can once again look at the American Flag and salute it. Hoping to see another JFK in the White House soon.
November 2, 2004 1:04am
-----I know PERSONALLY two people whose rights were infringed directly by the Patriot Act. They weren't Americans. So what? We have solicited cases at Muslims For Bush for the entire summer now --- you are most welcome to email me about anyone you know of at MuslimsForBush@mac.com so that we can bring better attention towards it for With regards to the question at hand - you are welcome to check immigration statistics yourself - we have more immigrants from the Muslim world entering the USA today than we did before 911 --- and despite our plea for solicitations, we have not received one - perhaps yours will be the first? -------Bush "gave $18 billion to Iraq". Gee HasanDaddy, did you forget to mention that they killed 100,000 civilians? Nothing is free, huh? You are welcome to agree or disagree on this, but we hold true to the opinion that many more Muslims would have perished, within this war, had Saddam Hussein been kept in power We are talking about a dictator who was responsible for the Iran-Iraq war, an invasion of Kuwait, a coup planning against Pakistan, and lastly, a gassing of Kurdistan --- we should celebrate that he is no longer in power, as his past history has only shown a trial of Muslim bloodshed With regards to the war itself, Kerry voted for the Iraq war and I feel that you are completely overlooking that --------"Kerry wrote the Patriot Act" ... uhh yeah, somehow that seems a bit deceptively written, don't you think? First you argue he wrote a "portion" of it, then he just "wrote it" (implying he was THE main author). Is this seriously a joke? No, no seriously? Is it? What part did he write? He wrote parts that dealt with bank accounts and money laundering.... however, Senator Feingold voted against the Patriot Act --- does it not bother you that Kerry wrote parts of it??? Furthermore, you have ZERO rebuttal for my facts that Kerry wants to STRENGTHEN the Patriot Act -----And furthermore, anyone who knows a tiny bit about law knows fully well that laws can be interpreted and enforced in different ways -- Kerry has repeatedly made the point that the Patriot Act can be enforced in NON-Ashcroft way such that it does not impede as grossly on civil liberties. I already linked an article that shows how Kerry plans to STRENGTHEN the Patriot Act --- and you had ZERO response for it..... Secondly, you actually 'believe' Kerry when he says that??? Once again, Kerry says one thing and means another --- conclusion: he can't be trusted --------"Bush reduced Israel's aid from $2 billion to $4 billion" - how do you reduce something from a smaller number to a greater one? Good work, Ali Hasan. That's the Bush math that led to "tax cut and spend" and the largest deficit buildup in US history. There has not been an American war that didn't have a deficit. History will show that this deficit will be paid off soon. ------"Kerry voted against aid to Iraq". That is the blatantly idiotic argument on the $89 billion aid package that Bush uses on a daily basis. Kerry voted for it when it was being paid for by a repeal of the tax cuts for the rich. When the funding for the bill was changed such that it was NOT being paid for by a tax cut, Kerry voted against in protest (and I fully support that). It was not meant against Iraq, but against Bush protecting his precious tax cuts for the rich. First off, if you wanna get picky with grammar, it was an $87 billion bill --- for someone who tries to know facts all the time, at least you should know that one Second, by saying the above, you are condoning the idea that the Muslim World should only receive American aid, as long as it comes from repeals of a tax cut I disagree with that logic --- I support ANY BILL THAT GIVES AID TO MUSLIM COUNTRIES - ESPECIALLY IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN - because those countries need aid now more than anyone else does However, you think its important to repeal tax cuts, more than it is to support Muslim countries I guess our priorities are different? ------To you, "Kerry is worse on civil rights". That's why the ACLU supports him right HasanDaddy, because he's worse on civil rights? GET A LIFE! You get a life --- I already linked an article that demonstrated Kerry's resolve in STRENGTHENING the Patriot Act --- and you didn't respond to it.... ------"Bush has recognized Palestine". If you think that Bush's policy (described as "unquestioning support for Sharon" by the BBC) can considered as kind to the Palestinians, so much so that it's a selling point to Muslim voters, you smoke crack. Okay.... that above statement had ZERO analysis of how Bush's policy is bad for Palestine.... rather, it had an attack against me, and a 'claim' by BBC.... why don't you look into the Palestine-Israel issue and get back to me on it The fact are that Bush is the ONLY President to officially recognize Palestine Bush got the UN to recognize Palestine Bush has promised aid to Palestine, in the region of $20 billion, once created Bush wants to give total control of the Gaza Strip and West Bank to Palestine Bush wants Palestine to have a capital in East Jerusalem This is a far cry from the Clinton Plan that called for no aid to Palestine and Israeli control of all roads and highways within the Gaza Strip and West Bank Kerry has not even talked about recognizing Palestine --------"Kerry voted for the war on Iraq". Kerry was with the 70% of Americans misled by NOT just CIA evidence, but more importantly DOCUMENTED efforts by the Whitehouse and Pentagon to distort, hide, suppress, and manipulate evidence to support the case for war. And by the way - why is that a weakness for Kerry and not for your commander-in-chief who spearheaded the effort? Kerry was on the Senate Intelligence Committee and his Intelligence reports were the exact same of the White House, if not, more up-to-date --- in addition, Kerry has also said that he would've still voted for the war, even if there were no WMD's - www.wsws.org So if Kerry was so badly mis-led, then why would he STILL vote for the war? -------The real issue here is that it is completely ridiculous that Naseeb thinks that this should have been an interview. They got Kerry, and once Bush couldn't be bothered instead they got ... a 24 year old with NO qualifications WHATSOEVER and NO BASIS for offering any kind of election insight? Is this some kind of joke? Cool off on the hater-aid, Tariq --- you are more than welcome to start your own political group and answer to your own interviews.... no need in criticizing the hard work of one group, when clearly, you could have done it too, but chose not to That is a hater --- and I'm not too fond of haters.... CONCLUSIONS ----- 1. You had NO RESPONSE to my article showing that Kerry wants to STRENGTHEN the Patriot Act 2. You believe that repealing the tax cuts is more important than aid to Iraq and Afghanistan 3. You believe that poor Kerry was misled, when in reality, Kerry would still vote for the war --- so was he still misled? 4. You demonstrated little knowledge of the Palestine-Israel conflict, by defending your argument with a quote from BBC, instead of factual information Waste your time with those points above - You had a chance to answer them before, and you refused
November 2, 2004 1:11am
"Bush reduced Israel's aid from $2 billion to $4 billion" I was never very good at scrabble.....
November 2, 2004 4:53pm
If you want to be deported then vote for me!!!
November 2, 2004 5:49pm
Haji_luv, I'm on the same page as you here. The arguments in this article above are ridiculous to the point that it's a waste of anyone's time to address them. Not even the Bush campaign's chairman himself would suggest that Kerry is MORE to blame than Bush for the Patriot Act because he "wrote it" and "voted for it". Hamdani, you misquoted me - I carefully made the point of NOT saying that all Republicans are "rich white conservatives etc" - but rather that that is their BASE. This is widely accepted and Bush campaign representatives admit as much on national TV so I don't feel bad doing so. Anyway, the wider problem here is not Ali's support for Bush, but rather the misleading/distorting evidence he gives. A reasonable argument CAN probably be made for Muslims supporting Bush. (It might, for example, attempt to argue how Bush's conservative policies on abortion, stem cell, gays, etc are more in line with Islamic religious values). Ali Hasan's, however, is NOT a reasonable argument. It is based on foreign policy distortions and facts that are COMPLETELY taken out of context and mangled. They include abominations such as "Bush gave money to Iraq and Afghanistan -- PERIOD" - as if such money came as regular foreign aid, and was not necessitated by the devastating bombing and invasions that preceded. Since when is foreign aid supposed to come as a quid pro quo for invasion rights? If this is to be considered "supporting the Muslim world" as Ali Hasan wants us to believe, then should Pakistan and other Muslim countries also get in line to be bombed and invaded by the U.S. next so that they can be graced by a little reconstruction aid after? I don't have time to write now because I'm at work but I'll get back to this later tonight ...
November 2, 2004 6:08pm
We know what Bush is capable of so maybe Kerry would be better...Oh wait!! Just because we don't know what he's capable of doesn't mean it won't be worst. Either way, they both suck!!!!! I'd rather not vote then to vote between 2 idiots. GO NADER!!!
November 2, 2004 6:12pm
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE EXIT POLL: 93 PERCENT OF MUSLIMS VOTING FOR KERRY Samplings in Ohio and Florida show overwhelming support (WASHINGTON, D.C., 11/2/2004) - Preliminary results of an exit poll by a prominent national Islamic civil rights and advocacy group indicate that more than 90 percent of Muslim voters are casting their ballots for John Kerry in today's election. In that early survey of 537 Muslim voters, conducted by the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), 93 percent of respondents said they voted for Kerry, 5 percent favored Ralph Nader and less than 1 percent said they supported President Bush. The exit poll exceeds the results of a post-debate CAIR survey indicating that 80 percent of likely American Muslim voters planned to vote for Kerry. Today's poll results are also in line with the American Muslim Taskforce on Civil Rights and Elections - Political Action Committee (AMT-PAC) endorsement of John Kerry. SEE: www.americanmuslimvoter.net In the key battleground state of Florida, a CAIR sampling of 335 Muslims who cast their votes today or in early polling shows that 95 percent voted for Kerry and just 3 percent voted for President Bush. Ralph Nader received under 2 percent of Muslim votes. In Ohio, a similar sampling of 222 Muslim voters showed 86 percent voting for Kerry, 4 percent for Bush and 10 percent for "other" or a third party. "We are seeing an unprecedented level of voter mobilization by the American Muslim community in this election," said CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad. "I believe Muslim voters have come of age and will be a factor in all future elections." Muslims from almost every state responded to the exit poll, with the most responses coming from California, Virginia, Texas, Maryland, Illinois, New York, Florida, and Ohio. Surveys were faxed and e-mailed to Muslim individuals and organizations nationwide this afternoon. In the weeks leading up to the election, CAIR launched a nationwide "Get Out the Muslim Vote" campaign that included phone banks in a number of election centers, distribution of Muslim voter guides and transportation services for Muslim voters. CAIR, America's largest Islamic civil liberties group, is headquartered in Washington, D.C., and has 29 regional offices and chapters nationwide and in Canada. - END -
November 2, 2004 8:03pm
NPR said that when it comes to foreign aid (without strings attached) Europe gives more - see book United States of Europe for more information.
November 2, 2004 8:45pm
I have said this before and I'll say it again, Voting for Bush is a vote against Islam, forget even that, A vote for Bush is a vote against humanity. Muslims for Bush in my opinion is the equivilant of jewish people supporting Hitler. Come on people, wake up! Go Vote and lets get Bush out of office!
November 2, 2004 9:54pm
Even Bono made that point (on Oprah Winfrey)--that the US gives the least in aid amongst developed nations.
November 3, 2004 2:40am
Your family has done a greater disservice to the muslim community than conceivable... and for what? So that you sycophants can be invited to the next white house iftar party once again? I have read some of the articles written by you and your mother on your website and clearly there's a disconnect between your perception and the actual reality. Once the election is over, and your Lord has prevailed, I can only imagine how quickly your family will line up at the trough when the time comes for Bush to reward his vassals. And one more thing...if you have any future aspirations for holding a federal position (and who are we kidding, that is your goal), don't count on the Muslim vote...this moment will surely come to haunt you in the future.
November 2, 2004 11:22pm
The huge contribution solves the mystery of the Muslims for Bush. Since you lean towards facts, the Bush regime has managed to destabilize the MiddleEastern region. If he is voted back, he might successfully destabilize the entire Muslim world.
November 3, 2004 12:51am
We cannot make generalizations about Kerry based on single, specific trival instances and use them to boost/justify Bush instead.
November 3, 2004 3:42am
Alhamidullah brother. Your wishes have been granted. I have been thinking also of the other services Bush has done for the ummah. Could you forget the tons of used weaponry and depleted uranium munitions in Iraq and Afghanistan? These represent a net transfer of US steel to the muslim world! And the uranium ain't no donkey-nuts either. I think it's a service to all those enterprising muslims who want to sell the used laser-guided shell casings and M-16 rifle rounds for the worldwide used metals market. Truly 'tons' of opportunity there. Oh yeah, you just have to be careful not to get in the way of the metal when a GI/marine is firing it. Easy! I am looking forward to more such net transfers of metal (some less-enlightened people call them 'wars'. Pssh.). Four more years of entrepreneurial opportunity. Now thank me for bringing this obscure fact to light.
November 3, 2004 9:36am
what difference could the muslim vote bring when it only represents less than 1% of america?
November 3, 2004 9:56am
us 90% better pray that kerry gets ohio...
November 3, 2004 10:52am
i think your rudeness is unbecoming If Ali wanted blind appeasement of the muslim vote, I doubt he would have started MFB. I think if Ali ever seeks a public office, he will not need the muslim vote....and quite sadly, this election proves that a muslim vote is non-pivotal
November 3, 2004 11:04am
Right-wing Presidents are sometimes the ones that can deliver peace, because the country trusts them wrt security. All may not be lost. At least he has to clean up his own mess now. We can be certain that Iraq is going to get a whole lot more bloody, Iran is next and Syria will be slapped down hard. If all this happens before May then it'll be difficult for Tony Blair. Maybe that is the best we can hope for...? Not that the UK has taken a principled stand on anything, but at least it is recognised here that peace throughout the Middle East is contigent on the Palestinian-Israeli issue being resolved. That may happen with Bush too, as he has no term to protect... But I doubt it. We are in for a rough ride - it's going to get much much worse.
November 3, 2004 6:39am
We'll know for sure in 11 days (that's how long the Ohio votes might take to count). I'm sad, not just for the nation but the rest of the world. And I thought the last four years were miserable.
November 3, 2004 8:18am
Now... according to one report 90+ % of Muslims voted for Kerry... and the democrat party... Any thoughts on what will happen now that there is probably going to be a republican presidency and a stronger republican presence in the Congress? I mean vis a vis Muslims? Shouldn't the Muslims have played both sides?
November 3, 2004 12:24pm
Shazia You are right. A few days ago a high up Iranian official said this: "Despite his wrong policies, Bush is better for the region. A re-election will allow him to finish his projects that he has started" There was obviously a wrong turn... it was in 2000 ... when Muslims voted enmasse for Bush... now they have made another wrong turn by voting as a bloc for Kerry... meanwhile America has chosen the right man for the time... even if Kerry is better as an individual.
November 3, 2004 12:26pm
now that he has won (probably illegaly again...) i just want you to know that you and your mr bush are major douche bags and i think the only station fit to air your dumb commercial is Fox Television.. if you could pass that message on to your new president it'd be much appreciated... and maybe to the people of Iraq too, they must be thinking we're all sell-outs like yourself... i'm going to canada.
November 3, 2004 1:22pm
i hope the hasan family takes accountability for the next 4 yrs of terror, lies, scandals and stands by their puppet master as he wreaks more havoc on the poor world. when your grandkids get asthma from the smog ridden air their breathing, you can tell proudly them as their wheezing that "back in 2004, i did this to you." now, we as american muslims get the worst of it. we're not quite safe at home, nor in muslims countries. but hey, its cool because ali hasan gets to be on tv and look like a jackass. who dresses you boy?! its a sad day for america, and for the world. i cant wait to see that fbi scandal unwrap.
November 3, 2004 1:29pm
wow, looks like you have some teenage hijabi fans! ;D
November 3, 2004 2:47pm
clearly that was the deciding factor in this election. oh, what's that you say? the great majority of Muslims voted for Kerry over Bush? apparently they must not have known about the Palestinian suitemate, or about how Bush has called "Islam a religion of peace", and has a "vision of a Palestinian state". alas that Kerry didn't win, because, acording to a previous Naseeb vibe, Muslims wanted Kerry to win, because "Kerry becoming the president would save Islam".
November 3, 2004 3:05pm
YLH, is impossible to gauge how things like this go. Thank God for human diversity - there needs to be more involvement of Muslims in politics, all across the political spectrum. Any which way to get our message heard. Is ironic though that the thing that appears to have turned the vote according to the preliminary analyses - moral issues - are the very issues that many Muslims and Bush are in complete agreement on.
November 3, 2004 3:24pm
i was just perusing through these talkbacks, and i find them to be rather ironic. when HasanDaddy has his earlier vibe about "Muslims being a swing state", i was here trying to get him to explain why muslims should vote for bush. i was attacked by some of the naseeb people responding. when tariqF had his earlier vibe about why Muslims should vote for kerry, i asked him why muslims should vote for kerry, in a similar fashion as Hamdani here. the ironic part is, Shazia agrees with Hamdani here, but she along with AvaS and Kingriz, all attacked me for it. calling me a "pawn of the Republican" party, a "tool", etc etc. now, Shazia agrees with Hamdani. and, keep in mind, Hamdani is the self professed worshipper of all that is "liberal", "modern", "Westernized", etc. and he is calling the muslim world "sheep" for voting for kerry. and, to top it off, he has gotten into a fight with TariqF, the same guy that Hamdani has been slandering me about regarding my non-existant "religiously fanatical" comments in the aformentioned vibe by TariqF. just a tad bit ironic, wouldn't ya say?
November 3, 2004 3:38pm
Kerry was also a mmber of Skull and Bones at Yale. he was 2 or 3 years of bush at yale. they were in the same group together.
November 3, 2004 3:50pm
details of this in my journal. I think a vote for kerry is a bullet in a palestinian child.
November 3, 2004 4:12pm
Shazia, Which moral issues do you think Bush's policies are in complete agreement with muslims? And which muslims? There is a big difference between beliefs and policies. If we talk about beliefs, then Kerry's are just like Bush's. Maybe some analytical Republican's policies on "moral" issues might have been more in agreement with most muslims, but Bush's would be more in agreement with the OBL's. I think Kerry's approach to even pretty much all the "moral" issues is more moderate and more appealing be it as controversial as abortion, gun control, gay rights and ofcourse war too.
November 3, 2004 5:38pm
I apologize if my comments were rude...they were made last night in a fit of rage after watching the election coverage till 3AM. Yet that doesn't mean i'm retracting the basic ideas conveyed in my previous post. I still think this guy's an idiot for the asinine arguments he poses, not only in this vibes article but on the MFB website (Go look at my JE if you want clarification). And frankly, I don't get what you mean by "blind appeasement of the Muslim vote". I'm sure Hasan will not have to depend on the Muslim vote when (and Im sure that's not an if) he runs for office because he has already proven to his republican overlords where he stands. Look at the way he has phrased some of his remarks: 1. feel free to contact us where we can present that case to the administration 2. So even without the Hasan family, Muslims will always get wonderful things from President Bush. Do you fail to see the arrogance exhibited in these comments? Its disgusting he actually seems to believe that his 2 person organization has the ear of the administration. As if all the good things that bush has done for the muslims (and I really dont know what he is talking about here) is because of the Hasan family. Im sure he would like us to believe this as much as he would like the administration to believe that he and his family represent American Muslimshes nothing but a Desi version of Chalabi.
November 3, 2004 6:38pm
OK, I'm wondering - do I move to Canada which is more richer than Mexico? The problem is I'm not into cold weather. Texas with Republicans and now the whole of the US - President, Congress and Senate? And if Requnist dies and O'Conner leaves....they'll have the judiciary too. That's one hell of a monopoly but Americans just couldn't see it cause they like a guy with whom they can have a frigging beer and they've got an issue with what goes on in people's bedrooms (who cares), I'm more concerned about things that are going to effect us in our every day lives? Well, folks from Canada - how long does it stay cold?
November 3, 2004 6:49pm
You wrote: "Any thoughts on what will happen now that there is probably going to be a republican presidency and a stronger republican presence in the Congress? I mean vis a vis Muslims? Shouldn't the Muslims have played both sides?" What makes you think that Bush will look at "Muslim voting statistics" before making policies that affect Muslims in his second term? After all, as you yourself have already pointed out many times in this same comment thread, didn't a STRONG majority of Muslims vote like "lemmings" for Bush last time around? I'm not sure what "playing both sides" really means. We have no economic power or media influence or anything whatsoever, apart from the ballot box power. And we put that behind Bush last time and he didn't give anything at all back. If us choosing him did nothing, somehow I doubt he'd feel that he owed us anything more if the next time around we played both him and the other side.
November 3, 2004 7:38pm
"So that you sycophants can be invited to the next white house iftar party once again?" Succint and to the point. It all comes down to power mongering. The devil resides within us all.
November 3, 2004 7:45pm
Look at that caption. My God. "Bush with Iraqi refugee". Does she have a name? Or she no more than a two word poster icon providing evidence of Bush's Compassion towards pathetic have nots from far away lands? They forgot to put up "Bush with destitute black inner city kid."
November 3, 2004 7:55pm
The reason why most of the world dislikes President Bush is, in my opinion, the issue of going to war in Iraq when there was no need. When the leader of the worlds most powerful nation does as he wishes without any real accountability - we have issues. At the very least I hope he has learned something from the 48% of Americans who didn't vote for him, and perhaps he will change some of his views/ positions accordingly. And from time to time he comes out with the oddest quotes such as: "I do say that freedom is the Almighty's gift to every person," the president replied. "I also condition it by saying freedom is not America's gift to the world. It's much greater than that, of course. And I believe we worship the same god." But his actions speak louder than his words. May God have mercy and help us all, amen.
November 3, 2004 8:21pm
sadly we already know the election results and i can't even express how disappointed i am. but i was even more disappointed to read this interview by a fellow muslim...there are so many incorrect facts in his words and such weak arguments, that i couldn't help but write... honestly, the interview struck me as plain ignorant. this guy needs to open his eyes and step outside his little world. just take a look at bush's policies in any arena... the negative impact on so many communities is astoundingly evident. domestically -- high health care costs, ban on reimportation of prescription drugs, unemployment, infringement of rights of american muslims, the list goes on and on. and internationally...the war on iraq, need i say more? i could continue all night. as far as american muslims are concerned, all this administration has done for us is to stereotype us as terrorists. and it was all in how 9/11 was handled. no doubt the event was horrific, but the response post 9/11 should have been used to create sympathy for what happens around the world every day; instead it was used to create divisions in this country and hatred toward muslims. although the bush administration may have said that they were not directly targeting muslims... actions speak louder than words. i read through a lot of the talkbacks and they make great points in this regard; samra, tariqf, others, you guys made some excellent points. so i won't reiterate too much more on american muslims... but i do want to make another point. this isn't just a question about the muslims. i dont think that muslims are concerned only about how actions of the bush administration impact them, theyre also concerned about the big picture... bushs actions in international politics. the US hegemony has tremendous power in impacting both international and domestic policies (of other countries). in one blow, bush has undermined the power of international institutions that the US itself created post WWII. these institutions, which have been based all along on the idea of reciprocity and mutual trust, have been dealt a major blow. bush has constantly favored unilateral action rather than multilateral collaboration... but guess what? its not just about the US. the US has a responsible role to play in this world - because it's a superpower but also because this country is comprised of people from around the world. bushs actions have destroyed US credibility, transparency, and accountability. this has not only made the US less trustworthy, but it has set a precedence that any country can exercise its sovereignty -- i.e basically do whatever the hell it pleases without regard to anyone else. this obviously holds dangerous implications for the future. we've essentially backtracked a 100 years and undermined the idea of being team player. guess we're reverting to a dog eat dog world. i cannot believe that an educated individual and a fellow muslim would be supportive of bush. i am disillusioned by this as i am of our country for electing this president. and why would naseeb post this interview anyway? it lacks insight, credibility, and is just plain wrong. now that bush has been re-elected... who knows whats to come. i can only hope that he will change his policies and take a different direction...
November 3, 2004 9:21pm
TariqF... My point is that Muslims should become active in politics, become registered Democrats or Republicans and vote consistently along those lines instead of voting as a bloc like this time and in 2000, especially when our favorite candidates (Bush in 2000 and Kerry in 2004) have little to offer to us. The presence of influential Muslims like the Hassans in the Republican camp and the Chaudhrys in the Democrat Camp is good thing for Muslims... Muslims should have more of the same... more party affiliations and more of an effective role in US Politics. I doubt that you will disagree with this idea.
November 3, 2004 9:25pm
Shazia, Yes How ironic. How many of our new gungho Democrat Muslims who are mourning the Kerry defeat would vote for same sex marriage for example ? It should really come down to that... Muslims should not simply be involved... they should be involved on issues... and vote according to their conscience, be it for Democrats or for republicans. -YLH
November 3, 2004 9:38pm
Mansoor77, The essential difference between you and me is that I did not resort to comments about appearances, age, gender and sexual orientation.
November 4, 2004 1:29am
KARL ROVE, Bush's long-time political guru and White House advisor: "As people do better, they start voting like Republicans... ...unless they have too much education and vote Democratic, which proves there can be too much of a good thing." -- nuff said
November 4, 2004 1:34am
"Trying to eliminate Saddam...would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible.... We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq....There was no viable "exit strategy" we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land." -- "A World Transformed", George Bush Sr., written 5 years ago...perhaps his son should read it...
November 3, 2004 10:30pm
Four years back, Muslims voted for Bush and the Republican Party because they feared Joe Liberman, a Jew to be in power. However, we learned in the last four years how wrong our decision was as Bushs leadership was nothing close to what we had accepted. By the same token, there is no guarantee that if Kerry was to resume office (granted that majority of Muslims voted for him), he would work for the welfare of Muslims. Further, we all know it is one thing that the politicians say and the other that they act upon once they get in power. Moreover, agreeing upon the fact that Kerry has an unusual tendency of going back in his words; nothing would be guaranteed. I am not favoring one candidate over another. Just making a point that we could not predict for certain that the future would be for the better of Muslims if either candidate would resume power. We can only hope and pray that Bush learned from the 48% of votes that he did not receive and uses this reelection as an opportunity to reach out to them.
November 3, 2004 10:33pm
Democrats lost not b/c it had anything to do with how Muslims voted for Kerry. I feel the democrats focused on the wrong issues which lead to thier demise. Americans in the end felt comfortable with the moral issues that Bush stood for. People loved his personality and down to earth demeanor. I did not vote for Bush but I do understand why he won. It was not a total surprise to me. Rarely do wartime presidents lose the 2nd term.
November 3, 2004 10:50pm
Good God, Hamdani quit crying wolf! Mansoor is behaving himself on here, there is no need to alert the naseeb police. You will be safe; the girls will protect you I(oh but not the hijabi ones for obvious reasons...) Neways, kudos to Mehreen for saying what is on 99% of Muslims' minds in the US. Bush's win is disappointing as it is. But having someone who defends the man single-handedly responsible for the needless slaughter of 100,000+ innocent Iraqis and God knows how many others to follow in countries deemed "undemocratic" makes me physically ill. HasanDaddy, you cannot take the money your family will end up saving into the grave with you. Only your deeds and good intentions go with you in the end. Clearly, anyone who votes for or supports GW Bush does not have good intentions, or a good grasp of reality for that matter. Is Kerry any better necessarily? Maybe not. But politicians are like diapers; when they stink, change them!
November 3, 2004 11:38pm
I think we should be proud as a community for our involvement this election. We registered ourselves, debated, articulated, understood, called others into action in an unprecedented way. We should seize this momentum to stay involved in the political process and make a difference. Regardless of the outcome for the candidate you supported, let's keep up the passion for not being overlooked. As American Muslims transition from almost 50% first generation immigrants to second and third generation Americans, our voice will get louder and its impact more pronounced. Give yourself a pat on the back.
November 3, 2004 11:45pm
Muslims didn't vote for Bush in 2000 not just because of Lieberman. In fact, it was because of Gore stiffing the Muslim-American community, refusing to even meet with our leaders. Bush, on the other hand, reached out to the community and met with our leaders. Gore decided his own fate. Many Muslims thought it would actually have been good for Lieberman to be in the White House, putting a face to the Jewish influence over American politics. Either way, Bush turned out to be horrible. Maybe the electorate will get smarter by 2008. Salam :-)
November 3, 2004 11:58pm
they got the seats they wanted and they are gonna have a field day with which wars to pick, I smell Iran in 05 and then syria.
November 4, 2004 12:31am
Dont Mess with Texas
November 4, 2004 1:52am
Amen to Monis I agree bro. we did what we thought was best this year, at least we were clear about it. And I can gladly say the fact that so many of us discussed some key issues in some civilized /uncivilized manor on naseeb and other venues was an achievement in itself. Thats one great step forward; we got something good going here people lets keep it going regardless of if we do not agree on things completely. Our disagreement and discussion will lead to better results and therefore eventually some what satisfaction. Im proud of all of you who voiced your opinion here, right wingers, left wingers, liberals, conservatives, etc. We must appreciate our diversity and individuality. One of my good high school professors once said its not important to have an argument but it is gravely important to have an opinion and if having an opinion leads to an argument it is for the betterment of self and humanity in broad. samH love what you said: politicians are like diapers; when they stink, change them!
November 5, 2004 11:41am
Bismillah. Yes. That's why my message was adressed to everyone in that society. However, It is the Bush family who is responsbile for what orignally happened. It is also a known fact by the Apache people that The president's family has custody of the red father's skull. AND EVERY APACHE KNOWS THIS. Return back what is not yours. Respectfully. God bless.
November 5, 2004 12:35pm
Paki786, you are right. I really don't know what I'm talking about so I'll stop. And of course it's simplistic - it's politics
November 5, 2004 1:29pm
Dude - applause for you! Muslim presence, in BOTH parties, guarantees that we are marginalized by NO ONE
November 4, 2004 3:42am
My fault, I should have explained what the 'moral issues' were - I just thought you'd be able to understand but won't make such assumptions again. Moral issues that Bush and many Muslims on this site agree on (these according to analysis of the election were the main reason for voting, and most of these people voted Bush): abortion, gay marriages and stem cell research. Paki786 - you said that Muslims would support Kerry's moderate stance on these issues. Read Irshad Manji's interview on Vibes. That should tell you just how some Muslims view gay people, let alone gay people that want to marry... Mansoor77- show me the link to what I said re. you being a tool of the Republican party. And then we can discuss it nicely
November 5, 2004 7:24am
AvaS, While I appreciate your vote of confidence, I am afraid like TariqF's initial reaction you too failed to see my point. Like TariqF you too have take a potshot about my place of residence sadly... but let me answer some of your points anyway... First of all I was part of the Democrat Party, canvassing all over Central and North New Jersey in the year 2000. I was also promoted to canvass manager by the election date... and I have a pretty good idea what the democrat party is all about. I can assure you that so far as the world is concerned... the Democrats may only be marginally better. I know this from experience... I remember getting into a very heated debate about American foreign policy vis a vis Arafat with a self proclaimed secular liberal democrat. The point I made about the Republican Party stands... it is not a monolithic movement, though it has become dominated by the extreme right wing for now... George W Bush is a clever politician who knew how to play the evangelical christian card... I know the Midwest and Politics too well to know the redneck vision of the world... and we do get Fox News out here to know the perils to the world that exist due to the Neocon lobby.... Which is all the more the Muslims should join the Republican Party... to make it swing back to the center right.... so that GOP selects some one like Jeff Johnson from the moderate republican camp instead of someone like George W Bush... All I am saying is that real politic and not emotional rhetoric will help Muslims consolidate themselves in the United States... so TariqF is wrong.. not when he says that Republican has a white christian base, because it does (and democracy allows such a situation) but when he says that Muslims should stay away from the Republican Party... Muslims should Join Both parties according to their own conscience. -YLH
November 5, 2004 8:02am
Paki786, I have gone out of my way to be conciliatory but you have not afforded me the same courtesy. There is indeed a difference between policies and beliefs. Only politicians have policies in the sense that we are talking about. Muslims, not being elected, do not have policies - they have beliefs. www.guardian.co.uk I do think many (please note the use of of the word many) Muslims are in, using your words, "complete agreement" with Bush on these issues. They may not say that because of Iraq/Palestine etc, but if those issues were not there (we wish), then I believe Bush's views would be acceptable and preferable to many Muslim voters. The reaction against Manji was furious and full of hate. There was everything from she's going to hell, a kafir, to it's ok for her to be gay as long as she doesn't have sex because it is gay sex that is evil, not being gay. Others said she would have to face God and it was His judgement. All of this led me to believe that Muslims would not be happy leagalising gay marriage - because to be even gay already pitches you into the depths of hell. Marriage of such would not make a difference as it was evil anyway. I don't believe that is a huge heap of misplaced logic. You clearly believe it is. Abortion - many Muslims are anti-abortion. Some do not even believe in contraception. Stem cell research: using embryos that are a result of abortion. Etc. Congratulations on your liberalism wrt this. But I think in different circumstances Bush would have been a very attractive proposition to some Muslims - and these policies would be part of that proposition.
November 4, 2004 7:17am
Moral and family issues are the reason why people vote Republican, unless they make over $200,000 per year. My coworker was harressed by a woman because she (my coworker) wanted to vote Democratic. The woman said to her, "How can you vote Democratic and endorse the killing of unborn babies." My co-worker was lost for words. So I told her the next time someone says that, ask them how they can vote Republican and take healthcare and medicine, education, SSI and a decent living for that baby when it's born. Most Americans I know who get hysterical about abortion are the same Americans who cut CHIP funding for healthcare, educational services and needed mental health and after school services for these kids they so "want to save." I find one word to support it "hypocrisy." When I confront them, they basically tell me, I'm a heathen anyway. Great response!! Barak Ombama (did I get his name right?), the new Senator from IL said that the Republican Party has done an excellent job to use these simplistic terms to appeal to the American public. By focusing on individual or personnal morality, they have failed to let the people see the importance of public morality. Democrats are just going to have to do something similar in the next election. O, and yes, Iran and Syria are next. The only thing is how's he gonna fight it without a draft. And if Rumsfield and Wolfowitz stay.....and no Colin Powell? And how does he plan on paying for the war? There is a trillion dollar deficit, no-one is getting taxed and educational and social services are in the toilet, and people are economically worse off than they were ten years ago. Cold weather and Canada is looking more appealing each day!! Thank goodness I kept my UK citizenship....
November 4, 2004 8:38am
SamH, Instead of being so trigger happy, please refer to Mansoor77's post in which he is inquiring about the difference between myself and him. I merely answered his question... is that a crime? First the response to the JE and now here... Talk about the foot-in-the-mouth disease... -YLH
November 5, 2004 11:41am
well, again you are saying the same thing without explaining why. I think everybody knows that the "moral" vote won the election for Bush this time. But "moral" vote doesn't equate to everybody who values "morality". Your implying Muslims would have voted for Bush this time around if there was no war is very simplistic. That might come from you not experiencing the American politics yourself. You have to keep in mind that the immigrant muslim community participated in the 2000 elections perhaps for the first time as somewhat of a community. And the reason for going for Bush was his courting the Muslim vote and promising to work on issues that are dear to them as opposed to Gore not even meeting them- and not Lieberman being a jew as a Muhammad on the street would say. Those promises were not acted upon - with or without the war. Forget even those promises. Any politically savvy Muslims knew what kind of policy makers John Ashcroft, Daniel Pipes and Paul Wolfowitz are even before their appointments. If we were going to be "hoarded" as a block vote for Bush this time around even without the war and even Bush somehow miraculously doing something about the policies the bloc voted for, then individuals like these would raise a lot of eyebrows in that hoarding process. Your comparing the Muslim vote with the "moral" vote Bush got is again very simplistic. The "moral" vote is from the majority. Minorities - which Muslims are - would pay a lot more attention to the policies effecting them. Blacks are more fervent church goers than the "moral" vote but yet you won't find many black voters amongst the "moral" vote. There wasn't any politics involved in that moral vote. The "moral" voters beleive Democrats are immoral and Republicans are moral- and would have voted Republican anyway. Though, the republicans were successful in making them turn out in masses this time. The very first thing they will point out to will be Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky - while taking Newt Gingrich as a respected "moral" leader. Newt Gingrich, in case you don't know, is a Republican who raised the most hue and cry at the Monica episode yet having some skeletons of the same kind in his own closet. Of all the muslims I know who care somewhat about "morality", they know about Newt Gingrich, they know about Trent Lott. And I am yet to meet one who cares more about what Clinton and Gingrich did,as it takes place in the whole society, than what Trent Lott had to say as that effects us directly. Bush being in "complete agreement" with muslims are your words - not mine. There were reports that this is Kerry's election to lose. It is too easy to look at it in hindsight, but I think he lost it trying to be too much of a gentleman and statesman. He could have brought down the number of moral voters showing up had he reverted the moral issues back to Bush and how his policies on moral issues aren't going to permeate morality at all- and will just cause other problems. Oh well. Now the whole world is into four more years of "staying the course" - or perhaps even a worse course since Dick Cheney introduced Bush mentioning we've got a "mandate" now and Bush himself saying he has got "political capital" now and will spend it all. So much for Kerry asking for "healing" and Bush saying in return that he will work to "earn" the support. And hold your congratulations on liberalism. I never said or even implied I am for gay marriages or homosexuality or abortion. They are great sins- and I believe thats the belief of almost all muslims. I just said Kerry's policies were a lesser of the two evils- and explained why atleast for gay marriages.
November 4, 2004 12:16pm
Shazia, I am not sure whom your fault of assuming to think that he/she would be able to understand what "moral issues" were was addressed to. I would give you the benefit of the doubt that you weren't addressing me as I mentioned abortion and gay rights too. I just asked you "Which moral issues do you think Bush's policies are in complete agreement with muslims?" as you just threw that out without elaborating why and which of his policies are in "complete agreement" with muslims. I never said muslims would support Kerry's moderate stance on these issues. I merely said his stance was "more moderate and more appealing" (a lesser of the two evils) as compared to Bush's in response to you saying "moral issues - are the very issues that many Muslims and Bush are in complete agreement on". I also said there is a big difference between beliefs and policies and you have reverted back to beliefs instead of policies. Although there are other "moral" issues like abortion, stemcell research(a bit controversial) and even war too if you are talking from a Muslim perspective (there are even quite a few christians who are completely against the war because of their faith), but lets jsut concentrate on homosexuality as you brought that up.Belief homosexuality is a sin? Yes. Was Kerry offering something to address this social problem/sin? No. Was Bush? No. All Bush proposed was amending the constitution while supporting civil unions. There is no "morality" in condoning a sin only so long as its below 80% treshhold while not doing anything about addressing that sin. Kerry's policy was more appealing in the sense that the gays who are really serious about it would need to move to a state that supports gay marriages- somewhat quarantining other states if you will. I don't think this problem can be addressed in the US without either the state having some say in entertainment and higher education or they getting more "moral", hence Kerry's stance was more appealing in the sense that since neither was proposing anything that might start helping a containment of the homosexuality problem starting with education and entertainment media, then might as well not create other problems that could infringe on civil liberties.
November 4, 2004 1:04pm
Paki786, it's noto me who is confusing beliefs with policies. It's the US electorate and your President and his entourage. No offence meant, I should have clarified but had spent so long watching/reading/digesting the info, I wrongly assumed all would know what I was talking about.
November 4, 2004 1:54pm
I knew what issues you were talking about. But you are yet to say anything about why do you think Muslims are in complete agreement with Bush on moral issues? Given that both the candidates had policies geared towards moral issues, your saying Muslims are in complete agreement with Bush could only mean Muslims are in complete agreement with his policies regarding the issues. Because it its just about beliefs, then Kerry made it clear what his beliefs are regarding abortion and homosexuality- and they are no different than Bush's. And all you had to offer was: "Read Irshad Manji's interview on Vibes. That should tell you just how some Muslims view gay people, let alone gay people that want to marry". This is again pertaining to beliefs and not policies.
November 4, 2004 10:27pm
Gosh, so many replies to read, so forgive me if I get this response miscontrued. The discription that TariqF gave about the Republican party is true. Come to Texas and you'll meet them everywhere, and you can't get a word in with them. Their minds are set. See, I just did a reading for a play this evening. The woman who wrote it (from New York), I know very well. It was a Christian play and she asked me to read a part to see how it flowed. Well, Christians believe in what is known as "The Rapture." See, once the state or nation of Israel is created, Jesus will come. So all the people who are alive today will be able to witness this happening because it is supposed to happen in their lifetime. With Bush and the Christian Right, Iraq the only threat to Israel removed and Iran and Syria next, and Arafat dying...these is only adding fuel to the fire. Now the next step is to build the Temple of David - where the Dome of the Rock is located. Did you know that over 85 per cent of the Christian Right also voted in this election. More than in the one in 2000. Guys, wake up and smell the coffee. Anyone want to add to these comments? O, and when you go to a Southern Baptist or Texan and tell them there is such a thing as a Palestinian Christian, they're like "Huh?" or "Duh?" It's such a shock to them. We're responsible for educating people, but unfortunately, in my community I don't see enough Muslims making that effort. So Mansoor77, I agree with you that Hamdani needed to be corrected regarding his lack of knowledge regarding his comments towards TariqF, but I can forgive him for not knowing since he is not living in the US. However, you live here and you still told people to support Nadar. Fortunately it didn't make a difference in the outcome of the election. By the way, we all answered your question why to vote for Kerry. Millions did vote, but unfortunately we were four million or so short. Still let's see what happens...they say Hilary Clinton might run and I like her...She already did a good job during her first two terms ;)
November 6, 2004 7:34pm
...Rednecks voted for a redneck.
November 6, 2004 7:48pm
I guess that makes me a redneck!
November 6, 2004 9:07pm
I didnt think right. it is right.
November 6, 2004 11:39pm
first off - thanks! second - you must be a redneck too! especially if you are 'RIGHT'
November 6, 2004 11:53pm
I am a Republican. I voted for Kerry. Not because Bush is a liar or misled us in the war. Not because I did not want Dick Cheney as PRESIDENT again. Kerry is still a politician and still has to keep the lobby groups happy. I voted Kerry BECAUSE I dont want ANYONE with that much religion to be making laws we all have to live by. I dont care what religion or who it is. Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist.... I dont care. Really if the election was just on Iraq, Kerry would have won. The irony in all of this is that the very issues that got Bush elected are issues Muslims themselves feel strongly about and agree with. LOL Abortion, Gay Marriage and the like. The Catholics jacked us in the election. 2nd largest population in the country and the bishops told them not to vote Pro Life. So there ya have it. Now I wish the Govt would go around and yand the Tax Exempt status of EVERY Church, Cathedral and Mosque in the country that voiced an opinion openly to their congregations about who to vote for. By law they are not allowed to publicly endorse a candidate.
November 7, 2004 11:34am
LOL. Has much as we are not too wild about Bush, Dick Cheney and Haliburton both run and own this country and soon the rest of the world. Brown and Root (owned by Haliburton) profited from the Vietnam War. Once the wars were over the companies did not do well financially until Bush Sr. went into the first Gulf War. Lockheed Martin (formly knowns as General Dynamics) has received some of the most amazing contracts in the past four years and I believe they're working on a jet better than the F-16. Defense industries are doing extremely well these days as most desi engineers will tell you.
November 7, 2004 9:05pm
It's sad to see how some Muslims can sell their souls for their individual interests while ignoring what is in the larger interest of our community. I guess as long as their bank accounts are growing they don't care about the thousands of Iraqis, Afghanis, and Palestinians who have and are been killed and wounded every day.
November 8, 2004 12:04am
It's sad to see how some Muslims can sell their souls for their individual interests while ignoring what is in the larger interest of our community." What community? Why would you even say something so ridiculous. Do you really think it would be different if the roles were reversed? Hasan Ali believes that Bush is better than Kerry for Pakistan and Islam. I mean really how good would kerry have been? If big bird had been running against Bush Muslims would have wanted us to vote for him too. You should blame the ultra conservative leaders we have and the rest of the Muslim world for the crimes they commit against each other. Even in the middle of all of this the Sunnis and Shias keep blowing each other up. If they are not fighting us they will kill each other. This mess did not happen overnight. And I dont care what some of you might think. Even if Kerry was elected. The Palestinians would still be screwed, and we were not gonna pull out of Iraq. We cant at this point. No matter what we have to finish what Bush started. If we pull out now you will have a bunch of Militant Taliban types feeling a sense of victotry and Muslims will suffer more at the hands of them than they will at the hands of Cheney.
November 8, 2004 10:04pm
>>If we pull out now you will have a bunch of Militant Taliban types feeling a sense of victotry and Muslims will suffer more at the hands of them than they will at the hands of Cheney.
November 9, 2004 1:40pm
Are you related to that one eyed, captain hook cleric from London? Very strong resemblence. Back to the subject at hand.... What I said is fact. The war should have never happened, it was based on false accusations and motivated by greed, but now that its there and we walk away without a clear victory. The Iraqi people will suffere much as the Afghanis suffered at the hands of the Taliban. What you have in Iraq is a bunch of people flocking to fight for "God" and against the evil west. If we leave those people will stay in place, assume positions of power and then start to enforce their "Vision" of an "Islamic" state.
November 10, 2004 12:45pm
Nope no relation to any pirates, are you by daft ? Dont bother answering that, I know the answer. "Those people" as you refer to them dont want invaders in their country. Its their country to do with as they please. Who are you to make choices for others ? If the Iraqi people want an Islamic state, then so be it. To hell with your "clear victory," as if killing over 100000 men, woman and children in a span of 18 months wasnt enough. If you're so concerned about Taliban types look no further than your backyard in the US.
November 11, 2004 7:05pm
If you're so concerned about Taliban types look no further than your backyard in the US. Or Spencer, West Virginia
November 12, 2004 2:15am
Was that a come back ? Oh yes I live in west virginia according my profile dont I ? So tell me when you cant defend your point of view do you always refer to the opposition as "taliban types," or is this a blanket association of anyone with a beard ? Being against the war but for the brutal occupation, sounds like a real Kerry democrat, the sort who opposes a burgler until he actually breaks in.
November 13, 2004 1:40pm
Muhammad Ali is the Uncle Tom version of being a muslim. He is a muslim being subservient to Whites. In my opinion, hes a sellout. It seems like he lost his religion and where he came from. He probably got absorbed too much into the American Culture. Its people like him that really make me sad. Hasan is also a traitor. To see him supporting the War on Iraq, its just deploreable..with innocent Muslims dying, he doesnt care about anyone but himself. I would not support him or Bush Hasan is a bad example for us Muslims and therefore should not be followed jazak allah kahir
November 15, 2004 4:52pm
I never would have thought a 'real' Muslim could ever defend Bush, and what he's done. I'm not saying Bush is a bad guy, but come on, that's just bull, the fact you ignored the whole "crusade" thing, and acted like it wasn't a big deal when it REALLY is, shows how you're just one of those sell out/suck ups. I personally don't think Bush is the bad guy, I think he's the puppet. Rumsfeld and Cheney are the bad guys. If anything, Bush is the best in his admin right after Powell, he's just easily manipulated, and he'll say anything to win. I also think it was rather low of you to bring Kerry into it, and this is what makes me sick about politicians and both cantidates; instead of trying to make YOURSELF look good, you go ahead and bash the opponent. What really pisses me off is how 52% of the country voted for Bush for morale reasons. I thought America was a "free" country? What ever happened to seperation of Church and state? The people have been misguided into thinking things, such as how the war in Iraq is a positive thing, and that changing presidents during this, is a bad thing. I don't know about you people, but the fact that almost 1/2 the country don't want Bush in office should be enough to get him impeached. I'm pretty sure there are some tolerable democrats and republicans. This is just sad, and the Americans think the middle east needs some democracy! *laughs* You're not defending the man, you're basically advertising him, you wanted the people to vote for him, so you and your wealthy self could live what you think is a happy life, while the rest of your Muslim 'brothers' suffer. People such as yourself, and the damn red neck Americans are so selfish it isn't even funny. "Hey! Aslong as it will make us safe, kill 'em!"
November 15, 2004 9:39pm
Ali Hasan said that Muslims will get nothing but wonderful things from Bush but all we have gotten is terrorism from his administration. How can a Muslim vote for and support a President who does not support Muslims but only publicly tries to appear that way. How can Muslims be for Bush when he has clearly showed he lack of care for Muslims in his relations with the Muslim countries and people. And it is very funny that if we know of Muslims being locked up without reason to contact those who support Bush for help. HA! It is those who support Bush and his administration that locked them up in the first place so why would be go to the enemy for help? very unlogical. And how can Bush possibly be the most Pro-Muslim American President? that is funny as well. Even though he has said that Islam is a religion of peace it does not outweigh all the bad things that he has said about Islam. And in fact he has contradicted himself by then turning around and calling Muslims terrorists. Why are we all terrorists? Why must Muslims be the first to be blamed? Why must Muslims be the only ones labeled as terrorists? How can one say that Bush is Pro-Muslim when he is clearly the opposite? And lastly Ali Hasan says that Bush wants to create Palestine. This could not be any furher away from the truth. It is the Bush administration that is supporting Israel and giving them immense amounts of money for their weapons and other machinery to us against the Palestinians, how can this show that Bush is for Palestinians and a palestinian state? it can't and it doesn't. If Bush really wanted to help the Palestinians he would have done so already just like he wanted to go into Iraq. When you really want to do something nothing will stop you. If Bush really wanted to help Palestinians as much as he wanted to go to Iraq(for no reason) he would have done so already. He's all talk but he won't do anything to really and truly help our fellow Muslims in Palestine and even those Christians who are suffering over there as well.
November 16, 2004 1:10am
Hi Helwa I appreciate your concern over Palestine, but I will have to take exception with you, with regards to Bush President Bush is most certainly the most Pro-Palestinian President we have ever had, and certainly, most Pro-Palestinian Presidential candidate You mention that Bush is propogating Israel with "immense amounts of money" ---- however, why is that the Bush administration reduced American aid to Israel from $4 billion down to $2 billion..... From there, President Bush is the only President to ever 'recognize' Palestine, and in doing so, also arm-wrested the United Nations into doing the same ---- let us re-iterate that point ---- PRESIDENT BUSH FORCED THE UNITED NATIONS TO RECOGNIZE PALESTINE From there, he is the only President that has promised to donate higher amounts of American aid to Palestine than is currently being given to Israel, as well as giving Palestinians complete control over the West Bank and Gaza Strip The Clinton Roadmap called for Isreal to control the infrastructures, including the upkeep of Israeli checkpoints, within the Gaza Strip and West Bank Personally, I am looking forward to his continued work on Palestine, in this upcoming term ----- and I am very proud to say that I supported the Presidential candidate who is most poised to create Palestine!
November 16, 2004 4:58am
Reduced American aid from 4 billion dollars, to 2 billion... WOW! If I remember correctly, 2 billion is still a lot. Let me get this straight, you think BUSH is the most pro-palestininian president ever..? Now seriously, how much are you getting paid to say this?
November 19, 2004 8:42pm
Can you explain what you mean by "PRESIDENT BUSH FORCED THE UNITED NATIONS TO RECOGNIZE PALESTINE" ? Was there a resolution passed that I'm unaware of that said the Palestinians had no right to a state? As far as complete control of Gaza strip and West Bank, much of the apartheid wall encroaches seriously upon Palestinian land. Sharon's So either Bush had knowledge of Sharon's intention to hold on to much of the West Bank or he was simply duped. Can you reveal your sources as to his promise to "donate higher amounts of American aid to Palestine than is currently being given to Israel". Also where do you get the 2 billion dollar figure? Anyone can make a promise. What has he accomplished in the past 4 years. The Palestinians are definitely worse off today than they were four years ago. If you expect Bush to be the one to force Israel to negotiate any kind of viable state, you're kidding yourself.
November 20, 2004 10:24pm
Looks like the first aid installment, from the Bush Administration, is about to be sent to Palestine Bush is even bypassing Congressional Approval, in order to do it, so it doesn't get held up in Congress www.khaleejtimes.com can we say - First American President To Ever Give Aid To Palestine????
November 21, 2004 3:41am
Of course the US has to give them aid, they are freakin' destroying their countries. As for Isreal getting reduced sums of money, that's simple.... Bush is a conservative. He has been cutting funding to everything, even AIDS treatment in Africa.
November 21, 2004 11:58pm
no response to my questions?
December 1, 2004 7:45pm
Is that what your family aims for...i doubt you and your families objective by this campaign is for the betterment of the ummah
December 4, 2004 11:09pm
The sad reality is that while Bush may campaign and 'keep friendly relations' all he wants, his ACTIONS (and not his outwardly words) have shown his hatred against Muslims. Tolerating a few muslims, putting up with them, or putting on an act is not hard for a politician. These people campaign with all sorts of ethnic groups but only deliver to their real self-interests. President Bush has attacked Iraq, killed several innocent children, and is following in the footsteps of his father who mandated sanctions to, not ruin Saddams regime, which was alive and healthy afterwards, but to kill several innocent children. Also, unless these Muslims for Bush have actually gone to Iraq and seen the condition there, I dont think you are justified to say that they are better off. Please see what those people have to say for themselves, and not the propoganda shown on TV. I HAVE seen it, and I can testify that they are being slaughtered, sexually humiliated, stripped beyond animalism, and discriminated against. Please do not believe every media propoganda fed to you on the news at 9 pm. Also, it is true that Bush is pro-Pakistan and Pro-Saudi. However, if you feel that Pakistan and Saudi is more important than Afghanistan, and Iraq, and more importantly, superior to justice implementation and the defense of innocent civilians, then you will probably side with Bush. Once again, it doesnt take much to be a hypocrite, and President Bush is the prime example. The Patriot Act in itself is a blatant infringement on our rights. He does not want Muslims in America; or for that matter, in the world. Why is he pretending to be our friend? So we can fund his campaigns. Political figures are always in need of money and they targedt the middle class and upper middle classes, especially the Republican Party. Our situation is similar, but not identical, to that of African Americans who have been duped into thinking that President Bush actually cares for them because he has two blacks in his cabinet. What about his abandoning all of NAACP's invitations and refusing their proposed reforms? Once again, it is hypocrisy. Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) had to deal with it himself with the Jews of Madinah. The Quran clearly states that a man who has innocently killed a tree of the enemys territory without cause has done wrong. What about Mr. Bush? Please watch Fahrenheit 911 to see a documentary (REAL LIFE FOOTAGE) that cannot be biased because it is REAL LIFE.
December 12, 2004 2:51pm
I think this author is a bit naive.... no hard feelings brother, but for you to take these little nice gestures from Bush as face value is simply silly. Bush has build alliances with every other corrupt leaders of the Muslim and Arab countries not its people. By the way, what is wrong for giving Kerry a chance and see what he's got. How much worse can it get. We all seen what bush has done with his first 4 Peace Y'll
December 12, 2004 3:14pm
Hassandaddy......I hope you are getting something for defending this administration like that. I don't know what cave your in but last time I checked this government did nothing for the palestinian pple. P.S. stop taking whatever your on.
December 13, 2004 5:27am
It is clear now that America has the best run propaganda machine on the planet. The fact is that Americans--(including some American or Americanized Muslims) are also the most ill-informed people on the planet. The irony is that with all of the ignorance in our own country, we would be better off with a dictatorship after all, but the fact is that we will get the worst of both worlds. Here are some really important points to note about American policies in the Mid-East: While all those educated in the world have an understanding of what it takes to be a true bigot, few can appreciate the sheer magnitude of bigotry exhibited by those who favor the extremism of U.S. policies abroad. It takes a great deal of patience to talk to many of these individuals who will confine their beliefs to a handful of images and slogans from the patronizing media of the United States. If they dissent from the normal consensus, by far they will pay their dues to the nearest stationed beer-drinking relative who will tell them about the time when the world was supposedly a better place and they were supposedly the greatest heroes. Now bigotry in America has a long history which we will not go into for the moment, it suffices to mention the campaign of extermination imposed by against the Native Americans often called Indians by the confusedoruneducated rogues and criminals moving to the new world at that time. The history of America is marked by these frequent displays of idiocy, including the outright self-induced terror of the Japanese, Chinese, or perhaps some commie-pinko-socialist who might have tricked or cajoled them into reading Karl Marx, Lenin, or some other world-wide evil too horrible to declare openly at a family reunion or holiday picnic. We are reminded of the absolute horror experienced by children during the so-called Cold War when during the frequent (all too frequent) Nuclear attack drills caused them to wait patiently under a desk with the realization that perhaps their own leaders had no real plan to save them from total annihilation. This level of fear was all that was necessary to keep the public fires going that led to the horrors of Vietnam , Laos and Cambodia . Those Chinese and Communists were going to take over the world if we didnt kill about 3-4 million peasants in Indochina who had nothing to do with the affair. Such was the policies of a backward, fear-driven America brought to the world for over a decade in the last century. And since the fall of the feared and over-exaggerated Russian economy from the second world to the third world, via the continued policies of containment, isolation and depopulation of nearby satellite countries, we note that a new doctrinal enemy emerges to fill the gap and allow the U.S. to continue along the same policies as it did during the Cold War. These policies are quite clear and show the amazing ability its own leaders had in militarization at the expense of mass ignorance and bigotry enjoined on its own population. We saw that these policies continued in the Carter and Reagan administrations with the arming of Islamic Freedom Fighters in Iraq , Iran and particularly Afghanistan (which led to tightening the grip against the communist-pinkos and the Chinese). We see that such policies led to a massive organizing of extremist Islamicists and even psychological operations by the Special Forces to increase the levels of fanaticism to fuel the revolution against the then supposed world EnemyRussia. We see that the subsequent destabilization of the region brought more chaos in order to justify the continuance of U.S. intervention in the Middle-East. It is clear by the documentary record exhibited by the U.S. State Dept. that the following guidelines were employed to continue the chaos: (1) Target strategic resources abroad (2) Identify indigenous population ideals, political environment etc. (3) Identify avenues of financial and strategic support (4) If those avenues do not originate from the United States then we marginalize their support from other countries and replace it with ours (5) As soon as the target nation is supposed to receive support from a doctrinal enemy represented by the terms "communist," "socialist" per the Cold War doctrine or with the current doctrinal enemy "Islamicists" or "terrorists," then economic sanctions are immediately imposed. (6) A campaign of depopulation occurs either via American forces directly (as in the napalming of Vietnam ) or preferably some minority group armed and trained by U.S. Special Forces (as in places like Guatemala , El Salvador , and Afghanistan ). (7)U.S forces obtain permanent occupation and/or strategic dominance within the target country. It should be noted that U.S. media plays a direct role in ``doctrinalizing'' these points to fit with the overall sentiments of the majority. Such was the case during the ``Cold War'' concerning the ``commies,'' ``pinkos,'' and the fear of the possibility of outright nuclear engagement which is later replaced by the fears from ``Islamic terrorist'' and ``Al-Qaida'' during the last 20 years. It should also be noted that no significant policy changes have occured during this transition--as the point of all U.S. policy within the last 50 or so years is actually directed at the systematic control and containment of the Asiatic hemisphere, as easily seen by the location of U.S. bases in Japan, Korea, Phillipines, Indochina, Afghanistan, and now currently, Iraq. So we are now clear on the undisputed record which demonstrated the huge proportion of bigotry imposed by the fearful constituents of the U.S., and even more clear that such fear and hatred is a fertile breeding ground for further interventionism overseas which in turn correlate to the creation of a world Pax-Americana completing the exact scenario of world expansionism and imperialism that was projected as the ominous Soviet doctrine.
February 21, 2005 10:27am
Ali, you have affirmed my theory that the length of your hair = the amount of pot you smoke. Bro, I respect EVERYONE's opinion, we are in America afterall, not Khazikstan, but seriously? Your math, that you wanted me to add up about the aid that was given to Afghanistan, and Pakistan after Bush vs. before was great. My father is a calculus teacher, and I think I've got this one down. However, the fact that we're giving countries aid after BOMBING the SHIITE out of them, and doing exponentially more damage to their countries than we can possibly fiscally repay, shows that that is 'fuzzy math' at best. Before I really go Punjabi on this thing, I've got to stop myself, but I just had to voice my concerns. I was born a Republican, and have conservative views on many things, but after this Administration and the appauling violations on Humanity, not just Islam, and my personal freedoms, I cannot support this regime...that's right regime that is in power in this country. I hope you don't end up in Guantanamo Bay homie, but there you might realize the flaws in your logic.
March 6, 2005 1:46am
... confuse politics with Islam. Bush has improved from his previous position and Muslims tend to be forgiving - you probably can't expect Bush to understand the nuances in the difference between say, hitting Iraq for a. personal reasons and b. rooting out the Taliban and Usama, while succeeding in conning us into believing that the USA's custodianship over the oil there was just collateral damnage. He himself may not realise the difference between all these contrary intentions (niyah) - well okay, should we forget about it brothers and sisters? All of us forget once in a while to examine our intentions before we act, right? Indeed, in any event, it's not for us to remember or not, anyway, as a group, because Iraq is a national/political issue ever more than it is an Islamic one. I'm leery of the idea of Muslims relating to Bush and political issues in general so carelessly.
March 25, 2005 2:26am
Ali Hassan = Big Joke. I wouldnt even waste my time trying to argue. Allah guides those who he wishes and the ones he choses not too, may HE keep their hearts, minds, and ears sealed forever!
March 26, 2005 1:05am
That's odd - I was under the impression that HER (Allah) guidance is extended to everyone last I checked, Islam was never an exclusive club, with a bouncer named 'Allah' guarding the door
March 26, 2005 6:48pm
Hassan, I think you have pushed the debate now. How do you refer to Allah SWT has her? In ALL the Quranic texts and Sunnah, Allah SWT has been referred to has HE and HIM. I dont think ANY scholar has ever used her or she. The quran is wirttien in Nahu Fusha Arabic in its purest form and that is only how we muslims take it. I dont think that you should make your own interpetations of the Quran. Maybe that same logic has lead you to believe that Islam can be subject to change. You might ask how do I change? Well lets look at what you are doing. Seeking help from a kafir and making allies with them was never done by Rasulullah or any of the Sahabas. As a matter of fact he encourage to to call them out and correct them for their wrong. What are you doing? You are begging for mercy at the hands of Bush and the rest of these anti Islamic parties. Anyone who likes to change Islam to meet their needs or financial needs has truly waged war against Islam. Allah SWT does not guide everyone. Where is your proof of this? There are many proofs that Allah SWT does not guide everyone. The munafiqeen are a good exmaple. Allah SWT never extends HIS help to the hyporcites. We can also look at the ayats in the Quran that say those who deal with intrest wage war against Allah SWT. So Allah SWT extends guidance to those who HE wages war against? Are you saying Allah SWT contradicting himself? I would think not and hope you dont think so also. Lets look at other Quranic texts. What about Pharoe, the people of Aad, the people of Lut, or what about Nuh (A) and how he could convert anybody including his own son! Indeed Allah SWT willed that they not become Muslims. So can you explain to me how Allah SWT extended his guidance there? I would also like to request you speak with proof, since never before have I seen you do so. We can also look at the history of the sahabas. When did they allow innovators as part of Islam? Never has history seen it. Abu Bakr (R) immediately suceeding the Prophet (S) was faced with an immediate challange. Some "muslims" thought that they did not have to pay zakat because the Prophet (S) died. He gave them an option and they didnt comply so he declared jihad on them. Lets look at the life of our scholars such as Ibn Taymiyyah. What did he do? If it werent for him declaring jihad against the Mongols, Islam would have been currupted. He refused to accept innovations in the same way the Prophet (S) and the sahabas did. Speaking of innovations, you are also partaking in great one. What is this innovation? We call it VOTING for kafirs and partaking in their kuffar government. Also propogating the slaughter of Muslims. If you were sincere about helping Islam and Muslims, you would read what the Sunnah and Quran say about this. If you even cared for your own self benefit you would open these texts to realize that you are not in accordance with them in this matter. You might tell me you have, but I ask you WHAT are your proofs? Please bring forth any Quranic evidence or Prophetic traditions. I challage you to do so, and you will not find any from authentic traditions. I suggest that you broaden your study of Islam a bit before calling for things that are un-Islamic. Go back to the Quran and Sunnah!
April 1, 2005 9:31pm
No response, I know you can not find any evidences or proofs. Seems to me like you and your family like to ramble for money. Funny how 90% of those Muslims who even did vote were against you. I saw that little documentary your cousin did. I find it funny that he is even against you, and your mother? All I can say is WOW! She really has NO Idea about politics. So you wanted America to go into Iraq and kill innocent people? You want sanctions? You want to go to war with Syria? I also find it funny you mention somehting about Palestine, like donkey Bush is doing something for that state. That its all a bunch of lies. Looks whats going on now, the Jews and Christians are on a property rush. They buy palestinian property with out palestinian approval, probably very much the same was Bush has bought out your family. All I can say is WALLAHI, Allah will bring justice to those who aid the KUFFAR. If you dont fear for your Muslims brothers, than have FEAR of ALLAH! I am warning you, many people like you have come into Islam before, and Allah SWT has delt with them more severely each and every time. Gain not the anger of Allah SWT. I urge you to leave your parents money alone and their political intrest. Come study Islam. Leave this kuffar business for the Kafirs. WALLAHI you will never gain ANYTHING from a kafir alliance, Allah SWT stated this in the Quran. Look deep inside your heart and find the Muslim that is willing to come out, not the one that supports the real tyrants, or hugs and kisses women on tv, not the one that encourage others to do wrong. But bring out the Muslim that is like Omar bin Kattab (R), Khalid Bin Waleed, Salman Farsi, Salahuddin Ayubi, Ibn Khattab, and soo many more! May Allah SWT guide you and all of us. If you are sincerely for Islam, sincerely look for the truth. Allah SWT will never keep you from the truth if you are sincere.
April 2, 2005 2:28am
If you need more background on the author, watch the documentary listed under the Junoonistan village, which was aired by BBC. You will fully comprehend the length and breadth of his 'naivete'!
May 9, 2005 3:13am
Good question - as a matter of fact, we put together a page that is dedicated towards what President Bush has to say about Muslims - please visit it - www.muslimsforbush.com - believe me, after reading it, I know where I stand within the eyes of President Bush
June 23, 2005 1:01pm
Ali: Please wake up and smell the coffee. Where are you coming from? Dont you have to answer to the Highest Authority in this Universe? Just pounder upon these questions. May Allah SWA forgive all of our shortcoming
July 5, 2005 4:10am
I think about answering Allah's call every single day of my life --- I have thought long and hard about what I can do to help the Ummah ---- and as of November of 2004, the very best thing I could've done was to get President Bush re-elected ----- you can check out my BeliefNet article as to why I believe that ---- www.beliefnet.com ----- if my actions are wrong, then Allah can take care of that ---- for now, I only allow Her to judge my actions - be well!
September 6, 2005 6:12pm
Perhaps it is time for muslims to stop relying on others to make a diffence to them, but to go and make a place for themselves where the big decisions are made.
September 27, 2005 4:00pm
dude, whats the deal?????? why are you still writing about this c rap when your best friend got voted back in? Don't you have anything else to do, a real job maybe??? why are you so intent on convincing us that Bush is fit to be prez? for ppl that hate Bush, you're not going to change that, why dont you just give it up and actually do something productive with your life?