Hussam Ayloush on KOCE OC Insider discussing Muslims, moles and the FBI. Is the FBI keeping us safe or invading privacy? Show aired on Wed. May 13, 2009
I was most disheartened by his nonanswer to "Islam is a national security threat." He scoffs instead of engaging the fallacy. He should have pointed out the illogic of a statement about a religion that is practiced by people from Kosovo to Indonesia, from India to China, from Oman to Ghana. To claim that a religion of so many years is itself a threat is stupid. But Ayloush fails to argue that. To all of our detriment. He makes us look complicit instead of clearing the good name of our religion.
For example, Ayloush contradicts himself when he says that he is unwilling to accept the argument of the informant for his conman background on one hand, but then mentions arguments of the conman's experiences on the other hand as proof of victimization. You can't have it both ways!
I was most disheartened by his non-answer to "Islam is a national security threat." Again, he used the conman is not credible excuse. That's not an argument.
It's incumbent that the leadership change. Let Muslim citizens who are trained and educated wtihin the Western system be our spokespeople and those with whom federal agencies interact with. It is is deathly serious because the flaws of this organization's stubborn commitment to its decade-old groupthinking leadersihp reverberates onto all Muslim-Americans unfairly. We need representation that instinctively thinks from both perspectievs and articulates concerns in pragmatic, sympathetic fashion.
2,cont. We need a representative who can articulate the security organizations' scenarios of concern, respond in a pragmatic and productive way, while also better communicating the activities of simple worship and peaceful daily practice that our members, like any people of faith, engage in. Ayloush failed to do that. The interviewer had to posit this concern and even after Ayloush failed to convince the audience: he made the audience more circumspect by speaking in victimized tones.
1, There is a considerable amount of groupthink among CAIR leadership. A sense of victimization or continually talking with people in the same small office room that obviously share one perspective makes for a lack of outside perspectives coming in. The thinking among these leaders is uniform and heavily lacks self-critique. They are stubbornly loyal to the current leadership and unwilling to bring in new faces to better represent the Muslim community at the executive levels.
We Muslims need better representation in our national leadership.
As much as I appreciate CAIR's mission, and I have worked with the organization in the past, I'll be the first to say that people like Ayloush, Awad, etc., are not able to communicate properly with a Western audience.
There are certain principles of debate and conversation that are important for properly stating your case and Ayloush misses it all in this interview.
I was most disheartened by his nonanswer to "Islam is a national security threat." He scoffs instead of engaging the fallacy. He should have pointed out the illogic of a statement about a religion that is practiced by people from Kosovo to Indonesia, from India to China, from Oman to Ghana. To claim that a religion of so many years is itself a threat is stupid. But Ayloush fails to argue that. To all of our detriment. He makes us look complicit instead of clearing the good name of our religion.
morninglight98 2 years ago
For example, Ayloush contradicts himself when he says that he is unwilling to accept the argument of the informant for his conman background on one hand, but then mentions arguments of the conman's experiences on the other hand as proof of victimization. You can't have it both ways!
I was most disheartened by his non-answer to "Islam is a national security threat." Again, he used the conman is not credible excuse. That's not an argument.
morninglight98 2 years ago
It's incumbent that the leadership change. Let Muslim citizens who are trained and educated wtihin the Western system be our spokespeople and those with whom federal agencies interact with. It is is deathly serious because the flaws of this organization's stubborn commitment to its decade-old groupthinking leadersihp reverberates onto all Muslim-Americans unfairly. We need representation that instinctively thinks from both perspectievs and articulates concerns in pragmatic, sympathetic fashion.
morninglight98 2 years ago
2,cont. We need a representative who can articulate the security organizations' scenarios of concern, respond in a pragmatic and productive way, while also better communicating the activities of simple worship and peaceful daily practice that our members, like any people of faith, engage in. Ayloush failed to do that. The interviewer had to posit this concern and even after Ayloush failed to convince the audience: he made the audience more circumspect by speaking in victimized tones.
morninglight98 2 years ago
1, There is a considerable amount of groupthink among CAIR leadership. A sense of victimization or continually talking with people in the same small office room that obviously share one perspective makes for a lack of outside perspectives coming in. The thinking among these leaders is uniform and heavily lacks self-critique. They are stubbornly loyal to the current leadership and unwilling to bring in new faces to better represent the Muslim community at the executive levels.
jesuismaisoui 2 years ago
We Muslims need better representation in our national leadership.
As much as I appreciate CAIR's mission, and I have worked with the organization in the past, I'll be the first to say that people like Ayloush, Awad, etc., are not able to communicate properly with a Western audience.
There are certain principles of debate and conversation that are important for properly stating your case and Ayloush misses it all in this interview.
I'll expand on my reasons in the next comment.
jesuismaisoui 2 years ago