This morning, the authorities have publically identified a 24-year-old man who lives with his mom close to the Salman al-Farisi Islamic Center, as a person of interest in the Corvallis arson.
A Muslim neighbor was quoted as saying, “If that was him, it would be shocking…You cannot judge the person if you don’t have all the evidence against him.”
The young man in question was reported as saying that he had read on a blog that the Muslims set the fire themselves.
The hate speech that this young man accepted at face value is a warning of how dangerous this kind of misinformation can be when it twists a mind vulnerable to hatred. I hope it was not a neighbor. We can only wait to see how this develops.
Over at a Facebook site where I contribute, a man made some remarks which I thought might indicate that he felt that this was a hate crime only because it was a Mosque and not a Synagogue or Christian church. I followed him to this page and engaged him in a private civil conversation. I gave him some information, sent him some links. And he wound up coming back to like a comment I had made about “being honored to be at the candlelight vigil”.
One person at a time.
Someone Set Fire to the Islamic Center in my Town
Oregon Muslims Gathered Last Night in Solidairity
No Fear in Corvallis Last Night
Image from NewsBlogNYC.com
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Cranky Cuss
john tapley
Catnlion
WriteNOWMom
Colony of Losers
Jane Gideon
Salon.com
Comments
Over the years in my career I developed a habit of simply observing my employees in their various places. No words, no interactions when I was observing, just watching and listening. I could always tell when there was a disruptive force working amongst them, it was as palpable as physical being in my presence. When I felt that presence at work, I worried as it is exactly as you portrayed, a fire that can burn out of control so fast, it can destroy an entire department of people within days.
I watched closely the interactions of my staff members and it always lead to one person holding the match. That person would be different from time to time depending upon the circumstances, but it was always a single individual who would start that fire and if I didn’t find the source of the fire, it was a very tough job, in fact close to impossible to rebuild the trust and cohesive atmosphere that it destroyed.
Words and even body language are very dangerous when carelessly misused aren’t they?
Thanks for an excellent real life example of how disruptive of peace just one person can be.
You sound like a great boss to monitor the morale in your business like that. I would love to work at a place that cared so much about how folks felt on the job. That kind of care cannot be taught; it is inate.
Here is to sanity in the new year!
rated with love
Fighting hatred by love. May be the only thing that works.
Thanks for coming by. (Love the holiday avatar!)
"Other than drive-by shootings, all physical violence begins with verbal violence. Worse, is the almost casual acceptance of a false premise."
You are right as rain. Folks do not realize that when they practice the politics of division, others may take it in deadly seriousness.
Coming from you who have fought the good fight all your life, I consider that high praise.
"Hate" can be rather vague and can be thrown back at the left by an unscrupulous right. We should narrowly construct these laws so they can't be increased in breadth.
I heard Rush Limbaugh a few months back saying that criticism of Big Companies was "hate speech" as was criticism of the "Rich." He said the rich were a minority that were disliked, often for actions most of them were not guilty of. He said violence against the rich, because of their wealth, should be a "hate crime," and vocally professed hatred or dislike of the rich should be "hate speech" and should not be tolerated by companies or on university campuses or in the media.
I agree with you., but I dont trust the right and I see where they want to go with this. We need to narrowly construct this law...
Exactly. You can get much accomplished with reasonable words and actions. When I was a middle-management-type clown, I found that while there's little distance involved between a kick in the slats and a pat on the back ... it means a great deal to the person on the receiving end.
I had not heard that particular twist on the term "Hate Speech" toward the newest minority--our rich masters. That makes perfect sense since they have always used our own language to paint us black. Look at how they turned "liberal" into an epithet.
I am not sure what else we can call it. "Inciting violence talk"? That could be applied to anyone criticising the Right or the poor Rich.
What a world of Double Speak.
Boanerges Redux,
You must have been a terrific manager. I don't think they teach that in management school. It is the issue, not the person.
Did someone set the Mosque on fire?
Who was the young man in question?
Did he do something?
Was he the person of interest?
What was the hate speech?
Lew
Excuse me. There has been a lot of news about this so I have taken the expedient of not giving background.
This is breaking news this morning that they have identified a person of interest, who has not been arrested, in the firebombing that occurred at the Islamic Center in my town early Sunday morning. It is being highly suspicioned that it is a hate crime but there have been no charges yet.
This young man is the suspected arsonist.
I updated the post with links to my previous post.
The hate speech was in his paragraph:
"The young man in question was reported as saying that he had read on a blog that the Muslims set the fire themselves. "
This accusation that the people who worshiped there burned their own house of worship has actually been written in response to this story in blogs elsewhere. Blaming the victims is never good.
Really? I love Lima Beans, but I defend your right not to like them at all. After all, there are simply beans...
The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. But whatever.
You have the right to be rude about my post all you want.
If you look at these two young men central to this story--one a would-be terrorist and the other an alleged arsonist of a house of worship, you have to wonder what they have been listening to and believing. Hatred breeds violence in vulnerable populations like disaffected young men. If we could figure out the lesson this story holds for us, we would all be safer.
But whatever.
Cheers me so to see your sweet little tree!
You are my legal gal too!
There is a balance that needs to be struck. A news item recently has a disabled vet being tried for crimes against the church which protests at soldier's funerals. This church's activism is supported by law but the ethical concerns to me are difficult.
I do know that young men are being assaulted by hate talk on all sides and can react with violence.
It is the greatest pity of all.
The only thing I can think of to do is just keep trying. One person at a time.
"Hate speech" is the most politically correct and easily abused trope of modern culture. "Hate speech is, outside of the law, any communication which disparages a person or a group on the basis of some characteristic such as race or sexual orientation."
Does that mean that every time some bobo on OS makes a invective filled rant about Israel, conservatives, etc. that it's hate speech? And why doesn't every one of you pile on and tell this moron that he or she is engaging in hate speech?
And that is the problem with 'hate speech'; it is a very fuzzy object whose boundaries are different depending on one's own preconceptions. And that is why the First Amendment is a good absolute to work at.
You use the term "politically correct" as a sobriquet just as time worn as how you find "hate speech".
On the day after the Mosque arson in my town, I was involved in an AP conversation about the fire where you got all the crazies spouting Islamophoic falsehoods. Chief among these vitrolic comments was the belief that my Muslim neighbors set this fire themselves--a belief shared by the alleged firebomber.
This is hate talk because it prepetuates suspicions and ascribes evil intent to everything a certain group does--be it Christians, Jews or Muslims. For most folks, talk is as far as it goes. For vulnerable minds like the Christmas tree bomber and this alleged arsonist of a Mosque, it incites violence.
The First Amendment is not an absolute but is a Democratic ideal that we constantly need to consult to deal with truth in our society.
Hate speech is not a truth.
Travel seems not to have broadened your view into a global persepctive.
There are none so blind as will not see.