As a Muslim who enjoys religious freedom in this country, as an African American who has experienced firsthand racism, and as an American who truly believes in the principles of freedom that this country claims to support, it has been sickening to read all of these reports about the mosque that New York Muslims want to build 2 blocks away from “ground zero”, and how 70% of Americans allegedly oppose it.

First of all, I will use the term “racism” in my comments, only because there is really no good term to describe someone who has malicious feelings or even evil intentions against someone of another religion.  ”Religist” simply isn’t a word.

The funny thing about racism is that it can hide in plain sight for years, and even the person who harbors it is unaware of its presence.  We saw this when Obama ran for office, when people threatened him and at times even went so far as to question his citizenship.  We saw it after 9/11, when anyone who even looked like he or she might be Arab was suddenly a potential terrorist in the eyes of many angry Americans.  And if you spend enough time living in brown skin of any shade, you experience it routinely in the work place, with law enforcement, at stores, and elsewhere.  Racism is far from dead.  In fact, in some ways, it has increased, while only becoming more discreet.

Racism against Muslims, for lack of a better term, is apparently at an all-time high.  Not only were Muslims responsible for 9/11, after all, but they are also the “enemy” of what is becoming the next Vietnam in Afghanistan, with no end to the war in sight.  Just as Japanese were the “enemy” in WWII, with Japanese Americans being shunned and even sent off to concentration camps, so too have Muslims become the “other” suspiciously watched in America.

The difference, much to the chagrin of those racist Americans, is that Islam is much more prevalent in this country and Muslims are much more numerous.  We have Muslims in Congress, and your doctor, police officer, judge, or even your nanny may be Muslim, and you may not even know it.  There are generations of Muslims with names like mine, with no hint of Arab, Pakistani, or other middle-eastern/south asian blood.  So, yes, even your librarian may be Muslim.

Does that mean you should freak out now because we’re “invading” America?  No, it’s too late for panic anyway, but there’s nothing to be afraid of, people.  Islam in America is not new.  Muslims came over with Columbus (and even BEFORE Columbus).  In fact, according to many reports, Columbus would not have even made the journey, if it were not for the sea navigation tools of Muslims.

Since that time, slaves and former slaves, farmers, factory workers, and all types of Muslim Americans, from sea to shining sea, have lived peacefully in this country.   And yes, on September 11, 2001, there were Muslims who died as a direct result from those attacks.  There was at least one Muslim prayer room in the World Trade Center itself!

Therefore, people like Mike Lupica of the NY Daily News who ramble off nonsense about “sensitivity to 9/11 victims” are simply finding ways to openly express their racism, without directly mentioning it.  I mean, really, Mr. Lupica, what “sensitivity” is it that these victims, and apparently you also, have?  Are they “sensitive” to having to look at brown people?  Are they “sensitive” to the smell of ethnic food?  Are they “sensitive” to seeing people dressed differently?  What exactly is the “sensitivity”?

He did not answer it in his article, despite taking up two pages.  Instead he danced around the issue, never quite mentioning what exactly it was that offends people so much.  What about the mosque is so wrong?  Don’t the families of Muslim victims of 9/11 also have “sensitivity”?  Don’t they have the right to also honor their loved ones?  Or is that right only reserved for white Christian Americans?

These are not rhetorical questions.  I challenge anyone who opposes the building of the mosque to answer them.  Please tell me you actually have some legitimate reason for opposing the mosque, other than outright racism, and I may very well change my opinion.   I will say this.  Mike Lupica is right.  It’s not about “freedom of religion” at all.  It’s about racism, plain and simple.  They hate us, and they want us gone.

Photo by Rachael Voorhees

It may not have been a pretty exit, as President Obama himself called it “offensive”.  But the fact remains that by saying Israelis should “get the hell out of Palestine” Helen Thomas amplified the stifled voices of native peoples all over the world.

Much of Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and yes, America, was occupied through violence, oppression, and murder.  Israel’s bloody chapter of history has been no different.

The fact that Jews left Europe to occupy Palestine because of their own plight does not make it right.  If anything it reflects the cycle of abuse we see on an individual basis.  The abused child grows up to become the abuser.  Being the victims of a Holocaust does not give Israelis the right to inflict one on the Palestinians, one that has lasted 60 years.

Helen Thomas was right.  They should leave, but they probably will not.  Their children have grown up in Israel, unaware of the crimes of their fathers.  Those children are innocent, just as the children of American slave owners are, but they still reap the benefits of the suffering inflicted on others.  For that, there must be some resolution.

When Mandela opposed Apartheid and spent the better part of his life in jail, much of the western world turned a blind eye.  Voices like Helen Thomas were ignored or even shunned.  Today, they will ignore her, shun her, and maybe even hate her, but she is right.  History will record just how right she was.

There has been much talk about the cybersphere with the release of Apple’s new iPad.  Some of that talk has reflected the views of people who believe the days of print materials are numbered.  And please don’t mistakenly assume that because I am a librarian, I would shed tears over such a loss.

From the perspective of historical preservation, appreciation of literature, and a general love of books, I would certainly miss holding a book in my hand — the smell and texture of the pages, the feeling of turning each one with my fingers, and the weight of the object in my hand.

Nevertheless, I recognize that a change must come.  Printing anything on paper is destroying our environment, the only earth we have. Something must replace the traditional book, but the real question here is whether e-book readers like Amazon’s Kindle or over-glorified e-book readers like the new iPad are the answer to this dilemma.  I think not.

There are two main problems with this theory.  The first is cost.  While there may be future devices that are inexpensive and easily distributable, these devices are not.  As much as Apple fanboys would have you believe that everyone and their mama is going out to buy an iPad, that simply is not the case.  If people have to pay more or even as much for a reading device as they do for mobile service or cable television, people will simply stop reading.

The second problem is format.  Digital media is currently laced with poison (i.e. DRM).  It is a hassle that you cannot share your e-books with others as easily as you would shared a print book.  It is ridiculous that libraries cannot do this, and until they can, e-books will always be second-rate.  The format problem is also reflected in the devices themselves.  No matter how thin they get, they are not going to replace the look and feel of a real book.

I believe the real solution is something like I saw on Caprica: a page that looks and feels like paper but is electronic.  We have the ability to synthesize almost anything these days.  I am lactose intolerant but can eat soy cheese and hardly notice the difference.  Paper can be synthesized and so can book covers that are stronger and more resilient than the current offerings.  Imagine hold a book that looks and feels just like a real book, but you can press a button when you are finished reading and turn it into the book’s sequel.

I am not writing this because of nostalgia or my love of books but just based on my observation of library patrons and people in general.  I believe that until we reach the point where the benefits of e-books outweigh the inconveniences and high cost, print books are safe.