Colin Powell’s endorsement of Democratic Presidential nominee Sen. Obama is certainly big news. In endorsing Obama, Powell did not hide his respect for Sen. McCain. But he underscored two very important points – the narrowing of the Republican agenda and the questionable selection of Sarah Palin.

A particular point of Powell’s interview on Meet the Press caught my attention:

“I am also troubled by, not what Senator McCain says, but what members of the party say. And it is permitted to be said such things as, "Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim." Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he's a Christian. He's always been a Christian. But the really right answer is - what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer's no, that's not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president? Yet, I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, ‘He's a Muslim and he might be associated terrorists.’ This is not the way we should be doing it in America.

I feel strongly about this particular point because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay was of a mother in Arlington Cemetery, and she had her head on the headstone of her son's grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone. And it gave his awards -- Purple Heart, Bronze Star -- showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death. He was 20 years old. And then, at the very top of the headstone, it didn't have a Christian cross, it didn't have the Star of David, it had crescent and a star of the Islamic faith. And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, and he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was 14 years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he can go serve his country, and he gave his life.”

On the ballot this election is not just the selection of the 43rd president but also a referendum on the future of American politics. Will we continue to look the other way as minorities like Muslims or Hispanics become cannon fodder to score cheap political points? Or will Americans finally transcend their fears and say enough is enough.

As a nation, we are at a crossroad. One path is laden with fear and paranoia. The other path is sober and pragmatic. In the immediate aftermath of 9-11 “fear” was the primary motivator behind U.S. policies. While not rational or defensible, this is at least understandable. But nearly seven years later the fact that our policies and politics continue to be driven by fear ought to be our collective concern.

Policies and politics driven by fear will be naturally irrational. To sustain such counterproductive policies, politicians resort to fear mongering, thus unleashing a vicious cycle. One in which “fear” leads to bad policies and bad policies lead to more “fear.”

There are many victims of this vicious cycle, the foremost of whom are our soldiers making the ultimate sacrifice for a cause that is ill-defined and a goal that is ever elusive. Domestically, it is the American Muslim and Arab community that have been one of the groups bearing the primary brunt of our fear-driven politics.

Muslims and their faith Islam are misunderstood, feared and shunned. A USA Today/Gallup Poll shows that 4 in 10 Americans admit having some prejudice against Muslims. A country as diverse as America and one that stands on the principles of liberty and justice can ill afford to remain entrenched in such paranoia.

Despite the fact that the American Muslims have to live with the consequences of such pervasive prejudice, the community shows remarkable optimism. A recent poll by the Pew Center concludes that that American Muslims are mostly mainstream and decidedly American in their outlook, values, and attitudes. American Muslims have a positive view towards the larger society and overwhelmingly reject extremism in all its forms.

At some level, I share the pessimism in John Mueller's book "Overblown" that, despite the low odds of terrorists succeeding, politicians will be inclined to sanctimoniously to play to those fears, bureaucrats will stoke the same fears, entrepreneurs will work very hard to milk it, and the press will continue to make sure that what bleeds leads. Yet I am more persuaded by a sense of optimism and hope.

Because the power to change this situation is in the hands of those who choose not to accept the status quo. It is my hope that this election we will finally transcend the politics of fear and forever change the direction of our country. However, if ordinary Americans continue to be mired in stereotypical assumptions about Islam and Muslims, then my fear is that even the audacity of hope will not be able to transcend the politics of fear.

The challenge for the next President will be to develop global alliances that will focus on terminating those political conflicts that spawn terrorism. This alliance is only possible when American foreign policy changes course to reflect America's values of liberty and justice for all, not some.

A recent study sponsored by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs argues that a well-integrated and empowered Muslim population would far better serve the United States than a population that feels marginalized and harassed. More than ever before, our nation needs the voices of American Muslims to navigate the critical policy challenges both here and abroad.

If we were to do this, American will not only be safer, it will be freer. America will be more respected for its moral convictions than feared for its military might. We will once again (in the words of former President Clinton) lead by the power of our examples not the examples of our power.

Amen - excellent!! Especially the last 2 paragraphs...American Muslims DO need to fully enter the public discourse & define themselves. Integration can be a powerful motivator to work within the society as a fully voting, engaged, articulate citizen - the time is now!

>>and he waited until he can go serve his country, and he gave his life

Semper Fi, Spc Khan. More about this soldier at: http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/19/more-on-the-soldier-kareem-r-khan/

Yet, who appreciates his sacrifice more: Muslims whose stature his sacrifce raised, or Americans who wonder why a Muslim would fight and die for this country? I shudder to think of what the I-want-to-be-seen-as-pious people really think of him and his family.

Oh yeah. Colin Powell. After having helped kill half a million Iraqi Muslims, we now have him here to defend American-Muslims. Ha ha hah ah hahaa. Powell is a spiritually bankrupt person. Someone who chose to pander to war mongerers instead of standing up against war. Especially given his position of authority. A chance to be an American Hero instead of an American Goat.

Sour grapes, because he was supposed to be standing up for President this election cycle, but he knows he chose the wrong path, and is now feeling marginalized. Probably pandering to the American-Muslim vote in case he gets a chance to stand up for President next time around. You know American-Muslims, mention their name on the news, and they are all over you for acknowledging their existence. "Oh yipee, Powell knows we exist, oh my god, oh my god, we must vote him in to Office". yadda yadda yadda.

Plus I question this whole line of reasoning about the Muslim-American solider. That "Oh, look Muslim fighting for America. Patriot. Blah blah blah". This is a faulty line of reasoning.

First one has to question the fundamental nature of the American military. Whether it is indeed a Patriotic force or whether it is actually a mercenary institution. Because if it is indeed a mercenary institution as I contend, then having Muslim members in it makes absolutely no difference as everybody is there to make a buck, black, white, blue, yellow. So being Muslim in such a situation means nothing, its just for money.

The military, by its fundamental nature is an instrument of foreign policy as well as to defend the state from foreign conquest or attack. Patriotism and yes, even college money, get people to overcome their fear of injury or even death for the collective good. Now, since we have a strict civilian control of the military, we have to do what the President or Congress orders the Joint Chiefs to do. Its not like in other countries where Muslims come from where the military runs the government. We see what disasters those are for the economy, social development and lack of stability. So, preserving the system we have is better than rebellion against foolish policies.

>
Oh yeah. Colin Powell. After having helped kill half a million Iraqi Muslims, we now have him here to defend American-Muslims. Ha ha hah ah hahaa. Powell is a spiritually bankrupt person. Someone who chose to pander to war mongerers instead of standing up against war. Especially given his position of authority. A chance to be an American Hero instead of an American Goat.

Sour grapes, because he was supposed to be standing up for President this election cycle, but he knows he chose the wrong path, and is now feeling marginalized. Probably pandering to the American-Muslim vote in case he gets a chance to stand up for President next time around. You know American-Muslims, mention their name on the news, and they are all over you for acknowledging their existence. "Oh yipee, Powell knows we exist, oh my god, oh my god, we must vote him in to Office". yadda yadda yadda.<

Spot on. Ironic that Khan(a brainwashed merc) would be alive(as well as over a million of innocent Iraqis) today if not for Powell's WMD lies. How soon people forget.

"Spot on. Ironic that Khan(a brainwashed merc) would be alive(as well as over a million of innocent Iraqis) today if not for Powell's WMD lies. How soon people forget."

Politicians do our dirty work while we cower behind the facade of relative absolute moralities. If politicians don't do our dirty work then they're doing someone else's. In this case Powell did ours as he stood up for us "terrorists". Therefore, credit should be given where its due, otherwise no one will do our dirty work.

>Politicians do our dirty work while we cower behind the facade of relative absolute moralities. If politicians don't do our dirty work then they're doing someone else's. In this case Powell did ours as he stood up for us "terrorists". Therefore, credit should be given where its due, otherwise no one will do our dirty work.<

I'm not sure what you mean by "our dirty work," nor is anybody hiding behind "relative moral absolutes." I really am tired of the "oh look someone said something nice about Muslims, lets all go honor him." attitude of some Muslims.Colin Powell is a war criminal whose lies led to the deaths of over a million people. No 60 second sound byte will change that.

Its not about honoring him, although many muslims would go overboard with glee that he said this - it's about being pragmatic...don't shut people off when they're making positive overtures like that.

The Prophet did the same - he sought protection from folks who harmed his people in Makkah, yet fought them when he went to Medinah.

>The Prophet did the same - he sought protection from folks who harmed his people in Makkah, yet fought them when he went to Medinah.<

Wrong. Care to name any of these folks? I don't recall Abu Jahl ever protecting the Prophet(saw) or the nascent Muslim community.

Colin Powell, in standing up for the Palestinian POV, based on his own moral compulsion, basically made that choice and got sidelined by Bush and his cronies- and (was forced to)resign soon after.

I remember thinking as I watched his interviews, and listened to his reasonable points, that his views would not sit well with the neocons in Washington. And, lo- it didn't.
He knew that speaking for what he felt was right would be the end of his career in the Whitehouse.
I hope Obama uses him as a real and honest borker in peace negotiations in Israel/Palestine.

"Wrong. Care to name any of these folks? I don't recall Abu Jahl ever protecting the Prophet(saw) or the nascent Muslim community."

I believe it was abu lahab who protected him briefly after abu talib died. After which he was protected by Mut'im ibn Uday after Taif. The point is the Prophet compromised certain principles and the safety of muslims at certain points in his life. For example, in an expedition to give dawah to the banu ghatafan tribe, a number of muslims were killed even though a promise was made that they would be protected. One (or two) muslims took revenge in a subsequent trip and blood money was asked for from the Prophet which the Prophet accepted. At the same time, the Prophet was not magnanimous all the time.

Since you asked...our dirty work, or at-least one of the strategies that muslims have employed since 9/11 and after is to turn the question of the cause for violent behavior on western actions and policies instead of on Islam or on something inherent in muslims. The fact is that much of the blame on the authoritarian, polarized, poverty-ridden nature of our societies lies with us and only some on the west. "We're not like the fundamentalists you project on TV - fix your Israel policy first!" is the mantra. Well, Powell helped us along in this regard.

I think the one consistent thing about Kareem Khans participation in the war is that as a citizen he was clear about his role within his country. We can't speak for him or validate his actions. Like the obviously poisonous "mujahideen" who operate outside any civilisationary rules, Kareem too has too account to Allah for his actions, but whether they were good or bad is not something that is immediately obvious to any of us.

Yes, Colin Powell did lie to the United Nations about the threats of terrorists and American military urgency, but he did ultimately resign in protest. I think his dissent must be given due consideration. He probably does believe what he says and that is that the United States is an a-religious society and that Muslim participation is welcome. That's the point of this article. What Americans believe America is. And his view is positive and probably true. Else I think, many Muslims would have migrated form the United States in protest of the war.

>> The fact is that much of the blame on the authoritarian, polarized, poverty-ridden nature of our societies lies with us and only some on the west. <<

I don't full agree with you, but the end result would be the same. Ownership of our problems allows us the opportunity to fix it. If we allow that polarizing dialogue to form the core of our views, then we end up being unable to deal with problems that stem from our society. Because the specter of western interference becomes all-encompassing. i.e. We won't be able to deal with the problem until we "deal" with the United States. I believe that that incapacitates us politically. Just as Zionists have little political output without being victims, so too will we produce little without the civilisationary conflict as our guidepost.

"We won't be able to deal with the problem until we "deal" with the United States."

Point well taken.

On the muslim soldier - I don't know why some make it a big deal that he fought for the american military. Joining the american military is the same as joining any other country's military. Muslim countries have killed muslim civilians and armed forces now and they have done so before. Muslims have fought each other since during the lifetimes of the companions. So this notion of muslims joining a "kaffir" army as being abominable is absolutely untenable. God will judge the companions as He will judge this soldier as He will judge all of us who participate and gain from an america dominated economy.

Whereas we can speculate all we want about all of this the grief of the soldier's mother remains without question.

>Yes, Colin Powell did lie to the United Nations about the threats of terrorists and American military urgency, but he did ultimately resign in protest.<

He didn't resign, he served just one term. "Civilisationary rules"? Like invading a country on a lie, occupying it for over 5 years and torturing, raping, and killing over a million Iraqis. Selective memory loss there?
Powell is a war criminal, no ifs, ands, or buts about it.

>Muslim countries have killed muslim civilians and armed forces now and they have done so before. Muslims have fought each other since during the lifetimes of the companions.<

And your simplistic point is? That its ok to join the US military because Muslims have fought each other(for whatever reasons you didn't care to elaborate)?
Khan was an idiotic mercenary who died for a barrel of oil. Its ironic that Powell brought him up since his WMD lies resulted in Khan's death.