• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US appoints envoy to Muslim world

Scorpion89

Scorpion89

Banned
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
2,629
Reaction score
527
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
BBC NEWS | Americas | US appoints envoy to Muslim world

The US State Department has appointed its first Special Representative to Muslim Communities.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Farah Pandith would play a leading role in US efforts to "engage Muslims around the world".

She said Ms Pandith, who was born in Indian-administered Kashmir, would bring years of experience to the role.

The appointment is part of President Barack Obama's attempts to improve relations with the Muslim world.

Mrs Clinton said Ms Pandith "sees her personal experience as an illustration of how Muslim immigrants to the US can successfully integrate themselves into American society".

The State Department said Ms Pandith, who is a Muslim, would be responsible for helping US efforts to "engage with Muslims around the world on a people-to-people and organisational level".

Great just what we need so I guess next we will have a special envoy to the Hindu World and then Druid World. Man this is a smack of Separation of Church and State and Racist by The Obama Admin. but hey it's Mr. Obama he can do anything he wants.
 
Umm......how is a woman supposed to "engage" the types that support the Taliban and al-Qaeda?
 
celticlord said:
Umm......how is a woman supposed to "engage" the types that support the Taliban and al-Qaeda?
Click to expand...

Are those the types we really want to engage in talks?
 
Scorpion89 said:
Great just what we need so I guess next we will have a special envoy to the Hindu World and then Druid World. Man this is a smack of Separation of Church and State and Racist by The Obama Admin. but hey it's Mr. Obama he can do anything he wants.
Click to expand...

The Muslim world has a few more geopolitical problems than the Hindu World. And there is no Druid World, other than WoW. ;)
 
celticlord said:
Umm......how is a woman supposed to "engage" the types that support the Taliban and al-Qaeda?
Click to expand...

Uhh are you suggesting that most Muslims support the Taliban and al-Qaeda? :confused:
 
Kandahar said:
The Muslim world has a few more geopolitical problems than the Hindu World. And there is no Druid World, other than WoW. ;)
Click to expand...

Our you sure that there isn't any Druid left I would double check that
 
Kandahar said:
The Muslim world has a few more geopolitical problems than the Hindu World. And there is no Druid World, other than WoW. ;)
Click to expand...

Well, it depends on what you define a druid as.

There are people who are members of a religion which worships nature(more than one?), but I don't know enough about it to know what they call themselves.
 
celticlord said:
Umm......how is a woman supposed to "engage" the types that support the Taliban and al-Qaeda?
Click to expand...

Are you saying all Muslims support Al-Q and the Taliban?
 
The Mark said:
How is what he said about the issue saying what you say it is saying?
Click to expand...

The article indicated this:
The State Department said Ms Pandith, who is a Muslim, would be responsible for helping US efforts to "engage with Muslims around the world on a people-to-people and organisational level".
Click to expand...

To which he responded:
celticlord said:
Umm......how is a woman supposed to "engage" the types that support the Taliban and al-Qaeda?
Click to expand...

Since the article neither stated nor implied anything at all about terrorist groups or Islamic extremists, the only logical conclusion that I can draw is that Celticlord was referring to "the Muslim world" when he made his comment about the Taliban and al-Qaeda.

If I am mistaken, Celticlord, please clarify who you are referring to, and how it is relevant to this thread.
 
I've heard it all, now.
 
Kandahar said:
The article indicated this:
The State Department said Ms Pandith, who is a Muslim, would be responsible for helping US efforts to "engage with Muslims around the world on a people-to-people and organisational level".
Click to expand...

To which he responded:
celticlord said:
Umm......how is a woman supposed to "engage" the types that support the Taliban and al-Qaeda?
Click to expand...

Since the article neither stated nor implied anything at all about terrorist groups or Islamic extremists, the only logical conclusion that I can draw is that Celticlord was referring to "the Muslim world" when he made his comment about the Taliban and al-Qaeda.

If I am mistaken, Celticlord, please clarify who you are referring to, and how it is relevant to this thread.
Click to expand...

You are perhaps correct as to his meaning.

However, I took it to mean that places like Iran and the like would be less likely to deal with a female, as they have biases against females in positions of power.

Whereas you appeared to take it as meaning the WHOLE of the muslim world.

So I felt it necessary to disagree with you.
 
Last edited:
The new envoy should immediately be sent to Tehran
 
Kandahar said:
Uhh are you suggesting that most Muslims support the Taliban and al-Qaeda? :confused:
Click to expand...
Of course they don't! Why just look at all the huge rallies in the Muslim World against these organizations and terrorist tactics in general. And note the expansive educational initiatives in such countries to combat the recruitment of teenagers as suicide bombers.

Note the many elegant, widely published religious rulings and instruction from top-flight Islamic scholars decrying the actions of the Taliban and al-Qaeda in the name of Muhammadanism.

What? You don't see these things? I wonder why?
 
Islam is a religion. Constitutionally speaking, we are required to appoint an envoy for all known religions.
 
apdst said:
Islam is a religion. Constitutionally speaking, we are required to appoint an envoy for all known religions.
Click to expand...

Wait, what?

Please explain your reasoning.
 
apdst said:
Islam is a religion. Constitutionally speaking, we are required to appoint an envoy for all known religions.
Click to expand...

No, that is not true.
 
The Mark said:
Wait, what?

Please explain your reasoning.
Click to expand...


Seperation of church and state. It's unconstitutional for the United States government to officially recognize one religion over all others.

The appointment of an enoy to the Muslim World includes American Muslims, as well as Arab Muslims; otherwise, it would discriminatory. It's unconstitutional for one religion in this country to have a government department for that religion.
 
Kandahar said:
Uhh are you suggesting that most Muslims support the Taliban and al-Qaeda? :confused:
Click to expand...
Hardly. It also hardly requires a scholar of Islam to know that certain groups within the "Muslim world" place women in what we would consider second-class status.

Remember that in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, women are not allowed to drive.

Remember that Northern Sudan enforces a strict interpretation of Shari'ah, and as recently as 2007 sentenced women to death by stoning for adultery.

Remember that the bottom of the 2009 Social Institutions and Gender Index is predominantly Muslim.

Remember that the Taliban, during the time of their control of Afghanistan, denied women the right to even leave the house without a male to escort them, denied them education, and even access to healthcare.

Outreach is about changing perceptions--changing the perceptions especially of one's putative enemies. Where is the need greater for shifting perceptions--among fairly moderate Egyptians or among fundamentalist Afghans and Pashtuns?

If the outreach message is going to be rejected by those putative enemies because of the gender of the messenger, how much can realistically be accomplished?

An envoy to the Ummah who will not be allowed to speak to the entirety of the Ummah is hindered in what she can accomplish.
 
celticlord said:
Hardly. It also hardly requires a scholar of Islam to know that certain groups within the "Muslim world" place women in what we would consider second-class status.

Remember that in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, women are not allowed to drive.

Remember that Northern Sudan enforces a strict interpretation of Shari'ah, and as recently as 2007 sentenced women to death by stoning for adultery.

Remember that the bottom of the 2009 Social Institutions and Gender Index is predominantly Muslim.

Remember that the Taliban, during the time of their control of Afghanistan, denied women the right to even leave the house without a male to escort them, denied them education, and even access to healthcare.

Outreach is about changing perceptions--changing the perceptions especially of one's putative enemies. Where is the need greater for shifting perceptions--among fairly moderate Egyptians or among fundamentalist Afghans and Pashtuns?

If the outreach message is going to be rejected by those putative enemies because of the gender of the messenger, how much can realistically be accomplished?

An envoy to the Ummah who will not be allowed to speak to the entirety of the Ummah is hindered in what she can accomplish.
Click to expand...

Was not Condi Rice able to deal with Saudi Arabia and the Sudan?
 
apdst said:
Seperation of church and state. It's unconstitutional for the United States government to officially recognize one religion over all others.

The appointment of an enoy to the Muslim World includes American Muslims, as well as Arab Muslims; otherwise, it would discriminatory. It's unconstitutional for one religion in this country to have a government department for that religion.
Click to expand...

Hmm...

I could agree with that.

But are we aware of all the religions out there?

For all we know, there could be some random hermit in the rain forrest who started his own religion which only he believes in...do we have to search them all out and send envoys to every one?
 
celticlord said:
Hardly. It also hardly requires a scholar of Islam to know that certain groups within the "Muslim world" place women in what we would consider second-class status.

Remember that in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, women are not allowed to drive.

Remember that Northern Sudan enforces a strict interpretation of Shari'ah, and as recently as 2007 sentenced women to death by stoning for adultery.

Remember that the bottom of the 2009 Social Institutions and Gender Index is predominantly Muslim.

Remember that the Taliban, during the time of their control of Afghanistan, denied women the right to even leave the house without a male to escort them, denied them education, and even access to healthcare.

Outreach is about changing perceptions--changing the perceptions especially of one's putative enemies. Where is the need greater for shifting perceptions--among fairly moderate Egyptians or among fundamentalist Afghans and Pashtuns?

If the outreach message is going to be rejected by those putative enemies because of the gender of the messenger, how much can realistically be accomplished?

An envoy to the Ummah who will not be allowed to speak to the entirety of the Ummah is hindered in what she can accomplish.
Click to expand...

But did you consider that her gender might HELP change perceptions? I doubt Martin Luther King would have been as influential as he was if he were white. But he became the most prominent face of Black America to many white people...and many of them found him (and by extension, black people) to be much less scary than they imagined.

Sometimes it takes strong figures who belong to precisely the groups who are most oppressed. Many Muslim nations have shown this is possible. For example, Pakistan has become decidedly more liberal toward women's rights since Benazir Bhutto was prime minister in the early 90s. Obviously it has a long way to go, but the trend is undeniably in favor of greater gender equality.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom