Scott Horton Interviews Stephan Salisbury

Scott Horton, August 14, 2010

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Stephan Salisbury, author of Mohamed’s Ghosts: An American Story of Love and Fear in the Homeland, discusses the “Mosque at Ground Zero” that is neither a mosque nor at ground zero, how most “Not in MY NYC” protesters are from out of town and don’t reflect the tolerance of Manhattan residents, the hostile sendoff of NYC cultural center representative Feisal Abdul Rauf on his State Department-sponsored Middle East religious tolerance tour, the deep rooted xenophobia in the U.S. exacerbated by post-9/11 government persecution of Muslims, the FBI  informants and provocateurs behind high-profile terrorist-cell arrests and how the Woodrow Wilson-era Palmer Raids gave a career boost to young J. Edgar Hoover.

MP3 here. (36:54)

Stephan Salisbury is cultural writer for the Philadelphia Inquirer. His most recent book is Mohamed’s Ghosts: An American Story of Love and Fear in the Homeland.

31 Responses to “Stephan Salisbury”

  1. [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Ron Paul News, AngelaKeaton. AngelaKeaton said: Antiwar Radio Stephan Salisbury: Stephan Salisbury, author of Mohamed’s Ghosts: An American Story of Love an… [...]

  2. ive never read it but from what ive heard the Quran is very bloody, and its not surprising that it could be used to justify violence. SAME GOES FOR THE BIBLE. I have read a lot of that book and it is full of insane writings and can be used to justify whatever action you decided to take (eg. eye for an eye, OR turn the other cheek).

    Uncivilized brutish behavior should be expected from any book written 1500 or so years ago.

    I was once on the "tolerance" bandwagon until i realized i should probably be speaking against, (peacefully of course) oppressive, mysogenistic, authoritarian violence non-sense i would never advocate to anyone.

    We need to use rationality to guide our behavior: logic and empiricism, not mysticism.

  3. just to be clear on the last post, im just as anti-christian as i am anti-muslim. but i would NEVER promote violence against either even as their books promote violence against me (being a non-believer).
    (please dont insult anyone by talking about context, either.)

    Luke 19:27 (see 19:11-27)

    "But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them – bring them here and kill them in front of me."

    Qur'an:8:39 "So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world)."

    there are many more to be found like this with a quick google search.

    as Stefan Molyneux points out,(hope im paraphrasing right) as a non-believer, muslims and christians saying not to worry about these quotes are kinda like Ku Klux Klan members telling a black man, "hey dont worry, we dont REALLY believe that stuff about lynchings."

  4. Who made the decision to put the MX warhead on Minuteman-3 (CEP 30 meters or less) and for what reason ? Maybe to minimize nuclear winter effects. But they still need the anti-retaliation weapons on ships in the Black Sea in Bulgaria and on land in Poland and Romania by 2015. The D5 on Trident-2 does minimize nuclear winter effects. The same goes for earth penetrating warheads, of course. To be deployed on the new missiles ?

  5. U never read a book and yet you call it bloody? That is so unfair of someone who claims to be 'tolerant' lmao.
    The Quraan mentions the words Peace, Love, Tolerance and coexistence and even urges the Muslims only to resort to war if they are attacked and yet you don't read it and u goon call it bloody?
    May God Bless Your Ignorance!
    This is a post from someone who follows the 1500 year old book. You suppose that 1500 years ago all mankind was as stupid as you? That's so stupid of an American…but then, r they not all stupids?

  6. Americans think of ways to carry out successful wars, exterminate others and dominate. They never think of peace and peaceful resolutions of conflicts. I wonder if all the Americans are actually a blood thirsty nation that loves 'true blood' and other vampirical means of living…

  7. I dont expect to change the mind of a True Believer.

    im not saying that muslim peoples havent accomplished amazing things in their golden era, but moral philosophy is not one of them. Not to pick on just muslims, all of mankind has been savage.

    Im sure the Quran does say nice things about peace and love etc. but if i talk about peace and love and then i talk about murdering people in the next breath, you wouldnt call me good. Same with the Quran.

    Have you read the whole thing? but really, it is so easy to google passages from the Quran that are inexcusable.

    Tabari IX:69 "Killing disbelievers is a small matter to us."

    you can look up more yourself. it is full of awful things like that and you dont have to read the whole book to see that the Quran is not good. Im sorry but I simply cant be tolerant of evils like these.

  8. “Not in MY NYC” I hate to inform you but Ground Zero has purposely been converted into a shrine to 9-11. That was done on purpose by New York City officials. Right from the start it was converted into hallowed ground to keep the rubes fighting the GWOT and to keep the rubes sending money into New York City. So now the yokels are complaining, and good for them, they have a lot to complain about from how the war was prosecuted to the bailouts of Wall Street banks. Ha Ha New York, you are getting what you asked for.

    Protesting Mosques started in 'sophisticated' Europe.

    Naming it Cordoba after the 'Iberian' City lost to Islam is also a provocation done on purpose imo.

  9. I assume you mean the American Government or the American military? If we are speaking in aggregate groupings and not considering individuals, im sure you would be just as offended if I called you a terrorist?

  10. Just look at this comment section. Despite listening to the program people still waltz along like pawns in a game of chess. How disappointing to see the comments after hearing such a great program

  11. And yet, the people who came along in both the 18th and the 20th centuries claiming that they'd do better without religion – that they'd be more merciful, more respectful of human life and the rights of man – didn't. Apparently "logic and empiricism" are not guards against killing and hurting people over belief in bizarre and unprovable ideas.

    Sorry – but those are the historical facts. I did not make up the Reign Of Terror, the Vendee, the Moscow Show Trials, the Gulags, the Cultural Revolution, or the Killing Fields just to embarrass you or win an argument.

  12. And yet, the people who came along in both the 18th and the 20th centuries claiming that they'd do better without religion – that they'd be more merciful, more respectful of human life and the rights of man – didn't. Apparently "logic and empiricism" are not guards against killing and hurting people over belief in bizarre and unprovable ideas.

    P.S. It's weird how you're giving us chapter and verse citations from books you claim never to have read.

  13. The best points of the interview: the gov't has no authority to prevent anyone from practicing ANY religion here. There is a near 100% makeup of decent people that practice Christianity and Muslim. There are of course, a few bad apples on both sides. Whether it is the KKK or Al Quaeda or whoever, they still only represent the smallest of minority. Unfortunately, religion and this small minority are used against us to keep us fighting each other when we should be fighting the atrocities of gov't and big business in collusion.

  14. I'm one of those people of Manhattan (at least I was on 9/11; kinda switching to upstate these days). I noticed right from the getgo that non-Manhattanites were far more scared of 'terrorism' than people who actually were there when it happened. Go figger.

  15. Wish someone would compare & contrast, in an analytical way, this anti-Muslim hysteria with the McCarthy era.

  16. J. Edgar did investigate the Quakers, need you be reminded.

    Heh, guest said "He [J.E. Hoover] launched those raids in drag……"

  17. My good man, that isn't from the Quran.
    Tabari is a collection of prophetic narrations called "Hadith"
    Tabari's work, which you are quoting now was merely a compilation of all the various narrations that existed, without regards to authenticity. There are many better books out there such as Bukhari & Muslim.

    I would also take anything you find on anti islamic websites like "prophet of doom" with a grain of salt. If you want to learn about Islam, i suggest you visit a proper Islamic website or your local mosque, where people will be more than happy to answer any questions you may have.

  18. "(please dont insult anyone by talking about context, either.) "

    Huh? Could you please explain this statement? How is it an insult to request that the context of the quote be given?

    After all, without context, I have a clear example of you contradicting yourself within the same post:

    1) "i would NEVER promote violence against either" – Against Mysticism

    2) "But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them – bring them here and kill them in front of me." – Against Mysticism

    Context is everything (to those who are honest).

  19. I found it telling that when Scott mentioned that the real issue over Cordoba house was one of property rights (if's there's no claim to damage, then it's none of your business – paraphrase), Stephan gave a condescending chuckle and said (paraphrase) "well, the local community has already approved the project".

    Good little statist Salisbury. Can't give any credence to such crackpot notions as individual property rights. The collective (community) uber alles.

  20. im sorry if i wasnt clear. The 2nd quote that starts "but those enemies…" is a quote from Jesus. This is not what I advocate. My point is that It is unjustifiable.

  21. Sorry about that. My fault. I should have done more research. Please refer to the post below for proper quotes from Quran that I dont believe are "taken out of context."

    To read the Quran in english, with annotations, I went here

  22. Lucky you, this interview does just that.

  23. You didn't answer my question/request. Please explain "please don't insult anyone by talking about context, either".

    My point, which you evidently missed, is that context is everything. Of course I know the 2nd quote is from Jesus, not you. But by taking it out of context, I made it appear that you had said it. If I were dishonest (not just making a point), I could state that you advocate killing those who do not want you to be king over them and provide that quote from your post as evidence. Then say "and don't insult me by bringing up context" in an attempt to preempt you from correcting me by providing the context of the quote (which, in your post, is actually a quote from the Bible, not your own words; a fact only made clear when the context is provided).

  24. If you are a Christian you follow what the bible tells you to do, is that correct? Well if there are directions from Jesus to kill non-believers and you do not, i would think its logical that you are not a Christian. I realize this is an uncomfortable conclusion for most, as it was for me. But unfortunately, im not making this up.

    Jesus says in Luke 19:27 (see 19:11-27)
    "But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them – bring them here and kill them in front of me."

  25. I am simply stating that it is pretty impossible to put that quotation into a context that does not make it psychopathic. Im not sure im fully understanding you here but ill try to explain further and take another stab at it.

    When confronted with uncomfortable quotes from the bible many Christians say "you have to understand the context." Could Jesus have mean metaphorically killing their souls? Could he have meant killing in a video game? I dont think so. It is insulting, i think, to try to explain this away and it is only recently that anyone started talkingabout putting things in the bible "into context" because they are too horrific to acknowledge that the bible means what is plainly written. You dont have to be a scholar of biblical times to understand what is meant.

  26. So are you denying that context is important? Or only when Christians or Muslims request that it be provided? Sounds fairly prejudiced to me.

    Perhaps the respective contexts of those quotations from the Bible and Qran do support your point (that the Bible and Qran "justify violence"). Maybe they don't. Only by knowing the context could we honestly decide.

    In this age of sound-bite, perhaps that's a tough concept to grasp. But anyone who wants to be honest must reject manipulating the words of others to fit their own designs (not saying you are, only rejecting your statement that to request context would be an insult).

  27. I understand your point, but i cant seem to even think up a way that these quotations can be explained away by context.

    Can you even think of a plausible way that these statements that i have quoted in other sections of this thread would not be the war mongering, misogynistic, violent rants that they seem to be because of there context? Please give me an example….

    I understand we should be rigorous in our analysis, but come on? Why are you so reluctant to call a spade a spade? Why are you so persistantly questioning ME instead of the proponents of such STONE EVIL rhetoric?

  28. My intent wasn't to defend the two quotations, but to challenge the comment:

    "(please dont insult anyone by talking about context, either.)"

    That sentence smacks of prejudice and close-mindedness. It is the very opposite of being "rigorous in our analysis". It's the close-cousin to "I've already made up my mind, don't try to reason with me."

    It's one thing to analyze a quote in context, and then draw a conclusion (which perhaps you've already done for the above quotations, but have neglected to inform us about). It's another to deny that context is crucial in drawing an honest conclusion.

    I question you, because you are here and you are responding. You have no evidence that I do not also question others for what they advocate elsewhere.

    I've made my point and have explained/defended it adequately enough. No need to continue the discussion unless you've got a substantive rebuttal to "context is crucial" to add.

  29. musilms are the enemy because they dont police THEIR RELIGEON.
    the only thing i suppot them IN IS with is there idea on gays.
    but the shari laws is a mockery in this the 21st century.


  31. [...] Read more: Stephan Salisbury [...]

Leave a Reply