Ms. Carleton continues to spread outright misinformation and division: which is the main reason she lost the vote 63 to 10:
1. Racism was not "promoted" by anyone, except by her comments here. People of all colors voted each way -- there just happen to be over five times as many who voted against her. Ms. Carleton is the "faction" here -- not the overwhelming majority.
2. Sal Baldenegro has a much longer and righteous history in Barrio Hollywood than Ms. Carleton ever has and has every right to express his opinions. Her attack on him shows to all that she is only "inclusive" of the few that blindly support her.
3. Gentrification is not a "myth" as she asserts, but a very real threat to residents in and around the area. To say it doesn't exist proves how out of touch she is, not only with residents but small business folks who are concerned as well.
4. I did not prevent any discussion as she claims. In fact, discussions took place over many months of public meetings. Minutes of our meetings could prove this.
5. I am not a spokesperson for the El Rio Coalition but a proud supporter and member of the group that helped stop the City's give-away of the Trini Alvarez Golf Course to developers, a worthy struggle that Ms. Carleton took no role in, in fear of alienating her Bureaucratic friends in the City of Tucson.
In reality, the Weekly article was the most objective piece written on the issue, which is obviously the cause of her consternation. Too bad for her, but good for the community.
It is a well established fact that Kacey Carleton along with the owners of Pat's Chili Dogs, and the owners of Unique Trends Hair Salon tried for over a year to change the Barrio Hollywood Neighborhood Association bylaws to limit residents to ONE VOTE PER HOUSEHOLD. I personally witnessed these events and for Kacey Carleton to write a guest editorial claiming it never happened is an outrage. Kacey Carleton continues to lie about the good people of Barrio Hollywood and claim we are racist against her because she is white. The reason people in the barrio do not like her, is because of her condescending attitude and disgusting reprehensible
I wish Hollywood could just stand together. Negative publicity feeds into the destruction of something my elders worked hard to construct.
I've read Mr. Briggs highly biased articles which all sound like he's desperate for some mining company to put him on a retainer and all I can say it that in my office, (I'm into mining as well) this pretty well pins it down.
Sumayyah might I kindly add that simply by posting your name on the Facebook public page you left yourself open to comments so you have to be ready to deal with it and I dont think that it was meant to slander or backbite you however it was simply as a comment upon your behavior seen from the perspective of devout muslims who do fear Allah yet know that Islam does teach us that we should always follow "mutual consultation" and yes I am sorry but we must always have a shura and even when only three travel one must be appointed as Imam or leader,, and in your case we view it as you overstepping that process.. And Allah knows best.
Dear OLD PUEBLO, I would like to point out a few things for general education purposes as I disagree with your statement.
First of all, people need to realize that many ME countries have several sects some of which are considered deviant,, for example the Alawi in Syria are not really considered Muslim because many of their beliefs follow what is called shirk or worshiping some one in addition to or instead of God Almighty, whom most Christians call God the Father.
Secondly, again very important to realize, just as not all Americans are good practicing Christians or even believing in Christ, also many many born Muslims do not KNOW, UNDERSTAND OR PRACTICE what Islam TEACHES... and often they color their Islamic interpretation with tribal rules and culture-- not what Islam teaches..
Thirdly, you are very Naive if you think the majority of Muslims are immigrants from the ME and btw Indonesia and Malasia make up the majority of the Muslim population worldwide. They are in Asia not the ME. Many of whom make up the US Muslim population are actually AMERICANS who converted to Islam such as myself and I have roots in Germany. Unless you consider yourself a native American, you too are descendant from Immigrants.....
Finally, and if you had educated yourself just a little bit you would know that Islam espouses the constituents of a country to follow the law of the land unless it specifically counters or denies something forbidden in the QUR'AN, which is the correct spelling btw.
In reference I give you this: http://en.islamtoday.net/node/604 The Muslims living a non-Muslim country, even if they originally entered that country by means of forged documents, are considered to be living in their adopted country under a covenant. They must, therefore, comply with the laws of their country of residence without, at the same time, disobeying Islamic Law.
Allah says: “Oh you who believe! Fulfill (your) obligations.” [Sûrah al-Mâ’idah: 1]
He also says: “And fulfill (every) covenant. Verily! The covenant will be questioned about.” [Sûrah al-Isrâ': 34]
He says: “And fulfill the Covenant to Allah when you have covenanted, and break not the oaths after you have confirmed them.” [Sûrah al-Nahl: 91]
A Muslim is not to break or violate oaths or promises. He will not be a true faithful Muslim if he does so. Allah Said: “It is not the case that every time they make a covenant, some party among them throws it aside. Nay! The truth is most of them believe not.” [Sûrah al-Baqarah: 100]
Among the characteristics of a hypocrite is that he: “…acts treacherously toward covenants (pledges), and when entrusted he betrays.”
Scholars have stated that those who enter non-Muslim countries have to adhere to their respective laws and regulations even if they entered those countries illegally, and they have no excuse for breaking those laws, since they were entrusted to abide by those laws upon entry into those countries.
The eminent Hanafî jurist, Mohammad b. Hasan Al-Shaybânî writes [Biographies (2/6)]:
If it happens that a company of Muslims pass through the enemy’s front lines by deceptively pretended to be messengers of the Muslim’s Caliph carrying official documents – or if they were just allowed to pass through the enemy lines – they are not allowed to engage in any hostilities with the enemy troops. Neither are they entitled to seize any of their money or properties as long as they are in their area of authority. This also applies in case of being truly trusted by the other party.
Accordingly, we conclude the following:
Muslims living in non-Muslim countries have to comply with laws and regulations of the country they have been entrusted though valid visas to enter. At the same time, they have to avoid whatever contradicts Islamic teachings. In case they are obliged by law to uphold something contrary to Islamic teachings, they have to adhere to the minimum that the law requires of them.
One of the best approaches for a Muslim living in these countries is patience. As long as he agrees to live in a non-Muslim country, he is never to rebel against the inhabitants of his choice of residence, even it seems to hard for him to endure.
Sister while you may have some points its necessary to understand the deen from a deeper perspective and understand the roles we occupy.. I do not agree with your actions as well and we need to always look back to how the Prophet sas used to deal with such issues for they did occur during his time as well. Even if you intended to be peaceful, just the fact that you showed up is provocative. There are other ways of standing up for your religion than foolishness which is how I see such things. If however, you had supported and coordinated with the ICT to have an open house inviting people to ICT to gain information and answer questions, I am sure you would have had better reactions from people, and while i am in no position to say what Allah would or would not accept or how he would judge, I might suppose a proactive instead of reactive position would receive greater ajr.
I'm Sumayyah Dawud, the organizer of the Stand Up Against Hate counter-protest. I am appalled that almost the entirety of this article is dedicated to backbiting and slandering me. This is especially appalling when it comes from a Muslim who should know better.
I created the event page in the early stages once I heard the bigots were planning on protesting the ICT mosque with a similar plan of action as was done to protest the mosque in Phoenix. In the early stages of organizing, I reached out and sent a message to ICT's Facebook account as well as a message to Maryam Mir, the one who wrote this article. Neither was ever responded to and in the case of ICT, Facebook stamped the message as indicating it had been read. Further, on the event page I stated multiple times that we were more than willing to work with ICT to support them as that was the whole intent from the beginning and to make sure that our counter-protest would not create a hardship. Despite all of this, no one from ICT reached out to me even though my contact information was readily available.
Only in the week before the event, did ICT reach out and we came to a conclusion that if the bigots were to cancel their protest, we would either cancel ours or move it to an alternate location which we did.
Maryam makes assumptions and accusations about my intent of the rally as well as my background yet never actually took the time to talk to me before writing this article of backbiting and slander. I used to live in Tucson and I have been to ICT on multiple occasions. Further, scholars and leaders do not necessarily have to be obeyed in Islam when they are not ruling by the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Defense of the Muslim community is an obligatory duty of Muslims. Shura or not, the fact is that bigots were planning on protesting a mosque with firearms and some of them posted threats of violence (and activists on our page reported these threats to law enforcement).
If Maryam's slander wasn't bad enough, she took it further and compared me--a Muslim who was standing up in defense of the Muslim community and potentially risking my own life in doing so--to the islamophobic bigots themselves. Her statements actually indicated that in many ways she considered me worse than the bigots. If you think a Muslim who stands up in defense of the Muslim community is worse than islamophobes wanting to eradicate Islam from the face of the earth, then you are a disbeliever. End of story. Think wisely about what you post because Allah (swt) is watching.
Maryam chose to attack my character and what I was trying to do to support my Muslim community. Maybe you don't consider Tucson "my community" but I am a member of the Muslim ummah and we are all ONE community regardless of where we live or come from. Backbiting and slander are sins in Islam and those who engage in them can expect to be held accountable on Youm al-Qiyamah (Judgment Day).
After today's tragic news in TN, this article is poorly timed.
The problem now is that there are plenty of proposals in that will do this under such a lame price structure. It's just a scham no matter how it gets sliced, and the city will throw away 600k to find out just how stupid they are. The city will get exactly what it wants to pay for, 600k for nada. Our tax dollars at work... One way or another.
The problem now is that there are plenty of proposals in that will do this under such a lame price structure. It's just a scham no matter how it gets sliced, and the city will throw away 600k to find out just how stupid they are. The city will get exactly what it wants to pay for, 600k for nada.
If you think that Islam is compatible in the west in it's current form, you are living with your heads in the sand. Let me guess, not a single one of you were deployed to the middle east in the past 20 years.
They don't assimilate. The Koran will always be served before any national flag.
Mr. Workman, I guess it boils down to what is considered to be scared ground. If you believe Mr. Wendsler Nosie Sr. or Mr Terry. Rambler, it could encompass virtually everything. Under that interpretation any activity conducted on public lands could be halted by anyone by just claiming the site is scared ground.
Even the members of the San Carlos Apache tribe are sharply divided on this issue. Many members of the tribe have questioned their leadership's actions and the manner in which these actions have been carried out.
"Suppose They Gave a Hate Rally... And No One Came....:" That would be nice!
The Dean Remingtons of the world are just hate-filled. It's not about free speech, it's about intimidation.
Mr. Briggs, thank you for bringing to light the relevant portions of the text. The historical framework certainly has emotional appeal, because something native to our minds, morality, objects to the US' bad faith dealings with Natives. But in more legal terms, I would guess history draws out some of the reasons for the federal trust relationship with Natives, speaks to why Oak Flat is in bad faith, and furthermore speaks to concrete injustices in the present extending out from the past. But even more, I believe, the repeal has to do with present and future considerations. This is part of what my article tries to communicate. Sacred lands form an integral part of Native cultures and their preservation and reproduction, and ultimately the right to self-determine. The right of self determination, religious conscience, culture seem far superior to economic gain or, in the case of the San Francisco Peaks, even, "multiple use doctrine" (for Crissake).
Mr. Workman's guest opinion concerning Oak Flat has identified several issues which I believe need to be debated. Mining Law has been modified, but it has not really addressed current problems. The concept of "Responsible Development of Natural Resources" is a nice phrase but with little consensus of what those words really mean. One point that really concerns me is the way the "land exchange" occurred. This action goes against the way government is supposed to function; those who manipulated the process are at fault, and they are losing the trust of those who are trying to believe in government (especially democratic government). Finally, respect of indigenous cultures had been absent throughout history and governments have used many suspect rationales and excuses for their actions. Let's get into a real discussion of "what is right", and let's remember that Laws are meant to achieve Justice, but laws may not be just!
Ms. Judy - the mining law has been updated ~20+ times since its inception and has served the country well - providing incentive for private companies to explore the country, spend hundreds of billions of dollars to develop the nations mineral resources and in the process help the US become an industrial nation rather than an isolated agrarian country dependent on all those around us for the minerals we need. This one operation will provide 25% of the copper needed by Americans and bring in ~60 billion to the Arizona economy in a mining district that has been producing copper since before Arizona statehood. Mother nature blessed Arizona with copper - this is our contribution to the nation - not vast fields of soy and corn, organic yogurt empires, strawberry and tulip farms, or kaolin clay. None of those operations are possible without copper to run motors, pumping systems, lights, and timers. Why not be part of the solution to make the project the best project possible from an environmental and sustainable perspective. We need copper and other metals - make it happen in the least damaging method possible.
Let's discuss the mountain high toxic tailings from the mine just outside Superior shall we?
You have not spoken to anybody that practiced religion before recorded time. So that may not be true.
When the Confederate Flag was taken down today they gave it to the Confederate War Museum is it was representative of the Confederate Army.
20 years from now children will be lied to. They will never know what it actually stood for.
Does this fit the definition of ethnic cleansing?
Tucson Weekly |
7225 Mona Lisa Rd. Ste. 125, Tucson AZ 85741 |
(520) 797-4384 |
Powered by Foundation