Open Discussion: President Obama’s Speech in Cairo

President Obama delivered a very moving and powerful speech in Cairo on June 4th, 2009.  The speech focused primarily on improving American and Muslim relations, but also addressed issues such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as well as the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

I admit that it was heartening and emotional to hear Obama cite so many verses from the Holy Qur’an, as well as referring to the miracle of al-Isra, the Night Journey, in which the Prophet Muhammad journeyed to the seven heavens and met with Jesus, Moses, and Abraham, peace be upon them all.  When Obama said “peace be upon them” after mentioning these Prophets, there was enormous applause from the audience because the attendees, as well as Muslims all around the world, knew exactly what it meant:  Respect.

It was also nice to hear Obama stress on the importance of Islam being part of America.  He acknowledged the contributions of Islamic civilization, particularly in mathematics, science, poetry, architecture, and music.  When he spoke of Israel and Palestine, he emphasized on a two-state solution and recognized the struggles that both Israelis and Palestinians face.  For many Muslims, the Israeli-Palestinian crisis is crucial simply because U.S. foreign policy has been overwhelmingly supportive (politically, militarily, and economically) of Israel while vilifying and ignoring the plights of Palestinians.

Although there were many times during the speech where it seemed like Obama was hesitant to acknowledge certain atrocities, such as Israel’s recent airstrike on Gaza, it was at least refreshing to hear a U.S. president recognize the Palestinian humanitarian crisis.  I really liked when he said “children of Abraham,” because that kind of language speaks to the hearts of inter-faith communities around the world.

While citing the Qur’an and reaching out to Muslim majority countries displays the President’s desire to improve relations, it’s important to stay mindful that actions speak louder than words.  As Tariq Ramadan mentions in his recent article, “Obama’s speech to Muslims will mean little if its symbolism is not followed up by concrete measures to restore trust.”  In no way am I trying to deny Obama’s efforts, but rather I’m simply pointing out that I truly hope he follows up on his words.

What are your thoughts?  If you missed the President’s speech, you can watch it below (it’s divided into 6 parts):

Watch Part 2
Watch Part 3
Watch Part 4
Watch Part 5
Watch Part 6

Egyptian-born American Muslim to advise White House

This is a post from a couple of weeks ago, but I still thought it was worth sharing.  Written by Marwa Awad, originally published on Al-Arabiya News.

The first Muslim scarf-wearing woman appointed to a position in President Barack Obama’s administration met with lawmakers Monday and discussed her role on an interfaith advisory board the new administration hopes will broaden dialogue and understanding.

Dalia Mogahed’s dimpled smile shined from under her hijab, the Muslim headscarf, as she addressed senate staff and think tanks at a meeting organized by the Congressional Muslims Staffers Association to discuss American Muslim public opinion in the wake of a recent survey.

The Egyptian-born American who heads the Gallup American Center for Muslim Studies, a non-governmental research center providing data-driven analysis on the views of Muslim populations around the world, became the first Muslim veiled woman to be appointed to a position in the White House.

“I am very honored to be given this opportunity to serve my country in this way,” Mogahed, who will be Obama’s window into the Muslim American community, told AlArabiya.net.

Last month, Obama signed an executive order setting up a new body at the White House called the “Office of Religious Partnerships” to support religious institutions and strengthen inter-faith dialogue and government ties. The advisory group, consisting of 25 religious and secular representatives, is to report to the president on the role religion can play in resolving social problems and addressing civil rights issues.

“The key idea of the council is to tap into the energy and wisdom of religious organisations and leaders who focus on faith groups to solve common problems,” explained Mugahed.

Mogahed will brief Obama on what Muslims want from the U.S. in a bid to create channels of communication and correct the erroneous image of Muslim Americans.

The advisory group will help define issues of concern to religious constituents including the effects of economic crisis on minority groups and the phenomenon of fatherless families. It will also seek to reduce the number of abortions and strengthen inter-faith relations between Muslims and Christians.

“The main premise behind the council is cooperation between faiths and helping them become a force that helps push society forward,” said Mogahed. “These societal challenges are shared by all faith-based groups and it is our task to unite them against common challenges.”

Mugahed will keep her full time job at Gallup while serving as an advisor.

Qualified

Mogahed’s appointment comes at a critical time given the rising tide of Islamophobia in the media and within some academic circles.

“I am very happy that Dalia was asked to be part of this advisory group because she represents a unique position,” Jihad Saleh Williams, from Congressional Muslim Staffers Association, told AlArabiya.net.

Mogahed coauthored the book with John L. Esposito which covered findings from 40 countries

“There is always the question of who are the experts? Who speaks about Muslims? That is on the minds of policy makers and people in general,” said Williams. “Dalia knows the Muslim community and all that she says comes from her work at Gallup, which is fact-based and is the opposite of the ‘experts’ we often see on TV who speak, not based on facts, but on ideology. Dalia is the fact-based alternative to that,” he explained.

As a senior researcher and executive director of the Gallup Center with a chemical engineering and business administration background, Mogahed headed studies on Muslim public opinion worldwide. Her studies and resulting statistics have been quoted in prominent media such as the Wall Street Journal, Foreign Policy magazine, Middle East Policy and the Harvard International Review.

In 2008, she co-authored woth John L. Esposito “Who speaks on behalf of Islam? What a Billion Muslims Really Think,” the largest and most comprehensive study of the Muslim public opinion around the world.

Changing image of Muslims in America

The first Muslim advisor appointed by the White House marks the beginning of an opportunity for Muslims to seriously engage in public policy and contribute to developing solutions to social challenges.

“American Muslims have ideas and should participate in the development of solutions that serve their country and it is important that they get the opportunity to do so,” Mogahed said.

She hopes to counter stereotypes of Muslims as extremists and sources of unrest that have gained ground in recent years in the wake of U.S.-led wars in two Muslim countries.

As for being the first veiled woman in the White House, Mogahed said the veil was a non-issue in the process of hiring; that her appointment was based on Obama`s interest in hearing from Muslims and her ability to provide that information through her work at Gallup.

“Hijab was not an issue. What the Obama administration is after is sound advice on how to engage American citizens in a common cause,” Mogahed said.

There are currently two full time Muslim hires in the White House, though neither hold high-ranking political positions. However Williams said that the Obama administration is generally behind on appointments and that the Muslim community, like other groups, has submitted resume books it hope will be consulted as more staffing decisions are made throughout the summer.

Critics of U.N. Anti-Blasphemy Resolution Overlook Opportunities for Global Dialogue

By Jehanzeb Dar

Much is being made about the U.N. Anti-Blasphemy Resolution, which calls upon member nations, including the United States, to combat defamation of religion — Islam in particular.  Critics of the resolution include CNN’s Lou Dobbs, who describes the opposition against the resolution as a “fight for free speech,” author Christopher Hitchens, and Islamophobes around the blogosphere who scathingly label the resolution a step towards “spreading Sharia law to the West.”

The resolution, “Combating the Defamation of Religion,” was adopted in 2007 and “stresses the need to effectively combat defamation of all religions and incitement to religious hatred, against Islam and Muslims in particular.”  Unsurprisingly, religious groups and free-speech advocates in the United States accuse the resolution of impeding on constitutional rights such as freedom of expression.  John Bolton, former U.N. Ambassador, comments:  “It’s obviously intended to have an intimidating effect on people expressing criticism of radical Islam, and the idea that you can have a defamation of a religion like this, I think, is a concept fundamentally foreign to our system of free expression in the United States.”

I’ve noticed a lot of bloggers terming this issue “freedom under fire” and I see a lot of Islamophobes pouncing on it since it “scores points” for their “argument” that Muslims want to “impose Sharia law.”  What I see missing from these reactions are efforts to engage in global dialogue between the Muslim and non-Muslim worlds.  Rather than recognizing the importance of much-needed dialogue, Lou Dobbs and Christopher Hitchens spend about seven minutes defending freedom of expression, accusing the U.N. of being a “totalitarian” and “authoritarian organization,” and resorting to typical fear-mongering tactics by saying there are “Muslims who are prepared to use violence at the drop of a hat.”  Dobbs and Hitchens present us with a very singular, misconstrued, and stereotypical perspective on the situation instead of acknowledging social problems such as annually rising hate crimes and discriminatory acts against Muslims in the West, which clearly contribute to the formation of this particular U.N. resolution.

The fact of the matter is that this is a very complicated issue.  Personally, I find the U.N. anti-blasphemy resolution flawed.  Although the resolution aims to prevent violence and discrimination against people of any religious background, I believe the defamation laws can be abused by governments.  Individuals should be allowed to express their views and opinions about religions and cultures without worrying about being criminalized.  I am not against the idea of people criticizing Islam; surely everyone is entitled to their opinion, but what I am against is dehumanization and vilification of religions and entire groups of people.  There is a difference between constructive criticism and hate speech, the latter has the potential to lead to discrimination and hate crimes.  One could argue that organizations like the KKK are entitled to “freedom of speech,” but when they advocate violence towards African-Americans, it no longer complies with the American constitution.

The “Combating the Defamation of Religion” resolution was introduced by the Organization of the Islamic Conference.  The fact that the resolution stems from a Muslim organization should indicate the importance of dialogue rather than perceiving the idea as an attempt to “impose Sharia law in the West.”  As I mentioned, I do not support the resolution, but I think it raises an important opportunity for Muslim and non-Muslim communities to achieve a richer and empathetic understanding about issues related to vilification of Islam in mainstream media, pop culture, and newspapers.  During the Muslim Holy Month of Ramadan in 2008, for example, the Clarion Fund decided to distribute millions of anti-Islamic DVDs entitled “Obsession” to swing states in the U.S.  Although there are those who continue to argue that the film is an exercise of “freedom of expression,” the larger issue that is often ignored is how Islamophobic imagery was distributed on a massive scale.  Whenever Muslims protested against the DVD and wrote letters to their newspapers, they were often accused of being “over-sensitive” or “impeding on American values.”  Muslim voices were hardly given a chance to voice their own opinions about the DVD and how it made them feel.  Instead, their voices were lost and dumped into a box of Islamophobic generalizations.

The argument that people like Dobbs and Hitchens don’t seem interested in is that dehumanization and vilification of a religion and/or entire group of people is an inevitable companion of war.  In other words, in order to successfully rally supporters for war, one needs to establish an immensely contrasting divide between “us” and “them.”  Demonizing the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, in the Danish cartoons is an example of attacking the very heart of Muslims and reinforcing the “differences” between non-Muslims and Muslims, not just in the Islamic world, but also within the West.  The Danish cartoons also generated such a negative perception and attitude towards the Prophet Muhammad that CAIR (the Council for American-Islamic Relations) mobilized to hold seminars to educate and enlighten non-Muslims about the truth of the Prophet.  Muslims wouldn’t have held educational programs if they weren’t so concerned about the general public’s perception of their religion after the Danish cartoons and riots.  The mainstream media didn’t seem to be concerned with these stories because they were too busy covering the violent riots in the Muslim world.  The inability to empathize with the sentiments of Muslims all over the world (including in the West) represents a failure to establish communication and understanding.

It is important for freedom of speech to be protected, but when Muslim-Americans experience ignorance, verbal abuse, physical assault, and vandalism, it is society’s responsibility to recognize that they, like every other American citizen, deserve to be treated equally regardless of their skin color, culture, and religious background.  Sensitive issues need to be discussed fairly and openly between Muslim and non-Muslim communities, otherwise stereotypes and misunderstandings will continue to persist.  Islamophobic rhetoric and blindly defending “free speech” are just obstacles and barriers that are created to prevent necessary dialogue.  If people like Lou Dobbs and Christopher Hitchens took the opportunity to engage in respectful and open-minded discussions with Muslim-Americans, they may empathize with how Islamophobic material, like the Danish cartoons and the “Obsession” DVD, have been used to bully, harass, and discriminate against Muslims in the West.

In the end,  it is not simply a matter of “freedom of speech.”  It’s a matter of understanding one another better.  The Muslim-American experience needs to stop being treated as something “foreign;” on the contrary it is an American story that isn’t being given enough voice.  As Muslim students, who protested the Danish cartoons in Washington D.C., wrote on their banners, “Freedom of Speech Does Not Equal Freedom to Hate.”

A Muslim’s Memo to Obama: Words Cannot Camouflage Cluster Bombs

This post comes to IOMS from Junaid of Crossing the Crescent and is republished with the writer’s permission.

A fair number of liberals swooning over President Barack Obama’s recent speechmaking are also impressed by his rhetorical overtures to Arabs and Muslims, first articulated during his inaugural address and reiterated on a major Arabic-language news channel.

The sharp divergence in tone and tenor from Bush’s rhetoric is certainly welcome after eight years of hubris and arrogance.

Quoting from a New York Times article today:

In the interview, which was taped on Monday night and broadcast throughout the Muslim world on Tuesday, Mr. Obama said it was his job “to communicate to the Muslim world that the Americans are not your enemy.”

He added that “we sometimes make mistakes,” but said that America was not born as a colonial power and that he hoped for a restoration of “the same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago.”

But while the best orators can massage reality through rhetoric, rhetoric cannot reshape reality when there is a vast, yawning chasm between mellifluous words and murderous weapons.

Obama’s silence-and, ultimately, lame endorsement-of Israel’s murder of hundreds of civilians is an example of such a chasm. It is one that will not easily exit the collective memory of the Muslim world by dint of a few pretty pronouncements.

Was it a “mistake” to stand by Israel as it ruthlessly and deliberately destroyed and deracinated Palestinian neighborhoods in a ghastly display of cheerful brutality? Obama certainly didn’t think so, as he told State Department employees. He obligatorily invoked the usual AIPAC-induced buzzwords that exude a perverse “blame the victim” vibe, championing Israel’s “right to defend itself” as it left mountains of corpses in the wake of its massive attack of hospitals, depots, journalists, and human rights infrastructure. He even spared a moment to demand that Hamas recognize Israel’s legitimacy as it illegitimately rampaged through Gaza, and reminded us all of Israel’s right to exist.

But was Israel’s “right to exist” ever threatened by unguided rockets that failed to kill more than three or four civilians while Israel itself was swiftly slaughtering five or six hundred innocents? Should Obama have not rather concerned himself with the “right to exist” of a people–a stateless, homeless, blockaded, people–who were being flattened inside their refugee camps as he was lecturing?

Obama’s decision to emphasize the absurd instead of the obvious was very revealing. It was a message that Muslim life is expendable. It was a message that Muslims can be killed en masse. And it was a message the Muslim world heard loudly.

If one hundred Palestinian corpses are placed next to one Israeli corpse, the “new” White House informed Muslims through Obama’s messaging, its scales of sympathy will still not tip in their favor. Palestinians will be addressed tersely and only to demand that they recognize their oppressor’s right to exist.

This is akin to yelling into the ear of a rape victim during an assault that she must recognize the rights of her rapist. It is an insult with few parallels-but many echoes.

Can a relationship based on “respect and partnership” be established in this context? Obama silently acceded to-and then effectively endorsed-wanton violence in which more than half the victims were civilians, extended his sympathy first and foremost to the victimizers, and only secondarily, half-heartedly, grudgingly, to the victims.

Obama’s fundamental failure to confront Israel’s utter disregard for Muslim life is a red line that cannot be elided by fine speechmaking. Any “good faith” effort he attempts in the Islamic sphere will melt like hot wax under the burning impact of his failure to confront the Palestinian question honestly.

This was made painfully clear when Obama dispatched George Mitchell to the Middle East in the aftermath of the Gaza invasion to make some initial steps toward something resembling peace.

On its face, the move was reasonable: Mitchell is a serious and hardened diplomat. The only problem with this political maneuver is that Israel, euphoric from its latest round of killing, is about to empower hard-right politicians who view any peace process with hatred and contempt. Even though the war was launched by what passes for the “center-left” in Israel-Ehud Barak and Tzipi Livni-this sector will not be the main beneficiary of its own blood-soaked policies.

Instead, the fascist politician Avigdor Liberman, who pines for the ethnic cleansing of Israel’s Arabs, and the Likudnik Benjamin Netanyahu, who openly opposes any peace moves, are expected to reap the most fruit in the upcoming elections. The very idea that such men have the slightest interest in achieving peace is a pungent mixture of the perverse and the peculiar.

The ascendance of Israel’s right in a war launched by its left should serve as a cautionary reminder that, sometimes, an action can have unforeseen consequences. The same can be said of inaction: it cannot always be covered up in fine phrases or even in well-meaning actions that come too little, too late. Obama is going to have to do more than utter pretty words and dutifully dispatch diplomats after “allies” commit massacres if he genuinely expects the United States to achieve cordial relations with the world’s 1.5 billion Muslims.

It is a macabre fact that while Obama now speaks warm words about the prospects of future relations with Muslims, the Israelis viewed his very ascension as a perfect opportunity to go “berserk” (as the operation was approvingly described in Israel) against Muslims–with the implicit understanding that the madness will, of course, pause in time for the inaugural ceremony, and be followed by zero repercussions for the aggressors.

No “respect or partnership” with Muslims can be based upon this kind of grotesque, quasi-coordinated humiliation.

If Obama is at all serious about his overture, he will have to confront old shibboleths and entrenched interests-including the pro-Israeli lobby. Of course, that is no easy task, and it is tempting to ignore for two reasons.

First: no other vested interest surpasses in obscenity or audacity this largely unchallenged outfit. Its attempts to portray an occupying power as the victim of the very people it has occupied, dispossessed, and corralled into the world’s largest concentration camp is strange. That this reverse-reality trick is performed by invoking a persecution from another time and place is even stranger–a feat of emotional extortion without equal.

Indeed, as Israeli shells were splattering Palestinian skulls on the walls of destroyed homes, one indignant American Jewish writer opined in a British newspaper that the pressing problem of the hour was actually an upsurge of “the purest antisemitism since the Nazi era.” Pity that it was not the Palestinians experiencing this apparent upswing of Nazi-like vitriol: it would have spared them 95% of their casualties.

Second:, unlike Israel and its American lobbying arm, the Muslim world is weak. In fact, it is in shameful disarray. The collective failure of the Arabs and the Muslims to do more than posture, prattle, and piss in the wind during the demolition of Gaza will be recorded–and has already been recorded in the minds of many of its followers-as one of the lowest points in the 1,400-year history of Muslim civilization.

Nonetheless, there are sound geo-strategic reasons for America to make good with a quarter of humanity. If Obama is committed to achieving that end, he should know that Muslims, for all their current failings, are neither stupid nor naïve. Cooing while killing will work no better than the last eight years of cackling while killing.

If President Obama wishes to repair relations with the Muslim world and help isolate Islamic extremists, he is going to have to reign in anti-Muslim extremists who would already be isolated but for America’s enabling of them. Israel in “berserk” mode tops that list.

Muslim-Americans Cautiously Optimistic about Obama

Yesterday morning, as I rushed to eat my breakfast and leave for class, my father tapped me on the shoulder and said, “Guess what?”  With little interest I asked “What?” and expected my dad to crack another joke about Obama converting to Islam, but instead he said, “On the first day, Obama suspended all the trials at Guantanamo Bay.  He’s shutting it down.”  I was pleasantly surprised.

As I drove to college, I felt a little more optimistic about Barack Husayn Obama’s Presidency.  “So far, so good,” I said to myself.  “Not bad, not bad.”  As I read the article myself, the skeptic in me surfaced again when I read Guantanamo Bay would be shut down within a year’s time.  In a facility where Muslim detainees, many of whom are suspected “terrorists” and Al-Qaida “links,” are victimized by brutal and unlawful methods of torture, such as being forced to eat pork, drink alcohol, and curse the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), am I the only one who thinks one year is too long?

The truth is I struggled, and continue to struggle, with my support for Obama.  During election time, I proudly supported him.  I put his lawn signs up and even convinced others to vote for him. Muslim-Americans, including friends of mine, campaigned for him and encouraged fellow Muslims to show their support.

As someone who has experienced Islamophobia first-hand, foreign policy and racial profiling were probably the most important issues to me in this election. Hate crimes and discriminatory acts towards Muslims increased on an annual basis, and I did not hear President Bush voice any concern about it. In addition to how the media kept vilifying Islam and isolating the Muslim voice, I felt like an outsider. But when I saw Obama run for president and talk about so many things, like engaging in diplomacy with Muslim countries, ending racial profiling, closing Guantanamo Bay, and even going as far to state that the U.S. is not just a Christian nation, but a Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Atheist nation as well, I felt like the positive image of America could be restored again and that I wouldn’t just be viewed as an “immigrant-American” anymore.  For once, I felt like I could look at our flag and connect with it in a way that I never did before.  But those moments were very brief and they went away quickly.

During the presidential debates, he spoke with so much hostility towards Pakistan. He came off sounding very ignorant and misinformed about the situation. Then Gaza was a wake up call. With over 1,300 people dead, I can’t help but wonder why Obama would condemn the terrorist attacks in Mumbai, but not have the courage to condemn Israel’s terrorist attacks on Gaza.   During the crisis, I re-watched his speech at AIPAC several times and felt my hopes in him crumbling away.

After one of the Gaza rallies in Philadelphia, a friend of mine said, “everyone at that rally voted for Obama. Is he going to show us any appreciation in return?” I voted for Obama because I am sick of feeling like an outsider.  I voted for Obama because I’m sick of seeing only one side of the story, while Muslims are vilified in the mainstream media.  I voted for Obama because I don’t want my heart to feel any more pain whenever I’m praying for fellow human beings who are being killed overseas.

And then, just last night, things started to shift again for me.  After Isha prayer at my local Mosque, my fellow Muslim brothers and I were talking about Obama’s order to shut down Guantanamo bay.  I expressed my disappointment over Obama not saying anything to condemn Israel’s attacks on Gaza, but then a fellow Muslim brother told me that the expectation level for Obama is so high that if he makes one little mistake, we get very critical of him.  This needs to change, he encouraged.  We shouldn’t be too quick to judge.  As our discussion carried on, I decided to make my own list of “Pros” and “Cons” about Obama’s Presidency in respect to issues that concern many Muslim-Americans.

Pros:

1.  His name is Barack Husayn Obama.  Whether people like it or not, he has a Muslim background.  Though there are conflicting reports, it looks like his grandmother, Sarah Husayn Obama, is a Muslim.  It is also clear that he has Muslim relatives.  I personally believe this is a very positive sign because it will most likely make him more sympathetic to the Muslim world (as well as the struggles of Muslim-Americans).  This would give him more credibility and respect in the Muslim world than any other American president.

2.  According to the official website for the White House, the Obama administration promises to end racial profiling.  As the agenda states:  “President Obama and Vice President Biden will ban racial profiling by federal law enforcement agencies and provide federal incentives to state and local police departments to prohibit the practice.”

3.  President Obama has already signed the executive orders to shut down Guantanamo Bay within a year.  It is truly comforting that the new President has acted so swiftly to prohibit unlawful methods of prisoner abuse and torture.  Muslims-Americans, as well as Muslims around the world, are still outraged by how the Bush administration stood by silently while interrogators desecrated Qur’ans and flushed them down toilets in order to intimidate detainees.

4.  Diplomacy with Iran.  This was one of the many issues that made Muslim-Americans distance themselves from John McCain.  Although the Obama administration claims to perceive Iran as a “threat,” it promises to engage in direct diplomacy with  its leadership.  I would like to think that Obama already acknowledges the fact that Iran has a Jewish population of over 25,000 and even has Jewish representation in the Iranian parliament.  One would hope that the Obama administration noticed the Iranian Jews who took to the streets of Iran and protested against Israel’s attacks in Gaza.

Cons:

1.  Afghanistan and Pakistan.  According to the official White House website, the Obama administration promises to “refocus American resources on the greatest threat to our security — the resurgence of al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan. They will increase our troop levels in Afghanistan, press our allies in NATO to do the same, and dedicate more resources to revitalize Afghanistan’s economic development. Obama and Biden will demand the Afghan government do more, including cracking down on corruption and the illicit opium trade” (emphasis added).  Reading this statement makes one ask:  “Weren’t we voting for an anti-war President?”  In regards to Pakistan, “Obama and Biden will increase nonmilitary aid to Pakistan and hold them accountable for security in the border region with Afghanistan.”  It doesn’t make sense to me why the Obama administration would increase troop levels in Afghanistan and yet not send military aid to Pakistan.  As I mentioned in another post of mine, Pakistan has suffered (and continues to suffer) a great deal when it comes to combating the Taliban.  It’s rather unsettling how Obama doesn’t seem to recognize this.

2.  Hilary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Rahm Emanuel are all in Obama’s cabinet.  Hilary Clinton once stated she would “obliterate Iran,” Joe Biden is a self-proclaimed Zionist, and Rahm Emanuel served in the Israeli military and is very pro-Israel.  I know Obama has the final say on things, but one cannot help but worry about his cabinet’s potential influences.

3.  Israel.  Will we finally see a president who takes a strong stance against Israel’s military occupation of the Palestinian people?  Will we finally see a president who will sincerely help the Israelis and Palestinians come to a resolution without vilifying the Palestinians?  Or are we going to see the same failed policies of the Bush administration?  It should be obvious to people by now that AIPAC has an immense influence on U.S. politics.  It’s hard to imagine someone getting elected president of the United States without supporting AIPAC and the state of Israel.

4.  Obama may fail to understand the Muslim world in the same way Bush failed to.  During Obama’s speech on inauguration day, he said:  “To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict or blame their society’s ills on the West, know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy…”  He’s clearly addressing the Muslim world here and what’s so frustrating is that this statement paints the same image that Bush presented, i.e. the Muslim world is “destroying” and killing people without any reason. Of course there is violence taking place in the Muslim world, but what triggered that violence? You look at Iraq, and you’ll see that violence erupted in the form of resistance against U.S. invasion and occupation. You look at Palestine, and you see violent resistance against the brutal Israeli military occupation.  Obama continued and said:  “The world will judge you on what you build, not what you destroy…” Well if Iraq, Palestine, and Afghanistan get a chance to build instead of getting bombed, then I’m sure things would be much different.  And wasn’t Israel recently bombing innocent people and destroying places like schools, Mosques, and hospitals?

Anyway, these are just a few “Pros” and “Cons” that I thought of the other night.  I’m sure others have more to add.  I want to believe Obama can bring a positive change.  I can’t imagine how a man like him can sit down and speak to the late Palestinian academic, Edward Said, and then (many years later) kiss up to Israel and AIPAC.  I can’t imagine how a man like him could speak to Rashid Khalidi and not see the oppression taking place against the Palestinians.  I sincerely hope that my worries about him are wrong.  I’d rather be cautiously optimistic and suprised than be overly enthusiastic and end up feeling disappointed and fooled.

What’s in a Name?

Emanuel Calls ADC to Repudiate Negative Comments About Arabs

From the ADC webpage:


Washington, DC | November 13, 2008 | www.adc.org | Today, Congressman Rahm Emanuel, recently appointed White House Chief of Staff to President-Elect Barack Obama, called American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) President Mary Rose Oakar to repudiate negative comments about Arabs made by his father Benjamin Emanuel .

In the phone call, Congressman Emanuel said, “From the fullness of my heart, I personally apologize on behalf of my family and me. These are not the values upon which I was raised or those of my family.” During the phone call, Emanuel added, it is unacceptable to make remarks such as these against any ethnic or religious group.

ADC President Mary Rose Oakar said, “We cannot allow Arabs and Muslims to be portrayed in these unacceptable terms. I welcome Rahm’s apology and his pledge to meet with our Community. I also thank our members and friends who responded who expressed concern about this matter. ”
MEDIA COVERAGE:

NEW YORK TIMES: Emanuel Apologizes for Father’s ‘Arab’ Comments

TIME: RAHM EMANUEL’S FATHER PROBLEM

ABC NEWS: AMERICAN-ARAB ANTI-DISCRIMINATION COMMITTEE ASKS RAHM TO REPUDIATE HIS DAD’S COMMENTS

JEWISH TELEGRAPH AGENCY: ARAB-AMERICAN GROUP BLASTS EMANUEL’S DAD

TEXT OF NOV. 11 ADC LETTER TO CONGRESSMAN EMANUEL
View letter online at: www.adc.org/PDF/rahm.pdf
Dear Congressman Emanuel:

I am writing to you on behalf of the largest American‐Arab Civil Rights group in the United States, with members in every State of the Union, founded in 1980. We work in coalition with all civil rights organizations.

This has been an historic election, one which energized our Country and gave many people the reason to vote for change. I know the Arab‐American community was very involved in this presidential election, and voter turnout in the community was exceptionally high. We wish to congratulate you on being named, by President‐Elect Obama, White House Chief of Staff. We were, however, deeply disappointed by comments made by your father, Mr. Benjamin Emanuel, on the momentous occasion of your announcement as Chief of Staff. According to numerous news stories in the U.S. and in Israel, he made the following comments in an interview with Ma’ariv, “Obviously he’ll influence the President to be pro‐Israel. Why wouldn’t he? What is he, an Arab? He’s not going to be mopping floors at the White House.”

The American‐Arab Anti‐Discrimination Committee (ADC) views this characterization of an Arab as an unacceptable smear. One can readily imagine the justifiable outcry if someone made a similar remark about African‐Americans, Jews, or Hispanics, concerning cleaning the floors of the White House. Do the normal standards of decency and civility not apply when talking about Arabs? ADC asks you to disavow and repudiate these remarks publicly. We sincerely hope you will distance yourself from any demeaning characterization of any ethnic, religious, or racial group. President‐Elect Obama pledged a respect for the diversity of this Nation, and Arab Americans certainly add, in a positive way, to our Country’s diversity.

Sincerely,
Hon. Mary Rose Oakar, ADC President
Kareem Shora, JD. LLM., National Executive Director

Cc: President‐Elect Barack Obama
# # #
NOTE TO EDITORS: The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), which is non sectarian and non partisan, is the largest Arab-American civil rights organization in the United States. It was founded in 1980, by former Senator James Abourezk to protect the civil rights of people of Arab descent in the United States and to promote the cultural heritage of the Arabs. ADC has 38 chapters nationwide, including chapters in every major city in the country, and members in all 50 states.

The ADC Research Institute (ADC-RI), which was founded in 1981, is a Section 501(c)(3) educational organization that sponsors a wide range of programs on behalf of Arab Americans and of importance to all Americans. ADC-RI programs include research studies, seminars, conferences and publications that document and analyze the discrimination faced by Arab Americans in the workplace, schools, media, and governmental agencies and institutions. ADC-RI also celebrates the rich cultural heritage of the Arabs.
____________________________________________________________
American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee | www.adc.org
1732 Wisconsin Ave., NW | Washington, DC | 20007
Tel: 202-244-2990 | Fax: 202-244-7968 | E-mail: media@adc.org

First Muslim Female State Representative Elected to the Michigan State Legislature

By DAVID N. GOODMAN

DETROIT — Michigan is getting its first female Muslim legislator, thanks in large part to her Jewish boss, the incumbent.

Rashida Tlaib, a lawyer, community activist and daughter of Palestinian immigrants, easily won a House seat in Tuesday’s general election after emerging from an eight-way Democratic primary with 44 percent of the vote in August.

Tlaib, 32, said she wouldn’t have run but for the repeated urging of Democratic state Rep. Steve Tobocman, who is stepping down because of term limits. Once she decided to run, she threw herself into it, knocking on 8,000 doors and hitting each household twice.

Southeastern Michigan has about 300,000 people with roots in the Arab world, but few of them live in Tlaib’s largely black and Hispanic district in southwest Detroit.

“We view her victory as a sign that Michigan Muslims are welcomed as a part of our state’s multi-faith and multiethnic society,” said Dawud Walid, Michigan director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

According to the American Muslim Alliance, only nine Muslims were serving in state legislatures nationwide before Tuesday’s elections, and only one of them is a woman. There are two Muslim members of Congress - Democrats Keith Ellison of Minnesota and Andre Carson of Indiana.

The Michigan Legislature’s first known Muslim member, James Karoub, served three terms in the state House in the 1960s.

Tobocman said he first met Tlaib about five years ago when she was working for the Arab Community Center for Economic and Social Services, where she did advocacy work for immigrants.

“I was just really, really impressed,” he said. When he later became majority floor leader and got another staff slot, he recruited Tlaib for the job. He said she brings a passion for social justice and the ability to work with people across the political aisle with very different outlooks.

“She’s someone who just intuitively understood the process right off the bat,” Tobocman said.

The election was only one of many firsts for Tlaib. The eldest of 14 children of a retired Ford Motor Co. worker and his wife, she was the first in her family to earn a high school diploma. She went on to finish college and law school while helping raise 13 siblings.

“My parents … are amazing Americans,” she said. “They never thought this would ever happen.”

What President Obama Means to this Muslim Mama

“a letter to my sons on the eve of a nation’s great change”

November 5, 2008

My Dear Sons,

If I can indicate to you the significance of Barack Obama’s election as President of the United States of America in even the smallest way, I will have succeeded with this letter. You’ve seen that I’ve spent much of this day in silence and tears. Most likely you won’t remember, but if you do, forgive my silence. I don’t know what to say. There is a great wheel of thought turning in my head. The ideas fly past before I can grasp them, to take a moment and investigate what it is I’m feeling; to grapple with the full import of what has happened in our great country. As for the tears, they are tears of joy. Never stem tears of happiness. They are like the rain that replenishes the earth.

I admit that with the curious circumstances surrounding President George W. Bush’s election into office in 2000, I lost faith in the effectiveness of U.S. democracy. In 2004, there was a repeat of 2000’s debacle, and with W’s claims of “political capital” at his fingertips, it seemed to me that our democracy may have crumbled. Hope was a match in my fingertips, it’s flame whipped out by a quick wind. But today, my beautiful and wonderful boys, my faith in our country has been restored. I once again believe that my voice, a voice that generations before me fought to assign a value to, has not only been heard and valued, it has become tenable twice over. My voice is not only that of a woman, it is that of a woman of color.

I’m certain you will grow up with the knowledge of your own ethnic roots if in no other capacity than in relation to your faith. What speaks to my heart today is that you may not struggle to find your own place in society the way I did for much of my life. The adversity I (and the rest of your extended family) faced during my years in Oklahoma,Texas and Arkansas may be something forever foreign to you. In those pre-9/11 days, there was certainly undisguised hatred for us as Muslims, but the main disgust we encountered was race-based. Years of hatred culminated, for us, in repudiation based on the darker tones of our skin in a White, Presbyterian-dominated area. Last night, around 11PM, it became clear to me that there is a chance you may grow up without facing, witnessing or being pressured to take part in this type of adversity. While this hope is certainly incredible in its scope, and perhaps unfounded, there are reasons that my heart is opened to your freedom from racial stigma.

Certainly, Obama’s election would not have happened at this time in America’s life if not for the many incredible failures of George W. Bush as America’s 43rd president. Had Bush not abused his position of power by pursuing war on unfounded reasons and overspending the “political capital” he claimed to have earned, America could not have reached a point of such openness to and even desire for change. I am greatly aware of Obama’s weaknesses as a candidate for this office. The polarity of the campaign period shed light on the many failings of each candidate searching for nomination, but I believe Obama was the best of the lot we were granted despite his lack of experience in governance, and it is my hope that he will be a capable leader–one who continues on in the traditions of his campaign; to stay focused on the issues and to work for an America truly united by refusing to engage the propaganda and slander of naysayers and ne’er-do-wells.

You were both born into a time of misunderstanding with regards to Islam. After my move to Indiana from Arkansas, I saw the race-driven hatred fall away to be replaced with a subversive reinforcement of anti-Islam sentiment. In high school, I did not yet know myself as a Muslim. That identity had always been secondary. I’m sure the discrimination I faced based on my skin color aided me in defining myself as “Other” when it came to race. With our move from Arkansas to Indiana, I saw that fade away. Instead of being characterized as Arab and Muslim by default, I was characterized as Muslim and Arab by default. Looking back, I can say the consequences of this inversion was an increased interest in faith. With your father by my side, I clung to my new Muslim identity to find that it came with its own challenges.

Yes, there was harassment, but I was not generally subjected to it. I had female friends whose faith was visible due to the cloth on their heads. They were treated with derision. “Is there a bomb in your backpack?” was a question one of my friends regularly faced as she tried to pass through a particular hallway on her way to class. A group of boys, three or four of them, would yank her bag, tug her scarf, stand in her way or simply stare her down. It hurt her, but she kept walking. For many of us at that time, there was no recourse for the overt and sometimes physical aggression we experienced in places that should have been safe. This was pre-9/11.

I will say one thing for the horrid events of September 11, 2001. Had they not happened, we as Americans would not have had the chance to plumb the depths of the hatred for and fear of the “other” that we hide within. Before 9/11, harassment was tolerated, allowed to happen with merely the shake of a head or a click of the tongue. “What a shame,” we subjects of discrimination were told. “Some people just don’t understand.” We were then laden with the responsibility to understand for them, to forgive them for their ignorance. We were expected not to educate.

9/11 ended the “do nothing” period for Muslims in America and around the world. Suddenly, we were targets due to the crimes of those who perpetuated terror in the name of our faith. Our majority was forced to stand up and shout until we were blue in the face that we do not tolerate, accept or condone this type of violence. That we, the Muslim masses, believe in democracy, in the freedom of religion the Constitution promises.

We could no longer sit idly by. Our friends and family were being whisked away to detention centers, fathers and mothers and sisters and brothers detained, tortured, murdered in response to the acts of unilateral thinkers whose views we did not share. We had to speak up, to claim in voices rough with tears that we are people too. Like those minorities before us, we will not be denied our civil rights in a country we love because of its promised equality. Perhaps the writers of the Constitution were not so forward thinking when they promised freedom of religion–perhaps it only applied to those who worship in churches–but we would not let our mosques be riddled with bullets or burned to the ground.

My precious boys, neither of you is old enough to understand why the tears keep falling from my eyes yet I cannot stop smiling. My silent treatment of you will likely be forgiven by its omission from your memories. I am writing this because I want you to understand the incredible blessings of the world you have been born into. There is adversity at every corner, but with adversity comes hope. Barack Obama’s election proves this. He is a man of color elected as president in a country built from the blood of minorities. He is not a Muslim. He did not make a strong standing for Muslims in his campaign, but unlike his contemporaries, he has not incited hatred against us, derided us for our beliefs or used our differences of faith as cause to exclude us from our rightful category of American.

Here is what Obama’s election means to me: Yes, you will still grow up in a minority. You, like all humans, will face challenges day by day. But you are starting your lives in a world much different than that one I grew up in–in a world that has wildly changed. It may be that you will have more doors open to you based on your diversity. You are starting your lives in an America embracing a new reflection in the world’s mirror. I hope you help to keep that reflection crisp and clean. I hope your journey toward self-identification is filled with opportunity. You are the newest generation of American Muslims. Today I am able to believe that perhaps once another half a century has passed, you will be leaders for this great country. Perhaps, now that we are moving past race-based limitations, faith-based limitations will also begin to fail. Perhaps, one day, you will inspire hope for those both like and unlike you, your heads held high, your voices lifted as you say it: Yes we can.

I pray that you’ll find these words some day and that they will illuminate a history that seems to you fashioned of fiction. May you grow up knowing only the equality our constitution promises and the beauty of democracy at its best. May you grow up free from the hate that has plagued this country for far too long. May you grow up free. May you grow up Muslim Americans.

All my love,

Your Mother

A Hug and a Cup of Hot Cocoa

From Meet the Press:

I’m 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 7 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. Now, we have got to stop polarizing ourself in this way.

I found this on Aisha: Perpetually Befuddled. She likened Colin Powell’s above statements to a hug and a cup of hot cocoa. I can’t think of a better analogy, unless, of course, you don’t like hugs or cocoa.

It’s wonderful to see a politician (and a Republican!!) stand up and say that Muslims are Americans too. That we love and serve our country, and that if a person is Muslim, so what.

I feel like much of this election has been spent with Muslims and liberals in the background grumbling that politicians are either fearmongering or they are deflecting issues of the American culture of fear regarding Muslims and Arabs that has sprung up post 9/11.

Well, for those of us who have been shouting at the top of our lungs until we’re blue in the face that being Muslim does not void love of America and that it shouldn’t matter if a person is Muslim, take that deep breath of fresh air. And if you’re so inclined, hold it until Obama’s in office.

Speaking of which, I’m sure there must be a hard core McCain supporter out there who is also Muslim. Would you care to share your voice?