Arab Eye for the American Guy

Bridging Two Worlds

2007-04-16T16:40:00.001-07:00

In today's world, there's an obvious divide between the west and the east: the Judeo-Christian world and the Muslim world. Their relations have been so strained by severe conflicts that stretch from war torn Iraq to "diminishing Palestine" to the damaging effects of colonialism and imperialism on African nations to the single acts of intolerance in the western world, that sometimes it seems beyond repairable. Both sides get so caught up in heated debates and defensive confrontations that they start to play the finger pointing game, forgetting the same past in which they came from. They dispute over their few differences, setting aside their various similarities.

A true clash of thriving civilizations. No two civilizations, not in the past or present, have encountered such disastrous ramifications of their actions as these two have. No two civilizations have gone on this long in such horrid conditions due to their atrocious relations, with the end of their societies already in the making.

But it wasn't always like this. Once upon a time, all 3 Abrahamic religions were able to live in peace and harmony, in a society that was very tolerant of all beliefs and lifestyles. No matter their differences and uniqueness, the 3 religions were able to live in unity because of one significant similarity- they believed in one almighty God. These were the "people of the book." But along this righteous path, something went wrong. Something went terribly wrong, and since, has stayed that way. And it's only getting worse. The world witnessed the largest clash of religions in the Crusades and to think it would have stopped there would be a figment of imagination. The violence, the casualties and the bloodshed altogether do not mount up to the immeasurable hatred and widespread ignorance we live in today. No speck of unity is left; all decency and righteousness has faded away, leaving us with the devastating effects of what started out to be a conflict over land.

And who is to blame for this undying epidemic that has plagued the world?

Well depends on who you're asking. Neither side has taken responsibility, not even an ounce of it. No matter what is being discussed, be it the Arab-Israeli conflict or the civil war that has taken over Iraq or a mere dispute on American soil, each side is quick to blame the other. Media on both sides are loaded with propaganda aimed at exaggerating the truth and spreading false information in order to register a "real enemy" in the hearts and minds of the viewers, leaving the people confused, scared, and downright hateful towards the opposing side. Osama bin Laden and terrorism, jihad and suicide bombers, haters of freedom and lovers of war, is the image of Islam that is prevalent in the West; corrupt and immoral, materialistic and egocentric, infidels set out to capture the world into its grasp, are images that flood mainstream Middle Eastern media. And though all images are a realistic representation of both sides, in the larger picture, they are representative of the minority. But those people who truly uphold these portrayals are the soldiers battling on the frontline for the sovereignty of their nations. The representation of their people is in their hands because they determine the course of action their society as a whole takes.

So who are these soldiers? In the Middle East, there's two categories of people: martyrs who defend their land and right to live, and terrorists, whose sole mission in life is to whip out those they deem as non-believers. Regardless of which group they fall into, they're all residents of third world countries, belonging to poverty-stricken, war torn nations. They are made to think like a combat and react in vicious manners because they were born, raised, and will eventually die in the presence of hatred, violence, and bloodshed. Most are uneducated and unemployed, living in such poor conditions, that even the worst nightmare could not conjure up. They live by the gun and die by the grenade because they know nothing else. Their leaders use the Quran for justification in order to gain following, and convince their supporters that it applauds rewards their actions. Their counterparts in the West are the leaders of the free world. These are the elites, belonging to the wealthiest and highly educated minority who take up governmental seats or exceedingly respectable positions. These people have the power to shape the public mind and motivate righteous actions in order to promote and spread tranquility, tolerance, and democratic principles, yet do so by using scare tactics. They have so blatantly abused their power, it's tormenting. And until they know what to righteously do with it, it should be taken away and handed to those who only want what is good for the world. Like George Elliott once said, "the responsibility of tolerance lies in those who have the wider vision." And are these western leaders not ones who preach visions of a better world?

Though both sides are ridden themselves of guilt, they're all to blame for the heightened state of paranoia and hatred that we live in today.

So what is the solution? Well that's a hard question to answer because there is no one concrete solution. But the first step is recognition. Both sides must recognize and admit to their mistakes and attribution to the troubling world we live in today. They must recognize and acknowledge the other's concerns and justifications for their actions; even though they don't agree, they should at least try to understand. And finally when everyone is well informed, dialogue between the two worlds can begin. No matter their vast differences, they do share common backgrounds, interests, needs, and wants; they need to realize this and be more accepting, therefore allowing both to move forward and reach a common, suitable ground. And if this doesn't happen soon, we will see the crash of the two greatest civilizations coming to a near end. The war of the worlds has only begun. It's up to all of us how it ends.

"History leaves no doubt that among of the most regrettable crimes committed by human beings have been committed by those human beings who thought of themselves as civilized. What, we must ask, does our civilization possess that is worth defending? One thing worth defending, I suggest, is the imperative to imagine the lives of beings who are not ourselves and are not like ourselves: animals, plants, gods, spirits, people of other countries, other races, people of the other sex, places and enemies."
--Wendell Barry

"The test of courage comes when we are in the minority. The test of tolerance comes when are in the majority."
--Ralph Sockman

"It is the enemy who can truly teach us to practice the virtues of compassion and tolerance."
--Dalai Lama

Arab of Color

2007-03-31T22:23:00.000-07:00

The color of one's skin has always been an issue of controversy and the center of heated debates in the Western world, but not so much in the Eastern world. Or to better phrase that, throughout history, Westerners have been the "predators" and Easterners have been the "prey," for a lack of a better word. Since the creation of mankind, Westerners, predominately light skinned, have always been prejudice against those of darker complexions, whereby Easterners fell as subjects of their bigotry. Easterners, specifically Arabs, have always been known to be very welcoming, non-prejudice people (don't let the media fool you). I mean look back at why Malcolm X converted to Islam; after his trip to Mecca, he came back astonished at the fact that such a society that was deemed "backwards" was intermingled with peoples of light and dark skin, whereas such a modernized society like America, that was built on freedom and equality, was still stripping away the rights of those that were of color. Such a discovery is what opened the eyes of many African Americans to the nondiscriminatory world in which the Arabs lived in.

It let them know that the grass was truly greener on the other side.

However, all this time, we have been fooled. It's not that racism didn't exist, it's just that it wasn't so outwardly portrayed or practiced as it was in the "free world." Whereas Westerners were so down right gun -hoe about their hatred for non-Caucasians, Arabs just disregarded people of darker complexions, yet same culture, native tongue, and religious beliefs, as part of their racial group. Both are forms of racism, just one is more intentional then the other. Yet history has proven that no matter how severe racism is, any shape or size of it is problematic.

In the end, racism in its harshest or simplest form has detrimental effects; the difference is how long these effects take to settle in and actually impact society.

And sadly, I realized that I too was guilty of thinking in discriminatory ways, even if unintentional. A minor act of prejudice, merely making a snap statement, would reinforce this gloomy realization. *Sigh*

I was at dinner with a darker skinned Arab friend and we were arguing about whether or not Egyptians were considered African. I got agitated at the fact that he kept calling Egyptians African and kept questioning why I thought otherwise. The way he came at me made me feel as if he was trying to call me out as a racist, so I quickly got defensive and explained to him that I had nothing against Africans, its just that I consider Egyptians to be Arab for several reasons. Of course, he asked me what those reasons were. I proceeded to answer, though I thought the answer was quite obvious: Egyptians speak Arabic just like people of Arabia, have the common Arab features like big eyes/noses, dark features, tanned skin, share the same culture, eat the same foods, and uphold the same religious beliefs. He agreed with me, but the conversation didn't end there. He agreed that by definition, and not geographic location, Egyptians were Arabs, and then asked "Well what about Somalians, Sudanese, Yemenis, and Nubians, what do you consider those people?" Quickly I answered "African, of course!" And that's when he opened my eyes to the fact that I was sadly mistaken and that I had just contradicted myself within the span of 30 seconds because, based on my definition, all those people were Arab too. So why was I so quick to say they weren't? Sadly, because of their skin color.

I was very disappointed in myself because I never would have seen myself as one who was racist or even thought in such racist ways. But after that discussion, I realized that all my lighter skinned Arab relatives and friends thought the same way. And the reason this has never changed or even brought to our attention was because it's was never a topic of discussion; we're too busy criticizing whites making blacks feel inferior, that we failed to realize that we too were doing the same (of course, not on the same level).

And that small, yet insightful discussion, is what lead me to place this topic on the table.

Racism is everywhere. It is a pervasive problem with multiple damaging effects. It eludes no group of people. It stifles, hinders, and massacres thoughts, beliefs, racial groups, and nations. It invades the public discourse through news media, music, movies, and the rest of pop culture. However, racism isn't always to obvious. Racism may be conscious or subconscious and is expressed in actions or attitudes initiated by individuals, groups, and institutions that treat human beings like they don't deserve to breathe. How far have we really come as a planet on this issue? Not even the most accepting of people, the people who love to host tourists, who can sit down at a coffee shop and have a drink with a stranger from the other side of the world with great glee, can lift the tide of this unwavering foam of hate.

The group I speak of is my own: "El shaab al arabi" or the people of Arabia, who unfortunately fall into the same disgusting trap that the Western world does. While most Arabs are not by any means outwardly racist, they still think in stereotypical ways. The bigger issue is the inner racism that nobody ever sees. I'm here to state that the subconscious racism of dark skinned peoples in the Arab world is just as despicable and damaging to the society's well being as the conscious racism practiced in the United States and across Europe. Why is it that when you think of the Arab world or the Middle East you merely think of Egypt, Palestine, Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, and Iraq? Who decided the color of your skin was the justification for such bigotry? Why do we as a people still allow the horrid effects of colonialism and imperialism to run rampant in our societies? True the British and French are big factors in this problem, especially with their still existing records on human rights towards dark skinned individuals as well as there rule over our land for centuries, but why hasn't this affect faded away? Morocco, Sudan, Somalia, Ethiopia, Libya, Qatar, Yemen, etc. are all part of the Arabian landscape and more importantly a part of the cultural fabric, yet are not accepted, or considered inferior. God is great, people united are indestructible, and the mind is a terrible thing to waste. Are those lessons not obvious to an area of the world that has seen the three monotheistic religions rise as well as the Egyptian, Persian, Byzantine, and Ottoman Empires? This fact can escape others with excuse, but we are a blessed people in a blessed land. Why have we not set the example and stood for what is right?

The answer lies in the denial of the problem. However, just as generations of African-Americans lived in this country without the status of citizenship while first generation Asian-Americans were considered 3/5 a citizen, many Arab countries with Arabic speaking peoples are not even considered so while Persians, Pakistanis, and Afghans are mistaken for them. Could this be because of skin color? Of course that is the reason and it is a shame. No one can argue the Middle East is the most diverse part of the world since the beginning of time and it is the center of everything Holy and was apart of a Mediterranean culture of unmatched inventions in academia. I have even witnessed this fact in my own country of Egypt. Now while I love my land and my people and believe we do a lot of things right, we are human and susceptible to poisonous thought from within and from outside its borders. I've seen it at "public and private sector" levels. For example, every child of Egyptian parents grows up knowing and appreciating the Nasser vs. Sadat arguments during an azuma' (home gathering of friends and family) while drinking shay (tea) after dinner. Now while there are fair arguments on both sides as to who holds the "Crown of Egypt," there is a sizeable amount of those who dislike Anwar al-Sadat for other reasons that Gamal Abdel-Nasser didn't have to worry about (can you guess what that is). Even in Egypt's version of Hollywood we see a bias towards fairer skinned men and women while those same actors pile the powder on their faces to please the camera. Ironically though, most Egyptians and Arabs in general are such a medium to tanned (I am myself), yet it does not eliminate nor rectify the invisible disease that has plagued all lands throughout the history of mankind.

While the world's environments and governments are taking a plunge, the grace and dignity of human autonomy and brotherhood will indeed rise again. I believe that with all my heart: "During the past eleven days here in the Muslim world, I have eaten from the same plate, drunk from the same glass, and slept on the same rug - while praying to the same God - with fellow Muslims, whose eyes were the bluest of blue, whose hair was the blondest of blond, and whose skin was the whitest of white. And in the words and in the deeds of the white Muslims, I felt the same sincerity that I felt among the black African Muslims of Nigeria, Sudan and Ghana. We were truly all the same (brothers) because their belief in one God had removed." --Malcolm X.

Four Years Later

2007-03-22T10:04:00.000-07:00

4 years and 3 days later, still not much progress. Not much has changed.

Well not for the good, atleast.

It was just 4 years ago, (March, 19, 2003 to be exact) that President Bush Jr. declared war on Iraq, as a means to stop the spread of terrorism throughout the region, take out a villainous dictator and set up democracies in the third world countries.

And only one of the three tasks Bush set out to do have been accomplished. He managed to topple Saddam Hussein, but terrorism has only risen and spread, and democracies have yet to be set up. Bush has brought this country to one of its highest deficits, has created more enemies than destroyed, and continues to play a global cat and mouse game that has failed miserably. Bush's "stay the course" plan has steered off course.

Unless you consider Afghanistan a success...

America as the leader of the free world has put into a office a president that does not work for his own people, tries to shutup the media, an institution that embodies the first constitutional right, and has forced pro-American democracy in a foreign land at the point of a gun. The war was a mechanism for Bush's own selfish purposes and unfortunately, Bush did not turn up as the loser, everyone else did. The War in Iraq has only increased violence and hatred towards America throughout the Middle East. It has provided a platform for terrorist networks to grow, with members finding reasons to further justify their actions; extremists and even civilians want America out and see America as the"enemy." It has lowered America's stance in the eyes of the world, let alone in the eyes of the American people. Not only does much of the world see America as a "bully," "hypocrite," "Satan," and various harsher names that I need not say, and Iraqis have lost hope in America and no longer see it as their "savior," but more then half of the American public feels like it has been deceived and wants this nightmare to end. Not only has this war left the nation equally divided between anti-war protesters and pro-war activists, but has also left the Congress evenly separated with blue cowards who sat back and did nothing, and red ignorants who so blindly support Bush, making it harder to get anything done on the Hill.

Bush stands knee high in hypocrisy and his supporters stand knee high in denial and that has not hurt them, but it hurt us.

And this war has cost everyone so much, yet has accomplished so little. To date, the American government has spent well over $400 billion of tax-payers' money on this war, on both military and non-military expenses. But what's far worse then this figure is human causalities during this 4 year span. To date, the Department of Defense has confirmed 3,242 American deaths, not counting over 24,000 that were severely wounded. And Iraqi death tolls? Though there are no official documentations of Iraqi deaths, it has been confirmed that over 65,000 Iraqis died, both civilians and military personnel, . Total of wounded and killed that has been actually documented in this war with no end? ALMOST 100,000 PEOPLE! That's 100,000 people who died for no reason. People who put their lives second to freedom, democracy, and peace around the world, only to have just the opposite occur. Young and old, white and color, brother and father, mother and daughter, cop and teacher, Christian and Muslim, American and Iraqi: mere players in this global cat and mouse doom game. And sadly, this situation is only getting worse. Car bombs and mortar attacks have doubled and quadrupled, respectively, in the past year alone. And according to an ABC survey, 6 out of 10 Iraqis say that their living situations worsened and fear their lives, double the percentage who said so in late 2005. Around half say that increasing U.S. forces in the country will make the security situation worse, a decision that has not been highly supported both there and here.

Apparently Bush feels like he hasn't done enough damage. What will make this man realize that he isn't going about this the right way?!

And like Helen Thomas said in her live interactive video conference with aspiring journalists in C-Span's Distance Learning Course, Bush "struck a match throughout the entire region; the Middle East is on fire. It's a Russian roulette."

Indeed, it is.

I'd write more on this subject, but I feel like I can write forever, so I'm just going to end this here. But here are some great links on the war, including sites with the figures and statistics I used in this entry, as well as many more others. Please take some out to go through these sites and educate yourself with the truth about this devastating situation.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/19/AR2007031900421.html

http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/press/pr15.php

http://icasualties.org/oif/

http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182

"We often give our enemies the means to our own destruction."
--Aesop

"I'm fed up to the ears with old men dreaming up wars for young men to die in."
--George McGovern

"History teaches that wars begin when governments believe the price of aggression is cheap. To keep the peace, we and our allies must be strong enough to convince any potential aggressor that war could bring no benefit, only disaster."
--Ronald Reagan

"War prosperity is like the prosperity that an earthquake or a plague brings. The earthquake means good business for construction workers, and cholera improves the business of physicians, pharmacists, and undertakers; but no one has for that reason yet sought to celebrate earthquakes and cholera as stimulators of the productive forces in the general interest."
--Ludwig von Mises

Where Were We?

2007-03-18T17:39:00.000-07:00

Saturday March 17, 2007-- Thousands of protesters poured into the streets of D.C. late Friday night to prepare for the "March on Pentagon," a national anti-war demonstration organized and led by United for Peace organization. D.C. was just one of many stops for the rally against the Bush administration's handling of the war; specifically, protesters wanted the Pentagon to cut funding and stop supporting Bush's plans that have cost tens of thousands of American and Iraqi lives. The march comes at the mark of the 4th anniversary of the US-led War on Iraq and as Bush sends more troops to stop the escalating conflicts in Iraq and regain control in the region.

Nearly 10,000 protesters gathered at 23rd street and Constitution Avenue to begin the day long march. Throughout the day, tens of thousands of more protesters joined in the anti-war march as it stopped at the Lincoln Memorial, crossed over the bridge, and ended at the Pentagon. Peace and anti-war organizations, Vietnam and Iraqi war veterans, families, and students took to the streets of D.C. Caucasians, African Americans, Hispanics, Asians, Christians and Jews alike joined the peace movement. Muslims and Arabs showed up and many were scattered throughout, coming in smaller group of families and friends. Smaller mosques participated in the march, but not the larger ones. Dar al-Hijrah and Adam Center, the two largest mosques in the DC metropolitan area, had no official buses nor did they organize groups as they had done in previous demonstrations. Muslims and Arabs came alone in disappointing numbers. So where were the majority?

Some at home, some at work, some attending to personal, important errands. But most? Sleeping, eating, shopping, or smoking sheesha. *Sigh*

And that's the problem with Muslims and Arabs alike. They complain about the depressing situation in Iraq and curse Bush's name on a daily basis, but when it comes time to do something, they're ghost. Nowhere to be found. They talk the talk, but when it comes time to walk the walk, they're too busy, too caught up with their lives. And that is the problem with us. We claim we would die for our brothers and sisters back home, but yet we can't even stand up for them. We know how to talk amongst one another, and criticize for hours at a time, but we can't voice our opinions publicly. When it comes time to fight, we put down our armor (our voices) and run. Some people traveled 14 hours by bus, while others payed $300 for a round trip airfare, just to join in the march, but we couldn't make a small, 30 minute trip to D.C. The march was in our backyards, yet we sat back and watched.

What if Martin Luther King Jr. had sat in his lawn chair and stared out into the world silently? What if he had revisited his dream over and over again, but had not shared it with the rest of the world? What if he had continued to complain amongst his fellow African American brothers and sisters, yet when it came time to stand up, he sat right back down? What if he had thought to himself "I am only one person. Surely, one person cannot make that much of a difference"...?

African Americans would not be where they are today.

And now it is our time to do the same. It is our time to stand up and voice our opinions. Stand up and join our fellow Americans in stopping the spread of propaganda that the Bush administration puts out to brainwash the citizenry. Stand up and fight to put an end to hatred and violence. Stand up and spread peace and tolerance both here and abroad. Stand up and halt the march down hell's lane. Stand up and fight for our fellow Americans and Iraqis who are putting their lives on the line everyday for nothing. Stand up and fight for what is right.

We have the chance and means for doing it, and people have paved the way for us to have the right to stand up and fight, so let's not waste this opportunity. Let's not have people look back in 50 years and shake their heads in shame. Let's not have history repeat itself.

Let's stop being lazy and make a difference, for sitting back and watching is just as bad as doing the dirty.

There were three men competing to see who was the worst one in the world. The first one attacked a woman, beat her until her teeth fell out and she bled from her nose and ears. He beat her so savagely that she fainted. He turned to the others and said, "I am the worst one of all." The second man stepped up to rape her and beat her further until she was almost dead. He turned to the others and said, "No one can be worse than me." The third one stepped up, smiled coldly, and said, "No, I am the worst one even though I just stood by and watched, because this woman is my sister."

The woman is Iraq.
The first man is Saddam.
The second is the West.
The third is the Muslim world that stood by and did nothing...
--Anonymous

"Those who do nothing are inviting shame as well as violence. Those who act boldly are recognizing right as well as reality."

--John F. Kennedy

"If you stand up and be counted, from time to time you may get yourself knocked down. But remember this: A man flattened by an opponent can get up again. A man flattened by conformity stays down for good."

--Thomas J. Watson

Unfit to be a Mother?

2007-03-10T14:32:00.000-08:00

So reading this blog you may think to yourself "wow, she's a bit late on the matter," and true indeed I am. But just a bit. I wanted to do a lot of research before I spoke and formulated my opinion, especially because this is about my home country and therefore, a sensitive subject matter for me. This one is a long one, but I PROMISE it's the last one of this length. Like I said, this is a very important, and dear to my heart, subject.

In the Arab world, Egypt is known as the "mother of the world." And she deserves her title. She is one of the four first civilizations of the world, is home to one of the largest libraries and oldest universities in the world, was once a great contributor to the creation of science and math, and a pioneer of art and literature in the Middle East, landing it the title of "Hollywood of the Middle East." Egyptian culture is a striking blend of old and new, east and west. Egypt was also one of the very first Arab countries to adopt a democratic government. But is it still upholding its roots? Does it still deserve it's once righteously given title?

Many today would argue no.

Since the start of the new year, Egyptian liberally charged media has come under investigation by the government. Specifically, bloggers have come into the spotlight, becoming the government's recent target of crackdowns on antagonists and criticizers of the current administration. President Hosni Mubarak has been a long time opponent of independently owned media outlets, for he has no tolerance of those who show resentment towards the government. The government monopolizes the media and places a cap on what it can and can't say, what it can and can't show, and who it can and can't attack. The government tries to control and limit freedom of speech, a right that is safeguarded by the Egyptian constitution. However, it is not an absolute right. Just as with any country that upholds freedom of speech, Egypt prohibits speech that is deemed universally intolerable or is pure defamation. Like with other Arab countries that grant freedom of speech, Egypt puts the right to speak one's mind second to making false statements against the government or the religions of the land. Defamation of religion and the government is legally banned.

So does that mean one cannot speak out against Hosni Mubarak and his unpopular government without fear of being arrested? Can one really not publicly discuss their opposition to the current administration, which seems to be a democratic one, but yet runs as an undying dictatorship (I say this because Mubarak has ruled Egypt for 26 years, longer than any leader since the 19th century when the modern state was first formed)? Is freedom of speech not a right, but a privilege, after all?

Well to answer your questions, we must go back in time. But no worries, we will not venture into the days of the pharaoh; we just need to recall the past few weeks...

On February 22, Egyptian native Abdel Kareem Nabil Soliman was sentenced to four years in prison on charges of religious incitement, provoking public uprising against the government, discussing inappropriate issues that harm the reputation of Egypt and disrupt national security, and for also insulting the president on his blog. Blogs are a new and unfamiliar journalistic tool to Egypt because of it's nontraditional journalistic nature, whereby news is still widely broadcasted through TV and newspapers; online Egyptian newscasting is slowly catching up to it's American counterparts, but Blog usage is rapidly growing because it provides a platform for social, political and religious minorities whose issues are rarely broadcasted in traditional media or publicly discussed for that matter. Last year, a number of bloggers were arrested for a connection to a political movement for democratic reform; amongst those arrested was Nabil. All but Nabil were released; he was put on trial by Mubarak's prosecutors as al-Azhar University pushed for his indictment. Al-Azhar expelled Nabil in 2006 after he posted several anti-Islamic blogs, blaming the 2005 deadly sectarian riots against Egyptian Christian Coptic Church on Muslim extremists, and calling al-Azhar the "university of terrorism" and "the other face of al-Qaeda," along with calling President Mubarak the "symbol of tyranny." University administrators soon filed a complaint to the Public Prosecutor Office against Nabil, alleging he was "spreading rumors endangering public security" and "defaming President Mubarak." Trial against Nabil began on January 25, and for nearly a month, heated exchanges took place with young, liberated minds on one side, and traditional conservatives on the other. On February 22, Nabil was found guilty on all charges. Now I think it's ridiculous that he's been arrested for insulting the president because that is a right that is protected in Egypt's legal framework. However, like I said earlier, freedom of speech stops when defamation occurs; it is clearly stated in Egypt's constitution. And to blatantly link someone or an organization to terrorism without sound evidence is wrong. True there are extremist scholars in al-Azhar, but that doesn't mean the entire university is a supporter and encourager of terrorism. Now as far as insulting the president, he has a right too. If you lived in Egypt, you'd feel the same way about Mubarak. But let's face it, presidents cannot deal with foes or criticizers.

So what's been going on since then? More rebelling, more anti-Mubarak slogans, more protests. But this special case has also gained special attention beyond the borders of Egypt:

--Several American congressmen have written a letter to Egyptian Ambassador Nabil Fahmy urging the release of Nabil.
--Rallies and protests have been held in D.C., N.Y.C., Chicago, London, Paris, Rome and Ottawa against Nabil's arrest.
--Internet petitions have been started up to pressure Egyptian officials to release Nabil. http://www.petitiononline.com/KAmer/ and http://www.freekareem.org/.

But this situation isn't unique; this isn't the first time the Egyptian government has imprisoned someone for criticizing the government. When he came into power after former president Sadat's assassination in 1981, President Mubarak extended Egypt's Emergency Law, keeping the country under a state of emergency. Under this state, the government has the power to imprison individuals without trial for any period of time, and virtually no reason, as a means to fight global terrorism. Basically, under the court of law in Egypt, one is guilty under proven Innocent. So why has this case gained more attention above the rest?

Beats me. This is all too ironic if you ask me...

On the eve of September 11, "the emergence of the Arab world's most ambitious democracy movement, coalescing in opposition to the taciturn Mubarak, took place" (this was taken from a great article in the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/17/AR2007031701482.html). Protests, banners and slogans all carried the same theme, one that most Egyptians felt but had never publicly expressed - "Down with Mubarak!" Since 911, several hundreds, if not thousands, of Egyptians have been detained on mere suspicions or for simply expressing opposition to the government. The favorite target of President Mubarak's abuse of power is felt by members of the Muslim Brotherhood, a Sunni Islamist Organization that supports the reestablishment of Sharia or Islamic law. But Mubarak's infinite power doesn't end there; the Muslim Brotherhood is just the beginning of Mubarak's list of endless targets. President Mubarak has long gone, and this has recently gone up drastically, after secular democrats who fight for basic rights and freedoms, those engraved and entitled to all citizens in the Egyptian constitution. The Bush administration has tolerated President Mubarak's brutal crackdowns on those deemed as "radical Jihadists" or "Islamic extremists" or "enemies of the free world" as a mechanism to fight the War on Terror. The Bush administration never thought twice about what Mubarak was doing; never asked, never cared. Why the Bush administration cares now, who knows.

I have many possible answers floating around in my head, but I still haven't landed my finger on the exact, definite reason.

Hypocrisy, though, rings in my head. *Sigh*

But I must say, I'm very tired of hearing all the negativity there is to hear about Egypt's human rights record and it's limitations on natural born freedoms. I'm tired of hearing the criticism that Egypt isn't respecting the freedom of expression. I'm tired of hearing that it limits the rights of all of it's citizens, or at least those who oppose Mubarak. I'm tired of hearing that it is not playing its role correctly as a leading democratic government in the Arab world. America is not one to talk about limiting it's citizens' rights and putting people behind bars for no apparent reason, or proper due process of law. Looking back in it's history, and even til today, America is just not one to talk.

"The decay of decency in the modern age, the rebellion against law and good faith, the treatment of human beings as things, as the mere instruments of power and ambition, is without a doubt the consequence of the decay of the belief in man as something more than an animal animated by highly conditioned reflexes and chemical reactions. For, unless man is something more than that, he has no rights that anyone is bound to respect, and there are no limitations upon his conduct which he is bound to obey."
--Walter Lippmann

"Of what use is freedom of speech to those who fear to offend?"
--Roger Ebert

So what does "jihad" really mean?

2007-03-06T21:22:00.000-08:00

In this day and age, we hear the word "jihad" atleast 3 times a day. Most stories pertaining to the Middle East or Muslims in general, from suicide bombers in the West Bank to roadside killings in Baghdad to plotted transatlantic aircraft terror attacks, contain the word "jihad." And that's just the problem- that often times this word is linked to terrorism, violence, and hatred. But the reality of it all is the word "jihad," in it's literal and true usage, is quite the opposite. So how did such a word get tangled up in this ugly mess?

Ignorant politicians misused the word, and idiotic journalists published it. IF only these journalists had done their job and set out to find out the truth about this word, would it's real definition not had vanished.

Jihad literally translates to "strive" from Arabic to English. The Quran describes Jihad as a system of checks and balances, as a way that Allah set up to "check one people by means of another." Jihad, as defined by Merriam Webster (not an Arabic dictionary, but a western one, so don't even try to call me out on this one) is a personal struggle in devotion to Islam especially involving spiritual discipline. Simply stated, it's a personal battle from within to reach the highest and purest level of spirituality, and thus bring one closer to Allah (the Arabic word for God). Now how did such a peaceful word metaphor into a hateful one? People taking things out of context. The second definition, and it's broader interpretation, of jihad is a holy war waged on behalf of Islam as a religious duty. In the days of the prophet, jihad referred to the military exertion against non-Muslim combatants in order to defend the Islamic state. It wasn't used to convert non-Muslims by force, but rather expand and defend Islam. This meaning, of course, was taken out of context to stand for oppression of those who are non-Muslims and conversion to Islam by force. And now, centuries later, it has taken on this violent and false connotation.

And this is why I'm here to educate you and put a stop to this demeaning meaning of such a beautiful word. Please spread the message.

There are 5 kinds of jihad fi sabililah or the struggle in the cause of God:
Jihad of the heart/soul-an inner struggle of good against evil in the mind.
Jihad by the tongue-a struggle of good against evil waged by writing and speech, such as in the form of Khutbas (sermons).
Jihad by the pen and knowledge- a struggle for good against evil through scholarly study.
Jihad by the hand- struggle of good against evil waged by actions or with one's wealth, such as actively doing all five pillars of Islam.
Jihad by the sword-holy war in the name of God in the defense of Islam.

"They are those who have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right, for no cause except that they say,'Our Lord is Allah.'
--Quran 22:40

"Let there be no compulsion in religion"
--Quran 2:256

See it From my Eyes :)

2007-03-06T20:39:00.000-08:00

Hi everybody! Welcome to my 2ND blog.. yes yes my second because apparently I wasn't really getting the whole blog thing.. after listening to the London Guardian blogging editor Kevin Anderson, I realized I was going about this whole blog thing all wrong! I needed to find a specific angle on a subject matter that I cared dearly for, which is something I already knew but didn't retain.. so here I am attempting to do a blog for the second time.. hopefully this one comes out better then the first! Wish me luck!

I think this could be the beginning of a beautiful thing :)

So before I run off ranting about this or that, let me introduce myself. My name is Duha El-Quesny and I am currently a student at George Mason University (known across the nation as "Cinderella" for it's magical basketball season in '06). My entire life I wanted to be a lawyer; since the day I learned to talk, I learned to argue. I mastered the skill of rhetoric and articulate debating at a very young age, and realized "Hey, why not make big bucks off of it?" But then 911 occurred and that's when I took a whole new approach on life.

It was then that I realized I could do much more with my skill set then just argue for those who were probably guilty anyways.

On the eve of September 11,2001, my life changed. No longer did I feel proud to be an Arab or Muslim. Image after image, story after story, all captions and headlines read the same: "Islam Fascism," "Radical Jihadists," "Muslim Extremists," and the list can go on for days. I was sick and tired of reading and seeing stories that were so bias, so one sided when it came to discussing Arabs, Islam or the Middle East. Enough was enough! Something had to be done! And I was set to do just that!

I realized I not only had a talent and love for arguing (and still do, don't worry, that hasn't faded away), but I also enjoyed reading and writing. So collectively, debating intelligently, reading, and writing, as well as being an objective and open minded person (I must admit, though, that at times I'm not) were all artibutes of a good journalist; not to mention I tend to be a nosey person, and in the field of journalism, you must have a need to want and know more. So I came to realize that with my natural talents, and ethnic and religious background, I could indeed change the face of journalism. I could report about the Middle East, Islam, and Arabs from an objective and knowledgeable standpoint. Enough with the reporters who know abosutely NOTHING about the subject matter they were covering, let alone can't pronounce half the words and misuse several key terms on a daily basis (which I'll get to later). It was about time someone stepped up to the plate and knew what they were talking about. And that person would be me.

Now that I have the platform to do this, let's get started.

"He has the deed half done who has made a beginning."
--Horace