How are Muslims and Americans similar? They're People

I watch the news and hear the American side of the stories, both of which portray Muslims as a collective. However, Muslims are people. In a recent presentation in the University of Northern Colorado’s Mind 182 class, one Saudi student spoke of a story where his older brother found out that he had been ditching school to play soccer. This is a classic example of a personality trait. The student loved soccer and did not think of school as important. It is hard to forget how many American college students have experienced the same desire to ditch school when, as the semester progresses, it gets easier to find a parking spot on campus and attending classmates become fewer. Another presentation led a female Saudi student to say that her dream was to make education for students with special needs better in her country. There are a volume of people who want to make education better for students in the United States. A recent delegate assembly of the Colorado Education Association is such an example. I tell you, Americans, Muslims are not much unlike from us. The difference is that they live in a dissimilar environment. Their surroundings are more regulated, something that has led to few women having political rights. However, what is often missed in the news is the fact that there are a few women that are speaking in Arab and Middle Eastern politics. One such example is the fact that Kuwaiti government has Dr. Modi Abdul Aziz Hamoud, the Minister of Education and the Minister of Higher Education. Looking at her image above, she is pictured just like US Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Neither woman is wearing a hijab. They are both wearing professional clothing that is fitting for government positions. Ultimately, both look very similar but are in parts of the world where ideologies are opposite when it comes to women. However, they are not much different as they are both serving their governments.
This evening I watched one of my economics classmates smoking a cigarette. I yelled his name out the window and he smiled. I said good luck on the final and he understood what I was saying. The first time I met him, I was open to meeting him, but ultimately had my concerns and skepticisms. He was friendly to me and it changed what I thought of him. I remember asking what language he spoke. He said he spoke both Arabic and French. I never imagined that an Arab would speak French. He was communicating to me in English. The first time I met my coworker at the ticket office it was similar. I found out that he spoke English and French. However, I had no skepticism or concerns about him. The only difference between my coworker and classmate is that my classmate looked and sounded like he was from the Middle East. My classmate still has emotions, like smiling and feeling good that I remembered his name, just as my coworker has emotions when it comes to areas of his life. They are both students at the University of the Northern Colorado and in the eyes of the student body they are equally important.
The purpose of knowing whether someone is similar is that it gives us the ability to connect. It is like the new Pepsi commercial at the movie theater, and below, that is designed to make the world a better place. After everyone has shuffled around the cards that say what is important to them, the person at the top of the screen pours a Pepsi. The Pepsi is a symbol of connection because everyone can see the Pepsi that is being poured. They are a connection and just like Pepsi is trying to make the world better, we have to make the world better. The Mind 182 class referenced above is an example of positive diplomacy. As students, we are asked to sit down with each other and with students through the Soliya Connect Program. Within class and through Soliya we are interacting with students from the Middle East. We ask questions, they ask questions, and we all start to formulate researched ideas about each other through discussion. When I asked the Saudi woman who came into our class if women were killed for being out in public without men, she was surprised. She was clear to say that what the media portrays as Saudi Arabia is not real. I have also had the ability to support this with fact, such as hearing from other Soliya students that are not from Saudi Arabia who have similar experiences with the people that are in Saudi Arabia. I am able to see that there are women in the Kuwaiti government. Ultimately, what I am learning is that there is more truth to what people of the countries in the Middle East say about their country than what the people in our country say about their country. This is the same as if they were talking about my country. It is better to ask the person who lives and breathes from the culture than the person that truly has had no experience.

">

Pressure Pushing Down on Me

RE: Companies Feeling More Pressure to Cut Iran Ties (April 23, 2010)

By Peter Baker

To the Editor:

I found this article really interesting because it showed how America seems to feel the need to step up when the UN fails. I think that this pressure to end ties with Iran will have a great impact on this country. However, whether the impact will be good or bad remains to be seen. Also the effectiveness of this strategy has yet to be determined. On one hand Iran could fold and give up its nuclear aspirations. However on the other hand, not every company in the world is going to cut ties to Iran and therefore Iran will most likely always have the funding that it needs, this could mean that this pressure would have no effect at all. One other outcome however, is that Iran could retaliate against the US violently and cause another war. I think the main question now is: is this sanction worth the risk and will it have the outcome that President Obama is looking for. Also what effect will this sanction, and Iran’s reaction to it have worldwide?

How Could We?

RE: Report Details Torture at Secret Baghdad Prison (April 27, 2010)

By Sam Dagher

To the Editor:

“America is the symbol of democracy, but then you have the abuses at Abu Ghraib,” Mr. Maliki said. “The American government took tough measures, and we are doing the same, so where is the problem and why this raucousness?” Although this entire article was very disturbing this is the part that really shocked me. The acts committed at this prison were atrocious and inhuman, how can we wonder why people from all over the world hate us when we know that they have stories like this to go off of. Not only did we show them that this sort of violence is ok but we gave them a rock solid excuse for committing violence in the future. If America is a democracy and we are a democracy then we can do these horrible things in the name of democracy. I feel like this will have a huge impact over the way that America is viewed by the world. How can we hope to create a peaceful world when all we contribute is violence that breeds hatred?

Instability = a Breeding Ground for Violence

RE: Wave of Fatal Bombins Widens Fissures in Iraq (April 23, 2010)

By Steven Lee Myers

To the Editor:

This article shows how an unstable country is a violent one. I think Americans need to ask our government if we are contributing or causing much of this violence. The article talked about how these bombings were adding to the instability of the government, bombings which were a response to American presence in Iraq and are helping to destabilize the government that Americans are trying to create. Is this the right course of action for the Iraqi people? Or just for America? One man who had been injured by the bombing summed up the people’s feelings nicely, “The politicians are busy forming the government and forgot all about us,” he said. “They are all useless.” It seems like America is only adding to chaos and violence within Iraq, even though that is exactly what we are trying to prevent. I think that stability needs to come from the people for it to have any hope for permanence, yet what are we doing to help that?

Guilty Until Proven Innocent

RE: Jury to Be Anonymous in Trial of Ex-Student Accused of Aiding Al Qaeda (April 26, 2010)

By Benjamin Weiser

To the Editor:

If there is anything that I have learned, it is that history repeats itself. This trial and the wording within the article closely resemble the mood in America during the 1920’s towards immigrants. First of all I think that the jurors have every right to remain anonymous because it would keep their judgment honest because they wouldn’t be afraid that what they had to say would cause them any harm. However I think this whole trial needs to be examined. In the past the fear of immigrants has caused some of the most heinous miscarriages of justice in American History, for example the case of Sacco and Vanzetti; two Italian immigrants who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and paid dearly for that mistake because of fabricated evidence. I’m not saying that Hasmi is either innocent or Guilty, merely that this bias needs to be taken into account and should be eliminated from the article.

There are 2 Sides to Every Story

RE: 2 Officials and 2 Views on Discussing Mideast Peace (April 28, 2010)

By Mark Landler

To the Editor:

When I began reading this piece I was expecting to read something presenting two sides of a particular story, for example the views of an Iraqi and the views of an American on peace in Iraq. However what I found was much different. This whole article was only one side of the Palestinian Israeli story. It made it seem like the Palestinians weren’t even part of the peace negotiations. Only the American view and the Israeli view were presented and so this article was not a fair representation of the situation at all. The article made it seem like the biggest problem for peace in Israel right now is the continued construction in Jerusalem and an Israeli mayor. Not once did the article try to explain why the construction was a problem for peace and to add further insult there was only a brief portion that had anything to do with Palestine at all. This article was horribly biased incredibly uninformative with regard to what the issue really is about and the people who are really affected by the decisions made by these politicians.

Post for March 29th: Not a Surprise

Re: Religious Parties Now Key to Iraq Rule by: Margaret Coker

Though the people are more interested in basic social services the government is still largely swayed by the religious alliances of its members. The government structure is still he who as the right connections has the power, or so to speak. I did not feel this was a particularly earth shattering article, it makes a good deal of sense that Iraq’s government is subject to the suasion of religious parties when religion is such a heated issue throughout that area. While many of the religious factions are saying they will not lend support to the current Prime Minster Nouri al-Maliki and are leaning more toward Mr. Allawi’s campaign. While the people don’t want to focus on issues centered on religion the bloc is encouraging only those candidates who are against secularization. Personally, I think it is possible to have too much religion and a break from such a heady drink maybe so be suggested to those in power in the Middle East.

Obama is not stupid...

As Iraq Remains Messier Than Expected, Obama Sticks to a Deadline
By Peter Baker and Rod Nordland. April 28, 2010

Many are getting fed up with President Obama because he is sticking to a deadline, which is not getting American soldiers out of the Middle East as fast as they would like. When Obama ran for president, much support was gained because of his want to pull out our troops, but people believe that he is not sticking to his word. I think that Mr. Obama is doing the right thing, because we cannot leave a country to function on its own without a working government in tact. Also, there is not stable security, and many people are not able to walk around as freely because it is not safe. Iraq is now a better, but worse place than it was was when Saddam Houssein was in power; there is unfortunately no stability in the country, and this is something that will get better over time, and the United States has to make sure that the country is heading on the right path before we leave the people to govern the new democracy.

Violence vs. Violence

A Holiday of Contradictions in Afghanistan
By Alissa J. Rubin

To the Editor,

I find it extremely sad and disheartening that the situation in other parts of the world is so desperate that on a national holiday, a day when many in other countries would dedicate time to remembering what happened on that day or celebrating with family and friends, that Afghanistan citizens turn to violence. I think the greatest tragedy surrounding this holiday is that reclaiming the country from the hands of a communist leader became a violent act of men fighting to take control, killing tens of thousands in the process. It is so astounding to observe what lengths people are going to in order to fight for what they believe to be right. In this case, though, it sounds more like a struggle for power and leadership. I find it odd to think of this day as a holiday. While one good thing came from Mohammad Najibullah's removal from the position, it seems as if many more terrible things have spawned because of it.

To stay or to move on?

Obama Sticks to a Deadline in Iraq
By Peter Baker

To the Editor,

The issue of when to leave the Middle East has been a topic of discussion for a long time. Many were opposed before the troops even left in the first place. I find it interesting, now that Obama is keeping his promise of removing American troops by August, that there is such debate over whether or not it is the right time for such an action. This is not to say that the concern is unfounded. I agree that it is important for the removal of military forces to be strategic and done at a time that will not invalidate our efforts or cause a reverse effect. But the overwhelming pessimism toward removal portrayed in this article was surprising. “I’m for a shift away from the current rigid deadline to something more flexible, more reflective of the fluid and tense situation in Iraq, where the last thing the Iraqis really need is for the United States to be focused more on exit than anything else at a moment of high political uncertainty,” says Meghan L. O'Sullivan, a former deputy national security adviser to President Bush. It seems that the greatest concern is that IRaq will not be able to stand on its own feet when American forces leave. I feel that we are underestimating the people of Iraq in thinking that they won't be able to support their own government once our military leaves. Have we really listened to what they want? Do they want us to stay? Or are we choosing not to act out of fear? I think that Obama should keep his promise. It would show the American people and the world that he can stay true to his word. It will also show that we have trust in the people of Iraq, and confidence that they can maintain their own government.

Does Israel Want Peace?

World Briefing: Israel: Abbas Signals Readiness for Indirect Peace Talks (AP)

Palestine's president, Mahmoud Abbas, has finally publicly announced his eagerness to start negotiating peace with Israel. However, what does Israel do in the midst of all this? They go and build more housing developments in East Jerusalem. One of the main issues in the conflict is the city of Jerusalem; Palestinians want it as their capital, but things are not settled and Israel is continuing to break international law and build on the land anyway. This makes me wonder if Israel even wants peace, because they obviously know that the housing situation is making matters more and more tense with each new building built. I do not believe that Israel has the right to be building on this land before things have been settled. Palestine clearly seems to be ready to work things out, but I think the actions of Israel are speaking louder than its words.

To petition the government for a redress of grievances

Re: "Iran mutes a chorus of voices for reform"

(April 19, 2010)

To the Editor:

In the United states constitution, amendment 1 states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances". This is exactly the problem that Iran is having according to the article my Robert F. Worth. The people are not being allowed to express their discontent against the government. Their rights are being limited in a way that I believe, based on the formation of the Unites States, will result in a country that is not supported by its people. This is already happening. The people are being suppressed based on their discontent with their government. If the people cannot express their opinions on the governing body, they will not feel as though they have any ownership in the government, and therefore will not feel compelled to abide by its rules unless out of fear. This is the direction the Iranian government is heading. By silencing all those in opposition to the government, it will create an atmosphere of fear in which the people do not speak out for what they believe in, not because it is in alignment with the government's actions, but because they are afraid of the consequences should they speak out.

A need for safety

Re: " Wave of Fatal Bombings Widens Fissures in Iraq"

(April 23, 2010)

To the Editor:

The death counts and stories of suicide or roadside bombings are nothing new to the news coverage of the Middle-East. However, their affects are different depending on the groups carrying out the attacks, and the reactions of the people. In Baghdad, the bombs are causing a fissure between the people and their faith in the government. This is a dire circumstance. Exactly how dire this circumstance is was completely overlooked by your article. When people no longer feel that their government has any control in the situation, that is when they join militant groups such as Al Qaeda or the Taliban. Out of fear or anger or a desperation to do something about their current situation, these militant groups know that if they can offer a degree of protection in times of turmoil, they will gain followers. By the government indecision and apparent power of Al Qaeda, the area is looking at an increase in violence as the groups gain membership and thus power. The way to combat this surge in membership is to first attempt some sort of stabilization of the governing forces so that the people feel there is another body to watch out for them, and then to go after the militant groups. Going about it the other way around will only result in further fractioning of the already unstable, volitile government.

A side not often considered

Re: "Mood is dark as Israel Marks 62nd year as a nation"

(April 19th, 2010)

To the Editor:

Thank you for exposing a side of this Israel-Palestine conflict not often heard, and even more infrequently considered. When one hears a story from history it is all too easy to pick a side. One side is good and one side is evil, right? Regardless of which side you decide for yourself is the right one to support, the other side is still human, and chances are good that this other side is hurting as well. It is important not to demonize one group of people just because you do not agree with them. In the Israel-Palestine conflict, the United States has allied itself with Israel. However I have heard much about how evil the Israelis are for occupying and taking advantage of the unfortunate Palestinians. I did not even consider the fact that Israel could be hurting as well. This article forced me to think about this fact, and now I view the conflict of a clash of governments, that has manifested itself in the actions, thoughts, and worries of the people. After all, isn't this how most national conflicts arise? Had the governments not clashes I have faith that the Israelis and the Palestinians would have gotten along peacefully. However, it has already been done. Now the people are left to deal with the aftermath.

Let's realize how lucky we are

Re: "TV Mystic Lingers in Saudi Jail"

(April 24, 2010)

To the Editor:

The long drawn out stay in jail that Mr. Sibat of Lebanon has gone through is truly a traumatizing set of circumstances for he and his family. While this is unjust and inhumane, it brings to light a perspective of the United States' justice system that as a citizen, we don't often think about. Often times, citizens of the United States feel as though our justice system isn't fair, but put in a world context, I would vehemently argue otherwise. In Saudi Arabia, "the judges think they are the interpreters of God's word, and this is the whole problem in Saudi Arabia". In the United States, while everyone has their own biases, the judicial system is set up with a just trial as a priority. Unfortunately in Saudi Arabia, cases like this one are not at all unlikely, as a matter of fact, this particular case is not a topic of much public attention or outrage. Many of us U.S. citizens may not realize how lucky we are. We are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Sibat is being treated with the opposite mindset. Hopefully, you have not had to go to jail for fraud, but I am almost certain that because our justice system is set up the way that it is, you would not be executed via "long, curved sword."