Some other classmates commented on Sami Yusef and how he is an extremely unique musician. They also explain how someone like Sami would not work in the United States. I disagree. The United States already has artists similar to Sami, singing about religion and peace. For example, Nickelback is a huge band and they are a Christian Rock group. Also Matisyahu is a huge sensation. He is an Orthodox Jewish singer who is able to combine reggae and Hebrew, preaching about peace and the Bible. His music was all over MTV and I do not know of anyone who doesn’t know about Matisyahu. His music also transcends generations: my grandparents, aunt and uncle all enjoy Matisyahu’s music. So, while Sami Yusef is unique in the sense of his extreme popularity, I feel like someone similar could become popular in the United States if his or her music is really good.

In addition, I noticed that a lot of classmates commented on Dubai after our guest speaker. Many people expressed diverse sentiments regarding the growing phenomenon. Most of my peers decided that they would like to visit Dubai and see the glitz and glamour with their own eyes. My interest was also sparked following the guest speaker. I enjoyed his pictures and the way he described the layout of the area. Some questioned whether the quick expansion of Dubai was positive or negative in the Middle East. While those opinions were very difference, the overall consensus was a deep fascination with Dubai.

Ultimately, many people admitted their feelings of embarrassment about how little they truly knew about the Arab media. I happen to be one of them. I didn’t know anything about media in the Middle East, yet I have to say that I don’t know about the media in Asia, South America, Africa and Australia. I know a little bit about Europe through reality TV and due to the fact that I lived in Italy for four months. But aside from that, I have to admit that most Americans don’t receive an education about foreign media. Which is why I am glad that I was able to take this class and truly gain an understanding (even if it was just brushing the surface) of Arab media.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5274030.ece

And I know I am biased because I am Jewish and because this is the story we are exposed to in the United States. I am sure that the Middle East reports it differently but the fact is, I read this story and a few others stories of similar content. Media in the United States is this way. But the fact is, an innocent rabbi and his wife were murdered and she was five months pregnant. It makes me want to cry. How can people just murder innocent people without any qualms or misgivings? Apparently their nanny saved the other child by taking hold of him and running out the door after ten hours of siege. The child has a genetic disease called Tay-Sachs, which is terminal. It kills me that the child will die alone, without his mother and father. It is a heart-breaking and tragic story. And why did it happen? Because of terrorists. Because people want to change the current situation in India and Pakistan so they take the lives of innocence.

We talked about Hezbollah in class yesterday and it was very interesting to me. A couple of thoughts ran through my mind during the discussion. I thought about all the good things that Hezbollah does for its own people, all the schools, hospitals, benefits, cleaning, etc. But then I think back to the music videos, which were not music videos but military propaganda pieces and I wondered what exactly they are teaching in these schools. Maybe that is irrational to think but nationalism and propaganda remind me of the Nazis. The Nazis took care of their own and simultaneously destroyed many other people: Jews, gypsies, gays, disabled, etc. So does that make them good? I am not being entirely serious when I say nationalism and Nazism are related. But my grandma survived the Holocaust and she lost her father at Buchanwald. And any group that has similarities to the Nazis terrifies me, especially when their video games are anti-Israel. I think that nationalism can be a good thing. But there is certainly violence involved in Hezbollah’s plans and there must be SOME reason that six countries consider it a terrorist organization. It can’t just be that Hezbollah does positive things and the United States automatically misunderstands the organization. They support suicide bombers and the families of those that died in any sort of martyr attacks. I am just throwing it out there that maybe Hezbollah treats its own people right in Lebanon, but elsewhere maybe it does in fact do harm and should be considered a threat.

To ride the subway or not to ride the subway… that is the question. Today word leaked from the Associated Press (a wire service) that al-Qaida terrorists are targeting New York City subways and railways over the upcoming holidays. According to the story, the FBI “received a ‘plausible but unsubstantiated’ report” about an upcoming attack. The first thing that comes to my mind is fear. I certainly don’t want to die in the New York City metro system. So, should I avoid the subways? The second thing that comes to my mind is: is this all bullshit? Should I go on with my day-to-day life and not allow a fear of a ‘plausible but unsubstantiated’ threat? Is this just a ploy by the government to instill terror into the lives of Americans? Part of me feels like if I am going to die, then I am going to die and that’s it. I cannot live my life in fear of an ominous death lurking at any corner. The fact is, everyone will die eventually, maybe today, maybe in 50 years.

What bothers me about this article is the fact that these attacks were discussed all the way back in September. Meaning, someone knew of a potential plot and waited until now to scare us. And who knows if this is even a real threat? It pisses me off that the government would hide something like this until now.

Fear is a very powerful thing. People act differently when they are scared, especially with the threat of death hovering in front of their eyes. I won’t be surprised if New Yorkers look suspiciously at anyone in Arab garb over the next couple weeks. These threats make Americans revert back to 9/11 sentiments. How are we supposed to promote peace and understanding amongst Arabs and Americans when Americans only see terror? They don’t even see the horrors we are causing over in the Middle East because American media only broadcasts what it wants. Even the color system we assign to the different levels of terror alerts. It is meant to play with American emotions and let me tell you, it works. The government understands the powers of fear and terror and they utilize it to gain support for their actions in the Middle East. And it works.

As for London and their Islam Awareness Week, I think it is a little different. Islam is not a cause, it’s a religion. Therefore businesses may have a little bit more difficulty aligning themselves as Islam promoters. Apparently the week was started by an Islamic society living in England. It is focused towards schools and universities to promote awareness of the religion in youth. This tactic always works: get kids while they are young and impressionable. Even Hitler used this tactic in Hitler Youth, brainwashing the German youth about his antics. I am in no way comparing Hitler to Islamic Awareness Week, I am merely pointing out how easily the youth are influenced in both good and bad ways. Teaching tolerance to kids makes it more probable these ideals will stick throughout adulthood. However, it also singles out Islam. I am not entire sure it is better to point out the differences between individuals at a young age. I know when I was little, I never even noticed the differences between me and my friends. Once you point out to little children that there are some people that are not the same, this may cause even more problems. However, for university-aged young adults, I think this week could spread understanding. Young adults are at an age where education can influence them even more than parents may be able to. Therefore, I hope that in London, most of the efforts to promote Islam Awareness Week are geared towards people my age.

My question is: if there is an Islam Awareness Week, do other religions of England also have their own weeks? Or is it all encompassed under the title of “Diversity Week”? And if so, why don’t they spread awareness of all religions?

Salaam Pax may be the blogger king in Iraq, but according to this article, the Blogfather, Hossein Derakhshan was the master of Iran. He even developed a program so he could blog in Farsi: work that allowed Persian letters to show up on the Internet. This weekend he was arrested due to his opinions about Israel, the government referring to him as an Israeli spy. As an advocate of free speech I believe his arrest is completely ridiculous. Just because of he believes Iran should recognize Israel, he was arrested as a spy. Nobody even considered his other beliefs and his patriotism toward Iran, claiming that he would fight on Iran's side if it were ever attacked by America. He also avidly promotes Iran to have its own nuclear weapons. However, when you live in Iran, I guess you are expected to hate Israel, or at least talk as though you hate Israel in order to avoid suspicion. Granted, I think that he should have stayed in Canada, where he was safe and away from all the ridiculous antics of Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. With a man like Ahmadinejad as president, how is a country like Iran supposed expand knowledge? Forums like blogs are necessary to exchange opinions and inspire growth within the country. With the president calling for the arrest of Iranians with different opinions, how is Iran supposed to grow as a culture? It seems backward to me. Not that I believe in the clash of civilizations, I just believe that the president of Iran is an idiot (and I mean that). He denies the fact that there are gays in Iran. He denies the fact that the Holocaust happened. He apparently lives in a fantasy world. The oppression emanating from Iran makes me sick. Even from reading Persepolis, I became nauseas about the Iranian government. I have nothing against the people of Iran. In fact I think that bloggers like Hossein Derakhshan are necessary for the eventual transformation of the Iranian government. I will admit that I have no idea what the president of Iran does for his own people, however I do see the way he preaches. He is scary to me, almost reminiscent of Hitler himself. Bold statement, I know. But people like him should never have a chance to attain nuclear weapons. Because he may actually destroy the world. And people can disagree with these statements, I just thought I would throw out my opinion since this is a BLOG and on BLOGS you are allowed to express your opinions in a safe environment. Except for the blogfather of Iran.

Technically, it is all propaganda. Both Americans and Iraqis are guilty of using propaganda in their news media for their own personal benefits. So, why does the term propaganda have such an extremely negative connotation? At least in my mind, it reminds me of the Nazis. Since Nazi propaganda, people have been very careful to steer clear of this term, yet they are guilty of utilizing it.

Persepolis and Persepolis II by Marjane Satrapi are told through the eyes of little girl growing up in Iran during the Iran/Iraq war, exemplifying certain problems of both the East and the West. Marjane grew up in a liberal home with two parents that protested the government. While there were many people that demonstrated against the government, her story can in no way be extrapolated to encompass all Iranian life. She had a completely unique situation and therefore readers can only gain insight into her personal experience. In a way, Persepolis portrays the Orientalist view of the East. While Marjane does not agree with this perception, she explains the flaws of Eastern society: the class separation and the separation of men and women. She finds the fact that her maid cannot sit at the table with her family at dinner completely unfair. In regard to men and women, Marjane makes a social commentary on the ignorance of the government. At school, men and women are not allowed to walk up the same stairwells for fear that the men will be tempted to look at a woman’s behind. While she finds this belief ridiculous, it is part of Iranian culture. These views of the East further enhance the notion of Orientalism in the sense that the East is “backward”. The graphic novel also portrays the Clash of Civilizations. When Marjane is sent abroad to study in Austria, she is an outsider, rarely able to connect with Westerners. The only group she befriends is a collection of people striving to be different. However, she ultimately views them as all the same: vacationing in the Alps, having sex, and doing drugs. Eventually, Marjane discovers drugs as her only outlet to the pain of being so different. She culturally clashes in Austria. Upon her return to Iran, she experiences difficulty in reconnecting with her old friends. At first her friends want to Westernize, mimicking Marjane and attempting to discover an “insider’s” view of abroad. However, when they realize she takes birth control and has sex, they shun her as a slut. Because Marjane spent her teenage years in Austria, she found a clash upon her return to Iran. In a way this refutes the entire theory of the Clash of Civilizations. Marjane grew into this hybrid of East and West, almost a globalized yet solitary culture, where she can no longer fit in anywhere.

Another interesting cross between cultures is Salam Pax, the blogger in Iraq commenting on the events of the most current war. The fact that he is blogging creates a problem with the theory of Orientalism. According to my definition, the East is supposedly backward, especially with technology. However, Salam Pax reaches out to a global community through the Internet. He is able to connect with people from Iraq, England, America, and all over the world. However, some of what he says enhances both the Clash of Civilizations and Orientalism. He gives power to the West by claiming that the US has turned a blind eye on the problems of Iraq for thirty years and only now they stick their nose where it does not belong. He claims, “The entities that call themselves ‘the international community’ should have… looked at reports about weapons and human rights abuses a long time before having them thrown in their faces as excuses for war five minutes before midnight” (Pax 120). In other words, the West should have taken an interest in Iraqi troubles long before this war. In addition to his annoyance with American government, Pax blogs as though Orientalism exists, even though he doesn’t necessarily agree, by claiming that the West demonizes Arabs and Islam. He points out various stereotypes, poking fun of both societies. However, ultimately, Salam Pax proves that a global culture is possible, as the mediums of communication continuously become easier to utilize. His blog is proof that there are similarities in day-to-day life among every culture. While in a way, I am extrapolating from his small contribution (a blog), I feel as though he is very much an inside source, an every day Iraqi.

Unlike Salam Pax’s blog, Palestine by Joe Sacco should not be taken as an every day situation. Joe Sacco’s story is of an outsider in Palestine, seeking the stories of horror and destruction from refugees. It is dangerous to extrapolate from his graphic novel because he rarely gives readers a glimpse of day-to-day Palestinian life. As for Lebanon, Mazen Kerbaj’s comic was relatable and sad. He showed everyday life for a little boy growing up in times of war. I feel like his piece was acceptable to expand to the youth of Lebanon due to the fact that he is merely a small boy. However, one should consider the fact that his point of view is Westernized as he goes to a French school in Lebanon. The 99 comic book is also very telling of Islamic society. This comic exemplifies that the clash does not exist. The story is translatable to Western and Eastern culture alike, and although there are religious undertones, it is easy to understand the success in any country. The problem with all of the sources is the fact that they are all Westernized. Authors have been outside of the land they describe and have a different perspective from those remaining within the countries’ borders. Therefore, we must take this Westernized aspect into account when extrapolating. Ultimately, there are dangers in assuming unity within any culture. Even worse, it is dangerous to extrapolate from these four war-ridden stories out to all of Islamic culture. The fact that these stories are so different from each other is enough of an example to show how dangerous it would be to understand Arab and Islamic people as one unified entity.

I also really enjoyedA Happy Childhood. It was short but very powerful. Mazen was born the exact year the war started and describes how running into bomb shelters were just the norm. I found the last page to be the most interesting. He imagined the militia and his friends to look two different ways, even though they were growing up to become the future army. I found it very intriguing.

Further, Edward Said goes as far as claiming, “there has never been any American expert on the Islamic world whose audience was a wide one” (Said Covering Islam 17). In other words, Americans are rarely exposed to true portrayals of the Islamic world. Said claims that these outlets do exist but are not studied by a wide enough audience. In addition, films hardly ever portray Arabs in the media as normal people experiencing day-to-day life. In this way Jack Shaheen definitely makes a plausible argument. There are very few situations where Arabs are depicted in a fair and balanced light. However, I truly detest how Shaheen can continue on complaining for paragraphs about the lack of fairness rather than doing something about it. On the same token, I understand his frustration. I am a Jewish girl, also a minority, however I have blonde hair and green eyes. Never are Jews portrayed with this appearance in the media: only dark hair, brown eyes, and big noses. However, rather than becoming angry, I enjoy defying this stereotype and any other stereotype that is thrown my way. Blondes are stupid? We will see about that…

However, Shaheen’s argument about stereotypes of Arabs in films did not resonate soundly for me. I personally know many Arab people, two of which I would consider close friends. I would never associate them with the way Arabs are portrayed in films or television. Rather, I take films for what they are: entertaining segments meant to make studios money. It is doubtful that all Americans watch films and understand these stereotypes as fact, especially with the increasing Arab population in the United States. Everyone interprets films and media in their own way and it is foolish to assume the audience’s uniformity in construe. With increasing exposure to the true people of the Arab world, it is more likely that people will remember their personal experiences with Arabs over their media experience.

In regard to the Clash of Civilizations, I believe Orientalism is a continuation of the theory. Orientalism is inevitably one of the reasons the “clash” exists. It emphasizes the media’s role in further separating the East and the West, justifying power over the “other”. While Edward Said and Jack Shaheen do not agree with Orientalism, they both seemingly understand that it exists. They admit to the power of persuasion in the media. Therefore, the media is the enabler for the clash to exist. Without this means of communicating the supposed differences between the East and the West, it is unlikely that Americans would even know about that area of the world. For many Americans, ignorance is bliss. We were unaware of any struggle in that part of the world until our leaders told us to view them as evil. Evil is a very strong word and a way to enable negative propaganda against another population. In other words, if the media did not portray the Arabs as ruthless terrorists, none of these “Oriental” stereotypes would exist.

The problems with the concept of a clash of civilizations are sometimes overlooked due to its power. The strength of such a perception lies in the fact that it unites people over a common cause. When Americans hear their president claim that we are raging a crusade for good against those that are evil, we unite over a common cause. Similarly, when Osama bin Laden addresses his followers, he uses the same “us versus them” mentality. In bin Laden’s letter posted on the Internet entitled To the Americans, he justifies aggression against all the Americans including innocent civilians by claiming, “America is the land of freedom, and freedom’s leaders in this world… American people are the ones who choose their government through their own free will” (bin Laden 164). Therefore, he justifies violence against all Americans just because a little over half the population (though for many unique and varied reasons) voted for President Bush in the past election. What about all those Americans that did not vote for Bush? These propaganda tactics by bin Laden create an image of the enemy. It is very strong tactic which is extremely useful when war is raging against another nation. Both sides use the terms associated with the clash of civilizations theory in order to create a negative image and attempt to unify their population against what is deemed as the enemy. The argument is very convincing, however it is extremely flawed. Instead, people should not be treated as sheep following senselessly as their leaders rage war.

Today an interesting situation is occurring: the world is getting smaller. While culturally the West and the rest of the world are very diverse, the technology available today gives everyone a means to unite. The internet, telephones, and satellite television make communication available between anyone in the world. The mere fact that I can watch videos of Osama bin Laden’s speeches on YouTube is an example of how connected the world truly is today. According to Benjamin Barber, as the world gets smaller, nations and subcultures are more likely to rebel and declare their diversity. He claims, “Ironically, a world that is coming together pop culturally and commercially is a world whose discrete subnational ethnic and religious and racial parts are also more in evidence, in no small part as a reaction to McWorld” (Barber 11). In other words, Barber explains that in reaction to all the new media, technology, and economic interdependence, many cultural groups are attempting to return to their own traditions and values. Barber goes on to discuss that the clash among civilizations is a direct result of this rebellion against modernity. For example, Osama bin Laden calls his people to return to the basics of Islam. Ironically, he is reaching his people through the media, an example of the modernity that he is simultaneously discouraging.

Due to the fact that the battle is among the leaders of these two civilizations, I will use the juvenile term “clash”. My belief is that the leaders of both sides are too similar to ever truly get along. They are both like animalistic creatures during mating season, wanting to spread their seed and birth nations that will carry on their family name and traditions. The Western leaders want to force feed democracy into the screaming mouths of countries that could potentially threaten their manhood. Similarly, Islamic “fundamentalists” (a term that I have qualms about after reading Mamandi) want to save the world from rotting in hell by demanding a return to the traditional and literal interpretation of the Quran, expelling all those who challenge these ideas. Each leader feels threatened by the opposition’s power and commands their people to take action. In addition, both leaders interpret their religious texts exactly as read. As Mamdani points out in his Culture Talk about the very religious Christian leaders of America, “Jimmy Carter was America’s first ‘born-again’ president. Ronald Reagan was the second, and George W. Bush is the third” (Mamdani, 44). Yet, how can these selected leaders of democracy and the “free world” understand the separation of church and state when they are the embodiment of both? I am not denying the existence of a clash. There are many types of clashes that are occurring even in our own presidents. I believe that the term “civilizations” is too broad. Ultimately, the true clash that exists is the clash between leaders, striving to impose their personal beliefs on the rest of the world.

Later in Hammond's article, he does address the fact that radical Islamist groups "engage in a game of hide-and-seek with Internet providers, but there is too much space in the vastness of the World Wide Web to keep them down." (Hammond, 122). I want to know how all these extremist find the websites if they are constantly redefining themselves within cyber space? How does the government not find those responsible if their readers can find them? In addition, Kimmage explained how Iraq is a definite target for fundamentalists because it is a conflict zone. However, Hammond explains that Iraqis have only selective access to the Internet. I am just confused as to how sites such as Al-Queda's Media Nexus are deemed successful when their materials appear to threaten government and should be banned (according to the laws of the land).

Our media went into a frenzy, suddenly opening our eyes to an area of the world that was unfamiliar. Through the media, I learned that there were people in the Arab world that hated me just because of the fact that I was an American. Being so young, I couldn't comprehend how people could have such an extreme hatred and not even know me. Granted, our media exposed us to the extreme fundamentalists, in my head at that time it was difficult to seperate peaceful Muslims with their dangerous neighbors. And then, of course, a war began in Iraq, which didn't even have anything to do with the attacks on 9/11. But, as I explained earlier, it is hard to separate the peaceful from the extreme. At that time, we were all conditioned into understanding that there was an enemy and Americans were going to war to fight it. The sad part of American culture is our willingness to believe what we are told. When we are told there is an enemy, many people are willing to hate them without a second thought. In my Propaganda and Persuasion class we learned how the enemy is created an how it is important to have one in a war.

However, I had no idea how rich Arabic history was. After I read the Hammond reading I understood that only recently the Arab states have freed themselves from foreign colonies. I also didn't realize that there was and is tension between Arabs from different countries and that they too have a common enemy. Their way to unite is over the hatred of Israel (which I have many opinions about but I will save for another blog on another day). The Hammond reading was a necessary part of this course. You really do have to look back and understand the history before you can examine current culture.

Overall, I just wanted to blog today in order to express my extreme sorrow for all those who lost loved ones in the World Trade Center and to express my prior ignorance in everything Islam.