According to a recent article from The New York Times entitled, "Israel Calls for Urgent Help Fighting Lethal Fire," a raging fire insinuated in one of Israel's forests in a highly populated area. This, "caused the evacuation of thousands of people, burned some kibbutz houses to the ground and prompted the Israeli government to call for urgent international aid in fighting the inferno" leaving 40 people dead. (New York Times) Since this fire was so vast and expansive, Israel had to call for help from surrounding countries such as Cyprus, Italy, Russia, and Greece to send firefighting planes.
This fire was the biggest and deadliest fire in all of Israel's history and it is reported that the fire broke out about 11:30 a.m. and was still raging out of control in the evening. The fire was contained not until the next day. The areas in northern Israel that were impacted the most included, "Kibbutz Beit Oren, a communal farm in the Carmel hills, several houses were burned to the ground. Most of the residents were believed to have evacuated ahead of the fire. The University of Haifa was evacuated as a precaution, as was a luxury spa hotel, Yaarot Hacarmel." (New York Times) It is so upsetting to hear that many innocent lives were lost due to this fire. Also, many homes were destroyed completely and the families now need to rebuild their lives and homes.
I think that it is very important for people all over the world to reach out to Israel as well as the families to help rebuild this community. The United States, after September 11th, was aided by many other countries that showed their support for the U.S. and so this country should in return do the same and extend a helping hand to countries in need. I encourage everyone to find a way to help out a community, especially the community in Israel that suffered this tragedy.
In our reading of Babbie, it talked about the Internet and search engines, which are, "a computer program designed to locate where specified terms appear on websites throughout the World Wide Web." (Babbie 484) This relates to the article and my blog because if people wish to find out more information on this matter concerning Israel they could go to a search engine, such as Google, and type in their queries. Also, a search engine could find out how to reach out and help the community of Israel that was affected and give donations that go directly to fund the rebuilding of the community and help the families.
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Thursday, November 18, 2010
AirSpace Wars
As part of International rules and regulations, whenever a foreign aircraft from a different country enters into the airspace of a different country, they must make contact with the country before doing so. The foreign aircraft must readily identify themselves and provide the necessary information in order for there to be an understanding reached and the flight can be continued. A country can't fly into the airspace of another country without permission, and this is for safety and security reasons. A country owns the land below the physical country, the skies above the physical country and everything in between those two areas. If the foreign aircraft does not obey this rule, then the hosting country chases the foreign aircraft out of their skies, but if the foreigner doesn't comply, then a more assertive action can be taken.
In the article from the New York Times entitled, "Iran says foreign planes violated airspace", this provided the information on the event that took place just yesterday, November 17th, 2010. Iranian officials claimed, "that unidentified foreign planes violated its airspace six times as the country began its biggest air-defense drill ever, but that the intruders were intercepted and forced back by Iranian jets." (The New York Times) For fear of the country's safety, their strongest and biggest air-defense drill was put into action in order to drive out the intruders. Gen. Hamid Arjangi, a spokesman for the military during its exercises, said "Iran’s radar stations and observation posts picked up on the planes as they entered Iranian airspace during the five-day drill, which started Tuesday." (The New York Times) As soon as the suspected aircrafts where in violation of trespassing into unwelcomed airspace, the Iranian jets picked up on the plans as soon as the entered into Iran. I think this was a good test for the Iranian airspace defense team and it was a success in that in drove out the intruders in a timely and effective fashion. It is not released yet as to who was in those unidentified aircrafts and for what reason.
After the events of September 11th, 2001, not only has the United States, but other countries as well have made sure to strengthen their security systems when it comes to airplanes and airspace. Another attempted terrorist attack can be on the rise, so all countries need to be aware of this potential threat occurring. I think that this is good Public Relations on the part of the United States as well as Iran that they are taking all of the necessary actions to protect their communities and their citizens by taking precautionary steps to security.
In our book by Babbie, it discussed frequency distribution which is, "a description of the number of times the various attributes of a variable are observed in sample." (Babbie 454) I think Iran, the United States, or any country would be wise to do a frequency distribution on how many times they receive threats or tips of a terrorist attack, and this could help predict when another potential attack is eminent. Better to be prepared than unprepared in a situation like this.
In the article from the New York Times entitled, "Iran says foreign planes violated airspace", this provided the information on the event that took place just yesterday, November 17th, 2010. Iranian officials claimed, "that unidentified foreign planes violated its airspace six times as the country began its biggest air-defense drill ever, but that the intruders were intercepted and forced back by Iranian jets." (The New York Times) For fear of the country's safety, their strongest and biggest air-defense drill was put into action in order to drive out the intruders. Gen. Hamid Arjangi, a spokesman for the military during its exercises, said "Iran’s radar stations and observation posts picked up on the planes as they entered Iranian airspace during the five-day drill, which started Tuesday." (The New York Times) As soon as the suspected aircrafts where in violation of trespassing into unwelcomed airspace, the Iranian jets picked up on the plans as soon as the entered into Iran. I think this was a good test for the Iranian airspace defense team and it was a success in that in drove out the intruders in a timely and effective fashion. It is not released yet as to who was in those unidentified aircrafts and for what reason.
After the events of September 11th, 2001, not only has the United States, but other countries as well have made sure to strengthen their security systems when it comes to airplanes and airspace. Another attempted terrorist attack can be on the rise, so all countries need to be aware of this potential threat occurring. I think that this is good Public Relations on the part of the United States as well as Iran that they are taking all of the necessary actions to protect their communities and their citizens by taking precautionary steps to security.
In our book by Babbie, it discussed frequency distribution which is, "a description of the number of times the various attributes of a variable are observed in sample." (Babbie 454) I think Iran, the United States, or any country would be wise to do a frequency distribution on how many times they receive threats or tips of a terrorist attack, and this could help predict when another potential attack is eminent. Better to be prepared than unprepared in a situation like this.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
U.S. radical says to Muslims: Kill U.S. 'devils'
HATE. This is a very powerful word. Sometimes we can use it in a loose manner saying, "I hate this weather. Or, I hate this color on me." Other times, hatred can develop into a much deeper feeling by having hatred for another person. That hatred can cultivate into something stronger,and can cause people to act unreasonably and pursue distasteful actions.
Hatred was definitely the motive behind terrorist attacks that have occurred from September 11th, to the recent terrorist plot of sending packages to the U.S. with explosives. In one of my previous blog entries, I discussed this attempted attack on the U.S. with these packages, and how it was unsuccessful. Recently, the al-Qaida branch in Yemen claimed responsibility for the failed bomb plot. It is unfortunate for the U.S. to have to continue putting up with and be on the look out for these daily terrorist attacks. To add fuel to the flame, there has been a recent rallying by a radical cleric to kill any American. In an article published by the Record Journal entitled, "Cleric to Muslims: Kill U.S. 'devils'", this article stated that "A U.S. born radical cleric who belongs to the al-Qaida offshoot behind the cargo bomb plot on the United States told Muslims theya re free to kill American 'devils' at will in a video posted on extremist websites." (Record Journal) This man, named Anwar al-Awlaki has inspired several attacks agsint the United States and has made it his life goal to seeking revenge against the United States.
So, why is al-Awlaki filled with all of this hatred against the U.S. and what are his motives? According to some of his past messages, "he has justified killing American civilians as retaliation for the killing of hundres of thousands of Muslim civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere."(Record Journal) I think that killing people, especially on the basis of no rationale, but just based on hatred is the worst thing a person could possibly do and this is very inhumane and unloving. Every living person has the right to continue living peacefully and ruling their life they want to fulfill it, and no one has the right to take away a person's right to live. Al-Awlaki encourages any Muslim to not consult with anybody in the killing of the Americans, but just to go ahead and kill them. It upsets me to see that someone could have no heart and go this far to say it is ok to take someone's life away, as if that person was valueless. No one knows the extent that al-Awlaki has on his outreach to people, but I sincerely hope that people will think rationally about this matter and not listen to what this radical and heartless cleric has to say.
This blog post is not meant to alarm people and think that all Muslims are going to kill Americans, but rather it is to inform and educate people that Muslims are good people. The problem is terrorist groups, especially al-Qaida, and they are the organization behind this hatred. Muslims still need to be treated and viewed in a respectable manner, but it is unfortunate to see that Muslims' reputation is being harmed and tarnished all because of this terrorist group. I think people need to come together and learn more about each other's differences in order to be more accepting. Instead of promoting hatred in this world, we need to start promoting LOVE.
In Chapter 13 of our book by Babbie, it discussed qualitative research, specifically Semiotics, which is, "The study of aigns ad the meanings associated with them. This is commonly associated with content analysis." (Babbie, 422) Since semiotic analysis invovles a search for the meanings either intentionally or unintentioinally attached to signs, this would be a good method of research to conduct. One study can examine the sign of Islam and get the results of what people think of when they see this sign, especially since a particular sign means something to a particular person. To go further, since people too could be examples of signs, it would be interesting to put a Muslim person in front of people, and then get people's initial reactions of the Muslim person.
Hatred was definitely the motive behind terrorist attacks that have occurred from September 11th, to the recent terrorist plot of sending packages to the U.S. with explosives. In one of my previous blog entries, I discussed this attempted attack on the U.S. with these packages, and how it was unsuccessful. Recently, the al-Qaida branch in Yemen claimed responsibility for the failed bomb plot. It is unfortunate for the U.S. to have to continue putting up with and be on the look out for these daily terrorist attacks. To add fuel to the flame, there has been a recent rallying by a radical cleric to kill any American. In an article published by the Record Journal entitled, "Cleric to Muslims: Kill U.S. 'devils'", this article stated that "A U.S. born radical cleric who belongs to the al-Qaida offshoot behind the cargo bomb plot on the United States told Muslims theya re free to kill American 'devils' at will in a video posted on extremist websites." (Record Journal) This man, named Anwar al-Awlaki has inspired several attacks agsint the United States and has made it his life goal to seeking revenge against the United States.
So, why is al-Awlaki filled with all of this hatred against the U.S. and what are his motives? According to some of his past messages, "he has justified killing American civilians as retaliation for the killing of hundres of thousands of Muslim civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere."(Record Journal) I think that killing people, especially on the basis of no rationale, but just based on hatred is the worst thing a person could possibly do and this is very inhumane and unloving. Every living person has the right to continue living peacefully and ruling their life they want to fulfill it, and no one has the right to take away a person's right to live. Al-Awlaki encourages any Muslim to not consult with anybody in the killing of the Americans, but just to go ahead and kill them. It upsets me to see that someone could have no heart and go this far to say it is ok to take someone's life away, as if that person was valueless. No one knows the extent that al-Awlaki has on his outreach to people, but I sincerely hope that people will think rationally about this matter and not listen to what this radical and heartless cleric has to say.
This blog post is not meant to alarm people and think that all Muslims are going to kill Americans, but rather it is to inform and educate people that Muslims are good people. The problem is terrorist groups, especially al-Qaida, and they are the organization behind this hatred. Muslims still need to be treated and viewed in a respectable manner, but it is unfortunate to see that Muslims' reputation is being harmed and tarnished all because of this terrorist group. I think people need to come together and learn more about each other's differences in order to be more accepting. Instead of promoting hatred in this world, we need to start promoting LOVE.
In Chapter 13 of our book by Babbie, it discussed qualitative research, specifically Semiotics, which is, "The study of aigns ad the meanings associated with them. This is commonly associated with content analysis." (Babbie, 422) Since semiotic analysis invovles a search for the meanings either intentionally or unintentioinally attached to signs, this would be a good method of research to conduct. One study can examine the sign of Islam and get the results of what people think of when they see this sign, especially since a particular sign means something to a particular person. To go further, since people too could be examples of signs, it would be interesting to put a Muslim person in front of people, and then get people's initial reactions of the Muslim person.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Yemeni woman arrested for bomb package sent to the U.S.
If you have been to an airport recently within the past 5 years, you will agree with me that security is very strict on what items you can bring on the plane with you. The items one is allowed to bring has been limited, you can't bring tweezers, a plastic knife, toothpaste or shampoos need to be in a container no bigger than 3 oz. These limitations have been taken into action after the events of September 11th, in hopes to prevent any more terrorists attacks. Seems like a full proof system doesn't it? Well, even with this system in action, packages with explosives were on an American airplane en route to the United States. These explosives were in packaged form and addressed to Chicago-area synagogues, and contained PETN, which is an industrial explosive. The fact that these explosives made it onto airplanes showed that nearly a decade wince the events of September 11th, terrorists continue to find security vulnerabilities, and somehow make it successfully past this intense security system.
The Record Journal's article, "Yemeni woman arrested, al-Qaida bomber eyed in plot" followed up on this story and provided details on this plot. A Yemeni woman was arrested on suspicion of mailing these packages because her name was on the return address. This young woman was a medical student, and she along with her mother were detained for questioning regarding this matter. The packages were located on airplanes in England and the United Arab Emirates. Primes Minister David Cameron of England said he believes the explosive device found in England was, "intended to detonate aboard the plane." Other officials said, "it's unclear whether the bombs were wired to cell phones, timers and power supplies, and were intented to be detonated remotely while the planes were in the air, or when the packages were halfway around the world in the U.S."(Record Journal) The suspected bomb maker behind this attack is assumed to be the same maker behind the Christmas Day attack, Ibrahim Hassan al-Asiri. Al-Asiri has been kept a close eye on by the United States and are hoping to find him to detain him. The packages' destinations were to synangogues in Chicago, which has about 100 members, and serves Jews in the gay community and their families. It is unknown at the moment the reasoning behind this specific synogogue and if there were any potential targets specifically.
How did the United States discover these bombs in the packages? Thanks to intelligence passed from Saudi Arabia, they had been monitoring actions from terrorists groups, and passed this tip along to the United States, which then discovered the bombs.
The U.S. has been on the lookout for terrorists plots, "having received indnications that the Yemeni-based al-Qaida faction was interested in exploring an operation involving cargo planes, said a U.S. counterterrorism official on the matter. (Record Journal) As a results of this incident, the U.S. has temporarily banned all incoming cargo and mail from Yemen. This failed attack should serve as a "wake up call" that the United States needs to increase security on cargo planes and be more alert to bomb threats associated with terrorism, especially from Yemen's al-Qaida branch which is the most active of the terrorist group's affiliates. While the U.S. is trying to build relationships with other countries, such as Yemen, it is difficult to maintain any trustworthy relationship because of the numerous amount of terrorist attacks. Maybe, the U.S. is abiding by the saying, "keep your friends close, and your enemies closer." I appreciate the fact that other countries have the U.S.'s back in a sense, by keeping an eye out for terrorism, and attempted to hault any harm done to the U.S. Saudi Arabia is not viewed by the U.S. in a highly respected manner, but hopefully the fact that they provided an essential tip, which prevented precious lives from being taken, can somewhat put them in a better position in the minds of people here in the United States.
This event relates to Chapter 12 in Babbie because it discussed evaluation research which is, "research undertaken for the purose of determinng the impact of some social intervention, such as a program aimed at solving a social problem." (Babbie 390) An evaluative research program that can be conducted relating to this event of the bomb threat is to create and invoke a security plan for cargo planes and see the results produced by this security plan. Is it successful or not in finding bombs and explosives before allowing entrance on an aircraft? This evaluative process can prove to be helpful in the war against terrorism.
The Record Journal's article, "Yemeni woman arrested, al-Qaida bomber eyed in plot" followed up on this story and provided details on this plot. A Yemeni woman was arrested on suspicion of mailing these packages because her name was on the return address. This young woman was a medical student, and she along with her mother were detained for questioning regarding this matter. The packages were located on airplanes in England and the United Arab Emirates. Primes Minister David Cameron of England said he believes the explosive device found in England was, "intended to detonate aboard the plane." Other officials said, "it's unclear whether the bombs were wired to cell phones, timers and power supplies, and were intented to be detonated remotely while the planes were in the air, or when the packages were halfway around the world in the U.S."(Record Journal) The suspected bomb maker behind this attack is assumed to be the same maker behind the Christmas Day attack, Ibrahim Hassan al-Asiri. Al-Asiri has been kept a close eye on by the United States and are hoping to find him to detain him. The packages' destinations were to synangogues in Chicago, which has about 100 members, and serves Jews in the gay community and their families. It is unknown at the moment the reasoning behind this specific synogogue and if there were any potential targets specifically.
How did the United States discover these bombs in the packages? Thanks to intelligence passed from Saudi Arabia, they had been monitoring actions from terrorists groups, and passed this tip along to the United States, which then discovered the bombs.
The U.S. has been on the lookout for terrorists plots, "having received indnications that the Yemeni-based al-Qaida faction was interested in exploring an operation involving cargo planes, said a U.S. counterterrorism official on the matter. (Record Journal) As a results of this incident, the U.S. has temporarily banned all incoming cargo and mail from Yemen. This failed attack should serve as a "wake up call" that the United States needs to increase security on cargo planes and be more alert to bomb threats associated with terrorism, especially from Yemen's al-Qaida branch which is the most active of the terrorist group's affiliates. While the U.S. is trying to build relationships with other countries, such as Yemen, it is difficult to maintain any trustworthy relationship because of the numerous amount of terrorist attacks. Maybe, the U.S. is abiding by the saying, "keep your friends close, and your enemies closer." I appreciate the fact that other countries have the U.S.'s back in a sense, by keeping an eye out for terrorism, and attempted to hault any harm done to the U.S. Saudi Arabia is not viewed by the U.S. in a highly respected manner, but hopefully the fact that they provided an essential tip, which prevented precious lives from being taken, can somewhat put them in a better position in the minds of people here in the United States.
This event relates to Chapter 12 in Babbie because it discussed evaluation research which is, "research undertaken for the purose of determinng the impact of some social intervention, such as a program aimed at solving a social problem." (Babbie 390) An evaluative research program that can be conducted relating to this event of the bomb threat is to create and invoke a security plan for cargo planes and see the results produced by this security plan. Is it successful or not in finding bombs and explosives before allowing entrance on an aircraft? This evaluative process can prove to be helpful in the war against terrorism.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Saddam Hussein's Public Relations Representative sentenced to death
There is a saying, "Show me who your friends are, and then I will judge you." For the majority of the time, who you associate with dictates what kind of a person you are. If you have optimistic friends that have goals in life to be successful, for the most part, you in turn will also want to have goals for your life, because you are motivated, so you too can be successful. On the other hand, if you have friends that are into drug dealing, then one day you may find yourself dealing drugs with them. Although these are examples I created, it is true that who you have dealings with and you decide to surround yourself with will have an affect on the person you are. This is the case a lot of the time with rulers and their representatives. Recently, Saddam Hussein was given the death penalty and put to death, on account of many wrong doings. It is no surprise that many of his partners and allies are also finding them selves in cornered positions. Tariq Aziz is one of those unfortunate people to also go down the same path as Hussein. Aziz was a former top aide to Hussein and his urbane public relations representative to the world. Mr. Aziz often represented Iraq at the United Nations and other global settings, serving as a public defender of Mr. Hussein.
In the New York Times, an article entitled, "Top Aide to Saddam Hussein is Sentenced to Death," the death sentencing of Mr. Aziz occurred on October 26, 2010. Aziz was found guilty by an Iraqi court, and was convicted of murder against members of rival Shiite political parties. For years, Aziz has put his efforts into justifying Iraq's use of chemical weapons, invasion of oil-rich Kuwait, and killings of Shiites and Kurds. Using chemical weapons is against the United Nations, and as a member of the United Nations, Iraq can't overstep its boundaries on producing nuclear weapons. Mr. Aziz is one of Iraq's most hunted officials and is "one of the best-known emblems of the Hussein era." (New York Times) When U.S. troops captured Aziz, this was a great victory because the United states want to put an end to the Hussein era, and this involves preventing Hussein's key components by any means necessary. One of Mr. Aziz's lawyers claimed, "that he was responsible only for Iraq’s diplomatic and political relations, and that he had no ties to the executions and purges carried out by Mr. Hussein’s government." (New York Times) The Iraqi court found no support of this claim, and immediately, Aziz was sentenced to be executed, just like his "friend" Saddam Hussein. "Death sentences were also handed down on Tuesday against other former officials in Mr. Hussein’s government including Abed Hammoud, a former secretary to Mr. Hussein, and former Interior Minister Sadoun Shakir."(New York Times) This goes to prove that any affiliates of Saddam Hussein are going to share the same fate as he did.
It is interesting to note that a public relations representative could potentially share the same fate as who they work with or for. This is important to take into consideration for any public relations practitioner, to make sure that not only what you do is ethical, but also make sure others that you are working for or with are conducting themselves in an ethical and moral manner. I support the Iraqi courts decision on this matter, because Aziz was responsible for the killings of many people (Shiites and Kurds) and also attempted to advance Iraq's stance in the world by trying to invade Kuwait and advancing nuclear weapon technology. I think it is essential for public relations representatives as well as other people to really know and understand who their friends are in order to prevent their bad conduct from rubbing off on you.
This article and topic relates to our class reading in Babbie because the Chapter discussed Content Analysis, which is "the study of recorded human communications." (Babbie 356) It would be interesting to do a content analysis based on the laws of Iraq or look into the local newspapers in Iraq to see how people view the sentencing of Mr. Aziz, as well as if there is anyone else in the country that still supports Saddam Hussein.
Lesson of the story: Be careful who your friends are.
In the New York Times, an article entitled, "Top Aide to Saddam Hussein is Sentenced to Death," the death sentencing of Mr. Aziz occurred on October 26, 2010. Aziz was found guilty by an Iraqi court, and was convicted of murder against members of rival Shiite political parties. For years, Aziz has put his efforts into justifying Iraq's use of chemical weapons, invasion of oil-rich Kuwait, and killings of Shiites and Kurds. Using chemical weapons is against the United Nations, and as a member of the United Nations, Iraq can't overstep its boundaries on producing nuclear weapons. Mr. Aziz is one of Iraq's most hunted officials and is "one of the best-known emblems of the Hussein era." (New York Times) When U.S. troops captured Aziz, this was a great victory because the United states want to put an end to the Hussein era, and this involves preventing Hussein's key components by any means necessary. One of Mr. Aziz's lawyers claimed, "that he was responsible only for Iraq’s diplomatic and political relations, and that he had no ties to the executions and purges carried out by Mr. Hussein’s government." (New York Times) The Iraqi court found no support of this claim, and immediately, Aziz was sentenced to be executed, just like his "friend" Saddam Hussein. "Death sentences were also handed down on Tuesday against other former officials in Mr. Hussein’s government including Abed Hammoud, a former secretary to Mr. Hussein, and former Interior Minister Sadoun Shakir."(New York Times) This goes to prove that any affiliates of Saddam Hussein are going to share the same fate as he did.
It is interesting to note that a public relations representative could potentially share the same fate as who they work with or for. This is important to take into consideration for any public relations practitioner, to make sure that not only what you do is ethical, but also make sure others that you are working for or with are conducting themselves in an ethical and moral manner. I support the Iraqi courts decision on this matter, because Aziz was responsible for the killings of many people (Shiites and Kurds) and also attempted to advance Iraq's stance in the world by trying to invade Kuwait and advancing nuclear weapon technology. I think it is essential for public relations representatives as well as other people to really know and understand who their friends are in order to prevent their bad conduct from rubbing off on you.
This article and topic relates to our class reading in Babbie because the Chapter discussed Content Analysis, which is "the study of recorded human communications." (Babbie 356) It would be interesting to do a content analysis based on the laws of Iraq or look into the local newspapers in Iraq to see how people view the sentencing of Mr. Aziz, as well as if there is anyone else in the country that still supports Saddam Hussein.
Lesson of the story: Be careful who your friends are.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
U.S. plans to sell Jet Fighters and Helicopters to Saudis
The Obama Administration notified Congress recently that they were planning to sell up to $60 billion in advanced weaponry to Saudi Arabia. This advanced weaponry would include Jet Fighters and Helicopters including Apaches, Black Hawks, and Little Bird attack choppers. Congress has just 30 days to block the deal to prohibit this sale, but if they decide to let it pass, then this sale could be the largest arms deal in American history. Even though the Obama Administration is awaiting the decision made by Congress, officials claim that they don't expect a lot of opposition to the proposal and are optimistic that the deal will pass Congress.
What type of weaponry does Saudi Arabia currently have? According to the New York Times article entitled, U.S. plans to sell Jet Fighters and Helicopters to Saudis, "State Department and Pentagon officials told lawmakers that the sales would include 84 new F-15 fighter jets, upgrades to 70 existing Saudi F-15s, 190 helicopters and a wide array of missiles, bombs and delivery systems, as well as accessories like night-vision goggles and radar warning systems." (The New York Times) This deal, if passed, has the potential of shifting the region's balance of power and authority on a global level.
If you are wondering why the United States is proposing to enter into such a deal, the answer is quite simple: it is intended to strengthen the defense forces of Saudi Arabia, which has been a long time ally of the United States. According to Andrew Shapiro (the assistant secretary of state for political and military affairs) another reason is, "It will send a strong message to countries in the region that we are committed to support the security of our key partners and allies in the Arabian Gulf and broader Middle East. And it will enhance Saudi Arabia’s ability to deter and defend against threats to its borders and to its oil infrastructure, which is critical to our economic interests.”(New York Times) The United States realizes that one of our major oil suppliers is Saudi Arabia, and protecting our allies that we benefit tremendously from is at the top of our agenda. With the events of terrorism on the rise against the United States, it is crucial that this country protect and defend ourselves from all aspects in order to secure this country's welfare.
The United States has deeply rooted connections in the Middle East in order to maintain and build a strong relationship with other countries because this relationship proves to be mutually beneficial. The public relations dealings is essential to continue to provide communication between the United States and the Middle East in order to satisfy the needs of both entities. To apply the readings this week in our book for class by Earl Babbie,there could be several methods of research conducted. One is ethnomethodology (which I don't recommend being done, but it would be interesting to see) "involves the intentional breaking of agreements as a way of revealing their existence (Babbie 325) To apply, in order to show the importance of having this relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia, ethnomethodology suggests to break this deal of the $60 billion in weaponry by the U.S. to Saudi Arabia. There could also be focus groups brought in to examine the opinion of people that work for the Obama Administration to see what they think of this deal and how it will affect their relationship with Saudi Arabia. Until those 30 days are up, we will see how Congress decides.
What type of weaponry does Saudi Arabia currently have? According to the New York Times article entitled, U.S. plans to sell Jet Fighters and Helicopters to Saudis, "State Department and Pentagon officials told lawmakers that the sales would include 84 new F-15 fighter jets, upgrades to 70 existing Saudi F-15s, 190 helicopters and a wide array of missiles, bombs and delivery systems, as well as accessories like night-vision goggles and radar warning systems." (The New York Times) This deal, if passed, has the potential of shifting the region's balance of power and authority on a global level.
If you are wondering why the United States is proposing to enter into such a deal, the answer is quite simple: it is intended to strengthen the defense forces of Saudi Arabia, which has been a long time ally of the United States. According to Andrew Shapiro (the assistant secretary of state for political and military affairs) another reason is, "It will send a strong message to countries in the region that we are committed to support the security of our key partners and allies in the Arabian Gulf and broader Middle East. And it will enhance Saudi Arabia’s ability to deter and defend against threats to its borders and to its oil infrastructure, which is critical to our economic interests.”(New York Times) The United States realizes that one of our major oil suppliers is Saudi Arabia, and protecting our allies that we benefit tremendously from is at the top of our agenda. With the events of terrorism on the rise against the United States, it is crucial that this country protect and defend ourselves from all aspects in order to secure this country's welfare.
The United States has deeply rooted connections in the Middle East in order to maintain and build a strong relationship with other countries because this relationship proves to be mutually beneficial. The public relations dealings is essential to continue to provide communication between the United States and the Middle East in order to satisfy the needs of both entities. To apply the readings this week in our book for class by Earl Babbie,there could be several methods of research conducted. One is ethnomethodology (which I don't recommend being done, but it would be interesting to see) "involves the intentional breaking of agreements as a way of revealing their existence (Babbie 325) To apply, in order to show the importance of having this relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia, ethnomethodology suggests to break this deal of the $60 billion in weaponry by the U.S. to Saudi Arabia. There could also be focus groups brought in to examine the opinion of people that work for the Obama Administration to see what they think of this deal and how it will affect their relationship with Saudi Arabia. Until those 30 days are up, we will see how Congress decides.
Thursday, October 14, 2010
The need for an alliance between the United States and Pakistan
Did you ever have a best friend, who you trusted, and claimed to "have your back", but then helped out your enemy to do something bad towards you? Unfortunately, this may have happened to the majority of us, including the United States. The United States is allies with Pakistan, in which the United States agrees to send $1 billion annually to this country, and in return Pakistan agrees to take action against al-Qaida and Taliban forces that are located in their country. This appears that both sides have a fair share on what they are supposed to provide in this friendship and both have mutual benefits. Pakistan, according to the U.S., has been an unreliable ally because this country, "keeps evadings its responsibilities in taking military action against Taliban and al-Qaida forces in North Waziristan." (New Haven Register) In the article, "Pakistan, U.S. need alliance" by Kui B. Rai in The New Haven Register, it discussed how because of Pakistan's unreliability, both the United States and NATO attacked Pakistan, which in turn enraged the Pakistani public and makes the U.S. even more unpopular. Pakistan claims that they are not willing to fight the Taliban because they "want to recover its influence in that country and is concerned about Taliban attacks within Pakistan" (New Haven Register) Pakistan therefore cooperates with the United States and NATO in the war against the Taliban to what it considers an acceptable extent.
The United States considers Pakistan a necessary ally because their friendship has become crucial in fighting terrorists, so the U.S. continues to support this nation. Both countries realize that without the other country, they would be lacking vital components to continue their countries. In my opinion, I think that the United States is giving 60% in this relationship whereas Pakistan is givign 40%. A functioning relationship needs to be 50-50 from both ends of each party because it shows that both are giving and receiving equally. The United States is providing a huge amount of funds towards Pakistan for their cooperation as well as funding to Pakistan's army, and Pakistan in return is only providing some action being taken against the Taliban and Al-Qaida, almost as if they take action when they feel like it. I think there needs to be stricter guidelines that are more specific, developed by the United States, to state what they expect from Pakistan. Pakistan can hear these guidelines and tailor them to a certain extent that is agreeable between both parties, which can then result with having more precise solutions on what to do if faced with when deciding to take actions against the Taliban.
Communication is key in any relationship, especially when dealing with a friendship in which you must provide for your friend and take into consideration how your actions are going to benefit/harm them. Right now I think Pakistani's are not viewing the United States as being fair and just in their actions of attack, and so this is going to damage the relationship from Pakistans end. Americans, feel that Pakistan is not keeping their end of the bargain and so they feel that they are untrustworthy and unreliable, so this too is damaging the relationship from the United States' part. Both sides have ill feelings towards the other and so it is necessary for both sides to communicate and listen to each other to understand the feelings of the other party. In our class book of Babbie, we learned about survey research, and this may provide to be a useful tool to get a better understanding of both countries, by surveying Americans and Pakistanis with questions, open-ended, closed-ended, and agree/disagree. This survey research is, "a popular social research method, and is the administration of questionnaires to a sample of resondents selected from some population." (Babbie 309) This survey can hopefully be a guide to the opinion of the larger population and provide a representation of feelings generated from each country, which can then be looked at, and then a solution can be reached in order to better the friendship/relationship between Pakistan and the United States.
The United States considers Pakistan a necessary ally because their friendship has become crucial in fighting terrorists, so the U.S. continues to support this nation. Both countries realize that without the other country, they would be lacking vital components to continue their countries. In my opinion, I think that the United States is giving 60% in this relationship whereas Pakistan is givign 40%. A functioning relationship needs to be 50-50 from both ends of each party because it shows that both are giving and receiving equally. The United States is providing a huge amount of funds towards Pakistan for their cooperation as well as funding to Pakistan's army, and Pakistan in return is only providing some action being taken against the Taliban and Al-Qaida, almost as if they take action when they feel like it. I think there needs to be stricter guidelines that are more specific, developed by the United States, to state what they expect from Pakistan. Pakistan can hear these guidelines and tailor them to a certain extent that is agreeable between both parties, which can then result with having more precise solutions on what to do if faced with when deciding to take actions against the Taliban.
Communication is key in any relationship, especially when dealing with a friendship in which you must provide for your friend and take into consideration how your actions are going to benefit/harm them. Right now I think Pakistani's are not viewing the United States as being fair and just in their actions of attack, and so this is going to damage the relationship from Pakistans end. Americans, feel that Pakistan is not keeping their end of the bargain and so they feel that they are untrustworthy and unreliable, so this too is damaging the relationship from the United States' part. Both sides have ill feelings towards the other and so it is necessary for both sides to communicate and listen to each other to understand the feelings of the other party. In our class book of Babbie, we learned about survey research, and this may provide to be a useful tool to get a better understanding of both countries, by surveying Americans and Pakistanis with questions, open-ended, closed-ended, and agree/disagree. This survey research is, "a popular social research method, and is the administration of questionnaires to a sample of resondents selected from some population." (Babbie 309) This survey can hopefully be a guide to the opinion of the larger population and provide a representation of feelings generated from each country, which can then be looked at, and then a solution can be reached in order to better the friendship/relationship between Pakistan and the United States.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Times Square bomber gets life sentence
If someone were to look at you, and judge you by the type of clothing you are wearing, how would that make you feel? What about your nationality? Skin color? Religion? Without making the effort of getting to know who you really are, and what kind of a person you are, they automatically make assumptions about you based on what they first notice. As we know, these assumptions the majority of times are incorrect and are not truly an accurate representation of who you really are. But, if people would take the time to get to know you better, they would be surprised to find out the person you really are. Unfortunately, people are not given that chance, and so these assumptions automatically are linked to that person. What is even worse is when people, who recognize they exist under a stereotype, they try to educate people on who they really are and prove to the world that, that stereotype is incorrect and a poor representation of themselves. They try to show they are good people and they deserve the right to be acknowledged as the person they truly are. Sometimes, these poor people are faced with the obstacle of people under the same stereotype adding to the inaccurate associations. So, the efforts of people trying to improve the situation are overshadowed by the people giving a bad representation. It is like taking one step forward, and two steps back.
An event as described above occurred recently in which a Pakistani immigrant tried to detonate a car bomb in Times Square this past weekend. In the Record Journal article of "Times Square bomber gets life sentence", the bomber, Faisal Shahzad accepted a life sentence from this incident. Faisal apprently build a propane and gasoline bomb and drove it into Time Square, where he threatened to kill people. The reason as to why he did this was in order to protest Americans for occupying Muslim countries. He said, "We are only Muslims trying to defend our religion, people, homes and land, but if you call us terrorists, then we are proud terrorists and we will keep on terrorizing you until you leave our lands and people at peace" (Record Journal) Here, Faisal is trying to proclaim the reason of this bad act in the name of Islam and of Allah (God), which is not the actual purpose of God and this religion. Muslims are peaceful people, and the people in the Middle East are one of the most, if not the most generous and hospitable people in the world. If only people would take the chance to get to know them, and become more acquainted with this culture. After hearing this quote from Faisal, I began to wonder what Muslims were thinking and whether or not they supported this statement. I interviewed one of my friends, who is Muslim, on this matter and they said, "I do not support the statements made by Faisal Shahzad and I think that he is doing a diservice to me and people from my religion. I do my best to treat other people with respect and accept others of their differences and I in return expect people to do the same for me. I really hope that people don't think I am a terrorist." (Anonymous) I agree with this person's quote because we all need to be followers of the golden rule,"treat others the way you want to be treated."
Shahzad also claimed,"Brace yourselves, because the war with Muslims has just begun. Consider me the first droplet of the blood that will follow."(Record Journal) I include this quote not to alarm or frighten people, but I wanted to show that there is good and bad in every race/ethnicity. I think that if people were more educated and understanding of the Middle Eastern culture along with Muslims, they wouldn't have this fear or untolerable attitude towards this group. It is unfortunate that the actions of this man will now have a negative effect on Muslims in general, especially when Muslims are working so hard to improve their status and image in general,especially here in the United States. This is associated with the term ecological fallacy in which people erroneously base conclusions about individuals solely on the observation of groups (Babbie).
Public Relations representatives in the Middle East are working hard to improve their relationship with the United States and are trying to better the identity of its individuals by mending wrongs, and educating people with a better understanding. As the 10 year anniversary of September 11th, 2001 comes about next year, public relations practitioners in the Middle East are working hard to produce new campaigns and ways to connect with the United States. I believe all global citizens need to be more accepting of people different from you, break barriers, and get to know someone better before you judge them for their differences, and who knows, you may like what you discover and that person can potentially become a good friend of yours.
An event as described above occurred recently in which a Pakistani immigrant tried to detonate a car bomb in Times Square this past weekend. In the Record Journal article of "Times Square bomber gets life sentence", the bomber, Faisal Shahzad accepted a life sentence from this incident. Faisal apprently build a propane and gasoline bomb and drove it into Time Square, where he threatened to kill people. The reason as to why he did this was in order to protest Americans for occupying Muslim countries. He said, "We are only Muslims trying to defend our religion, people, homes and land, but if you call us terrorists, then we are proud terrorists and we will keep on terrorizing you until you leave our lands and people at peace" (Record Journal) Here, Faisal is trying to proclaim the reason of this bad act in the name of Islam and of Allah (God), which is not the actual purpose of God and this religion. Muslims are peaceful people, and the people in the Middle East are one of the most, if not the most generous and hospitable people in the world. If only people would take the chance to get to know them, and become more acquainted with this culture. After hearing this quote from Faisal, I began to wonder what Muslims were thinking and whether or not they supported this statement. I interviewed one of my friends, who is Muslim, on this matter and they said, "I do not support the statements made by Faisal Shahzad and I think that he is doing a diservice to me and people from my religion. I do my best to treat other people with respect and accept others of their differences and I in return expect people to do the same for me. I really hope that people don't think I am a terrorist." (Anonymous) I agree with this person's quote because we all need to be followers of the golden rule,"treat others the way you want to be treated."
Shahzad also claimed,"Brace yourselves, because the war with Muslims has just begun. Consider me the first droplet of the blood that will follow."(Record Journal) I include this quote not to alarm or frighten people, but I wanted to show that there is good and bad in every race/ethnicity. I think that if people were more educated and understanding of the Middle Eastern culture along with Muslims, they wouldn't have this fear or untolerable attitude towards this group. It is unfortunate that the actions of this man will now have a negative effect on Muslims in general, especially when Muslims are working so hard to improve their status and image in general,especially here in the United States. This is associated with the term ecological fallacy in which people erroneously base conclusions about individuals solely on the observation of groups (Babbie).
Public Relations representatives in the Middle East are working hard to improve their relationship with the United States and are trying to better the identity of its individuals by mending wrongs, and educating people with a better understanding. As the 10 year anniversary of September 11th, 2001 comes about next year, public relations practitioners in the Middle East are working hard to produce new campaigns and ways to connect with the United States. I believe all global citizens need to be more accepting of people different from you, break barriers, and get to know someone better before you judge them for their differences, and who knows, you may like what you discover and that person can potentially become a good friend of yours.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
8 Iranian Officials Sanctioned by the United States
The United States have made it their job to oversee and help out governmental systems in Iran. Last year, 2009, Iran had an election for a new President, however, angry crowds mobbed the streets of Tehran to protest the elections. There were 8 Iranian officials that played a huge role in the bloody suppression of anti-government activists against these elections. In The New York Times, U.S.'s Secretary of State (Hilary Rodham Clinton) and Treasury Secretary (Timothy F. Geithner)"accused the men of ordering the arbitrary arrests, beating, torture, rape, blackmail and killing of Iranian citizens in the violent crackdown since the June 2009 election." (Landler 2010)
Why are the United States getting involved with affairs in the country of Iran? The first reason is that this country is trying to promote and expand the idea of human-rights on an international level. Any impingements on human-rights in the United States is unacceptable and not tolerated, and the victimizers are punished. Having this philosophy, the U.S. wants other countries to adopt a similar mind set and will in turn given support to those countries. As a result of the attempt to advance this philosophy, the United States has acknowledged human-rights abuses as the basis for these sanctions and have frozen foreign assets and denied visas to all of the 8 arbitrators. The other reason as to why the United States insists on heavy involvement with Iran is to keep an eye on the nuclear activities in Iran. Even though the United Nations attempts to oversee nuclear activities around the world, it does not necessarily prevent countries from engaging in producing nuclear power. This outlook on nuclear affairs has links to those 8 affiliated people which include, the commander of the Islamic revolutionary guard corps, the minister of welfare and social security, and other intelligence officials. Mohammad Ali Jafari, the commander of the guard corps has already been identified by the United States for his involvement in the nuclear program and therefore the U.S. made sure that he was included in one of those being sanctioned and stripped of privileges, and it gave permission to the United States to further investigate their findings in nuclear activity.
"Iranian human-rights and democracy advocates have long pleaded with the United States to concentrate on rights abuses, expressing frustration that it looked at Iran only through a nuclear lens. Analysts noted that the United States has long criticized human-rights abuses in countries like the Soviet Union, with which it was also engaged in sensitive nuclear negotiations."(Landler 2010) Iran is concerned that the United States is only helping out affairs in Iran for the U.S.'s own personal gain so they can have control in the nuclear war. As stated in this quote, the United States had to engage in a similar action with the Soviet Union in order to continue being the leader in the nuclear war. I think that by the United States taking this action in affairs against the 8 Iranian officials is an example of progress learned by the United States and the Obama administration. It is a step forward for public relations of the United States with the Middle East because its efficient response to the political upheaval in the Middle East, in this case with Iran. I think that the United States need to show more that they are sincerely concerned with bettering countries for their internal affairs rather than coming off as trying to peer into nuclear activities of other countries.
In our reading for this week in the book, The Basics of Social Research by Earl Babbie, it discussed the different types of samplings that are used in research. The one type of sampling that would be useful to study thinking of actions taken by The United States by Iranians would be to get a purposive sampling which is, "a type of nonprobability sampling in which the units to be observed are selected on the basis of the researcher's judgment about which ones will be the most useful or representative. (Babbie 207) So, to carry out this sampling I would ask questions directed specifically to Iranians, instead of people from other countries, because their input would be the most useful and applicable for the research. We learned about the term "informant" which is a member of the group who can talk directly about the group per se. Informants would be good tools to use for research because it could create input necessary for conducting a study.
Why are the United States getting involved with affairs in the country of Iran? The first reason is that this country is trying to promote and expand the idea of human-rights on an international level. Any impingements on human-rights in the United States is unacceptable and not tolerated, and the victimizers are punished. Having this philosophy, the U.S. wants other countries to adopt a similar mind set and will in turn given support to those countries. As a result of the attempt to advance this philosophy, the United States has acknowledged human-rights abuses as the basis for these sanctions and have frozen foreign assets and denied visas to all of the 8 arbitrators. The other reason as to why the United States insists on heavy involvement with Iran is to keep an eye on the nuclear activities in Iran. Even though the United Nations attempts to oversee nuclear activities around the world, it does not necessarily prevent countries from engaging in producing nuclear power. This outlook on nuclear affairs has links to those 8 affiliated people which include, the commander of the Islamic revolutionary guard corps, the minister of welfare and social security, and other intelligence officials. Mohammad Ali Jafari, the commander of the guard corps has already been identified by the United States for his involvement in the nuclear program and therefore the U.S. made sure that he was included in one of those being sanctioned and stripped of privileges, and it gave permission to the United States to further investigate their findings in nuclear activity.
"Iranian human-rights and democracy advocates have long pleaded with the United States to concentrate on rights abuses, expressing frustration that it looked at Iran only through a nuclear lens. Analysts noted that the United States has long criticized human-rights abuses in countries like the Soviet Union, with which it was also engaged in sensitive nuclear negotiations."(Landler 2010) Iran is concerned that the United States is only helping out affairs in Iran for the U.S.'s own personal gain so they can have control in the nuclear war. As stated in this quote, the United States had to engage in a similar action with the Soviet Union in order to continue being the leader in the nuclear war. I think that by the United States taking this action in affairs against the 8 Iranian officials is an example of progress learned by the United States and the Obama administration. It is a step forward for public relations of the United States with the Middle East because its efficient response to the political upheaval in the Middle East, in this case with Iran. I think that the United States need to show more that they are sincerely concerned with bettering countries for their internal affairs rather than coming off as trying to peer into nuclear activities of other countries.
In our reading for this week in the book, The Basics of Social Research by Earl Babbie, it discussed the different types of samplings that are used in research. The one type of sampling that would be useful to study thinking of actions taken by The United States by Iranians would be to get a purposive sampling which is, "a type of nonprobability sampling in which the units to be observed are selected on the basis of the researcher's judgment about which ones will be the most useful or representative. (Babbie 207) So, to carry out this sampling I would ask questions directed specifically to Iranians, instead of people from other countries, because their input would be the most useful and applicable for the research. We learned about the term "informant" which is a member of the group who can talk directly about the group per se. Informants would be good tools to use for research because it could create input necessary for conducting a study.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Anti-Muslim incidents on the rise
Pearl Harbor. What "enemy" nation would you associate this event with? Unfortunately, many of us would think of Japan. During this time period of the events of Pearl Harbor, Japanese people residing in this country were believed to be associated as bad people that were spying on the United States, and were therefore thrown into jails. Even though these were U.S. citizens, the Japanese were automatically tossed into the category of "against the United States" because their mother nation was the enemy against the United States. The same stereotype has been placed on Muslims here in the United States as well as in the Middle East. Things have not been turning out well for citizens here, because there have been hate crimes occurring all around the United States that are geared specifically towards Muslims.
In New York City, just a few blocks away from the site of Ground Zero, a Muslim cab driver was stabbed to death on the job by a person that shared in this hatred towards Muslims. There have been numerous reports on a national level by "FBI agents and civil rights division investigators also are looking into vandalism and other incidents at mosques or mosque construction sites in Arlington, Texas; Murfreesboro, Tenn.; Madera, California,; and Waterport, N.Y." (New Haven Register E3). It seems that this hatred is spreading to all ends and angles of the United States in the North, South, East, and West. Threatening messages of lives were left at several mosques, and the list goes on about the occurring hate crimes. It appears to be the "season of hate" against Muslims, considering the anniversary of September 11th, 2001. As discussed in one of my previous blogs, A Flordia pastor caused a global uproar with his event of National Burn a Quran day on the 9/11 anniversary.
How do Muslims here in the United States feel about the hate crimes targeted towards them? "U.S. Muslims say their national organizations share the blame, for answering intricate questions about Islam with platitudes, and failing to fully examine the potential for extremism within their communitities" (Record Journal, Rachel Zoll). Muslims here as well as in the Middle East understand that ignorance may be what is causing this hate crime, but they don't appreciate the fact that they are being grouped as one unit in that all are terrorists. Muslims here all insist that "I'm American too",but many people questions their loyalty to this country. What is making this worse and escalating the hate crimes is the propoganda and intensified images of violence overseas in the name of Islam with the U.S. troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. In my opinion, this country is being very contradictory because while they are poking fun of a situation and its members, they are also hurting members of this country too. The media needs to understand that what they profess to the public can catch the attention of its audience and persuade people to act on behalf of their feelings, which can lead to these hate crimes. Public Relations in the Middle East are trying very hard to maintain and repair their image seen in the United States for the sake of their area, and Muslims in the United States.
What is the United States doing as a result of these hate crimes? After these reports, the Attorney General Eric Holder met Tuesday with Muslim and other religious leaders to discuss these attacks and "reiterated teh department's strong commitment to prosecuting hate crimes. Violence against individuals or institutions based on religious bias is interolerable, and the department will bring anyone who commits such crimes to justice" (New Haven Register E3). I wonder if the Attorney General will hold true to his statement and make a concerted effort against hate crimes. I also wonder, what will be the punishments or the "justice" brought forth against those who promote this hate crime. It will be an interesting case to see once an occurance happens. Other religions have been supporting the Muslim faith against these hate crimes because they realize that it is not fair to prosecute those under one faith, especially when one of the beauties of this country is based on the First Amendment, "freedom of religion". "Many Jewish, Roman Catholic, Protestant, evangelical, atheist and other groups have responded with an outpouring of support for Muslims, but suspicion remains high among many Americans." (Record Journal, RAchel Zoll).
This relates to what we are learning in the textbook ,"The Basics of Social Research", by Earl Babbie, because it discusses first of Conceptions, Concepts, and Reality. A conception is a techniccal term for mental images that we put together to form a concept. Not always are our conceptions correct, because they may turn into misconceptions in which an idea/thought is not true in reality. This relates to the idea that Americans have a misconception on Muslims, because they seem to believe that all Muslims are terrorists after the events of 9/11. What I hope to get out of my thesis is a conceptualization which is, "The process through which we specify what we mean when we use particular terms in research" (Babbie pg. 134) and I hope to better understand feelings of the MIddle East. When studying variable, I could look into nominal and ordinal measures to better understand people and what they believe.
I strongly agree with what Scott Morrow says in the New Haven Register, "Our communities are strengthened by the religious observances and practice of our neighbors." How true this is, all of us need to make a conscious effort to do good in this world, and then we can make the world a better place.
In New York City, just a few blocks away from the site of Ground Zero, a Muslim cab driver was stabbed to death on the job by a person that shared in this hatred towards Muslims. There have been numerous reports on a national level by "FBI agents and civil rights division investigators also are looking into vandalism and other incidents at mosques or mosque construction sites in Arlington, Texas; Murfreesboro, Tenn.; Madera, California,; and Waterport, N.Y." (New Haven Register E3). It seems that this hatred is spreading to all ends and angles of the United States in the North, South, East, and West. Threatening messages of lives were left at several mosques, and the list goes on about the occurring hate crimes. It appears to be the "season of hate" against Muslims, considering the anniversary of September 11th, 2001. As discussed in one of my previous blogs, A Flordia pastor caused a global uproar with his event of National Burn a Quran day on the 9/11 anniversary.
How do Muslims here in the United States feel about the hate crimes targeted towards them? "U.S. Muslims say their national organizations share the blame, for answering intricate questions about Islam with platitudes, and failing to fully examine the potential for extremism within their communitities" (Record Journal, Rachel Zoll). Muslims here as well as in the Middle East understand that ignorance may be what is causing this hate crime, but they don't appreciate the fact that they are being grouped as one unit in that all are terrorists. Muslims here all insist that "I'm American too",but many people questions their loyalty to this country. What is making this worse and escalating the hate crimes is the propoganda and intensified images of violence overseas in the name of Islam with the U.S. troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. In my opinion, this country is being very contradictory because while they are poking fun of a situation and its members, they are also hurting members of this country too. The media needs to understand that what they profess to the public can catch the attention of its audience and persuade people to act on behalf of their feelings, which can lead to these hate crimes. Public Relations in the Middle East are trying very hard to maintain and repair their image seen in the United States for the sake of their area, and Muslims in the United States.
What is the United States doing as a result of these hate crimes? After these reports, the Attorney General Eric Holder met Tuesday with Muslim and other religious leaders to discuss these attacks and "reiterated teh department's strong commitment to prosecuting hate crimes. Violence against individuals or institutions based on religious bias is interolerable, and the department will bring anyone who commits such crimes to justice" (New Haven Register E3). I wonder if the Attorney General will hold true to his statement and make a concerted effort against hate crimes. I also wonder, what will be the punishments or the "justice" brought forth against those who promote this hate crime. It will be an interesting case to see once an occurance happens. Other religions have been supporting the Muslim faith against these hate crimes because they realize that it is not fair to prosecute those under one faith, especially when one of the beauties of this country is based on the First Amendment, "freedom of religion". "Many Jewish, Roman Catholic, Protestant, evangelical, atheist and other groups have responded with an outpouring of support for Muslims, but suspicion remains high among many Americans." (Record Journal, RAchel Zoll).
This relates to what we are learning in the textbook ,"The Basics of Social Research", by Earl Babbie, because it discusses first of Conceptions, Concepts, and Reality. A conception is a techniccal term for mental images that we put together to form a concept. Not always are our conceptions correct, because they may turn into misconceptions in which an idea/thought is not true in reality. This relates to the idea that Americans have a misconception on Muslims, because they seem to believe that all Muslims are terrorists after the events of 9/11. What I hope to get out of my thesis is a conceptualization which is, "The process through which we specify what we mean when we use particular terms in research" (Babbie pg. 134) and I hope to better understand feelings of the MIddle East. When studying variable, I could look into nominal and ordinal measures to better understand people and what they believe.
I strongly agree with what Scott Morrow says in the New Haven Register, "Our communities are strengthened by the religious observances and practice of our neighbors." How true this is, all of us need to make a conscious effort to do good in this world, and then we can make the world a better place.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Minister vows to burn Quran as a protest for 9/11
As we know, there are many different religions in the world all with its religious leaders. For example, there are priests, ministers, rabbis, and an Imam. These religious leaders are supposed to be holy people in which they act in accord with their beliefs and represent their religious organization, so its followers agree and go along with its leaders. Many times this can be a wise thing to follow, but at other times, there are questionable actions that people follow.
In the New Haven Register, I read an article entitled, "Florida minister vows to burn Quran as 9/11 protest" in which a Christian minister wanted to create a movement in which people gathered together to each burn a Quran(the holy book of Islam) as a protest to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11th. Pastor Terry Jones claims that this idea came to him in July because he believes in an anti-Islam philosophy and preaches this idea to his small, evangelical Christian church. Ever since this thought in July he prayed about whether or not he should proceed with this event and decided the week of the anniversary of Sept. 11th, that he would go on with the burning of the Qurans.
This sparked much controversy on a global scale, public in the United States, in the White House, and for the top U.S. general in Afghanistan. The public in the United States have shown their disapproval of this movement, because there have been press articles regarding the disagreement against Pastor Terry Jones. Pastor Jones has also recieved more than 100 death threats from unknown sources. On a global scale, this reflects badly on the United States, because one of the beauties of this country is the freedom and acceptance of religion for all. Now, that there is this act by the minister, it is making this country sound contradictory and untrustworthy, and so it is inflaming public opinion and inciting violent views towards this country. The U.S. general in Afghanistan said that "the images of the burning of a Quran would undoubtedly be used by extremists in Afghanistan and around the world to inflame public opinion and incite violence." (New Haven Register) The White House is unsupportive of this movement because it is impinging on what this country represents and is causing too much disruption among the people. Although people are unsupportive of this, Pastor Terry Jones is protected by the First Amendment and he has the right to take this action.
This event has caused much attention to the Middle East as a whole. People are looking to how the Middle East is going to react to this and what action they are going to take in response to such a distasteful event. The Middle East and the United Sates are trying to mend their relationship and trying to improve it, but it is no help when people in this country are doing things to incite ill feelings. In a sense, Pastor Terry Jones is ripping off the bandaid covering a wound and then him burning the Qurans is like re-opening the wound. Now, the Middle East has been more affected on how people perceive this organization even after alomst a decade after the events of September 11th. Just when people thought the hatred against the Middle East was lessening, more controversy towards the Middle East has resounded.
In my opinion, I believe that the actions of Pastor Terry Jones were unpatriotic, wrong, and illegal. The Quran is similar to that of the christian Bible, in which it is the sacred word of God and it insists on being treated with the utmost respect. As mentioned in my previous blog concerning the potential building of a mosque near Ground Zero, the Islamic religion should not be punished just because of the actions of a couple of individuals from that religion, not all members are bad and terrorists. Why then are people, especially Americans, who are Muslim, being punished and criticized for something they should not be attributed to? This issue links to the reading we had for class in Chapter 4 of The Basics of Social Research, in which the term ecological fallacy is, "erroneously basing conclusions about individuals solely on the observation of groups and that it is an assumption that something learned about an ecological unit says something about the individuals making up that unit." (Babbie, 108). People in the United States and I am sure all over the world assume that all Middle Eastern individuals are bad people and terrorists after the events of September 11th, and that any Muslim is deemed to be associated with the terrorists and events of September 11, 2001. We also see that a spurious variable which is, "a coincidental statistical correlation between two variables, shown to be caused by some third variable" (Babbie 98), and example is the location of people may have an affect on a differing opinion whether it be people within the United States and people outside of the United States, from a different country. I am shocked to see that such a holy man that is supposed to represent God is doing something so distasteful just because he wants to protest the Islamic religion. There are other ways to do so in a more respectful manner and get your point across. Stay tuned in one of my future blogs that will address how this protest went and what results, if any, were created from this protest.
In the New Haven Register, I read an article entitled, "Florida minister vows to burn Quran as 9/11 protest" in which a Christian minister wanted to create a movement in which people gathered together to each burn a Quran(the holy book of Islam) as a protest to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11th. Pastor Terry Jones claims that this idea came to him in July because he believes in an anti-Islam philosophy and preaches this idea to his small, evangelical Christian church. Ever since this thought in July he prayed about whether or not he should proceed with this event and decided the week of the anniversary of Sept. 11th, that he would go on with the burning of the Qurans.
This sparked much controversy on a global scale, public in the United States, in the White House, and for the top U.S. general in Afghanistan. The public in the United States have shown their disapproval of this movement, because there have been press articles regarding the disagreement against Pastor Terry Jones. Pastor Jones has also recieved more than 100 death threats from unknown sources. On a global scale, this reflects badly on the United States, because one of the beauties of this country is the freedom and acceptance of religion for all. Now, that there is this act by the minister, it is making this country sound contradictory and untrustworthy, and so it is inflaming public opinion and inciting violent views towards this country. The U.S. general in Afghanistan said that "the images of the burning of a Quran would undoubtedly be used by extremists in Afghanistan and around the world to inflame public opinion and incite violence." (New Haven Register) The White House is unsupportive of this movement because it is impinging on what this country represents and is causing too much disruption among the people. Although people are unsupportive of this, Pastor Terry Jones is protected by the First Amendment and he has the right to take this action.
This event has caused much attention to the Middle East as a whole. People are looking to how the Middle East is going to react to this and what action they are going to take in response to such a distasteful event. The Middle East and the United Sates are trying to mend their relationship and trying to improve it, but it is no help when people in this country are doing things to incite ill feelings. In a sense, Pastor Terry Jones is ripping off the bandaid covering a wound and then him burning the Qurans is like re-opening the wound. Now, the Middle East has been more affected on how people perceive this organization even after alomst a decade after the events of September 11th. Just when people thought the hatred against the Middle East was lessening, more controversy towards the Middle East has resounded.
In my opinion, I believe that the actions of Pastor Terry Jones were unpatriotic, wrong, and illegal. The Quran is similar to that of the christian Bible, in which it is the sacred word of God and it insists on being treated with the utmost respect. As mentioned in my previous blog concerning the potential building of a mosque near Ground Zero, the Islamic religion should not be punished just because of the actions of a couple of individuals from that religion, not all members are bad and terrorists. Why then are people, especially Americans, who are Muslim, being punished and criticized for something they should not be attributed to? This issue links to the reading we had for class in Chapter 4 of The Basics of Social Research, in which the term ecological fallacy is, "erroneously basing conclusions about individuals solely on the observation of groups and that it is an assumption that something learned about an ecological unit says something about the individuals making up that unit." (Babbie, 108). People in the United States and I am sure all over the world assume that all Middle Eastern individuals are bad people and terrorists after the events of September 11th, and that any Muslim is deemed to be associated with the terrorists and events of September 11, 2001. We also see that a spurious variable which is, "a coincidental statistical correlation between two variables, shown to be caused by some third variable" (Babbie 98), and example is the location of people may have an affect on a differing opinion whether it be people within the United States and people outside of the United States, from a different country. I am shocked to see that such a holy man that is supposed to represent God is doing something so distasteful just because he wants to protest the Islamic religion. There are other ways to do so in a more respectful manner and get your point across. Stay tuned in one of my future blogs that will address how this protest went and what results, if any, were created from this protest.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Building a Mosque at Ground Zero
When you think of September 11th, what comes to mind? Before the year of 2001, the day of September 11th was just an ordinary day like any other day of the year. People went to work, school, and did other activities attributing this day to nothing special. For one of my good friends, September 11th was his birthday. After this date in 2001, my good friend's birthday would become known globally and would be a day to remember. Unfortunately for my friend, people wouldn't remember this day as his birthday, but rather a tragedy in which thousands of lives were lost and landmarks that represented the United States would be destroyed. After this tragic event, people in the United States began to associate the small terrorist group with the Middle East as a whole and combine them into one entity. Accordingly, whenever someone hears the words "Middle East" people automatically think terrorists and bad people. This stereotype has damaged the reputation of a specific region along with its people as a whole, and branded them with a demeaning title. This past June, there has been much controversy on the plans of constructing a mosque just two blocks from Ground Zero. People believe that Ground Zero is a sacred ground that should be preserved to honor the lives and victims of September 11th, 2001. On one side of the debate, people for the mosque believe that the mosque will serve an educational purpose and promote a better understanding of the Islamic religion, especially when people in this country are ignorant when it comes to the beliefs and values of Islam. They believe that this can serve as a healing power by turning the tragedy from 2001 into a positive, in order to create a better relationship with the Islamic and Middle Eastern society. Those against the mosque believe that it is a slap in the face to the victims that lost their lives just a little distance from the site of the mosque, a cause of those under this religion, and that it would be a constant reminder of what "evil" lurks in this religion. Both sides of this debate are very opinionated and raise different issues. President Obama supports the building of the mosque in the desired site. Looking at this issue from a legal standpoint, people need to realize that this country is founded greatly on the Constitution and the laws contained in this sacred document. The First Amendment says that, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" so there is a basic freedom of religion that is granted to all of the citizens of the United States of America. This event connects to the Public Relations in the Middle East, because it affects the Middle East in a negative way. The reputation of the Middle East is not placed on a pedestal and seen in high regards by this country, because of the events of 9/11. The Public Relations of the Middle East are working very hard to try to heal the perspective on the Middle East as a culture and with its people. It is unfortunate to see that one event and crisis can damage an entity as a whole, even though the majority of its people are good. The Middle East Public Relations Association (MEPRA) is now busy working on ways to stimulate good viewpoints toward this region, and how they can improve the reputation of the Middle East, especially after the events of 9/11. After doing the reading in The Basics of Social Research by Earl Babbie, I thought it would be interesting to examine this issue of the building of the mosque through a premodern, modern, and postmodern view. The section relates this to the term "naive realism" because it is true that because people are ignorant on certain topics, they automatically assume ideas based on the little knowledge they do know. Looking at this issue from a premodern view, people think that it is a bad idea to build a mosque because it will promote terrorism and attract bad people into the area near Ground Zero, because all Muslims are bad. According to a modern view, even though very few people that were part of a religion did something horrific, does not mean that all people of that religion are bad, and that people should be able to exercise their freedom of religion wherever they desire because they too are citizens of this country. A postmodern view would acknowledge that people of this religion have the possibility of either being good or being bad. All the different images and ideas portrayed by having this mosque with people of this religion are equally "true" in the sense that anything is possible. It is interesting to note the different views and how they would react if faced with an issue like this. My personal opinion on this issue is that the mosque should be able to be constructed on the desired site near Ground Zero. I am very disappointed in the attitudes of people that attribute the religion of Islam with terrorism. Before the events of 9/11, there was an act of terrorism that was very deadly that took place within the United States. Timothy McVeigh detonated a truck bomb in front of a building that killed 168 people and launched other attacks in various areas that took the lives of many people. Did I mention that Timothy McVeigh was a Catholic? It is interesting, because after the killings done by McVeigh, the whole religion of Catholicism was not branded as a terrorist group and it was not assumed that just because someone was Catholic, it automatically made them a terrorist. So, why is that another religion, in this case Islam, has the reputation that all of its members are terrorists? This baffles me. While I think that the mosque should be able to be built wherever it desires, I think that it is wise on the Islamic community to not continue to build near Ground Zero. Wisdom means acknowledging when it is a good or bad time to act in a certain way. After much controversy and debate over this construction and to avoid any more bad publicity towards the Middle East and its assocaited members, I think the mosque should consider to be built somewhere else in the area.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)