Wednesday, April 24, 2013

Muslims have a problem. Uncle Ruslan may have the answer.





The following piece is excerpted (heavily) from the Washington Post
The uncle to Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, the alleged Boston Marathon bombers, accomplished something that 11 years of post-9/11 press releases, news conferences and soundbites by too many American Muslim leaders has failed to do on the issue of radicalization and terrorism: with raw, unfettered emotion, he owned up to the problem within.
As an American Muslim who has watched the radicalization of Muslims from Louisville, Ky., to Chatanooga, Tenn., to Chechnya, the ancestral ethnicity of the alleged bombers, over the last three decades, I had one question on my mind.



I asked softly: “Is your family Muslim?”
The uncle didn’t hear me well: “Huh?”
I repeated my question: “Is your family Muslim?”
The question was one other journalists later admitted to me that they wondered but didn’t dare ask, the proverbial elephant in the room, only at that moment, on a cul-de-sac with manicured lawns, playground sets and helicopters and Canadian geese overhead. 
In Washington, D.C., leaders of national American Muslim organizations filled a room at the National Press Club and issued their flat, blanket rebuttals: Islam doesn’t sanction violence, and it doesn’t allow terrorism. 
When the New York Post made the mistake of writing that a Saudi witness was actually a suspect, bloggers and others took advantage of the opportunity to chortle over the mistake as just one more horrible example of stereotyping.
While it is critical that we don’t jump to conclusions by associating religious affiliation with militancy, there is no doubt that embracing an ideology of Islam that promotes extremism and violence has been a motivator for terrorism, from assassinated al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden to Army Major Nidal Hasan.
Did such an ideology influence the Tsarnaev brothers? Who or what compelled them to violence? What role does Muslim culture play in this type of radicalization?
Rather than worrying about being politically correct, we have to be comfortable asking these difficult questions. 
And the collectivist-minded Muslim community needs to learn an important lesson from Tsarni: 
It’s time to acknowledge the dishonor of terrorism within our communities, not to deny it because of shame. 
As we negotiate critical issues of ethnicity, religious ideology and identity as potential motivators for conflict, we have to establish basic facts.
So when I asked about his faith, Tsarni heard me. And he did something remarkable. He didn’t flinch.
“We are Muslims,” he answered clearly and steely-eyed. “We are Chechnyans. We are ethnic Chechnyans.”
“Do you think that they got radicalized in the mosques in that area?” I asked.
What I heard I couldn’t believe, I’ve become so used to the tactics of deflection. He looked me straight in the eye, and he said, 
What happened when this Muslim American looked us in the eye and admitted the problem?
Tsarni became “Uncle Ruslan” to millions of Americans watching him on TV and later online, winning their respect, first, with apologies and then, with his hands clenched, fierce indignation, outrage and anger over the suspected role of his nephews as the Boston Marathon bombers. 
The uncle stunned seasoned reporters, some of them veterans of the trials in Guantanamo Bay and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, with his straight talk. 
First, he expressed his condolences to the victims of the Boston Marathon bombings and, then, declared loud and clear that his nephews brought “shame” on his family and the people of Chechnya, the family’s ethnicity: 
“Yes, of course, we’re ashamed. We’re ashamed. They’re children of my brother, who had little influence of them!” Later on Dzhokhar: 
“He put a shame on the entire Chechnyan ethnicity!” According to public records, Uncle Ruslan shared the same last name as his nephews but shortened it .
With close-cropped hair, a strong jawline and fit physique, the attorney became an accidental spokesman, instilling confidence as a truth-teller.
His effectiveness reveals that the best crisis management doesn’trequire intellectual gymnastic but just plain, honest talk: We have a problem. We know it. And we want to do right. 
“Uncle Ruslan” proved that folks can handle nuance. “It was wild, dramatic, angry, over-the-top,” wrote Washington Post blogger Alexandra Petri. She added: “People like Uncle Ruslan remind us that it’s the apples, not the barrel.”
She concluded: “Thank you. This was a moment we all needed.”

Back in America, Uncle Ruslan was winning in the court of public opinion.
And it was stunning to see how he acknowledged the shame openly but didn’t allow it to silence his criticism.
The bombing suspects, "put a shame on the entire Chechnyan ethnicity,” he said.
What Tsarni is admitting is something true but politically incorrect to talk about: the increasing use of these phrases of religiosity are code inside the community for someone who is becoming hardcore. 
It doesn’t mean that they’re becoming violent or criminal, but it’s a red flag. 
Instead of playing that game, Uncle Ruslan did something remarkable. He put his hands together as if in prayer, and he showed humility, not defensive arrogance, saying he’d prostrate himself before the victims of the Boston bombings.
Ameen, as “amen” is said in Arabic and Muslim culture, to Uncle Ruslan. 
I believe it’s time for us American Muslims to take collective responsibility, rather than issue collective denial. 
That’s the attitude that cultivates confidence and fosters safety—for all.
Rather than waiting for an invitation to RSVP to a superfluous “interfaith” dinner, Uncle Ruslan did something simple but crucial: He extended an invitation, was a good neighbor and took responsibility for the trouble that emerged in his front yard. In short, he owned up.
Surely, the Tsaernev family story is complicated, and there is nobody without flaw.
But Uncle Ruslan showed us where to be“Uncle Ruslan” proved that folks can handle nuance. “It was wild, dramatic, angry, over-the-top,” wrote Washington Post blogger Alexandra Petri. She added: “People like Uncle Ruslan remind us that it’s the apples, not the barrel.”

She concluded: “Thank you. This was a moment we all needed.”in.
With reporters still camped out , he emerged from his neighbor’s porch, his arm around the older music teacher who lived there, leading her warmly into his house. Hundreds of miles away, Boston Police drew close to bringing his nephew into custody, leaving Uncle Ruslan, the rest of Tsaernev family and our Muslim communities to do some real soul-searching about how we lost these boys to the ideology of terrorism.
To me, the answer lies inside a culture shift where we honestly acknowledge the radicalization problems within our communities—so that no Uncle Ruslan has to step outside his home, confessing to something gone very, very wrong.
Asra Q. Nomani, a former Wall Street Journal reporter, is a mother and the author of “Standing Alone: A Muslim Woman’s Struggle for the Soul of Islam.”


Monday, April 22, 2013

Why the Chinese Earthquake is More Significant than the Boston Bombings

Not seen here on American Trusim, but seen broadly in response comments on websites such as CNN.com and Huffington Post, I think a lot of folks missed my point entirely my blog post contrasting the obsession with everything Boston Marathon Bombing related and the complete indifference to the deaths and injuries in China.

I UNDERSTAND that people are more interested and more obsessed with the Boston Bombing for two main reasons:

  • Boston is in the United States - That act of terror happened here, in our backyard, on American soil.
  • Terrorism is a Deliberate Act, Earthquakes are Acts of Nature - Terrorism is much more grave.
I GET that, OK?  That was never in question.  You'll get no argument from me that there would naturally be more interest in a bombing inside the United States vs. an earthquake in China.  WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE.

What I DON'T get is that there was next to NO coverage of the devastation and death caused by the Chinese earthquake.

What's worse, in the small amount of coverage we're now seeing, it appears that impacted Chinese citizens are not getting the help nor the attention they deserve, either. 

100,000 Homeless in China  

"We are in the open air here. No place to sleep, nothing to eat. No one is paying any attention to us," said Peng Qiong, 45, a farmer in Chaoyang village on the outskirts of Lushan, near the epicenter.

Thousands of displaced survivors are living in Red Cross tents following an earthquake in China's Sichuan province, though many are left with no form of shelter. Saturday's 6.6 magnitude earthquake killed more than 200 people and has left an estimated 100,000 homeless.

Caring about the 200 who died, the 11,000 who were injured and the 100,000 left homeless does not take away from how we feel about the tragedy in Boston, but we MUST treat these situations very differently and ask the world to begin paying attention to the needs of the Chinese people affected by this natural disaster.

Sunday, April 21, 2013

Three Die in Boston, 186 in China - Which Gets More Media Attention?

The two Boston Marathon bombing culprits have been killed in one case and captured in the other.  They turned out to be brothers who had lived in the Boston area for quite a while, but felt tied to Chechnya, and possibly conducted this act of terrorism as a Chechnya protest.  Maybe?

That one of the terrorists is dead, and the other captured is a good thing.

Along with rest of the United States, I sat, transfixed Friday night, as police forces (local, state and federal) converged on a covered boat parked in a Watertown, MA driveway, bringing an incredible manhunt to a close, with the second terrorist, a 19-year-old, being shot and eventually surrendering to authorities.

Their deadly act killed three people in Boston, and injured hundreds more.

Then, half a world away, a major earthquake struck the Chinese province of Sichuan at 8 a.m. local time, killing 186 and injuring more than 11,000.


How much television coverage have you seen of the earthquake in China or the 186 deaths there?

All I've seen is a text crawl at the bottom of the screen while wall-to-wall, repetitious coverage of the Boston Marathon Bombings continues on all the 24-hour news networks (CNN, Fox, MSNBC, etc.) non stop.

Three people died in Boston.  186 in China.  11,000+ were injured in China.

Where are the five-minute profiles of children who died in the China earthquake?  Instead, we're treated to "deep background" pieces on the Boston Terrorists, the Tsarnaev brothers and speculation by talking heads about what might have radicalized these men.

What about the dead and injured in China?

I'm not saying the events which unfolded in Boston aren't newsworthy.  They clearly are, and I was among the "consumers" of news all week long, and especially into the weekend.

But, do they justify the amount of international news coverage they're receiving, especially on the same weekend that a 7.0 magnitude earthquake killed nearly 200 people (sure to be more) and injured 11,000?

We need to get our priorities straight, here in the United States and elsewhere.



Wednesday, April 17, 2013

Tragedy in Boston

Media reported an arrest had been made, then stepped back from the assertion. 


(From CNN)  Investigators scrambling to solve the fatal bombings at the Boston Marathon want to question a man seen on video as a possible suspect in the attack, two official sources with knowledge of the investigation said Wednesday.

The sources identified the person as a man wearing a white baseball cap. News of a possible suspect comes on a day when authorities have made "significant progress" in the case but no arrests, a federal law enforcement source told CNN's John King.

Sources previously told CNN that a suspect was in custody, but both Boston police and the FBI denied that any arrests had been made.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

In writing about the recent deaths and injuries from the bombing attacks at the Boston Marathon, the only title that seemed fitting was "Tragedy in Boston."

The human toll that has been seen on television the last few days is deeply saddening to anyone with a conscience.  There can be no excuse, political, ideological or otherwise for the slaying of innocent civilians, including women and children.

A SLATE article (I refuse to link to it) employs the headline, "Let's hope the Boston Marathon Bomber is White Male."

WHAT?

It would be understandable to say, "Let's hope the Boston Marathon Bomber ISN'T (fill-in-the-blank)," but to "wish" for the guilty party to come from a certain group, race or demographic is deplorable, and an example of "Yellow Journalism" at its worst, simply seeking headlines.

In fact, a current SLATE piece from David Weigel IS headlined, "Understandable for Muslims to 'Hope Beyond Hope' That This Doesn't Turn out to Be What It Might Be."

Weigel quotes CNN correspondent Christiane Amanpour who said, "There are no conclusions.  Is it international? Is it domestic?  I am part Iranian. And I do understand the burden of association. And I know when we know who did this, we will all unite in strong condemnation."

That is reasonable.  Hoping that a white male, black female, Latino male, Irish female, etc. is culpable, is far beyond the pale.

I'd call it racism, but then again, the Left is incapable of racism, right?

Thursday, April 4, 2013

North Korea gives nuclear-war warning (Al Jazeera Report)


AL JAZEERA:  North Korea gives nuclear-war warning

"Moment of explosion approaching fast" after Pentagon move to deploy missile defence system to Pacific island.

First, consider the country (North Korea) and secondly, consider the source of this story, Al Jazeera.  Still, read on . . . 

The North Korean army has warned the US that its military has been cleared to wage an attack using "smaller, lighter and diversified nuclear" weapons.

"The moment of explosion is approaching fast," the military said, warning that war could break out "today or tomorrow".

The statement, carried by the Korean Central News Agency early on Thursday, said troops had been authorised to counter US aggression with "powerful practical military counteractions".

The warning, the latest in a series of escalating threats against the US and South Korea, came after the Pentagon said it would deploy a missile defence system to the US Pacific territory of Guam to strengthen the region's protections against a possible attack.

Meanwhile, a  South Korean news agency reported that the North had moved a mid-range missile to its eastern coast..

Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general, said that he was "deeply concerned" over rising tensions on Thursday.

'Clear danger'

In an address to the National Defence University in Washington on Wednesday, Chuck Hagel, US defence secretary, labelled North Korea's recent rhetoric as a threat to the US and its Asia-Pacific allies.

"Some of the actions they've taken over the last few weeks present a real and clear danger," he said.

Hagel added that the US was doing all it could to defuse the situation.

Deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defence System is the latest step the US has taken to bolster forces in the region in a far-reaching show of force aimed at countering the North Korean threat.

The Pentagon already has sent dispatched bombers, stealth fighters and ships.

The land-based missile defence system includes a truck-mounted launcher, tracking radar, interceptor missiles and an integrated fire control system.

The Pentagon said the system would boost defences for US citizens in Guam, a US territory, and US forces stationed there.

North Korea has railed for weeks against joint US and South Korean military exercises taking place in South Korea and has expressed anger over tightened sanctions for a February nuclear test.

Following through on one threat on Wednesday, North Korean border authorities refused to allow entry to South Koreans who manage jointly run factories in the North Korean city of Kaesong.

Meanwhile, North Korea barred entry to a joint industrial complex it shares with the South for a second day, the South Korean Unification Ministry has said.

The ministry also said on Thursday that it would allow 222 South Korean workers to leave the zone through the day.

Shut down threat

North Korea also repeated its threat to shut down Kaesong industrial zone, where 123 South Korean firms operate factories, if the South's government continued to insult it and worsen the situation by mentioning a possible military action against it.

"If the South's puppet conservative group and its media continue bad-mouthing ... we will be taking the stern measure of pulling out all of our workers from the Kaesong industrial zone," KCNA news agency quoted the North's Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of the Fatherland as saying.

Kaesong brings in $90m annually in wages to 53,000 North Korean workers and is one of the impoverished North's few sources of ready cash.

South Korean workers were banned from entering the site, located 10km inside the North, on Wednesday amid a tense standoff with North Korea pitted against South Korea and the US.

Al Jazeera's Harry Fawcett, reporting from the Paju border crossing, said that the longer Kaesong remains inaccessible to Seoul, "the bigger and more serious the situation becomes".

The real test will come over the weekend when the factories in the complex begin to run low on supplies, he said.

'Contingency plan'

The gates between North and South Korea will open 10 times on Thursday to allow workers to leave.

After the 222 South Korean workers leave between 10am and 5pm (01:00-08:00 GMT), another 606 workers from the South will remain in the Kaesong complex.

The operating stability of the complex is seen as a bellwether of inter-Korean relations, and its closure would mark a clear escalation of tensions beyond all the military rhetoric.

South Korea's defence ministry said it had contingency plans, including possible military action, to ensure the safety of its citizens working in the joint industrial zone. 

"We have prepared a contingency plan, including possible military action, in case of a serious situation," Defence Minister Kim Kwan-jin told ruling party MPs in a meeting on Wednesday. 

Border crossings for Kaesong had until Wednesday been functioning normally despite soaring tensions in recent weeks between the North and the South.

Pyongyang has been ramping up its threats since it was hit by international sanctions following its third nuclear test earlier this year. 

Tuesday, April 2, 2013

How Will the US Respond to a North Korean Attack on South Korea?

What will the United States do if there is a live-fire exchange between North and South Korea?

There has been a lot of "pooh poohing" of the rants / threats coming out of South Korea in recent days, with the White House even saying there is "no evidence that the country’s leader, Kim Jong-un was mobilizing troops or other military forces for any imminent attack.

Yet, at the same time, the US has moved a Navy destroyer off the coast of North Korea and has made mock bombing runs over South Korea with its B-2 stealth bombers, a highly unusual move for the US.

While the US has made these moves (along with its 28,500 troops stationed in South Korea), the military of North Korea says it is at its highest level of alertness, and continues to insist that a state of war exists between the two Koreas.

Equally disturbing is the fact that South Korean President Park Geun-hye has ordered her military to "deliver a strong and immediate response to any North Korean provocation."  In fact, she has said (rightly so), "If the North attempts any provocation against our people and country, you must respond strongly at the first contact with them without any political consideration."

This contrasts with the stance historically taken by South Korean.  Park is taking a much harder stance than her predecessor, Lee Myung-bak, who did not respond after a 2010 North Korean artillery attack killed four South Koreans.

So, we currently have:

  • An unpredictable N. Korean making military threats against S. Korea and the US
  • The US moving warships and planes into the region and conducting maneuvers there
  • S. Korea pledging to respond to any attack militarily
  • Reports of the Chinese military mobilizing near the border with N. Korea
  • N. Korea reportedly re-starting a shuttered nuclear reactor
If the two countries trade missiles, bombs or gunfire, how will the United States respond given the currently explosive situation on the Korean peninsula?  A military exchange could take place by accident or on purpose.  No matter what the provocation, with 28,500 American troops in South Korea, would the US be forced to attack North Korea?

If US troops were targeted, or accidentally harmed, what would be the United States' response?  

Further, if the North attacks the South, it appears that military leaders in the south have been given the "green light" by their civilian leadership to respond, unilaterally.

This has all the makings of a catastrophe just waiting to happen, if one or more of the players makes a misstep.

Monday, April 1, 2013

Tensions Mount on Korean Peninsula:

US Moves Destroyer Off of North Korea,
Chinese Troops Mobilize Near Border


The U.S. Navy is shifting a guided-missile destroyer in the Pacific to waters off the Korean peninsula in the wake of ongoing rhetoric from North Korea, U.S. defense officials said.

The USS McCain is capable of intercepting and destroying a missile, should North Korea decide to fire one off, the officials said.

Still, U.S. defense officials insist that there is nothing to indicate that North Korea is on the verge of another launch. 

As North Korean state TV shows constant images of the army bombarding South Korea, North Korea's leader Kim Jong Un is saying his missiles are at the ready and has cut off emergency communications.

The McCain in December 2012 was moved to be in position to defend against a impending North Korean rocket launch.

On Sunday, The United States sent F-22 stealth fighter jets to South Korea as part of military exercises in a move aimed at further deterring threats from North Korea against its neighbor.

S. Korean President Gives Military "Green Light" to Strike Back

Also Monday, South Korean President Park Geun-hye appeared to give her country's military permission to strike back at any attack from the North without further word from Seoul.

"As commander-in-chief of the armed forces, I will trust the military's judgment on abrupt and surprise provocations by North Korea," she said, according to Yonhap.

The deployments and Park's remarks came as tensions approached an all-time high between Pyongyang and Washington.  

Kim Jong Un has ratcheted up the rhetoric against both South Korea and the United States in recent months, and in February violated U.N. sanctions by ordering a nuclear weapons test.

On Saturday, North Korea said it had entered a "state of war" against South Korea, according to a statement reported by the North's official news agency, KCNA. 


The greatest danger right now appears to be the possibility of a miscalculation. 

- US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta


"The reality is we don’t have as much insight as we should," Panetta said of Kim's motives.

Kim has also recently threatened to "settle accounts" with the U.S. and posed near a chart that appeared to detail bombings of American cities.

In North Korea, meanwhile, KCNA reported on an Easter service at which it said "the participants renewed the firm resolution to put the warmongers [the US and South Korea] into the red hot iron-pot of hell as early as possible."

# # # # #