Thursday, February 25, 2010
Friday, February 12, 2010
Revisiting History so the Guest of Future Doesn't Surprise You
"History is a race between education and catastrophe". -H.G. Well
Humans and most animals rely on prior experiences to give them an idea of what will happen if they commit an action in the future. A toddler who places his or her hand on a flame will, after that incident, more likely than not, stay away from touching a flame; the memory of what happened before will be enough to stop them. But what happens if the toddler touches the fire and doesn't remember the entire incident? The attraction of the fire draws him or her to it again and the baby will probably touch the flame again and feel the same pain once more. And each time they forget, they'll probably repeat it.
Individually, our memories of personal experiences shapes our decisions in the future. However, socially speaking, history (our collective memories) tends to be forgotten resulting in our (social) repeating of putting our hands on the flames and burning ourselves. As a collective society, we've become amnesiac when it comes to the experiences of history and it has led us to a condition where we are increasingly suffering on a day to day basis. We've lived this way for so long that we believe it's a normal thing to go through the things we face on the street, at work (slave jobs) and anywhere in between. Yet this way of suffering is not a normal thing and we need to revisit history to understand this.
Regardless of how scary it is, how much it makes us terrified, we need to see what's happened not so we can write homework assignments but so we can take the best of historical events and figures and bring them into this world and so we can see the worse of history and prevent it by all means from being repeated. There's truth and wisdom in Maya Angelou's words "History, despite its wrenching pain, cannot be unlived, but if faced with courage, need not be lived again."
Monday, February 8, 2010
Aafia Siddiqui and the repeated precedent
For those of you who don't know about the case of Aafia Siddiqui, here's a link to an article about her and the resultant trial which ended in a guilty verdict on the charge of attempted murder. Article and Video Report on Aafia Verdict
Her case represents a consistent trend throughout the world where to be a Muslim on trial is an automatic guilty verdict. Regardless of what evidence is brought forth in favor of the defendant and what evidence is lacking that shows inconsistencies in governmental cases, the Muslim who is put on the stand by a western government will almost assuredly be found guilty.
One of the disheartening things about Aafia Siddiqui's case is the fact that though she was missing for some years, this was not looked into during her trial. The judge didn't bring it up, nor did the defense team, financed by the Pakistani government, delve into this crucial fact of the case. Essentially, Siddiqui was portrayed, as many Muslims are, as a lunatic bent on destroying the lives of Americans. On top of this, Siddiqui has three children who entered her native Pakistan with her before she was arrested, two of them were missing and are missing right to this day. Again, this held no weight in the trial at hand. Why was a full picture not painted around Aafia Siddiqui and instead only a biased one which portrayed her as yet another so-called "Islamist jihadist"?
Those who have it in their best interest to maintain the current status quo have made it their goal to vilify Muslims in the public eye. Though it has been done in the recent past with the propaganda against Muslims and places like Iran during the 80's (one need only look at characters in wrestling such as The Iron Sheik or album titles such as "Sheikh Yerbooti") it wasn't until nearly nine years ago that this went into full steam. While the Muslims represented a potential threat that existed in lands far, far away, the events in 2001 signaled a threat in people's back yards. From there, because of this fear engendered by those events, the Muslims became fair game at any and all points. Repeatedly the media pounded (and continues to pound) into the heads of the public "they're terrorists, they're terrorists, they're terrorists" or "they don't believe in women's rights, they want women to be subservient" and the list goes on for giving justifications for attacking Muslims and making them a disgusting site in the public eye. The unrelenting injections into the public's head has taken full effect to either make people loathe Muslims or fear Muslims intently.
Many proofs of this can be seen and the Aafia Siddiqui case is one such. Like the image of the depraved, sex-crazed black man that was fed to America between the time of the "emancipation" of "slaves" until the end of the civil rights era (roughly), the image of the crazed Muslim creates in the public a monster so huge, so threatening, so dark and deadly that the public, when forced to encounter it, would prefer to look away while the guillotine is let go. Do what you must, get rid of that ghastly beast, just keep it away from my sight, never let me anywhere close! And be sure to destroy it completely. In the past, people destroyed the black beast arresting him, insulting him, spitting on him, punching, kicking and attacking him, stringing a rope around his neck and lynching him, setting his dead, swinging body on fire and taking pictures in front of the monster as evidence that this beast was dead and gone, no longer a threat. Today, the process has been transferred to Muslims. The same excuses are used they're a threat, they are deadly, we're doing it for our safety otherwise we will be destroyed by their lunatic ways.
So deep is this fear and hatred that those who have the potential to change things don't even want to hear, they simply believe their big brother is out to protect them so they do what he tells them to do. Who asked during the trial about the missing years of Aafia? Who brought up the allegations of her being tortured and raped, the statements by prisoners who have sworn they heard her screaming and yelling? And what about her children? Who's made any statement about her children who've been missing? Perhaps they don't matter because they are the seed of the looming Muslim Monster that lurks under every bed and behind every bush on each corner of the street. The Monster must not be thought about, and if it is seen, it must be destroyed by the knights in armor 21 Shots to Kill the Muslim Monster.
Her case represents a consistent trend throughout the world where to be a Muslim on trial is an automatic guilty verdict. Regardless of what evidence is brought forth in favor of the defendant and what evidence is lacking that shows inconsistencies in governmental cases, the Muslim who is put on the stand by a western government will almost assuredly be found guilty.
One of the disheartening things about Aafia Siddiqui's case is the fact that though she was missing for some years, this was not looked into during her trial. The judge didn't bring it up, nor did the defense team, financed by the Pakistani government, delve into this crucial fact of the case. Essentially, Siddiqui was portrayed, as many Muslims are, as a lunatic bent on destroying the lives of Americans. On top of this, Siddiqui has three children who entered her native Pakistan with her before she was arrested, two of them were missing and are missing right to this day. Again, this held no weight in the trial at hand. Why was a full picture not painted around Aafia Siddiqui and instead only a biased one which portrayed her as yet another so-called "Islamist jihadist"?
Those who have it in their best interest to maintain the current status quo have made it their goal to vilify Muslims in the public eye. Though it has been done in the recent past with the propaganda against Muslims and places like Iran during the 80's (one need only look at characters in wrestling such as The Iron Sheik or album titles such as "Sheikh Yerbooti") it wasn't until nearly nine years ago that this went into full steam. While the Muslims represented a potential threat that existed in lands far, far away, the events in 2001 signaled a threat in people's back yards. From there, because of this fear engendered by those events, the Muslims became fair game at any and all points. Repeatedly the media pounded (and continues to pound) into the heads of the public "they're terrorists, they're terrorists, they're terrorists" or "they don't believe in women's rights, they want women to be subservient" and the list goes on for giving justifications for attacking Muslims and making them a disgusting site in the public eye. The unrelenting injections into the public's head has taken full effect to either make people loathe Muslims or fear Muslims intently.
Many proofs of this can be seen and the Aafia Siddiqui case is one such. Like the image of the depraved, sex-crazed black man that was fed to America between the time of the "emancipation" of "slaves" until the end of the civil rights era (roughly), the image of the crazed Muslim creates in the public a monster so huge, so threatening, so dark and deadly that the public, when forced to encounter it, would prefer to look away while the guillotine is let go. Do what you must, get rid of that ghastly beast, just keep it away from my sight, never let me anywhere close! And be sure to destroy it completely. In the past, people destroyed the black beast arresting him, insulting him, spitting on him, punching, kicking and attacking him, stringing a rope around his neck and lynching him, setting his dead, swinging body on fire and taking pictures in front of the monster as evidence that this beast was dead and gone, no longer a threat. Today, the process has been transferred to Muslims. The same excuses are used they're a threat, they are deadly, we're doing it for our safety otherwise we will be destroyed by their lunatic ways.
So deep is this fear and hatred that those who have the potential to change things don't even want to hear, they simply believe their big brother is out to protect them so they do what he tells them to do. Who asked during the trial about the missing years of Aafia? Who brought up the allegations of her being tortured and raped, the statements by prisoners who have sworn they heard her screaming and yelling? And what about her children? Who's made any statement about her children who've been missing? Perhaps they don't matter because they are the seed of the looming Muslim Monster that lurks under every bed and behind every bush on each corner of the street. The Monster must not be thought about, and if it is seen, it must be destroyed by the knights in armor 21 Shots to Kill the Muslim Monster.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)