mohammadalisalih.com Blog

The Cambridge, MA, 911 caller, Lucia Whalen, who reported a possible break-in at the home of Black Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates, did not mention race in the call, according to a statement issued by her attorney and backed up by Cambridge Police Commissioner Robert Haas. The call led to the arrest of Gates and a national debate about racial profiling.
“Contrary to published reports that a ‘white woman’ called 911 and reported seeing ‘two black men’ trying to gain entry into Mr. Gates home, the woman, who has olive colored skin and is of Portuguese descent, said she observed ‘two men’ at the home,” her lawyer’s statement read.
Haas said Whalen, after questioning by the dispatcher during the 911 call, speculated that one of the men “might have been Hispanic.” Haas added:” It was very clear that she wasn’t sure what the men’s race was.”
He acknowledged that in the police report the caller was said to have observed “what appeared to be two black males.” But, later, Hass said report was a summary and not necessarily based on the initial call.
COMMENTS:
1. This African immigrant who believes that his color doesn’t have anything to do with his identity, and is sad – and sometimes angry – because many African Americans seem to be pre-occupied with their color, is just intrigued by Professor Gates’ episode.
2. But, aren’t the Whites also pre-occupied with Blacks’ color, if not with their own?
3. For now, I settle on the believe that, yes, most Whites are pre-occupied with Blacks color. Unfortunately, but understandably, they stereotype it, at best, as the color of crimes and misconduct, and, worst, as the color of un-civilized and primitive people.
3. But the above-mentioned point that Lucia Whalen “has olive-colored skin and is of Portuguese descent” makes me wonder if the Whites themselves are, or beginning to be, pre-occupied with their own lily-white, North European color

“Cosmopolitan” magazine keeps saying that “women were born to attract,” which is fine with this Third World traditional Arab Muslim, But, in rational, secular, individualistic and free America, it doesn’t seem an easy job because women apparently need to balance between the emotional (“I am pretty”) and the rational (“I am equal to you”). On the other hand, men apparently also need to balance between the emotional (“She is sexy”) and the rational (“She is equal to me”), which, at least for this man, is, also, not an easy job.

That was why I was intrigued by this piece from “Forbes” magazine, advising professional women, on “Not What to Wear to Work:
1. “Showing too much cleavage at work is the No. 1 fashion faux pas. Studies show that women who dress in sexy attire in a professional environment are more often passed over for promotions than women who dress more conservatively. Bottom line: If you want to get ahead, ditch the low-cut top.”
2. “Wearing a micro-mini may send the message that you’re trying to compensate for skills you lack in other areas. Also, the knee is a visual anchor. People’s attention will be drawn downward when they approach you, instead of toward your face where it should be. Put on a skirt that you can sit down in without showing too much thigh.”

3. “Summer materials look and feel cool and pretty, but in the light of a staff meeting, they can reveal the outlines of your legs — and much more. Clothes with lining are always a safe choice.”
4. “A rule of thumb when it comes to accessories in the workplace: Less is more. Costume jewelry, when worn in bulk, tends to look tacky. The real thing, on the other hand, can come off as gaudy. A boardroom-ready look includes one show stopper plus subtle accessories. That means if you’re going to put on a chunky beaded necklace, stick to minimal earrings and arm candy.”

Recently, 30 women college students from Saudi Arabia approached and interviewed complete strangers walking around in Babson College in Boston , part of an assignment to, equipped with video cameras, document differences between American and Saudi culture.

“Basically they don’t know much,” said Maria Mahdaly, from Dar al Hekma College, an all-women’s college in Jeddah. “The major difference was they don’t know about us, but we know a lot about America .”

Her fellow, Alaâ Al-Mizyen, agreed. “Everyone comes here knowing about hip-hop, the music, the language, the fashion and the culture,” she said. But, when asked about Saudi Arabia , many Americans responded with, “Isn’t that the place with all of the oil?”

The students said part of the reason Americans might not be familiar with their culture was because Saudi Arabia was “quiet and low-key. To me it’s like a diamond in the rough,” Al-Mizyen said.

One misconception that westerners have about that culture is that Saudi women are oppressed, said Saleha Abedin, vice dean at Dar al Hekma. She added that perhaps it came from the portrayal of Saudi Arabia in the media about how some Saudi women dress. But, she said women were very influential in Saudi society, and that” these students are pioneers and successful ones at that.”

As for the Americans, Emily Tavoulareas who had visited Saudi Arabia as part of the exchange program, said she wore a hijab while she was there and it was not confining as some Americans perceive it to be. “It felt strangely comfortable,” she said. And when she returned to the states she said, “I was craving to have a scarf around my neck.”

“We learn things about our own culture sometimes when we see through others’ eyes,” she said.

COMMENTS:

1, Without mentioning the situation of Saudi women, this piece reflects a problem I faced when I first came to America, about 40 years ago: I found this part familiar: “The major difference was they don’t know about us, but we know a lot about America … Everyone comes here knowing about hip-hop, the music, the language, the fashion and the culture … But, when asked about Saudi Arabia, many Americans responded with, ‘Isn’t that the place with all of the oil?’ ”

2. Until the present time, I am still asked by some Americans about where Sudan was. The recent fame of Sudan among the Americans has been negative: the civil wars in the South an in Darfur .

3. I, and the Saudi women, probably need to be realistic and understand that America is the strongest, biggest and more influencial country in the World.

But, on the hand, the strongest among us has more moral obligation to work to close the gap.

The Valley Club, a suburban private summer preserves on a leafy hillside outside Philadelphia, opened in 1954, as years of pressure to desegregate the city’s public pools neared success.

This year, it looked as if the municipal pools might not open, given Philadelphia’s budget woes. So Alethea Wright, the director of Creative Steps day camp reached a contract with the Valley Club, and on the Monday before July 4, her 65 children — black and Hispanic, kindergartners to seventh-graders — jumped into the cool water.

Within minutes, she said, they were racing back to her, saying they had overheard people making racial remarks about them. “A couple of the children ran down saying, ‘Miss Wright, Miss Wright, they’re up there saying, “What are those black kids doing here?” ‘

The Club president John Duesler said: “There is a lot of concern that a lot of kids would change the complexion . . . the atmosphere of the club.”

Later, he changed his explanation in a statement that read like this: “We had originally agreed to invite the camps to use our facility, knowing full well that the children from the camps were from multi-ethnic backgrounds. Unfortunately, we quickly learned that we underestimated the capacity of our facilities and realized that we could not accommodate the number of children from these camps. All funds were returned to the camps and we will re-evaluate the issue at a later date to determine whether it can be feasible in the future.”

COMMENTS:

1.”WSC” (Whites Superiority Complex), in my vocabulary, refers to situations when Whites behave arrogantly because they are more civilized than other races. I believe the arrogance part is somewhat natural as people tend to feel superior over those who are less civilized, less educated, less affluent and less beautiful. But, by adding “complex,” I try to qualify this arrogance as not healthy, not correct and not moral.

2. I am a Northern Sudanese, and in Sudan we, the Muslims/Arabs, are more civilized, educated and affluent than the tribes of the South. Yes, we have this superiority feeling, and, yes, it is a “complex” because it shouldn’t be.

3. So, in America, I understand the feelings of Mr. John Duesler and other Whites at the Valley Club. I understand the subtlety, the silence, the quick eye contacts, the what-is-going-on and, when afraid to be heard by others, the stop-that, and, when discovered by others, the you-shouldn’t-have-said-that.

But, it is not correct, for them and for us.

Conservative Republicans were outraged at Supreme Court nominee, Sotomayor, because she said “wise Latina” could be smarter than White men and because, apparently throughout her adult live, and especially at college, she confirmed her identity as a proud Latina. This outrage seemed to be based on the assumption that whiteness is not, in itself, a distinct identity.

Being White, for these Conservatives, seemed to be a neutral condition and a natural thing. And, so, any “identity,” say being Black, Brown or Yellow, female or gay, seemed to be judged by them against their supposedly “objective” standard.

Three years ago, Justice Alito, during his hearings, talked about the impact of his background as the son of Italian immigrants on his rulings. So, why couldn’t Sotomayor mention that her Puerto Rican background might be relevant to her work?

Conservative Sen. Jeff Sessions said, with a straight face, that heritage and experience could have no bearing on a judge’s work.

Sotomayor’s” wise Latina” speech meant that everyone had a unique personal history that had to be acknowledged before it can be overcome, if it had to be overcome.

Actually, from my experience, it shouldn’t be overcome. .

Yes, justice is supposed to be blind. But for most of history, it hasn’t been. In America, it is probably an irony that women, Blacks and Latinos are acutely aware of how the view of justice has evolved, or been forced to evolve.

Suppose I was nominated to the Supreme Court, I wouldn’t wait for someone to ask me before I declared the following:

1.My color (and weight, hight and the shape of my nose, lips and ears) didn’t have anything to do with my identity.

2. The core of my identity is my faith. Because I am a Muslim, it is, of course, Islam, but I could have been a Christian, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, or could have been worshipping a cow, a statue, a tree – or myself. Anyway, there is a faith that I strongly believe and use it as a guide in my life.

3. Because the faith I believe in is, as I see it, built on freedom and justice, I will do my best to interpret the law accordingly. Therefore, it seems difficult for me to understand how a judge could be “neutral.”

4. If a judge should be “neutral,” why did the Supreme Court, interpreting the Constitution, issue the “separate but equal,” and half-a-century later, interpreting the same Constitution, declared that it was wrong?

President Obama’s speech marking the 100th anniversary of the NAACP’s founding was described by some a “tough love” message to Black Americans.

A century ago, when the NAACP was founded, there were lynchings, race riots and Jim Crow segregation in the South. Today, all of that is fast-receding history. Some, Blacks and some murmuring Whites, wondered whether there was still a role the NAACP.

Obama said there were two roles: (1) nationally, advocacy. (2) locally, mentoring children and improve performance in schools.

Obama embodies three trends among Black Americans

First, he is the son of a Kenyan immigrant.

Second, he is biracial; the product a Black-White marriage that was, long time ago, was illegal in many states.

Third, he belongs to a new generation; not post-race, but less race, and less pre-occupation with color.

Obama said: “If we haven’t already reached this point, we’re getting close to reaching it, where there are going to be more African Americans in this country who never experienced anything remotely close to Jim Crow than those who lived under Jim Crow.”

Eugene Robinson, a “Washington Post” Black columnist whom I said, many times before in these writings, that he suffered from Black Inferiority Complex (BIC) because of his pre-occupation with Black color, seemed to have been mellowed because of this Obama factor.

He wrote: “But we have to accept this new reality, because I can’t argue with Obama when he says that black America’s growing diversity is ‘all for the good.’ “

Obama added: “One of the ways that I think that the civil rights movement weakened itself was by enforcing a single way of being black — being authentically black. And, as a consequence, there were a whole bunch of young black people — and I fell prey to this for a time when I was a teenager — who thought that if you were really ‘down’ you had to be a certain way. And oftentimes that was anti-something. You defined yourself by being against things as opposed to what you were for you.”

Three cheers for Obama.

Henry Gates, Summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Yale. MacArthur “genius grant” recipient, acclaimed historian, Harvard professor and PBS documentarian. One of Time magazine’s “25 Most Influential Americans” in 1997, and holder of 50 honorary degrees, was arrested by a Cambridge, MA, White police. Gates didn’t have his house key, after returning from a trip to China, and thought of entering through the back door, and that was when a neighbor apparently thought he was a burglar, and called the police.

Gates and the police gave differing accounts of what happened next.

Racial profiling became a national issue in the 1990s, when highway police on major drug delivery routes were accused of stopping drivers simply for being black.

But, Greg Ridgeway, who has a Ph.D in statistics and studies racial profiling for the RAND research group, said: “You’re never going to be able to (statistically) prove racial profiling. There’s always a plausible explanation.”

Black Congressman Danny Davis didn’t agree, but didn’t disagree. He had no doubt that profiling is real: He said he was stopped while driving in Chicago in 2007 for no reason other than the fact he is black.

Some people pointed out that Gates might have violated the cardinal rule of avoiding arrest: Do not antagonize the cops.

Apparently Gates shouted: “Are you not answering me because I’m a black man in America?”

COMMENTS:

1.Many times, I expressed my sadness and anger at Black Americans because of their general pre-occupation with their color.

2. Many times, I said that my color doesn’t have anything to do with my identity.

3. If I looked at myself as Black, others, in a way or another, will do the same. Also, I would tend to explain things that happen to me, good or bad, on the basis of my color.

4. I am glad that President Obama is bringing a new message to Black (and White) Americans. But, because of this pre-occupation of Professor Gates with his color, I am still sad and angry.

Dr. Jok Madut Jok, Southern Sudan, formerly Associate Professor, U. of Loyola Marymount, CA .

“With all due respect to the many considered opinions expressed over the past several days on this list, i shiver in disappointment, i screech from exasperation, that so many of my northern brothers have expended their valuable time beating their chest at times about the might of their Islamic culture, or offensively paternalistic about the southerners at other times, or simply mistaken about the variety of southern opinion on independence/separation/ referendum. but before i rush to explain myself further, let me introduce myself to you all. i am Jok Madut Jok, and i am currently living in a small village called Luonyaker in Gogrial East County, Warrap state, possibly a place you will not find on the map, but nevertheless connected to the world via international humanitarian aid, and the new county government, which has installed a V-sat so that we can have internet in the bush.
On the issue of whether the south is or is not going to separate, i find it all puzzling that we sit wherever we are and crack our heads on how the south is going to vote. Why? Is it a concern how the south is going to vote, when in fact, there is an agreement that has called for that referendum? If someone is opposed to southern separation, why would they agree to such a referendum and then try to predict the outcome? such speculations and reinterpreting of what southern leaders say in public speeches simply disregards the fact that whatever the referendum brings is a democratic exercise that all the Sudanese people, through their representatives to the negotiations, have agreed to.
Personally, I have never felt like I owe the Sudan state any allegiance. Referendum or no referendum, I will never become a Sudanese in the way that this states want southerners to be citizens. i have never lived in the north, never find anything in common with northern Sudanese even though they were my colleagues in university. Then there is the whole history of violent relationships that has characterized the better part of the last 50 years, a history that is not just vividly memorable, but painted on peoples’ bodies. for me, that is not a history upon which to build a unified state. it is a history of violence that can only produce more violence if unity is imposed. my friends, that is an opinion that I am sure most southerners living in the south during the last two decades will agree with.
But whether or not south will be a “prefailed state,” ala economist magazine, which many northerners on this list are now taking as evidence for the failure of the south to govern itself or even worth the respect from northern citizens, let me state clearly that northerners shedding tears because southerners are supposedly killing one another are simply paternalistic. why is it ok for the northern government to kill people en mass here in the south and no one lifts a hand in the north to protest state violence against innocent civilians here, but now everyone is crying that southerners are killing one another? Is it ok for the north to kill us but unacceptable for us to kill one another? Or is that the ultimate case of hypocrisy?
As for those counting small signs here and there as evidence of southern independence, i tell them that those signs mean nothing in the face of the referendum. let us just exercise our democratic right and that will be that.
Peace to you all.”

YASEN YASEN, JUBA:
“I have already sent you several messages concerning the situation in South Sudan. Messages from someone who is living in the South and not theorizing from an armchair in New York. The South IS independent now (de facto), and will be de jure by January 2011, possibly before. The Southerners have already and unequivocally made up their minds. Independence and nothing but Independence. They do not call it Separation. Let me give you some examples to illustrate my point:

1.The curricula and textbooks in the first 12 years of pre-university education are now either Kenyan or Ugandan and not Sudanese.
2.The courts use the Kenyan/Ugandan laws as well as the common sense of the judge concerned but not Sudanese laws.
3.The anthem and flag of the SPLM is used to the exclusion of the Sudanese ones in ALL occasions.
4.The Parliament of the South has not so far promulgated a single law. It is a debating society and only discusses laws passed by the Khartoum Parliament and to annul them and make them void for the South.
5. Official correspondence in Arabic from Khartoum is not read and is shoveled into the garbage basket. Nobody reads any document in Arabic. 6. Mosques are forbidden henceforth to raise the Azzan from a microphone and heavy taxes are levied on them.
6. No Arabic is allowed in the University of Juba.
7.The galabia and the tobe are nowhere to be seen.
8. Arabi Juba is on its way out and will soon be extinct.
9. Kabli or Wardi are unheard of.
10. Mulah and Kisra are no longer eaten.
11. Northern Sudanese culture has been muffled and trampled on. They say: we are free, man.
12. The telephone code is that of Uganda.
13. Israeli companies control 90% of the hotel industry in Juba.
14.The Government of South Sudan is buying massive quantities of arms and the shipment hijacked by the Somalis has now arrived in Juba and will be sent to Abeyei.

Last Friday in Kadougli (which will be part of South Sudan Republic) Silva Kiir said that separation with peace is better than unity with war. He meant that if the plebiscite resulted in unity, then there will be war. What other proof do you need, Mohammad? This statement sums it all.

And on and on and on. Come for a week to see for yourself. You will be my guest. Tell me if you need a return air ticket. You will wish to come through Nairobi and not Khartoum, so that the security people will not be on your heels.

But you look like an Obama.”

DAVID IGNATIUS, ON ROBERT MCNAMARA, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE DURING VIETNAM WAR (IGNATIUS’S FATHER WAS AN ASSISTANT:
1.McNamara “conveyed an audacity not of hope, but of reason … (he was) an ultimate rationalist … (But) the generals and admirals didn’t want to be rationalized; they had built a mighty machine to face the Soviet Union … (So)that was his greatest sin, that he sacrificed young American lives without fully believing in the possibility of victory.”
2. “Vietnam shattered the rationalist faith. Here was a peasant enemy, fighting in what looked to us like pajamas and living off handfuls of rice, that, somehow, persisted against all of America’s military might.”
3. “Be careful of the certainties that McNamara conveyed; be worry of the notion that smart people can solve any problem only if they just try hard enough.”
COMMENTS:
1.Mr. Ignatius, a supporter of the war on terrorism, of the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and the current drone killings of innocent people in Pakistan, is a hypocrite who doesn’t want to apply the same rational – no pun intended – of “peasant enemy” to Muslims who decided to sacrifice their lives to liberate their countries from US occupation.
2. However, Mr. Ignatius is correct when he criticized applying the “rationalist faith” in Vietnam, and the “certainties … that smart people can solve any problem only if they just try hard enough.”
3. Muslims or no Muslims, Mr. Ignatius may want to go further and ask why a “peasant enemy” was able to defeat the US “mighty machine”. Could it be that he had a strong faith (God forbid, a Buddhist one) that he should sacrifice his live to liberate his country from US occupation? Could it be that spiritualism, whatever spiritualism, is stronger than rationalism, like that identified with McNamara?