Intra-party disagreement on Syria is good for politics

http://blogs.detroitnews.com/politics/2013/09/10/intra-party-disagreement-syria-good-political-process/

Sep 10, 2013, 9:33 am    

        

• By Dawud Walid

Syria’s 100,000-plus deaths, a small percentage caused by chemical weapons, are a tragedy for the entire human family.

Due to recent fatalities caused by chemical armaments, our national discourse has been dominated by President Obama’s proposal to intervene militarily in Syria. The horrible circumstances there, however, have been of benefit to our nation in the sense that it has broken (if only temporarily) obtuse partisanship among Democrats and Republicans.

Many Democratic congressmen are bucking Obama’s call. The rank and file in the party are not covering down on calls from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California, to support the administration in this endeavor. Even MoveOn.org, which has always strongly advocated for Obama’s agenda, are opposing military action in Syria with e-mail blasts urging people to protest.

Likewise, Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Senator John McCain, R-Arizona, have vigorously supported armed action in Syria, yet are facing strong resistance from fellow party members – one of the most outspoken being Representative Justin Amash, R-Michigan. Moreover, the conservative Heritage Foundation and libertarian-leaning Cato Institute are also voicing opposition, which is being heard by leaders in the GOP establishment.

These are healthy developments in the American political landscape. Especially during the Obama Era, too much of the national discourse among elected officials has been driven purely by the kings and queens of the two parties. So while I’m deeply concerned about events taking place in Syria, I do see a small silver lining in this tragedy. Hopefully, this renewed spirit of debate will extend to other issues from immigration reform to how we can restore our civil liberties that have slowly eroded since the tragedy of 9/11.

 

Doing Your Part in Countering anti-Muslim Bigotry

“Doing Your Part in Countering anti-Muslim Bigotry”

By CAIR-MI Executive Director Dawud Walid

 

Robert Spencer, who is one of America’s most prolific anti-Muslim bigots, recently appeared at Eastern Michigan University to debate the topic, “Is Islam a Religion of Peace?”  The debate, which was sponsored by the conservative Catholic station, Ave Maria Radio, also had a Muslim participant from another state, who is neither a trained speaker nor a scholar in Islam.  This event can serve as a lesson on how we should coordinate and trust our community’s leadership as well as how we should better prepare ourselves to convey Islam to the American society. 

It is not a good idea to enter into a debate in which the playing field is not level.  The topic, “Is Islam a Religion of Peace,” was framed by a known Islamophobe, and it would likely to put any Muslim who engages in the discussion on the defensive.  It’s akin to having a topic of “Is Judaism a religion of fair-dealing?” or “Are Africans a civilized race?”  Such framing in itself infers the opposite.  Moreover, the moderator of the debate took the position of the negative along with Spencer.  The backdrop of it being held at a university only provided the air of academic impartiality. 

Hence, local Muslim leaders did not accept to debate Spencer, and I urged community members not to attend.  Spencer could have shouted in the wind all that he wanted, but a community leader’s engaging him in the debate would have given the appearance of validity to the event geared towards bigotry.  The outside Muslim speaker, who did not confer with local Muslim leaders and organizations, would have better served the community’s interests by consulting with Muslims in Michigan.

Nonetheless, the Qur’an does call us to engage people of other faiths, even debate them, at the appropriate time.  Allah (SWT) says [16:125] in an ayah revealed in Makkah relating to the Prophet (SAWS) discussing Islam with polytheists, “Call to the way of your Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching, and debate them in a way which is best.”  Allah (SWT) also addressed in [29:46] discussing issues with Jews and Christians except those who maliciously work to lie against the Prophet (SAWS) and undermined Muslims, “And do not debate with the People of the Book but in a way which is best except with those committing oppression from them.”

Hence the Qur’an is calling us to use logic when discussing issues with people of other faiths and to debate them, when appropriate, in a non-hostile manner.  It also calls us to be judicious in not only how we debate, but by following a criteria as to who should be engaged in debate. 

Thus, we all need to prepare ourselves by acquiring more Islamic knowledge for better presenting Islam to the broader public.  Moreover, we need to be cognizant of the audience to which we are speaking to.  Both involve some training. 

In regards to when we are called upon to speak about Islam, we must consider if we are in fact the appropriate persons to convey the message, which means that we need to have self-knowledge and humility.  This is what Musa (AS) displayed when he was asked to spread the message of One God to his people. Allah (SWT) said in [20:25 – 20:32]:

He [Musa] prayed: My Lord expand for me my breast, make my matter easy, loosen the knot from my tongue, that they may comprehend my speech, and make for me a minister from my family, Harun my brother, increase through him my strength and let him share my task.

Even a prophet of Allah (SWT) asked for human assistance and felt that he was not the most eloquent to speak in a particular situation.  We should also apply this same standard to ourselves.

The Islamophobia network raises vast sums of money to spread their misinformation in comparison to what Muslim organizations are given to counter it.  Investing in countering Islamophobia should be a higher monetary priority for our charitable giving.  Just as important as raising money for public relations campaigns to counter anti-Muslim hate, there is the need to better cultivate Muslim human capital to better present Islam.  Our human capital is our community’s greatest asset.  

CAIR-MI has taken the lead in training hundreds of Muslims over the years with our Presenting Islam to Fellow Americans (PITFA) sessions.  PITFA teaches best practices for public speaking to how to answer the most frequent and difficult questions asked in America pertaining to Muslims and Islam.  Our trained staff as well as outside experts have empowered members of the community to speak about our faith in churches and libraries and on radio and television programs.  We also continue to provide guidance and talking points to our imams when bigots like Spencer and Terry Jones, the Qur’an burning pastor from Florida, come into town, to when tragedies such as the Boston Marathon bombing take place.

I encourage you to not only financially support CAIR-MI, but also to attend our next PITFA seminar.  Our community needs all hands on deck in the important task of conveying the beautiful message of Islam and to counter anti-Islam propaganda, which leads to a number of issues for us including workplace discrimination and bullying of our children in public schools.

To give monetary support to CAIR-MI’s anti-Muslim hate work or to obtain more information about PITFA, please log on our website at www.cairmichigan.org.

Congressman Gary Peters meets with Arab and Muslim American groups

http://www.arabamericannews.com/news/index.php?mod=article&cat=Community&article=7374

Congressman Gary Peters meets with Arab and Muslim American groups 

By Natasha Dado

Thursday, 09.05.2013, 09:45pm

DEARBORN — Democratic Congressman Gary Peters has been making his rounds to meet with Arab and Muslim American leaders and groups over the past few weeks. Peters is a candidate for U.S. Senate and competing in the race to for U.S. Sen. Carl Levin’s seat.  

 

Peters paid a visit, last Tuesday, Aug. 27, to The Arab American News office, where he met with the paper’s publisher, Osama Siblani, who discussed with the crisis in Syria with Peters, urged him to do all he could to prevent a U.S. strike on the country. 

Peters with members of the ACRL.

On that same day, he attended an event, hosted by the American Arab Chamber of Commerce at Byblos Banquet Hall, where according to representatives from Peters’ office,  he talked to community members about issues surrounding small businesses.  He also met with members of the Arab American Civil Rights League (ACRL) at the organization’s office in Dearborn, along with Executive Director of the Council on American Islamic Relations Dawud Walid. Peters also met with Imam Mohammad Elahi from the Islamic Institute of Knowledge, and other members of the Arab and Muslim communities.  Elahi asked Peters to do all he could to prevent U.S. intervention in Syria and to use dialogue and diplomacy for a democratic transition in Syria. 

 

The Congressman spoke about the complicated nature of the conflict in Syria and recognized the difficulty in dealing with it. He said he would do all he could to reduce the suffering of Syrians, through humanitarian help. 

 

Dawud and members of the ACRL discussed civil rights issues, pertaining to the Muslim American community, with Peters and asked for his support to the End Racial Profiling Act (ERPA) 2013.  

 

The ERPA Bill, which was introduced May 23, 2013, aims to eliminate racial profiling in local and state law enforcement, or government agencies. It would require agencies to have policies and procedures in place to protect against racial profiling. 

 

Racial profiling has become a hot-button issue, from cases ranging from the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, religious questioning of American Muslims who travel across the U.S.- Canada border, to the recently introduced “stop-and-frisk” tactics brought to the Detroit Police Department, which branched off of New York Police Department procedures.  

 

Civil rights groups rip Detroit Police stop-and-frisk plan

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130905/METRO01/309050123/1361/Civil-rights-groups-rip-Detroit-Police-stop-and-frisk-plan

September 5, 2013 at 6:04 pm

 

Dawud Walid, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations-Michigan, speaks with the media on Thursday during a press conference at the ACLU of Michigan office in Detroit to express concern about a Detroit Police Department plan to adopt a stop-and-frisk policy. (Steve Perez / The Detroit News)

Civil rights groups rip Detroit Police stop-and-frisk plan

• George Hunter
• The Detroit News

Detroit— A coalition of civil rights organizations on Thursday expressed concern about a Detroit Police plan to adopt a stop-and-frisk policy in the wake of a federal judge’s decision that found that the practice in New York was unconstitutional.

The Manhattan Institute and Bratton Group, consultants hired to help shape Detroit Police Department policy, pioneered the stop-and-frisk model when they developed New York’s program. Last month, U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin ruled the program was unconstitutional and said the city’s police unfairly targeted blacks and Hispanics.

The consultants are implementing a stop-and-frisk initiative in Detroit, laid out in their contract with the city, in which Traffic Unit officers are training to “prevent street crime through the use of traffic stops.”

Members of the American Civil Liberties Union, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Detroit Coalition Against Police Brutality, the Arab-American Civil Rights League and the National Action Network held a press conference Thursday to voice their opposition to the plan.

“We don’t want STRESS 2.0,” Dawud Walid, director of the Michigan chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations said in reference to the controversial Detroit Police unit, “Stop the Robberies, Enjoy Safe Streets,” which was disbanded by former Mayor Coleman Young after residents complained officers assigned to the unit were violating citizens’ civil rights.

Walid pointed out that police aren’t allowed to stop someone solely based on race, which the federal judge said was happening in New York.

“Some may say that Detroit is 80 percent black, so how can there be racial profiling? But if the police department is involved in looking at just skin color, that doesn’t make our community safer, but it also takes away people’s dignity.”

Ron Scott, director of the Detroit Coalition Against Police Brutality, said his organization already has received dozens of complaints about police improperly stopping residents.

“For quite some time, we’ve gotten complaints from people who were stopped, or in many cases, what amounts to home invasions by police looking for drugs,” Scott said. “Crime can best be combated by the police working with the community, not making people enemy combatants.”

ACLU attorney Mark Fancher pointed out that stop-and-frisk policies are legal.

“As long as it’s carried out properly,” he said. “But there’s the prospect it’ll be carried out in an unconstitutional way. What concerns us is (the Manhattan Institute’s) legal analysis in which they endorse what’s happening in New York. We have a very big problem with that.”

Later Thursday, Walid appeared at the weekly meeting of the Detroit Board of Police Commissioners to complain about police officers’ improper frisking of two Muslim youths and to air his concerns about the department’s stop-and-frisk program.

Detroit Police Chief James Craig insisted Detroit’s program won’t mirror New York’s.

“The Detroit Police Department has not, and will not adopt a stop-and-frisk model like you’ve read about in New York,” he said. “I don’t like using the term ‘stop-and-frisk’ because it has a negative connotation. I refer to it as investigative stops. Sometimes no frisk is even done.”

Craig also pointed out that the police department is under a federal consent decree, and said his officers will adhere to federal guidelines.

Craig also stressed he will have final word about Detroit Police policy.

“Keep in mind, the Manhattan Institute and the Bratton Group are just advisers,” he said. “There’s been no training for a stop-and-frisk model like New York’s. That has not happened and will not happen.”

Craig said the sole focus of the quarterly Command Accountability Meeting, to be held Sept. 24 at police headquarters, will be on the department’s stop-and-frisk policy.

“We’ll explain some of the misunderstandings, and articulate some of the issues surrounding stop-and-frisk,” Craig said.

Syria debate: Sen. Paul’s unfit comments

http://blogs.detroitnews.com/politics/2013/09/04/sen-pauls-comments-fitting-syria-debate/

Sep 4, 2013, 5:05 am          

       

• By Dawud Walid

The national debate over whether America should intervene militarily in Syria is healthy. The executive branch has the duty to be transparent as to why we should take military action against another country.

President Obama made a prudent decision by opening up the debate in Congress, which represents the voices of the people. I hope that our senators and representatives discuss the pros and cons with decorum based upon the long-term interests of the United States, the Syrian people and its neighbors.

But Senator Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, made a troubling point Sunday on “Meet the Press” as to his concerns about the Syrian crisis. Paul said Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad “has protected Christians for a number of decades” – referring to the opposition as “Islamic rebels.”

Our national calculation for foreign intervention should not be based on the premise of some lives being more precious than others. The overwhelmingly majority of the 100,000-plus fatalities and 2 million refugees (1 million of them being children) are Muslims. Paul’s statements infer that Christian lives are more precious than Muslims.

Just as there are rebels who are Muslim, there are a large number of Muslims who are in the Syrian army, including some of its military officers. Paul’s derogatory use of the term,“Islamic,” furthers the Clash of Civilizations framework and paints our military as crusaders.

While discussing the Al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat Al-Nusra, which operates in Syria, is valid, the group should not be mislabeled as “Islamic.” Wanton violence has nothing to do with faith. Furthermore, the majority of Al-Qaeda’s victims follow the Islamic faith.

In the coming days, I hope Congress sticks to substantive issues pertaining to chemical weapons having been used in Syria and the consequences for and against taking military action. The value of life, based on religious affiliation or lack thereof, should not be a part of the conversation.