A Simple Critique of The Muslim Brotherhood

What follows is a very simple critique of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) and their political Freedom and Justice Party (FJP). There are many more issues that can be raised here, but for now this is the starting point.

I cannot deny that the MB have fulfilled a gap in social security in Egypt for years, with their health care and education programs. That being said, they have been too chummy with the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) this year in an effort to gain political clout and freedom. Additionally, they appear to be incredibly out of touch with some of the bigger issues, and their inability to make a public statement against the recent violence (which left over 2000 injured and 41 dead) indicates that they would rather win an election than do what is right. Add to that, recent interviews with FJP members are rather embarrassing in their inability to articulate any sort of real critique of the violence that essentially brought central Cairo to a standstill for 6 days.

Furthermore, when voting actually started there were numerous reports of them defying election laws by campaigning at polling stations (despite US State department announcements that there were no issues to report). While I am sure they are not the only party to do this, they are definitely the most organized and the most visible. As a result, rallying respect for them given their subtle manipulation of circumstances and getting into bed with SCAF despite everything that SCAF has done recently is almost impossible. Since they are the largest and most organized party in Egypt, a full throated condemnation of the violence would have been much more meaningful- as it is, the hard line stance has lost much support from many of their youth contingent who actually defied official orders not to go to Tahrir square in solidarity with those opposing the violence that ensued at the hand of the police and military. Given the ratio  of youth in relation to the rest of the population, their disregard for youth opinion illustrates how out of touch they are with an ever changing and increasingly younger population.

While the above may be limited to certain events that remained fairly removed from the majority of the population, there are bigger issues at play. Since they have gotten into bed with SCAF, and SCAF is obviously reluctant to hand over power to a civilian government despite what they say (just look at the articles they tried to introduce that would make them exempt to civilian oversight) what’s to say they won’t do a little back scratching to ensure both remain in power? They both need some legitimacy from outside. The MB and SCAF can supply that legitimacy for the other, in a way that no one else can. If the MB wins the majority of the seats, they will have a majority of the voices writing the constitution. I think their relationship with SCAF is definitely something that needs to be examined and critiqued. You say that they did not want to dominate the election, but winning half of the seats (don’t forget the total number of seats they were vying for did increase on more than one occasion as the election neared) is still dominating the election giving the shear number of parties running. Winning half of the seats puts them in control. Perhaps they’re not going for a 90% election rate that was so common under NDP rule, but they’re hoping that they will be seen as unobtrusive and not the dominating party that they would still be. It’s a game of semantics and it’s all carefully orchestrated.

I don’t necessarily have a problem with the MB in government. Certainly not based on religion. My problem is that more so than most of the other parties, I really don’t trust them. They have had almost fifty years to perfect the subtle manipulation of reality to be able to exist without crossing the line into the forbidden; this is a skill that will continue to serve them well as the country moves forward but at a cost that may not be revealed until it is too late.

Adding to my distrust is recent research I have conducted related to a critique of North African Islamic parties and Islamic banking. I have little use for religous rhetoric when, for example, Islamic banking usually ends up costing the people more than traditional banking systems. It’s pure hypocrisy wrapped up in a religious bow to make people feel better.

Sports Culture and the Demise of Academia

The world is watching in astonishment as the news of the sex scandal at one of America’s most prestigious public universities unfolds. it astounds me that people can express such levels of outrage at the dismissal of high level administrators for possibly ruining Penn State University’s (PSU) football reputation for years to come. Has our love of sports reached the level where pedophilia is now excusable?

While head coach Joe Paterno was not linked to the scandal as a participant, his dismissal came as ordered by PSU’s board of trustees, who ultimately rejected Paterno’s promise to retire at the end of the current season. Paterno is accused of not doing enough to bring attention to former assistant coach Jerry Sandusky’s reported sodomy of a child in the PSU football locker room. While Sandusky was no longer a coach at the time Paterno became aware of the situation, he was permitted to use the facilities in his charitable work with at risk children. It was these children from with whom Sandusky committed these egregious and unforgivable acts. A student allegedly witnessed Sandusky sodomizing a child in the PSU locker room, reported it to Paterno. At this point Paterno reported it to higher-ups who apparently did nothing. While Paterno made an effort to bring justice, the fact that he did not pursue justice when the university’s administration failed to act is shameful. It is for this reason that he is being dismissed.

What is tragic is that public reaction has condemned Paterno’s (affectionately called ‘Joe Pa’ by fans) dismissal as an end to PSU’s football. Riots erupted Wednesday night after the announcement of Paterno’s dismissal was made. This sequence of events just highlights the fact that America’s sport culture trumps justice and morality. We often see forgiveness being extended to professional athletes after gaffes, indiscretions and even criminal acts. While these acts are usually greeted with public outcry, the potential loss of a beloved sports team quickly warms the heart to the offender and all is forgotten.

The acts in this case, however, are so egregious they disturb the very fundamentals of what is typically considered moral. That the injustice to the coach is more important than the injustice to the numerous child victims and the victims that could have been prevented if action had been taken years ago when the crimes were first discovered is heart breaking. As a society we champion our sports and make heroes of the star athletes. We put millions of dollars into attracting the star athletes, building the finest facilities and creating spectacles of matches. Meanwhile the United States trails behind in math and science achievements.

If only academia was championed in the same manner that sports are. If the same investments were made into building the greatest libraries and state of the art research facilities. There was a time that building the most envious library in the world was something that was yearned for. Sadly, sports facilities take precedence and library renovations fall to the bottom of the renovation wish list. At Rutgers University, a public university in New Jersey, more than $115 million dollars has been spent on athletics since 2006. This has come at the expense of faculty raises and ultimately general expenditures on academic related items.

Institutions of learning are supposed to be more than places to throw a ball around. They are supposed to be places where character is built; where honesty and integrity are emphasized; where priorities are determined and where communities are formed. How can an institution hope to stand up and promote these things ever again when they have failed on the most basic level of humanity has been violated and then subsequently covered up and lied about. How can we instill ethics in students when the very people who are supposed to be teaching it are the ones that are violating them? Morality is subjective to a certain extent, but it had been previously fairly well established that pedophilia was an abominable offense to everyone. The simple fact is that this revelation illustrates that morality is getting a make over and even the unthinkable is now acceptable if the price is right. In this case, the price of losing the reputation and the income from football outweighed the sanctity of childhood.

Egypt Today Same as Yesterday

A new LA Times article highlights the growing skepticism that Egypt’s ruling Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) will relinquish power. Instead, it is expected that they will secretly be pulling the strings behind the scenes even after parliamentary elections begin in November. It is surprising that people are shocked by this revelation. There has been great discussion around this scenario since SCAF took power in February, in what is most accurately described as a bloodless military coup.

The reality is that Egypt’s military has been ruling the country since 1952 when Nasser and the Free Officers took control of the country following King Farouk’s hasty departure. In the sixty years since this, all three of Egypt’s presidents have been military officers. First with Nasser, followed by Sadat and finally Mubarak. This unwavering interruption of military supremacy has given SCAF great reason to fear an actual transition to civilian rule and democracy.What would happen to their power if well, they weren’t in power.

It is no wonder that recent decrees aim at tightening military control in the wake of a civilian rule. In the new measures, SCAF is exempt from parliamentary oversight of its budget, has veto rights over parliamentary legislation regarding military affairs, and is deemed the “sole protector of the constitution.”

Not much has changed in the eight months since SCAF took power. Emergency laws and military trials for civilians are still the status quo; the police and military apparatus is still resisting change. A recent op-ed piece by prominent Egyptian blogger Alaa Abd El Fattah addresses these issues in a piece published in English by the Guardian. Shortly after this piece was published, SCAF announced the planned release of over 300 political prisoners arrested since February in an obvious attempt to undo much of the negative and mounting pressure from a very discontent masses.

In the wake of the 9 October protests that resulted in 27 deaths at the hand of the military, including a famed Egyptian activist Mina Daniel, public discontent is mounting and public criticism is multiplying. In the meantime, SCAF is turning it’s attention not to reforming the system, but to erecting the world’s largest flagpole. Simultaneously using that occasion to expand the offices of the Ministry of Interior (MOI) which has also received its share of protests and calls for reform.

What’s more disconcerting, from a non-Egyptian perspective, is that fact that despite the thousands who have died and the estimated 12,000 plus people arrested and tried in military courts, the West has done virtually nothing to curb the behavior. Egypt receives the second largest foreign aid package (second only to Israel) from the United States. Much of America’s “world power” credibility had been lost in the realm of public opinion (both domestically and internationally) when they continued to waiver on a stance with regards to Mubarak and whether he should step down or not. By the time a decisive “enough is enough” line was expressed, too many people had died and the regime had shown its true colors for the majority of people to continue to support America’s role in the region.

Unfortunately, what has followed Mubarak is simply more of the same; they are cut from the same cloth after all, they all wore the same uniform. Yet despite the rising death toll (the overall death count fails to be reported for individual acts of violence. While many outlets discussed the 29 who died on 9 October, no reports added those numbers to the casualty counts from the other clashes that occurred since February. Egypt continues to receive unwavering support from the United States. We continue to see it as a strategic ally; a beacon into the Middle East peace process. However, as Egypt begins to evolve its relations with Israel and as the growing public begins to demand a more hands-off American foreign policy in the region, perhaps it is time that America reevaluate its own position in the region.

It continues, however, that America continues to want to play a “world power” role, yet they fail to publicly condemn SCAF and their tyrannical and blood thirsty methods of ruling the country. For a country whose modus operandi claims to be exporting democracy, America does little to actually foster or encourage it. While it is understandable that American interests have to play a part in policy decisions, the level of hypocrisy that the US is willing to reach to pay lip service to democracy without actually fostering it globally is getting absurd. Egypt is grasping at straws to try to achieve the freedom that they fought for. The United States has an opportunity to show the people what being a true leader and promoter of democracy means, and yet they continue to fund the tools of oppression that SCAF uses to suppress and oppress the people.

AIPAC’s continued dictation of foreign policy is going to do nothing to reclaim dwindling international support for America and is setting dangerous ground for global security and relations. And while the US hails democracy as the most important and only truly acceptable form of government, the reality is that democracy is only important when the country is a strategic ally. The US still deems Egypt important, perhaps the reality has yet to catch up with them. However, the most important thing they can do is cut all funding to SCAF until full and true transitions to democracy can be made. Perhaps if then presidential elections wouldn’t be scheduled for 2013 (despite early promises by SCAF that they would hold them within six months of their taking power); perhaps then they wouldn’t try to control the “democratic” process of rewriting the nation’s constitution; perhaps then they would stop oppressing the people for calling them out on their antics; perhaps then the United States could start to reclaim its name as a true supporter of democracy and leader in world politics.

US Hypocricy Continues to Mount

Palestine has been recognized as a member state of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and with that came the abrupt halt of US funding to the UN body.

Palestine was admitted as a member state to UNESCO following a vote of its 173 member states. Full membership required  a simple majority. Of the 173 countries eligible to vote, 107 voted in favor of Palestine’s enhanced membership status, 14 states voted against and 40 abstained. Unlike the security council of the main UN body, no country has veto power in UNESCO. Each country is granted one vote. The democratic process overwhelming voted to recognize full statehood of Palestine.

Unfortunately, yet again, the US has declared this process to be unacceptable. A law passed in the 1990s by Congress dictated that all US funding would be cut to any UN body that admitted Palestine as a state. While ordinarily there is a clause included in such laws that gives the president override powers in cases of national interest and security. In this particular case, this override clause was intentionally omitted from the bill.

Within hours of the UNESCO vote, and in accordance with this law, the US declared that they would no longer pay their approximately $60 million in dues. The US contribution totals approximately 20 percent of UNESCO’s total budget. A wonderful op-ed piece published by Al Jazeera English explains the unfortunate position the US now finds itself in. In brief, by stopping funding the US has further alienated a weakening support from within the Middle East and Arab states. As the US continues to lose legitimacy, its unflinching support of Israel will only further expand the rift. This bill also highlights the enormous power of the Israel lobby, AIPAC, in US politics. It is the most powerful and influential lobbying group in the country. Political candidates who are deemed as a threat by AIPAC will never get elected. This vote also puts the US in continued precarious situations and it depends on UNESCO (and other UN bodies) to maintain its national interests around the globe.

What’s more troubling, however, is that this sets a dangerous precedent. As it seems inevitable that Palestine will continue to be welcomed as a full member state in other UN bodies as a result of this vote, the US will have to cut funding to all of them. It seems wrong that they should be allowed to cut funding to various UN bodies yet retain veto power in the security council of the main UN body.

Academics and political analysts have debated the role of the UN in the changing global order, with many saying the organizations legitimacy is hampered by the archaic system that has continued into the new millennium. Established to reward the allied states in the aftermath of WWII (and ultimately punish the axis powered states) the right to veto has never been reexamined. Repealing this right would require and entire overhaul of the UN as we know it; not surprisingly there isn’t a rush to examine this prospect by the powers that be.

As the US continues to fight an increasing popular fight for sovereignty and self-determination, its global bargaining power and heavy weight status is dwindling quickly. While the US and Israel are strong allies, and the reasons historically are comprehensible, does the current global political atmosphere allow for such absolutes when American popularity around the world is diminishing rather rapidly?

While the UN is in need of an organizational rethink and overhaul, the US’s foreign unwavering foreign policy perhaps needs to be reexamined to be a little more concerned with its own national security and national interests.

The Tribulations of Nation-Building

The theoretical discourse of nation-building is rather abundant, but I find it hard to generalize because so much is based on where a nation is coming from. History is paramount. But so are the political forces in neighboring countries. As South Sudan tries to build itself up, political forces from Sudan are easily refocusing attention away from other nation-building activities.

It was announced Friday that the national capital of South Sudan would no longer be Juba, which has served as the administrative capital since 2005′s Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA); the new capital would now be Ramciel, a more central location much less densely populated. This move, while seemingly sporadic, was actually initially put forward by Dr John Garang, South Sudan’s former leader who was killed in a plane crash shortly after negotiating and signing the CPA. The relocation was later shelved as pressure from Juba’s elders requested that Juba remain the national capital. However, land issues has once again reasserted pressure for the move, which is expected to take 3-5 years to complete.

These nation-building activities however, are not the only source of focus. As fighting continues in border regions, Sudan’s Khartoum based government is cracking down on political opposition movements, which has resulted in tens of thousands of inhabitants fleeing their homes. This has culminated in the banning of one of Bashir’s major opposing political parties, the SPLM-North. The SPLM is the ruling party of South Sudan.

The fighting that has broken out between Khartoum and South Sudan loyalists/ sympathizers is startling. For three months, small scale war has broken out across the border region, starting in Abyei spreading to South Kordofan and now reaching Blue Nile State. This has sent many Sudanese into South Sudan for refuge and even into neighboring Ethiopia, which is taking a major role in peace-keeping and peace negotiating. There are several issues to address when looking at the fighting. Not only does this serve as a major security threat to the infant nation, but it is also prioritizing resource allocation to increased self defense and redirecting focus and attention (at least in part) away from infrastructure building.

Perhaps the intensified conflict will finally put more pressure on both sides to finalize a border between the feuding states. In a sign of frustration and contempt. South Sudan is making good on its word to redirect oil through Kenya for export, bypassing the traditional route through Sudan. It is currently trucking the oil via caravan to Kenya (according to South Sudan TV news reports). This is further cutting off much needed financial revenue to Khartoum, and mostly likely only serving to further fuel the hostilities on the part of Sudan.

As this situation continues to play out, additional external pressure is needed on both sides to ensure that this does not escalate further. More widespread media attention is needed, while human rights groups continue to decry the aggression. As the fighting in South Kordofan continues to be investigated, only time will tell to what extent the atrocities extend.

Syria Beware

As it appears yet another authoritarian rule of the Middle East has fallen, with the events in Libya changing dramatically in favor of the opposition movement over the last 48 hours, attention needs to return to Syria, where Assaad and his government seem as determined as ever to hold out until the very end. As news of Libya broke around the world, the embattled Syrian leader has reiterated that Syria will not meet the same fate, while further vowing that force (read opposition) would be dealt with “firmly.”

Recently, Syria’s UN Ambassador recently head-to-head with Anderson Cooper, in a sad attempt to reaffirm the party line. According the interview, there has been no use of violence against peaceful protesters; there has been no mutilation of children; there has been no death of civilians. According to Ja’fari, the force that we has been exhibited at the hands of the regime has been targeted towards dangerous terrorists.

Is this foreshadowing of the future, or is Assaad confronting his fate and simply trying to hold on to the last straws of power? While I hope for the latter, his actions leave little reason for hope. Claims of possible elections within the year don’t sound promising. This has been a popular global technique used to calm the masses while maintaining power for decades. The promise of elections no longer means anything, especially with the ease at which they can be falsified. The Syrian government is notoriously restrictive in their admittance of foreign overseers and journalists now, the chances of Syria allowing international monitors in to any future election are slim; Ja’fari’s interview, however, did signal a possible shift in this policy as a way to quiet international condemnation.

International pressure has been increased with President Obama finally publicly calling for Assaad to step down, a declaration that is long overdue. The calls have been joined by new sanctions. International pressure has had little impact on the Ba’athist regime that has ruled for the last forty years (both under Bashar and his father, Haafaz). It’s not a matter of if Assaad will go, it’s a matter of when (all regimes do come to an end eventually be it by choice, force or death). The issue of concern is how many more lives are going to be lost as Assaad desperately clings to power?

Libya!

Most days I conclude that I have made grave errors in my choice of MA, realizing that the thought of getting stuck in life would prevent me from going back to school if I were to wait. As a result, I applied to one school with the intentions of continuing the same course of studies as my BA. This has been my life. I have a BA and MA in Middle East studies. While this a perfectly respectable career path, it by no means accurately represents my changing desires and interests.

Every now and then, however, events happen and it makes me wonder, maybe I was right all along. Maybe this is the field that I’m supposed focus on. This year has been unusually true in this regard; today has been especially so. As the world began to lose interest in the events of the region, Libya has pulled a fast one and the opposition has made it to the country’s capital, Tripoli. Al Jazeera is reporting that Saif al-Islam, Muammar’s delusional son and former supporter of democracy in Libya (at least according to his lip service), has been detained and Gaddafi’s oldest son, Mohamed, has surrendered.

It seems unlikely that things will end favorably for the despot who has ruled the country for over 40 years, since coming to power in 1969 via a coup d’etat. The oppositional Transitional Council has offered Gaddafi and his family safe passage out of the country should he surrender, but Colonel Gaddafi has too much of an ego to go off into the sunset with his tail between his legs. Even if he did make such a subtle departure, where would he go? To date I have not heard of anyone offering refuge to the leader or his family should they decide to leave. Saudi Arabia is now hosting both Ben Ali, Tunisia’s shamed former leader, and Saleh, Yemen’s wounded (though determined to return) embattled president. It seems unlikely that in the wave of change sweeping Egypt and the bitter battles still being waged in Syria that either country would offer to host the controversial figure.

Despite the offer of safe passage, he has still yet to announce his departure. Nothing in his history suggests to me that as of right now this is an option. He is still calling on his supporters to go out into the streets and defend Tripoli and his reign. However, as events are progressing rapidly, it may only be a matter of time before the reality of life or death knocks on his door. At which time, he’s just arrogant enough to choose death. As the next couple of days go by, the end game will surely become more obvious, but for today, the events of the last 36 hours will hopefully re-energize the opposition in Yemen (because despite Saleh’s departure his family and allies are still in control) and Syria where international pressure is mounting.

The International Face of Whom?

Rising to prominence during Egypt’s uprising for her tweets of the events, Gigi Ibrahim has gone on to become the international face of the revolution. But who is she really representing? The poor working class? The conservative majority? The farmers and peasants? Those earning 400LE (or less than $70) a month?

By her own admission she didn’t have any knowledge of political movements in Egypt prior to “taking a class” at the American University in Cairo. In another interview she blamed the state of Egypt on the last ten years of American foreign policy.

Since the protests that led to the ouster of Mubarak, she has become a voice of Egypt to America, despite her repeated criticisms of both America’s and Obama’s foreign policy and continued display of ignorance to all things political. She has been profiled for NPR, BBC and even shared the cover of Time magazine for her participation in the revolution.

The great irony, however, is that her privilege is in part what the demonstrators were protesting. For a girl who comes from and lives within upper-middle class society, she has undoubtedly never had to struggle for survival. Her attendance at one of the region’s most expensive and exclusive private universities further attests to this.

A number Egyptian and non-Egyptian academics are embarrassed by her and her ignorance, and less privilaged Egyptians feel as though she’s not an accurate representation due to her lack of political awareness and understanding and her privileged background. Her recurrent vanity and dismissive tone are encapsulated into her glamor shots and interviews and do little to further the dialogue in any meaningful way.

While she is not alone in her blogging/ tweeting sphere of Egyptian activism, the other prominent bloggers actively documenting the revolution have a much longer history of activism, predating the revolution and doing so at a time when political blogging was risking imprisonment. Their arrival in Tahrir was expected and their repeated analysis of their country illustrates a deep political understanding, both domestically and internationally, that goes beyond “America is the cause of the problems,” that comes through in Ms. Ibrahim’s discussions.

That’s not to say that America hasn’t influenced the state of affairs in the country or the region, they most certainly have. It would be naive, however, to dismiss the historical roles of France, Britain and Greece and the more modern roles of Saudi Arabia and the other OPEC nations. As the guarder of the Suez Canal, the politics of Egypt is in fact everyone’s supposed “business”.

So how can we explain American media’s love-affair with Gigi? She is a pretty, young, non-veiled Egyptian girl who has come to represent the new “liberal, liberated” Egypt to the rest of the world. She is America’s vision for a post-Mubarak Middle East. In true Neo-Orientalist fashion, we have chosen to promote the cover rather than the content to satisfy our own discourse.

Volunteerism is a Commitment Not a Hobby

I see a lot of posts on a Cairo discussion board by people looking to volunteer. Most want to work with children, refugees or displaced people: three of the most vulnerable groups. Unfortunately, in my experience many volunteers do it in an attempt to build a resume, get in to college/ graduate school or make themselves look good for some other self-serving purpose. They apply for internships or volunteer positions with the intention of giving enough time to put it on their resume without fully committing. Receiving what they want or need from the experience and disregarding the responsibility that comes from these experiences, particularly with vulnerable groups.

What many people don’t seem to realize, or don’t care about, is that short-term volunteer stints (or internships) can actually do more harm than good. While the volunteers are wrong for wanting to exploit these groups for their own gain, the organizations that allow it are also complicit in the problem for allowing this behavior to continue.

This is not to say that volunteerism is bad or that organizations who use volunteers are malicious or cruel institutions. On the contrary, most organizations who use volunteers try to make a difference in the lives of those they are assisting, and ultimately, want to extend their assistance to as many people as possible. Hence the need for volunteers. Unfortunately, it is often better to limit the number of people an organization can assist at a time in order to devote the most possible time and energy to a case than to try to help countless more at only a sub-par execution.

Organizations should require a minimum commitment of one year for any volunteer that is going to be working with the population of assistance. This would allow sufficient time for follow through and impact. This is especially important for any position that involves advocacy. It’s very hard to effectively advocate for a case when it has been turned over countless times and the person handling the case doesn’t really know the client or their situation. Repeated turnover of files is also how people get ‘lost’ in the system. Professional familiarity is an underrated necessity in successful advocacy work. Being able to know a case inside and out, to know the client and their history and their story makes advocates better at their job while providing better support for their clients.

If volunteers are unable to commit at least one year to their positions, they should not be allowed to meet with beneficiaries of programs.It’s that simple. Volunteers on a shorter-term basis should still be allowed to give their time, but they should do so behind the scenes. Assisting with administrative duties, helping to write grant proposals, development of program descriptions and content and producing annual reports. All of which are undeniably useful for future careers. Unfortunately, these types of jobs lack the same appeal and are not as often sought after.

Would-be volunteers underestimate the knowledge required to go into positions with refugees/ IDPs or children. The needs of these client bases are diverse and sometimes overwhelming. Without a proper understanding of the situations in which they are coming from, the histories of the countries the people are coming from or the psycho-social needs of the clients, and the environment in which they are working/ volunteering it is possible for volunteers to do more harm than good.

Equally important to realize, and often underestimated, is the trust factor. Many refugee/ IDP or youth populations have trust issues. Either due to their experiences in their lives or do to research fatigue or failed promises on the part of volunteers/ organizations. As a result of this, it takes longer for volunteers to be able to build trust with their populations. Short term volunteer positions perpetuates this cycle of breaking trust. Once trust is finally established, the volunteer leaves and the people that they are working with are once again abandoned, having to restart the process over again with another new volunteer. This is counterproductive to the whole process, and incredibly selfish on the part of the volunteer. In my experience, while it may take longer to build the trust, once it is there it is incredibly strong, making the leaving that much harder and the rebuilding of trust with the next person or organization that much longer. Eventually, the communities of interest stop seeking out help because they just feel like they are continually let down.

I fully support selfless devotion of time to causes one is passionate about. But I also understand and value the knowledge and responsibility associated with these types of commitments. There are plenty of other volunteer opportunities in existence for mere passing interest or resume building that doesn’t hold someone’s life and livelihood in your hands. While environmental preservation, roadside cleanup and animal shelter rescues may not be as ‘sexy’ as working with refugees or children, they are conducive to more passing interests and do not require the personal relationships mandated by other opportunities.

The Irony that is Glenn Beck

The burka, or conservative clothing that is compulsory in some Middle Eastern countries, has long been deemed repressive towards women and has often come under heavy scrutiny as such. Most notorious in Suadi Arabia, the article of the clothing has become symbolic of anti-Islamic outcries and the perceived treatment of women by its adherents.

It’s ironic then, that conservative pundit Glenn Beck would tell a woman to wear the garment. The suggestion came after he pretended to vomit on-air for ten minutes at the thought of ‘her naked body’ while discussing a PSA she had filmed for skin cancer awareness. The woman in question is fellow conservative pundit, Meghan McCain (daughter of former presidential candidate, John McCain).

Beck’s has made no effort to hide his Islamophobia. In fact, his efforts to spread hatred of Muslims and Arabs extends so far as to invent numbers of people who must be terrorists based on preposterous equations, used simply to inflate numbers to show the “threat” that is Islam. My question is, however, if everything Muslim is so bad, and the burqa so oppressive, why would he want to subjugate his own citizenry to such a lifestyle? I thought his whole aim was to prevent such cultural infiltration?

Fortunately, Meghan McCain addressed Beck’s on-air antics herself, in an open letter to Beck. In it she addresses his comments and even goes so far to question his “legacy” for his daughters:

You’re a full-grown man with teenage daughters who are probably dealing with the sexist, body-obsessed media environment that is difficult for all women. Is this really the legacy you want to be leaving for yourself?

It’s a slippery slope that American news is going down. Sexist, misogynistic comments make the pundits no better than the elements of the cultures they deride daily. Even more disheartening is that women are still being forced to endure gender related bigotry in ways that their male counterparts never would. Men are criticized on beliefs, qualifications and arguments. Almost never is criticism of a man made sexual. Shame on Glenn and shame on the countless others who allow themselves to fall victim to such shallow attacks on women.