|
I Was a Muslim in Trump's White House. I Lasted 8 Days. |
|
|
Thursday, 23 February 2017 14:34 |
|
Ahmed writes: "Like most of my fellow American Muslims, I spent much of 2016 watching with consternation as Donald Trump vilified our community. Despite this - or because of it - I thought I should try to stay on the NSC staff during the Trump Administration, in order to give the new president and his aides a more nuanced view of Islam, and of America's Muslim citizens. I lasted eight days."
Rumana Ahmed, who worked in the White House as part of the Obama and Trump administrations. (photo: Leah Varjaques/The Atlantic)

I Was a Muslim in Trump's White House. I Lasted 8 Days.
By Rumana Ahmed, The Atlantic
23 February 17
When President Obama left, I stayed on at the National Security Council in order to serve my country. I lasted eight days.
n 2011, I was hired, straight out of college, to work at the White House and eventually the National Security Council. My job there was to promote and protect the best of what my country stands for. I am a hijab-wearing Muslim woman––I was the only hijabi in the West Wing––and the Obama administration always made me feel welcome and included.
Like most of my fellow American Muslims, I spent much of 2016 watching with consternation as Donald Trump vilified our community. Despite this––or because of it––I thought I should try to stay on the NSC staff during the Trump Administration, in order to give the new president and his aides a more nuanced view of Islam, and of America's Muslim citizens.
I lasted eight days.
When Trump issued a ban on travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries and all Syrian refugees, I knew I could no longer stay and work for an administration that saw me and people like me not as fellow citizens, but as a threat.
The evening before I left, bidding farewell to some of my colleagues, many of whom have also since left, I notified Trump’s senior NSC communications adviser, Michael Anton, of my departure, since we shared an office. His initial surprise, asking whether I was leaving government entirely, was followed by silence––almost in caution, not asking why. I told him anyway.
I told him I had to leave because it was an insult walking into this country’s most historic building every day under an administration that is working against and vilifying everything I stand for as an American and as a Muslim. I told him that the administration was attacking the basic tenets of democracy. I told him that I hoped that they and those in Congress were prepared to take responsibility for all the consequences that would attend their decisions.
He looked at me and said nothing.
It was only later that I learned he authored an essay under a pseudonym, extolling the virtues of authoritarianism and attacking diversity as a “weakness,” and Islam as “incompatible with the modern West.”
My whole life and everything I have learned proves that facile statement wrong.
My parents immigrated to the United States from Bangladesh in 1978 and strove to create opportunities for their children born in the states. My mother worked as a cashier, later starting her own daycare business. My father spent late nights working at Bank of America, and was eventually promoted to assistant vice president at one of its headquarters. Living the American dream, we’d have family barbecues, trips to Disney World, impromptu soccer or football games, and community service projects. My father began pursuing his Ph.D., but in 1995 he was killed in a car accident.
I was 12 when I started wearing a hijab. It was encouraged in my family, but it was always my choice. It was a matter of faith, identity, and resilience for me. After 9/11, everything would change. On top of my shock, horror, and heartbreak, I had to deal with the fear some kids suddenly felt towards me. I was glared at, cursed at, and spat at in public and in school. People called me a “terrorist” and told me, “go back to your country.”
My father taught me a Bengali proverb inspired by Islamic scripture: “When a man kicks you down, get back up, extend your hand, and call him brother.” Peace, patience, persistence, respect, forgiveness, and dignity. These were the values I’ve carried through my life and my career.
I never intended to work in government. I was among those who assumed the government was inherently corrupt and ineffective. Working in the Obama White House proved me wrong. You can’t know or understand what you haven’t been a part of.
Still, inspired by President Obama, I joined the White House in 2011, after graduating from the George Washington University. I had interned there during my junior year, reading letters and taking calls from constituents at the Office of Presidential Correspondence. It felt surreal––here I was, a 22-year-old American Muslim woman from Maryland who had been mocked and called names for covering my hair, working for the president of the United States.
In 2012, I moved to the West Wing to join the Office of Public Engagement, where I worked with various communities, including American Muslims, on domestic issues such as health care. In early 2014, Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes offered me a position on the National Security Council (NSC). For two and a half years I worked down the hall from the Situation Room, advising President Obama’s engagements with American Muslims, and working on issues ranging from advancing relations with Cuba and Laos to promoting global entrepreneurship among women and youth.
A harsher world began to reemerge in 2015. In February, three young American Muslim students were killed in their Chapel Hill home by an Islamophobe. Both the media and administration were slow to address the attack, as if the dead had to be vetted before they could be mourned. It was emotionally devastating. But when a statement was finally released condemning the attack and mourning their loss, Rhodes took me aside to to tell me how grateful he was to have me there and wished there were more American Muslims working throughout government. America’s government and decision-making should reflect its people.
Later that month, the evangelist Franklin Graham declared that the government had “been infiltrated by Muslims.” One of my colleagues sought me out with a smile on his face and said, “If only he knew they were in the halls of the West Wing and briefed the president of the United States multiple times!” I thought: Damn right I’m here, exactly where I belong, a proud American dedicated to protecting and serving my country.
Graham’s hateful provocations weren’t new. Over the Obama years, right-wing websites spread an abundance of absurd conspiracy theories and lies, targeting some American Muslim organizations and individuals––even those of us serving in government. They called us “terrorists,” Sharia-law whisperers, or Muslim Brotherhood operatives. Little did I realize that some of these conspiracy theorists would someday end up in the White House.
Over the course of the campaign, even when I was able to storm through the bad days, I realized the rhetoric was taking a toll on American communities. When Trump first called for a Muslim ban, reports of hate crimes against Muslims spiked. The trend of anti-Muslim hate crimes is ongoing, as mosques are set on fire and individuals attacked––six were killed at a mosque in Canada by a self-identified Trump supporter.
Throughout 2015 and 2016, I watched with disbelief, apprehension, and anxiety, as Trump’s style of campaigning instigated fear and emboldened xenophobes, anti-Semites, and Islamophobes. While cognizant of the possibility of Trump winning, I hoped a majority of the electorate would never condone such a hateful and divisive worldview.
During the campaign last February, Obama visited a Baltimore mosque and reminded the public that “we’re one American family, and when any part of our family starts to feel separate … It’s a challenge to our values.” His words would go unheeded by his successor.
The climate in 2016 felt like it did just after 9/11. What made it worse was that this fear and hatred were being fueled by Americans in positions of power. Fifth-grade students at a local Sunday school where I volunteered shared stories of being bullied by classmates and teachers, feeling like they didn’t belong here anymore, and asked if they might get kicked out of this country if Trump won. I was almost hit by a car by a white man laughing as he drove by in a Costco parking lot, and on another occasion was followed out of the metro by a man screaming profanities: “Fuck you! Fuck Islam! Trump will send you back!”
Then, on election night, I was left in shock.
The morning after the election, we lined up in the West Colonnade as Obama stood in the Rose Garden and called for national unity and a smooth transition. Trump seemed the antithesis of everything we stood for. I felt lost. I could not fully grasp the idea that he would soon be sitting where Obama sat.
I debated whether I should leave my job. Since I was not a political appointee, but a direct hire of the NSC, I had the option to stay. The incoming and now departed national security adviser, Michael Flynn, had said things like “fear of Muslims is rational.” Some colleagues and community leaders encouraged me to stay, while others expressed concern for my safety. Cautiously optimistic, and feeling a responsibility to try to help them continue our work and be heard, I decided that Trump's NSC could benefit from a colored, female, hijab-wearing, American Muslim patriot.
The weeks leading up to the inauguration prepared me and my colleagues for what we thought would come, but not for what actually came. On Monday, January 23, I walked into the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, with the new staffers there. Rather than the excitement I encountered when I first came to the White House under Obama, the new staff looked at me with a cold surprise. The diverse White House I had worked in became a monochromatic and male bastion.
The days I spent in the Trump White House were strange, appalling and disturbing. As one staffer serving since the Reagan administration said, “This place has been turned upside down. It’s chaos. I’ve never witnessed anything like it.” This was not typical Republican leadership, or even that of a businessman. It was a chaotic attempt at authoritarianism––legally questionable executive orders, accusations of the press being “fake,” peddling countless lies as “alternative facts,” and assertions by White House surrogates that the president’s national security authority would “not be questioned.”
The entire presidential support structure of nonpartisan national security and legal experts within the White House complex and across federal agencies was being undermined. Decision-making authority was now centralized to a few in the West Wing. Frustration and mistrust developed as some staff felt out of the loop on issues within their purview. There was no structure or clear guidance. Hallways were eerily quiet as key positions and offices responsible for national security or engagement with Americans were left unfilled.
I might have lasted a little longer. Then came January 30. The executive order banning travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries caused chaos, without making America any safer. Discrimination that has existed for years at airports was now legitimized, sparking mass protests, while the president railed against the courts for halting his ban. Not only was this discrimination and un-American, the administration’s actions defending the ban threatened the nation’s security and its system of checks and balances.
Alt-right writers, now on the White House staff, have claimed that Islam and the West are at war with each other. Disturbingly, ISIS also makes such claims to justify their attacks, which for the most part target Muslims. The Administration’s plans to revamp the Countering Violent Extremism program to focus solely on Muslims and use terms like “radical Islamic terror,” legitimize ISIS propaganda and allow the dangerous rise of white-supremacist extremism to go unchecked.
Placing U.S. national security in the hands of people who think America’s diversity is a “weakness” is dangerous. It is false.
People of every religion, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, and age pouring into the streets and airports to defend the rights of their fellow Americans over the past few weeks proved the opposite is true––American diversity is a strength, and so is the American commitment to ideals of justice and equality.
American history is not without stumbles, which have proven that the nation is only made more prosperous and resilient through struggle, compassion and inclusiveness. It’s why my parents came here. It’s why I told my former 5th grade students, who wondered if they still belonged here, that this country would not be great without them.

|
|
FOCUS | Milo Yiannopoulos: A Danger to Our Children |
|
|
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=36478"><span class="small">John Kiriakou, Reader Supported News</span></a>
|
|
Thursday, 23 February 2017 12:47 |
|
Kiriakou writes: "As a Greek-American, I feel almost compelled to apologize for my fellow Hellene Milo Yiannopoulos's remarks, released last week, in which he condones pedophilia. I won't."
Milo Yiannopoulos, foreground left, arrives for a news conference in New York, Tuesday, February 21, 2017. (photo: Seth Wenig/AP)

Milo Yiannopoulos: A Danger to Our Children
By John Kiriakou, Reader Supported News
23 February 17
s a Greek-American, I feel almost compelled to apologize for my fellow Hellene Milo Yiannopoulos’s remarks, released last week, in which he condones pedophilia. I won’t. Yiannopoulos is a vile and hateful person, and his sick claim that he will be “forever indebted to Father Mike” for a sexual liaison they apparently had when Yiannopoulos was a child has no place in civilized debate. Yiannopoulos’s later protestations that his comments were taken out of context, that he would never advocate pedophilia, and that he was being set up by his political enemies, etc., are unconvincing. There is no excuse for what he said. There is no justification.
I’ve had some first-hand experience with pedophiles, and I can tell you that there is no hope for them. There is no therapy, no medication, that’s going to make them better. It’s in their nature, their psyche, to prey on children. And we have to protect our children from them.
I encountered my first pedophile on my fourth day in prison, where I spent 23 months after blowing the whistle on the CIA’s torture program. It was my first day of work in the prison library, where I was hired to wipe off tables for $6.00 a month. Another prisoner asked me what I was in for and how much time I had. I told him and asked about his own case.
“Oh, I have 24 years,” he said. I was shocked at the length of his sentence. It was my understanding that a prisoner had to have under 20 years to be placed in a low-security prison. I asked if he minded telling me what he was in for. “I got caught looking at crime scene photos,” he said. I didn’t understand. “Well, looking at photos of children having sex with adults is a crime. I got caught looking at the photos.” I was repulsed. But he went on. “What really did me in was that subfolder.” “All right,” I said. “I’ll bite. What was in the subfolder?” He got excited. “I like to masturbate looking at pictures of dead children. I have a friend who works in a morgue …” I put my hands up. “Stop! Don’t ever speak to me again! Understand?” He did.
A couple of months later I was working as a janitor in the prison chapel. We had a hard-and-fast rule in the chapel: Do not talk about your case. It was supposed to be a quiet place of reflection and meditation, right? But in reality, the chapel was a hangout for pedophiles, just like the library was. They felt safe there, unlike outside in the prison yard, and so they congregated there. And, as you can imagine, they all liked to talk about their cases. One pedophile, whom we called “Chomo the Giant,” with “chomo” being prison slang for “child molester,” was telling a group he was sitting with how wronged he had been. “She wanted to do it. She came on to me. She said it felt good. We love each other.” He was talking about his 15-year-old daughter.
An 80-year-old pedophile in my housing unit was known as “Butt Daddy.” That was the chat room userID he used to communicate with an undercover policeman in the sting operation that would eventually wrap him on the NBC television program “To Catch a Predator.” When he was arrested, police found a set of handcuffs, rope, a body bag, and a bag of lime in the trunk of his car. Senior citizen or not, the guy meant business.
The point is that these examples are the norm. These are the kinds of people society is up against. “Father Mike” didn’t do Milo Yiannopoulos any favors. Father Mike should have been prosecuted and sent to prison for as long as necessary to keep our children safe.
And Milo Yiannopoulos, in the meantime, ought to be silenced — not because he is a “conservative provocateur,” as the mainstream media describes him. He ought to be silenced because he and his opinions are a danger to our children.
John Kiriakou is a former CIA counterterrorism officer and a former senior investigator with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. John became the sixth whistleblower indicted by the Obama administration under the Espionage Act – a law designed to punish spies. He served 23 months in prison as a result of his attempts to oppose the Bush administration's torture program.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

|
|
|
FOCUS: Blessed Are the Winners. Big League. |
|
|
Thursday, 23 February 2017 12:04 |
|
Keillor writes: "The Lord is my shepherd. Okay? Totally. Big league. He is a tremendous shepherd. The best. No comparison. I know more than most people about herding sheep. And that's why I won the election in a landslide."
President Donald Trump. (photo: Rex Features/AP)

Blessed Are the Winners. Big League.
By Garrison Keillor, The Washington Post
23 February 17
he Lord is my shepherd. Okay? Totally. Big league. He is a tremendous shepherd. The best. No comparison. I know more than most people about herding sheep. And that’s why I won the election in a landslide, and it’s why my company is doing very, very well. Because He said, “I’m with you, Donald. You will never want.”
So we were on this green pasture by the still waters and He said, “Lie down.” I said, “Lie down?” He said, “Lie down.” And He made me lie down. Right there in the pasture. So I lie down. People are so surprised that I lie down — “Oh, he’s lying down.” But He’s my shepherd. Great shepherd. Not just good. Great. It was right there that I thought, “This is going to be a tremendous golf course. Terrific greens. Plenty of water.” And it is. Everybody who plays it comes away saying, “That is the greatest course in the entire world.” Everybody.
So He was saying to me, Blessed are the dealmakers, for theirs is the kingdom. Big time. Blessed are they who scorn, for they shall be comfortable. Blessed is machismo, for it wins again and again. Blessed are they who are persecuted by the dishonest press, for they shall continue down the paths of righteousness, and that’s what is going on here. We are bringing righteousness to Washington for the first time and making incredible progress. I’ve done more in the past month than most presidents do in a year. Washington was without form and void and I issued an executive order, “Let there be light,” and did I get credit for it? No, the dishonest press said, “It hurts our eyes.” So I divided the light from the darkness. Day and night. Night and day. I did all this in two nights and a day. Under deadline, under budget. Next week we’re going to do the firmament, the waters, the dry land, start naming beasts, all the rest of it.
I tell you, I have been walking through the valley of the shadow of death. The shadow of death. I have to say that. Terrible. Because of the dishonest Medianites, or, as I call them, the media, including a lot of you here in this room, writing stories about chaos. Where’s the chaos? We’ve got light and darkness, day and night. There is no chaos. I know what’s true and the level of dishonesty is unbelievable. The story about the rich man in hell and the beggar Lazarus in heaven — fake news. Totally fake. Rich man wouldn’t give him the crumbs off his table? Not true. Never happened. “What shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul?” He never said it. Same with “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into the kingdom of heaven.” Garbage. Total garbage.
I am not a bad person. You don’t get to 306 electoral votes by being a bad person. So I wish you could write something nice, but maybe you can’t and that’s okay, too. I can live with that because I fear no evil: for the Lord is with me; and my staff has been a great comfort to me. Tremendous people. Because I know good from bad. Okay? I inherited a mess, the instability, divisiveness, darkness, iniquity, leprosy, madmen, but nonetheless the Lord has prepared a tremendous table before me in the presence of my enemies. Beautiful table. Steaks, seafood, tremendous wines, anything I want, and here I am with goodness and mercy following me every single day of my life, not just mercy but goodness, too, and we’re making tremendous progress, great numbers getting bigger every day, multitudes gathering everywhere I go, touching the hem of my garment, but the media is still bitter about Hillary losing in a landslide and the Lord anointing my head with oil, which people make fun of and that’s okay, let them laugh at my hair, I got 306 electoral college votes. They said there’s no way to get 222. No way, José. I got 306. That’s what I call the cup running over. Filled the cup and then it ran over. The overflow was tremendous. Huge overflow. Biggest overflow ever. Fantastic. Through the ceiling. Stock market up. Good jobs. You name it.
So it looks like I am going to be dwelling in the house of the Lord forever and I’m having a good time. I love this. I am having fun.

|
|
Is the Democratic Party With the Resistance? This Weekend Might Tell |
|
|
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=19600"><span class="small">Bill McKibben, Guardian UK</span></a>
|
|
Thursday, 23 February 2017 09:56 |
|
McKibben writes: "President Needy's poll numbers have begun to tumble. But only a crazy person could keep up this plate-spinning pace for long. Since he clearly will, those fighting Trump need to find a fortress to call home - a place to find shelter in and from which to sally forth. One of those fortresses may be the Democratic party, depending on how this weekend's vote for a new DNC chairman comes out."
Anti-Trump protest. (photo: Drew Angerer/Getty)

Is the Democratic Party With the Resistance? This Weekend Might Tell
By Bill McKibben, Guardian UK
23 February 17
The DNC votes on who will become the new chairman in a few days. If Keith Ellison wins, the party might just be able to win back its lost credibility
he resistance is doing as well as anyone could realistically hope. Deprived by the elections of any institutional power, we’ve marched in record numbers with courage and wit. That’s helped journalists to find their footing, and President Needy’s poll numbers have begun to tumble. But only a crazy person could keep up this plate-spinning pace for long. Since he clearly will, those fighting Trump need to find a fortress to call home – a place to find shelter in and from which to sally forth.
One of those fortresses may be the Democratic party, depending on how this weekend’s vote for a new DNC chairman comes out.
There are a number of candidates, but two appear to be in the lead: former labor secretary Tom Perez, and Minnesota congressman Keith Ellison. Both, by all accounts, are good guys, and not greatly divided by ideology. But they clearly represent the two wings of the party.
Perez is from the ruling wing, the institutional party. He is closely identified with Barack Obama, who he worked for, and Hillary Clinton, who he supported. Ellison is from the movement wing. He is closely identified with Bernie Sanders. Indeed, he was one of the few members of Congress who actively supported his insurgent candidacy.
The choice is actually about the best way to unite the opposition to Trump, at least for the purposes of winning elections.
We don’t need the Democratic party to tell us what to think – we have vibrant and engaged movements out there that are reshaping public opinion every day, in the airports and on Facebook. Black Lives Matter leads our movement intellectually in a way that the Democratic party never will. But we may need the Democratic party for the fairly limited purpose of winning elections and hence consolidating power. What would best serve that utilitarian need?
The answer, I think, is pretty clear.
Ellison – and by extension the movements he represents – offers the party the items it lacks and needs. Credibility, for one. You could (and this is the argument of Perez and his establishment team) begin in the middle, with as unthreatening and centrist a party as possible, and then reach out to the various movements and try to bring them on board. But I doubt that will work.
The deep-seated anger at the elites, who have compromised serious principle time and time again, is simply too strong. If the polls are to be believed, most Americans don’t trust any of Washington’s power centers, the DNC included. No one looks at Steny Hoyer and thinks, “What barricade can I die on?” The last chair of the DNC, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, was the embodiment of this kind of non-principled power-based thinking, and she did tremendous damage.
And if that’s true of Americans in general, it’s doubly true of young people. In fact, more than doubly: the single most remarkable statistics of the 2016 election season were the four- and five- and six-to-one margins by which Sanders won young voters.
That he was able to overcome that inherent distrust means he may be able to do the party a great service, and deliver it a generation of voters who are not otherwise inclined to affiliate with institutions of any sort. Ellison is the bridge to that world, and it would be political malpractice to draw it up. But he’s also the bridge to the world of movements, which supply the passion and spirit and creativity that the DNC requires at least as badly as it needs credibility.
A typical Ellison supporter is someone like Jane Kleeb, the whirlwind Nebraska organizer who spearheaded much of the fight against the Keystone XL pipeline, and is now assembling a coalition of farmers, ranchers and other unlikely activists across the midwest to fight fossil fuel infrastructure and demand renewable energy.
Kleeb’s just been elected chair of Nebraska’s Democratic party, giving it a transfusion of organizing energy that had been lacking; if you want to compete in the heartland, she’s the kind of person you need.
These folks are serious about winning elections – Ellison himself has been a remarkably successful campaigner in his Minnesota base, expanding his margins year after year and lending effective support to the rest of the ticket. And they know how to raise money, one of the key jobs of a party: Sanders’ 27-bucks-at-a-time model is clearly the future of political fundraising, a welcome change from simply finding plutocrats or shaking down Wall Street.
Ellison is in a very real way the safe choice. If the institutionalists are put in charge, then much of the DNC’s energy in the years to come will be spent trying to deal with people who distrust institutions. But with Sanders’ implicit backing, Ellison can short-circuit that conversation and simply get to work.
Few people will accuse the black Muslim Berniecrat of being an apparatchik. And since he’s simultaneously a modest midwestern track-and-field coach, he’ll be able to get a message across to the broad middle.
I don’t know whether that will be enough to save the Democratic party. We’re in an era of rapid deinstitutionalization – our political parties may just become hollow shells that cannot compete against insurgent candidates like Sanders (who was an independent most of his career).
But there are, unfortunately, strong forces in the constitution that favor a two-party system. So even if parties are not as important as protest, it’s still worth seeing if they can serve a useful role going forward. Keith Ellison is the best chance of finding out.

|
|