Racial Profiling in Post 9/11 America

1. Racial Profiling in Post 9/11 America UGS 302- Understanding 9/11 Abi Kolb

2. What is Racial Profiling? • “Attributing a predisposition for certain behavior to an individual’s race or ethnic heritage” (Pal, K.-Kennedy School Review) • Framing of Islam • Arab, Middle Eastern, and Muslim = ENEMY http://www.impactpress.com/articles/febmar03/racialpro2303.html

3. History of Racism • Constitution- “all men are created equal” • Nation struggled with slavery • Slowly all rights were restored-14th amendment • “Melting Pot” http://www.americanmethod.com/conservative_bumper_stickers/item/US_american_flag_sticker_decal_patriotic/1307

4. Racial Profiling- Immoral? • Pre-9/11, the United States would have never dreamed of implementing such tactics in our society • Violated civil liberties • Post 9/11- all rules seemingly went out the window

5. Racial Profiling and the War on Terror • 19 out of 19 of the suspected suicide terrorists involved in 9/11 were Arab (Begley- Newsweek) • Goal of War: end terrorism • “The United States will use every legal means at our disposal to prevent further terrorist activity”- Attorney General John Ashcroft • Goal of Racial Profiling: enhance national security • How did the impact society?

6. Racial Profiling in Society • Airport Security • Government Electronic surveillance • Intercept phone calls and e-mails of “suspect” terrorist communication http://travel.nytimes.com/2012/10/07/travel/speedy-airport-security-should-you-apply.html?_r=0 http://www.clipartof.com/portfolio/geoimages/illustration/3d-cell-phone-syncing-with-a-laptop-computer-1073135.html

7. Concern for Civil Liberties • Hate crimes committed against Arab people in America after 9/11 • National hatred • U.S. took things too far in their determination to enhance national security • “No rules”; “End terrorism at all cost”

8. Media • Loaded images of 9/11 attacks • Framing of Islam as violent • Created idea of “the enemy” of the war on terror http:/www.mediabistro.com/fishbowldc/q-where-were-you-on-sept-11_b50061/ http://www.tibetsun.com/news/2012/09/14/us-braces-for-more-violence-from-anti-islam-film

9. Racial Profiling in American Culture • Deeply rooted fear of terrorism is evident in our actions and policies • A part of who we are • Media=big influence; framing of Islam

10. Can We Achieve Balance? • Security and Racial Profiling go hand in hand now • Fear of terrorism pushes us to extreme measures • Seems improbable that racial profiling can ever be removed from our societal practices

11. 9/11 & Education Joanne Chia

12. What is Terrorism? • No universally accepted definition • “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives” (Federal Bureau of Investigation)

13. Controversial Topics • Religion & Politics • Hijacked extremist view of Islam vs. historical mainstream view of Islam • Action of Bush administration

14. Textbook Information • Chronologically • Romanowski • Treatment of 9/11 & ability to answer several questions: • Why was US attacked? • What were the reactions to the attacks? • How was the invasion of Afghanistan portrayed? • What changes were presented in American culture, government, and lifestyle? • How were controversies in the war with Iraq presented?

15. Textbook Information • Hess & Stoddard • Forceful language • “horrendous plot” • “unprecedented attack” • “crime against humanity”

16. Textbook Information • Longitudinal study • “About 3,000 people were killed in the attacks. They included all the passengers on the four planes, workers and visitors in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, and about 300 firefights and 40 police officers who rushed into the twin towers to rescue people. The attacks of September 11 were the most destructive acts of terrorism in modern history. ” (The Americans 2005 edition) • “About 3,000 people were killed in the attacks—the most destructive acts of terrorism in modern history.” (The Americans 2010 edition)

17. Possible Solutions • Readjustment of teaching methods and attitudes • See 9/11 as an opportunity for transformation of curriculum • Platform for discussion • Instead of relying on textbooks, redirect to documentaries, books, news, etc.

18. Results • Curiosity & interest = most effective way to learn • Foster critical thinking skills • Realization of other points of view • More knowledgeable

19. Balancing Pro-Americanism vs. Multiculturalism • Yet to resolve • Patriotic: American’s interests are #1 priority, allowed to question why terrorists would attack us and deem them as evil and their actions as unjustified, superior • Multicultural: Understanding of other perspectives – Muslims & Middle Easterners

20. Balancing Pro-Americanism vs. Multiculturalism • We hold perceptions that all Arabs are Muslims, all Muslims are fundamentalisms, all Muslim fundamentalists are terrorists, and religious fundamentalists • Rather than jumping to conclusions, we need to acknowledge the difference between the Islam terrorists follow and what the majority believe

21. Iraq: the Sunnis Shiite Conflict Courtney Samson

22. Questions: • How did their conflict start? • How did the United States affect their relationship? • How did the U.S. get it so wrong in missing the conflict between the Sunnis and Shiites?

23. History of the Feud • Shiites: • Believe an imamate should be head of Islam. • Believed Ali should have taken over after the death of the Prophet, but instead was the fourth caliph. • Sunnis: • Believe caliphs should be head of Islam. • Umar, who would later become a caliph, declared Abu Bakr caliph.

24. History of the feud cont. • In the Battle of Karbala, Yazid, the current caliph, killed Hussein, Ali’s grandson. • This established Sunni rule and Shiite as second class.

25. Before the U.S. Invasion • Saddam Hussein’s reign was oppressive and cruel. • Sunnis tried to keep Shiites out of the government. • Although the leadership was oppressive, the actual relationships in the general public were good enough.

26. Relationship Change and Start of Civil War • In the first election after the fall of Hussein, the Sunnis boycotted the vote. • Shiites increased the police and military forces, so the Sunnis got defensive and “stepped up their bombing campaign” (Ghosh et al., 2007). • Change of government: out with old (Sunnis) and in with the new (Shiites). • Young American “diplomats who didn’t know the difference between Shi’ites and Sunnis…got to decide how those communities would share power” (Ghosh, 2010).

27. The New Problem • Shiites were taking advantage of their power to get vengeance. • The Sunnis were upset at their loss of power, so they retaliated. • This tension started a civil war, making the establishment of government difficult. • The United States thought they would be viewed as heroes, but that quickly changed.

28. It Seemed Like America Was Doing Good in Iraq • It appeared as though the U.S. was accomplishing its goals with the new democratic government. But in reality, “television broadcasts of live parliamentary sessions were halted out of fear that lawmakers’ attacks on one another… would spark violence on the streets” (Ryan, 2010, p. 68). • It also looked like situations for Iraqi women were getting better because they were being allowed in government positions. But “many of the women elected in 2005 were selected for their willingness to comply with party wishes” (Ryan, 2010, p. 70). • Economy: “The farm sector… is in shambles. The manufacturing industry barely exists… [and the] oilfield and refinery officials are still making do with equipment that dates to the 1950s and ‘60s” (Ryan, 2010, p. 71).

29. An Unexpected Alliance • Although both sides still disliked each other, they disliked the presence of al-Qaeda in Iraq even more. • The Sunnis accepted guns from the U.S. to fight al-Qaeda, and the Shiites stopped their attacks to let the U.S. and Sunnis get rid of al-Qaeda.

30. How the U.S. Got it Wrong • The Bush administration was mainly focused on getting rid of Saddam Hussein. • All the research I found on the Sunnis and Shiites was written after 2003. • If it had been more prominent in both the media and in the Bush administration’s thoughts on war with Iraq, we could have either saved ourselves a decade of warfare, or at least prepared for the civil war that erupted and could have done a better job setting up the government.

31. How Public Relations Changed Following the Terrorist Attacks of 9/11 Emma Stephens 12/6/12

32. Immediate Patriotism • The Bush Administration quickly framed 9/11 and declared the War on Terror • Dissenting views were swept under the rug http://ashraf62.wordpress.com/2011/09/13/911-is-history-now/ http://www.raphaelsonlaw.com/Ground-Zero-Cases.html http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=1999526n

33. Patriotism in Music: Toby Keith • “Courtesy of the Red White and Blue” became a smash hit • Toby Keith was known for his involvement with United Service Organizations • Boulton says: Traditional “us” of country music grows to include all American citizens http://blog.newsok.com/bamsblog/2010/04/27/toby-keith-to-visit-troops-this-spring-on-four-country-uso-tour/

34. Patriotism in Baseball: Carlos Delgado • Delgado sat in the dugout during the 7th inning’s “God Bless America” • Made sense immediately after, but not years after http://bomberbanter.com/2011/02/08/carlos-delgado-protests-the-iraq-war-in-2004/ http://www.buckblunders.com/tag/carlos-delgado/ http://bomberbanter.com/2011/02/08/carlos-delgado-protests-the-iraq-war-in-2004/

35. Patriotism in Music: The Dixie Chicks • Natalie Maines: We’re ashamed that the president of the United States is from Texas • Free speech no longer existed

36. Historical Perspective • Brands: Drawing parallels between WWII and the War on Terror might not be completely innocent • Like Henry Clay vs. Andrew Jackson http://www.utexas.edu/cola/depts/history/features/_features/brands09.php http://www.teacheroz.com/WWIIpropaganda.htm

37. Effects • Dissenting views were not common until substantial time had passed • Politicians who had gained favor by supporting a popular president went back to preaching their own views • How do you measure the progress of the War on Terror? http://bilalahmedkhan.blogspot.com/2011_05_01_archive.html

38. The Roll Media Played in Influencing People’s Views of 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

39. Conspiracies • American government • Missiles • Intentional air defense failure • Controlled demolitions

40. Factors • Mainstream media bias • Influence on a polarized electorate • Lack of investigation

41. Framing • “Media coverage does not tell the public what to think, but it does have an effect in telling them what subjects to think about” – Dr. Mark Harmon • coverage reflected local politics and concerns • Patriotism • American’s loyalty to their government reached a pinnacle.

42. Less Legitimate • Covered Conspiracies • “the more conspiracy theories a monological thinker agrees with, the more she or he will accept” – Dr. Virem Swami

43. Media Bias • 9/11 Commission Report • Press didn’t question it • “The press became a willing accomplice of Bush Administration policy...there were a variety of stories that the media did not pursue such as the arrest and detention of 1,200 Arab men following the attacks, the curtailment of the Freedom of Information act or even the question as to why the U.S. was the target of such vicious attacks and hatred” – Douglas Kellner • Government controlled the main stream media

44. Polarized Electorate • “We expect that 9/11 conspiracy theories…but will be aligned with mainstream political divisions and discourses built up around those divisions” – Carl Stempel • Democrats more likely to believe conspiracy theories • Mind Set: influential members of the Bush Administration were looking for an excuse to invade Iraq

45. Conclusions • Who believes 9/11 conspiracies? • Those that already believe in different conspiracy theories are more inclined to also be interested in those of 9/11. • Those who follow non mainstream media on a regular basis are more exposed to conspiracy theories. • Those who do not agree with the Government