natalie's narrative

Mission Al Jazeera

“This is a strange time for America. Everywhere it seems people are seeing things through a prism of their own fears and stereotypes.”

I just finished Mission Al Jazeera, about former Marine Josh Rushing’s experience as a public-affairs official during the Iraq invasion. Out of frustration with the incompetence, spin, cultural misunderstandings, and eventual silencing from the military/Bush administration, Rushing resigns from the military and joins Al Jazeera, a major Arab news network with 50 million viewers, as a correspondent.

He is also featured in Control Room, a documentary film about Al Jazeera’s coverage of the war. I watched the film for an anthropology class at Wheaton, and while it has some difficult parts, it’s a must-see. I was somewhat disappointed with the book, which consists mainly of Rushing’s wandering train of thought (hmm, similar to my style of writing…). Mission Al Jazeera still contains, however, some pretty eye-opening and anger-inducing information!

Rushing was a military spokesperson at the U.S. Central Command (CentCom) in Doha, Qatar during the initial stage of the invasion. He brings along The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Iraq, 2002 edition, and later remarks that he actually learned a lot of helpful information, even from that type of book. He says, “had someone in the administration read it, they too could have learned a lot, especially from the chapter titled: ‘West is West, The British and the Americans: The deal cutting, opportunism, miscalculations, and compound errors that led to a profound mistrust of the West’ (40). He continues:

[P]lenty within its pages gave rise to concern about what we were planning to do in Iraq. The book recounted how many times the area had been controlled by foreign occupiers like the British, the Hashemites, the Greeks, and the Persians. I realized how likely it was that Iraqis would see what we were doing as a repeat of history: To their eyes the U.S. presence would appear as yet another attempt at colonization, as when foreign powers drew lines on a map creating a nation of people who had serious dissimilarities and no organizational reasons to be united as one nation.” (40-1)

I happened to be in a class focusing on the history of the Middle East when Bush decided to invade Iraq. The semester included a lot of cringing, embarrassment, and frustration. What a sad state of affairs that a bunch of college freshmen probably had more insight into what was going to happen than the Bush administration!

Anyway, when Rushing arrived at CentCom, he was astonished that no one could speak Arabic. This was the media hub that released all news updates during the first stages of the invasion of Iraq, and journalists from all over the world set up offices there. The major US American networks received the best treatment, while the presence of non-USA press was tolerated. You would think that Al Jazeera, for example, would get better treatment since they’re covering the war for the Arab world. In fact, Rushing was assigned to be the spokesperson to Al Jazeera, even though he was a junior, relatively inexperienced officer. No strategic forethought went into that decision.

Rushing suggests to General Tommy Franks that Franks should call on the Al Jazeera representative first during press conferences, in order to show deference to Arabs. Franks’ response: “Sure, right after I rip off his head and sh*t down his throat!” (50). This was representative of the attitudes of many who were there. 

The Bush administration, working through political appointees with little military experience, lived out the idea that “truth is the first casualty of war.” Secretary Rumsfield considered the media an entity to be contained, condescended to, and chastised if they dared to criticize the war. The White House would develop the talking points, which would be constantly repeated, since the lessons learned from Vietnam showed us that the administration must shape the American public’s view of the war.

Not that any reporters were challenging the talking points they were fed; according to Rushing, many journalists were set on advancing their careers, rather than questioning the administration’s actions. Why am I using the past tense, anyway?? I don’t think anything has changed since 2003-2004. Rushing describes the failure of the American media to focus on the war, since many “distractions,” such as Natalee Holloway or Michael Jackson often took precedent. Blonde girls and outrageous pop stars are way more exciting (and more revenue-producing) than Plamegate, nonexistent WMD’s, or the elimination of habeas corpus.

One compelling part of Rushing’s story is his realization of a deep-seated cultural prejudice in himself and his fellow Americans. We get outraged over Al Jazeera’s broadcasting of gory footage of American prisoners of war. The images of America’s sons and daughters bloodied and beaten evoke a strong reaction, while similar footage of Iraqis brings no response.

Although Rushing’s memoir may be a little unorganized, it has certainly made me want to make sure I have access to Al Jazeera English whenever I get cable! 

This American Life

I love listening to "This American Life" on NPR. This week's episode made me a little teary-eyed, thanks to Act Two. Act One is an illuminating look at a journalist's experience in Iraq. You can listen to the full episode here: My Brilliant Plan.

*Sigh of relief*

We US Americans no longer have to worry about Matthew 19:24! From The New York Times Magazine's "Waving Goodbye to Hegemony."

Church as countercommunity (more on empire)

“In the face of an empire that rules through military and economic control, what is the shape of a community that serves a ruler who brings reconciliation and peace by sacrificial death rather than military might? If the empire elevates economic greed and avarice into civic virtues, while Paul dismisses such a way of life as idolatrous, then how does a Christian community shaped by Paul’s gospel live its life in the empire?” (61)

Those are questions from Colossians Remixed: Subverting the Empire that I’ve been wrestling with for quite some time. Ever since I took a History of the Middle East class and grew very familiar with Central American history through studying Spanish lit, I’ve become uncomfortable with my participation in an unjust empire. Living in a country that has been driven by the “progress myth,” too, I have often wondered how our faith is affected by neo-colonialism and capitalism.

Brian McLaren, in his book Everything Must Change, discusses “framing stories.” These are powerful stories that we tell ourselves, and they shape the way we live. The framing story of US Americans is that increasing wealth and security is good, and our foreign and economic policy decisions are based on this framing story. Walsh and Keesmaat, the authors of Colossians Remixed, remark that this progress myth legitimizes our lifestyle (62).

Just as the Roman Empire in the time of the early church enjoyed “Pax Romana,” we today are the beneficiaries of “Pax Americana.” (It is not a true peace, given that the cost is violent loss of life or oppression in any other part of the world—or even forgotten neighborhoods here.) Pax Americana is our “imperial mythology,” possessing a “clear distinction between good and evil and its self-righteous and aggressive foreign policy” (62). Christians are supposed to tell a story that is an alternative to the American framing story that promises to save us through economic success, homeland security, and global control—or, um—making sure everyone else is practicing democracy.

Walsh and Keesmaat want to tell the story beginning with the Israelites, since this ancient people also faced empires. Who God called them to be could be a great lesson for the church today. Wouldn’t it be amazing to see the church live out the following alternative?

“Israel is called to image a counterreality in a countercommunity. While the empire is frantically caught up in the management of production and consumption, Israel is called to a Sabbath keeping that acknowledges the gift character of its life in the land. And while the empire is sustained on the backs of slaves and an economics of oppression, a sabbath-keeping Israel images its God by caring for the poor, the stranger and sojourner, the widow and orphan. The care of the marginalized—those who have no standing ground in the community—is antithetical to the constant striving for power, dominance and hierarchy that characterizes the empire. Israel is called to be an alternative socioeconomic witness to the empire” (66-7).

Immigration myths

A lot of myths exist when it comes to immigration. ImmigrationProf Blog provides us with a rebuttal of five common misconceptions, as they are becoming more prevalent in the presidential campaign. Here's the link: Immigration myths.

Taking the incarnation seriously

The last chapter in Who's Afraid of Postmodernism discusses how to take the incarnation seriously. A lot of the ideas are difficult for me to grasp or to picture how they would be translated in real life, thanks partly to my low-church background. I'm not too familiar with vocabulary like sacrament and liturgy. James K.A. Smith, the author, wants to move away from a type of worship that is knowledge-based, Cartesian, and propositional, since the incarnation deals with more than just the mental, intellectual capacity. We have so focused on our minds that we may have left out other areas:

Taking the incarnation seriously means taking bodies seriously, which means affirming the space that they occupy as an arena of revelation and grace. The sacramental imagination begins from the assumption that our discipleship depends not only--not even primarily--on the conveyance of ideas into our minds, but on our immersion in embodied practices and rituals that form us into the kind of people God calls us to be. (139-40)

Smith also reminds us that we are "created for stories, not propositions; for drama, not bullet points" (140). The incarnation, the "story of God-become-flesh is best rendered by the poetry and painting of affective worship rather than the narrowly cognitive didacticism of Power-Pointed 'messages'" (140). Worship should "activate all the senses" (140). I wonder what worship and discipleship should look like, then? I don't have a very "sacramental imagination," so that's why I ask!

The real Martin Luther King Jr.

Dr. Michael Westmoreland-White has a post on the real MLK Jr. It's better than anything I could have come up with today! He remarks: "The Real Martin Luther King, Jr. was far more radical than the icon–and it is the radical King whom we need to recover today." Here's the link: MLK, Jr.: Nonviolent Radical for Our Time.

Orthopraxy vs. orthodoxy

I just read a post by Todd, Good Practice Begets Good Theology, that is worth checking out. Many times I think Christians have it backwards; we think that right theology (orthodoxy) results in—and is more important than—right actions (orthopraxy). On the contrary, Todd references Dallas Willard: “it matters little what we say we believe, but that what we really believe is demonstrated in our living.”

A comment left is also worth thinking on: “Christianity is knowledge-based, not behavior-based.”

I recently re-watched The Last Kiss, and I love a scene at the end of the film with Zach Braff’s character and his girlfriend’s father. The father remarks:

Stop talking about love. Every asshole in the world says he loves somebody. It means nothing. It still doesn't mean anything. What you feel only matters to you. It's what you do to the people you say you love, that's what matters. It's the only thing that counts.

While reading Brian McLaren’s Everything Must Change, which points out the failure of the church to effect change in the world, I wonder if our solely feelings-based and knowledge-based faith is hamstringing what should also be a faith driven by actions. Perhaps a misunderstanding of the oft-quoted “faith” over “works” has caused us to reach a point where inaction is acceptable. As long as my TULIPs are fine, why should a massive famine or genocide concern me? I point this criticism at myself more than anyone else.

“It’s what you do to the people you say you love, that’s what matters.” If we do nothing about global crises, or even about our local neighbors, then our words will ring hollow when we say we love the world. And as the body of Christ, we risk undermining what it means when we say that Jesus loves the world.

The Great Debaters

I got to see The Great Debaters last weekend and recommend it. Oprah Winfrey was one of the producers, and it stars Denzel Washington and Forest Whitaker. Set in the Jim Crow South of the 1930's, the film made me realize not only the physical colonization of African-Americans that occurred, but the intellectual  colonization as well. It's also very applicable to many issues we are facing today. A few great lines:

"An unjust law is no law at all." -James Farmer Sr. quoting Augustine
"Majorities do not decide what is right or what is wrong." -Samantha Booke
"Jesus was a radical." -Melvin Tolson, the "evil communist" debate team coach

The debates in Oklahoma and at Harvard are awesome, too. They made me want to re-read Martin Luther King Jr, especially since we'll be observing MLK Day on Monday. Go see the film!

Born again...

A couple of friends and I will be joining a book discussion next week about Brian McLaren's Everything Must Change: Jesus, Global Crises and a Revolution of Hope. Lately I've been thinking through how individualism has so affected our view of what the church should be, and a story that McLaren shares is in the same vein. He visited South Africa to meet with local pastors, and during his time there a healthcare worker criticizes the conservative church's efforts in a slum named Khayelitsha that is ravaged by AIDS and unemployment. The church's work was focused on individual people becoming Christians, instead of being focused on larger-scale issues as well, such as sex education and job training.

The healthcare worker comments: "By talking only about individuals being born again, they keep Khayelitsha and our whole nation from being born again in a fuller sense of the term" (29). This made me wonder what it means for the church in my nation to be born again in this fuller sense...