essay two

Afghan Troubles

            To those who are not familiar with the Koran, they might think of it as the holy book that is studied by the Islamic faith. More specifically, the Koran is the record of God’s words to the Prophet Muhammad as revealed through the Angel Gabriel. Muslims believe this to be the holiest book and are instructed from day one to think of it this way, as it is the only proof that Muhammad was the messenger of God words. Essentially, pious Muslims are willing to do anything to protect this sacred text.

            On Monday February 20^th, 2012, two NATO soldiers, possibly Americans, pulled up in a military dump truck to the landfill at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan and started to unload bags of books into the incinerator. According to Afghani witnesses, a few workers approached the pit to see what they were exactly burning and a boy exclaimed, “It is Holy Koran.”(NYT) Immediately, all who heard this attempted to attack the supposed NATO officers with their helmets while some tried to put out the flame. In all 4 Korans were burned in the fire as reported by the New York Times.

            Hours later, workers who witnessed the event smuggled the burnt Korans out of the base and shortly thereafter protests began. As word of this atrocious episode spread on Tuesday, thousands of people gathered outside the base armed with stones and gasoline bombs with the intent of making it quite obvious how disgusted they were. The large crowd soon set the external checkpoint to the base on fire.  A protestor named Mohammed Asif said, “They have burned our Holy Korans… We are Muslims and we are created by God and the Koran is our Gods book; we have to defend it. This means they burned our faith, our honor and our lives. The person who did this must stand trial.”(NYT). That same day, John Allen, the NATO commanding general, issued an apology to the people, president, government, and religion of Afghanistan on local television and radio saying the burnings were unintentional. However, it did not silence the people of this nation. From here, the story quickly turned into international knowledge, however no one was concerned how dangerous this may be at the time.

            The following day, fierce protests continued within six of the country’s provinces leaving several dead and many more wounded. Abdul Khawasi, a member of Afghanistan’s Parliament, urged that jihad should be waged against America calling it an obligation (NYT). The Afghani government attempted to crack down on the protests on Thursday, resulting in further death and injury as concern grew amongst the government and Western officials for what was to come on the Friday day of prayer. This crackdown did not prevent the killing of two American soldiers by a man dressed in an Afghan Army uniform. This is when the story began to make its way into many more media outlets in the United States, prompting Republican candidates to take a stance on the issue that I will touch upon later. President Obama issued an apology over a phone call and in a letter to President Hamid Karzai that same day; however, members in parliament continue to openly encourage the public to attack NATO forces. Karazi continued to try to convince his country and members of the parliament to resist in a public address made that day.

            The story complicates even further with growing fear as to who is influencing all these people. The lawmaker Fatima Aziz from the Kunduz province feared that Iran and Pakistan are exploiting this unrest through, “behind-the –scenes manipulation.” (NYT) These countries have used this incident to put the American military under greater pressure. Furthermore, the Taliban issued two statements essentially encouraging citizens to attack anyone who was attempting to calm the protestors or anyone from or affiliated with NATO.

            As violence continued in Afghanistan through its fifth day of protests, the civilian death toll continued to rise. 10 died on Friday, majority of which were from gunshot wounds. In the Heart Province, stray gunfire hit a police truck full of ammunition causing it to explode injuring 65 people. Again, Iran was accused of being a culprit in this protest with many locals suggesting that Radio Mashad, an Iranian news station, was advocating against Western interests (NYT).

            On the February 25^th, two U.S. Officers were assassinated in the heavily guarded Interior Ministry building in Kabul. This incident triggered NATO to pull out all of its advisers in Kabul. Demonstrations against America continued, clearly showing that the encouragement by members of Parliament and Iran is even having an effect on the security forces within the nation (NYT).

            It is quite obvious that this story within Afghanistan is allowing anti-American groups and nations to take advantage of the raging emotions of the people of Afghanistan. What started out as simple protests that often occur in the Middle East has turned into national turmoil created by Americans. The media in the area have used this opportunity to exploit the emotions of Afghani people and create anti-American sentiment in greater interest for those against Western involvement. Now, this is becoming a topic of political interest in the U.S. too.

            In a Fox News Article written on the 23^rd, Nina Shea, a member of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, agreed with the U.S. decision to immediately apologize for the burning of the Korans. “It just feeds the sense of grievance,” says Shea, explaining that the multiple apologies from the White house, Pentagon, and State Department are not having an effect. Ahmad Majidyar, a senior research associate with the American Enterprise Institute, counters that argument by saying many Afghani residents accept the apologies made by the Americans and that the demonstrations are not as prevalent within the country as they seem to be. As aforementioned, we now know that is not the case (Fox News).

            Despite these opinions, political candidates are using this issue as a way to gain political leverage.  On the 24^th, Fox News reported that Newt Gingrich found the President’s apologies outrageous because the U.S. did not receive any apology from the Afghani president for killing two of our soldiers for little reason. He also said if this continues he believes that the U.S. should say, “goodbye and good luck,” to Afghanistan because they do not care about the U.S. personnel risking their lives and spending our money over there (Fox News). Rick Santorum made an appearance on ABC News on the 26^th and said Obama should not have apologized because the burning of the Korans was a clear mistake and that it was hurting America’s image abroad and in Afghanistan. He also said that there was not a mistake that two Americans were killed in uniform, rather it was something deliberate and that an apology on the behalf of the U.S. was unnecessary (Huffington Post).

            There are numerous implications that can come from this incident. In theory, if the U.S. continues to stay in Afghanistan, riots can get even worse than they already are. I think American advisers as well as soldiers will continue to be killed. It seems as though every day more and more Muslims are taking to the streets to show their outrage. Also, in many of the articles that I have read on the subject almost all have a comment from a Muslim from Afghanistan that declares that they should wage jihad in honor of what the Koran represents. It is also apparent that people within the Afghani forces are starting to turn on Americans that are already involved in their country. If we were to pull out, I think many lives can be saved and a great deal of money will no longer go to training Afghani forces. But if the U.S. left, Iran and Pakistan may feel like they have won the small battle in a large fight, which would not be good for the Middle East in my opinion. One problem that I see with this entire saga is that the Taliban is showing that it has the power to take control of a country that it once had a great power over. It would almost be like taking a step in the wrong direction if we left that country, however, things at this moment are volatile and it is difficult to say what I believe is going to happen. I find it unfortunate that the Taliban is having the influence it has at the moment over something that seems so simple. The other day I happened upon the Fox News station on XM Satellite Radio and I remember hearing that it is believed to be just as unsacred to write in the Koran as it is to burn the Koran, but a large number of Muslims write in the Koran anyway. Like I said before, it is hard to say what is going to come of this entire situation, nonetheless it is a very interesting one at that.  This may not affect my personal life in the immediate future or maybe not even affect me at all, but it definitely will play a role in the large scheme of things.  

Taking an Approach

After I first read, “taking an approach,” I saw that I had some similarities to “forwarding” a text. If you were to forward a text, you essentially take an authors ideas and examples and use them to enhance your writing. “Taking an approach” is similar to “forwarding” in that you use an author’s idea to help prove the point you are making in a text. However, “taking an approach” specifically means to take an author’s writing style or “mode” and use that to build your own ideas. (at least that is what I understood from this confusing chapter).

According to Harris, there are three methods of using an author’s writing style to enhance your text. The first is “acknowledging influences” which essentially acknowledges the writers ideas that you use to enhance your writing. The second is turning an approach on itself, which is taking the questions that the author asks their audience, and asking those questions back to that author. The final method is reflexivity in which you the writer recognize the mode that he or she wrote in.

I initially found it hard to find examples of this in the Huffington Post of the New York Times, but I then realized is isn’t something that you can physically identify in their writing. The researchers, editors, writers and publishers are all applying their previous knowledge of different types of writing to the piece they are currently working on. A general example of this would a writer would try to draw on the emotions of the reader by using certain techniques that they learned over their years of reading. 

Countering on my own

I initially thought that it would be difficult to counter or forward something in my own writing. But as I began to read through my blogs I found that it would be a simple task that required a little more thought than usual.

            The blog that I will be revising addresses Nicholas Carr’s “Is Google Making Us Stupid.” In this blog post, I agree with Carr’s point that Google is essentially turning our brains to over efficient tools and I even can note that I have the same experience that he has had when reading. To revise this blog post, I’m going to use the countering technique as demonstrated by Harris. After reading several more articles after this one, I have changed my opinion on how the Internet is affecting our brains. In the blog post, I briefly summarize Carr’s main points and give a personal example. To counter, I am going to give a personal example of when the Internet is beneficial to our brains and then make the point that the Internet might actually be good for us despite what Carr thinks.

           

            Although Carr definitely makes a good point that the Internet is negatively affecting our brains, I feel as though he left out the other side of the story. Can the Internet actually help us process information faster by allowing us to review more texts in a shorter amount of time?  I think so. Carr could have easily given an example similar to the one I am about to give: while writing a paper, I typically will have all of the sources I plan to use in front of me, whether it be a book or several Internet sources opened on my computer screen. I usually will open the text I plan to cite and skim it quickly for the example I need. Typically, I find it within a few minutes of viewing the text. I have found over my writing career that it is becoming much faster and easier to find the example I need from texts I will use in my writing. Is this the result of interaction with the Internet? Carr points out that the Internet is making our brains programmed for efficiency and immediacy. If this were true, would this example be a result of constant Internet use? I believe so. One can easily apply Carr’s idea of how the Internet is shaping our brains to examples like the one I mentioned above.

Countering

Upon coming across the title of this chapter, I thought Harris would show us literary techniques to disprove or argue an idea. However, countering is a technique in which the writer introduces a new idea into conversation and uses this idea to convey their point. Countering is not a technique used to bash or debate an issue, rather it is a technique used to, “respond to prior views in ways that move the conversation in new directions.” (Harris, 56)

Harris presents countering in three different ways. First, a writer can “argue the other side” by first presenting text’s side of the argument and then follow that up by presenting the other side of that issue being discussed in the text. By “uncovering values,” a writer recognizes concepts or ideas that an author failed bring up or acknowledge in their text. When “dissenting,” the writer argues against a thought that was presented in another text.

I like how Harris defines countering. It often recognizes both sides of the argument and by doing so it shows the audience that one point is much stronger than its countering point. This method does not directly insult a piece of writing, however it uses reasoning to disprove an argument. It makes it feel more like a conversation and I feel like it can help eliminate some a bias in a text.  

In the Green section of The Huffington post, you can definitely see “countering” being used in a few of the articles. It is most prevalent in the political articles related to green issues. An article of this nature will often begin by presenting a popular belief of the climate or of something green related, and then refute it with new evidence or bills that are being introduced. 

Forwarding

In Forwarding, Harris gets to the point of the chapter rather quickly. Within the first six pages, Harris establishes what he is attempting to show his audience, and then he uses the rest of the chapter to describe what the four types of forwarding are.

Harris uses the metaphor of conversation to help his audience understand what “forwarding” a text means. The goal of a conversation is not to win the argument or have the final say; rather it is to push it forward and bring up new ideas to further strengthen and add more credibility to a conversation. When forwarding a text, you take some aspect of that work and relate it to your writing. An essay should not try to tell their audience that there is only one opinion or idea that is correct. The idea of an essay should be to work with other texts to add validity and credibility to an argument. You are also carrying on a conversation by carrying ideas from other pieces of writing and applying it to yours. Your essay now becomes apart of a large string of thoughts and ideas, and maybe someday someone will engage in a conversation with your piece of writing. This is the idea of forwarding: actively engaging your writing with other pieces of texts, carrying on a conversation of sorts.

As aforementioned, Harris divides forwarding up into four different types: illustrating, authorizing, borrowing, and extending. By illustrating, writers apply specific examples from a separate text to their own. If a writer is authorizing, they are using the credibility of an author to strengthen their argument. If borrowing from a text, a writer is directly citing a writer’s text to further prove an argument. When extending a text, you take an idea presented by the author and interpret it in your own way.

In the blogs on the Huffington Post, forwarding is used everywhere. In every blog, there are examples of the four different types of forwarding. Blogging also allows for what I would call, “direct” forwarding. By this I mean they provide a direct link related to the issue that helps the reader get loser to the direct source of the news.