I later learned that her experience overlapped with where I worked and studied: she had worked for the Wall Street Journal and taught at Georgetown University.

During the more than year-long campaign, Trump made a large number of discriminatory remarks against Muslims, immigrants, women, and people of color. I’m very curious. All of Normani’s identities have been attacked by Trump. She should be the person who is the strongest protester against Trump. How can she vote for him and also publicly write articles in support of him?

After Normani’s article was published, Georgetown University professor Christine Fair launched a fierce criticism of her. She described Normani as hooking up with the media like a solicitor, saying she was a clown and an idiot. This public case prompted the editor of the school magazine to have the idea of ??inviting the two to have a conversation. The editors believed that if they could debate on social media, they should also be brave enough to speak publicly. "Dissent is at the heart of a university's academic culture, and Georgetown should not be an exception."

Normani immediately accepted the invitation. But Phil refused.

The conversation ultimately took place between Jacques Berlinerblau, director of the Center for Jewish Civilization at Georgetown University, and Normani.

On the evening of March 1st, I arrived at the antique Copley Formal Lounge early. What is different from usual is that this time there are several school police officers on standby to prevent disturbances. There have been riots at other universities due to serious political divisions, and tonight's topic involves complex and sensitive religious issues. Thinking of this, sitting in the first row, I thought a little uneasily, no one will smash flowers and plants tonight, right?

Meet

Entering the hall, I recognized the famous woman at a glance. She is wearing an Islamic-style green dress and her steps are light and agile. She does not look like a woman in her 50s, and she looks weaker than the photo in the Washington Post. Soon, the audience arrived in twos and threes, including women wearing Muslim headscarves and men wearing Muslim caps. Are they here to protest?

The seats were packed. After the editor-in-chief of the school magazine gave a speech, Jewish civilization scholar Paulina Blau began to introduce Normani. He said: "I accepted the invitation because I have deep respect for this woman..."

As soon as he spoke the first sentence, he was interrupted by a deliberately loud applause from an audience member. It was me. The Muslim man next to me, and a few people behind me, led the applause. It turns out that they are not here to sing the opposite, but to stand up for Normani. Maybe it’s because he hopes to get a head start and scare the opponents!

Polina Blau was a little embarrassed and said that everyone should listen to what he said before applauding. He said he had deep respect for the woman. He and this woman have different opinions, but civilization is based on harmony without difference.

“I have worked with Normani ***, and her writing is fascinating. She has long supported liberalism, supports everyone should have the right to make choices, supports homosexuality, supports gun control, these are all The core ideals of the Democratic Party. I was also driven by curiosity to hear why Normani voted for Trump this time."

Normani thanked Polina Blau and put aside Chen. Meet the audience who came to listen to the conversation. Her voice was neither too loud nor too soft, gentle and calm, as if she was carefully protecting something fragile. When speaking to the audience, she leaned forward slightly, as if she wanted to strengthen her persuasiveness. But she didn't mean to flatter him.

She said: "Before this, I had identified with liberalism all my life. In every presidential election, I voted for the Democratic Party. I also voted for Obama. When this election began, I She initially considered voting for Sanders.”

She mentioned two reasons that prompted her to change her mind: She was a single mother, raising a son, and working as a freelancer. Obamacare reforms have increased the financial burden on her income bracket.

She also mentioned that she has been working against radical Islamic terrorism for the past 15 years.

On the night when terrorists attacked a nightclub in the United States last year, she saw Trump tweeting that he would crack down on radical Islamic terrorism. The Democratic Party, represented by Obama and Hillary Clinton, is unwilling to use the term "radical Islamic terrorism." They believe that only people with extreme ideas are responsible for launching terrorist attacks. If religion and terrorism are compared together, they worry that it will lead to people's hatred of different faiths and cause more confusion and division.

Normani said Trump gave her hope of breaking the deadlock. Because the Muslim community needs reform. If there is no reform and the conservative authoritarian forces are allowed to silence the voice of criticism, the ideology will become more and more extreme.

Of course, she admitted that extremist ideas can be seen in many religions, not just Islam.

She said: We oppose the Christian theocratic system, why don’t we also oppose the Muslim theocratic system, but accept it as a brother? I believe that we should try our best to eradicate extremist ideas among the Muslim community, instead of allowing terrorists to amplify the wound collection in people's hearts and create terror and hatred.

But her hopes for Trump were strongly questioned by the audience and became the focus of the evening's discussion.

Wars over the travel ban

After Trump took office, he issued an executive order requiring airports to immediately ban the entry of all citizens from seven countries with predominantly Muslim populations. The ban caused confusion and was seen as undermining freedom of religious belief, and a judge issued an order suspending enforcement. (Author's note: After the completion of this article, Trump signed a revised executive order on March 6, removing Iraq from the seven countries and changing it to six countries. The main reason for removing Iraq was to consider the United States' It is necessary to join hands with Iraq to fight against the "Islamic State" (ISIS) terrorists. The new executive order prohibits the issuance of new visas to citizens of six predominantly Muslim countries in the next 90 days, but those who have already obtained visas are not included in this modification. The ban is intended to be passed by the court, but many people believe that the executive order does not change the characteristics of discriminating against Muslims)

Normani once told Fox News that Trump’s ban does not change. The ban against Muslims is to safeguard homeland security. She said: "What we are facing is a crisis, an ideological war of a generation. What we need are extreme solutions."

Polina Blau asked: Trump Doesn’t the ban target immigrants from countries with predominantly Muslim populations?

She insisted on her point of view: "To me, this executive order is only the first step in solving the problem of terrorism, although this step is not smooth."

The audience did not Be persuaded.

An audience member asked: Don’t you think Trump has obvious rejection and fear of Islam (Islamophobia)? During his campaign, he said that he would lock all Muslims around the world out of the country. Can't you see his hostility towards Muslims?

She said: I really don’t think Trump is anti-Muslim. It’s just that the communication method Trump uses is not what we are used to. As for what his tweets represent, I have no obligation to defend him one by one.

At this time, the audience was in an uproar. Many people shook their heads in opposition, thinking that she was denying an obvious fact. Trump's own famous saying during the election was to lock out all Muslims around the world.

Polina Blau interjected: So where do you draw the line? Are there no boundaries at all?

Normani replied: How to define Islamophobia? It refers to an irrational fear of Muslims. But the Trump administration recognizes that terrorism is not a problem for Muslims as a whole. I don't think Trump is misunderstanding on this issue.

An audience member asked: Trump’s executive order does not ban the entry of citizens from Muslim countries that have caused major terrorist attacks on the United States, such as Saudi Arabia, whose terrorists participated in the horrific 9/11 incident. .

Is Trump’s ban really about fighting terrorists?

Normani replied: I am counting how many days have just passed since Trump took office. (At this time, someone in the audience commented: This is not the core of the issue.)

She went on to say: The seven countries involved in Trump’s executive order are different from the possible threats to U.S. security listed by the Obama administration in 2011. The list of countries posing a threat is consistent. She repeatedly emphasized that it was Obama who made the list of countries, not Trump.

In fact, there are multiple fact-checking websites in the United States that provide clear explanations about the differences between Obama’s and Trump’s bans.

According to the Politifact website, the temporary ban issued by Obama in 2011 was a targeted executive order with a narrow scope of application. It was triggered by a failed terrorist attack plan and only targeted refugees. Trump's ban is for a hypothetical situation, because citizens of these seven countries have not caused major casualties in terrorist attacks on the United States. His ban is broader.

Polina Blau said: Even a major terrorist-producing country like Saudi Arabia is not among them. How could you let Trump go so easily?

Another audience member asked: How do you convince yourself that Trump’s words will not encourage hatred against Muslims?

Normani replied: That’s a good question. I think the Trump administration will try to discern, and I'm sure they're trying to cool down that atmosphere. This is also one of the challenges we face.

"Trump's America"

Normani expressed his distrust of Hillary in the "Washington Post" article. After news broke that the Clinton Foundation had received millions of dollars in donations from Qatar and Saudi Arabia, she concluded that Clinton did not have the resolve to fight radical Islamic terrorists.

According to public information, the Clinton Foundation has indeed received donations from these two countries. However, the foundation’s financial situation has been strictly audited and has high transparency. It has been rated as a global star by many charity rating agencies. One of the highest-level foundations. Of course, these ratings may be based primarily on tax returns and may not fully reflect whether Clinton maintains an appropriate distance from donors.

Normani said that she is more optimistic about Trump’s America than Hillary’s America.

She said in the article: "I was born in India and came to the United States in the summer of 1969 when I was only four years old. I have no fear of 'Trump's America'. The checks and balances of the American system, and our rich history of pursuing social justice and civil rights equality will never allow the artificial fears in Trump's speech to come true."

"My biggest concern is in 'Sheila,'" she said. In the United States, the possible impact of Muslim theocratic countries including Qatar and Saudi Arabia requires us to muster the moral courage to face not only anti-Muslim hatred, but also hatred from Muslims. ”

However, Normani may have been too optimistic in his estimate of “Trump’s America.” There are many signs that although the United States has a rich history of pursuing social justice and civil rights equality, society is far from forming a political consciousness. This is precisely why Trump’s remarks have been enthusiastically welcomed by some people, but have been strongly criticized by others. Reasons for objection.

Refuse to worship in a small dark room

As a Muslim immigrant in the United States, Normani has a different perspective than many others.

Normani is not an ordinary reporter or writer. She gave birth to a child out of wedlock and was considered virtuous in traditional Islam. She has been a vocal advocate for the freedom and advancement of Muslim women and the abandonment of outdated concepts.

She told the audience: In Mecca, women can worship anywhere. However, at the Islamic Center in Washington, I could only go to a darkened room to worship, and I was not allowed to enter through the front door. This is unacceptable to my liberal ideals.

In 2004, she published an article in the "Washington Post" calling for women to be allowed to worship in the main hall of the mosque like men, instead of hiding in dark huts. In her small hometown in West Virginia, she defied the rules and chose to worship with men.

Although she stood 20 feet away from male Muslims, an all-male court tried to ban her from doing so. Later an elder suggested that a group of men surround her during her prayers in an attempt to "scare her away". After the article was published, a fellow Muslim said to her: "You have brought shame to our community. Stop writing!"

Nomani said that the behavior of the Muslim community in trying to censor and control dissent has changed. It is becoming increasingly common for increasingly authoritarian forces to refrain from criticizing the extreme elements of religious ideology in the name of safeguarding the image of Islam. She believes that the teachings promoted by these forces are a patriarchal culture based on shame, which emphasizes respectability, and those who dare to criticize are often attacked, harassed and intimidated. She herself has even received death threats.

The "Pearl Incident" that had a profound impact

Another thing that had a profound impact on her was her good friend and former Wall Street Journal colleague Daniel Pearl ( Daniel Pearl was kidnapped by terrorists and eventually brutally murdered while doing investigative reporting on terrorists in Pakistan. This incident in 2002 shocked the world. Nomani happened to be writing a book in Pakistan at the time. Pearl left her local residence that January morning and never returned.

Later, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a member of Al Qaeda who planned the 9/11 attacks, admitted that he had killed Pearl. However, when the US government announced his charges, it only mentioned that he caused the "9.11" incident, but did not say a word that he was responsible for Pearl's death.

This conclusion confused Normani. She felt that as an investigative reporter and Pearl's friend, she had a mission to find out for him who the real murderer was. She spent ten years doing this research. "I was focused on it, and it even became my career for a while."

She co-founded the Pearl Project (Pearl Project) with Georgetown University professor ***. She participated in social network data training, and she led students to interview current and former American and Pakistani officials. Even her mother participated in translating thick Urdu materials. Through her efforts, she found enough evidence to prove that the person who confessed was indeed the real murderer, although the U.S. government did not tie 9/11 to the Pearl incident due to various considerations.

Normani gave her son the middle name Daneel in honor of her best friend.

The journey of finding faith

She wrote about her confusion in the book "Standing Alone". She said the person who planned and killed Pearl was someone like her who prayed five times a day. The father of her child, like her, would go to the mosque to pray every Friday, but when she gave birth to the child, he did not stand with her. Instead, he regarded her as a betrayer of the religion for giving birth to a child out of wedlock. These things once made Normani doubt his faith. For this reason, she went to Mecca, the birthplace of Islam, to find spiritual support.

During this journey, she was able to pursue Islamic civilization and follow the footsteps of some great women in history, discovering that some of them were deviant and some were single mothers like herself. She realizes that she is deeply at odds with tradition, power, and fear. She believes that the core values ??of all religions and cultures are: truth, knowledge, love, and courage.

Because of the truth, she was freed from duplicity, self-contradiction and shame; because of her deep understanding and speculation about religion, she was able to get rid of the constraints and gain physical and mental liberation as a Muslim woman; her parents and brothers The love of her friends inspired her to explore areas that were considered forbidden areas, to think and learn freely; finally, courage allowed her to dare to be honest and uphold justice.

A friend who knows her said: Nomani is obviously not a Muslim in the conventional sense. After experiencing Pearl's death, Normani's strong hatred of Muslim extremist terrorists became the overwhelming reason for her support for Trump.

This reason is so strong that she can ignore some things in Trump's words and deeds that are obviously contrary to her inner beliefs.

I agree with my friend’s judgment. Nomani's fight for Muslim women to gain a higher status shows that she is a defender of women's rights, which is in sharp contrast to Trump's insults and derogations towards women. She also opposes building a wall between the United States and Mexico and supports fighting climate change. She supports abortion. It can be said that she does not agree with Trump and most of the ideas of the Communist Party and the party.

From my perspective, although she voted for Trump, what she did shows that she is still a pure liberal.

When she heard Trump’s slogan about banning citizens from Muslim countries from entering the country, others saw Trump’s disrespect for Muslims, but what she saw was a glimmer of hope, a glimmer of hope for the present. Some discourse systems and the hope of challenging the Muslim theocratic autocracy.

Normani’s struggle was difficult and lonely. If this ancient religious group really needs reform, because of the particularity of religion, any change can only be initiated by insiders and is difficult to achieve by external forces.

She has her own special mission.

“Ballots are not love letters”

The real question is, can Normani’s hope of breaking the status quo be realized through Trump? Is what Trump advocates the direction of freedom she pursues?

Compared to Obama, who advocates equality and religious freedom, will Trump give Muslim women a higher status? His travel ban did more to raise concerns about discrimination against Muslims than help encourage open discussion and reflection on religious issues.

So far, Trump has not introduced any policies that can effectively curb terrorist activities, and it is not as he boasted during the campaign that this will all change on his first day in office.

How determined is Trump to fight against extremist Muslim terrorists? How high is it on his agenda? What cards does he have to play?

Normani was asked repeatedly in the conversation how she could be sure that things would get better, not worse, as she hoped. She admitted: "Every day I have to face problems like this, which makes me feel like I have to constantly prove something, and I have to send a tweet one day to declare that I regret this choice."

Trump In the short period of time since taking office, although Wall Street indexes have hit record highs in anticipation of tax cuts, other aspects have been riddled with problems. A flurry of resignations and replacements in the cabinet due to various scandals, mixed foreign policy signals, and unsubstantiated attacks on the media have earned him a reputation for undermining free speech. These flaws are inevitable.

Normani could not explain this perfectly. She said: "The vote is not a love letter to me."

She said that she has received more vitriol and hatred in the past three months than she has heard in the past 15 years. What she strives for is communication and discussion without restricted areas. She said that the dialogue tonight at Georgetown University can be held in such a peaceful atmosphere, which gives me hope!

Different voices of Muslims

A former White House staff member who is also a Muslim sees a much pessimistic prospect for "Trump's America".

Rumana Ahmed is a Bangladeshi immigrant who came to the United States with her parents in 1978. She has believed in the American Dream since she was a child and likes Disney, American football and participating in community services. She is the only hijab-wearing Muslim woman working in the West Wing. When President Obama left the White House, she chose to stay on the National Security Council, wanting to continue serving the country.

“But I only lasted 8 days.”

Ahmed wrote an article in The Atlantic Monthly, saying that when Obama was in office, the White House was very welcoming and tolerant of her. After Trump's executive order was issued, people in the White House viewed her as a threat. She saw that the policy power of the White House was in the hands of a few people. The travel ban resulted in a large number of Muslims being discriminated against at the airport, and the writer of far-right articles advocating that Islam is the enemy became a senior White House official.

Her boss, Michael Anton, wrote an article under a pseudonym praising autocracy, believing that diversity is a weakness of the United States, and saying that Islam is incompatible with modern Western ideas. Ahmed said: The idea of ??calling America's diversity a "weakness" is dangerous. The phenomenon of people of different religions, races, genders and ages flocking to the airport to protest against the executive order just proves that diversity is a strength.

Conversation after the show

Since there were no questions asked, I went to meet Normani after the show. I introduced that I had done a lot of news reporting for the Wall Street Journal, and she smiled kindly.

But I still raised my question: You said one of the reasons you voted for Trump was because of the increase in your cost of living caused by Obamacare. So, which reason is more important: economic considerations or concerns about extreme religious ideologies? If Obama's health care plan brought you an improvement in life, would you still make the same choice?

She said: This is a good question. After a pause, she said: Ideology is probably the main reason.

I asked again: As a veteran journalist, what do you think of the White House press conference refusing free media participation?

She said: I think the media is becoming more and more biased.

This answer surprised me a little. I asked: Even if the media is really biased, can this be a reason for Trump to block their reporting rights?

She replied with some reluctance: It was just a small briefing, not a large press conference. Of course, by doing this, Trump will give people more excuses to hate him.

She was not so confident when she said this. I asked in my heart: As a veteran reporter, if you step out of your position as a Trump voter, do you think this is just Trump giving others an excuse to criticize, rather than causing substantial harm to freedom of speech and democracy? ? Shouldn't this be strongly protested?

But out of respect for her and my understanding of her as a public figure, I didn’t ask further. I just shook her hand and said goodbye in a friendly way.

I think that she must have had many mental journeys that I don’t understand until she gets to where she is today.

Another friend of hers said to me: "I didn't vote for Trump, but I understand why Normani did it."