The Westboro Baptist Church currently holds the title of most insane thing purporting to be a Christian church in America, but could a small congregation of horribly misguided Christians in central Florida soon be taking their place? The Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville is hosting "International Burn a Koran Day" on the 9th anniversary of September 11th. This, of course, will come a little more than a month after their "No Homo Mayor" protest.
The Church and its senior pastor Terry Jones says that Islam is "a violent and oppressive religion that is trying to mascarade itself as a religion of peace, seeking to deceive our society." Of course, it's widely known that all non-violent, non-oppressive religions celebrate peace by burning the holy books of other churches.
The protest comes about a year after the Church put up a crude "Islam is of the Devil" sign out front. Incidently, Jones has written an entire book of the same name which includes ten handy reasons why it's totally cool to burn Korans.
The church has set up a Facebook page for the group, which for some reason has already attracted a number of comments posting anti-semitic images.
While Jones mainly seems to be set on hating on Muslim, he occasionally finds time to hate gays too. Gainesville recently elected openly gay politician Craig Lowe as Mayor, and of course Dove World campaigned hard against him. On his inauguration day they'll be hosting a "No Homo Mayor" protest at city hall.
As for the Koran burning, we just have to wonder if Sarah Palin will ask peace-seeking Christians to "refudiate" the protest, as it's unnecessary provocation that stabs hearts.
Source - http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2010/07/florida_church_hosting_interna.php
Subscribe to My Muslim News by Email
Sunday, July 25, 2010
Friday, July 23, 2010
Fallujah's Cancer rate worse than Hiroshima
The Iraqi city of Fallujah continues to suffer the ghastly consequences of a US military onslaught in late 2004.
According to the authors of a new study, “Cancer, Infant Mortality and Birth Sex-Ratio in Fallujah, Iraq 2005–2009,” the people of Fallujah are experiencing higher rates of cancer, leukemia, infant mortality, and sexual mutations than those recorded among survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the years after those Japanese cities were incinerated by US atomic bomb strikes in 1945.
The epidemiological study, published in the International Journal of Environmental Studies and Public Health (IJERPH), also finds the prevalence of these conditions in Fallujah to be many times greater than in nearby nations.
The assault on Fallujah, a city located 43 miles west of Baghdad, was one of the most horrific war crimes of our time. After the population resisted the US-led occupation of Iraq—a war of neo-colonial plunder launched on the basis of lies—Washington determined to make an example of the largely Sunni city. This is called “exemplary” or “collective” punishment and is, according to the laws of war, illegal.
The new public health study of the city now all but proves what has long been suspected: that a high proportion of the weaponry used in the assault contained depleted uranium, a radioactive substance used in shells to increase their effectiveness.
In a study of 711 houses and 4,843 individuals carried out in January and February 2010, authors Chris Busby, Malak Hamdan, Entesar Ariabi and a team of researchers found that the cancer rate had increased fourfold since before the US attack five years ago, and that the forms of cancer in Fallujah are similar to those found among the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bomb survivors, who were exposed to intense fallout radiation.
In Fallujah the rate of leukemia is 38 times higher, the childhood cancer rate is 12 times higher, and breast cancer is 10 times more common than in populations in Egypt, Jordan, and Kuwait. Heightened levels of adult lymphoma and brain tumors were also reported. At 80 deaths out of every 1,000 births, the infant mortality rate in Fallujah is more than five times higher than in Egypt and Jordan, and eight times higher than in Kuwait.
Strikingly, after 2005 the proportion of girls born in Fallujah has increased sharply. In normal populations, 1050 boys are born for every 1000 girls. But among those born in Fallujah in the four years after the US assault, the ratio was reduced to 860 boys for every 1000 female births. This alteration is similar to gender ratios found in Hiroshima after the US atomic attack of 1945.
The most likely reason for the change in the sex ratio, according to the researchers, is the impact of a major mutagenic event—likely the use of depleted uranium in US weapons. While boys have one X-chromosome, girls have a redundant X-chromosome and can therefore absorb the loss of one chromosome through genetic damage.
“This is an extraordinary and alarming result,” said Busby, a professor of molecular biosciences at the University of Ulster and director of scientific research for Green Audit, an independent environmental research group. “To produce an effect like this, some very major mutagenic exposure must have occurred in 2004 when the attacks happened. We need urgently to find out what the agent was. Although many suspect uranium, we cannot be certain without further research and independent analysis of samples from the area.”
Busby told an Italian television news station, RAI 24, that the “extraordinary” increase in radiation-related maladies in Fallujah is higher than that found in the populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki after the US atomic strikes of 1945. “My guess is that this was caused by depleted uranium,” he said. “They must be connected.”
The US military uses depleted uranium, also known as spent nuclear fuel, in armor-piercing shells and bullets because it is twice as dense as lead. Once these shells hit their target, however, as much as 40 percent of the uranium is released in the form of tiny particles in the area of the explosion. It can remain there for years, easily entering the human bloodstream, where it lodges itself in lymph glands and attacks the DNA produced in the sperm and eggs of affected adults, causing, in turn, serious birth defects in the next generation.
The research is the first systematic scientific substantiation of a body of evidence showing a sharp increase in infant mortality, birth defects, and cancer in Fallujah.
In October of 2009, several Iraqi and British doctors wrote a letter to the United Nations demanding an inquiry into the proliferation of radiation-related sickness in the city:
“Young women in Fallujah in Iraq are terrified of having children because of the increasing number of babies born grotesquely deformed, with no heads, two heads, a single eye in their foreheads, scaly bodies or missing limbs. In addition, young children in Fallujah are now experiencing hideous cancers and leukemias.…
“In September 2009, Fallujah General Hospital had 170 newborn babies, 24 percent of whom were dead within the first seven days, a staggering 75 percent of the dead babies were classified as deformed.…
“Doctors in Fallujah have specifically pointed out that not only are they witnessing unprecedented numbers of birth defects, but premature births have also considerably increased after 2003. But what is more alarming is that doctors in Fallujah have said, ‘a significant number of babies that do survive begin to develop severe disabilities at a later stage.’” (See: “Sharp rise in birth defects in Iraqi city destroyed by US military”)
The Pentagon responded to this report by asserting that there were no studies to prove any proliferation of deformities or other maladies associated with US military actions. “No studies to date have indicated environmental issues resulting in specific health issues,” a Defense Department spokesman told the BBC in March. There have been no studies, however, in large part because Washington and its puppet Baghdad regime have blocked them.
According to the authors of “Cancer, Infant Mortality and Birth Sex-Ratio in Fallujah,” the Iraqi authorities attempted to scuttle their survey. “[S]hortly after the questionnaire survey was completed, Iraqi TV reportedly broadcast that a questionnaire survey was being carried out by terrorists and that anyone who was answering or administering the questionnaire could be arrested,” the study reports.
The history of the atrocity committed by American imperialism against the people of Fallujah began on April 28, 2003, when US Army soldiers fired indiscriminately into a crowd of about 200 residents protesting the conversion of a local school into a US military base. Seventeen were killed in the unprovoked attack, and two days later American soldiers fired on a protest against the murders, killing two more.
This intensified popular anger, and Fallujah became a center of the Sunni resistance against the occupation—and US reprisals. On March 31, 2004, an angry crowd stopped a convoy of the private security firm Blackwater USA, responsible for its own share of war crimes. Four Blackwater mercenaries were dragged from their vehicles, beaten, burned, and hung from a bridge over the Euphrates River.
The US military then promised it would pacify the city, with one unnamed officer saying it would be turned into “a killing field,” but Operation Vigilant Resolve, involving thousands of Marines, ended in the abandonment of the siege by the US military in May, 2004. The victory of Fallujah’s residents against overwhelming military superiority was celebrated throughout Iraq and watched all over the world.
The Pentagon delivered its response in November 2004. The city was surrounded, and all those left inside were declared to be enemy combatants and fair game for the most heavily equipped killing machine in world history. The Associated Press reported that men attempting to flee the city with their families were turned back into the slaughterhouse.
In the attack, the US made heavy use of the chemical agent white phosphorus. Ostensibly used only for illuminating battlefields, white phosphorus causes terrible and often fatal wounds, burning its way through building material and clothing before eating away skin and then bone. The chemical was also used to suck the oxygen out of buildings where civilians were hiding.
Washington’s desire for revenge against the population is indicated by the fact that the US military reported about the same number of “gunmen” killed (1,400) as those taken alive as prisoners (1,300-1,500). In one instance, NBC News captured video footage of a US soldier executing a wounded and helpless Iraqi man. A Navy investigation later found the Marine had been acting in self-defense.
Fifty-one US soldiers died in 10 days of combat. The true number of city residents who were killed is not known. The city’s population before the attack was estimated to be between 425,000 and 600,000. The current population is believed to be between 250,000 and 300,000. Tens of thousands, mostly women and children, fled in advance of the attack. Half of the city’s building were destroyed, most of these reduced to rubble.
Like much of Iraq, Fallujah remains in ruins. According to a recent report from IRIN, a project of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Fallujah still has no functioning sewage system six years after the attack. “Waste pours onto the streets and seeps into drinking water supplies,” the report notes. “Abdul-Sattar Kadhum al-Nawaf, director of Fallujah general hospital, said the sewage problem had taken its toll on residents’ health. They were increasingly affected by diarrhea, tuberculosis, typhoid and other communicable diseases.”
The savagery of the US assault shocked the world, and added the name Fallujah to an infamous list that includes My Lai, Sabra-Shatila, Guérnica, Nanking, Lidice, and Wounded Knee.
But unlike those other massacres, the crime against Fallujah did not end when the bullets were no longer fired or the bombs stopped falling.
The US military’s decision to heavily deploy depleted uranium, all but proven by “Cancer, Infant Mortality and Birth Sex-Ratio in Fallujah,” was a wanton act of brutality, poisoning an entire generation of children not yet born in 2004.
The Fallujah study is timely, with the US now preparing a major escalation of the violence in Afghanistan. The former head of US Afghanistan operations, General Stanley McChrystal, was replaced last month after a media campaign, assisted by a Rolling Stone magazine feature, accused him, among other things, of tying the hands of US soldiers in their response to Afghan insurgents.
McChrystal was replaced by General David Petraeus, formerly head of the US Central Command. Petraeus has outlined new rules of engagement designed to allow for the use of disproportionate force against suspected militants.
Petraeus, in turn, was replaced at Central Command by General James “Mad Dog” Mattis, who played a key planning role in the US assault on Fallujah in 2004. Mattis revels in killing, telling a public gathering in 2005 “it’s fun to shoot some people.... You know, it’s a hell of a hoot.”
Source - http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/jul2010/fall-j23.shtml
Subscribe to My Muslim News by Email
According to the authors of a new study, “Cancer, Infant Mortality and Birth Sex-Ratio in Fallujah, Iraq 2005–2009,” the people of Fallujah are experiencing higher rates of cancer, leukemia, infant mortality, and sexual mutations than those recorded among survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the years after those Japanese cities were incinerated by US atomic bomb strikes in 1945.
The epidemiological study, published in the International Journal of Environmental Studies and Public Health (IJERPH), also finds the prevalence of these conditions in Fallujah to be many times greater than in nearby nations.
The assault on Fallujah, a city located 43 miles west of Baghdad, was one of the most horrific war crimes of our time. After the population resisted the US-led occupation of Iraq—a war of neo-colonial plunder launched on the basis of lies—Washington determined to make an example of the largely Sunni city. This is called “exemplary” or “collective” punishment and is, according to the laws of war, illegal.
The new public health study of the city now all but proves what has long been suspected: that a high proportion of the weaponry used in the assault contained depleted uranium, a radioactive substance used in shells to increase their effectiveness.
In a study of 711 houses and 4,843 individuals carried out in January and February 2010, authors Chris Busby, Malak Hamdan, Entesar Ariabi and a team of researchers found that the cancer rate had increased fourfold since before the US attack five years ago, and that the forms of cancer in Fallujah are similar to those found among the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bomb survivors, who were exposed to intense fallout radiation.
In Fallujah the rate of leukemia is 38 times higher, the childhood cancer rate is 12 times higher, and breast cancer is 10 times more common than in populations in Egypt, Jordan, and Kuwait. Heightened levels of adult lymphoma and brain tumors were also reported. At 80 deaths out of every 1,000 births, the infant mortality rate in Fallujah is more than five times higher than in Egypt and Jordan, and eight times higher than in Kuwait.
Strikingly, after 2005 the proportion of girls born in Fallujah has increased sharply. In normal populations, 1050 boys are born for every 1000 girls. But among those born in Fallujah in the four years after the US assault, the ratio was reduced to 860 boys for every 1000 female births. This alteration is similar to gender ratios found in Hiroshima after the US atomic attack of 1945.
The most likely reason for the change in the sex ratio, according to the researchers, is the impact of a major mutagenic event—likely the use of depleted uranium in US weapons. While boys have one X-chromosome, girls have a redundant X-chromosome and can therefore absorb the loss of one chromosome through genetic damage.
“This is an extraordinary and alarming result,” said Busby, a professor of molecular biosciences at the University of Ulster and director of scientific research for Green Audit, an independent environmental research group. “To produce an effect like this, some very major mutagenic exposure must have occurred in 2004 when the attacks happened. We need urgently to find out what the agent was. Although many suspect uranium, we cannot be certain without further research and independent analysis of samples from the area.”
Busby told an Italian television news station, RAI 24, that the “extraordinary” increase in radiation-related maladies in Fallujah is higher than that found in the populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki after the US atomic strikes of 1945. “My guess is that this was caused by depleted uranium,” he said. “They must be connected.”
The US military uses depleted uranium, also known as spent nuclear fuel, in armor-piercing shells and bullets because it is twice as dense as lead. Once these shells hit their target, however, as much as 40 percent of the uranium is released in the form of tiny particles in the area of the explosion. It can remain there for years, easily entering the human bloodstream, where it lodges itself in lymph glands and attacks the DNA produced in the sperm and eggs of affected adults, causing, in turn, serious birth defects in the next generation.
The research is the first systematic scientific substantiation of a body of evidence showing a sharp increase in infant mortality, birth defects, and cancer in Fallujah.
In October of 2009, several Iraqi and British doctors wrote a letter to the United Nations demanding an inquiry into the proliferation of radiation-related sickness in the city:
“Young women in Fallujah in Iraq are terrified of having children because of the increasing number of babies born grotesquely deformed, with no heads, two heads, a single eye in their foreheads, scaly bodies or missing limbs. In addition, young children in Fallujah are now experiencing hideous cancers and leukemias.…
“In September 2009, Fallujah General Hospital had 170 newborn babies, 24 percent of whom were dead within the first seven days, a staggering 75 percent of the dead babies were classified as deformed.…
“Doctors in Fallujah have specifically pointed out that not only are they witnessing unprecedented numbers of birth defects, but premature births have also considerably increased after 2003. But what is more alarming is that doctors in Fallujah have said, ‘a significant number of babies that do survive begin to develop severe disabilities at a later stage.’” (See: “Sharp rise in birth defects in Iraqi city destroyed by US military”)
The Pentagon responded to this report by asserting that there were no studies to prove any proliferation of deformities or other maladies associated with US military actions. “No studies to date have indicated environmental issues resulting in specific health issues,” a Defense Department spokesman told the BBC in March. There have been no studies, however, in large part because Washington and its puppet Baghdad regime have blocked them.
According to the authors of “Cancer, Infant Mortality and Birth Sex-Ratio in Fallujah,” the Iraqi authorities attempted to scuttle their survey. “[S]hortly after the questionnaire survey was completed, Iraqi TV reportedly broadcast that a questionnaire survey was being carried out by terrorists and that anyone who was answering or administering the questionnaire could be arrested,” the study reports.
The history of the atrocity committed by American imperialism against the people of Fallujah began on April 28, 2003, when US Army soldiers fired indiscriminately into a crowd of about 200 residents protesting the conversion of a local school into a US military base. Seventeen were killed in the unprovoked attack, and two days later American soldiers fired on a protest against the murders, killing two more.
This intensified popular anger, and Fallujah became a center of the Sunni resistance against the occupation—and US reprisals. On March 31, 2004, an angry crowd stopped a convoy of the private security firm Blackwater USA, responsible for its own share of war crimes. Four Blackwater mercenaries were dragged from their vehicles, beaten, burned, and hung from a bridge over the Euphrates River.
The US military then promised it would pacify the city, with one unnamed officer saying it would be turned into “a killing field,” but Operation Vigilant Resolve, involving thousands of Marines, ended in the abandonment of the siege by the US military in May, 2004. The victory of Fallujah’s residents against overwhelming military superiority was celebrated throughout Iraq and watched all over the world.
The Pentagon delivered its response in November 2004. The city was surrounded, and all those left inside were declared to be enemy combatants and fair game for the most heavily equipped killing machine in world history. The Associated Press reported that men attempting to flee the city with their families were turned back into the slaughterhouse.
In the attack, the US made heavy use of the chemical agent white phosphorus. Ostensibly used only for illuminating battlefields, white phosphorus causes terrible and often fatal wounds, burning its way through building material and clothing before eating away skin and then bone. The chemical was also used to suck the oxygen out of buildings where civilians were hiding.
Washington’s desire for revenge against the population is indicated by the fact that the US military reported about the same number of “gunmen” killed (1,400) as those taken alive as prisoners (1,300-1,500). In one instance, NBC News captured video footage of a US soldier executing a wounded and helpless Iraqi man. A Navy investigation later found the Marine had been acting in self-defense.
Fifty-one US soldiers died in 10 days of combat. The true number of city residents who were killed is not known. The city’s population before the attack was estimated to be between 425,000 and 600,000. The current population is believed to be between 250,000 and 300,000. Tens of thousands, mostly women and children, fled in advance of the attack. Half of the city’s building were destroyed, most of these reduced to rubble.
Like much of Iraq, Fallujah remains in ruins. According to a recent report from IRIN, a project of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Fallujah still has no functioning sewage system six years after the attack. “Waste pours onto the streets and seeps into drinking water supplies,” the report notes. “Abdul-Sattar Kadhum al-Nawaf, director of Fallujah general hospital, said the sewage problem had taken its toll on residents’ health. They were increasingly affected by diarrhea, tuberculosis, typhoid and other communicable diseases.”
The savagery of the US assault shocked the world, and added the name Fallujah to an infamous list that includes My Lai, Sabra-Shatila, Guérnica, Nanking, Lidice, and Wounded Knee.
But unlike those other massacres, the crime against Fallujah did not end when the bullets were no longer fired or the bombs stopped falling.
The US military’s decision to heavily deploy depleted uranium, all but proven by “Cancer, Infant Mortality and Birth Sex-Ratio in Fallujah,” was a wanton act of brutality, poisoning an entire generation of children not yet born in 2004.
The Fallujah study is timely, with the US now preparing a major escalation of the violence in Afghanistan. The former head of US Afghanistan operations, General Stanley McChrystal, was replaced last month after a media campaign, assisted by a Rolling Stone magazine feature, accused him, among other things, of tying the hands of US soldiers in their response to Afghan insurgents.
McChrystal was replaced by General David Petraeus, formerly head of the US Central Command. Petraeus has outlined new rules of engagement designed to allow for the use of disproportionate force against suspected militants.
Petraeus, in turn, was replaced at Central Command by General James “Mad Dog” Mattis, who played a key planning role in the US assault on Fallujah in 2004. Mattis revels in killing, telling a public gathering in 2005 “it’s fun to shoot some people.... You know, it’s a hell of a hoot.”
Source - http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/jul2010/fall-j23.shtml
Subscribe to My Muslim News by Email
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Israeli soldiers Killed 5 Palestinians In Gaza in June”
The al-Mezan Center for Human Rights, based in Gaza, issued a report on the Israeli violations in the Gaza Strip in June and stated that Israeli soldiers continued their attacks and killed five Palestinians in different part of the Gaza Strip.
The attacks targeted the residents and their property, while the soldiers killed five Palestinians in different parts of the Gaza Strip and wounded several other residents.
The center said that the army used excessive and deadly force against unarmed civilians in direct violation to the international law and the Fourth Geneva Conventions.
Israel is trying to create a "buffer zone" near the borders of Gaza and carried out nine invasion during which army bulldozers uprooted dozens of farmlands in order to create this zone. The lands are the only source of income to dozens of families.
The al-Mezan report also slammed the ongoing Israeli siege and the closure of border terminals. It added that the Israeli Navy continued its violations against Palestinian fishermen by opening fire at them and their boats, and by chasing them to the shore.
Israeli soldiers also targeted residents who collect stone and the rubble of bombarded buildings in areas near the northern and eastern borders of the Gaza Strip. The residents collect stones and rubble in an attempt to use them in rebuilding their bombarded homes due to the lack of construction materials. Several residents were wounded by military fire while trying to collect stones.
Furthermore, soldiers kidnapped a patient at the Eretz (Beit Hanoun) crossing as he was heading to an Eye Hospital in the central West Bank city of Ramallah.
Soldiers also kidnapped a paramedic who was on his way to attend a five-day training workshop at the Red Crescent headquarters in Ramallah Source
Subscribe to My Muslim News by Email
The attacks targeted the residents and their property, while the soldiers killed five Palestinians in different parts of the Gaza Strip and wounded several other residents.
The center said that the army used excessive and deadly force against unarmed civilians in direct violation to the international law and the Fourth Geneva Conventions.
Israel is trying to create a "buffer zone" near the borders of Gaza and carried out nine invasion during which army bulldozers uprooted dozens of farmlands in order to create this zone. The lands are the only source of income to dozens of families.
The al-Mezan report also slammed the ongoing Israeli siege and the closure of border terminals. It added that the Israeli Navy continued its violations against Palestinian fishermen by opening fire at them and their boats, and by chasing them to the shore.
Israeli soldiers also targeted residents who collect stone and the rubble of bombarded buildings in areas near the northern and eastern borders of the Gaza Strip. The residents collect stones and rubble in an attempt to use them in rebuilding their bombarded homes due to the lack of construction materials. Several residents were wounded by military fire while trying to collect stones.
Furthermore, soldiers kidnapped a patient at the Eretz (Beit Hanoun) crossing as he was heading to an Eye Hospital in the central West Bank city of Ramallah.
Soldiers also kidnapped a paramedic who was on his way to attend a five-day training workshop at the Red Crescent headquarters in Ramallah Source
Subscribe to My Muslim News by Email
Monday, July 19, 2010
Arabs League reject unconditional talks Amr Moussa says negotiations cannot start until guarantees are given to Palestinians
Subscribe to My Muslim News by Email
The head of the Arab League has said that Palestinians cannot move into direct peace talks with Israel unless "written guarantees" are given beforehand.
Amr Mussa, the secretary general of the 22-member pan-Arab organisation, spoke in Cairo as Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian president, held meetings aimed at breathing new life into the stalled peace process.
Mubarak spent Sunday in talks with Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister and George Mitchell, the US envoy to the Middle East peace process.
Israel and the US had hoped they could persuade the Arab League to back a Palestinian return to the negotiating table without preconditions, but after a meeting with Mitchell, Mussa dismissed the idea.
"We cannot automatically move from one negotiation to another without written guarantees," Mussa, whose organisation backed indirect talks between Israel and the Palestinians in May, said.
Resuming direct talks
Ahmed Aboul Gheit, the Egyptian foreign minister, said after the meetings that no breakthrough had been achieved.
"We are still hopeful that we can bridge this gap. The gap between the needs for security for Israel and the borders for the Palestinians," he said.
Al Jazeera's Ayman Mohyeldin, reporting from Egypt, said that it looked as though the Palestinians would not be tempted back to negotiations without specific guarantees on crucial issues such as borders, settlements and security assistance.
"So far the indications are that not enough progress has been made to warrant moving from proximity talks to direct talks," he said.
In an interview with the Jordanian newspaper Al-Ghad on Saturday, Abbas laid out a number of conditions for negotiations with Israel. He said he would resume direct talks if Israel agreed to the borders prior to the 1967 Middle East war as the basis for a Palestinian state.
He also requested an international force deployed along the border to protect the Palestinian state.
"If they agree to that, we will consider that acceptable progress, and we will move to direct negotiations," Abbas told the newspaper.
Abbas made no mention of requiring Israel to freeze settlement growth, which has long been a precondition for direct talks. The 10-month suspension of new settlement activity in the occupied West Bank, announced last year by Netanyahu, will end in September.
Yasser Abd Rabbo, a senior Palestinian official, told Al Jazeera he wants the United States to clarify its position on several issues, including borders, before resuming direct talks.
Gaza disengagement plan
Looming over Sunday's meeting between Netanyahu and Mubarak was a proposal by Avigdor Lieberman, the Israeli foreign minister, to cut all ties with Gaza.
Lieberman leaked the proposal to the Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth, calling it a "second disengagement" from the Gaza Strip.
Israel would seal its land border with Gaza, and lift its naval blockade of the territory, while European countries would be asked to take the lead on reconstructing Gaza's economy, decimated by years of war and blockade.
The plan is unpopular with the Egyptian government, because it would force Cairo to take greater responsibility for Gaza.
Netanyahu has already sought to distance himself from the proposal, saying it had not received his approval. Source
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Syria, Lebanon sign economic agreements
Subscribe to My Muslim News by Email
DAMASCUS: Syria and Lebanon signed economic agreements on Sunday, signaling improving ties, but did not resolve a border demarcation issue the Lebanese government views as central to its sovereignty.
The deals, signed by Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri with his counterpart in the Syrian capital, were the first since the 2005 assassination in Beirut of his father Rafik Hariri.
The elder Hariri was a member of Parliament and a former premier whose killing heralded international pressure that forced Syria to end its 29-year military presence in Lebanon.
“We want the ties between Syria and Lebanon to form a model for an Arab common market,” Hariri said at a news conference with Syrian Prime Minister Naji Al-Otri.
The agreements included investment protection, pharmaceutical products, shipping, tourism and taxation.
Hariri, who also met President Bashar Assad, said a committee set up by the two countries to demarcate the border "has to begin its work and finish it as soon as possible."
Otri said cooperation between Syria and its smaller neighbor had to extend to security. Damascus had hinted it was concerned about infiltration by militants from Lebanon after a 2008 bombing targeted a security compound in Damascus.
Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Al-Moualem said border demarcation must not cause what he termed social suffering by Syrian families living on Lebanese land and vice-versa.
"The border demarcation issue is not stuck. The two countries have formed committees and are in agreement," he said.
Syria agreed with Lebanon in 2008 to set the border, two years after a United Nations resolution recommended Syria work on the issue. Damascus has since said its technical teams were busy finishing border demarcation with Jordan and that a small Lebanese region occupied by Israel and bordering Syria complicated any demarcation.
A UN investigation into Hariri's killing implicated Lebanese and Syrian security officials. Syria denied any involvement and the younger Hariri has visited Syria several times since he became prime minister last year.
An international tribunal into the killing has yet to indict any suspects. Moualem said if Syrian involvement was proven, the government would try the suspect in Syria for treason.
Source
DAMASCUS: Syria and Lebanon signed economic agreements on Sunday, signaling improving ties, but did not resolve a border demarcation issue the Lebanese government views as central to its sovereignty.
The deals, signed by Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri with his counterpart in the Syrian capital, were the first since the 2005 assassination in Beirut of his father Rafik Hariri.
The elder Hariri was a member of Parliament and a former premier whose killing heralded international pressure that forced Syria to end its 29-year military presence in Lebanon.
“We want the ties between Syria and Lebanon to form a model for an Arab common market,” Hariri said at a news conference with Syrian Prime Minister Naji Al-Otri.
The agreements included investment protection, pharmaceutical products, shipping, tourism and taxation.
Hariri, who also met President Bashar Assad, said a committee set up by the two countries to demarcate the border "has to begin its work and finish it as soon as possible."
Otri said cooperation between Syria and its smaller neighbor had to extend to security. Damascus had hinted it was concerned about infiltration by militants from Lebanon after a 2008 bombing targeted a security compound in Damascus.
Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Al-Moualem said border demarcation must not cause what he termed social suffering by Syrian families living on Lebanese land and vice-versa.
"The border demarcation issue is not stuck. The two countries have formed committees and are in agreement," he said.
Syria agreed with Lebanon in 2008 to set the border, two years after a United Nations resolution recommended Syria work on the issue. Damascus has since said its technical teams were busy finishing border demarcation with Jordan and that a small Lebanese region occupied by Israel and bordering Syria complicated any demarcation.
A UN investigation into Hariri's killing implicated Lebanese and Syrian security officials. Syria denied any involvement and the younger Hariri has visited Syria several times since he became prime minister last year.
An international tribunal into the killing has yet to indict any suspects. Moualem said if Syrian involvement was proven, the government would try the suspect in Syria for treason.
Source
Elite Revolutionary Guards were killed and 100 wounded in suicide attack at a Shiite mosque in the southeast Iranian city of Zahedan
A late night broadcast by Al Arabiya television said the Sunni Muslim rebel group Jundollah claimed responsibility for the attack on the Zahedan's Grand Mosque.
The group said the attacks were in response to the execution by Iran of the group's leader Abdolmalek Rigi in June, the Dubai-based channel said.
In an e-mail to the station, the group said the bombings targeted a gathering of the Revolutionary Guards in the southeastern city of Zahedan, Arabiya said.
"In the two explosions in Zahedan more than 20 people were killed and over 100 were injured," Fariborz Rashedi, head of the emergency unit at Sistan-Baluchestan province told IRNA.
It later quoted Zahedan prosecutor Mohammad Marzieh as saying that 21 people had died.
Iran's deputy Interior Minister said "a number of Iran's Revolutionary Guards were killed and injured," the semi-official Fars news agency reported.
Zahedan's MP Hoseinali Shahriari told Fars that he believed Sunni rebel group Jundollah was behind the explosions.
Iran hanged Jundollah's leader, Abdolmalek Rigi, last month for his involvement in earlier deadly attacks in Iran.
Predominantly Shiite Muslim Iran arrested Rigi in February, four months after his Jundollah group claimed a bombing which killed dozens of people, including 15 members of the Guards. It was the deadliest attack in Iran since the 1980s.
Zahedan is the capital of Sistan-Baluchestan province which shares a border with Pakistan. The province faces serious security problems and there are frequent clashes between police and drug dealers and bandits.
In 2009, the group detonated a bomb in a Shiite mosque in Zahedan, killing 30 people and wounding more than 120.
Jundallah says it is fighting for the rights of the Sunni Baluch minority, and accuses Iran's Shiite-dominated government of persecution. Tehran claims Jundallah is behind an insurgency in its southeast that has destabilized the border region with Pakistan.
Source -
Subscribe to My Muslim News by Email
The group said the attacks were in response to the execution by Iran of the group's leader Abdolmalek Rigi in June, the Dubai-based channel said.
In an e-mail to the station, the group said the bombings targeted a gathering of the Revolutionary Guards in the southeastern city of Zahedan, Arabiya said.
"In the two explosions in Zahedan more than 20 people were killed and over 100 were injured," Fariborz Rashedi, head of the emergency unit at Sistan-Baluchestan province told IRNA.
It later quoted Zahedan prosecutor Mohammad Marzieh as saying that 21 people had died.
Iran's deputy Interior Minister said "a number of Iran's Revolutionary Guards were killed and injured," the semi-official Fars news agency reported.
Zahedan's MP Hoseinali Shahriari told Fars that he believed Sunni rebel group Jundollah was behind the explosions.
Iran hanged Jundollah's leader, Abdolmalek Rigi, last month for his involvement in earlier deadly attacks in Iran.
Predominantly Shiite Muslim Iran arrested Rigi in February, four months after his Jundollah group claimed a bombing which killed dozens of people, including 15 members of the Guards. It was the deadliest attack in Iran since the 1980s.
Zahedan is the capital of Sistan-Baluchestan province which shares a border with Pakistan. The province faces serious security problems and there are frequent clashes between police and drug dealers and bandits.
In 2009, the group detonated a bomb in a Shiite mosque in Zahedan, killing 30 people and wounding more than 120.
Jundallah says it is fighting for the rights of the Sunni Baluch minority, and accuses Iran's Shiite-dominated government of persecution. Tehran claims Jundallah is behind an insurgency in its southeast that has destabilized the border region with Pakistan.
Source -
Subscribe to My Muslim News by Email
Suicide Bomber Strikes In Iraq kills 48 people
The bombings were the deadliest in a series of attacks across Iraq Sunday that were aimed at the Sons of Iraq, a Sunni group also known as Sahwa that works with government forces to fight Al-Qaeda in Iraq. The attacks highlighted the stiff challenges the country faces as the US scales back its forces in Iraq, leaving their Iraqi counterparts in charge of security.
The first attack Sunday morning — the deadliest against Iraq's security forces in months — killed at least 45 people and wounded more than 40. It occurred at a checkpoint near a military base where Sahwa members were lined up to receive paychecks in the mostly Sunni district of Radwaniya southwest of Baghdad.
"There were more than 150 people sitting on the ground when the explosion took place. I ran, thinking that I was a dead man," said Uday Khamis, 24, who was sitting outside the Mahmoudiyah hospital where many of the wounded were taken. His left hand was bandaged and his clothes were stained with blood.
"There were more dead people than wounded," he added. More on This
Subscribe to My Muslim News by Email
The first attack Sunday morning — the deadliest against Iraq's security forces in months — killed at least 45 people and wounded more than 40. It occurred at a checkpoint near a military base where Sahwa members were lined up to receive paychecks in the mostly Sunni district of Radwaniya southwest of Baghdad.
"There were more than 150 people sitting on the ground when the explosion took place. I ran, thinking that I was a dead man," said Uday Khamis, 24, who was sitting outside the Mahmoudiyah hospital where many of the wounded were taken. His left hand was bandaged and his clothes were stained with blood.
"There were more dead people than wounded," he added. More on This
Subscribe to My Muslim News by Email
Britons link Islam with extremism, says survey
Most people in the UK associate Islam with extremism and the repression of women, a survey has suggested. The online YouGov poll found 58% of those questioned linked Islam with extremism while 69% believed it encouraged the repression of women.
The survey of 2,152 adults was commissioned by the Exploring Islam Foundation. The organisation has launched a poster campaign on London transport to combat negative perceptions of Muslims.
BBC home editor Mark Easton says the survey, conducted last month, paints a negative picture of British attitudes to Islam. Asked if Muslims had a positive impact on British society, the YouGov poll found four out of 10 disagreed with the statement. Half linked Islam with terrorism, just 13% thought it was based on peace and 6% associated it with justice. Some 60% admitted they did not know much about the religion, but a third said they would like to know more.
The Exploring Islam Foundation hopes to challenge the negative views of the religion with its Inspired By Muhammad project. It will feature posters of Muslim professionals, displayed in central London locations such as bus stops and tube stations, alongside messages emphasising the ways in which Muslims balance religious tradition with contemporary human rights and social responsibility. This campaign is important because it can help non-Muslims to better understand the faith that inspires and guides their Muslim friends, neighbours and colleagues
Remona Aly, campaigns director for the foundation, said many Muslims were concerned about the way their faith was perceived by the public. “We want to foster a greater understanding of what British Muslims are about and our contribution to British society. We are proud of being British and being Muslim,” she said.
A spokesman for the Quilliam Foundation , the counter-extremism think tank, welcomed the campaign, describing it as a “timely step to help improve relations and foster deeper understanding between British citizens”.
“This campaign is important because it can help non-Muslims to better understand the faith that inspires and guides their Muslim friends, neighbours and colleagues. This initiative also helps British Muslims reclaim the Prophet Muhammad as a time-honoured guide for peace, compassion and social justice from those who seek to twist his teachings.”
Source - http://www.euro-islam.info/2010/06/09/britons-link-islam-with-extremism-says-survey/
The survey of 2,152 adults was commissioned by the Exploring Islam Foundation. The organisation has launched a poster campaign on London transport to combat negative perceptions of Muslims.
BBC home editor Mark Easton says the survey, conducted last month, paints a negative picture of British attitudes to Islam. Asked if Muslims had a positive impact on British society, the YouGov poll found four out of 10 disagreed with the statement. Half linked Islam with terrorism, just 13% thought it was based on peace and 6% associated it with justice. Some 60% admitted they did not know much about the religion, but a third said they would like to know more.
The Exploring Islam Foundation hopes to challenge the negative views of the religion with its Inspired By Muhammad project. It will feature posters of Muslim professionals, displayed in central London locations such as bus stops and tube stations, alongside messages emphasising the ways in which Muslims balance religious tradition with contemporary human rights and social responsibility. This campaign is important because it can help non-Muslims to better understand the faith that inspires and guides their Muslim friends, neighbours and colleagues
Remona Aly, campaigns director for the foundation, said many Muslims were concerned about the way their faith was perceived by the public. “We want to foster a greater understanding of what British Muslims are about and our contribution to British society. We are proud of being British and being Muslim,” she said.
A spokesman for the Quilliam Foundation , the counter-extremism think tank, welcomed the campaign, describing it as a “timely step to help improve relations and foster deeper understanding between British citizens”.
“This campaign is important because it can help non-Muslims to better understand the faith that inspires and guides their Muslim friends, neighbours and colleagues. This initiative also helps British Muslims reclaim the Prophet Muhammad as a time-honoured guide for peace, compassion and social justice from those who seek to twist his teachings.”
Source - http://www.euro-islam.info/2010/06/09/britons-link-islam-with-extremism-says-survey/
Ibrahim, Ex-Catholic, USA
A time comes in everyone’s life, or at least I hope it comes, when they realize that they have to not only believe what they believe in, whatever it may be, but get out there and proclaim it to the world. Luckily, that time came early for me. I am 17, and Islam is the belief that I’m proclaiming.
I was raised Catholic. Not internally as much as externally. I went to Catholic Sunday school, called CCD, but the Catholic view of God never played a major roll in my childhood. It was a Sunday thing. Anyhow, I started to enjoy Mass around 7th grade. It made me feel good to do the right thing. I was always a rather moral person, but I never really studied the fundamentals of Catholicism. I just knew that I felt good worshipping my creator.
I really liked Catholicism, but I always saw it as us (the Catholics) with Jesus worshipping God, not us worshipping God and Jesus as one. I saw Jesus (peace be upon him) as my example on how to be a good follower of and submitter to God’s will, but not as God himself.
Before I was confirmed in 8th grade, in the fall of 1999, I learned a lot about what Catholicism was. The Catholicism of the Church had a lot on viewing Jesus as God in it. Nothing like my “undivided God being worshipped by me with Jesus as an example” train of thought. It was like they just opened up a can of cold, illogical confusion and tried to feed it to me. It didn’t feel right.
I continued with Catholic church, and kept on worshipping. But I talked to many in the church about my feelings that Jesus wasn’t God but more of a Prophet, an example. They told me that I had to accept him as God and as a sacrifice, and so on. I just wasn’t buying it. I tried to buy it but I guess God withhold the sale for my own benefit. There was a better car out there for me. I continued at the church.
Sometime in mid-December of 1999, for no reason that I can recall I started reading up on Islam in encyclopedias. I remember making a list of bolded words in the entry for “Islam” in an old 1964 Grolier World Book that I found in my closet, and studying them. For some reason I was amazed by this faith and that it was all about God and that it was everything that I believed all my life - right here. Previously, I had accepted that there was no faith like I felt inside of me. But I was amazed that I had found this faith. I found out that “my” faith had a name, and millions of other adherents!
Without ever reading a Qur’an or talking to another Muslim, I said shahada (declaring your belief in no god but God) on 31 December 1999. As the months passed, I learned more. I went through many periods of confusion, happiness, doubt and amazement. Islam took me on an enlightening tour of me, everyone else, and God.
The transition was slow. I was still attending Mass five months into my change of faith. Each time I went, I felt more and more distant from the congregation, but closer and closer to Prophet Jesus and God.
During Ramadan 2001, the second time I fasted (the first year, I converted during Ramadan and did not fast), I went to the library during lunch period. It was better than sitting at a table with my friends, because I got work done in the library. I swear my grades went up. Anyways, I started talking to the only other Muslim at my school, John. We talked about Islam a little more each day. He’s an awesome brother and he took me to the mosque on the last Friday of Ramadan. Going was one of the best things I ever made in my life. God really answered my prayers this time. I thought I would be nervous, but I wasn’t at all. It was the most natural thing I ever did in my life. I felt home. I realized something before leaving. As I sat there on the floor, praying to God, I realized that the room was full of others but it was OK. See, at home when someone asks me what I am doing, I never say I am praying. I never admit it to anyone. It is too awkward. But there, at the masjid, I was praying to God in front of a score of other Muslims and I felt perfectly fine. Better than fine! I felt secure and safe. It was the most liberating thing since I accepted God into my heart that cold New Year’s Eve almost two years ago.
I never told my parents right out. In fact, I don’t plan to. The most significant clue that I gave came around 1:00 AM on 16 December 2001, when I finally told my dad I was going to the mosque in the morning with a friend when he asked me why I was setting my alarm. He told me how he can’t wait for me to move out of the house, how displeased he is with me and how stupid the choices I make are to him. I never told them straight out because I figured it was best to test the waters by revealing clues bit by bit; I didn’t want to send a shockwave through the family. I can only imagine what my dad would do if he knew I was actually a practicing Muslim. He seems to hate my guts just for studying the faith, which he thinks is all I am doing. I understand that my dad is a depressed man, so I don’t really hold this all against him. I mean, it is his fault for thinking himself so smart that he doesn’t need God. That thought is what got him so depressed. But I don’t think he realized how hard one’s heart can be when you deny your human need for a relationship with your Creator. So I don’t hold it all against him. He didn’t know what he was getting into. My mom doesn’t know that I am a Muslim, but at least she hasn’t shown her anger over me going to the mosque. She is upset over it but never told me that I displease her, at least. As God commands, I’ll continue to try my best to be nice to my parents as long as they don’t attempt to take away my Islam. The best thing that I can do for them is to be a good example so that maybe one day, inshallah, they can see that there is a better way of living than living in the dark world of God-denial.
I’ve never been to the Mid-East, but I am studying Islam every day. I read books from every point of view. Sufi, Shia, Sunni, books on the Qur’an alone... The Muslims view sects as haram, so no matter what you believe you are always a Muslim and nothing extra. You may have completely different views than another Muslim, but as long as you both believe that there is no god but God, you are both Muslims and that’s that. I read a lot on-line, and discuss a lot with other Muslims on-line and on the phone. I’ve met some really great people on-line who have taught me a lot about life, Islam and God.
Right now, I am 100% a Muslim and that will never change, inshallah. I thank God that I’ve gone through so many periods of doubt. When I look back I see that it was not God leaving me but God telling me that it was time that I asked myself how much I loved God, and what I was willing to go through to understand my faith. A week of crying, depression, prayer, reading to the extreme, and ignoring most other things in life sounds harsh...but the reward - knowing so much more about yourself, God, and the relationship between you (Islam) - is worth more than any material things. Through my interrogation of Islam I gained God’s most precious gift - Islam, or surrender to the peace. I’ve heard Christians say that with Christianity you “know God on a personal level.” In Islam, your relationship with God is so much deeper than that. God is with me every moment, guiding me, teaching me, loving me, protecting me, liberating me, enlightening me, comforting me... Alhamdulilah for Islam!
Islam has done a lot for me. More than I could have ever guessed. And every day, it just gets better. I went from living my life on a trial-and-error basis to embracing guidance, and now knowing what the best choices are for me to make. From seeking who I am and spending a life in confusion, I am being guided. I can’t find the words to say what its like, but I’ll try again: God reveals to me what life is. I don’t have to guess anymore.
- -- -
Sura 93, “The Morning Hours”
By the morning hours
By the night when it is still
Your lord has not abandoned you
and does not hate you
What is after will be better
than what came before
To you the lord will be giving
You will be content
Did he not find you orphaned and give you shelter
Find you lost and guide you
Find you in hunger and provide for you
As for the orphan, do not oppress him
And one who asks, do not turn him away
And the grace of your lord -- proclaim
- -- -
That is what I went through, what God did for me - what I am. So here is my proclamation to the world. Islam is more than you think it is, in fact more liberal than most would wish it to be. But do not only listen. Study all views for yourself...and come to your own conclusion. God says “let there be no compulsion in religion” because faith in God is a choice made by the heart, and it can’t be forced.
Source-http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/3794/
I was raised Catholic. Not internally as much as externally. I went to Catholic Sunday school, called CCD, but the Catholic view of God never played a major roll in my childhood. It was a Sunday thing. Anyhow, I started to enjoy Mass around 7th grade. It made me feel good to do the right thing. I was always a rather moral person, but I never really studied the fundamentals of Catholicism. I just knew that I felt good worshipping my creator.
I really liked Catholicism, but I always saw it as us (the Catholics) with Jesus worshipping God, not us worshipping God and Jesus as one. I saw Jesus (peace be upon him) as my example on how to be a good follower of and submitter to God’s will, but not as God himself.
Before I was confirmed in 8th grade, in the fall of 1999, I learned a lot about what Catholicism was. The Catholicism of the Church had a lot on viewing Jesus as God in it. Nothing like my “undivided God being worshipped by me with Jesus as an example” train of thought. It was like they just opened up a can of cold, illogical confusion and tried to feed it to me. It didn’t feel right.
I continued with Catholic church, and kept on worshipping. But I talked to many in the church about my feelings that Jesus wasn’t God but more of a Prophet, an example. They told me that I had to accept him as God and as a sacrifice, and so on. I just wasn’t buying it. I tried to buy it but I guess God withhold the sale for my own benefit. There was a better car out there for me. I continued at the church.
Sometime in mid-December of 1999, for no reason that I can recall I started reading up on Islam in encyclopedias. I remember making a list of bolded words in the entry for “Islam” in an old 1964 Grolier World Book that I found in my closet, and studying them. For some reason I was amazed by this faith and that it was all about God and that it was everything that I believed all my life - right here. Previously, I had accepted that there was no faith like I felt inside of me. But I was amazed that I had found this faith. I found out that “my” faith had a name, and millions of other adherents!
Without ever reading a Qur’an or talking to another Muslim, I said shahada (declaring your belief in no god but God) on 31 December 1999. As the months passed, I learned more. I went through many periods of confusion, happiness, doubt and amazement. Islam took me on an enlightening tour of me, everyone else, and God.
The transition was slow. I was still attending Mass five months into my change of faith. Each time I went, I felt more and more distant from the congregation, but closer and closer to Prophet Jesus and God.
During Ramadan 2001, the second time I fasted (the first year, I converted during Ramadan and did not fast), I went to the library during lunch period. It was better than sitting at a table with my friends, because I got work done in the library. I swear my grades went up. Anyways, I started talking to the only other Muslim at my school, John. We talked about Islam a little more each day. He’s an awesome brother and he took me to the mosque on the last Friday of Ramadan. Going was one of the best things I ever made in my life. God really answered my prayers this time. I thought I would be nervous, but I wasn’t at all. It was the most natural thing I ever did in my life. I felt home. I realized something before leaving. As I sat there on the floor, praying to God, I realized that the room was full of others but it was OK. See, at home when someone asks me what I am doing, I never say I am praying. I never admit it to anyone. It is too awkward. But there, at the masjid, I was praying to God in front of a score of other Muslims and I felt perfectly fine. Better than fine! I felt secure and safe. It was the most liberating thing since I accepted God into my heart that cold New Year’s Eve almost two years ago.
I never told my parents right out. In fact, I don’t plan to. The most significant clue that I gave came around 1:00 AM on 16 December 2001, when I finally told my dad I was going to the mosque in the morning with a friend when he asked me why I was setting my alarm. He told me how he can’t wait for me to move out of the house, how displeased he is with me and how stupid the choices I make are to him. I never told them straight out because I figured it was best to test the waters by revealing clues bit by bit; I didn’t want to send a shockwave through the family. I can only imagine what my dad would do if he knew I was actually a practicing Muslim. He seems to hate my guts just for studying the faith, which he thinks is all I am doing. I understand that my dad is a depressed man, so I don’t really hold this all against him. I mean, it is his fault for thinking himself so smart that he doesn’t need God. That thought is what got him so depressed. But I don’t think he realized how hard one’s heart can be when you deny your human need for a relationship with your Creator. So I don’t hold it all against him. He didn’t know what he was getting into. My mom doesn’t know that I am a Muslim, but at least she hasn’t shown her anger over me going to the mosque. She is upset over it but never told me that I displease her, at least. As God commands, I’ll continue to try my best to be nice to my parents as long as they don’t attempt to take away my Islam. The best thing that I can do for them is to be a good example so that maybe one day, inshallah, they can see that there is a better way of living than living in the dark world of God-denial.
I’ve never been to the Mid-East, but I am studying Islam every day. I read books from every point of view. Sufi, Shia, Sunni, books on the Qur’an alone... The Muslims view sects as haram, so no matter what you believe you are always a Muslim and nothing extra. You may have completely different views than another Muslim, but as long as you both believe that there is no god but God, you are both Muslims and that’s that. I read a lot on-line, and discuss a lot with other Muslims on-line and on the phone. I’ve met some really great people on-line who have taught me a lot about life, Islam and God.
Right now, I am 100% a Muslim and that will never change, inshallah. I thank God that I’ve gone through so many periods of doubt. When I look back I see that it was not God leaving me but God telling me that it was time that I asked myself how much I loved God, and what I was willing to go through to understand my faith. A week of crying, depression, prayer, reading to the extreme, and ignoring most other things in life sounds harsh...but the reward - knowing so much more about yourself, God, and the relationship between you (Islam) - is worth more than any material things. Through my interrogation of Islam I gained God’s most precious gift - Islam, or surrender to the peace. I’ve heard Christians say that with Christianity you “know God on a personal level.” In Islam, your relationship with God is so much deeper than that. God is with me every moment, guiding me, teaching me, loving me, protecting me, liberating me, enlightening me, comforting me... Alhamdulilah for Islam!
Islam has done a lot for me. More than I could have ever guessed. And every day, it just gets better. I went from living my life on a trial-and-error basis to embracing guidance, and now knowing what the best choices are for me to make. From seeking who I am and spending a life in confusion, I am being guided. I can’t find the words to say what its like, but I’ll try again: God reveals to me what life is. I don’t have to guess anymore.
- -- -
Sura 93, “The Morning Hours”
By the morning hours
By the night when it is still
Your lord has not abandoned you
and does not hate you
What is after will be better
than what came before
To you the lord will be giving
You will be content
Did he not find you orphaned and give you shelter
Find you lost and guide you
Find you in hunger and provide for you
As for the orphan, do not oppress him
And one who asks, do not turn him away
And the grace of your lord -- proclaim
- -- -
That is what I went through, what God did for me - what I am. So here is my proclamation to the world. Islam is more than you think it is, in fact more liberal than most would wish it to be. But do not only listen. Study all views for yourself...and come to your own conclusion. God says “let there be no compulsion in religion” because faith in God is a choice made by the heart, and it can’t be forced.
Source-http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/3794/
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Muslim World\'s Fastest Growing Stock Markets Averaged 99.8% Market Cap Growth in 2004: Report
Muslim World's Fastest Growing Stock Markets Averaged 99.8% Market Cap Growth in 2004: Report
/Islam PR News/ - HOBOKEN, NJ, July 23, 2005 -- Dinar Standard , a business strategy e-magazine, today released its 2005 Stock Market Analysis Brief of the Muslim World, covering 27 active Stock Markets from the 57 member countries of the OIC (Organization of Islamic Conference).
The report shows the top 10 fastest growing stock markets of the OIC member countries averaged market capitalization growth of 99.87% between 2003-2004. Comparatively, the top 10 global stock markets, which include the NYSE, Tokyo, and the London Stock Markets, averaged market cap growth of 19.79% during the same period.
The Saudi Tadawul Stock Market (with 73 listed companies) led the markets of the Muslim majority states in terms of market capitalization ($ 292 billion at the end of 2004). Its leading capitalized companies were SABIC (the petrochemical global giant), Saudi Telecom, and Saudi Electric.
Amongst the largest markets, the UAE based stock markets of the Abu Dhabi Securities Market and the Dubai Financial Market showed the most impressive growth. Dubai Financial Market's DFM Index posted the largest Index growth increase of 175% in 2004 to 439 from the year before. Its market capitalization grew 146% to $36 billion compared to the year before. Meanwhile, the Abu Dhabi Securities Market boosted its market capitalization by 83% to $55.48 billion in 2004 compared to the year before with its broad market index, the ADSM posting a 75% increase in the same period to 3070.88.
This growth needs to be put in perspective of the nascent state of many of these markets. Total market capitalization of the 27 markets from the OIC member countries stood at US $1,151 billion at the end of 2004 which is almost the same size as that of the German Deutche Bourse's domestic market capitalization, which at the end of 2004 stood at US $1,195 billion. The world's largest stock market's (the NYSE) domestic market capitalization was US $ 12,708 billion in 2004.
The recent surge in these markets has been impressive. "The buzz around the growth of many of the Muslim world's stock markets, such as the Karachi Stock Exchange, the Dubai Financial Market, the Tadawul, the Surabaya and others has certainly been noticeable and bodes well for the future of their domestic companies.", states Rafi-uddin Shikoh, Editor of Dinar Standard . The Stock Market Analysis Brief of the Muslim World provides a complete and comparative factual picture of these developing markets.
Sajjad Chowdhry, Associate Editor of Dinar Standard adds, "The growing public and government interest in supporting and nurturing domestic markets is also helping raise their level of global competitiveness. It gives rise to and propagates culture of responsible corporate governance, transparency and other all-round corporate best practices."
Source
/Islam PR News/ - HOBOKEN, NJ, July 23, 2005 -- Dinar Standard , a business strategy e-magazine, today released its 2005 Stock Market Analysis Brief of the Muslim World, covering 27 active Stock Markets from the 57 member countries of the OIC (Organization of Islamic Conference).
The report shows the top 10 fastest growing stock markets of the OIC member countries averaged market capitalization growth of 99.87% between 2003-2004. Comparatively, the top 10 global stock markets, which include the NYSE, Tokyo, and the London Stock Markets, averaged market cap growth of 19.79% during the same period.
The Saudi Tadawul Stock Market (with 73 listed companies) led the markets of the Muslim majority states in terms of market capitalization ($ 292 billion at the end of 2004). Its leading capitalized companies were SABIC (the petrochemical global giant), Saudi Telecom, and Saudi Electric.
Amongst the largest markets, the UAE based stock markets of the Abu Dhabi Securities Market and the Dubai Financial Market showed the most impressive growth. Dubai Financial Market's DFM Index posted the largest Index growth increase of 175% in 2004 to 439 from the year before. Its market capitalization grew 146% to $36 billion compared to the year before. Meanwhile, the Abu Dhabi Securities Market boosted its market capitalization by 83% to $55.48 billion in 2004 compared to the year before with its broad market index, the ADSM posting a 75% increase in the same period to 3070.88.
This growth needs to be put in perspective of the nascent state of many of these markets. Total market capitalization of the 27 markets from the OIC member countries stood at US $1,151 billion at the end of 2004 which is almost the same size as that of the German Deutche Bourse's domestic market capitalization, which at the end of 2004 stood at US $1,195 billion. The world's largest stock market's (the NYSE) domestic market capitalization was US $ 12,708 billion in 2004.
The recent surge in these markets has been impressive. "The buzz around the growth of many of the Muslim world's stock markets, such as the Karachi Stock Exchange, the Dubai Financial Market, the Tadawul, the Surabaya and others has certainly been noticeable and bodes well for the future of their domestic companies.", states Rafi-uddin Shikoh, Editor of Dinar Standard . The Stock Market Analysis Brief of the Muslim World provides a complete and comparative factual picture of these developing markets.
Sajjad Chowdhry, Associate Editor of Dinar Standard adds, "The growing public and government interest in supporting and nurturing domestic markets is also helping raise their level of global competitiveness. It gives rise to and propagates culture of responsible corporate governance, transparency and other all-round corporate best practices."
Source
Muslims Must Join the Oppressed
“On January 26, 1950, we are going to enter into a life of contradiction. In politics, we will have equality and in social and economic life we will have inequality...We must remove this contradiction at the earliest moment or else those who suffer from inequality will blow up the structure of political democracy which this assembly has so laboriously built up”.
These historic words of Ambedkar in the Constituent Assembly spoke for all the poor of the country and Dalits in particular. What he had said 50 years ago, will hold good as India goes into the second millennium. He had also been prophetic in his assertion that persistent inequality will spell the demise of political democracy itself.
The thoughts of Ambedkar are most relevant today and his analysis of the Indian society needs to be understood by all those who are deeply concerned with the destiny of the people here. He has laid bare the inequities of this society and the theology which has been its driving force. His critique of this theology popularly known as Manuvada, professed by the upper castes of the land, must be known to all who cherish the democratic ethos.
Ambedkar characterised this society driven by caste as graded inequality because caste is an integral part of it. He found this caste-bound society bereft of social conscience and remarked on its moralistic unconcernedness.
Ambedkar’s rhetorical question, “A population which is hide-bound by caste, which flouts equality of status, which is infected by ancient prejudices and is dominated by notions of gradations in life. A population which thinks some are high, that some are low, can it be expected to have the right notions even to discharge bare justice?”
He made a fine distinction between class and caste, terming the former as non-social and the latter as anti-social.
Ambedkar pointed out the devastating impact of caste on the Dalit community, which showed itself in the most obnoxious practice of untouchability. He said, “Dalits - not that they have large property to protect from confiscation. But they have their very persons confiscated. The socio-religious disabilities have dehumanised the untouchable and their interests at stake are the interests of humanity”.
Apartheid of South Africa pales into insignificance beside untouchability and Ambedkar had to caution its practitioners thus, “To observe untouchability is a risk as dangerous as to bear live coals on their tongues”.
That this shameless practice should be prevalent even to this day is a crying shame. Ambedkar described the most sacred book of the Manuvadis as neither a book on religion nor a treatise on philosophy, but a mere justification for war based on the spurious logic which holds killing a body does not amount to killing the soul because the soul is immortal! Hence there is neither regret nor remorse over killing.
What was most damning about caste according to him was that it is an impediment to nationalism because caste loyalty over-rules all else. A society that had denied social intercourse, office or property is doomed; it is as though creation of caste was the end and aim of Manuvada. It is well to bear in mind that forces representing Manuvada constitute 5 to 10% of Indian populations; but these are entrenched in the body politic in all positions of power and wealth. They are found in the administration including the forces of law and order, the judiciary, industry and business and political parties.
Caste is so ingrained in the Indian ethos that even the Christian, Sikh and either communities totally opposed to caste, have become its victims, what is worse even the backward castes and Dalits have not been immune,
Manuvada has trained these communities too. To define Manuvada, inequality is built into the structure; its faith in violence is borne out in the alleged mortality of the body and the immortality of the soul. This inequality is extended to all women who are looked down upon as cattle.
Then there is the macho stance, distorted model of masculinity that promotes militarisation of society, a culture of violence and aggressive communalised nationalism.
Muslims have to confront this aggressive Manuvada, red in teeth and claw and seek allies amongst all those who feel threatened by this neo-fascism. This pernicious theology target the most backward classes and Dalits, seeking to use them as cannon fodder in genocidal war against minorities but eventually dominates them imposing its hegemony over the rest of society. The tribals and other minorities are targeted too.
Muslims therefore must be an inalienable part of the vanguard combating the forces of Manuvada by making common cause with all the victims of these fascist forces. The ultimate objective is to set up a casteless society wedded to social justice, a democratic structure that assures all a place in the sun. The thoughts of Ambedkar will enable all those forces standing for life and hope to carry the battle against the forces of evil and destruction to a triumphant end.
By Hasan Mansur, a civil liberties activist and former professor of English
(source: http://www.islamicvoice.com)
These historic words of Ambedkar in the Constituent Assembly spoke for all the poor of the country and Dalits in particular. What he had said 50 years ago, will hold good as India goes into the second millennium. He had also been prophetic in his assertion that persistent inequality will spell the demise of political democracy itself.
The thoughts of Ambedkar are most relevant today and his analysis of the Indian society needs to be understood by all those who are deeply concerned with the destiny of the people here. He has laid bare the inequities of this society and the theology which has been its driving force. His critique of this theology popularly known as Manuvada, professed by the upper castes of the land, must be known to all who cherish the democratic ethos.
Ambedkar characterised this society driven by caste as graded inequality because caste is an integral part of it. He found this caste-bound society bereft of social conscience and remarked on its moralistic unconcernedness.
Ambedkar’s rhetorical question, “A population which is hide-bound by caste, which flouts equality of status, which is infected by ancient prejudices and is dominated by notions of gradations in life. A population which thinks some are high, that some are low, can it be expected to have the right notions even to discharge bare justice?”
He made a fine distinction between class and caste, terming the former as non-social and the latter as anti-social.
Ambedkar pointed out the devastating impact of caste on the Dalit community, which showed itself in the most obnoxious practice of untouchability. He said, “Dalits - not that they have large property to protect from confiscation. But they have their very persons confiscated. The socio-religious disabilities have dehumanised the untouchable and their interests at stake are the interests of humanity”.
Apartheid of South Africa pales into insignificance beside untouchability and Ambedkar had to caution its practitioners thus, “To observe untouchability is a risk as dangerous as to bear live coals on their tongues”.
That this shameless practice should be prevalent even to this day is a crying shame. Ambedkar described the most sacred book of the Manuvadis as neither a book on religion nor a treatise on philosophy, but a mere justification for war based on the spurious logic which holds killing a body does not amount to killing the soul because the soul is immortal! Hence there is neither regret nor remorse over killing.
What was most damning about caste according to him was that it is an impediment to nationalism because caste loyalty over-rules all else. A society that had denied social intercourse, office or property is doomed; it is as though creation of caste was the end and aim of Manuvada. It is well to bear in mind that forces representing Manuvada constitute 5 to 10% of Indian populations; but these are entrenched in the body politic in all positions of power and wealth. They are found in the administration including the forces of law and order, the judiciary, industry and business and political parties.
Caste is so ingrained in the Indian ethos that even the Christian, Sikh and either communities totally opposed to caste, have become its victims, what is worse even the backward castes and Dalits have not been immune,
Manuvada has trained these communities too. To define Manuvada, inequality is built into the structure; its faith in violence is borne out in the alleged mortality of the body and the immortality of the soul. This inequality is extended to all women who are looked down upon as cattle.
Then there is the macho stance, distorted model of masculinity that promotes militarisation of society, a culture of violence and aggressive communalised nationalism.
Muslims have to confront this aggressive Manuvada, red in teeth and claw and seek allies amongst all those who feel threatened by this neo-fascism. This pernicious theology target the most backward classes and Dalits, seeking to use them as cannon fodder in genocidal war against minorities but eventually dominates them imposing its hegemony over the rest of society. The tribals and other minorities are targeted too.
Muslims therefore must be an inalienable part of the vanguard combating the forces of Manuvada by making common cause with all the victims of these fascist forces. The ultimate objective is to set up a casteless society wedded to social justice, a democratic structure that assures all a place in the sun. The thoughts of Ambedkar will enable all those forces standing for life and hope to carry the battle against the forces of evil and destruction to a triumphant end.
By Hasan Mansur, a civil liberties activist and former professor of English
(source: http://www.islamicvoice.com)
Friday, July 16, 2010
Official Responce to UK Ban Against Dr. Zakir Naik
Exclusive interview by Dr. Zakir Naik regarding exclusion from entering UK by Britain's Home Secretary Theresa May.
Appeal: Please register your protest by sending emails and letters to U.K. High Commission condemning the UK Home department for their decision to exclude Dr. Zakir Naik to enter U.K & canceling his Visa.
For more information please log on to:
http://www.zakirnaikexclusion.com/
MOCKERY OF FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
This is with reference to an exclusion order issued to Dr Zakir Naik by the British Home Office, UK Border Agency, dated 16th June 2010.
Dr Zakir Naik, the illustrious and eminent speaker from Mumbai, India, is respected and revered throughout the world for his enlightening and convincing efforts promoting similarities between major faiths based on converging values for a common platform of Peace, using the binding commonalities that exist between the religious scriptures including the Bible, Vedas, Torah and Glorious Qur'an.
Following on from recent malicious and specious reports in the British media about the work of Dr Zakir Naik, we are disappointed to learn the British Government has decided to exclude him from visiting the United Kingdom to conduct a Peace Conference Tour between 25th-27th June 2010.
It is deeply regrettable the British Government has bowed to pressure from sectarian and Islamophobic pressure groups by preventing the entry of Dr Zakir Naik, who has been visiting and delivering talks in the United Kingdom for the past 15 years.
In the wake of these inaccurate press reports, Dr Zakir Naik issued a press release in the United Kingdom dated 11th June 2010 which is attached herewith.
The exclusion order issued by the Secretary of Home Department UK, appears to rely mainly on the following four extracts from various talks by Dr Zakir Naik which they found objectionable;
As a student of comparative religion, Dr Zakir Naik has worked tirelessly for the common good amongst people of all faiths engaging in constructive debate and dialogue. These discussions have been hugely successful and have resulted in much progress towards a better understanding of Islam as well as enhanced harmony between people of different beliefs, dispelling fears, suspicions and misunderstandings.
Dr Zakir Naik is undoubtedly an opponent of terrorism and as such has often spoken out against all acts of violence and violent extremism. He has emphatically and unequivocally condemned the killing of civilians and is one of the world's regular noted orators on this topic.
In the wake of the exclusion order and based on legal advice, Dr Zakir Naik intends to bring the matter before the High Court of the United Kingdom and request a Judicial Review to have the exclusion order overturned.
We would request the Indian authorities to engage with and make representations to the British Government about the excellent services and work of Dr Zakir Naik in promoting Peace and social harmony worldwide. We would propose the Indian Government to encourage the British Home Office to revoke the exclusion order and permit the Peace Conference Tour to continue as scheduled, whilst upholding the values of freedom and justice.
Iran scientist: CIA offered me $50m to lie about nuclear secrets
An Iranian scientist who says he was abducted and taken to the United States by the CIA returned to Tehran yesterday to a hero's welcome and claimed that he had been pressured into lying about his country's nuclear programme.
Shahram Amiri said that he was on the hajj pilgrimage when he was seized at gunpoint in the city of Medina, drugged and taken to the US, where he says Israel was involved in his interrogation. In the US, officials were reported to have admitted that Mr Amiri was paid more than $5m (£3.2m) by the CIA for information about Iran's nuclear ambitions.
The US claims to have received useful information from him in return for the money, but is clearly embarrassed by his very public return to Iran. The offer of a large bribe is reportedly part of a special US programme to get Iranian nuclear scientists to defect.
Flashing a victory sign, Mr Amiri returned to Tehran International Airport to be greeted by senior officials and by his tearful wife and seven-year-old son, whom he had not seen since he disappeared in Saudi Arabia during a visit 14 months ago. Iran said it was demanding information about what had happened to him.
The US says that he entered the US of his own free will and had relocated to Tucson, Arizona. The US is claiming that Mr Amiri, who had worked for Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, re-defected because pressure was placed on his family back in Iran, something he denied yesterday. Officials suggested that Iran had used his family to get him to leave the US.
"Americans wanted me to say that I defected to America of my own will, to use me for revealing some false information about Iran's nuclear work," Mr Amiri said at Tehran airport.
"I was under intensive psychological pressure by [the] CIA... the main aim of this abduction was to stage a new political and psychological game against Iran."
Iran and the US have been engaged in a semi-covert war involving defections, seizures and kidnappings in recent years, of which the case of Mr Amiri is only the latest example.
It reached its peak in Iraq in 2007 when the US abducted Iranian consular officials from the northern city of Arbil and Iran seized a British navy patrol boat in the Gulf. Last year, Iran seized three Americans hiking in the mountains of Iraqi Kurdistan, claiming they had strayed over the Iranian border, while other accounts said they had been forced into Iran at gunpoint.
Mr Amiri had appeared in three contradictory videos; in the first he claimed to have been kidnapped and tortured and in the second, he said he had come to the US to write his PhD.
In a third video he denounces the second one. On Monday he arrived unannounced at the Iranian interest section of the Pakistani embassy in Washington and asked for an air ticket to return to Iran.
At his press conference at Tehran airport, Mr Amiri stressed that he had acted under compulsion. "Israeli agents were present at some of my interrogation sessions and I was threatened to be handed over to Israel if I refused to cooperate with Americans," he said. "I have some documents proving that I've not been free in the United States and have always been under the control of armed agents of US intelligence services."
He says he was offered $50m to stay in the US. Mr Amiri denied that he had ever had any information about the Iranian nuclear programme. "I am an ordinary researcher... I have never made nuclear-related researches. I'm not involved in any confidential jobs. I had no classified information."
Mr Amiri had worked at Iran's Malek Ashtar University, an institution closely connected to the country's elite Revolutionary Guards.
US officials said that Mr Amiri may not be able to access his $5m, because of sanctions on Iran. The Washington Post said yesterday that the Iranian scientist had been working with the CIA for a year and officials were "stunned" by his request to go home this week. The officials added that he had provided useful information, though not directly on whether Iran was trying to make a nuclear device.
Source - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iran-scientist-cia-offered-me-50m-to-lie-about-nuclear-secrets-2027718.html
From Minneapolis to Mogadishu-The Rageh Omaar Report -The Fight In Somalia
At least 20 young American men of Somali background left their homes in Minneapolis to return to Somalia and fight alongside a militant group called al-Shabab.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Dr Zakir Naik Banned from entering UK
The government has banned Dr Zakir Naik, an Indian Muslim preacher, from entering the UK where has was due to arrive today to begin a lecture tour that would see him appear at the Sheffield Arena, London's Wembley Arena and Birmingham's LG Arena in the NEC.
From the Telegraph:
'The Home Secretary can exclude or deport an individual if she thinks that their presence in the UK is not conducive to the public good.
'There had been speculation that Dr Naik would be allowed into the UK. However Mrs May said she was excluding him because of the “numerous comments” he made were evidence of his “unacceptable behaviour”.
'This behaviour applies to anyone who writes or publishes material which can “foment justify or glorify terrorist violence” or “seek to provoke others to terrorist acts”.
'Mrs May told The Daily Telegraph: “I have excluded Dr Naik from the UK. Numerous comments made by Dr Naik are evidence to me of his unacceptable behaviour.
'“Coming to the UK is a privilege not a right and I am not wiling to allow those who might not be conducive to the public good to enter the UK.
'“Exclusion powers are very serious and no decision is taken lightly or as a method of stopping open debate on issues.”
'Home Office sources said Dr Naik had been filmed on a website making inflammatory comments such as “every Muslim should be a terrorist”.
'He said: “When a robber sees a policeman he’s terrified. So for a robber, a policeman is a terrorist. So in this context, every Muslim should be a terrorist to the robber.”'
Dr Zakir Naik, considered among the top 100 most powerful men in India and the latest individual who has been excluded by the UK government from entering Britain, is yet another example of the creeping assault on freedom of expression and the effectiveness of malevolent campaigning run by lobbyists and sections of the media.
At the end of last month, numerous newspapers ran sensationalist headlines:
The Times: 'Muslim preacher of hate is let into Britain'
The Daily Mail: 'Allowed into UK, the preacher who backs Bin Laden'
The Daily Express: 'Terror backer' can enter UK...despite Tories' ban pledge
The Daily Star: 'Islamic extremist Zakir Naik to start tour preaching hate'
For his part, Zakir Naik has issued a press release in which he emphasises that his comments about Bin Laden were made in 1996, and that he 'unequivocally condemns acts of violence including 9/11, 7/7 and 7/11 (Serial train bombing in Mumbai) which are completely and absolutely unjustifiable on any basis.'
Readers will recall that when an arrest warrant was issued for Tzipi Livni, the Jewish Leadership Council reportedly ‘warned the government that an inability to invite Israeli leaders to Britain was probably discriminatory against the Jewish community.’ Does it not follow that it is discriminatory against the Muslim community to ban Zakir Naik?
The issue of excluding speakers also raises the question of how arbitrarily we assess the good versus bad statements made by speakers. If we are to extend the same gesture to others who allegedly incite violence and are not conducive to the public good, then surely, the government should also be scrutinising whether Benny Morris (who described the Arab world as ‘barbarian’ and Palestinians as wild animals who had to be locked up in ‘a cage’), Avigdor Lieberman (who called for the execution of Arab Israeli Knesset members who were in contact with Hamas or marked the Nakba) and Geert Wilders, best known for his strident attacks on Islam, should gain entry into the UK.
Arguably, though we may not agree with speakers’ views, they should be able to visit the UK. If they are then thought to have broken any of our laws then a prosecution should be brought forth.
You can write to your local MP to press the home secretary, Theresa May, on why the government has selectively enforced its denial of entry into the UK:
Find your MP, and write to them:
http://findyourmp.parliament.uk/commons/l/
http://www.writetothem.com
This Post is Credited to iengage.org.uk
From the Telegraph:
'The Home Secretary can exclude or deport an individual if she thinks that their presence in the UK is not conducive to the public good.
'There had been speculation that Dr Naik would be allowed into the UK. However Mrs May said she was excluding him because of the “numerous comments” he made were evidence of his “unacceptable behaviour”.
'This behaviour applies to anyone who writes or publishes material which can “foment justify or glorify terrorist violence” or “seek to provoke others to terrorist acts”.
'Mrs May told The Daily Telegraph: “I have excluded Dr Naik from the UK. Numerous comments made by Dr Naik are evidence to me of his unacceptable behaviour.
'“Coming to the UK is a privilege not a right and I am not wiling to allow those who might not be conducive to the public good to enter the UK.
'“Exclusion powers are very serious and no decision is taken lightly or as a method of stopping open debate on issues.”
'Home Office sources said Dr Naik had been filmed on a website making inflammatory comments such as “every Muslim should be a terrorist”.
'He said: “When a robber sees a policeman he’s terrified. So for a robber, a policeman is a terrorist. So in this context, every Muslim should be a terrorist to the robber.”'
Dr Zakir Naik, considered among the top 100 most powerful men in India and the latest individual who has been excluded by the UK government from entering Britain, is yet another example of the creeping assault on freedom of expression and the effectiveness of malevolent campaigning run by lobbyists and sections of the media.
At the end of last month, numerous newspapers ran sensationalist headlines:
The Times: 'Muslim preacher of hate is let into Britain'
The Daily Mail: 'Allowed into UK, the preacher who backs Bin Laden'
The Daily Express: 'Terror backer' can enter UK...despite Tories' ban pledge
The Daily Star: 'Islamic extremist Zakir Naik to start tour preaching hate'
For his part, Zakir Naik has issued a press release in which he emphasises that his comments about Bin Laden were made in 1996, and that he 'unequivocally condemns acts of violence including 9/11, 7/7 and 7/11 (Serial train bombing in Mumbai) which are completely and absolutely unjustifiable on any basis.'
Readers will recall that when an arrest warrant was issued for Tzipi Livni, the Jewish Leadership Council reportedly ‘warned the government that an inability to invite Israeli leaders to Britain was probably discriminatory against the Jewish community.’ Does it not follow that it is discriminatory against the Muslim community to ban Zakir Naik?
The issue of excluding speakers also raises the question of how arbitrarily we assess the good versus bad statements made by speakers. If we are to extend the same gesture to others who allegedly incite violence and are not conducive to the public good, then surely, the government should also be scrutinising whether Benny Morris (who described the Arab world as ‘barbarian’ and Palestinians as wild animals who had to be locked up in ‘a cage’), Avigdor Lieberman (who called for the execution of Arab Israeli Knesset members who were in contact with Hamas or marked the Nakba) and Geert Wilders, best known for his strident attacks on Islam, should gain entry into the UK.
Arguably, though we may not agree with speakers’ views, they should be able to visit the UK. If they are then thought to have broken any of our laws then a prosecution should be brought forth.
You can write to your local MP to press the home secretary, Theresa May, on why the government has selectively enforced its denial of entry into the UK:
Find your MP, and write to them:
http://findyourmp.parliament.uk/commons/l/
http://www.writetothem.com
This Post is Credited to iengage.org.uk
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Turkish PM calls Israeli ship raid a 'massacre'
ANKARA: The Turkish prime minister furiously blamed Israel on Tuesday for a "bloody massacre" that killed nine people on a Gaza-bound Turkish aid ship, and proclaimed that the two countries had reached a turning point in their long-standing alliance.
Turkey withdrew its ambassador to Israel immediately after the raid, scrapped three joint military exercises and called the UN Security Council to an emergency meeting that demanded an impartial investigation.
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan told lawmakers in Parliament that the boarding of the Mediterranean flotilla and killing of at least four Turkish activists was an attack "on international law, the conscience of humanity and world peace." "Today is a turning point in history. Nothing will be same again," Erdogan said, gesturing angrily and his voice shaking at times.
Turkey's Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu demanded ahead of a meeting with US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton that the United States condemn the raid, a measure the White House has not taken.
This predominantly Muslim and historically secular country has had decades of close military and trade ties with the US and the Jewish state.
Turkey welcomed Jews fleeing Nazi persecution during the World War II and was among the first Muslim countries to recognize Israel in 1948. The Israeli and Turkish militaries work closely together — Israel recently completed an upgrade of Turkish tanks and warplanes worth more than $1 billion.
But relations between Israel's year-old right-leaning government and Turkey's Islamic-rooted administration, which took power in 2002, have been deteriorating since Israel's 2008-2009 war in Gaza.
Erdogan walked off the stage last year after berating Israel's President Shimon Peres at an international gathering in Davos, Switzerland, over the war in Gaza.
In January, Turkish Ambassador Oguz Celikkol was not greeted with a handshake and was forced to sit on a low sofa during a meeting in Israel with Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon, who later apologized.
The killing of the Turkish activists by Israeli soldiers on a Turkish-flagged ship unleashed a new level of fury against Israel.
Thousands of pro-Islamic and nationalist Turks poured into the streets in Istanbul and Ankara Monday and protests continued on Tuesday outside Israeli diplomatic missions, with demonstrators carrying Palestinian and Turkish flags and shouting "down with Israel!" "It is something inhumane," Ali Goktas, an 18-year-old air-conditioner repairman said in Ankara. "I would like to see a harsher Turkish government reaction in the face of such an attack against Turkish people." Turkey's Foreign Ministry said four Turkish citizens were confirmed slain by Israeli commandos and another five were also believed to be Turks, although Israeli authorities were still trying to confirm their nationalities.
"This bloody massacre by Israel on ships that were taking humanitarian aid to Gaza deserves every kind of curse," Erdogan said angrily, demanding that Israel immediately halt its "inhumane" blockade of Gaza.
Organized by the Istanbul-based Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief under the unofficial auspices of the Turkish government, the flotilla was the ninth attempt by sea to breach the three-year-old blockade of Gaza. Israel and Egypt imposed the blockade after the violent 2007 seizure by Hamas militants of Gaza, home to 1.5 million Palestinians. Israel allowed five seaborne aid shipments to get through but snapped the blockade shut after the 2008-2009 war.
Israeli officials have said the Turkish charity is merely a front and that the group is has links to Al-Qaeda and Hamas despite its operating legally in Turkey. The charity denies the charges.
Turkey's Deputy Prime Minister Bulent Arinc said Turkey would launch legal action in a Turkish court against Israel over the deadly raid.
There were signs, however, that the long-term strategic partnership between the Jewish state and its most important Muslim ally will endure: Turkey canceled three joint land and sea exercises but appears to be otherwise maintaining deep military ties that include the planned delivery of $183 million worth of Israeli drone planes this summer.
Bilateral trade stands around $2.6 billion — roughly one percent of Turkey's overall trade.
Erdogan said the Israeli raid proved "how good they are at killing people." "Israel in no way can legitimize this murder, it cannot wash its hands of this blood," Erdogan said.
Turkey has been increasingly assertive diplomatically in the Middle East, backing Iran's attempts to quash new UN
sanctions over its nuclear program and trying to mediate Israeli talks with Syria, which demands the full withdrawal of Israeli troops from the Golan Heights as a condition for peace.
Erdogan has often said the world is turning a blind eye to Israel's nuclear program and that Iran's is being scrutinized because of its membership in the International Atomic Energy Agency whereas Israel, which has not signed a nonproliferation treaty, is "free to do what it wants." Erdogan said Turkey would continue to support the Palestinian people.
"We will not turn our back on Palestine, Palestinians and Gaza," Erdogan said.
"No one should test Turkey's patience," he added.
"Turkey's hostility is as strong as its friendship is valuable." He urged Israelis to question the actions of their government.
"It is damaging your country's image by conducting banditry and piracy," Erdogan said. "It is damaging interests of Israel and your peace and safety. It is the Israeli people who must stop the Israeli government in the first place." He said Israel cannot face the international community without expressing "regret." "Israel cannot ensure its security by drawing the hatred of the entire world," the prime minister declared.
Turkey sent three planes to bring back some 20 Turks wounded during clashes that broke out when Israeli commandos raided the Turkish vessel. Erdogan said he had snubbed an Israeli offer to fly back the Turkish wounded. Source
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan told lawmakers in Parliament that the boarding of the Mediterranean flotilla and killing of at least four Turkish activists was an attack "on international law, the conscience of humanity and world peace." "Today is a turning point in history. Nothing will be same again," Erdogan said, gesturing angrily and his voice shaking at times.
Turkey's Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu demanded ahead of a meeting with US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton that the United States condemn the raid, a measure the White House has not taken.
This predominantly Muslim and historically secular country has had decades of close military and trade ties with the US and the Jewish state.
Turkey welcomed Jews fleeing Nazi persecution during the World War II and was among the first Muslim countries to recognize Israel in 1948. The Israeli and Turkish militaries work closely together — Israel recently completed an upgrade of Turkish tanks and warplanes worth more than $1 billion.
But relations between Israel's year-old right-leaning government and Turkey's Islamic-rooted administration, which took power in 2002, have been deteriorating since Israel's 2008-2009 war in Gaza.
Erdogan walked off the stage last year after berating Israel's President Shimon Peres at an international gathering in Davos, Switzerland, over the war in Gaza.
In January, Turkish Ambassador Oguz Celikkol was not greeted with a handshake and was forced to sit on a low sofa during a meeting in Israel with Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon, who later apologized.
The killing of the Turkish activists by Israeli soldiers on a Turkish-flagged ship unleashed a new level of fury against Israel.
Thousands of pro-Islamic and nationalist Turks poured into the streets in Istanbul and Ankara Monday and protests continued on Tuesday outside Israeli diplomatic missions, with demonstrators carrying Palestinian and Turkish flags and shouting "down with Israel!" "It is something inhumane," Ali Goktas, an 18-year-old air-conditioner repairman said in Ankara. "I would like to see a harsher Turkish government reaction in the face of such an attack against Turkish people." Turkey's Foreign Ministry said four Turkish citizens were confirmed slain by Israeli commandos and another five were also believed to be Turks, although Israeli authorities were still trying to confirm their nationalities.
"This bloody massacre by Israel on ships that were taking humanitarian aid to Gaza deserves every kind of curse," Erdogan said angrily, demanding that Israel immediately halt its "inhumane" blockade of Gaza.
Organized by the Istanbul-based Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief under the unofficial auspices of the Turkish government, the flotilla was the ninth attempt by sea to breach the three-year-old blockade of Gaza. Israel and Egypt imposed the blockade after the violent 2007 seizure by Hamas militants of Gaza, home to 1.5 million Palestinians. Israel allowed five seaborne aid shipments to get through but snapped the blockade shut after the 2008-2009 war.
Israeli officials have said the Turkish charity is merely a front and that the group is has links to Al-Qaeda and Hamas despite its operating legally in Turkey. The charity denies the charges.
Turkey's Deputy Prime Minister Bulent Arinc said Turkey would launch legal action in a Turkish court against Israel over the deadly raid.
There were signs, however, that the long-term strategic partnership between the Jewish state and its most important Muslim ally will endure: Turkey canceled three joint land and sea exercises but appears to be otherwise maintaining deep military ties that include the planned delivery of $183 million worth of Israeli drone planes this summer.
Bilateral trade stands around $2.6 billion — roughly one percent of Turkey's overall trade.
Erdogan said the Israeli raid proved "how good they are at killing people." "Israel in no way can legitimize this murder, it cannot wash its hands of this blood," Erdogan said.
Turkey has been increasingly assertive diplomatically in the Middle East, backing Iran's attempts to quash new UN
sanctions over its nuclear program and trying to mediate Israeli talks with Syria, which demands the full withdrawal of Israeli troops from the Golan Heights as a condition for peace.
Erdogan has often said the world is turning a blind eye to Israel's nuclear program and that Iran's is being scrutinized because of its membership in the International Atomic Energy Agency whereas Israel, which has not signed a nonproliferation treaty, is "free to do what it wants." Erdogan said Turkey would continue to support the Palestinian people.
"We will not turn our back on Palestine, Palestinians and Gaza," Erdogan said.
"No one should test Turkey's patience," he added.
"Turkey's hostility is as strong as its friendship is valuable." He urged Israelis to question the actions of their government.
"It is damaging your country's image by conducting banditry and piracy," Erdogan said. "It is damaging interests of Israel and your peace and safety. It is the Israeli people who must stop the Israeli government in the first place." He said Israel cannot face the international community without expressing "regret." "Israel cannot ensure its security by drawing the hatred of the entire world," the prime minister declared.
Turkey sent three planes to bring back some 20 Turks wounded during clashes that broke out when Israeli commandos raided the Turkish vessel. Erdogan said he had snubbed an Israeli offer to fly back the Turkish wounded. Source
Israeli bulldozers have destroyed six buildings in occupied East Jerusalem - US criticizes Israel
Israeli bulldozers have destroyed six buildings in occupied East Jerusalem, resuming the demolition of Palestinian property after a halt aimed at encouraging peace talks, provoking Palestinian anger and US "concern".
Tuesday's demolitions were the first since a halt in October aimed at encouraging so-called peace talks, and Palestinians said they proved the Israeli government was not committed to the negotiations. The demolitions come just a week after Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, pledged to take "concrete steps that could be done now - in the coming days, in the coming weeks - to move the peace process further along in a very robust way" after meeting Barack Obama, the US president, at the White House.
Obama had called for direct negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians to be restarted before the partial suspension on the construction of Israeli settlements on Palestinian land expires in September.
"My hope is that once direct talks have begun, well before the moratorium [on settlements] has expired, that that will create a climate in which everybody feels a greater investment in success," Obama had said last Tuesday, adding that he hoped mutual confidence-building moves would pave the way to negotiations.
The White House meeting had come as Obama and Netanyahu tried to downplay recent tensions between their countries over Israel's continuing construction of settlements, which is illegal under international law.
US opposes 'unilateral actions'
But on Tuesday the latest demolitions threatened to turn ties frosty again, with the US joining the EU and UN in expressing concern over them.
PJ Crowley, a spokesman for the US state department, urged Israel to refrain from actions that could undermine negotiations with Palestinian leaders.
"Obviously we are concerned about reports today of a number of buildings in East Jerusalem being demolished," he said at a news briefing on Tuesday.
"The US has made it clear that it disagrees with some government of Israel actions in Jerusalem that affect Palestinians in areas such as housing, including home demolitions, and has urged all parties to avoid actions that could undermine trust.
"We continue to oppose and we will make clear to the government of Israel that we oppose unilateral actions that prejudge negotiations.
"The status of Jerusalem and all other permanent status issues must be resolved by the parties through negotiations," he said.
Volatile issue
Jerusalem demolitions are a volatile issue because of conflicting Israeli and Palestinian claims to the city's eastern sector.
Israel, which captured the sector in the 1967 Middle East war, sees it as part of its capital city, while Palestinians want it returned for the capital of their future state.
Israel says it is only enforcing the law against building violations, but Palestinians say discriminatory planning practices make it impossible for them to get permits, leaving them no choice but to build illegally and risk demolition.
About a third of Jerusalem's 750,000 residents are Palestinian. They have residency status in Jerusalem and receive Israeli social benefits, but do not hold Israeli citizenship.
Tuesday's bulldozing of the buildings was carried out by a court order, none of the structures razed were homes and all had been illegally built and uninhabited, the Jerusalem municipality said in a statement.
But Palestinians disputed those claims, saying three of the demolished structures were homes and one was a warehouse.
Two daybeds and bags crammed with children's clothing and kitchen utensils were strewn outside one of the buildings.
Basem Isawi, 48, an unemployed contractor, stood stony-faced amid the rubble of his unfinished home, forbidding his six children to come out of the nearby house where they currently live to see what had happened to it.
Isawi said he built the almost-finished home illegally for about $25,000 because he was convinced the municipality would deny him a permit.
He had been notified of the impending demolition but did not know when it was set to happen, he said.
New Israeli apartments
"We watched them destroy the house, and we couldn't do anything," Isawi said.
Police said the demolitions were carried out without incident.
Since October, no houses had been demolished in the eastern sector of the city until Tuesday. The demolitions seemed to indicate a move away from the unofficial freeze on them, which Israel imposed after much criticism from Washington.
On Monday, a Jerusalem municipal committee gave preliminary approval to 32 new apartments in a Jewish neighbourhood in East Jerusalem, rolling back a decision earlier this year to quietly put new projects on hold.
And in recent weeks, the municipality has begun demolishing small, uninhabited structures, such as sheds, built without permits in East Jerusalem.
Saeb Erekat, a senior Palestinian negotiator and aide to Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, condemned the demolitions.
"This government of Israel has been given the choice between settlements and peace and it is obvious that it chose settlements," he said.
Source
Tuesday's demolitions were the first since a halt in October aimed at encouraging so-called peace talks, and Palestinians said they proved the Israeli government was not committed to the negotiations. The demolitions come just a week after Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, pledged to take "concrete steps that could be done now - in the coming days, in the coming weeks - to move the peace process further along in a very robust way" after meeting Barack Obama, the US president, at the White House.
Obama had called for direct negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians to be restarted before the partial suspension on the construction of Israeli settlements on Palestinian land expires in September.
"My hope is that once direct talks have begun, well before the moratorium [on settlements] has expired, that that will create a climate in which everybody feels a greater investment in success," Obama had said last Tuesday, adding that he hoped mutual confidence-building moves would pave the way to negotiations.
The White House meeting had come as Obama and Netanyahu tried to downplay recent tensions between their countries over Israel's continuing construction of settlements, which is illegal under international law.
US opposes 'unilateral actions'
But on Tuesday the latest demolitions threatened to turn ties frosty again, with the US joining the EU and UN in expressing concern over them.
PJ Crowley, a spokesman for the US state department, urged Israel to refrain from actions that could undermine negotiations with Palestinian leaders.
"Obviously we are concerned about reports today of a number of buildings in East Jerusalem being demolished," he said at a news briefing on Tuesday.
"The US has made it clear that it disagrees with some government of Israel actions in Jerusalem that affect Palestinians in areas such as housing, including home demolitions, and has urged all parties to avoid actions that could undermine trust.
"We continue to oppose and we will make clear to the government of Israel that we oppose unilateral actions that prejudge negotiations.
"The status of Jerusalem and all other permanent status issues must be resolved by the parties through negotiations," he said.
Volatile issue
Jerusalem demolitions are a volatile issue because of conflicting Israeli and Palestinian claims to the city's eastern sector.
Israel, which captured the sector in the 1967 Middle East war, sees it as part of its capital city, while Palestinians want it returned for the capital of their future state.
Israel says it is only enforcing the law against building violations, but Palestinians say discriminatory planning practices make it impossible for them to get permits, leaving them no choice but to build illegally and risk demolition.
About a third of Jerusalem's 750,000 residents are Palestinian. They have residency status in Jerusalem and receive Israeli social benefits, but do not hold Israeli citizenship.
Tuesday's bulldozing of the buildings was carried out by a court order, none of the structures razed were homes and all had been illegally built and uninhabited, the Jerusalem municipality said in a statement.
But Palestinians disputed those claims, saying three of the demolished structures were homes and one was a warehouse.
Two daybeds and bags crammed with children's clothing and kitchen utensils were strewn outside one of the buildings.
Basem Isawi, 48, an unemployed contractor, stood stony-faced amid the rubble of his unfinished home, forbidding his six children to come out of the nearby house where they currently live to see what had happened to it.
Isawi said he built the almost-finished home illegally for about $25,000 because he was convinced the municipality would deny him a permit.
He had been notified of the impending demolition but did not know when it was set to happen, he said.
New Israeli apartments
"We watched them destroy the house, and we couldn't do anything," Isawi said.
Police said the demolitions were carried out without incident.
Since October, no houses had been demolished in the eastern sector of the city until Tuesday. The demolitions seemed to indicate a move away from the unofficial freeze on them, which Israel imposed after much criticism from Washington.
On Monday, a Jerusalem municipal committee gave preliminary approval to 32 new apartments in a Jewish neighbourhood in East Jerusalem, rolling back a decision earlier this year to quietly put new projects on hold.
And in recent weeks, the municipality has begun demolishing small, uninhabited structures, such as sheds, built without permits in East Jerusalem.
Saeb Erekat, a senior Palestinian negotiator and aide to Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, condemned the demolitions.
"This government of Israel has been given the choice between settlements and peace and it is obvious that it chose settlements," he said.
Source
The Future of Islam - Reza Aslan explains why the real target in the 9/11 attacks was not the United States but moderates in the Muslim world.
In recent weeks, a young Iranian-American author has been making his rounds of the talk show circuit. Turn on the TV and you might catch a glimpse of him on "Meet the Press" or more recently Jon Stewart's "Daily Show". Reza Aslan is a man in demand these days.Aslan's new-found popularity is hardly surprising since his latest book, No god but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam, offers a surprising answer to the question on every American's mind since the Sept. 11 attacks: Why do they hate us? As it turns out, says Aslan, it's really not about "us" at all. Islamic terrorism, he argues, is for the most part a symptom not of a clash of civilizations but an internal conflict within the Muslim world -- a centuries-old battle over the future of Islam.
In offering a rich, nuanced, and insightful history of Islam, the book challenges dogmatic views on both sides of the political divide, be it the right-wing conflation of the battle against terrorism with a Christian crusade or liberals' fear of Middle Eastern groups that call for the establishment of a religious state. More shocking for progressives: he is also optimistic about the future of Iraq as the first successful experiment in Islamic democracy.
Reza Aslan spoke to AlterNet from his home in Santa Barbara.
Lakshmi Chaudhry: Let me start out by asking you what motivated to write this book? What were you trying to achieve?
This book was actually a result of a series of courses that I taught at the University of Iowa. I was a visiting assistant professor there, and taught the religion and politics of the Middle East. After Sept. 11, the course became so popular that it occurred to me that it’s information that most Americans don’t have. Most of the western world is fairly ignorant when it comes to the faith and practice, and history and political culture of Islam and of the Muslim world.
It also occurred to me that there were few people who were explaining this from a perspective of faith, as well as from an objective scholarly perspective -- as a Muslim and as a scholar of comparative religion.
The most startling claim you make in the book is about the Sept. 11 attacks. According to you, they did not, in fact, mark the moment of a clash of civilizations between the West and a pan-Islamic Jihad, but rather a moment in an internal conflict within Islam -- a 14-century-long internal conflict within Islam. Could you talk about that?
We are now living in the twilight of that era of Arab-Islamic reformation. This is a process that began around the time of the colonialist experience, some 100-150 years ago, when Muslims were, for the first time, forced to respond to not just the realities of the modern world -- secularism and modernization, and industrialization -- but also the western cultural hegemony that came part and parcel with the colonialist experience.
So naturally there were two broad reactions to it. One, there were those groups of modernists, reformists, and moderates who eagerly accepted these enlightenment principles that the colonialists were preaching -- concepts such as human rights, individualism, constitutionalism and rule of law -- and to a far lesser degree, democracy and popular sovereignty. They not only adopted [these principles], but strove to create an indigenous vision of these principles, and an indigenous Islamic enlightenment.
Source
In offering a rich, nuanced, and insightful history of Islam, the book challenges dogmatic views on both sides of the political divide, be it the right-wing conflation of the battle against terrorism with a Christian crusade or liberals' fear of Middle Eastern groups that call for the establishment of a religious state. More shocking for progressives: he is also optimistic about the future of Iraq as the first successful experiment in Islamic democracy.
Reza Aslan spoke to AlterNet from his home in Santa Barbara.
Lakshmi Chaudhry: Let me start out by asking you what motivated to write this book? What were you trying to achieve?
This book was actually a result of a series of courses that I taught at the University of Iowa. I was a visiting assistant professor there, and taught the religion and politics of the Middle East. After Sept. 11, the course became so popular that it occurred to me that it’s information that most Americans don’t have. Most of the western world is fairly ignorant when it comes to the faith and practice, and history and political culture of Islam and of the Muslim world.
It also occurred to me that there were few people who were explaining this from a perspective of faith, as well as from an objective scholarly perspective -- as a Muslim and as a scholar of comparative religion.
The most startling claim you make in the book is about the Sept. 11 attacks. According to you, they did not, in fact, mark the moment of a clash of civilizations between the West and a pan-Islamic Jihad, but rather a moment in an internal conflict within Islam -- a 14-century-long internal conflict within Islam. Could you talk about that?
We are now living in the twilight of that era of Arab-Islamic reformation. This is a process that began around the time of the colonialist experience, some 100-150 years ago, when Muslims were, for the first time, forced to respond to not just the realities of the modern world -- secularism and modernization, and industrialization -- but also the western cultural hegemony that came part and parcel with the colonialist experience.
So naturally there were two broad reactions to it. One, there were those groups of modernists, reformists, and moderates who eagerly accepted these enlightenment principles that the colonialists were preaching -- concepts such as human rights, individualism, constitutionalism and rule of law -- and to a far lesser degree, democracy and popular sovereignty. They not only adopted [these principles], but strove to create an indigenous vision of these principles, and an indigenous Islamic enlightenment.
Source
Is Islam Really Stuck in the 12th Century on Women's Rights? Apparently, they're a couple of decades behind the "liberal" West, and not so stuck after all.
Before 9/11/01, the media relegated stories about women in Islamic societies to page B27, below the fold. Ever since 9/12/01, those same stories have screamed from the front pages in 100-point type. The shift in discourse coincided with the launch of Bush's global "War on Terror," when various hawks began using the plight of women in Islam to illustrate the supposed perfidy of our "enemies," and to justify a series of military "interventions" -- invasions -- by Western powers.
In the United States, there's now an almost universally held belief that most women in Islamic societies face wretched persecution and that Islam itself is wholly to blame. But there's scant empirical evidence to support the claim -- mostly, we're treated to detailed reports of horrific abuses in theocratic states like Saudi Arabia and Iran, despite the fact that just six percent of the Muslim world live in those two countries. If you ask average Americans how they came to their beliefs about how badly women suffer in Islamic societies, most will reply that "everyone knows it."
But I've seen no empirical data to suggest that an Islamic majority itself correlates with the subordination of women better than other co-variables like economic development, women's ability to serve in government, a political culture that values the rule of law or access to higher education. In other words, you can use a comparison of women's status in Saudi Arabia and Sweden to make an intellectually weak argument for Western superiority, but there's little support for the notion that women living in "traditional" Islamic cultures enjoy a lower social status than those in orthodox Christian, Jewish or Hindu communities, to name a few examples. Think of the perfectly backwards Eastern Orthodox Church, the largest Christian communion in the world. Or consider the country where women may be brutalized more terribly than in any other, the Democratic Republic of Congo, which is 70 percent Christian and 10 percent Muslim. Or go to Utah, where tens of thousands of Mormon fundamentalists believe that women are literally the property of their fathers or husbands. Of course, Mormon fundamentalists are the exception that proves the endless benevolence and equality of the West, while whatever despicable caricature of justice perpetrated on a woman by the House of Saud is breathlessly recounted as emblematic of Islamic culture as a whole.
Source
In the United States, there's now an almost universally held belief that most women in Islamic societies face wretched persecution and that Islam itself is wholly to blame. But there's scant empirical evidence to support the claim -- mostly, we're treated to detailed reports of horrific abuses in theocratic states like Saudi Arabia and Iran, despite the fact that just six percent of the Muslim world live in those two countries. If you ask average Americans how they came to their beliefs about how badly women suffer in Islamic societies, most will reply that "everyone knows it."
But I've seen no empirical data to suggest that an Islamic majority itself correlates with the subordination of women better than other co-variables like economic development, women's ability to serve in government, a political culture that values the rule of law or access to higher education. In other words, you can use a comparison of women's status in Saudi Arabia and Sweden to make an intellectually weak argument for Western superiority, but there's little support for the notion that women living in "traditional" Islamic cultures enjoy a lower social status than those in orthodox Christian, Jewish or Hindu communities, to name a few examples. Think of the perfectly backwards Eastern Orthodox Church, the largest Christian communion in the world. Or consider the country where women may be brutalized more terribly than in any other, the Democratic Republic of Congo, which is 70 percent Christian and 10 percent Muslim. Or go to Utah, where tens of thousands of Mormon fundamentalists believe that women are literally the property of their fathers or husbands. Of course, Mormon fundamentalists are the exception that proves the endless benevolence and equality of the West, while whatever despicable caricature of justice perpetrated on a woman by the House of Saud is breathlessly recounted as emblematic of Islamic culture as a whole.
Source
How American Right-Wing Christians Are Waging 'Spiritual Warfare' in Northern Iraq all with the blessings of the Kurdistan government and assistance from U.S. taxpayers.
On a barren hillside outside Sulaymaniyah in southeast Iraqi Kurdistan sits a small compound of buildings clustered behind battered gray and ochre walls. Atop one wall is a large white sign glittering with gold and azure lettering that reads in English and Arabic: Classical School of the Medes. It is one of three new private schools in the region that teach a "Christian worldview," the handiwork of American evangelicals from Tennessee.
Since the US occupation took hold, American evangelicals have established not only schools, but printing presses, radio stations, women's centers, bookstores, medical and dental clinics, and churches in northern Iraq, all with the blessings and assistance of the Kurdistan government. Many of these efforts were funded in part by US taxpayer dollars, channeled through Department of Defense construction contracts and State Department grants.
In September 2003, just four months after US forces took down Saddam Hussein's regime, 350 evangelical pastors and church leaders assembled in Kirkuk, where they were warmly welcomed by Massoud Barzani, president of the Kurdistan Regional Government. At that gathering, George Grant, a leader of Servant Group International, the evangelical organization in Nashville that set up the chain of Christian schools, declared that "Jesus Christ is Lord over all things; He is Lord over every Mullah, every Ayatollah, every Imam, and every Mahdi pretender; He is Lord over the whole of the earth, even Iraq!"
CENTCOM documents show that between 2005 and 2007, DOD's Joint Contracting Command Iraq/Afghanistan paid the Kurdish company Daban Group at least $465,639 for the construction of Grant's School of the Medes. Two years earlier, tens of thousands of dollars from a State Department-funded program called Healthcare Partnerships in Northern Iraq also made their way into a variety of Servant Group evangelical and humanitarian projects.
In return for the Regional Government's support for this evangelical presence in Kurdistan, Doug Layton, another Tennessean and a Servant Group founder, served as a crucial liaison for the KRG in Washington during the Bush years. There, he ran Kurdish public relations efforts and recruited evangelical businessmen to invest in the region.
"Since the run up to the Iraq War, [Massoud] Barzani and the KRG played to the Bush administration and its right-wing evangelical Christian base," said Mike Amitay, a Middle East senior policy analyst at the Open Society Policy Center. "That's where they saw the power and the money. Barzani was going to let them set up schools and churches and get what he needed." But, Amitay adds, "given the rise of the Islamic parties in Kurdistan and Assyrian Christian resentment of American evangelical exceptionalism and proselytizing, they're playing with fire."
Source
Since the US occupation took hold, American evangelicals have established not only schools, but printing presses, radio stations, women's centers, bookstores, medical and dental clinics, and churches in northern Iraq, all with the blessings and assistance of the Kurdistan government. Many of these efforts were funded in part by US taxpayer dollars, channeled through Department of Defense construction contracts and State Department grants.
In September 2003, just four months after US forces took down Saddam Hussein's regime, 350 evangelical pastors and church leaders assembled in Kirkuk, where they were warmly welcomed by Massoud Barzani, president of the Kurdistan Regional Government. At that gathering, George Grant, a leader of Servant Group International, the evangelical organization in Nashville that set up the chain of Christian schools, declared that "Jesus Christ is Lord over all things; He is Lord over every Mullah, every Ayatollah, every Imam, and every Mahdi pretender; He is Lord over the whole of the earth, even Iraq!"
CENTCOM documents show that between 2005 and 2007, DOD's Joint Contracting Command Iraq/Afghanistan paid the Kurdish company Daban Group at least $465,639 for the construction of Grant's School of the Medes. Two years earlier, tens of thousands of dollars from a State Department-funded program called Healthcare Partnerships in Northern Iraq also made their way into a variety of Servant Group evangelical and humanitarian projects.
In return for the Regional Government's support for this evangelical presence in Kurdistan, Doug Layton, another Tennessean and a Servant Group founder, served as a crucial liaison for the KRG in Washington during the Bush years. There, he ran Kurdish public relations efforts and recruited evangelical businessmen to invest in the region.
"Since the run up to the Iraq War, [Massoud] Barzani and the KRG played to the Bush administration and its right-wing evangelical Christian base," said Mike Amitay, a Middle East senior policy analyst at the Open Society Policy Center. "That's where they saw the power and the money. Barzani was going to let them set up schools and churches and get what he needed." But, Amitay adds, "given the rise of the Islamic parties in Kurdistan and Assyrian Christian resentment of American evangelical exceptionalism and proselytizing, they're playing with fire."
Source
SADIST DUTCH MP’S HITLERIZED PERCEPTION OF THE KORAN
Mr. Geert Wilders, the far-right racist Dutch MP, and a member of the Dutch House of Representatives is expected to release a short anti-Koran film on January 25, 2008.[1] Theme of the film is that the “Koran promotes violence.” It is perplexing to see an MP embarking on a single sided debate advancing his “HITLERIZED PERCEPTION” of the sacred text.
If everyone, by simply reading translation of the Koran, becomes expert in the Koran’nic exegesis, then it is quite reasonable for Mr. Wilders to ask the Dutch government to close all academic institutions in the Netherlands, hand over text books to students so they can master their chosen field of study on their own.
What exactly is Mr. Wilders’ intention behind producing such a film? To provoke Muslims so they react violently this in turn, will empower him further in the Dutch parliament. This type of behavior can only exist in a person having NECROPHILOUS mindset. A NECROPHILOUS person is one who loves death, bloodshed, darkness and all forms of tendencies towards human destruction. This he/she causes by his/her words and deeds.
“The Netherlands is a country of destination and, to a lesser extent, transit for trafficking in women and children. According to a 2003 United Nations report, the Netherlands is one of the top nine destination countries for sex trafficking in the world.”[2] In June 2006, a group of pedophiles in the Netherlands created a Charity, Freedom and Diversity (NVD) political party. This party, in addition to many other policies, wants to lower the legal age for sexual consent from 16 to 12, legalize child pornography and sex with animals, i.e. Zoophilia.[3] For Mr. Wilders, misquoting and distorting the Koran is of paramount importance than confronting dehumanized social patterns in his country.
His deliberate portrayal of the Koran “promoting violence,” has actually fulfilled many prophecies of the Koran. Following passages of the Koran revealed more than 1,400 years ago, prophesizes that there will arise individuals like Mr. Wilders who, based on their ignorance and hatred will openly show their animosity towards the Koran and those who believe in it:
1. “If they were to get the better of you, they would behave to you as enemies, and stretch forth their hands and their tongues against you for evil: and they desire that ye should reject the Truth.” [60:2]
2. “…and ye shall certainly Hear much that will grieve you, from those who received the Book before you and from those who worship many gods.” [2:186]
3. “But truly (Revelation) is a cause of sorrow for the Unbelievers.” [69:50]
Mr. Geert told The Daily Telegraph of March 2, 2007: “Islam itself is the problem. Islam is a violent religion. The Prophet Mohammed was a violent man. The Koran is mostly a violent book. We should invest in Muslim people but they have to first get rid of half the Koran and half of their beliefs….”[4] Had he said something positive about the Koran and Islam, he would have proven message of the above passages to be non-divine.
A dark-hearted person with an agenda, such as Mr. Wilders and his “team of experts” while reading the meaning of the Koran in English or Dutch,[5] may come across verses that look odd, confusing, or void of meaning. This is because various verses were revealed under specific circumstances on specific occasions. This, in the area of Koran’nic studies is known as ‘Asbab ul Nazul,’ which means ‘Reasons of Revelation.’[6] This is precisely where the secondary source, the books of Prophetic traditions are consulted for further explanation of verses that appear to have no context.
The Koran is in the Arabic language. Its mode of expression is neither poetry nor prose, but has its own style and rhythm. It has a rare beauty, grandeur, and sublimity. Its language surpasses any known written work in the Arabic language. Therefore, no rules, grammatical or otherwise of any other language can be used to interpret the Koran.
Sadist leaders with fossilized minds existed throughout history. By their toxic speeches and beastly nature, they mesmerized their own citizens to slaughter those whom they perceived to be the enemy. Mr. Wilders is not the first, nor is he going to be the last to have intentionally disfigured the meaning of the Koran: a straight object dipped into a glass of water always looks crooked.
On November 28, 1940, Nazis in Germany released an anti-Jewish, anti-Judaism film “The Eternal Jew” written by Hitler’s minister of propaganda, Dr. Joseph Goebbels. A demonic view of Judaism is sadistically depicted at the end of the film where Jews are shown slaughtering lawful animals in a kosher manner. The purpose of this particular scene was to show “diabolic brutality” of Judaic teachings.[7] Long gone is evil Dr. Goebbels, but manifestation of his evilness can still be visualized in Mr. Geert Wilders.
If or when Mr. Wilders’ film is released, advice to Muslims is not to become emotional, not to react in a violent manner, not to burn country’s flag, not to demonstrate in the streets. The most appropriate way to respond and expose his genocide-centric agenda is to use intellectual arsenal.
Producing a documentary film where his unfounded linear claims about the Koran “being a violent book” are scholarly refuted. The film should then be shown wherever possible. This is the only way to bring awareness to humanity that Nazi’s “well-fed” brain child is sitting within the Dutch parliament.
Irrespective of color, race, creed or religion, a tiny segment of humans on this wonderful planet have completely lost their humanness. It is the duty of the sane ones to help and teach the art of being human to those who have strayed far away from the path. Learning, understanding and respecting – without exploitation – others is need of our turbulent times. Loving humanity is an Art. Successful are those that are able to handle the brush, and know how to paint a stunning landscape.
If everyone, by simply reading translation of the Koran, becomes expert in the Koran’nic exegesis, then it is quite reasonable for Mr. Wilders to ask the Dutch government to close all academic institutions in the Netherlands, hand over text books to students so they can master their chosen field of study on their own.
What exactly is Mr. Wilders’ intention behind producing such a film? To provoke Muslims so they react violently this in turn, will empower him further in the Dutch parliament. This type of behavior can only exist in a person having NECROPHILOUS mindset. A NECROPHILOUS person is one who loves death, bloodshed, darkness and all forms of tendencies towards human destruction. This he/she causes by his/her words and deeds.
“The Netherlands is a country of destination and, to a lesser extent, transit for trafficking in women and children. According to a 2003 United Nations report, the Netherlands is one of the top nine destination countries for sex trafficking in the world.”[2] In June 2006, a group of pedophiles in the Netherlands created a Charity, Freedom and Diversity (NVD) political party. This party, in addition to many other policies, wants to lower the legal age for sexual consent from 16 to 12, legalize child pornography and sex with animals, i.e. Zoophilia.[3] For Mr. Wilders, misquoting and distorting the Koran is of paramount importance than confronting dehumanized social patterns in his country.
His deliberate portrayal of the Koran “promoting violence,” has actually fulfilled many prophecies of the Koran. Following passages of the Koran revealed more than 1,400 years ago, prophesizes that there will arise individuals like Mr. Wilders who, based on their ignorance and hatred will openly show their animosity towards the Koran and those who believe in it:
1. “If they were to get the better of you, they would behave to you as enemies, and stretch forth their hands and their tongues against you for evil: and they desire that ye should reject the Truth.” [60:2]
2. “…and ye shall certainly Hear much that will grieve you, from those who received the Book before you and from those who worship many gods.” [2:186]
3. “But truly (Revelation) is a cause of sorrow for the Unbelievers.” [69:50]
Mr. Geert told The Daily Telegraph of March 2, 2007: “Islam itself is the problem. Islam is a violent religion. The Prophet Mohammed was a violent man. The Koran is mostly a violent book. We should invest in Muslim people but they have to first get rid of half the Koran and half of their beliefs….”[4] Had he said something positive about the Koran and Islam, he would have proven message of the above passages to be non-divine.
A dark-hearted person with an agenda, such as Mr. Wilders and his “team of experts” while reading the meaning of the Koran in English or Dutch,[5] may come across verses that look odd, confusing, or void of meaning. This is because various verses were revealed under specific circumstances on specific occasions. This, in the area of Koran’nic studies is known as ‘Asbab ul Nazul,’ which means ‘Reasons of Revelation.’[6] This is precisely where the secondary source, the books of Prophetic traditions are consulted for further explanation of verses that appear to have no context.
The Koran is in the Arabic language. Its mode of expression is neither poetry nor prose, but has its own style and rhythm. It has a rare beauty, grandeur, and sublimity. Its language surpasses any known written work in the Arabic language. Therefore, no rules, grammatical or otherwise of any other language can be used to interpret the Koran.
Sadist leaders with fossilized minds existed throughout history. By their toxic speeches and beastly nature, they mesmerized their own citizens to slaughter those whom they perceived to be the enemy. Mr. Wilders is not the first, nor is he going to be the last to have intentionally disfigured the meaning of the Koran: a straight object dipped into a glass of water always looks crooked.
On November 28, 1940, Nazis in Germany released an anti-Jewish, anti-Judaism film “The Eternal Jew” written by Hitler’s minister of propaganda, Dr. Joseph Goebbels. A demonic view of Judaism is sadistically depicted at the end of the film where Jews are shown slaughtering lawful animals in a kosher manner. The purpose of this particular scene was to show “diabolic brutality” of Judaic teachings.[7] Long gone is evil Dr. Goebbels, but manifestation of his evilness can still be visualized in Mr. Geert Wilders.
If or when Mr. Wilders’ film is released, advice to Muslims is not to become emotional, not to react in a violent manner, not to burn country’s flag, not to demonstrate in the streets. The most appropriate way to respond and expose his genocide-centric agenda is to use intellectual arsenal.
Producing a documentary film where his unfounded linear claims about the Koran “being a violent book” are scholarly refuted. The film should then be shown wherever possible. This is the only way to bring awareness to humanity that Nazi’s “well-fed” brain child is sitting within the Dutch parliament.
Irrespective of color, race, creed or religion, a tiny segment of humans on this wonderful planet have completely lost their humanness. It is the duty of the sane ones to help and teach the art of being human to those who have strayed far away from the path. Learning, understanding and respecting – without exploitation – others is need of our turbulent times. Loving humanity is an Art. Successful are those that are able to handle the brush, and know how to paint a stunning landscape.
Somalia’s forgotten war
Al-Shabab’s celebration of the Kampala attacks is bad news for Africa
Sunday's twin suicide blasts in Kampala, which killed more than 70 people mostly football fans, are a grim reminder of the festering conflict in Somalia. The radical Al-Shabab movement has claimed responsibility and threatened to carry out more attacks against Uganda and Burundi unless the two countries withdraw their forces from Amisom, the African Union peacekeeping mission in Somalia.
Somalia has been embroiled in a bloody civil war, which has left this once promising country in tatters, for more than 20 years. The tragedy of Somalia is compounded by the fact that no one really cares about what’s happening there. Its conflict has become invisible. But this is proving to be a costly mistake, as the terrible attacks in Kampala have shown. Somalia’s disintegration as a country has produced a number of anomalies such as pirates, but the biggest threat is the rise of extremist movements in the midst of total anarchy and their quest for control.
Baghdad and Kabul are like Scandinavian cities compared to Mogadishu, Somalia’s decrepit capital. The daily reality there is made of street wars, bombings, beheadings and tribal fighting. It’s a forgotten war that now threatens to bring to power a regime that is more ruthless than the Taleban. But what is worse is that if it succeeds then Al-Qaeda and other fanatics will have a base from which they can destabilize other countries in Africa.
But getting involved is costly. Those who did were eventually chased out. The US, under President Bill Clinton, intervened briefly but left in a hurry after suffering 19 Marine casualties in Mogadishu. The UN too sent two peacekeeping missions between 1992 and 1995 only to see its coalition forces attacked by power hungry warlords. It finally abandoned the country and few months later the government collapsed.
As Somalia became engulfed by civil war, its neighbors, primarily Ethiopia, stepped in. Addis Ababa had previously supported the armed insurgency that ended the long rule of the country’s dictator Mohammad Siad Barre. But that only led to Somalia’s partition with Somaliland, the northwestern part of the country, declaring independence in 1991. By then the various Somali parties and coalitions had declared war on each other and a long and brutal fighting ensued. The result was disastrous for civilians and famine claimed the life of no less than 300,000 people in the mid-1990s.
By the onset of the 21st century Somalia had been divided largely along tribal lines with Somaliland and Puntland autonomous regions in the north and in the Horn of Africa while the south slowly fell under the control of Hizbul Islam and Al-Shabab movements. The federal government, recognized as the legitimate power in Somalia, could barely keep hold of parts of the capital and nearby regions.
When the Islamic Courts Movement briefly took over in the south, including the capital, in 2006 and imposed Shariah law, Ethiopia and the African Union quickly responded. Ethiopia invaded the south dislodging the Islamic Courts, but that only led to the birth of more radical off-shoots including Al-Shabab.
Al-Shabab was able to regroup and become a considerable force. They defeated the Ethiopians in a number of battles and finally drove them out the country. Now they have managed to neutralize the interim federal government and wage war against fellow Islamist rivals, including Hizbul Islam and others. The small African Union force is what stands in their way.
Al-Shabab movement will almost certainly take over Mogadishu and overthrow the government in the coming weeks and months. It will impose a strict Shariah law and turn what is left of the country under their control into a closed society run by arbitrary laws and ironclad rules. But that should be the least of the world’s concern.
The collapse of Somalia will have catastrophic results on all of its neighbors and most of Africa. The Kampala attacks prove that Al-Qaeda-like tactics, adopted by Al-Shabab, can easily move across borders with lethal results. The fact that the African Union peacekeeping mission there is hapless and could soon abandon the country is frightening.
Somalia is an ancient civilization and a land that has played a key part in East African history. Like many of its neighbors it has a checkered past and a complicated tribal and ethnic make-up. Now major chunks of this country have been impregnated by extremist militants. Piracy is only one face of Somalia today. This Arab League and African Union member state has been abandoned by the world community. But leaving it to its fate will not be easy or free of cost.
Somalia could prove to be more dangerous to world stability than Afghanistan and Iraq put together. It is true that it is an impoverished land, with little strategic assets, but allowing a radical Islamist movement to take over will have severe consequences on Africa and the region.
It is a tough challenge. The country has been allowed to succumb to innumerable failings in the past 20 years that it is almost ridiculous to suggest a solution. Al-Shabab’s celebration of the Kampala attacks is bad news for Africa.
ArabNews
Sunday's twin suicide blasts in Kampala, which killed more than 70 people mostly football fans, are a grim reminder of the festering conflict in Somalia. The radical Al-Shabab movement has claimed responsibility and threatened to carry out more attacks against Uganda and Burundi unless the two countries withdraw their forces from Amisom, the African Union peacekeeping mission in Somalia.
Somalia has been embroiled in a bloody civil war, which has left this once promising country in tatters, for more than 20 years. The tragedy of Somalia is compounded by the fact that no one really cares about what’s happening there. Its conflict has become invisible. But this is proving to be a costly mistake, as the terrible attacks in Kampala have shown. Somalia’s disintegration as a country has produced a number of anomalies such as pirates, but the biggest threat is the rise of extremist movements in the midst of total anarchy and their quest for control.
Baghdad and Kabul are like Scandinavian cities compared to Mogadishu, Somalia’s decrepit capital. The daily reality there is made of street wars, bombings, beheadings and tribal fighting. It’s a forgotten war that now threatens to bring to power a regime that is more ruthless than the Taleban. But what is worse is that if it succeeds then Al-Qaeda and other fanatics will have a base from which they can destabilize other countries in Africa.
But getting involved is costly. Those who did were eventually chased out. The US, under President Bill Clinton, intervened briefly but left in a hurry after suffering 19 Marine casualties in Mogadishu. The UN too sent two peacekeeping missions between 1992 and 1995 only to see its coalition forces attacked by power hungry warlords. It finally abandoned the country and few months later the government collapsed.
As Somalia became engulfed by civil war, its neighbors, primarily Ethiopia, stepped in. Addis Ababa had previously supported the armed insurgency that ended the long rule of the country’s dictator Mohammad Siad Barre. But that only led to Somalia’s partition with Somaliland, the northwestern part of the country, declaring independence in 1991. By then the various Somali parties and coalitions had declared war on each other and a long and brutal fighting ensued. The result was disastrous for civilians and famine claimed the life of no less than 300,000 people in the mid-1990s.
By the onset of the 21st century Somalia had been divided largely along tribal lines with Somaliland and Puntland autonomous regions in the north and in the Horn of Africa while the south slowly fell under the control of Hizbul Islam and Al-Shabab movements. The federal government, recognized as the legitimate power in Somalia, could barely keep hold of parts of the capital and nearby regions.
When the Islamic Courts Movement briefly took over in the south, including the capital, in 2006 and imposed Shariah law, Ethiopia and the African Union quickly responded. Ethiopia invaded the south dislodging the Islamic Courts, but that only led to the birth of more radical off-shoots including Al-Shabab.
Al-Shabab was able to regroup and become a considerable force. They defeated the Ethiopians in a number of battles and finally drove them out the country. Now they have managed to neutralize the interim federal government and wage war against fellow Islamist rivals, including Hizbul Islam and others. The small African Union force is what stands in their way.
Al-Shabab movement will almost certainly take over Mogadishu and overthrow the government in the coming weeks and months. It will impose a strict Shariah law and turn what is left of the country under their control into a closed society run by arbitrary laws and ironclad rules. But that should be the least of the world’s concern.
The collapse of Somalia will have catastrophic results on all of its neighbors and most of Africa. The Kampala attacks prove that Al-Qaeda-like tactics, adopted by Al-Shabab, can easily move across borders with lethal results. The fact that the African Union peacekeeping mission there is hapless and could soon abandon the country is frightening.
Somalia is an ancient civilization and a land that has played a key part in East African history. Like many of its neighbors it has a checkered past and a complicated tribal and ethnic make-up. Now major chunks of this country have been impregnated by extremist militants. Piracy is only one face of Somalia today. This Arab League and African Union member state has been abandoned by the world community. But leaving it to its fate will not be easy or free of cost.
Somalia could prove to be more dangerous to world stability than Afghanistan and Iraq put together. It is true that it is an impoverished land, with little strategic assets, but allowing a radical Islamist movement to take over will have severe consequences on Africa and the region.
It is a tough challenge. The country has been allowed to succumb to innumerable failings in the past 20 years that it is almost ridiculous to suggest a solution. Al-Shabab’s celebration of the Kampala attacks is bad news for Africa.
ArabNews
The End of the "War on Terror?"
Among the several previews to the recently released US National Security Strategy, Brennan once more highlighted that the new document marks the end of the “war on terror.” Dropping the expression that proved so damaging to the US image and interests is certainly a welcome development, but more needs to be done to permanently bury a view of the world that only breeds more extremism.
Last May, at the renowned US military academy of West Point, President Barack Obama introduced the new US national security doctrine, formally expressed in the National Security Strategy 2010 released by the White House later that month. As is already tradition among foreign policy analysts, journalists and think tankers, a whole range of analysis was published about the new strategy. A particular point of general interest is usually to identify what are the elements of change, and also the elements of continuity, in relation to the previous national security strategy.
Whether or not the recently released document represents such a break from the Bush administration’s 2002 and especially the 2006 National Security Strategies remains an issue of debate. In his speech, Obama tried to point out how different this strategy is when compared with his predecessor’s. Clearly, there are some aspects to it that do mark a shift, especially regarding the emphasis on multilateralism as opposed to unilateralism, diplomacy over the use of military force, and in the explicit recognition of the limits of American might.
In addition to Obama, US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, US National Security Advisor James Jones, and John Brennan, Obama’s top counter-terrorism adviser, also previewed the new strategy. Brennan in particular highlighted that the US is involved in a conflict with Al-Qaeda, and not in a “war on terror.” In the 2006 National Security Strategy, expressions like “the war against terror,” “the war against terrorists,” “the terrorist enemy,” and so forth could be found all across the document.
This expression “war on terror,” which reflects a particular view of the world and how to deal with it, proved very damaging for the US image and interests across the wider Middle East.
Brennan advocated the abandonment of this expression as early as 2009 in his first speech after joining the Obama administration. At the time, Brennan argued that the new approach would focus on the “root causes of terrorism,” namely economic and social causes that breed extremism. This view is in sharp contrast with the Bush administration’s idea that terrorism was caused by tyrannical regimes in the Middle East.
It remains to be seen if the dropping of the expression “war on terror” corresponds to actions by the Obama administration that really establish a change of course in this regard. There is an effort in the new document to stress clearly that the new administration is not at war with Islam—“…this is not a global war against a tactic—terrorism or a religion—Islam. We are at war with a specific network, Al-Qaeda, and its terrorist affiliates who support efforts to attack the United States, our allies, and partners.”
Although the expression “war on terror” has been dropped, there is still some doubt about if the idea behind the expression is still present in the new strategy—“For nearly a decade, our nation has been at war with a far-reaching network of violence and hatred.” Indeed, the question remains if the Obama administration is aware that the wrong response to extremism only breeds more extremism.
In order to end “The War on Terror,” the Obama administration has to do more than remove a word from a document. One of the flags of the Obama presidential campaign was the closure of Guantanamo, the darkest symbol of a “whatever it takes” approach of Bush’s “war on terror.” This proved to be a much harder task than initially thought, and the deadline to close it in January this year was not met. The question of what do to with the inmates that remain there is only one of the puzzles the Obama administration needs to solve. Sending the many Yemeni nationals still in Guantanamo back to Yemen is certainly not an option. Although it was an invention of the Bush administration to transform this prison into a torture camp where “terror” was fought with “terror,” the inability to keep the pledge of closing the prison has backfired on the Obama administration.
There is another development which is at least as damaging for the US’s long term interests as their inability to close Guantanamo, and that is the huge increase of drone strikes in Pakistan since the Obama administration took office. As a past article in The Majalla has argued, while “counter-terrorism experts find this program a real asset, some counterinsurgency specialists have been firm in pointing out that it sends the wrong message to the Pakistani people.” Various warnings have been made about the potential boomerang effect of this strategy, including by David Kilcullen and Andrew Exum, of the Center for a New American Strategy, and by Professor Fawaz Gerges from the London School of Economics, in a recent article in Newsweek.
This strategy, responsible for the killing of too many civilians, is contradictory to numerous ideas put forward in the new National Security Strategy, namely “the strengthening of international norms on behalf of human rights,” or the “efforts to live our own values, and uphold the principles of democracy in our own society, underpin our support for the aspirations of the oppressed abroad, who know they can turn to America for leadership based on justice and hope.” It is particularly hard to see how the bombing of villages in tribal areas of Pakistan by unpiloted US drones can contribute to the goal contained in the new strategy of “build[ing] positive partnerships with Muslim communities around the world.”
Until at least these two issues—the closure of Guantanamo and the restrain in drone strikes—are addressed, the “war on terror” isn’t really over, it just changed its face.
Majallahreports
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)