Day-long event to focus on spirituality, education, activism, social concerns
(SAN DIEGO, CA, 7/23/10) -- On Saturday, July 24, the San Diego Muslim community will hold a day-long conference for American Muslim youth at the Islamic Center of San Diego (ICSD). The theme of the conference is “Muslim Youth in America: Seeking the Straight Path.”
WHAT: “Muslim Youth in America: Seeking the Straight Path” Conference
WHEN: Saturday, July 24th, 10 a.m. – 11 p.m.; A Press Conference for the event will be held at 1 p.m. in the 2nd Floor Library, Islamic Center of San Diego.
WHERE: Multipurpose Room (1st Floor) Islamic Center of San Diego, 7050 Eckstrom Avenue, San Diego, CA 92111
CONTACT: CAIR San Diego Public Relations Director Edgar Hopida, 619-913-0719 or 858-278-4547, E-mail: ehopida@cair.com
The conference will feature dialogue-oriented sessions on the development of a good Muslim spiritual character and the importance of obtaining both religious and secular education. Other discussions will focus on “Radicalization of American Muslim Youth: Myth or Reality” and on social problems that are experienced by Muslim youth.
“The purpose of this conference is to provide Muslim youth a constructive environment in which to discuss issues of spirituality, education, activism, and social problems in order to help them pursue a path that will positively impact the broader society,” said CAIR-San Diego Public Relations Director Edgar Hopida.
The conference is sponsored by the Islamic Center of San Diego (ICSD), Masjidul Taqwa, the Council on American Islamic Relations - San Diego Chapter (CAIR-San Diego), Logan Islamic Community Center (LICC), and Muslim American Society (MAS) Youth San Diego.
CAIR is America's largest Muslim civil liberties group. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.
Source: http://islamonline.com
Thursday, September 30, 2010
My Leap of Faith for You - Love and Faith Redefined
Albert Einstein not often cited for ideas outside the realm of science. But I recently came across an insightful statement formulated by him (the quotation above) that sparked a synapse some where in my mind about the relationship between religion and love.
If the laws of gravity do not apply to love, that is, if human beings are not attracted by mere earthbound love, then I am left with two questions: First, if it's not love that brings two people together, than what does? Second, if love alone, or at least the popular conception of it, does not attract two individuals, than what does love pair-up with to bring human beings into each other's intimate spheres? So the questions can be distilled to a single inquiry: How do people fall in love? Contrary to popular belief and Hollywood, falling in love does not happen spontaneously like a raging forest fire or something. How do I speak with such certainty when trashing the notion of romanticized love you say? Well, isn't it apparent? Look around you! When walking down the road, do you see people randomly bursting into passionate paroxysms? I mean, it's not like your taking the subway one day and you engage the person next to you just like that. It takes time to develop real love.
So what does taking time mean anyway? Well, it means that usually your feeling of deep love will not present itself the moment you first meet someone. No. Love needs to be given a chance to be cultivated and grown by an extended relationship, which is where marriage comes in as an active mechanism that allows such a seedling to germinate and eventually grow tall.
The truth of the matter is that something else is required to get love going. Like an engine or a chemical reaction, some kind of catalyst is needed to jumpstart the lifelong development that love requires. What is this enigmatic catalyst? Well, let's turn to the seventh verse of the forty-ninth surah of the Qur'an, Al-Hujurat (look at the first excerpt above).
From this verse and many similar ayahs in the Qur'an, we learn that Allah has integrated faith into our very hearts. Many people would interpret the idea of faith being "adorned" in our hearts as a kind of symbolic statement, but the fact of the matter is that our hearts are physically tuned to reverberate to the sounds of faith, the feeling of pure wholesomeness that belief brings with it. Establishing a loving relationship not only requires visceral attraction (an earthly desire), but also a huge input of faith, which answers our opening questions.
Perhaps this is too simplistic of an answer for you? Let's get a bit empirical, shall we? From my observation, as well as many other Muslims, it seems as though there is a huge contrast in marriage patterns between modern-day Muslims (you and I) and the early Muslims (570 CE / 632 H). I often find myself thinking, perhaps a little optimistically, of how relatively easy marriage was accomplished in early Muslim communities (think Madinah and afterwards Makkah). Men and women were often wedded at relatively young ages and decisions of whether to marry or not were likewise relatively brief and punctual.
For example, it wasn't really that long after Ah proposed to marry Fatimah that marital requirements were met and arrangements were finalized. And mind you, these weren't cold, hard arrangements met with corporate speed, nor were they swooning over one another in a fashion akin to Romeo and Juliet. No, this man and this woman made a mutual decision to love each other and that is a fact. They decided to put hands and hearts together in this earth and plant a seed there and nurture it to something large and beautiful, and that something bloomed into a blossom of love and tenderness into eternity.
And so from our more empirical discourse, we can start to make connections. We can begin to understand Einstein's statement about love not being contained by worldly constriction or law (gravity). No. Love is a heavenly attribute, a gift that God has saturated our hearts with. And mingling with love in the core of our hearts is faith. So what is faith but love, and what is love but faith. They both originate from the same pulsing locus, that miraculous muscle, for lack of a more transcending word, that sets into motion our bodies and our senses. They are one expression, even as their Originator is One.
And so we must ask ourselves the crucial question: How do we fall into real love? How do you find that true inamorato, if you are a Muslimah, or inamorata if you are a Muslim, in the modern, urban, and lonely landscape that you live in? Well, keep on looking sugar 'cause you aint gonna find nobody if you keep looking for the rest of your allotted time in life.
You cannot float through life with a belief that one day your one true love will come waltzing through your bedroom door. No. On the contrary, if you want to love someone, then you have to make that decision to defy mere dunya-related gravity. You have to grasp the fact that because faith and love are, so to say, a package deal, when you make an authentic decision to love someone, you are making a leap of faith.
There will be a point in your life's path that will tumble down into a deep ravine, and until you decide to put your faith in an individual human being and take that scary leap of faith, you will not continue to move in a positive direction. So think about fighting gravity, think about taking love and faith seriously.
Source: http://www.islamicity.com
If the laws of gravity do not apply to love, that is, if human beings are not attracted by mere earthbound love, then I am left with two questions: First, if it's not love that brings two people together, than what does? Second, if love alone, or at least the popular conception of it, does not attract two individuals, than what does love pair-up with to bring human beings into each other's intimate spheres? So the questions can be distilled to a single inquiry: How do people fall in love? Contrary to popular belief and Hollywood, falling in love does not happen spontaneously like a raging forest fire or something. How do I speak with such certainty when trashing the notion of romanticized love you say? Well, isn't it apparent? Look around you! When walking down the road, do you see people randomly bursting into passionate paroxysms? I mean, it's not like your taking the subway one day and you engage the person next to you just like that. It takes time to develop real love.
So what does taking time mean anyway? Well, it means that usually your feeling of deep love will not present itself the moment you first meet someone. No. Love needs to be given a chance to be cultivated and grown by an extended relationship, which is where marriage comes in as an active mechanism that allows such a seedling to germinate and eventually grow tall.
The truth of the matter is that something else is required to get love going. Like an engine or a chemical reaction, some kind of catalyst is needed to jumpstart the lifelong development that love requires. What is this enigmatic catalyst? Well, let's turn to the seventh verse of the forty-ninth surah of the Qur'an, Al-Hujurat (look at the first excerpt above).
From this verse and many similar ayahs in the Qur'an, we learn that Allah has integrated faith into our very hearts. Many people would interpret the idea of faith being "adorned" in our hearts as a kind of symbolic statement, but the fact of the matter is that our hearts are physically tuned to reverberate to the sounds of faith, the feeling of pure wholesomeness that belief brings with it. Establishing a loving relationship not only requires visceral attraction (an earthly desire), but also a huge input of faith, which answers our opening questions.
Perhaps this is too simplistic of an answer for you? Let's get a bit empirical, shall we? From my observation, as well as many other Muslims, it seems as though there is a huge contrast in marriage patterns between modern-day Muslims (you and I) and the early Muslims (570 CE / 632 H). I often find myself thinking, perhaps a little optimistically, of how relatively easy marriage was accomplished in early Muslim communities (think Madinah and afterwards Makkah). Men and women were often wedded at relatively young ages and decisions of whether to marry or not were likewise relatively brief and punctual.
For example, it wasn't really that long after Ah proposed to marry Fatimah that marital requirements were met and arrangements were finalized. And mind you, these weren't cold, hard arrangements met with corporate speed, nor were they swooning over one another in a fashion akin to Romeo and Juliet. No, this man and this woman made a mutual decision to love each other and that is a fact. They decided to put hands and hearts together in this earth and plant a seed there and nurture it to something large and beautiful, and that something bloomed into a blossom of love and tenderness into eternity.
And so from our more empirical discourse, we can start to make connections. We can begin to understand Einstein's statement about love not being contained by worldly constriction or law (gravity). No. Love is a heavenly attribute, a gift that God has saturated our hearts with. And mingling with love in the core of our hearts is faith. So what is faith but love, and what is love but faith. They both originate from the same pulsing locus, that miraculous muscle, for lack of a more transcending word, that sets into motion our bodies and our senses. They are one expression, even as their Originator is One.
And so we must ask ourselves the crucial question: How do we fall into real love? How do you find that true inamorato, if you are a Muslimah, or inamorata if you are a Muslim, in the modern, urban, and lonely landscape that you live in? Well, keep on looking sugar 'cause you aint gonna find nobody if you keep looking for the rest of your allotted time in life.
You cannot float through life with a belief that one day your one true love will come waltzing through your bedroom door. No. On the contrary, if you want to love someone, then you have to make that decision to defy mere dunya-related gravity. You have to grasp the fact that because faith and love are, so to say, a package deal, when you make an authentic decision to love someone, you are making a leap of faith.
There will be a point in your life's path that will tumble down into a deep ravine, and until you decide to put your faith in an individual human being and take that scary leap of faith, you will not continue to move in a positive direction. So think about fighting gravity, think about taking love and faith seriously.
Source: http://www.islamicity.com
Monday, September 27, 2010
Take seriously Iran's global ambitions
By Jamsheed K. Choksy
The firing up of Iran’s Bushehr reactor has provoked anxiety among Americans and Israelis. Yet a poll this summer by the University of Maryland and the Carnegie Corporation indicated that 77 percent of Arabs in the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt and Morocco believe Iran has a right to its nuclear program and 57 percent see a positive outcome to Iran’s developing nuclear weapons. Another poll by the Pew Research Center, while not as favorable for Iran, also found growing support. This shift in Middle Eastern perception is one result of the Islamic Republic’s drive to expand its global influence.
In his own words, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is trying to return Iran to “its proud and great heritage” of global prominence. Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki claims that Western nations “lack political maturity.” They are referring to Iran’s 2500-year history during which the Achaemenid Persian Empire ruled from the Indus River to the Aegean Sea, the Sasanian kingdom divvied up the Near East with Byzantium and the Safavids split the Middle East with the Ottomans. Ahmadinejad’s chief of staff Esfandiar Rahim Mashaei has bragged: “What Westerners are most concerned about is Iran leading the world.”
Words are cheap yet what Iran is doing warrants attention.
Ahmadinejad and supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei schedule numerous annual meetings with African heads of state to consolidate Iran’s growing role in Africa. Iranian officials extend development aid to poor nations there as a means of gaining support. So doing reduces hard currency reserves available to an Iranian regime under great economic pressure at home after years of international sanctions. Yet pinching its own citizens to expand global influence is working. Sub-Saharan countries like Senegal increasingly regard Iran as a “reliable partner.”
Iran has reinforced its links with Shiite militias and politicians in Iraq, so that successful nation building there requires Tehran’s cooperation. Providing material support for Hizbullah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza gives Iran clout among the Arab public. These actions have added to calls among Americans and Israelis for a military strike against Iran – a confrontation Tehran’s leaders cannot possibly win. Yet Major General Yahya Rahim Safavi of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) notes that Tehran’s gamble is making “Iran a great power in the Middle East.” Not surprisingly, and unlike their citizens, leaders of the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt are wary of Iran dominating the region.
In Asia, Iran has focused attention on Tajikistan and Afghanistan – challenging Russian and American influence there. Tehran initiated negotiations to lay a natural gas pipeline via Pakistan to India to become a major supplier of energy to South Asia, a scheme, however, unlikely to materialize for decades. Meanwhile, Iran, one of the world’s largest exporters of crude oil, ironically has inadequate refined gasoline for its domestic consumption due to economic sanctions brought on by belligerence toward the West. Attempting to break American and European Union attempts to isolate it, Tehran actively courted China into becoming Iran’s largest trading partner. South Korea too has begun to feel a need to position itself in more neutrally toward Iran due to lucrative bilateral trade. Much coaxing by Washington was necessary to convince Seoul to go along with sanctions. Ahmadinejad’s government reckons that easing the West’s economic stranglehold will alleviate the Iranian public’s growing malcontent with domestic progress.
Ensuring robust diplomatic, economic and military ties with Latin American nations is yet one more aspect of the Islamic Republic’s globalizing its influence. Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Cuba are forming alliances with Iran aimed at replacing US visions of democracy and security. As part of Iran’s adventurism in the western hemisphere, the IRGC engages in arms sales via its ally Syria to Venezuela and Bolivia. It now expands that activity by sharing weapons knowhow and the finished products with many other developing nations.
Such hard and soft power expansions fit well into Iran’s long-term scheme for reshaping global actions and shifting international priorities away from those championed by the US and its allies. Tehran plays upon a popular Third World theme that the dispossessed should unite, irrespective of religion and ethnicity, against the world’s superpowers.
Iran has actively nurtured its influence within the Group of Fifteen, now actually numbering 17 member states from Africa, Asia and Latin America. The group’s 14th summit was held at Tehran last May with Ahmadinejad presiding. He used the occasion to build bridges of cooperation while championing opposition to the US, the EU and Israel.
The Non-Aligned Movement, or NAM, with its 118 member states occupies Iran’s attention, too. When NAM’s foreign ministers met in July 2008, Tehran took center stage as the host city. A public statement by the attendees lent support to Iran’s nuclear program. In June 2010, NAM even praised “Iran for its cooperation with the [International Atomic Energy Agency].” NAM’s next summit will be held at Kish Island in 2012, where Ahmadinejad will assume its secretary-generalship, giving the Islamic Republic another global platform.
Despite having only a nascent space program, Iran chairs the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. Its stockpiling of chemical and biological weapons notwithstanding, Iran holds the vice chairmanship of the UN Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. Iran also has steadily acquired seats on the boards of other UN agencies. Those organizations include the Office of Drugs and Crime, the Commission on Science and Technology for Development, the Development Program, the World Food Program, the Environment Program, the Children’s Fund, the Commission on the Status of Women and the Office of High Commissioner for Refugees. Iran seems to be wagering that leadership roles in these international agencies will eventually translate into perceptible power.
In dealings with the UN Security Council, Iran often does gain tangible victories by dividing Russia and China from the three other permanent members, namely, the US, the United Kingdom and France. Russia’s loading of fuel into the Bushehr reactor is a stark example of Iran exploiting superpower rivalry to produce nuclear energy despite Western objections. Through negotiations, Iran also has gained cooperation from the Security Council’s non-permanent members like Turkey, Brazil and Lebanon during nuclear and sanctions deliberations.
Within the context of its overall global expansion, atomic energy provides Iran greater visibility as a limited number of nations possess that capability. Ali Akbar Salehi, director of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, now claims his country is attempting nuclear fusion. Having not yet achieved fission, Iran is far from assembling a hydrogen bomb. Yet Iranian leaders’ willingness “to share nuclear knowledge and technology” with other developing nations will further undermine the Non-Proliferation Treaty while enhancing their own influence, if other recalcitrant regimes like those in Syria and Myanmar accept the offer. Indeed, Syria is suspected of having collaborated with Iran on such an endeavor at the Al-Kibar facility which Israel bombed.
Not surprisingly, and despite growing internal unrest, Iranian leaders feel confident in challenging the world’s great powers. Through words and deeds, Iran’s pursuit of global influence is multifaceted, targeted and well under way. It should be taken seriously.
Read more: http://dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=5&article_id=119709#ixzz10jx0n6DO
The firing up of Iran’s Bushehr reactor has provoked anxiety among Americans and Israelis. Yet a poll this summer by the University of Maryland and the Carnegie Corporation indicated that 77 percent of Arabs in the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt and Morocco believe Iran has a right to its nuclear program and 57 percent see a positive outcome to Iran’s developing nuclear weapons. Another poll by the Pew Research Center, while not as favorable for Iran, also found growing support. This shift in Middle Eastern perception is one result of the Islamic Republic’s drive to expand its global influence.
In his own words, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is trying to return Iran to “its proud and great heritage” of global prominence. Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki claims that Western nations “lack political maturity.” They are referring to Iran’s 2500-year history during which the Achaemenid Persian Empire ruled from the Indus River to the Aegean Sea, the Sasanian kingdom divvied up the Near East with Byzantium and the Safavids split the Middle East with the Ottomans. Ahmadinejad’s chief of staff Esfandiar Rahim Mashaei has bragged: “What Westerners are most concerned about is Iran leading the world.”
Words are cheap yet what Iran is doing warrants attention.
Ahmadinejad and supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei schedule numerous annual meetings with African heads of state to consolidate Iran’s growing role in Africa. Iranian officials extend development aid to poor nations there as a means of gaining support. So doing reduces hard currency reserves available to an Iranian regime under great economic pressure at home after years of international sanctions. Yet pinching its own citizens to expand global influence is working. Sub-Saharan countries like Senegal increasingly regard Iran as a “reliable partner.”
Iran has reinforced its links with Shiite militias and politicians in Iraq, so that successful nation building there requires Tehran’s cooperation. Providing material support for Hizbullah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza gives Iran clout among the Arab public. These actions have added to calls among Americans and Israelis for a military strike against Iran – a confrontation Tehran’s leaders cannot possibly win. Yet Major General Yahya Rahim Safavi of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) notes that Tehran’s gamble is making “Iran a great power in the Middle East.” Not surprisingly, and unlike their citizens, leaders of the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt are wary of Iran dominating the region.
In Asia, Iran has focused attention on Tajikistan and Afghanistan – challenging Russian and American influence there. Tehran initiated negotiations to lay a natural gas pipeline via Pakistan to India to become a major supplier of energy to South Asia, a scheme, however, unlikely to materialize for decades. Meanwhile, Iran, one of the world’s largest exporters of crude oil, ironically has inadequate refined gasoline for its domestic consumption due to economic sanctions brought on by belligerence toward the West. Attempting to break American and European Union attempts to isolate it, Tehran actively courted China into becoming Iran’s largest trading partner. South Korea too has begun to feel a need to position itself in more neutrally toward Iran due to lucrative bilateral trade. Much coaxing by Washington was necessary to convince Seoul to go along with sanctions. Ahmadinejad’s government reckons that easing the West’s economic stranglehold will alleviate the Iranian public’s growing malcontent with domestic progress.
Ensuring robust diplomatic, economic and military ties with Latin American nations is yet one more aspect of the Islamic Republic’s globalizing its influence. Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Cuba are forming alliances with Iran aimed at replacing US visions of democracy and security. As part of Iran’s adventurism in the western hemisphere, the IRGC engages in arms sales via its ally Syria to Venezuela and Bolivia. It now expands that activity by sharing weapons knowhow and the finished products with many other developing nations.
Such hard and soft power expansions fit well into Iran’s long-term scheme for reshaping global actions and shifting international priorities away from those championed by the US and its allies. Tehran plays upon a popular Third World theme that the dispossessed should unite, irrespective of religion and ethnicity, against the world’s superpowers.
Iran has actively nurtured its influence within the Group of Fifteen, now actually numbering 17 member states from Africa, Asia and Latin America. The group’s 14th summit was held at Tehran last May with Ahmadinejad presiding. He used the occasion to build bridges of cooperation while championing opposition to the US, the EU and Israel.
The Non-Aligned Movement, or NAM, with its 118 member states occupies Iran’s attention, too. When NAM’s foreign ministers met in July 2008, Tehran took center stage as the host city. A public statement by the attendees lent support to Iran’s nuclear program. In June 2010, NAM even praised “Iran for its cooperation with the [International Atomic Energy Agency].” NAM’s next summit will be held at Kish Island in 2012, where Ahmadinejad will assume its secretary-generalship, giving the Islamic Republic another global platform.
Despite having only a nascent space program, Iran chairs the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. Its stockpiling of chemical and biological weapons notwithstanding, Iran holds the vice chairmanship of the UN Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. Iran also has steadily acquired seats on the boards of other UN agencies. Those organizations include the Office of Drugs and Crime, the Commission on Science and Technology for Development, the Development Program, the World Food Program, the Environment Program, the Children’s Fund, the Commission on the Status of Women and the Office of High Commissioner for Refugees. Iran seems to be wagering that leadership roles in these international agencies will eventually translate into perceptible power.
In dealings with the UN Security Council, Iran often does gain tangible victories by dividing Russia and China from the three other permanent members, namely, the US, the United Kingdom and France. Russia’s loading of fuel into the Bushehr reactor is a stark example of Iran exploiting superpower rivalry to produce nuclear energy despite Western objections. Through negotiations, Iran also has gained cooperation from the Security Council’s non-permanent members like Turkey, Brazil and Lebanon during nuclear and sanctions deliberations.
Within the context of its overall global expansion, atomic energy provides Iran greater visibility as a limited number of nations possess that capability. Ali Akbar Salehi, director of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, now claims his country is attempting nuclear fusion. Having not yet achieved fission, Iran is far from assembling a hydrogen bomb. Yet Iranian leaders’ willingness “to share nuclear knowledge and technology” with other developing nations will further undermine the Non-Proliferation Treaty while enhancing their own influence, if other recalcitrant regimes like those in Syria and Myanmar accept the offer. Indeed, Syria is suspected of having collaborated with Iran on such an endeavor at the Al-Kibar facility which Israel bombed.
Not surprisingly, and despite growing internal unrest, Iranian leaders feel confident in challenging the world’s great powers. Through words and deeds, Iran’s pursuit of global influence is multifaceted, targeted and well under way. It should be taken seriously.
Read more: http://dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=5&article_id=119709#ixzz10jx0n6DO
Iraq Waits for a Government on a Long Vacation
By TIMOTHY WILLIAMS and YASIR GHAZI
BAGHDAD — More than six months ago, millions of Iraqis cast aside fears about bombs and bullets to vote. In households without a reliable supply of water, the indelible purple ink on the voters’ index fingers did not wear off for more than a week.
The voters have since watched winter turn to spring, and now summer become fall — and the people they elected still have no leader. They are waiting for their parties to come to an agreement so they can start work. And while the summer months were marked by a surge in violence and by riots over the lack of electricity, drinking water and other basic services, in Baghdad, members of Parliament have lived out a workers’ fantasy: a vacation of more than 200 days (and counting), with full pay and benefits, each free to do his heart’s desire.
Since the March 7 election, they have met just once, and that was for less than 19 minutes.
In the interim, some have sought out less chaotic places with better weather and less bloodshed, staying in nice hotels or private homes with chlorinated swimming pools in Jordan, Syria, Iran or Dubai.
A few have sat home and stewed.
Others have reconnected with family, undergone medical procedures in countries with better-equipped hospitals, or gone to weddings and funerals they would otherwise have missed.
More than a dozen members interviewed say they have been assiduously following news on television and in the papers on sporadic talks among parties to form a coalition government. There has been much news, they agree, but little progress.
The energy and optimism with which these would-be reformers rode into Baghdad after the March 7 election have all but vanished. They have been replaced by feelings of embarrassment, frustration and anger.
“I’m representing the Iraqi people, but it doesn’t feel like it,” said Kadhim Jwad, a Sadrist elected to represent Babil Province in the country’s south. “I’m at the boiling point. I’m tired and annoyed all the time. There’s lots of pressure on me. This is more than I can take.”
Ayad Samarrai, the speaker of Iraq’s last functioning Parliament — a body whose trademark lassitude led the public to vote good members out of office in March (though Mr. Samarrai was re-elected) — said feelings of melancholy were not uncommon among his colleagues.
“Not having a session has created a state of psychological emptiness” among those elected, he said. “They feel useless. They were ready to participate. They were ambitious, ready to make change. And of course, that motivation has now been stopped entirely.”
A salve for their ennui, however, has been their compensation: salaries of about $11,050 a month each, which include a housing allowance; a fleet of three brand-new armored sport utility vehicles and a 30-member security detail for their use; freshly issued diplomatic passports, which allow for worry-free international travel; and government payments into pension plans that will yield 80 percent of their salaries.
A bank was recently set up inside the Parliament building so that checks can be cashed without fuss.
In the meantime, one in four Iraqis are estimated to live below the poverty line. Leila Hassan, a newly elected member, said, “I get embarrassed when people ask me ‘What’s going on?’ and when I go out, I feel shy because I’m worried people will blame me.”
Ms. Hassan, from the Kurdish Alliance party, said she had tried to stay engaged, but now often gives in to an all-enveloping boredom.
“In my spare time, well, I’m not married and my mother takes care of me,” the 30-year-old said. “She cooks and cleans the house, so I have nothing to do. I have spent a lot of time reading books.”
Ms. Hassan said she had also taken courses on democracy with other women elected to Parliament, which has taken them to the United States and Lebanon.
“We have agreed to serve as a lobby on women’s issues inside Parliament,” she said. “We expected that we would meet each other during a session, so it’s funny it happened outside Iraq.”
Mahmoud Othman, also a member of the Kurdish Alliance, said he had been fighting the doldrums by showing up at Parliament in spite of himself. He has found himself feeling even more isolated.
“I keep coming to the building, but I am all alone,” he said. “I find no one. Sometimes, there are journalists so I do an interview with them, and sometimes I see friends here, but nothing very useful.”
He said he had spent all but one month of the break in Baghdad, a city he says compares poorly to Erbil, the capital of the semi-autonomous Kurdish region.
“Baghdad? What’s there in Baghdad?” he said. “There’s nothing to do in Baghdad. I’m sitting at home most of the time with my wife, chatting, bonding. This has been a great opportunity for me to spend more time with her.”
Fatah al-Ashikh, a member of the Iraqiya political slate, who represents Baghdad, said the hiatus had given him the chance to work on his doctorate in media studies.
“I am using this useless time to do something that will help me in the future,” he said.
He has also broken in his new official passport.
“During Ramadan, I went to Syria and spent most of the month there,” he said. “I was running from the heat of Iraq and all the electrical blackouts.”
Mr. Ashikh also organized a rally protesting a Florida pastor’s threat earlier this month to burn copies of the Koran, and said he had visited the sites of recent bombings around the country — of which there has been no shortage since the election.
“I’ve been able to attend many events,” he said, “including a lot of funerals for army officers who have been killed by terrorists.”
Unadim Kana, an independent who represents Christians in Nineveh Province in Iraq’s north, said he, too, had been “able to travel freely,” but said he would be happy to dispense with that new freedom if he were allowed to work.
“We have lost seven months of possibility,” he said.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com
BAGHDAD — More than six months ago, millions of Iraqis cast aside fears about bombs and bullets to vote. In households without a reliable supply of water, the indelible purple ink on the voters’ index fingers did not wear off for more than a week.
The voters have since watched winter turn to spring, and now summer become fall — and the people they elected still have no leader. They are waiting for their parties to come to an agreement so they can start work. And while the summer months were marked by a surge in violence and by riots over the lack of electricity, drinking water and other basic services, in Baghdad, members of Parliament have lived out a workers’ fantasy: a vacation of more than 200 days (and counting), with full pay and benefits, each free to do his heart’s desire.
Since the March 7 election, they have met just once, and that was for less than 19 minutes.
In the interim, some have sought out less chaotic places with better weather and less bloodshed, staying in nice hotels or private homes with chlorinated swimming pools in Jordan, Syria, Iran or Dubai.
A few have sat home and stewed.
Others have reconnected with family, undergone medical procedures in countries with better-equipped hospitals, or gone to weddings and funerals they would otherwise have missed.
More than a dozen members interviewed say they have been assiduously following news on television and in the papers on sporadic talks among parties to form a coalition government. There has been much news, they agree, but little progress.
The energy and optimism with which these would-be reformers rode into Baghdad after the March 7 election have all but vanished. They have been replaced by feelings of embarrassment, frustration and anger.
“I’m representing the Iraqi people, but it doesn’t feel like it,” said Kadhim Jwad, a Sadrist elected to represent Babil Province in the country’s south. “I’m at the boiling point. I’m tired and annoyed all the time. There’s lots of pressure on me. This is more than I can take.”
Ayad Samarrai, the speaker of Iraq’s last functioning Parliament — a body whose trademark lassitude led the public to vote good members out of office in March (though Mr. Samarrai was re-elected) — said feelings of melancholy were not uncommon among his colleagues.
“Not having a session has created a state of psychological emptiness” among those elected, he said. “They feel useless. They were ready to participate. They were ambitious, ready to make change. And of course, that motivation has now been stopped entirely.”
A salve for their ennui, however, has been their compensation: salaries of about $11,050 a month each, which include a housing allowance; a fleet of three brand-new armored sport utility vehicles and a 30-member security detail for their use; freshly issued diplomatic passports, which allow for worry-free international travel; and government payments into pension plans that will yield 80 percent of their salaries.
A bank was recently set up inside the Parliament building so that checks can be cashed without fuss.
In the meantime, one in four Iraqis are estimated to live below the poverty line. Leila Hassan, a newly elected member, said, “I get embarrassed when people ask me ‘What’s going on?’ and when I go out, I feel shy because I’m worried people will blame me.”
Ms. Hassan, from the Kurdish Alliance party, said she had tried to stay engaged, but now often gives in to an all-enveloping boredom.
“In my spare time, well, I’m not married and my mother takes care of me,” the 30-year-old said. “She cooks and cleans the house, so I have nothing to do. I have spent a lot of time reading books.”
Ms. Hassan said she had also taken courses on democracy with other women elected to Parliament, which has taken them to the United States and Lebanon.
“We have agreed to serve as a lobby on women’s issues inside Parliament,” she said. “We expected that we would meet each other during a session, so it’s funny it happened outside Iraq.”
Mahmoud Othman, also a member of the Kurdish Alliance, said he had been fighting the doldrums by showing up at Parliament in spite of himself. He has found himself feeling even more isolated.
“I keep coming to the building, but I am all alone,” he said. “I find no one. Sometimes, there are journalists so I do an interview with them, and sometimes I see friends here, but nothing very useful.”
He said he had spent all but one month of the break in Baghdad, a city he says compares poorly to Erbil, the capital of the semi-autonomous Kurdish region.
“Baghdad? What’s there in Baghdad?” he said. “There’s nothing to do in Baghdad. I’m sitting at home most of the time with my wife, chatting, bonding. This has been a great opportunity for me to spend more time with her.”
Fatah al-Ashikh, a member of the Iraqiya political slate, who represents Baghdad, said the hiatus had given him the chance to work on his doctorate in media studies.
“I am using this useless time to do something that will help me in the future,” he said.
He has also broken in his new official passport.
“During Ramadan, I went to Syria and spent most of the month there,” he said. “I was running from the heat of Iraq and all the electrical blackouts.”
Mr. Ashikh also organized a rally protesting a Florida pastor’s threat earlier this month to burn copies of the Koran, and said he had visited the sites of recent bombings around the country — of which there has been no shortage since the election.
“I’ve been able to attend many events,” he said, “including a lot of funerals for army officers who have been killed by terrorists.”
Unadim Kana, an independent who represents Christians in Nineveh Province in Iraq’s north, said he, too, had been “able to travel freely,” but said he would be happy to dispense with that new freedom if he were allowed to work.
“We have lost seven months of possibility,” he said.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com
Holy words and the common good
By Hesham A. Hassaballa
Thankfully, the Florida pastor decided to cancel his plans to burn copies of the Quran on September 11. Not as well reported, though, were the stories of others in the United States who did the deed.
On September 11, a burned copy of the Quran was found at a mosque in Michigan.
Two Tennessee pastors also burned copies of the Quran on September 11, despite protest from members of their own families.
And last week, a partially burned Quran was also found outside a mosque in my home town, Chicago. Although sad, it is not entirely surprising there would be copycats.
As I read the reports of these sporadic burnings of the Quran, all I could do was lament that they very likely had little knowledge of the contents of this book, and the deep connections it has to their own faith. Had they taken a little time to read the book they wanted to burn, it is quite possible they would have changed their minds. And after all, if they had mustered enough effort to obtain a copy of the Quran, why not read it first?
I know if they would do so, they would find much with which they can relate. They would learn that both Moses and Jesus Christ are mentioned more by name in the Quran than the Prophet Muhammad himself.
They would read passages in the Quran saying Jesus was "strengthened with the Holy Spirit" (in at least three passages: 2:87, 2:253, and 5:110).
They would discover that the 19th chapter of the Quran is named for Jesus’ mother, Mary. And they would read that the Quran holds up the example of the Virgin Mary as the ideal believer: "And [we have propounded yet another parable of God-consciousness in the story of] Mary, the daughter of Imran..." (66:12)
If they would read the Quran, they would find that some 73 passages of the Quran speak of Moses and his epic. And they would find that the Quran records two miracles about Moses: Moses’ staff turning into a serpent and his hand glowing brightly after placing it under his arm. They would read that the Quran says that God bestowed His grace upon Moses and Aaron (37:114), that he was “specially chosen” by God (19:51) and that God bestowed on Moses “wisdom and knowledge” (28:14) as a reward for doing good. In addition, the Book of Moses in the Jewish Bible is described by the Quran as a “Light and Guide” (6:91).
If they would read the Quran, they would find this passage about the equality of humanity:
"O Mankind! Behold, we have created you from a male and female and have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another. Verily, the best of you in the sight of God is the one who is most conscious of Him. Behold, God is All-knowing, All-aware." (49:13)
They would read this passage about salvation:
"Verily, those who have attained to faith [in this divine writ], as well as those who follow the Jewish faith, and the Christians, and the Sabians -- all who believe in God and the Last Day and do righteous deeds -- shall have their reward with their Sustainer; and no fear need they have and neither shall they grieve. (2:62)
I can go on and on and on -- reciting verses from the Quran that touch the heart of the sacred beliefs of both Judaism and Christianity. And of course it does, because the Quran calls Muslims to be the spiritual siblings of Christians and Jews, as children of the God of Abraham.
Are there tough and belligerent verses in the Quran? Most definitely -- as there are in the Jewish Bible and the Christian New Testament. Yet, like the verses in the texts of the Jews and the Christians, the verses in the Quran have a context and explanation.
But what is most important to focus on is that which is common to all three faiths in our country, and to use those common beliefs to bring people together, and to support the common good.
This summer has seen so much fear and hate-mongering for cynical political gain, and it has ensnared many Americans who are, in reality, good people who are simply misinformed. Once we learn the truth, we will realize that we are really much more similar than we are different.
Source: http://islamonline.com
Thankfully, the Florida pastor decided to cancel his plans to burn copies of the Quran on September 11. Not as well reported, though, were the stories of others in the United States who did the deed.
On September 11, a burned copy of the Quran was found at a mosque in Michigan.
Two Tennessee pastors also burned copies of the Quran on September 11, despite protest from members of their own families.
And last week, a partially burned Quran was also found outside a mosque in my home town, Chicago. Although sad, it is not entirely surprising there would be copycats.
As I read the reports of these sporadic burnings of the Quran, all I could do was lament that they very likely had little knowledge of the contents of this book, and the deep connections it has to their own faith. Had they taken a little time to read the book they wanted to burn, it is quite possible they would have changed their minds. And after all, if they had mustered enough effort to obtain a copy of the Quran, why not read it first?
I know if they would do so, they would find much with which they can relate. They would learn that both Moses and Jesus Christ are mentioned more by name in the Quran than the Prophet Muhammad himself.
They would read passages in the Quran saying Jesus was "strengthened with the Holy Spirit" (in at least three passages: 2:87, 2:253, and 5:110).
They would discover that the 19th chapter of the Quran is named for Jesus’ mother, Mary. And they would read that the Quran holds up the example of the Virgin Mary as the ideal believer: "And [we have propounded yet another parable of God-consciousness in the story of] Mary, the daughter of Imran..." (66:12)
If they would read the Quran, they would find that some 73 passages of the Quran speak of Moses and his epic. And they would find that the Quran records two miracles about Moses: Moses’ staff turning into a serpent and his hand glowing brightly after placing it under his arm. They would read that the Quran says that God bestowed His grace upon Moses and Aaron (37:114), that he was “specially chosen” by God (19:51) and that God bestowed on Moses “wisdom and knowledge” (28:14) as a reward for doing good. In addition, the Book of Moses in the Jewish Bible is described by the Quran as a “Light and Guide” (6:91).
If they would read the Quran, they would find this passage about the equality of humanity:
"O Mankind! Behold, we have created you from a male and female and have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another. Verily, the best of you in the sight of God is the one who is most conscious of Him. Behold, God is All-knowing, All-aware." (49:13)
They would read this passage about salvation:
"Verily, those who have attained to faith [in this divine writ], as well as those who follow the Jewish faith, and the Christians, and the Sabians -- all who believe in God and the Last Day and do righteous deeds -- shall have their reward with their Sustainer; and no fear need they have and neither shall they grieve. (2:62)
I can go on and on and on -- reciting verses from the Quran that touch the heart of the sacred beliefs of both Judaism and Christianity. And of course it does, because the Quran calls Muslims to be the spiritual siblings of Christians and Jews, as children of the God of Abraham.
Are there tough and belligerent verses in the Quran? Most definitely -- as there are in the Jewish Bible and the Christian New Testament. Yet, like the verses in the texts of the Jews and the Christians, the verses in the Quran have a context and explanation.
But what is most important to focus on is that which is common to all three faiths in our country, and to use those common beliefs to bring people together, and to support the common good.
This summer has seen so much fear and hate-mongering for cynical political gain, and it has ensnared many Americans who are, in reality, good people who are simply misinformed. Once we learn the truth, we will realize that we are really much more similar than we are different.
Source: http://islamonline.com
Friday, September 24, 2010
Iraq, a Thorn Removed from Israel’s Side
After seven years of bloodshed and wanton destruction, President Obama "turned the page" and announced an end to the U.S. combat operations in Iraq on August 31. The end came only after the loss of lives of more than 4,400 U.S. soldiers and a war tab of a trillion dollar (according to one estimate it tops $3 trillion). It's hard to estimate the death and destruction that the war brought to Iraq - a country that never presented even a remote threat to the U.S. national security. The full cost of war to Iraqis in terms of human lives and material is immeasurable.
What were the motives of one of the longest running, costliest, and bloodiest wars in history?
The Bush administration kept changing its rationale for war against Iraq. First, Iraq's possession of the long-range weapons of mass destruction (WMD) was the reason given for the U.S. drive to war. On March 6, 2003, President Bush declared: "Saddam Hussein and his weapons are a direct threat to this country, to our people, and to all free people... He has weapons of mass destruction... The American people know that Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction."
However, the Bush administration's claim that Iraq's armament contains WMD was thoroughly debunked in October 2004 with the release of the report of chief U.S. weapons inspector Charles A. Duelfer. Duelfer admitted, "We were almost all wrong" about Iraq's weapons. Later it was found that the charges were intentionally fabricated to justify the war against Iraq. In addition, the International Atomic Energy Agency chief weapons inspector Mohammed El-Baradei had testified before the UN Security Council that the allegations of WMD were based on documents determined to be forgeries.
After Duelfer's report sucked the air out of the WMD accusation, the reasons for war shifted from one assertion to another - link to 9/11 attacks and Al-Qaida, creating an environment in Iraq conducive to stable democracy, etc - all these assertions proved to be without merits. The attempts to link Saddam to 9/11 were disreputed to the point where President Bush was forced to disavow the claim himself.
The U.S. declaration of war against Iraq had nothing to do with WMD, 9/11 attacks, threat to the U.S. security, the war on terrorism, or a desire to create an open and democratic society in Iraq. Then why did the U.S. go to war with Iraq?
Though, some argued, Iraq was a destabilizing influence and posed unacceptable risk to the flow of Gulf oil to international market. The steady supply of oil to the U.S. and its western allies must not be jeopardized and must be defended "by any means necessary, including military force." However, the evidences negate the notion that seizing or controlling oil resources were the principle motivation for America to launch its invasion; it may be seen as peripheral benefit of the invasion, but not the raison d'tre. Neither the oil flow secured anymore, nor the domination of the region rich in energy sources enhanced in any significant way than what it was before the war. The huge human and economic drain of the war - trillion plus dollar and the loss and maiming of thousands of American soldiers - simply could not be justified as the price for mere securing the oil supplies when there were no serious threats of cutting off oil deliveries to the west.
When we put the pieces together, we find enhancing Israel's security and survival, controlling countries in Israel's neighborhood, and protecting Israel's WMD were the motives hidden behind the faade of lies and deceit for invading Iraq. Iraq war was not waged at the nudging of big oil concerns, but in the words of Lawrence Wilkerson, who was former Secretary of State Colin Powell's chief of staff, the Iraq war was embarked upon by "secretive, little-known cabal". It was the secretive cabal of Zionist ideologues that was bent on creating a war with Iraq out of its concern for Israel's security and pave way for the "final solution to the Palestinian problem".
Columnist Tim Rutten in his review of Soldier: The Life of Colin Powell by Karen DeYoung (October 09, 2006, LA Times) says, "Powell's version of events confirms what others have reported that Cheney, Rumsfeld and their neoconservative aides arrived in Washington determined to find a reason to attack Saddam Hussein." In Powell biography, Rutten further writes, "readers are told that the neoconservatives in the Defense Department -- nearly all of them Jews -- supported war against Iraq as the first step to replacing Arab despots with democratic governments that would sever their ties to the Palestinians, thereby enhancing Israel's security." General Colin Powell later regretted his role in the Iraq war and called his famous speech to the United Nations, in which he gave a detailed description of Iraqi weapons programs that turned out to be false, as "painful" and a "blot" on his record.
Stephen J. Sniegoski, a historian and writer, says in his paper, The war on Iraq: Conceived in Israel, published more than a month before the American attack, says: "A clear illustration of the neoconservative thinking on war on Iraq is a 1996 paper developed by Perle, Feith, David Wurmser, and others published by an Israeli think tank, the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, titled 'A clean break: a new strategy for securing the realm.' It was intended as a political blueprint for the incoming government of Benjamin Netanyahu. It presented a plan whereby Israel would 'shape its strategic environment,' beginning with the removal of Saddam Hussein and the installation of a Hashemite monarchy in Baghdad, to serve as a first step toward eliminating the anti-Israeli governments of Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Iran."
The peace treaty with Israel neutralized Egypt, Jordon, and PLO. Saudi Arabia and five other Gulf countries are having not so secret trade and cozy relations with the Jewish state. Turkey always maintained friendly relations with Israel, though the relations have recently become strained. Attempts are being made to fracture and defang nuclearized Pakistan and closing in on Iran. Iraq was the only country left in the Israel's neighborhood, and to some extent Syria and Lebanon, that remained a thorn at the side of Israel and somewhat threat to its security. The U.S. and the Great Britain, who jointly midwifed Israel, and since its birth played the role of protector and benefactor, with their own blood and treasure removed Iraq from Israel's security threat list.
Israel's long time wish for the destruction of Iraq, the most advanced Arab nation that ardently defended and supported the Palestinian resistance and exhorted other Arab regimes not to normalize relations with the apartheid state of Israel at the expense of Palestinian rights, came true without losing a single Israeli soldier or spending a dime.
Yesterday, besieged but independent Iraq rejected an offer to participate in a peace process with Israel in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions (Al Jazeera, 09 Nov 2009). Today, the occupied Iraqi government has dropped an article from the Baghdad International Fair charter which obliges participating companies to prove they do not have trade links with Israel. Iraq is surely being put on the path to join the Egypt and Jordan led club of Israel friendly Arab countries to reshape the Middle East into a neutered and Israel-friendly region - so the muffled protesting cry of Palestinians gather no volume.
Source: http://www.iviews.com
What were the motives of one of the longest running, costliest, and bloodiest wars in history?
The Bush administration kept changing its rationale for war against Iraq. First, Iraq's possession of the long-range weapons of mass destruction (WMD) was the reason given for the U.S. drive to war. On March 6, 2003, President Bush declared: "Saddam Hussein and his weapons are a direct threat to this country, to our people, and to all free people... He has weapons of mass destruction... The American people know that Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction."
However, the Bush administration's claim that Iraq's armament contains WMD was thoroughly debunked in October 2004 with the release of the report of chief U.S. weapons inspector Charles A. Duelfer. Duelfer admitted, "We were almost all wrong" about Iraq's weapons. Later it was found that the charges were intentionally fabricated to justify the war against Iraq. In addition, the International Atomic Energy Agency chief weapons inspector Mohammed El-Baradei had testified before the UN Security Council that the allegations of WMD were based on documents determined to be forgeries.
After Duelfer's report sucked the air out of the WMD accusation, the reasons for war shifted from one assertion to another - link to 9/11 attacks and Al-Qaida, creating an environment in Iraq conducive to stable democracy, etc - all these assertions proved to be without merits. The attempts to link Saddam to 9/11 were disreputed to the point where President Bush was forced to disavow the claim himself.
The U.S. declaration of war against Iraq had nothing to do with WMD, 9/11 attacks, threat to the U.S. security, the war on terrorism, or a desire to create an open and democratic society in Iraq. Then why did the U.S. go to war with Iraq?
Though, some argued, Iraq was a destabilizing influence and posed unacceptable risk to the flow of Gulf oil to international market. The steady supply of oil to the U.S. and its western allies must not be jeopardized and must be defended "by any means necessary, including military force." However, the evidences negate the notion that seizing or controlling oil resources were the principle motivation for America to launch its invasion; it may be seen as peripheral benefit of the invasion, but not the raison d'tre. Neither the oil flow secured anymore, nor the domination of the region rich in energy sources enhanced in any significant way than what it was before the war. The huge human and economic drain of the war - trillion plus dollar and the loss and maiming of thousands of American soldiers - simply could not be justified as the price for mere securing the oil supplies when there were no serious threats of cutting off oil deliveries to the west.
When we put the pieces together, we find enhancing Israel's security and survival, controlling countries in Israel's neighborhood, and protecting Israel's WMD were the motives hidden behind the faade of lies and deceit for invading Iraq. Iraq war was not waged at the nudging of big oil concerns, but in the words of Lawrence Wilkerson, who was former Secretary of State Colin Powell's chief of staff, the Iraq war was embarked upon by "secretive, little-known cabal". It was the secretive cabal of Zionist ideologues that was bent on creating a war with Iraq out of its concern for Israel's security and pave way for the "final solution to the Palestinian problem".
Columnist Tim Rutten in his review of Soldier: The Life of Colin Powell by Karen DeYoung (October 09, 2006, LA Times) says, "Powell's version of events confirms what others have reported that Cheney, Rumsfeld and their neoconservative aides arrived in Washington determined to find a reason to attack Saddam Hussein." In Powell biography, Rutten further writes, "readers are told that the neoconservatives in the Defense Department -- nearly all of them Jews -- supported war against Iraq as the first step to replacing Arab despots with democratic governments that would sever their ties to the Palestinians, thereby enhancing Israel's security." General Colin Powell later regretted his role in the Iraq war and called his famous speech to the United Nations, in which he gave a detailed description of Iraqi weapons programs that turned out to be false, as "painful" and a "blot" on his record.
Stephen J. Sniegoski, a historian and writer, says in his paper, The war on Iraq: Conceived in Israel, published more than a month before the American attack, says: "A clear illustration of the neoconservative thinking on war on Iraq is a 1996 paper developed by Perle, Feith, David Wurmser, and others published by an Israeli think tank, the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, titled 'A clean break: a new strategy for securing the realm.' It was intended as a political blueprint for the incoming government of Benjamin Netanyahu. It presented a plan whereby Israel would 'shape its strategic environment,' beginning with the removal of Saddam Hussein and the installation of a Hashemite monarchy in Baghdad, to serve as a first step toward eliminating the anti-Israeli governments of Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Iran."
The peace treaty with Israel neutralized Egypt, Jordon, and PLO. Saudi Arabia and five other Gulf countries are having not so secret trade and cozy relations with the Jewish state. Turkey always maintained friendly relations with Israel, though the relations have recently become strained. Attempts are being made to fracture and defang nuclearized Pakistan and closing in on Iran. Iraq was the only country left in the Israel's neighborhood, and to some extent Syria and Lebanon, that remained a thorn at the side of Israel and somewhat threat to its security. The U.S. and the Great Britain, who jointly midwifed Israel, and since its birth played the role of protector and benefactor, with their own blood and treasure removed Iraq from Israel's security threat list.
Israel's long time wish for the destruction of Iraq, the most advanced Arab nation that ardently defended and supported the Palestinian resistance and exhorted other Arab regimes not to normalize relations with the apartheid state of Israel at the expense of Palestinian rights, came true without losing a single Israeli soldier or spending a dime.
Yesterday, besieged but independent Iraq rejected an offer to participate in a peace process with Israel in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions (Al Jazeera, 09 Nov 2009). Today, the occupied Iraqi government has dropped an article from the Baghdad International Fair charter which obliges participating companies to prove they do not have trade links with Israel. Iraq is surely being put on the path to join the Egypt and Jordan led club of Israel friendly Arab countries to reshape the Middle East into a neutered and Israel-friendly region - so the muffled protesting cry of Palestinians gather no volume.
Source: http://www.iviews.com
US fanning the flames of Islamophobia
Far too much publicity has already been given to the threat made by a pastor of a tiny US cult church to burn copies of the Qur’an. The provocative act by an obscure individual was blown out of proportion by media frenzy.Virtually overnight, Rev Terry Jones, who left Germany under a cloud of accusations andhis 50 followers at the Dove World Outreach Center, became an international sensation.Book burning, including of sacred religious texts, is nothing new. But the question must be asked: why the contemptible episode was given headline-grabbing attention around the world, leading to rioting and even deaths.
The incitement of Jones is representative of the deep malaise of Islamophobia that has been orchestrated by the misguided and ill-conceived ‘war on terrorism’ and linking this to Islam, or what the politicians and the media would call “twisted form of Islam”, “extremist Islam” “the extreme form of Islam”, “the Islamic terrorist” or the more nuanced form, “Islamist terrorists”. The
consequence has been to demonise the religion of 20% of the world’s population, with the consequence that there is an increase in assaults on Muslims, attacks on mosques and the publication of outrageous cartoons. The second wave has targeted Islamic symbols,extending to ever encroaching bans on their dress and places of worship.
Muslims in the US are living in fear of the hatred that has been caused by the ‘war on terror’ and more so since the campaign against building of Muslim cultural centre
two blocks away from Ground Zero and the threat of burning of the Qur’an accompanied
by the Islamophobic tirades. We have therefore published a sample of the
increasing number of Islamophobic attacks across the US in this issue of the newspaper.
Jones has been seeking media attention sincebeing expelled from the German Evangelical Alliance for being a Christian Fundamentalist two years ago, resorting to even printing T-shirts for schoolchildren with ‘Islam is of the Devil’ on the back. Although he eventually dropped his threat timed to coincide with the 9th anniversary of 9/11,the publicity generated led to a series of copycat burnings and desecrations of the Qur’an across the US, including outside the White House.
The British media is already responsible for giving grossly disproportionate attention to unrepresentative and dubious Muslim characters and organizations. The tabloid press as well as some more up-market newspapers are also not unknown to indulge in sensationalist and often bizarre stories that dwell upon discrediting Muslims and Islam.But perhaps the chief culprits of fanning the flames of Islamophobia are politicians and government policies. Whichever way it is worded, the ‘war on terrorism’ has been perceived to be targeted against Islam and its more than one billion followers. Like during the medieval era, it is the religion of Islam that is being erroneously blamed as the cause of extremism and terrorism, whether or not it is presented and packaged as being just perverted form or extremist elements. The consequence has been to tarnish all Muslims with the same brush and demonise their religion, Islam.
Interestingly, every politician in the West and every journalist and media outlet, has been careful to emphasise that Pastor Jones does not represent the majority of the Christians or Americans and that he is a lunatic fringe. No one has uttered that he is following a twisted form of Christianity.However, when it comes to the lunatic fringe in the Muslim world everyone is tarnished with one brush by blaming the religion. One only needs to see counter terrorism policies in the UK and also in the rest of the Western world where the target has been Islam, imams,mosques, Muslim ‘chaplains’ in prisons,university campuses and hospitals. Even toddlers have not been spared. Counter terrorism measures in nurseries, schools and universities targeting ONLY Muslim pupils. No area of the life of Muslim has been spared not even sport, sport centres and gyms.
It was notable in the intervention of US President Barack Obama over the book burning that his appeal was directed at fears that the stunt could “greatly endanger our young men and women in uniform who are in Iraq, who are in Afghanistan.” It was the act itself that should have been condemned and he should
have empathised with the hurt that 1.5 billion Muslims would feel if the Qur’an was burnt. Even Nato and US Commander, Gen David Petraeus, issued a statement a day after 500 demonstrated in Kabul against the proposed burning of the Qur’an, that the latter could provoke violent retaliation against US troops – with no concern about the 1.5 billion Muslims. In her denouncement that the planned Florida event was “plainly disrespectful – even abhorrent”, German Chancellor Angela Merkel was ironically in the same breath honouring the Islamophobic Danish cartoonist
Kurt Westergaard, who similarly provoked worldwide outrage in the Muslim world by his cartoon of the Prophet.
It is time to start to repair some of the damage done and prevent incidents like the Qur’an burning occurring again by changing our discourse about the threat of terrorism. The primary reason is about politics, our foreign and domestic policies against Muslims and not religion. The Pastor said the reason why he was burning the Qur’an was because it was the source of evil and terrorism; the reason why many in the US do not want the Muslim cultural centre or what they perceive it to be a mosque near Ground Zero, is because they believe the mosque (and therefore Islam) was responsible for the terrorist attacks in New York. If the Islamic cultural centre is not built in its current location two blocks away from Ground Zero, it
would be a vindication to those who believe that Islam is the source of terrorism and extremism and to those who believe that the‘war on terrorism’ is the war against Islam.
Source: http://www.muslimnews.co.uk
The incitement of Jones is representative of the deep malaise of Islamophobia that has been orchestrated by the misguided and ill-conceived ‘war on terrorism’ and linking this to Islam, or what the politicians and the media would call “twisted form of Islam”, “extremist Islam” “the extreme form of Islam”, “the Islamic terrorist” or the more nuanced form, “Islamist terrorists”. The
consequence has been to demonise the religion of 20% of the world’s population, with the consequence that there is an increase in assaults on Muslims, attacks on mosques and the publication of outrageous cartoons. The second wave has targeted Islamic symbols,extending to ever encroaching bans on their dress and places of worship.
Muslims in the US are living in fear of the hatred that has been caused by the ‘war on terror’ and more so since the campaign against building of Muslim cultural centre
two blocks away from Ground Zero and the threat of burning of the Qur’an accompanied
by the Islamophobic tirades. We have therefore published a sample of the
increasing number of Islamophobic attacks across the US in this issue of the newspaper.
Jones has been seeking media attention sincebeing expelled from the German Evangelical Alliance for being a Christian Fundamentalist two years ago, resorting to even printing T-shirts for schoolchildren with ‘Islam is of the Devil’ on the back. Although he eventually dropped his threat timed to coincide with the 9th anniversary of 9/11,the publicity generated led to a series of copycat burnings and desecrations of the Qur’an across the US, including outside the White House.
The British media is already responsible for giving grossly disproportionate attention to unrepresentative and dubious Muslim characters and organizations. The tabloid press as well as some more up-market newspapers are also not unknown to indulge in sensationalist and often bizarre stories that dwell upon discrediting Muslims and Islam.But perhaps the chief culprits of fanning the flames of Islamophobia are politicians and government policies. Whichever way it is worded, the ‘war on terrorism’ has been perceived to be targeted against Islam and its more than one billion followers. Like during the medieval era, it is the religion of Islam that is being erroneously blamed as the cause of extremism and terrorism, whether or not it is presented and packaged as being just perverted form or extremist elements. The consequence has been to tarnish all Muslims with the same brush and demonise their religion, Islam.
Interestingly, every politician in the West and every journalist and media outlet, has been careful to emphasise that Pastor Jones does not represent the majority of the Christians or Americans and that he is a lunatic fringe. No one has uttered that he is following a twisted form of Christianity.However, when it comes to the lunatic fringe in the Muslim world everyone is tarnished with one brush by blaming the religion. One only needs to see counter terrorism policies in the UK and also in the rest of the Western world where the target has been Islam, imams,mosques, Muslim ‘chaplains’ in prisons,university campuses and hospitals. Even toddlers have not been spared. Counter terrorism measures in nurseries, schools and universities targeting ONLY Muslim pupils. No area of the life of Muslim has been spared not even sport, sport centres and gyms.
It was notable in the intervention of US President Barack Obama over the book burning that his appeal was directed at fears that the stunt could “greatly endanger our young men and women in uniform who are in Iraq, who are in Afghanistan.” It was the act itself that should have been condemned and he should
have empathised with the hurt that 1.5 billion Muslims would feel if the Qur’an was burnt. Even Nato and US Commander, Gen David Petraeus, issued a statement a day after 500 demonstrated in Kabul against the proposed burning of the Qur’an, that the latter could provoke violent retaliation against US troops – with no concern about the 1.5 billion Muslims. In her denouncement that the planned Florida event was “plainly disrespectful – even abhorrent”, German Chancellor Angela Merkel was ironically in the same breath honouring the Islamophobic Danish cartoonist
Kurt Westergaard, who similarly provoked worldwide outrage in the Muslim world by his cartoon of the Prophet.
It is time to start to repair some of the damage done and prevent incidents like the Qur’an burning occurring again by changing our discourse about the threat of terrorism. The primary reason is about politics, our foreign and domestic policies against Muslims and not religion. The Pastor said the reason why he was burning the Qur’an was because it was the source of evil and terrorism; the reason why many in the US do not want the Muslim cultural centre or what they perceive it to be a mosque near Ground Zero, is because they believe the mosque (and therefore Islam) was responsible for the terrorist attacks in New York. If the Islamic cultural centre is not built in its current location two blocks away from Ground Zero, it
would be a vindication to those who believe that Islam is the source of terrorism and extremism and to those who believe that the‘war on terrorism’ is the war against Islam.
Source: http://www.muslimnews.co.uk
CAIR: San Diego Muslims to Hold Youth Conference
Day-long event to focus on spirituality, education, activism, social concerns
(SAN DIEGO, CA, 7/23/10) -- On Saturday, July 24, the San Diego Muslim community will hold a day-long conference for American Muslim youth at the Islamic Center of San Diego (ICSD). The theme of the conference is “Muslim Youth in America: Seeking the Straight Path.”
WHAT: “Muslim Youth in America: Seeking the Straight Path” Conference
WHEN: Saturday, July 24th, 10 a.m. – 11 p.m.; A Press Conference for the event will be held at 1 p.m. in the 2nd Floor Library, Islamic Center of San Diego.
WHERE: Multipurpose Room (1st Floor) Islamic Center of San Diego, 7050 Eckstrom Avenue, San Diego, CA 92111
CONTACT: CAIR San Diego Public Relations Director Edgar Hopida, 619-913-0719 or 858-278-4547, E-mail: ehopida@cair.com
The conference will feature dialogue-oriented sessions on the development of a good Muslim spiritual character and the importance of obtaining both religious and secular education. Other discussions will focus on “Radicalization of American Muslim Youth: Myth or Reality” and on social problems that are experienced by Muslim youth.
“The purpose of this conference is to provide Muslim youth a constructive environment in which to discuss issues of spirituality, education, activism, and social problems in order to help them pursue a path that will positively impact the broader society,” said CAIR-San Diego Public Relations Director Edgar Hopida.
The conference is sponsored by the Islamic Center of San Diego (ICSD), Masjidul Taqwa, the Council on American Islamic Relations - San Diego Chapter (CAIR-San Diego), Logan Islamic Community Center (LICC), and Muslim American Society (MAS) Youth San Diego.
CAIR is America's largest Muslim civil liberties group. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.
Sources: http://islamonline.com
(SAN DIEGO, CA, 7/23/10) -- On Saturday, July 24, the San Diego Muslim community will hold a day-long conference for American Muslim youth at the Islamic Center of San Diego (ICSD). The theme of the conference is “Muslim Youth in America: Seeking the Straight Path.”
WHAT: “Muslim Youth in America: Seeking the Straight Path” Conference
WHEN: Saturday, July 24th, 10 a.m. – 11 p.m.; A Press Conference for the event will be held at 1 p.m. in the 2nd Floor Library, Islamic Center of San Diego.
WHERE: Multipurpose Room (1st Floor) Islamic Center of San Diego, 7050 Eckstrom Avenue, San Diego, CA 92111
CONTACT: CAIR San Diego Public Relations Director Edgar Hopida, 619-913-0719 or 858-278-4547, E-mail: ehopida@cair.com
The conference will feature dialogue-oriented sessions on the development of a good Muslim spiritual character and the importance of obtaining both religious and secular education. Other discussions will focus on “Radicalization of American Muslim Youth: Myth or Reality” and on social problems that are experienced by Muslim youth.
“The purpose of this conference is to provide Muslim youth a constructive environment in which to discuss issues of spirituality, education, activism, and social problems in order to help them pursue a path that will positively impact the broader society,” said CAIR-San Diego Public Relations Director Edgar Hopida.
The conference is sponsored by the Islamic Center of San Diego (ICSD), Masjidul Taqwa, the Council on American Islamic Relations - San Diego Chapter (CAIR-San Diego), Logan Islamic Community Center (LICC), and Muslim American Society (MAS) Youth San Diego.
CAIR is America's largest Muslim civil liberties group. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.
Sources: http://islamonline.com
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
The Islamic Center in Washington D.C.- A Place to Appreciate
The oldest Islamic house of worship in the city, the Islamic Center in Washington D.C. is a symbol of Islam in America. More than 6,000 people in the D.C. area from 75 different countries attend prayers there each Friday. When the Center was first opened in 1957, it was the largest Muslim place of worship in the Western Hemisphere. Since its beginnings, the Islamic Center has committed itself to promoting a better understanding of Islam in the United States. Serving as a source of guidance for Muslims, the Center offers Islamic literature and provides help to needy families. In addition, the Islamic Center offers: officiating marriage ceremonies, counseling those in need, providing a research center with an extensive library, and organizing language and religious classes for both children and adults.
Getting There
Located on Embassy Row, just east of the bridge over Rock Creek, the Islamic Center is in the Dupont Circle neighborhood, so if you're taking the Metro, you'll want the Dupont Circle Red Line. Its exact location is: 2551 Massachusetts Avenue. The Islamic Center is open Monday through Saturday from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. Via CheapHotels.org, the leading hotel booking site for budget hotels, you can find cheap hotels in Washington D.C.
History of Islamic Center
The idea for the Islamic Center in Washington D.C. was initiated in November 1944 during a conversation between Mr. M. Abu Al Hawa, a Palestinian immigrant and businessman, and the former Ambassador of Egypt, Mr. Mahmood Hassan Pasha. Shortly after this important exchange of words, a few diplomats and American Muslims formed the Washington Mosque Foundation, which quickly grew to include membership from every Islamic nation in the world, as well as American citizens. The Foundation was able to raise enough money to buy the land where the Center currently resides and the cornerstone was laid on January 11, 1949. Like many other places of worship in Washington D.C., the building came to realization through gifts and monetary support-mostly from foreign governments. For example, Egypt sent the solid bronze chandelier; the Shah of Iran donated the Persian carpets; and the Turkish government gave the tiles which line the mosque walls. Not only did foreign governments offer monetary support, but they also sent workers to move the project along. Craftsmen from Egypt came to Washington D.C. to manifest the artwork of Quranic verses on the ceiling of the mosque. And, the Turkish government sent craftsmen to lay the tiles on the mosque walls. Designed by noted Italian architect Prof. Mario Rossi, the Center celebrated its opening on June 28, 1957.
President Dwight D. Eisenhower remarks of the Mosque and Islam
At the dedication ceremony, former United States President Dwight D. Eisenhower affirmed the Islamic world's "traditions of learning and rich culture" which have "for centuries contributed to the building of civilization." His closing remarks were: "As I stand beneath these graceful arches, surrounded on every side by friends from far and near, I am convinced that our common goals are both right and promising. Faithful to the demands of justice and of brotherhood, each working according to the lights of his own conscience, our world must advance along the paths of peace.
Source: http://www.islamicity.com/
Getting There
Located on Embassy Row, just east of the bridge over Rock Creek, the Islamic Center is in the Dupont Circle neighborhood, so if you're taking the Metro, you'll want the Dupont Circle Red Line. Its exact location is: 2551 Massachusetts Avenue. The Islamic Center is open Monday through Saturday from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. Via CheapHotels.org, the leading hotel booking site for budget hotels, you can find cheap hotels in Washington D.C.
History of Islamic Center
The idea for the Islamic Center in Washington D.C. was initiated in November 1944 during a conversation between Mr. M. Abu Al Hawa, a Palestinian immigrant and businessman, and the former Ambassador of Egypt, Mr. Mahmood Hassan Pasha. Shortly after this important exchange of words, a few diplomats and American Muslims formed the Washington Mosque Foundation, which quickly grew to include membership from every Islamic nation in the world, as well as American citizens. The Foundation was able to raise enough money to buy the land where the Center currently resides and the cornerstone was laid on January 11, 1949. Like many other places of worship in Washington D.C., the building came to realization through gifts and monetary support-mostly from foreign governments. For example, Egypt sent the solid bronze chandelier; the Shah of Iran donated the Persian carpets; and the Turkish government gave the tiles which line the mosque walls. Not only did foreign governments offer monetary support, but they also sent workers to move the project along. Craftsmen from Egypt came to Washington D.C. to manifest the artwork of Quranic verses on the ceiling of the mosque. And, the Turkish government sent craftsmen to lay the tiles on the mosque walls. Designed by noted Italian architect Prof. Mario Rossi, the Center celebrated its opening on June 28, 1957.
President Dwight D. Eisenhower remarks of the Mosque and Islam
At the dedication ceremony, former United States President Dwight D. Eisenhower affirmed the Islamic world's "traditions of learning and rich culture" which have "for centuries contributed to the building of civilization." His closing remarks were: "As I stand beneath these graceful arches, surrounded on every side by friends from far and near, I am convinced that our common goals are both right and promising. Faithful to the demands of justice and of brotherhood, each working according to the lights of his own conscience, our world must advance along the paths of peace.
Source: http://www.islamicity.com/
Message to Muslims: I’m Sorry
That's reasonable advice, and as a moderate myself, I'm going to take it. (Throat clearing.) I hereby apologize to Muslims for the wave of bigotry and simple nuttiness that has lately been directed at you. The venom on the airwaves, equating Muslims with terrorists, should embarrass us more than you. Muslims are one of the last minorities in the United States that it is still possible to demean openly, and I apologize for the slurs.
I'm inspired by another journalistic apology. The Portland Press Herald in Maine published an innocuous front-page article and photo a week ago about 3,000 local Muslims praying together to mark the end of Ramadan. Readers were upset, because publication coincided with the ninth anniversary of 9/11, and they deluged the paper with protests.
So the newspaper published a groveling front-page apology for being too respectful of Muslims. "We sincerely apologize," wrote the editor and publisher, Richard Connor, and he added: "we erred by at least not offering balance to the story and its prominent position on the front page." As a blog by James Poniewozik of Time paraphrased it: "Sorry for Portraying Muslims as Human."
I called Mr. Connor, and he seems like a nice guy. Surely his front page isn't reserved for stories about Bad Muslims, with articles about Good Muslims going inside. Must coverage of law-abiding Muslims be "balanced" by a discussion of Muslim terrorists?
Ah, balance - who can be against that? But should reporting of Pope Benedict's trip to Britain be "balanced" by a discussion of Catholic terrorists in Ireland? And what about journalism itself?
I interrupt this discussion of peaceful journalism in Maine to provide some "balance." Journalists can also be terrorists, murderers and rapists. For example, radio journalists in Rwanda promoted genocide.
I apologize to Muslims for another reason. This isn't about them, but about us. I want to defend Muslims from intolerance, but I also want to defend America against extremists engineering a spasm of religious hatred.
Granted, the reason for the nastiness isn't hard to understand. Extremist Muslims have led to fear and repugnance toward Islam as a whole. Threats by Muslim crazies just in the last few days forced a Seattle cartoonist, Molly Norris, to go into hiding after she drew a cartoon about Muhammad that went viral.
Ads by Google:
Advertisements not controlled by IslamiCity
And then there's 9/11. When I recently compared today's prejudice toward Muslims to the historical bigotry toward Catholics, Mormons, Jews and Asian-Americans, many readers protested that it was a false parallel. As one, Carla, put it on my blog: "Catholics and Jews did not come here and kill thousands of people."
That's true, but Japanese did attack Pearl Harbor and in the end killed far more Americans than Al Qaeda ever did. Consumed by our fears, we lumped together anyone of Japanese ancestry and rounded them up in internment camps. The threat was real, but so were the hysteria and the overreaction.
Radicals tend to empower radicals, creating a gulf of mutual misunderstanding and anger. Many Americans believe that Osama bin Laden is representative of Muslims, and many Afghans believe that the Rev. Terry Jones (who talked about burning Korans) is representative of Christians.
Many Americans honestly believe that Muslims are prone to violence, but humans are too complicated and diverse to lump into groups that we form invidious conclusions about. We've mostly learned that about blacks, Jews and other groups that suffered historic discrimination, but it's still O.K. to make sweeping statements about "Muslims" as an undifferentiated mass.
In my travels, I've seen some of the worst of Islam: theocratic mullahs oppressing people in Iran; girls kept out of school in Afghanistan in the name of religion; girls subjected to genital mutilation in Africa in the name of Islam; warlords in Yemen and Sudan who wield AK-47s and claim to be doing God's bidding.
But I've also seen the exact opposite: Muslim aid workers in Afghanistan who risk their lives to educate girls; a Pakistani imam who shelters rape victims; Muslim leaders who campaign against female genital mutilation and note that it is not really an Islamic practice; Pakistani Muslims who stand up for oppressed Christians and Hindus; and above all, the innumerable Muslim aid workers in Congo, Darfur, Bangladesh and so many other parts of the world who are inspired by the Koran to risk their lives to help others. Those Muslims have helped keep me alive, and they set a standard of compassion, peacefulness and altruism that we should all emulate.
I'm sickened when I hear such gentle souls lumped in with Qaeda terrorists, and when I hear the faith they hold sacred excoriated and mocked. To them and to others smeared, I apologize.
Source: http://www.iviews.com
I'm inspired by another journalistic apology. The Portland Press Herald in Maine published an innocuous front-page article and photo a week ago about 3,000 local Muslims praying together to mark the end of Ramadan. Readers were upset, because publication coincided with the ninth anniversary of 9/11, and they deluged the paper with protests.
So the newspaper published a groveling front-page apology for being too respectful of Muslims. "We sincerely apologize," wrote the editor and publisher, Richard Connor, and he added: "we erred by at least not offering balance to the story and its prominent position on the front page." As a blog by James Poniewozik of Time paraphrased it: "Sorry for Portraying Muslims as Human."
I called Mr. Connor, and he seems like a nice guy. Surely his front page isn't reserved for stories about Bad Muslims, with articles about Good Muslims going inside. Must coverage of law-abiding Muslims be "balanced" by a discussion of Muslim terrorists?
Ah, balance - who can be against that? But should reporting of Pope Benedict's trip to Britain be "balanced" by a discussion of Catholic terrorists in Ireland? And what about journalism itself?
I interrupt this discussion of peaceful journalism in Maine to provide some "balance." Journalists can also be terrorists, murderers and rapists. For example, radio journalists in Rwanda promoted genocide.
I apologize to Muslims for another reason. This isn't about them, but about us. I want to defend Muslims from intolerance, but I also want to defend America against extremists engineering a spasm of religious hatred.
Granted, the reason for the nastiness isn't hard to understand. Extremist Muslims have led to fear and repugnance toward Islam as a whole. Threats by Muslim crazies just in the last few days forced a Seattle cartoonist, Molly Norris, to go into hiding after she drew a cartoon about Muhammad that went viral.
Ads by Google:
Advertisements not controlled by IslamiCity
And then there's 9/11. When I recently compared today's prejudice toward Muslims to the historical bigotry toward Catholics, Mormons, Jews and Asian-Americans, many readers protested that it was a false parallel. As one, Carla, put it on my blog: "Catholics and Jews did not come here and kill thousands of people."
That's true, but Japanese did attack Pearl Harbor and in the end killed far more Americans than Al Qaeda ever did. Consumed by our fears, we lumped together anyone of Japanese ancestry and rounded them up in internment camps. The threat was real, but so were the hysteria and the overreaction.
Radicals tend to empower radicals, creating a gulf of mutual misunderstanding and anger. Many Americans believe that Osama bin Laden is representative of Muslims, and many Afghans believe that the Rev. Terry Jones (who talked about burning Korans) is representative of Christians.
Many Americans honestly believe that Muslims are prone to violence, but humans are too complicated and diverse to lump into groups that we form invidious conclusions about. We've mostly learned that about blacks, Jews and other groups that suffered historic discrimination, but it's still O.K. to make sweeping statements about "Muslims" as an undifferentiated mass.
In my travels, I've seen some of the worst of Islam: theocratic mullahs oppressing people in Iran; girls kept out of school in Afghanistan in the name of religion; girls subjected to genital mutilation in Africa in the name of Islam; warlords in Yemen and Sudan who wield AK-47s and claim to be doing God's bidding.
But I've also seen the exact opposite: Muslim aid workers in Afghanistan who risk their lives to educate girls; a Pakistani imam who shelters rape victims; Muslim leaders who campaign against female genital mutilation and note that it is not really an Islamic practice; Pakistani Muslims who stand up for oppressed Christians and Hindus; and above all, the innumerable Muslim aid workers in Congo, Darfur, Bangladesh and so many other parts of the world who are inspired by the Koran to risk their lives to help others. Those Muslims have helped keep me alive, and they set a standard of compassion, peacefulness and altruism that we should all emulate.
I'm sickened when I hear such gentle souls lumped in with Qaeda terrorists, and when I hear the faith they hold sacred excoriated and mocked. To them and to others smeared, I apologize.
Source: http://www.iviews.com
Eid ul-Fitr and 11 September
Maplewood, New Jersey - Every year Eid ul-Fitr, the celebration marking the end of Ramadan, happens on a different day, approximately 11 days earlier than the year before. This year, it arrived on Thursday in some parts of the world, but most of us celebrated on Friday, depending on which night the new moon was sighted by each particular community.
The uncertainty surrounding which day Eid will fall upon results from Islam’s lunar calendar. The months are dictated by the cycles of the moon and there are no extra days, no shortened months and no leap years, which in the Gregorian calendar ensure that April planting takes place in the spring, October harvest in the fall, and New Year’s Day falls on 1 January.
And strange as this calendar system may seem to some, and difficult as it is to fit into our linear American lifestyle, there are still spiritual qualities to appreciate. For example, one blessing Muslims share is: “May you see Ramadan in every season of the year.”
In the past dozen years, the Ramadan cycle has coincided with many major American events as well as civil and religious holidays: the Super Bowl, Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday, New Year’s Day, Kwanzaa, Christmas, Hanukkah, Advent, Thanksgiving, All Saints’ Day, Halloween, the High Jewish holy days of Yom Kippur and – this year – Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish new year.
Last year and the year before, Muslim and Jewish groups made the most of the concurrent fasting holidays – Ramadan and the 24-hour Yom Kippur fast – to show solidarity by fasting and breaking bread together through interfaith events at synagogues, mosques and community centres.
Yet at the state level, beyond an annual fast-breaking iftar at the White House since 1996, there is little national recognition of this holiday, which is as significant to Muslims as Easter and Passover are to Christians and Jews.
A handful of American cities close schools in observance of Eid, because of the growing number of Muslim students in their districts, but in New Jersey, like many American cities, fewer than two per cent of public schools close for Muslim holy days. It is only because Eid comes at the same time as the Jewish New Year this year that schools will be closed in many American cities.
The U.S. State Department notes that Islam is one of the fastest-growing religions in the United States. As it grows, it is becoming increasingly important to consider the need to respect Muslim holy days in public life.
As the moon moves the months of the Islamic calendar 11 days earlier each year and Ramadan shifts into the summer, the coincidence with big American holidays comes to a close for a while. But in 2016 Eid ul-Fitr will take place around the Fourth of July, and by 2020 it will be closer to Memorial Day in May.
This year there’s another American day of remembrance that coincided with Eid ul-Fitr – one of grief, reflection, anger and fear: the anniversary of the events of 11 September 2001.
This year’s Eid celebrations overlapped with memorial services for those who died. And Muslim Americans were conscious of that. As Americans they grieve. As Muslims, by and large, they feel the weight of perceived stereotypes and all too often find themselves defending Islam.
Out of consideration for the solemnity of 11 September, many Muslims decided not to hold big public Eid celebrations on the second day of the three-day feast as they typically have done in the past. The annual Muslim Family Day merriment, often scheduled the second day of Eid at amusement parks or children’s museums in some cities in the United States, was postponed until 12 September. Ironically, the founder of Muslim Family Day, Tariq Amanullah, died in the Twin Towers on 9/11.
Muslims have been part of the fabric of American society since the days of slavery; they are insiders, not outsiders. Given the accusations of Muslim insensitivity surrounding a proposed Islamic community centre in lower Manhattan, I hope this small, symbolic gesture in delaying the celebration of a major religious holiday, and Muslim Americans’ high standard for respect and patriotism, will be noted.
Source: http://islamonline.com
The uncertainty surrounding which day Eid will fall upon results from Islam’s lunar calendar. The months are dictated by the cycles of the moon and there are no extra days, no shortened months and no leap years, which in the Gregorian calendar ensure that April planting takes place in the spring, October harvest in the fall, and New Year’s Day falls on 1 January.
And strange as this calendar system may seem to some, and difficult as it is to fit into our linear American lifestyle, there are still spiritual qualities to appreciate. For example, one blessing Muslims share is: “May you see Ramadan in every season of the year.”
In the past dozen years, the Ramadan cycle has coincided with many major American events as well as civil and religious holidays: the Super Bowl, Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday, New Year’s Day, Kwanzaa, Christmas, Hanukkah, Advent, Thanksgiving, All Saints’ Day, Halloween, the High Jewish holy days of Yom Kippur and – this year – Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish new year.
Last year and the year before, Muslim and Jewish groups made the most of the concurrent fasting holidays – Ramadan and the 24-hour Yom Kippur fast – to show solidarity by fasting and breaking bread together through interfaith events at synagogues, mosques and community centres.
Yet at the state level, beyond an annual fast-breaking iftar at the White House since 1996, there is little national recognition of this holiday, which is as significant to Muslims as Easter and Passover are to Christians and Jews.
A handful of American cities close schools in observance of Eid, because of the growing number of Muslim students in their districts, but in New Jersey, like many American cities, fewer than two per cent of public schools close for Muslim holy days. It is only because Eid comes at the same time as the Jewish New Year this year that schools will be closed in many American cities.
The U.S. State Department notes that Islam is one of the fastest-growing religions in the United States. As it grows, it is becoming increasingly important to consider the need to respect Muslim holy days in public life.
As the moon moves the months of the Islamic calendar 11 days earlier each year and Ramadan shifts into the summer, the coincidence with big American holidays comes to a close for a while. But in 2016 Eid ul-Fitr will take place around the Fourth of July, and by 2020 it will be closer to Memorial Day in May.
This year there’s another American day of remembrance that coincided with Eid ul-Fitr – one of grief, reflection, anger and fear: the anniversary of the events of 11 September 2001.
This year’s Eid celebrations overlapped with memorial services for those who died. And Muslim Americans were conscious of that. As Americans they grieve. As Muslims, by and large, they feel the weight of perceived stereotypes and all too often find themselves defending Islam.
Out of consideration for the solemnity of 11 September, many Muslims decided not to hold big public Eid celebrations on the second day of the three-day feast as they typically have done in the past. The annual Muslim Family Day merriment, often scheduled the second day of Eid at amusement parks or children’s museums in some cities in the United States, was postponed until 12 September. Ironically, the founder of Muslim Family Day, Tariq Amanullah, died in the Twin Towers on 9/11.
Muslims have been part of the fabric of American society since the days of slavery; they are insiders, not outsiders. Given the accusations of Muslim insensitivity surrounding a proposed Islamic community centre in lower Manhattan, I hope this small, symbolic gesture in delaying the celebration of a major religious holiday, and Muslim Americans’ high standard for respect and patriotism, will be noted.
Source: http://islamonline.com
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Iran ‘halves jail terms’ for seven Bahai followers
PARIS (AFP) - Iran has cut jail terms imposed on seven leading members of the country's Bahai religious minority from 20 to 10 years, French members of the faith said on Saturday.
The seven, including two women, were arrested in May 2008 and put on trial in January this year on charges including spying for foreigners, spreading corruption, undermining Islam and cooperating with Israel.
They were sentenced on August 8 to 20 years imprisonment, but the French Bahai community said in a statement Saturday that their lawyers
had been told orally that the term had been halved.
"The Bahais of France, greatly concerned for their co-religionists, call on the authorities in Iran to take immediate steps to release them unconditionally," it added.
The defendants have been identified as two women, Fariba Kamalabadi and Mahvash Sabet, and five men: Jamaloddin Khanjani, Afif Naeimi, Saeid Rezaie, Behrouz Tavakkoli and Vahid Tizfahm.
They "were all members of a national-level group that helped see to the minimum needs of Iran's 300,000-strong Bahai community, the country's largest non-Muslim religious minority," a statement by the French Bahais said in August.
"The trial of the seven consisted of six brief court appearances which began on 12 January this year after they had been incarcerated without charge for 20 months, during which time they were allowed barely one hour's access to their legal counsel. The trial ended on 14 June," it added.
The case brought condemnation from Washington, where US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the sentencing was "a violation of Iran's obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights."
Clinton was referring to the 1966 UN treaty on fundamental freedoms, which Iran ratified before the 1979 Islamic revolution overthrew the pro-Western shah.
"The United States is deeply concerned with the Iranian government's continued persecution of Bahais and other religious minority communities in Iran," she added in August.
"The United States is committed to defending religious freedom around the world, and we have not forgotten the Bahai community in Iran," she said.
"We will continue to speak out against injustice and call on the Iranian government to respect the fundamental rights of all its citizens in accordance with its international obligations."
Followers of the Bahai faith, which was founded in Iran in 1863, are regarded in the Islamic republic as infidels and suffered persecution both before and after the Islamic revolution.
The Bahais consider Bahaullah, born in 1817, to be the latest prophet sent by God and believe in the spiritual unity of all religions and all mankind.
The group now has seven million followers, including 300,000 in Iran -- where its members are barred from higher education and government posts -- and has a large temple in Haifa, in northern Israel.
"For Muslims, there can't be another prophet or divine messenger after Mohammed," Bahai follower Foad Saberan told AFP, explaining why the group has been dubbed "non-protected infidels" in Iran.
"So they consider Bahaullah an impostor and his followers heretics, whereas the Bahai faith has nothing to do with Islam and is an independent religion.
"And if the headquarters of the religion is in Haifa, it's because that's where Bahaullah ended up settling in 1868 after he was exiled to Baghdad then to Constantinople, long before the creation of the state of Israel."
Bahai leaders believe a total of 47 members of their religion are imprisoned in Iran simply for their beliefs.
Source: http://www.islamtribune.com
The seven, including two women, were arrested in May 2008 and put on trial in January this year on charges including spying for foreigners, spreading corruption, undermining Islam and cooperating with Israel.
They were sentenced on August 8 to 20 years imprisonment, but the French Bahai community said in a statement Saturday that their lawyers
had been told orally that the term had been halved.
"The Bahais of France, greatly concerned for their co-religionists, call on the authorities in Iran to take immediate steps to release them unconditionally," it added.
The defendants have been identified as two women, Fariba Kamalabadi and Mahvash Sabet, and five men: Jamaloddin Khanjani, Afif Naeimi, Saeid Rezaie, Behrouz Tavakkoli and Vahid Tizfahm.
They "were all members of a national-level group that helped see to the minimum needs of Iran's 300,000-strong Bahai community, the country's largest non-Muslim religious minority," a statement by the French Bahais said in August.
"The trial of the seven consisted of six brief court appearances which began on 12 January this year after they had been incarcerated without charge for 20 months, during which time they were allowed barely one hour's access to their legal counsel. The trial ended on 14 June," it added.
The case brought condemnation from Washington, where US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the sentencing was "a violation of Iran's obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights."
Clinton was referring to the 1966 UN treaty on fundamental freedoms, which Iran ratified before the 1979 Islamic revolution overthrew the pro-Western shah.
"The United States is deeply concerned with the Iranian government's continued persecution of Bahais and other religious minority communities in Iran," she added in August.
"The United States is committed to defending religious freedom around the world, and we have not forgotten the Bahai community in Iran," she said.
"We will continue to speak out against injustice and call on the Iranian government to respect the fundamental rights of all its citizens in accordance with its international obligations."
Followers of the Bahai faith, which was founded in Iran in 1863, are regarded in the Islamic republic as infidels and suffered persecution both before and after the Islamic revolution.
The Bahais consider Bahaullah, born in 1817, to be the latest prophet sent by God and believe in the spiritual unity of all religions and all mankind.
The group now has seven million followers, including 300,000 in Iran -- where its members are barred from higher education and government posts -- and has a large temple in Haifa, in northern Israel.
"For Muslims, there can't be another prophet or divine messenger after Mohammed," Bahai follower Foad Saberan told AFP, explaining why the group has been dubbed "non-protected infidels" in Iran.
"So they consider Bahaullah an impostor and his followers heretics, whereas the Bahai faith has nothing to do with Islam and is an independent religion.
"And if the headquarters of the religion is in Haifa, it's because that's where Bahaullah ended up settling in 1868 after he was exiled to Baghdad then to Constantinople, long before the creation of the state of Israel."
Bahai leaders believe a total of 47 members of their religion are imprisoned in Iran simply for their beliefs.
Source: http://www.islamtribune.com
Monday, September 20, 2010
Muslims in Oz protest against proposal to ban burqa
Melbourne, September 20: Muslims, including women and children, in Australia have staged a march in Sydney to protest against a proposal to ban burqa in the country, condemning it as part of the West's "war on Islam".
Women with veils and placards rallied in hundreds showing "my burqa - conviction not coercion" and "leave my mum alone - we love niqab" yesterday in a park in Punchbowl, southwestern Sydney, according to media reports here.
The protest against calls to ban the full face covering was organised by a coalition of Muslim groups including Islamist political party Hizbut Tahrir, which favours the creation of an Islamic caliphate, and the fundamentalist Ahlus Sunna wal Jamaah Association.
Women with veils and placards rallied in hundreds showing "my burqa - conviction not coercion" and "leave my mum alone - we love niqab" yesterday in a park in Punchbowl, southwestern Sydney, according to media reports here.
The protest against calls to ban the full face covering was organised by a coalition of Muslim groups including Islamist political party Hizbut Tahrir, which favours the creation of an Islamic caliphate, and the fundamentalist Ahlus Sunna wal Jamaah Association.
AP Interview: Ahmadinejad says future is Iran's
NEW YORK – Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Sunday that "the future belongs to Iran," and challenged the United States to accept that his country has a major role in the world.
The comments came in an hourlong interview with The Associated Press on the first day of his visit to the United States to attend the annual general assembly of the United Nations this week.
He insisted that his government does not want an atomic bomb — something he has said in the past — and that Iran is only seeking peace and a nuclear-weapons-free world. He repeatedly sidestepped questions on when Iran would resume talks on its disputed nuclear program, and he said anti-nuclear sanctions against his government would have no effect.
Appearing calm and self-assured on his seventh trip to the United States, the Iranian president showed every sign of being in command of himself and prepared to deflect questions about his government's harsh suppression of opposition forces after last year's disputed election that returned him to a second term.
"The United States' administrations ... must recognize that Iran is a big power," he said. "Having said that, we consider ourselves to be a human force and a cultural power and hence a friend of other nations. We have never sought to dominate others or to violate the rights of any other country.
"Those who insist on having hostilities with us, kill and destroy the option of friendship with us in the future, which is unfortunate because it is clear the future belongs to Iran and that enmities will be fruitless."
Over the years, Ahmadinejad has become more articulate and polished. He wore a gray pinstriped suit and a pinstriped white shirt, open with no tie, for the interview, conducted in an East Side hotel not far from the United Nations.
A few blocks away, dozens of protesters demonstrated with tape across their mouths to symbolize what they consider to be the oppressive nature of the Iranian government. The nonprofit Israeli education group, Stand With Us, organized the rally, one of many expected outside the United Nations and elsewhere in the city before Ahmadinejad leaves Friday.
In the interview in a room crowded with aides, bodyguards and Iranian journalists, the Iranian leader projected an air of innocence, saying his country's quest to process ever greater amounts of uranium is reasonable for its expanding civilian power program, omitting that the watchdog United Nations agency involved has found Iran keeping secrets from its investigators on several occasions, including secret research sites.
He also did not acknowledge that the leaders of the political opposition in Iran have been harassed and that government opponents risk violence and arrest if they try to assemble. He did allow that there have been some judicial "mistakes."
Ahmadinejad argued that the opposition Green Movement, which has largely been forced underground, continues to enjoys rights in Iran but said that in the end it must respect "majority rule." He also disavowed any knowledge of the fate of a retired FBI employee who vanished inside Iran in 2007, saying the trail will be followed up by a joint U.S.-Iranian committee.
Government opponents "have their activities that are ongoing and they also express their views publicly. They have several parties, as well as several newspapers, and many newspapers and publications. And so there are really no restrictions of such nature," the president said.
He did not mention that many newspapers have been closed down and that prominent opposition figures were put in prison and then tried after tens of thousands of Iranians took to the streets claiming that the election that put him back in power in 2010 was fraudulent and stolen.
The public appearances of his rivals Mir Houssein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi have been severely restricted and their offices recently were raided by police.
Ahmadinejad said Iran is more free than some other countries. "I believe that when we discuss the subject of freedoms and liberty it has to be done on a comparative basis and to keep in mind that democracy at the end of the day means the rule of the majority, so the minority cannot rule."
He added: "In Iran I think nobody loses their job because of making a statement that reflects their opinion. ... From this point of view, conditions in Iran are far better than in many other places in the world."
Ahmadinejad asserted that international nuclear regulators had never found proof that Iran is pursuing an atomic bomb.
"We are not afraid of nuclear weapons. The point is that if we had in fact wanted to build a nuclear bomb, we are brave enough to say that we want it. But we never do that. We are saying that the arsenal of nuclear bombs (worldwide) have to be destroyed as well," he said.
The U.S. accuses Iran of hiding plans to build a nuclear bomb; Iran denies that and says it's working only toward building nuclear power plants.
Ahmadinejad took no personal responsibility for the fate of the three American hikers who were taken prisoner along the border with Iraq more than a year ago — treating it as a strictly legal affair.
"We're very glad that that lady was released," he said about Sarah Shourd, who arrived in New York on Sunday and held a news conference while Ahmadinejad was being interviewed by the AP, denying she had done anything wrong.
"(Due) to the humanitarian perspective of the Islamic Republic chose to adopt on the subject, she was released on bail," Ahmadinejad said. "And we hope that the other two will soon be able to prove and provide evidence to the court that they had no ill intention in crossing the border, so that their release can also be secured."
Tying the case to Iran's assertion that eight of its citizens are being held unjustly in the United States, he said, "It certainly does not give us joy when we see people in prison, wherever in the world that may be, and even when we think of prisoners here."
His answers were translated from Farsi by an Iranian translator, but Ahmadinejad appeared to be following the questions in English and occasionally corrected his interpreter.
Asked about retired FBI employee Robert Levinson, who disappeared during a trip to Iran in 2007, Ahmadinejad hinted that his government considers that Levinson had been on some "mission" when he vanished.
"Of course if it becomes clear what his goal was, or if he was indeed on a mission, then perhaps specific assistance can be given," the Iranian leader said. "For example, if he had plans to visit with a group or an individual or go to another country, he would be easier to trace in that instance."
Levinson was last seen on Iran's Kish island in March 2007 where he had gone to seek information on cigarette smuggling for a client of his security firm. He had been an FBI agent in New York and Florida before retiring in 1998. He has not been seen since. Iran says it has no information on him.
Overall, Ahmadinejad said that Iran's course is set and the rest of the world needs to accept it.
Another round of international pressure in the form of sanctions would only be futile, he said. "If they were to be effective, I should not be sitting here right now."
Sourcue : Yahoo News
The comments came in an hourlong interview with The Associated Press on the first day of his visit to the United States to attend the annual general assembly of the United Nations this week.
He insisted that his government does not want an atomic bomb — something he has said in the past — and that Iran is only seeking peace and a nuclear-weapons-free world. He repeatedly sidestepped questions on when Iran would resume talks on its disputed nuclear program, and he said anti-nuclear sanctions against his government would have no effect.
Appearing calm and self-assured on his seventh trip to the United States, the Iranian president showed every sign of being in command of himself and prepared to deflect questions about his government's harsh suppression of opposition forces after last year's disputed election that returned him to a second term.
"The United States' administrations ... must recognize that Iran is a big power," he said. "Having said that, we consider ourselves to be a human force and a cultural power and hence a friend of other nations. We have never sought to dominate others or to violate the rights of any other country.
"Those who insist on having hostilities with us, kill and destroy the option of friendship with us in the future, which is unfortunate because it is clear the future belongs to Iran and that enmities will be fruitless."
Over the years, Ahmadinejad has become more articulate and polished. He wore a gray pinstriped suit and a pinstriped white shirt, open with no tie, for the interview, conducted in an East Side hotel not far from the United Nations.
A few blocks away, dozens of protesters demonstrated with tape across their mouths to symbolize what they consider to be the oppressive nature of the Iranian government. The nonprofit Israeli education group, Stand With Us, organized the rally, one of many expected outside the United Nations and elsewhere in the city before Ahmadinejad leaves Friday.
In the interview in a room crowded with aides, bodyguards and Iranian journalists, the Iranian leader projected an air of innocence, saying his country's quest to process ever greater amounts of uranium is reasonable for its expanding civilian power program, omitting that the watchdog United Nations agency involved has found Iran keeping secrets from its investigators on several occasions, including secret research sites.
He also did not acknowledge that the leaders of the political opposition in Iran have been harassed and that government opponents risk violence and arrest if they try to assemble. He did allow that there have been some judicial "mistakes."
Ahmadinejad argued that the opposition Green Movement, which has largely been forced underground, continues to enjoys rights in Iran but said that in the end it must respect "majority rule." He also disavowed any knowledge of the fate of a retired FBI employee who vanished inside Iran in 2007, saying the trail will be followed up by a joint U.S.-Iranian committee.
Government opponents "have their activities that are ongoing and they also express their views publicly. They have several parties, as well as several newspapers, and many newspapers and publications. And so there are really no restrictions of such nature," the president said.
He did not mention that many newspapers have been closed down and that prominent opposition figures were put in prison and then tried after tens of thousands of Iranians took to the streets claiming that the election that put him back in power in 2010 was fraudulent and stolen.
The public appearances of his rivals Mir Houssein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi have been severely restricted and their offices recently were raided by police.
Ahmadinejad said Iran is more free than some other countries. "I believe that when we discuss the subject of freedoms and liberty it has to be done on a comparative basis and to keep in mind that democracy at the end of the day means the rule of the majority, so the minority cannot rule."
He added: "In Iran I think nobody loses their job because of making a statement that reflects their opinion. ... From this point of view, conditions in Iran are far better than in many other places in the world."
Ahmadinejad asserted that international nuclear regulators had never found proof that Iran is pursuing an atomic bomb.
"We are not afraid of nuclear weapons. The point is that if we had in fact wanted to build a nuclear bomb, we are brave enough to say that we want it. But we never do that. We are saying that the arsenal of nuclear bombs (worldwide) have to be destroyed as well," he said.
The U.S. accuses Iran of hiding plans to build a nuclear bomb; Iran denies that and says it's working only toward building nuclear power plants.
Ahmadinejad took no personal responsibility for the fate of the three American hikers who were taken prisoner along the border with Iraq more than a year ago — treating it as a strictly legal affair.
"We're very glad that that lady was released," he said about Sarah Shourd, who arrived in New York on Sunday and held a news conference while Ahmadinejad was being interviewed by the AP, denying she had done anything wrong.
"(Due) to the humanitarian perspective of the Islamic Republic chose to adopt on the subject, she was released on bail," Ahmadinejad said. "And we hope that the other two will soon be able to prove and provide evidence to the court that they had no ill intention in crossing the border, so that their release can also be secured."
Tying the case to Iran's assertion that eight of its citizens are being held unjustly in the United States, he said, "It certainly does not give us joy when we see people in prison, wherever in the world that may be, and even when we think of prisoners here."
His answers were translated from Farsi by an Iranian translator, but Ahmadinejad appeared to be following the questions in English and occasionally corrected his interpreter.
Asked about retired FBI employee Robert Levinson, who disappeared during a trip to Iran in 2007, Ahmadinejad hinted that his government considers that Levinson had been on some "mission" when he vanished.
"Of course if it becomes clear what his goal was, or if he was indeed on a mission, then perhaps specific assistance can be given," the Iranian leader said. "For example, if he had plans to visit with a group or an individual or go to another country, he would be easier to trace in that instance."
Levinson was last seen on Iran's Kish island in March 2007 where he had gone to seek information on cigarette smuggling for a client of his security firm. He had been an FBI agent in New York and Florida before retiring in 1998. He has not been seen since. Iran says it has no information on him.
Overall, Ahmadinejad said that Iran's course is set and the rest of the world needs to accept it.
Another round of international pressure in the form of sanctions would only be futile, he said. "If they were to be effective, I should not be sitting here right now."
Sourcue : Yahoo News
Friday, September 17, 2010
Regarding U.S. Muslims: A misguided debate
Laurie Goodstein’s article, ‘American Muslims Ask, Will We Ever Belong?’ was intended as a sympathetic reading of the concerns of U.S. Muslim communities facing increasing levels of hostility and fear. While generally insightful and sensibly written, the article also highlights the very misconceptions that riddle the bizarre debate pitting American Muslims against much of the government, the mainstream media and most of the general public.
This is how Goodstein lays the ground for her discussion: “For nine years after the attacks of Sept. 11, many American Muslims made concerted efforts to build relationships with non-Muslims, to make it clear they abhor terrorism, to educate people about Islam and to participate in interfaith service projects. They took satisfaction in the observations by many scholars that Muslims in America were more successful and assimilated than Muslims in Europe.” (New York Times, September 5, 2010)
This argument is not Goodstein’s alone, but one repeated by many in the media, the general public, and even among American Muslims themselves. The insinuation of the above context is misleading, and the timeline is selective.
True, it largely depends on who you ask, but there seem is more than one timeline in this narrative. The mainstream interpretation envisages the conflict as beginning with the hideous bombings on September 11, 2001. All that has happened since becomes justified with the claim that ‘Muslims’ started it. These same ‘Muslims’, some argue, are now twisting the knife by wanting to build a mosque not too far from Ground Zero, and they must be stopped.
The media fan the flames of this fear, while unknown, attention-hungry zealots propose to burn the holy book of Islam. Scheming rightwing politicians jump on board, fiery media commentators go wild with speculations, and the public grow increasingly terrified of what the Muslims might do. Even the sensible among all of these groups advise Muslims to basically try to make themselves more likable, to assimilate and fit in better.
That timeline and logic may be omnipresent in mainstream society in the U.S., but many on the fringes dare to challenge it. More, throughout Muslim-majority countries, in fact most of the world, September 11, 2001 was one station, however bloody, among many equally bloody episodes that defined the relationship between Muslims and the United States. Again, it all depends on who you ask. An Iraqi might locate the origin of hostilities with the Iraq war of 1990-91, and the deadly sanctions that followed, taking millions of civilian lives over the next decade. Some Muslims might cite the U.S. military presence in holy Muslim lands, or their intervention in Muslim countries’ affairs. They may also point to the U.S. government’s support of vile and brutal regimes around the world.
But the vast majority, while acknowledging all of these, will refer to the genesis of all hostilities - before Saddam Hussein existed on the map of Arab politics, and before Osama bin Laden led Arab fighters in Afghanistan, with the direct support of the U.S., to defeat the Soviets. It is the tragedy in Palestine that has continued to pain Muslims everywhere, regardless of their background, politics or geographic location. They know that without U.S. help, Israel would have no other option but to extend its hand to whatever peace offer enjoys international consensus. With every Palestinian killed, an American flag is burned, since the relationship has been delineated with immense clarity for decades. When U.S. General David Petraeus argued last March that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was fomenting anti-American sentiment, he spoke as a military man stating a fact. He was right, although many continue to ignore his remarks at their own peril.
True, timelines can be selective, but empathy requires one to understand another’s perspective and not just one’s own.
The Florida Priest on a mission to burn the Koran needs to see past his own terrible prejudices. Media commentators need to stop pigeonholing Muslims, and realize that there is no such thing as a Muslim polity in America. There is no truth to the idea that all Muslims hold the same religious values and political aspirations which are at constant odds with ‘American values’, and which need to be amended in order to make peace with their ‘new’ surroundings.
Needless to say, talks of ‘assimilation’ are misguided. Muslims have lived in the United States for generations and have become an essential part of American life. Millions of U.S. Muslims are also African American. Do they too need to assimilate? And if not, should we divide American Muslims to groups based on ethnic background, skin color, or some other criterion?
One cannot offer simple recipes by calling on the general public to adopt this belief or ditch another. Public opinion is formulated through a complex process in which the media is a major player. However, it is essential that one remembers that history is much more encompassing and cannot be hostage to our diktats and priorities. Such selective understanding will surely result in a limited understanding of the world and its shared future, and thus a misguided course of action.
That said, Muslims must not fall into the trap of victimhood, and start dividing the world into good and evil, the West and Muslims, and so on. How could one make such generalized claims and still remain critical of the notion of a ‘clash of civilizations’? It remains that many Americans who have a negative perception of Muslims are not motivated by ideological convictions or religious zealotry. Most American clergy are not Koran-burning hateful priests, and not all media pundits are Bill O’Reilly.
There is no question that the conflict remains largely political. Misconceptions and misperceptions, manipulated by ill-intentioned politicians, media cohorts and substantiated by violence and war will not be resolved overnight. However, hundreds of interfaith dialogues and conferences will not change much as long as American armies continue to roam Muslim countries, support Israel and back corrupt leaders. Reducing the issue by signaling out a Muslim community in this country and then calling on frightened and fragmented communities to ‘make more effort’ is unfair and simply futile.
Source: http://islamonline.com
This is how Goodstein lays the ground for her discussion: “For nine years after the attacks of Sept. 11, many American Muslims made concerted efforts to build relationships with non-Muslims, to make it clear they abhor terrorism, to educate people about Islam and to participate in interfaith service projects. They took satisfaction in the observations by many scholars that Muslims in America were more successful and assimilated than Muslims in Europe.” (New York Times, September 5, 2010)
This argument is not Goodstein’s alone, but one repeated by many in the media, the general public, and even among American Muslims themselves. The insinuation of the above context is misleading, and the timeline is selective.
True, it largely depends on who you ask, but there seem is more than one timeline in this narrative. The mainstream interpretation envisages the conflict as beginning with the hideous bombings on September 11, 2001. All that has happened since becomes justified with the claim that ‘Muslims’ started it. These same ‘Muslims’, some argue, are now twisting the knife by wanting to build a mosque not too far from Ground Zero, and they must be stopped.
The media fan the flames of this fear, while unknown, attention-hungry zealots propose to burn the holy book of Islam. Scheming rightwing politicians jump on board, fiery media commentators go wild with speculations, and the public grow increasingly terrified of what the Muslims might do. Even the sensible among all of these groups advise Muslims to basically try to make themselves more likable, to assimilate and fit in better.
That timeline and logic may be omnipresent in mainstream society in the U.S., but many on the fringes dare to challenge it. More, throughout Muslim-majority countries, in fact most of the world, September 11, 2001 was one station, however bloody, among many equally bloody episodes that defined the relationship between Muslims and the United States. Again, it all depends on who you ask. An Iraqi might locate the origin of hostilities with the Iraq war of 1990-91, and the deadly sanctions that followed, taking millions of civilian lives over the next decade. Some Muslims might cite the U.S. military presence in holy Muslim lands, or their intervention in Muslim countries’ affairs. They may also point to the U.S. government’s support of vile and brutal regimes around the world.
But the vast majority, while acknowledging all of these, will refer to the genesis of all hostilities - before Saddam Hussein existed on the map of Arab politics, and before Osama bin Laden led Arab fighters in Afghanistan, with the direct support of the U.S., to defeat the Soviets. It is the tragedy in Palestine that has continued to pain Muslims everywhere, regardless of their background, politics or geographic location. They know that without U.S. help, Israel would have no other option but to extend its hand to whatever peace offer enjoys international consensus. With every Palestinian killed, an American flag is burned, since the relationship has been delineated with immense clarity for decades. When U.S. General David Petraeus argued last March that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was fomenting anti-American sentiment, he spoke as a military man stating a fact. He was right, although many continue to ignore his remarks at their own peril.
True, timelines can be selective, but empathy requires one to understand another’s perspective and not just one’s own.
The Florida Priest on a mission to burn the Koran needs to see past his own terrible prejudices. Media commentators need to stop pigeonholing Muslims, and realize that there is no such thing as a Muslim polity in America. There is no truth to the idea that all Muslims hold the same religious values and political aspirations which are at constant odds with ‘American values’, and which need to be amended in order to make peace with their ‘new’ surroundings.
Needless to say, talks of ‘assimilation’ are misguided. Muslims have lived in the United States for generations and have become an essential part of American life. Millions of U.S. Muslims are also African American. Do they too need to assimilate? And if not, should we divide American Muslims to groups based on ethnic background, skin color, or some other criterion?
One cannot offer simple recipes by calling on the general public to adopt this belief or ditch another. Public opinion is formulated through a complex process in which the media is a major player. However, it is essential that one remembers that history is much more encompassing and cannot be hostage to our diktats and priorities. Such selective understanding will surely result in a limited understanding of the world and its shared future, and thus a misguided course of action.
That said, Muslims must not fall into the trap of victimhood, and start dividing the world into good and evil, the West and Muslims, and so on. How could one make such generalized claims and still remain critical of the notion of a ‘clash of civilizations’? It remains that many Americans who have a negative perception of Muslims are not motivated by ideological convictions or religious zealotry. Most American clergy are not Koran-burning hateful priests, and not all media pundits are Bill O’Reilly.
There is no question that the conflict remains largely political. Misconceptions and misperceptions, manipulated by ill-intentioned politicians, media cohorts and substantiated by violence and war will not be resolved overnight. However, hundreds of interfaith dialogues and conferences will not change much as long as American armies continue to roam Muslim countries, support Israel and back corrupt leaders. Reducing the issue by signaling out a Muslim community in this country and then calling on frightened and fragmented communities to ‘make more effort’ is unfair and simply futile.
Source: http://islamonline.com
How to Live the Sunnah? (Tell Us)
In the commemoration of Prophet Muhammad's (peace and blessings be upon him) birthday, a Muslim should think whether or not he or she leads his or her life according to the Prophet's Sunnah. Regular assessment of one's life on the scale of the Prophet's Sunnah would help him or her in remaining on the right track and in correcting his or her mistakes before it's too late.
For sure, adherence to the Sunnah is a sign of true love for the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) as actions speak louder than words. True love should have manifestations in one's actions.
Some people might imagine that it is difficult to live the Sunnah in the modern life. However, this imagination carries no weight on seeing successful Muslims following the Sunnah.
Now, let's exchange views on:
• Could a Muslim follow the Sunnah and be successful at the same time?
• How to translate the Sunnah into practices?
• What is the Sunnah in principle?
Share your views with your Muslim brothers and sisters in order to help each other revive and live the Sunnah.
Source: http://www.islamonline.net
For sure, adherence to the Sunnah is a sign of true love for the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) as actions speak louder than words. True love should have manifestations in one's actions.
Some people might imagine that it is difficult to live the Sunnah in the modern life. However, this imagination carries no weight on seeing successful Muslims following the Sunnah.
Now, let's exchange views on:
• Could a Muslim follow the Sunnah and be successful at the same time?
• How to translate the Sunnah into practices?
• What is the Sunnah in principle?
Share your views with your Muslim brothers and sisters in order to help each other revive and live the Sunnah.
Source: http://www.islamonline.net
US to expand ambit of Mideast talks
AMMAN: US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Thursday the United States planned to involve Syria and Lebanon in talks with Israel with the aim of reaching "comprehensive" peace in the Middle East as enshrined in the Arab peace initiative.
US Middle East envoy George Mitchell is on his way for consultations in Damascus and Beirut," Clinton told a joint press conference with Jordanian Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh after her talks with King Abdallah over a working lunch.
The two sides described the meeting as "very productive" and a royal court statement said that Clinton briefed the monarch on the outcome of the new round of direct talks between the Palestinians and Israel and her discussions over the past three days with the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.
"We discussed the ongoing direct negotiations and expressed confidence that Netanyahu and Abbas are serious and can take the difficult decisions to resolve core issues within a year," Clinton said.
"I also have confidence that the two leaders can reach the results we want — two states that live in security and peace," she added.
Clinton said the Palestinian people deserved "an independent, sovereign and viable state".
She praised the Arab peace initiative as an excellent document that "holds out the very promise we seek" — a comprehensive peace in the Middle East.
The Arab peace plan, which was adopted by the Arab summit in Beirut in 2002, offers Israel recognition by all Arab states if it pulls out from all the Arab territories it seized in the 1967 Middle East War, including East Jerusalem.
On his part, Judeh said Jordan was "encouraged" by the outcome of the new round of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian authority as reported by the US secretary of state. He quoted Clinton as saying that the two sides had started discussion on the controversial core issues — Jerusalem, borders, the refugees and security.
But Clinton’s optimism was not reflected in remarks by officials who said Israel has rejected a proposal to extend by three months a West Bank settlement building freeze whose looming expiration threatens to sink peace talks.
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak told Israel's Channel 1 television on Thursday he proposed a three-month extension of the moratorium in a meeting with Netanyahu on Wednesday.
Looming over the negotiations is a Palestinian threat to pull out of the nascent talks if new construction begins in the West Bank settlements when the 10-month moratorium ends Sept. 30.
"I spoke with him (Netanyahu) about the issue and told him to give it another three months during the negotiations," Mubarak said in an excerpt from the interview aired on Israel Radio.
Officials close to the talks said the United States had made a similar proposal and Netanyahu, whose governing coalition is dominated by pro-settler parties, turned it down.
In a statement, Netanyahu's bureau said it would not comment on the substance of the negotiations but that he was standing by his position not to extend the moratorium.
Source: http://www.islamicity.com
US Middle East envoy George Mitchell is on his way for consultations in Damascus and Beirut," Clinton told a joint press conference with Jordanian Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh after her talks with King Abdallah over a working lunch.
The two sides described the meeting as "very productive" and a royal court statement said that Clinton briefed the monarch on the outcome of the new round of direct talks between the Palestinians and Israel and her discussions over the past three days with the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.
"We discussed the ongoing direct negotiations and expressed confidence that Netanyahu and Abbas are serious and can take the difficult decisions to resolve core issues within a year," Clinton said.
"I also have confidence that the two leaders can reach the results we want — two states that live in security and peace," she added.
Clinton said the Palestinian people deserved "an independent, sovereign and viable state".
She praised the Arab peace initiative as an excellent document that "holds out the very promise we seek" — a comprehensive peace in the Middle East.
The Arab peace plan, which was adopted by the Arab summit in Beirut in 2002, offers Israel recognition by all Arab states if it pulls out from all the Arab territories it seized in the 1967 Middle East War, including East Jerusalem.
On his part, Judeh said Jordan was "encouraged" by the outcome of the new round of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian authority as reported by the US secretary of state. He quoted Clinton as saying that the two sides had started discussion on the controversial core issues — Jerusalem, borders, the refugees and security.
But Clinton’s optimism was not reflected in remarks by officials who said Israel has rejected a proposal to extend by three months a West Bank settlement building freeze whose looming expiration threatens to sink peace talks.
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak told Israel's Channel 1 television on Thursday he proposed a three-month extension of the moratorium in a meeting with Netanyahu on Wednesday.
Looming over the negotiations is a Palestinian threat to pull out of the nascent talks if new construction begins in the West Bank settlements when the 10-month moratorium ends Sept. 30.
"I spoke with him (Netanyahu) about the issue and told him to give it another three months during the negotiations," Mubarak said in an excerpt from the interview aired on Israel Radio.
Officials close to the talks said the United States had made a similar proposal and Netanyahu, whose governing coalition is dominated by pro-settler parties, turned it down.
In a statement, Netanyahu's bureau said it would not comment on the substance of the negotiations but that he was standing by his position not to extend the moratorium.
Source: http://www.islamicity.com
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Muslim Americans have a history before 9/11
New York, New York - I live in Harlem on a street that is home to three churches and a mosque. The mosque is next door to one of those churches and when male congregants mingle on the sidewalk, it’s impossible to tell who had just been in church and who in the mosque. It’s only some of the women’s headscarves that tell you.
Muslim Americans were not invented on 11 September 2001. Our history with New York, and the rest of the country for that matter, far precedes those attacks. Some of the earliest arrivals were on slave ships that crossed the Atlantic.
Yet the anti-Muslim hate metastasising across the United States these days is ferocious in its determination to drive a wedge between the “American” and the “Muslim” of our identities.
In just one week, a cab driver was stabbed in New York by a passenger who asked him if he was Muslim; a drunk burst into a New York mosque and urinated on prayer rugs; a brick was thrown at an Islamic centre in Madera, California; and a fire at the building site of a mosque in Tennessee was being investigated by the FBI.
“What's going to happen to me, our mom, sister-in-law, and all the women in the States who wear a hijab [headscarf] and don't need to be asked if they're Muslim first?” my sister Nora, a graduate student, asked.
It’s not just about Park51, a proposed Islamic centre and mosque in Lower Manhattan, two blocks away from Ground Zero. There are at least four other planned mosques across the country, miles away from “hallowed ground”, facing anti-Muslim opposition.
Some have tried to blame Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the leader of Park51, for provoking still-hurt feelings over 9/11. But depicting him as the imam who kicked the hornet’s nest would display unforgivable amnesia in the face of the manufacture of “Muslim” as a slur in this country.
Despite an appearance by US President George W. Bush at a mosque after 9/11 to show he didn’t hold all Muslims responsible, his administration proceeded to do exactly that: military trials for civilians, secret prisons, the detention of hundreds of Muslim men without charge, the torture and harsh interrogation of detainees and the invasions of two Muslim-majority countries.
When Republicans “accused” US President Barack Obama of being Muslim during the 2008 presidential campaigns, Democrats didn’t utter a single “So what?”
A one-time strategist to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, suggested she “go negative” on Obama in 2007 when she was campaigning for president – painting him as too foreign and exotic to lead America at war. She did not heed the advice but her campaign did leak photographs of Obama wearing traditional Somali clothes.
Those incidents and others were steps up a ladder of bigotry that is now delivered with the gravitas of political office. When a former vice-presidential candidate and ex-governor (Sarah Palin), a former House Speaker (Newt Gingrich), and various House members peddle in the most lurid caricatures of Muslims it is not difficult to understand the current crescendo of bigotry.
I have not forgotten acts of violence or attempted terrorism by Muslim Americans over the past year. The Muslim American community has not tiptoed around them. It issued several condemnations but also refused to be held guilty by faith affiliation.
And we refuse to disappear. We will not allow the bigots to pick apart the fabric that is America. Those Muslims mingling outside the mosque on my street are a microcosm of America. We vote – and our votes count, especially in swing states. That taxi driver stabbed in New York is one of the thousands of Muslims who comprise 50 per cent of NYC cabbies.
We’re America’s teachers, comedians and even its current beauty queen, Rima Fakih.
And we’re also America’s doctors. My sister-in-law, an obstetrician/gynecologist, and I were watching one of those medical dramas when she told me an anecdote that neatly sums it all up: “I was delivering a baby the other day and the father was watching via Skype cam. He was a soldier in Afghanistan. And I thought, here I am: a Muslim doctor in a headscarf delivering a baby whose father is an American soldier in Afghanistan, a Muslim country.”
Source: http://islamonline.com
Muslim Americans were not invented on 11 September 2001. Our history with New York, and the rest of the country for that matter, far precedes those attacks. Some of the earliest arrivals were on slave ships that crossed the Atlantic.
Yet the anti-Muslim hate metastasising across the United States these days is ferocious in its determination to drive a wedge between the “American” and the “Muslim” of our identities.
In just one week, a cab driver was stabbed in New York by a passenger who asked him if he was Muslim; a drunk burst into a New York mosque and urinated on prayer rugs; a brick was thrown at an Islamic centre in Madera, California; and a fire at the building site of a mosque in Tennessee was being investigated by the FBI.
“What's going to happen to me, our mom, sister-in-law, and all the women in the States who wear a hijab [headscarf] and don't need to be asked if they're Muslim first?” my sister Nora, a graduate student, asked.
It’s not just about Park51, a proposed Islamic centre and mosque in Lower Manhattan, two blocks away from Ground Zero. There are at least four other planned mosques across the country, miles away from “hallowed ground”, facing anti-Muslim opposition.
Some have tried to blame Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the leader of Park51, for provoking still-hurt feelings over 9/11. But depicting him as the imam who kicked the hornet’s nest would display unforgivable amnesia in the face of the manufacture of “Muslim” as a slur in this country.
Despite an appearance by US President George W. Bush at a mosque after 9/11 to show he didn’t hold all Muslims responsible, his administration proceeded to do exactly that: military trials for civilians, secret prisons, the detention of hundreds of Muslim men without charge, the torture and harsh interrogation of detainees and the invasions of two Muslim-majority countries.
When Republicans “accused” US President Barack Obama of being Muslim during the 2008 presidential campaigns, Democrats didn’t utter a single “So what?”
A one-time strategist to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, suggested she “go negative” on Obama in 2007 when she was campaigning for president – painting him as too foreign and exotic to lead America at war. She did not heed the advice but her campaign did leak photographs of Obama wearing traditional Somali clothes.
Those incidents and others were steps up a ladder of bigotry that is now delivered with the gravitas of political office. When a former vice-presidential candidate and ex-governor (Sarah Palin), a former House Speaker (Newt Gingrich), and various House members peddle in the most lurid caricatures of Muslims it is not difficult to understand the current crescendo of bigotry.
I have not forgotten acts of violence or attempted terrorism by Muslim Americans over the past year. The Muslim American community has not tiptoed around them. It issued several condemnations but also refused to be held guilty by faith affiliation.
And we refuse to disappear. We will not allow the bigots to pick apart the fabric that is America. Those Muslims mingling outside the mosque on my street are a microcosm of America. We vote – and our votes count, especially in swing states. That taxi driver stabbed in New York is one of the thousands of Muslims who comprise 50 per cent of NYC cabbies.
We’re America’s teachers, comedians and even its current beauty queen, Rima Fakih.
And we’re also America’s doctors. My sister-in-law, an obstetrician/gynecologist, and I were watching one of those medical dramas when she told me an anecdote that neatly sums it all up: “I was delivering a baby the other day and the father was watching via Skype cam. He was a soldier in Afghanistan. And I thought, here I am: a Muslim doctor in a headscarf delivering a baby whose father is an American soldier in Afghanistan, a Muslim country.”
Source: http://islamonline.com
We are not invisible
As Fox News, the New York Post, and other right-wing media outlets are stirring up emotions over the so-called "terror mosque" planned near the site of the World Trade Center, I can't help but think back to the few days I spent in southern Ohio as a volunteer for the Obama campaign in November 2008.
It was there, in Fairfield County, that I committed one of the greatest acts of cowardice in my life. I allowed myself to stand by and say nothing while an entire creed was deemed violent, hateful, and un-American.
At the time, the Obama team was already concerned about the false rumor that their candidate, a self-identified Christian, was a closet Muslim. (According to a recent survey, nearly one-fifth of Americans continue to believe this). When approaching potential voters who believed the rumor, volunteers were instructed not to get in an argument over Muslims, their rights, much less what Islam really stands for. Instead, we were given pamphlets about Obama's faith in Christ and were told to talk about the then-senator's churchgoing habits.
On one campaign stop I knocked on the door of a middle-aged woman who was shocked to see her son's name on my list of potential Obama voters. "He had better not vote for Obama," she declared to me on her doorstep. When I asked her why, she leaned towards me and whispered in my ear, "Well, for one, he's a Muslim and I have the proof."
Although I was curious to see her "proof," I could already imagine what it was: The same old laundry list of hateful ideas that continue to divide American society. That Ohio mother was probably never going to vote for Obama, but what was of greater concern to me was the idea that being a Muslim automatically disqualified an individual from public service in the United States. Looking at me, my appearance and physical features, she might have guessed that I was a misguided but well-meaning New York, Jewish liberal. She had no clue that I was a Muslim.
What I wish Americans like her would understand is that the world's one billion Muslims are not a monolithic block hell-bent on the destruction of Christendom. Muslims are ethnically and nationally diverse; they are Arabs, Indonesians, Iranians, Canadians, and Americans. They converse in myriad tongues including Urdu, Russian, Turkish, French, and English. Like many Americans, many Muslims mourn the tragedy unfolding in Gaza; and just like many Americans, many Muslims could care less. Some are as religious as any weekly churchgoer; others couldn't tell you the difference between Mecca and McDonalds.
While proud of their coreligionists' past and current accomplishments, Muslims often discuss and try to fix their home and ancestral societies' ills. We curse the filth who throw acid at young girls simply because their parents sent them off to get an education. We organize to protest and prevent the hanging of men accused of being homosexuals. We speak up when historical catastrophes are denied. We deplore violence and terrorism, committed by anyone at home or abroad.
To many Muslims, particularly those living in the United States, the criticism of the so-called "Ground Zero mosque" to be built in lower Manhattan is a strange occurrence. "Haven't we," many wonder, "integrated fully into American life?"
I spent one glorious night in August 2001 shaking and grooving at the nightclub located on the top floor of the World Trade Center. At the night's conclusion I stood with friends in the Trade Center's plaza, in between those two magnificent towers. I thought about how half of my entire hometown could work in just those two buildings. "I can't believe," I told a good friend, "that those bastards tried to take down this whole complex."
A few weeks later, when the news broke, the first call I made was to my father. "Dad, Dad, they bombed New York! They bombed New York! Those Muslims! Those Muslims!" In my shock and sorrow, I failed to realize that the moment those men chose to take innocent lives, they ceased being Muslims. They were simply criminals. Terrorists.
Almost every American-Muslim will consistently condemn what happened on September 11. The real inconsistency lies with the American right. They organize and take names like the tea party and the Minutemen in honor of America's founders. Yet they ignore the words of President George Washington, who, in a letter to the Jews of Newport, Rhode Island, declared that the United States, "gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens." They also ignore George W. Bush's reminder that Muslims thrive in countries like the United States "not in spite of their faith, but because of it." American conservatives spoke out in support of the Iranian youth who took to the streets and rooftops of Tehran to protest their government by chanting "Allahu Akbar," God is great. But popular opinion in America would not permit those same youth to pray in the vicinity of the World Trade Center even though the heinous act committed there had nothing to do with them.
If I could do it all over again and go back to that day in Ohio, I would ignore the pleas of the Obama campaign. I would stand up straight and declare to the misinformed woman that I am a Muslim. Not a "moderate Muslim," not a Westernized "good Muslim," but a Muslim like Mahmoud Darwish, like Shirin Ebadi, like Muhammad Ali, like some New York cabbies, and the bankers on Wall Street. But I am also an American, born in California with no other home in the world. I, like my fellow Muslims, love this country and have firm roots here. Spit on me and my faith if it makes you feel better, but our Constitution has given me my seat. I refuse to move to the back of the bus.
Source: http://islamonline.com
It was there, in Fairfield County, that I committed one of the greatest acts of cowardice in my life. I allowed myself to stand by and say nothing while an entire creed was deemed violent, hateful, and un-American.
At the time, the Obama team was already concerned about the false rumor that their candidate, a self-identified Christian, was a closet Muslim. (According to a recent survey, nearly one-fifth of Americans continue to believe this). When approaching potential voters who believed the rumor, volunteers were instructed not to get in an argument over Muslims, their rights, much less what Islam really stands for. Instead, we were given pamphlets about Obama's faith in Christ and were told to talk about the then-senator's churchgoing habits.
On one campaign stop I knocked on the door of a middle-aged woman who was shocked to see her son's name on my list of potential Obama voters. "He had better not vote for Obama," she declared to me on her doorstep. When I asked her why, she leaned towards me and whispered in my ear, "Well, for one, he's a Muslim and I have the proof."
Although I was curious to see her "proof," I could already imagine what it was: The same old laundry list of hateful ideas that continue to divide American society. That Ohio mother was probably never going to vote for Obama, but what was of greater concern to me was the idea that being a Muslim automatically disqualified an individual from public service in the United States. Looking at me, my appearance and physical features, she might have guessed that I was a misguided but well-meaning New York, Jewish liberal. She had no clue that I was a Muslim.
What I wish Americans like her would understand is that the world's one billion Muslims are not a monolithic block hell-bent on the destruction of Christendom. Muslims are ethnically and nationally diverse; they are Arabs, Indonesians, Iranians, Canadians, and Americans. They converse in myriad tongues including Urdu, Russian, Turkish, French, and English. Like many Americans, many Muslims mourn the tragedy unfolding in Gaza; and just like many Americans, many Muslims could care less. Some are as religious as any weekly churchgoer; others couldn't tell you the difference between Mecca and McDonalds.
While proud of their coreligionists' past and current accomplishments, Muslims often discuss and try to fix their home and ancestral societies' ills. We curse the filth who throw acid at young girls simply because their parents sent them off to get an education. We organize to protest and prevent the hanging of men accused of being homosexuals. We speak up when historical catastrophes are denied. We deplore violence and terrorism, committed by anyone at home or abroad.
To many Muslims, particularly those living in the United States, the criticism of the so-called "Ground Zero mosque" to be built in lower Manhattan is a strange occurrence. "Haven't we," many wonder, "integrated fully into American life?"
I spent one glorious night in August 2001 shaking and grooving at the nightclub located on the top floor of the World Trade Center. At the night's conclusion I stood with friends in the Trade Center's plaza, in between those two magnificent towers. I thought about how half of my entire hometown could work in just those two buildings. "I can't believe," I told a good friend, "that those bastards tried to take down this whole complex."
A few weeks later, when the news broke, the first call I made was to my father. "Dad, Dad, they bombed New York! They bombed New York! Those Muslims! Those Muslims!" In my shock and sorrow, I failed to realize that the moment those men chose to take innocent lives, they ceased being Muslims. They were simply criminals. Terrorists.
Almost every American-Muslim will consistently condemn what happened on September 11. The real inconsistency lies with the American right. They organize and take names like the tea party and the Minutemen in honor of America's founders. Yet they ignore the words of President George Washington, who, in a letter to the Jews of Newport, Rhode Island, declared that the United States, "gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens." They also ignore George W. Bush's reminder that Muslims thrive in countries like the United States "not in spite of their faith, but because of it." American conservatives spoke out in support of the Iranian youth who took to the streets and rooftops of Tehran to protest their government by chanting "Allahu Akbar," God is great. But popular opinion in America would not permit those same youth to pray in the vicinity of the World Trade Center even though the heinous act committed there had nothing to do with them.
If I could do it all over again and go back to that day in Ohio, I would ignore the pleas of the Obama campaign. I would stand up straight and declare to the misinformed woman that I am a Muslim. Not a "moderate Muslim," not a Westernized "good Muslim," but a Muslim like Mahmoud Darwish, like Shirin Ebadi, like Muhammad Ali, like some New York cabbies, and the bankers on Wall Street. But I am also an American, born in California with no other home in the world. I, like my fellow Muslims, love this country and have firm roots here. Spit on me and my faith if it makes you feel better, but our Constitution has given me my seat. I refuse to move to the back of the bus.
Source: http://islamonline.com
British Muslims celebrate Eid after a spiritual and generous Ramadan
A joyous Islamic festival after British Muslims show enormous generosity during the month of Ramadan.
On behalf of the Muslim Council of Britain, I extend my Eid greetings to all Muslims and peoples of other faiths and communities in the UK. Times like Eid are special as they bring together in celebration our richly diverse and vibrant range of Muslim communities living in Britain.
Eid is a joyous and unique thanksgiving festival which Muslims celebrate all over the world. We praise and thank Allah, subhanahu wa ta’ala for the blessings of the holy month of Ramadan, where the Almighty showers His mercy and forgiveness, and an opportunity to reflect and enhance our understanding and commitment to Him and His creation.
Throughout this month we witnessed moving and humbling feats of spiritual devotion and solidarity. Men, women and children fasted long hours; thousands filled mosques in our towns and cities for the nightly prayers and many of our friends from other faiths joined us to experience the fast of Ramadan. This is inspiring and heartening at a time when many in our community are experiencing the rise of Islamophobia.
We celebrate Eid knowing also that the month of Ramadan was an opportunity to extend our hand of generosity to those less fortunate. Millions of pounds were raised to feed the poor around the world, particularly the victims of the Pakistan floods. In this country, Muslim families also brought food to their local parks in Leicester, Manchester and other towns to share with the homeless and hungry of all faiths and backgrounds.
Our festival of Eid al-Fitr is a culmination of this month of spiritual reflection, good works and charity. Let it be an opportunity to bring together families and communities, and share our joy to foster respect and understanding. I pray that Allah accepts all our good deeds and we continue to live the spirit of Ramadan throughout the rest of the year.
Source: http://islamonline.com
On behalf of the Muslim Council of Britain, I extend my Eid greetings to all Muslims and peoples of other faiths and communities in the UK. Times like Eid are special as they bring together in celebration our richly diverse and vibrant range of Muslim communities living in Britain.
Eid is a joyous and unique thanksgiving festival which Muslims celebrate all over the world. We praise and thank Allah, subhanahu wa ta’ala for the blessings of the holy month of Ramadan, where the Almighty showers His mercy and forgiveness, and an opportunity to reflect and enhance our understanding and commitment to Him and His creation.
Throughout this month we witnessed moving and humbling feats of spiritual devotion and solidarity. Men, women and children fasted long hours; thousands filled mosques in our towns and cities for the nightly prayers and many of our friends from other faiths joined us to experience the fast of Ramadan. This is inspiring and heartening at a time when many in our community are experiencing the rise of Islamophobia.
We celebrate Eid knowing also that the month of Ramadan was an opportunity to extend our hand of generosity to those less fortunate. Millions of pounds were raised to feed the poor around the world, particularly the victims of the Pakistan floods. In this country, Muslim families also brought food to their local parks in Leicester, Manchester and other towns to share with the homeless and hungry of all faiths and backgrounds.
Our festival of Eid al-Fitr is a culmination of this month of spiritual reflection, good works and charity. Let it be an opportunity to bring together families and communities, and share our joy to foster respect and understanding. I pray that Allah accepts all our good deeds and we continue to live the spirit of Ramadan throughout the rest of the year.
Source: http://islamonline.com
Sunday, September 5, 2010
CAIR: Tenn. Lt. Gov. Questions Muslim Religious Rights
Gubernatorial candidate urged to meet with state's Muslim leaders
(WASHINGTON, D.C., 7/25/10) -- A prominent national Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization today called on Tennessee Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey to meet with representatives of that state's Islamic community after the gubernatorial candidate seemed to claim that First Amendment religious rights may not apply to Muslims and that Islam may not be a real religion.
[To CONTACT Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey, e-mail: lt.gov.ron.ramsey@capitol.tn.gov As always, be POLITE.]
The Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) said Ramsey's remarks came in response to a question on a recent campaign stop. The questioner said: "We've got a threat that's invading our country from Muslims. What's your stand?"
Ramsey responded by referring to a controversy over the expansion of a mosque in Murfreesboro, Tenn. He defended religious freedoms, but claimed "you cross the line when they start trying to bring shariah [Islamic] law into the state of Tenn. . .into the United States." He went on to state: "You could even argue whether being a Muslim is actually a religion or is it a nationality, way of life or cult, whatever you want to call it. . .this is something that we are going to have to face."
SEE: Ramsey Argues Freedom of Religion Doesn't Apply to Muslims (Video)
"We see a disturbing trend in our nation in which it is suggested that American Muslims should have fewer or more restricted constitutional rights than citizens of other faiths," said CAIR National Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper. "We urge Lt. Gov. Ramsey to meet with representatives of the Tennessee Muslim community who can offer him balanced and accurate information about Islam."
SEE: Does the Right View Muslims as Equal Citizens? (CAIR)
He noted that retired General William Boykin mirrored Ramsey's views when the general stated in a recent interview: "What we are not seeing first and foremost is the fact that Islam is not religion. It is a totalitarian way of life. There is a religious component. But we still treat it as a First Amendment issue when in fact it is a totalitarian way of life."
SEE: General Boykin Says Practice of Islam Not Protected Under First Amendment
Hooper said activists nationwide are seeking to restrict the right of Muslims to build or expand mosques, introducing anti-Islam legislation or resolutions, disrupting Muslim events, and even challenging the right of Muslims to live where they choose.
SEE: CAIR Rep on CNN to Discuss Opposition to U.S. Mosques (Video)
Okla. Legislator's Proposal Would Ban Use of Sharia Law
CAIR Video: Fla. Anti-Islam Group Seeks to Disrupt Muslim Event
CAIR Video: Okla. Neighbor Posts Yard Signs Opposing New Residents
A church in Florida is also encouraging Americans to desecrate the Quran, Islam's revealed text, on September 11.
SEE: Florida Church Hosting "International Burn a Koran Day" on 9/11
Yesterday, CAIR called on the FBI and Virginia's Tidewater Joint Terrorism Task Force to explain why a leader of an anti-Islam hate group was invited to offer training to state and federal law enforcement officers.
SEE: Anti-Islam Hate Group Leader Trains Va. Terror Task Force
Become a Fan of CAIR on Facebook
Subscribe to CAIR's E-Mail List
CAIR is America's largest Muslim civil liberties and advocacy organization. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.
Source: http://islamonline.com/
(WASHINGTON, D.C., 7/25/10) -- A prominent national Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization today called on Tennessee Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey to meet with representatives of that state's Islamic community after the gubernatorial candidate seemed to claim that First Amendment religious rights may not apply to Muslims and that Islam may not be a real religion.
[To CONTACT Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey, e-mail: lt.gov.ron.ramsey@capitol.tn.gov As always, be POLITE.]
The Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) said Ramsey's remarks came in response to a question on a recent campaign stop. The questioner said: "We've got a threat that's invading our country from Muslims. What's your stand?"
Ramsey responded by referring to a controversy over the expansion of a mosque in Murfreesboro, Tenn. He defended religious freedoms, but claimed "you cross the line when they start trying to bring shariah [Islamic] law into the state of Tenn. . .into the United States." He went on to state: "You could even argue whether being a Muslim is actually a religion or is it a nationality, way of life or cult, whatever you want to call it. . .this is something that we are going to have to face."
SEE: Ramsey Argues Freedom of Religion Doesn't Apply to Muslims (Video)
"We see a disturbing trend in our nation in which it is suggested that American Muslims should have fewer or more restricted constitutional rights than citizens of other faiths," said CAIR National Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper. "We urge Lt. Gov. Ramsey to meet with representatives of the Tennessee Muslim community who can offer him balanced and accurate information about Islam."
SEE: Does the Right View Muslims as Equal Citizens? (CAIR)
He noted that retired General William Boykin mirrored Ramsey's views when the general stated in a recent interview: "What we are not seeing first and foremost is the fact that Islam is not religion. It is a totalitarian way of life. There is a religious component. But we still treat it as a First Amendment issue when in fact it is a totalitarian way of life."
SEE: General Boykin Says Practice of Islam Not Protected Under First Amendment
Hooper said activists nationwide are seeking to restrict the right of Muslims to build or expand mosques, introducing anti-Islam legislation or resolutions, disrupting Muslim events, and even challenging the right of Muslims to live where they choose.
SEE: CAIR Rep on CNN to Discuss Opposition to U.S. Mosques (Video)
Okla. Legislator's Proposal Would Ban Use of Sharia Law
CAIR Video: Fla. Anti-Islam Group Seeks to Disrupt Muslim Event
CAIR Video: Okla. Neighbor Posts Yard Signs Opposing New Residents
A church in Florida is also encouraging Americans to desecrate the Quran, Islam's revealed text, on September 11.
SEE: Florida Church Hosting "International Burn a Koran Day" on 9/11
Yesterday, CAIR called on the FBI and Virginia's Tidewater Joint Terrorism Task Force to explain why a leader of an anti-Islam hate group was invited to offer training to state and federal law enforcement officers.
SEE: Anti-Islam Hate Group Leader Trains Va. Terror Task Force
Become a Fan of CAIR on Facebook
Subscribe to CAIR's E-Mail List
CAIR is America's largest Muslim civil liberties and advocacy organization. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.
Source: http://islamonline.com/
Take me out of your box, for humanity’s sake
Islamabad - Travelling alone as a Muslim Pakistani female hasn’t been all that easy in a post-9/11 world. In fact, being ”Muslim”, “Pakistani” and a “woman” simultaneously can be too many red flags attached to one identity.
While pursuing my education abroad I had many experiences dealing with airport security and immigration staff – particularly during my travels between Costa Rica, the United States and Pakistan. But I also learned through these experiences that sometimes a little act of kindness can go a long way in transforming our view of the ”other”, helping us to realise and appreciate the inherent good in people.
In my mind I had put airport authorities everywhere in a box labelled “Ruthless-officials-securing-their-country”. And the box they might have had for me was, well, “She-must-be-up-to-something”. My interaction at the airport served as a microcosm of the larger Muslim-Western relationship, rife with stereotyped ideas and deeply held, hardly questioned beliefs about the other, further polarising the two groups.
My box guided my behaviour in front of airport security officials. This meant no extra talking, only brief answers, doing what they said and praying in my heart to come out of the question-and-answer session alive and kicking, and not detained somewhere in Guantanamo. Though this box helped me control my behaviour for the situation at hand, deep down I developed bitterness, fear, mistrust and anxiety of entering any country other than my own, especially a Western one.
It also compelled me to judge security officials I came across during my international travels in a negative way – as the “other”.
There was one particular occasion that at first bolstered this sentiment. I was waiting for a flight to Pakistan with a ten-hour transit in a UK airport. My hand luggage included nothing extraordinary except for a very unusual umbrella that a friend had given me during a visit to the Harvard Art Museum in Massachusetts. A professor at Harvard, this friend showed me the university and bought me an umbrella with an image of Harvard and the Charles River painted on it. That umbrella signified her kind friendship, love and belief in me. To me, it was not just an umbrella, but a connection to the world of knowledge that I admired and wanted to immerse myself in.
Afraid that I might lose it, I kept the umbrella as part of my carry-on. Though it passed through all the security checks in the United States, it was declared a “security risk” in the UK. Security officials asked me to throw it away before boarding the plane to Pakistan.
Bewildered by the seemingly random changes in security standards between airports, I tried in vain to argue. But I was not allowed to board the plane with the umbrella, and had to throw it away.
As I walked away, wiping my tears, I heard a security official yell out: “Excuse me, Ma’am! I have a solution!”
He took the umbrella out of the trash, a Swiss Army knife out of his pocket and started cutting the ribs and stretchers off the canopy of the umbrella. He meticulously removed the canopy off the shaft of umbrella, neatly folded it and handed it over to me with a smile: “Now you can take this,” he said. “Please get it remade once you are back home.”
I certainly did not expect this kind of action from a white British security official. His act of kindness did not fit in the box I had created for him. I had cast him as the “other”. But he proved otherwise.
No matter how hard we try, today’s circumstances push us to box, stereotype, categories and judge individuals or groups who are different from us. In recent times stereotyping has become the most comfortable response mechanism while dealing with security issues, both for Muslims as well as Westerners. Such stereotyping widens the gap that exists between Muslim and Western worlds. It limits both groups’ ability to allow for individuality and critical judgment when faced with challenging situations, generating further mistrust.
This incident helped me realize that there are moments and spaces in which our individual actions can alter the stereotypes that we carry for one other. The action that I witnessed left an indelible impression on me, and a renewed belief in the inherent goodness of human beings. Individual actions that go beyond stereotypes might not be a panacea to problems that exist between the Muslim and Western worlds, but they are a step toward better understanding and harmony.
Source: http://islamonline.com/
While pursuing my education abroad I had many experiences dealing with airport security and immigration staff – particularly during my travels between Costa Rica, the United States and Pakistan. But I also learned through these experiences that sometimes a little act of kindness can go a long way in transforming our view of the ”other”, helping us to realise and appreciate the inherent good in people.
In my mind I had put airport authorities everywhere in a box labelled “Ruthless-officials-securing-their-country”. And the box they might have had for me was, well, “She-must-be-up-to-something”. My interaction at the airport served as a microcosm of the larger Muslim-Western relationship, rife with stereotyped ideas and deeply held, hardly questioned beliefs about the other, further polarising the two groups.
My box guided my behaviour in front of airport security officials. This meant no extra talking, only brief answers, doing what they said and praying in my heart to come out of the question-and-answer session alive and kicking, and not detained somewhere in Guantanamo. Though this box helped me control my behaviour for the situation at hand, deep down I developed bitterness, fear, mistrust and anxiety of entering any country other than my own, especially a Western one.
It also compelled me to judge security officials I came across during my international travels in a negative way – as the “other”.
There was one particular occasion that at first bolstered this sentiment. I was waiting for a flight to Pakistan with a ten-hour transit in a UK airport. My hand luggage included nothing extraordinary except for a very unusual umbrella that a friend had given me during a visit to the Harvard Art Museum in Massachusetts. A professor at Harvard, this friend showed me the university and bought me an umbrella with an image of Harvard and the Charles River painted on it. That umbrella signified her kind friendship, love and belief in me. To me, it was not just an umbrella, but a connection to the world of knowledge that I admired and wanted to immerse myself in.
Afraid that I might lose it, I kept the umbrella as part of my carry-on. Though it passed through all the security checks in the United States, it was declared a “security risk” in the UK. Security officials asked me to throw it away before boarding the plane to Pakistan.
Bewildered by the seemingly random changes in security standards between airports, I tried in vain to argue. But I was not allowed to board the plane with the umbrella, and had to throw it away.
As I walked away, wiping my tears, I heard a security official yell out: “Excuse me, Ma’am! I have a solution!”
He took the umbrella out of the trash, a Swiss Army knife out of his pocket and started cutting the ribs and stretchers off the canopy of the umbrella. He meticulously removed the canopy off the shaft of umbrella, neatly folded it and handed it over to me with a smile: “Now you can take this,” he said. “Please get it remade once you are back home.”
I certainly did not expect this kind of action from a white British security official. His act of kindness did not fit in the box I had created for him. I had cast him as the “other”. But he proved otherwise.
No matter how hard we try, today’s circumstances push us to box, stereotype, categories and judge individuals or groups who are different from us. In recent times stereotyping has become the most comfortable response mechanism while dealing with security issues, both for Muslims as well as Westerners. Such stereotyping widens the gap that exists between Muslim and Western worlds. It limits both groups’ ability to allow for individuality and critical judgment when faced with challenging situations, generating further mistrust.
This incident helped me realize that there are moments and spaces in which our individual actions can alter the stereotypes that we carry for one other. The action that I witnessed left an indelible impression on me, and a renewed belief in the inherent goodness of human beings. Individual actions that go beyond stereotypes might not be a panacea to problems that exist between the Muslim and Western worlds, but they are a step toward better understanding and harmony.
Source: http://islamonline.com/
Friday, September 3, 2010
Why We've Given Less To Pakistan's Flood Victims
By and large, Americans haven't opened up their wallets to help victims of the flood disaster in Pakistan. According to Indiana University's Center on Philanthropy, charitable donations by individuals, foundations and companies totaled just $25 million as of Aug. 30.
By comparison, the center's data show that Americans donated $900 million to relief efforts in Haiti within five weeks of the earthquake there.
Disaster relief experts were nearly universal in agreeing that there are at least three reasons why fundraising for this disaster has been challenging.
The first has to do with the nature of the disaster, says Randy Strash, the strategy director for emergency response at World Vision, a Christian relief agency with worldwide operations, including programs in Pakistan.
Fewer Donations For Floods
“Earthquakes, regardless of their location, under the same circumstances will raise 10 to 15 times more from the private donors than a flood,” Strash says
The slow-moving nature of floods, combined with typically lower death tolls, removes a sense of urgency in many donors’ minds, Strash says. He says many people use the number of dead as a "barometer" for the severity of a disaster.
Fewer than 2,000 people have been reported killed by the floods in Pakistan, compared with an estimated death toll of over 200,000 in the Haiti earthquake. But disaster experts warn that the humanitarian situation in Pakistan may be even more serious than in Haiti because millions more people have lost their homes and livelihoods in the flood.
The Media's Impact
The relatively lower amount of news coverage in Pakistan may be another factor.
“There hasn’t been that much media coverage relative to the kinds of coverage that we certainly saw in Haiti and many other disasters,” says Nan Buzard, senior director for disaster response at the American Red Cross.
The Project for Excellence in Journalism said there was 10 times as much U.S. news coverage of the earthquake in Haiti as of the floods in Pakistan.
Buzard said without a stream of stories and vivid images playing over and over on cable TV, public awareness of a disaster is low and donations are correspondingly weak.
Experts also point to donor fatigue. Indiana University’s Center on Philanthropy estimates that about 40 percent of American households donated money to disaster relief efforts in Haiti.
“The fact that people were so generous with Haiti and we’re in a difficult economic environment at this time, I think makes it more difficult for people to give to Pakistan as a result,” says Michael Delaney, the director of humanitarian response for Oxfam America.
Lessons From The Past, Religious Contributions
But the experience of past disasters suggests that donors are sometimes capable of repeated, generous giving. After a large earthquake struck Pakistan in October 2005, Americans donated $150 million for relief efforts there, according to data from Indiana University.
Those donations came a little over a month after Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans and the Gulf Coast, prompting nearly $2 billion worth of donations. Americans also gave about $900 million for relief efforts after the Indian Ocean tsunami that struck in late December 2004.
Only one charity contacted by NPR reported no difficulties raising money for Pakistan.
Islamic Relief USA doubled its fundraising goal to $10 million after a surge of donations, says spokeswoman Rabiah Ahmed.
“The majority of our donors are Muslim and this happened right before the month of Ramadan, [which is] the time for Muslims to be generous and to give money to the people that are in need,” Ahmed says.
Religious and cultural affinity also very likely played a role in the strong fundraising efforts by charities in the United Kingdom, which has large Pakistani and Muslim communities. The Disasters Emergency Committee, an umbrella group of 13 British charities, reported on Aug. 27 that its flood relief appeal had raised about $61 million.
But there are also concerns religion may have played a role in another way. The campaign to halt a planned Islamic cultural center in Lower Manhattan and anti-Muslim remarks by politicians may have made some Americans wary of giving money to Muslim Pakistan.
Una Osili, director of research for Indiana University's Center on Philanthropy, says religion “is a factor.” But she emphasizes that it’s difficult to measure its impact on fundraising. Americans’ perceptions of Pakistan probably also played a role in the relatively low level of giving, she adds.
“There is a strong association with Pakistan and terrorism right now and that may also explain the differential response that we have observed,” Osili says.
Dwindling Relief
With donations running low, charities operating in Pakistan say they may not be able to continue supporting their programs there. World Vision has raised $1 million in private donations but has a $20 million relief effort under way. The charity hopes to raise an additional $11 million and fund the difference from its reserves. But unless donations pick up soon, it may have to scale back its operations in Pakistan, says Strash, the group’s strategy director.
He says the low level of giving is discouraging, but adds: “At the same time, giving is voluntary. You can’t force people to give; you have to present the case as strongly as you can.”
United Nations officials warned this week that millions of weakened flood survivors could face disease and hunger. Strash hopes Americans will see the gravity of the situation and find a way to reach a little deeper in their pockets.
Source: http://www.islamicity.com
By comparison, the center's data show that Americans donated $900 million to relief efforts in Haiti within five weeks of the earthquake there.
Disaster relief experts were nearly universal in agreeing that there are at least three reasons why fundraising for this disaster has been challenging.
The first has to do with the nature of the disaster, says Randy Strash, the strategy director for emergency response at World Vision, a Christian relief agency with worldwide operations, including programs in Pakistan.
Fewer Donations For Floods
“Earthquakes, regardless of their location, under the same circumstances will raise 10 to 15 times more from the private donors than a flood,” Strash says
The slow-moving nature of floods, combined with typically lower death tolls, removes a sense of urgency in many donors’ minds, Strash says. He says many people use the number of dead as a "barometer" for the severity of a disaster.
Fewer than 2,000 people have been reported killed by the floods in Pakistan, compared with an estimated death toll of over 200,000 in the Haiti earthquake. But disaster experts warn that the humanitarian situation in Pakistan may be even more serious than in Haiti because millions more people have lost their homes and livelihoods in the flood.
The Media's Impact
The relatively lower amount of news coverage in Pakistan may be another factor.
“There hasn’t been that much media coverage relative to the kinds of coverage that we certainly saw in Haiti and many other disasters,” says Nan Buzard, senior director for disaster response at the American Red Cross.
The Project for Excellence in Journalism said there was 10 times as much U.S. news coverage of the earthquake in Haiti as of the floods in Pakistan.
Buzard said without a stream of stories and vivid images playing over and over on cable TV, public awareness of a disaster is low and donations are correspondingly weak.
Experts also point to donor fatigue. Indiana University’s Center on Philanthropy estimates that about 40 percent of American households donated money to disaster relief efforts in Haiti.
“The fact that people were so generous with Haiti and we’re in a difficult economic environment at this time, I think makes it more difficult for people to give to Pakistan as a result,” says Michael Delaney, the director of humanitarian response for Oxfam America.
Lessons From The Past, Religious Contributions
But the experience of past disasters suggests that donors are sometimes capable of repeated, generous giving. After a large earthquake struck Pakistan in October 2005, Americans donated $150 million for relief efforts there, according to data from Indiana University.
Those donations came a little over a month after Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans and the Gulf Coast, prompting nearly $2 billion worth of donations. Americans also gave about $900 million for relief efforts after the Indian Ocean tsunami that struck in late December 2004.
Only one charity contacted by NPR reported no difficulties raising money for Pakistan.
Islamic Relief USA doubled its fundraising goal to $10 million after a surge of donations, says spokeswoman Rabiah Ahmed.
“The majority of our donors are Muslim and this happened right before the month of Ramadan, [which is] the time for Muslims to be generous and to give money to the people that are in need,” Ahmed says.
Religious and cultural affinity also very likely played a role in the strong fundraising efforts by charities in the United Kingdom, which has large Pakistani and Muslim communities. The Disasters Emergency Committee, an umbrella group of 13 British charities, reported on Aug. 27 that its flood relief appeal had raised about $61 million.
But there are also concerns religion may have played a role in another way. The campaign to halt a planned Islamic cultural center in Lower Manhattan and anti-Muslim remarks by politicians may have made some Americans wary of giving money to Muslim Pakistan.
Una Osili, director of research for Indiana University's Center on Philanthropy, says religion “is a factor.” But she emphasizes that it’s difficult to measure its impact on fundraising. Americans’ perceptions of Pakistan probably also played a role in the relatively low level of giving, she adds.
“There is a strong association with Pakistan and terrorism right now and that may also explain the differential response that we have observed,” Osili says.
Dwindling Relief
With donations running low, charities operating in Pakistan say they may not be able to continue supporting their programs there. World Vision has raised $1 million in private donations but has a $20 million relief effort under way. The charity hopes to raise an additional $11 million and fund the difference from its reserves. But unless donations pick up soon, it may have to scale back its operations in Pakistan, says Strash, the group’s strategy director.
He says the low level of giving is discouraging, but adds: “At the same time, giving is voluntary. You can’t force people to give; you have to present the case as strongly as you can.”
United Nations officials warned this week that millions of weakened flood survivors could face disease and hunger. Strash hopes Americans will see the gravity of the situation and find a way to reach a little deeper in their pockets.
Source: http://www.islamicity.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)