I have been on the pilgrimage to Mecca three times in my life: once during the annual hajj season and twice during the off-season. This has left me savvy as I try to negotiate the physical hurdles, including massive crowds and the heat, while performing the pilgrimage rituals.
With the pilgrimage I hope to refill my always empty spiritual cup by praying and reflecting in peace. The best time to visit the Kaaba and do this, I have come to realize, is after midnight.
The Kaaba is the imperfect cube structure that is the center of the Grand Mosque in Mecca and is at the epicenter of the pilgrimage rites. After midnight, the crowds thin out, the heat is less oppressive and I can have a little space to sit quietly on the steps of the courtyard surrounding the Kaaba and reflect.
The Kaaba, draped in black silk cloth embroidered with Koranic calligraphy, is brilliantly lit at night. Even late, scores of pilgrims are circling the structure. The sounds of the Koranic verses they are reciting wash over me like ocean waves. There is the faint odor of a detergent that was used to wash down the marble floor of the courtyard. The place is clean indeed.
I focus on the Kaaba, imagining the scene when it was being built. I try to see Prophet Abraham, by then an old man, and his son Ishmael, as they stood side by side building the structure, which the Koran describes as "The First House (of worship) appointed for mankind."
Hajj, an annual pilgrimage Muslims must perform once in their lifetime if they can afford it, is a journey to what Muslims believe is this first house of worship. The spot where Abraham stood to build the Kaaba is marked by a small structure called the "Station of Abraham." As they built the walls of the Kaaba, the Koran states, the prophet and his son prayed: "My Lord, make this a City of Peace."
Most people familiar with Islam may recognize hajj as one of its five pillars, but they may not know its primary association with Abraham. Several of the hajj rituals--such as running between the hills of Safa and Marwa, which are a few hundred yards from the Kaaba, and the stoning of the three pillars that represent the devil--are also linked to Abraham.
I thought about my fellow pilgrims running between the two hills in what was once a desert, re-enacting the desperate search for water by Ishmael's mother, Hagar.
I thought about us stoning the pillars, symbolically warding off evil, and emulating Abraham's stoning of the devil each of the three times the devil tried to stop him from fulfilling his duty to God.
And I thought about the celebration of Eid al-Adha, "the festival of the sacrifice," on the last day of hajj. The holiday commemorates Abraham's willingness to sacrifice his dearest possession, his son, at God's command.
Abraham's willingness to sacrifice all for God is admired by all three Abrahamic faiths, Judaism, Christianity and Islam. And the theme of connecting the three religions as part of the Abrahamic tradition runs all through the Koran.
Jews and Christians are referred to as "People of the book." On more than one occasion the following verse appears in the Koran: "Verily they who believe and they who are Jews, Christians . . . whoever believes in God and the Last Day, and do that, which is right, shall have their reward with their Lord. Fear shall not come upon them and neither shall they grieve."
Prophet Muhammad wanted Muslims to remind themselves constantly of this link to Abraham. His companions asked him how they should invoke the blessings of God upon him. He replied, "(First) Say; May the blessings of God be upon Muhammad and his progeny" and then say "May the blessings of God be upon Abraham and his progeny." This invocation is part of Muslims' daily prayers.
The time I spent reflecting at the footsteps of Kaaba has reinforced my belief that it is essential for the "progeny of Abraham" to be conscious of their common heritage. Appreciation of this Abrahamic tradition can unite Jews, Christians and Muslims in attaining a dream of peaceful coexistence. Muslims are reminded of it during hajj and in their daily prayers. Sitting on the steps of the Kaaba, I found myself echoing Abraham with my prayer: Lord, bring peace to this world.
Source: http://www.islamicity.com
Monday, October 4, 2010
CAIR: Muslims Condemn Hate Vandalism of Md. Synagogue
(WASHINGTON, D.C., 7/28/10) -- The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) today condemned the vandalism of a synagogue in Olney, Md., and expressed sympathy and solidarity with the congregants.
Become a Fan of CAIR on Facebook
Subscribe to CAIR's E-Mail List
Congregants of B’Nai Shalom Synagogue discovered anti-Semitic graffiti on the outside of the building earlier this week. Vandals spray-painted Nazi swastikas and the words "Arbeit Macht Frei" meaning "work will set you free," which was the slogan over the entrance to the Auschwitz concentration camp.
SEE: Maryland Synagogue Vandalized
“Such a hateful attack on the Jewish community and on a house of worship is intolerable and must be condemned by Americans of all faiths,” said CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad. “We offer our support to the congregants of B’Nai Shalom Synagogue. Americans must stand together against bigotry and all forms of religious or ethnic intimidation, which run contrary to the values of our faiths and our nation.”
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
Become a Fan of CAIR on Facebook
Subscribe to CAIR's E-Mail List
Congregants of B’Nai Shalom Synagogue discovered anti-Semitic graffiti on the outside of the building earlier this week. Vandals spray-painted Nazi swastikas and the words "Arbeit Macht Frei" meaning "work will set you free," which was the slogan over the entrance to the Auschwitz concentration camp.
SEE: Maryland Synagogue Vandalized
“Such a hateful attack on the Jewish community and on a house of worship is intolerable and must be condemned by Americans of all faiths,” said CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad. “We offer our support to the congregants of B’Nai Shalom Synagogue. Americans must stand together against bigotry and all forms of religious or ethnic intimidation, which run contrary to the values of our faiths and our nation.”
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
Indian court rules in favor of mythology
First they created a dispute about the origin of the Babri Mosque in Ayodhya, India, then they installed idols of Hindu mythological gods and then they demolished the Mosque and finally they decided to partition the Mosque into three units, with one part offered to Muslims and the other two to Brahmans. In this process that spans over a few centuries, the Brahman politicians, religious leaders, fanatics and law enforcement agencies as well as judges acted within a framework that can easily be seen as prejudiced and biased.
Yet, the verdict on the Babri Masjid given by India's Allahabad High Court has not settled the issue. With the exception of Brahman led fanatic and extremist groups, every group including several prominent Brahman intellectuals and lawyers in India feel that justice was not served on on September 30, 2010 when the Court decided to divide the Mosque into three portions with the main one going to Hindus.
With this judgment, a Judicial court for the first time in Indian history has given legitimacy to a myth that is based on fiction rather than facts.
Rama is a mythological king of Ayodhya in ancient Hindu religious texts. No respectable Brahman scholar accepts the story as true that was narrated by Valmiki, the poet harbinger in Sanskrit literature. Particularly the story that deals with the killing of a so called untouchable by Rama is widely accepted as mythology. Valmiki writes in the Ramayana that a Brahmin's son died in a young age. In a Vedic (of Hindu religion) ruled country it was believed that everyone had a 100 year life. The Brahman went and complained to Ram about why his son died early. Ram thought that some un-Vedic things must have happened to cause this disruption in life span. He found out that Sambuk, a dalit (untouchable) was chanting Vedas. A person of the untouchable class was considered unclean and had thus defiled the Vedas, the Hindu religious text. So he killed Sambuk and the Brahman child became alive.
The writer of Ramayana, Valmiki according to Brahmin sources was a highway robber, robbing the people after killing them. After chopping their fingers he used to create and wear the Maala (necklace) of fingers of the victims, because of this his name was Angolimaal. Once, the robber tried to rob the divine sage Narada for the benefit of his family. Narada asked him if his family would share the sin he was incurring due to the robbery. The robber replied positively, but Narada told him to confirm this with his family. The robber asked his family, but none agreed to bear the burden of sin. Dejected, the robber finally understood the truth of life and asked for Narada's forgiveness. Narada taught the robber to worship god. The robber meditated for many years, so much so that ant-hills grew around his body. Finally, a divine voice declared his penance successful, bestowing him with the name "Valmiki": "one born out of ant-hills". The Ramayana, originally written by Valmiki, consists of 24,000 verses in six cantos (some say seven i.e. including the Uttara Ramayana). The Valmiki Ramayana is dated variously from 500 BC to 100 BC. As with many traditional epics, it has gone through a long process of interpolations and redactions, making it impossible to date accurately.
It is this version of history that a judicial court has upheld, raising questions about the impartiality of the judiciary in India. Yet, a final verdict on India's judiciary system is yet to be given. The Supreme Court will give the final verdict on the case that Muslims have appealed.
Doubtlessly, India's youth deserve to be applauded for not falling into the propaganda of fanatics and zealots as they responded to the verdict in a civil manner unprecedented in India in similar situations.
The Allahbad High Court Judgment is biased. It is more like a religious and political statement than a judicial verdict. It ignores the rules of justice and defies the facts even the court upheld to be facts.
While it accepts the fact that no temple was demolished in the 16th century by Muslims to build the mosque, it describes the Babri Mosque a disputed land between two parties Hindus and Muslims. Paradoxically, it divides the mosque land into three parties Hindu, Muslims and Hindu Nirmohi Akhara.
While the court fails to identify the actual place of the birth of Rama, described as god, it gives the main portion of the Mosque to Hindus on the basis of the claim the Hindus made first in 1949 when they placed the idols of Rama inside the Mosque under the central dome. Ironically, the court acknowledges the conspiracy of placing the idols by a groups of Brahmans inside the Mosque without using the word conspiracy.
The court fails to record the fact that one of the parties was in contempt of the country by demolishing the Mosque and pitching its tent there while the case was being discussed in the country.
Based on a verbal narration of events in 1848 when parts of the premises were used by a section of Hindus as a place for Ram Alkhara and Sita Rasoi, the court allocates one third of the inside Mosque premises to Nirmohi Akhara while acknowledging the fact that the mosque was present since 16th century denies the mosque the actual location to rebuild itself. In fact, it echoes the Vishwa Hindu Parishad position that the mosque should be build in the adjoining land.
The Court verdict is not a unanimous verdict. Thus it is understood that honorable judges did not agree unanimously on the verdict. The minority of judges had doubts and questions about the validity and authenticity of the premises on which the verdict was based.
Obviously, justice has not been served in the case. The court by and large upheld the position of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Bhartiya Janta Party and many other Brahman led organizations ignoring the historical facts that were established centuries ago. The court verdict sets a dangerous precedence because based on it, every historical Muslim monument and Mosque in India can be challenged and divided between parties who dispute their ownership.
The court decision is a set back to Indian judiciary and an alarming sign for minorities.
Under the circumstance, the Muslim community should defer the matter to the Supreme Court and if the judgment is upheld there, it should respect the decision believing the that ultimate justice will be served by the Judge of all judges. There is no need to defy the law and order and violate the sanctity of human life as was done by those who demolished the Mosque in 1992.
What is at stake in India is not a piece of land but the whole concept of justice. The court, unfortunately upheld historical fabrications, distortion and lies as the basis of its verdict and ignored the facts while acknowledging their existence.
The judgment is a sad precedence in the history of Indian judiciary. Perhaps Indian Muslims will learn a lesson from this by empowering themselves through education and economic self sufficiency.
Sources: http://www.islamicity.com/
Yet, the verdict on the Babri Masjid given by India's Allahabad High Court has not settled the issue. With the exception of Brahman led fanatic and extremist groups, every group including several prominent Brahman intellectuals and lawyers in India feel that justice was not served on on September 30, 2010 when the Court decided to divide the Mosque into three portions with the main one going to Hindus.
With this judgment, a Judicial court for the first time in Indian history has given legitimacy to a myth that is based on fiction rather than facts.
Rama is a mythological king of Ayodhya in ancient Hindu religious texts. No respectable Brahman scholar accepts the story as true that was narrated by Valmiki, the poet harbinger in Sanskrit literature. Particularly the story that deals with the killing of a so called untouchable by Rama is widely accepted as mythology. Valmiki writes in the Ramayana that a Brahmin's son died in a young age. In a Vedic (of Hindu religion) ruled country it was believed that everyone had a 100 year life. The Brahman went and complained to Ram about why his son died early. Ram thought that some un-Vedic things must have happened to cause this disruption in life span. He found out that Sambuk, a dalit (untouchable) was chanting Vedas. A person of the untouchable class was considered unclean and had thus defiled the Vedas, the Hindu religious text. So he killed Sambuk and the Brahman child became alive.
The writer of Ramayana, Valmiki according to Brahmin sources was a highway robber, robbing the people after killing them. After chopping their fingers he used to create and wear the Maala (necklace) of fingers of the victims, because of this his name was Angolimaal. Once, the robber tried to rob the divine sage Narada for the benefit of his family. Narada asked him if his family would share the sin he was incurring due to the robbery. The robber replied positively, but Narada told him to confirm this with his family. The robber asked his family, but none agreed to bear the burden of sin. Dejected, the robber finally understood the truth of life and asked for Narada's forgiveness. Narada taught the robber to worship god. The robber meditated for many years, so much so that ant-hills grew around his body. Finally, a divine voice declared his penance successful, bestowing him with the name "Valmiki": "one born out of ant-hills". The Ramayana, originally written by Valmiki, consists of 24,000 verses in six cantos (some say seven i.e. including the Uttara Ramayana). The Valmiki Ramayana is dated variously from 500 BC to 100 BC. As with many traditional epics, it has gone through a long process of interpolations and redactions, making it impossible to date accurately.
It is this version of history that a judicial court has upheld, raising questions about the impartiality of the judiciary in India. Yet, a final verdict on India's judiciary system is yet to be given. The Supreme Court will give the final verdict on the case that Muslims have appealed.
Doubtlessly, India's youth deserve to be applauded for not falling into the propaganda of fanatics and zealots as they responded to the verdict in a civil manner unprecedented in India in similar situations.
The Allahbad High Court Judgment is biased. It is more like a religious and political statement than a judicial verdict. It ignores the rules of justice and defies the facts even the court upheld to be facts.
While it accepts the fact that no temple was demolished in the 16th century by Muslims to build the mosque, it describes the Babri Mosque a disputed land between two parties Hindus and Muslims. Paradoxically, it divides the mosque land into three parties Hindu, Muslims and Hindu Nirmohi Akhara.
While the court fails to identify the actual place of the birth of Rama, described as god, it gives the main portion of the Mosque to Hindus on the basis of the claim the Hindus made first in 1949 when they placed the idols of Rama inside the Mosque under the central dome. Ironically, the court acknowledges the conspiracy of placing the idols by a groups of Brahmans inside the Mosque without using the word conspiracy.
The court fails to record the fact that one of the parties was in contempt of the country by demolishing the Mosque and pitching its tent there while the case was being discussed in the country.
Based on a verbal narration of events in 1848 when parts of the premises were used by a section of Hindus as a place for Ram Alkhara and Sita Rasoi, the court allocates one third of the inside Mosque premises to Nirmohi Akhara while acknowledging the fact that the mosque was present since 16th century denies the mosque the actual location to rebuild itself. In fact, it echoes the Vishwa Hindu Parishad position that the mosque should be build in the adjoining land.
The Court verdict is not a unanimous verdict. Thus it is understood that honorable judges did not agree unanimously on the verdict. The minority of judges had doubts and questions about the validity and authenticity of the premises on which the verdict was based.
Obviously, justice has not been served in the case. The court by and large upheld the position of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Bhartiya Janta Party and many other Brahman led organizations ignoring the historical facts that were established centuries ago. The court verdict sets a dangerous precedence because based on it, every historical Muslim monument and Mosque in India can be challenged and divided between parties who dispute their ownership.
The court decision is a set back to Indian judiciary and an alarming sign for minorities.
Under the circumstance, the Muslim community should defer the matter to the Supreme Court and if the judgment is upheld there, it should respect the decision believing the that ultimate justice will be served by the Judge of all judges. There is no need to defy the law and order and violate the sanctity of human life as was done by those who demolished the Mosque in 1992.
What is at stake in India is not a piece of land but the whole concept of justice. The court, unfortunately upheld historical fabrications, distortion and lies as the basis of its verdict and ignored the facts while acknowledging their existence.
The judgment is a sad precedence in the history of Indian judiciary. Perhaps Indian Muslims will learn a lesson from this by empowering themselves through education and economic self sufficiency.
Sources: http://www.islamicity.com/
Thursday, September 30, 2010
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.
Source: 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.
Source: http://islamonline.com
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)