New World Forum & Reviews.

Terrorism - The Symptom of a Serious Social Disorder

2008-12-29T11:54:00.001-08:00

The recent terrorist attacks in Mumbai seem to have shaken not only India but the entire world. These acts of terrorism demonstrated that even a handful of people who decide to lay down their life can shake a country which has one of the biggest and mightiest army and police in the world.

Yet the instance was not the first of its kind. Just few years back, terrorists attacked USA on 9/11 and killed thousands of people. Thereafter, the war on terrorism was launched by Western powers lead by USA against the countries believed by them behind the attack. No one knows how many people had been killed by the western forces to revenge the death of their innocent people. Many of us are perhaps not even interested as we treat the terrorists as our enemy whose lives matters little for them who are the victim of terrorism.

Yet, before claiming that terrorism is the biggest threat or the biggest killer today, it would be interesting to glance through the statistics published recently in an article "Lightening kills more than terror" in The Times of India, (New Delhi edition) on December 17, 2008. The article provides the statistics of the unnatural deaths in India (per day) in 2007. There are 934 people dying every day due to natural deaths which includes

-Suicides - 336
-Road Accidents - 314
-Drowning - 74
-Falls - 29
-Lightening Strikes - 8
-TERROR VIOLENCE 2

If we add the number of people dying every day in India due to medical illness, poverty, hunger, cold etc i.e. due to man made causes, the number of unnatural deaths may be many thousands times that of the numbers of people dying due to terror.

Thus logically, terror may not be the biggest killer of people even in the countries affected by terrorism. Yet it shakes the humanity due to the inhuman way, a terrorist kills the innocent people.

The act of terrorism also shakes the faith of an ordinary human being in God as he wonders, what is He doing when innocent people are being killed? Even the people, who have deep faith in God, fail to explain such acts spiritually.

Terrorism, having seed in the hatred, creates tremendous hatred in the world. People just can not adjust with the idea of love and compassion against the terrorists. How many of us are willing to even listen to the sermon like "Love your enemy" or "offering the other cheek, if someone slaps you". "An eye for an eye" seems to be the only solution of the problem of terrorism.

Is it so?

The Wisdom of God

We all know that when we are angry, the first casualty is our capacity to think, logic and reason. Anger, like a fire, burns the body and soul of the person and it must not be allowed to engulf us for a very long period. We have to find solution of terrorism by understanding it rather than hating it.

The first requirement for any understanding in man is to have faith in God and Man. If He is Supreme, nothing can happen in this world without his direction and wish.

Why must God allow terrorism to happen?

Why should the innocent human beings be killed by terrorists?

Terrorism is an attack on the society and not on the individual. Any one who would be coming in the range of the gun would be killed on that day.

Are We Not Sowing Hatred and Injustice?

All scriptures universally endorse that you have to reap what you sow. Yet, most of us expect to reap good while sowing evil in this world.

There are numerous studies that have proven the harmful effect of smoking, alcoholism, drugs, fatty food, sexual indulgences and its role in causing dreaded diseases like Cancer, Heart Attack or AIDS. In India, for example, it is written on every packet of cigarette that smoking causes cancer. Yet, people do such acts every day thinking that they would not suffer from it.

Yet when it is pay out time, they curse advertiser, manufactures, drug traffickers and even God for their ply.

There is no limit to the hatred and injustice that is perpetuated by the mankind in this world.

Millions of innocent birds are killed even before the first man gets infected from Bird Flue. Millions of innocent Kangaroos are killed to protect man in a country. Just a few days back, an Honorable Judge of High Court in India ordered to kill all stray dogs in the State of Maharashtra.

We are killing millions of innocent animals, birds and fishes everyday to feed just one specie of the earth known as man.

Man has acquired virtually all lands and forests and water bodies of the earth for its sole use as if Lord has created only for man for Earth.

Yet man found nothing wrong in such inhuman acts until the mightier and greedier of the men decided to kill other men for conquering the Earth to satisfy their greed. Millions of people were killed in the wars to satisfy one person's quest of power in last century. Yet none asked question as there was always a cause for such action which was logical and reasonable at least to the people who thought they can win the war.

Yet, when we are on the receiving end we call it injustice and cruelty.

Can Might Be Always Right?

Even though man has evolved from animal, yet they prefer working by the law of jungle i.e. "Might is Right". Even the scientific community accepted this universal law of jungle by calling evolution of life as "Survival of the fittest."

There is no doubt that the Western world today is so powerful that they can destroy the rest of the world perhaps in a matter of days. There are thousands of unused nuclear weapons and missiles which can send any country into the Stone Age. Hence, in their exalted sense of power and security, they often think that what they know is right and what they do is right. While no one has the right to judge their "rights", they can judge everyone's right.

Jesus Christ said in Bible, "Do not judge so that you will not be judged".

The reason why we must not judge others that all judgments are based on a particular perspective and based on the relative truth that changes with time. The history has demonstrated in countless times that no principle is sacrosanct and nothing is in fallible. Therefore, judging others from one's own perspective always lead to wrong judgment.

Even the first principle of natural justice says that nobody would be judge in his own cause.

Scriptures: The Path to Happiness

As per one survey conducted by Newsweek, more than 91% people in USA still believes in God and only 3% call themselves atheists. This is simply amazing as even after five centuries of the scientific knowledge and technological developments, people are convinced that only scriptures can guide them in the path of happiness and peace.

Yet it is surprising that we violate virtually every law of scriptures while claiming ourselves to be Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist or Jew.

Some of the universal principles of scriptures can be summarized as following

1. God is one (Do not fight in the name of God).
2. God is present in all beings (Show compassion to all lives).
3. Love all people and feel compassion for all living being (Do not hate).
4. Do not accumulate wealth (Do not live for bread alone)
5. Do not seek power (Serve instead of ruling others).
6. Respect your parents and elders (Have gratitude to parents) .
7. Shun violence (Respect Other's Views).
8. Speak Truth (Do not Speak Falsehood).
9. Be faithful (Do not commit adultery).
10. Deal with people in a way you would like to others to deal you.

Yet, one can easily see that the modern societies are evolved on just the converse principles, though based on the same laws. These facts are demonstrated from the following

? People do not believe in the God of others. The result is that God is used as the main justification for wars
? People see God in themselves while see Devil in others (enemy)
? We are compassionate only for people of our family, country, race or religion
? There are few people in this world, who have billions in their account, while there are billions who do not even have one dollar. They sleeps in footpath, remain hungry for days, die due to cold and heat and by simple illness
? Society is hierarchical and everyone is subordinate to someone. The head of some nations are so powerful that they can kill millions at their wish
? Parents are discarded by their children at old age when they fetch no return
? Violence is the most desired solution for the rich and powerful for solving all problems. Nonviolence is for the weak and poor.
? Truth is rare or fallacy the rule
? Adultery is a rule and Faithfulness is an exception
? Different treatment for different people even within the same religion, state or status

The Root of Terrorism

The values preached in scriptures are not merely theories but contains in it the universal laws of peaceful and loving existence. Religions, though developed in different countries under different prophets in different times, contain the same truth.

One can break these laws for the immediate material benefits or instant gratifications, yet he loses peace and happiness in the process.

Terrorism is just a symptom of the ill of the society like theft, murder, rape or any other crime. Terrorism, however, makes great news as it is fought against the most powerful organ of the modern civilization i.e. State.

Terrorism is a weapon of the weak who can not fight the might of the State power. Hence the weak demonstrate their power by killing the citizens of the powerful enemy.

When a journalist, threw shoes at George Bush, The President of America, the most powerful person of the world, recently at Baghdad he became a hero overnight. The entire Arab world rejoiced at this incident. A man even offered 10 million dollars for the shoe.

Terrorism or other crimes can be eliminated from this world only if the humanity is able to rise above greed, inequality, injustice that is perpetrated by the modern world against the weak and poor people.

This is a difficult solution as the very foundation of modern life is based on the principles of the survival of the fittest. Let the weak perish from this world as they have no right to survive in the world that is based on competition and not compassion.

World As Family

The only way to avoid the symptom of a disease is to eliminate the cause of the symptom. The root of all crimes, particularly terrorism lies in the basic philosophy of materialistic life that defies all tenets of scriptures and spirituality. Only when the modern world can visualize the whole world as one family, such problems can be solved. Are we ready to live like a family and share our fortunes and power with all humanity? In answer to this question lies the solution of terrorism.

Dr. Awdhesh K Singh is an Engineer by education and philosopher by passion. He holds his PhD degree in the area of E-Governance.

He has published several papers in International Journals and Conferences on the subject of E-governance and the application of Artificial Intelligence tools like Fuzzy Logic (FL) and Expert Systems (ES) for E-governance.

He has keen interest in the study and application of Religion, Spirtuality and Philosophies for solving the real-life problems of the modern world.

Many of his articles are published on the website of Aatmic Science Forum and Science of Soul.

His can be contacted on the email aksinghirs [a] yahoo.com

Spiritual Economics

2008-11-26T13:54:00.001-08:00

A very wise consultant to the health care industry shared with me a conversation he had with a hospital board of directors facing bankruptcy: "What do you think caused the financial difficulties of the hospital?" he asked. "The labor unions wanting too much, the doctors demands, and the patients who can't pay their bills."

"No," said the forthright consultant, "the cause of this difficulty is your greed, selfishness and disregard for the needs of your community."

How could that be true? These were all well-educated, well-respected citizens of their community who saw themselves as charitable and responsible. Yet true it was. And one-by-one, they opened their eyes to how they had ignored the clear needs signaled from the community, remained adversarial in talks with doctors and support staff, ignored the need to invest in new systems, equipment and procedures. All these decisions and behavior were justified at the time they were made by the self-interested, culturally approved "need" to hold on to profits.

In the face of the current economic crisis, unstable stock market, businesses like the auto industry facing bankruptcy, and the financial challenges of individuals, the cry that emerges from the news media is "what are we going to do about this?" "Who is to blame?" and "What will president-elect Obama do to save our economy?"

Just as the above hospital board of directors facing bankruptcy of their organization, the country is desperate for a quick fix, for a 'to do' solution, for a hero to reveal a formula that will distribute over a trillion dollars to the right places.

Money is viewed as the source of and solution to our problems. Yet, perhaps the problem is thinking that money is the solution to our problems.

The view that money is both the source and solution to our problems has brought the nation to a no-win situation: We need money to solve our problem of lack of money, but taking money from ourselves will continue the problem of lack of money.

All attention seems focused on money - where is it, who has it, who spent it, who needs it, how can we get it to those who need it, and those who will spend it wisely?

There are many concerns being voiced about the "Big-Money Rescue" solutions being promoted such as:

-limiting entrepreneurs from the "reward" of money by 'spreading the wealth around' through high taxes will de-incentivize the business people who generate the wealth of this country

-"rescuing" those who squandered the money under their responsibility by giving them more is not intelligent

-renegotiating with those who have bought what they cannot afford will encourage more irresponsible spending

All of these concerns are legitimate, and all see the economy as based on the generation, accumulation and distribution of money.

The truth is that any use of money will result in some good and some bad, depending on the clarity, motivation and honesty of those given the responsibility to spend it, which is everyone, as everyone uses money.

The view that The Economy=Money promotes a climate of greed, which is what the economy is acutely suffering from now. When money is seen as the source and goal of business (and thus, of life), then business people focus on making money for themselves, their stockholders, and their businesses. In this climate inventiveness and ideas are channeled toward making money and the more the better. Certainly some good, useful and creative ideas have been generated from this climate, but the 'side-effect' is greed and corruption. Anything to 'make money' becomes justified, and acceptable. Just as in medicine, sometimes the "side-effect" can be more deadly than the disease.

What is the purpose of business?

The purpose of business is not to make money, nor to lose money.

The purpose of business is to see a real need and fill it with a reliable product or service through an efficient organization. The result of good business is prosperity for all. Those who run the business, produce the product or service, and those who purchase the product/service. There need be no limit on wealth for those stewarding a useful, efficient business. Everyone benefits. Individuals, communities, nations and the global community are joined in the endeavor to meet real needs and prosper, individually and collectively. This is economy based on the idea that what is truly good for one is good for all. This idea is one that cannot be legislated, regulated or manipulated. It is an idea that when understood by an individual/entrepreneur/businessperson, guides and inspires their activities. Any individual living this principle will be trustworthy, and the needs of their business will be met.

This is the heart of the American Dream. The opportunity to see a real need, develop an organization to serve the need and benefit from the prosperity that is generated for all.

This points to individual motivation as the source of our problems and the source of our solutions. A trillion dollars can be thrown into the system, and where personal gain and greed is the underlying motivation, the economy will continue to suffer. On the other hand, prosperity will spread where there is motivation based on good will.

The challenge then is not what "to do," but rather to understand and face the real problem and cultivate an economy of prosperity based on solid, time-tested principles of good business and good living. Afterall, it is not individuals who can be blamed for being influenced by the climate of greed, yet it is individuals who can see the problem and participate in the solution.

This is called Spiritual Economics as it is based on what cannot be legislated, manipulated, regulated or contracted. It is based on something non-material, yet something that we have the capacity to recognize when we see it. The truth of it is undeniable. It may be argued that it's idealistic - that most of business-as-usual is greedy and that's just the way it is. But if we accept that as truth, we are doomed to continue a downward spiral of constant gain and loss, and continuous struggle between those who have and those who have not.

There are numerous examples of entrepreneurs, scientists, inventors, educators, legislators, who have seen real needs, responded with an idea, product or service and prospered. Those who have prospered from knowing this truth are not primarily motivated by money. They are motivated by good ideas, efficient systems and personal excellence. This is spiritual economics as it is based on something intangible yet substantial, imperceptible yet knowable, unseen yet recognizable.

These same individuals who accumulated great wealth from implementing good ideas plow their wealth back into the community through charitable and altruistic visions. This is the continuation of valuing good ideas, efficient systems and personal excellence.

The good news is that to get the economy back on the right track does not require us to wait for the "trickle down" when someone figures out what to do and does it. It is something we all can be attentive to right now.

When frightened about financial issues wake-up! It's not money that is the source of intelligence and creativity. And, it's not fear that will generate good ideas. It's the God-given gift of open-mindedness and receptivity that allow good, new ideas to flow right to the challenging situation of the moment. This is priceless.

Coming Up:

What is poverty?

Education as Capital in Spiritual Economics

Scrutinizing our motivations

Egyptians vie for Islamists leadership

2006-03-12T12:01:00.000-08:00

Two Muslim preachers compete for the leadership of Islamists: Yousef Al-Qaradhawi, an Egyptian radical cleric living and preaching in exile Qatar. Qaradhawi wears the Muslim uniform - a turban and a Jilbab (gown). The other, Amr Khaled, is a young soft-spoken Egyptian who wears a Western suit and a necktie.

Mishari Al-Thaidi writes in Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (March 7): "A row has broken out between Khaled and Qaradhawi. The latter objects to Khaled's mission to Denmark, with 50 other preachers, to present 'real Islam' to the Danes." Qaradhawi does not believe that Khaled's mission would bring in any good results. On the contrary, it would kill the momentum which the anti-Islamic cartoons have generated. "At last, Muslims, all Muslims express their indignation and are united around their Prophet (PBUH)." Qaradhawi told Al-Jazeera.

Fahmi Huwaidi, also in Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (March 8) stands by Al-Qaradhawi. "Amr Khaled should confine himself to preaching and should not interfere with theological issues. He should listen to learned people like Sheikh Al-Qaradhawi," Huwaidi argues.

My comment: Qaradhawi wants to exploit the Danish cartoon row to advance his political agenda. Qaradhawi, a traditionalist, wants to silence "modern" Muslim young preachers like Amr Khaled. Khaled seems to be palatable to young moderate Muslims. He addresses practical, contemporary issues. He is less dogmatic than fundamentalists like Qaradhawi. Preachers like Khaled are perhaps in a position to influence young Muslims and keep them off extremism.
Qaradhawi is not interested in dialogue and in spreading a moderate form of Islam. For his political Islam, he needs radical ideas, radical events, and radical preachers. Moderate Islam would dilute the line drawn between Islam and the rest of the world. Islamophobia and Westophobia nourish his "Kampf" (struggle) for Islam, Qaradhawi-style.

Both Qaradhawi and Huwaidi characterise Khaled as naive and simple-minded. For them, the West has "declared war" on Islam and this war must be ferociously fought. Radical Islamists like Qaradhawi hate to have competitors like Khaled. Moderate preachers would take the wind from the sails of radicals. Qaradhawi and Huwaidi would love to have radical preachers who charge young Muslims with hatred and violence against Westerners, the unbelievers.
Barbaric West!

Under the title "Barbaric West!" Abdulmin'em Saeed observes in Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (March 3) that whenever Islamists and Pan-Arabists talk or write, they severely attack the West. Here are some samples: The West exterminated the Native Americans. The West is decadent. There is racial discrimination in the West, etc. All these things are true. Nobody denies them.
It seems, however, that we, Arabs and Muslims, know more about atrocities and decadence in the West than about our own atrocities and deficiencies. We excoriate atrocities everywhere, but not in our societies.

My comment: This may be attributed to the fact that the West is more critical of itself and more honest and freer than we Arabs and Muslims are. Let us count just a few instances of Arab and Muslim atrocities: Who murdered one and a half million Armenians? Our fellow Muslim brothers in Turkey. For half a century we have been demanding the liberation of Palestine, but we have denied 20 million Kurds a homeland. Who is to blame for that? Again our fellow Muslim brothers in Turkey, Iraq, Syria, and Iran.

According to UN reports, we have in our Muslim societies as much prostitution,homosexuality,rape and women trafficking as Western societies have. We have in our Muslim societies more corruption than Western societies have. In practice, we Muslims discriminate against people from certain countries/regions and colours. We also discriminate against women,homosexuals,Ethnic minority groups and look down on them, especially in the Arab Gulf region.

Muslim countries rate top in terms of child labour, something that is almost non-existent in the West. Where is more freedom, justice, and tolerance? In the West. Most Muslim countries lack freedom of speech, religious freedom and social justice. It is even forbidden in some Muslim countries to erect churches and temples.

Ethnic minorities in the West are protected per constitution and in practice. The small Danish community in northern Germany, for example, is allowed to have its own schools and cultivate its own culture. Until recently, the Kurds in Turkey were not even allowed to use their own language in public. Laila Zen, a former Kurdish MP was imprisoned for fifteen years because she used Kurdish in the Turkish Parliament.

Who is more civilised? The West? Or the Muslim Orient? Shame on those who deny atrocities amongst us.

Defenders of the Faith

2006-03-12T11:34:00.000-08:00

FOR centuries, we have been told that without religion we are no more than egotistic animals fighting for our share, our only morality that of a pack of wolves; only religion, it is said, can elevate us to a higher spiritual level. Today, when religion is emerging as the wellspring of murderous violence around the world, assurances that Christian or Muslim or Hindu fundamentalists are only abusing and perverting the noble spiritual messages of their creeds ring increasingly hollow. What about restoring the dignity of atheism, one of Europe's greatest legacies and perhaps our only chance for peace?

More than a century ago, in "The Brothers Karamazov" and other works, Dostoyevsky warned against the dangers of godless moral nihilism, arguing in essence that if God doesn't exist, then everything is permitted. The French philosopher André Glucksmann even applied Dostoyevsky's critique of godless nihilism to 9/11, as the title of his book, "Dostoyevsky in Manhattan," suggests.

This argument couldn't have been more wrong: the lesson of today's terrorism is that if God exists, then everything, including blowing up thousands of innocent bystanders, is permitted — at least to those who claim to act directly on behalf of God, since, clearly, a direct link to God justifies the violation of any merely human constraints and considerations. In short, fundamentalists have become no different than the "godless" Stalinist Communists, to whom everything was permitted since they perceived themselves as direct instruments of their divinity, the Historical Necessity of Progress Toward Communism.

During the Seventh Crusade, led by St. Louis, Yves le Breton reported how he once encountered an old woman who wandered down the street with a dish full of fire in her right hand and a bowl full of water in her left hand. Asked why she carried the two bowls, she answered that with the fire she would burn up Paradise until nothing remained of it, and with the water she would put out the fires of Hell until nothing remained of them: "Because I want no one to do good in order to receive the reward of Paradise, or from fear of Hell; but solely out of love for God." Today, this properly Christian ethical stance survives mostly in atheism.

Fundamentalists do what they perceive as good deeds in order to fulfill God's will and to earn salvation; atheists do them simply because it is the right thing to do. Is this also not our most elementary experience of morality? When I do a good deed, I do so not with an eye toward gaining God's favor; I do it because if I did not, I could not look at myself in the mirror. A moral deed is by definition its own reward. David Hume, a believer, made this point in a very poignant way, when he wrote that the only way to show true respect for God is to act morally while ignoring God's existence.

Two years ago, Europeans were debating whether the preamble of the European Constitution should mention Christianity as a key component of the European legacy. As usual, a compromise was worked out, a reference in general terms to the "religious inheritance" of Europe. But where was modern Europe's most precious legacy, that of atheism? What makes modern Europe unique is that it is the first and only civilization in which atheism is a fully legitimate option, not an obstacle to any public post.

Atheism is a European legacy worth fighting for, not least because it creates a safe public space for believers. Consider the debate that raged in Ljubljana, the capital of Slovenia, my home country, as the constitutional controversy simmered: should Muslims (mostly immigrant workers from the old Yugoslav republics) be allowed to build a mosque? While conservatives opposed the mosque for cultural, political and even architectural reasons, the liberal weekly journal Mladina was consistently outspoken in its support for the mosque, in keeping with its concern for the rights of those from other former Yugoslav republics.

Not surprisingly, given its liberal attitudes, Mladina was also one of the few Slovenian publications to reprint the infamous caricatures of Muhammad. And, conversely, those who displayed the greatest "understanding" for the violent Muslim protests those cartoons caused were also the ones who regularly expressed their concern for the fate of Christianity in Europe.

These weird alliances confront Europe's Muslims with a difficult choice: the only political force that does not reduce them to second-class citizens and allows them the space to express their religious identity are the "godless" atheist liberals, while those closest to their religious social practice, their Christian mirror-image, are their greatest political enemies. The paradox is that Muslims' only real allies are not those who first published the caricatures for shock value, but those who, in support of the ideal of freedom of expression, reprinted them.

While a true atheist has no need to boost his own stance by provoking believers with blasphemy, he also refuses to reduce the problem of the Muhammad caricatures to one of respect for other's beliefs. Respect for other's beliefs as the highest value can mean only one of two things: either we treat the other in a patronizing way and avoid hurting him in order not to ruin his illusions, or we adopt the relativist stance of multiple "regimes of truth," disqualifying as violent imposition any clear insistence on truth.

What, however, about submitting Islam — together with all other religions — to a respectful, but for that reason no less ruthless, critical analysis? This, and only this, is the way to show a true respect for Muslims: to treat them as serious adults responsible for their beliefs.

Slavoj Zizek, the international director of the Birkbeck Institute for the Humanities, is the author, most recently, of "The Parallax View."

No Ports or Nukes for Muslims

2006-03-12T11:28:00.000-08:00

THIS is not a good time to be a Muslim. Today, in the Western world, openly expressed hatred and contempt for Islam and Arabs has become the only socially acceptable prejudice.

The collapse of the Dubai ports deal is the latest striking example. The highly professional port operator, DP World, was forced to give up a deal to manage East Coast US harbours after an enormous political uproar in America. At the heart of the uproar was the fact that DP World was owned by the Arabs.

The cry went up from the US Congress and media: ‘Keep Arabs out of our ports!’ No one seemed to notice, or care, that Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states have invested $121 billion in US companies and property.

A bi-partisan coalition of Islam-hating conservatives, evangelical Christians, publicity-seeking Democrats and the mighty Israeli lobby, forced President George Bush to back down on the port plan. UAE, a staunch US friend and ally, was slapped in the face. But it had the good sense and good taste to withdraw from the no-win battle.

This ugly business came right after Bush’s trip to India where he completed the enshrinement of America’s double-standard nuclear policy. After preaching for years about stopping nuclear proliferation, Bush agreed to give India nuclear fuel and key US nuclear technology, while turning a blind eye to India’s ongoing production of nuclear weapons and denying old ally, Pakistan, any such aid.

Nuclear arms for largely Hindu India are good; nuclear arms for Muslim Pakistan and Iran are unacceptable. India, which is working on intercontinental and sea-launched nuclear missiles, is being fawned over by the US, while Pakistan stays in the dog house and even faces threats of US attacks on its nuclear infrastructure.

This week, US Vice-President Dick Cheney, addressed the Israeli lobby in the US and came close to threatening war against Iran over its alleged covert nuclear arms programme — which may not even exist, while India is estimated to have stockpiled around 100 deliverable nuclear warheads, and Israel reportedly has 200. North Korea, that nuclear-armed member of the axis of evil,’ seems to have been forgotten in Washington’s rush to chastise the ‘disobedient’ Muslim world. Of course, going after supposedly nuclear states that don’t have any such weapons, i.e. Iraq and Iran, is a lot safer than attacking a state that actually does have them.

No sooner was Bush back from India when he unblushingly again proclaimed the need for nuclear non-proliferation. A few days later, the BBC broke a fascinating story, revealing that in the 1960’s, Britain had secretly sold Israel nuclear components used to make its first atomic, then hydrogen warheads. Interestingly, some of this British technology, notably the use of the rare element tritium to boost the explosive power of nuclear weapons, was later sold by Israel to India.

Speaking of proliferation, I was always amused when I hear Britain’s sanctimonious prime minister, Tony Blair, sermonise about the evils of Iraq’s so-called weapons of mass destruction. His moralising reminds me of the media joke which made the rounds during the time of the US invasion of Iraq: ‘Of course we know Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. We have the receipts to prove it!’

In late 1990, on the eve of the first US attack on Iraq, I was covering the looming war from Baghdad. There, I discovered four British technicians who told me a remarkable story which they backed up with documents. The four technicians had been secretly sent to Iraq through a joint operation of the British Ministry of Defence and MI6 Secret Intelligence Service. Their job was to develop germ warfare weapons for Iraq, using anthrax, Q-fever, tularemia, and botulism. The germ raw materials were supplied to Iraq, with full US government approval, by an American laboratory in Maryland.

The British scientists worked at a top-secret laboratory at Salman Park, near Baghdad. They never progressed very far in turning the lethal germs into stable, deliverable battlefield weapons, but the technicians all insisted the germ weapons were intended solely for us against Iran, with which Iraq had been locked in a bloody, eight-year war. So the only potential arms of mass destruction in Iraq were actually those supplied by Great Britain, which today is warning about the dangers from Iran. Such hypocrisy is truly breathtaking. You need a fine Saville Row suit and the very best Queen’s English to pull it off. The moral of this story: if you want to run seaports or obtain nuclear weapons for self-defence, you had better change your name to O’Reilly, Schwartz or Patel and stop turning to Makkah in your prayers.

Eric S Margolis is an eminent journalist and columnist based in Toronto, Canada. He can be reached at margolis@foreigncorrespondent.com

Half of Americans Hold Negative Views on Islam

2006-03-10T10:20:00.000-08:00

There are some days you just want to throw up your hands in despair and today is one of them: A new US poll reveals that nearly half of Americans hold a negative view of Islam.

The survey also found that one in three Americans have heard prejudiced comments about Muslims lately. In a separate question, slightly more (43 percent) reported having heard negative remarks about Arabs. One in four Americans admitted to harboring prejudice toward Muslims, the same proportion that expressed some personal bias against Arabs.

The Washington Post and ABC News poll, released yesterday, found that 46 percent of Americans have a negative view of Islam, a figure that is seven percent higher than in the months after the Sept. 11 attacks, the Post reported.

Those polled who believe Islam helps fuel violence against non-Muslims has more than doubled since the attacks, from 14 percent in January 2002 to 33 percent today.

Several Mideast experts told the Post the poll results did not surprise them as they feel the Arab world has been demonized in the US since 2001.

Juan Cole, a professor of modern Middle Eastern and South Asian history at the University of Michigan said Americans have been given the message to respond this way by the American political elite, the mass media and by select special interests.

A surprising item from the poll found that even Americans who said they understood Islam and who viewed the religion as peaceful and respectful, also said it harbors harmful extremists and were no less likely to have prejudiced feelings against Islam.

A total of 1000 randomly selected Americans were interviewed March 2-5 for the poll.

The Post quoted a school bus driver in Chicago, Gary McCord, 65, who said he is dealt with many children of Arab descent.Some of the best families I've ever had were some of my Muslim families. They were so nice to me.

But the Post said his good feelings do not extend to Islam. "I don't mean to sound harsh or anything, but I don't like what the Muslim people believe in, according to the Quran. Because I think they preach hate" he said.

The truth is Koran teaches love and humanity, there are Muslims who preach hatred. Majority of Muslims also have negative views on United States and the west, the best solution is exchange of ideas and clearing up all the negative views based on ignorance.
Last Friday a Iranian student who is mentally ill tried to kill his fellow students in UNC, luckily no one died, but reaction of non-Muslims were and is hostile toward innocent Muslims who had nothing to do with lunatic man.

For those who asked me about Iran; Iran is largest Shia Muslim country, Iranians are not Arabs, Majority of them are Aryans.

Egypt Arrests Islamic Radicals

2006-03-09T09:53:00.000-08:00

Egyptian security forces have rounded up a number of Muslim Brotherhood members after briefly banning the Islamist party’s mouthpiece publication, a spokesman for the Islamist movement said yesterday. In the latest campaign against the banned but occasionally tolerated group, Issam Al-Aryan alleged that security forces had threatened to hold the family of one now detained member, Abdul Moneim Mahmud, hostage until he handed himself in.

Mahmud, 26, who lives in the Mediterranean city of Alexandria, is an outspoken member of the Brotherhood. “This is a new phenomenon,” Aryan said.

“Now they are occupying homes in order to force their (Brotherhood members’) surrender,” Aryan said. In the past, Aryan said, security forces arrested Brotherhood members in the middle of the night or at dawn in their homes.

But the alleged holding of families hostage and recent arrests on the street and in public places such as coffee shops suggest a break with tradition, he said.

Fellow Brotherhood member Ayman Abul Ghani was arrested along with his wife as they were picking up their children from school in the northeastern Cairo suburb of Nasr city, he said. “The family members were detained for four hours while the police searched their home,” Aryan said.

He added that the arrests brought to more than 20 the number of Brotherhood figures detained since last week when the government unleashed a new campaign against the group, the largest opposition force in the country. Brotherhood officials suggested that the renewed hostility against them may have been triggered by an article by Rashad Bayyumi, a member of the group’s Guidance Office, in the Afaq Arabia weekly. He was picked up in a first wave of arrests last week.

The edition that carried the article criticizing Egyptian Dictator Hosni Mubarak’s son, Gamal Mubarak, was banned outright and the paper has not appeared on the streets since then. The Brotherhood’s parliamentary bloc issued a statement yesterday condemning the decision to ban the paper, which was launched under license from the liberal Ahrar party, but acts as the Brotherhood’s mouthpiece. “The bloc sees in this decision further efforts to backtrack on democracy and freedom of opinion and expression,” it said.

The Brotherhood said the authorities had justified their decision by saying it was due to a dispute within the paper’s management. However, a statement published later on the Brotherhood’s official website said the (governmental) Superior Press Council had reversed its ban “after solving the dispute.”

The Brotherhood, which fielded candidates as independents in legislative polls last year, won a record number of seats in parliament, taking 88 of the 454 seats up for grabs.

A government clampdown on the opposition in the run-up to the elections targeted Brotherhood members with a wave of arrests, though most of those detained were freed by the end of January.

Israel Will Attack Iran

2006-03-09T09:49:00.000-08:00

If the UN Security Council is incapable of taking action to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, Israel will have no choice but to defend itself, Israel’s defense minister said yesterday. Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz was asked whether Israel was ready to use military action if the Security Council proved unable to act against what Israel and the West believe is a covert Iranian nuclear weapons program.

“My answer to this question is that the state of Israel has the right give all the security that is needed to the people in Israel. We have to defend ourselves,” Mofaz told Reuters after a meeting with his German counterpart Franz Josef Jung.

The Iranian delegation to an IAEA board of governors meeting in Vienna issued a statement earlier warning that the United States could feel “harm and pain” if the Security Council took up the issue of Tehran’s nuclear fuel research and vowed never to abandon its atomic program.

“So if the United States wishes to choose that path, let the ball roll,” Tehran national security official Javad Vaeedi said.

Security Council diplomats said it would probably start debating Iran next week and US Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns said it would be Monday or Tuesday. Iran, the world’s No. 4 oil provider, also said it would review its oil export policy should the council tackle its case. “The United States may have the power to cause harm and pain but it is also susceptible to harm and pain,” Vaeedi said.

Asked about Iran’s warning, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said in New Orleans: “Provocative statements and actions only further isolate Iran from the rest of the world.”

OPEC Agrees to Keep Taps Open

2006-03-09T09:43:00.000-08:00

Saudi Minister of Petroleum and Mineral Resources Ali Al-Naimi talks to reporters at the beginning of an OPEC session in Vienna. He said the Kingdom was boosting spending on security for its oil installations after last month’s Abqaiq attack.

OPEC said yesterday it will keep oil output close to the limit to bring prices within consumers’ comfort zone and fill supply gaps, but a threat by Iran to review its oil exports cast a shadow.

Iran issued its warning at the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency even as the nation’s oil minister sat down across town with OPEC colleagues to discuss oil output, export disruptions in Nigeria and Iraq and prices above $60 a barrel.

Iran Oil Minister Kazem Vaziri struck a softer note, saying: “We have no intention of reducing any of our exports.”

OPEC President Edmund Daukoru of Nigeria said there will be no change to the group’s 28 million barrels per day ceiling in place since July 2005, despite forecasts for lower demand in spring. “There are simply too many geopolitical factors to change production,” he said.

Oil consumers have not felt this vulnerable for decades. Rebel attacks have cut exports from the world’s eighth biggest supplier Nigeria by 11 million barrels since the start of the year. Fellow OPEC member Iraq is in crisis and oil prices are at their highest level in real terms for 25 years.

OPEC’s economists forecast world oil demand will slow in the second quarter. Iran is struggling to sell its hard-to-refine high sulfur crude and top exporter Saudi Arabia has kept output flat since May 2004 in response to its customer needs.

Kuwaiti Oil Minister Sheikh Ahmad Al-Fahd Al-Sabah said OPEC was working to bring US crude below $60. He believed there was no need for the organization to cut output all year. “If we continue with the same production I believe the price will go below $60 in the second quarter,” the minister said.

Saudi Arabia, the most influential voice in OPEC, has said it believes a production cut now would be counterproductive.

Fellow OPEC ministers have lined up in support, drowning out price hawk Venezuela’s call for the group to look at reducing production by 500,000 barrels daily.

Some analysts are looking with concern to the peak winter season, fearing OPEC, which pumps over a third of the world’s oil, may struggle to meet demand if output problems persist. “If demand continues to be strong we are going to be struggling,” said Yasser Elguindi, senior managing director at Medley Global Advisors. “OPEC appears to be taking the view that the risks are weighted more to the upside than the downside.”

Demand from the United States, consumer of a quarter of the world’s oil, and China has been the main driver in a rally that has seen prices double in the past two years. So far the world economy has coped but analysts say an upward shift of $10 a barrel for about two years would begin to bite, driving inflation about 0.25 percent a year higher and paring growth by the same amount.

OPEC confirmed June 1 as the date of its next ministerial meeting in Caracas.Unless Israel or US attacks Iran's Nuclear facilities.

Port Deal Will Succeed Despite US Opposition

2006-03-07T12:51:00.000-08:00

The head of a Dubai company facing a political firestorm over its multi-billion dollar bid to take over the operations of six major American ports voiced optimism Sunday the deal would succeed.

In an interview with CNN television, Dubai Ports World chief executive officer Muhammad Sharaf said: “As far as we’re concerned the deal is going to go through.” After initially approving the $6.8 billion deal, the administration of President George W. Bush has launched a fresh review of the transaction amid fierce political opposition from within the government’s own ranks motivated by Islamphopia and Jewish groups.

The deal, in which DP World would take over Britain’s Peninsular and Oriental Steamship Navigation Co. which currently runs the six ports, has provoked outcries that it would endanger US security.

Republican representative Duncan Hunter, the chairman of the powerful House Armed Services Committee, is seeking to sink the takeover.

He told the ABC News “This Week” program on Sunday that government-owned DP World cannot be trusted to run US ports in Baltimore, Miami, New Jersey, New Orleans, New York and Philadelphia.

Numerous US lawmakers have lined up in opposition, citing the United Arab Emirates recognition of the Afghan Taleban government and concerns that it was home to two of the September 11, 2001 hijackers.

Links between the two nations have been strong for years; in 2000 Dubai cinched a multi-billion dollar deal to buy 80 high-tech F-16 fighter jets from the US.

Although some lawmakers, including Hunter, are moving to author legislation that would torpedo the deal, Bush has said he would veto such legislation.
Dubai rulers launched a massive public relation campaing in US, starting live coverage from Dubai by CNN anchorman Wolf Blitz. The Dubai port uses high technology to inspect all the cargo.

Islam’s Coming Crusade

2006-03-07T10:46:00.000-08:00

The Crusades began with a rumor of defilement. In 1095, Pope Urban II denounced the Muslims as "a race utterly alienated from God." Among their many offenses, Muslims had seized the churches of Jerusalem: "They circumcise the Christians, and the blood of the circumcisions they either spread upon the altars or pour into the vases of the baptismal font." Such false rumors were already widespread in Christendom. Urban tapped them to launch the First Crusade.
Almost a millennium later, Muslim leaders and clerics are using the same language to stir the Muslim masses. They accuse the godless West of defiling the Prophet of God. Khaled Mashal, the leader of Hamas abroad, has demanded that Europe repent for the Danish cartoons. "Tomorrow, our nation will sit on the throne of the world. . . . Apologize today, before remorse will do you no good. . . . Since God is greater, and He supports us, we will be victorious." Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad struck the same note, in a speech marking the 27th anniversary of Iran's revolution: "The Iranian nation is telling you now that although you have Mammon, you do not have God. But God is with us."

"A race utterly alienated from God" -- this is how Pope Urban II demonized the Muslims in the 11th century. This is exactly how Islam's leaders are demonizing the West in the 21st. The secular West had flattered itself, believing it had pulled the Muslim world into modernity. Yes, Islam has sent forth suicide bombers and terrorist insurgents. But they and their sympathizers were in the minority -- so the pollsters and analysts told us: "Don't judge Islam by the acts of a misguided few." This faith in the pragmatic Muslim majority has underpinned every Western policy, from the Israeli-Palestinian "peace process" to the Bush administration's democracy promotion. The Muslim masses, the assumption goes, will choose peace and freedom, if given the chance. But they haven't. 9/11 could be attributed to a fanatic minority. Not so the Danish cartoon protests: Millions have taken part.

What about the Iranians who elected a president openly bent on confrontation with the West? What of those Egyptian voters who gave the Muslim Brotherhood a stunning success in parliamentary elections? And what about the supposedly secular Palestinians, who have swept Hamas into power? A poll conducted last year showed that 60 percent of Jordanians, Egyptians and Palestinians want Islamic shari'a law to be the sole source of legislation.

The experts resort to political and socioeconomic explanations: Syria incites proxies to punish Europe for its support of the U.S. over Lebanon. Iran stirs things up to escape possible sanctions over its nuclear program. Muslim minorities in Europe are protesting against racism and exclusion. Palestinians voted not for Islam, but against corruption.

There are plenty of inequalities in the world that cut against Muslims -- enough to explain any outburst. This is the default analysis, reassuring us that there isn't a "clash of civilizations," only a clash of interests. These analyses have their place, but they're not sufficient. The clash goes beyond differing interests. Hundreds of millions of Muslims who live alongside us and among us inhabit another mental world.

Ahmadinejad feels the presence of the Mahdi, Islam's promised messiah. Hamas, according to its charter, believes that the Jews have fomented every upheaval in the world since the French Revolution. Muslim opinion-makers deny the thoroughly documented Nazi Holocaust, but accept the patently fraudulent Protocols of the Elders of Zion as an indisputable fact.

The present Muslim campaign has its share of opportunists. But it is also driven by a religious fervor. At some point, a Muslim equivalent of Pope Urban II could appear. This time, the crusade would be a Muslim one. Its advance scouts are already at work in Europe.

The West (and Israel) have mocked the prophet -- not Muhammad, but Samuel Huntington, author of A Clash of Civilizations. Our elites have spent a decade denying the truth at the core of his thesis: that the Islamic world and the West are bound to collide. Even now, we glibly predict that possession of political power and nuclear weapons will make Islamists act predictably. It all makes perfect sense -- to us. But the cartoon affair and the Hamas elections are timely reminders that our perfect sense isn't theirs. Fortunately, it isn't too late. There is a clash of civilizations, but there isn't yet a war of the worlds. "You do not have God," they say. "God is with us." That is their prayer. But they lack power, resources and weapons. Today they burn flags; a united West can still deny them the means to burn more. It can do so if it acts swiftly and resolutely, to keep nuclear fire out of Iran's hands, and to assure that Hamas fails.

By:Martin Kramer is the Wexler-Fromer fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Is the Time Appropriate for Oil Bourse?

2006-03-06T00:37:00.000-08:00

The Iranian government intends to open a euro-based Oil Bourse in 1385 (March 2006-2007). Under the bourse’s trading mechanism oil payments will be in euro instead of the traditional U.S. dollar. The system will allow anyone willing either to buy or sell oil for euro to transact on the exchange, thus circumventing altogether the U.S. dollar. Oil has traditionally and historically been exclusively traded in U.S. dollar.

The Executive branch and the Majlis seem to be fully behind this idea and believe it will demonstrate Iran’s power and independence. Moreover, the Islamic Republic thinks the Oil Bourse will open new doors, markets and customers for Iranian oil instead of the limited market the country transacts with now.

The Oil Bourse will be based in Iran’s main Free Trade Zone Kish Island, specifically Kish’s famous financial bazaar. The main shareholders of the bourse will be Iran’s largest state-owned foundation (MJF) as well as a subsidiary of the National Iranian Oil Company.

Analysts are skeptical about the prospects for success of the Oil Bourse. They remind that in the post-revolutionary years, Iran tried its hand in a number of such endeavors but the efforts were fruitless. Examples include the Kish Air Show that was supposed to serve as a regional market for aircraft and airplane parts. However, in reality, the idea was a bust and wasn’t enthusiastically received by the region’s aviation industry.

The idea to create a market in Iran to serve as a regional hub for the sale and purchase of oil industry equipment also failed to attract sufficient international and regional attention.

It takes two to tango and it isn’t enough for Iran to be determined to establish an Oil Bourse. If the international community shows little interest in such an idea the chances of such a bourse achieving its objectives are nil.

Furthermore, pundits add the reason some of our Persian Gulf neighbors such as Dubai have registered some successes in becoming a regional economic hub is because the international community is cooperating fully with the United Arab Emirates in turning Dubai into a success story.

If the international community was as interested in investing in Iran, our FTZs - particularly Kish - would have been as developed as Dubai by now.

For heaven’s sake, foreign banks aren’t even allowed to open a branch in Iran yet. How does the government expect Iran’s Oil Bourse to succeed if our banking, economic, commercial and investment rules, regulations and statutes are inadequate and unattractive to the rest of the world?

Is this really an appropriate time for opening an Oil Bourse when the Western powers are pushing to isolate Iran and impose economic and other types of sanctions on us?

Political and economic watchers think that under the prevailing circumstances opening an Oil Bourse will be fraught with problems and obstacles. After all, the government has already had to postpone the inauguration of the bourse by more than one year. Therefore, before the officials in charge pursue grandiose and lofty ideas such as an Oil Bourse, they should get to work in reforming Iran’s laws, relaxing investment restrictions, solving Iran’s various problems with the global community, etc.

Egyptian Police Detained a Leading Member of the Opposition

2006-03-03T13:12:00.000-08:00

CAIRO - Egyptian police detained a leading member of the opposition Muslim Brotherhood and six other members in Cairo on Friday, Brotherhood officials said.
After Egyptian Dictator Hosni Mubarak told his nation " Americans and western countries are no longer interested democracy in the Muslim and Arab Countries, Bush and neocons dreams about democracy was killed after Islamist took advantage and won elections in Palestine, Iraq and 88 seats in Egyptian parliament.

Police and intelligence officers went to the home of Rashad Bayoumi, a member of the group's 13-member Guidance Office, near the Giza pyramids and took him away for questioning, one official said. The office acts as the Brotherhood's executive committee.

Bayoumi is the most senior Brotherhood member detained since Essam el-Erian, now head of the political department. He was released in October after five months in jail without trial.

In a separate raid in the south Cairo suburb of Maadi on Friday, police detained six members of the Brotherhood active in student politics, the officials said.
"It (the detention) could be a message to the Brothers that the government is not going to change its way of dealing with them, even if the Brotherhood has 88 seats in parliament" added Abdel Galil el-Sharnougi, one of the officials.

An Interior Ministry spokesman said he had no information about the detentions.

The Brotherhood won the seats in last year’s elections, emerging as the largest opposition force in the country.After the elections the authorities gradually released without trial or charges hundreds of members and organisers held during the campaigning. Only one member has been charged with an offence related to the elections.

Membership of the Muslim Brotherhood is against the law, making it possible for the police to detain members at any time. But the organisation has an office open to the public and its candidates did not hide their affiliation during the elections.

Egypt is largest Arab country(Pop.80M). Sec. Of State Ms.Rice refused to meet elected members of Muslim Brotherhood during her visit to Egypt, when Egyptian Dicatator gave her subjucation lessons.

Egyptian goverment will arrest all the leading Islamist next week, the plan was approved by Washington, and Democracy in the middle east is dead.

Rice: Democracy in the Arab countries Needed a Generation

2006-03-02T13:32:00.000-08:00

Egyptian Dictator Hosni Mubarak boasted that Egypt had won over US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to its views on democracy in the Arab world and quoted her as saying it would take a generation for democracy to take hold. “She was very polite as she was listening to Egyptian opinions and points of view. She didn’t bring up difficult issues or ask to change anything or to intervene in political reform, as some people say,” he told newspaper editors.

Mubarak, who met Rice in Cairo last Wednesday, was speaking on Monday on his way back from a trip to the Gulf. His remarks were published in the government newspaper Al-Gomhuria. “She was convinced by the way that political reform and the implementation of democracy is being done in Egypt... She said that democracy in the Arab countries needed a generation,” the newspaper quoted him as saying.

In public in Cairo, Rice said she had talked candidly with Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit about what she called setbacks and disappointments in Egyptian domestic politics during 2005, including the jailing of liberal opposition leader Ayman Nour. Political analysts say the US campaign for democracy in the Arab world, which began in earnest as an explanation for the US invasion of Iraq, has lost steam in recent months and definetly abandoned.

Mubarak said that at their first meeting Rice told him she knew nothing about the Middle East. But after listening to the Egyptians, “she understood the truth about the situation in the Arab region,” he added. Mubarak had also urged US Vice President Dick Cheney to heed his advice “for once” and not to take military action against Iran, Egyptian newspapers reported yesterday. “I warned Cheney against a strike on Iran and told him: ‘Listen to my advice for once’,” he was quoted as telling Cheney, who was a strong advocate of the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 despite Arab opposition.

Cheney and Mubarak met on Jan. 17 and discussed Iran’s controversial nuclear program during a visit by the vice president. Last month, US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said that Washington did not rule out using military force against Iran to prevent it from obtaining nuclear weapons. Mubarak, quoted in the press, said an attack on Iran would only serve to strengthen the insurgency in neighboring Iraq.

Mubarak also said an Israeli attack on Iran was most unlikely because Tehran would respond by launching ballistic missiles at the Jewish state. “If an air strike (against Iran) took place, Iraq will turn into terrorist groups more than it is already...".

Mubarak is former Egyptian Air force General.

Sunni & Shi'ah Muslims:The Roots of Hatred

2006-02-28T14:04:00.000-08:00

The history of Islam is quite mute or partial about the First Muslim civil war, which divided the Islamic Empire and community the Prophet Mohammed founded. Many Sunni scholars refused or simply reject any notion of Mohammed's intention of his successor. Shi'ah Historians insist that Mohammed proclaimed his cousin and son-in law Ali bin Abi Thalib as his successor or Khalifah during his last Haj.

Mohammed died at his beloved wife Aishah's house,the community was deeply hurt and there were loud jeremiads about immortality of their beloved messenger of God. Abu Bakr, respected friend of Mohammed and father of Aishah called the community and gave one of the most memorable speeches, he concluded that "Mohammed was a man, and mortal, those who worship him, he is a dead man, if you worship to your creator, the God of the earth (Allah) is alive and never dies". Community buried Mohammed and gave allegiance to Abu bakr as the Khalifah.
Ali and his wife, the only surviving offspring of Mohammed were not happy, the entire propinquity of Mohammed's Bani Hashim clan were disappointed considered leadership will remain among Bani Hashim clan, besides Ali's knowledge of Islam was ahead of all the remaining comrades of early days of Islam. Ali the first Muslim and close companion of Mohammed was considered as his successor, Ali was a General, a Poet, and strong handsome man, His talents and closeness to the Prophet earned him many enemies.

Abu Bakr ruled a few years, he appointed his successor, Omar bin Khatab, old friend of Mohammed and great warrior,Abu Bakr died in his home,only leader who was not assassinated until the rule of Ummayids. Omar ruled the golden age of Islam,his generals conquered Quds, and ruled with iron fist and Justice. Omar was assassinated while praying. Ali was offered to become a leader but turned down, after conditions he demanded were not met, so it was offered old companion of Mohammed's named Osman bin Afan of Ummayid dynasty,Old man in his eighties, his clan Umamyids were and remained secretly the archenemy of Mohammed and his Banu Hashim clan. In the early days of Islam,Ummayids fought Mohammed harshly and killed Mohammed's Uncle Hamza. Ummayids were natural rulers of Arabia,Elite politicians and considered their position to rule new Islamic Empire. They converted to Islam and forgiven by Mohammed upon conquest of Makkah.
Osman appointed positions of his government to his clan of Ummayids. When disgruntled Muslims killed the Osman, Muslims went to Ali's house and pledged allegiance, Ali was still able man, although his wife Fatima the daughter of Mohammed died. He hesitated but accepted to save what he called Mohammed's community from civil war,and corrupt regime.

Ali became leader 25 years after the death of Prophet, immediately his rule was challenged by Ummayids, their leader who was Governor of Sham ( Syria) Mu'awiyah Ibn Abu Sufiyaan, son of Mohammed's number one enemies; his parents Hinda and Abu Sufyan ibn Harb were notorious enemy of Mohammed. The father of Mu'awiyah never accepted Islam except to save his life and property.
Ali inherited anarchy and disorganized regime, some old companions of Mohammed pledge allegiance, some refused to give oath to Ali, the conspiracy against him was not secret,influential families were among them, Ali refused to use force and waited time for truce, The biggest challenge came from Mu'awiyah, The Governor of Syria. Muawiyah refused to obey the new Khalifah for a reason that the killers of Osman were still free, as long those responsible are not caught and punished, he will not pledge no allegiance, and suggested that Ali Party (Shias) were behind the assassination of Osman. Two of old companions of Mohammed ( Zubayr and Talha ) broke their oath to Ali and declared open insurgence against Ali.
Enemies of Ali and the Prophets Family included the beloved wife of the Prophet, Aishah who encouraged open antagonism toward Ali and Banu Hashim clan.

Ali's loyal supporters called themselves,( Shiata-Ali) or Party of Ali, and remain loyal to him and the blood family of the Prophet, after Ali was killed by disgruntled supporter, The entire Islamic Empire split in two, Powerful Muawiyah and Ummayid dynasty who ruled from Syria, and small despised but gradually achieved prominence in Iran and Iraq, Shia Muslims, who believe that The Prophet and his family are rightful rulers of Muslim Empire and mourn till today the assassination of Ali and Massacre of His children in Kerbala,Imam Hussein's death, the Ashurah. Muslims of Umayids killed all those who had any blood relation to the Prophet, after Ummayids were defeated by another clan of Bani Hashim, certain uncle of Prophet Mohammed's Abbas Bani Hashim. The new rulers Abbasids moved to a new Capital they founded in Baghdad, persecution against Prophets descendents never ceased, they were hunted and killed. Muslims who stayed loyal to Ummayids are what they called Sunnis, who are majority of 1.5 Billion Muslims of the world, Shia Muslims are majority only in Iran, Bahrain, Iraq, Kuwait and almost half of Population in Lebanon.
Sunni historians and dissemenator damaged and mendacious called Ali loyalist as fake Muslims who worship not to Allah but Ali, there is no evidence any Shia's except small minorities who believe Ali was the Prophet,many contribution of Shia Muslims were ignored, such as Azhar University, which was founded by Shia Muslim rulers of Egypt,The Fatimds, but today is center of Sunni Muslims learning.
Although many claim as descendents of Mohammed or Ali, there is no evidence that anyone who have blood relation to the Prophet is alive, Sunnis make sure they killed them all centuries ago. Direct abuse and discrimination Shia Muslims face in Islamic countries is beyond comprehension, Majority of Sunnis consider Shias as infidels and worst, Shias has been persecuted in Saudia,Kuwait, Bahrain and the biggest butcher of Shias's Saddam Hussein who killed,tortured Shias without any condemnation from Sunni Muslims. The Taliban regime massacred Shia communities in Afghanistan, this hatred toward Shia's were nurtured by sunni scholars last thousand years, even Syrian Sheikh Taymiyah wrote, "Ali and Muawiyah conflict were solved through sword, it's behind us"
I wonder if revered Sheikh is aware that silence means acceptance, that we accepted murder of Ali and his son Hussein who was butchered unkind and viciously with his family in Kerbala was grandson of the Prophet, and was killed by Yazid bin Muawiyah shameful ways, I think the Sheikh Taymiyah popular nowadays among radicals has no feelings between right and wrong, but only the victories one is with God, one fails because God is not his side, Thousands of years produced silence of majority Muslims about crimes committed against our beloved Prophet's family, it's farce to see same people who slaughtering and committing every incendiaries in the name of Prophets cartoons are the ones who never acknowledge the history of persecution against our Muslim brothers, the Shia's. Another evidence of Sunnis hatred toward Shias was the bombing of the Mosque of Prophets Grandson in Iraq, The Sunni midget King of Jordan is alarmed by Majority Shia in Iraq with good relationship with powerful Iran, and openly advocating more power for sunni minorities in Iraq.
This is prove that Sunnis never let go suspicion and hatred toward Shias, and coming weeks or so we will witness the power of Brutes such as Moktada al Sadr and other radicals of both sides, who are anticipating another civil war, with new weapons and more technology it will be catastrophe was right those who don't remember the past and condemned to repeat it.
This history's long and needs more detailed version will be available upon finishing my Historical Novel, ( Ali). If you need more info or comment contact me, and I am a sunni Muslim, whatever that means.

Book Reviews

2006-02-24T09:27:00.000-08:00

This Week we reviewed Books from Arab countries and next week will be African. All the books are available in English.

Yassir Arafat, Bassam Abu-Sharif, Beirut: Riad El-Rayyes Books, December 2005. pp482

The author of this biography of the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, Bassam Abu-Sharif, was for many years one of Arafat's closest advisors, and he is therefore uniquely well-placed to write Arafat'spersonal and political story. Driven from Jerusalem by the Israelis as a child, Abu-Sharif spent most of his life fighting back: dubbed "the face of terror" by the American magazine Time, he was a member of the politburo of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine,in which capacity he allegedly masterminded a series of airplane hijackings, survived a letter bomb from the Israeli secret services,losing several fingers and an eye, and went on to become Yasser Arafat's confidant and spokesman. His books include September Papers (1979), Political Settlement (1980) and, most controversial of all, Best of Enemies(1996), written jointly with Uzi Mahnaimi, a former Israeli spy master,whom Abu-Sharif met in a London restaurant in 1988. This meeting not only produced this book but also led to a collaboration that "helped move the peace negotiations forward and set the stage for the Arafat-Rabin hand shake of 1993," as the publicity for the Best of Enemies claims.

It is therefore interesting to see what Abu-Sharif has to say ten years after the appearance of this much-publicised book and more than ayear after the death of Arafat, especially since many Arabs believe that Arafat was killed by his Israeli partners in the "peace of the brave" that both Arafat and Abu-Sharif believed in. Indeed, the bookends with Abu-Sharif describing Arafat's last days, when, not longbefore he died, he told Abu-Sharif that "we were betrayed by the Americans, but they will regret it one day, as there will be no stability in the region before our people attain liberty and independence." Abu-Sharif says here that at the beginning of October 2004 he noticed a rapid deterioration in Arafat's health, and, though Arafat said he had flu when asked what the matter was, Abu-Sharif says he began to suspect that he was being poisoned. On October 25 he contacted the French consul in Jerusalem to urge his help in transferring Arafat to France, which was done on 29 October. The rest is history.

Ending with Abu-Sharif's final encounter with Arafat in 2004 and beginning with his first meeting with the man in 1973, this book reveals many intimate stories from the life of this most influential and enigmatic of all Arab leaders, weaving personal information about what food or dress Arafat liked and disliked with some of the most momentous political events in the modern history of the Arab world. The book also reveals many hitherto unknown secrets regarding, among other things, pressures exerted on the PLO to change its political programme in 1988, and what happened in the corridors of the 1991 Madrid Peace Conference, which itself led to the discussions that issued in the Oslo Accords and the 1993 hand shake on the White House lawn.

Fairuz wa al-Rahabnah: masrah al-gharib wa al-kinz wa al-a'jouba(Fairuz and the Rahbanis: Theatre of Strangeness, Treasure and Wonder),Fawwaz Trabulsi, Beirut: Riad El-Rayyes Books, January 2006. pp240

There are many books in Arabic ó and perhaps other languages as welló on the legendary Lebanese singer Fairuz, who celebrated her 70th birthday a few weeks ago. However, this recent book is unique in that it has been written by a leading Lebanese political activist, Fawwaz Trabulsi, who has written extensively on Arab and Lebanese politics since 1969 when his first book Socialist Lebanon: Socialist Activism and the Contradictions ofthe Lebanese Situation appeared. Trabulsi has also translated many works into Arabic, including books by Antonio Gramsci and Edward Said.

As a result, Trabulsi brings rare insight to his study of Fairouz and the Rahbani Brothers, and one that weaves together politics, artand the wider cultural context. Fairuz wa al-Rahabnah investigates Lebanese reality as this is depicted in the Rahbanis'musicals, which were written for and performed by Fairuz. Casting a fresh look at these striking examples of Arab musical theatre and re-reading what has been written on Fairouz and Rahbanis against the political and cultural background of Lebanon and the Arab world in the second half of the 20th century, Trabulsi finds that though "the Rahbanis have concentrated their efforts on rejuvenating Lebanese patriotism by means of poetry, dialogue, music and scenery, many commentators have tended to ignore the fact that they have also done their utmost to reconcile Lebanese patriotism with wider Pan-Arab belonging."

Trabulsi continues that "suffice it to remember in this context that they visited Cairo in 1955 during the rule of Kamil Shamoun [in Lebanon] and in the same year that the Baghdad Pact was launched. This invitation came from Nasser, who had been so charmed by the voice of Fairuz that he wished she were Egyptian." Nevertheless, despite the reconciliation that the Rahbanis attempted between Lebanese patriotism and Pan-Arabism, Trabulsi comments that their brand of Pan-Arabism was"one that concentrated on the Lebanese-Syrian-Palestinian union, though they were ambivalent on that front too."

This is a remarkable book, and it is one that should be read by anyone interested in the matchless influence of Fairuz and the Rahbanis. This influence Trabulsi attributes to four elements: the superb voice of Fairuz; the musical and poetic ingenuity of Assi andMansour al-Rahbani; the ability of the singer to become a national cultural phenomenon; and the way the art of the Rahbanis has become entrenched in the popular culture of Lebanon.

Al-'irak wa rahan al-mustaqbal (Iraq and the Challenge of the Future), Maitham al-Janabi, Damascus & Baghdad: Al-Madaa Publishing Company, 2006. pp390

Numerous books on Iraq have appeared since the US-led invasion ofthe country in 2003, many of them by Iraqi scholars who lived in exile during the rule of Saddam Hussein. This book, the latest publication ofIraqi political scientist Maitham al-Janabi, examines the origins ofthe Iraqi nightmare past and present. In his view, while the US-led invasion and on-going occupation of Iraq have compounded the country's problems, much of what we are witnessing today in Iraq has its roots in the country's complex history. Indeed, al-Janabi notes that, "when a Sufi was asked 'from whence comes this cry of pain,' he answered 'from everything,' a saying that aptly reflects what remains of Iraq today."

Al-Janabi divides his study into six chapters, the titles of which give the flavour of his analyses: "Iraq and the Problematic of the Nationalist Idea"; "Iraq and the Problematic of the Patriotic Idea","The Legitimate Alternative State"; "Civil Society and the Building of National Reconciliation"; "Philosophy of an Alternative Culture"; "The Philosophy of Education". He believes that there is an inherent paradox in the Iraqi ordeal as this is being witnessed today. "While the totalitarian regimes that have ruled the country have succeeded in alienating Iraqis from their history, crushing any sense of meaning or optimism for the future," he writes, "this in a sense has also opened the way towards a future unfettered by the absurdity of what took placein Iraq during most of the 20th century." In the author's view, Iraq needs a "new construction" and not just reconstruction, the latter implying only restoration. But, al-Janabi argues, there is little intoday's Iraq that is worth restoring.

The challenge for the future, al-Janabi feels, is to build anew,constructing institutions and Iraqi citizens alike from the ground up.This, he admits, will be a difficult task and one that can only be achieved by work on five fronts, simultaneously taking in the eradication of totalitarian residues in state institutions, the deconstruction of extremist mindsets, the promotion of moderate social and political thinking, and the consolidation of a liberal and rational culture through the building of civil society institutions able tocounter traditional modes of thinking. Finally, the fight against social marginalisation in Iraq will require the reintegration of social forces into economic and social production.

Al-izdouaj al-thaqafi wa azmat al-moa'rada al-masriya (Cultural Dualism and the Crisis of the Egyptian Opposition), Ibrahim Mansour,Cairo: Dar Merit, 2006. pp283

Twenty years have elapsed since Ibrahim Mansour, who died in 2003,conducted the interviews published in this book. A leading Egyptian intellectual and a gifted writer of fiction and critic, Mansour commanded the love and the friendship of many generations of Egyptian writers, and the interviews in this book with leading Egyptian writers including Naguib Mahfouz, Youssef Idris, Amal Donqol, Fouad Zakaria and Ahmed Fouad Negm, among others, reveal his rare qualities of depth and intimacy.

In all these interviews with 11 leading Egyptian intellectuals,Mansour was preoccupied by a major hypothesis that he put to the test in his dialogues: namely that a cultural dualism, or "schizophrenia,"as he sometimes described the phenomenon, exists in Egypt whereby the elite, be they political leaders or intellectuals, live in isolation from the masses or from the ordinary man in the street. In testing this point of departure, Mansour engages his interlocutors in heated and spirited discussions that often sound like verbal duels and in which the issues at stake are discussed with vitality and verve.

When Mansour asks Naguib Mahfouz, for example, about the influence of popular Egyptian culture and heritage on his writing, Mahfouz answers that "when I began writing novels I made use of the available techniques employed in writing the novels of the period, those techniques naturally being taken from Western literature [...] True, we read books of Arab heritage, but when we sat down to write we did not want to write like the Thousand and One Nights, as the model we wanted to emulate 50 years ago was a European one."

Mansour asks about the validity of this kind of imitation in hindsight, and whether emulation of this sort is not an error. Mahfouz replies that "it was not an illusion, but I could not say whether it was wrong or right. All I know is that if someone had told me in the past that I wrote like Balzac, then I would have been pleased to no end, as if I had been a student who had succeeded in solving a difficult mathematical problem. Now, however, I am not so sure I would be pleased." Why, asks Mansour, should this be so, to which the novelist replies that this is because "I want to be myself, even if that means I am less of a writer than Balzac."

What is most extraordinary about these interviews from the 1980s is that many of the controversial and problematic issues discussed arestill with us today, and they still do not have the prospect of any satisfactory resolution. Indeed, one of the disturbing conclusions one draws after reading this enjoyable book is that the "cultural schizophrenia" that Mansour identifies and discusses with his interlocutors is one that still besets many Arab intellectuals.

Al-imara fi al-a'sr al-amoyi: al-injaz wa al-ta'oil(Architecture in the Umayyad Period: Achievement and Interpretation),Khalid al-Sultani, Damascus & Baghdad: Al-Madaa Publishing Company,2006. pp389

This book by Khalid al-Sultani of the Danish Royal Academy of Arts deals with a very important juncture in the development of Islamic architecture, the Umayyad period, which the author describes as the founding moment from which much of what we now identify as Islamic architecture developed. "Any analysis of architecture during the Umayyad period," al-Sultani writes, "the most important juncture in the development of Arab-Islamic architecture, must take as its point of departure two major elements: achievement and interpretation. For the primary function of any form of architecture lies in the value of whatit achieved in terms of constructions and buildings and then in how far these achievements lend themselves to a number of interpretations and kinds of explanation."

The Umayyad dynasty was founded in 661 CE following years of political uncertainty,and division of Muslims, Sunni Muslims and Shia Muslims. The political centre of Islam was shifted to the dynasty's capital of Damascus, surviving for around a century before being overthrown in turn by the Abbasids, whose capital was established at Baghdad in 750. However, during the hundred or so years of its existence the Umayyad dynasty was able to use the resources of the new Islamic state to foster the arts and architecture: the Dome ofthe Rock in Jerusalem (691) and the Great Mosque of Damascus (706) are among its most important architectural achievements, it being said that the Caliph Abdel-Malik set aside the tax revenues of Egypt for seven years to pay for the former, while the later was built using revenues drawn over a similar period from Syria.

While Umayyad architecture drew elements from previous architectural traditions, among them Roman and Byzantine, mosque architecture in particular necessitated a new use of space, and gradually anarchitecture that was distinctly Islamic in character emerged.Al-Sultani divides his scholarly study of the dynasty's architectural achievements into five parts, looking at architectural space in the first part, before cataloguing a hundred years of architectural activities and achievements and reviewing the architectural context ofthe period. He also provides a useful survey of the architectural worksof the Umayyad period and a general introduction and conclusion.

In his conclusion, al-Sultani writes that his study has sought "to be a preliminary and modest contribution towards the gigantic effort of re-evaluating the different stages of past Islamic architecture, the study of which to a large degree is limited to historical periods as ifeach period were an 'isolated pocket' containing no traces from the past or influences on the future." In contrast, the wider and more comprehensive treatment of the whole of the Islamic architectural heritage that al-Sultani is proposing, and of which the present volume is designed as a part, would, he says, "afford us a wider scope [in understanding] a continuum that continues to the present day."

Soa'l al-thaqafa: al-thaqafa al-arabiyya fi alim moutahoil (The Question of Culture: Arab Culture in a Changing World) Ali Oumlil,Casablanca: Arab Cultural Centre Publications, 2005. pp159

This book, the latest by the prominent Moroccan intellectual Ali Oumlil, professor at the Mohamed V University, Rabat, is a stimulating study of Arab culture and the wider context within which this culture is practiced. It focuses on issues such as the challenges western information technology imposes on Arab culture, the impact of neo-liberalism on Arab societies, and the pros and cons of the much-discussed "dialogue of cultures". Regarding this last issue in particular, Oumlil argues that for a useful dialogue between Arab-African culture and the West to take place mutual recognition must take place first, something that has not yet happened. Mutual recognition of this sort faces two major obstacles: the first being an Islamic fundamentalism that reduces Arab culture to religion, and then reduces that religion to a fundamentalist creed; the second being western fundamentalism, which perceives modernity as the West's creation and over which the West has a monopoly.

However, besides diagnosing the ills of Arab culture and its interaction with the wider world, Oumlil attempts in the six chapters of his book to answer a number of pertinent questions. He discusses,for example, what the Arabs need to do if they are to produce educational policies able to generate human resources capable of integrating into and competing in today's world. He examines which Arab values are conducive to a modern mindset, and he discusses how the Arabs should inculcate a respect for human dignity and for human rightsin the younger generations.

Finally, Oumlil discusses the impact of Muslim immigration to the West on western societies and especially on Europe. He believes that European Muslims have developed their own identities, and these will allow them to take matters in hand in those areas that concern them.Muslims living in Islamic countries should not interfere in the affairs of Europe's Muslims, or consider them to be "brethren living in alien countries." On the contrary, Oumlil argues, claims of brotherhood should not entail patronizing attitudes: the future of Europe's Muslims is their own business, he writes, and they should be allowed to formulate that future without outside interference.

40 Pyramids of Egypt and Their Neighbours, Photographs by SherifSonbol and text by Peter Snowdon, Cairo: Cyperus Press, 2006. pp96

This beautifully produced book of photographs by the internationally acclaimed photographer Sherif Sonbol and the accompanying text written by Peter Snowdon(Fo is a treasure-trove that would delight all Egyptologyfans. In 40 Pyramids of Egypt and Their Neighbours, Peter Snowdon writes "Egypt is home to more than 100 pyramids, many of which have long since disappeared or collapsed, leaving nothing but a faint impression of their previous existence in the sand. The photographs inthis book are of those pyramids which have weathered the sand storms,looters and the ravages of time and remain yet standing."

Of Sonbol's photography The New York Times wrote "Rare is the photographer who looks at familiar art form and shows it in a newlight. But Sherif Sonbol's stunning and revelatory photographs demonstrate a particularly agile eye, frequently abstracting shapes into dynamic and explosive bursts of colour... Even when Sonbol concentrates on stillness, he exemplifies the adage that a pause is not a pause but 'an act of accomplishment.'"

UAE Donated $1 Million to Bush Library

2006-02-24T09:05:00.000-08:00

United Arab Emirates contributed at least $1 million to the Bush Library Foundation, which established the George Bush Presidential Library at Texas A&M University in College Station.

The donations were made in the early 1990s for the library, which houses the papers of former President George H.W. Bush, the current president’s father.

The list of donors names of late Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan (President of UAE) and the people of the United Arab Emirates as one donor in the $1 million or more categories.

The amount of the gift grants them recognition on the engraved donor wall in the library entrance or on the paving bricks that line the library’s walkways, according to library documents.

Roman Popaduik, chairman of the Bush Library Foundation that collects donations, said he could not discuss details of the gifts except to say the amount category and whether it was before or after 1997.

The chief executive of the Dubai Ports World, Ahmed bin Sulayem, did not donate individually.

The hundreds of large donors include longtime Bush associates, including Vice President Dick Cheney and other administration officials as well as business titans - such as Enron Corp. founder Kenneth Lay - and big Republican donors.

Other Arab donors include the state of Kuwait, the Saudi Royal family and Prince Bandar bin Sultan family, the Sultanate of Oman, King Hassan II of Morocco and the Emir of Qatar. The former South Korean prime minister and China also gave tens of thousands of dollars to the library.

The Respect of A Cousin

2006-02-24T08:13:00.000-08:00

After the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten’s 12 caricatures of the prophet Muhammad were republished in European newspapers, riots erupted in Damascus, Gaza, Beirut and elsewhere throughout the Muslim world. The violence is an extreme manifestation of the deep hurt felt by virtually all Muslims.

As we condemn the violence on the streets, perhaps we should take a moment to understand the hurt in the hearts of the great majority of Muslims who did not engage in violence.

For Muslims, the mere rendering of an image of Muhammad is sacrilege. The portrayal of Muhammad in a pejorative fashion is to them an inconceivably offensive desecration, on the level of what would be for us the defilement of a Torah scroll. Because it was done in newspapers across Europe, it was a slap in the face repeated thousands of times.

Perhaps it’s a question of respect, not freedom. Freedom of expression theoretically protects the right of a non-Jew to desecrate a Torah scroll. Yet we would all view freedom of expression as a hollow defense to such a vile act.

Some say Muslims can’t take criticism and simply don’t understand freedom of the press. In my own limited experience, that has not been the case. For the past year I’ve written a column in a Muslim newspaper, Muslims Weekly, in which I’ve criticized suicide bombing, the treatment of Jews under Islamic rule, the anti-Jewish rantings of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and even Muslims Weekly’s own reporting about Israel. But it was all done with respect, an informed appreciation of the wonderful benefits that Islam conferred upon the Jewish people, along with a willingness to look at our own imperfections together with those of the other.

Regardless of whether or not the European press was constitutionally free to publish the offensive images, the act was a blatant and vulgar act of disrespect to Islam. Such insults no doubt contribute to the frightening specter of a clash of civilizations.

What can we do as Jews to lessen the hostilities? Perhaps, just perhaps, a little respect would help. Rather than ripping the wounds wider with editorial musings extolling freedom of speech and condemning violent protests, is it not time for a bit of healing?

The pages of this Jewish newspaper present a place for a small start by showing Muslims right here that though we too have the freedom to say anything we like, we choose to convey respect to our Muslim cousins. Printing something positive about Muhammad best does this.

There is a space between romanticizing the past and vilifying it. There is a time to focus on the dark side of history and a time to view the other in the best light. There is a time to cull from our rabbinic writings the good our sages saw in Islam and there is quite a bit of such sentiment recorded. We Jews need to learn to be more flexible, pursuing the claims of Jews expelled from Arab countries and criticizing anti-Jewish TV programs and cartoons in the Muslim media, while at the same time displaying gratitude for all the good Islam did for us. There is a time to jump over our pain and see the humanity of the other. That time is now. Let us start:

There is a Hadith (oral tradition concerning the words and works of Muhammad) recorded by Bukhari in the name of Amer Bin Rabiha that reads as follows:

“A funeral procession passed us and the Prophet stood up for it. We said, ‘but Prophet of God, this is a funeral of a Jew.’ The Prophet responded, ‘rise.’ ”

One can search the writings of the ancient non-Jewish world for a more powerful example of a public display of respect for the humanity of the Jew. There simply is no more powerful statement than the single word uttered by Muhammad nearly 14 centuries ago.

Some readers will bombard this newspaper with reams of material showing a darker side to Islam, as if it were just too much for them to hear one good thing. But it is there, it is a sacred part of their tradition, it is good and we should hear it and respect it.

When you give respect you get it. When you take criticism, you earn the right to give it. Perhaps this article will be republished in Muslim newspapers, compete with its critical comments about the pain we feel in the face of anti-Jewish cartoons and worse in Muslim media. Muslim readers may come to understand that an article by a Jew, in a Jewish newspaper, was one of respect, telling its audience: “We know that the one mocked in newspapers in Europe is the one who had the humanity to tell his companions to rise for the funeral procession of a Jew.”

Edward Miller, a local attorney, is active in efforts to reconcile Jews and Muslims.

Israel Destroyed a US Funded Public Park

2006-02-23T10:37:00.000-08:00

The Israeli Army, using a bulldozer, destroyed a US-funded public park, including a children’s playground and swimming pool, in a West Bank village yesterday, witnesses and officials said. The bulldozer, protected by a force of Israeli soldiers, demolished the park in Azzun, close to the northern town of Qalqiliya, on the grounds that it had been built without permission of the Israeli authorities in the occupied territory.

Construction work on the park had begun in November last year and was almost completed, the mayor of Azzun, Ihssan Abdellatif, told AFP. He said that the project, which cost around $120,000, had been financed by the US Agency for International Development.

“I can confirm that the park that was destroyed today was funded by USAID,” a spokeswoman for the agency, Anna-Maija Litvak, told AFP. The spokeswoman added that USAID (US Taxpayers) had contributed around $80,000 toward the cost.

Meanwhile, Iran offered yesterday to help finance a Palestinian Authority run by the Hamas group, state radio reported in Tehran. Israel promptly warned the Palestinians that if they accepted Iranian money, they would be aligning themselves with an “international pariah.” The secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Ali Larijani, announced the offer after a meeting with Khaled Meshaal, the political leader of the Hamas, in Tehran, the radio said.

“The United States proved that it would not support democracy after it cut its aid to the Palestinian government after Hamas won the elections. We will certainly help the Palestinians,” Larijani said, according to the radio.

In Jerusalem, Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev said: “The incoming Palestinian leadership has to decide if it wants to be part of the legitimate international community or if it wants, through its own actions, to align itself with international pariahs.”

Rice Struggles to Find Support for Mideast Policies

2006-02-23T10:18:00.000-08:00

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice faced an uphill struggle trying to reconcile Washington's push for democracy and concerns over rising Islamism as she pressed on with a tour of Mideast allies. Washington's top diplomat held talks with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak which focused on the aftermath of Hamas victory last month in the Palestinian parliamentary elections.

During a joint press conference with Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul Gheit on Tuesday, she reiterated the tough stance of her administration, which lists Hamas as a terrorist organization."You cannot have one foot in the camp of terror and another foot in the camp of politics" she said, adding that the international community expected the Islamist movement to recognize the Jewish state's right to exist.

Hamas has used softer language since its resounding electoral victory over the mainstream Fatah but has stopped short of considering normalization with the Jewish state. But Egypt has argued Washington had to respect the outcome of the democratic Palestinian elections and should not rush to boycott a government led by Hamas.

We should give Hamas time, Abul Gheit said. I am sure that Hamas will develop, will evolve. We should not prejudge the issue, Abul Gheit said. The United States has threatened to cut aid to a Hamas-led government if the militant movement did not recognize Israel and end violence.

Egypt is an important voice at this time of change and choice for the Palestinian people" said Rice, who held talks earlier Tuesday with Egypt's intelligence chief Omar Suleiman.

Hamas which was asked by Palestinian President and Fatah Chairman Mahmoud Abbas to form the next government, dismissed Rice's comments and argued Washington's tough talk could only backfire.

The United States still haven't learned that the language of threats doesn't work with Hamas, the movement's spokesman Mohammed Nazzal told AFP.

The more the United States pressures Hamas, the more the Palestinian people will support Hamas, he said after meeting one of Suleiman's deputies, Mohsen Al-Naamani. Nazzal interpreted Rice's remarks as a sign of US "nervousness;.

Before departing to Saudi Arabia, Rice also had brief meeting with members of Egypt's civil society ( Not known members of Islamic party-Muslim Brotherhood) who exposed their ideas about means of promoting democracy whilst at the same time countering the rise of Islamism.

Eliminating the Muslim Brothers is totally non-democratic. The issue is how can we compete with them,; intellectual Tarek Heggi told her. He urged Washington to be more specific in promoting democracy in the region.

Since the victory of Hamas, Washington is hesitant to promote democracy in the region, Islamist are very strong In Egypt, Morocco, Sudan, Yemen, Somalia and Palestine, it seems that democracy in the region will help the enemies of United States, whether the Bush administration will continue to support democracy in Islamic world is questionable.

Facts about Dubai Ports World

2006-02-22T22:19:00.000-08:00

Dubai Ports World is at the center of the Washington controversy over whether the firm, owned by Dubai, should take over managing six major ports in the United States.

Here are facts about Dubai Ports World:

Dubai Ports is owned by government of Dubai,The ruling Family of Dubai Al-Maktoum Family, Head of the family, current Vice president of UAE, Prime Minister and Minister of defense of UAE, Sheikh Mohammed Bin Rachid Al Maktoum is very generous to many Washington insiders,and he is very shrewd businessman.

Share holders at Britain's P&O, who had been managing the ports, voted last week in favor of Dubai Port’s multi billion dollar bid, giving the firm control over the management of P&O’s global operations, including in the US ports of New York and New Jersey, Baltimore, Philadelphia,New Orleans and Miami.

The deal made Dubai Ports World the world’s third-largest ports group.

Dubai Ports World purchased the global port assets of US freight rail company CSX Corp. In 2005 for $1.15 billion. US Treasury Secretary John Snow is a former chairman of CSX, but left the company a year before the Dubai deal.

One of DP World's top executives, David Sanborn, was nominated by President George W. Bush in January to become the administrator of the Maritime Administration in the US Department of Transportation. At least one senator plans to hold up Sanborn’s confirmation until more questions about the port deal are answered.

Dubai Ports has international operations in the Dominican Republic,Venezuela, Germany, Romania, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Djibouti, India,China, Malaysia, South Korea and Australia in addition to the UAE.

Book Review: Orhan Pamuk's My Name is Red

2006-02-22T21:39:00.000-08:00

Novelist such as Mr.Pamuk comes once in a lifetime, (b. 1952, Istanbul). He was brought up in Nisantasi. He attended Roberts College (1970) In Istanbul and then Istanbul Technical University, Faculty of Architecture for some time.

He graduated fromIstanbul University, Institute of Journalism (1977). He did hispostgraduate studies at the institute he graduated from. At twenty-two, he gave up everything and took up writing as his sole occupation.

He embarked on his career in literature with his poems published in thereview Yeditepe (1970). Later, he focused on writing short stories andnovels.He came third at a competition held at the Antalya FilmFestival.

He ranked first with Mehmet Eroglu at the MilliyetNovel Award in 1979 with his novel Karanlik ve Isik (Darkness andLight) and thus became well known. He collected the Orhan Kemal Awardin 1983 and the Madarali Award in 1984 with his novel Cevdet Bey veOgullari (Cevdet Bey and His Sons).

He received the Prix de la Découverte Européenne in 1991 with the French translation of his Sessiz Ev (Silent House).

He gained international fame with Beyaz Kale (The White Castle), which was published in 1985 and translated into many languages in 1990. He attended Columbia University in New York as a visiting scholar between1985-1988.

He collected the Prix France Culture award in 1990with the French translation of his novel Kara Kitap (The Black Book).The only screenplay he wrote was filmed in 1991.

His novel Benim Adim Kirmizi (My Name is Red, 1998) received many awards,including La Prix Du Meilleur Livre Etranger in France, the GrinzaneCavour in Italy in 2002 and the International Impac in Dublin in 2003.The latter award was accompanied by an award of €100,000 from the city of Dublin.

My Name is Red ( Vinatage paperback $22.95)is a feast of pleasure, One never bores or stops reading until the end. Based on Mystery of a beautifully written tales of magic and power. tales such as Arabian Nights of sixteenth-century Istanbul. When a Sultan commissions a book of forbidden subject, all Istanbul and mystery of the books leads to hidden secret of miniaturist, a murder, forbidden love and desires,Art, Religion, sex, nothing goes unnoticed by this Master storyteller. this Book one cannot have enough, do yourself a favor, and a get a copy of My Name is Red, by Orhan Pamuk.

His works have been translated into thirty-two languages. His statements on the Kurdish and Armenian problems have been matters of debate and criticism. He refused the highest award in Turkey.

WORKS:

NOVEL: (Darkness and Light, 1980), (Cevdet Bey and His Sons, 1982), (Silent House, 1983), (TheWhite Castle, 1985), (The Black Book, 1990), (NewLife, 1994), (My Name is Red, 1998), (Snow,2002).

SCREENPLAY:(Hidden Face, 1992).

MEMOIR-ESSAY: (Other Colors, 1999), Istanbul (Istanbul, 2003.)

Zogby Says Saudis Need Better PR Strategy in US

2006-02-22T14:36:00.000-08:00

— The Kingdom Of Saudi Arabia (Royal family)needs to hone the communication skills of “smart Saudi women” to put across its message effectively to the American audience, said a prominent Arabist intellectual from the US during a press conference here yesterday.

“The country is wasting its resources in trying to reach out to the Americans through their media. Such a strategy has turned out to be counter-productive,” James Zogby, president of the Arab-American Institute (AAI), told mediapersons at the Council of Saudi Chambers of Commerce & Industry (CSCCI).

Pointing out that Saudi Arabia should review its communication strategy, Zogby said talented Saudi women from the mass media could be mobilized to explain the Saudi point of view to the target audience, such as the American youth, the elite, opinionmakers and other influential people in the US.

Zogby also disclosed that current thinking in the US administration was in favor of relaxing visa restrictions for students and businessmen wishing to visit the US. “They do realize that they were overreacting to events in the aftermath of Sept. 11. New procedures would be put in place by the State Department. As a result, the restrictions would be eased somewhat,” he said.

He said it was a smart move on the part of the Saudi government to try to send more students to the US. This would increase pressure on the State Department to rationalize the visa procedure for both students and the business community.

At the press conference, Zogby distributed a copy of the presentation that the AAI made to US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice who will be visiting Saudi Arabia and other Middle East countries to urge them not to give aid to Hamas and also help in the reconstruction of Iraq.

“USAID (Agency for International Development, the main organ for foreign aid from US public funds) programs strengthen Palestinian civil society, empowering moderates to affect change in their government,” states the letter. “Withdrawal of US financial support as punishment for the results of a democratic election it actively supported could cause a breakdown in civil society. This vacuum could lead to civil war or increased interference from regional players.”

Asked about the US double standard in dealing with the Arab states vis-a-vis Israel, Zogby said: “Double standard in the US is not the issue. Asymmetry in the balance of power is the main problem. When one side is much stronger than the other, it speaks from a position of strength and defines the debate. That’s how George W. Bush succeeded in defining Sen. John Kerry as a weak candidate in defending America’s security interests, even though John fought in the Vietnam War and Bush did not.”

By the same token, said Zogby, the Israelis have succeeded in defining their conflict with the Palestinians as one concerning the war on terror.

“An Israeli delegation visits the US every week for interaction with influential sections of the society,” he said. “They have also hired an American PR firm for giving them expert opinion on how they should handle their media campaign. Thus, a large number of Americans have been locked in place by negative perceptions about the Arabs.”

He said Saudi authorities should design a new communications strategy that relies on people-to-people contacts, and visits to places in the US other than Washington and New York in order to explain the Saudi perceptions.

“It’s true there are Americans who appreciate what Saudi Arabia has been doing as a responsible member of the international community,” said Zogby. “But there is still an information gap which has not been bridged by the advertising campaign.”

Ahmadinejad: Palestinian Nation's Will Greatest Power to Solve Mideast Crisis

2006-02-21T11:36:00.000-08:00

Iran's Radical President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said here on Monday in a meeting with Head of the Political Office of Palestinian Resistance Movement Hamas, Khalid Mashal that the Palestinians now have the strongest position in the Middle East peace process.
Ahmadinejad stressed, "Today the Palestinian nation's will is the greatest power in the Middle East and by voting in favor of Hamas the Palestinians emphasized their ideal of resistance till the liberation of their country and the enemies cannot confront that will." Speaking to Dr. Mashal and his accompanying delegation, the IRI President said that the Palestinian nation's support for Hamas is your greatest political asset, adding, "The Palestinians' vote in this election was to the liberation of the entire occupied territories through continuation of resistance and the establishment of an independent Palestinian country."

He said that the victory of Hamas meanwhile reflected the historic will of the Palestinians for choosing a new path and for leading a new type of life, adding, "The Palestinian nation's will annulled the Oslo Agreement, the Road Map project, and all previous plans for Middle East."

The President added, "Hamas victory proved the Palestinian nation's will for deciding their fate independently, despite the opposition of the superpowers and Western countries."

Emphasizing that the philosophy behind the existence of the Zionist regime has been put under serious question today, Ahmadinejad said, "The occupying regime of Holy Qods was established on a sad day when the Muslim nations were unfortunately asleep."

He added, "That regime's establishment and its sixty-year aggressions against the Islamic countries have all been at the service of ensuring the interests of the West, but today we have the wave of Islamic awakening, and the gradual collapse of the hegemony of the West, which is the reason why the occupiers do not feel at ease within the occupied lands."

Referring to the plots hatched by enemies for halting the process of the victories of the resistance movement by depriving them of the opportunities, Ahmadinejad warned, "You should be aware not to fall prey to political fractions within Palestinian groups and beware that our popular government is taking shape under such conditions that a large part of your country is still occupied."

The head of the Political Office of Hamas Khaled Mashal, too, during the meeting referring to the "astonishing victory" of his resistance group in recent elections said, "Hamas has said ever since the early results of elections were being announced that the Palestinian nation's victories can continue from now on."

He said, "Hamas would soon take responsibility as the Palestinian Authority and push forth the Palestinian nation's ideals despite all hardships ahead, and we are determined not to yield to the mounting pressures that are already evident."

Khaled Mashal meanwhile stressed that Hamas would never retreat from its basic stand of not recognizing the legitimacy of the usurper Zionist regime, to keep insisting on the basic right of all Palestinian refugees to return to Palestine, and for freedom of all Palestinian inmates from horrendous Israeli prisons.

Iran's ruling conservative clergy offered Millions of Euros to help the new Hamas led government, Thanks for high oil prize and booming economy in Iran, also Mr.Mashal met Iran supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khameini, and chief of intelligence.

The New Rise of Islamic Radicals

2006-02-21T11:33:00.000-08:00

Since President Bush called democratization in the Middle east, the Islamic radicals used this alien weapon to achieve the power, either with ballot or bullet. Lugubrious mood of west and the new life of Islamic radicals are blamed to democratization of Muslim world.
Hamas won and is bound to rule Palestinians under Israeli subjugation, US, European ever attentive to Israelis demands refused and cut off all the aid to Palestinians, which in due course will find other sources of income such as Iran, rich Oil Arab countries, and exiled Palestinian Diaspora. Hamas leaders are sharp and clever and achieved their success through patience and terror, Now that they won the election, they will need to govern with moderate views, as long they don't seem to betray those who elected them. Isolating Hamas will not help no one, besides let them rule and fail if necessary.
Egypt, Morocco, Turkey, Jordan and many other countries Islamic Radicals are using Hamas strategy of bullet or ballot.

Recalcitrant Islamic courts in Somalia are encouraged by Hamas, they are consolidating their power through bullet, they already have the poor majority of population support, simply, the Islamic Radicals with all their faults are no corrupt. Who is funding them? Iran? Saudi? Al-Qaeda?
The answer is far beyond those countries, Islamist are better organized than so-called secularist, and they found new blood to reinvent their popularity through risible cartoons of the our beloved Prophet Mohammed(MPUH).

I assure you Pres. Bush is not mistaken by Democracy in middle east, only real representative of the people can negotiate with the West, not corrupt obese leaders of our so-called friends. United States must respect the wishes of the majority of Muslim People, and become honest broker of peace between the Israelis and Palestinians.

Latin America: 21st Century Socialism?

2006-02-19T14:02:00.000-08:00

The victory of the Left-wing forces in several Latin American countries, and an emotional speech by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez about the advent of the "era of 21 century socialism" in the region have shown that it is increasingly turning red.
Leftism is nothing new in Latin America. In the second half of the 20th century it was dubbed a "red continent". But at that time the Soviet Union, China, and Cuba were competing with each other in proletarian internationalism, supplying Latin American countries with Communist propaganda and money. This is now a thing of the past. After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Russia has lost even its economic contacts with the region. After the collapse of its donor, the U.S.S.R., Cuba had to think about its own survival rather than a regional revolution. Having overcome Mao's radicalism, China has not abandoned Latin America, but gives priority to economic interests just like any other country. The current "reddening" of Latin America is very different from what it was in the past.

The prestigious Le Monde Diplomatique has described the situation as a complete failure of neoliberalism and subsequent social tensions. This conclusion is correct but not without reservations, since it makes a generalization for the entire continent, where the situation in every country is determined by its own set of problems and its leaders.

In addition, the continent is divided into opposite economic groups. Mercosur, the Southern Common Market, unites Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, and, since late 2005, Venezuela. It may soon be joined by Bolivia, led by the recently elected first Amerindian President, Evo Morales. Mercosur is against globalization and the economic blockade of Cuba. It blames major transnational corporation for all trouble in Latin America, which are eating the best and biggest pieces of the Latin American pie, ignoring the interests of the local people.

The philosophy of the US-established North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), joined by Canada and Mexico, is poles apart. These are aggressive advocates of globalization, which defend the interests of big business, and are overtly trying to pull all Latin American nations into their orbit. There are also other economic groups, like the Andes Group, but the nations that remain indecisive, are most likely to be drawn to one of the two strongest magnets. The strength of one magnet is obvious - money. The strength of the other one, Mercosur, is both populism and assertion of social rights and justice in entire Latin America.

Not all Left-wing leaders are as radical as Hugo Chavez, who has recently threatened to discontinue oil supplies to the U.S. if it dares touch Iran. Some regimes are more of a shade of pink than red. But many find the general choice of the palette alarming. Experts are concerned over the presidential elections in Brazil, Mexico, and Nicaragua in 2006, where the Leftist forces are likely to win. Previously, Chavez with his rhetoric looked like an outcast, whereas now that Evo Morales promised to nationalize the Bolivian gas industry, the soil for radical populism in the region has become fertile.

But the diagnosis by Le Monde Diplomatique is only partially convincing. It is true that neoliberalism has failed to solve Latin American problems. But it is also true that in the last century Latin American countries tried almost all political and economic mechanisms, but nothing worked.

Virtually every country flirted with left-wing phraseology, including "guerrilla". Some countries, for instance Columbia, are still in a guerrilla state today. Finally, while Latin Americans have witnessed numerous coups d'etat, on many occasions they did not resort to military or guerrilla assistance when they ousted the presidents whom they had elected themselves through democratic procedures. In other words, Latin Americans went from democracy to dictatorship and back a hundred times. For many decades they have been pegging their hopes now on the U.S., then on themselves, now on big business, then on small entrepreneurhsip. During some periods South America believed in the magic of Harvard boys, during others Karl Marx be came its favorite. It produced its own magicians as well, but eventually they were ousted with rotten tomatoes. Neoliberal ideas were just one more failure in a long list of other abortive attempts at achieving prosperity.

It appears, that Latin America suffers from some chronic ailment, which cannot be cured with either Left, or Right, or centrist pills.

Incidentally, the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) stayed in power in Mexico longer than others - from 1917 to 1994. A candidate from the ruling party made a statement at an election meeting, which was endlessly repeated as a joke: "We are neither the Left, nor the Right, nor the Center. We are the opposite!" Maybe, this ambiguity suited the country for some time, but eventually those obscure heroes also left the scene.

This leads to a classic question: who is to blame? The U.S. seems to be the only factor that has been permanently hovering over Latin America. For this reason, I will dare put the blame with U.S. President James Monroe. It was the Monroe doctrine that defined the continent and all its sovereign countries as a "zone of American interests".

It is difficult to count how many times Washington used military force to change the course of political developments in its favor, thereby preventing the region from developing naturally, and learning from its own setbacks and successes. American influence is bound to have some positive features, but they are negligible compared to negative ones. It is wrong to try to impose one's own values and morality upon millions of people of another civilization. This is detrimental to both sides.

If the U.S. recognized the rights of Latin Americans to live without its dictate, it would be the best remedy against the current manifestations of radicalism in the region. But this is not realistic. Judging by the current U.S. foreign policy, the White House will not be satisfied until the rest of the world toes its line.

U.S. Missed an Opportunity With Iran

2006-02-19T13:58:00.000-08:00

- In May 2003, shortly after the U.S. military destroyed the army of Saddam Hussein, a fax arrived at the State Department with an Iranian offer to open talks that would include a discussion of weapons of mass destruction.

The one-page document was written by Sadegh Kharrazi, Iran's ambassador to France and nephew of Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi and passed on by the Swiss ambassador to Tehran, who represented U.S. interests in Iran, a former administration official said.

The official, who saw the document, said it indicated that Iran wanted to negotiate a grand political bargain with the United States that would include everything from Iran's nuclear program to its support for groups that Washington regards as terrorist.

"The Iranians acknowledged that WMD [weapons of mass destruction] and support for terror were serious causes of concern for us, and they were willing to negotiate," said Flynt Leverett, a former senior director for Middle East affairs at the National Security Council who said he read the document. "The message had been approved by all the highest levels of authority. They wanted us to deal with sanctions, security guarantees, normalization of relations, and support for integration of Iran into the World Trade Organization."

The fax was one of a series of informal soundings that emanated from Tehran in the months after the United States invasion of Iraq. Iran's envoys to Sweden and Britain also began sending signals that the regime was ready to negotiate a deal, according to a former Western diplomat closely familiar with the messages. Iran was sending messages through other back-channels as well, according to Paul Pillar, who served as the CIA's national intelligence officer for the Near East and South Asia from 2000 to 2005.

"There were several other informed intellectuals who visited Iran at the time," he said. "They were being used to receive and deliver similar sorts of messages. There was an interest in Tehran in engaging and talking."

But the Bush administration was in no mood for conversation or grand political bargains, the former officials said. According to Leverett, who left government in mid-2003, the administration rejected the Iranian probe and instead sent a complaint to Swiss Ambassador Tim Guldimann, saying he had overstepped his role as an intermediary by passing it on in the first place.

Critics, including the two former Bush administration officials, European diplomats, and policy experts, say the United States may have squandered an opportunity to negotiate an end to Iran's nuclear program by not talking with Tehran. According to both Leverett and Pillar, the administration's priority was to avoid negotiations with the regime, out of concern it would imply acceptance of its continuation in office. Since then, Iran's government has become even more conservative, making the prospect of further negotiations more problematic.

"No one at a senior level was willing to push Iran on diplomacy," said Leverett. "Was there at least a chance that we could have gotten something going? Yes, there was a chance."

Unity, Now a Must for Palestinians

2006-02-18T07:58:00.000-08:00

Israel and the U.S. are reportedly poised to adopt a range of reprisals intended to isolate a Hamas-led Palestinian Authority as the Islamist faction is being sworn into parliament for the first time. The package of measures under discussion will allegedly seek to separate Israel gradually from a Palestinian Authority dominated by Hamas.

In the face of the plots led by U.S. and Israel, Hamas leaders have gone on a diplomatic offensive. The exiled supreme leader of Hamas, Khaled Meshaal, has been meeting diplomats and politicians in Turkey. Russia has also formally invited Hamas leaders to talks in Moscow, scheduled to take place early next month. Hamas leaders are also visiting Muslim countries including Egypt and Iran.

The big victory of Hamas was a “political quake” hitting the Middle East. Consequently, peace talks between Israel and Palestine are entering a new phase. Hamas will also face fresh challenges as Israel, U.S. and the West are seeking their own objectives. British Prime Minister Tony Blair and German Chancellor Angela Merkel have called on Hamas to renounce violence while the U.S. Congress has voted to cut 400-million-dollar annual aid from Washington to the Palestinian Authority. Israel has imposed bans on the Palestinians willing to move between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

The new-look Palestinian parliament, in which MPs from the radical Islamist faction occupy 74 out of the 132 seats, will be inaugurated today following Hamas's massive election victory last month.

Notwithstanding their own slogans of democracy, the West and the U.S. do not respect a democracy-based election in the Middle East. Hamas favors a coalition government in the occupied lands, reaching out to other movements including Fatah.

Under the present circumstances, Palestinians need more unity in helping the future “government of resistance” or would face new crises escalated by their foes.

Mahmoud Abbas will ask Hamas to form new goverment Today.

Banned Book of Egyptian Novelist ; Children of the Alley.

2006-02-17T11:08:00.000-08:00

Children of the Alley, which was among the four works that qualified Mahfouz for the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1988, has never been published in book form in Egypt. With the work having been banned several times by Al-Azhar, Mahfouz still insists he will not print it without the official endorsement of the seat of Sunni religious learning.

But a recent announcement that a state-owned publishing house would print the novel here for the first time has reignited a debate in intellectual circles on the role of the oldest Sunni institution in regulating literature.

According to Mahfouz’s lawyer, Ahmed Awadein, the Nobel Laureate will agree to have the novel published here in Arabic (the English version has long been available from AUC for LE 65) if Al-Azhar explicitly allows it —and if an Islamist thinker agrees to write an introduction for it.

And it may not be enough for a publisher to satisfy those conditions, Awadein adds, saying Mahfouz isn't certain now is the time to publish the novel.

The black market book

“He does not want to publish it now because the climate is not ready for it and people have a wrong idea about it. They think it personifies God,” says Awadein. “Publishing the novel is contingent upon having an appropriate climate in which the book would not be resented as it was [in the past].”

Children of the Alley made its first appearance in 1959 as a serialized novel the state-owned daily Al-Ahram. Interpreted by many as an allegory of the three monotheistic religions, it features a father named El-Gabalawi who casts his sons out of his house for disobedience. The storyline revolves around feuds that erupt among El-Gabalawi’s descendants as they give up what the novelist calls their ‘human values.’

Its publication drew immediate fire from religious scholars who claimed El-Gabalawi character was a blasphemous personification of God.

“Mr. Naguib is still committed to that agreement, although the climate has changed,” he says.

According to Abdel Zaher Mohammed, the head of the Publication and Translation Department at Al-Azhar Islamic Research Academy (IRA), the novel is officially banned in Egypt. He explains that in cases where authors seek the endorsement of their works by Al-Azhar before publication, they are sometimes required to omit parts that allegedly contradict the Islamic faith.

Under the law, Al-Azhar is authorized only to regulate publications that relate to the Qur’an and the Sunna. However, this role has been extended in practice to include all artistic works that touch on religion. Outside Egypt it's another story: The novel has been in print in Lebanon since the 1960s. Attempts to import the Lebanese edition resulted in a 1968 IRA decree forbidding its circulation.

Twenty years later, IRA issued a similar fatwa banning not just the printed book, but also audiovisual works based on the novel. The fatwa came in response to an adaptation of the novel into a radio series by the state-owned Egyptian Radio and Television Union (ERTU). ERTU’s president heeded the decree and cut the broadcasts short.

In addition to AUC’s work, international publishers have translated the book under the titles Children of the Alley and Children of El-Gabalawi.

Coupled with his courages outspoken support of the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty, Mahfouz’s controversial novel won him condemnation from Islamist extremists who have accused him of heresy and condoned his execution. In 1994, two fundamentalists stabbed him in the neck outside his Cairo home in the Agouza district.

Early last month, Magdy El-Dakkak, editor-in-chief of the monthly magazine Al-Hilal, dropped a bombshell by announcing that he would print the forbidden novel whether Mahfouz gave his okay or not. But after a warning from the privately owned Dar El-Shorouk publishing house, which bought exclusive rights to print Mahfouz’s works in Arabic in 2000, Dar Al-Hilal promptly retracted the announcement.

The retraction was cemented by a letter from Mahfouz objecting to the publication of his work without his permission.

El-Dakkak, who also heads Dar Al-Hilal’s editorial board and vets the printing of one book each month, says he wanted to challenge what he calls ‘the imaginary ban’ imposed on the novel.

“I wondered how a work by an Egyptian novelist like Naguib Mahfouz, who is known worldwide, could be banned in Egypt,” he claims. “I also wondered how this ban could last for almost 40 years. I found it unacceptable that Egyptians cannot read one of Mahfouz’s most important works,” says El-Dakkak, who adds that he also wanted to challenge Al-Azhar ‘guardianship.’

In the meantime, the editor-in-chief admits that he had no qualms about publishing the novel without Mahfouz’ permission.

“I appreciate Naguib’s stand and I understand his reasons for refusing to print the novel, but Children of the Alley is no longer the property of Naguib Mahfouz. It is part of Egypt's heritage, and we have the right as a people to have it printed by an Egyptian publishing house and to read it in Egypt. I respect his creative works and rights, though,” says El-Dakkak.

Speaking with Islamist thinker Ahmed Kamal Abouel Magd about Children not long after the 1994 attempt on his life, Mahfouz shrugged off charges of blasphemy, stressing his belief in Islam.

“All my old and new writings hold onto these two tenets: Islam is the source of good values for our nation, and science is the means to achieve progress and development in the present and the future,” Abouel Magd quoted Mahfouz as saying in a 1994 column in Al-Ahram. “And I would like to say that even Children of the Alley, which was misunderstood by some people, did not drift away from that vision. The great moral crowned by the events of the novel was that when people gave up religion, symbolized by El-Gabalawi, and thought they could manage their lives relying only on science, symbolized by Arafa they found out that science without religion turned into an evil weapon and subjected them to the tyranny of the ruler and stripped them of their freedom. Thus, they looked back to El-Gabalawi,” Mahfouz is quoted as saying.

“The problem with Children of the Alley from the beginning was that I wrote it as ‘a novel’ while people read it as ‘a book.’ The novel is a literary construct that combines truth and symbol, reality and fiction. And a novel should not be judged according to the historical facts that the author believes in. ,” added Mahfouz.

Yet Dar El-Shorouk lawyer Hossam Loutfi claims Mahfouz had already agreed with his publisher to release the novel in January without Al-Azhar’s endorsement, then got cold feet at the last moment.

“The novel is ready, and the introduction has been written by a prominent Islamic figure, and Mr. Naguib has approved it,” Loutfi alleges.

Awadein flatly denies Loutfi’s claims, maintaining that his client never gave the go-ahead to publish without Al-Azhar’s approval.

While most writers insist that the novel should not be published without Mahfouz’s consent, they categorically disagree with the author about seeking Al-Azhar’s endorsement.

“I am against this concept because Al-Azhar is not a body entitled to ban or approve works,” says El-Ghitani. “Literature has nothing to do with Al-Azhar. I respect his [Naguib’s] wishes, but it does not prevent me from disagreeing with him.”

Author Youssef El-Koied, another of Mahfouz’s close friends, shares El-Ghitani’s view.

“Religion means the Qur’an and the Sunna, and Al-Azhar should be held responsible for those two. Al-Azhar has nothing to do with a novel, movie, play or a video clip. Since when does Al-Azhar interfere with literature and art?”

El-Koied contends that, “Reading a literary work from a religious or a political perspective is unacceptable.”

El-Ghitani goes a step further, saying that banning books is absurd in this day and age: “I believe that now is the best time to publish it because there is nothing that could be banned now. The concept of banning [works] is obsolete. What is banned can be read on the Internet,” he points out, adding that the novel is already sold on the black market.

While both El-Ghitani and El-Koied refuse to accept what they call Al-Azhar’s interference, the two authors see no reason for the recent rise of the Muslim Brotherhood to pose a threat to any plans to print the book. “It makes no difference whether they [the Brotherhood] are with the novel or against it because they are not in power. It is the state, represented by Al-Azhar, that showed more backwardness in this case,” says El-Koied.

The banned-but-tolerated Brotherhood established itself as the main opposition bloc in the People's Assembly by securing 88 of the new parliament's 444 elected seats late last year. Brotherhood-affiliated MPs have consistently opposed on the floor of Parliament the circulation of literary works they claim contradict Islamic norms.

Little wonder, then, that it came as a surprise then when a prominent member of Al-Ikhwan’s (Muslim Brotherhood) Guidance Bureau paid Mahfouz a visit in December on the occasion of his birthday. Abdel Moneim Abouel Fottouh stressed the group's appreciation of the novelist's works and the organizations commitment to freedom of expression. He had reportedly condoned the publishing of Children of the Alley in Egypt, but maintains that he disagrees with the content of the novel.

Either way, Mahfouz’s position has certainly pleased Al-Azhar’s scholars. Former Mufti Nasr Farid Wassel hailed the writers insistence on seeking the body's endorsement as ‘wise.’

“He [Mahfouz] understands the current circumstances and tries to maintain his intellectual role and does not want to drift away from his society and religion,” believes Wassel, who is currently an IRA member.

Wassel maintains that his institution has a responsibility to safeguard the integrity of faith. The IRA usually issues decrees against books it sees as undermining Islam. To Wassel, those edicts hardly count as censorship, as the oldest Sunni institution plays an ‘advisory’ role and has no effective authority to enforce its fatwas on the ground.

“We do not exercise any censorship,” says Wassel. “Al-Azhar is keen on uniting [Muslims] and the nation, having people adhere to their religion, achieving social and familial peace and achieving peace between the ruler and the ruled. It [Al-Azhar] only makes recommendations, saying whether [a work] is beneficial or not whether it can foment a sedition or not,” he adds.

“Al-Azhar has the right to check and endorse books that relate to religion or speak about issues of creed or religious symbols,” says Ali Abouel Hassan, a former head of the fatwa committee at the IRA.

Abouel Hassan explains if the IRA determines that a book contradicts Shariah, it issues a statement recommending the ban of that book and sends it to the police unit responsible for confiscating banned works.

“Publishing a book [contrary to Al-Azhar’s wishes] is considered a crime,” he adds, saying the same applies to movies, songs and videos, among other forms of expression.

Abouel Hassan dismisses accusations that Al-Azhar impedes literary creativity.

“Why would [critics] bring accusations only against us and not against those who verify books for political and security reasons?” wonders Abouel Hassan. “This is not a form of guardianship, but a right granted to specialists in order to monitor and regulate what circulation.

Children of Gebelawi is story about Gebelawi and his children, he is absent or rather a figure of self exiled Father, and the rest of characters are four of characters some assume is based on Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed. The book is written with simple prose and is feast of guess who? Naguib other marvelous novels such as Middaq Alley are subject of many Taboo's in Islamic society, but at heart I believe he is one of the best novelist in the World. It is shame not to publish openly in Middle east, except Lebanon.
All Naguib Mahfouz books are available in USA.
1-Children of the Alley or Gebelawi
2-Middaq Alley.
3-Trilogy of Naguib Mahfouz.
4-Miramar
5-Fountain and Tomb.

Iran N- Program & US, Israel and Saudis.

2006-02-17T09:24:00.000-08:00

— A senior official of the Washington-based Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation has defended Israel’s nuclear program yesterday, saying that it is one of three countries in the region that have not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

“If you are speaking about any double standard, you have to remember that Pakistan, a Muslim country, also possesses nuclear weapons. But we cannot say that the nuclear programs of India, Pakistan and Israel are illegal, because they do not have the treaty obligations,” Stephen G. Rademaker, acting assistant secretary for the bureau told a limited press conference.

Rademaker was in Riyadh as part of his swing through the Middle East to ratchet up pressure on Iran, which has reportedly resumed its nuclear-enrichment program. During his stay, he had talks with Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal and Assistant to the Minister of Defense and Aviation Gen. Prince Khaled ibn Sultan.

“If you want to say that the US policy is inconsistent vis-à-vis Israel, you also have to say that US policy is inconsistent toward Pakistan. At the same time, both are major non-NATO allies of the US and also recipients of the US aid,” said Rademaker in response to allegations that the US has a double standard with respect to Israel’s nuclear arsenal and Iran’s potential N-weapons capabilities.

According to the US-based non-profit Center for Defense Information, Israel is estimated to have 100 to 200 warheads; India is suspected of having at least 60 warheads; and Pakistan has 24-48 warheads.

“Iran’s nuclear program is not just a threat to the United States or Israel. I don’t know why the Arab world continues to believe that Iran will only use its nuclear weapons against Israel,” he said.

Rademaker said the US policy has been consistent all along. “We want India, Pakistan and Israel to sign up to the NPT. In all three cases, they have resisted our advice,” he said. “We would like every country in the world to join the NPT.”

He added that the best way to encourage Israel to join the treaty is not to support more Arab states to go nuclear. “You want to persuade Israel to give up its nuclear weapons, while you allow Iran to go for the nuclear option. This is a wrong way to approach the issue,” he said.

“Today Iran is giving Israel the best possible reason not to give up its nuclear weapons. Moreover, Iran’s president wants Israel to be erased from the map.”

The US official claimed that Iran was close to having nuclear weapons. In this context, he referred to the concern that the 27 members of the 35-member International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) board meeting expressed recently over Iran’s nuclear program.

“This is profoundly threatening under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty,” he said. “Iran is not the Netherlands or Japan. In other words, it cannot be trusted given its record of nuclear activity.”

Muslim Scholar Calls Muslims to Adopt a Critical Intellectual Distance

2006-02-16T09:40:00.000-08:00

Muslim Academic and Scholar Tariq Ramadan called on Muslims not to fall in the trap of emotional reactions which lead to the clash of civilisations.

Ramadan stressed the idea that Muslims, whose religion calls for the respect of all Prophets, should not fall in the trap of emotional reactions which lead to the clash of civilisations.

“I have called on Muslims to avoid violent demonstrations. I have also condemned the calls for reprisals against European interests. The message Muslims should pass is that the caricatures hurt them, and that we, Muslims, don't draw pictures of the Prophets and don't insult them. After the message is conveyed, we should move to another issue,” he said.

Ramadan warned that the polemic raised by the issue would lead to extremism on both sides.

“What is going on today is that the extremists of both parties are trying to use this polemic to serve their own interests,” the scholar said, stressing that the best way to avoid the current clash is to make both parties focus on their common values rather than their differences.

As an alternative reaction, Ramadan called on Muslims to adopt a “critical intellectual distance”, by avoiding emotionally-driven answers to the provocations.

Since the age of Enlightenment, Ramadan explained, the West has developed a culture of satire towards religion. This has become one of the traits of the Western civilization. But on the other hand, he stressed, the West should respect the limits of freedom of expression, as “freedom of expression doesn't give the right to say anything against anyone”.

Ramadan added that the best way to get out of the trap opposing the Islamic Civilisation to the Western one is to concentrate on the two sides' shared values rather than differences.

“It is imperatively necessary to place common values in the centre of our interests. Both our civilisations accept freedom, but not irresponsible freedom,” he insisted.

The Swiss scholar was born in 1962 in Geneva. Holder of a PhD in philosophy and another in Islamic studies, Ramadan has taught religion in many universities, including the University of Notre Dame, Indiana, US, and the University of Oxford as a visiting professor.

Ramadan is known for his moderate, but sometimes controversial positions concerning the position of Muslims in the West. He supports integration rather than alienation from the western societies where they live.

In Sep. 2005, he was invited by the government of Tony Blair to join a task force supporting moderate Islam in the UK.

Mr.Ramadan is the grandson of the Founder of Radical Muslim Brotherhood ( Al-Ekhwan Muslimum) in Egypt, Hassan Al-Banna.

US daily urges Bush to scuttle UAE port deal

2006-02-16T09:10:00.000-08:00

A conservative US newspaper ( Washington Times) yesterday urged President George W Bush to scuttle a deal between the United States and the United Arab Emirates, under which a UAE firm will run six major US ports.
The US Committee on Foreign Investment, which is part of the Treasury Department, approved earlier this week a 6.8-billion-dollar deal between the ports' current British manager and Dubai Ports World, that will make the UAE firm manager of the facilities in New York, New Jersey, New Orleans, Miami, Philadelphia and Baltimore.
"Do we really want our major ports in the hands of an Arab country where Al-Qaeda recruits, travels and wires money?" The Washington Times asked in an editorial.
It went on to say that the UAE was home to Marwan al-Shehhi, a September 11 hijacker, and the country remained a transit point for Al-Qaeda operatives and a hub for Al-Qaeda's financing activities.
"We should be improving port security in an age of terrorism, not outsourcing decisions to the highest bidder," the editorial said. "President Bush should overrule the committee to reject this deal. If that doesn't happen, Congress should take action."
UAE Goverment or Dubai goverment had no comment.

Book Review:"Robert Graves and the Twelve Caesars" by Gore Vidal

2006-02-15T22:24:00.000-08:00

Tiberius, Capri. Pool of water. Small children... So far so good. One's laborious translation was making awful sense. Then... Fish. Fish? The erotic mental image became surreal. Another victory for the Loeb Library's sly translator, J.C. Rolfe, who, correctly anticipating the pruriency of schoolboy readers, left Suetonius's gaudier passages in the hard original. One failed to crack those intriguing footnotes not because the syntax was so difficult (though it was not easy for students drilled in military rather than civilian Latin) but because the range of vice revealed was considerably beyond the imagination of even the most depraved schoolboy. There was a point at which one rejected one's own translation. Tiberius and the little fish, for instance.

Happily, we now have a full translation of the text, the work of Mr. Robert Graves, who, under the spell of his Triple Goddess, has lately been retranslating the classics. One of his first tributes to her was a fine rendering of The Golden Ass: then Lucan's Pharsalia; then the Greek Myths, a collation aimed at rearranging the hierarchy of Olympus to afford his Goddess (the female principle) a central position at the expense of the male. (Beware Apollo's wrath, Graves: the 'godling' is more than front man for the 'Ninefold Muse-Goddess.') Now, as a diversion, Mr. Graves has given us The Twelve Caesars of Suetonius in a good, dry, no-nonsense style; and, pleasantly enough, the Ancient Mother of Us All is remarkable only by her absence, perhaps a subtle criticism of an intensely masculine period in history.

Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus - lawyer and author of a dozen books, among them Lives of Famous Whores and The Physical Defects of Mankind (What was that about?) - worked for a time as private secretary to the Emperor Hadrian. Presumably it was during this period that he has access to the imperial archives, where he got the material for The Twelve Caesars, the only complete book of his to survive. Suetonius was born in AD 69, the year of the three Caesars Galba, Otho, Vitellius; and he grew up under the Flavians: Vespasian, Titus, Domitian, whom he deals with as contemporaries. He was also close enough in time to the first six Caesars to have known them intimately, at least from Tiberius on, and it is in this place in time which gives such immediacy to his history.

Suetonius saw the world's history from 49 BC to AD 96 as the intimate narrative of twelve men wielding absolute power. With impressive curiosity he tracked down anecdotes, recording them dispassionately, despite a somewhat stylized reactionary bias. Like his fellow historians from Livy to the stuffy but interesting Dion Cassius, Suetonius was a political reactionary to whom the old Republic was the time of virtue and the Empire, implicitly, was not. Bit it is not for his political convictions that we read Suetonius. Rather, it is his gift for telling us what we want to know. I am delighted to read that Augustus was under five feet seven, blond, wore lifts in his sandals to appear taller, had seven birthmarks and weak eyes; that he softened the hairs of his legs with hot walnut shells, and liked to gamble. Or to learn that the droll Vespasian's last words were: 'Dear me, I must be turning into a god.' ('Dear me' being Graves for 'Vae') The stories, true or not, are entertaining, and when they deal with sex startling, even to a post-Kinseyan.

Gibbon, in his stately way, mourned that of the twelve Caesars only Claudius was sexually 'regular.' From the sexual opportunism of Julius Caesar to the sadism of Nero to the doddering pederasty of Galba, the sexual lives of the Caesars encompassed every aspect of what our post-medieval time has termed 'sexual abnormality.' It would be wrong, however, to dismiss, as so many commentators have, the wide variety of Caesarean sensuality as simply the viciousness of twelve abnormal men. They were, after all, a fairly representative lot. They differed from us - and their contemporaries - only in the fact of power, which made it possible for each to act out his most recondite sexual fantasies. this is the psychological fascination of Suetonius. What will men so place do? The answer, apparently, is anything and everything. Alfred Whitehead once remarked that one got the essence of a culture not by those things which were said at the time but by those things which were not said, the underlying assumptions of the society, too obvious to be stated. Now it is an underlying assumption of twentieth-century America that human beings are either heterosexual or, through some arresting of normal psychic growth, homosexual, with very little traffic back and forth. To us, the norm is heterosexual; the family is central; all else is deviation, pleasing or not depending on one's own tastes and moral preoccupations. Suetonius reveals a very different world. His underlying assumption is that man is bisexual and that given complete freedom to love - or, perhaps more to the point in the case of the Caesars, to violate - others, he will do so, going blithely from male to female as fancy dictates. Nor is Suetonius alone in this assumption of man's variousness. From Plato to the rise of Pauline Christianity, which tried to put the lid on sex, it is explicit in classical writing. Yet to this day Christian, Freudian and Marxian commentators have all decreed or ignored this fact of nature in the interest each of a patented approach to the Kingdom of Heaven. It is an odd experience for both a contemporary to read of Nero's simultaneous passion for both a man and a woman. Something seems wrong. It must be one or the other, not both. And yet this sexual eclecticism recurs again and again. And though some of the Caesars quite obviously preferred women to me (Augustus had a particular penchant for Nabokovian nymphets), their sexual crisscrossing is extraordinary in its lack of pattern. And one suspects that despite the stern moral legislation of our own time human beings are no different. If nothing else, Dr. Kinsey revealed in his dogged, arithmetical way that we are all a good less predictable and bland than anyone had suspected.

One of the few engaging aspects of the Julio-Claudians was authorship. They all wrote; some wrote well. Julius Caesar, in addition to his account of that famed crusade in Gaul, wrote an Oedipus. Augustus wrote an Ajax, with some difficulty. When asked by a friend what his Ajax had been up to lately, Augustus sighed: 'He has fallen not on his sword, but wiped himself out on my sponge.' Tiberius wrote Elegy on the Death of Julius Caesar. The scatterbrained Claudius, a charmingly dim prince, was a devoted pedant who tried to reform the alphabet. He was also the first to have a serious go at Etruscan history. Nero of course is remembered as a poet. Julius Caesar and Augustus were distinguished prose writers; each preferred plain old-fashioned Latin. Augustus particularly disliked what he called the 'Asiatic' style, favored by, among others, his rival Marc Antony, whose speeches he found imprecise and 'stinking of far-fetched phrases.'

Other than the fact of power, the twelve Caesars as men have little in common with one another. But that little was significant; a fear of a knife in the dark. Of the twelve, eight (perhaps nine) were murdered. As Domitian remarked not long before he himself was stuck down: 'Emperors are necessarily wretched men since only their assassination can convince the public that the conspiracies against their lives are real.' In an understandable attempt to outguess destiny, they studied omens, cast horoscopes, and analyzed dreams (they were ingenious symbolists, anticipating Dr. Freud, himself a Roman buff). The view of life from Palatine Hill was not comforting, and though none of the Caesars was religious in our sense of the word, all inclined to the Stoic. It was Tiberius, with characteristic bleakness, who underscored their dangerous estate when he declared that it was Fate, not the gods, which ordered the lives of men.

Yet what, finally, was the effect of absolute power on twelve representative men? Suetonius makes it quite plain: disastrous. Caligula was certifiably mad. Nero, who started well, became progressively irrational. Even the stern Tiberius's character became weakened. In fact, Tacitus, in covering the same period as Suetonius, observes: 'Even after his enormous experience of public affairs, Tiberius was ruined and transformed by the violence influence of absolute power.' Caligula gave the game away when he told a critic, 'Bear in mind that I can treat anyone exactly as I please.' And that cruelty which is innate in human beings, now give the opportunity to treat others as toys, flowered monstrously in the Caesars. Suetonius's case history (and it is precisely that) of Domitian is particularly fascinating. An intelligent man of some charm, trained to govern, Domitian when he first succeeded to the Principate contented himself with tearing the wings of flies, an infantile pastime which gradually palled until, inevitably, for flies he substituted men. His favorite game was to talk gently of mercy to a nervous victim; then, once all fears had been allayed, execute him. Nor were the Caesars entirely unobjective about their bizarre position. There is an oddly revealing letter of Tiberius to a Senate which had offered to ensure in advance approbation of all his future deeds. Tiberius declined the offer: 'So long as my wits do not fail me, you can count on the consistency of my behavior; but I should not like you to set the precedent of binding yourselves to approve a man's every action; for what if something happened to alter that man's character?' In terror of their lives, haunted by dreams and omens, giddy with dominion, it is no wonder that actual insanity was often the Caesarean refuge from a reality so intoxicating.

The unifying Leitmotiv in these lives in Alexander the Great. The Caesars were fascinated by him. He was their touchstone of greatness. The young Julius Caesar sighed enviously at his tomb. Augustus had the tomb opened and stared long at the conqueror's face. Caligula stole the breastplate from the corpse and wore it. Nero called his guard the 'Phalanx of Alexander the Great.' And the significance of this fascination? Power for the sake of power. Conquest for the sake of conquest. Earthly dominion as an end in itself: no Utopian vision, no dissembling, no hypocrisy. I knock you down; now I am king of the castle. Why should young Julius Caesar be envious of Alexander? It does not occur to Suetonius to explain. He assumes that any young man would like to conquer the world. And why did Julius Caesar, a man of the first-rate mind, want the world? Simply, to have it. Even the resulting Pax Romana was not a calculated policy but a fortunate accident. Caesar and Augustus, the makers of the Principate, represent the naked will to power for its own sake. And though our own society has much changed from the Roman (we may point with somber pride to Hitler and Stalin, who lent a real Neronian hell to our days), we have, nevertheless, got so into the habit of dissembling motives, of denying certain dark constants of human behavior, that it is difficult to find a reputable American historian who will acknowledge the crude fact that a Franklin Roosevelt, say, wanted to be President merely to wield power, to be famed and to be feared. To learn this simple fact one must wade through a sea of evasions: history as sociology, leaders as teachers, bland benevolence as a motive force, when, finally, power is an end to itself, and the instinctive urge to prevail the most important single human trait, the necessary force without which no city was built, no city destroyed. Yet many contemporary sociologists and religionists turned historians will propose, quite seriously: If there had not been a Julius Caesar then the Zeitgeist would have provided another like him, even though it is quite evident that had this particular Caesar not existed no one would have dared to invent him. World events are the work of individuals whose motives are often frivolous, even casual. Had Claudius not wanted an easy conquest so that he might celebrate a triumph at Rome, Britain would not have been conquered in AD 44. If Britain had not been colonized in the first century... the chain of causality is plain

One understands of course why the role of the individual in history is instinctively played down by a would-be egalitarian society. We are, quite naturally, afraid of being victimized by reckless adventurers. To avoid this we have created the myth of the ineluctable mass ('other-directedness') which governs all. Science, we are told, is not a matter of individual inquiry but of collective effort. Even the surface storminess of our elections disguises a fundamental indifference to human personality: if not this man, then that one; it's all the same, life will go on. Up to a point there is some virtue in this; and though none can deny that there is a prevailing grayness in our placid land, it is certainly better to be non-ruled by mediocrity's than enslaved by Caesars. But to deny the dark nature of human personality in not only fatuous but dangerous. For in our insistence on the surrender of private will ('inner-directedness') to a conception of the human race as some teeming bacteria in the stream of time, unaffected by individual deeds, we have made vulnerable not only the boredom, to that sense of meaninglessness which more than anything else is characteristic of our age, but vulnerable to the first messiah who offers the young and bored some splendid prospect, some Caesarian certainty. That is the political danger, and it is a real one.

Most of the world today is governed by Caesars. Men and more and more treated as things. Torture is ubiquitous. And, as Sartre wrote in his preface to Henri Alleg's chilling book about Algeria, 'Anyone, at any time, may equally find himself victim or executioner.' Suetonius, in holding up a mirror to those Caesars of diverting legend, reflects not only them but ourselves: half-tempted creatures, whose great moral task it is to hold in balance the angel and the monster within - for we are both, and to ignore this duality is to invite disaster.

1959

Conservatives question Bush's conservatism

2006-02-15T17:52:00.000-08:00

Hard-line conservatives, among President George W Bush's staunchest supporters, question whether he is conservative enough when it comes to government spending and growth, leaders of the movement say. "What conservatives have realised during the last five years is that we have not elected a conservative president," said Bill Lauderback, executive vice president of the American Conservative Union. "Nor do we have a conservative majority in either the House or Senate." Conservatives gathered at a Washington hotel this weekend for the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, where they assess the status of their movement and what they think of government policies. President Ronald Reagan remains the champion of low-tax, small-government supporters even after Bush's re-election and the dominance of Republican lawmakers. They are quite unhappy with some Bush administration initiatives for example, the multibillion-dollar prescription drug programme for the elderly and the No Child Left Behind education law and special spending projects from Congress that have ballooned the cost and scope of the federal government. "We are in danger of becoming the party of big government," said Rep Mike Pence of Indiana, chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee. Pence said he and his allies in the US Congress plan to make sure that trend is reversed. "The era of big Republican government is over," Pence said, adding the word "Republican" to the memorable phrase used by President Bill Clinton in his 1996 State of the Union address. Many conference participants feel that limited government overrides all other issues such as gun rights, anti-abortion policies and conservative judges. Yet, despite their unhappiness, Bush remains popular with this group, especially for his court appointments and handling of terrorism. "They like Bush," said David Keene, chairman of the ACU, which runs the conference. "But they are frustrated and disappointed with some things the administration has done. And the frustration is deep because government spending and growth of government are at the core of beliefs of many people here." Keene said conservatives are starting to look ahead at future leaders, accepting that they've gotten some of what they want from Bush. In a straw poll for presidential favourites in 2008, Virginia Sen George Allen received 22 per cent of the vote. Arizona Sen John McCain garnered 20 per cent, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani 12 percent and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice 10 per cent, according to results from Fabrizio, McLaughlin and Associates. Those who attended the conference were given an opportunity to offer their preferences as they checked in, but the results do not represent the sentiments of all those present. Still, McCain's strong showing suggests that he is faring better with a group that was cool to his White House bid in 2000. The campaign against terror and not economic policy has become the glue that binds the conservative movement, said Brent Bozell, founder and president of the Media Research Centre, a conservative media watchdog group. "We're ready for a candidate to assume the Reagan mantle," he said. "Bush has done an extraordinary job on the war on terror. But on economic policy, he fiddles while Rome burns."

Why I am Not a Radical?

2006-02-15T12:09:00.000-08:00

As a Muslim, I have to explain about Islam to anyone, most of the people have no clue about Islam, same way most Muslims have little and no correct information about United States, I suggest to learn each other civilized ways.
Many Americans got information through news media, if it's about Middle east, the expert is always (except token Muslims) a Jewish person, most are bias against Islam and Muslims, the common hatred between many Muslims and Jewish people is mutual.
I am not anti-Semite for simple reason of that I am a Semitic, a fact many Americans are ignorant about it, lately Thomas Friedman of NYTimes, and many pundits had written books, articles to misinform American public about angry hateful Muslims, which is the point I want to explain once for all.
My family Islamic background dates back before the migration of prophet Mohammed to Medina, the beginning of Islamic calendar, I am grandson of Islamic jurist and a Judge, I know about Koran and Islamic Laws, and there is nothing in both that teaches hatred or terror, in fact Islam forbids killing,rape and subjugation.
Islamic radicals are product of societies that has been betrayed by their own leaders, Majority of Muslim countries are under corrupt dictatorship, Many unemployed, frustrated young people went to either west or the mosque, and those who went to Mosque are the Radicals, not all of them.
How can a man of tolerance accept the words of hate preacher such as Sheikh Qaradawi?Or follow the ignorant power hungry Bin Laden? What happen the civil societies in the Muslim world?
Unless we fight this disease of bigotry ourselves no one will win the so-called Islamic radicals, United States must accept and encourage the voices of moderate Muslims, and support any democracy in the Islamic world, as I wrote many times, the Islamist wants to govern, and people wants regimes change without the invasions.
I hope next time people will read more careful and try to understand that I don't have to go through cavity search, suspicion and Islamicphopia, that is what water carriers of Israel are scribbling newspapers and yelling on Foxnews.
We are Part of each other. Lets not allow radicals define us.

Don't Do It.

2006-02-14T12:40:00.000-08:00

Israeli security officials said they were looking at ways to force Hamas from power, and were focusing on an economic squeeze that would prompt Palestinians to clamor for the return of Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas' ousted Fatah Party. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter with the media.

But Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev said, "There is no such plan."

The New York Times, citing anonymous U.S. and Israeli officials, reported Tuesday that the United States and Israel were considering a campaign to starve the Palestinian Authority of cash so Palestinians would grow disillusioned with Hamas and bring down a Hamas government.

U.S. Embassy spokesman Stewart Tuttle had no comment.

The reports came a day after the outgoing Fatah parliament gave sweeping new powers to Abbas, allowing him to set up a sympathetic court that would be able to veto Hamas legislation unchallenged.

Mushir al Masri, a Hamas spokesman and incoming legislator, said attempts to bring down a future Hamas government were hypocritical.

"This is ... a rejection of the democratic process, which the Americans are calling for day and night," al Masri said. "It's an interference and a collective punishment of our people because they practiced the democratic process in a transparent and honest way."

"We need a firm Islamic and Arabic position to confront this challenge," al Masri added.

The idea of withholding aid is not new. Since Hamas' electoral victory, the West has been threatening to cut nearly $1 billion in annual aid to the Palestinians, though Russia's recent invitation to Hamas to visit Moscow, and France's support for the Russian approach, have cracked what was a united front.

Israel has also threatened to cut off monthly transfers to the Palestinians of about $50 million from taxes and customs it collects for them, once Hamas takes power. The new Palestinian parliament is to convene for its first session on Saturday, and a new Cabinet is expected to be appointed within weeks.

What is new is the twist of forcing regime change by impoverishing the Palestinians even further.

Even with the Israeli tax transfers and Western aid, the Palestinian Authority is expected to run a $660 million budget deficit in 2006. Without the tax and aid, the Hamas government could be forced to enact widespread layoffs that would scotch the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian families.

Besides the cash squeeze, Israel has other leverage on the Palestinian Authority, including its control of the movement of people and goods between the noncontiguous West Bank and Gaza Strip, and the entry of Palestinian workers into Israel.

The strategy of bringing Palestinians to their knees by cutting off cash could easily backfire, however, with Palestinians blaming the U.S. and Israel — not Hamas — for their growing misery. Moreover, Hamas would certainly turn to the Muslim world and private donors to try to make up at least some of the Western shortfall.

Israeli security officials said they weren't optimistic about prospects for ousting Hamas.

Israel, which was caught unaware by Hamas' sweeping victory in Jan. 25 Palestinian elections, is putting the finishing touches on its policy toward Hamas, which is to be sent to Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz and acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert later this week for his review, Israel Radio reported on Tuesday.

Asked how Israel would handle Hamas, Mofaz told the radio station, without elaborating, that "Israel is strong enough to deal with any eventuality that would come down the pike. ... If Hamas creates a situation in which it continues to act as a terror group and takes over the Palestinian Authority, Israel has the tools to deal with an authority ruled by Hamas."

Mofaz was headed to Cairo on Tuesday to discuss Hamas' ascent to power and security arrangements on Israel's border with Egypt.

The Times said the idea of forcing regime change by further impoverishing the Palestinians was being discussed at the highest levels of the U.S. State Department and the Israeli government. The ultimatum to Hamas would be either to recognize Israel's right to exist, abandon violence and accept previous Palestinian-Israeli agreements, or risk isolation and eventual collapse, the newspaper said.

Hamas, which swept to power on the strength of public dissatisfaction with Fatah's failure to eradicate lawlessness and corruption, has repeatedly rejected Western demands to change its violent ways. On Monday, a Hamas leader said the group would annul landmark interim peace accords with Israel from the mid-1990s.

US & EU : Muslims Make a Wrong Choice

2006-02-14T09:45:00.000-08:00

Most condescendingly is when someone pretends to know what is good for you, you behave this way and you will get a prize, otherwise you get the beating, that is what EU and US are conducing Muslims everywhere, If they make a wrong choice and vote for undesirables ( Hamas, Muslim brotherhood, etc) that option will lead in a bad direction, if you behave right and follow our direction and approve our selected leaders such as Mohmoud Abbas, Mubarak of Egypt and other incompetent desert rats, then you shall receive the candy.
US and Israel are working with old and obese leaders of Al-Fatah, according to some resources, they are planning to hold the money from PA and create political instability in Palestine. Against the wishes of majority of Palestinian people who voted for Hamas, The contumacious Islamic party. Hamas refused to denounce the violence and recognition of State of Israel, European and US ordered and pressured to do that, but Hamas as I suspect are playing the game of Naughty boy who can and will not apologize unless Israelis do the same.
Israel declared war against Hamas and killed many members, without condemnation from EU or US, it's very amusing to see where this will lead. Those who are calling for a new Election in Palestine are dangerous to the long term interest of the people of US and the rest of the world. We must learn to respect the wishes of others. Pres.Bush Was the one who advocated the democracy in the Middle East, and it's sad to see last Sunday on CBS, Ms.Rice to duck the reality that US government was caught with no plan or actual any strategic plan for what will be outcome of free and democratic Islamic world.
In Years, I wrote and whispered anyone who has ears; once given a ballot, the majority of Muslims will vote Islamist Parties, because they are less corrupt and to ameliorate their lives. Moreover, they never had a power, give them chance to succeed or fail, they are much better than what we got now.
Egypt declared yesterday ($3 Billion a year from US taxpayers) there will be no elections in two years, Washington and Cairo are afraid the outcome of the election and a victory of Islamist parties, I expect Morocco will follow the path, most of polls shows Islamist parties far ahead than secular parties, The economy of Morocco is in bad shape, chronic unemployment, raising cases of HIV/AIDS, gap between the poor and rich, of course the Islamist will win once given the chance.
I have no sympathy toward Islamist parties, but as a realistic person, I believe we must talk to them and soften their approach and views of violence and world affairs, I know deep down, they want to govern, (Example the current Turkish leaders) not to destroy, and besides they are much better administrators than current obese, useless, timorous.
Let us give them a chance with a warning; Govern right, defeating them with risible plans are more dangerous, they won and let them prove to Palestinian people they can lead also, and US must denounce the undemocratic move of Mubarak regime to postpone the elections.
" Right temporarily defeated is stronger than Evil triumphant" MLK.Jr.

Algeria Jails Cartoon Publishers

2006-02-13T23:29:00.000-08:00

Algeria: 13 Feb. The now-banned Errisala is aimed at the youthA leading media watchdog has condemned the arrest of two Algerian editors who published some of the cartoons satirising the Prophet Mohammed.
"The detention of those two men is absurd and dangerous" says Reporters Sans Frontieres.
Kamel Boussaad and Berkane Bouderbala were arrested last week and their magazines, Errissala and Essafir banned from publication.
The images,first published in a Danish paper, have angered many Muslims.
Both magazines were critical of the original cartoons and were asking their readers to complain to the Danish authorities.
But according to Algerian law, both journalists now face between three and five years in jail for "insulting the prophet".
Moderate Islamists
Essafir's declared objective was to explain their readers why the caricatures had sparked so much controversy within the Muslim world.
This initiative "has turned itself against us", says Essafir editor-in-chief Mohammed Fardjallah.
"We can't criticise journalists for trying to explain the row without the slightest reference to the object of the controversy," argues RSF.
The BBC's Mohammed Areski Himeur in Algiers says that both Essafir (The Ambassador) and Errissala (The Messenger), published in Arabic, have moderate pro-Islamist views and print only a few thousand copies a week.
Both magazines are aimed at the youth.
Television trouble
The row over the cartoons has also made waves within the management of two state-owned television channels.
Two directors and several journalists working with Canal Algerie and A3 have been sacked for broadcasting the drawings.
All say it was a mistake; they had not checked pictures sent to them by Western television channels.
The caricatures of Prophet Mohammed have been condemned by political and religious leaders in Algeria, but the controversy has not sparked a lot of reactions within the wider public.

Imam of Makkah: Punish Mockers of the Prophet.

2006-02-11T06:52:00.000-08:00

Makkah, 11 February 2006 — An influential imam of the Grand Mosque in Makkah yesterday called for the imposition of stiff punishment on those daring to mock the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).
Delivering his Friday sermon, Sheikh Abdul Rahman Al-Sudais also emphasized the need to activate international resolutions that condemn and punish such crimes as defamation of religions and prophets.
“All Islamic countries have condemned this act of crime,” Al-Sudais told the faithful who packed the large mosque complex, referring to the blasphemous cartoons published by Western newspapers.
“We make a call from the podium of the Grand Mosque and the birthplace of Islam, on behalf of Muslims all over the world, that tough punishment should be imposed on those who make a mockery of the Prophet,” the imam said.
Sudais said Western countries and organizations were adopting double standards on the issue of Danish cartoons allowing abuse of Muslim sanctities and their Prophet.
“The repulsive cartoons depicting the Prophet have violated the sanctity of 1.5 billion Muslims around the world and their feelings.... This has exposed those who are actually promoting extremism, violence and hatred between peoples,” Sudais said.
He praised Muslims all over the world for standing up to the challenge and protesting the publication of cartoons.
Sudais told Islamic scholars and intellectuals to do more to spread the message of the Prophet and his noble qualities and ideals. “We must seize this opportunity to spread the correct perspective of his noble life through publications and programs in various languages,” he added.
The imam called on wealthy Muslims to use their money to confront the smear campaigns against Islam.

Oil Prices Increase on Iran Nuclear Row.

2006-02-09T22:58:00.000-08:00

– Oil prices rose Monday after Iran ended all voluntary cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency, saying it would start uranium enrichment and bar surprise inspections of its facilities.
Traders fear the dispute between the United Nations and Iran could disrupt supplies from OPEC's second-largest oil producer.
Light, sweet crude for March delivery on the New York Mercantile Exchange rose 75 cents to $66.12 a barrel in electronic trading by afternoon in Europe. The contract had risen as high as $66.62 earlier in the day.
Brent crude for March rose 81 cents to $64.20 a barrel on London's ICE Futures exchange.
Nymex heating oil advanced more than 2 cents to $1.8045 a gallon, while gasoline rose less than a cent to $1.6900 a gallon. Natural gas lost 17 cents to $8.440 per 1,000 cubic feet.
Iran's announcement Sunday came after the International Atomic Energy Agency reported the nation to the U.N. Security Council over its nuclear program. Iran insists it only wants to generate electricity, but the United States and some of its allies claim the Islamic Republic is trying to build a weapon.
The Islamic Republic left the door open for further negotiations over its nuclear program and, in an apparent softening of its position, said it was willing to discuss Moscow's proposal to shift large-scale enrichment operations to Russian territory in an effort to allay suspicions.
An Iranian official at the IAEA meeting in Vienna, Austria, had said that proposal was "dead." The comment was made after the IAEA's 35-nation board of governors voted to report Iran to the council, which has the power to impose economic and political sanctions.
Dominic Bryant, an analyst at BNP Paribas, said that while Iran's referral was widely expected, it is still a significant milestone in the dispute, which will be protracted.
Worries over supplies from Iraq and Nigeria persist as well. Insurgents have targeted oil installations in northern Iraq in efforts to cripple the country's infrastructure. Nigeria's exports have been reduced because of recent violence against oil companies. Insurgents have blown up pipelines and have taken oil workers hostage over the past months.

Putin Invites Hamas.

2006-02-09T22:45:00.000-08:00

Friday 10 February 2006 — Russian President Vladimir Putin yesterday invited Hamas for talks in Moscow after the group won last month’s Palestinian legislative elections.
Putin told a news conference in the Spanish capital, Madrid, that he intended to invite Hamas leaders to Russia, a member of the Quartet of Middle East peace mediators along with the United States, the United Nations and the European Union.
Putin insisted Russia was right to back a dialogue with the group. “We are ready to work with all parties. Contacts with Hamas must continue,” Putin said on the second and final day of an official visit to Spain.
“Today we have to recognize that Hamas came through the doors of power via legitimate means and also respect the choice of the Palestinian people,” the Russian president said.
Moscow, unlike the United States and the European Union, does not consider Hamas a terrorist organization.
Putin also stressed that it was time for the world to accept the poll result and work with a Hamas-led administration, even though the group has yet to accept key international demands to renounce violence and recognize Israel’s right to exist.
Hamas responded by saying it would accept an invitation from Putin for talks in Moscow.
“We salute the Russian position and when an invitation is officially sent to us, we will accept it with the aim of strengthening our relations with the West and particularly with the Russian government,” Hamas’ spokesman in Gaza, Sami Abu Zuhri, said.
Abu Zuhri added that a visit by Hamas officials to Moscow would present an opportunity for the movement to “explain its position and its vision regarding Israel’s deceptive policies.” Israel was surprised. “(Russia) agreed to the Quartet’s statements, so people in Jerusalem are raising an eyebrow — what’s going on here?” an Israeli government source said.
At a meeting in London on Jan. 30, Quartet representatives called on Hamas to renounce violence and recognize Israel if it participates in a Palestinian government.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Wednesday that international aid could not flow to Hamas until it recognized Israel’s right to exist. The group, which is expected to form a new Palestinian government soon, has said it would ask Arab and Muslims states for political and financial support to counter such threats.
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan appealed yesterday to Hamas to transform itself into a political party. “I urge Hamas to listen to the appeals not just from the Quartet but from other governments in the region asking it to transform itself into a political party,” the secretary-general told reporters at the United Nations.
“This is not the first time that an armed movement has transformed itself into a political party. There are lots of examples around the world,” Annan noted. “I urge Hamas to go the same route.”
In the Gaza Strip, an Egyptian diplomat became the most high-profile victim yesterday of a kidnapping spree when he was abducted by masked gunmen as he drove to work.
Two masked gunmen shot out the tires of a diplomatic vehicle and kidnapped Egypt’s military attaché to the Palestinian Authority, Hussam Almousaly, just outside the heavily guarded Egyptian mission.
The kidnapping of a diplomat from one of the Palestinians’ most important allies signaled that no one was immune from the increasing lawlessness in the Gaza Strip. Egypt, a frequent mediator between militants and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, is seen by some as the only chance for maintaining some stability in Gaza.
The identity of the gunmen or their motive was not immediately known. Palestinian security officials set up roadblocks throughout Gaza to try to find the kidnappers.
The Egyptian Foreign Ministry said in a statement that it was working to determine how the abduction happened and to “expedite the release of the kidnapped diplomat.”

Hamas to name a PM

2006-02-09T21:18:00.000-08:00

Hamas to name Islamic University head as PM .

CAIRO: The militant group Hamas has decided to name Jamal Al-Khudairi, a Gaza businessman who ran for parliament as an independent with Hamas backing, as its candidate for Palestinian prime minister, a top Hamas official said yesterday. Al-Khudairi, the board chairman of the Islamic University in Gaza, was picked as the group's candidate for prime minister during a meeting of the group's leadership this week in Cairo, said the Hamas official. He spoke on condition of anonymity because the group has not yet made the proposal to Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas. If Al-Khudari is not accepted in negotiations with Abbas or turns down the nomination, the group will name as candidate the current Palestinian trade and economics minister Mazen Sonnoqrot, another independent with Hamas sympathies, the Hamas official said.Al-Khudairi, about age 50, has never addressed issues such as violence or recognition of Israel, sticking in most of his campaign speeches to issues such as education and job training. He has, however, talked about the need for internal Palestinian reform. He is a businessman who owns the biggest mattress factory in the West Bank and Gaza, and holds an engineering degree from an Egyptian university. He has been, for 14 years, chairman of Gaza's Islamic University, an institution mostly controlled by Hamas. Khaled Meshaal, the political leader of Hamas, said yesterday that a long-term cease-fire with Israel is possible if the Jewish state returned to its 1967 borders. In an interview with the British Broadcasting Corp. in Cairo, Meshaal also said that Hamas would not renounce violence as it is entitled to resist what it regards as Israel's occupation of Palestinian land. Meshaal, who lives in exile in Damascus, Syria, said Hamas was capable of leading the Palestinians in a long fight that they would be better able to bear than Israel. Abbas has said that he will ask Hamas, whose members won the largest number of seats in the Palestinian parliament in last month's elections, to form the new government. Abbas asked the new parliament to convene on Feb 18. Exiled Hamas leaders from Syria joined Hamas leaders from Gaza in a series of meetings this week in Cairo to try to hammer out the movement's plans for a new Palestinian government after last month's landslide election win. The Hamas official said group leaders from both inside and outside the Palestinian territories had unanimously agreed on the choice of Al-Khudairi. Hamas has proposed a national coalition government that would also include Fatah Abbas' party plus other Palestinian factions and independent figures. During their meeting, the Hamas leaders also decided that if all efforts to name a cabinet with a non-Hamas prime minister fail, they will name one of their own leaders as the new prime minister, the official said. "Then (Gaza Hamas leader) Ismail Haniyeh will be our choice," the official said.Hamas political chief yesterday warned Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas against making changes in the leadership structure without first consulting the militant organisation, a marked hardening of the group's stance going into negotiations on forming a new government. Political leader Khaled Mashaal also again declared that Hamas would not recognise Israel despite intense pressure from the international community and Arab neighbours. "We will not give legitimacy to occupation," he said before moving on issue the warning to Abbas, also known as Abu Mazen. "This is a message to Abu Mazin and other brothers in the authority to stop issuing decrees and decisions (before consulting with us) as if to throw them in our face," Mashaal told a Cairo press conference. "We will not deal with them as legitimate no one can deceive us." Mashaal may have been responding to reports in the Palestinian press that Abbas planned to appoint his current Interior Minister Nasser Youssef as deputy commander of the Palestinian security forces. Such a move would enable Abbas to maintain control over the forces.

Nuclear case Against Iran Strong.

2006-02-09T10:48:00.000-08:00

WASHINGTON, 9 February 2006 — Iranian engineers have completed sophisticated drawings of a deep subterranean shaft that could be used for testing explosive nuclear devices, The Washington Post reported yesterday.
Citing unnamed officials familiar with available intelligence, the newspaper said the proposed 400-meter tunnel is complete with remote-controlled sensors to measure pressure and heat and appears to be designed for an underground atomic test that might one day announce Tehran’s arrival as a nuclear power.
US and allied intelligence analysts believe that day remains as much as a decade away, assuming that Iran applies the full measure of its scientific and industrial resources to the project and encounters no major technical hurdles, the report said.
But whether Iran’s leaders have reached that decision and what concrete progress the effort has made remain divisive questions among government analysts and UN inspectors, said the Post.
The drawings of the unbuilt test site, not disclosed publicly before, appear to US officials to signal at least the ambition to test a nuclear explosive, the newspaper said.
The designs were obtained from a laptop computer stolen by an Iranian citizen in 2004, and allegedly drawn up by a firm called Kimeya Madon for a small-scale facility to produce uranium gas — the construction of which would give Iran a secret stock that could be enriched for fuel or for bombs.
Also on the laptop, obtained by the CIA and shared with British, German and French intelligence, were drawings on modifying Iran’s ballistic missiles in ways that might accommodate a nuclear warhead.
US intelligence analysts consider the laptop documents authentic but admit they cannot prove it, and say a small possibility remains that opponents to the Iranian regime could have forged them to implicate the government, or speculate that a third country, such as Israel, may have fabricated the evidence, says the Post, adding that analysts have now discounted this theory.
But US and UN experts who have studied the undated drawings say they do not clearly fit into a larger picture, according to the report.
Nowhere, for example, does the word “nuclear” appear on them. The authorship is unknown, and there is no evidence of an associated program to acquire, assemble and construct the components of such a site, the paper said.
As far as US intelligence knows, the idea has not left the drawing board, the paper said.
Additionally, an imprisoned Pakistani arms dealer, Bukhary Syed Tahir, thought to have played the role of manufacturer, salesman and partner in Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan’s nuclear network, which allegedly supplied materials to Libya, Iran and North Korea, recently offered unconfirmed statements that Iran received several advanced centrifuges and equipment that would vastly improve its nuclear knowledge.
Meanwhile, an Iranian government spokesman Gholam-Hossein Elham on Monday stressed the peaceful and transparent nature of Iran’s nuclear activities and said Tehran does not intend to leave the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
He told reporters that the door for negotiations was still open and there were no obstacles to the continuation of talks.
Stressing the international call for nuclear disarmament, he said Iran “favors non-discriminatory and comprehensive nuclear disarmament.”
Criticizing the discriminatory attitude of certain nuclear countries toward the nuclear activities of others, he said: “There are a number of countries which possess atomic weapons who wish to deprive others of the legitimate and indisputable right to access nuclear technology for peaceful uses.”
“The rights of all countries (to nuclear energy) should be determined within the context of international law, rules and relations and no country should have preference over another or be subjected to double standards.”
The government spokesman once again invited countries to participate in Iran’s nuclear programs, and assured that Iran would give “due respect to their individual national interests.”

Aoun Meeting With Hezbollah Leader

2006-02-09T10:42:00.000-08:00

BEIRUT, 9 February 2006 — An alliance between the leader of the pro-Syrian Hezbollah resistance movement and a prominent Christian leader who fought Syrian troops appears to have jolted Lebanon’s political landscape, raising hopes it might ease sectarian tensions in a country veering toward a renewed conflict.
The landmark meeting took place Monday between Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, a Shiite cleric and one of Syria’s close allies, and Michel Aoun, a Maronite Catholic who leads a parliamentary bloc and who as army commander in the late 1980s fought Syrian troops. “The Aoun-Nasrallah meeting is a ... plan for a new Lebanon, around which all Lebanese forces could rally,” pro-Syrian former Environment Minister Wiam Wahhab told The Associated Press.
As-Safir newspaper said in a headline Tuesday, “The Aoun-Nasrallah meeting: A political coup.” Its publisher, Talal Salman, said he hoped the agreement would help eliminate the “sectarian climate” in the country, and also perhaps bridge gaps between pro-Syrian and anti-Syrian groups. Reaction from anti-Syrian politicians, however, ranged from cautious welcome to silence or subtle criticism.
“Any meeting between leaders from different sects is positive. It is useful,” said Samir Franjieh, an anti-Syrian Christian lawmaker. He told The Associated Press that the Aoun-Nasrallah agreement will lead to “a realignment of political forces” in Lebanon in the face of the anti-Syrian coalition, and that could further polarize the country between anti- and pro-Syrian camps.
The alliance also confirms Aoun’s break with the anti-Syrian coalition. Both Aoun and Nasrallah insist their agreement is not directed against anti-Syrian groups. But it was clear that one of the reasons behind their political alliance is an upcoming parliamentary seat election in central Lebanon that is shaping up as a battle between pro- and anti-Syrian parties.
The men’s meeting, held in a Maronite church south of Beirut, came a day after thousands of rampaging Muslim demonstrators set fire to the building housing Denmark’s diplomatic mission in a Christian neighborhood in Beirut in the most violent of escalating worldwide rage over caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad.
Sunday’s riots threatened to rekindle sectarian tensions in this mixed Muslim-Christian nation, which is struggling to recover from the devastating 1975-90 civil war. Extremists took over the streets in the Ashrafieh neighborhood where the Danish mission is located, wreaking havoc on property for about three hours.

New Report From Saudi Secret Weapon.

2006-02-08T12:50:00.000-08:00

I spoken to my Saudi friend in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, he told me something I was suspicious, but was not fully aware. Recently the King Abdullah of Saudia appointed his nephew and former Saudi ambassdor to Washington, Prince Bandar bin Sultan as new National Security head, but Saudis are faced by major problems internaly and externaly, particularly Iranian Nuclear program.
Thanks to soaring oil price, the Saudis are enjoying surpluss budget and a lot of cash to move around. Prince Bandar known for his western clothe and his irrisistable charms,seduced and won friendship of every President since Reagan, he is sauve, magnanimous former Pilot and he is inspired to become the King of Saudia, One day.
The new National Security head, according to my source has a budget of more than 10 billion dollars, and sole function will be to acquire the Saudis a nuclear bomb. Iran will have one within next five years, and Saudis are already working on. The King paid well publicised visit to India, Pakistan, China, and Indonesia, as usual many gifts were given, some politicians bought through luxrative contracts. Saudis send indirect mesagge to Iran sole provider; Russia, besides Saudis Have more money than Iran.
The Nuclear arms Race I predicted is here, Ladies and Gentelmen, according my source Prince Bandar will achieve what he sought for, and he is capable of doing the mission he was set on, having his father as Minister of Defence with a budget of 10 Billion dollars, plus a lot of expenses, as he told to American journalist about Saudi corruption, he said " we did not invent, if...some money were stolen... So what", and that will be Saudi answer to Bush or whomever occupies the White House once this come to the light, Iranians has one, Israelis has one, so we have one too, so what ! indeed So what.

US & INDIA Nuclear Problem

2006-02-08T12:45:00.000-08:00

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - A landmark nuclear cooperation deal between India and the United States has run into serious trouble, with Washington playing hard ball and India's atomic energy establishment raising objections to the terms of the deal.

Now Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has a tough choice to make -- override his own scientific establishment or suffer a serious loss of face when President George W. Bush visits his country in early March.

"The government is debating this very seriously," said foreign policy expert C. Raja Mohan. "Some big decisions have to be taken."

The deal, agreed in principle when Singh visited Washington last July, would offer India access to nuclear technology and reactors -- at a stroke removing much of the stigma India attracted when it conducted nuclear tests in 1974 and 1998.

In return, New Delhi offered to separate its civilian and military nuclear programs -- and place the civilian part under international supervision.

But that is where the deal could come unstuck.

The U.S. administration, under pressure from a hesitant Congress, wants to see more of India's program under international supervision than New Delhi is offering.

At the heart of the debate is a prototype Fast Breeder program, which would process plutonium from spent fuel from India's existing Heavy Water reactors.

The chief of India's Department of Atomic Energy Anil Kakodkar went public with his objections in a newspaper interview published in full on Wednesday. Placing the Fast Breeder under international supervision would "shackle" his scientists and leave the country dependent on imported uranium, he said.

"Both from the point of view of maintaining long-term energy security and for maintaining the 'minimum credible deterrent', the Fast Breeder program just cannot be put on the civilian list," he said. "This is not in our strategic interest."

TURF BATTLE

Nonsense say the deal's supporters. DAE, long a secretive and isolationist organization, is simply scared of opening up, ignoring long-term strategic goals for its own narrow interests.

"There is a very strong turf battle going on," said Dr Harsh V. Pant, a lecturer in defense studies at King's College, London. "The scientific establishment wants to defend its turf."

Singh, already under fire from his Communist allies over the deal, has promised to address parliament later this month about the deal. Promising to defend India's national interest, he vowed there was "no question of bending" to American demands.

U.S. officials are hoping to reach a deal before Bush's visit. But in a January 26 interview with Reuters, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice said India had to make some "difficult choices."

In New Delhi, the foreign ministry is keen to push the deal through, but says Washington is a playing tough. "It's coming down to hard-nosed political bargaining," said one official.

India's civilian and military nuclear programs are completely entwined. New Delhi had proposed a phased separation, Washington wants it done in one go, he said.

"That is, of course, not impossible but it will take us time and preparation if we agree to do it. And we only have three weeks before the Bush visit -- that may not be sufficient."

US gives Israel $10 Million a Day

2006-02-08T12:13:00.000-08:00

Wednesday, 8, February, 2006 (09, Muharram, 1427)

Israeli Forces Kill 3 Palestinians.

GAZA CITY, 8 February 2006 — Two Palestinian militants were killed yesterday in the latest Israeli airstrike on Gaza while Special Forces shot dead a top armed leader in the West Bank as Israel vowed to continue targeting activists. Two members of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, linked to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ defeated Fatah movement, were killed in what was the fourth Israeli airstrike on Gaza in three days, sources said.

The slain men were named by Fatah sources as Mohammed Abu Shareya, a 25-year-old Al-Aqsa field commander and fellow fighter Suhale Abu Bakr. Medics said three bystanders were also wounded in the blast. Just hours earlier the leader of Islamic Jihad’s armed wing in the West Bank was shot dead by Israeli Special Forces following a lengthy shootout in Nablus.

Meanwhile, a Hamas leader said yesterday it was very likely that one of its members would become Palestinian prime minister after winning parliamentary elections last month. Hamas officials are holding talks in Egypt about forming a new Palestinian government following the group’s landslide victory in the Jan. 25 poll. They have said they want a new administration to include the defeated Fatah faction, which long dominated Palestinian politics, but had not previously said they expected to secure the post of premier.

What we are not informed is how much money we give to State of Israel, 10 Million a day,By American Taxpayers, according to US officials, That money helps Israelis to occupy Palestinians and subjugation of more than 4 million Palestinians. Many Americans are not aware there are more than one Million Palestinian Christians, and Palestine is under foreign occupation condemned by UN,EU,AU, the entire world, except our government in Washington, who don't see occupation of Palestine as important as freedom of Iraqis.

IRAN IN STATISTICS

2006-02-07T22:24:00.000-08:00

News : IRAN IN STATISTICS

Iran accounted for transit of 7.716 million tons of products worth 1.87 million in the first ten months of the current calendar year which started March 2005. They show 7.5 percent decline in terms of weight and 16.4 percent rise in terms of value.
Sixty percent of intra-city trips are carried out by personal vehicles in Iran. Six million Iranians are slum-dwellers.
IRAN*- Precipitation drops 41 percent compared with preceding year.
85.4 percent of Iranians call for continuation of nuclear activities and 12.7 percent demand Iran’s flexibility.

France: No Confrontation Sought With Iran

2006-02-07T22:14:00.000-08:00

News :

DOUSTE-BLAZY: No Confrontation Sought With Iran
PARIS (Reuters) - The international community is not seeking a confrontation with Iran over its nuclear program, French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said yesterday, noting that talks with Tehran were still possible.
Iran on Sunday ended snap UN checks of its nuclear sites and said it was resuming uranium enrichment, a day after being reported to the Security Council over suspicions it is building nuclear weapons.
Douste-Blazy urged Tehran to cooperate with the international community.
"We tell them: There is still time to negotiate. But suspend sensitive nuclear activities," he told France Inter radio.
"We must make people understand that the international community's goal is not punitive, it is only political. We are not looking for any confrontation, to the contrary, it's negotiations we are looking for," he said.
The International Atomic Energy Agency voted on Saturday to report Iran to the Security Council but the top UN body will take no action until an IAEA report is delivered in March.
The Security Council has the power to impose political and economic sanctions but there are divisions among its five permanent members -- the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China -- about how to deal with Tehran.
"It is time (for Iran) to come back to reason, because if not, it's obviously the Security Council and a possible escalation," Douste-Blazy said.

Iran says it wants nuclear technology to generate electricity, not make bombs as some Western countries allege.
Which is total lie. Iran will make bombs as soon as they can, and it will cause great danger to the region.

The heat is on; 2008

2006-02-07T14:47:00.000-08:00

Both Senators are expected to run 2008 presidential election, although Sen.Obama remains very popular among Moderate Democrats, it's hard to predict his chance on national election. McCain needs moderate democrats to win the election, by nature they are competing among same constituency.
Our Beloved and hated former Senator Edwards is expected to run again in 2008, he was spotted around traingle lately, perhaps aiming to win his own state at least next election.

Sen.McCain, in a Letter to Obama Monday:"I concluded your professed concern for the institution and the public interest was genuine and admirable. Thank you for disabusing me of such notions.""I'm embarrassed to admit that after all these years in politics I failed to interpret your previous assurances as typical rhetorical gloss routinely used in politics to make self-interested partisan posturing appear more noble."

Obama, Replying to McCain's Letter:"The fact that you have now questioned my sincerity... is regrettable but does not in any way diminish my deep respect for you nor my willingness to find a bipartisan solution to this problem.""It was in this spirit [of collegiality] that I approached you to work on ethics reform, and it was in this spirit that I agreed to attend your bipartisan meeting last week."

Ayatollah next move: Nuclear

2006-02-07T12:57:00.000-08:00

More farce and diversion about those bloody cartoons, while Iranian leaders are quietly making thier own bomb, and Tony Blair and Europeans failed to stop them. Leaders in Iran are using the public anger toward west and of course, Muslim leaders favorite enemy; Israel. To boil public anger already simmiring with high unemployment, and lack of public services, Iran whether we like it or not will join the club, and to understand what kind of leaders rule with insane mentality, read next report:

A prominent Iranian newspaper said it was going to hold a competition for cartoons on the Holocaust in reaction to European newspapers recently republishing the prophet drawings. Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said the Prophet Muhammad drawings were an Israeli conspiracy motivated by anger over the victory of the militant Hamas group in last month's Palestinian elections.

The Iranian newspaper Hamshahri invited foreign cartoonists to enter its Holocaust cartoon competition, which it said woulAhmadinejad, the former Tehran mayor known for his opposition to Israel.d be launched Monday. The newspaper is owned by the Tehran Municipality, which is dominated by allies of President Mahmoud

Iran will join soon the world most exculesive club, according to nameless official of Bush administration, Iran has the money and technology, all we can do is delay, but they will have it. Strange enough the regime in Tehran don't pay that much attention, most dangerous and obivious is Saudis will seek material to produce thier own bomb, great mistrust and hatred between Riyadh and Tehran is well known, and once now Saudi and other gulf Sheiks lost the buffer between them and Iran, namely Saddam Hussien. Once the nuclear appears in middle east, we will witness a competition between Saudis, Iran, and Egypt.
Israelis has one for a long time, and it is open secret, they never made big deal about it, but once Iran and conservative clergy got one, they will at least help Saudis for thier search of ultimate weapon. Saudis and the rest of Arab world pressured members of IAEA and India and Pakistan not to assist Iran's bomb, but as yesterday reported by New York Times, Washington will not object against Iranian bomb, besides it's too late and Bush and his team are not interested another war, Iraq is already failed, nothing is coming out except more death.
Clergy in Iran who despise Israel and Sunni Saudis in same way, will be very much risk to let them have a bomb, and once they got one, I for one will not visit middle east.
President Bush must face upcoming danger of Persian gulf, showing sign of weakness to Iran will trigger new Nuclear arms race betweeen two or more largest oil producers in the world. Pres.Bush must pay attention this catastorphe, before Ayatollah Khameini creates another holocaust.

Universal Peace.

2006-02-06T12:13:00.000-08:00

I read many diifucult times in last two years, Islam and Universal Peace,(Sayyed Qutb).Published in English by American Trust Publications in 1977, Unless you are known Islamic reader Sayyed Qutb is considered by many as a ideologist of Muslim brotherhood, and he paid his life for it.

Sayyed Qutb was born in Assiyut in Egypt, apporoxmitely 1906. His education like many lower class children started at local Koran school, and he memorized entire Koran like many children in Islamic world. We know little about his youth, but I assume as showed in his later books, that he was a novelist at heart, one may even suggest as failed or un-published confused Novelist, in short an Artist.
One of his best books is ( Al-Tafsir al fanni fi al Koran) or The artistic Imagery in the Koran, It shows the novelist part of the man. He went on to study Azhar University, oldest Islamic university founded by Shia Muslims, he also worked as public servant and a teacher, he visited United States with great distaste of American materialism and sexaul perversity, a theme will dominate Islamic Radicals generation to come, he was an observer and a typical guest, watchful but distant. He also visited Italy and Germany, some even say Swizerland, but that is beyond the point. Upon his return in Egypt, he become active member of Muslim Brotherhood, and edited and wrote newspapers funded by MB.
The Ikhwan as they were known was anti-British group and abhored the foreign King of Egypt, they also advocated Morality and Social engineering. Sayyed Qutb lectured through Arab world and become very well known intellectual, a position he may desired, but as famous as any novelist of that era.
After Nasser and so-called free officers took the power from lazy, overweight King, they banned the Muslim Brotherhood and arrested and killed many of their leaders, Nasser claimed the MB tried to assasinate him, Sayyed Qutb wrote books in prison among them his most famous book, The Shade of the Koran, almost poetic style of his prose and as gifted writer it is the best of all his books, available also in US.
The book in hand is Islam and Universal Peace, and I chose this book to translate my vision of Peace in this diffucult time, the seperation between Religion and Politics is non existance, hatred, racism, xenophopia, and above all the unquestining public who gave up their freedom of thought to ignorant and radical Politicians, clergy and un- intellectual recieved opinion dispensers.
Sayyed Qutb divides his book seven chapters, it reads like sermon, of course he was preacher, among them are;
Islamic concept of Peace; In Islamic faith, he writes, Peace is the rule while war is exception, peace means harmony in the universe, the laws of life, while war is the result of violation of harmony as injustice,despotism and corruption. Sayyed Qutb is agreeable so far, then he attacks those he considered outside of that boundry," War is permitted against atheisim(Nasser-Soviets) which is the worst kind of injustice. Such a peril should be checked by temporary drastic measures in order that peace be maintained. Those who don't believe God are bound to hell, according to Sayyed Qutb, why we should let them rule us, Fight them, that is why some radicals chose him over other more moderate clergy, he suffered and he been there.
Nasser and his boys read carefully what Qutb was writing, and they used his own words to hung him in prsion in 1966. He become the mischief who wants destroy the civil society and stabilty of Egypt.So they Killed him with delight of Soviets. Chapter title Peace of Conscience, he attacks vehemnetly Christianity and their fabricated, ungodly morals, the beliefs of the church, and even goes to call them corrupt, in simply put, they are infedels as long they support those who oppress us in Egypt, Now Mr.Qutb behaves like an bedioun Arab, Friend of my enemy is my enemy, Osama took those words thirty years later, If you support the corrupt Saudi Royal Mafia, you are my enemy, because they are enemy of Islam, all these nonsense is to seek the ultimate prize, Political Power.
Sayyed Qutb, as I wrote the was my companion in diffucult time, I wonder if he would accept current carnage of blind leading blind in Muslim World, where the civility is rare commodity, where person's life is worth nothing, where corruption and oppression is the rule of law. Was he radical Islamist? some right wing (or rather chicken wing) who never read him or visited Middle East convince us to believe, deep down after I read him many times, my conculusion is simple, he was man of his time, he never understood America like many Arab/ Muslims who even visit or live here, but common misunderstanding is two ways, Americans and the rest of west are as Ignorant about Islam, and most of the time are as ignorant as Muslims, whether we need a dailogue or war is up to our politicians and warmongers, I call for quick and rational dialogue between those of us who love humanity with great passion and value the human lives and dignity.
Sayyed Qutb was killed by Egyptian goverment because he protested against imported ideas of Secularism and socialism as a alien to Muslim Culture, he resisted and spoke up against opprresion of his people, under the disguise of modernity,he paid a for his life, it pains me when his name is slandered by Radicals who read between the lines in search of excuses to hate, or those in the west who never read him or understood him. Sayyed Qutb died for his beliefs in Islam and that no human should oppress other living creatures, and humanity as he quoted from the Koran;
Ye are the best of People (human beings), evolved for mankind, enjoinig what is right,forbidding what is wrong, and believing in God"
Now, wrong and right are mixed, where should we turn for moral leadership.

Danger in the Middle East.

2006-02-06T10:21:00.000-08:00

I tried to avoid the little farce between so-called Free speech advocates in old Europe, and ever sensetive Islamic world. Unlike many Muslims I saw the cartoons in question and found it's nothing but publicity and provocation seeking bored Danish ugly cartoons, No picture looks like the Prophet and as a Muslim, I have not found a reason to end up the pocket of those who trying to provoke me, I am a Muslim, not because what others say about my religion, but simply a question of faith, but we learn two lesson;
First, we now know that the great Liberal nations of Denmark and Sweden is riddled with racsim and xenophopia, they are as diseased as any society, their social and intellectual conditions were prefabricated to please their imagined Image of themselves as enlightenten Europeans, the point is Europeans, whether is France, Germany, Italy or northern cousins are sick and full of fear that Muslims are coming jingoism.
Second, Muslims are willingly giving up their rights to ignorant Mullahs and overweight politicians, in that order what they recieve is diversion of real problems in the Muslim world, as it been seen around the world and proclaimed the Imam of Mekkah, this cartoons united Muslim world, if that is the case then, Muslim world has a bigger problem than cartoons. The Main problem is the lack of open discussions, the hatred between Sunnis and Shia muslims are legendery, but we are not allowed to discuss honestly and openly, why? Last year I had a long debate ( I forced them to debate with me ) a group of Arab students in US, of course they dispise America, but they want the Education and dollars, after I nagged the leader of the group, a young man who claimed has a great knowledge of Islam, Why we cannot talk the first Islam civil war? what happened? His reply was swift and to the point, Imam Thaymiya(Ancient Syrian God father of modern day Radicalsim) forbid to talk about it, the matter he said was solved through the blood, and we should leave it that way. I become curiuos, well what is your opinion about Shia Muslims? They are nothing but infedels, and I take refuge to Allah for not being born Shia, was his answer without feelings, but he believe it every word he said to me. I was shocked and disgusted this hatred, that is for me worst than any suicidal Danish cartoonist statement. The heart of Muslim world, we are showered with hate and dispair, Just watch half and hour of Sheikh Qardaawi of Al-Jazeera, most popular TV preacher, (yes, we have our own TV preachers, thanks to American inspiration) and you will see how much hate and intolerance he disturbutes in matter of seconds, all he does is to forbid things he has no idea about it, or condemn people behaviour, he calls names to Jewish people, and Christians, obviously to Sheikh Qardaawi has no symapthy towards them, or anyone else who don't practise his version of Islam, but no one says anything about this filth when it reaches our homes and places of worship,Muslim world publish with immunity pictures of ugly Jewish and Americans, blood dripping, money stealing Jewish men, that would make proud Nazi propoganda, in mean time no one asks to behave responsible, and the respect of fellow human beings who just happens to be non-Muslim, this deeply hypocritical world everyone is loser, unless we come to our senses and stop demonizing our fellow humans.
I will not pretend that solution is here, but I will call complete cease fire, Muslims to go back their real issues and stop acting like a victims of European racism, besides more we cry out, more ridiculous we look and sound, get use to it, move on, nothing a Danish says changes my mind about Prophet Mohammed, so are you. As far is concerns me the European papers can publish anything their xenophopic media needs to sell papers, we make our point not to make fun or riducule our Prophet, and I know they got the messagge.

Raw News

2006-02-05T21:06:00.000-08:00

Welcome to my page.
Current news, Essays, Book reviews, and many more, coming soon to this page, starting Monday February 6.