Conservatives rebel against President Bush & the neocon agenda.

click here to see article

By Brendan O’Neill

click here to link to the article

By Masood Farivar

August 22, 2006—As violence rages in Iraq, it has become ever more difficult to make sense of it all. Undoubtedly some is the work of terrorists bent on disrupting the democratic process, some the work of Sunnis and Baathists angry at their loss of power. But to Vali Nasr, author of

The Shi’a Revival

, most of the current violence is part of a broad sectarian conflict. The fall of Saddam Hussein, he argues, has indeed given birth to a “new Middle East”—but not yet the one hoped for. We are now seeing the Shi’a of Islam, newly empowered in Iraq and ever more militant in Iran, challenge the Sunnis—Islam’s dominant sect—in a conflict that will take years to resolve, if not decades.

Like many modern-day sectarian rifts, this one predates the modern era—in this case, by well more than a millennium. In the succession crisis that followed the death of the Prophet Muhammad (s) in 632, the majority of Muslims followed as caliph one of the Prophet’s (s) closest companions. A minority dissented, arguing that the Prophet (s) had passed the leadership of his community to Ali (ra), his cousin and son-in-law. The dissenters became known as “Shi’at-Ali,” or Partisans of Ali. The followers of Prophet’s (s) sunna, or tradition, became known as Sunnis. In time, each side developed what Mr. Nasr calls a distinct “ethos of faith and piety.”

Will a new Middle East end up being the site of a war within Islam Sunni against Shi’a?

The Shi’a got their wish when Ali (ra) became the fourth caliph, but the pivotal moment in Shi’a history came in 680 when Ali’s (ra) son Hussein (ra) and 72 of his followers were massacred in the desert of southern Iraq. For the Shi’a, Hussein (ra) came to symbolize resistance to tyranny; his martyrdom is commemorated to this day as a central act of Shi’a piety.

With the exception of a few short-lived Shi’a dynasties (Iraq is not the first Shi’a Arab state), the Shi’a never really wielded political power, living mostly as a marginalized minority under Sunni rule. This historical experience, Mr. Nasr observes, has long imbued the Sunnis with a sense of “worldly success,” and a presumption of mastery, while furnishing the Shi’a underdogs with a narrative of “martyrdom, persecution, and suffering.”

Mr. Nasr uses this history to explain why Iraq’s Shi’a so eagerly embraced the fall of Saddam Hussein. Whereas the Americans saw regime change in Iraq as a harbinger of democracy, Iraq’s Shi’a viewed it primarily as the end to centuries of Sunni domination. And Saddam’s fall inevitably stirred hopes for a Shi’a revival elsewhere. The mantra “one man, one vote” has reverberated among the politically marginalized Shi’a of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Lebanon, where Hezbollah’s TV station has recited democracy’s shibboleths as part of its own campaign to win a larger political role.

All this agitation has alarmed the region’s Sunni leaders, Mr. Nasr observes, and not just the Sunni fundamentalists. King Abdullah of Jordan has warned about the emergence of a “Shi’a crescent” slicing across the region; Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has questioned the Shi’a’s Arab loyalties. Certainly both Egypt and Jordan—and many other nations in the region—have reason to be concerned about the rise of a Shi’a-dominated Iraq allying with Iran, the Mideast’s other Shi’a powerhouse.

Mr. Nasr is at his best when he explains the historical ties among Shi’a, not least among Shi’a in Iran and Iraq. It was thought, before the invasion of Iraq in 2003, that a new Iraq would turn away from Iran because of the profound cultural differences between Arabs and Persians and because of their widely different historical experience. It is true that Iraq is unlikely to follow Iran’s theocratic model—Iraq’s Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani is the follower of the most vocal clerical critic of the late Ayatollah Khomeini, the founder of Iran’s current theocracy. But ties between the Shi’a of Iran and Iraq have grown stronger since the invasion, Mr. Nasr notes, and Tehran, he believes, holds the key to stability in Iraq. Thus Mr. Nasr urges the U.S. to normalize its relations with Iran, despite the heated rhetoric of recent months and quarrels over the intent of Iran’s nuclear program.

It must be said that Mr. Nasr supports his arguments by over-citing extremists on both sides of the sectarian divide. There is no doubt that such extremists play a role, intensifying the crisis and propelling the violence. But such an approach, on Mr. Nasr’s part, has the effect of playing down unfairly the many moderate participants in these debates who aim at reconciliation and who respect the normal give-and-take of politics. In short, the Sunni-Shi’a divide does not yet even begin to approach the division, within Christianity, that incited the long and bloody Wars of Religion in the 16th and 17th centuries.

More importantly, Mr. Nasr minimizes a reality at odds with his thesis: Religious extremism and anti-Americanism cut across sectarian lines. The strategic alliance directed at the U.S.—Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas—is half-Sunni and half-Shi’a. What is more, the region’s other great powers—Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Syria—are overwhelmingly Sunni. Thus if the Shi’a are to gain rights in these countries, they are going to have to do so as citizens of each rather than as members of a pan-Shi’a movement.

Mr. Nasr urges the Bush administration to engage the region’s Shi’a before it worries about the spread of democracy. But it was democracy that brought the Shi’a to power, and it will be democracy that will redress their centuries-old sense of injustice.

Mr. Farivar is a reporter for Dow Jones Newswires.

No arrests yet in Minneapolis mosque arson

MINNEAPOLIS, MN—Police in Minneapolis continue to search for two suspects for their involvement in a mosque. Police said burglary or a bias crime could be motives for the fire, which damaged dozens of religious books.

“There’s no doubt this was clearly a hate crime,” Minneapolis City Council Member Gary Schiff, whose ward includes the mosque, said Friday outside the center. “It was a very deliberate offense.”

Representatives of the mosque said their security tape showed a man breaking into the building about 2 a.m. and then leaving without causing damage. But a second man is seen entering through the same window three hours later while people prayed elsewhere in the building.

The blaze was discovered about 5:30 a.m. by a group of worshippers who heard noises during fajr prayers. No structural damage was reported.

“While we think this case has the fingertips of a hate crime, we’re not making any judgment on any particular people, community or faith,” mosque spokesman Mohamed Issa said in a statement.

“We have been receiving weekly, and sometimes daily, fax messages riddled with insults and ‘go-back-to-your-country’ rhetoric since we bought the property,” he said.

The new center is open but still under construction. Gas from a lawn mower was used to start the fire, Minneapolis police Sgt. Sean McKenna said.

Children learn about faiths at weekend tour

ROCHESTER, NY—Young people of diverse faiths visited a mosque, a church, a Hindu temple and a synagogue as part of a weekend program organized by the “Center for Interfaith Studies and Dialogue” at Nazareth College in Rochester. For many of the teens, it was the first time they had been in a mosque. It was also their first experience observing Muslims at prayer. The teens attending the program included those from Fairport, Rochester, Brighton, Chili and other Monroe County towns.

Muhammad Shafiq, the interfaith center’s executive director and the imam at the Islamic Center of Rochester, led the tour of the mosque. “This is congregational worship and a thanks-giving service,” he said as about two dozen teens sat in a circle. If someone built a house for you, then you would be thankful, Shafiq explained. “God has given us this beautiful universe and we say, ‘Thank you.’”

Nazan, a 19-year-old Muslim who attends Monroe Community College, said learning to talk to people of other faiths was the most important part.

“If you don’t have communication, there’s nothing,” she said. “There’s no bond, no unity, no peace, no love.”

University of Illinois at Chicago Scholar Promotes Muslim Integration

CHICAGO—Most of metropolitan Chicago’s 400,000 Muslims are isolated from the communities in which they live—especially in the suburbs—and not necessarily by choice, says Louise Cainkar, a fellow of the Great Cities Institute of the University of Illinois at Chicago and an internationally recognized expert on Muslims and Arabs in the West.

Through a study supported by a $50,000 grant from the Chicago Community Trust, Cainkar will study relationships between Muslims and others in their suburbs. She will recommend strategies by which local Muslim organizations can speed the process of civic integration.

Her study will focus on three Chicago suburbs where residents have opposed mosques: Bridgeview, where mobs surrounded a mosque for three days after 9/11; and Morton Grove and Orland Park, where residents organized to stop the construction of mosques.

“Many Americans have held Muslims collectively responsible for the 9/11 attacks because of negative media portrayals and events in the Middle East,” Cainkar said. “As an isolated group, Muslims were easily targeted, and there were few social repercussions for targeting them.”

Cainkar said that historically, American immigrant groups adapt to the dominant culture as that culture changes to accommodate them in a process that typically takes 20 to 30 years.

“One major lesson of history is that for Muslims to be welcome as members of American society, American society itself must change, and Muslims must do much of the work to cause that change,” Cainkar said.

“The issues Muslims face are in some ways more difficult than for previous religious minorities because social conflicts involving Muslims have both domestic and global components. Some American politicians have relied on negative images of Muslims to gain support for their foreign policies. This frustrates Muslim Americans’ efforts to be civically engaged in American society,” she said.

Cainkar will identify organizations and individuals who exert influence within the Muslim community, and areas where Muslims lack influence. After distributing her report to Muslim leaders and activists, she will meet with them to plan strategies for civic work, community organizing, and leadership development.

The project’s effect will be evaluated in February 2008, one year after Cainkar has made her recommendations.

Hyderabad Association in N. California revived

LOS ANGELES, CA—The Hyderabad Association of Washington Metropolitan Area (HAWMA) has been revived after a brief lapse. The announcement was made by HAWMA’s president Sultana Kamal. The association planning to hold its annual function on November 4, 2006 which will feature Hyderabadi dinner and musical evening. The annual magazine Koh-i-Noor will also be released on the same day.

Muslim athletes sue NMSU

ALBUQUERQUE—The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a lawsuit against New Mexico State University football coach Hal Mumme, NMSU Vice President, Provost William Flores, and the NMSU Board of Regents for religious discrimination.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Muslim athletes who were kicked off the team by Mumme last year. The athletes believe they were singled out and labeled as troublemakers because of their religious beliefs.

Call for articles from Bangladeshi-Americans

The Bangladeshi-American Foundation, Inc. will organize its annual Bangladeshi-American Convention on July 6-7, 2007 at Hilton Mclean Tyson’s Corner in Virginia. The broader objectives of the Convention remain the development of a united, stronger and compassionate community. To this end, the Convention focus is to (i) showcase and appreciate Bangladeshi-American Community achievements, (ii) recognize individuals or organizations for their outstanding services to Bangladesh or Bangladeshi-American Community, and (iii) showcase activities of Bangladeshi-American Non-Profit Organizations.

To mark the convention a commemorative magazine will also be published for which organizations and individuals are encouraged to contribute articles. All Bangladeshi-American Non-Profit Organizations are asked to submit a 300-word write-up. This write-up should be organized in terms of the date the organization was established, its objectives and activities in the U.S. or in Bangladesh, and current contact information (name, e-mail, telephone and web address, if available). The deadline for submitting this write-up is October 30, 2006.

In addition, Bangladeshi-American youths are requested to write about the challenges they faced while growing up in America, with a focus on the dual culture, or about any experience they had while visiting Bangladesh or any project they may have supported or are supporting there.

The deadline for this submission is also October 30, 2006 and should be in 300 words or less. Each submission should also include a digital photo to be printed with the article in the magazine. All submissions should be sent to: shuda@xula.edu and copied to Probashiusa98@hotmail.com.

8-36

By Bob Wood

If you think like I do—and I hope you’re getting help if you do—you tend to see financial implications where many others do not. We can draw parallels to the markets or our own financial situations from the strangest places. Recently, a television show on survival in the wild has provided inspiration for me.

On Friday nights on The Discovery Channel, I sometimes watch the show “Survivorman,” featuring Canadian Les Stroud. As described by the program’s web site, the premise of the show is: ‘‘No food, no shelter, no fresh water, no tools… no camera crew. One man—alone in the wild for seven days with only his wits and stamina to sustain him.’’

Stroud is sent to the remotest, least habitable places, where he survives, using only items found in surrounding swamps, deserts or remote mountains. He exists in places where survival would be almost impossible for most of us. Given only warm clothing, he relies on himself to find food, water, shelter and tools for hunting and fishing.

Oh, surely there is a safety net of sorts, should he not find food, falls victim to illness or an accident, or meet an unexpected alligator or venomous snake. Surely The Discovery Channel wouldn’t leave him to die for dramatic effect or publicity.

So where am I going with this? What parallels do I see in your financial future? Well, to start, I see a need for building the proper foundation for your family’s financial future. In other words, what would happen if your family unexpectedly found itself in a fight for financial survival? Perhaps too many of you rush into the stock markets without having built that vital financial foundation with life insurance.

And I’m talking about large amounts of that survival stuff! Let me illustrate. Have you heard of someone who died and left a surviving spouse and children with too much money? Or have you heard of someone dying unexpectedly when far too few assets were available to replace a lifetime of income? Too often, the surviving spouse and children are left to fend for themselves. At times, they find themselves in foreboding circumstances like the “Survivorman” hero Stroud. Yet Stroud is uniquely prepared to scratch out the basic necessities for survival, while most of your loved ones, when left behind, are not.

Why would anyone be in a hurry to buy stocks or mutual funds without first buying loads of life insurance? The answers befuddle me. And, yes, I’ve already heard all the objections, since I once sold insurance! But never, ever have I heard a good excuse for not buying at least enough insurance to enable your family’s meeting obligations in the event of your unexpected death.

In my local paper today, I see death notices for six people under the age of 50. Premature death happens, perhaps more often than we realize. The six were all men. And it’s a fact of life that we men tend to die sooner. But what becomes of our family members left behind? Do they continue their lives as before, staying in the same home, making sure the kids get to the colleges of their choice, as envisioned all along?

In most cases, the answer is “No,” which is a really bad thing. Life insurance is easy to get and extremely cheap, too, considering the benefits of a good policy. I know what you’re thinking: “If it was so cheap, I’d have some!”

You probably think that anyone selling insurance is really just looking to make a big commission at your expense. Actually, in the case of term insurance, commissions are rather small. And so are the premiums, since term-insurance pay-outs occur less often than the superior, more permanent coverage. But what could possibly be more comforting to your surviving dependents shortly after your death than an insurance agent arriving at your front door with a large check in hand, made out to them? What is the agent’s value then? And how big would you like that check to be?

Another frequent objection to insurance is that if you live a long life as expected, those premium dollars were wasted. That is a lame reason for not keeping your family out of the financial wilderness if you should die early. Look at it this way: if you live long enough to outlast your life insurance coverage, you had sufficient time to amass the financial resources needed by your family at your death. Either way, the family wins.

The idea that you would rather grow your IRA or brokerage account with the hope of accumulating sufficient retirement income plays into the false hopes that have failed to pay off for millions of stock market investors in the past few decades. Life insurance is a sure thing; the markets are far from it.

I am convinced that putting money into the stock market before buying a big life insurance policy is making one of the worst financial decisions possible. It would be like “Survivorman” Stroud entering the wilds without a couple of basic tools, such as a Swiss Army Knife.

And that is the best analogy I can make for the best kind of insurance policy to buy. Commonly referred to as “the Swiss Army Knife of financial planning,” a permanent life insurance policy is the best kind to own. And the most expensive of these policies is the best ever! Hey, where did everybody go…?

Let’s face facts here. As with anything else we buy, the less we spend, the less we get. And we would all like to think of leaving our survivors with as much as possible with the highest degree of certainty, right? So why skimp on something so vitally important to their lives after losing you? How much are you worth to them? Ask them!

So if this topic is hitting home for you, get on the phone with your insurance agent and ask him to meet with you and discuss the wonders of permanent life insurance, notably a Variable Universal Life policy—the most expensive kind. But it’s the most expensive for a reason: it is the best coverage to have. And even better, you don’t have to die to realize the benefits!

Let’s assume that you live to a very old age and never need a big check for your family’s survival. You covered your obligations with your earnings. But you may still want to leave something for your children and grandchildren upon your death, while still enjoying added benefits in your old age. How about tax-free income? Does that sound good?

If you are going to invest in the stock market anyway, doing so along with this type of insurance coverage allows tax deferred growth, similar to your IRA or 401(k) plan. And you have the benefit of mutual funds in these policies.

Even better, when managed properly—with the help of a qualified agent, your new best friend—these policies can produce eventual cash accumulation, which can be taken as loans against cash value at current market rates. And those withdrawals are tax free.

Of course, for this benefit, you will have to put a lot more money into the policy than required to cover the cost of insurance. I recommend adding as much as allowed for as long as you can. Should you live long and need more coverage due to bigger home mortgages or more children, the policy’s death benefit can also rise without the need for additional policies.

As you get older, sufficient cash accumulation can reduce or eliminate the need for premium payments during retirement. And with personal income tax rates sure to rise in future years due to massive fiscal imbalances in our collective accounts for Social Security and Medicare obligations, taking tax free income from your policy will look better than the tax scalping your IRA funds may well suffer.

The idea of buying life insurance is not a popular one. But having that fat policy will make all the difference in your survivor’s ability to continue a normal life without your help. And since I no longer sell life insurance and will make not one cent from your rushing out to buy it—as you should, I hope you will take my advice in the manner intended.

If you’re still balking, a low-cost alternative to Variable Universal Life coverage does exist. Fidelity and other financial groups offer no-load policies that pay no commissions to selling agents. However, I do not recommend them. Life insurance is a legal contract, and these financial life savers are far too important to do “on the cheap,” just to save a few dollars. Your agent is worth what he makes—and many times over that, if the worst happens to you.

The best time to buy coverage is when you are still young. The cost of insurance is at its lowest then, and you’ll have plenty of time to accumulate cash value. And if you live long, the estate planning opportunities are numerous, so you will always find wonderful reasons for having this tool in your financial survival kit.

Go now and buy the biggest policy you can afford. Then we’ll talk more about what to do with the rest of your discretionary cash in the stock market. Go. Now!

Have a great week,
Bob

Bob Wood ChFC, CLU Yusuf Kadiwala. Registered Investment Advisors, KMA, Inc., bwood44@tampabay.rr.com.•

8-36

By Dr. A.S. Nakadar

I recently wrote to predict that the Neo-cons and their allies will raise the boogeyman of terrorism in the pre-election period to influence the elections. And this is in fact what we have witnessed over the past couple of weeks—a drumbeat of trumped-up and speculative charges of terrorism that steadily resonates and amplifies the fear of the American people.

This fear serves two purposes. One is the political end; the Republican trump-card to counter the upper-hand the Democrats have as they approach the November elections. A second purpose is to dampen the debate on the recently concluded war between Israel and Hezbollah, because discussion of what happened will reflect badly on the USA, UK and Israel, but reflects relatively well on Hezbollah.

By the time the UN Security Council called for an “End to Hostilities” after 34 days of fierce fighting between Israel’s army and Hezbollah, Israeli’s myth of invincibility had been shattered and Hezbollah had courageously withstood the onslaught. Israel and the US didn’t expect the ferocious resistance offered by Hezbollah, nor its capability to inflict causalities inside Israel through its missiles.

Those 34 days dominated the world media reporting. With the announcement of the “End to hostilities” the world would start debating the war’s outcome. Many claimed Hezbollah’s victory, an unpalatable thought for Israel, USA and the UK. It became imperative for the Neo-cons and Israelis to divert world attention and to shift focus away from this issue.

It is noteworthy that the UK terror plot was discovered on Thursday, August 10, late in the evening. The first broadcast of the news took place in the US at 2:00AM Friday. The UN passed its Resolution 1701 [which would go into effect the following Monday August 14]. The announcement of arrests for the liquid-bomb plot occurred over the weekend, August 12-13. This strategy dominated the UN resolutions, its implications and the war outcome.

So, do you see how useful the terror boogeyman can be? Sensational reports of bombs disguised as liquids, speculation on the manner of use of liquids as bombs, and long stories on the added difficulties of getting through additional levels of airport security all quickly replaced coverage of the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict and resolution.

Craig Murray, the former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, called the liquid bomb plot “propaganda.”

“None of the alleged terrorists had made a bomb. None had bought a plane ticket. Many did not even have passports, which given the efficiency of the UK Passport Agency would mean they couldn’t be a plane bomber for quite some time,” wrote Murray in the aftermath of the plot’s “discovery.”

The issue has been raised to hysterical proportions as evidenced by the many reports of people who refused to fly with Muslims, Arabs, or South Asians in the days following the revelation of the plot.

Consider the Northwest Airlines flight from Amsterdam to Mumbai, India, which was diverted back to Amsterdam because of inter-passenger paranoia. Dutch police arrested twelve people for behaving “suspiciously” on the flight, but, as has so often occurred they were released later without any charges. The government of India lodged a strong protest against the maltreatment of its citizens and the Dutch government apologized.

Coverage of the UK Terror Plot has taken center stage in international news from the time of Resolution 1701’s passage until today, with consequently minor attention given to news stories related to Lebanon, for example the oil spill in the Mediterranean from Israeli attacks.

The demagoguery is the opportunity for Republican and right-wing candidates to hide from real issues like the Iraq war and the US’s flagging economy.

Peter King’s prejudice against the Muslim is well known. In 2004 he said that 85 percent of the mosques in the United States have extremist leadership. He is seeking re-election from the third district of NY and currently chairs the House Homeland Security committee. He said that the airport screeners shouldn’t be hampered by “political correctness.” Last week he endorsed requiring people of “Middle Eastern and South Asian” descent to undergo additional security checks because of their ethnicity and religion.

Similarly, Paul Nelson, a Republican running in the third district of Wisconsin, endorsed racial profiling last week on a local radio show. Asked on the show how screeners would spot a Muslim male, Nelson said, “If he comes in wearing a turban and his name is Muhammad, that’s a good start.”

Similarly John Faso, a Republican NY gubernatorial candidate, is supporting profiling. Citing the UK plot, Faso said law enforcement officials should be able to question a Muslim man without fear of being slapped by an ACLU lawsuit. “Looking for Muslims for participation in Muslim jihad is not playing the odds. It is following an ironclad tautology.”

Mark Flanagan, a congressional candidate in Florida, has become the fourth Republican office-seeker to call for profiling of Muslim airline passengers since the alleged airline bombing plot in Britain announced earlier this month.

Such sensational orchestrated news of the terror boogeyman, supported by a chorus of election-seeking candidates, will continue to dominate the news media until people’s memory develops amnesia for Israel’s war crimes, mass killings, and wanton destruction of Lebanese infrastructure.

Yes, we have to remain vigilant to prevent any act remotely resembling 9/11. And yes, we must stand for justice, peace and war repatriation compensations.

By raising the specter of terror in the hope of glossing over the war outcome and its crimes, we are only avoiding the real issues. And unless we do that we will continue to trample civil rights, civil liberties and religious freedom of individuals and of groups, especially those associated with Muslims or Islamic organizations. I am afraid we are almost becoming a nation riddled with with fabrications and lies to serve neocon political ends.

8-36

By Susan Schwartz

The Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) held a banquet/fundraiser at the Islamic Center of Southern California this past Saturday evening. The conference room of this oldest Islamic center in Southern California was packed to capacity.

MPAC describes its work as “working for the civil rights of American Muslims, for the integration of Islam into the American body politic, and for a positive and productive relationship between Muslims and their government.”

Following an excellent dinner, MPAC representatives spoke of the essential work of their organization, work which has increased exponentially during the past few months. Their speeches were supplemented by video presentations.

Haris Tarin, the Community Development Director for MPAC took to the podium and welcomed the audience. He then introduced Dr. Saleh Kholaki who read and translated a verse from the Holy Qur’an. The attendees were told that they must have two essential Qur’anic traits: hope and action, and were told that MPAC embodies these two traits.

Citing three recent crises: the alleged London liquid-bomb plot, Israel’s war against Lebanon, and foolish references to “Islamofascists,” the speakers demonstrated the increased burden on the shoulders of MPAC.

“What we do in the United States and what we do abroad are interconnected”.

MPAC is now in demand for commentary in the media. Representatives form MPAC have made more than 30 appearances on Fox News, CNN, CSPAN, BBC, MSNBC, NPR and all the Los Angeles news channels.

The Los Angeles Times invited MPAC to a debate at the Simon Wiesenthal center. For the first time in 60 years, an issue which had hitherto been portrayed only from the Israeli side could be seen from both sides. The one-sided policy of the United States vis-à-vis Israel is being seriously and systematically called into question, thanks in no small part to MPAC.

Salaam al Marayati and Edina Lekovic took turns with their presentation. Salaam has been chosen to receive the ACLU-LA Religious Freedom Award. Edina, just returned from a journalists’ conference, told the audience that MPAC has had to cultivate journalists, a job which takes many hours. Now, she explained, this process is beginning to pay off.

“Wafa Sultan and Irjad Mahgi will not define Islam. Steve {Emerson} and Daniel {Pipes} will not define Islam. Nor will we be silent while the President drags Islam through the mud.”

Salaam explained how MPAC has made inroads by meeting with prominent officials. He cited MPAC meetings with LA Mayor Antonio Villagarosa and with Governor Schwartzenegger, and said that such meetings have paid off. Salaam also spoke of the partnership that MPAC has formed with the FBI and with local law enforcement. MPAC has also met with Senator Dianne Feinstein (D, California) and Representative Jane Harmon (D, California), among other politicians. MPAC has sent interfaith delegations to meet with government officials and held a well-attended interfaith vigil at the very same LA Islamic center which was the venue for this fundraiser.

As he explained, MPAC is sought out by the media and meets with key Washington personnel. MPAC has held training session for Muslim communities in Los Angeles, Atlanta and Washington, DC.

Another goal of MPAC, he explained, is to redress the inequities in Hollywood with its one-sided support for Israel. Changing this will require a substantial investment, he explained, and explained also that MPAC also needs funds for an internship program.

The personnel at MPAC put their lives and careers on the line for Islam, he said. We are partners, and by giving generously we fulfill our part of the relationship.

Dr. Maher Hathout, the Senior Political Advisor to MPAC, took to the podium to raise funds. Dr. Hathout has been awarded the John Anson Ford Public Service Award by the Los Angeles Human Rights Commission. The retired reverend George Regas, from All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena, and Rabbi Leonard Beerman are the interfaith team that has sought to bring balance, justice and conscience to American foreign policy. “We are one of the few hopes for the United States. We Muslims are saviors,” explained Hathout.

Dr. Hassan Zeenni of the MPAC Foundation took the podium next. His goal for the evening was to raise $50,000. In a short time the goal was met and surpassed. The evening ended with prayers.

8-36

By Nilofar Suhrawardy, Muslim Media News Service (MMNS)

NEW DELHI—The two-day conference on “Terrorism,” called last week (August 20-21) by Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind proved to be an effective forum to convey several viewpoints regarding Indian Muslims.

Without doubt, the declaration adopted during the conference conveyed that the primary purpose of the roughly 150 ulema gathered from across the country was to defeat the stereotyped images which conflate Islam with terrorism. Describing terrorism as “completely un-Islamic,” the conference’s final declaration condemned “all forms of terror.” It also called on the government not to blame the entire community even if a few elements are found to be “wrong.” In addition, through the declaration, the clerics said they expected the government’s security agencies to be fair and even-handed while investigating terror cases.

This is not the first time Indian ulema addressed issues related to terrorism and bias, but what is noteworthy is that the conference provided a united front of Indian Muslim clerics to convey their viewpoint to the Indian government. Against the backdrop of Indian Muslims emerging as a strong political force, the conference conveyed the message that the government should not expect them to remain mute spectators to stereotyped images and abuses linked to them, Islam and terrorism.

The very fact that several members of the government, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, also participated in the conference suggested that this message was not missed by the government. During his address, Singh said: “It is sad if some people are now equating terror with Islam. This is just a third-rate attempt to provoke Muslims and the conspiracy must be resisted.” He also called on Muslim leadership to “lead” and help the government fight those who are “trying to mislead and provoke some Muslim youth at this point, and show them the right track.” Calling on Muslim clerics to pay greater importance to the progress of women, Singh said: “The government could help by opening schools but it is for the community’s leadership to make sure Muslim girls attend school and go on to claim their place as equals.”

What is noteworthy is that the ulema used the forum to share their grievances with the government regarding the bias displayed against Indian Muslims. The premier said that he shared Muslims’ “pain and anguish” on being victimized and accused of abetting terrorism. He assured the ulema that if wrongs had been done they would be corrected. Referring specifically to the Mumbai-blasts, Singh said that he had talked to Maharashtra’s chief minister to ensure that Muslims were not harassed by the police.

The ministers who participated in the conference included Home Minister Shivraj Patil and Human Resources Development (HRD) Minister Arjun Singh. Assuring the ulema that Muslims would not be harassed during investigations into terrorist attacks, Patil said: “We do not accept that only one community is responsible, there are wrong-doers in every community.” When confronted with questions regarding harassment of Muslim youths by police, Patil said that he would act immediately if concrete cases with proof were furnished. Dismissing the “Clash of Civilizations” theory, Patil said: “India had always believed in alliance, harmony and unity of civilizations.”

HRD Minister Singh was confronted by a question on whether the center intends to make signing of Vande Mataram compulsory in all educational institutions. Muslims are known to be opposed to the song because of its religious connotation and because its writer Bankimchandra Chatterjee was known to be anti-Muslim. The song is in his novel Anand Math, published in 1882. While Singh acknowledged that this song is viewed with a patriotic fervor by a considerable section of Indians, he asserted that there can be no compulsion on singing it. On whether one could be branded as unpatriotic for not singing it, he said: “Those who are making such suggestions are also those who wanted to issue a white paper on madarsas. The country is not with them.”

Among the clerics, giving examples of investigations being conducted regarding the Mumbai blasts, the majority voiced concern about the ease with which security agencies presume accused Muslims to be guilty. In addition, Maulana Abdul Wahab Khilji of Jamiat-e-Ahle-Hadis displayed concern about continuous usage of the term “Islamic terror.”

Maulana Arshad Madani of Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind said that cases/incidents involving non-Muslims hardly draw attention but whenever “a Muslim name comes up, the approach automatically hardens.” Their concern is supported by hundreds of young Muslims having been detained following the Mumbai attacks. In this context, the Muslim clerics have undeniably taken the right step forward by drawing government’s attention to their concern against such discriminatory approach. At the conference, ministers, including the premier, definitely assured clerics of their approach against such discrimination/bias. It remains to be seen whether these assurances are merely rhetoric or real support for fair treatment.

8-36

click here to see article examining the preposterous claims that UK Muslims were ready to detonate liquid bombs on transatlantic flights.