Indian Madrasas discussing launch of courses on Islamic economics and finance

Submitted by admin4 on 25 April 2009 - 7:06pm.

• Indian Muslim

By Mumtaz Alam Falahi, TwoCircles.net

New Delhi: To discuss the possibilities of launching professional courses on Islamic economics, finance and banking at madrasas in India, a two-day national workshop being participated by representatives of all leading madrasas from across the country and Islamic economists from India and abroad began today at Convention Hall of Jamia Hamdard in New Delhi.

The program jointly organized by Institute of Objective Studies (IOS) and Islamic Fiqh Academy (IFA) (India) in collaboration with Islamic Development Bank (IDB) (Jeddah) is aimed at discussing the issue in holistic way with madrasa authorities, said Maulana Ameen Usmani, secretary, Islamic Fiqh Academy.

Talking to TwoCircles.net on the sidelines of the workshop, Usmani said: “Students at Islamic madrasas in India read books of Fiqh written 700-800 years ago. Those books talk of Islamic financial issues. But there is a need to look at those issues in light of today’s requirements and changes.” This program is first such initiative in the country in this regard, he added.

Due to global economic crisis and failure of the prevailing financial system of the world, economists, financial experts and industrialists world over are looking up to Islamic finance and economic system with hope. Islamic economic system has become a topic of discussion in universities, research centers and debates in various western and European countries. But it is a great irony that madrasas are focusing on Fiqh and Hadees. They are not teaching Islamic finance in modern perspective. They are not giving required attention to the Quran which talks about the basics of Islamic economic and financial system.

“It is an irony that Islamic finance is not a topic of discussion at madrasas and among Islamic scholars in India today. Islamic madrasas give little attention to Islamic economic system in the present scenario. They are focusing on Fiqh and Hadees, not even Quran. They debate on whether or not science, maths and computers be made part of madrasa syllabus but they do not discuss Islamic finance,” says veteran journalist A U Asif.

That Islamic finance in modern perspective is not being taught at madrasas is not just India phenomenon was evident from the speech of Dr Ausaf Ahmad, Islamic economist and ex-official of IDB. No big madrasa in any country is giving required focus to Islamic finance and economics, he said.

Speaking on the occasion he said: “Jamia Al Azhar has about 1.2 lakh students, of which 20,000 from foreign countries. They give more attention to traditional Islamic subjects than to Islamic finance. Similar is the situation at Ummul Qura University in Makkah. There too little focus is given to Islamic economics, banking and finance.”

In his speech, Dr Muhammad Manzoor Alam, Chairman, IOS, suggested launching of courses on Islamic economics and finance in various universities and madrasas so that “our madrasa graduates could assess the demands of today and fast changing economic condition.” He said such courses have been launched at Aligarh Muslim University and Jamia Islamia at Shantapuram, Kerala.

In his keynote address on Teaching Islamic finance at Islamic Madrasas in India, renowned Islamic economist Dr Muhammad Najatullah Siddiqi said: “Teaching of Islamic finance in madrasas would be different from other subjects taught there. Unlike other traditional Islamic subjects where all focus is on texts and explanation thereof, Islamic finance and economics will be taught in the perspectives of time and place.” Besides, as Islamic financial system has been operational in several parts of the world for 30-40 years, the madrasa syllabus of Islamic finance will include critical analysis of the operation and its results, Dr Siddiqi, who is also Shah Faisal awardee, said.

“The syllabus should also give information about the texts of Quran and Hadis regarding prohibitions in financial issues like prohibition of interest as well as what was understood from such instructions in the past,” he said and added the syllabus should include development of contemporary Islamic financial system and differences of Ulema over running Islamic banking system.

Other prominent figures who are addressing the workshop include Maulana Khalid Saifullah Rahmani, general secretary, IFA, Maulana Salim Qasmi, director, Darul Uloom Deoband (Wakf) and Muhammad Sirajul Haque, representative of IDB.

Maulana Rabe Hasani Nadvi in his message gave a call for acceleration of efforts for strengthening Islamic economic system in the country. He supported the idea that Islamic finance and economic system should be made part of madrasa syllabus.

The madrasas attending the workshop include Nadwatul Ulema, Darul Uloom Deoband, Darul Uloom Deoband (Wakf), Jamia Nezamia (Hyderabad) and Jamiatul Falah (Azamgarh).

Why Suicide Bombing Violates Islam

Kamran Pasha: Why Suicide Bombing Violates Islam

Why Suicide Bombing Violates Islam

The evil of suicide bombings must be defeated by Muslims, as it violates every tenet of Islam. In the past two days alone, at least 150 people were killed in Iraq in a wave of suicide bombings which have torn apart any illusion of security in that tragic country.

As a Muslim, as a human being, I am filled with horror at images of men, women and children torn to shreds by the madness of people who turn themselves into incendiary devices. And I am filled with outrage and fury at the diabolic forces that seek to present this monstrous, murderous, terrorist activity as somehow sanctioned by my faith.

Let me put this in as simple terms as possible. Suicide bombings, indeed all forms of terrorism, are rejected by mainstream Islam, and always have been.

The Holy Qur'an says it in very clear, without any ambiguity:

"Do not kill yourselves, for truly God is merciful. And if any do that in rancor and injustice, soon shall We cast them in the Fire. " (Surah 4:29-30)

The Qur'an makes it clear that there are rules to human conflict and limits that must be followed:

"And fight in the way of God against those who fight you. But do not transgress the limits. Truly God does not love transgressors." (Surah 2:190)

As I discuss in my new novel Mother of the Believers, traditional Islamic law established very clear rules of war based on the practice of Prophet Muhammad and his early followers: Do not kill civilians. Do not kill women and children. Do not harm monks or priests of other religions. Do not destroy the environment.

Abu Bakr, the first leader of Islam after Prophet Muhammad, gave these commandments when Muslims were fighting the forces of the Byzantine Empire, which had sought to destroy the new religion and killed the Prophet's ambassador:

"Stop, O people, that I may give you ten rules to keep by heart: Do not commit treachery, nor depart from the right path. You must not mutilate, neither kill a child or aged man or woman. Do not destroy a palm tree, nor burn it with fire and do not cut any fruitful tree. You must not slay any of the flock or herds or the camels, save for your subsistence. You are likely to pass by people who have devoted their lives to monastic services; leave them to that to which they have devoted their lives. You are likely, likewise, to find people who will present to you meals of many kinds. You may eat; but do no forget to mention the name of God."

Muslims always took great pride in the fact that they acted honorably, even in war. They looked with contempt upon the warriors of Europe, who slaughtered civilians mercilessly during the Crusades. When the Muslim leader Saladin (Salahuddin Ayoobi) defeated the Christian kingdom of Jerusalem and retook the holy city, he spared its Christian populace and pointedly said: "We will not do to you what you did to us."

His comment was in reference to the First Crusade, where Christian "holy warriors" massacred tens of thousands of civilians upon taking Jerusalem in 1099. Muslims were slaughtered en masse, the Jews of Jerusalem were locked into its main synagogue and set on fire. And Arab Christians were murdered by their co-religionists for the sin of having dark skin and looking like the enemy. The Gesta Francorum, a Crusader chronicle of their activities, proudly notes that the "the slaughter was so great that our men waded in blood up to their ankles."

In the town of Ma'arra in Syria, the Crusaders committed the ultimate atrocity -- cannibalism. As Crusader chronicler Radulph of Caen wrote: "In Ma'arra, our troops boiled pagan adults in cooking-pots; they impaled children on spits and devoured them grilled."

To this day, the Crusaders are referred to in the Muslim world as "the cannibals of Ma'arra."

The Muslims looked at this kind of atrocity committed in the name of God as unworthy of any great religion, and held themselves above such monstrous behavior.

So how is it possible that its modern equivalent, the mass murder of civilians through suicide bombings, should now be done in the name of Islam?

In Dying to Win, Robert Pape, a scholar at the University of Chicago, analyzes the history and motivation of suicide bombers. Many people who read the book will be surprised to learn that suicide bombing was a tactic that was first used regularly by Hindu terrorists known as the Tamil Tigers. One of the most prominent victims of this tactic, Rajiv Gandhi, the Prime Minister of India, was killed on May 21, 1999 by a female suicide bomber from the Tamil Tigers. According to Pape, Gandhi's murder marks the first use of the "suicide vest" which has become the tool of suicide bombers throughout the world today.

A full chronology of the history of suicide bombing among Hindu extremists can be found at:

http://www.spur.asn.au/chronology_of_suicide_bomb_attacks_by_Tamil_Tigers_in_sri_Lanka.htm

(A warning that the link contains graphic photos of the carnage caused by suicide bombers.)

One of the greatest tragedies of modern Islam is that Muslim extremists began to adopt this horrific tactic of suicide bombing over the past two decades. Palestinian militants, arguing that they had no other effective way to combat Israeli oppression, began to employ these tactics, and the image of the "Muslim suicide bomber" began to take hold in the media.

I remember at the time most Muslims I spoke with expressed disgust at these horrific acts, but some added the caveat -- "What else can these poor people do? They have no tanks or jets to take on Israeli tanks and jets. This is their only way to fight."

My response then and now is that Islam is a religion that has established rules of war for a reason. Human conflict is perhaps inevitable, but unless there is a sense of morality among warriors, even among the warriors of the oppressed, human beings will descend into monstrosity. The nobility of a cause is forever tainted when dipped in the blood of innocents. The argument that Israeli military activities kill countless Palestinian civilians is not an argument that is supported by the noble spirit of Islam. As Saladin pointed out, the Muslims would not inflict on the Christians the atrocities that the Crusaders had inflicted on their victims, simple because we as Muslims were better than that.

And I warned those who would excuse the suicide bombers as long as they targeted "the unbelievers," that in Islam all human beings are brothers and sisters and have rights before God and man. I predicted that once some Muslims turned their back on Islam's strict rules of war and went beneath themselves in order "to win," the wrath of Allah would be unleashed upon the Islamic community. If we allowed suicide bombings against non-Muslims, then soon would God punish our sins by inflicting the same horror on Muslims.

Tragically, my prediction came true. Suicide bombers in Iraq and Afghanistan now kill thousands of Muslims a year, innocent people going to pray or shop in the marketplace, their only crime being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

This kind of monstrous behavior is not Islam. It never has been Islam. And it will never be Islam, no matter what kind of self-serving justifications the terrorists use.

For those who wish to learn more about mainstream Muslim positions about war, terrorism and suicide bombing, I refer you here:

http://islam.about.com/cs/currentevents/a/suicide_bomb.htm

http://www.harunyahya.com/terrorism3.php

It is time for Muslims and people of all faiths to stand together in love and justice and end this horrific scourge of terrorism and suicide bombing on humanity.

I look forward to the day that the world will no longer associate such monstrosity with my beloved faith. And that one day, mankind will believe that Islam really does represent what its name stands for: "Peace."

Kamran Pasha is a Hollywood filmmaker and the author of Mother of the Believers, a novel on the birth of Islam as told by Prophet Muhammad's wife Aisha (Atria Books; April 2009). For more information please visit: http://www.kamranpasha.com

The Idol of Zionism Created by the West Must Be Shattered

MEMRI: Latest News

April 24, 2009 No. 2326

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: The Idol of Zionism Created by the West Must Be Shattered

According to reports in the West, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad toned down his speech at the Durban Review Conference, held April 22-24, 2009 in Geneva, due to public criticism. However, when he returned to Iran he stepped up his anti-West and anti-Israel statements. In an April 23, 2009 speech in Eslamshahr, near Tehran, Ahmadinejad said that the West is worshipping the idol it had created in the form of Zionism, and is forcing the entire world to worship it as well - but that this idol "must be shattered in order to save humanity." He also claimed that the West fabricated the Holocaust and made it a sacred issue, and is using it to take over the entire world.

Also, in a speech the previous day at an international conference of prosecutors of Islamic countries in Tehran, he accused the West of "prepar[ing] the ground for the fulfillment of Zionism's aspirations."

The following are excerpts from speeches he made after returning from Geneva:

"This Idol of Zionism Must Be Shattered in Order to Save Humanity… Iran's Revolution Has Already Been Exported"

In his speech in Eslamshahr, Ahmadinejad said: "Wherever we want to visit and at every conference in which we participate, they [the Western countries] say: 'Who do you want to criticize? [You can] criticize the U.S., Europe, the [Second] World War, the Vietnam War, or the Korean War, but you must not criticize the Zionists.' The people of the West fabricated what is known as the Holocaust and Zionism, and they have sanctified it and placed it at the top of all holy beliefs. They have all united around it, and by hoisting the banner of Zionism, while using violence and aggression, spreading civil strife, and [perpetrating] Zionist crimes, they have taken over the world and wish to rule it.

"I say to them: 'In your countries, you permit [even] the affronting of the divine prophets, the holy of holies of the world.' They respond by saying: 'That's freedom of speech.' But when it comes to [the issue of] the Zionists, they say: 'Shut up, and don't utter a word.' They [the Western countries] have fabricated an idol called Zionism, which they worship and want to force all the nations to worship.

"I declare from [this pulpit] that this idol of Zionism must be shattered in order to save humanity... [1] They must know that the free nations, the Iranian nation, and the people of Eslamshahr will not tolerate this modern idol-worshiping, that they will shatter this idol with force... Indeed, they have already shattered this idol.

"A journalist asked me: 'Do you still want to export your revolution?' I said to him: 'Iran's revolution has already been exported. The world's nations chant the slogans of the Iranian nation, and talk about brotherhood, justice, and peace, and about the confrontation with oppression and with the crimes of the Zionists. The Islamic Revolution of Iran has already been exported. Can't you see that? Can't you discern that? If you go to America, [you will see] that there too people chant the slogans of the Iranian nation." [2]

"The Zionists are the Ones Running International Relations… The Mask of Judaism [Behind which Zionism Hides] is False"

At an April 22, 2009 speech at the international conference of Islamic prosecutors, which convened in Tehran, Ahmadinejad said: "Let me say a few words about the Durban [2] conference in Geneva: The Zionists are the ones running international relations... Everybody knows that Zionism is a political party, and you all know that the mask of Judaism [behind which they hide] is false, because Zionism is devoid of religion, and they are against religion, against race, and against humanity.

"Zionism is a convoluted and crude party, which operates contrary to the teachings of the divine prophets and against humanity [in an effort] to take over the foundations of the world. Their management of the world takes two forms: One is behind-the-scenes control - they have arranged the [international] institutions so that they will continuously strive to achieve the Zionist goals. They [i.e. Westerners] have prepared the ground for the fulfillment of Zionism's aspirations, and they fully support the Zionist regime, without donning the mask of Zionism [themselves].

"All the organizations - the [U.N.] Security Council and the international political and judicial institutions - wholeheartedly support the Zionists, even though the Zionist mark is not branded on their foreheads.

"I believe that behind the scenes, the Zionists are running these institutions to their own advantage." [3]

"Over 70% of the Europeans Support Iran … [Because] the Statements of the Iranian Nation Stem from Divine Inspiration"

Upon his return from Geneva, Ahmadinejad said in a speech at Mehrabad airport in Tehran: "A journalist asked me in Geneva: 'Why do you say these things? The Europeans are concerned about your statements.' I told him: Let's test what you say, and hold a referendum in Europe. You will see that over 70% of the Europeans support the Iranian nation. This is because the statements of the Iranian nation stem from divine inspiration." [4]

[1] Fars (Iran), April 23, 2009.

[2] ISNA (Iran), April 23, 2009.

[3] The Institution of the Iranian Presidency, April 22, 2009.

[4] Kayhan (Iran), April 22, 2009.

Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright says "in many ways Islam is maybe the most democratic religion because there is nobody between you and God"

Albright Praises Obama's Efforts to Engage Muslim World
By Mohamed Elshinnawi Washington, D.C. 24 April 2009

President Barack Obama continued his outreach to the Muslim world in April with a visit to Turkey. There was generally favorable response across the political spectrum in Muslim countries to the president's public statements - such as a pledge made before Turkey's Parliament in Ankara.

"We seek broader engagement based on mutual interest and mutual respect," Obama said. "We will listen carefully, we will bridge misunderstandings, and we will seek common ground. We will be respectful, even when we do not agree."

The president's approach seems to enjoy popular support back home, as well. The latest Washington Post/ABC opinion survey shows that 81 percent of Americans believe it is important for the U.S. to engage the Muslim world.

Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright says the president already has taken action to improve relations with Muslim countries

That is also the conclusion of the report by the U.S.-Muslim Engagement Project. Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright - one of its authors - said the president already is adopting several of its recommendations.

"In terms of diplomacy and conflict resolution, he did say that resolving the Israeli-Palestinian issue was a major input, and he immediately named Senator George Mitchell as his envoy in order to work on that particular issue," she says. "On Iraq, he made a commitment to a relatively fast drawn down. On Afghanistan and Pakistan, he also felt very strongly that it was very important to deal with as a regional diplomatic issue and has named Ambassador [Richard] Holbrook as his representative in order to deal with issues there."

At the meeting with ambassadors from member states of the Organization of The Islamic Conference, or OIC., Albright laid out the project's strategies for combating Islamic extremism: First, elevate diplomacy as the primary tool for resolving key conflicts involving Muslim countries. Then promote broad-based economic development in those nations, foster mutual respect and understanding between Americans and Muslims, and support efforts to improve governance and promote civic participation in predominantly Muslim societies.

"There is no doubt in my mind that Muslim countries can be democracies," Albright says. "Turkey is a perfect example of that. It is very evident, and, actually, in my study of religions, in many ways Islam is maybe the most democratic religion because there is nobody between you and God. So I do not think that is something that can be used as reason not to have Muslim democracies."

Albright said the members of the Leadership Group on U.S. Muslim Engagement are calling on the Obama administration to continue promoting democracy through diplomacy, not force.

Former U.S. Rep. Vin Weber says the administration should exert political and economic pressure to promote democratic reforms in the Middle East

Former Congressman Vin Weber, another group member, pointed out that the Bush administration policy of promoting regime change by military intervention strengthened the misperception that while the U.S. is calling for democratic reforms, Washington is continuing to support repressive governments in allied Muslim countries.

"It is a fact, unfortunately, that the word democracy has become a code word in recent years for regime change and maybe for armed intervention regime change, but at the end of the day, there is a core value that Americans have stood for, that we have to continue stand for, and we can't allow that as well to become a fundamental impediment to improving the relations we are talking about."

Weber said the report recommends fighting poverty and using U.S. political and economic leverage with authoritarian governments to promote democratic reforms and create a middle class and a civil society.

The OIC ambassadors were generally pleased with the report. Moroccan Ambassador Aziz Mekouar called it "a most constructive blueprint for building relationships of cooperation" between the United States and the larger Muslim world.

"I think that President Obama has taken very good steps immediately after he took office by appointing Senator Mitchell as a personal envoy, and he went there several times, and Secretary Clinton also went to the region, so we are seeing more than goodwill," Mekouar says. "We are seeing a lot of actions to try to help solve the conflict in the Middle East on the basis of two-state solution."

Libya Ambassador Ali Aujali says the Arab world will remain skeptical of American policy in the Middle East until they see concrete changes

Libyan Ambassador Ali Aujali agreed, but said the Arab world is waiting for some concrete policy changes, especially in regard to Israel's continued expansion of settlements in the West Bank.

"Until we see this change in American policy in the Middle East, and we see that Americans have shifted from supporting one side against the other side, until we see a clear position of the administration that they will help to stop the new settlements, I think the Arab world still will not believe there is a change in the administration's foreign policy."

In the face of such skepticism, members of the Engagement Project hope their proposed new strategies will help guide the Obama Administration to a more productive dialogue between the United States and the Muslim world.

'The Armenian Genocide by the Ottomans… The Big Lie'

MEMRI: Latest News

April 23, 2009 No. 2325

London Islamist Hani Sibai: 'The Armenian Genocide by the Ottomans… The Big Lie'

The following is an article by Dr. Hani Sibai, [1] an Islamist activist residing in London who is the founder and director of a private institution called "The Almaqreze Centre for Historical Studies." [2]


A "Reply to the Alleged Claim of the Armenian Genocide by the Ottomans"

"Praise be to Allah and Peace and Blessing be upon our beloved Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him.

"This is an article in reply to the alleged claim of the Armenian genocide by the Ottomans:

"First: Introduction

"Second: Crucial points to understand the conflict

"Third: [A] Few Examples of the Loyalty of the Armenians to Russia and their Mutiny against the Othman State

["Fourth: A statement buried in the U.S. archives]

"Fifth: Conclusion."


When Did the Issue of Armenia Come to Light - And Why Do the Armenians Insist That They Were Subjected to Genocide by the Ottomans?

"First: Introduction

"This false claim and despicable propaganda (i.e. the Armenian genocide by the Ottomans) had been adopted by the Russians who used the Armenians to achieve their political interests and ambitions. It was the Russians who had created the Armenian state and had given them, illegally, most of the lands owned by the Muslims after they were expelled from them. These vast lands were seized by the Russians during centuries of constant wars against the Ottoman Empire.

"Russia conducted an organized terror campaign against the citizens of the Ottoman state; they destroyed complete towns and villages fully inhabited with Muslims, and those Muslims who would remain alive were forced to leave. The Russians [would] seize all the properties of those oppressed Muslims, who were exposed to the worst kind of mass extermination in the history of mankind. At the same time, and under the pretext of defending Christianity, the Russian armies [would] bring in the Armenians who were supporting them in their wars against the Ottomans, and give them Muslims lands. The Russian government [would] provide the Armenian rebels with money and weapons, after any incident between a Muslim among the Ottoman nationals and an Armenian supporting Russia. The Muslim was not allowed to retaliate [against] the hostility of the Armenian gangs, who [would] attack the villages and rape women; and if a Muslim tried to defend his land and honor, the Armenian gangs would destroy and burn down the whole village.

"Russia used the Armenian rebels to extend their areas of influence and seize countries that were under the Ottoman Empire, and this policy had helped them create the Soviet Union since the Bolshevist revolution in 1917. This has been confirmed by Laurent Chabri and Annie Chabri in their valuable book Politics and Minorities in the Near East, and although they were not unbiased in their book (Politics and Minorities in the Near East, translated by Dr. Dhuqan Qarqut, page 311), they said in it: 'The Armenians, who remained in Armenia and who were under the authority of the Turks on one side and under the authority of the Persians on the other, had seen great hope by the end of the eighteenth century in the Russian power, the Christian power that would appear in the scene of the Near East, and with it came the desire to extend well behind the Caucasus towards the south and the southeast. Before that, in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the Armenians had tried vainly to get a support from the western Catholics, expecting a military intervention from the western countries in order to rescue them from the Turkish firepower. Russia did not break those new hopes, as it used the army of Armenian volunteers to invade Persia and occupy the lands that form what is held to be the Russian Armenia.'

"Perhaps, one [may] ask when the issue of Armenia came to light internationally, and why the Armenians insist about their allegation that they have been subjected to a genocide by the Ottomans.

"To answer these questions, we will shed light upon the following issues:


Crucial Points to Understand the Conflict

"Second: Crucial Points to Understand the Conflict

"The first point: The Armenian issue was raised at the international level for the first time following the Saint Stefano Deal: after the end of the Russian-Turkish war 1877-1878, the two parties conducted the deal of Saint Stefano and Berlin in 1878, where articles 16 and 61 gave way to deal with the Armenian issue internationally in a manner that is still gouging and exacting pressure on the Turks up to our present time.

"The second point: It is necessary to study the historical period during which the Armenians claim to have been subjected to genocide, and it is the period that more or less between 1821 and 1922. There should also be a study of a great geographical region that was under the authority of the Ottomans, from the Caucasus to Anatolia and the Balkans, including Bulgaria and Greece, where most of the inhabitants of these vast regions were Muslims.

"There are indeed some serious studies about this subject, although few, such as the one conducted by Justin McCarthy in his book Death and Exile: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims, 1821-1922 (Princeton, N.J.: Darwin Press, ©1995), a book that was sponsored by the U.S. National Endowment for Cultural Studies to investigate the First World War and its effects, and by the Institution for Turkish Studies to look into the deaths and migration of the Turks, jointly with some American and British universities…

"This research is considered to be the best effort regarding this issue, despite our reservation about some remarks that do not diminish its value and its genuine effort, and it was translated into Arabic and published by Qadams in Damascus. Naturally, the study of this region geographically and historically, with the nature of the conflict in that period, necessitates a great deal of research and documented studies, which would allow reasonable and just people to discover the gravity of this allegation, repeatedly quoted by the West about the so-called 'Armenian genocide,' in time when the western writers ignore the fate of millions of Muslims who were expulsed from their lands and killed at the hands of the Russians, the Armenians, the Bulgarians, the Greeks and the Serbians during the aforementioned period up to 1922!

"As in the words of McCarthy: “There were Muslim societies in an area with the size of western Europe that were reduced or exterminated. In the Balkans, the great Turkish population was reduced to their previous number. In the Caucasus, there was expulsion of the Charkas, the Laz, the Abkhaz and the Turks along with other Muslim minorities. Anatolia has changed, as its east and west were almost completely destroyed. This was one of the greatest tragedies in history. (McCarthy: p327)

"The third point: There was the role of the 'Union and Progress Group' in the downfall of the Ottoman Caliphate in 1908, coercing the Sultan Hamid the Second to retire, and introducing an article in the new constitution, allowing all the Ottoman citizens to be armed and providing a legal cover for the ethnic minorities to procure weapons. The Armenians exploited the new legislation to acquire and store weapons with which they killed Muslims. The Armenian aggression against the Muslims began in the town of Adana before the middle of 1909, under the leadership of the vicar of the city of Asvin, named Mustic.

"The fourth point: There was also the role played by western ambassadors and consuls and American protestant missionaries in misleading the public opinion and spreading reports, exaggerating the number of killed Armenians, while disregarding the number of Muslims killed in the war. In many occasions, telling lies was deliberate as is the case of American consul who was accused of siding fanatically with the Armenians. The French consul was not less fanatic than the American or the Russian consuls!

"Unfortunately, the Sultan Abdul Hamid believed that the British government wanted to preserve the unity of the Ottoman provinces, but he came around after it was too late!

"Robert Mantran said in the second part of his book The History of the Ottoman State, a book that contains many inaccurate statements: 'From 1878 to 1879, Abdul Hamid began to have suspicions that England wanted to abandon its traditional policy about preserving the unity of the Ottoman lands. These suspicions were fed by the pressures executed by the British government on the Sultan Abdul Hamid in order to carry out the promised reforms in the Armenian region, and were increased intensely by the appointment of Gladstone, leader of the Liberals, as the head of British government in May 1880. He was a known enemy of the Turks since the slaughters in Bulgaria. Those suspicions were confirmed, in a way, by the control of London upon Egypt in 1882. Since that time, the British diplomacy had witnessed - according to the Istanbul's view - a complete turn over.' (Robert Mantran: The History of the OttomanState ).

"The fifth point: It is the misleading western propaganda, diffused by the media to distort the facts and depict the Muslims as savages and barbarians; while on the other hand, it pictures the Armenians as genius, righteous and tolerant people!

"The sixth point: These problems and worries, stirred by enemy forces against the Ottoman State, appeared in its reigning lands of the Caucasus, the Crimean peninsula, the Balkans and Anatolia, and had an impact on the fate of the Muslims in those vast territories, because of many fundamental factors:

"a. The weakness of the Ottoman State, to the point where it was described as 'the sick man'

"b. Inciting the Christian Nationalism among the minorities, who were under the Ottoman Empire. The Great Powers at that time, which were ambitious enough to divide the properties of the Ottoman Empire, strove to incite the non-Muslim minorities to rise up and revive nationalism, as is the case with Armenia, Bulgaria, Greece and Serbia. Robert Mantran confirmed this issue, saying: 'In reality, the Armenian National Movement, after 1878, is associated, to a considerable extent, with the analysis which the Armenian intellectuals had conducted about the Bulgarian independence. Bulgaria had achieved this independence with the help of Europe, but, in fact, it had been achieved by the use of force and ruthless methods used by the Bulgarian Revolutionary Committees. Therefore, the Bulgarian example dominated the Armenian combatants' thought, especially those who would resort to create the first organizations. Actually, the first revolutionary parties started to appear in the middle of 1880: the Armenian Party was established (in Fan) in 1885 by a number of educators, then the two large parties, unlike the first party, were formed by Armenians from Caucasus who had very little link with the Armenian Turks. The first of these two large parties was Hintshaq, which was established in Geneva in 1887, and Tashnaq (The Armenian Revolutionary Union) established in 1890 in Tiflis.' (Robert Mantran: Second 2, p. 217)

"c. The Russian colonial expansion, which continued to absorb the properties of the Ottoman Empire piece by piece."

The West Uses "The Armenian Problem" Against the ModernTurkishState - Even Though the "Turkish Government Adopts the Secular System and Fights Any Aspect of Islam in the Country, in Order to Satisfy the West and Join... the EU"

"Therefore, from the aforesaid, we can understand the Armenian problem, which the West uses against the modern Turkish state, though the new Turkish government adopts the secular system and fights any aspect of Islam in the country, in order to satisfy the West and join the promised paradise of the European Union. However, the European Union will never allow Turkey to be a member in its club, because the Western leaders know very well that Kamal Ataturk had done a very good job by turning Turkey into a secular state. Nevertheless, they know that, although the Turkish people are far from the real Islam, they still have the spirit of it in their blood and a yearning for the return of the glorious Islam, which have started to spread in recent years, even though the army tried hard to stop this living spirit. Accordingly, the European leaders worry about the entry of Turkey into the European Union because they believe with faith that this Union is a Christian club and there is no place for a Muslim state in it.

"Although Turkey and the United States are close allies at the moment, the leaders of the White House are not certain about their interests in the remote future; therefore they will, eventually, adopt a resolution which condemns Turkey of the Armenian genocide, and hence use extortion against Turkey and use this resolution as an excuse to sanction Turkey economically, and intervene militarily, if Turkey abandons its extreme secular system and adopts an Islamic system. If that happens, Europe and the US will form an alliance and wage a fierce war against Turkey. It will be like a Third, Fourth or Fifth World War against Turkey in order to occupy Constantinople and annex it to the West."


The Armenians' Loyalty to Russia and Their Mutiny Against the OttomanState

"Third: The Loyalty of the Armenians to Russia and their Mutiny Against the OttomanState

"The religious loyalty had a major impact in the conflict between Russia and the Ottoman state, because the concept of citizenship had not appeared then. This principle was confirmed by McCarthy in his aforementioned book: 'It is obvious that the Armenian people, under the Ottoman and the Russian control, used to view each other as brothers, regardless of their nationalities, and the same thing goes for Muslims. It is not clear whether the concept of citizenship, in comparison with the religious affiliation, was firmly established, to a greater extent, in either the Caucasus or eastern Anatolia before 1920.

"'In the East, a Caucasian Muslim felt that he was closer to his Anatolian Muslim brother than to a Caucasus Armenian; likewise, the Eastern Anatolian Armenian related himself to the Caucasus Armenian and not to the Anatolian Muslims. Their affiliations with their religious groups were confirmed by the Caucasian and Eastern Anatolia wars time after time.” (Justin McCarthy: Expulsion and Genocide, p. 49)

"The religious loyalty is not something strange in world history, but what is strange is to exclude this principle in assessing the nature of the conflict throughout history. As an example of the importance of this religious loyalty, the Russian Tsarists used to persecute the Armenian Church, and then they changed their treatment during the reign of Peter the Great, so that they could use them as support in their expansionist wars against the Ottoman state. The Armenian people understood that on the basis that they belong, along with the Russians, to the same Christian religion and that their enemy was one (the Ottoman Islamic State).

"In fact, the Armenian people used the same principle with the French and established a legion which became under the French army command in Qulayqiliyyah. This Armenian legion caused mischief on earth on the basis that the French were their brothers in religion and that they had a common enemy (i.e. the Ottoman Islamic State). The American Protestant Missionaries had also a major role in inflaming this conflict and the religious brotherhood was the sole factor which associated them with the Armenians, and worst, it covered the reality of the carnage committed by the Armenians against Muslims. This is not prejudice from my part in understanding the nature of the conflict, because all the historical facts confirm it and the modern history supports this opinion.

"If you really want to understand this fact clearly, look at the regions of conflict in the world: Palestine, Iraq, Kashmir, Afghanistan, Burma, Thailand, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Somalia, Darfur and the pressure and oppression of Muslims in the West. Is all this just sheer coincidence, unintentional and with no religious loyalty in this conflict and in waging these unjust wars?

Examples of the Armenians' Loyalty to the Russians

"A Few Examples of the Armenians' Loyalty to the Russians and their Mutiny against the Ottoman Empire

"In his study, McCarthy mentioned many historical proofs of the Armenian's loyalty to the Russians, which we will summarize as follows:

"1. During the reign of Peter the Great, the Armenians started to rely more on the Russians, hoping that they would get the support they needed. Since the first waves of attacks by the Russians on the Caucasus, the Armenians had formed a military power to help the Russians attack the region and they pledged their allegiance to the Tsars.

"2. During the eighth and ninth century, the Armenians (Church leaders, secular leaders, different groups, etc.) supported the Russian attack of Muslim lands in the Caucasus, hoping to overthrow the Muslim leaders in these states.

"3. The Armenians were employed as spies for the Russians against their Muslim leaders, whether they were the Ottomans or Armenians who were subjects of the Persian state.

"4. When the city of Derbend was under siege by the Russian army in 1796, its Armenian inhabitants sent to the Russians valuable information about the city's water supplies, and this allowed the Russian army to defeat the army of Derbend.

"5. In the 1890's, Armenian archbishop (Argotnisky-Dolgorokov) publicly announced that he hoped that the Russians would liberate Armenia from Muslim rule.

"6. During the wars of 1827-1829 and the Qaram war, the Armenian citizens of both the Ottoman and Persian Empires, together with the Armenians who lived inside the Russian Empire, fought alongside the Russian army against the Persian army and the Ottoman Empire.

"7. The Armenians, living inside Ottoman Anatolia, gave their allegiance to the Russian cause by working as spies for the Russian government.

"8. The Armenians would cross the borders of Anatolia and give reports of the Ottoman armies to the Russian in all the wars of eastern Anatolia.

"9. The Armenians in Anatolia helped the invading Russian armies in 1827, and when the Russian armies left, thousands of Armenians followed it outside Anatolia.

"10. During the Qaram war, the Armenians gave secret information from the city of Kars which was under the Russian siege.

"11. The Armenian guides paved the way for the Russian invaders from the Ottoman Anatolia in 1877.

"12. In 1877, the Armenians of Elsekirt valley welcomed the invading Russian armies, and when the Russian armies left all Armenians left with them.

"13. The Armenians of Anatolia and Caucasus were allies of the Russian armies in the First World War. In Anatolia, the Armenian rebels' reliance on the Russians became clear by the middle of the 19th century, by revolting in Zeyton when there was need for financial resources to reinforce their defense in Zeyton against the Ottomans. In 1854, while the Ottoman armies were fighting against the Russian in the Qaram war, the Armenian rebels tried to get financial support from the Russians.

"14. In 1872, the Armenians of Van, who were citizens of the Ottoman Empire, wrote to the Russian Emperor's representative in Caucasus asking help from him against their government. They wanted to become citizens of Russia so they started to buy and store weapons.

"15. There were constant contacts and communications between the Ottoman Armenians and the Russian Empire within the Armenian revolutionary groups, especially Tashnaq, and the other half of Armenia under the Russian control was a centre for storing weapons and revolutionary organization against the Ottoman Empire.

"16. The Archbishop of Derik, on the side of the Persian border with the Ottoman, transformed a monastery into a store for weapons and a centre of infiltration for the Armenian rebels to the Ottoman Empire.

"17. The Armenians and the Georgians, especially those who had relatives in Iran or had businesses, continued to be significant sources of information for the Russians; hence they had a major impact in the Russian political and strategic decisions. The Tsar, Alexander Tsitsianov, ordered his advisers to contact Patriarch Daniel and his followers.

"18. Patriarch Daniel, who was a candidate, supported by the Russians, for the position of the Armenian Church Patriarchy (after the death of Argotnisky-Dolgorokov) would spy and give valuable information to the Russians.

"19. In 1808, Alexander Tsitsianov rewarded Patriarch Daniel with a first-degree monastic for his services in spying and providing information to the Russians. While the Russians were fighting to expand their territories in Kur and Aras, the Armenians continued to send letters to the Russian officials encouraging them to capture areas under Muslims control and save the Armenian people from the Muslim persecution.

"20. The relation between the Armenian rebels and the Armenian Church had facilitated their activities to a larger extent, because the church was an organization which managed to cross the border easily, and in Istanbul, itself, the church leaders and priests had the freedom to move as they pleased and the Ottoman Armenians could not touch them, although they were caught many times carrying letters, reports and money to the rebels. Besides, some churches and monasteries were used as clandestine stores for weapons, which were smuggled to the Armenian rebels, as these churches and monasteries were not subject to security inspection.


"Therefore, we have examined some examples of the Armenians' loyalty and allegiance to the Russians during times of war and peace, which quash their fabricated lie (The Armenian genocide by the Ottomans).
For more confirmation about the authenticity of our report, we present this statement:


The Americans Disregarded a Report on the Damage and Destruction Perpetrated by the Armenians and Their Atrocities Against the Muslims

"Fourth: A Statement Buried in the U.S. Archives

"This statement is in the form of a report, made by two men who did not have any sympathy for the Ottoman Muslims. They were rather fanatically inclined towards the Armenians, and went to the region with a deliberate thought that the Armenians were a victimized nation, against whom the Muslims had committed group killings and slaughters, according to information taken from the misleading Western media and from the American Protestant Missionaries, who did not deserve any trust as witnesses of the Muslims' sufferings, because they were excellent in deceptively recording acts against the Armenians in details. They were also dishonest in recording acts against the Muslims, as reported by some historians! Therefore, who are these two witnesses who returned to America with a different mood than the one with which they set out to eastern Anatolia?

"They are Captain Emory Niles and Arthus Sutherland, who were commanded by the American State administration [sic] to check the situation in eastern Anatolia. When they arrived in Anatolia, they travelled all around the region and listened to the testimony of the two parties. They were surprised at the bulk of distortions, fabricated by the Armenians, and were shocked at the terrifying ordeal and atrocities suffered by the Muslims at the hands of the Armenians! The American government was not pleased with the report so they disregarded it.

"It was for this reason that the report of the two American envoys was not included in the file of the American Investigating Committee, and all thanks to Allah, Glorified is He, that their report was not lost, but rather concealed and buried in places linked to the First World War in eastern Anatolia!
Justin McCarthy, of the University of Louisville, printed the report in 1994, and published it in his book Muslims and the Minorities! He published it once more in another book, Expulsion and Genocide, and all thanks and praise to Allah.

"As for the report of Niles and Sutherland, they wrote: 'In the entire region from Bitlis through Van to Bayezit, we were informed that the damage and destruction had been done by the Armenians, who, after the Russians retired, remained in occupation of the country and who, when the Turkish army advanced, destroyed everything belonging to the Muslims. Moreover, the Armenians are accused of having committed murder, rape, arson and horrible atrocities of every description upon the Muslim population. At first, we were most incredulous of these stories, but we finally came to believe them, since the testimony was absolutely unanimous and was corroborated by material evidence. For instance, the only quarters left at all intact in the cities of Bitlis and Van are Armenian quarters … while the Muslim quarters were completely destroyed.'

"They also said in their report: 'The ethnic situation in this region (Bayezit and Ardrom) is extremely critical because of its closeness to an Armenian front, fled by the refugees who report about the atrocities and organized killings committed by the Armenian government and its army and people against the Muslim residents. Although few hundred Armenians live actually in the province of Van, it is impossible for them to live in the mountainous regions of the province of Ardrom, where everyone feel utmost hatred towards them. There, the Armenians destroyed the villages and committed all types of criminal acts against the Muslims, before they retreated. The criminal acts of the Armenians have left a living and influencing factor of hatred on the other side, an aversion that fumes with rage at least in the region of Van. The existence of organized killings in Armenia was confirmed by refugees from all Armenian territories and also by some British officers in Ardrom.' (McCarthy: p251.)

"Niles and Sutherland presented, in their report, some statistics covering the number of Muslim villages and houses which survived the miseries of war around the cities of Van and Bitlis alone; its confirmed that the Armenians had destroyed most Muslim houses and demolished all building with Islamic features, as detailed in the following table:

"Destruction in Van and Bitlis
"After the War 1919 Before the War The City of Van
"3 3400 Muslim houses
"1170 3100 Armenian houses

"After the War 1919 Before the War The City of Bitlis
"Naught 6500 Muslim houses
"1000 1500 Armenian houses [3]


As for villages in the provinces of Van, Sanjiq and Bayezit before the war and the Armenian occupation, it was reported, in the statistics of Noles and Sutherland, that the number of Muslim houses before the war in the villages of the province of Van was 1,373 and it decreased after the war in 1919 to 350 houses! Whereas the houses of the Armenians were 112 before the war and they increased after the war to 200! In the villages of the province of Bayezit, the number of the Muslim houses before the war was 448 and they reduced to 243 after the war, while the houses of the Armenians were 33 and they remained 33 after the war!

"Niles and Sutherland conscientiously summarized the history of Muslims in eastern Anatolia in the end of their report: 'Although it is not part of our investigation at all, one of the significant facts which affected us in every place of Bitlis and Trabzon, that we have passed through, was that the Armenians had committed exactly all the atrocities and group killings which the Turks had committed against the Armenians in other places. At first, we largely had doubt regarding all the narrations we have received, but the overall agreement of all the witnessed and the passion with which they discussed the evil acts perpetuated against them, and their apparent hatred towards the Armenians, besides all the materialistic proofs in the land itself, all this made us believe the authenticity of the facts in general.

"'First, the Armenians killed Muslims in a large scale and with various barbarity in their methods. Second, the Armenians were responsible for the destruction of most towns and villages. The Russians and the Armenians occupied the country for a long period (1915-1916), and it appeared that during that period, anarchy was limited, even though the Russians undoubtedly had caused much damage. In 1917, the Russian army was disbanded and left the authority in the hands of the Armenians alone. During that period, the Armenian militias patrolled the country, killing Muslim civilians. When the Turkish army moved towards Arzugan, Ardrom and Van, the Armenian army broke up and its soldiers or militias began destroying Muslim properties and killings mercilessly the Muslim inhabitants. The result was a completely destroyed country and a strong hatred towards the Armenians; a fact which makes it impossible for these two people to co-exist in the present time. The Muslims declared that if they were to be forced to live under the Armenian authority, they would rather fight, and it seems to us that they are likely to execute their threat. This opinion is shared by the Turkish, British and American officers that we have met.' (McCarthy: p 253-254).

"This is just a testimony about the organized killing perpetuated by the Armenians against the Muslims during the First World War, from 1914 to 1918 in the provinces of Van and Betlis, in east Anatolia, let alone the decrease of the number of Muslim inhabitants in the all eastern Ottoman provinces, such as Ardrom, Betlis, Diyar Bikr, the Al-'Aziz colony, Siwas, Halab and Trabzon. We will discover that in the period from 1912 to 1922, more than 62% of the Muslims in the province of Van were missing, 42% in the province of Betlis, 31% in the province of Ardrom and more than 60% in the Qoqaz!

"As for the provinces in western Anatolia, such as Aydin, Kadawindakar, Bigha and Idmid, the coalition forces expulsed the Turkish refugees who settled there and handed their properties to the Greeks! They left the Muslims without any refuge in the greatest public group theft in history. It was a premeditated group killing against the Muslims in the Qoqaz, Anatolia and the Balkans, with the blessing of the world imperialistic powers in that miserable period, and the dramatic end of the Ottoman Caliphate, which lasted six centuries.


"Millions of Muslims Were Killed at the Hands of the Armenians... The Defect Lies With Us as a Nation That Accepts Humility and Cheers Its Executioner"

"Fifth: Conclusion

"Therefore, it has become clear to us the weakness of this allegation of 'the Armenian genocide by the Ottomans,' which is repeatedly declared by the Armenians and those who encouraged them and supported them.

"Millions of Muslims were killed at the hands of the Armenians, the Russians, the Greeks, the Bulgarians, the Serbians and other enemies of the Ottoman Islamic state, in which lived under its reign various ethnic minorities in peace and security! Yet, no one asked for the punishment of the criminal perpetrators, who committed those group killings.

"The Muslims who were and still are the victims of these gruesome killings are exposed as savage killers!

"The real problem lies with the regimes related to the Islamic world for not demanding - even with diffidence - the punishment of the offenders behind the ongoing crimes against the Muslims in the Caucasus and Chechnya, the population exterminated in the Balkans, the mass graveyards in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the killing of more than one million child in Iraq alone, the destruction and complete disappearance of towns and villages in Afghanistan during the barbaric British, Russian and American aggressions. These oppressive regimes did not take one sound decision in its life to demand justice for their people, and ask for compensations from the French, the British, the Spanish, the Italians, the Dutch, the Russians and the Americans for their victims in Algeria, Morocco, Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, Indonesia, Malaysia, Kashmir, Thailand, Somalia and Sudan!!!

"The Armenians have scraped the scab off wounds which are not dressed yet. They revived grieves which have not calmed yet. They stirred sorrows which would not rest until justice is done in the future. The western world owes a clear apology to the Muslims and compensation deemed for the crimes committed in the crusade wars, past and present! Yes, we demand apology and compensation for the mass killings of the Muslims during many centuries.

"As for those who seek their mercy in every fabricated case highlighted by them, and keep on defending disgracefully on the doorsteps of the Security Council and European Union, well it is self-destruction itself! It is better for this nation (Islamic) to be swallowed by the earth than to live in disgrace and dishonor!

"The defect lies with us as a nation that accepts humility and cheers its executioner and does not punish its killer!"

[1] For more about Hani Al-Sibai Visit MEMRI TV: http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1513.htm ; http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/803.htm ; http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/748.htm ; http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/576.htm

[2] Article is posted on the centers website, see http://www.almaqreze.net/articles/artic1059.html.

[3] The table is presented here as in the original article.

Little Guantanamos

alJazeera Magazine - 'Little Guantanamo'

AMY GOODMAN: We turn right now to an issue of prisons here at home. While President Obama has pledged to close Guantanamo and the secret overseas CIA prisons, calls are increasing for him to reexamine the treatment of prisoners detained as part of the so-called war on terror being held inside the United States.

With little public scrutiny, the Bush administration opened two secretive prisons in Indiana and Illinois, known as Communication Management Units, or CMUs, that are designed to severely restrict prisoner communication with family members, the media and the outside world. Dozens of Muslim men are still being held at the CMUs, as well as other prisoners, including environmental and animal rights activists.

The government has provided little information about the special prison units. A search on the Bureau of Prisons website yields just one document even mentioning the program. Only a handful of news articles have covered what’s been described as a Little Guantanamo by some of the prisoners.

The first CMU was opened in 2006 in a special, isolated wing of the federal prison in Terre Haute, Indiana. A second CMU was opened last year in Marion, Illinois.

Prisoners held inside the special unit include Dr. Rafil Dhafir, the Iraqi-born doctor from upstate New York who is serving a twenty-two-year sentence for violating the Iraqi sanctions by sending aid to Iraq through his charity Help the Needy; Yassin Aref, the Kurdish-born imam from Albany, New York, who was convicted in a controversial FBI sting operation; and also the environmental activist Daniel McGowan. He’s serving a seven-year sentence for his role in two acts of arson.

Some critics have suggested McGowan and other non-Muslim prisoners are being held in the CMU, because the federal government wants to avoid accusations that the CMUs are designed to only hold Muslim men.

The Bureau of Prisons declined our invitation to join us today. But in a written statement, a Bureau of Prisons spokesperson said, quote, “Race and religion play no factor in an offender’s designation to this unit. It’s solely based on their need for increased monitoring of their communications.”

We’re joined now in Washington, D.C., by Will Potter. He is a freelance reporter, editor of the website greenisthenewred.com. Earlier this week, he published an article called “Secretive U.S. Prison Units Used to House Muslim, Animal Rights and Environmental Activists.” We are also joined by two attorneys who represent men being held in these cases.

But, Will Potter, just lay out the story for us.

WILL POTTER: Good morning, Amy. Thanks for having me.

These CMUs are so-called self-contained units in two facilities in the country. There’s one in Terre Haute, Indiana, and another in President Obama’s home state of Illinois at Marion. And according to the Justice Department and the Bureau of Prisons, they’re being used for inmates that need increased communications monitoring. In practice, what we’re seeing is a roundup of inmates from a variety of prisons across the country that are being put in these CMUs and having intense communications monitoring take place that rival some of the most extreme prisons in the country, including ADX, the supermax in Colorado. And as inmates were taken there, they’re given no opportunity to appeal or have a hearing of their designation.

Once they’re there, they have extreme restrictions, including having all phone calls monitored and limited to fifteen minutes a week, where the average is about 300 minutes a month. You have visitation restrictions that include no personal contact and limited to four hours a month, whereas with the ADX supermax, for instance, visitation hours are thirty hours a month. And on top of that, you have a restriction of due process rights. These individuals have no idea why they’re there, and they have no means of challenging it.

AMY GOODMAN: How much is known about these prisons? How much has been written about them?

WILL POTTER: Not very much has been written about it, and very little is known. I have a Freedom of Information Act request of—obtained through attorneys, that requested to know who actually is in these facilities. The government acknowledges that they exist. The government acknowledges that—you know, through their institutional supplements, what the policies are, or at least the skeleton of those policies. But the government refuses to say who is actually there, why they’re there, and how they can get out, if they want to appeal that designation.

AMY GOODMAN: I also want to bring into the conversation two attorneys who represent men being held inside the CMUs, the Communication Management Units. Lauren Regan is the executive director of the Civil Liberties Defense Center. She is part of Daniel McGowan’s defense team. She’s joining us from Eugene, Oregon, by DN! video stream. In New York, we’re joined by Kathy Manley, an attorney for Yassin Aref.

Lauren Regan, let’s begin with you. Describe Daniel McGowan’s situation at the prison. Exactly where is he?

LAUREN REGAN: Well, he is in the CMU in Marion, Illinois. He was literally snatched in the middle of the night from a federal prison in Sandstone, Minnesota, and was never given any reason why he was transferred there. He had just completed his six-month prison review, and they gave him complete exemplary reviews. He was a model inmate. And interestingly, Daniel really had no prior convictions at all. Normally, he would have been qualified for a very low- or minimum-security prison. He had no violence or, you know, any problems in the prison system. And he wasn’t convicted of any terrorist crime or being affiliated with a terrorist organization, other than the government’s claim that he was affiliated with the Earth Liberation Front.

AMY GOODMAN: I’m looking at a piece in the Eugene Weekly. It says in a letter that Daniel McGowan wrote to you, “the prisoners refer to the unit as ‘Little Guantanamo’ and speculate that when the real Guantanomo closes, some of those prisoners will be sent to Marion.” Lauren?

LAUREN REGAN: Yes, that’s correct. The inmates there do call Marion, Illinois, “Little Guantanamo.” Part of the reason that they call it that is because it is a secret facility. They do feel as if they are being hidden, not only from society at large, but from other inmates in the federal system. As well, you know, as Will mentioned, their lives within the prison are extremely different from even those that are being sanctioned or punished for violent actions while in prison. There is an incredible amount of barbwire. Daniel has actually said that in seeing pictures of Guantanamo, the unit where he’s being housed is actually more fortified than the photos of Guantanamo.

And, you know, just to give you an example, normally prisoners in the federal system have access to recreation yards and all sorts of outdoor activities, but at Little Guantanamo, there are four cages that they are allowed out into for a very short time period each day. The cage has a basketball hoop, and that’s about the extent of their recreation time, also sort of harkening to a Guantanamo-type existence.

And the other similarity, of course, is, like the people in Guantanamo Bay, these individuals have no understanding of what they did to get themselves into the CMU and what they can do to get out of it. Normally when a prisoner is being disciplined for something they did wrong, they are able to earn their way out of that disciplinary unit, even those that are being held in Florence, Colorado, the most violent prison in America, if they conduct themselves for one year with good behavior, they can go back into a general unit. But as far as we know right now, Mr. McGowan will serve the remainder of his sentence in this facility, because we can’t find any mechanism to challenge his designation there, which will be part of a future litigation.

AMY GOODMAN: Is Daniel McGowan allowed to grant any interviews from prison? Has he done any media interviews?

LAUREN REGAN: Well, we’ve attempted. There have been several requests by media to conduct both print and film interviews, and all of them have been denied. And as far as we know at this time, the warden of that unit is indicating that they will not permit any contact.

And in fact, you know, even his attorney calls to me are greatly restricted. I’m only allowed to speak with him on the phone if we have an imminent upcoming court hearing. Otherwise, I have to write to him. And we’ve already had one letter, attorney-client-privileged letter, opened by the prison and read, and they made comments on legal strategy that I was sending to him. So there’s a bunch of problems.

AMY GOODMAN: Kathy Manley, tell us about the case of Yassin Aref, exactly where and how he is being held right now, what communication he is able to have with the outside world.

KATHY MANLEY: OK. Well, first I’d like to say that Yassin really loves this show. He was able to listen to it when he was in solitary confinement in Rensselaer County Jail for over a year, and he said that this show and his Holy Book helped him keep his sanity during that time.

After—he was convicted in a very unfair FBI sting operation. He’s a Kurdish refugee from Iraq. He came here expecting to find freedom, but because he had been outspoken about the war and about Palestinian rights, he was investigated. They couldn’t really find anything, so they were still suspicious of him, and they set him up in this sting operation. And he was convicted. It’s a long story. I won’t go into all of that. But it was terribly unfair. And after he was sentenced to fifteen years, he was taken to the CMU in Terre Haute, and that was in May of 2007.

And he wrote about it, which is on his website yassinaref.com. He wrote about it, called “Dead Life in a Political Prison.” And he described the life there, which one of the worst parts for him is not being able to have contact visits with his family, with his wife and four young children, which they can’t even hardly get there anyway, because it’s so far away. They’ve only been there once in that two years. And when they did go, I went with them, and there was this tiny little room that they had to be in. I got to have a contact visit as his attorney, but they really needed to be able to hug him. His baby, his other children, his wife had to visit through glass with a phone. And so, that’s probably the hardest part for him and just not being able to support his family, of course.

But the CMUs, when they were first set up, the way prison units are usually set up is they’re regulated in the Code of Federal Regulations. And under the Administrative Procedures Act, they usually request public comment with setting up something new like this. And they actually did that in 2006. They had proposed regulations, codified CFR proposed regulations, and they asked for comment.

And the ACLU and other groups showed that these proposed rules would be unconstitutional, discriminatory and restricting communications with the media, restricting the contact visits, a lot of this stuff would be unconstitutional. And then the Bureau of Prisons said, “OK, we won’t do it.” Well, then, at the end of 2006, they did it anyway, but they didn’t codify it. The institution supplement they published, instead of citing to the regulations that they would normally do, they just say “according to national policy” they’re doing this. And I do think it’s illegal.

AMY GOODMAN: I’m looking at Yassin Aref’s piece called “Dead Life,” where he says, “To me it is clear that the Government separated us out and put us here for these reasons:

“Most of the people here are victims of the Government, who targeted them and set them up. Then, during the prosecution, they claimed that these people are dangerous, that they intend to harm Americans and would support terrorists. So now, to keep the charade going, they must open a special unit and claim we are too dangerous to be in the general population.”

KATHY MANLEY: Yeah, that’s—

AMY GOODMAN: Kathy Manley?

KATHY MANLEY: That’s something that at first, when we were working on Yassin’s case, we thought he was the only one that was innocent and convicted unfairly, and then we started looking into other cases, and we realized that there’s a lot of other people in his situation who are either completely innocent or way overcharged, where there was some kind of vendetta against them, mostly Muslim men.

And Yassin, he wrote a book about his life, Son of Mountains. He wrote that piece you were talking about.

Also, the reason that they said that they put him in the CMU, the reason they gave is because they said he had communicated with a terrorist group called JEM. And that’s just a complete lie. There was a sting operation. There was no actual communication with JEM. The FBI informant pretended to be in communication with JEM. He wasn’t even in communication with this group. And Yassin said he could never support that group. He didn’t know enough about it. He wouldn’t support it. And then they actually claimed that that was why they put him in the CMU.

AMY GOODMAN: And Dr. Rafil Dhafir, his situation and who he is?

KATHY MANLEY: Yeah, he’s an oncologist from Syracuse, New York, who was also convicted very unfairly. He was convicted of violating the sanctions against Iraq under Saddam by sending charity—money to charity there to help children, called Save the Needy. And they didn’t even accuse him of anything to do with terrorism. And they just—he was the only person convicted of violating these sanctions. And for some reason, they put him at the CMU, too. Basically it’s anybody that they’re suspicious of their ideas.

AMY GOODMAN: Dr. Dharif, serving a twenty-two-year sentence. This issue of racial and religious profiling, Kathy Manley?

KATHY MANLEY: Well, yeah, it’s unconstitutional to treat people more restrictively in a prison context because of their race or religion. And they’re clearly doing that. I mean, the CMU in Terre Haute is almost 90 percent Muslim. They just threw in a few non-Muslims. In Marion, I’m not quite sure. Yassin was recently moved to Marion all of a sudden, which is even farther away from his family. I mean, this is just—it’s clearly discriminatory, unconstitutional.

(www.democracynow.org)
Source: Middle East Online

Church seeks to convert Obama grandma

First Published 2009-04-20


'Born a Muslim and wishes to die a Muslim'

 
Church seeks to convert Obama grandma

 
Relatives of 'Mama Sarah' say she was surprised by Church baptism offer, declined to attend.

 
NAIROBI - A Protestant church in Kenya is trying to convert US President Barack Obama's step-grandmother to Christianity against her will, a Muslim group said Monday, condemning the move as provocation.

The Seventh Day Adventist church in the western town of Kisumu had invited 87-year-old Sarah Obama -- a Muslim -- to a function on Saturday, where she was allegedly to be baptised.

According to relatives in her village of Kogelo, "Mama Sarah", as she is popularly known in the US president's paternal homeland, was surprised by the offer and declined to attend.

"I regret the attempt by the Christian religion to force her to convert," said Sheikh Mohamed Khalifa, the organising secretary of the Council of Imams and Preachers of Kenya.

"Why only her? Why not before Obama became president? Didn't they see her before he became president?" he said.

Said Obama, a step-brother to the US president, said the church pastors had approached Sarah Obama with news that she could become a Christian.

"Mama (Sarah) was born a Muslim and wishes to die a Muslim. The issue of conversion is neither here not there," he said.

Khalifa denounced the move as a "provocation."

"They don't have permission from Jesus to convert someone. I challenge them to quote a verse from the Bible allowing them to convert someone," he said.

Sarah became a national celebrity when her grandson visited the country in 2006 and her modest homestead has become a tourist attraction since the former Illinois senator's November 2008 election triumph.

The Kenyan government last month declared Kogelo a protected national heritage site.

U.S. military recruiting minors?

alJazeera Magazine - U.S. military recruiting minors?

AMY GOODMAN: Two Northern California towns are finding themselves in a showdown with the Pentagon over a ban on recruiting minors for the military. Last November, residents of Eureka and Arcata passed a ballot initiative known as the Youth Protection Act. The measure bars the U.S. government from trying to enlist youths under the age of eighteen in any branch of the U.S. armed forces.

But just days after the laws went into effect, the Justice Department filed a suit seeking to overturn them. The Justice Department’s civil action says the initiatives are invalid because they conflict with federal law. Both towns are refusing to cave. They’ve hired lawyers, filed counter-claims challenging the federal government’s action.

I’m joined now by two guests involved with this local grassroots effort. David Meserve is a member of the Stop Recruiting Kids coalition, which spearheaded the successful ballot measure banning military recruitment of minors in Arcata and Eureka, former member of Arcata’s city council. Sharon Adams is also with us. She’s a San Francisco-based attorney with the Stop Recruiting Kids coalition, board member at large of the National Lawyers Guild Bay Area Chapter.

We welcome you both to Democracy Now!

DAVID MESERVE: Thank you.

AMY GOODMAN: When did you pass this, David?

DAVID MESERVE: We passed it last November as a ballot initiative.

AMY GOODMAN: And explain exactly what it says.

DAVID MESERVE: Well, what it actually says is that no person who is employed by or an agent of the United States government shall, within the city limits of Arcata, recruit, initiate contact with for the purpose of recruiting, or promote the future enlistment of anyone under the age of eighteen.

AMY GOODMAN: How much was this being done before? And how much is it continuing?

DAVID MESERVE: Well, it happens nationwide, that the recruiters target kids at increasingly younger ages, but certainly down to fourteen, fifteen and sixteen, not to actually enlist, but to encourage them to think about enlisting in the future and to portray the military life as something that would be a good choice for them.

AMY GOODMAN: What was the vote in Eureka and Arcata?

DAVID MESERVE: Well, in Arcata, it passed by 73 percent margin, and in Eureka, by 57 percent. And we were actually—we had kind of thought that it was going to pass in Arcata. Arcata is known as a fairly liberal town, has done things like this in the past. The really exciting thing was it passing in Eureka, which is much more of a kind of working-class town, logging, fishing, etc. And we felt that we had really succeeded in Eureka, because we intended this as a nonpartisan measure, as something that did not require being anti-military to pass it. All we were really saying is that it’s inappropriate to recruit kids into the military. And apparently that message rang true for the people of Eureka.

AMY GOODMAN: OK, so it hasn’t been implemented yet. The Justice Department is not pleased. Explain what they’re doing.

DAVID MESERVE: Well, the Justice Department immediately sued to invalidate the measure—

AMY GOODMAN: This was under President Bush?

DAVID MESERVE: This was under President Bush. There were those who encouraged us to delay things until President Obama was in office, but we don’t really think that there would have been much difference, and they certainly haven’t dropped the lawsuit since he’s been in office.

So, they are trying to invalidate the measure under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, and we are fighting back legally and saying that the government really needs to remember that the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution also includes the Bill of Rights and also includes treaties signed by the U.S. government.

AMY GOODMAN: We tried to have a representative from the Justice Department on the show today, but they did not get back to us. Sharon Adams, explain the significance of these two referendum that have been passed by these towns and the Justice Department taking them on.

SHARON ADAMS: Well, the Justice Department is saying that they violate the Supremacy Clause, as David said. And—

AMY GOODMAN: And explain exactly what that is.

SHARON ADAMS: The Supremacy Clause is an article in the Constitution that says that the laws of the United States are the supreme law of the land, but it also includes in there the treaties that the United States has signed. So, one of our arguments is that there’s a protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict. That’s a treaty that the United States has signed. And in that treaty, it specifically discusses recruiting. And it specifically says, as far as the United States is concerned, that the United States will not recruit under the age of seventeen. And what we see over and over is that they are actually recruiting under the age of seventeen. So what we are saying is that there is no violation of the Supremacy Clause. What we’re saying is that the Supremacy Clause—the laws of the United States and this protocol are actually in—they’re in accord. And what’s happening is that the way that the recruiting is actually happening is not in accord with the existing laws in the United States and with the treaties.

AMY GOODMAN: So, what are you going to do now, David Meserve? You used to serve on the city council, but these laws are now not in effect.

DAVID MESERVE: Well, we’re moving ahead to defend them, and we’re also hoping that other cities want to follow suit. We’re encouraging other cities to think about ballot initiatives like this in the future, because it is a way for people to speak out from a grassroots level. And we’re also asking that they hold back a little bit and take a look at how the case turns out and whether there are any changes that would be advised for cities who will be doing this in the future, because we think it’s really important for cities and communities to be able to speak out and say that we believe that it’s wrong to recruit kids, and we believe that we have the power of the law on our side, as well as just the power of the right of what should be.

AMY GOODMAN: And what about the federal government saying it trumps what you want in your local town?

DAVID MESERVE: Well, we don’t think that the federal government does trump it, both because of the optional protocol and also because of the Ninth Amendment. And under the Ninth Amendment, there is the right to privacy, and we believe that intrinsic in that is the right to protect children from being approached by recruiters.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to ask you, Sharon Adams, about a different issue, maybe somewhat related. I was speaking at the Federal Reserve here at lunchtime in San Francisco yesterday, and a woman came up to me from the National Lawyers Guild, and she talked about the attempted impeachment of a judge here, Jay Bybee, talking about the torture memos. Can you talk about the efforts around these torture memos and what you’re doing?

SHARON ADAMS: Well, the National Lawyers Guild has filed in California a complaint with the State Bar of California against William Haynes. William Haynes was the attorney for Donald Rumsfeld and the Department of Defense, and William Haynes wrote a memo that basically recommended that Donald Rumsfeld approve certain enhanced interrogation techniques. And based on this recommendation by William Haynes, Donald Rumsfeld did do that. It was directly linked—it has been directly linked to the torture abuses that occurred at Abu Ghraib.

So, what we did with the Guild was we filed a complaint with the State Bar against William Haynes, who is registered in-house counsel here in California, because he’s now working at Chevron Corporation in San Ramon. And we are seeking to have him disciplined for his actions in writing those—in making that recommendation that led to approval of basically torture techniques.

AMY GOODMAN: So, you have Jay Bybee, this impeachment effort?

SHARON ADAMS: Right. The impeachment effort is being done by a slightly different group, but they are trying to go through the Democratic Party and get an actual resolution trying to get Jay Bybee impeached, because the only way to get him removed from the bench right now is through Congress, through an impeachment action. So they’re trying to do a grassroots movement to begin that.

AMY GOODMAN: And John Yoo, who’s a professor here at UC Berkeley in Berkeley, California, though he’s teaching at Chapman Law School down in—

SHARON ADAMS: Right.

AMY GOODMAN: —near Los Angeles.?

SHARON ADAMS: He is not registered in California as an attorney. He teaches here, but he’s not a registered attorney here. His registration is in Pennsylvania. So the Guild is also trying to—is working on a complaint against him in Pennsylvania, as well.

AMY GOODMAN: And how does this relate to the latest news we have out of Spain? Scott Horton is reporting that the proceedings will move against a number of these men.

SHARON ADAMS: I think it’s just the tide is turning. I really do. I’m just—every time I hear some new little bit of news, I feel that maybe the world is waking up from slumber.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you very much for being with us, Sharon Adams and David Meserve, coming down from Northern California from Arcata and Eureka, of Stop Recruiting Kids coalition.
Source: Middle East Online

Ahmadinejad slams 'racist' Israeli government

First Published 2009-04-20


'Efforts must be made to put an end to the abuse by Zionists'

 
Ahmadinejad slams 'racist' Israeli government

 
Several diplomats attending UN conference walk out as Iran President speaks about Israel.

 
GENEVA - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad criticised the formation of a "racist government" in the Middle East, in a clear reference to Israel, during a United Nations conference on racism Monday.

"They sent migrants from Europe, the United States ... in order to establish a racist government in the occupied Palestine," he said.

The Iranian leader added: "Efforts must be made to put an end to the abuse by Zionists and (their) supporters."

"Governments must be encouraged and supported in ... eradicating this barbaric racism and to move towards reform."

Ahmadinejad was about 10 minutes into his speech when several diplomats, including the French ambassador exited.

France condemned what it called Ahmadinejad's "hate speech" after its ambassador walked out of the UN racism conference.

"The president, who had already rejected the unacceptable statements made by the Iranian president in other circumstances, condemns utterly this hate speech," said President Nicolas Sarkozy's office.

"He calls for the European Union to take an extremely firm stance," it added, in a statement issued in Paris.

"I hope this protest gesture inspires the international community to take notice," added Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner in a second statement.

"The defence of human rights and the fight against all types of racism are too important for the United Nations not to unite against all forms of hate speech, against all perversion of this message," he said.

"Faced with attitudes like that which the Iranian president has just adopted, no compromise is possible."

United Nations chief Ban Ki-moon deplored Ahmadinejad's speech.

"I deplore the use of this platform by the Iranian President to accuse, divide and even incite. This is the opposite of what this conference seeks to achieve," said Ban in a statement.

Ban met Ahmadinejad before the Iranian president was due to address the meeting.

"I reminded the President that the UN General Assembly had adopted the resolutions to revoke the equation of Zionism with racism," he said.

"It is deeply regrettable that my plea to look to the future of unity was not heeded by the Iranian President," Ban added.

When addressing a UN conference against racism, Ahmadinejad criticised the creation of a "totally racist government in occupied Palestine" in 1948, calling it "the most cruel and racist regime".

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown "unreservedly condemned" the "offensive and inflammatory" comments made by Ahmadinejad, his spokesman said.

At least three demonstrators from the French Union of Jewish Students, dressed as clowns and shouting "racist, racist," were expelled from the conference as Ahmadinejad began to speak.

The Iranian's president's speech was marked by more catcalls from the non-governmental organisation, as well as applause, but the response was more muted among about 100 countries attending.

Ahmadinejad on said countries that are boycotting the UN racism conference are doing so out of "arrogance and selfishness."

"In our opinion, this is arrogance and selfishness and the root cause of the problems of the world," Ahmadinejad told a press conference.

Before his arrival in Geneva, Ahmadinejad said "the Zionist ideology and regime are the flag-bearers of racism."

Israel has often come under international criticism for ‘racism’ and mistreatment of its Arab minority, who are the original inhabitants of the land and today make up one fifth of its total population.

The Arab population is comprised of the descendants of the Palestinians who remained in their land despite being subjected to an Israeli campaign of 'ethnic cleansing' during the creation of Israel.

The majority of those who fled and their descendants, an estimated six million Palestinians, wish to return to their rightful homes but are prevented from doing so by Israel, in violation of international human rights.

Hadith: Put Love in the Hearts of People

Gmail - Muslims Fear FBI is Spying in Mosques / CAIR Seeks Release of Fla. Muslim Detained After Acquittal - mohamediqbalp@gmail.com

April 6, 2009 Forward to a Friend Support CAIR Contact Us Update Your Profile


* Hadith: Put Love in the Hearts of People
* Breaking: CAIR to Seek Release of FL Muslim Detained After Acquittal
* Muslims Fear FBI is Spying in Mosques (Buffalo News)
o CAIR: U.S. Muslims Debate How Much to Help FBI (SF Chron)
o Why U.S. Muslims Are Considering Suspending FBI Outreach Ties
* CAIR-OK: Bill Would Set Back the Clock on Civil Rights Progress
* Most Back Outreach to Muslim Nations, but Suspicion Persists (ABC News)
o Most in Poll Back Outreach to Muslims (Wash Post)
* TN Mosque Seeks ‘Buffer Zones’ from Restaurant Serving Alcohol

-----

HADITH OF THE DAY: PUT LOVE IN THE HEARTS OF PEOPLE - TOP

When the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) entered a new town, he would say: "O God. . .put our love in the hearts of its people and put the love of its righteous people in our hearts."

Fiqh-us-Sunnah, Volume 4, Number 147

-----

BREAKING NEWS: CAIR TO SEEK RELEASE OF FL MUSLIM DETAINED AFTER ACQUITTAL - TOP

(TAMPA, FL, 4/6/09) - On Tuesday, April 7, the Tampa chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-Tampa) will hold a news conference to call for the release of former USF student Youssef Megahed who was acquitted Friday of charges in federal court but was detained today by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Members of Megahed’s family will attend the news conference.

WHAT: Press Conference Calling for Release of Youssef Megahed
WHEN: Tuesday, April 7, 11 a.m. EST
WHERE: CAIR-Tampa Office, 8056 North 56th Street, Tampa, FL

SEE: Youssef Megahed Detained By Immigration Officials

CONTACT: CAIR-Tampa Executive Director Ramzy Kilic, Tel: 813-514-1414 or 813-486-2529, Email: rkilic@cair.com

-----

MUSLIMS FEAR FBI IS SPYING IN MOSQUES - TOP
Queries about moles bring no answers
Dan Herbeck, Buffalo News, 4/6/09

A coalition of Muslim-American groups claims the FBI has been planting counterterrorism spies in mosques in some U. S. cities.

Last month, 10 Muslim-American organizations threatened to stop working with the FBI on outreach efforts in the Muslim-American community.

Dr. Khalid J. Qazi, president of the Muslim Public Affairs Council of Western New York, said he is concerned about the situation and hopes the FBI provides some answers soon.

“[Muslims] are asking questions, wondering if there are moles spying on mosques throughout the country,” Qazi told The Buffalo News. “People ask me about it, and I have to tell them the honest truth - that I don’t know if it’s happening.”

The controversy has been growing among Muslim-Americans since February, when an Irvine, Calif., fitness instructor named Craig Monteilh told reporters that the FBI paid him to infiltrate mosques in several communities in Southern California during an investigation conducted in 2006-07.

Monteilh, a former convict, told the Associated Press that FBI agents had picked him up every morning for two weeks and took him to a building in Los Angeles where he learned some Arabic and learned about Islam. After that, he said, he infiltrated several mosques as an FBI informer. (More)

SEE ALSO:

CAIR: U.S. MUSLIMS DEBATE HOW MUCH TO HELP FBI - TOP
Matthai Kuruvila, San Francisco Chronicle, 4/6/09

A petition organized by a Newark nonprofit urging Muslims to limit social outreach with the FBI has provoked a national debate within the Muslim community about how to deal with law enforcement.

The curb proposed by the petitioners - eliminating joint FBI town halls and other meet-and-greet events - is largely a response to the FBI's restricting its work with the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the largest Muslim civil rights group.

The petitioners say their stand on behalf of CAIR, which has an extensive presence around the country and in the Bay Area, has larger meaning for all Muslim institutions.

"We're fighting against being relegated to second-class citizenship," said Agha Saeed, chairman of the Newark-based American Muslim Taskforce on Civil Rights and Elections, the coalition of national Muslim organizations that issued the March 17 petition.

The tensions with the FBI come as the agency insists that it wants better relations with Muslims. (More)

---

FBI MUSLIM OUTREACH HARMED BY ABUSIVE TACTICS - TOP
Dr. Agha Saeed, Special to InFocus News, 4/1/09

A recent statement by a coalition of major national Islamic organizations cited a number of incidents in which the government unfairly targeted American mosques and Muslim groups and said concern over those abuses could result in the suspension of long-standing community outreach initiatives with the FBI.

That statement, issued by the American Muslim Taskforce on Civil Rights and Elections, is at its heart really a call for increased engagement and dialogue based on mutual respect and the preservation of constitutionally-protected civil and religious rights, not just on photo opportunities.

The essence of civic engagement, as practiced by Dr. Martin Luther King, is to create public awareness of unjust policies and tactics and to make it impossible for an oppressive status quo to be sustained.

American Muslim concerns are centered on four main factors: infiltration of mosques and systematic intimidation of religious leaders (Imams); use of agents provocateurs; use of the questionable category of unindicted co-conspirators to undermine major Muslim organizations, and denial of the First Amendment right to petition the government for a redress of grievances for organizations articulating a Muslim point of view on peace with justice in Palestine and elsewhere.

In its statement, AMT noted that "the FBI sent a convicted criminal to pose as an agent provocateur in several [California] mosques." Muslims find these FBI-induced false conversions a profoundly hurtful violation of their religious freedoms. AMT also cited the FBI’s disengagement from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the nation’s largest and most respected Muslim civil rights organization, and the "unjustified" designation of some 300 groups and individuals as "unindicted co-conspirators" in conjunction with the Holy Land Foundation trial in Dallas, Texas. . .

Muslims are not considering severing all ties with law enforcement agencies, but would only suspend participation in public relations efforts such as town hall meetings, diversity training and participation in FBI citizens’ academies that came to be viewed as public relations cover for behind-the-scenes abuses. Reporting of suspected criminal activities or of anti-Muslim hate crimes would continue.

This effort is not a campaign of disengagement, but is instead designed to truly engage top Justice Department officials on these critical issues. It is also designed to help restore respect and equal rights for American Muslims after eight years of being treated as suspects rather than partners. (More)

-----

CAIR-OK: IGNORANCE IS THE ENEMY - TOP
House Bill 1645, authored by Rep. Wade Rousselot, D-Wagoner, seems harmless on its surface. However, it has an amendment that may set back the clock on the civil rights progress in America.
Razi Hashmi, Tulsa World, 4/4/09

[Razi Hashmi is the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Oklahoma, a grassroots civil rights advocacy group whose mission is to enhance understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.]

When Rep. Rex Duncan, R-Sand Springs, heard about a Muslim woman re-taking her driver's license photo at the Department of Public Safety after her civil rights were violated, he proposed an amendment that would take all Oklahomans' civil rights away. This attack against Americans' civil rights would affect others besides the Muslim community, and is not without unintended consequences.

The sponsors have tagged this legislation to another bill that is irrelevant to the case at hand, and if passed, it would prohibit religious minorities from wearing religiously-mandated head covering when taking photos for their driver's licenses and other IDs.

Those affected would be Jewish men who wear yarmulkes, Catholic nuns who wear the habit, Indian Sikhs who wear turbans, Muslim women who wear the hijab (Islamic head scarf), and other religious groups who wear head coverings. If Mother Teresa were alive today and this proposed law were passed, she would not be able to get a driver's license in the state of Oklahoma!

America has a long-standing history of religious pluralism and freedom. It goes against the founding principles of our country to prohibit one's free practice of religion, protected by the U.S. Constitution.

The Oklahoma State Legislature needs to stop wasting time mixing religion and politics with pet projects such as placing the Ten Commandments on state property, and prohibiting religious head wear on driver's licenses. Being in the buckle of the Bible belt, Oklahomans have a responsibility to uphold the separation of Church and State just like the rest of this country.

Locally, we cannot forget that we do have bigger issues to focus on, namely the economy. In these tough economic times, it is disconcerting to see our state legislators wasting precious taxpayer dollars by attempting to pass a law that violates our First Amendment rights. If the legislators believe that Oklahoma is recession-proof, then we clearly have not felt the effects of the state Capitol, which has and will continue to drive people out of the state and send labor to other states that will accept a diverse workforce with open arms. (More)

-------

MOST BACK OUTREACH TO MUSLIM NATIONS, BUT SUSPICION AND UNFAMILIARITY PERSIST - TOP
ABC News/Washington Post Poll: 48 Percent Hold Unfavorable Opinion of Islam
Gary Langer, ABC News, 4/5/09

With President Obama in Turkey for a two-day visit, an ABC News/Washington Post poll finds that Americans overwhelmingly support U.S. outreach to Muslim nations -- but many also express continued suspicion of the world's second-largest religion.

Americans by 48-41 percent hold an unfavorable opinion of Islam -- its highest unfavorable rating in ABC/Post polls since 2001. And 29 percent express the belief that mainstream Islam encourages violence against non-Muslims -- down slightly from its peak, but double what it was early in 2002.

Click here for PDF with charts and questions.

Unfamiliarity is a central factor in these views. Fifty-five percent of Americans concede that they lack a good basic understanding of Islam; about as many, 53 percent, don't personally know a Muslim. People who profess an understanding of Islam, or know a Muslim, have much more positive views of the religion. (More)

SEE ALSO:

MOST IN POLL BACK OUTREACH TO MUSLIMS - TOP
Jon Cohen and Jennifer Agiesta, Washington Post, 4/6/09

Most Americans think President Obama's pledge to "seek a new way forward" with the Muslim world is an important goal, even as nearly half hold negative views about Islam and a sizable number say that even mainstream adherents to the religion encourage violence against non-Muslims, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

There is still a broad lack of familiarity with the world's second-largest religion -- 55 percent of those polled said they are without a basic understanding of the teachings and beliefs of Islam, and most said they do not know anyone who is Muslim. While awareness has increased in recent years, underlying views have not improved.

About half, 48 percent, said they have an unfavorable view of Islam, the highest in polls since late 2001. Nearly three in 10, or 29 percent, said they see mainstream Islam as advocating violence against non-Muslims; although more, 58 percent, said it is a peaceful religion.

Muslims make up about 1 percent of all U.S. adults.

Majorities of Americans with sympathetic and unsympathetic views about Islam said it is important for the president to try to improve U.S. relations with Muslim nations, with those holding more positive views much more likely to call those moves "very important." (More)

-------

TN: MOSQUE DOESN'T AGREE WITH RESTAURANT'S PLAN TO SERVE ALCOHOL - TOP
Jessie Pounds, Knoxville News Sentinel, 6/5/09

It's a Fort Sanders clash of cultures and good intentions.

On one side of the disagreement is a Muslim mosque, and some of its worshippers are unhappy about plans for a new restaurant that will serve alcohol.

On the opposing end of the clash is a business owner who says he's invested $1 million to upgrade a blighted building and has tried to accommodate Muslim worshippers during spiritual holidays.

The two entities - The Hill restaurant and the Anoor mosque - are a mere 191 feet apart.

Building owner Trevor Hill wants to offer alcoholic drinks along with home-cooking-style dinner and lunch menus, and he hopes to launch the eatery in about a week. He'll keep the restaurant open as late at night as is still profitable in hope of appealing to the young residents of Fort Sanders, where the building is located.

The possibility that the restaurant could serve as a local drinking hangout bothers mosque attendees like board member Nadeem Sidiqqi.

Islam prohibits the consumption of alcohol, but Sidiqqi said the protest isn't an attack on drinking in general, just a call for buffer zones for religious establishments. . .

Knoxville's local beer ordinance establishes a 300-foot buffer zone around churches and other similar institutions for a beer permit but waives the requirement if the establishment is granted a liquor license by the state of Tennessee. (More)