DePaul buys into growth of Islamic banking
Classes are teaching financing methods that conform to holy laws as field expands into a global industry
By Deborah Horan
Amir Davoodi had read about the meteoric rise of Islamic banking, but the senior finance major at DePaul University didn't realize how intrigued he would become with the idea of mixing Islam and market finance until he took a course on the subject last fall.
Now Davoodi has accepted an internship with a local Islamic real estate company, Sunrise Equities, and might pursue the banking niche after graduation.
"Right now it's booming," Davoodi said. "They're saying there's a market out there for it. I know I can learn a lot and it will help with my career."
Driven by rising oil prices and an increasing desire by Middle Eastern and Asian investors to keep their cash in the region, Islamic finance has boomed into a $500 billion to $600 billion global industry, experts in the field said.
The growth prompted DePaul last fall to join a tiny vanguard of U.S. colleges offering classes or lectures on the subject. On Thursday, the university will sponsor a conference on Islamic banking methods including home financing, private equity, bonds, even derivatives and hedge funds.
"There is a significant demand clicking up for people who understand the field and can design products that are Islamic and can answer the needs of the community," said Ali Fatemi, chair of DePaul's finance department, who was instrumental in bringing the Islamic banking course to campus.
...
Pertinent Links:
1) DePaul buys into growth of Islamic banking
Showing posts with label illinois. Show all posts
Showing posts with label illinois. Show all posts
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
DAR AL HARB - U.S.A. - ILLINOIS: 22 YR OLD STUDENT THREATENS A "MURDEROUS RAMPAGE" A LA VIRGINIA TECH SHOOTINGS
Ill. Student Accused of Terrorist Threat
EDWARDSVILLE, Ill. (AP) - A Southern Illinois University student was arrested after authorities say he threatened a "murderous rampage" similar to the Virginia Tech shootings that left 32 people and the gunman dead.
A gun dealer had alerted federal authorities about the man, saying he had seemed overly anxious to get a shipment of semiautomatic weapons, according to an affidavit filed in court by a police detective.
Olutosin Oduwole was charged Tuesday with attempting to make a terrorist threat, a felony. He remained jailed Wednesday in lieu of $1 million bail.
According to the affidavit, the 22-year-old student wrote a note demanding that money be deposited to a PayPal account, threatening that "if this account doesn't reach $50,000 in the next 7 days then a murderous rampage similar to the VT shooting will occur at another highly populated university. THIS IS NOT A JOKE!"
Authorities found the note Friday in Oduwole's car on campus, said university spokesman Greg Conroy. Police also said they found a loaded gun in Oduwole's dorm room.
The detective said in the affidavit that Oduwole, of Maplewood, N.J., had recently bought three .38-caliber semiautomatic guns online but had not yet received them, and also had ordered a .45-caliber semiautomatic gun similar to an Uzi.
A gun dealer alerted the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives because Oduwole "appeared very anxious to get these firearms and seemed very impatient," the affidavit said.
It wasn't immediately clear if Oduwole had an attorney who could speak for him. Conroy said Oduwole was taking summer courses this year.
...
Olutosin Oduwole
-Olutosin: Yoruba, meaning "God is worthy of praise"
-Yoruba:
Ethnic groups:
Nigeria, Africa's most populous country, is composed of more than 250 ethnic groups; the following are the most populous and politically influential: Hausa and Fulani 29%, Yoruba 21%, Igbo (Ibo) 18%, Ijaw 10%, Kanuri 4%, Ibibio 3.5%, Tiv 2.5%
Religions:
Muslim 50%, Christian 40%, indigenous beliefs 10%
Is Olutosin Oduwole a moslem?!?
Pertinent Links:
1) Ill. Student Accused of Terrorist Threat
EDWARDSVILLE, Ill. (AP) - A Southern Illinois University student was arrested after authorities say he threatened a "murderous rampage" similar to the Virginia Tech shootings that left 32 people and the gunman dead.
A gun dealer had alerted federal authorities about the man, saying he had seemed overly anxious to get a shipment of semiautomatic weapons, according to an affidavit filed in court by a police detective.
Olutosin Oduwole was charged Tuesday with attempting to make a terrorist threat, a felony. He remained jailed Wednesday in lieu of $1 million bail.
According to the affidavit, the 22-year-old student wrote a note demanding that money be deposited to a PayPal account, threatening that "if this account doesn't reach $50,000 in the next 7 days then a murderous rampage similar to the VT shooting will occur at another highly populated university. THIS IS NOT A JOKE!"
Authorities found the note Friday in Oduwole's car on campus, said university spokesman Greg Conroy. Police also said they found a loaded gun in Oduwole's dorm room.
The detective said in the affidavit that Oduwole, of Maplewood, N.J., had recently bought three .38-caliber semiautomatic guns online but had not yet received them, and also had ordered a .45-caliber semiautomatic gun similar to an Uzi.
A gun dealer alerted the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives because Oduwole "appeared very anxious to get these firearms and seemed very impatient," the affidavit said.
It wasn't immediately clear if Oduwole had an attorney who could speak for him. Conroy said Oduwole was taking summer courses this year.
...
Olutosin Oduwole
-Olutosin: Yoruba, meaning "God is worthy of praise"
-Yoruba:
Nigeria:
The Yoruba (Yorùbá in Yoruba orthography) are a large ethno-linguistic group or ethnic nation in Africa; the majority of them speak the Yoruba language (èdèe Yorùbá; èdè = language). The Yoruba constitute approximately 21 percent of Nigeria's total population,[1] and around 30 million individuals throughout the region of West Africa.[2] They share borders with the Borgu (variously called Bariba and
Borgawa) in the northwest, the Nupe and Ebira in the north, the Ẹsan and Edo to the
southeast, the Igala and other related groups to the northeast, and the Egun, Fon, and other Gbe-speaking peoples in the southwest. While the majority of the Yoruba live in southwestern Nigeria, there are also substantial indigenous Yoruba communities in Benin, Ghana and Togo, as well as large diasporic Yoruba communities in Sierra Leone, Brazil, Cuba, Puerto Rico and Trinidad, the Caribbean, and the United States. The Yoruba are the main ethnic group in the states of Ekiti, Lagos, Ogun, Ondo, Osun, and Oyo, which are subdivisions of Nigeria; they also constitute a sizable proportion of Kwara and Kogi states as well as of the Benin.
Many people of African descent in the Americas have claim to Yoruba ancestry (along with several other ethnic groups) to some degree. A significant percentage of Africans enslaved during the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade in the Americas were Yoruba.
Ethnic groups:
Nigeria, Africa's most populous country, is composed of more than 250 ethnic groups; the following are the most populous and politically influential: Hausa and Fulani 29%, Yoruba 21%, Igbo (Ibo) 18%, Ijaw 10%, Kanuri 4%, Ibibio 3.5%, Tiv 2.5%
Religions:
Muslim 50%, Christian 40%, indigenous beliefs 10%
Is Olutosin Oduwole a moslem?!?
Pertinent Links:
1) Ill. Student Accused of Terrorist Threat
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
DAR AL HARB - U.S.A. - ILLINOIS: MOSLEM DUNKIN DONUTS OWNER GETS TO SUE DUNKIN DONUTS BECAUSE THEY WANT HIM TO SELL PORK PRODUCTS
Muslim Dunkin' owner gets OK to sue over pork
LOS ANGELES (Reuters)—A discrimination lawsuit filed by a Muslim Dunkin' Donuts franchisee who was not allowed to renew his contract with the chain because of a refusal to sell pork products can proceed, a U.S. appeals court ruled Tuesday.
The decision reversed an Illinois federal court judge's 2004 ruling that rejected Walid Elkhatib's argument that Dunkin' Donuts discriminated against him based on his race by making the sale of breakfast sandwiches with bacon, ham or sausage a mandatory part of his franchise agreement.
According to court papers, Elkhatib, a Palestinian Arab, has been a Dunkin' Donuts franchisee since 1979, before the company began selling any pork.
Once breakfast sandwiches were introduced in 1984, Mr. Elkhatib's Chicago-area Dunkin' Donuts outlets sold them without bacon, ham or sausage for nearly 20 years. The company did not object, even providing him with a sign that said "Meat Products Not Available."
In 2002, however, Mr. Elkhatib was told he would not be able to relocate a store or renew his franchisee agreements due to his failure to carry the full product line.
Mr. Elkhatib sued Dunkin' Donuts and its former parent company, Allied Domecq, later that year, claiming that the chain's refusal to renew his franchises constituted racial discrimination.
In an opinion Tuesday, U.S. Circuit Judge Ilana Diamond Rovner wrote that because three other Dunkin' Donuts franchisees in the area were allowed to continue operating without selling breakfast sandwiches for reasons other than the owners' religious views, such as space or lease restrictions, that there was sufficient evidence to take the suit to trial.
"There is significant evidence that the carrying of breakfast sandwiches was not an issue of importance to Dunkin Donuts. It allowed other franchises in the area to refuse to carry any breakfast sandwiches at all, when merely relocating the stores, or in one case merely rearranging the displays, would have allowed them to carry the full line," Judge Rovner wrote.
She added that "there is no evidence that there was any change in corporate policy, or even regional policy, on the matter."
A Dunkin' Donuts spokeswoman said she could not comment on pending litigation. Mr. Elkhatib could not immediately be reached for comment.
Dunkin' Donuts is a unit of Dunkin' Brands, which is owned by private equity firms Bain Capital, Carlyle Group and Thomas H. Lee partners.
Pertinent Links:
1) Muslim Dunkin' owner gets OK to sue over pork
LOS ANGELES (Reuters)—A discrimination lawsuit filed by a Muslim Dunkin' Donuts franchisee who was not allowed to renew his contract with the chain because of a refusal to sell pork products can proceed, a U.S. appeals court ruled Tuesday.
The decision reversed an Illinois federal court judge's 2004 ruling that rejected Walid Elkhatib's argument that Dunkin' Donuts discriminated against him based on his race by making the sale of breakfast sandwiches with bacon, ham or sausage a mandatory part of his franchise agreement.
According to court papers, Elkhatib, a Palestinian Arab, has been a Dunkin' Donuts franchisee since 1979, before the company began selling any pork.
Once breakfast sandwiches were introduced in 1984, Mr. Elkhatib's Chicago-area Dunkin' Donuts outlets sold them without bacon, ham or sausage for nearly 20 years. The company did not object, even providing him with a sign that said "Meat Products Not Available."
In 2002, however, Mr. Elkhatib was told he would not be able to relocate a store or renew his franchisee agreements due to his failure to carry the full product line.
Mr. Elkhatib sued Dunkin' Donuts and its former parent company, Allied Domecq, later that year, claiming that the chain's refusal to renew his franchises constituted racial discrimination.
In an opinion Tuesday, U.S. Circuit Judge Ilana Diamond Rovner wrote that because three other Dunkin' Donuts franchisees in the area were allowed to continue operating without selling breakfast sandwiches for reasons other than the owners' religious views, such as space or lease restrictions, that there was sufficient evidence to take the suit to trial.
"There is significant evidence that the carrying of breakfast sandwiches was not an issue of importance to Dunkin Donuts. It allowed other franchises in the area to refuse to carry any breakfast sandwiches at all, when merely relocating the stores, or in one case merely rearranging the displays, would have allowed them to carry the full line," Judge Rovner wrote.
She added that "there is no evidence that there was any change in corporate policy, or even regional policy, on the matter."
A Dunkin' Donuts spokeswoman said she could not comment on pending litigation. Mr. Elkhatib could not immediately be reached for comment.
Dunkin' Donuts is a unit of Dunkin' Brands, which is owned by private equity firms Bain Capital, Carlyle Group and Thomas H. Lee partners.
Pertinent Links:
1) Muslim Dunkin' owner gets OK to sue over pork
Thursday, June 14, 2007
DAR AL HARB - U.S.A. - ILLINOIS: ANTI-TERROR SATELLITES?!?
Boeing to build anti-terror satellites
Concerns over disruption of global communications prompt the manufacturer to install anti-jamming technology
by Jonathan Richards
Boeing has said that it will attach sophisticated antennas to its new satellites as part of a broader push – supported by the Pentagon – to counteract concerns that these space assets may be disrupted by terrorists and hostile governments.
According to one US Air Force officer, such fears went “beyond idle speculation”.
“Some of our customers are looking for technology to potentially reduce the threat of jamming,” said Craig Cooning, deputy general manager of Boeing’s Space and Intelligence Systems unit, which builds commercial and military satellites.
Boeing was in talks with one commercial operator about the upgrade, Mr Cooning said, and the US military – 80 per cent of whose satellite communications are carried by commercial satellites – is also understood to be supportive of the move.
The company declined to comment on the cost of the scheme, although Mr Cooning said that Congress “may be willing to subsidise” the upgrades. He added: “Inevitably we’re going to see more jamming in the future.”
Anti-jamming technology is already used by military and spy satellites, but proposals to install similar protection in the 250 large satellites in commercial operation have been prompted by the threat of disruption.
The successful jamming of video, data, or voice signals by individuals or groups could jeopardise the millions of dollars spent on just a handful of satellites, operators fear.
Such jamming of government navigation satellites has already occurred, according to Lieutenant General Robert Kehler of the US Air Force, “as has jamming of commercial telecommunications satellites”.
The focus of several countries, including China, on pursuing a space agenda has prompted strong words from the Bush Administration. Two months ago the State Department warned about the national security threat that could arise from terrorist groups jamming, blinding or disabling satellites.
...
Pertinent Links:
1) Boeing to build anti-terror satellites
Concerns over disruption of global communications prompt the manufacturer to install anti-jamming technology
by Jonathan Richards
Boeing has said that it will attach sophisticated antennas to its new satellites as part of a broader push – supported by the Pentagon – to counteract concerns that these space assets may be disrupted by terrorists and hostile governments.
According to one US Air Force officer, such fears went “beyond idle speculation”.
“Some of our customers are looking for technology to potentially reduce the threat of jamming,” said Craig Cooning, deputy general manager of Boeing’s Space and Intelligence Systems unit, which builds commercial and military satellites.
Boeing was in talks with one commercial operator about the upgrade, Mr Cooning said, and the US military – 80 per cent of whose satellite communications are carried by commercial satellites – is also understood to be supportive of the move.
The company declined to comment on the cost of the scheme, although Mr Cooning said that Congress “may be willing to subsidise” the upgrades. He added: “Inevitably we’re going to see more jamming in the future.”
Anti-jamming technology is already used by military and spy satellites, but proposals to install similar protection in the 250 large satellites in commercial operation have been prompted by the threat of disruption.
The successful jamming of video, data, or voice signals by individuals or groups could jeopardise the millions of dollars spent on just a handful of satellites, operators fear.
Such jamming of government navigation satellites has already occurred, according to Lieutenant General Robert Kehler of the US Air Force, “as has jamming of commercial telecommunications satellites”.
The focus of several countries, including China, on pursuing a space agenda has prompted strong words from the Bush Administration. Two months ago the State Department warned about the national security threat that could arise from terrorist groups jamming, blinding or disabling satellites.
...
Pertinent Links:
1) Boeing to build anti-terror satellites
Monday, May 28, 2007
DAR AL HARB - U.S.A. - ILLINOIS: DO WE HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT A MEDICAL JIHAD ?!?
When Your Doctor is a Muslim: Medical Terrorism Comes to America
By Debbie Schlussel
Sometimes--so many times--diversity is not what it's cracked up to be.
Just ask Joseph Applebaum. Well, you could ask him. But you won't get an answer. He's dead. And he's dead because he was a Jew, and his doctor is a Muslim and grad of "Ayman Al-Zawahiri" Medical School.
But Applebaum wasn't denied treatment for being a Jew in Egypt. Or elsewhere in the Muslim world. It happened right here on U.S. soil. In Chicago.
As Muslim doctors continue to flood into the country under lax immigration laws, hospitals around the country have acquired their fair share of them. Many hospitals in the Detroit area are now dominated by Muslim doctors and have been for some time.
But even in hospitals where they do not predominate, Muslim doctors are starting to demonstrate behavior toward non-Muslim patients that is beyond alarming.
On December 1, 2003, Joe Applebaum was admitted to Rush North Shore Medical Center, a major hospital in Chicago. He was stricken with an acute (or distended) abdomen--a swelling of the stomach that is easily diagnosed and treated. But it was never treated by anyone at the hospital. For 12 hours, Joe Applebaum was left alone--left to die, which he did the next day.
A Jewish man, he was identified as a Jew on the front page of his medical chart. The chief resident doctor assigned to treat Mr. Applebaum, Osama Ahmed Ibrahim, MD, sure noticed the religious notation on Applebaum's chart. And it appears that this is why he never once checked or examined this emergency patient, Mr. Applebaum, and left him to die. When another doctor at the hospital finally examined Mr. Applebaum--not his assigned doctor, Dr. Ibrahim, he told Applebaum's son, Michael, to say good-bye to his father because he was about to die.
Dr. Ibrahim, is a Muslim from Birmingham, England--a hotbed of Islamic radicalism and terror planning. It is breeding ground for anti-Semitic hate. He is a graduate of Ain Shams University Medical School in Egypt. This extremist school is also the alma mater of Al-Qaeda mastermind and number two, Dr. Ayman Al-Zawahiri. Zawahiri's father--a Muslim Brotherhood enthusiast--also taught at the University.
...
Hat Tip: The Religion of Peace
Pertinent Links:
1) When Your Doctor is a Muslim: Medical Terrorism Comes to America
By Debbie Schlussel
Sometimes--so many times--diversity is not what it's cracked up to be.
Just ask Joseph Applebaum. Well, you could ask him. But you won't get an answer. He's dead. And he's dead because he was a Jew, and his doctor is a Muslim and grad of "Ayman Al-Zawahiri" Medical School.
But Applebaum wasn't denied treatment for being a Jew in Egypt. Or elsewhere in the Muslim world. It happened right here on U.S. soil. In Chicago.
As Muslim doctors continue to flood into the country under lax immigration laws, hospitals around the country have acquired their fair share of them. Many hospitals in the Detroit area are now dominated by Muslim doctors and have been for some time.
But even in hospitals where they do not predominate, Muslim doctors are starting to demonstrate behavior toward non-Muslim patients that is beyond alarming.
On December 1, 2003, Joe Applebaum was admitted to Rush North Shore Medical Center, a major hospital in Chicago. He was stricken with an acute (or distended) abdomen--a swelling of the stomach that is easily diagnosed and treated. But it was never treated by anyone at the hospital. For 12 hours, Joe Applebaum was left alone--left to die, which he did the next day.
A Jewish man, he was identified as a Jew on the front page of his medical chart. The chief resident doctor assigned to treat Mr. Applebaum, Osama Ahmed Ibrahim, MD, sure noticed the religious notation on Applebaum's chart. And it appears that this is why he never once checked or examined this emergency patient, Mr. Applebaum, and left him to die. When another doctor at the hospital finally examined Mr. Applebaum--not his assigned doctor, Dr. Ibrahim, he told Applebaum's son, Michael, to say good-bye to his father because he was about to die.
Dr. Ibrahim, is a Muslim from Birmingham, England--a hotbed of Islamic radicalism and terror planning. It is breeding ground for anti-Semitic hate. He is a graduate of Ain Shams University Medical School in Egypt. This extremist school is also the alma mater of Al-Qaeda mastermind and number two, Dr. Ayman Al-Zawahiri. Zawahiri's father--a Muslim Brotherhood enthusiast--also taught at the University.
...
Hat Tip: The Religion of Peace
Pertinent Links:
1) When Your Doctor is a Muslim: Medical Terrorism Comes to America
Saturday, May 26, 2007
DAR AL HARB - U.S.A. - ILLINOIS: "A GIFT OF GOD TO A SICK, SICK WORLD" = LOUIS FARRAKHAN, ACCORDING TO PLEGER
Nation of Islam's Farrakhan speaks at Chicago Catholic church
CHICAGO: Former Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan told a predominantly black Catholic church that people who believe in God need not be divided, delivering a message of religious unity that has marked his recent addresses.
Speaking with a strong voice and gesturing firmly from the pulpit as he addressed a crowd of about 1,100 at St. Sabina Catholic Church, the black Muslim leader looked and sounded little like a man recovering from illness.
"I feel very honored to stand in this place," he said. "I feel very honored by the media being struck by my being in a Catholic church with a white pastor."
St. Sabina's Rev. Michael L. Pfleger told his congregation that Farrakhan's presence at the church is "only strange to people who don't know Minister Louis Farrakhan."
"He's spoken here many times and St. Sabina is a home for Louis Farrakhan," said Pfleger, who called Farrakhan "a gift from God to a sick, sick world."
...
Pfleger is a leftist nut and has been for many years...
Pertinent Links:
1) Nation of Islam's Farrakhan speaks at Chicago Catholic church
CHICAGO: Former Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan told a predominantly black Catholic church that people who believe in God need not be divided, delivering a message of religious unity that has marked his recent addresses.
Speaking with a strong voice and gesturing firmly from the pulpit as he addressed a crowd of about 1,100 at St. Sabina Catholic Church, the black Muslim leader looked and sounded little like a man recovering from illness.
"I feel very honored to stand in this place," he said. "I feel very honored by the media being struck by my being in a Catholic church with a white pastor."
St. Sabina's Rev. Michael L. Pfleger told his congregation that Farrakhan's presence at the church is "only strange to people who don't know Minister Louis Farrakhan."
"He's spoken here many times and St. Sabina is a home for Louis Farrakhan," said Pfleger, who called Farrakhan "a gift from God to a sick, sick world."
...
Pfleger is a leftist nut and has been for many years...
Pertinent Links:
1) Nation of Islam's Farrakhan speaks at Chicago Catholic church
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
DAR AL HARB - U.S.A. - ILLINOIS: AND ANOTHER SATELLITE OFFICE OF JIHAD
Islamic center request turned down by panel
By Jack Komperda
An Islamic center’s efforts to host religious events at a house it owns near Carol Stream has been dealt a setback.
The DuPage County Board’s development committee on Tuesday recommended against Almadina Islamic Center’s request to use the single-family house along Morton Road for various religious activities.
Board member Pamela Rion was one of the development committee members who voted against the permit request. She said the center doesn’t meet the county’s standards for the permit.
A final decision is slated to happen next week when the full county board considers the plan.
If the center’s request is denied, it still could host religious activities, but under a different set of zoning guidelines that regulate activities for unoccupied buildings.
However, the lawyer representing the center said it’s unclear whether the group can use the home at 2N579 Morton Road without anyone objecting in the future.
“The members are just hoping the property will be able to be used for gatherings … within the county’s permissible uses,” attorney Mark Stauber said.
Almadina’s representatives have said the vacant house would be used once or twice a week for prayer services by a small group of Sufi Muslims.
...
Pertinent Links:
1) Islamic center request turned down by panel
By Jack Komperda
An Islamic center’s efforts to host religious events at a house it owns near Carol Stream has been dealt a setback.
The DuPage County Board’s development committee on Tuesday recommended against Almadina Islamic Center’s request to use the single-family house along Morton Road for various religious activities.
Board member Pamela Rion was one of the development committee members who voted against the permit request. She said the center doesn’t meet the county’s standards for the permit.
A final decision is slated to happen next week when the full county board considers the plan.
If the center’s request is denied, it still could host religious activities, but under a different set of zoning guidelines that regulate activities for unoccupied buildings.
However, the lawyer representing the center said it’s unclear whether the group can use the home at 2N579 Morton Road without anyone objecting in the future.
“The members are just hoping the property will be able to be used for gatherings … within the county’s permissible uses,” attorney Mark Stauber said.
Almadina’s representatives have said the vacant house would be used once or twice a week for prayer services by a small group of Sufi Muslims.
...
Pertinent Links:
1) Islamic center request turned down by panel
Monday, April 23, 2007
DAR AL HARB - U.S.A. - ILLINOIS: TO = HALAL OR NOT HALAL IN ILLINOIS
Muslims in quandary over state food law
Legislation certifying food as halal was passed five years ago. To many Muslims' chagrin, it has yet to be put into effect.
By Margaret Ramirez
Tribune religion reporter
As a Muslim mom and teacher, Dilara Sayeed struggles to find the best food to nourish her family and feed their devout faith.
She wants beef and chicken that are healthy as well as halal: slaughtered and blessed according to Islamic law. Yet often she finds there are limits to the information available from the supermarket or even her neighborhood Muslim grocer. So she, like many Muslims, must trust in God that she is not being deceived.
"Sometimes I just can't get all the answers, so I make an assumption that I'm being served in an honorable way," said Sayeed, of Naperville. "I wish it wasn't true, but there may be some people who are abusing that trust."
Five years after Illinois lawmakers passed legislation making it illegal to falsely label or sell food as halal, the rules still have not gone into effect and the law is not being enforced. Because there are multiple interpretations of what constitutes halal, debates about how the law would work have proved difficult and divisive.
But after years of stalled discussions, Muslim leaders are hammering out a plan to implement the law. Many, however, say the result is likely to be a bureaucratic mess because of the new registration process and the nearly 30-page questionnaire that must be filled out by every grocer, restaurant owner, meat processor and farmer who prepares or sells halal food.
The Illinois statute, modeled after a New Jersey law, requires anyone selling or producing halal food to register with the state for a $75 fee and fill out a disclosure form by checking off boxes indicating how the food was obtained and who certified the product as halal. Since New Jersey passed the nation's first halal law in 2000, similar laws have taken effect in nearly a dozen states.
"With this law, a Muslim consumer is empowered," said Mazhar Hussaini, director of the halal food program for the Islamic Society of North America. "He has to show [the disclosure form to] whoever asks for it. We cannot rely on just the grocer's word, and we can trace the meat from farm to retail store."
Illinois lawmakers say the act purposely does not define halal to allow for the multiple standards in the community. For some Muslims, halal means only avoiding pork or alcohol; others favor hand-slaughter by a Muslim over machine slaughter. Still another growing movement of Muslims argues that halal goes beyond slaughter to how the animals are raised. These Muslims insist that only meat from animals that were raised on organic or natural farms and were slaughtered in a humane way are halal.
Meeting with lawmakers
Last month, several Muslim community leaders met with state lawmakers at a public hearing to discuss what questions would be on the disclosure form. The state Department of Agriculture submitted comments from the hearing to a joint committee and is awaiting approval.
Because the state cannot certify what is halal, officials want all pertinent information on the form so consumers can make purchases according to their own standard. Statements on the form ask, for example, whether the animal was facing Mecca when slaughtered and whether the person performing slaughter is Muslim.
Many Muslims, however, are frustrated that the law fails to define exactly what is halal. Others say the check-box system is inadequate, unenforceable and likely to encourage more fraud.
...
Pertinent Links:
1) Muslims in quandary over state food law
Legislation certifying food as halal was passed five years ago. To many Muslims' chagrin, it has yet to be put into effect.
By Margaret Ramirez
Tribune religion reporter
As a Muslim mom and teacher, Dilara Sayeed struggles to find the best food to nourish her family and feed their devout faith.
She wants beef and chicken that are healthy as well as halal: slaughtered and blessed according to Islamic law. Yet often she finds there are limits to the information available from the supermarket or even her neighborhood Muslim grocer. So she, like many Muslims, must trust in God that she is not being deceived.
"Sometimes I just can't get all the answers, so I make an assumption that I'm being served in an honorable way," said Sayeed, of Naperville. "I wish it wasn't true, but there may be some people who are abusing that trust."
Five years after Illinois lawmakers passed legislation making it illegal to falsely label or sell food as halal, the rules still have not gone into effect and the law is not being enforced. Because there are multiple interpretations of what constitutes halal, debates about how the law would work have proved difficult and divisive.
But after years of stalled discussions, Muslim leaders are hammering out a plan to implement the law. Many, however, say the result is likely to be a bureaucratic mess because of the new registration process and the nearly 30-page questionnaire that must be filled out by every grocer, restaurant owner, meat processor and farmer who prepares or sells halal food.
The Illinois statute, modeled after a New Jersey law, requires anyone selling or producing halal food to register with the state for a $75 fee and fill out a disclosure form by checking off boxes indicating how the food was obtained and who certified the product as halal. Since New Jersey passed the nation's first halal law in 2000, similar laws have taken effect in nearly a dozen states.
"With this law, a Muslim consumer is empowered," said Mazhar Hussaini, director of the halal food program for the Islamic Society of North America. "He has to show [the disclosure form to] whoever asks for it. We cannot rely on just the grocer's word, and we can trace the meat from farm to retail store."
Illinois lawmakers say the act purposely does not define halal to allow for the multiple standards in the community. For some Muslims, halal means only avoiding pork or alcohol; others favor hand-slaughter by a Muslim over machine slaughter. Still another growing movement of Muslims argues that halal goes beyond slaughter to how the animals are raised. These Muslims insist that only meat from animals that were raised on organic or natural farms and were slaughtered in a humane way are halal.
Meeting with lawmakers
Last month, several Muslim community leaders met with state lawmakers at a public hearing to discuss what questions would be on the disclosure form. The state Department of Agriculture submitted comments from the hearing to a joint committee and is awaiting approval.
Because the state cannot certify what is halal, officials want all pertinent information on the form so consumers can make purchases according to their own standard. Statements on the form ask, for example, whether the animal was facing Mecca when slaughtered and whether the person performing slaughter is Muslim.
Many Muslims, however, are frustrated that the law fails to define exactly what is halal. Others say the check-box system is inadequate, unenforceable and likely to encourage more fraud.
...
Pertinent Links:
1) Muslims in quandary over state food law
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
DAR AL HARB - U.S.A. - ILLINOIS: THE MIND OF A LEFTIE
George Bush's Samson Option
by Stephen Lendman
The Samson Option is terminology used to explain Israel's intention to use its nuclear arsenal as an ultimate defense strategy if its leaders feel threatened enough to think they have no alternative. It comes from the biblical Samson said to have used his great strength to bring down the pillars of a Philistine temple, downing its roof and killing himself and thousands of Philistine tormentors. It's a strategy saying if you try killing me, we'll all die together, or put another way, we'll all go together when we go. Richard Wagner had his apocalyptic version in the last of his four operas of Der Ring des Nibelungen - Gotterdammerung, or Twilight of the Gods based on Norse mythology referring to a prophesied war of the Gods resulting in the end of the world.
The Bush Doctrine isn't that extreme, and it's not the intent of this essay to suggest its unintended consequences may turn out that way even though the threat it may is real if they start firing off enough nukes like they're king-sized hand grenades. The Doctrine refers to the administration's foreign policy first aired by George Bush in his commencement speech to the West Point graduating class in June, 2002. It was later formalized in The National Security Strategy of September, 2002 and updated in more extreme form in early 2006 that makes for scary reading not recommended at bedtime. It mentions Iran in it 16 times stating: "We may face no greater challenge from a single country than from Iran" while failing to acknowledge what Pogo said about us on an Earth Day poster in 1970 and in a 1972 book titled - "We Have Met the Enemy and He Is Us."
The updated NSS details an "imperial grand strategy" with new language more belligerent than the original version that was intended to be a declaration of preemptive or preventive war against any country or force the administration claims threatens our national security. It followed from our Nuclear Policy Review of December, 2001 claiming a unilateral right to declare and wage future wars using first strike nuclear weapons that in enough numbers potentially can destroy all planetary life, save maybe some resilient roaches and bacteria. In still other national security documents, the administration intends being ready by maintaining total control over all land, surface and sub-surface sea, air, space, electromagnetic spectrum and information systems with enough overwhelming power to defeat any potential challengers using all weapons in the arsenal, including those nukes masquerading as king-sized grenades.
The doctrine got its baptism in Afghanistan right after the 9/11 attacks and before the 2002 NSS was released. It then played out in real time "shock and awe" force (without nukes) in Iraq that seemed to work like a charm until it didn't. That brings us to today and an administration feeling cornered by failure and needing to change the subject and get a victory in the face of major defeat or at least buy enough time to run out the clock on its tenure so a new administration can take over and deal with the mess left over. It'll be king-sized if the audible war drums now beating are for real.
Enter Iran to play dual roles for the Bush administration plus the same one always center stage when strategic resources are at stake. It's the designated target to pull George Bush's Middle East fat out of the fire and fulfill our 28 year commitment to regime change in the country since its 1979 revolution ousted Shah Reza Pahlavi whom we installed to replace democratically elected prime minister Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953 in the CIA's first-ever go at regime change. Those events began and ended the same way - violently, but if George Bush proceeds as he's now threatening, they'll seem like tempest-in-teapot prologues to the main event ahead looking like full scale war large enough to engulf the whole region and entire Muslim world with it.
CIA's assessment is blunt. If the US attacks Iran, Southern Shia Iraq will light up like a candle and explode uncontrollably throughout the country. CIA ought to know and likely concluded big trouble won't just be in Iraq, Shia Islam and the Middle East. It may show up anywhere including a neighborhood near you but not to express reconciliation and friendship.
Washington's other motive is no mystery to anyone knowing why we attacked and now occupy Iraq. It had nothing to do with nonexistent weapons and everything to do with removing a leader unwilling to accept our imperial management rules whose country happens to have the fourth largest and easily accessible proven oil reserves in the world we want to control. The joke goes - how did our oil end up under his sand. The same is true for Iran and has since 1979. The country's leaders reject our rules, and it too has easily accessible oil reserves that are the world's third largest behind Saudi Arabia and Canada (including the country's heavy reserves). Further, both countries have vast untapped more of them adding to their allure and Washington's determination to control them alone to have veto power over who gets access.
If the US attacks Iran, all bets are off on what's to come. The echoes of Waterloo could turn George Bush's Middle East adventurism into his inadvertent Samson option by expanding the Iraq conflict to a regional one with impossible to predict consequences that won't be good for Western interests and especially US ones. It will inflame the region and produce a tsunami of Shia rage and solidarity enough to inflame and unite the whole Muslim world in fierce opposition to America, its culture and people. It may irrevocably transform the region making it unwelcome for decades or longer to anything Western that only arrives for what it can take and doesn't take no for an answer.
It's backlash may also affect the administration and its party as unintended fallout from an ill-conceived adventure gone sour and beyond repair. And it may have further unintended consequences as well - the painful blowback kind from angry people striking back in catastrophic payback ways far harsher than ever before. It could be a dirty bomb or two detonated in one more US cities or a nuclear reactor core meltdown from sabotage or attack releasing lethal radiation in amounts great enough to make downwind areas from it forever uninhabitable. Imagine a nightmarish vision of New York or Chicago (surrounded by 11 aging nuclear power plants) as ghost towns, their structures intact but unfit to be occupied.
There is a macabre bright side, however, once past the onslaught if it comes and its aftermath. In six years, the Bush administration achieved the near-impossible. It made the US a pariah state alienating the whole Muslim world and vast numbers more everywhere including growing numbers at home with George Bush's approval rating at numbers approaching the lowest ever for a US president. Its policies of permanent war on the world, repression at home, entrenched corruption, worship of wealth and privilege, and indifference to human needs and the people he was elected to serve already destroyed any notion the country is a model democratic state or that Bush and his neocon fanatics should be governing it. Their imperial arrogance accelerated the country's fading global hegemony well advanced since the 1970s and likely irreversible. They buried the nation's influence and dominance in Iraq's smoldering sands and Afghanistan's rubble that are now both graveyards for US ambitions in those regions and beyond.
Attacking Iran will just make things far worse. It would be a fanatical "hail Mary" act of insanity that by one definition is repeating the same mistakes, expecting different results. It has no more chance of success than our misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan. And if nuclear weapons are used, including so-called low-yield ones, it will be an appalling crime against humanity and catastrophic event potentially affecting millions in the region by radiation poisoning alone. If it happens, it will irreversibly weaken US influence and credibility everywhere accelerating our decline even faster toward second-class status and loss of world leadership already hanging by a thread. It could also be a potentially lethal blow to the benefits of "Western civilization" always arriving through the barrel of a gun and thuggish heel of a colonizer's boot with the US having the biggest barrels and largest shoe sizes.
Key US players know the risks and want our losses cut before it's too late to act. They want an end to war, not more of it in a strategically vital world region too important to lose while fearing it's likely too late. The National Intelligence Estimate supports them believing the war in Iraq is unwinnable, transforming the country into a pro-American state impossible, and the president's notion of victory illusory. George Bush ignores its assessment and presses on.
Reports by Seymour Hersh and others now say the administration wants to weaken the Bashir Assad-led Syrian government's alliance with Iran and further undermine Hezbollah's influence in Lebanon and the region by funding Sunni extremist groups with known ties to al-Queda in what's called a "redirection program." It's the brainchild of Dick Cheney/Elliott Abrams (of Iran-Contra notoriety)/Zalmay Khalilzad/Condi Rice/Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan/Israeli elements & Co. with CIA's hands are all over it covertly beyond Congress' reach. It includes a larger effort, with Saudi help, to fund and unleash Sunni extremist elements against Tehran at the same time Washington is preparing to include Iran and Syria in regional discussions on the situation in Iraq. It proves again duplicity and shameless hypocrisy are never in short supply in Washington. They're only topped by the neocon leadership's crazed strategy to make a hopeless Middle East debacle catastrophic.
...
Pertinent Links:
1) George Bush's Samson Option
by Stephen Lendman
The Samson Option is terminology used to explain Israel's intention to use its nuclear arsenal as an ultimate defense strategy if its leaders feel threatened enough to think they have no alternative. It comes from the biblical Samson said to have used his great strength to bring down the pillars of a Philistine temple, downing its roof and killing himself and thousands of Philistine tormentors. It's a strategy saying if you try killing me, we'll all die together, or put another way, we'll all go together when we go. Richard Wagner had his apocalyptic version in the last of his four operas of Der Ring des Nibelungen - Gotterdammerung, or Twilight of the Gods based on Norse mythology referring to a prophesied war of the Gods resulting in the end of the world.
The Bush Doctrine isn't that extreme, and it's not the intent of this essay to suggest its unintended consequences may turn out that way even though the threat it may is real if they start firing off enough nukes like they're king-sized hand grenades. The Doctrine refers to the administration's foreign policy first aired by George Bush in his commencement speech to the West Point graduating class in June, 2002. It was later formalized in The National Security Strategy of September, 2002 and updated in more extreme form in early 2006 that makes for scary reading not recommended at bedtime. It mentions Iran in it 16 times stating: "We may face no greater challenge from a single country than from Iran" while failing to acknowledge what Pogo said about us on an Earth Day poster in 1970 and in a 1972 book titled - "We Have Met the Enemy and He Is Us."
The updated NSS details an "imperial grand strategy" with new language more belligerent than the original version that was intended to be a declaration of preemptive or preventive war against any country or force the administration claims threatens our national security. It followed from our Nuclear Policy Review of December, 2001 claiming a unilateral right to declare and wage future wars using first strike nuclear weapons that in enough numbers potentially can destroy all planetary life, save maybe some resilient roaches and bacteria. In still other national security documents, the administration intends being ready by maintaining total control over all land, surface and sub-surface sea, air, space, electromagnetic spectrum and information systems with enough overwhelming power to defeat any potential challengers using all weapons in the arsenal, including those nukes masquerading as king-sized grenades.
The doctrine got its baptism in Afghanistan right after the 9/11 attacks and before the 2002 NSS was released. It then played out in real time "shock and awe" force (without nukes) in Iraq that seemed to work like a charm until it didn't. That brings us to today and an administration feeling cornered by failure and needing to change the subject and get a victory in the face of major defeat or at least buy enough time to run out the clock on its tenure so a new administration can take over and deal with the mess left over. It'll be king-sized if the audible war drums now beating are for real.
Enter Iran to play dual roles for the Bush administration plus the same one always center stage when strategic resources are at stake. It's the designated target to pull George Bush's Middle East fat out of the fire and fulfill our 28 year commitment to regime change in the country since its 1979 revolution ousted Shah Reza Pahlavi whom we installed to replace democratically elected prime minister Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953 in the CIA's first-ever go at regime change. Those events began and ended the same way - violently, but if George Bush proceeds as he's now threatening, they'll seem like tempest-in-teapot prologues to the main event ahead looking like full scale war large enough to engulf the whole region and entire Muslim world with it.
CIA's assessment is blunt. If the US attacks Iran, Southern Shia Iraq will light up like a candle and explode uncontrollably throughout the country. CIA ought to know and likely concluded big trouble won't just be in Iraq, Shia Islam and the Middle East. It may show up anywhere including a neighborhood near you but not to express reconciliation and friendship.
Washington's other motive is no mystery to anyone knowing why we attacked and now occupy Iraq. It had nothing to do with nonexistent weapons and everything to do with removing a leader unwilling to accept our imperial management rules whose country happens to have the fourth largest and easily accessible proven oil reserves in the world we want to control. The joke goes - how did our oil end up under his sand. The same is true for Iran and has since 1979. The country's leaders reject our rules, and it too has easily accessible oil reserves that are the world's third largest behind Saudi Arabia and Canada (including the country's heavy reserves). Further, both countries have vast untapped more of them adding to their allure and Washington's determination to control them alone to have veto power over who gets access.
If the US attacks Iran, all bets are off on what's to come. The echoes of Waterloo could turn George Bush's Middle East adventurism into his inadvertent Samson option by expanding the Iraq conflict to a regional one with impossible to predict consequences that won't be good for Western interests and especially US ones. It will inflame the region and produce a tsunami of Shia rage and solidarity enough to inflame and unite the whole Muslim world in fierce opposition to America, its culture and people. It may irrevocably transform the region making it unwelcome for decades or longer to anything Western that only arrives for what it can take and doesn't take no for an answer.
It's backlash may also affect the administration and its party as unintended fallout from an ill-conceived adventure gone sour and beyond repair. And it may have further unintended consequences as well - the painful blowback kind from angry people striking back in catastrophic payback ways far harsher than ever before. It could be a dirty bomb or two detonated in one more US cities or a nuclear reactor core meltdown from sabotage or attack releasing lethal radiation in amounts great enough to make downwind areas from it forever uninhabitable. Imagine a nightmarish vision of New York or Chicago (surrounded by 11 aging nuclear power plants) as ghost towns, their structures intact but unfit to be occupied.
There is a macabre bright side, however, once past the onslaught if it comes and its aftermath. In six years, the Bush administration achieved the near-impossible. It made the US a pariah state alienating the whole Muslim world and vast numbers more everywhere including growing numbers at home with George Bush's approval rating at numbers approaching the lowest ever for a US president. Its policies of permanent war on the world, repression at home, entrenched corruption, worship of wealth and privilege, and indifference to human needs and the people he was elected to serve already destroyed any notion the country is a model democratic state or that Bush and his neocon fanatics should be governing it. Their imperial arrogance accelerated the country's fading global hegemony well advanced since the 1970s and likely irreversible. They buried the nation's influence and dominance in Iraq's smoldering sands and Afghanistan's rubble that are now both graveyards for US ambitions in those regions and beyond.
Attacking Iran will just make things far worse. It would be a fanatical "hail Mary" act of insanity that by one definition is repeating the same mistakes, expecting different results. It has no more chance of success than our misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan. And if nuclear weapons are used, including so-called low-yield ones, it will be an appalling crime against humanity and catastrophic event potentially affecting millions in the region by radiation poisoning alone. If it happens, it will irreversibly weaken US influence and credibility everywhere accelerating our decline even faster toward second-class status and loss of world leadership already hanging by a thread. It could also be a potentially lethal blow to the benefits of "Western civilization" always arriving through the barrel of a gun and thuggish heel of a colonizer's boot with the US having the biggest barrels and largest shoe sizes.
Key US players know the risks and want our losses cut before it's too late to act. They want an end to war, not more of it in a strategically vital world region too important to lose while fearing it's likely too late. The National Intelligence Estimate supports them believing the war in Iraq is unwinnable, transforming the country into a pro-American state impossible, and the president's notion of victory illusory. George Bush ignores its assessment and presses on.
Reports by Seymour Hersh and others now say the administration wants to weaken the Bashir Assad-led Syrian government's alliance with Iran and further undermine Hezbollah's influence in Lebanon and the region by funding Sunni extremist groups with known ties to al-Queda in what's called a "redirection program." It's the brainchild of Dick Cheney/Elliott Abrams (of Iran-Contra notoriety)/Zalmay Khalilzad/Condi Rice/Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan/Israeli elements & Co. with CIA's hands are all over it covertly beyond Congress' reach. It includes a larger effort, with Saudi help, to fund and unleash Sunni extremist elements against Tehran at the same time Washington is preparing to include Iran and Syria in regional discussions on the situation in Iraq. It proves again duplicity and shameless hypocrisy are never in short supply in Washington. They're only topped by the neocon leadership's crazed strategy to make a hopeless Middle East debacle catastrophic.
...
Pertinent Links:
1) George Bush's Samson Option
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
DAR AL HARB - U.S.A. - ILLINOIS: ACCOMODATING MOSLEMS ONLY BEGETS FURTHER ACCOMODATIONS
Muslims' Request For Space Rejected
Athletic officials will allow prayer throughout arena
By Paul Takahashi
The Daily Northwestern
Athletic officials will not establish a designated prayer space for Muslim students at sporting events held at Ryan Field and Welsh-Ryan Arena, said John Mack, Northwestern's associate athletic director of external affairs.
Instead, officials will grant certain concessions, such as allowing prayer rugs into the stadiums and letting students pray in places that do not block traffic flow.
The decision came after Muslim students expressed a need for clean prayer areas in January. Associated Student Government passed a resolution asking the athletic department to meet with the Muslim-cultural Students Association to explore possible accommodations.
Mack met with Muslim students, ASG representatives and the university chaplain last month, and informed them in an e-mail last week of the athletic department's decision."I thought the meeting was productive," Mack said. "It was a good compromise for both sides." Hibah Yousuf, McSA's ASG senator, said the decision was suitable, but not ideal.
"We had a hard time meeting with the athletic department at first, but they were very helpful once we met," said Yousuf, a Medill sophomore. "We're appreciative of their efforts in finding places for us to pray."
Muslims are required to pray five times daily, at specified times that sometimes occur during sporting events.
In its e-mail to McSA officials, the athletic department said they would inform their staff that Muslim students would be able to pray wherever they wish during sporting events, as long as they do not block traffic or interfere with game-day operations at the arenas.
Muslim students can bring prayer rugs and check them in the coat check room during basketball games. At football games, students will need to hold their prayer rugs with them because there aren't any coat check rooms at Ryan Field.
"We want to accommodate (Muslim students) based on religion," University President Henry Bienen told The Daily last week.
"But at the same time, we want to preserve the practicalities of the space at Welsh-Ryan and Ryan Field."
McSA President Amir Siddiqui said the athletic department's decision "works for us."
"It's a good in-between solution," said Siddiqui, a Weinberg senior. "We understand that space is not always available."
Yousuf said she viewed the accommodations as the first step toward meeting the needs of Muslim students.
"It's suitable for now," Yousuf said, "but we'll brainstorm some more options."
While the university officials think that this issue has been resolved, they will be expected, in a few months time, to give moslems even further accomodations...
It is a never ending process, until the stupid infidels give up everything and become subdued, just as allah demands...
Pertinent Links:
1) Muslims' Request For Space Rejected - Athletic officials will allow prayer throughout arena
Athletic officials will allow prayer throughout arena
By Paul Takahashi
The Daily Northwestern
Athletic officials will not establish a designated prayer space for Muslim students at sporting events held at Ryan Field and Welsh-Ryan Arena, said John Mack, Northwestern's associate athletic director of external affairs.
Instead, officials will grant certain concessions, such as allowing prayer rugs into the stadiums and letting students pray in places that do not block traffic flow.
The decision came after Muslim students expressed a need for clean prayer areas in January. Associated Student Government passed a resolution asking the athletic department to meet with the Muslim-cultural Students Association to explore possible accommodations.
Mack met with Muslim students, ASG representatives and the university chaplain last month, and informed them in an e-mail last week of the athletic department's decision."I thought the meeting was productive," Mack said. "It was a good compromise for both sides." Hibah Yousuf, McSA's ASG senator, said the decision was suitable, but not ideal.
"We had a hard time meeting with the athletic department at first, but they were very helpful once we met," said Yousuf, a Medill sophomore. "We're appreciative of their efforts in finding places for us to pray."
Muslims are required to pray five times daily, at specified times that sometimes occur during sporting events.
In its e-mail to McSA officials, the athletic department said they would inform their staff that Muslim students would be able to pray wherever they wish during sporting events, as long as they do not block traffic or interfere with game-day operations at the arenas.
Muslim students can bring prayer rugs and check them in the coat check room during basketball games. At football games, students will need to hold their prayer rugs with them because there aren't any coat check rooms at Ryan Field.
"We want to accommodate (Muslim students) based on religion," University President Henry Bienen told The Daily last week.
"But at the same time, we want to preserve the practicalities of the space at Welsh-Ryan and Ryan Field."
McSA President Amir Siddiqui said the athletic department's decision "works for us."
"It's a good in-between solution," said Siddiqui, a Weinberg senior. "We understand that space is not always available."
Yousuf said she viewed the accommodations as the first step toward meeting the needs of Muslim students.
"It's suitable for now," Yousuf said, "but we'll brainstorm some more options."
While the university officials think that this issue has been resolved, they will be expected, in a few months time, to give moslems even further accomodations...
It is a never ending process, until the stupid infidels give up everything and become subdued, just as allah demands...
Pertinent Links:
1) Muslims' Request For Space Rejected - Athletic officials will allow prayer throughout arena
Sunday, January 28, 2007
DAR AL HARB - U.S.A.: TAKING MOSLEMS AT THEIR WORD
Taking Muslims at their word
By Scott P. Richert
Special to the Register Star
On Sept. 12, Pope Benedict XVI delivered his now-infamous Regensburg Address. The reaction in the Muslim world included protests, violence and the murder of a nun — all over the pope’s citation of a late-14th-century Byzantine emperor’s rhetorical claim that all that Muhammad brought that was new were “things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”
Lost in the uproar was the main point of the pope’s speech: that “not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God’s nature” as Christians understand it. In Islam, however, Allah’s “will is not bound up with any of our (Western) categories, even that of rationality.”
Benedict’s speech was a call for dialogue between Christianity and Islam. For a dialogue to take place, however, three conditions are necessary: Both sides must be interested in pursuing the truth, which means embracing reason; both sides must represent their own positions truthfully, without any intent to deceive; and each side must take the other’s claims at face value, as truly representing the other’s position.
In the wake of Derrick Shareef's arrest for planning to detonate grenades at CherryVale Mall during Advent, a daylong dialogue that Aaron Wolf, the associate editor of Chronicles, and I held with leaders from the Iqra School and Muslim Association of Greater Rockford in February 2002 is perhaps more relevant today than it was when I published an account of it in the April 2002 issue of Chronicles.
(The text of the article is available at www.chroniclesmagazine.org/Chronicles/April2002/0402Rockford.htm.)
MAGR estimates that there are 300 Muslim families in the Rockford area; the school continues to grow, and may expand to include all 12 grades; and local Muslims are becoming more prominent, as doctors, lawyers and engineers, among other occupations.
What made the dialogue interesting was the candor with which both sides addressed questions about the role of Islam raised by the Sept. 11 attacks. When Aaron raised the question of the media's use of the term "radical Islam," Atteya Elnoory, the principal at that time, stated that "We don't even deal with radical Islam, because we do not know what it is." Dr. Khalid Siddiqui, then assistant director of the neonatal intensive-care unit at SwedishAmerican Hospital, the chairman of the board of the school, and now president of MAGR, elaborated on Elnoory’s remark, describing Islam as a pendulum, which can "swing to the extremes and come back to the middle, but you are still within the boundaries" of Islam.
Any discussion of radical Islam, he claimed, also depends on your perspective: "You can believe someone is a terrorist, and I don't." To prove his point, he cited the example of Osama bin Laden, who recognized the dangers of atheistic communism and "went (to Afghanistan) and used his whole wealth to fight."
When, as Dr. Siddiqui put it, bin Laden was able to do what the United States could not and the Russians were forced to withdraw from Afghanistan, "the CIA interfered and created a very unstable government." Finding themselves "still oppressed by Israel ... the only way to get out is to fight. Experience says that."
As for the future of Islam in America, Dr. Siddiqui argued that non-Muslim Americans should not fear the coming of sharia (Islamic law). "Who is superior to us? Only God. If he made the laws, then he can be unbiased." Moreover, he claimed, "If you look at the Constitution, it is a pure Islamic constitution," restricting the power of men and leaving room for the imposition of sharia.
Shpendim Nadzaku, the imam at the Rockford mosque (who hadn't yet moved to Rockford when Aaron and I visited), was called upon by the local media to condemn Shareef, and he held an open house at the mosque in the days after the arrest. The local media have presented him — correctly — as a representative of mainstream Islam. What they have not done, however, is attempt to understand what mainstream Islam means in an American context. As Dr. Siddiqui's remarks indicate, the views of mainstream Muslims are far from the views of most non-Muslim Americans. How many non-Muslims in Rockford believe that the Constitution is a pure Islamic document, and that America would benefit from adopting sharia as the law of the land? How many non-Muslims believe that the definition of terrorism should be different for Muslims than for non-Muslims?
In her Dec. 20 article on Sheik Nadzaku's open house, Geri Nikolai quoted Nadzaku as saying, "As long as justice is prevalent throughout society, at the end of the day, nothing should cause us to want to slaughter each other." On the surface, that seems a sentiment with which we can all agree. In Islam, as in the American constitutional system, justice means equal treatment before the law. For Muslims, however, the law in question is not the Constitution but sharia.
In his 1996 book "Salt of the Earth," Pope Benedict XVI (then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger) wrote that:
"The Quran is a total religious law, which regulates the whole of political and social life and insists that the whole order of life be Islamic."
"Sharia shapes society from beginning to end. In this sense, it can exploit such freedoms as our constitutions give, but it cannot be its final goal to say: Yes, now we too are a body with rights, now we are present (in society) just like the Catholics and the Protestants. In such a situation, (Islam) would not achieve a status consistent with its inner nature; it would be in alienation from itself."
Pope Benedict's understanding of this question is supported by prominent mainstream Muslims. The Rockford mosque has hosted a speaker from the Midwest chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the chief mainstream Muslim political activist group in the United States. A former chairman of CAIR, Silicon Valley entrepreneur Omar H. Ahmad, told the San Ramon Valley Herald in 1998 that:
"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Quran, the Muslim book of Scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."
CAIR, on its Web site, declares that jihad, in addition to meaning "struggle against evil inclinations within oneself," includes "struggle in the battlefield for self-defense (e.g., having a standing army for national defense), or fighting against tyranny or oppression." And Muslim scholars, such as Syed Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi, in "Muslims in the West: The Message and Mission," declare that oppression and injustice prevail whenever a society prevents Muslims (and all men) from living under Islam.
After Chronicles published my account of our visit to the Iqra School, I went on Wisconsin Public Radio to discuss the article. An angry caller accused me of misrepresenting Islam. "You said that they want to impose sharia in the United States. That's not true." When I pointed out that the remark that upset her was not mine but a quotation from Dr. Siddiqui, the caller indignantly replied, "He may have said that, but he doesn't mean it."
Pope Benedict is right: The West must engage Islam. The Muslim belief that Allah is beyond all reason is indeed a stumbling block to dialogue, but an even greater one is the condescending refusal of non-Muslims to acknowledge that faithful Muslims in America really do believe what Islam teaches.
Pertinent Links:
1) Taking Muslims at their word
2) Through a Glass, Darkly
Moslem rap:
The word mujahideen is jarring, especially coming out of the mouths of nine- and ten-year-old children. Zaid translates it as "people who struggle in the way of Allah," giving it a spiritual twist that initially seems appropriate, since Iman means "faith" and Siratul Mustaqeem is "the straight path" or "the path of righteousness." The next verse, however, calls to mind a more common definition:
According to the glossary of Islamic terms compiled by the International Islamic University, deen is "Usually translated as 'religion', but in fact mean[s] 'life-transaction', the transaction being between Allah and each of his created beings. The life-transaction . . . is universal. It is the way of Islam . . . "
The Muslimeen and Mumineen are Muslims, while the Mushrikeen are, literally, "idol worshippers"; in common usage, however, the latter term means "People who associate partners with Allah Ta'ala, such as the Christians, who have raised the Prophet Isa (Jesus, Son of Mary) . . . to the level of Allah." Kafireen (or kuffar) means "unbelievers."
The song comes from a tape entitled The Next Level, produced by the Muslim Youth of North America (MYNA), "an organization dedicated to promoting Islamic awareness in Muslim youth." The lyrics to their songs can be found on their website, and the tapes are available in Muslim bookstores across the United States. The second song on The Next Level is "Jihad of the Nafs," an anglicization of Jihad an-Nafs, which the Islamic glossary defines as "fighting against one's own evil wants and trying one's utmost to be a better person in the sight of Allah." But the lyrics, presented in the style and idiom of gangsta rap, leave a different impression:
...
By Scott P. Richert
Special to the Register Star
On Sept. 12, Pope Benedict XVI delivered his now-infamous Regensburg Address. The reaction in the Muslim world included protests, violence and the murder of a nun — all over the pope’s citation of a late-14th-century Byzantine emperor’s rhetorical claim that all that Muhammad brought that was new were “things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”
Lost in the uproar was the main point of the pope’s speech: that “not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God’s nature” as Christians understand it. In Islam, however, Allah’s “will is not bound up with any of our (Western) categories, even that of rationality.”
Benedict’s speech was a call for dialogue between Christianity and Islam. For a dialogue to take place, however, three conditions are necessary: Both sides must be interested in pursuing the truth, which means embracing reason; both sides must represent their own positions truthfully, without any intent to deceive; and each side must take the other’s claims at face value, as truly representing the other’s position.
In the wake of Derrick Shareef's arrest for planning to detonate grenades at CherryVale Mall during Advent, a daylong dialogue that Aaron Wolf, the associate editor of Chronicles, and I held with leaders from the Iqra School and Muslim Association of Greater Rockford in February 2002 is perhaps more relevant today than it was when I published an account of it in the April 2002 issue of Chronicles.
(The text of the article is available at www.chroniclesmagazine.org/Chronicles/April2002/0402Rockford.htm.)
MAGR estimates that there are 300 Muslim families in the Rockford area; the school continues to grow, and may expand to include all 12 grades; and local Muslims are becoming more prominent, as doctors, lawyers and engineers, among other occupations.
What made the dialogue interesting was the candor with which both sides addressed questions about the role of Islam raised by the Sept. 11 attacks. When Aaron raised the question of the media's use of the term "radical Islam," Atteya Elnoory, the principal at that time, stated that "We don't even deal with radical Islam, because we do not know what it is." Dr. Khalid Siddiqui, then assistant director of the neonatal intensive-care unit at SwedishAmerican Hospital, the chairman of the board of the school, and now president of MAGR, elaborated on Elnoory’s remark, describing Islam as a pendulum, which can "swing to the extremes and come back to the middle, but you are still within the boundaries" of Islam.
Any discussion of radical Islam, he claimed, also depends on your perspective: "You can believe someone is a terrorist, and I don't." To prove his point, he cited the example of Osama bin Laden, who recognized the dangers of atheistic communism and "went (to Afghanistan) and used his whole wealth to fight."
When, as Dr. Siddiqui put it, bin Laden was able to do what the United States could not and the Russians were forced to withdraw from Afghanistan, "the CIA interfered and created a very unstable government." Finding themselves "still oppressed by Israel ... the only way to get out is to fight. Experience says that."
As for the future of Islam in America, Dr. Siddiqui argued that non-Muslim Americans should not fear the coming of sharia (Islamic law). "Who is superior to us? Only God. If he made the laws, then he can be unbiased." Moreover, he claimed, "If you look at the Constitution, it is a pure Islamic constitution," restricting the power of men and leaving room for the imposition of sharia.
Shpendim Nadzaku, the imam at the Rockford mosque (who hadn't yet moved to Rockford when Aaron and I visited), was called upon by the local media to condemn Shareef, and he held an open house at the mosque in the days after the arrest. The local media have presented him — correctly — as a representative of mainstream Islam. What they have not done, however, is attempt to understand what mainstream Islam means in an American context. As Dr. Siddiqui's remarks indicate, the views of mainstream Muslims are far from the views of most non-Muslim Americans. How many non-Muslims in Rockford believe that the Constitution is a pure Islamic document, and that America would benefit from adopting sharia as the law of the land? How many non-Muslims believe that the definition of terrorism should be different for Muslims than for non-Muslims?
In her Dec. 20 article on Sheik Nadzaku's open house, Geri Nikolai quoted Nadzaku as saying, "As long as justice is prevalent throughout society, at the end of the day, nothing should cause us to want to slaughter each other." On the surface, that seems a sentiment with which we can all agree. In Islam, as in the American constitutional system, justice means equal treatment before the law. For Muslims, however, the law in question is not the Constitution but sharia.
In his 1996 book "Salt of the Earth," Pope Benedict XVI (then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger) wrote that:
"The Quran is a total religious law, which regulates the whole of political and social life and insists that the whole order of life be Islamic."
"Sharia shapes society from beginning to end. In this sense, it can exploit such freedoms as our constitutions give, but it cannot be its final goal to say: Yes, now we too are a body with rights, now we are present (in society) just like the Catholics and the Protestants. In such a situation, (Islam) would not achieve a status consistent with its inner nature; it would be in alienation from itself."
Pope Benedict's understanding of this question is supported by prominent mainstream Muslims. The Rockford mosque has hosted a speaker from the Midwest chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the chief mainstream Muslim political activist group in the United States. A former chairman of CAIR, Silicon Valley entrepreneur Omar H. Ahmad, told the San Ramon Valley Herald in 1998 that:
"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Quran, the Muslim book of Scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."
CAIR, on its Web site, declares that jihad, in addition to meaning "struggle against evil inclinations within oneself," includes "struggle in the battlefield for self-defense (e.g., having a standing army for national defense), or fighting against tyranny or oppression." And Muslim scholars, such as Syed Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi, in "Muslims in the West: The Message and Mission," declare that oppression and injustice prevail whenever a society prevents Muslims (and all men) from living under Islam.
After Chronicles published my account of our visit to the Iqra School, I went on Wisconsin Public Radio to discuss the article. An angry caller accused me of misrepresenting Islam. "You said that they want to impose sharia in the United States. That's not true." When I pointed out that the remark that upset her was not mine but a quotation from Dr. Siddiqui, the caller indignantly replied, "He may have said that, but he doesn't mean it."
Pope Benedict is right: The West must engage Islam. The Muslim belief that Allah is beyond all reason is indeed a stumbling block to dialogue, but an even greater one is the condescending refusal of non-Muslims to acknowledge that faithful Muslims in America really do believe what Islam teaches.
Pertinent Links:
1) Taking Muslims at their word
2) Through a Glass, Darkly
Moslem rap:
Give me, ya-Allah, Give me Iman and victory.
Give me, ya-Allah, give me strength to set us free,
As we struggle on your path,Mujahideen
Grant us, ya-Allah, the eyes to
see your light,
And show us, ya-Allah, what is wrong and what is right
As we walk along your path, Siratul Mustaqeem . . .
The word mujahideen is jarring, especially coming out of the mouths of nine- and ten-year-old children. Zaid translates it as "people who struggle in the way of Allah," giving it a spiritual twist that initially seems appropriate, since Iman means "faith" and Siratul Mustaqeem is "the straight path" or "the path of righteousness." The next verse, however, calls to mind a more common definition:
Help us, ya-Allah, to spread this blessed deen
And help us, ya-Allah, help the Muslimeen
And help us, ya-Allah, overcome the Mushrikeen . . .
Make us, ya-Allah, fighters for your deen,
And make us, ya-Allah for ever Mumineen
And do this, ya-Allah, despite the kafireen . . .
According to the glossary of Islamic terms compiled by the International Islamic University, deen is "Usually translated as 'religion', but in fact mean[s] 'life-transaction', the transaction being between Allah and each of his created beings. The life-transaction . . . is universal. It is the way of Islam . . . "
The Muslimeen and Mumineen are Muslims, while the Mushrikeen are, literally, "idol worshippers"; in common usage, however, the latter term means "People who associate partners with Allah Ta'ala, such as the Christians, who have raised the Prophet Isa (Jesus, Son of Mary) . . . to the level of Allah." Kafireen (or kuffar) means "unbelievers."
The song comes from a tape entitled The Next Level, produced by the Muslim Youth of North America (MYNA), "an organization dedicated to promoting Islamic awareness in Muslim youth." The lyrics to their songs can be found on their website, and the tapes are available in Muslim bookstores across the United States. The second song on The Next Level is "Jihad of the Nafs," an anglicization of Jihad an-Nafs, which the Islamic glossary defines as "fighting against one's own evil wants and trying one's utmost to be a better person in the sight of Allah." But the lyrics, presented in the style and idiom of gangsta rap, leave a different impression:
This is my Jihad, Jihad of the Nafs,
Battle of the soul against Shaytan and the rest.
I got my uzi of Iman,
bazooka of Qur'an
My M-16 of my deen of Islam,
Dropping bombs on Shaytan with Islam as my main gun,
He telling me to do wrong, I say "ain't gonna have noneof that."
Grenades, yo, of Taqwa on my back,
Bayonet of regret, if I ever get trapped.
I got the Sunna of the Prophet as my fully automatic.
I've been beaten by the devil many times and I've had it. . . .
Shaytan and his friends they be actin' diabolical
Yah, they be slick in the way they be calling us.
TV, CD, even on the PC,
Shaytan and his friends, yo, they keep us busy easy
Crazy, if you think you'll win without a plan
But Allah has a plan and this plan is Islam
Hey yo, Shaytan, yo I know that you're slick,
But Islam is the bomb, and now I got some tricks . . .
...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
