*****************************************************

Subject: Islam and the Middle East pt 2  

******************************************************

Location:  Printers Row   RSVP for details

Time : 7pm to 10pm - ish

Bring drinks and snacks to share 

Thanks for all the articles people sent me. I’ve done some hacking to get them down to a reasonable size. I hope I didn’t abuse the content too much. I felt that people wanted to talk more about Islam so gave that more weight

Note that this is Steve’s last discussion as a host before he decamps to Philly, so feel free to deeply insult him and trash his place to show our full appreciation of the many evenings he has suffered us droning on well past his bedtime.

Oh and don’t forget PANtathlon 2pm Sat Sept 30^th. Not completely sure what Maria is cooking up but it sounds like fun, especially with enough alcohol added to the mix.

..and keep those topic suggestion flooding in J

General:

The articles are the basis for the discussion and reading them helps give us some common ground and focus for the discussion, especially where we would otherwise be ignorant of the issues. The discussions are not intended as debates or arguments, rather they should be a chance to explore ideas and issues in a constructive forum Feel free to bring along other stuff you've read on this, related subjects or on topics the group might be  interested in for future meetings.

 GROUND RULES:

* Temper the urge to speak with the discipline to listen and leave space for others

* Balance the desire to teach with a passion to learn

* Hear what is said and listen for what is meant

* Marry your certainties with others' possibilities

* Reserve judgment until you can claim the understanding we seek

 Any problems let me know..

847-963-1254

tysoe2@yahoo.com

 The Articles:

********************************************************************************

First a quick tour of Islam

http://www.spaceandmotion.com/religion-islam-muslim-islamic-quran.htm

Islam / Muslim Religion

From Wikipedia the free encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam

Islam is a monotheistic faith and the world's second-largest religion.

In Arabic, Islam means "submission" and is described as a Din, meaning "way of life" and/or "religion." Etymologically, it is derived from the same root as, for example, Salam meaning "peace" (also a common salutation). A more precise translation of the word Islam would be the serenity that is created by submission. The word Muslim is also related to the word Islam and means "one who surrenders" or "submits" to God.

 Islam / Islamic / Muslim Beliefs

Followers of Islam, known as Muslims, believe that God (or, in Arabic, Allah) revealed his direct word for mankind to Muhammad (c. 570–632) and other prophets, including Adam, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. Muslims assert that the main written record of revelation to mankind is the Qur'an, which they believe to be flawless, immutable and the final revelation of God. Muslims believe that some parts of the Bible and the Torah may have been misinterpreted or distorted by their followers. With that perspective they view the Qur'an as corrective of Jewish and Christian scriptures.

Muslims hold that it is essentially the same belief as that of all the messengers sent by God to mankind since Adam, with the Qur'an (the one definitive text of the Muslim faith) codifying the final revelation of God. Islam sees Judaism and Christianity as derivations of the teachings of certain of these prophets - notably Abraham - and therefore see them as fellow Abrahamic religions, and People of the Book. Islam has two primary branches of belief, based largely on a historical disagreement over the succession of authority after Muhammad's death; these are known as Sunni and Shi'ite.

 The basis of Muslim belief is found in the shahadatan ("two statements"): la ilaha illa-llahu; muhammadur-rasulu-llahi — "There is no god but God; Muhammad is the messenger of God." In order to become a Muslim, one needs to recite and believe these statements. All Muslims agree to this, although Sunnis further regard this as one of the five pillars of Islam.

There are six basic beliefs shared by all Muslims:

Belief in God, the one and only one worthy of all worship.

Belief in the Angels.

Belief in the Book (al-Quran / Koran) (sent by God).

Belief in all the Prophets and Messengers (sent by God).

Belief in the Day of Judgment (Qiyamah) and in the Resurrection.

Belief in Fate (Qadar)

The Muslim creed in English:

I believe in God; and in His Angels; and in His Scriptures; and in His Messengers; and in The Final Day; and in Fate, that Good and Evil are from God, and Resurrection after death be Truth.

I testify that there is nothing worthy of worship but God; and I testify that Muhammad is His Messenger.

Islam God / Allah

The fundamental concept in Islam is the oneness of God (tawhid). This monotheism is absolute, not relative or pluralistic in any sense of the word. God is described in Sura al-Ikhlas, (chapter 112) as follows: Say "He is God, the one, the Self-Sufficient master. He never begot, nor was begotten. There is none comparable to Him."

In Arabic, God is called Allah, a contraction of al-ilah or "the (only) god". Allah thus translates to "God" in English. The implicit usage of the definite article in Allah linguistically indicates the divine unity. In spite of the different name used for God, Muslims assert that they believe in the same deity as the Judeo-Christian religions. However, Muslims strictly disagree with the Christian theology concerning the unity of God (the doctrine of the Trinity and that Jesus is the eternal Son of God), seeing it as akin to polytheism.

"O People of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning Allah save the truth . The Messiah , Jesus son of Mary , was only a messenger of Allah , and His word which He conveyed unto Mary , and a spirit from Him . So believe in Allah and His messengers , and say not "three" . Cease! ( it is ) better for you! Allah is only One God . Far is it removed from His transcendent majesty that he should have a son . His is all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth . And Allah is sufficient as its defender." [Chapter 4 : Surah 171] 

No Muslim visual images or depictions of God exist because such artistic depictions may lead to idolatry and are thus prohibited. Moreover, many Muslims believe that God is incorporeal, rendering any two or three dimensional depictions impossible. Instead, Muslims describe God by the many divine attributes mentioned in the Qur'an, and also with the 99 names of Allah. All but one Surah (chapter) of the Qur'an begins with the phrase "In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful". These are consequently the most important divine attributes in the sense that Muslims repeat them most frequently during their ritual prayers (called salah in Arabic, and in India and Pakistan called "namaz" (a Persian word)).

Prophets of Islam: Muhammad (Mohammed)

The Quran speaks of God appointing two classes of human servants: messengers (rasul in Arabic), and prophets (nabi in Arabic and Hebrew). In general, messengers are the more elevated rank. All prophets are said to have spoken with divine authority; but only those who have been given a major revelation or message are called messenger.

Notable messengers include Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad, all belonging to a succession of men guided by God. Islam demands that a believer accept all of the Judeo-Christian prophets, making no distinction between them. In the Qur'an, 25 specific prophets are mentioned.

Mainstream Muslims regard Muhammad as the 'Last Messenger' or the 'Seal of the Prophets' based on the canon. However, there have been a number of sects whose leaders have proclaimed themselves the successors of Muhammad, perfecting and extending Islam, or, whose devotees have made such claims for their leaders. However, most Muslims remain unaffected by those claims and simply regard those said groups to be deviant.

Islamic Law

Muslims in Islamic societies have traditionally viewed Islamic law as essential to their religious outlook. For Muslims living in secular Western countries sharia ceases to be relevant as law, but remains a source of personal ethics (for example, the avoidance of pork and alcohol, and the use of Sharia-compliant banking services). The Qur'an is the foremost source of Islamic jurisprudence; the second is the Sunnah (the practices of the Prophet, as narrated in reports of his life). The Sunnah is not itself a text like the Qur'an, but is extracted by analysis of the Hadith (Arabic for "report") texts, which contain narrations of the Prophet's sayings, deeds, and actions of his companions he approved.

Islamic Religious Authority

There is no official authority who decides whether a person is accepted to, or dismissed from, the community of believers, known as the Ummah ("Family"). Islam is open to all, regardless of race, age, gender, or previous beliefs. It is enough to believe in the central beliefs of Islam. This is formally done by reciting the shahada, the statement of belief of Islam, without which a person cannot be classed a Muslim. It is enough to believe and say that you are a Muslim, and behave in a manner befitting a Muslim to be accepted into the community of Islam.

Islamic eschatology

Islamic eschatology is concerned with the Qiyamah (end of the world) and the final judgement of humanity. Like Christianity and some sects of modern Judaism, Islam teaches the bodily resurrection of the dead, the fulfillment of a divine plan for creation, and the immortality of the human soul; the righteous are rewarded with the pleasures of Jannah (Paradise), while the unrighteous are punished in Jahannam (a fiery Hell, from the Hebrew ge-hinnom or "valley of Hinnom"; usually rendered in English as Gehenna). A significant fraction of the Qur'an deals with these beliefs, with many hadith elaborating on the themes and details.

The Five Pillars of Islam

The Five Pillars of Islam is the term given to the fundamental aspects of Islam. These five pillars are the most important obligations of a Muslim under Sharia law, and which devout all Muslims will perform faithfully, because they are essential to pleasing Allah.

The Five Pillars of Islam are:

"Shahadah": The Testimony that there is none worthy of worship except God and that Muhammad is his messenger.

" Salah": Establishing of the five daily Prayers (salah).

" Zakat": The Giving of Zakaah (charity), which is one fortieth (2.5%) of the net worth of possessions kept for more than a year, with few exemptions, for every Muslim whose wealth exceeds the nisab, and 10% or 20% of the produce from agriculture. This money or produce is distributed among the poor.

" Ramadhan": Fasting from dawn to dusk in the month of Ramadan (sawm).

" Hajj": The Pilgrimage (Hajj) to Mecca during the month of Dhul Hijjah, which is compulsory once in a lifetime for one who has the ability to do it.

NOTE: For the Shi'a a sect of Islam, the Five Pillars, or more correctly translated "the principles of religion", are the five fundamental principles of Islam; no more, no less. The Shi'a sect consider the Sunni five pillars to be merely the most important obligations rather than these being the Five Pillars of Islam.

The Five Pillars of the Shi'a sect are:

The Oneness of God (tawhid).

The Justice of God ('adl).

Prophethood (nubuwwah).

The Leadership of Mankind (imamah).

The Resurrection (me'ad).

The Qur'an (Koran)

The Qur'an is the sacred book of Islam. It has also been called, in English, the Koran and the Quran. Qur'an is the currently preferred English transliteration of the Arabic original (????); it means “recitation”.

Muslims believe that the Qur'an was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad by the Angel Gabriel on numerous occasions between the years 610 and Muhammad's death in 632. In addition to memorizing his revelations, his followers are said to have written them down on parchments, stones, bones, sticks, and leaves.

Muslims believe that the Qur'an available today is the same as that revealed to Prophet Muhammad and by him to his followers, who memorized his words. Scholars accept that the version of the Qur'an used today was first compiled in writing by the third Caliph, Uthman ibn Affan, sometime between 650 and 656. He sent copies of his version to the various provinces of the new Muslim empire, and directed that all variant copies be destroyed. However, some skeptics doubt the recorded oral traditions (hadith) on which the account is based and will say only that the Qur'an must have been compiled before 750.

There are also numerous traditions, and many conflicting academic theories, as to the provenance of the verses later assembled into the Qur'an. (This is covered in greater detail in the article on the Qur'an.) Most Muslims accept the account recorded in several hadith, which state that Abu Bakr, the first caliph, ordered Zayd ibn Thabit to collect and record all the authentic verses of the Qur'an, as preserved in written form or oral tradition. Zayd's written collection, privately treasured by Muhammad's widow Hafsa bint Umar, was used by Uthman and is the basis of today's Qur'an.

Uthman's version organized the revelations, or suras, roughly in order of length, with the longest suras at the start of the Qur'an and the shortest ones at the end. Later scholars have struggled to put the suras in chronological order, and among Muslim commentators at least there is a rough consensus as to which suras were revealed in Mecca and which at Medina. Some suras (eg surat Iqra) were revealed in parts at separate times.

Because the Qur'an was first written [date uncertain] in the Hijazi, Mashq, Ma'il, and Kufic scripts, which write consonants only and do not supply the vowels, and because there were differing oral traditions of recitation, there was some disagreement as to the correct reading of many verses. Eventually scripts were developed that used "points" to indicate vowels. For hundreds of years after Uthman's recension, Muslim scholars argued as to the correct pointing and reading of Uthman's unpointed official text, (the rasm). Eventually, most commentators accepted ten variant readings (qira'at) of the Qur'an as canonical, while agreeing that the differences are minor and do not greatly affect the meaning of the text.

The form of the Qur'an most used today is the Al-Azhar text of 1923, prepared by a committee at the prestigious Cairo university of Al-Azhar.

The Qur'an early became a focus of Muslim devotion and eventually a subject of theological controversy. In the 8th century, the Mu'tazilis claimed that the Qur'an was created in time and was not eternal. Their opponents, of various schools, claimed that the Qur'an was eternal and perfect, existing in heaven before it was revealed to Muhammad. The Mu'tazili position was supported by caliph Al-Ma'mun. The caliph persecuted, tortured, and killed the anti-Mu'tazilis, but their belief eventually triumphed and is held by most Muslims of today. Only reformist or liberal Muslims are apt to take something approaching the Mu'tazili position.

Most Muslims regard the Qur'an with extreme veneration, wrapping it in a clean cloth, keeping it on a high shelf, and washing as for prayers before reading the Qur'an. Old Qur'ans are not destroyed as wastepaper, but deposited in Qur'an graveyards. The Qur'an is regarded as an infallible guide to personal piety and community life, and completely true in its history and science.

From the beginning of the faith, most Muslims believed that the Qur'an was perfect only as revealed in Arabic. Translations were the result of human effort and human fallibility, as well as lacking the inspired poetry believers find in the Qur'an. Translations are therefore only commentaries on the Qur'an, or "translations of its meaning", not the Qur'an itself.

Islam and other religions

Non-monotheistic religions

The Islamic view of non-monotheist religions differs among scholars and varies according to time and place. For example, the relationship of Islam with Hinduism and non-monotheist religions varied greatly according to the religious outlook of individual rulers. In India, the Mughal emperor Akbar, for example, was very tolerant towards Hindus, while his successor Aurangzeb was less so. This variability persists today; while fundamentalists are often less tolerant, liberal movements within Islam often try to be more open-minded.

Islam's view of Jews and Christians

The Qur'an uses the term People of the Book to include all monotheists, including Jews, Christians and Muslims. According to Islam, all nations were given a Messenger and guidance from Allah. Muslims believe that Judaism and Christianity started out with the same message as Islam, but that eventually, due to their abandonment of adherence to strict monotheism, the followers of Moses earned God's anger (by worshipping the Golden Calf, mentioned in the Biblical account of Moses, and later Ezra) and the followers of Jesus went astray (by worshipping him). "And when Allah saith : O Jesus , son of mary! Didst thou say unto mankind : Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah? he saith : Be glorified It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right . If I used to say it , then Thou knewest it . Thou knowest what is in my mind , and I know not what is in Thy mind . Lo! Thou , only Thou art the Knower of Things Hidden." [Surah 5:116]

It is popularly held by the vast majority of Muslims that the Holy Tawrat (revelation given to Moses) and the Holy Injil (revelation given to Jesus Christ) have been corrupted over time and that the present day Bible and Torah share little or no resemblance to the original message. According to Islam, Muhammad was sent during a time of spiritual darkness and once the Qur'an was finally established, all past revelations were abrogated, making the Last Testament not only for the Arab nation but for all mankind until the Day of Judgement.

Some parts of the Qur'an attribute differences between Muslims and non-Muslims to tahref-ma'any, a "corruption of the meaning" of the words. In this view, the Jewish Bible and Christian New Testament are true, but the Jews and Christians misunderstood the meaning of their own Scripture, and thus need the Qur'an to clearly understand the will of God. However, other parts of the Qur'an make clear that many Jews and Christians used deliberately altered versions of their scripture, and had altered the word of God. This belief was developed further in medieval Islamic polemics, and is a mainstream part of both Sunni and Shi'ite Islam today. This is known as the doctrine of tahref-lafzy, "the corruption of the text". Either way the Quran clearly states that the necessary information which was written in the previous scriptures can also be found in the Quran: "And We have sent down to you (O Muhammad) the Book (this Qur’aan) in truth, confirming the Scripture that came before it and Mohaymin (trustworthy in highness and a witness) over it (old Scriptures). So judge among them by what Allah has revealed" [Surah 5:48]

Historically, Islamic scholars have agreed that the Qur'an gives "People of the Book" special status, allowing those who live in Muslim lands (called dhimmi—protected people) to practice their own religions and to own property. People of the Book were not subject to certain Islamic rules, such as the prohibitions on alcohol and pork. Under the Islamic state, they were exempt from the draft, but were required to pay a tax known as jizyah, part of which went to charity and part to finance churches and synagogues. (They were, however, exempt from the zakat required of Muslims.) This agreement has in the past led to Islamic countries practicing religious toleration for Christians and Jews, although they were never accorded the full status enjoyed by Muslims.

Exclusivistic thought in Islam

One part—often seen as the largest or at least currently the most vocal—focuses on the differences takes an exclusivistic and aggressive approach to the differences between Islam and the Judeo-Christian community. Like in other faiths, this can lead to parts of the Muslim community holding beliefs like the necessity of bringing them back to the "Straight Path" by persuasion, or even force, and then acting them out.

Inclusivistic thought in Islam

Another part—often with a lower-profile, if not currently an outright minority—of Muslims focus on the similiarities and believe that people of faith in Islam, Christianity, and Judaism all serve the same God, and cite verses such as the following:

"We believe in Allah, and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and in (the Books) given to Moses, Jesus, and the prophets, from their Lord: We make no distinction between one and another among them, and to Allah do we bow our will (in Islam)." (Surat Al Imran; 3:84).

" Those with Faith, those who are Jews, and the Christians and Sabaeans, all who have Faith in Allah and the Last Day and act rightly, will have their reward with their Lord. They will feel no fear and will know no sorrow." (Surat al-Baqara; 2:62).

One verse of the Qur'an says "God forbids you not, with regards to those who fight you not for [your] faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them; for God loveth those who are just." (Qur'an, 60:8), which is interpreted as a clear admonition not to be disrespectful or unkind to non-Muslims. According to a hadith, Muhammad said to his people "The one who murders a dhimmi [non-Muslim under protection of the state] will not smell the fragrance of Paradise, even if its smell was forty years travelling distance" [Sahih Ahmed].

The growth of Islam Religion today

Islam is the second largest religion in the world. According to the World Network of Religious Futurists (http://www.wnrf.org/news/trends.html), the U.S. Center for World Mission (http://www.religioustolerance.org/growth_isl_chr.htm), and the controversial Samuel Huntington, Islam is growing faster numerically than any other religion. It is a matter of great controversy whether this is due in large part to the higher birth rates in many Islamic countries, or whether a high conversion rate may also be a factor.

The Muslim population today comprises over 1.3 billion people; estimates of Islam by country based on US State Departement figures yield a total of 1.48 billion, 22.82% of the world's population. However, only 18% of Muslims live in the Arab world; a fifth is found in Sub-Saharan Africa, about 30% in the Indian subcontinental region of Pakistan, India and Bangladesh, and the world's largest single Muslim community (within the bounds of one nation) is in Indonesia. There are also significant Muslim populations in China, Europe (especially in the Mediterranean countries), Central Asia, and Russia. There are approximately 5 million Muslims in North America. The world population is growing at about 1.10% per year, but the percentage of Muslim population is increasing by 1.4% per year, mostly due to higher birth rate of African and Asian countries. Birth rates in many Muslim countries have begun to decline, although more slowly than in other nations, which also may be a factor.

Denominations of Islam

There are a number of Islamic religious denominations, each of which has significant theological and legal differences from each other. The major branches are Sunni and Shi'a, with Sufism often considered as an extension of either Sunni or Shi'a thought. All denominations, however, follow the five pillars of Islam and believe in the six pillars of faith (mentioned earlier).

The Sunni sect of Islam comprises the majority of all Muslims (about 90%). It is broken into four similar schools of thought (madhhabs) which interpret specific pieces of Islamic practice. They are named after their founders Maliki, Shafi'i, Hanafi, and Hanbali. Each school of thought differs slightly on fiqh (thoughts on how to practise Islam) although all accept the fundamentals contained within the Holy Quran.

Shi'a Islam comprises most of the Muslims that are not counted among the Sunni. The Shi'a consist of one major school of thought known as the Jafaryia or the "Twelvers", and a few minor schools of thought, as the "Seveners" or the "Fivers" referring to the number of infallible leaders they recognise after the death of Muhammad. The term Shi'a is usually taken to be synonymous with the Jafaryia/Twelvers.

While some consider the Islamic mysticism called Sufism to constitute a separate branch, most Sufis can easily be considered Sunni or Shi'a. Sufism is the hardest to understand by non-practitioners because on first sight it seems that sufis are either of Shi'a or Sunni denomination, but it is true that some sects of Sufism can be categorised as both Sunni and Shi'a whilst others are not from either denomination. The distinction here is because the schools of thought (madhhabs) are regarding "legal" aspects of Islam, the "dos" and "don'ts", whereas Sufism deals more with perfecting the aspect of sincerity of faith, and fighting one's own ego. Other people may call themselves Sufis who may be perceived as having left Islam (or never followed Islam). There are also some very large groups or sects of Sufism that are not easily categorised as either Sunni or Shi'a, such as the Bektashi or those that can be categorised as both at the same time, like the Barelwi. Sufism is found more or less across the Islamic world, though bearing distinctive regional variations, from Senegal to Indonesia.

According to Shaikh Mahmood Shaltoot, Head of the al-Azhar University in the middle part of the 20th Century, the Ja'fari school of thought, which is also known as "al-Shi'a al- Imamiyyah al-Ithna Ashariyyah" (i.e., The Twelver Imami Shi'ites) is a school of thought that is religiously correct to follow in worship as are other Sunni schools of thought. This position was not generally accepted by mainstream Sunni scholarship, and al-Azhar itself distanced itself from this position.

Muhammad / Mohammed

Muhammad (also transliterated Mohammad, Mohammed, Muhammed, and formerly Mahomet, following the Latin) is revered by Muslims as the final prophet of God. According to his traditional Muslim biographies (called sirah in Arabic), he was born c. 570 in Mecca (or "Makkah") and died June 8, 632 in Medina (Madinah), both cities in northern Arabia. His name is Arabic for "he who is highly praised".

Pious Muslims consider that his work merely clarified and finalized the true religion, building on the work of other prophets of monotheism, and believe Islam to have existed before Muhammad.

Summary of Muhammad

Muhammad is said to have been a merchant who travelled widely. Early Muslim sources report that in 611, at about the age of 40, he experienced a vision. He described it to those close to him as a visit from the Angel Gabriel, who commanded him to memorize and recite the verses later collected as the Qur'an. He eventually expanded his mission, publicly preaching a strict monotheism and predicting a Day of Judgement for sinners and idol-worshippers — such as his tribesmen and neighbors in Mecca. He did not completely reject Judaism and Christianity, two other monotheistic faiths known to the Arabs; he only claimed to complete and perfect their teachings. He soon acquired both a following and the hatred of his neighbors. In 622 he was forced to flee Mecca and settle in Medina with his followers, where he established legal authority as leader of the first avowedly Muslim community. War between Mecca and Medina followed, in which Muhammad and his followers were eventually victorious. The military organization honed in this struggle was then set to conquering the other pagan tribes of Arabia. By the time of Mohammed's death, he had unified Arabia and launched a few expeditions to the north, towards Syria and Palestine.

Under Muhammad's immediate successors the Islamic empire expanded into Palestine, Syria, Mesopotamia, Persia, Egypt, North Africa, and Spain. Later conquests, commercial contact between Muslims and non-Muslims, and missionary activity spread his faith over much of the globe.

Muhammad Quotes

 [Allah] has revealed to me that you should adopt humility so that no one oppresses another.

Riyadh-us-Salaheen, Hadith 1589.

Allah will not be merciful to those who are not merciful to people.

Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, #473

Anyone who believes in God and the Last Day should not harm his neighbour. Anyone who believes in God and the Last Day should entertain his guest generously. And anyone who believes in God and the Last Day should say what is good or keep quiet.

Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 73, Number 47.

Avoid cruelty and injustice for, on the Day of Judgment, the same will turn into several darknesses; and guard yourselves against miserliness; for this has ruined nations who lived before you.

Riyadh-us-Salaheen, Hadith 203.

By his good character, a believer will attain the degree of one who prays during the night and fasts during the day.

Abu Dawood, Hadith 2233.

Do not turn away a poor man...even if all you can give is half a date. If you love the poor and bring them near you...God will bring you near Him on the Day of Resurrection.

Al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 1376.

(Each one) of you should save himself from the fire by giving even half of a date (in charity). And if you do not find a half date, then (by saying) a pleasant word (to your brethren).

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 2, Hadith 394.

Even as the fingers of the two hands are equal, so are human beings equal to one another. No one has any right, nor any preference to claim over another. You are brothers.

Happy is the man who avoids dissension, but how fine is the man who is afflicted and shows endurance.

Sunah of Abu Dawood, Hadith 1996.

He who has been a ruler over ten people will be brought shackled on the Day of Resurrection, until the justice (by which he ruled) loosens his chains or tyranny brings him to destruction.

Al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 1037

" 'I and the person who looks after an orphan and provides for him, will be in Paradise like this,' putting his index and middle fingers together."

Sahih Al-Bukhari 8:34. 4

It is better for a leader to make a mistake in forgiving than to make a mistake in punishing.

Al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 1011

It is better for any of you to carry a load of firewood on his own back than begging from someone else.

Riyadh-Us-Saleheen, Chapter 59, hadith 540

Religion is very easy and whoever overburdens himself in his religion will not be able to continue in that way. So you should not be extremists, but try to be near to perfection and receive the good tidings that you will be rewarded.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 38

Righteousness is good morality, and wrongdoing is that which wavers in your soul and which you dislike people finding out about.

An-Nawawi's "Forty Hadith," Hadith 27.

Seven kinds of people will be sheltered under the shade of God on the Day of Judgment...They are: a just ruler, a young man who passed his youth in the worship and service of God...one whose heart is attached to the mosque...two people who love each other for the sake of God...a man who is invited to sin...but declines, saying 'I fear God'...one who spends his charity in secret, without making a show...and one who remembers God in solitude so that his eyes overflow.

Riyadh-us-Salaheen, Hadith 376.

" '...what is the best type of Jihad [struggle].' He answered: 'Speaking truth before a tyrannical ruler.' "

Riyadh us-Saleheen Volume 1:195

" While a man was walking along a road, he became very thirsty and found a well. He lowered himself into the well, drank, and came out. Then [he saw] a dog protruding its tongue out with thirst. The man said: 'This dog has become exhausted from thirst in the same way as I.' He lowered himself into the well again and filled his shoe with water. He gave the dog some water to drink. He thanked God, and [his sins were] forgiven.' The Prophet was then asked: 'Is there a reward for us in our animals?' He said: 'There is a reward in every living thing.' "

Fiqh-us-Sunnah, Volume 3, Number 104.

*************************************************************************

A piece on Islamic feminism and western perceptions…..

http://www.afsa.org/fsj/may00/fernea.cfm

The Muslim women's movement is discovering its roots in Islam, not in imitating Western feminists. By Elizabeth Warnock Fernea

I first went to the Middle East as a bride in 1956. My new husband, Robert Fernea, was setting out to do the field research for his doctoral dissertation in social anthropology at the University of Chicago and we settled in a small southern Iraqi village. Before we left, my mother counseled me to "try to enlighten" Middle Eastern women, because, she said, they were in grave need of Western women's help. The little I knew about the Middle East at the time seemed to be in accord with my mother's opinion.

Rather than welcoming my enlightened self, though, the Muslim women of the town where we were to live pitied me. To them, I did not even come close to the local ideal of womanhood. I was childless, thin, had short hair. I couldn't cook and, since I had no gold, my parents and my husband's parents evidently did not value me. Further, my husband had to be cruel, since he had brought me all the way from America alone, without any of my female relatives for company and support. This was further indication that a beneficial marriage had not been arranged properly by my parents.

To be pitied for what I cherished -- free choice of a spouse, opportunity for education, freedom to travel -- was a humbling experience. It made me re-evaluate my view of the world of women. Yet, when, on returning to the U. S. after two years of village life, I tried to explain my new understanding of and respect for cultural differences, my mother and my old college friends looked at me in disbelief. They suggested that I was misled, perhaps even brainwashed, since they were certain that Muslim women were living in ignorance and oppression. I replied that I had no desire to live the life of Iraqi village women, but that their views of the world and ways of living in it were at least worthy of respect.

But I am still asked the same questions today that my mother and my friends asked 44 years ago. What is it about a Muslim, Middle Eastern woman that evokes such strong negative responses in the West? After all, the West is a patriarchal society, too, sanctioned by the same monotheistic belief in God the Father as Judaism and Islam, the other two Abrahamic religions. But in any Western discussion of women's condition around the world, Islam always implies a worst case scenario. Curiously, the same stereotypes are not found in Western representations of Hindu women whose official legal status falls far below that of Muslim women. When a Hindu woman marries, for instance, she is formally detached from her own family and officially becomes part of her husband's family. This means that if her husband dies, the wife has no place to go.

In contrast, Muslim women remain members of their natal families throughout their lives. Divorced or widowed women have the right to return home and be supported. Further, under Koranic law a woman has legal status as a person and can perform religious duties similar to those of a man. She has the authority to prophesy, to accept or refuse a marriage offer, to administer economic enterprises and, most importantly, to inherit property. Though her share is only half a man's share, it is property nonetheless. Although greedy male kin have not always honored these rights, they stand on the books as sacred law and may be invoked in court by women who feel they have been unjustly treated.

When I visited the courts of Cairo and Rabat in 1995 and 1996, I met women and their lawyers who crowded the halls waiting to argue their cases to achieve what they perceived to be their just rights. Some observers have recently suggested that the outrage against Islam in the Christian medieval world had much to do with the revolutionary -- for the time -- Muslim pronouncements about women. What kind of religion would allow women to inherit? According to medieval thought, women were not capable of handling money. Economic rights like inheritance were not granted to women in England until the Married Women's Property Act in the mid-19th century. Until 1970, in some states in America, daughters still did not automatically inherit, particularly if valuable assets like farmland were at stake. Unless the father specifically designated his daughter as heir, and if there no brothers, the land passed to the nearest male relative. Muslim women have had better rights since 632 AD.

Today, Muslim women are exercising economic and other prerogatives, moving ahead in personal and professional ways that would have been totally improbable a half century ago. Women of all social classes are moving into the labor force, into schools and universities and into the mosques, banks and courts. Scores of academic books, articles and conferences held in the Western world testify to this progress. Yet despite these changes, I keep being asked the same stereotyped questions by lay, educated Westerners. Why? The answer requires digging deeper into history.

The Middle East has always constituted an exotic "other" for the West. When Europe was still in the process of developing from a backward economy and a group of warring states, the Islamic world was a center of culture, arts, sciences and technology. A source of silks and spices, the Eastern world became for the West a fabled land of enchantment, as well as one of hidden, erotic women. Historically, the Western relationship with the Middle East has been complicated not only by these exotic images, but by religious differences which go back to the founding of Islam in the 7th century. The Prophet Muhammad saw his new belief system as arising out of Judaism and Christianity, and even termed Jews and Christians "People of the Book," that is, those with the same original beliefs. The Christian hierarchy, however, immediately labeled Islam heresy. By the 11th century, Christians mounted the Crusades, a series of wars to reclaim the Holy Land from heretical peoples. Even in 1917, the Crusades were alive in the mind of British Gen. Edmund Allenby, who is reported to have shouted as he entered Jerusalem during the Palestinian campaign in World War I: "Saladin! Saladin! Sultan of Islam! We have returned!"

Odalisques and Slaves

Given this historical competition and enmity, is it any wonder that the West continues to stereotype the East? Muslim women have been doubly stereotyped. Early chronicles, novels, poems, plays and travel accounts characterize the Muslim woman as "hidden," but also an odalisque, a very sexy lady, lightly clad and much bejeweled, reclining provocatively on a chaise longue while being fanned by slaves with ostrich feather fans.

But, by the 19th century, with the Industrial Revolution and the onset of imperialism and colonialism, different images of Muslim women began to emerge from Western women's observations. The new image was that of a combination household slave and baby machine, a pathetic creature.

Hidden or Protected?

I, too, held such views, until I came to know Middle Eastern Muslim women as friends and learned about the diversity of their lives. For there is no single typical Muslim woman, any more than there is a single Christian, Jewish, Buddhist or Hindu woman. Muslim women's lives -- like Muslim men's lives -- differ depending on their social class, economic means, their rural or urban roots, their family position, and their interpretation and practice of their religion. There is no central authority that dictates to all Muslims what is and what is not religiously sanctioned behavior. Each group within the larger Umma, or community of Muslims, regulates its own behavior, according to the Koran and the sayings and traditions known as hadiths. But any given group also uses its traditions and social customs to interpret the Koran. Such interpretations are offered by jurists educated in one of six schools of Koranic law -- four under the Sunni and two under the Shia. For example, Mut'a, or "temporary marriage," (a couple signs a contract to be married for a specific amount of time) is allowed by the Shia, but forbidden by the Sunnis.

Proper woman's dress is also subject to diverse interpretation. Koranic verses suggest -- as do Biblical verses -- that women should be modest and cover their beauty before strangers. Does that mean complete cover, as in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan? Or partial cover, such as a long, loose dress and headscarf? Or something in between?

The contemporary Islamic women's movement, then, must be viewed in relation to cultural and religious values, rather than in the context of modern, Western, feminist stereotypes. Islam enjoins both men and women to marry and have children. In this way, both become mature persons and complete Muslims. In Islam, sex within the bounds of marriage is to be enjoyed as one of the pleasures of this world, a view closer to Judaism than to Christianity. In contrast, Christians have always celebrated the elevation of the spirit and the suppression of the flesh.

Muslim women are searching their own traditions for the means to achieve gender justice, however, rather than trying to be "like us." One of the principal avenues of their struggle is the arena of religion. This may perplex the average Westerner, who does not see religion and women's liberation on the same page. Certainly the West has believed that church and state must be separated before democracy can develop. But in Islamic society, no such division has ever taken place. Since religion equals power, Muslim women's move to work for gender justice through the existing power structure seems a reasonable and advantageous decision.

To the average Westerner, however, religious Islam does not seem at all reasonable. The term conjures up media photos of women wearing veils, modest long dresses or headscarves. To see women on the streets and in their places of work in "Islamic dress" only proves what was never doubted: that Muslim women are dominated by men and forced to look unattractive by husbands and fathers. But the reality behind the image is complex and varies from place to place. In Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan state law obliges women to dress in this fashion. But that is not the case in Egypt, Morocco or most other Middle Eastern countries. In Tunisia, the veil is forbidden. In Turkey, it is a source of controversy, as secular feminists march against its use and religious women march for their freedom to wear it. Yet, in Western minds the "cover" is an indication of oppression. Perhaps that assumption comes from the west's own experience that religious states and societies may be oppressive.

Gender Justice

Many Muslim women are finding that religious affiliation is often more freeing than restricting. A woman wearing hijab, modest dress, is able to move more easily in crowded streets and can expect respect rather than harassment in the work place. Westerners like Gustave Flaubert viewed Islamic society as charged with eroticism; men of the society certainly viewed women as either sexual objects or mother figures. But as more and more Muslim women become religiously identified and objects of public respect more than sexual desire, that is changing. Islamic dress also carries authority with it. A growing group of highly educated, religious women see themselves as engaged in a new effort to use their education to, as they say, look deep into the spirit of the Koran and find there the gender justice they believe was the original intent of the Prophet Mohammed. Hundreds of women's groups -- with more than 300 in Cairo alone -- have sprung up all over the Middle East. They have been formed not only as secular consciousness-raising groups, but also as Koranic study groups. Thus women have become today not only the subjects of intense religious debate, but also participants in that discourse. In the past, men interpreted the Koranic verses and the hadiths that described women's rights. Women themselves are now arguing for new evaluations of those older interpretations -- and supporting their arguments with evidence from the sacred texts.

In Egypt, which has a literacy rate of 50 percent, half the students in universities are women. According to UNESCO comparative surveys, in 1959 in Morocco, three years after independence, only 2,500 men and women were enrolled in university programs. By 1997 the total was more than 250,000 students; half were women. In Saudi Arabia, literacy rates for women have climbed from two percent in 1970 to 48 percent in 1990.

Consciousness Raising

What, then, if they don't want to be "like us," do Middle Eastern women want? Equal pay for equal work is the law in many Middle Eastern countries, though it is not always implemented. Egyptian factories employing more than 100 women are required to provide free childcare. Maternity leave, which is justified as better for the family, is taken for granted in professional jobs. Abortion is more or less accepted, if it is seen as better for the family or for the mother. Middle Eastern women do not seem interested in destroying the family structure, but they do want to equalize their position in it. Hence the call for equal access to divorce, equal access to child custody, equal inheritance and an end to polygamy. These issues are seldom discussed publicly in Saudi Arabia, but Moroccan women campaigned successfully in 1994 to partially improve child custody laws. In the past, custody automatically went to fathers, but now mothers receive custody, at least until they remarry.

Women in Egypt recently celebrated a great triumph: the passage by the People's Assembly of khula, or consensual divorce. Women are now free to ask for and get a divorce if they are willing to return their dowries; the law was justified on religious grounds.

Western feminists may rightly ask about the incidence of honor crimes (whereby a brother may kill a sister who has committed adultery to uphold the family honor), female genital mutilation and the total suppression of women by the Taliban government in Afghanistan. It is important to note that these practices are based on local social mores, rather than on Islam. The difference today, I believe, is that women are no longer content to accept the status quo or worse, but are actively taking steps against these crimes.

Certainly, women of any society will see women of another society through the prison of their own values and stereotypes.

According to psychologists, deep stereotypes take longer to disappear than superficial ones, because they are based on gut instinct and unexamined emotional reactions. For this reason, the West has clung to stereotypes long associated with Islam. As descendants of the philosophers of the Age of Reason, we should know better.

************************************************************************

Sharia law how it is implemented and can it coexist with democracy?

How have various Muslim countries applied sharia?

Sharia, or Islamic law, influences the legal code in most Islamic countries, but the extent of its impact varies widely. Avowedly secular Turkey is at one extreme. It doesn't base its laws on the Quran, and some government-imposed rules--such as a ban on women's veils--are contrary to practices often understood as Islamic. At the devout end of the spectrum are the Islamic Republic of Iran, where mullahs are the ultimate authority, and Saudi Arabia, a monarchy where the Quran is considered the constitution. In 1959, Iraq modified its sharia-based family law system and became one of the Middle East's least religious states. Whether sharia should be more strictly applied in post-Saddam Hussein Iraq is one of the most divisive issues facing the transitional government.

What is sharia?

Literally, it means "path," or "path to water," says Clark Lombardi, an expert on Islamic law at the University of Washington's School of Law. In its religious sense, it means God's law--the body of commands that, if followed, will provide the path to salvation. According to Islamic teaching, sharia is revealed in divine signs that must be interpreted by humans. The law is derived from four main sources:

the Quran, Islam's holy book, considered the literal word of God;

the hadith, or record of the actions and sayings of the Prophet Mohammed, whose life is to be emulated;

ijma, the consensus of Islamic scholars; and

qiyas, a kind of reasoning that uses analogies to apply precedents established by the holy texts to problems not covered by them, for example, a ban on narcotics based on the Quranic injunction against wine-drinking.

Introduction: Many Islamic fundamentalists and jihadists have as their ultimate goal the establishment of Muslim states where strict, traditional Sharia law is the law of the land, enforced without exception. They apply this goal not only to the Middle East, but to as broad a geographical area as possible. Some reformers in existing Muslim countries have resisted absolute application of Sharia, but many are losing the battle in the face of increasing extremism. Western nations want democracy to take hold in the Middle East, but do not want to interfere in religious matters. Yet, is this possible? Is democracy compatible with the tenets of Sharia?

Contemporary practice of Sharia law

There is tremendous variance in the interpretation and implementation of Islamic law in Muslim societies today. Liberal movements within Islam have questioned the relevance and applicability of Sharia from a variety of perspectives. Several of the countries with the largest Muslim populations, including Indonesia, Bangladesh and Pakistan, have largely secular constitutions and laws, with only a few Islamic provisions in family law. Turkey has a constitution that is strongly secular. Most countries of the Middle East and North Africa maintain a dual system of secular courts and religious courts, in which the religious courts mainly regulate marriage and inheritance. Saudi Arabia and Iran maintain religious courts for all aspects of jurisprudence, and religious police assert social compliance. Laws derived from Sharia are also applied in Afghanistan, Libya and Sudan. In practice the new Sharia courts in Nigeria have most often meant the reintroduction of harsh punishments without respecting the much tougher rules of evidence and testimony. The punishments include amputation of one/both hands for theft, and stoning for adultery and apostasy.

Many consider the punishments prescribed by Sharia as being barbaric and cruel; Islamic scholars argue that, if implemented properly, the punishments serve as a deterrent to crime. In international media, practices by countries applying Islamic law have fallen under considerable criticism at times. This is particularly the case when the sentence carried out is seen to greatly tilt away from established standards of international human rights.

Laws and practices under traditional Sharia

Marriage laws:

A Muslim may not marry or remain married to an unbeliever of either sex.

The Muslim man who is not currently a fornicator can only marry a Muslim woman who is not currently a fornicatress or a chaste woman from the “people of the book” (non-Muslims).

The Muslim fornicator can only marry a Muslim fornicatress.

The number of wives is limited to four; the number of owned slaves with whom the Muslim master may have sex is unlimited even if he is single.

The Muslim woman who is not currently a fornicatress can only marry a Muslim man who is not currently a fornicator.

The Muslim fornicatress can only marry a Muslim fornicator.

The woman cannot marry without the consent of her guardian. If she marries, her husband becomes her new guardian.

The guardian may choose to marry the virgin without asking her consent, however, she can oppose the marriage and then it is cancelled [Note: I could not find a clarification of this.]

The guardian cannot marry the divorced woman or the widow if she didn't ask to be married.

The number of husbands is limited to one; the Muslim mistress cannot have sex with her slaves.

Divorce laws:

The husband can divorce his wife whenever he wants; if the marriage is consumed, the divorced woman has to stay three months at the man's house before having the authorization to leave. The man has the ability to retract by having sex within these three months.

The woman who desires to be divorced needs the consent of her husband.

Under certain circumstances, the wife may ask the judge to separate the couple.

If a man divorces his wife three times, he can no longer marry her again unless she marries with another man and then

Theft:

In accordance with the Qur’an and several hadith, theft is punished by imprisonment or amputation of hands or feet, depending on the number of times it was committed.

Dietary laws:

Sharia dictates that Muslims may only eat meat that has been slaughtered in the name of God and meets stringent dietary requirements. Such meat is called hal?l, or "lawful". Islamic law prohibits a Muslim from eating pork, and most juridical opinions also hold monkey, dog, cat, carnivores and several other types of animal as har?m (prohibited). For the meat of an animal to be hal?l it must be one of the declared hal?l species, and the animal may not be killed by excessively cruel or painful means. The traditional means of slaughter is by slicing open the jugular veins at the neck, resulting in quick blood loss; a state of shock and unconsciousness is induced, and death soon follows through cardiac arrest.

According to the Qur'an, the animal does not have to be slaughtered by a Muslim, but may be slaughtered by a Jew or a Christian (People of the Book) as long as it meets their strict dietary laws. Thus, most Muslims will accept kosher meat as hal?l.

The role of women under Sharia:

Islam does not prohibit women from working, but emphasizes the importance of housekeeping and caring for the families of both parents.

Islam has no clergy, but women may become religious scholars. In practice, it is much more common for men to be scholars than women. Many interpretations of Islamic law hold that women may not have prominent jobs, and thus are forbidden from working in the government. This has been a mainstream view in many Muslim nations in the last century, despite the example of Muhammad's wife Aisha, who both took part in politics and was a major authority on hadith.

Dress codes:

The Qur'an also places a dress code upon its followers. "Say to the believing men to lower their gaze and preserve their modesty, it will make for greater purity for them and Allah is well aware of all that they do." For women, it emphasizes modesty. Allah says in the Qur'an, "And say to the believing women that they cast down their looks and guard their private parts and do not display their ornaments except what appears thereof, and let them wear their khum?r over their bosoms, and not display their ornaments except to their husbands or their fathers, or their sons,  . . ."  Men have a dress code which is more relaxed: the loins must be covered from knee to waist. The rationale given for these rules is that men and women are not to be viewed as sexual objects. Men keep their guard up and women protect themselves. In theory, should either one fail, the other prevents the society from falling into fitna (temptation, discord).

Some view Islamic women as being oppressed because of the required dress codes. However, in more moderate nations where these dress codes are not obligatory, there are still many Muslim women who practice it. Some choose to wear such clothes of their own free will because they believe it is the will of Allah, others due to community and social pressures.

One of the garments some women wear is the hij?b (of which the headscarf is one component). Hij?b means to cover the head as well as the body.

Domestic punishments:

According to most interpretations, authorization for the husband to physically discipline disobedient wives is given in the Qur'an. First, admonishment is verbal, and secondly a period of refraining from intimate relations. Finally, if the husband deems the situation appropriate, he may hit her:

"Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more [strength] than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them [first], [Next], refuse to share their beds, [And last] beat them [lightly]; but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means [of annoyance]: For Allah is Most High, great [above you all]."

The medieval jurist ash-Shafi'i, founder of one of the main schools of fiqh, commented on this verse that "hitting is permitted, but not hitting is preferable."

According to Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, head of the European Council for Fatwa and Research:

"If the husband senses that feelings of disobedience and rebelliousness are rising against him in his wife, he should try his best to rectify her attitude by kind words, gentle persuasion and reasoning with her. If this is not helpful, he should sleep apart from her, trying to awaken her agreeable feminine nature so that serenity may be restored, and she may respond to him in a harmonious fashion. If this approach fails, it is permissible for him to beat her lightly with his hands, avoiding her face and other sensitive parts. In no case should he resort to using a stick or any other instrument that might cause pain and injury. Rather, this 'beating' should be of the kind the Prophet (peace be on him) once mentioned to a disobedient maid-servant, when he said 'If it were not for the fear of retaliation on the Day of Resurrection, I would have beaten you with this miswak (tooth-cleaning twig)'.

 Quran-24:2 "The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication—flog each of them with hundred stripes: Let no compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by God, if ye believe in God and the last day."

Quran-17:32 "Nor come nigh to adultery: for it is a shameful (deed)) and an evil, opening the road (to other evils)."

Sahi Muslim No. 4206: "A woman came to the prophet and asked for purification by seeking punishment. He told her to go away and seek God's forgiveness. She persisted four times and admitted she was pregnant. He told her to wait until she had given birth. Then he said that the Muslim community should wait until she had weaned her child. When the day arrived for the child to take solid food, Muhammad handed the child over to the community. And when he had given command over her and she was put in a hole up to her breast, he ordered the people to stone her. Khalid b. al-Walid came forward with a stone which he threw at her head, and when the blood spurted on her face he cursed her."

Circumcision:

Male circumcision involves the removal of the foreskin and is customary in most Muslim communities. It is performed at different ages in different cultures.

Female circumcision is not part of mainstream Islam. It is not practiced in Maghreb countries and most of Asia, but is performed by Muslims and non-Muslims alike across East Africa and the Nile Valley, as well as parts of the Arabian peninsula and Southeast Asia. In both areas, the custom predates Islam. Many African Muslims believe that female circumcision is required by Islam, but a large number of Muslims believe this practice has no basis in Islam. Nevertheless it is justified on religious grounds by Muslims who practice it, mostly in parts of Africa. The use of the term 'female circumcision' is highly confusing, as the practice ranges from a mild superficial cut that does not reduce any physiological function to various forms of partial or even complete removal of female genital organs. In certain countries, this is accompanied by reducing the genital opening.

Muslim apostates:

In most interpretations of Sharia, conversion by Muslims to other religions is forbidden and is termed apostasy. Muslim theology equates apostasy to treason, and in most interpretations of Sharia, the penalty for apostasy is death.

Homosexuality and unmarried sex:

in most interpretations of Sharia, the death penalty is applied for homosexual acts. According to the opinions of scholars, acceptable means of performing the execution included burning, throwing from tall buildings, and stoning. Death by stoning is also the penalty for adultery, while lashing with 100 stripes is usually the legal penalty applied for fornication when the guilty parties are not married.

Freedom of speech:

Sharia does not allow freedom of blasphemy against the prophet Muhammad.

The Qur'an says that Allah curses the one who harms the Prophet in this world and He connected harm of Himself to harm of the Prophet. There is no dispute that anyone who curses Allah is categorized as an unbeliever, and the judgment of the unbeliever is that he is killed.

Sharia, democracy, and human rights:

In 1998, the Turkish Constitutional Court banned and dissolved Turkey's Refah Party on the grounds that the "rules of sharia", which Refah sought to introduce, "were incompatible with the democratic regime," pointing up that "Democracy is the antithesis of sharia." On appeal by Refah, the European Court of Human Rights determined that "sharia is incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy." It was determined that Refah's sharia would "do away with the State's role as the guarantor of individual rights and freedoms" and "infringe the principle of non-discrimination between individuals as regards their enjoyment of public freedoms, which is one of the fundamental principles of democracy". It was further ruled that “Principles such as pluralism in the political sphere or the constant evolution of public freedoms have no place in it. […] It is difficult to declare one’s respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia, which clearly diverges from Convention values, particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervenes in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts.”   

On the other side, legal scholar L. Ali Khan determines that “constitutional orders founded on the principles of Sharia are fully compatible with democracy, provided that religious minorities are protected and the incumbent Islamic leadership remains committed to the right to recall". However, Christian Pippan argues, this contradicts the political reality in most Islamic states. "While constitutional arrangements to ensure that political authority is exercised within the boundaries of Sharia vary greatly among those nations", most existing models of political Islam have so far grossly failed to accept any meaningful political competition of the kind that Khan himself has identified as essential for even a limited conception of democracy. Khan, writes Pippan, dismisses verdicts as from the European Court of Human Rights or the Turkish Constitutional Court "as an expression of purely national or regional preferences."

Several major, predominantly Muslim countries criticized the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) for its perceived failure to take into account the cultural and religious context of non-Western countries. Iran claimed that the UDHR was "a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition", which could not be implemented by Muslims without trespassing the Islamic law. Therefore the Organization of the Islamic Conference adopted the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which diverges from the UDHR substantially, affirming Sharia as the sole source of human rights. This Declaration became severely criticized by the International Commission of Jurists for allegedly gravely threatening the inter-cultural consensus, introducing intolerable discrimination against both non-Muslims and women, the restrictive character in regard to fundamental rights and freedoms, and attacking the integrity and dignity of the human being.

From the Council on Foreign Relations:

http://www.cfr.org/publication/8034/:

How does sharia become part of the law of modern Islamic states?

Through three main routes:

The constitution: Many Islamic countries acknowledge Islamic law in their constitutions by making Islam the official religion of the country or by stating that sharia is a source—or the only source--of the nation's laws. For example, Article II of the 1980 Egyptian constitution states that Islam is the religion of the state and "Islamic jurisprudence is the principal source of legislation." Iraq's interim constitution, passed under the U.S.-led occupation, makes Islam "a source of legislation" and stipulates that no law may "contradict the universally agreed tenets of Islam." The 1992 Basic Law of Saudi Arabia states that the nation's constitution consists of the Quran and the sunna, the actions and sayings of the prophet as recorded in the hadith. Article IV of the Iranian constitution states that “all civil, penal, financial, economic, administrative, cultural, military, political, and other laws and regulations must be based on Islamic criteria."

National law: Sharia has also been incorporated into Islamic national legal codes by decree or legislation. Depending on the country, sharia courts that oversee marriage and other personal law matters are headed either by a secular judge or by an Islamic judge called a qadi. In Saudi Arabia and Iran, supreme religious councils dictate how Islamic law is applied and, to a large extent, have veto power over legislation. In mixed religious-secular systems, such as in Egypt, sharia personal law courts are integrated into a Western-based legal system, and a secular supreme court has the final say, Brown says.

Sub-national law: Some religiously and ethnically diverse nations that used a federal governmental model--including Indonesia, Malaysia, and Nigeria--allow states or provinces the option of applying aspects of sharia.

How is sharia applied to banking and finance laws?

Islamic banking and finance is a rapidly expanding industry that seeks to harmonize modern business practices and traditional religious norms. Classical sharia prohibits riba, the charging of interest. It also condemns excessive profits and requires Muslims to invest only in ventures that are consistent with Islamic principles; for example, investing in a brewery or casino is forbidden. The Islamic finance industry, with estimated assets of $200 billion to $300 billion, represents a small chunk of the global marketplace, but is "already playing a significant role in the financial systems in the Middle East," said John B. Taylor, U.S. under secretary of the Treasury, in a 2004 address. In 2002, eight Muslim countries--Malaysia, Indonesia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Sudan, Bahrain, and Kuwait--launched a new organization, the Services Board Islamic Financial, to set common standards for Islamic banking.

How does sharia influence modern criminal law?

Many Islamic nations--such as Jordan, Kuwait, Pakistan, and Yemen--have certain criminal laws that reflect traditional Islamic practice, banning Muslims, for example, from drinking or selling alcohol. Enforcement of these laws is often spotty, and non-Muslims are generally exempted. The majority of Islamic nations no longer apply the traditional corporal punishments for violations of specific Quranic criminal laws. These punishments include flogging, amputation, and stoning.

Are non-Muslims bound by personal status sharia courts?

Generally speaking, no. Minorities in Muslim nations are generally governed under separate personal-status laws reflecting their own traditions, experts say. In Egypt, for example, Coptic Christians marry under Christian law, and foreigners marry under the laws of their countries of origin, Brown says. Criminal law applies to both foreigners and citizens.

--by Sharon Otterman, associate director, cfr.org

***************************************************************************

If education helps determine the future what is happening in the Arab World

Education for All in the Arab World: Past, Present and Future - Meeting of Arab Education Ministers on Education for All, Beirut, Lebanon  - Edited

An important basis for the blossoming of the Arab world was the statement of the the prophet Muhammad himself when he said that: “it is the duty of every Muslim man and woman to seek education”. The prophet founded mosque schools himself and under his influence Arabs pursued knowledge for its own sake. The use of Arabic, the language of the Koran, spread with Islam and gave a common means of communication to people over a vast area.

The Arabs translated and preserved teachings from Greece, India and Persia and from these texts a mass revolution in education began during the Abbasid dynasty (750?1258AD) which we might compare to the campaign for EFA today. Mosque schools were open to rich and poor and to men and women alike. Although lessons on the Koran and hadith (the science of tradition) were restricted to Muslims, non, Muslims could attend lessons in other subjects such as jurisprudence, philology, poetry and rhetoric.

Today, to many outside the Arab world, the term madrasa (which means place of learning) evokes a narrow, even reactionary, education focused solely on the Koran. History tells a different story. As particular madrasas grew and attracted scholars from all over the Arab empire the number of disciplines grew. Teachers received good salaries and scholarships were available to students. Funds came from both government and private sources.

In a phenomenon that was a precursor to the movement of scholars between the universities of medieval Europe, travelling from city to city in search of knowledge was a common practice in the early centuries of Islam. Academies built up impressive collections of books and knowledge was freely shared. As Arab influence spread to Spain and beyond, knowledge transfer based on Arab learning and scholarship helped to advance education in Europe, adding new disciplines to the traditional seven liberal arts, and introducing empirical methods to research.

Present weaknesses

This short reminder of history shows how ironic it is that Arabs themselves now identify a knowledge deficit as one of their major weaknesses at the beginning of the 21st century. A thousand years ago the Arabs did not simply lead in making discoveries and codifing knowledge, they also drove the development of the scientific method that became the basis of civilisation all over the world.

According to the UNDP’s Arab Human Development Report 2002, which has been a wake-up call for all of us, The great weaknesses of the Arab world are the lack of freedom, the lack of knowledge and the lack of women’s empowerment. Compare this to the intellectual effervescence of this region a thousand years ago, an effervescence which drove forward the development of knowledge in a wide range of practical and more theoretical areas. Compare this to the important role that women played in this opening up and communication of knowledge.

It seems to me that the great difference between today’s campaign for education for all in the Arab region, as compared to some other parts of the world, is that here we are talking about the recovery of a great tradition that has been lost. In other parts of the world we are trying to build the habit of education from scratch.

First, there is poverty and its corollary of unemployment. About one in five Arabs live on less than two dollars a day and economic growth at an annual 0.5% is dismal. Unless growth can be accelerated, the current figure of 12 million unemployed could rise to 25 million by 2010.

Second, the global trend of democratisation has had little impact in the Arab region, making for frustrated populations.

Third, freedom of expression and freedom of association are very limited, exacerbating the frustrations.

Fourth, more than half the Arab women are illiterate with the result that much that goes on in contemporary life passes them by.

Fifth and related to this, women’s political and economic participation remains the lowest in the world (with only 3.5% of all seats in parliaments).

Sixth, and a symbol of this lack of engagement with the modern world, only 1.2% of the population uses a PC and 0.6% of the population uses the Internet.

In the Arab world society is likely to become more market oriented, which requires the strengthening of education as a vehicle for social progress. At present too many Arab school systems are neither adapted to their surrounding socio?economic system, nor geared to promote social equity.

Arab cooperation is also a key to development in general and the advancement of education in particular. Islam carried the Arabic language to a large region, which should now take full advantage of the asset of a common language and recover some of the pan?Arab spirit that helped to make the great era of Arab intellectual achievement so dynamic.

One important reason .. for education ..is that this region has the highest proportion of young people in the world. Since nearly 40% of the Arabs are under 14, it is estimated that the Arab population will number 400 million in the third decade of this century. However, despite some positive achievements, the education systems in the region remain inadequately prepared to meet the challenges to be faced in the coming years. While Arab countries spend a considerable proportion of GDP on education, it doesn’t yield quality education.

Many international reports and conferences recommend that the Arab countries should emphasize education and should revamp their present educational systems and skill development institutions. There are major gaps in the quality of education, in maintaining a proper balance between secondary and tertiary education and between science, technology and other fields.

Note first that of the 28 countries judged by the 2002 Report as being seriously at risk of not achieving the three quantifiable EFA goals, five countries are from the Arab States.

Second, at the other end of the scale, note that only four out of the 83 countries judged to have a high chance of achieving or having achieved all three goals are from the Arab States.

To look now at another Dakar goal, namely the expansion of early childhood education, you can see that despite great improvement in pre-primary education, early childhood care and education are still a luxury for nearly all children. Average gross enrolment ratio for the Arab region is as low as 15.8%, while the average for all developing countries is 30.9% and the world average is 46.7%. Particularly low values are found in Algeria, Djibouti, Iraq, Libya, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Yemen where the gross enrolment ratio is less than 10 or even 5%. In countries such as Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco and the United Arab Emirates, the figure is above 50%.

Moving on to primary level, it is good to report that enrolment at primary level grew by a healthy 17% (from 30.5 to 35.7 million) between 1990 and 2000, but the Arab region still has one of the lowest net enrolment ratios in all developing regions. About one fifth of eligible children, which means more than 7 million kids, are out-of-school: 60% of them are girls.

The Arab region, along with South and West Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, has the world’s biggest gender disparities at primary level. However, once girls have access to school they do as well or better than boys. Girls repeat less than boys and survival rates to grade 5 are higher for girls than for boys. This is reflected at the secondary education level, which has expanded from a gross enrolment ratio of 49% in 1990 to almost 70% in 2000. As seen in this slide, there are more girls than boys on this level. Girls’ participation in secondary education increased during the 1990s, with strong gains in Algeria, Mauritania and Tunisia. But large disparities in favour of boys remain in Djibouti, Iraq and Morocco.

Looking now at literacy, the Arab region has some of the world’s lowest adult literacy rates, with only 60% of the region’s population of 15 and over able to read and to write in 2000, well below the world average of 80% and the developing country average of 73.6%. Gender disparity in literacy is severe. Women account for nearly two-thirds of the region’s illiterates, a figure not expected to change much by 2015. Gender gaps are particularly large in Algeria, Djibouti, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia and Yemen.

Despite the challenges that the region is facing in achieving quality education for all, there is also good news to report. Governments in the Arab region show a strong economic and political commitment to education. The international community also pays special attention to the region.

***********************************************************************************

Finally a piece on the next unruly nation in our sights

http://www.campaigniran.org/casmii/page/p/THE-IRAN-CRISIS-Facts-vs.-Fiction

THE IRAN CRISIS: Facts vs. Fiction (Editted)

By Massy Homayouni, 28 June 2006 (source: CASMII)

New York: On June 21st, 2006 Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran (CASMII) hosted a panel discussion in New York City

The panelists included a number of distinguished professors of Middle Eastern

So what is Iran all about - Iran that wants to develop nuclear weapons? Iran the scourge? Iran the Axis of Evil? Iran the blot upon the landscape of the world? Or Iran the tremendous possibility for peace across the world, the conceivable solution to the many things that the West finds most difficult.

The panelists spoke about all elements of importance from the human element - who are the Iranians? What are they all about? How do they think? To the Nuclear issue - does Iran intend on developing nuclear weapons? Is Iran a threat to International Peace? Has Iran violated the NPT? Has Iran clandestinely hidden its nuclear program for over 18 years from the IAEA and the rest of the world? Why does one of the largest producers of oil in the world need nuclear energy? To - US-Iran crisis and the politics of oil hegemony.

Dr. Nakhai discussed Iran's nuclear program from its inception to date. He was quick to point out that Iran was one of the earliest signatories to the NPT in 1968 during the reign of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Dr. Nakhai discussed the hypocrisy and double standards of the Bush Administration. It was the U.S. Government during President Ford's Administration who encouraged, assisted, and pushed for the Iranian nuclear program. In fact, the same individuals who under President Ford, namely Mr. Cheney, Mr. Rumsfeld and Mr. Wolfowitz, insisted that Iran needs to have nuclear energy for its growing population are the same individuals who under the Bush Administration are stating that Iran should not even be allowed to obtain the "knowledge" let alone develop nuclear energy.

…it is of critical importance for countries to develop nuclear energy, just like the U.S., Great Britain, France and many of the other countries of the world are doing. So why should Iran be singled out?

In response to Iran's nuclear program, Dr.Nakhai indicated that after 2000 man-hours of inspection by the IAEA, and some with only two hours of advance notice, the IAEA has found absolutely no evidence of diversion of any material towards a nuclear weapons program. Iran has undergone the most intrusive inspections of its program by the IAEA. It has allowed the IAEA to go any where and see anything, including it's sensitive military facilities, which it had no obligation to do, and in fact no other country will allow site inspections of their military facilities. Iran has followed through with the Additional Protocol, though it has not yet been ratified by Iran's Parliament. The IAEA has found nothing! These measures were all intended as confidence building measures by Iran.

In addition for over two and half years Iran voluntarily suspended its nuclear enrichment while it was in the midst of negotiations with the EU-3 and waiting to receive the famous incentive package. When the EU-3 finally provided their thirty five-page "package of incentives", it was nothing more than a lot of words, promises but nothing else. At such, time, when Iran realized that the EU-3 under pressure from the US was just stalling, Iran finally decided to resume its uranium enrichment.

With respect to the question that the Islamic Republic has been clandestinely developing its nuclear program for over 18 years without notifying the IAEA. Dr. Nakhai indicated that this is another false statement. As one of the earliest signatories to the NPT, Iran had no obligation to notify the IAEA of any facility until 180 days prior to introducing fissile material into the site. Something, which Iran had not done. This agreement was amended sometimes in the early 1990s for new signatories to the NPT.

Dr.Nakhai further described that due to the technical nature of Iran's nuclear program in comparison to that of Israel's, it would be impossible for Iran to hide any attempts of developing a nuclear weapons program. Such a program could be easily detected by the IAEA and satellite images.

1. The Iranian reactors yield the wrong kind of plutonium for making bombs.

2. The spent fuel pins in the Iranian reactor would be too dangerous to handle for weapons manufacture. Any attempt to divert fuel from the Iranian plant will be easily detectable

Just like there are many different kinds of nuclear reactors, there are different forms of plutonium, distinctions that are never made in public discussions. There are two different types of reactors, heavy water or graphite-moderated reactors; and pressurized, or "light water" reactors. The Dimona nuclear power plant in Israel is an example of the former. The Bushehr plant is the latter.

The Israeli plant is ideal for yielding the desirable isotope of plutonium, while the Iranian plant will produce plutonium, but the wrong kind. It will produce the heavier isotope - almost impossible to use in making bombs.

Another crucial factor in extracting weapons grade plutonium is the type of reactor and the mode that it operates. The Israeli plant can be refueled on line, without shutting down. Therefore, high-grade plutonium can be obtained covertly and continuously. In the Iranian plant, the entire reactor will have to be shut down - a step, which cannot be concealed from satellites, airplanes and other sources. These and many other technical factors demonstrate that Iran's current nuclear program is intended for civilian use as opposed to a weapons program.

Dr. Nakhai confirmed that Iran has not violated the NPT, but has been the strongest supporter of the NPT. Iran has provided recommendations for more stringent requirements to be observed by all NPT signatories.

Dr. Tom O'Donnell indicated that "Oil hegemony, not nukes, is the real issue."

and that just as the true reasons for the U.S. - British invasion of Iraq were not "weapons of mass destruction" nor "links to Al Qaeda," so too, the true reason for the present U.S.- Iran crisis is not about the ostensible "nuclear threat" posted by Iran. Rather the American push against Iran's nuclear program and for "regime change" is about maintaining American hegemony in the oil-rich Persian Gulf and Caspian Basin.

According to Dr. O'Donnell, the Iranians are nowhere near developing highly enriched uranium for nuclear weapons, in fact, they appear to be far from even producing sufficient low-level enriched uranium to use in fuel rods for their Russian-built nuclear power plants. And even if they were, this is not why Washington wants a regime change in Iran.

The reason for U.S. hostility to Iran can neither be explained by nukes nor by Islamic fundamentalism. Rather, the uncompromising first principle for Washington when it comes to Iran, or to any state in the Persian Gulf Region, is that the U.S. and the U.S. alone shall remain the regional power. This is all about oil!!

Dr. O'Donnell asserted, that according to the IAEA, about 60% of the world's oil reserves are in essentially five countries. Whoever has predominant influence in this region has their hand on "the global oil spigot" - a prize which brings enormous power and leverage far beyond the region itself, reaching over every country and enterprise that needs the region's oil. Washington has worked since the Iranian Revolution of 1979 to keep the Islamic Republic from once again becoming the oil-producing powerhouse it was under the Shah. No matter what compromises and "grand bargains" the Islamic Republic has offered the U.S. - Washington has rejected these. The Americans have actively blocked Iran from developing its oil and natural gas sector since 1996 by imposing sanctions. These sanctions have preserved U.S. hegemony in the Persian Gulf region and have greatly weakened the Iranian economy and the mullah's domestic position.

The U.S. has been enforcing unilateral sanctions to block foreign direct investment (FDI) in Iran's oil and natural gas sector for eleven years, with devastating effect on Iran's output and Iran's internal economy. As Dr. O'Donnell reiterated, one hears very little about this in mainstream media press, but it can be readily seen in the relevant data.

Since the 1979 Revolution, Iran's population has more than doubled, from 32 to nearly 70 million, while her oil production is only 70% of the pre-Revolution level. This then begs the following question: Why is it that the US and her allies believed, in the 1970s, that Iran needed nuclear reactors and nuclear energy, when Iran's population was less than half of the present and her oil production was much more than now, but they now argue that Iran does not need nuclear energy? How do the US and her allies suggest Iran should feed, house and educate her population, create jobs for her army of educated people, and develop the country, all with oil and gas alone, while she has very significant uranium deposits that can be used for generating electricity?

The U.S. Energy Information Agency's (EIA) latest report on Iran's oil sector says that Iranian oil fields need upgrading, modernization, and enhanced recovery efforts. In fact, Iran's domestic oil-refining capability has deteriorated to the point that it now actually has to import about one third of the gasoline for its citizens consumption needs. This widespread degradation of what was a world-class oil infrastructure under the Shah is the intended result of U.S. sanctions starving Iran of investment and denying it up-to-date technology.

Oil export revenues are central to Iran's economy. Thus, not only have sanctions depressed Iran's potential production, but also they have created a chronic economic crisis within Iran, posing a very serious problem for the regime. According to Dr. O'Donnell, the U.S. likes to focus on how the incompetent economic policies and corruption of the clerical government have caused economic hardships for the Iranian people. This is only a means for the U.S. to avert attention from its own crimes. The economic problem Iran is having is so bad that it cannot even afford subsidies for bread and gasoline.

Economic sanctions are a form of warfare. At a time when the rest of the Persian Gulf countries and Iran's neighbors are benefiting from an oil boom, Iran is in a miserable state; a country practically floating on oil which is unable to pump sufficient oil to finance its domestic economy during one of the biggest oil booms in history - all to assure that Iran cannot assume the role of a major player in the Persian Gulf region, in OPEC or in the international oil order. Sanctions have succeeded in preventing any significant Iranian challenge to U.S. oil hegemony. Removal of these sanctions is the fundamental aim of the clerical regime in pushing their nuclear program forward, hoping to trade the threat posed by the Iranian nuclear program (quite an empty threat for the present) for the Americans lifting of sanctions.

Of course, the standard press story is that the Iranian government, at present under President Ahmadinejad, has been dogmatically inflexible, especially when it comes to its nuclear program, its dedication to Islamic revolution, support for terror groups etc. However, this is not the case. The most striking proof of this is that, in 2003, the Islamic Republic offered a "grand bargain" to the United States. According to Flynt Leverett, then the National Security Council's Senior Director on the Middle East Affairs, and others, the Iranian government offered to end its support of Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Palestine, and to transform Hezbollah into a social-political organization. It agreed to recognize Israel and accepted the two state solution to the Israeli - Palestinian conflict. In return, it wanted an end to the sanctions; it wanted security guarantees, and U.S. assistance in joining the WTO. The U.S. refused this grand bargain, and actually reprimanded its ambassadors in Vienna for passing along the "grand bargain" offer from the Iranian government. What more could the U.S. want?

The answer is that Washington, and the neo-cons in particular, will accept nothing short of the complete removal of the clerical regime, and to reduce Iran to the status of an American protectorate alongside other oil-producing states of the Persian Gulf Region. It would appear that this decision was made along time ago.

Professor Abrahamian agreed with both Dr. Nakhai and Dr. O'Donnell regarding the fact that this is not about Iran's nuclear program. The U.S. since the Revolution of 1979 intended to topple the Iranian regime. He indicated that Iran's geopolitical position is of great importance to the U.S. Iran lies in the center of the oil-rich Persian Gulf States and the Caspian Basin. Iran has the second largest reserves of oil after Saudi Arabia and the second largest reserves of natural gas after Russia. No other country has the combined benefit of these vital energy resources together. Iran's control of the Strait of Hormuz places it at a position, where one quarter of the world's oil passes through on a daily basis. Iran is a bridge between Asia, Russia, and Europe.

Another important factor that must be taken into consideration is the role of Russia and China in this tri-polar game. China needs massive amounts of energy to help develop its economy. The multi-billion dollar agreements for infrastructure building in Iran is going to the Chinese. In return the Chinese get to have access to one of the most energy rich countries in the world. Russia on the other hand has its own oil and gas, but does not want to give up Iran, its stronghold in the region to the U.S. In the meantime the U.S. wants to re-enter Iran as it did under the Shah and as it has currently done in Iraq, in order that the U.S. is the sole country in control all oil concessions and agreements. The U.S. also aims to make sure that Russia does not create a strong position in the Persian Gulf and the Caspian Basin. The U.S. agenda cannot be executed under the Islamic Republic. The U.S. needs to bring about a new regime, which is in agreement with the American agenda.

Professor Abrahamian indicated that these reasons together make Iran a vital prize for the U.S., probably greater than any other country.

He indicated that as the saying goes in the White house, "Ordinary men want to go to Baghdad, but real men want to go to Tehran."

So what will the Bush Administration do? Use of greater sanctions and other incursions by various forces hostile to the regime in order to destabilize the Iranian government; forces such as the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MKO/MEK) (which signed a truce with the U.S. forces during the occupation of Iraq and which Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and others have repeatedly expressed interests in utilizing within Iran), or the monarchists. Or will the Bush Administration invade Iran militarily and use bombing campaign against Iran's nuclear sites to bring about a regime change? How will the U.S. destroy Iran's nuclear facilities, by using conventional or nuclear buster bunker tactical weapons?

It does not matter how the U.S. will bring about a regime change. Any one of these tactics used by the U.S., goes against the democratic values of the American people, the Constitution of the U.S. and all international norms. Furthermore, the U.S. has no right meddling in the internal affairs of Iran. Any political change will have to come directly from the Iranian people living in Iran, with no foreign intervention.

Whether we are liberals or conservatives, we cannot wait, …..this time the American people do not have the same excuse as they did during the Iraq invasion. We can no longer claim that, "we did not know that our government was lying". This time we are equally if not greater at fault than our government, because we did know, but did nothing to stop it!

That’s all folks!