Showing posts with label Muslim Issues. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Muslim Issues. Show all posts

Friday, January 12, 2007

Nomadic Herdsmen Innocent Targets of Bombing in Somalia, Says OXFAM

By Joe De Capua Washington12 January 2007

The relief organization OXFAM says nomadic herdsmen have been innocent targets of bombing in the south of the country. Beatrice Karanja, a spokesperson for OXFAM in Nairobi, tells VOA the bombings have affected some of the agency’s humanitarian water and sanitation programs.

“Oxfam has been receiving reports from our partner organizations in Somalia that nomadic herdsmen have been targeted in recent bombing raids. And what this has been is bombs have hit vital water sources, as well as the nomads and their animals, who had been gathering around large fires at night in order to ward off mosquitoes. What OXFAM is concerned about is that under international law there’s a duty to distinguish between military and civilian targets. But this principle isn’t being adhered to and eventually, as we see, innocent people are paying the price,” she says.

Karanja says OXFAM and other humanitarian organizations need greater access in Somalia to help those who’ve been displaced or affected in other ways by the recent fighting.

http://www.voanews.com/english/Africa/2007-01-12-voa26.cfm

Thursday, January 11, 2007

Troop Escalation and Iran

Distracting Congress from the Real War Plan
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts01102007.html

Is the surge an orchestrated distraction from the real war plan?

A good case can be made that it is. The US Congress and media are focused on President Bush's proposal for an increase of 20,000 US troops in Iraq, while Israel and its American neoconservative allies prepare an assault on Iran.

Commentators have expressed puzzlement over President Bush's appointment of a US Navy admiral as commander in charge of the ground wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The appointment makes sense only if the administration's attention has shifted from the insurgencies to an attack on Iran.

The Bush administration has recently doubled its aircraft carrier forces and air power in the Persian Gulf. According to credible news reports, the Israeli air force has been making practice runs in preparation for an attack on Iran.

Recently, Israeli military and political leaders have described Israeli machinations to manipulate the American public and their representatives into supporting or joining an Israeli assault on Iran.

Two US carrier task forces or strike groups will certainly congest the Persian Gulf. On January 9 a US nuclear sub collided with a Japanese tanker in the Persian Gulf. Two carrier groups will have scant room for maneuver. Their purpose is either to provide the means for a hard hit on Iran or to serve as sitting ducks for a new Pearl Harbor that would rally Americans behind the new war.

Whether our ships are hit by Iran in retaliation to an attack from Israel or suffer an orchestrated attack by Israel that is blamed on the Iranians, there are certainly far more US naval forces in the Persian Gulf than prudence demands.

Bush's proposed surge appears to have no real military purpose. The US military opposes it as militarily pointless and as damaging to the US Army and Marine Corps. The surge can only be accomplished by keeping troops deployed after the arrival of their replacements. Moreover, the increase in numbers that can be achieved in this way are far short of the numbers required to put down the insurgency and civil war.

The only purpose of the surge is to distract Congress while plans are implemented to widen the war. Weapons inspectors have failed to find a nuclear weapons program in Iran. Most experts say it would be years before Iran could make a weapon even if the Iranian government is actively working on a weapons program. Since the danger, if any, is years away, why is Israel so determined to attack Iran now?

The answer might be that Israel has the chance now. The Bush administration is in its pocket. The White House is working with neoconservatives, not with the American foreign policy community represented by the Iraq Study Group. Neoconservative propagandists are in influential positions in the media. The US Congress is intimidated by AIPAC. The correlation of forces are heavily in Israel's favor.

Part of the Israeli/neoconservative plan has already been achieved with the destruction of civilian infrastructure and spread of sectarian strife in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Lebanon. If Iran can be taken out with a powerful air attack that might involve nuclear weapons, Syria would be isolated and Hezbollah would be cut off from Iranian supplies.

Israel has two years remaining to use its American resources to achieve its aims in the Middle East. How influential will Israel and the neoconservatives be with the next president in the wake of a US defeat in Iraq and Israeli defeat in Lebanaon? If the US withdraws its troops from Iraq, as the US military and foreign policy community recommend and as polls show the American public wants, the only effect of Bush's Iraq invasion will have been to radicalize Muslims against Israel, the US, and US puppet governments in the Middle East. Extremist elements will tout their victory over the US, and the pressures on Israel to accept a realistic accommodation with Palestinians will be over-powering.

Now is the chance--the only chance--for Israel and the neoconservatives to achieve their goal of bringing Muslims to heel, a goal that they have been writing about and working to achieve for a decade. This goal requires the war to be widened by whatever deceit and treachery necessary to bring the American public along. The US Congress must immediately refocus its attention from the surge to Iran, the real target of Bush administration aggression.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com

Sunday, January 7, 2007

IBM worker says he was fired for being a Muslim

Paul McDougall

(01/05/2007 11:00 AM EST)

A Muslim electronics engineer who developed five patents for IBM claims the computer maker fired him because of his religion and that managers at the company mocked him for refusing to eat during the Ramadan fast and once told him to ignore Islamic law and clean a knife that had been used to cut pork.

Mahmoud Mousa, who calls himself a "Jordanian Muslim American," was employed at IBM's microelectronics plant in Burlington, Vt., from June 2003 to December 2005, when he was fired because of his religious beliefs, according to a lawsuit Mousa filed last month in U.S. District Court in New York. Mousa says IBM's stated reason for the firing -- that he had failed to show up for work -- "was a pretext to mask the motivating factor behind his termination -- discrimination on the basis of his religion and/or national origin," according the suit.

Mousa claims that he was subject to discrimination and anti-Islamic comments and behavior from two different managers while working at IBM's Burlington operations. On one occasion, a Manager of non-Muslim, Indian origin criticized Mousa for taking time out for Friday prayers, asking him "Why are you doing this?", according to court records. He also claims colleagues mocked him for refusing to eat pizza during his Ramadan fast and asked him to clean off a knife used to cut pork during a company picnic. Strict Islamic law forbids Muslims from touching pork.

Mousa also claims his $68,000 salary was considerably lower than salaries paid to co-workers with similar accomplishments. Mousa obtained five patents for IBM while at the company, including one for a means to create connections between vertically stacked circuits on computer chips, according to a search of a Web site that tracks patent filings.

He was fired in late December, 2005 for "abandoning his job," despite having received formal approval for a leave of absence from IBM's HR department.

http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=PCSVF5LSN1LOSQSNDLSCKHA?articleID=196801418

Saddam’s Undignified Execution

By M.J. Akbar, mjakbar@asianage.com

Saddam Hussein is more powerful in his grave than he ever was in his palace. Alive, he was a dictator. Dead, he is a martyr. The evil inherent in arbitrary power is in the process of being interred with his bones.

Strong men like to be associated with iron. Hence, an Iron Duke, or Iron Chancellor, or Iron Fist, an Iron Will. It is ironic that all it needs is an extra letter to turn iron into irony. If Saddam was full of iron when he ruled Iraq, his legacy is replete with irony.

To take the most obvious instance, in death he has become a symbol of justice denied. The inexplicable haste, and the brutal shoddiness with which he was hanged has become, thanks to a grainy video and millions of television screens, the final testimony in the first example of victor’s prejudice masquerading as law in this century. This is not an arbitrary interpretation. Louise Arbour, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, urged Iraq’s President Jalal Talabani, to stop Saddam’s execution because of doubts about the fairness of the trial.

Alive, Saddam Hussein was helpless against George Bush. Dead, Saddam could leave Bush helpless. His memory will pour fresh fuel on a hundred existing fires. The defeat and death of Saddam is a narrative with one author: George Bush. Saddam was the quarry, Bush was the hunter. The hunter changed the rules of this jungle when every reason was exposed as an excuse. When the quarry was trapped, all rules were abandoned in the pursuit of death.

Spin, passed on to the world’s most famous “embedded” reporters, the White House press corps, now seeks to distance Bush from the crude trial, premeditated judgment and barbaric execution. It is unconvincing. Bush’s formal statement welcomed the death of Saddam as an “important milestone on Iraq’s course to becoming a democracy that can govern, sustain and defend itself”.
There is an implicit admission in that sentence, that a “democratic” Iraq needs a dead Saddam.

Why was Saddam, in prison and unlikely to get out, considered so dangerous for Iraqi democracy? Is there a semi-hidden fear that the consuming anarchy in Iraq is breeding nostalgia for the stability and order of Saddam’s regime? Nostalgia can so easily turn into votes.
It is inconceivable that the White House was not informed about every step on the way to the noose. State-owned media like the Voice of America had begun preparing obituaries and reactions a day before the execution. Baghdad and Washington did not do themselves any favors by hanging Saddam during Eid Al-Adha, while millions were bowing their heads before the Kaaba during Haj, an event redolent with the spirit of sacrifice for a higher cause. Bush and his one-eyed coterie do not understand either Islam or Muslims, and will not fathom the anger that injustice generates on the street. The bars of Saddam’s cramped jail would not have melted in thirty days.

In death, Saddam has become a symbol of resistance to American hegemony. This is perhaps the height of irony, since, for most of his time in power, his enemies accused Saddam of being an American pawn in the region. Facts tell a story. Saddam Hussein was trained by the CIA during his years in exile in Cairo, after the failed coup of 1959. It has been mentioned, in more than one account, that his mentors were privately pleased when he seized power from an ailing Ahmad Hassan Al-Bakr in July 1979. They were certainly delighted when Saddam purged communists from the loose coalition in Iraq that was drifting towards the Soviet bloc at a time of heightening Cold War confrontation (the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan would take place in December that year).

Saddam Hussein did America an incalculable favor when on Sept. 22, 1980 he escalated border skirmishes into a full-scale war by bombing ten Iranian air bases. The planes in his air force were not MiGs from the Soviet Union. They were brand new Mirages from France. America maintained an official distance from that war, but there was much unofficial help as well as massive funding from American allies in the region. In December 1983, President Ronald Reagan sent a special envoy to Saddam, Donald Rumsfeld, the same man who launched the current Iraq war and who resigned last November. American arms to fight Iran came through third party routes, and American credit more visibly. Britain’s Margaret Thatcher took the lead in re-supplying military hardware to Saddam under the cover of lies, which were exposed in the 1996 Arms to Iraq report.

Paradoxically, Saddam occupied Kuwait because of war debts, and his conviction that the Arab regimes whose interests he had served by going to war against Iran had become stingy with their check books once the conflict had ceased. He had overplayed a very weak hand. But his faith in Washington was surely restored when the senior George Bush refused to remove him from power after an international coalition had defeated his armies on the battlefield in 1991.
There is a great deal hidden in Saddam’s grave. Was this one reason why he was denied a trial at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, a privilege granted to the Serbian butcher Slobodan Milosevic? Saddam and his lawyers would surely have had the freedom to assert a wider argument at The Hague, in a court devoid of kangaroos.

That kangaroo court in Baghdad is now an indelible America-inflicted scar across the face of the Middle East. A few lines from an editorial in the New York Times are appropriate: “Saddam Hussein deserves no one’s pity. But as anyone who has seen the graphic cell phone video of his hanging can testify, his execution bore little resemblance to dispassionate, state-administered justice... For the Bush administration, which insists it went to war in Iraq to implant democracy and justice, those globally viewed images were a shaming embarrassment. Unfortunately, all Americans will be blamed...”

It is not the defeat of Saddam, or his death, that has driven Iraq into chaos. It is a myth that Iraq needs despotism to keep it united. The Hashemite family of King Faisal ruled Iraq with a mild hand from 1921, when the state was formalized, to 1958. There was no talk of disintegration during the soft, albeit compromised, monarchy. Nor was there chaos during the two Baathist decades till 1979. The present havoc is a direct consequence of occupation, an inevitable insurrection against foreign troops on Iraqi soil, and a polity fractured by ethnic interests. The full account of this malfeasance will be written, but only after the occupation is over in a few years. “The enemies forced strangers into our sea/And he who serves them will be made to weep/Here we unveil our chests to the wolves/And will not tremble before the beast.”
As poetry that might not be the most memorable lines in Arabic, but these lines from Saddam Hussein’s last poem, written in jail, will resonate. Saddam’s grave in Tikrit has already become a memorial, where Iraq’s Sunnis are offering a prayer from wounded hearts. “I sacrifice my soul for you and for our nation,” he wrote. “Blood is cheap in hard times.” Blood flows, and each drop becomes a seed of future war.

http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7&section=0&article=90686&d=7&m=1&y=2007

Monday, December 25, 2006

Saudi Girl Students Explore New Career Options

By Lulwa Shalhoub, Arab News

JEDDAH — Architecture student Lama Al-Zoghibi won the “I Matter” prize in the third and final night of the activities that took place at the Equestrian Club here recently.

More than 2,500 applications were received from women who made presentations of ideas that would help empower Arab women.
Al-Zoghibi was declared the winner of this contest of innovation with her proposal to create a firm that would bring together women involved in the production of apparel and jewelry, and female business and advertising executives.
“I want to help provide more career options for women in different fields,” said 18-year-old Al-Zoghibi. “I didn’t expect to win the contest. Exchanging knowledge and experiences among the 10 finalists was the thing that I really enjoyed.”

Each contestant was evaluated out of 30 grades. The 10 contestants were Areeb Yasine and Lamees Basfar, both psychology students; Hudaybia Tarek, a business administration student; Eman Janbi, who works for Tamer Group; Nima Ahmed, an Arabian Entertainment Company Ltd. employee; Sara Marzouki, interior design student; the winner Al-Zoghibi and Rana Al-Amawi, both architecture students; Shaza Ahmad, a student of economics, and Nourazn Abu Taleb, an Effat College employee.

Al-Zoghibi, who is now in her freshman year studying architecture at Effat College, said that she hopes to implement her idea of an integrated fashion company after she graduates. The winner has been offered a one-month MBC internship in Dubai next summer.
“I’m happy for this opportunity,” she said. “That will be the first time for me to practice a real job and training.”

Report
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1&section=0&article=90417&d=26&m=12&y=2006

Call for Peaceful End to Iran N-Row

By Khaled Almaeena

Muscat — Saudi Arabia and Oman yesterday called for a peaceful resolution of the standoff between Iran and Western countries on Tehran’s nuclear program. They emphasized the right of all countries in the region to possess nuclear technology for peaceful purposes but reiterated that the Middle East must be made free of weapons of mass destruction.

King Abdullah arrived in Jeddah yesterday from Muscat after holding extensive talks with Sultan Qaboos on major regional and international issues as well as ways of boosting bilateral ties. Abdullah held a final round of talks with the Omani leader before returning to the Kingdom.

Sultan Qaboos underscored King Abdullah’s efforts in strengthening the six-member Gulf Cooperation Council and his support for joint GCC action in order to achieve greater progress and prosperity for GCC citizens and reinforce peace and stability in the Gulf region.

http://www.arabnews.com/?page=4&section=0&article=90405&d=26&m=12&y=2006