Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Topics - Henny

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 11
76
Chicken Soup / Middle Eastern Cooking 101 - Makloubeh (Upside-Down)
« on: September 17, 2007, 02:59:59 PM »
MAKLOUBEH (Literally means "Upside-down")

1 lg. cauliflower
Salt, pepper and allspice to taste
Oil for frying
3 1/2 c. meat or chicken broth
2 tbsp. pine nuts (or more if you want)
1 lg. onion
1/8 tsp. cinnamon
2 lb. lamb meat or chicken, cubed
2 c. rice

Boil meat or chicken in water, skimming the froth as it appears on the surface. Add salt and spices. Cover. Let meat simmer over medium heat until tender. Strain broth into a bowl, reserving meat for later use. (A pressure cooker works great for this part.)

Break the cauliflower into medium-size flowerets. Sprinkle with salt. Fry in deep, hot oil until golden brown. Drain on absorbent paper.

In a 4-quart pot, saute onion and meat. Cover meat with cauliflower, then rice. Add broth to cover the rice. Bring to boil and then lower heat and cook on low heat until done. Let cool for 1/2 hour, then turn pot upside down in a large platter and garnish with brown pine nuts. Serve with yogurt.

VARIATION # 1: Follow directions for cauliflower, replacing 2 large eggplants for cauliflower. Peel eggplants, slice 1/2 inch thick, sprinkle with salt and let drain for 1/2 hour. Squeeze water off of eggplant and fry in hot oil until golden brown. Drain over absorbent paper.

VARIATION # 2: Fry potato slices in oil until tender. Place under the layer of eggplant or cauliflower when preparing the dish.

77
3DHS / Inflating the Threat of Radical Islam
« on: September 17, 2007, 09:30:54 AM »
Inflating the threat of radical Islam
No, America is not fighting WW IV
Steve Chapman
September 16, 2007
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-oped0916chapmansep16,1,6969008.column?ctrack=3&cset=true

When the Cold War fizzled out, Americans rejoiced. Our long standoff with the Soviet Union, shadowed by the specter of nuclear war, was over, and the West had prevailed. What wasn't clear then was that many Americans would miss something about that era: the sense of being part of a historic, existential struggle between global forces of good and evil, in which we were on the right side.

The collapse of the Soviet empire deprived us of what had been a central part of our political identity. Since the end of World War II, America had stood in the forefront of opposition to communism. That opposition helped define us, and its disappearance left a void.

In 1989, conservative intellectual Francis Fukuyama lamented what lay ahead: "The struggle for recognition, the willingness to risk one's life for a purely abstract goal, the worldwide ideological struggle that called forth daring, courage, imagination, and idealism, will be replaced by economic calculation, the endless solving of technical problems, environmental concerns, and the satisfaction of sophisticated consumer demands."

Most of us soon got over the feelings of drift. But some people have dealt with the loss in another way -- by casting themselves in a grand revival of Armageddon. In this case, it's a titanic war against radical Islam, which, as the alarmists tell it, often sounds like a war between Islam and the West.

This enemy, we are told, is the heir of communism and Nazism, which President Bush often invokes to justify staying in Iraq. In this year's State of the Union address, he said, our foes "want to force our country to retreat from the world and abandon the cause of liberty. They would then be free to impose their will and spread their totalitarian ideology."

Norman Podhoretz, an adviser to Rudy Giuliani, titled his new book "World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism." (No, you didn't sleep through World War III -- that was the Cold War.) He says, "The stakes are nothing less than the survival of Western civilization, to the extent that Western civilization still exists, because half of it seems to be committing suicide." By that, he seems to be referring not just to terrorist groups but also to the proliferation of Muslims in the West, which many conservatives see as a mortal peril.

But to equate our current challenges with the Nazis and Soviets is to grossly misunderstand our enemies. Start with Saddam Hussein, who was often compared to Hitler -- though his army, quite unlike the Wehrmacht, dissolved on contact with the U.S. military. His Iraq was secular, not Islamist, and if he posed a danger, it was to his neighbors, not Western civilization.

Osama bin Laden must rejoice to be depicted as endangering our entire culture and way of life. In fact, his movement has failed to gain power in a single country even in the Islamic world, and he hasn't been able to carry out an attack on American soil in over six years. His movement exists today as a fragmented network of terrorist cells, with only a modest capacity to harm us.

Iran, with its fire-breathing president and nuclear ambitions, is supposed to be a looming threat to our existence. But as the world's only superpower, we can easily contain and deter even enemies with nukes -- which is why no one talks about fighting World War IV against North Korea.

The vision of a monolithic Islamic movement hostile to everything we value is equally warped. We usually associate the religion with Arab militants, but the world's biggest Muslim populations are in Indonesia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, India and Nigeria, not the Middle East. Some Muslim countries, such as Turkey, Indonesia and Senegal, are free and democratic. The others vary greatly in political openness and personal liberty -- sort of like non-Muslim countries.

Most Muslims are not terrorist sympathizers. A recent Gallup poll found that only 7 percent of the world's Muslims regard "the 9/11 attacks as completely justifiable and have an unfavorable view of the United States." Nor do many of them yearn to stamp out our freedoms. "When asked what they admire most about the West," reports Gallup, "Muslims frequently mention political freedom, liberty, fair judicial systems and freedom of speech." The striking thing about American Muslims is not how poorly they fit into a tolerant society, but how well.

Radical Islamic elements pose a danger to our security that will demand vigilance, resources, and in some instances, military action. But let's not make it more than it is.

78
3DHS / Key Sunni ally of U.S. assassinated
« on: September 13, 2007, 11:43:41 AM »
Key Sunni ally of U.S. assassinated
Story Highlights
Sheik Abdul Sattar Abu Reesha killed by roadside bomb, officials say

Abu Reesha led Anbar Salvation Council

Group worked with coalition forces against al Qaeda in Iraq

President Bush met with sheik earlier this month
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- A key Sunni sheik who united with U.S. forces to fight al Qaeda militants in Iraq was assassinated Thursday in a roadside bomb attack, officials said.

Sheik Abdul Sattar Abu Reesha, 39, was head of the Anbar Salvation Council, a coalition of tribes that has been working with the U.S. military to counter al Qaeda militants in Sunni-dominated Anbar province.

The afternoon attack near the sheik's home in Ramadi killed two bodyguards and wounded five other escorts, Ramadi police and Interior Ministry officials said.

The Anbar Salvation Council, funded and supported by Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, was formed last year.

Abu Reesha was one of several Sunni leaders who met with President Bush during his surprise visit to Anbar on September 3. In a photograph taken during the six-hour visit, a smiling Bush is seen shaking hands with the sheik.

Bush has repeatedly cited successful efforts to bring Anbar tribesmen over to the coalition's side in the fight against al Qaeda in Iraq as evidence of overall success by the U.S. military in Iraq. Since the Sunni sheiks began cooperating with the U.S. military, violent attacks have significantly decreased in Anbar, once a hot-spot for al Qaeda attacks.

Bush is expected to reiterate Anbar's success in a major address to the nation Thursday night.

Abu Reesha was a prime target for al Qaeda militants and other terrorist groups because of his visible alliance with the U.S. coalition.

Ramadi police are on full alert, Col. Tareq al-Thibawi said.

CNN's Jomana Karadsheh and Mohammed Tawfeeq contributed to this report.
 
Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/09/13/iraq.killing/index.html?eref=googletoolbar 

79
3DHS / The Islamophobe who cried Islamist
« on: September 13, 2007, 08:04:50 AM »
The Islamophobe who cried Islamist
by Ahmed Rehab
(Monday, September 10, 2007)
http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/45946
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Pipes is wedded to his personal political agenda to such a point that it dominates his worldview invalidating his ability to act as a neutral scholar on Muslim-related topics. Concerned with the interests of Israel above all else, he consistently defines Muslim-Americans exclusively as a function of their position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


It is a token of the farcical times in which we live when an agenda-driven ?scholar? with a track-record of attacking his ?subject matter? should feel entitled to be taken seriously.


Daniel Pipes is as much a scholar on Islam and Muslims as David Duke is a scholar on Judaism and Jews. He does not seem to know where scholarship ends and where political advocacy begins. He does not initiate his research by asking questions for which he seeks answers, but by providing answers for which he cherry-picks evidence.


Pipes is wedded to his personal political agenda to such a point that it dominates his worldview invalidating his ability to act as a neutral scholar on Muslim-related topics. Concerned with the interests of Israel above all else, he consistently defines Muslim-Americans exclusively as a function of their position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.


For Pipes, a ?bad? Muslim is a Muslim who challenges his views on Israel and a ?good? Muslim is one who agrees with them; in his ?scholarly? lingo, the code terms are ?Islamist? and ?moderate? respectively.


The fact that Pipes is taken seriously by anyone is an indication of how low the bar of discourse on Islam is today (see M.T. Akbar: ?We are not done with racism ? yet?). With fear and suspicion clouding reason and critical thinking, it is not difficult for a Harvard graduate with a grim face and a set of intriguing theories to wrestle some media attention.


The type of racism espoused by the likes of Pipes is not the usual banter. There is raw racism and then there is sophisticated racism, and Pipes is a sophisticated man.


Raw racism is where you, for instance, attribute miscreant behavior to blacks as a group. Sophisticated racism is where you come up with a new term like, say, ?blackists? and then:


a). Readily state that you do not attribute negative behavior to blacks, but to ?blackists?.

b). Turn around and define the great majority of blacks or grassroots black leaders as ?blackists?.


So you are back to square one, and hopefully no one noticed.


That is precisely what we are seeing with the ?Islam and Islamists? rhetoric. Pipes did not invent the term Islamist, but abusing it as per step (b) above is his trademark contribution to the discourse on Islam in the West. Today, there are many others who have jumped on the bandwagon; there is even a documentary film entitled - you guessed it - ?Islam vs. the Islamists? that falsely portrays most Muslim-Americans as ?Islamist.?


The film?s producer, Frank Gaffney, is a fellow contributor to that sham bastion of critical thinking and intellectual rigor that Daniel Pipes pontificates on regularly, David Horowitz?s notorious ?Front Page Mag.?


But back to Pipes.


Pipes is quick to parrot that radical Islam is the problem and moderate Islam is the solution.


That is all very well - until you realize that his raison d?etre is to claim that every Muslim individual or group of mentionable influence is a conveyer of radical Islam - particularly if they are outspoken against the illegal Israeli occupation.


On the other hand, everyone upon whom he bestows the ?moderate? badge is either a lone wolf with no credibility in the Muslim mainstream, an apologist for Pipes? own radical views on the Middle East, or both. It is even plausible that Pipes would refer to a Muslim who leaves Islam altogether as a ?moderate? Muslim, as he has in the case of Wafa Sultan.


Pipes constantly whines about influential Muslim groups like MPAC, CAIR and ISNA, mustering up the audacity to call them ?Islamist? despite the fact that these groups do not advocate Shariah-rule in the US; they not only accept the US constitution, they are at the forefront of those advocating for the full application of all its codes. Hardly the ethical journalist, Pipes will shamelessly quote questionable sources like the virulently anti-Muslim Pipeline news website to prove his point. A megalomaniac, he is one stop short of quoting himself.


As more and more Americans have come to realize that Daniel Pipes is a one trick pony who never lets facts get in the way of fables, his attacks against CAIR and other critics have sounded more and more desperate.


My advice to Mr. Pipes: pack up and move your tired anti-Muslim conspiracy theories to paid late-night cable programming ? there maybe a spot right before Minister Jack Van Impe?s apocalyptic hour.


80
3DHS / Russia builds 'most powerful bomb'
« on: September 12, 2007, 08:24:02 AM »
Russia builds 'most powerful bomb'
Story Highlights
Russia claims it has the world's most powerful non-nuclear air-delivered bomb

It is said to be more powerful than the U.S. "mother of all bombs"

Russia says it is similar to a nuclear bomb without harming the environment
MOSCOW, Russia (AP) -- The Russian military has successfully tested what it described as the world's most powerful non-nuclear air-delivered bomb, Russia's state television reported Tuesday.

It was the latest show of Russia's military muscle amid chilly relations with the United States.

Channel One television said the new weapon, nicknamed the "dad of all bombs" is four times more powerful than the U.S. "mother of all bombs."

"The tests have shown that the new air-delivered ordnance is comparable to a nuclear weapon in its efficiency and capability," said Col.-Gen. Alexander Rukshin, a deputy chief of the Russian military's General Staff, said in televised remarks.

Unlike a nuclear weapon, the bomb doesn't hurt the environment, he added.

The statement reflected the Kremlin's efforts to restore Russia's global clout and rebuild the nation's military might while the ties with Washington have been strained over U.S. criticism of Russia's backsliding on democracy, Moscow's vociferous protests of U.S. missile defense plans, and rifts over global crises.

The U.S. Massive Ordnance Air Blast, nicknamed the Mother Of All Bombs, is a large-yield satellite-guided, air-delivered bomb described as the most powerful non-nuclear weapon in history.

Channel One said that while the Russian bomb contains 7.8 tons of high explosives compared to more than 8 tons of explosives in the U.S. bomb, it's four times more powerful because it uses a new, highly efficient type of explosives that the report didn't identify.

While the U.S. bomb is equivalent to 11 tons of TNT, the Russian one is equivalent to 44 tons of regular explosives. The Russian weapon's blast radius is 990 feet, twice as big as that of the U.S. design, the report said.

Like its U.S. predecessor, first tested in 2003, the Russian bomb is a "thermobaric" weapon that explodes in an intense fireball combined with a devastating blast. It explodes in a terrifying nuclear bomb-like mushroom cloud and wreaks destruction through a massive shock wave created by the air burst and high temperature.

Thermobaric weapons work on the same principle that causes blasts in grain elevators and other dusty places -- clouds of fine particles are highly explosive. Such explosions produce shock waves that can be directed and amplified in enclosed spaces such as buildings, caves or tunnels.

Channel One said that the temperature in the epicenter of the Russian bomb's explosion is twice as high as that of the U.S. bomb.

The report showed the bomb dropped by parachute from a Tu-160 strategic bomber and exploding in a massive fireball. It featured the debris of apartment buildings and armored vehicles at a test range, as well as the scorched ground from a massive blast.

It didn't give the bomb's military name or say when it was tested.

Rukshin said the new bomb would allow the military to "protect the nation's security and confront international terrorism in any situation and any region."

"We have got a relatively cheap ordnance with a high strike power," Yuri Balyko, head of the Defense Ministry's institute in charge of weapons design, told Channel One.

Booming oil prices have allowed Russia to steadily increase military spending in recent years, and the Kremlin has taken a more assertive posture in global affairs.

Last month, President Vladimir Putin said he ordered the resumption of regular patrols of strategic bombers, which were suspended after the 1991 Soviet breakup.

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
 
Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/09/12/russia.bomb.ap/index.html?eref=googletoolbar 

81
Sports / Longhorns fan nearly castrated in bloody bar scuffle
« on: September 12, 2007, 08:22:35 AM »
Longhorns fan nearly castrated in bloody bar scuffle
Posted: Tuesday September 11, 2007 6:57PM; Updated: Tuesday September 11, 2007 7:23PM
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) -- To some Oklahoma football fans, there are things that just aren't done in the heart of Sooner Nation, and one of them is to walk into a bar wearing a Texas Longhorns T-shirt.

That's exactly what touched off a bloody skirmish that left a Texas-shirt-wearing fan nearly castrated and an Oklahoma fan facing aggravated assault charges that could put him in prison for up to five years.

The shocking case has set off a raging debate in this football-crazed region about the extreme passions behind a bitter rivalry. Some legal observers have even questioned whether this case could ever truly have an impartial jury.

"I've actually heard callers on talk radio say that this guy deserved what he got for wearing a Texas T-shirt into a bar in the middle of Sooner country," said Irven Box, an attorney in this city 20 miles from Oklahoma's campus in Norman.

According to police, 32-year-old Texas fan Brian Christopher Thomas walked into Henry Hudson's Pub on June 17 wearing a Longhorns T-shirt and quickly became the focus of football "trash talk" from another regular, 53-year-old Oklahoma fan Allen Michael Beckett.

Thomas told police that when he decided to leave and went to the bar to pay his tab, Beckett grabbed him in the crotch, pulled him to the ground and wouldn't let go, even as bar patrons tried to break it up. When the two men were separated, Thomas looked down and realized the extent of his injuries.

"He could see both of his testicles hanging on the outside of his body," said Thomas' attorney, Carl Hughes. "He was wearing a pair of white shorts, which made it that much worse."

It took more than 60 stitches to close the wound, and police interviewed Thomas at a nearby hospital emergency room.

Beckett's attorney, Billy Bock, concedes that his client commented about Thomas' shirt, but said it was just good-natured ribbing and that he apologized to Thomas when it appeared to upset the Texas fan. Later, Bock said Thomas approached his client at the bar and threatened him.

"My client is a little man, and this guy [Thomas] is 30 to 40 pounds bigger than him," Bock said. "He's bigger, stronger, younger and probably faster, and he aggressively leaned in and touched my client and threatened to beat him up. ... My guy was defending himself and just took control of the situation."

Thomas' attorney disputes Beckett's version.

"That's total malarkey," Hughes said. "My client never said a word to him. He got up to pay and when he paid and left a tip, the guy grabbed him."

Beckett, a 53-year-old church deacon, federal auditor and former Army combat veteran, has pleaded not guilty. His next court appearance comes Oct. 4, two days before the Sooners and Horns tangle in their annual football game at the Cotton Bowl in Dallas.

Thomas, who once lived in Houston and became a Texas fan during the heyday of star running back Earl Campbell, is still recovering from his injuries but has returned to work as a meat cutter at a Sam's Club warehouse store.

Like Beckett and Thomas, many fans of the two college squads never attended either university, but have come to identify so closely with these teams that they attach banners to their cars, wear team colors on game day and even have programmed their car horns to play school fight songs.

Dallas police Sgt. Andy Harvey, a 12-year veteran of the force, said it's not uncommon for fights to break out between fans of the two schools.

"People are passionate about their teams and their universities, and that's a good thing," he said, "but when you mix a real passionate sports fan and then get a little alcohol in there, sometimes it's not a good mix."

On both Texas and Oklahoma fan Web sites, boosters trade familiar tales of having their car tires slashed or windshields smashed for sporting the opposing team's sticker in enemy territory.

Assistant District Attorney Scott Rowland said the rivalry will have no bearing on the way the case is prosecuted.

"It appears that it played a part in the fight," he said, "but that won't play any more of a role in our handling of the case than would a fight over a girl or a car or a song on the jukebox."

Copyright 2007 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Find this article at:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/football/ncaa/09/11/oklahoma.texas.fight.ap/index.html?eref=googletoolbar 

82
3DHS / 'Anti-Semitic' label curbs talk about Israel
« on: September 11, 2007, 08:13:28 AM »
By Michael Smerconish
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/currents/20070909_Head_Strong___Anti-Semitic_label_curbs_talk_about_Israel.html

One year after 9/11, I visited Israel as a guest of the Jerusalem Post. In the midst of the intifadah, the hard-line newspaper arranged for me to broadcast my daily radio show from Jerusalem. At the time, I was also filing one-minute commentaries for KYW-AM (1060). One of them caused some consternation at home. Here is what I said:
"Yesterday, an Israeli guide was anxious to show me the community called Gilo.

" 'Look,' he said, 'at the sandbags that these people have to place in their windows to shield them from sniper fire from a neighboring village called Beit Jala.'

"Sure enough, there were sandbags in windows and bullet holes in walls. Thinking of my kids, I said, 'That's no place to raise a family.'

"Today, I had a different guide with a different perspective. He wanted me to tour an Arab neighborhood in the West Bank.

" 'Look at where Israeli tank fire has destroyed these homes,' he said to me. I looked. The devastation was terrible. 'This is no place to live,' I said to myself.

" 'Where are we?' I asked.

" 'This is the village called Beit Jala,' he told me, 'and the tank fired from over there, in Gilo' - where I had been the day before."

I ended the commentary by saying: "And so it goes."

My intention was only to present a form of geopolitical glass half empty/half full, not to assert any moral equivalency. But that didn't spare me an onslaught of e-mail from Jewish listeners disappointed in what I had said, or what they thought I was implying. Some told me my "comparison" was anti-Semitic, which stunned me, given that my entire trip had a palpable, pro-Israeli tone.

I was reminded of that experience this week while considering the backlash against the release of The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, by John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt. Mearsheimer is a political scientist at the University of Chicago. Walt is a professor at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government.

Their book is an outgrowth of their lengthy online article on the same subject, and of a 40-page essay published last spring in the London Review of Books. Their premise is that the United States has set aside its own security to advance the interests of Israel, owing to the existence of a "lobby," which they define as a loose coalition of individuals and organizations who actively work to steer U.S. foreign policy in a pro-Israel direction.

Among their observations is that anyone who criticizes Israel's actions or argues that pro-Israel groups have a significant influence over U.S. policy stands a good chance of being labeled anti-Semitic.

Labeling has become all too common in today's political debate, overlooking that few of us can neatly be compartmentalized under words such as liberal or conservative. Speak against same-sex marriage? You must be a "homophobe." Oppose affirmative action? That sounds "racist."

Similarly, to question U.S. support for Israel runs the risk of being branded "anti-Semitic." Perhaps it's only a small minority who assign the labels. Still, each debasing generalization stifles conversation about issues of the day. The shame is that some people, who already have a seat at the table, resort to such language as a way to prevent those of different views from even getting to the table at all.

Here's hoping that, six years removed from 9/11, Mearsheimer and Walt can initiate a reasonable conversation about Israel. No subject with implications for U.S. security should be off-limits. Among their words worthy of debate are these: "aying that Israel and the U.S. are united by a shared terrorist threat has the causal relationship backwards: the United States has a terrorism problem in good part because it is so closely allied with Israel, not the other way around."

Of course, others conclude that the origins of America's terror problem are much wider in scope than Israel alone; they argue that disdain for America's relationship with Israel long preceded the modern terrorist threat. I say let's air it out.

Mearsheimer and Walt's arguments sound similar to words spoken to me by Michael Scheuer, author of the book Imperial Hubris and a man who spent 22 years with the CIA. From 1996 to 1999, he ran "Alec Station," the Osama bin Laden tracking unit at the CIA's Counterterrorist Center. He told me he agreed with Mearsheimer and Walt that the Israeli lobby had "distorted and burdened" U.S. foreign policy.

"The most dangerous aspect of the Israel lobby," Scheuer said, "is that it threatens free speech in America. Very few Americans will exercise their right to free speech if criticizing Israel earns them identification as an anti-Semite."

Which reminds me that after I recently interviewed Scheuer, a blog posting said: "He won't out-and-out claim he hates Jews, but everything he criticizes centers around Israel and the 'dual loyalty' of neo-cons. You would be smart to avoid using this man as a reference. Soon he will reveal himself to be the true anti-Semite he is."

Scheuer argues that he was hired by the CIA not to be guardian of the world, but to be a guardian of the American people, and that our foreign policy should be designed to protect Americans first. This is exactly what Mearsheimer and Walt say we have abdicated.

Hardly an anti-Semitic view, and these well-credentialed academics have gone to great lengths to defuse any accusations of personal animus toward Israel.

"In its basic operations, the Israel Lobby is no different from the farm lobby, steel or textile workers' union, or other ethnic lobbies," they write in the London Review of Books. "There is nothing improper about American Jews and their Christian allies attempting to sway U.S. policy; the Lobby's activities are not a conspiracy of the sort depicted in tracts like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion."

Their words are falling on deaf ears in certain quarters. A number of potential forums for discussion with the authors have turned down or canceled events. According to the New York Times, these include the Center for the Humanities at the Graduate Center at the City University of New York, the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, a Jewish cultural center in Washington, and three organizations in Chicago.

This would seem only to strengthen their argument.

83
3DHS / Evangelical groups make war on terror look like a Crusade
« on: September 11, 2007, 08:08:45 AM »
http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070910/COLUMNIST12/709100315
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article published September 10, 2007

Evangelical groups make war on terror look like a Crusade


THERE is a widespread belief in the Muslim world that President Bush, under the guise of war against terrorism, is in fact waging a latter-day Crusade against Islam and Muslims. In the waning days of this administration, it is becoming more and more evident that there is some truth to that assumption.

An article published in the Los Angeles Times a few weeks ago outlined a disturbing relationship between the Department of Defense and Christian evangelists. The DoD has been delivering "Freedom Packages" to U.S. soldiers in Iraq containing proselytizing material both in English and Arabic as well as the apocalyptic video game "Left Behind: Eternal Forces." In the video, the soldiers of Christ hunt down enemies.

The packages were supplied by Operation Straight Up, a fundamentalist Christian ministry. This group was also planning to hold a series of entertainment programs for the troops called, symbolically, Military Crusade.

According to the same article, another evangelical group, Christian Embassy, has had unprecedented access to DoD facilities and personnel for making a documentary. Their cozy proximity to DoD led one high Pentagon official, Air Force Maj. Gen. John Catton, to assume the group was a quasifederal agency.

Proselytizing by Christian missionaries has a long and checkered history. Burning with zeal to save people around the world, these do-gooders descend with Bible in one hand and loaf of bread in the other to prey on the most vulnerable and needy. Be it in Iraq, Afghanistan, or India, the modus operandi is the same. Almost a century ago, Mahatma Gandhi, the apostle of religious harmony and pacifism, urged Christian missionaries to stop proselytizing in India. To Gandhi, most conversions had little to do with religion and a lot to do with hunger.

Freedom of religion does not include freedom to convert others. I would defend anyone's right to practice his or her religion but oppose any overtures to convert. For the missionaries to believe they have a God-given right to save others is not only arrogant, it reduces human spirituality to a cookie-cutter, one-size-fit-all concept of salvation. It tends to turns sublime into profane.

Most major religions carry a Himalaya-size chip of superiority on their shoulders. Each religion thinks it has the answer to life here and a recipe to secure the hereafter. One wonders what goes through the minds of religious leaders when they gather for their interfaith powwows. They profess equality while holding hands but sing a different tune to their flocks back in their churches, synagogues, mosques, and temples. Unless one is a hypocrite, it is just not possible to be equal and superior at the same time.

The recent capture and subsequent release of Korean missionaries in Afghanistan is a case study in ignorance and hypocrisy. Why would these young people risk their lives in a strange and dangerous land rather than putting all their efforts back in their own country? After all, South Korea, a nation of 49 million, still has 36 million non-Christians to convert.

And how about here in America? If every Christian denomination thinks it has the key to salvation, why don't they, in the spirit of love thy neighbor, try converting other Christians to their brand of Christianity? One would think Christian evangelists would first work to save their own before embarking on saving the rest of humanity.

At a recent interfaith seminar at Lakeside, Ohio, a pastor told me that proselytizing is an integral part of Christianity and therefore it may not be possible for most Christians to accord equality to other religions. While this might be a formidable barrier for some, it has not prevented a great majority of believing men and women of all religions from using faith and reason to move forward from the unattainable goal of painting the entire world in one color. All they have to do it to come down from their celestial high horses.

In a civil (and civilized) society, one should have the right to convert but only out of one's own free will. The government has no right to favor one religion over another and use the instruments of the state to facilitate proselytizing to a captive and captured people in occupied lands.

84
3DHS / Volunteers collect Baghdad's nameless dead
« on: September 10, 2007, 03:30:51 PM »
Volunteers collect Baghdad's nameless dead
Story Highlights
Volunteers dig graves by hand, bury Baghdad's unclaimed dead in Najaf

Sheik: "I look to them as human beings, with it my duty to bury them"

There were as many as 2,000 bodies a month following 2006 attack on holy site

Sheik: Number of unclaimed dead has risen drastically since U.S.-led war began
Editor's note: This is part of a series of reports CNN.com is featuring from an Anderson Cooper special this week, "Live from Iraq," which airs at 10 p.m. ET.

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Sheik Jamal al-Sudani leads a group of volunteers with one of the most solemn tasks in Iraq: Collecting and burying the hundreds of unclaimed dead every month and giving them a proper burial.

"I only think about one thing: That one day, I will face the same fate as these people have faced, and will there be someone to take care of me and bury me, too?" the sheik told CNN.

The discovery of slain bodies in bustling, war-torn Baghdad is a daily fact of life, as ever-present as the lively markets, the solemn mosques, the blinding sunrise and the soft sunset.

Many of the bodies of the slain men, women, and children -- found on the streets, in the sewers and in the ruins of bombings -- have never been claimed because some are so mangled and charred, they're unidentifiable.

As a result, many people have no idea whether their loved ones were killed or took flight to other cities. Others are afraid because they are Sunni and won't cross sectarian lines to claim the bodies at the Health Ministry morgue, controlled by Muqtada al-Sadr's hard-line Shiite followers.

And so religious volunteers, like al-Sudani, who regard a respectful burial of these victims of war as a crucial calling, have come forth to give the dead a proper resting place.

"I look to them as human beings, with it my duty to bury them so their sanctity will not be violated again after the violation of their killing," the sheik said.

This is the state of life -- and death -- in Baghdad: the cauldron of the Sunni-Shiite sectarian civil warfare that has escalated since the bombing of the Askariya Mosque in Samarra in February 2006.

It is a reality in the back of the minds of officials such as Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, and Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in the country -- both of whom will brief the U.S. Congress this week on the state of progress in Iraq.

The unidentified bodies have been showing up in significant numbers in morgues ever since the Askariya bombing, thought to have been carried out by Sunni militants.

Most of the dead are believed to be victims of sectarian animosity, slain after they were kidnapped or assassinated in so-called extra-judicial killings or in massive bombings.

Such grim volunteer work isn't entirely new to the region. Under former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, the sheik said, they often buried more than three dozen unidentified corpses a month.

After the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, that number rose to around 250 a month, he said. Following last year's Askariya bombing, the volunteers buried as many as 2,000 per month. The numbers now are back in the low hundreds, the sheik said.

These volunteers -- also Shiites with access to the Health Ministry -- are compelled by conscience and faith and take it upon themselves to bury the dead in holy anonymity.

Despite their sectarian affiliation, these volunteers are moderate in spirit, intent on burying Sunnis and Christians, as well as members of their own sect.

"When I enter the morgue, I don't see these human beings as Christian, Shiite or Sunni because I see them in death, embracing each other," said al-Sudani, a cleric from a small charity in Baghdad's Sadr City.

It is arduous work for these Shiite volunteers, who do what they can to repel the touch and odor of death.

The sheik and his comrades haul bodies more than 150 miles from Baghdad to Najaf in refrigerated trucks, and the graves are dug by hand.

The bodies are numbered and photographed, and the information is put into a database. Then they are prepared for burial, washed in sand and wrapped in shrouds in the traditional Muslim fashion.

The bodies are laid side-by-side, two to a grave.

The process overcomes the sheik, who is struck by the depressing otherworldliness of the tragedy.

"Now you see Iraqis' houses, meant to be a family's safest place, have become like graves for their families, because any minute, any second, they're ready to die by explosion, airstrikes or car bombs."

The sheik emphasized the gravity of today's horrors, compared with other eras. He and his volunteers don't need military or congressional reports to tell them of progress in Iraq -- for they bear witness.

"Now it's as if the streets are flowing with blood."

CNN's Youssif Basil, Tommy Evans, Michael Ware and Joe Sterling contributed to this report.
Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/09/10/iraq.deadbodies/index.html?eref=googletoolbar 

85
3DHS / Haditha Marine regrets dead, but says force needed
« on: September 07, 2007, 10:30:23 AM »
Haditha Marine regrets dead, but says force needed
Thu Sep 6, 2007 7:09PM EDT
By Adam Tanner

CAMP PENDLETON, California (Reuters) - Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, the U.S. Marine squad leader accused of leading a November 2005 massacre of 24 Iraqi civilians in Haditha, said on Thursday that he regretted the deaths but insisted he had acted properly to keep his men alive.

"I will bear the memory of the events of that day forever and will always mourn the unfortunate deaths of the innocent Iraqis who were killed during our response to the attack," Wuterich, 27, told an evidentiary hearing in his first military court testimony.

"Because families got killed that day and I can look at my family and I know I would not want that to happen to them," said Wuterich, who has three young daughters. His wife and parents watched from the back of the courtroom.

The Haditha incident, one of a series in which U.S. forces mistreated or killed Iraqi civilians, sparked international anger when it was first reported last year.

Wearing desert camouflage fatigues with sleeves rolled above his tattooed forearms, Wuterich described a complicated combat situation that he said required lethal force.

"Based on the information I had at the time, based on the situation, I made the best decision I could have at the time," he said calmly and with confidence.

An investigating officer hearing the evidence will recommend whether the case should go to trial. If convicted on the charges of murdering 17 Iraqi civilians, Wuterich could be sentenced to life in prison.

Wuterich, one of five Marines still facing legal proceedings over the Haditha killings, admitted he shot five Iraqis near a white car after a member of his unit was killed by a roadside bomb.

"Engaging was the only choice: the threat had to be neutralized," he said at a small military courtroom in Camp Pendleton north of San Diego. "They were not complying and, in fact, they were starting to run."

Other witnesses from his squad have testified that the Iraqis had their hands in the air and were not running. Marines did not find any weapons at the scene.

SHOOT FIRST, QUESTIONS LATER

Wuterich, the squad leader serving a seven-month tour of duty in Iraqi, said he then moved to clear two houses.

"The four of us aggressively advanced on the house and on approach I advised the team something like shoot first and ask questions later or don't hesitate to shoot," Wuterich said, reading from a prepared statement.

"I can't remember my exact words but I wanted them to understand that hesitation to shoot would only result in the four of us being killed."

The Marines fired grenades into the houses then shot the inhabitants, including women and children, resulting in another 19 dead. Wuterich said he did not fire any shots inside the houses and only later learned women and children were among the dead.

Some witnesses have said such a "shoot first and ask questions later" logic was improper.

Even as he described horrific deaths, Wuterich projected an earnest, level-headed demeanor that contrasted with some other U.S. soldiers who have been tried over Iraq abuses. Answering questions from his lawyer, Wuterich said he enjoyed Iraqi culture and sometimes played soccer with local children.

He also said he was disturbed when a fellow Marine whose testimony is key in the case -- and whose charges were dismissed in exchange for this testimony -- urinated on the skull of an Iraqi killed near the white car.

In questioning, Wuterich attorney Neil Puckett carefully elicited responses that suggested his client followed his training that day -- an essential part of defense strategy.

Military courts have imprisoned lower-ranking soldiers in a number of the Iraq abuse and civilian killing cases, while officers have faced administrative sanctions.

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN0638282120070906?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&pageNumber=1

86
3DHS / Bush and Hu hold 'friendly' talks
« on: September 06, 2007, 03:18:29 PM »
Bush and Hu hold 'friendly' talks

US President George Bush has held talks with his Chinese counterpart Hu Jintao in the Australian city of Sydney.

Mr Bush described the talks as friendly despite the fact they tackled thorny issues including religious freedom, climate change and exchange rates.

Few details have emerged so far, but Mr Bush said Mr Hu was "quite articulate" over the issue of product safety.

This contentious topic was highlighted recently by a series of recalls of Chinese-made products.

Mr Hu and Mr Bush were meeting ahead of a summit of Asia-Pacific leaders.


While the official leaders' meetings of the 21-nation Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation (Apec) forum are not due to take place until the weekend, several bilateral discussions have already taken place on the sidelines.


Australian Prime Minister John Howard met Mr Hu earlier on Thursday, and the two countries agreed to hold annual security summits.

Mr Bush, meanwhile, began his day by meeting Australian opposition leader Kevin Rudd.

Mr Rudd is far ahead of Mr Howard in opinion polls with a general election due later this year. He wants to withdraw Australian troops from Iraq, in contrast to Mr Howard, who has been a staunch supporter of US policy on Iraq.

Olympic invitation

Mr Bush acknowledged ahead of the meeting that the US and China had a "complex relationship", and said he would be "darned sure" to raise contentious matters during the bilateral talks.

But after their 90-minute meeting, Mr Bush described his Chinese counterpart as "an easy man to talk to," saying: "I'm very comfortable in my discussions with President Hu."

Mr Hu, in return, called the talks "candid and friendly".

The US president was invited to next year's Olympic Games in Beijing, an invitation which he said he was "anxious to accept".

The two men did not take questions after their session, but both spoke briefly to reporters.

"We talked about Iran and North Korea and Sudan. We talked about climate change and our desire to work together on climate change," Mr Bush said.

Mr Hu added that they had also discussed increasing trade ties between their two countries.

Meanwhile, other leaders from the Apec nations are gathering in Sydney ahead of the weekend summit.

Security is extremely tight in the city, with large demonstrations expected at the weekend.

A 5km (three-mile) barrier has been erected across the city's central business district and more than 5,000 police and troops are patrolling the streets.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/asia-pacific/6981007.stm

Published: 2007/09/06 11:31:08 GMT


87
3DHS / Euro MPs urge easing liquids ban
« on: September 05, 2007, 02:00:46 PM »
In my opinion, I don't care what the cost vs. benefit factor is, the restrictions should be left in place. And it's not that big of a deal. I've flown internationally since the ban was put enacted and it's probably one of the simpler security checks (easier than, say, looking for lighters a passenger is carrying).


Euro MPs urge easing liquids ban
By Alix Kroeger
BBC News, at the European Parliament in Strasbourg 

The European Parliament has backed a resolution which calls for the EU to review restrictions on taking liquids on board aeroplanes.
It is purely advisory as members of the European Parliament (MEPs) have no power to impose any measures.

But the resolution says the security benefits may not justify the cost of the restriction.

And it calls for the ban to be lifted unless further conclusive evidence can be brought forward to support it.

MEPs have voted for an urgent review of the EU regulation which says air travellers can only take liquids on planes in containers of less than 100ml.

The regulation was brought in after police in London said they had broken up a plot to bring down as many as 10 planes using liquid explosives.

If there is no new evidence to show that the regulation makes air travel safer, MEPs want the ban repealed.

The resolution says they recognise the need for security, but measures need to be realistically designed to reduce risk.

And it says the extra cost and inconvenience of the liquids ban may not be outweighed by the security it provides.


Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/6980208.stm

Published: 2007/09/05 14:27:20 GMT

88
3DHS / Senior Saudi royal demands reform
« on: September 05, 2007, 01:52:12 PM »
Senior Saudi royal demands reform
A senior Saudi prince has said he plans to form a political party and has criticised other senior royals for monopolising power and blocking reform.
Talal Bin Abdul-Aziz, a half-brother of King Abdullah, also criticised the jailing of well-known reformists.

Saudi officials made no immediate comment to Prince Talal's remarks.

The prince, who holds no official post, is seen as something of a maverick due to his past calls for reform, says BBC Middle East analyst Roger Hardy.

In the 1960s, he became known as the "Red Prince" when he broke with the ruling family and went into exile in Egypt, whose president, Gamal Abdul Nasser, was a severe critic of the Gulf kingdom.

 "We, in particular the sons of Abdul-Aziz [the founder of Saudi Arabia], should take part, both in expressing opinions and in decision-making" -- Prince Talal Bin Abdul-Aziz

But today, the prince is considered to be close to King Abdullah, who was seen as sympathetic to reform when he came to the throne two years ago.

Prince Talal is now trying, in a very public way, to test the limits of political change, our correspondent says.

'Eliminating others'

The prince's outspoken call for change came in an interview with the Associated Press. In it, he declared that he wanted to launch a political party, something that is banned in Saudi Arabia.

"I know this is not an easy thing to do, and we have a lot of obstacles ahead of us, but we have to start forming this party," he said.

Without naming names, Prince Talal said he wanted the party to challenge those who have been "holding executive power for some 70 years" - effectively attacking his own brothers.

 "We have signed international conventions, such as on women's rights, and we should respect them" - Prince Talal 

"This is a group which is not only blocking reform, but is also trying to eliminate others and take everything in its hand," he said.

"We, in particular the sons of Abdul-Aziz, should take part, both in expressing opinions and in decision-making."

Many Saudis are asking why the kingdom's smaller Gulf Arab neighbours are moving ahead politically faster than it is, he added.

The prince, who is in his 70s, also criticised the continued detention of several Saudi activists who have been advocating reform. He described the imprisoned activists as prisoners of conscience.

"They should be either tried in an independent court or set free," he said.

Prince Talal's son, al-Walid Bin Talal, is one of the wealthiest businessmen in the world, with a fortune believed to be in excess of $20bn.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/6980056.stm

Published: 2007/09/05 14:04:47 GMT

89
Chicken Soup / Killer Popcorn
« on: September 05, 2007, 01:38:13 PM »
Doctor Warns Consumers of Popcorn Fumes
Doctor Warns Consumers May Be in Danger From Fumes From Buttery Flavoring in Microwave Popcorn
By MARCUS KABEL
The Associated Press

Consumers, not just factory workers, may be in danger from fumes from buttery flavoring in microwave popcorn, according to a warning letter to federal regulators from a doctor at a leading lung research hospital.

A pulmonary specialist at Denver's National Jewish Medical and Research Center has written to federal agencies to say doctors there believe they have the first case of a consumer who developed lung disease from the fumes of microwaving popcorn several times a day for years.

"We cannot be sure that this patient's exposure to butter flavored microwave popcorn from daily heavy preparation has caused his lung disease," cautioned Dr. Cecile Rose. "However, we have no other plausible explanation."

The July letter, made public Tuesday by a public health policy blog, refers to a potentially fatal disease commonly called popcorn lung that has been the subject of lawsuits by hundreds of workers at food factories exposed to chemicals used for flavoring.

In response to Rose's finding, the Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association issued a statement Tuesday recommending that its members reduce "to the extent possible" the amount of diacetyl in butter flavorings they make. It noted that diacetyl is approved for use in flavors by the federal Food and Drug Administration.

One national popcorn manufacturer, Weaver Popcorn Co. of Indianapolis, said last week it would replace the butter flavoring ingredient because of consumer concern. Congress has also been debating new safety measures for workers in food processing plants exposed to diacetyl.

The FDA said in an e-mail it is evaluating Rose's letter and "carefully considering the safety and regulatory issues it raises."

Fred Blosser, spokesman for the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, said it is the first case the institute has seen of lung disease apparently linked to popcorn fumes outside the workplace.

The occupational safety arm of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said it is working on a response to the letter.

William Allstetter, spokesman for National Jewish Medical, confirmed the letter was sent by Rose, a specialist in occupational and environmental lung diseases and director of the hospital's Occupational and Environmental Medicine Clinic.

"There have been no other cases that we know of other than the industrial occupational ones," Allstetter said.

Rose acknowledged in the letter that it is difficult to confirm through one case that popping buttered microwave popcorn at home can cause lung disease.

However, she said she wanted to alert regulators of the potential public health implications.

Rose said the ailing patient, a man whom she wouldn't identify, consumed "several bags of extra butter flavored microwave popcorn" every day for several years.

He described progressively worsening respiratory symptoms of coughing and shortness of breath. Tests found his ability to exhale was deteriorating, Rose said, although his condition seemed to stabilize after he quit using microwave popcorn.

She said her staff measured airborne levels of diacetyl in the patient's home when he cooked the popcorn. The levels were "similar to those reported in the microwave oven exhaust area" at the quality assurance unit of the popcorn plant where the affected employees worked, she said.

David Michaels, of the George Washington University School of Public Health, who first published Rose's letter on his blog, The Pump Handle, said the finding is another reason for federal regulators to crack down on diacetyl exposure by workers and consumers.

"This letter is a red flag, suggesting that exposure to food flavor chemicals is not just killing workers, but may also be causing disease in people exposed to food flavor chemicals in their kitchens," Michaels wrote on his public health policy blog.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory?id=3557771

90
3DHS / Abandon Stereotypes, Muslims in America Say
« on: September 04, 2007, 04:58:36 PM »
Abandon Stereotypes, Muslims in America Say
By NEIL MacFARQUHAR
Published: September 4, 2007
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/04/us/04muslims.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

ROSEMONT, Ill., Sept 3 ? It is time for the United States to stop treating every American Muslim as somehow suspect, leaders of the faith said at their largest annual convention, which ended here on Monday.

Six years after the Sept. 11 attacks, Americans should distinguish between mainstream Muslims and the radical fringe, the leaders said.

?Muslim Americans feel an increasing level of tension and scrutiny in contemporary society,? said Ingrid Mattson, president of the Islamic Society of North America, the largest Muslim organization in the United States and the convention organizer.

The image problems were among the topics most discussed by many of the 30,000 attendees. A fresh example cited was an open letter from two Republican House members, Peter Hoekstra of Michigan and Sue Myrick of North Carolina, that attacked the Justice Department for sending envoys to the convention because, the lawmakers said, the Islamic Society of North America was a group of ?radical jihadists.?

The lone Muslim in Congress, Representative Keith Ellison, Democrat of Minnesota, the keynote speaker here, dismissed the letter as ill informed and typical of bigoted attacks that other minorities have suffered.

Leaders of American Muslim organizations attribute the growing intolerance to three main factors: global terrorist attacks in the name of Islam, disappointing reports from the Iraq war and the agenda of some supporters of Israel who try taint Islam to undermine the Palestinians.

American Muslims say they expect the attacks to worsen in the presidential election and candidates to criticize Islam in an effort to prove that they are tough on terrorism.

Zaid Shakir, an African-American imam with rock star status among young Muslims, described how on a recent road trip from Michigan to Washington he heard comments on talk radio from people who were ?making stuff up about Islam.?

Among the most egregious, he said, was from a person in Kentucky who denounced the traditional short wood stick some Muslims use to clean their teeth, saying, ?They are really sharpening up their teeth because they are planning to eat you, yes they are.?

Representatives of at least eight federal departments and agencies attended the convention, their booths sandwiched among hundreds of others from bookstores, travel agencies, perfumeries, clothing designers and real estate developers.

Mark S. Ward, who runs programs in Asia and the Middle East for the Agency for International Development, said Washington had to compete for influence abroad with militant groups that are expert at delivering humanitarian services.

Mr. Ward said he hoped more American Muslim organizations would apply to help distribute overseas aid.

A few people approached the Federal Bureau of Investigation booth to voice dismay at its presence, said a recruiter, David Valle, but most expressed pleasant surprise.

?A lot of folks think we want to hire them to spy on their community, spy on their families,? he said. ?We want to dispel any myths they might have about the F.B.I.?

The Justice Department responded to Mr. Hoekstra and Ms. Myrick?s letter by noting that broad community contact in areas like voting rights was an important part of its mission.

That theme was echoed by Daniel W. Sutherland, chief officer for civil rights and liberties at the Homeland Security Department. Mr. Sutherland told a luncheon audience that the government needed to dispel prejudice and misconceptions to steer the public discussion about fighting terrorism to ?a higher level.?

Sometimes frustration with the government boiled over. At a seminar on charitable giving, Ihsan Haque of Akron, Ohio, asked a Treasury Department representative, Michael Rosen, how to avoid being prosecuted for donating to Muslim charities. When Mr. Rosen said the government did not have the resources to check the million or so charities in the United States, Mr. Haque shouted, ?And I do??

Muslim leaders described the government relationship toward Muslim organizations as contradictory. The government seeks to foster greater civic engagement, because a lack of engagement is widely considered a big cause of Muslim extremism in Europe. A Department of Homeland Security official moderated a panel on aiding engagement.

Muslim groups are often treated as suspect, speakers said. In a trial that started in July in Dallas, federal prosecutors named the Islamic Society of North America as part of an effort to raise money for groups the government considers terrorists, but did not charge it with wrongdoing.

The Justice Department has to decide on its law enforcement side what it considers a target, said Khurrum Wahid, a prominent Muslim defense lawyer.

?Are they going to continue to say that the higher degree of religiosity you have the higher likelihood that you are a threat, because that?s the message they?ve sent,? Mr. Wahid said.

Rabbi Eric H. Yoffie, president of the Union for Reform Judaism, denounced by name Christian fundamentalists like Pat Robertson and Franklin Graham, as well as Dennis Prager, a well-known radio host who is Jewish.

?The time has come to stand up to the opportunists, the media figures, the religious leaders and politicians who demonize Muslims and bash Islam, exploiting the fears of their fellow citizens for their own purposes,? Rabbi Yoffie told the opening session.

The Koran tells Muslims to abstain from drinking alcohol and to lower their gaze in modesty when meeting a member of the opposite sex, but some college-age Muslim men and women at the convention stayed up late into the night drinking, talking and getting to know one another.

?If you keep your gaze lowered all the time, you might just walk into a wall,? said Hazem Talha, a high school senior from Atlanta who said he was here for the religious lectures.


Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 11