Muslim Response to the Cartoons in Danish Paper
Mirza A. Beg
Written, Tuesday, January 31, 2006
Media Monitor Network, Thursday, February 2, 2006
http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/26308
Al Jazeerah Friday, February 3, 2006
http://www.aljazeerah.info/3%20o/Muslim%20Response%20to%20the%20Cartoons%20in%20The%20Danish%20Paper%20By%20Mirza%20A.%20Beg.htm
Indian Express, Tuesday, February 7, 2006
http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=87400
Milli Gazette,Wednesday, February 8, 2006
http://www.milligazette.com/dailyupdate/2006/20060208-prophets-cartoons.htm
Muslims have and should strongly condemn the poor taste and bigotry of the Danish paper as well as the other papers that have republished the offending cartoons. People of goodwill from other communities would also join in condemnation because they understand the principle of upholding the public dialogue to a decent level.
But at the same time in a democratic society it is very important to uphold the freedom of the press and the freedom of expression. Governments can not, and should not muzzle the press, even in cases of gutter-journalism. They can and should condemn such practitioners help their constituents understand the harm it does to civil society.
Unlike the Rushdi affair, so far the Muslim world has dealt with the offence properly and the economic response is the right course.
It is extremely important to keep the hot heads among Muslims who indulge in offensive sloganeering; insulting others or threatening violence be kept in check and loudly condemned by the Muslim leaders. Yellow journalism exists. The constitution of democratic societies have very limited options in keeping it in check. The only way to keep it at a low level is condemnation by the society at large and not draconian measures by the governments.
Under the freedom of the press, the Danish paper had the right to print those cartoons. Muslims and decent people from all religions and even atheists who have taken an offense to the indecency have a right to not subsidize the paper by not buying it.
In the world at large, Muslims and all those who abhor indecency and bigotry have a right not to associate with those who subsidize yellow journalism, such as the advertisers and others form within that society, thus the economic boycott is a very good and civilized idea.
Economic boycott is a two edged sword and should not be taken lightly by those who are doing it, and by those who are the target. The sooner this is brought to a conclusion the better. A long drawn out war of words eventually deteriorates and is taken over by the extremists on both sides. Therefore it is also very important to have a view of what would be considered an adequate redress. The following points should be helpful in resolution.
1. If the European governments condemn the offensive cartoons and disassociate themselves, which they already have. They should be lauded and appreciated. It is not as easy for them to do as some would say. They pay a heavy political price to the bigoted part of their political base.
2. If the paper apologizes and prints the apology. It should be gratefully accepted. Again because it is a very difficult step for a major newspaper to do.
3. Some extremist fringe papers with only a small constituency may take up the cause of bigotry to increase their circulation. They should be ignored.
In a mercantile world where ideas are often valued in monetary terms, it is the only civilized and principled way of combating bigotry.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com
Friday, June 29, 2007
Women lead Prayer 05-03-25
Muslim Women Leading the Friday Prayer
Mirza A. Beg
Sunday, March 20, 2005
Al Jazeerah, Friday, March 25, 2005
http://www.aljazeerah.info/25%20o/Muslim%20Women%20Leading%20the%20Friday%20Prayer%20By%20Mirza%20A.%20Beg.htm
It certainly is a notable event, Earth shaking, perhaps not. From some perspectives it is a long overdue recognition of the right of women to participate fully and on equal terms with men. It is a minority view and goes strongly against a tradition that held sway for fourteen centuries. While in other perspectives held by a vast majority of Muslims around the world, it is wrong. The degrees of "wrong" range from it being considered: complete abomination, blatantly against the religion, an unnecessary innovation, against the authoritative texts, an attempt to grab headlines and appease the modernist detractors of Islam.
It is important to keep in mind that the foundation of Islam is "Shahada", that is the proclamation, "There is no deity except God and Muhammad was his messenger". The word of Quran Islam's holy book is the ultimate authority and the practices of the Messenger (Hadith) are the guide. One cannot negate the Quran and still be called a Muslim. However, the text has been interpreted with nuances of differences over the centuries. The practice and sayings of the Messenger have also been a subject of great debate throughout Islamic history. So much so that different interpretations have spawned many sects and schools of jurisprudence.
This event has taken place in a pluralistic, civil society; therefore, it cannot be stopped by legal or draconian means. This event can only be minimized and marginalized as being improper and wrong, by convincing a vast majority of the Muslims after a long and spirited debate. Those who want to can and will propagate and build on this event. Those who are opposed will and should marshal intellectual and religious arguments. Simply asserting that it has never been done and is against the traditions will not be a winning argument in the long run, and those who support this new development should not merely claim that it is modern and with the times. This is not a valid or decisive argument. Remember, many modern ideas popular at the time, end up on the dust heap of history. In a healthy society one should be able to discuss the religious and social issues in spirited debates, calmly with intellectual honesty and probity.
The debate has ensued. There are and will be knee jerk reactions. It will take some time for the arguments, both for and against, to crystallize and reach the people who really want to explore the intricacies and nuances of Islam honestly and logically. It is a very important that we participate in such a discussion. The Quran does not prohibit women from participating or even leading the prayers. Obviously the holy messenger was a man. Simply saying that the Messenger Muhammad (May God shed his grace on him) did not ever ask a woman to lead the prayers, would not be enough because traditionally women were not part of the public arena. From his character we know he was mild mannered and just. He was supporter of the downtrodden and women's rights. The question would hinge on, whether he specifically prohibited women to ever lead in prayers or not.
Historically, by and large, the very nature of societies have been for men to hold the temporal power and to be in the vanguard of priestly power as well - making them also the interpreters of the religion. The exceptional women have held power only temporarily and only by the support of men for specific reasons. The priestesses in the primitive religions were based on a female principle and were always supported and exploited by men.
With the exception of modern times, educational opportunities were available only to the very small upper crust of the population, and among them overwhelmingly only to men. So the women had to follow the rules adjudicated by men, as did the vast poorer sections of the population, males included. It is too simplistic to blame men as anti-women. Men have loved and cared for women as mothers, sister, wives and daughters, but a male mindset is imprinted in the laws of society. Powerful men held sway over the weaker men and all women.
This mindset persisted even in patent disregard of religion advocating and enjoining against injustice. In the case of Islam, we legitimately celebrate and take pride in the egalitarianism of Islam and that Islam gave women social and economic right, not available to others in contemporary societies. Yet those rights were substantially eroded over the centuries, and in most societies the atavistic tribal rights not only persisted, but were enforced by the guardians acting in the name of Islam.
Modern times have brought a great dilemma to the traditionalists. The right to literacy is a recognized universal right and education is spreading fast. The Internet has brought knowledge as close as the push of a button. Women particularly have made great strides. They are aspiring and succeeding in all fields of human endeavor, including, law and theology. They are not going to take a back seat, nor should they be inhibited.
Therefore the die has been cast' and the only option is for all sides to marshal their arguments, which should be based on the most sacred and binding texts. Simply throwing epithets, - such as women haters for traditionalists and Western stooges for those insisting on change, - is an insult to our intelligence and the comely spirit if Islam and civil society. People like me, who are not religious scholars but are willing to be educated welcome such a dialogue.
Mirza A Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com
Mirza A. Beg
Sunday, March 20, 2005
Al Jazeerah, Friday, March 25, 2005
http://www.aljazeerah.info/25%20o/Muslim%20Women%20Leading%20the%20Friday%20Prayer%20By%20Mirza%20A.%20Beg.htm
It certainly is a notable event, Earth shaking, perhaps not. From some perspectives it is a long overdue recognition of the right of women to participate fully and on equal terms with men. It is a minority view and goes strongly against a tradition that held sway for fourteen centuries. While in other perspectives held by a vast majority of Muslims around the world, it is wrong. The degrees of "wrong" range from it being considered: complete abomination, blatantly against the religion, an unnecessary innovation, against the authoritative texts, an attempt to grab headlines and appease the modernist detractors of Islam.
It is important to keep in mind that the foundation of Islam is "Shahada", that is the proclamation, "There is no deity except God and Muhammad was his messenger". The word of Quran Islam's holy book is the ultimate authority and the practices of the Messenger (Hadith) are the guide. One cannot negate the Quran and still be called a Muslim. However, the text has been interpreted with nuances of differences over the centuries. The practice and sayings of the Messenger have also been a subject of great debate throughout Islamic history. So much so that different interpretations have spawned many sects and schools of jurisprudence.
This event has taken place in a pluralistic, civil society; therefore, it cannot be stopped by legal or draconian means. This event can only be minimized and marginalized as being improper and wrong, by convincing a vast majority of the Muslims after a long and spirited debate. Those who want to can and will propagate and build on this event. Those who are opposed will and should marshal intellectual and religious arguments. Simply asserting that it has never been done and is against the traditions will not be a winning argument in the long run, and those who support this new development should not merely claim that it is modern and with the times. This is not a valid or decisive argument. Remember, many modern ideas popular at the time, end up on the dust heap of history. In a healthy society one should be able to discuss the religious and social issues in spirited debates, calmly with intellectual honesty and probity.
The debate has ensued. There are and will be knee jerk reactions. It will take some time for the arguments, both for and against, to crystallize and reach the people who really want to explore the intricacies and nuances of Islam honestly and logically. It is a very important that we participate in such a discussion. The Quran does not prohibit women from participating or even leading the prayers. Obviously the holy messenger was a man. Simply saying that the Messenger Muhammad (May God shed his grace on him) did not ever ask a woman to lead the prayers, would not be enough because traditionally women were not part of the public arena. From his character we know he was mild mannered and just. He was supporter of the downtrodden and women's rights. The question would hinge on, whether he specifically prohibited women to ever lead in prayers or not.
Historically, by and large, the very nature of societies have been for men to hold the temporal power and to be in the vanguard of priestly power as well - making them also the interpreters of the religion. The exceptional women have held power only temporarily and only by the support of men for specific reasons. The priestesses in the primitive religions were based on a female principle and were always supported and exploited by men.
With the exception of modern times, educational opportunities were available only to the very small upper crust of the population, and among them overwhelmingly only to men. So the women had to follow the rules adjudicated by men, as did the vast poorer sections of the population, males included. It is too simplistic to blame men as anti-women. Men have loved and cared for women as mothers, sister, wives and daughters, but a male mindset is imprinted in the laws of society. Powerful men held sway over the weaker men and all women.
This mindset persisted even in patent disregard of religion advocating and enjoining against injustice. In the case of Islam, we legitimately celebrate and take pride in the egalitarianism of Islam and that Islam gave women social and economic right, not available to others in contemporary societies. Yet those rights were substantially eroded over the centuries, and in most societies the atavistic tribal rights not only persisted, but were enforced by the guardians acting in the name of Islam.
Modern times have brought a great dilemma to the traditionalists. The right to literacy is a recognized universal right and education is spreading fast. The Internet has brought knowledge as close as the push of a button. Women particularly have made great strides. They are aspiring and succeeding in all fields of human endeavor, including, law and theology. They are not going to take a back seat, nor should they be inhibited.
Therefore the die has been cast' and the only option is for all sides to marshal their arguments, which should be based on the most sacred and binding texts. Simply throwing epithets, - such as women haters for traditionalists and Western stooges for those insisting on change, - is an insult to our intelligence and the comely spirit if Islam and civil society. People like me, who are not religious scholars but are willing to be educated welcome such a dialogue.
Mirza A Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com
Daniel pearl 02-03-05
Murder of Daniel Pearl
Mirza A. Beg
Written on Feb. 23rd, 2002
Muslim Observer March 5th, 2002
Daniel Pearl is the latest victim of the ferocious ignorance blowing from those who are a blot on the name of religion, any religion, in this case Islam. Nine reporters were killed in Afghanistan in the last three months. Before that, reporters have been killed in Bosnia, Kosovo, Chechnya, Northern Ireland and lots of other places. But people like Daniel Pearl keep reporting, because if they do not, we will not know the face of evil.
Murderers of Daniel Pearl obviously do not understand or respect Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism or any other religion. The pity is that they do not understand or respect Islam either, which in their own demented thinking, they are trying to uphold and protect. With friends like these who needs enemies, and with enemies like these even a scoundrel can look good.
Daniel Pearl was a reporter trying to gather information, information that could have been injurious to their cause. He came to them as an American journalist named Daniel Pearl, a Jew by religion. He did not hide his identity, did not try to infiltrate them by deception. Even if he was spying for the United States or even Israel, all they had to do was not to talk to him.
If his abductors had any inkling of the teachings of their own religion, they would have known that under Islamic as well as secular law, the only way he could or should have been killed is, either in self-defense or had he been found guilty of a capital offence by a duly recognized court. Neither of the conditions was applicable.
Americans and the present Pakistani government are the enemies in their eyes, for defeating and pursuing the Al Qaida operatives and the Talibans. Purportedly they killed Daniel Pearl because he was a spy and a Jew. That may satisfy their own convoluted sense of values, but over the years they have also killed thousands of Muslims, in whose name they are supposedly doing this evil deed. Killing of Muslims was justified on the basis of ethnic, linguistic, or political differences. They are a narrow minded, murderous blot on humanity and enemy of their own religion.
It is impossible to understand their thinking, because thinking is what they do not do. They lurk in the midst of religious zealots, masquerading as protectors, while growing as cancer if not cauterized.
All this will not make any sense to Daniel Pearl’s family, his widow, or his unborn child. We grieve for him because he was our brother in humanity, and he died at the hands of evil, which is the enemy of decency and humanity. In death he exposed the evil even more clearly.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted by email at mab64@yahoo.com
Mirza A. Beg
Written on Feb. 23rd, 2002
Muslim Observer March 5th, 2002
Daniel Pearl is the latest victim of the ferocious ignorance blowing from those who are a blot on the name of religion, any religion, in this case Islam. Nine reporters were killed in Afghanistan in the last three months. Before that, reporters have been killed in Bosnia, Kosovo, Chechnya, Northern Ireland and lots of other places. But people like Daniel Pearl keep reporting, because if they do not, we will not know the face of evil.
Murderers of Daniel Pearl obviously do not understand or respect Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism or any other religion. The pity is that they do not understand or respect Islam either, which in their own demented thinking, they are trying to uphold and protect. With friends like these who needs enemies, and with enemies like these even a scoundrel can look good.
Daniel Pearl was a reporter trying to gather information, information that could have been injurious to their cause. He came to them as an American journalist named Daniel Pearl, a Jew by religion. He did not hide his identity, did not try to infiltrate them by deception. Even if he was spying for the United States or even Israel, all they had to do was not to talk to him.
If his abductors had any inkling of the teachings of their own religion, they would have known that under Islamic as well as secular law, the only way he could or should have been killed is, either in self-defense or had he been found guilty of a capital offence by a duly recognized court. Neither of the conditions was applicable.
Americans and the present Pakistani government are the enemies in their eyes, for defeating and pursuing the Al Qaida operatives and the Talibans. Purportedly they killed Daniel Pearl because he was a spy and a Jew. That may satisfy their own convoluted sense of values, but over the years they have also killed thousands of Muslims, in whose name they are supposedly doing this evil deed. Killing of Muslims was justified on the basis of ethnic, linguistic, or political differences. They are a narrow minded, murderous blot on humanity and enemy of their own religion.
It is impossible to understand their thinking, because thinking is what they do not do. They lurk in the midst of religious zealots, masquerading as protectors, while growing as cancer if not cauterized.
All this will not make any sense to Daniel Pearl’s family, his widow, or his unborn child. We grieve for him because he was our brother in humanity, and he died at the hands of evil, which is the enemy of decency and humanity. In death he exposed the evil even more clearly.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted by email at mab64@yahoo.com
Vitims of Bombing 06-07-12
Mumbai Bombings –A Requiem for the Victims
Mirza A. Beg
Wednesday, July 12th, 2006
Al Jazeerah, Thurseday July 13, 2006
http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20editorials/2006%20Opinion%20Editorials/July/13%20o/Mumbai%20Bombings%20A%20Requiem%20for%20the%20Victims%20By%20Mirza%20A.%20Beg.htm
Counter Currents, Friday, July 14, 2006
http://www.countercurrents.org/ind-beg140706.htm
Media Monitors network, Thursday, July 13, 2006
http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/32493
We need to speak and speak with the courage of conviction. It is time for unequivocal condemnation of this and all heinous acts. The train bombings in Mumbai India, the attacks of 9/11 in the US, the Madrid and London bombings the suicide bombings on Middle East, Sri Lanka and many other places are not isolated incidents, but a pattern of deadly causes and deadly effects. They do not seem to have any chance of abatement in the near future. The world is reeling in spiraling brutal abyss.
Imagine one of our loved ones on that train in Mumbai and the dimensions of the tragedy suddenly hits home. There were many loved ones who perished in this dance of death, in a wider sense they were us; mindless tits for the multiple tats and on it goes. Governments suppress and repress some in the name of many with impunity under the cover of national, but in blatant violation of humane law. Thus they kill thousands over the years in the name of those whom they purport to represent and protect.
Some otherwise ordinary people on the receiving end, blinded by anger take refuge and find justification in terrorism committed against some distant clueless humans going about in the mundane drudgery of life. Terrorists become so callous in their anger multiplied many times by hate filled ideologies that they lose all sense of decency, distinction and humanity visiting carnage in distant lands on innocent people.
These incidences are going on around the world with the regularity of seasons. Many countries are perpetrators and victims at the same time. When we think of whose lives snuffed out and those that will carry the scar for the rest of their lives, our eyes well up. It is a reflection of our individual failure; we keep quite, in the face of atrocities, often for selfish reasons or false pride, but above all apathy.
It is also a reflection of our utter failure to tame our split personalities forcing us into compartmentalized thinking. As individuals we suffer and grieve and perhaps throw a few crumbs through a charitable organization for the victims, but as a society we create conditions through our governments to be duplicitous, and cruel while claiming to be good.
In the modern times with communications and transport facilities the problems of hunger, poverty and ethnic cleansing can and should have been solved. But what we give officially in charity with fanfare we take away many times more through the support of corrupt regimes for the benefit of our mega corporations who give mega bucks to the ones whom we vote to represent us.
We have unwittingly become a cog in the deception machine. All these lost lives had a story to tell. Once in a while some decent soul makes us see this. We feel momentary shock and sense of dejection. At times we feel utterly helpless and guilty for every morsel we take while others in distant places are suffering utter indignities, but life goes on.
The tyranny of power has been with us since the dawn of the civilization. The rebellious especially if they were powerless in terms of armament fought guerilla wars or indulged in hit and run terrorism. In modern times with the enormous power of explosives including the WMDs and the means of remote controlled impersonalized delivery systems the governments especially the rich and powerful ones became brazen in their hegemonic pursuits. The terrorists though lagging behind have kept up with the technology of destruction.
The idea that the governments have an unbridled right to crush opposition within their borders even if they are contentious, or ethnically torment or kill the pesky minorities have been proven to be barbaric and unattainable. British experience in Northern Ireland (Ulster) is a prime example. British draconian (State terrorism) iron fisted glove could not subdue the Ulster, instead the tit of torture created the tat of bombings in London. The British took head and settled with the Northern Ireland on difficult but equitable term, bringing peace to both and negating the old and false truism of force.
The “one percent “Bush doctrine “Bushism” is the last gasp of the hegemonic powers from the 20th century. The doctrine stated by Cheney and adopted by Bush as reported in the press is that if there is even a one percent chance of harm to the US, we should attack. One wonders how a one percent chance is calculated. There is always a one percent chance from many changing sources at any given time. Essentially it means that they will lie, connive or use any means to the preferred ends against whomever they please, inventing such inane phrases as axis of evil to lull the electorate. This policy gave us Iraq war, hundreds of thousands of civilians killed, the worst reputation in our history and a template for other hegemonic powers to follow. Imagine how this enormous expenditure could have been used towards constructive ends.
It is time to stop saber rattling and adopt the rule of national and international laws with transparency. It is time to bring the offenders, the terrorists to justice through legal means. Not through violations of human rights and gulags that Bush doctrine preaches. It will be a very slow and tedious process. The ushering of a new paradigm truly based of internationally recognized norms will be difficult and slow, but start we must, to reach what we the citizens of the world hope for, but have never truly tried with honesty.
There is no decency, courage or honor in killing thousands of innocent people in distant places by the governments in our name, or the terrorists in the name of what ever they represent. We know this, but just as we have learned to put our personal family tragedies behind, we will put this behind as well, and the dance of death and destruction will continues in our name. We have been guilty of silence, and they feed on our silence. It is time to speak with voice of humanity within us. No more blood tyranny, torture and terrorism in our names.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com
Mirza A. Beg
Wednesday, July 12th, 2006
Al Jazeerah, Thurseday July 13, 2006
http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20editorials/2006%20Opinion%20Editorials/July/13%20o/Mumbai%20Bombings%20A%20Requiem%20for%20the%20Victims%20By%20Mirza%20A.%20Beg.htm
Counter Currents, Friday, July 14, 2006
http://www.countercurrents.org/ind-beg140706.htm
Media Monitors network, Thursday, July 13, 2006
http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/32493
We need to speak and speak with the courage of conviction. It is time for unequivocal condemnation of this and all heinous acts. The train bombings in Mumbai India, the attacks of 9/11 in the US, the Madrid and London bombings the suicide bombings on Middle East, Sri Lanka and many other places are not isolated incidents, but a pattern of deadly causes and deadly effects. They do not seem to have any chance of abatement in the near future. The world is reeling in spiraling brutal abyss.
Imagine one of our loved ones on that train in Mumbai and the dimensions of the tragedy suddenly hits home. There were many loved ones who perished in this dance of death, in a wider sense they were us; mindless tits for the multiple tats and on it goes. Governments suppress and repress some in the name of many with impunity under the cover of national, but in blatant violation of humane law. Thus they kill thousands over the years in the name of those whom they purport to represent and protect.
Some otherwise ordinary people on the receiving end, blinded by anger take refuge and find justification in terrorism committed against some distant clueless humans going about in the mundane drudgery of life. Terrorists become so callous in their anger multiplied many times by hate filled ideologies that they lose all sense of decency, distinction and humanity visiting carnage in distant lands on innocent people.
These incidences are going on around the world with the regularity of seasons. Many countries are perpetrators and victims at the same time. When we think of whose lives snuffed out and those that will carry the scar for the rest of their lives, our eyes well up. It is a reflection of our individual failure; we keep quite, in the face of atrocities, often for selfish reasons or false pride, but above all apathy.
It is also a reflection of our utter failure to tame our split personalities forcing us into compartmentalized thinking. As individuals we suffer and grieve and perhaps throw a few crumbs through a charitable organization for the victims, but as a society we create conditions through our governments to be duplicitous, and cruel while claiming to be good.
In the modern times with communications and transport facilities the problems of hunger, poverty and ethnic cleansing can and should have been solved. But what we give officially in charity with fanfare we take away many times more through the support of corrupt regimes for the benefit of our mega corporations who give mega bucks to the ones whom we vote to represent us.
We have unwittingly become a cog in the deception machine. All these lost lives had a story to tell. Once in a while some decent soul makes us see this. We feel momentary shock and sense of dejection. At times we feel utterly helpless and guilty for every morsel we take while others in distant places are suffering utter indignities, but life goes on.
The tyranny of power has been with us since the dawn of the civilization. The rebellious especially if they were powerless in terms of armament fought guerilla wars or indulged in hit and run terrorism. In modern times with the enormous power of explosives including the WMDs and the means of remote controlled impersonalized delivery systems the governments especially the rich and powerful ones became brazen in their hegemonic pursuits. The terrorists though lagging behind have kept up with the technology of destruction.
The idea that the governments have an unbridled right to crush opposition within their borders even if they are contentious, or ethnically torment or kill the pesky minorities have been proven to be barbaric and unattainable. British experience in Northern Ireland (Ulster) is a prime example. British draconian (State terrorism) iron fisted glove could not subdue the Ulster, instead the tit of torture created the tat of bombings in London. The British took head and settled with the Northern Ireland on difficult but equitable term, bringing peace to both and negating the old and false truism of force.
The “one percent “Bush doctrine “Bushism” is the last gasp of the hegemonic powers from the 20th century. The doctrine stated by Cheney and adopted by Bush as reported in the press is that if there is even a one percent chance of harm to the US, we should attack. One wonders how a one percent chance is calculated. There is always a one percent chance from many changing sources at any given time. Essentially it means that they will lie, connive or use any means to the preferred ends against whomever they please, inventing such inane phrases as axis of evil to lull the electorate. This policy gave us Iraq war, hundreds of thousands of civilians killed, the worst reputation in our history and a template for other hegemonic powers to follow. Imagine how this enormous expenditure could have been used towards constructive ends.
It is time to stop saber rattling and adopt the rule of national and international laws with transparency. It is time to bring the offenders, the terrorists to justice through legal means. Not through violations of human rights and gulags that Bush doctrine preaches. It will be a very slow and tedious process. The ushering of a new paradigm truly based of internationally recognized norms will be difficult and slow, but start we must, to reach what we the citizens of the world hope for, but have never truly tried with honesty.
There is no decency, courage or honor in killing thousands of innocent people in distant places by the governments in our name, or the terrorists in the name of what ever they represent. We know this, but just as we have learned to put our personal family tragedies behind, we will put this behind as well, and the dance of death and destruction will continues in our name. We have been guilty of silence, and they feed on our silence. It is time to speak with voice of humanity within us. No more blood tyranny, torture and terrorism in our names.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com
Men Cruel and Kind 03-08-15
Men are Cruel, But man is kind
Mirza A. Beg
Written, August 15, 2003
Anniston Star, Thursday, August 21, 2003
Yellow Times. (Yellowtimes.org). Sunday August 31,2003
Second Flag salute (secondflagsalute.org) Sept.3, 2003
Birmingham Post Herald, Thursday, September 18, 2003
Arab Media watch, August 31, 2003
http://www.arabmediawatch.com/amw/Articles/Analysis/tabid/75/newsid395/941/-Men-are-cruel-but-Man-is-kind-/Default.aspx
The title, is a line from Tagor's poem, "Play things". It alludes to the innate goodness in most of us. As individuals (the man), we try to help the week and needy, but as a group (Men), under the blinding umbrella of tribalism or nationalism we become cruel towards them; whoever them of the moment may be.
In Iraq the American casualty figures are released carefully, classifying them as dead by hostile action, or accident. The figures for the Iraqi dead are not released; they are reported as Saddam loyalists or collateral damage. In essence, American casualties are 'us', therefore worth counting and mourning, but Iraqis are them, good riddance or at best ignored.
American casualties are mourned; news media keeps a daily count. Iraqi dead is no less human; they have families and neighbors that mourn them as well. Most of the Iraqis killed are "collateral damage". Most were caught at the wrong place at the wrong time. That is Iraq, where they live, their home.
Iraqis count their dead too. In the absence of credible information, that may be a few thousands. The rumor mill exaggerates the numbers to hundreds of thousands, spread by the grapevine mired in distrust and resentment. This is more damaging than the truth.
Saddam used the oil wealth to gradually bribe, coerce, intimidate and finally terrorize Iraqis into following his megalomania. By the time the Iraqis realized; it was too late for them wiggle out of his iron grip.
There were ample justifications to dislodge Saddam from power, but Bush was not willing to spend time to convince the Americans, therefore he resorted to the misuse of intelligence and scared America into believing an imminent danger from Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. This canard worked and overwhelming support was garnered.
General Shinseki, Chief of Army staff and many others warned of inadequate preparation about the post-war winning of peace. They were treated ignominiously, in the headlong rush to war.
The same warning came from French, Germans, and others in the UN. The Administration came to hate them for the fault of not supporting its misrepresentations, and in retrospect having the audacity of being right.
The military and economic might of the US prevailed, the problem of Iraq and its future is in American lap. America can not afford to fail. The world is watching intently. American word, intentions and actions are under scrutiny.
Under Saddam, Iraqis lived an apolitical, circumscribed life with guaranteed lively-hood and basic amenities. Almost four months after Saddam's defeat, they do not have jobs, basic necessities and safety. In the absence of food, water and safety, the old bad times do not look so bad.
Iraqis, distrustful of the American motives are getting desperate. The guerillas are not necessarily supporters of Saddam. All shades of nationalists resent American occupation. They subsume their differences to fight the common enemy. Bush falsely tied mutually antipathic Saddam Hussain with Bin Ladin. Now that Saddam is gone, Iraqi guerillas are willing to get help from all quarters and Bin Ladin is probably aching to help. The bombing of UN headquarters in Baghdad is indicative.
Iraqi guerillas maneuver to attack Americans in such away to elicit indiscriminate overwhelming response. Officially about five thousand Iraqis have been detained, but many more have been searched, shoved and humiliated. This creates fear, resentment and sympathy for the guerillas, irrespective of their brand of ideology.
This appears to be a long-term disaster in the making. A great nation should not jettison truth to achieve short-term objectives, using falsehood. It always comes back to haunt. Administration has asked other countries for policing and economic help that is so sorely needed in Iraq. Many countries are willing to help, but not under the present hegemonic set up. They need the UN umbrella of international legitimacy.
In a small world, no place is far enough. Iraq has exacerbated the war on terrorism and isolated America. It can not be fought in isolation. American safety depends on world peace and justice for the downtrodden. It is time to show that we care for others as well, by actions as much as in words. It is time to rise above crass nationalism and consider the world as our neighbor and be kind to "them" as well.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at: mab64@yahoo.com
Mirza A. Beg
Written, August 15, 2003
Anniston Star, Thursday, August 21, 2003
Yellow Times. (Yellowtimes.org). Sunday August 31,2003
Second Flag salute (secondflagsalute.org) Sept.3, 2003
Birmingham Post Herald, Thursday, September 18, 2003
Arab Media watch, August 31, 2003
http://www.arabmediawatch.com/amw/Articles/Analysis/tabid/75/newsid395/941/-Men-are-cruel-but-Man-is-kind-/Default.aspx
The title, is a line from Tagor's poem, "Play things". It alludes to the innate goodness in most of us. As individuals (the man), we try to help the week and needy, but as a group (Men), under the blinding umbrella of tribalism or nationalism we become cruel towards them; whoever them of the moment may be.
In Iraq the American casualty figures are released carefully, classifying them as dead by hostile action, or accident. The figures for the Iraqi dead are not released; they are reported as Saddam loyalists or collateral damage. In essence, American casualties are 'us', therefore worth counting and mourning, but Iraqis are them, good riddance or at best ignored.
American casualties are mourned; news media keeps a daily count. Iraqi dead is no less human; they have families and neighbors that mourn them as well. Most of the Iraqis killed are "collateral damage". Most were caught at the wrong place at the wrong time. That is Iraq, where they live, their home.
Iraqis count their dead too. In the absence of credible information, that may be a few thousands. The rumor mill exaggerates the numbers to hundreds of thousands, spread by the grapevine mired in distrust and resentment. This is more damaging than the truth.
Saddam used the oil wealth to gradually bribe, coerce, intimidate and finally terrorize Iraqis into following his megalomania. By the time the Iraqis realized; it was too late for them wiggle out of his iron grip.
There were ample justifications to dislodge Saddam from power, but Bush was not willing to spend time to convince the Americans, therefore he resorted to the misuse of intelligence and scared America into believing an imminent danger from Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. This canard worked and overwhelming support was garnered.
General Shinseki, Chief of Army staff and many others warned of inadequate preparation about the post-war winning of peace. They were treated ignominiously, in the headlong rush to war.
The same warning came from French, Germans, and others in the UN. The Administration came to hate them for the fault of not supporting its misrepresentations, and in retrospect having the audacity of being right.
The military and economic might of the US prevailed, the problem of Iraq and its future is in American lap. America can not afford to fail. The world is watching intently. American word, intentions and actions are under scrutiny.
Under Saddam, Iraqis lived an apolitical, circumscribed life with guaranteed lively-hood and basic amenities. Almost four months after Saddam's defeat, they do not have jobs, basic necessities and safety. In the absence of food, water and safety, the old bad times do not look so bad.
Iraqis, distrustful of the American motives are getting desperate. The guerillas are not necessarily supporters of Saddam. All shades of nationalists resent American occupation. They subsume their differences to fight the common enemy. Bush falsely tied mutually antipathic Saddam Hussain with Bin Ladin. Now that Saddam is gone, Iraqi guerillas are willing to get help from all quarters and Bin Ladin is probably aching to help. The bombing of UN headquarters in Baghdad is indicative.
Iraqi guerillas maneuver to attack Americans in such away to elicit indiscriminate overwhelming response. Officially about five thousand Iraqis have been detained, but many more have been searched, shoved and humiliated. This creates fear, resentment and sympathy for the guerillas, irrespective of their brand of ideology.
This appears to be a long-term disaster in the making. A great nation should not jettison truth to achieve short-term objectives, using falsehood. It always comes back to haunt. Administration has asked other countries for policing and economic help that is so sorely needed in Iraq. Many countries are willing to help, but not under the present hegemonic set up. They need the UN umbrella of international legitimacy.
In a small world, no place is far enough. Iraq has exacerbated the war on terrorism and isolated America. It can not be fought in isolation. American safety depends on world peace and justice for the downtrodden. It is time to show that we care for others as well, by actions as much as in words. It is time to rise above crass nationalism and consider the world as our neighbor and be kind to "them" as well.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at: mab64@yahoo.com
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Letter to Indian PM 06-04-03
When will the Government of India protect the victims in Gujarat
Mirza A. Beg
Wednesday, April 3, 2006
Dear Mr. Manmohan Sigh
The Prime Minister of India:
The fascistic Modi government in Gujarat is using the levers of power to kill the Muslims again. As you know, Government conniving to kill Minorities is called “pogrom”.
I joined the overwhelming majority of Muslims of India in condemning the violence in Kashmir by the extremists militants when you were about to engage in peaceful dialogue with the Kashmir separatists to bring a modicum of peace to the beleaguered Kashmiri people. The government under your leadership is pursuing the culprits, as it has pursued other culprits before to bring them to justice. Unfortunately terrorism has become more prevalent in modern times with easy accessibility of weapons and travel. The governments must combat this scourge to civil society.
But terrorism by outlaws and extremists pales in comparison to the state terrorism. It is immoral in all religious and secular codes, and injurious to the Indian constitution and people as a whole. Who would pursue when the Chief Minister of a state is the terrorist? Whom should the victims call for help? We know that you know the answer
Mr. Modi’s government in Gujarat indulged in fascistic pogrom against Muslims in February –March 2002 when about 2,000 Muslims were burned and killed by organized riots under the police protection. At that time the Central government was also dominated by the fascistic BJP. Yes they were popularly elected, but India is a secular constitutional Republic. The acts of the government were not only heinous but unconstitutional.
Dozens of inquiries have squarely laid blame for the pogroms on the Gujarat government, but the culprits are not only at large, but have gotten promotions and brazenly continue to implement their sectarian agenda killing and deprivation of minorities. The Killings in Vododra are only the latest.
The Congress dominated government was elected at the center in part because of the revulsion against such monstrous BJP dominated government. Now you are the Prime Minister. For a state government, not to be able to provide safety to life and limbs of its citizens is bad enough, but engaging in killing is unconscionable and it automatically becomes unconstitutional. When would the Central government act?
We realize the separation of powers between the central and the state governments, puts restraints on the center in interfering in the state affairs, but the killing of two Muslims by the police and burning of one by the mob in Vododra, is a clear message to the world that Murderers can control the state government with impunity and the victims cease to have the protection of the citizenship, while the country watches impotently wringing its collective hands, uttering platitudes.
Mirza A. Beg’s email address is mab64@yahoo.com
Mirza A. Beg
Wednesday, April 3, 2006
Dear Mr. Manmohan Sigh
The Prime Minister of India:
The fascistic Modi government in Gujarat is using the levers of power to kill the Muslims again. As you know, Government conniving to kill Minorities is called “pogrom”.
I joined the overwhelming majority of Muslims of India in condemning the violence in Kashmir by the extremists militants when you were about to engage in peaceful dialogue with the Kashmir separatists to bring a modicum of peace to the beleaguered Kashmiri people. The government under your leadership is pursuing the culprits, as it has pursued other culprits before to bring them to justice. Unfortunately terrorism has become more prevalent in modern times with easy accessibility of weapons and travel. The governments must combat this scourge to civil society.
But terrorism by outlaws and extremists pales in comparison to the state terrorism. It is immoral in all religious and secular codes, and injurious to the Indian constitution and people as a whole. Who would pursue when the Chief Minister of a state is the terrorist? Whom should the victims call for help? We know that you know the answer
Mr. Modi’s government in Gujarat indulged in fascistic pogrom against Muslims in February –March 2002 when about 2,000 Muslims were burned and killed by organized riots under the police protection. At that time the Central government was also dominated by the fascistic BJP. Yes they were popularly elected, but India is a secular constitutional Republic. The acts of the government were not only heinous but unconstitutional.
Dozens of inquiries have squarely laid blame for the pogroms on the Gujarat government, but the culprits are not only at large, but have gotten promotions and brazenly continue to implement their sectarian agenda killing and deprivation of minorities. The Killings in Vododra are only the latest.
The Congress dominated government was elected at the center in part because of the revulsion against such monstrous BJP dominated government. Now you are the Prime Minister. For a state government, not to be able to provide safety to life and limbs of its citizens is bad enough, but engaging in killing is unconscionable and it automatically becomes unconstitutional. When would the Central government act?
We realize the separation of powers between the central and the state governments, puts restraints on the center in interfering in the state affairs, but the killing of two Muslims by the police and burning of one by the mob in Vododra, is a clear message to the world that Murderers can control the state government with impunity and the victims cease to have the protection of the citizenship, while the country watches impotently wringing its collective hands, uttering platitudes.
Mirza A. Beg’s email address is mab64@yahoo.com
Cindy Sheehan 07-05-26
Withdrawal from the peace movement
Letter to Cindy Sheehan
http://laney5-sb.livejournal.com/
http://www.caplewoodblog.com
http://mirzasmusings.blogspot.com/
Dear Ms. Sheehan:
I am saddened by the circumstances that led you to your heart felt and disappointing decision to withdraw from the peace movement. My first reaction was to implore you to reconsider, but that would have been intellectually and emotionally very selfish of me.
I have admired the purity of your reasons and the tenacity of your purpose. Inevitably it requires tremendous sacrifices. The loss of a son is a horrible tragedy in itself, but to lose him for a cause that is evil is much harder. The hardship of your younger children and other personal sacrifices of family relationships are immeasurable.
I empathize with your sense of revulsion at being exploited as a cog in a political machine that is called the Democratic Party. Some how one feels unclean after the purity of intensions are muddied and co-opted by the snare of the other side that did not have the courage to oppose the evil.
I wish you and your family happiness, and hope you would come closer to finding solace and sustenance in each other. I hope, in time you will heal emotionally. In a few years after meeting the responsibility towards your children, you will find the rejuvenated inner strength to rejoin in the struggle to free our country from the Imperialistic foreign policy that has been supported by the power structure in both the parties. Thanks and warm regards,
Mirza A. Beg
http://mirzasmusings.blogspot.com
Mab64@yahoo.com
Letter to Cindy Sheehan
http://laney5-sb.livejournal.com/
http://www.caplewoodblog.com
http://mirzasmusings.blogspot.com/
Dear Ms. Sheehan:
I am saddened by the circumstances that led you to your heart felt and disappointing decision to withdraw from the peace movement. My first reaction was to implore you to reconsider, but that would have been intellectually and emotionally very selfish of me.
I have admired the purity of your reasons and the tenacity of your purpose. Inevitably it requires tremendous sacrifices. The loss of a son is a horrible tragedy in itself, but to lose him for a cause that is evil is much harder. The hardship of your younger children and other personal sacrifices of family relationships are immeasurable.
I empathize with your sense of revulsion at being exploited as a cog in a political machine that is called the Democratic Party. Some how one feels unclean after the purity of intensions are muddied and co-opted by the snare of the other side that did not have the courage to oppose the evil.
I wish you and your family happiness, and hope you would come closer to finding solace and sustenance in each other. I hope, in time you will heal emotionally. In a few years after meeting the responsibility towards your children, you will find the rejuvenated inner strength to rejoin in the struggle to free our country from the Imperialistic foreign policy that has been supported by the power structure in both the parties. Thanks and warm regards,
Mirza A. Beg
http://mirzasmusings.blogspot.com
Mab64@yahoo.com
Satire- letter- Bush 06-04-20
Dear Mr. Bush, I understand you
Mirza A. Beg
Written, Tuesday, April 18, 2006
Counter currents, Thursday, April 20, 2006
http://www.countercurrents.org/us-beg200406.htm
Al Jazeerah, Sunday April 23, 2006
http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20editorials/2006%20Opinion%20Editorials/April/22o/Dear%20Mr%20Bush,%20I%20understand%20you%20By%20Mirza%20A%20Beg.htm
Locust Fork, Friday April 21, 2006
http://www.locustfork.net/blog/
Milli Gazette, Wednesday, April 26, 2006
http://www.milligazette.com/dailyupdate/2006/20060426_usa_bush.htm
Just – International, April 30, 2006
http://www.just-international.org/article.cfm?newsid=20001282
Muslim Observer, Friday, April 28, 2006
Islamica community, May 3, 2006
http://www.islamicaweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=49811
Dear Mr. Bush - I know you do not tolerate criticism, so this letter is written with understanding. The mid term elections are around the corner. Some retired generals are demanding Rumsfeld’s head. Predictably the Democrats have joined in and even some Republicans, afraid of loosing their seats are peeling the blinders off and flirting with disloyalty. As usual they ‘misunderestimate’ you.
They do not grasp that you cannot fire your mentors like Cheney, Rumsfeld, Condi Rice and the Neo-con coterie, or perhaps they do understand that it would knock off the props from what they consider to be a Manchurian Presidency. Who else can run the policies with greater vigor than the ones who instituted them in your name?
You have the courage of their convictions. You do not entertain silly, soul-searching, tortuous reasoning that comes from studying history and analyzing contexts. It saps resolve and creates anxiety. You are proud of strong single-minded leadership with confidence rooted in cultivated ignorance.
Your mentors planned getting rid of Saddam Hussein even before your election. The quick way to defeat a regional bully is to be a world-class bully. You so enjoy that role. It always works in the short run. Elections are not fought for the long-term. The long-term consequences are for the historian nannies and the future generations to handle.
People who eagerly swallowed the lies in the service of “the cause” are complaining now. You know better. Torture of prisoners, spying on Americans, deceit in the service of “the cause” is justified and should be commended. Those citing constitution do not appreciate the importance of lying as the central tenet of an effective policy.
Unfortunately you have hit a rough patch. The Congressional Republicans committing the sin of getting caught in sleazy deals and the inept cover up of the utter fiasco in response to Katrina does not help either.
People do not realize how difficult it is to attend to silly problems. They even intrude in your vacations. You are right to lay down strict rules not to be disturbed. What are the mentors for? It worked for Reagan.
You resolutely destroyed the Iraqi army and its civilian infrastructure. The best way is to start with a clean slate and build a new country to the liking of your mentors. But Iraqis are such ingrates. They not only do not appreciate it, they have the temerity to ask for a democratic system suited to their historical, ethnic and cultural needs. Time and again they have stymied the Quislings you installed.
You have stayed the course with tenacity and were able to scare the Iraqis, the Arabs and the world, but master-stroke was scaring the Americans into re-electing you. Unfortunately the Americans are also impetuous ingrates. They are not scared any more and have started questioning your policies. Even the supine news media has started asking rude questions, thus helping the enemy. Just freeze them out, except sycophants like O’ Reillys and Hannitys populating the Fox news, and please do not forget the loyalty of Judith Miller.
To keep Americans scared, it is a good time to saber rattle against Iran. Your advisors brilliantly kept Iran firmly planted as an enemy. The axis of evil gambit helped defeat the moderating influence of President Khatami’s government. With quagmire in Iraq, problems in Afghanistan, the failure in North Korea, the Iranians came through when you needed a new enemy to demonize.
The Congress foolishly blocked your efforts to develop tactical nuclear bunker buster bomb that violated the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. Threatening Iran for three years, you skillfully succeeded in strengthening their resolve to start Uranium enrichment. With your bluster you were able to convince Iranian Mullahs that the only safety for them is to have nuclear weapons. It helps in keeping Americans scared.
With the US power, the world stands in awe of your ability to ignore reality and speak with ambidextrous mouth. You have thrown the gauntlet for Iran to accept our meddling to change their democratically elected government, as in the past. In 1941 we installed the young Shah, then overthrow Mosaddeq’s democracy in 1953 and helped Saddam Hussein to wage an eight-year war on Iran, using chemical weapons in the 1980s. It is good that Americans only remember the hostage taking by Iran in 1979. It helps in brazenly threatening Iran with invasion, including nuclear attack.
The courage of your mentors’ conviction helped you invade Iraq. The same courage is helping you carry on, unmindful of the no-win situation. If Iran does not back down we loose whatever credibility is left. If we attack Iran no one in the world, except Israel would even pretend to be with us. But that is a long-term problem. It will actually be advantageous in supplying more terrorists for you and your successors to keep Americans scared for a long time. There are people calling for caution. Do not listen to them. It only weakens the resolve and saps your visceral energy.
The most important thing is to keep Americans scared and plied with well placed lies. Lofty ideals are for speeches, real politics works at the basest level. I am in awe of your simplistic courage Mr. President. You may need to get this letter translated, just ask any high school student; do not bother Cheney, Rumsfeld or Rice.
Mirza A. Beg can be reached at mab64@yahoo.com
Mirza A. Beg
Written, Tuesday, April 18, 2006
Counter currents, Thursday, April 20, 2006
http://www.countercurrents.org/us-beg200406.htm
Al Jazeerah, Sunday April 23, 2006
http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20editorials/2006%20Opinion%20Editorials/April/22o/Dear%20Mr%20Bush,%20I%20understand%20you%20By%20Mirza%20A%20Beg.htm
Locust Fork, Friday April 21, 2006
http://www.locustfork.net/blog/
Milli Gazette, Wednesday, April 26, 2006
http://www.milligazette.com/dailyupdate/2006/20060426_usa_bush.htm
Just – International, April 30, 2006
http://www.just-international.org/article.cfm?newsid=20001282
Muslim Observer, Friday, April 28, 2006
Islamica community, May 3, 2006
http://www.islamicaweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=49811
Dear Mr. Bush - I know you do not tolerate criticism, so this letter is written with understanding. The mid term elections are around the corner. Some retired generals are demanding Rumsfeld’s head. Predictably the Democrats have joined in and even some Republicans, afraid of loosing their seats are peeling the blinders off and flirting with disloyalty. As usual they ‘misunderestimate’ you.
They do not grasp that you cannot fire your mentors like Cheney, Rumsfeld, Condi Rice and the Neo-con coterie, or perhaps they do understand that it would knock off the props from what they consider to be a Manchurian Presidency. Who else can run the policies with greater vigor than the ones who instituted them in your name?
You have the courage of their convictions. You do not entertain silly, soul-searching, tortuous reasoning that comes from studying history and analyzing contexts. It saps resolve and creates anxiety. You are proud of strong single-minded leadership with confidence rooted in cultivated ignorance.
Your mentors planned getting rid of Saddam Hussein even before your election. The quick way to defeat a regional bully is to be a world-class bully. You so enjoy that role. It always works in the short run. Elections are not fought for the long-term. The long-term consequences are for the historian nannies and the future generations to handle.
People who eagerly swallowed the lies in the service of “the cause” are complaining now. You know better. Torture of prisoners, spying on Americans, deceit in the service of “the cause” is justified and should be commended. Those citing constitution do not appreciate the importance of lying as the central tenet of an effective policy.
Unfortunately you have hit a rough patch. The Congressional Republicans committing the sin of getting caught in sleazy deals and the inept cover up of the utter fiasco in response to Katrina does not help either.
People do not realize how difficult it is to attend to silly problems. They even intrude in your vacations. You are right to lay down strict rules not to be disturbed. What are the mentors for? It worked for Reagan.
You resolutely destroyed the Iraqi army and its civilian infrastructure. The best way is to start with a clean slate and build a new country to the liking of your mentors. But Iraqis are such ingrates. They not only do not appreciate it, they have the temerity to ask for a democratic system suited to their historical, ethnic and cultural needs. Time and again they have stymied the Quislings you installed.
You have stayed the course with tenacity and were able to scare the Iraqis, the Arabs and the world, but master-stroke was scaring the Americans into re-electing you. Unfortunately the Americans are also impetuous ingrates. They are not scared any more and have started questioning your policies. Even the supine news media has started asking rude questions, thus helping the enemy. Just freeze them out, except sycophants like O’ Reillys and Hannitys populating the Fox news, and please do not forget the loyalty of Judith Miller.
To keep Americans scared, it is a good time to saber rattle against Iran. Your advisors brilliantly kept Iran firmly planted as an enemy. The axis of evil gambit helped defeat the moderating influence of President Khatami’s government. With quagmire in Iraq, problems in Afghanistan, the failure in North Korea, the Iranians came through when you needed a new enemy to demonize.
The Congress foolishly blocked your efforts to develop tactical nuclear bunker buster bomb that violated the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. Threatening Iran for three years, you skillfully succeeded in strengthening their resolve to start Uranium enrichment. With your bluster you were able to convince Iranian Mullahs that the only safety for them is to have nuclear weapons. It helps in keeping Americans scared.
With the US power, the world stands in awe of your ability to ignore reality and speak with ambidextrous mouth. You have thrown the gauntlet for Iran to accept our meddling to change their democratically elected government, as in the past. In 1941 we installed the young Shah, then overthrow Mosaddeq’s democracy in 1953 and helped Saddam Hussein to wage an eight-year war on Iran, using chemical weapons in the 1980s. It is good that Americans only remember the hostage taking by Iran in 1979. It helps in brazenly threatening Iran with invasion, including nuclear attack.
The courage of your mentors’ conviction helped you invade Iraq. The same courage is helping you carry on, unmindful of the no-win situation. If Iran does not back down we loose whatever credibility is left. If we attack Iran no one in the world, except Israel would even pretend to be with us. But that is a long-term problem. It will actually be advantageous in supplying more terrorists for you and your successors to keep Americans scared for a long time. There are people calling for caution. Do not listen to them. It only weakens the resolve and saps your visceral energy.
The most important thing is to keep Americans scared and plied with well placed lies. Lofty ideals are for speeches, real politics works at the basest level. I am in awe of your simplistic courage Mr. President. You may need to get this letter translated, just ask any high school student; do not bother Cheney, Rumsfeld or Rice.
Mirza A. Beg can be reached at mab64@yahoo.com
9/11 Need to reason 01-10-18
9/11 Need to Reason
Oct 18, 2001
The tragic destruction of life on the September 11th has no parallel, is deplorable and can not be justified by any sane person. In the wake of this tragedy the most prominent question being asked is why do “they“ hate us? Our ubiquitous talking heads on television and most politicians are trying very hard not to answer that question and lead us into a thicket of non-answers. Such as “They hate us because of our freedom, democracy and way of life”.
In the Middle East they have specific grievances: The U.S. unquestioned and uncritical support of Israel and its oppression of a dispossessed people. This is exacerbated by our backing of authoritarian regimes in the region, under the banner of American democracy.
Dishonest answers to a legitimate and a very important question are bound to create ignorance here, more discontent around the world and germinate more bitterness in the Middle East. We should punish the perpetrators of the crime of September the 11th, because it is the right thing to do, but please do not dupe us with more lies and disinformation.
Mirza A. Beg
Oct 18, 2001
The tragic destruction of life on the September 11th has no parallel, is deplorable and can not be justified by any sane person. In the wake of this tragedy the most prominent question being asked is why do “they“ hate us? Our ubiquitous talking heads on television and most politicians are trying very hard not to answer that question and lead us into a thicket of non-answers. Such as “They hate us because of our freedom, democracy and way of life”.
In the Middle East they have specific grievances: The U.S. unquestioned and uncritical support of Israel and its oppression of a dispossessed people. This is exacerbated by our backing of authoritarian regimes in the region, under the banner of American democracy.
Dishonest answers to a legitimate and a very important question are bound to create ignorance here, more discontent around the world and germinate more bitterness in the Middle East. We should punish the perpetrators of the crime of September the 11th, because it is the right thing to do, but please do not dupe us with more lies and disinformation.
Mirza A. Beg
Rightwing Christian 01-11-21
The Editor
Tuscaloosa News
Nov. 21, 2001
Dear Editor:
This is in reference to Ms. Joan Ramie’s letter in the Tuscaloosa News of Nov. 21st. I am happy that Ms Ramie can read, or she may have heard it on a venomous radio program. I will urge her to know that half-truths are worse than lies. She has conveniently quoted a part of Verse 2-191 from the Quran. The preceding verse 2-190 reads, ”And fight in the way of God those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. God does not like transgressors”. And the following verses 2-192 &193 read. “But if they cease God is oft forgiving and merciful. If they cease let there be no transgression, except against oppression”. These verses were revealed when Meccans were attacking the nascent Islamic community. They are clearly talking about a defensive struggle and prohibit aggression.
Ms. Ramie seems to have proclivity towards oppression. She needs to learn her Bible as well. I will encourage her to start with Deuteronomy Chapter 20, particularly verses 16 and 17. Verse 16 reads, ”But of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shall save alive nothing that breatheth”. I will not like to characterize Christianity by this verse or the Deuteronomy chapter 20 alone. I wish her well in her endeavor.
Tuscaloosa News
Nov. 21, 2001
Dear Editor:
This is in reference to Ms. Joan Ramie’s letter in the Tuscaloosa News of Nov. 21st. I am happy that Ms Ramie can read, or she may have heard it on a venomous radio program. I will urge her to know that half-truths are worse than lies. She has conveniently quoted a part of Verse 2-191 from the Quran. The preceding verse 2-190 reads, ”And fight in the way of God those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. God does not like transgressors”. And the following verses 2-192 &193 read. “But if they cease God is oft forgiving and merciful. If they cease let there be no transgression, except against oppression”. These verses were revealed when Meccans were attacking the nascent Islamic community. They are clearly talking about a defensive struggle and prohibit aggression.
Ms. Ramie seems to have proclivity towards oppression. She needs to learn her Bible as well. I will encourage her to start with Deuteronomy Chapter 20, particularly verses 16 and 17. Verse 16 reads, ”But of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shall save alive nothing that breatheth”. I will not like to characterize Christianity by this verse or the Deuteronomy chapter 20 alone. I wish her well in her endeavor.
Right wing bigots 04-02-13
'God’ same entity in every language
Tuscaloosa News
February 13, 2004
Email this story.
Dear Editor: Mr. Randy Fuller’s letter of Feb. 8 originated from the depths of ignorance. God is called Allah in the Arabic language, not only by Muslims but also by Arabic-speaking Jews and Christians. Mr. Fuller probably thinks that the French do not worship God because they call Him “Dieu." The word for God in Aramaic, the language of Jesus, is “Allaha."
Sadly the attackers on Sept. 11, 2001, were Muslims; their acts were at variance with Islam, as any Christian criminal act is at variance with Christianity. Islam considers the murder of one person as heinous as the murder of all of humanity.
This country was founded on the premise of practicing one’s belief without coercion by government. Mr. Fuller confuses patriotism with religious intolerance, as the perpetrators of Sept. 11, 2001, did.
A Muslim woman wears a scarf out of conviction. Forcing her to remove the scarf is to force her to abjure her beliefs, inconsistent with freedom of speech and religion.
Her driver’s license photograph without a scarf, while she drives wearing a scarf, defeats the purpose of carrying identification. As long as her face is totally visible, she can be identified better while wearing a scarf. Many Muslim women wearing the scarf are not Arabs but born and bred, proud Americans, good Muslims and good Americans.
I hope one day, people will emerge from personal darkness to learn tolerance, not only in other parts of the world but some in this country as well.
Tuscaloosa News
February 13, 2004
Email this story.
Dear Editor: Mr. Randy Fuller’s letter of Feb. 8 originated from the depths of ignorance. God is called Allah in the Arabic language, not only by Muslims but also by Arabic-speaking Jews and Christians. Mr. Fuller probably thinks that the French do not worship God because they call Him “Dieu." The word for God in Aramaic, the language of Jesus, is “Allaha."
Sadly the attackers on Sept. 11, 2001, were Muslims; their acts were at variance with Islam, as any Christian criminal act is at variance with Christianity. Islam considers the murder of one person as heinous as the murder of all of humanity.
This country was founded on the premise of practicing one’s belief without coercion by government. Mr. Fuller confuses patriotism with religious intolerance, as the perpetrators of Sept. 11, 2001, did.
A Muslim woman wears a scarf out of conviction. Forcing her to remove the scarf is to force her to abjure her beliefs, inconsistent with freedom of speech and religion.
Her driver’s license photograph without a scarf, while she drives wearing a scarf, defeats the purpose of carrying identification. As long as her face is totally visible, she can be identified better while wearing a scarf. Many Muslim women wearing the scarf are not Arabs but born and bred, proud Americans, good Muslims and good Americans.
I hope one day, people will emerge from personal darkness to learn tolerance, not only in other parts of the world but some in this country as well.
Dissent in India 02-06-14
Kashmir confrontation used to quash dissent in India
Commentary
By MIRZA A. BEG
Birmingham Post-Herald
June 14, 2002
World attention has been riveted, on saber rattling by India and Pakistan. These two countries have fought three short wars in the last 54 years over their contentious claims on Kashmir.
This time the West has taken greater notice because in 2001 both countries joined, rather forced their way into the nuclear club. India is thought to have 150 nuclear weapons, and Pakistan is estimated to have 50.
The Kashmir problem can be resolved with honesty and goodwill. These ingredients are missing on both sides. Whenever the two governments feel threatened by internal dissent, the Kashmir front gets activated. All political parties are obliged to line up behind the government, lest they be branded unpatriotic.
Hapless Kashmiris resent the heavy hand of Indian military. A full-blown rebellion has ensued in the Indian-controlled part of Kashmir since the late 1980s. Pakistan has morally and materially supported the rebels. The more the oppression, the greater the rebellion, followed by even greater oppression. This cycle has been repeating for at least 15 years. So why the confrontation between the nuclear neighbors now?
The present crisis in Kashmir was India's response to an internal problem. In February-March of 2002, a government-engineered genocide took place in the Indian Sate of Gujrat. The Indian and the world press, human rights organizations and the Western governments vigorously condemned the government of India.
A Muslim girl was abducted by Hindu zealots returning from the celebration of the destruction of a 16th century Mosque. To thwart the rescue efforts, they locked the railroad car in which they were travelling. Enraged Muslims from the girl's village burned the railroad car resulting in the deaths of the zealots.
Instead of prosecuting the miscreants, the government of Gujrat took this opportunity to implement their pre-planned genocide of Muslims. The government-sponsored hooligans, with the help of the police, burned more than 2,000 Muslims in major cities of Gujrat. More than 150,000 people were rendered homeless, their property looted. The government accused the victims for starting the riots. This was to be a model to be followed in other states, by Goebbelian propaganda.
Unfortunately for them, the Hindu intelligentsia, Indian newspapers and magazines of national stature were shocked into furious denunciation of the government of Gujrat and the central government. International press and governments expressed their horror vociferously.
The government tried to shroud the genocide with platitudes, but the condemnation continued unabated. Hundreds of reporters had taken thousands of photographs to prove the complicity of the government in the carnage. The government of India needed a bigger issue to divert the world's attention, and a patriotic issue to silence the domestic uproar.
In the last 20 years, many countries have seen a rise in religious fanaticism. India did not escape it either. In 1996, a Hindu fascist party BJP (Indian Peoples Party) succeeded in forming a coalition government with the help of small regional parties.
BJP is the political face of a fascist Hindu organization founded in the 1920s and named National Self-service Organization (Hindi acronym RSS). RSS was established to revitalize a very narrow-minded atavistic interpretation of Hinduism. Christianity, Islam, other religions and secular forces were seen as an abomination and a threat to their concept of India.
The founders of RSS were deeply impressed by the Nazis. They saw the secularism of Gandhi and Nehru (though they were Hindus) as anti-Hindu. RSS was implicated in the assassination of Gandhi and was banned in the early '50s. RSS went underground, and a political party Jansangh was formed to circumvent the ban; it later evolved into BJP.
BJP started gaining strength in the late '80s. Using fascistic methods, it has engineered many riots against Muslims and fanned the flames of hatred against the conversions of untouchables to Christianity, resulting in the rape of nuns and killing of missionaries. An Australian missionary and his two sons were burnt alive in their car in 1998. The purpose was to scare the upper cast Hindus into voting BJP into office. They succeeded in garnering enough votes to form the largest party in the Indian parliament, but could not get outright majority.
The minions of RSS collect enormous amounts of money in the United States from successful Indians to fund Nazi like mayhem and riots in India
.
Indians or Pakistanis are not so stupid as to start a nuclear war in which both countries will lose, bringing the wrath of the whole world on themselves. Actually, their nuclear capability acts as deterrent.
Our policy makers should pay closer attention to domestic dimensions of the simmering disputes. Our attention span is so ephemeral that only large-scale mayhem or the threat of nuclear war gets our attention. It is time our policy makers earn their keep and help solve the problems before they threaten to blow up and engulf us.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at Mab64@yahoo.com
Commentary
By MIRZA A. BEG
Birmingham Post-Herald
June 14, 2002
World attention has been riveted, on saber rattling by India and Pakistan. These two countries have fought three short wars in the last 54 years over their contentious claims on Kashmir.
This time the West has taken greater notice because in 2001 both countries joined, rather forced their way into the nuclear club. India is thought to have 150 nuclear weapons, and Pakistan is estimated to have 50.
The Kashmir problem can be resolved with honesty and goodwill. These ingredients are missing on both sides. Whenever the two governments feel threatened by internal dissent, the Kashmir front gets activated. All political parties are obliged to line up behind the government, lest they be branded unpatriotic.
Hapless Kashmiris resent the heavy hand of Indian military. A full-blown rebellion has ensued in the Indian-controlled part of Kashmir since the late 1980s. Pakistan has morally and materially supported the rebels. The more the oppression, the greater the rebellion, followed by even greater oppression. This cycle has been repeating for at least 15 years. So why the confrontation between the nuclear neighbors now?
The present crisis in Kashmir was India's response to an internal problem. In February-March of 2002, a government-engineered genocide took place in the Indian Sate of Gujrat. The Indian and the world press, human rights organizations and the Western governments vigorously condemned the government of India.
A Muslim girl was abducted by Hindu zealots returning from the celebration of the destruction of a 16th century Mosque. To thwart the rescue efforts, they locked the railroad car in which they were travelling. Enraged Muslims from the girl's village burned the railroad car resulting in the deaths of the zealots.
Instead of prosecuting the miscreants, the government of Gujrat took this opportunity to implement their pre-planned genocide of Muslims. The government-sponsored hooligans, with the help of the police, burned more than 2,000 Muslims in major cities of Gujrat. More than 150,000 people were rendered homeless, their property looted. The government accused the victims for starting the riots. This was to be a model to be followed in other states, by Goebbelian propaganda.
Unfortunately for them, the Hindu intelligentsia, Indian newspapers and magazines of national stature were shocked into furious denunciation of the government of Gujrat and the central government. International press and governments expressed their horror vociferously.
The government tried to shroud the genocide with platitudes, but the condemnation continued unabated. Hundreds of reporters had taken thousands of photographs to prove the complicity of the government in the carnage. The government of India needed a bigger issue to divert the world's attention, and a patriotic issue to silence the domestic uproar.
In the last 20 years, many countries have seen a rise in religious fanaticism. India did not escape it either. In 1996, a Hindu fascist party BJP (Indian Peoples Party) succeeded in forming a coalition government with the help of small regional parties.
BJP is the political face of a fascist Hindu organization founded in the 1920s and named National Self-service Organization (Hindi acronym RSS). RSS was established to revitalize a very narrow-minded atavistic interpretation of Hinduism. Christianity, Islam, other religions and secular forces were seen as an abomination and a threat to their concept of India.
The founders of RSS were deeply impressed by the Nazis. They saw the secularism of Gandhi and Nehru (though they were Hindus) as anti-Hindu. RSS was implicated in the assassination of Gandhi and was banned in the early '50s. RSS went underground, and a political party Jansangh was formed to circumvent the ban; it later evolved into BJP.
BJP started gaining strength in the late '80s. Using fascistic methods, it has engineered many riots against Muslims and fanned the flames of hatred against the conversions of untouchables to Christianity, resulting in the rape of nuns and killing of missionaries. An Australian missionary and his two sons were burnt alive in their car in 1998. The purpose was to scare the upper cast Hindus into voting BJP into office. They succeeded in garnering enough votes to form the largest party in the Indian parliament, but could not get outright majority.
The minions of RSS collect enormous amounts of money in the United States from successful Indians to fund Nazi like mayhem and riots in India
.
Indians or Pakistanis are not so stupid as to start a nuclear war in which both countries will lose, bringing the wrath of the whole world on themselves. Actually, their nuclear capability acts as deterrent.
Our policy makers should pay closer attention to domestic dimensions of the simmering disputes. Our attention span is so ephemeral that only large-scale mayhem or the threat of nuclear war gets our attention. It is time our policy makers earn their keep and help solve the problems before they threaten to blow up and engulf us.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at Mab64@yahoo.com
Need Islamic Inst. 03-01-31
Establish Islamic research Institutes in the west
Mirza A. Beg
Written January 31, 2003
The Minaret Vol. 25, Issue 3 March 2003
Muslims all over the world, especially in North America have built thousands of Masjids. There is a gleaming new Masjid in almost every University town. Larger metropolitan areas have many Masajid. The next step in cultural and religious rooting, the establishment of parochial schools seems to be going on steadily.
There are Islamic organizations such as ISNA, ICNA, CAIR, AMC and many others, involved in presenting, propagating the message of Islam, and are involved in social and political work with varying degrees of success. There are magazines and newspapers representing and informing the Muslim community in North America.
All these are symptomatic of a developing reasonably vibrant community. The roots are being planted and nurtured. The work done and being planned by all the above entities is valuable and needed. The method of learning and propagation of Qur’an and Hadeeth through these institutions is the continuation of what was and is almost frozen in time, which may be all right for the primary and secondary education, but the adult mind especially the young adult mind needs to be challenged.
There has been a quantum jump in the number of Muslim scholars in many western universities in the last forty years. All of the better known western Universities have reputable departments or faculty for Islamic studies. They have established excellent reputations, in the field of Islamic studies, consisting of historical perspective of Muslim civilizations, political developments, social developments or lack there of, ethnography etc. They have produced excellent books, monographs, essays and commentaries. These are great gifts to the intellectuals. A miniscule minority of Muslim and non-Muslim intelligentsia reads and appreciates them.
Most Muslims in the west live their lives in daily pursuit of livelihood and take special pride in quoting Hadeeth and some times Qur’an. They try to take their guidance from the fountainhead of Islam. In the process often, Hadeeth is not so much misquoted as quoted out of context and out of place. The depth and breadth of understanding is of not much concern.
There has been a lot of discussion about the problems associated with quoting and interpreting Ahdeeth and their authenticity. Yet to my knowledge there is no new expounding and discerning work on the authenticity, gradation and probity of Ahdieeth or a study of those who were so prolific at imparting these loaded some times seemingly contradictory words to subsequent generations. It is time to mount a serious effort towards gaining insight and historical perspective, in order to bring it in the realm of understanding in for the contemporary times.
It is time to establish through endowments, independent department of Islamic studies in a few major Universities. The purpose would be to study and interpret, specifically Qur'an, Hadeeth and the derivation of Jurisprudence. One may think in terms of a Western ALAzhar or, “Dar-ul-Uloom”.
Many departments exist that teach and research Islam in the western universities, but none to my knowledge whose emphasis is on Qur'an and Hadeeth. Of course there are many departments in the Muslim countries. This or these new centers would have their mission to study and research in the most rigorous terms with no agenda, except to seek knowledge with utmost intellectual freedom. An idea of historical accuracy championed by Ibn Khaledoon that has evolved into a rigorous scientific methodology in the west.
The purpose would be pure research and teaching, not to sieve through a grating to celebrate and validate or to denigrate Islam. The most religious of the ideas is to understand the truth behind words the best one can, through historical and linguistic research. There would be, as there always have been (unless stifled) disagreements. Through the hashing of disagreements and intellectual dialogue would come better understanding. The biographies coming from such an effort would not be a hatchet job or simple hagiographies. The teaching would be
It is time to translate and interpret the great religious works of the past in English, which is, and is likely to be the most important intellectual and commercial language for the foreseeable future. The great Muslim and non-Muslim scholars in the west have mostly written explaining Islam to the west. It is time to understand, research and explain the nuances of Arabic to the English speaking Muslim Diaspora for whom we are establishing Masajids and Islamic schools.
This in no way would replace the great learning centers in the East, it would augment them and provide a healthy new dimension to the dialogue and research using scientific logic, though pioneered by the medieval Muslim scholars, has come to fruition in the west.
Such an unencumbered department/Institute/entity in the present circumstances can not function in the Islamic countries. Those perceived to question deeply held beliefs would fear for their livelihoods and even their lives. But in North America or Europe scholars with proven scholarly credentials can do wonderful work to build on the rich tradition of early Islamic scholarship. They can mine the information from little known yet important Islamic sources that dotted the whole of Islamic world through the centuries and produce thoughtful and thought provoking analyses that would affect the whole of Islamic polity and ethos.
This effort would take a number of years to get going and a generation or two to flower. But it is needed for the future to arrive in the colors we want and hope to see.
This would require a huge endowment. With a large Muslim polity it is difficult but not out of reach. Most organizations are ultimately beholden to those who fund them, be they individual donors, government subsidies, or public contributions. An endowment would make them truly independent of any monitory constraints, and engender a truly free environment for the search for truth and knowledge in the best tradition of Islamic spirit and western scientific research methodology.
There are many good organizers and leaders in the community. It would be great if they take up the task and think about this proposal. With thoughtful comments, adjustments, modifications and above all commitment it can be accomplished. It would not only be good for Muslim community; it would be a gift to the humanity with no ulterior motives or demand of a return favor.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mbeg@yahoo.com
Mirza A. Beg
Written January 31, 2003
The Minaret Vol. 25, Issue 3 March 2003
Muslims all over the world, especially in North America have built thousands of Masjids. There is a gleaming new Masjid in almost every University town. Larger metropolitan areas have many Masajid. The next step in cultural and religious rooting, the establishment of parochial schools seems to be going on steadily.
There are Islamic organizations such as ISNA, ICNA, CAIR, AMC and many others, involved in presenting, propagating the message of Islam, and are involved in social and political work with varying degrees of success. There are magazines and newspapers representing and informing the Muslim community in North America.
All these are symptomatic of a developing reasonably vibrant community. The roots are being planted and nurtured. The work done and being planned by all the above entities is valuable and needed. The method of learning and propagation of Qur’an and Hadeeth through these institutions is the continuation of what was and is almost frozen in time, which may be all right for the primary and secondary education, but the adult mind especially the young adult mind needs to be challenged.
There has been a quantum jump in the number of Muslim scholars in many western universities in the last forty years. All of the better known western Universities have reputable departments or faculty for Islamic studies. They have established excellent reputations, in the field of Islamic studies, consisting of historical perspective of Muslim civilizations, political developments, social developments or lack there of, ethnography etc. They have produced excellent books, monographs, essays and commentaries. These are great gifts to the intellectuals. A miniscule minority of Muslim and non-Muslim intelligentsia reads and appreciates them.
Most Muslims in the west live their lives in daily pursuit of livelihood and take special pride in quoting Hadeeth and some times Qur’an. They try to take their guidance from the fountainhead of Islam. In the process often, Hadeeth is not so much misquoted as quoted out of context and out of place. The depth and breadth of understanding is of not much concern.
There has been a lot of discussion about the problems associated with quoting and interpreting Ahdeeth and their authenticity. Yet to my knowledge there is no new expounding and discerning work on the authenticity, gradation and probity of Ahdieeth or a study of those who were so prolific at imparting these loaded some times seemingly contradictory words to subsequent generations. It is time to mount a serious effort towards gaining insight and historical perspective, in order to bring it in the realm of understanding in for the contemporary times.
It is time to establish through endowments, independent department of Islamic studies in a few major Universities. The purpose would be to study and interpret, specifically Qur'an, Hadeeth and the derivation of Jurisprudence. One may think in terms of a Western ALAzhar or, “Dar-ul-Uloom”.
Many departments exist that teach and research Islam in the western universities, but none to my knowledge whose emphasis is on Qur'an and Hadeeth. Of course there are many departments in the Muslim countries. This or these new centers would have their mission to study and research in the most rigorous terms with no agenda, except to seek knowledge with utmost intellectual freedom. An idea of historical accuracy championed by Ibn Khaledoon that has evolved into a rigorous scientific methodology in the west.
The purpose would be pure research and teaching, not to sieve through a grating to celebrate and validate or to denigrate Islam. The most religious of the ideas is to understand the truth behind words the best one can, through historical and linguistic research. There would be, as there always have been (unless stifled) disagreements. Through the hashing of disagreements and intellectual dialogue would come better understanding. The biographies coming from such an effort would not be a hatchet job or simple hagiographies. The teaching would be
It is time to translate and interpret the great religious works of the past in English, which is, and is likely to be the most important intellectual and commercial language for the foreseeable future. The great Muslim and non-Muslim scholars in the west have mostly written explaining Islam to the west. It is time to understand, research and explain the nuances of Arabic to the English speaking Muslim Diaspora for whom we are establishing Masajids and Islamic schools.
This in no way would replace the great learning centers in the East, it would augment them and provide a healthy new dimension to the dialogue and research using scientific logic, though pioneered by the medieval Muslim scholars, has come to fruition in the west.
Such an unencumbered department/Institute/entity in the present circumstances can not function in the Islamic countries. Those perceived to question deeply held beliefs would fear for their livelihoods and even their lives. But in North America or Europe scholars with proven scholarly credentials can do wonderful work to build on the rich tradition of early Islamic scholarship. They can mine the information from little known yet important Islamic sources that dotted the whole of Islamic world through the centuries and produce thoughtful and thought provoking analyses that would affect the whole of Islamic polity and ethos.
This effort would take a number of years to get going and a generation or two to flower. But it is needed for the future to arrive in the colors we want and hope to see.
This would require a huge endowment. With a large Muslim polity it is difficult but not out of reach. Most organizations are ultimately beholden to those who fund them, be they individual donors, government subsidies, or public contributions. An endowment would make them truly independent of any monitory constraints, and engender a truly free environment for the search for truth and knowledge in the best tradition of Islamic spirit and western scientific research methodology.
There are many good organizers and leaders in the community. It would be great if they take up the task and think about this proposal. With thoughtful comments, adjustments, modifications and above all commitment it can be accomplished. It would not only be good for Muslim community; it would be a gift to the humanity with no ulterior motives or demand of a return favor.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mbeg@yahoo.com
Cyclic Polit. Morality 03-01-08
Is Political Morality Cyclical?
Mirza A. Beg
Written, December 16,2002
Muslim Observer Jan 8, 2003
Every four years during the elections the old administration is castigated for the lapses of judgements, political compromises, being out of touch and often, for plain immorality and circumvention of the will of the Americans and the constitution.
Charges though, exaggerated, are usually not without foundation. Opinion writers do cover the shenanigans, but we pay attention only when it becomes a full-blown scandal.
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. (Thomas Jefferson, letter to Abigail Adams, February 22, 1787)
The scandals come with almost quadrennial bipartisan regularity. Major. Escalation of the Vietnam War based on a falsehood of the Gulf of Tongkin resolution, resulting in the "credibility gap" of the Johnson administration. Secret war in Cambodia and the overthrow of the Government in Chile culminated in "Watergate" of the Nixon administration. Savings and loan debacle in first and the Iran-Contra Affair tarnished the second Reagan administration. The renting of Lincoln bedroom (Symptomatic of bribes) in the first and Monica affair in the second Clinton administration jarred as well as entertained us for eight years.
Congress wakes up to what they already knew and condoned. At great expense and drama the investigations are televised and compete with the soap operas. Some of us malign the investigation as being partisan witch-hunt; others revel in the expose depending on which side of the political divides one roosts. Those found guilty after enormous expense are often pardoned by the outgoing administration and are rehabilitated when that party comes back to power. There is the rub.
After eight years of very successful soap opera called Clinton administration, Bush squeaked into office by a bare minority vote of the electorate and a bare majority of the Supreme Court. Irrespective of one's politics most were hopeful and reasonably convinced that Bush may not be the brightest bulb on the Republican roster, at least he appeared to be honest and would shy away from the felons and near felons of the former administrations. That was not to be. Graduates of the felonious Iran-Contra affair of the Reagan Administration are gradually being rehabilitated in this Administration.
Bush and most Republicans can justifiably be credited for being tough on crime, petty crimes that is! Former felons, pardoned felons and facilitators of mass murders from former administrations are gradually being rehabilitated in the corridors of power.
Mid way through his term, a more confident Bush has appointed Elliot Abrams, John Poindexter, John Negroponte and Otto Reich to manage critical policy positions. Mercifully Henry Kissinger has just withdrawn from Chairing the commission on 9/11. He could not reveal the list of his international clients as required. Good for those who really want the commission to find the truth. Mr. Kissinger and truth had never been on amicable terms. His role in Nixon era shadow killings has made it difficult for him to even travel to many European and Latin American countries.
The first four are graduates of the felonious Iran-Contra affair of the Reagan Administration. To recapitulate, they were discredited for plotting and subsequent cover up of sale of weapons to Iran (prohibited by law), so they could funnel the proceeds to the Contras (also prohibited), who indulged in mass killings and even raping of American Nuns in Nicaragua.
Abrams the then Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Central America pleaded guilty to withholding information from Congress and received two years probation and 100 hours of community work. In testimony to the congress, he said, ”I never said I had no idea about most of the things you said I had no idea about”. In his autobiography he wrote that he had to lie to the Congress to protect national interest.
Abrams is the Presidents man on the Middle-East policy. Bush wants to convince the world that he is committed to the creation of the Palestinian State. He appoints a man committed to destruction of Palestinian entity. Bush can fool us, the world leaders watch US policy more closely. Credibility gap again?
John Poindexter, former Admiral and National Security Advisor to President Reagan was convicted of five felonies involving conspiracy, obstruction of Congress. Appellate court reversed the sentence citing congressional immunity for his testimony. He is in the Homeland Security Department.
John Negroponte our Ambassador to the UN was then ambassador to Honduras overseeing horrendous human rights abuses by the Junta, some of whose former generals are not even allowed to enter the US. We want the world to think we are for Human rights!
Otto Reich now Assistant Secretary of State was Head of the Office of Public Diplomacy. Essentially his job was Goebbelian propaganda in praise of murderous Contras. We want the world to believe us.
Once safely ensconced in power Bush is gravitating towards people prone to felonious conduct. It is a shame that among two hundred and seventy million Americans he can not find honest, intelligent and dedicated Republicans to staff these positions.
It is an insult to the Americans in general and the honest law abiding Republican in particular. There are many highly qualified Republicans who could do credit to these positions. Perhaps they have not earned their stripes for deceit and thus can not be relied upon to play toady in times of need.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com
Mirza A. Beg
Written, December 16,2002
Muslim Observer Jan 8, 2003
Every four years during the elections the old administration is castigated for the lapses of judgements, political compromises, being out of touch and often, for plain immorality and circumvention of the will of the Americans and the constitution.
Charges though, exaggerated, are usually not without foundation. Opinion writers do cover the shenanigans, but we pay attention only when it becomes a full-blown scandal.
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. (Thomas Jefferson, letter to Abigail Adams, February 22, 1787)
The scandals come with almost quadrennial bipartisan regularity. Major. Escalation of the Vietnam War based on a falsehood of the Gulf of Tongkin resolution, resulting in the "credibility gap" of the Johnson administration. Secret war in Cambodia and the overthrow of the Government in Chile culminated in "Watergate" of the Nixon administration. Savings and loan debacle in first and the Iran-Contra Affair tarnished the second Reagan administration. The renting of Lincoln bedroom (Symptomatic of bribes) in the first and Monica affair in the second Clinton administration jarred as well as entertained us for eight years.
Congress wakes up to what they already knew and condoned. At great expense and drama the investigations are televised and compete with the soap operas. Some of us malign the investigation as being partisan witch-hunt; others revel in the expose depending on which side of the political divides one roosts. Those found guilty after enormous expense are often pardoned by the outgoing administration and are rehabilitated when that party comes back to power. There is the rub.
After eight years of very successful soap opera called Clinton administration, Bush squeaked into office by a bare minority vote of the electorate and a bare majority of the Supreme Court. Irrespective of one's politics most were hopeful and reasonably convinced that Bush may not be the brightest bulb on the Republican roster, at least he appeared to be honest and would shy away from the felons and near felons of the former administrations. That was not to be. Graduates of the felonious Iran-Contra affair of the Reagan Administration are gradually being rehabilitated in this Administration.
Bush and most Republicans can justifiably be credited for being tough on crime, petty crimes that is! Former felons, pardoned felons and facilitators of mass murders from former administrations are gradually being rehabilitated in the corridors of power.
Mid way through his term, a more confident Bush has appointed Elliot Abrams, John Poindexter, John Negroponte and Otto Reich to manage critical policy positions. Mercifully Henry Kissinger has just withdrawn from Chairing the commission on 9/11. He could not reveal the list of his international clients as required. Good for those who really want the commission to find the truth. Mr. Kissinger and truth had never been on amicable terms. His role in Nixon era shadow killings has made it difficult for him to even travel to many European and Latin American countries.
The first four are graduates of the felonious Iran-Contra affair of the Reagan Administration. To recapitulate, they were discredited for plotting and subsequent cover up of sale of weapons to Iran (prohibited by law), so they could funnel the proceeds to the Contras (also prohibited), who indulged in mass killings and even raping of American Nuns in Nicaragua.
Abrams the then Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Central America pleaded guilty to withholding information from Congress and received two years probation and 100 hours of community work. In testimony to the congress, he said, ”I never said I had no idea about most of the things you said I had no idea about”. In his autobiography he wrote that he had to lie to the Congress to protect national interest.
Abrams is the Presidents man on the Middle-East policy. Bush wants to convince the world that he is committed to the creation of the Palestinian State. He appoints a man committed to destruction of Palestinian entity. Bush can fool us, the world leaders watch US policy more closely. Credibility gap again?
John Poindexter, former Admiral and National Security Advisor to President Reagan was convicted of five felonies involving conspiracy, obstruction of Congress. Appellate court reversed the sentence citing congressional immunity for his testimony. He is in the Homeland Security Department.
John Negroponte our Ambassador to the UN was then ambassador to Honduras overseeing horrendous human rights abuses by the Junta, some of whose former generals are not even allowed to enter the US. We want the world to think we are for Human rights!
Otto Reich now Assistant Secretary of State was Head of the Office of Public Diplomacy. Essentially his job was Goebbelian propaganda in praise of murderous Contras. We want the world to believe us.
Once safely ensconced in power Bush is gravitating towards people prone to felonious conduct. It is a shame that among two hundred and seventy million Americans he can not find honest, intelligent and dedicated Republicans to staff these positions.
It is an insult to the Americans in general and the honest law abiding Republican in particular. There are many highly qualified Republicans who could do credit to these positions. Perhaps they have not earned their stripes for deceit and thus can not be relied upon to play toady in times of need.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com
Iraq, Victory -Defeat 04-10-07
Iraq, victory or defeat
Mirza A. Beg
Written on October 5, 2004
Yellow Times.Org; Thursday, October 7, 2004
http://www.yellowtimes.org/article.php?sid=2094
Media Monitor Network. Net; Saturday, October 9, 2004
http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/10380/
Al Jazeerah, Saturday; October 9, 2004
http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20editorials/2004%20opinions/October/9%20o/Iraq,%20victory%20or%20defeat%20By%20Mirza%20A.%20Beg.htm
Left Hook, an online radical youth Journal; Saturday, October 9, 2004
http://www.lefthook.org/Politics html /Beg100904.
Birmingham Post-Herald; Friday, October 22, 2004
Asia Tribune, October 10, 2004
http://www.arabmediawatch.com/amw/Articles/Analysis/tabid/75/newsid395/941/-Men-are-cruel-but-Man-is-kind-/Default.aspx
If destruction was the objective, the United States could have destroyed Iraq in one fell swoop. Destroying Iraq was not the stated objective. Destroying it slowly with a promise to rebuild is proving to be excruciatingly expensive, in American reputation, lives and material. Winning means achieving the objectives of the war.
The aim of removing Saddam from power was achieved, but the reasons for the war -- WMD, imminent threat of nuclear weapons, and collusion between Al Qaida and Saddam -- were false and contrived, as proven by the 9/11 commission and congressional and independent inquiries as well as the CIA. Though Wolfowitz conceded in 2003 that creating democracy would not have been a sufficient reason to invade Iraq, Bush nevertheless, has settled on the war objective of bringing democracy to Iraq and being the "best friend" of Iraqis.
Americans legitimately mourn the deaths of their service personnel and celebrate their sacrifices. American service men and women lay down their lives for their country at the order of the commander-in-chief. They follow orders regardless of the ineptitude of the leadership. The Bush administration cowardly hides behind the sacrifices of the servicemen by falsely equating the criticism of Bush policies to the criticism of the servicemen.
While Iraq is spiraling down into death and destruction, Iraqi doubts of US sincerity are crystallizing into total distrust. Americans are oblivious to the Iraqi casualties. They may not matter to us. They matter enormously to the Iraqis and the rest of the world. The total counts of Iraqi dead and wounded are not even reported, let alone mourned in America. Rumsfeld calls them collateral damage. American media does show the dead children being pulled out of the rubble, but no one bats an eye.
As of September 2004, about 1050 Americans have died and 7,000 have been wounded in Iraq. The ratio of American dead and wounded is about 1 to 7
Estimates of Iraqi dead range from 20,000 to as much as 60,000. The Iraqi wounded are overwhelmingly civilians caught in our "precision" aerial bombing and terrorist car bombings in congested neighborhoods. Iraqis do not wear flack jackets or travel in armored vehicles. A conservative estimate of the ratio of Iraqi dead and wounded would be 1 to 15. Using the conservative figure of 20,000, means there are about 300,000 Iraqi wounded.
In our own lives we know that if one of us was injured or killed, about 100 to 500 people would know and care enough to hate the perpetrators. Considering the low figure of 100 would result in 30 million Iraqis angry with the US for the death and destruction.
The population of Iraq is only 24 million. Granted many injured may belong to the same family and would have overlapping circles of friends. Still the number is extremely high. Add to that the daily bombings by the insurgents and hostage taking because the US occupation cannot enforce law and order.
Iraqis have experienced more death and destruction from their new "best friend" than the brutal and hated Saddam regime. Suddenly Saddam does not look as bad any more. This is borne out by the Iraqi public opinion surveys. The hatred of America has reached about 80%, which amount to about nineteen million Iraqis.
After proclaiming "mission accomplished," Bush blamed the insurgency on the Saddam loyalist and foreign Al Qaida sympathizers. This is only partly true because no insurgency can survive without the support of the population. The support has gradually grown and in effect Iraqis see it as a guerilla war of liberation against American occupation.
The Bush Administration tries to impede Al Jazeera, in the US and in Iraq. This only deprives Americans from finding what others see. Iraqis intently watch American news and can see that Bush does not care how many Iraqis die or are maimed. There is no discussion or sadness in America about the Iraqi dead.
Iraqis learn from Bush and his supporters that the war in Iraq is good, as it attracts the "terrorists" to Iraq to be killed so that the US remains safe. This is good propaganda for the US elections, but unfortunately Iraqis believe Bush, and hate us even more. Iraq is their home. They are killed, maimed and destroyed, while Bush is attracting the terrorists to Iraq to fight them there. Could Al Qaida have hoped for a better propaganda tool?
Stubbornly, Bush insists on "staying the course." On this disastrous course the war objectives cannot be met. If the course is not changed the war and even more importantly the peace is as good as lost.
Mirza A. Beg welcomes comments at: mab64@yahoo.com
Mirza A. Beg
Written on October 5, 2004
Yellow Times.Org; Thursday, October 7, 2004
http://www.yellowtimes.org/article.php?sid=2094
Media Monitor Network. Net; Saturday, October 9, 2004
http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/10380/
Al Jazeerah, Saturday; October 9, 2004
http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20editorials/2004%20opinions/October/9%20o/Iraq,%20victory%20or%20defeat%20By%20Mirza%20A.%20Beg.htm
Left Hook, an online radical youth Journal; Saturday, October 9, 2004
http://www.lefthook.org/Politics html /Beg100904.
Birmingham Post-Herald; Friday, October 22, 2004
Asia Tribune, October 10, 2004
http://www.arabmediawatch.com/amw/Articles/Analysis/tabid/75/newsid395/941/-Men-are-cruel-but-Man-is-kind-/Default.aspx
If destruction was the objective, the United States could have destroyed Iraq in one fell swoop. Destroying Iraq was not the stated objective. Destroying it slowly with a promise to rebuild is proving to be excruciatingly expensive, in American reputation, lives and material. Winning means achieving the objectives of the war.
The aim of removing Saddam from power was achieved, but the reasons for the war -- WMD, imminent threat of nuclear weapons, and collusion between Al Qaida and Saddam -- were false and contrived, as proven by the 9/11 commission and congressional and independent inquiries as well as the CIA. Though Wolfowitz conceded in 2003 that creating democracy would not have been a sufficient reason to invade Iraq, Bush nevertheless, has settled on the war objective of bringing democracy to Iraq and being the "best friend" of Iraqis.
Americans legitimately mourn the deaths of their service personnel and celebrate their sacrifices. American service men and women lay down their lives for their country at the order of the commander-in-chief. They follow orders regardless of the ineptitude of the leadership. The Bush administration cowardly hides behind the sacrifices of the servicemen by falsely equating the criticism of Bush policies to the criticism of the servicemen.
While Iraq is spiraling down into death and destruction, Iraqi doubts of US sincerity are crystallizing into total distrust. Americans are oblivious to the Iraqi casualties. They may not matter to us. They matter enormously to the Iraqis and the rest of the world. The total counts of Iraqi dead and wounded are not even reported, let alone mourned in America. Rumsfeld calls them collateral damage. American media does show the dead children being pulled out of the rubble, but no one bats an eye.
As of September 2004, about 1050 Americans have died and 7,000 have been wounded in Iraq. The ratio of American dead and wounded is about 1 to 7
Estimates of Iraqi dead range from 20,000 to as much as 60,000. The Iraqi wounded are overwhelmingly civilians caught in our "precision" aerial bombing and terrorist car bombings in congested neighborhoods. Iraqis do not wear flack jackets or travel in armored vehicles. A conservative estimate of the ratio of Iraqi dead and wounded would be 1 to 15. Using the conservative figure of 20,000, means there are about 300,000 Iraqi wounded.
In our own lives we know that if one of us was injured or killed, about 100 to 500 people would know and care enough to hate the perpetrators. Considering the low figure of 100 would result in 30 million Iraqis angry with the US for the death and destruction.
The population of Iraq is only 24 million. Granted many injured may belong to the same family and would have overlapping circles of friends. Still the number is extremely high. Add to that the daily bombings by the insurgents and hostage taking because the US occupation cannot enforce law and order.
Iraqis have experienced more death and destruction from their new "best friend" than the brutal and hated Saddam regime. Suddenly Saddam does not look as bad any more. This is borne out by the Iraqi public opinion surveys. The hatred of America has reached about 80%, which amount to about nineteen million Iraqis.
After proclaiming "mission accomplished," Bush blamed the insurgency on the Saddam loyalist and foreign Al Qaida sympathizers. This is only partly true because no insurgency can survive without the support of the population. The support has gradually grown and in effect Iraqis see it as a guerilla war of liberation against American occupation.
The Bush Administration tries to impede Al Jazeera, in the US and in Iraq. This only deprives Americans from finding what others see. Iraqis intently watch American news and can see that Bush does not care how many Iraqis die or are maimed. There is no discussion or sadness in America about the Iraqi dead.
Iraqis learn from Bush and his supporters that the war in Iraq is good, as it attracts the "terrorists" to Iraq to be killed so that the US remains safe. This is good propaganda for the US elections, but unfortunately Iraqis believe Bush, and hate us even more. Iraq is their home. They are killed, maimed and destroyed, while Bush is attracting the terrorists to Iraq to fight them there. Could Al Qaida have hoped for a better propaganda tool?
Stubbornly, Bush insists on "staying the course." On this disastrous course the war objectives cannot be met. If the course is not changed the war and even more importantly the peace is as good as lost.
Mirza A. Beg welcomes comments at: mab64@yahoo.com
Iraq,drains the USA 05-09-11
Iraq, A Drain on American Power
Mirza A. Beg
Written on Sunday, September 11, 2005
Al-Jazeerah.net, On line, Friday, September16, 2005
http://www.aljazeerah.info/16o/Iraq%20A%20Drain%20on%20American%20Power%20By%20Mirza%20A%20Beg.htm
Media Monitor Network, Friday September 16, 2005
http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/19715
The Milli gazette India, Friday, September 16th, 2005
http://www.milligazette.com/dailyupdate/2005/20050917-iraq.htm
Middle East Times, Monday, September 19, 2005
http://www.metimes.com/articles/normal.php?StoryID=20050919-051355-5199r
The Tuscaloosa News, Sunday, September 18th, 2005
Common Ground Common Sense Friday Sept. 16, 2005
http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t37807.html
INDIGENOUS SOVEREIGNTY INTERNATIONAL, September 2005
http://groups.msn.com/INDIGENOUSSOVEREIGNTYINTERNATIONAL/general.msnw?action=get_message&mview=0&ID_Message=2469&LastModified=4675539732029089679
Muslim Weekly Voice of Muslims in America, September 23, 2005
http://www.muslimsweekly.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=710&Itemid=67
The two and a half year old invasion of Iraq has been terribly mismanaged. Most Americans were oblivious to it, because Iraq is “over there,” and the amenities of the average American were not directly affected. The terrible mismanagement in the wake of Hurricane Katrina has opened their eyes to the abject incompetence of the Bush administration.
Finally more and more Americans are asking, why are we in Iraq? The two reasons promoted by Bush were WMDs in Iraq and the complicity of Saddam in the 9/11 attacks. Both have been proven to be not only false, but also contrived. The roster of mismanagement in Iraq is long. Nothing in Iraq has been done right.
The fall of Saddam was quick, but as many predicted, American forces are stuck in a quagmire of guerilla war in Iraq. American soldiers live imprisoned in the green zones. Almost, every day they loose a few of their comrades. They keep fighting the same battle over and over again but cannot sustain the occupation. Even the road from the airport to Baghdad is not safe.
Falsehood exposed, Bush under the tutelage of his “Neocon” mentors, invented a fallback position - bringing democracy to Iraq.
“Bush a champion for democracy” would be laughable, if it were not so sad to the Latin Americans and to the people of the Middle East. In April 2002, Bush recognized the coup in Venezuela, against the democratically elected government of Hugo Chavez, even before the dust had settled. The coup failed within 48 hours, with Chavez back in a stronger position. Recently, Rev. Pat Robertson, a close religious-political ally of Bush, suggested assassination of Chavez, with not a word of condemnation from Bush. In March 2004, Bush struck again at the democratically elected Aristide government of hapless Haiti. Under the American installed dictator, Haiti has gone from bad to worse.
It is preposterous for Bush to constantly threaten Iran and Syria with the bluster ”all options are open,” meaning war. Then counter-intuitively expect them to seal their long borders with Iraq to the Guerilla traffic. In the interest of safety, their policy is to keep the US bogged down in Iraq. It sounds even sillier to the rest of the world, when the US cannot seal its own border from the illegal immigration from Mexico.
The regular threats from Bush have been a bonanza that the Mullahs in Iran could not have dreamed. A belligerent Bush first wiped out their archenemy Saddam, but is helpless to stop the formation of a Shia dominated religious government of Iran’s choice in Iraq. As if this were not enough, by constant saber rattling the US arouses nationalism in the secular opposition to line up behind the Mullahs of Iran.
Russia, China, India and many European countries are weary of an intemperate hyper power. They are afraid to criticize the US directly and are diplomatic in their criticism, but they would not lift a finger to help in Iraq. Russia and China convinced the Uzbekistan government to kick the US airbase out. They hope that losses in troops and materials in Iraq would cut the US down to size. It is not too difficult to imagine how and from where the weapons are coming to arm the resistance.
From the bully pulpit of the presidency, dutifully reported by the media, Bush gives the ‘Happy Talk’ of victory, trying to keep the public support for a war based on repeated falsehood. In the pages of the international newspapers, Bush is regarded as a super bully who took out a regional bullying maniac, Saddam Hussain. The international outpouring of help after Katrina is indicative of the ambivalent feelings. They like and grieve with the Americans as they did after 9/11, but distrust and dislike the Bush government.
Bush attempts to pull at the national heartstrings by invoking the sacrifice of dead American soldiers to continue his failed policies. It is insulting that soldiers should keep dying and killing to defend Bush’s misadventure simply because many have already given their lives for their belief that they were defending their country.
About 1900 American soldiers have died and 15,000 wounded in Iraq. Of course they should be mourned, but the enormous Iraqi civilian casualties should also matter to us. They certainly matter to the Iraqis and all others who care for human life. Estimates, range to more than 100,000 Iraqis dead and many hundreds of thousands wounded, with no end in sight to the mayhem. Iraqi casualties are the most potent recruitment tool for Iraqi guerillas. But the Pentagon callously refuses to tabulate or acknowledge the Iraqi civilian dead and wounded.
Fatigue from the deceit, incompetence and hubris of the Bush administration has started to set in. The much-ballyhooed Homeland Security Department after three years and billions of dollars was unable to cope with a slow, well-predicted unfolding disaster in the wake of hurricane Katrina. Increasing number of Americans, even the Fox news watchers, now know that the war in Iraq was contrived.
Just as we wonder why many countries helplessly live under corrupt dictatorships. Others wonder why Americans elected such an incompetent president, one who is weakening America by frittering away its goodwill and enormous power by such cruel misuse of that power.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com
Mirza A. Beg
Written on Sunday, September 11, 2005
Al-Jazeerah.net, On line, Friday, September16, 2005
http://www.aljazeerah.info/16o/Iraq%20A%20Drain%20on%20American%20Power%20By%20Mirza%20A%20Beg.htm
Media Monitor Network, Friday September 16, 2005
http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/19715
The Milli gazette India, Friday, September 16th, 2005
http://www.milligazette.com/dailyupdate/2005/20050917-iraq.htm
Middle East Times, Monday, September 19, 2005
http://www.metimes.com/articles/normal.php?StoryID=20050919-051355-5199r
The Tuscaloosa News, Sunday, September 18th, 2005
Common Ground Common Sense Friday Sept. 16, 2005
http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t37807.html
INDIGENOUS SOVEREIGNTY INTERNATIONAL, September 2005
http://groups.msn.com/INDIGENOUSSOVEREIGNTYINTERNATIONAL/general.msnw?action=get_message&mview=0&ID_Message=2469&LastModified=4675539732029089679
Muslim Weekly Voice of Muslims in America, September 23, 2005
http://www.muslimsweekly.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=710&Itemid=67
The two and a half year old invasion of Iraq has been terribly mismanaged. Most Americans were oblivious to it, because Iraq is “over there,” and the amenities of the average American were not directly affected. The terrible mismanagement in the wake of Hurricane Katrina has opened their eyes to the abject incompetence of the Bush administration.
Finally more and more Americans are asking, why are we in Iraq? The two reasons promoted by Bush were WMDs in Iraq and the complicity of Saddam in the 9/11 attacks. Both have been proven to be not only false, but also contrived. The roster of mismanagement in Iraq is long. Nothing in Iraq has been done right.
The fall of Saddam was quick, but as many predicted, American forces are stuck in a quagmire of guerilla war in Iraq. American soldiers live imprisoned in the green zones. Almost, every day they loose a few of their comrades. They keep fighting the same battle over and over again but cannot sustain the occupation. Even the road from the airport to Baghdad is not safe.
Falsehood exposed, Bush under the tutelage of his “Neocon” mentors, invented a fallback position - bringing democracy to Iraq.
“Bush a champion for democracy” would be laughable, if it were not so sad to the Latin Americans and to the people of the Middle East. In April 2002, Bush recognized the coup in Venezuela, against the democratically elected government of Hugo Chavez, even before the dust had settled. The coup failed within 48 hours, with Chavez back in a stronger position. Recently, Rev. Pat Robertson, a close religious-political ally of Bush, suggested assassination of Chavez, with not a word of condemnation from Bush. In March 2004, Bush struck again at the democratically elected Aristide government of hapless Haiti. Under the American installed dictator, Haiti has gone from bad to worse.
It is preposterous for Bush to constantly threaten Iran and Syria with the bluster ”all options are open,” meaning war. Then counter-intuitively expect them to seal their long borders with Iraq to the Guerilla traffic. In the interest of safety, their policy is to keep the US bogged down in Iraq. It sounds even sillier to the rest of the world, when the US cannot seal its own border from the illegal immigration from Mexico.
The regular threats from Bush have been a bonanza that the Mullahs in Iran could not have dreamed. A belligerent Bush first wiped out their archenemy Saddam, but is helpless to stop the formation of a Shia dominated religious government of Iran’s choice in Iraq. As if this were not enough, by constant saber rattling the US arouses nationalism in the secular opposition to line up behind the Mullahs of Iran.
Russia, China, India and many European countries are weary of an intemperate hyper power. They are afraid to criticize the US directly and are diplomatic in their criticism, but they would not lift a finger to help in Iraq. Russia and China convinced the Uzbekistan government to kick the US airbase out. They hope that losses in troops and materials in Iraq would cut the US down to size. It is not too difficult to imagine how and from where the weapons are coming to arm the resistance.
From the bully pulpit of the presidency, dutifully reported by the media, Bush gives the ‘Happy Talk’ of victory, trying to keep the public support for a war based on repeated falsehood. In the pages of the international newspapers, Bush is regarded as a super bully who took out a regional bullying maniac, Saddam Hussain. The international outpouring of help after Katrina is indicative of the ambivalent feelings. They like and grieve with the Americans as they did after 9/11, but distrust and dislike the Bush government.
Bush attempts to pull at the national heartstrings by invoking the sacrifice of dead American soldiers to continue his failed policies. It is insulting that soldiers should keep dying and killing to defend Bush’s misadventure simply because many have already given their lives for their belief that they were defending their country.
About 1900 American soldiers have died and 15,000 wounded in Iraq. Of course they should be mourned, but the enormous Iraqi civilian casualties should also matter to us. They certainly matter to the Iraqis and all others who care for human life. Estimates, range to more than 100,000 Iraqis dead and many hundreds of thousands wounded, with no end in sight to the mayhem. Iraqi casualties are the most potent recruitment tool for Iraqi guerillas. But the Pentagon callously refuses to tabulate or acknowledge the Iraqi civilian dead and wounded.
Fatigue from the deceit, incompetence and hubris of the Bush administration has started to set in. The much-ballyhooed Homeland Security Department after three years and billions of dollars was unable to cope with a slow, well-predicted unfolding disaster in the wake of hurricane Katrina. Increasing number of Americans, even the Fox news watchers, now know that the war in Iraq was contrived.
Just as we wonder why many countries helplessly live under corrupt dictatorships. Others wonder why Americans elected such an incompetent president, one who is weakening America by frittering away its goodwill and enormous power by such cruel misuse of that power.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com
Introspection - 06-03-29
Introspection, the key to Understanding
Mirza A. Beg
Saturday, March 11, 2006
Counter Currents. Org, Wednesday, March 29, 2006
http://www.countercurrents.org/beg290306.htm
South Asian outlook, May 2007, Vol.6, No. 11
http://www.southasianoutlook.com/
When societies feel besieged they find it comforting to cast a longing backward glance where all sins are washed off in the pool of selective memory and pretentious reading of history with rose colored glasses. It may work as a survival mechanism for individuals, but when communities indulge in it as a salve for the wounds purportedly by the hands of others, while the worst ones being self inflicted, it is a recipe for continued downward spiral.
As individuals, most of us would help any one in need, but as a part of a group we tend to think in terms of us versus them and some times indulge in what we would condemn in others. The cultural imprint over the religion is often a source of contention and intolerance.
Religion affects us at three intertwined levels that can not be completely separated. They are- personal, social and political.
On the personal level, religion answers to our most in-expressible sublime yearnings. It gives us hope in the most hopeless circumstances; it gives us moorings and a strong sense of morality.
On the social level, it usually is a force for the good of the community, but starts becoming sectarian when it adopts exclusivity.
Religion as a political tool has brought untold suffering throughout the history. Early 20th Century saw the rise of irreligious and eventually anti religious communism. It brought even more suffering to the people it ruled than the religions could have. Most emerging societies thought that socialism would help raise them to modernity, without the infrastructure of democracy, it deteriorated to draconian dictatorship. After the disillusionment and suppression by the dictatorships masked as socialism, the religions have come back to dominate the world political debate. It is also becoming clearer, even more so than in the past, religion is invariably misused in the service of the State. With greater sophistication in propaganda, politics becomes sectarian in the service of religion and religion in debased in the service of power hungry politicians.
One of the great challenges of modern times for all societies is how to balance personal freedom and restrictive societal obligations.
It pits the demands of religion as one interprets it, against the freedom of others to interpret it slightly or drastically differently. For a civil society to function effectively, we accept restrictive rules and regulations for the common good. Yet, with time, many seemingly good laws designed to benefit the status quo prove to be bad and restrictive, even retrogressive and draconian. Often good laws degenerate into a bad caricature of the intended purpose. A pluralistic, democratic system regularly reevaluates and better interprets such laws, not because of external pressures but because of its experiences as a corrective mechanism.
It is time to learn and adapt. All new or foreign ideas are not necessarily good or bad. It is important to consider them thoughtfully; avoiding the pit falls of colonialist 19th and 20th centuries. Adoption or rejection without thoughtful evaluation, simply because they are from outside, Eastern or Western, is indicative of a closed mind. The baser Western mores have already infiltrated most societies; what is being resisted is the individual freedom and free flow of knowledge to our detriment.
Achieving a great civilization is always much more difficult than descending into chaos. Circling the wagons and pining for a past, viewed through rose-colored glasses is not an option, if the society aspires to greatness. What was considered acceptable in the past needs reexamination in light of the present needs and knowledge. A healthy civil dialogue ushers a gradual acceptance of the desirable.
Humans are wired for and feel comfortable in “group think”. Let us assume that all of us belong to the same race, religion and creed, and in a political speech I say that, “We are the most compassionate, caring and just society. We are the brightest and the most blessed. Our religion, or ideology is the light to the world, and it is our calling to bring the world to sanity and grace, to lead the world to a better tomorrow. I suspect the audience would clap heartily in unison and my poll numbers would go up. However if I change the pronoun ‘WE’ to ‘I’, my poll numbers would tank and would be accused of being an insufferable megalomaniac even though the ideas are the same.
An overwhelming majority of us were born in our parent’s religion and culture, and have made no effort to even know the basics of another religion let alone try to understand them. We tend to either evangelize or avoid talking of religions altogether. When we consider and compare cultures and religions, it is our unconscious effort to show the superiority of our beliefs. Often we tend to be self delusional, and compare the best from our religion, culture or ideology to the worst of the other.
Religious texts do not lend themselves to easy piece meal interpretations. We quote part of the religious text that suites our purpose. One can find thousands of such examples without much effort.
It is important to remember, if we indulge in lies for our religion or against other religions in order to enhance our religion, obviously we are not fooling God. We are simply injuring the thing we purport to love, our religion and our character.
9/11 has changed the perception of methods of war. Up to the 20th century the instruments of mass destruction were in the arsenal of the states. The biggest purveyors of terrorism to gain advantage were also the states. Now with the proliferation of information and retailing of weapons of mass destruction, individuals have joined the fray on a world scale.
It is the duty of truly religious people to raise their voices against the individual terrorism, but even more so the state terrorism, because it is done in our name. Because of the hold of religion on average populace, it becomes imperative to not let our faith be enlisted by the state to harm others. When the upholders of religion refuse to be a part of the solution, they become a part of the problem by design or default.
The best we can do with our limited knowledge and intellectual resources is to be honest with ourselves. That is what our religion asks us to do. What do we believe and why? Introspection – examining our own belief with an open mind and to be a little more critical of ourselves before criticizing others is the best way to build bridges It opens up the mind, not only we understand others better and with more empathy, but we discover a more beautiful and fulfilling dimension of our own religions that is uplifting, liberating and peace loving.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com
Mirza A. Beg
Saturday, March 11, 2006
Counter Currents. Org, Wednesday, March 29, 2006
http://www.countercurrents.org/beg290306.htm
South Asian outlook, May 2007, Vol.6, No. 11
http://www.southasianoutlook.com/
When societies feel besieged they find it comforting to cast a longing backward glance where all sins are washed off in the pool of selective memory and pretentious reading of history with rose colored glasses. It may work as a survival mechanism for individuals, but when communities indulge in it as a salve for the wounds purportedly by the hands of others, while the worst ones being self inflicted, it is a recipe for continued downward spiral.
As individuals, most of us would help any one in need, but as a part of a group we tend to think in terms of us versus them and some times indulge in what we would condemn in others. The cultural imprint over the religion is often a source of contention and intolerance.
Religion affects us at three intertwined levels that can not be completely separated. They are- personal, social and political.
On the personal level, religion answers to our most in-expressible sublime yearnings. It gives us hope in the most hopeless circumstances; it gives us moorings and a strong sense of morality.
On the social level, it usually is a force for the good of the community, but starts becoming sectarian when it adopts exclusivity.
Religion as a political tool has brought untold suffering throughout the history. Early 20th Century saw the rise of irreligious and eventually anti religious communism. It brought even more suffering to the people it ruled than the religions could have. Most emerging societies thought that socialism would help raise them to modernity, without the infrastructure of democracy, it deteriorated to draconian dictatorship. After the disillusionment and suppression by the dictatorships masked as socialism, the religions have come back to dominate the world political debate. It is also becoming clearer, even more so than in the past, religion is invariably misused in the service of the State. With greater sophistication in propaganda, politics becomes sectarian in the service of religion and religion in debased in the service of power hungry politicians.
One of the great challenges of modern times for all societies is how to balance personal freedom and restrictive societal obligations.
It pits the demands of religion as one interprets it, against the freedom of others to interpret it slightly or drastically differently. For a civil society to function effectively, we accept restrictive rules and regulations for the common good. Yet, with time, many seemingly good laws designed to benefit the status quo prove to be bad and restrictive, even retrogressive and draconian. Often good laws degenerate into a bad caricature of the intended purpose. A pluralistic, democratic system regularly reevaluates and better interprets such laws, not because of external pressures but because of its experiences as a corrective mechanism.
It is time to learn and adapt. All new or foreign ideas are not necessarily good or bad. It is important to consider them thoughtfully; avoiding the pit falls of colonialist 19th and 20th centuries. Adoption or rejection without thoughtful evaluation, simply because they are from outside, Eastern or Western, is indicative of a closed mind. The baser Western mores have already infiltrated most societies; what is being resisted is the individual freedom and free flow of knowledge to our detriment.
Achieving a great civilization is always much more difficult than descending into chaos. Circling the wagons and pining for a past, viewed through rose-colored glasses is not an option, if the society aspires to greatness. What was considered acceptable in the past needs reexamination in light of the present needs and knowledge. A healthy civil dialogue ushers a gradual acceptance of the desirable.
Humans are wired for and feel comfortable in “group think”. Let us assume that all of us belong to the same race, religion and creed, and in a political speech I say that, “We are the most compassionate, caring and just society. We are the brightest and the most blessed. Our religion, or ideology is the light to the world, and it is our calling to bring the world to sanity and grace, to lead the world to a better tomorrow. I suspect the audience would clap heartily in unison and my poll numbers would go up. However if I change the pronoun ‘WE’ to ‘I’, my poll numbers would tank and would be accused of being an insufferable megalomaniac even though the ideas are the same.
An overwhelming majority of us were born in our parent’s religion and culture, and have made no effort to even know the basics of another religion let alone try to understand them. We tend to either evangelize or avoid talking of religions altogether. When we consider and compare cultures and religions, it is our unconscious effort to show the superiority of our beliefs. Often we tend to be self delusional, and compare the best from our religion, culture or ideology to the worst of the other.
Religious texts do not lend themselves to easy piece meal interpretations. We quote part of the religious text that suites our purpose. One can find thousands of such examples without much effort.
It is important to remember, if we indulge in lies for our religion or against other religions in order to enhance our religion, obviously we are not fooling God. We are simply injuring the thing we purport to love, our religion and our character.
9/11 has changed the perception of methods of war. Up to the 20th century the instruments of mass destruction were in the arsenal of the states. The biggest purveyors of terrorism to gain advantage were also the states. Now with the proliferation of information and retailing of weapons of mass destruction, individuals have joined the fray on a world scale.
It is the duty of truly religious people to raise their voices against the individual terrorism, but even more so the state terrorism, because it is done in our name. Because of the hold of religion on average populace, it becomes imperative to not let our faith be enlisted by the state to harm others. When the upholders of religion refuse to be a part of the solution, they become a part of the problem by design or default.
The best we can do with our limited knowledge and intellectual resources is to be honest with ourselves. That is what our religion asks us to do. What do we believe and why? Introspection – examining our own belief with an open mind and to be a little more critical of ourselves before criticizing others is the best way to build bridges It opens up the mind, not only we understand others better and with more empathy, but we discover a more beautiful and fulfilling dimension of our own religions that is uplifting, liberating and peace loving.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com
PM, India - Gujarat 06-05-03
When will the Government of India protect the victims in Gujarat?
Mirza A. Beg
Wednesday, May 3, 2006
Dear Mr. Prime Minister of India:
The fascistic Modi government in Gujarat is using the levers of power to kill the Muslims again. As you know, the act of the government conniving to kill minorities is called “pogrom”.
I joined the overwhelming majority of Indians in condemning the violence in Kashmir by the extremist militants, perhaps to pre-empt your peaceful dialogue with the Kashmiri separatists to bring a modicum of peace to the beleaguered Kashmiri people. The government is pursuing the culprits, as it has pursued other culprits before to bring them to justice, as it should. Unfortunately terrorism has become more prevalent in modern times with easy accessibility of weapons. The governments must combat this scourge to the civil society.
But terrorism by outlaws and extremists pales in comparison to the state terrorism. It is immoral in all religious as well as the secular codes, and injurious to the Indian constitution and people as a whole. Who would pursue the police when the Chief Minister of a state is the chief terrorist? Whom should the victims call for help? We know that you know the answer.
Mr. Modi’s government in Gujarat indulged in fascistic pogrom against Muslims in February –March 2002, killing and burning about 2,000 Muslims by organized riots under the police protection. At that time the Central government was also dominated by the fascistic BJP. Yes they were popularly elected, but India is a secular constitutional Republic. The acts of the Gujarat government were not only heinous but unconstitutional, and the silence of the central BJP government was defending.
Dozens of inquiries commissions have squarely laid the blame for the pogroms on the Gujarat government. The culprits are not only at large, but have gotten promotions and brazenly continue to implement their sectarian agenda of killing and deprivation of the minorities. The Killings in Vadodra are only the latest incident to be continued if the central government remains moribund.
The Congress dominated government was elected at the center in part because of the revulsion against a monstrous BJP dominated government. For a state government, not to protect the lives and limbs of its citizens is bad enough, but engaging in killing is unconscionable and it automatically becomes unconstitutional. Mr. Prime Minister, when would the Central government act?
We do realize the separation of powers between the central and the provincial governments puts restraints on the center from interfering in the affairs of provincial governments. But center has a duty in protect its citizens when the provincial government is the culprit.
Killing of two Muslims by the police and burning of one by the mob in Vadodra and raping of Nuns with impunity is a clear message to the world that murderers can control the state government in India with impunity and the victims cease to have the protection of citizenship, while the country watches impotently wringing its collective hands and uttering platitudes.
Mr. Prime Minister, it is time for the center to act, not only to protect the victims of the pogrom but to dismantle the power of the monstrous thugs in Gujarat, maligning the name of India and impeding the greatness that India is poised for.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com
Please call/fax/write to:
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh: Phone: 91-11-2301-2312, 91-11-2301-8939
Fax: 91-11-2301-9545, 91-11-2301-6857 Email: pmosb@pmo.nic.in, pmo@nic.in
Smt Sonia Gandhi: Phone: 91-11-2301-9080, 91-11-2301-4481
Fax: 91-11-2301-8651
Email: soniagandhi@sansad.nic.in
Home Minister Shivraj Patil: Phone: 91-11-2309- 2462, 91-11-2379-4842 Fax: 91-11-2379-4833, 91-11-2309-3750, 91-11-2309-4221 Email: svpatil@sansad.nic.in
Mirza A. Beg
Wednesday, May 3, 2006
Dear Mr. Prime Minister of India:
The fascistic Modi government in Gujarat is using the levers of power to kill the Muslims again. As you know, the act of the government conniving to kill minorities is called “pogrom”.
I joined the overwhelming majority of Indians in condemning the violence in Kashmir by the extremist militants, perhaps to pre-empt your peaceful dialogue with the Kashmiri separatists to bring a modicum of peace to the beleaguered Kashmiri people. The government is pursuing the culprits, as it has pursued other culprits before to bring them to justice, as it should. Unfortunately terrorism has become more prevalent in modern times with easy accessibility of weapons. The governments must combat this scourge to the civil society.
But terrorism by outlaws and extremists pales in comparison to the state terrorism. It is immoral in all religious as well as the secular codes, and injurious to the Indian constitution and people as a whole. Who would pursue the police when the Chief Minister of a state is the chief terrorist? Whom should the victims call for help? We know that you know the answer.
Mr. Modi’s government in Gujarat indulged in fascistic pogrom against Muslims in February –March 2002, killing and burning about 2,000 Muslims by organized riots under the police protection. At that time the Central government was also dominated by the fascistic BJP. Yes they were popularly elected, but India is a secular constitutional Republic. The acts of the Gujarat government were not only heinous but unconstitutional, and the silence of the central BJP government was defending.
Dozens of inquiries commissions have squarely laid the blame for the pogroms on the Gujarat government. The culprits are not only at large, but have gotten promotions and brazenly continue to implement their sectarian agenda of killing and deprivation of the minorities. The Killings in Vadodra are only the latest incident to be continued if the central government remains moribund.
The Congress dominated government was elected at the center in part because of the revulsion against a monstrous BJP dominated government. For a state government, not to protect the lives and limbs of its citizens is bad enough, but engaging in killing is unconscionable and it automatically becomes unconstitutional. Mr. Prime Minister, when would the Central government act?
We do realize the separation of powers between the central and the provincial governments puts restraints on the center from interfering in the affairs of provincial governments. But center has a duty in protect its citizens when the provincial government is the culprit.
Killing of two Muslims by the police and burning of one by the mob in Vadodra and raping of Nuns with impunity is a clear message to the world that murderers can control the state government in India with impunity and the victims cease to have the protection of citizenship, while the country watches impotently wringing its collective hands and uttering platitudes.
Mr. Prime Minister, it is time for the center to act, not only to protect the victims of the pogrom but to dismantle the power of the monstrous thugs in Gujarat, maligning the name of India and impeding the greatness that India is poised for.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com
Please call/fax/write to:
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh: Phone: 91-11-2301-2312, 91-11-2301-8939
Fax: 91-11-2301-9545, 91-11-2301-6857 Email: pmosb@pmo.nic.in, pmo@nic.in
Smt Sonia Gandhi: Phone: 91-11-2301-9080, 91-11-2301-4481
Fax: 91-11-2301-8651
Email: soniagandhi@sansad.nic.in
Home Minister Shivraj Patil: Phone: 91-11-2309- 2462, 91-11-2379-4842 Fax: 91-11-2379-4833, 91-11-2309-3750, 91-11-2309-4221 Email: svpatil@sansad.nic.in
Genocide in Gujarat 02-03-18
Genocide Masquerading as Riot in Gujrat, India
Mirza A. Beg
Written on March 18, 2002
Birmingham News, Sunday June 23rd, 2002
While Israel–Palestine conflict sucks away the oxygen of world attention; another genocide is going on in Gujrat, India. Indian government euphemistically calls it a riot.
Riot occurs when a group of people in anger violates the law and injures another group. In India, it happens with greater frequency than a government should tolerate. The government should arrest the miscreants and bring them to justice. What happened at the Godhra railroad station was a riot. Some Muslims in anger at the abduction of a minor girl by Hindu zealots, burnt the rail road car in which they were travelling. The government of the Gujrat State instead of investigating and bringing the rioters to justice helped the revenge seekers statewide, in burning and killing of innocent Muslims. This is genocide.
What is alarming to those who love India, its secularist tradition, culture, and constitution, is the complicity of the Gujrat government in facilitating, and at times spearheading the killings and burning of the Muslim neighborhoods, which are increasingly becoming ghettoes. The power of the government and the police force was used to kill and burn at least 2,000 people and property with great care and deliberation to hit only the intended Muslim minority. More than 150, 000 people have fled their homes and are in camps.
Solace, if possible is, that some courageous Hindu officials have quit plum government jobs in disgust, and a few police officials in spite of threats from the government did not participate in government sponsored killings. For the defiance of the terrorist government’s illegal orders they have been punished, yet have remained steadfast.
Almost all the Indian newspapers and magazines of national stature have strongly chastised the Gujrat and the central governments. National and international human rights and secular groups have issued reports detailing the governments complicity.
Hundreds of reporters have taken thousands of photographs showing hooligans throwing incendiary objects from behind the police cordons at the confined victims. Many of the photographs are available on the Internet. Indians can be genuinely proud of the excellent reporting by many Hindu journalists who value truth and are a credit to their profession.
Mr. Vajpayee, the Indian Prime Minister, shed some opportune tears at the carnage, but instead of firing Mr. Modi, the Chief Minister of Gujrat, he has thrown his full support behind him. India is a parliamentary democracy; there are many precedents of firing the state governments by the central government, especially when they belong to the same party.
All the secular parties and national newspapers have urged that Mr. Modi’s government in Gujrat should be removed from office immediately and a judicial inquiry instituted. A fascist government such as his can not be trusted to investigate itself.
The bane of the past judicial inquires have been that the judges overcoming impediments placed by the government do a meticulous job of investigation and assigning guilt. Usually the guilty are powerful people in the government, as happened in the1984 killings of Sikhs or many riots against Muslims and atrocities against Christians.
The inquiry takes a few years to complete. In the intervening time passions cool and the national memories fade. The government ignores the recommendations of the judicial inquiry and thus it becomes an exercise in futility. The guilty not only go free but also find encouragement to become even more brazen and bold in their evil deeds.
International pressure, particularly pressure from the Unites States would be very helpful in checking the terrorism perpetrated by the government. The State Department and the U.S. Congress should take special notice of the fascistic organizations in India such as World Hindu Organization, (Hindi acronym VHP) and National Self Service Corps (Hindi acronym RSS). These are the kingpins of the terror throughout India. RSS was banned in 1950s for masterminding the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi.
The justice department should investigate the activities of these organizations in this country. These organizations collect enormous amounts of donation from the successful Indians in the United States to subsidize killing and mayhem in India. These fascist-terrorist organizations will not be banned in India at this time because they are the backbone of the electoral base for the present government, which does not have a plurality and is dependent on coalition partners. It may be recalled that Nazis came to power as a minority government with coalition partners and would not have banned their thuggish militia called the “Brown Shirts”.
It is heartening to note that the Supreme Court of India has accepted a public interest petition to examine and rule on the complaint against the state government of Gujrat. It is hoped, the court will rule expeditiously on the complaint as the killings are still going on and the government is spreading misinformation to whip up passions to polarize the electorate to create a larger voter base for itself just as Nazis did 70 yeas ago.
One can not be appreciative enough of the many Hindus, particularly the intelligentsia who have voiced their abhorrence in hundreds of newspaper articles to the calumnious deeds done in their name. Some of the most revered religious leaders such as the “Shankaracharyas” have decried the rape, mayhem and pillage being done by the political opportunists in the name of Hindu creed. All who love India and humanity need to speak out to defeat the present fascistic hijacking of Hindu ethos so that India may find its destiny as a great nation.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com
Mirza A. Beg
Written on March 18, 2002
Birmingham News, Sunday June 23rd, 2002
While Israel–Palestine conflict sucks away the oxygen of world attention; another genocide is going on in Gujrat, India. Indian government euphemistically calls it a riot.
Riot occurs when a group of people in anger violates the law and injures another group. In India, it happens with greater frequency than a government should tolerate. The government should arrest the miscreants and bring them to justice. What happened at the Godhra railroad station was a riot. Some Muslims in anger at the abduction of a minor girl by Hindu zealots, burnt the rail road car in which they were travelling. The government of the Gujrat State instead of investigating and bringing the rioters to justice helped the revenge seekers statewide, in burning and killing of innocent Muslims. This is genocide.
What is alarming to those who love India, its secularist tradition, culture, and constitution, is the complicity of the Gujrat government in facilitating, and at times spearheading the killings and burning of the Muslim neighborhoods, which are increasingly becoming ghettoes. The power of the government and the police force was used to kill and burn at least 2,000 people and property with great care and deliberation to hit only the intended Muslim minority. More than 150, 000 people have fled their homes and are in camps.
Solace, if possible is, that some courageous Hindu officials have quit plum government jobs in disgust, and a few police officials in spite of threats from the government did not participate in government sponsored killings. For the defiance of the terrorist government’s illegal orders they have been punished, yet have remained steadfast.
Almost all the Indian newspapers and magazines of national stature have strongly chastised the Gujrat and the central governments. National and international human rights and secular groups have issued reports detailing the governments complicity.
Hundreds of reporters have taken thousands of photographs showing hooligans throwing incendiary objects from behind the police cordons at the confined victims. Many of the photographs are available on the Internet. Indians can be genuinely proud of the excellent reporting by many Hindu journalists who value truth and are a credit to their profession.
Mr. Vajpayee, the Indian Prime Minister, shed some opportune tears at the carnage, but instead of firing Mr. Modi, the Chief Minister of Gujrat, he has thrown his full support behind him. India is a parliamentary democracy; there are many precedents of firing the state governments by the central government, especially when they belong to the same party.
All the secular parties and national newspapers have urged that Mr. Modi’s government in Gujrat should be removed from office immediately and a judicial inquiry instituted. A fascist government such as his can not be trusted to investigate itself.
The bane of the past judicial inquires have been that the judges overcoming impediments placed by the government do a meticulous job of investigation and assigning guilt. Usually the guilty are powerful people in the government, as happened in the1984 killings of Sikhs or many riots against Muslims and atrocities against Christians.
The inquiry takes a few years to complete. In the intervening time passions cool and the national memories fade. The government ignores the recommendations of the judicial inquiry and thus it becomes an exercise in futility. The guilty not only go free but also find encouragement to become even more brazen and bold in their evil deeds.
International pressure, particularly pressure from the Unites States would be very helpful in checking the terrorism perpetrated by the government. The State Department and the U.S. Congress should take special notice of the fascistic organizations in India such as World Hindu Organization, (Hindi acronym VHP) and National Self Service Corps (Hindi acronym RSS). These are the kingpins of the terror throughout India. RSS was banned in 1950s for masterminding the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi.
The justice department should investigate the activities of these organizations in this country. These organizations collect enormous amounts of donation from the successful Indians in the United States to subsidize killing and mayhem in India. These fascist-terrorist organizations will not be banned in India at this time because they are the backbone of the electoral base for the present government, which does not have a plurality and is dependent on coalition partners. It may be recalled that Nazis came to power as a minority government with coalition partners and would not have banned their thuggish militia called the “Brown Shirts”.
It is heartening to note that the Supreme Court of India has accepted a public interest petition to examine and rule on the complaint against the state government of Gujrat. It is hoped, the court will rule expeditiously on the complaint as the killings are still going on and the government is spreading misinformation to whip up passions to polarize the electorate to create a larger voter base for itself just as Nazis did 70 yeas ago.
One can not be appreciative enough of the many Hindus, particularly the intelligentsia who have voiced their abhorrence in hundreds of newspaper articles to the calumnious deeds done in their name. Some of the most revered religious leaders such as the “Shankaracharyas” have decried the rape, mayhem and pillage being done by the political opportunists in the name of Hindu creed. All who love India and humanity need to speak out to defeat the present fascistic hijacking of Hindu ethos so that India may find its destiny as a great nation.
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com
Freedom & Decency 06-02-09
Freedom of Expression and Obligation to Decency
Mirza A. Beg
Written, Monday, February, 6th 2006
Al Jazeerah, Thursday. February 9, 2006
http://www.aljazeerah.info/9%20o/Freedom%20of%20Expression%20and%20Obligation%20to%20Decency%20By%20Mirza%20A.%20Beg.htm
Tuscaloosa News, Sunday, February 12, 2006
http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060212/NEWS/602120342/1012/editorial1
Muslim Observer, February 10, 2006
Who will pick up the pieces when two fools collide?
A Danish paper wantonly goes out to gratuitously offend the followers of Islam invoking freedom of the press. The legitimate Muslim protests are being taken over by mindless extremists who think violence, intimidation, arson and even killing is permissible, insulting and injuring the religion they purport to defend. Let us consider the hypocrisy of both sides.
Freedom of expression, especially freedom of the press has been one of the cornerstones of the modern pluralistic democratic societies. They are enshrined in most constitutions.
Historical experience testifies that suppressing any speech can result in the suppression of all expressions contrary to the interests of those in power. Therefore to protect legitimate political dissent even reprehensible speech is protected. Often the rights to stupidity are less challenged than the right to hold the governments accountable. Horrible modern examples are the fascistic and communistic regimes of mid twentieth century.
Up to the first half of the 20th century ugly caricatures of Blacks in the US and Jews in many Western Christian countries were not only tolerated, but were rampant. The resulting Nazi holocaust jarred the West, leading to a well-deserved guilty conscience. Now the denial of Holocaust is a criminal offence not only in Germany, given its past, but also in Austria, France, Belgium, Poland and Switzerland. The result of the historic treatment of Blacks in the US has so shamed the nation that certain derogatory words have been expunged from the public discourse. In the US incendiary public speech about any particular group is considered a hate speech. Under certain circumstances it is illegal. These do circumvent the right of free speech, but evolving civil society considered it necessary to protect the freedom from the extremists.
Reprehensible incendiary speech that squarely lands in the column of bigotry need to be strongly condemned by the overwhelming sections of the polity, in order to protect the widest boundaries of free speech.
The dictionary definition of a bigot is - A person who holds blindly and intolerantly to a particular creed or opinion. The widely understood definition is- Bigots tend to generalize without exception, such as all Christians, all Muslims, all Jews, all Blacks are such and such.
Though they can, but media overwhelmingly exercises good judgement in the interest of the victims by not publishing names of the minors in some crimes.
It turns out that the right wing Jyllands-Posten of Denmark egregiously with the intent to offend published the cartoons. It may be their right to offend as many tabloids do, but those who understand and celebrate freedom of the press and civil society also had a civic duty to condemn it. On the contrary some newspapers in European countries that circumvent the right of some free but offensive speech, republished those offensive cartoons in the preposterous knee-jerk reaction claiming to defend the right of free speech. The Muslims correctly see it as hypocrisy.
It is important to remember that Western media is not particularly anti Islamic, it is often profane. In mid 1980s a Museum exhibited Andres Serrano’s Crucifix in Urine, or another painting in 1990s Madonna smeared with dung. Serrano had a right to do whatever he wanted in the privacy of his home or studio, but the exhibit was not only reprehensible by offensive and should not have been shown in a publicly subsidized Museum. In the movie “Last Temptation of Christ” Jesus was shown in a compromising position. A theater in Paris was burned resulting in one death.
It should not go unnoticed that the US and British governments as well as many European governments have condemned the egregious nature of those cartoons. The newspapers in the US and Britain as well as major newspapers in many European countries have not published them. Not because they were afraid, but because they decided not to fall in the gutter with the exploiters of free speech.
In the West in some quarters it is an open season on Islam. The widespread civil protest by Muslims is completely justified, as a long established civil right. The boycott of Danish products that subsidize the offending Danish paper through advertisements was a proper retaliation. But the rowdy behavior of some protestors is an insult to Islam and the prophet who lived and preached civility, consideration and the rule of law. Destruction of Embassies and deaths of innocent people is barbaric and against the tenets of Islam. If those countries do not prosecute to the fullest extant of the law they should be considered complicit. Prophet Muhammad and early Caliphs especially admonished the mistreatment of ambassadors.
The Iranian president is reported to have asked for the cartoons about holocaust in retaliation. Iran has many political grievances against Israel. But targeting Jewish calamity is reprehensible. If the reports are true, it does not insult the victims of holocaust; it only exposes his narrow minded, misplaced vindictiveness, and insults the tenets of Islam.
The Danish government could not have censored the cartoons under Danish laws, but an unequivocal condemnation of the bad taste would have gone a long way towards amelioration. The Muslim governments should protect the lives and property against lawlessness.
Let us hope and pray, “God protect us from our mindless friends, so we can understand our often misperceived enemies and break bread in peace to reduce animosity and enhance friendships leading to a better world.”
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com
Mirza A. Beg
Written, Monday, February, 6th 2006
Al Jazeerah, Thursday. February 9, 2006
http://www.aljazeerah.info/9%20o/Freedom%20of%20Expression%20and%20Obligation%20to%20Decency%20By%20Mirza%20A.%20Beg.htm
Tuscaloosa News, Sunday, February 12, 2006
http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060212/NEWS/602120342/1012/editorial1
Muslim Observer, February 10, 2006
Who will pick up the pieces when two fools collide?
A Danish paper wantonly goes out to gratuitously offend the followers of Islam invoking freedom of the press. The legitimate Muslim protests are being taken over by mindless extremists who think violence, intimidation, arson and even killing is permissible, insulting and injuring the religion they purport to defend. Let us consider the hypocrisy of both sides.
Freedom of expression, especially freedom of the press has been one of the cornerstones of the modern pluralistic democratic societies. They are enshrined in most constitutions.
Historical experience testifies that suppressing any speech can result in the suppression of all expressions contrary to the interests of those in power. Therefore to protect legitimate political dissent even reprehensible speech is protected. Often the rights to stupidity are less challenged than the right to hold the governments accountable. Horrible modern examples are the fascistic and communistic regimes of mid twentieth century.
Up to the first half of the 20th century ugly caricatures of Blacks in the US and Jews in many Western Christian countries were not only tolerated, but were rampant. The resulting Nazi holocaust jarred the West, leading to a well-deserved guilty conscience. Now the denial of Holocaust is a criminal offence not only in Germany, given its past, but also in Austria, France, Belgium, Poland and Switzerland. The result of the historic treatment of Blacks in the US has so shamed the nation that certain derogatory words have been expunged from the public discourse. In the US incendiary public speech about any particular group is considered a hate speech. Under certain circumstances it is illegal. These do circumvent the right of free speech, but evolving civil society considered it necessary to protect the freedom from the extremists.
Reprehensible incendiary speech that squarely lands in the column of bigotry need to be strongly condemned by the overwhelming sections of the polity, in order to protect the widest boundaries of free speech.
The dictionary definition of a bigot is - A person who holds blindly and intolerantly to a particular creed or opinion. The widely understood definition is- Bigots tend to generalize without exception, such as all Christians, all Muslims, all Jews, all Blacks are such and such.
Though they can, but media overwhelmingly exercises good judgement in the interest of the victims by not publishing names of the minors in some crimes.
It turns out that the right wing Jyllands-Posten of Denmark egregiously with the intent to offend published the cartoons. It may be their right to offend as many tabloids do, but those who understand and celebrate freedom of the press and civil society also had a civic duty to condemn it. On the contrary some newspapers in European countries that circumvent the right of some free but offensive speech, republished those offensive cartoons in the preposterous knee-jerk reaction claiming to defend the right of free speech. The Muslims correctly see it as hypocrisy.
It is important to remember that Western media is not particularly anti Islamic, it is often profane. In mid 1980s a Museum exhibited Andres Serrano’s Crucifix in Urine, or another painting in 1990s Madonna smeared with dung. Serrano had a right to do whatever he wanted in the privacy of his home or studio, but the exhibit was not only reprehensible by offensive and should not have been shown in a publicly subsidized Museum. In the movie “Last Temptation of Christ” Jesus was shown in a compromising position. A theater in Paris was burned resulting in one death.
It should not go unnoticed that the US and British governments as well as many European governments have condemned the egregious nature of those cartoons. The newspapers in the US and Britain as well as major newspapers in many European countries have not published them. Not because they were afraid, but because they decided not to fall in the gutter with the exploiters of free speech.
In the West in some quarters it is an open season on Islam. The widespread civil protest by Muslims is completely justified, as a long established civil right. The boycott of Danish products that subsidize the offending Danish paper through advertisements was a proper retaliation. But the rowdy behavior of some protestors is an insult to Islam and the prophet who lived and preached civility, consideration and the rule of law. Destruction of Embassies and deaths of innocent people is barbaric and against the tenets of Islam. If those countries do not prosecute to the fullest extant of the law they should be considered complicit. Prophet Muhammad and early Caliphs especially admonished the mistreatment of ambassadors.
The Iranian president is reported to have asked for the cartoons about holocaust in retaliation. Iran has many political grievances against Israel. But targeting Jewish calamity is reprehensible. If the reports are true, it does not insult the victims of holocaust; it only exposes his narrow minded, misplaced vindictiveness, and insults the tenets of Islam.
The Danish government could not have censored the cartoons under Danish laws, but an unequivocal condemnation of the bad taste would have gone a long way towards amelioration. The Muslim governments should protect the lives and property against lawlessness.
Let us hope and pray, “God protect us from our mindless friends, so we can understand our often misperceived enemies and break bread in peace to reduce animosity and enhance friendships leading to a better world.”
Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)