Martin Luther King Junior

"Beyond Vietnam," Address delivered to the Clergy and Laymen Concerned about Vietnam, at Riverside Church 4 April 1967 New York City Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, I need not pause to say how very delighted I am to be here tonight, and how very delighted I am to see you expressing your concern about the issues that will be discussed tonight by turning out in such large numbers. I also want to say that I consider it a great honor to share this program with Dr. Bennett, Dr. Commager, and Rabbi Heschel, some of the distinguished leaders and personalities of our nation. And of course it's always good to come back to Riverside Church. Over the last eight years, I have had the privilege of preaching here almost every year in that period, and it is always a rich and rewarding experience to come to this great church and this great pulpit. I come to this magnificent house of worship tonight because my conscience leaves me no other choice. I join you in this meeting because I am in deepest agreement with the aims and work of the organization which has brought us together, Clergy and Laymen Concerned About Vietnam. The recent statements of your executive committee are the sentiments of my own heart, and I found myself in full accord when I read its opening lines: "A time comes when silence is betrayal." That time has come for us in relation to Vietnam. The truth of these words is beyond doubt, but the mission to which they call us is a most difficult one. Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government's policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one's own bosom and in the surrounding world. Moreover, when the issues at hand seem as perplexing as they often do in the case of this dreadful conflict, we are always on the verge of being mesmerized by uncertainty. But we must move on. Some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak. And we must rejoice as well, for surely this is the first time in our nation's history that a significant number of its religious leaders have chosen to move beyond the prophesying of smooth patriotism to the high grounds of a firm dissent based upon the mandates of conscience and the reading of history. Perhaps a new spirit is rising among us. If it is, let us trace its movement, and pray that our own inner being may be sensitive to its guidance. For we are deeply in need of a new way beyond the darkness that seems so close around us. Over the past two years, as I have moved to break the betrayal of my own silences and to speak from the burnings of my own heart, as I have called for radical departures from the destruction of Vietnam, many persons have questioned me about the wisdom of my path. At the heart of their concerns, this query has often loomed large and loud: "Why are you speaking about the war, Dr. King? Why are you joining the voices of dissent?" "Peace and civil rights don't mix," they say. "Aren't you hurting the cause of your people? "they ask. And when I hear them, though I often understand the source of their concern, I am nevertheless greatly saddened, for such questions mean that the inquirers have not really known me, my commitment, or my calling. Indeed, their questions suggest that they do not know the world in which they live. In the light of such tragic misunderstanding, I deem it of signal importance to try to state clearly, and I trust concisely, why I believe that the path from Dexter Avenue Baptist Church-the church in Montgomery, Alabama, where I began my pastorate-leads clearly to this sanctuary tonight. I come to this platform tonight to make a passionate plea to my beloved nation. This speech is not addressed to Hanoi or to the National Liberation Front. It is not addressed to China or to Russia. Nor is it an attempt to overlook the ambiguity of the total situation and the need for a collective solution to the tragedy of Vietnam. Neither is it an attempt to make North Vietnam or the National Liberation Front paragons of virtue, nor to overlook the role they must play in the successful resolution of the problem. While they both may have justifiable reasons to be suspicious of the good faith of the United States, life and history give eloquent testimony to the fact that conflicts are never resolved without trustful give and take on both sides. Tonight, however, I wish not to speak with Hanoi and the National Liberation Front, but rather to my fellow Americans. Read more...

A friend's reply to Dawkins

And I am still adamant that human desire for power, wealth, and sex are the fundamental reasons why we do anything not in keeping with religion. Here is my line of thinking: 1) Either everything we do has been formed by genetics and evolution and in that sense religion is merely a "proper and natural" expression of our evolution somehow. And as Dawkins so often points out, there is no such thing as evil in nature, everything is merely our need to replicate our DNA. If this is the case there is no friction between religion and our nature, and he has no argument based on his own fundamental position. 2) If religion somehow defies our inherent dna and evolutionary position then it is somehow not related to our genetic evolutionary path. If that is the case, and Dawkins whole tirade against religion seems to indicate that he feels it is, then any activities justified by religion have an inherent friction based on the contrast between the religious instruction that goes against our inherent dna, and our inherent evolution. 3) If there is a friction between religious instruction and inherent evolution, which is the cause of murder, rape, pillage, genocide, desire for power, anger, animosity and hatred? 4) Religion itself sets out against all of these things: Though shalt not kill. Not covet anothers wife. It places emphasis on living simply. It places emphasis on generosity. It places emphasis on sacrifice, tolerance, renunciation, self-control, and ultimately it idealises celibacy. 5) What does our evolutionary DNA propose? It proposes that man should spread his seed into as many women as possible. It proposes that women should find the most powerful man to protect her offspring. It supposes that might makes right as the flow of DNA is primary, and success is its own marker of rightness. It is our fundamental material nature to be greedy, to seek power, to have little control over ourselves etc. Of course there are social instincts as well since human's are social creatures. But Religion idealises the very best of humanities qualities and seeks to emphasise and encourage them. 6) Therefore if there is any failure in humanity to follow the instructions of religion, is this due to religion itself or due to a failure in humanity to abide by the instructions of religion? It is quite obvious our failure to abide by any moral code (whether it is religious or not) comes from our inherent material natures. Our greed and desire for power and sex which emanates fundamentally from our material natures is only contested by our ability to think and reason beyond our own basic selves. Whether the moral code you aspire to comes from religion or is conceptualised without a God, that moral code is at odds with the very idea of our simple evolutionary source. Evolution and the spread of DNA cannot have a moral code, and especially cannot explain how humans are sentient, and can exercise thought, reason, and self control. 7) The fact that religions vue celibacy as the final mastery of self control is because religion teaches us to go against our fundamental material natures. It is in direct conflict with the very nature which evolution proposes. There is nothing worse than false renunciation, but actual renunciation, without the hypocrasy that is rife within religion (as people discover power, sex, and greed through manipulation of the realm of religion), is trully the most liberating force. It frees the soul and our spiritual being from our material conditions. 8) Dawkins must attack religion on this issue precisely because it is it's greatest merit, and he is trying to hide the paucity of explanation of human psychology found in evolution. Evolution has no clue why we are even capable of higher thought, or why God evokes such strong feeling in us. That is because evolution deals only with our material conditioning. It has no answers. That is why religion's strongest point is its deep understanding of the meta-psychological. And here I am not talking about stupid and simplistic rituals or superstitions. 9) Religion is torn between removing itself from the world around it (and hiding away from the material conditions in isolatation where the trully virtuous can live by the principles of religion), or it must make some compromise with the forces of material conditioning. If it must make compromise with the forces of material conditioning, then it must confront greed, power, wealth, desire, hatred, murder, theft, and violence. It must therefore either choose pure idealism and be slaughtered and or made irrelevant, or it must practice defence and match the violence of the materially conditioned. The need to match the violence of the materially conditioned ensures that a successful religion will seek to understand, and maintain god consciousness whilst holding a firm line against the non-virtuous. Virtue and Vice then vie for the balance of humanity. But when religion losses its essence in the fight, it becomes merely another tool of oppression, devoid of all its aspirations. 10) the way to discover if someone is manipulating religion for the sake of material conditioning or if someone is trully religious fighting against the weakness of material conditioning is to measure their tolerance, inspiration, and their own personal practice. If they practice their beliefs in detail, if the society is exemplary and inspires god consciousness in a peaceful and tolerant fashion, if it is strong against the forces of material conditioning, then it's leadership is fighting a good fight. If in proclaiming religious principles the leadership encourages intolerance and denigrates the idea of faith and of God, then it is merely utilising the forces of religion for the purpose of material conditioning. The more people abide simply by ritual in force, the less love for God they will feel. Thus many of the most religiously ideal societies were and are the very least religious.

A friend's lament

Yeah, but luggage isn't the only reason for the recurring incidents at Jamarat and other places. There are many smaller incidents that take place every minute which aren't reported and don't have anything to do with logistics. People charge towards the pillars with such anger and rage that they defy the true intended spirit of the Hajj and its rituals. In fact you even hear people swearing at the shaytaan as they stone instead of saying the takbir. It's both the ignorance, disregard and lack of consideration for your fellow Muslims that annoys me. Even during the tawaaf when performing ramal, there are men who are doing a full Olympic sprint in the first three shawaat knocking over anybody who's in their way. The same thing again happens during saee, at the black stone, at Maqaami-Ibrahim, at the Prophets grave...... The thing is you can't reason with these people. It's supposed to be the most sacred and peaceful of journeys (and I know not with out struggle of course), but still..... One of the most repeated words that you hear there (apart from the Talbiyya etc....) is sabr because you realise that Muslims don't have any patience, they can't wait in a queue and everyone thinks that they're the only ones serving God. It almost feels like some kind of violent race to heaven where Muslims really are literally trampling on each other to get to the gates of paradise. It's like people are oblivious of their surroundings and are ignoring everybody and everything around them. They don't want to see the bigger picture because that requires the daunting task of forgetting that you're not the centre of the universe. Humans are inherently selfish and Muslims are no exception to the rule. So when I say that it tests your faith I don't just mean the physical danger or indeed the fear of dying for the sake of God. It's all the negative experiences which test your patience and understanding of each other as humans and as fellow Believers. That although you will die alone you can't disregard others on the same journey. I feel in a sense bewildered that this is the Muslim ummah the very same one which Gods says in the Quran "We have appointed you a middle nation so that you may be witnesses against mankind...." Well even at Hajj we're not doing a very good job are we ? However, it's easy to criticise others, become conceited, or simply be aloof and detach ourselves and close our eyes from things that we don't like, but it's more difficult to still remain part of everything, remain humble and maybe change things. I've had a zillion things to do this morning and I think I'm in serious danger of going off on a tangent here so I'll stop rambling.

The Raid...

We were collected at my aunts house for my cousins birthday party a few days ago. J. just turned 16 and my aunt invited us for a late lunch and some cake. It was a very small gathering- three cousins- including myself- my parents, and J.’s best friend, who also happened to be a neighbor.

The lunch was quite good- my aunt is possibly one of the best cooks in Baghdad. She makes traditional Iraqi food and for J.’s birthday she had prepared all our favorites- dolma (rice and meat wrapped in grape leaves, onions, peppers, etc.), beryani rice, stuffed chicken, and some salads. The cake was ready-made and it was in the shape of a friendly-looking fish, J.’s father having forgotten she was an Aquarius and not a Pisces when he selected it, “I thought everyone born in February was a Pisces…” He explained when we pointed out his mistake.

When it was time to blow out the candles, the electricity was out and we stood around her in the dark and sang “Happy Birthday” in two different languages. She squeezed her eyes shut briefly to make a wish and then, with a single breath, she blew out the candles. She proceeded to open gifts- bear pajamas, boy band CDs, a sweater with some sparkly things on it, a red and beige book bag… Your typical gifts for a teenager.

The gift that made her happiest, however, was given by her father. After she’d opened up everything, he handed her a small, rather heavy, silvery package. She unwrapped it hastily and gasped with delight, “Baba- it’s lovely!” She smiled as she held it up to the light of the gas lamp to show it off. It was a Swiss Army knife- complete with corkscrew, nail clippers, and a bottle opener.

“You can carry it around in your bag for protection when you go places!” He explained. She smiled and gingerly pulled out the blade, “And look- when the blade is clean, it works as a mirror!” We all oohed and aahed our admiration and T., another cousin, commented she’d get one when the Swiss Army began making them in pink.

I tried to remember what I got on my 16th birthday and I was sure it wasn’t a knife of any sort.

By 8 pm, my parents and J.’s neighbor were gone. They had left me and T., our 24-year-old female cousin, to spend a night. It was 2 am and we had just gotten J.’s little brother into bed. He had eaten more than his share of cake and the sugar had made him wild for a couple of hours.

We were gathered in the living room and my aunt and her husband, Ammoo S. [Ammoo = uncle] were asleep. T., J. and I were speaking softly and looking for songs on the radio, having sworn not to sleep before the cake was all gone. T. was playing idly with her mobile phone, trying to send a message to a friend. “Hey- there’s no coverage here… is it just my phone?” She asked. J. and I both took out our phones and checked, “Mine isn’t working either…” J. answered, shaking her head. They both turned to me and I told them that I couldn’t get a signal either. J. suddenly looked alert and made a sort of “Uh-oh” sound as she remembered something. “R.- will you check the telephone next to you?” I picked up the ordinary telephone next to me and held my breath, waiting for a dial tone. Nothing. “There’s no dial tone… but there was one earlier today- I was online…” J. frowned and turned down the radio. “The last time this happened,” she said, “the area was raided.” The room was suddenly silent and we strained our ears. Nothing. I could hear a generator a couple of streets away, and I also heard the distant barking of a dog- but there was nothing out of the ordinary. T. suddenly sat up straight, “Do you hear that?” She asked, wide-eyed. At first I couldn’t hear anything and then I caught it- it was the sound of cars or vehicles- moving slowly. “I can hear it!” I called back to T., standing up and moving towards the window. I looked out into the darkness and couldn’t see anything beyond the dim glow of lamps behind windows here and there. “You won’t see anything from here- it’s probably on the main road!” J. jumped up and went to shake her father awake, “Baba, baba- get up- I think the area is being raided.” I heard J. call out as she approached her parents room. Ammoo S. was awake in moments and we heard him wandering around for his slippers and robe asking what time it was. Meanwhile, the sound of cars had gotten louder and I remembered that one could see some of the neighborhood from a window on the second floor. T. and I crept upstairs quietly. We heard Ammoo S. unlocking 5 different locks on the kitchen door. “What’s he doing?” T. asked, “Shouldn’t he keep the doors locked?” We were looking out the window and there was the glow of lights a few streets away. I couldn’t see exactly where they came from, as several houses were blocking our view, but we could tell something extraordinary was going on in the neighborhood. The sound of vehicles was getting louder, and it was accompanied by the sound of clanging doors and lights that would flash every once in a while. We clattered downstairs and found J. and the aunt bustling around in the dark. “What should we do?” T. asked, wringing her hands nervously. The only time I’d ever experienced a raid was back in 2003 at an uncle’s house- and it was Americans. This was the first time I was to witness what we assumed would be an Iraqi raid. Read more...

A friend of mine wrote this

I think it needs to be emphasized in the Western coverage of this matter (including BBC's) that the popular perception of Muslims regarding the cartoons is hugely skewed because of reports/rumors/email forwards that misrepresent the contents of the cartoons. The general perceptions vary between ideas such as the cartoons portraying the Prophet as a pedophile, or being raped by a dog, or being associated with pigs. Some sources of such fabrications have been identified, but most people are not clear on what the cartoons really portray and have a much more offensive and demeaning portrayal in their minds. A second issue is the perceived double standard in having laws in Europe that protect Jews and their symbols (especially the Holocaust) from ridicule or defame or even questioning and discussion, while Muslims are given the "freedom of speech" line by those same countries. A third issue of course is the lack of understanding of Muslims of their own history and how the Prophet himself (and God, through the Quran) has responded to ridicule directed at him. The Quran mentions in many places the kinds of ridicule that had been leveled at Muhammad (he was accused of being just a poet- poets usually having been perceived as being inspired by demons, or being a magician, or being a priest- also a concept with different connotations in pre-Islamic Arab society, or being simply mad). The Sira or history of the Prophet also mentions many kinds of abuse and ridicule that the Prophet had endured. My point is that the restraint showed by Muhammad and urged by him unto his companions in the face of such ridicule or abuse should be an example for Muslims today to follow. Words are words. They should be combated or responded to by words- or by "beautiful forgiveness" as Islam instructs- or as the Quran instructs: if the ignorant ones speak to us, then we say unto them peace be upon you, that is, we calmly and pleasantly ignore them.

The mural maze

Much of Iran's most virulently anti-Israeli public art has been produced using technology from the Jewish state. Robert Tait explains

Wednesday February 8, 2006

Guardian Unlimited

Things may change when Iran's biggest-selling newspaper gets round to publishing the results of its planned cartoon contest satirising the Holocaust, but for now the larger-than-life mural lionising Reem Saleh al-Riyashi, a Palestinian female suicide bomber, is as vivid an illustration as any of the Islamic republic's implacable hostility to Israel.

Two years ago, al-Riyashi entered the realms of Palestinian martyrdom when she blew herself up, killing four Israelis in the process, at the Erez crossing point in Gaza. Today, motorists and passersby gazing down from Motahari Street, in central Tehran, can contemplate her grimly resolute features as she holds her young son in one hand and a gun in the other.

Next to her portrait, set against a backdrop showing the Jerusalem landmark the Dome of the Rock and two booted feet trampling an Israeli flag, is another giant picture celebrating the actions of a further seven Palestinian women suicide bombers.

On the face of it, the banners are the highly predictable artistic reflection of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's recent wave of fervently anti-Zionist rhetoric, in which he called for Israel to be "wiped off the map" and dismissed the Holocaust as a myth. But there is one twist: they have been created with technology made in Israel.

Experts in Iran's printing industry say they are typical of images produced by hi-tech digital printers made by Scitiex Vision, based in Tel Aviv. Printing equipment originating in Israel is commonly used in Iran.

"Those two banners are five metres wide, and no printing company other than Scitex produces that kind of technology," said one Tehran printing company owner, who requested anonymity. "The large-format printing industry is Israeli-led. Their equipment is very reliable. The result is that Israeli-made equipment is sold in Iran, and a lot of the anti-Israeli and anti-American propaganda you see here is made by this kind of equipment.

Read more...

Worlds apart

sraelis have always been horrified at the idea of parallels between their country, a democracy risen from the ashes of genocide, and the racist system that ruled the old South Africa. Yet even within Israel itself, accusations persist that the web of controls affecting every aspect of Palestinian life bears a disturbing resemblance to apartheid. After four years reporting from Jerusalem and more than a decade from Johannesburg before that, the Guardian's award-winning Middle East correspondent Chris McGreal is exceptionally well placed to assess this explosive comparison. Here we publish the first part of his two-day special report

Chris McGreal Monday February 6, 2006

Guardian

Read the second part of Chris McGreal's report

Said Rhateb was born in 1972, five years after Israeli soldiers fought their way through East Jerusalem and claimed his family's dry, rock-strewn plot as part of what the Jewish state proclaimed its "eternal and indivisible capital". The bureaucrats followed in the army's footsteps, registering and measuring Israel's largest annexation of territory since its victory over the Arab armies in the 1948 war of independence. They cast an eye over the Rhateb family's village of Beit Hanina and its lands, a short drive from the biblical city on the hill, and decided the outer limits of this new Jerusalem. The Israelis drew a line on a map - a new city boundary - between Beit Hanina's lands and most of its homes. The olive groves and orchards were to be part of Jerusalem; the village was to remain in the West Bank.

The population was not so neatly divided. Arabs in the area were registered as living in the village - even those, like Rhateb's parents, whose homes were inside what was now defined as Jerusalem. In time, the Israelis gave the Rhatebs identity cards that classified them as residents of the West Bank, under military occupation. When Said Rhateb was born, he too was listed as living outside the city's boundaries. His parents thought little of it as they moved freely across the invisible line drawn by the Israelis, shopping and praying inside the walls of Jerusalem's Old City.

Four decades later, the increasingly complex world of Israel's system of classification deems Said Rhateb to be a resident of the West Bank - somewhere he has never lived - and an illegal alien for living in the home in which he was born, inside the Jerusalem boundary. Jerusalem's council forces Rhateb to pay substantial property taxes on his house but that does not give him the right to live in it, and he is periodically arrested for doing so. Rhateb's children have been thrown out of their Jerusalem school, he cannot register a car in his name - or rather he can, but only one with Palestinian number plates, which means he cannot drive it to his home because only Israeli-registered cars are allowed within Jerusalem - and he needs a pass to visit the centre of the city. The army grants him about four a year.

Read more...

We have lost our voice

Moderate Muslims, from Denmark to the Middle East, are caught in the vice of a manufactured conflict

Tabish Khair in Aarhus Tuesday February 7, 2006

Guardian

When I first saw them, I was struck by their crudeness. Surely Jyllands-Posten could have hired better artists. And surely cartoonists and editors ought to be able to spot the difference between Indian turbans and Arab ones. In some ways, that was the essence of the problem to begin with. It is this patronising tendency - stronger in Denmark than in countries such as Britain or Canada - that decided the course of the controversy and coloured the Danish reaction.

One could see that the matter would take a turn for the worse when, late last year, the Danish prime minister refused to meet a group of Arab diplomats who wished to register their protest. In most other countries they would have been received, their protest accepted. The government would have expressed "regret" and told them it could not put pressure on any media outlet as a matter of law and policy. In their turn, having done their Muslim duty, these diplomats might have helped lessen the reaction in their respective countries. By not meeting them, the prime minister silenced all moderate Muslims just as effectively as they would be later silenced by militant Muslims around the world.

Like many other moderate Muslims, I too have been silent on these cartoons of the prophet Muhammad and the ensuing protests. Not because I do not have anything to say, but because there is no space left for me either in Denmark or in many Muslim countries.

Read more...

Broke Back to the Future

Amazing re-edit of the Back to the Future series into a film preview depicting a gay love relationship between Doc and McFly. Click here.

Brain food

As new research published today reveals a link between poor diet and mental ill health, Fran Gorman says it's time for the government to act Rise in mental illness linked to unhealthy diets, say studies

Fran Gorman Monday January 16, 2006

SocietyGuardian.co.uk

There appears to be no respite in the pace or impact of the growing burden of mental ill health on individuals and the nation as a whole. One in four people is likely to experience a mental illness at some point in their life, and the costs of mental ill health to the UK economy are now approaching £100bn a year.

Mental health problems are believed to be the result of a combination of factors, including age, genetics and environmental factors. One of the most obvious, yet under-recognised factors in the development of major trends in mental health is the role of nutrition.

But the body of evidence linking diet and mental health is growing at a rapid pace. As well as its impact on short and long-term mental health, the evidence indicates that food could play an important contributing role in the development, management and prevention of specific mental health problems such as depression, schizophrenia, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and Alzheimer's disease.

The increasing incidence of mental ill health echoes changes in food production in the UK. The last 50 years have witnessed significant changes to the way food is produced and manufactured. The proliferation of industrialised farming has introduced higher levels and different types of fat into our diet.

Read more...

Iran and Israel will be kings of the Middle East jungle

The US occupation of Iraq has turned its neighbour into a new regional power. But the contagion is likely to spread far wider David Hirst Friday January 13, 2006 Guardian In March 2003, before US troops reached Baghdad, Middle East scholar Volker Perthes wrote that while the risks of this "illegitimate" war were enormous, those of "a US failure to stabilise postwar Iraq would be even higher". With those words looking increasingly prophetic, no one, in picturing the implications of such failure, is now more lurid than the Bush administration. The direness of the prospect has become its strongest argument for "staying the course", but for others it is already a given, amounting to "the greatest strategic disaster in US history", in the words of the retired US general William Odom. If so, what will this disaster look like? In scale, it will surely be at least commensurate with the vast ambitions that came with the invasion in the first place, Iraq being cast as the platform for reshaping the entire Middle East. A general US retreat from the region, with troop withdrawal at its core, is no doubt a prerequisite for, and yardstick of, the emergence of a healthy, self-reliant new Middle Eastern order. But, with the kind of ignominious scuttle from Iraq that failure would presumably entail, the region won't just revert to the status quo ante. Instead of Iraq becoming a beacon of all good things it will become the single most noxious wellspring of all the bad ones the invasion was supposed to extinguish - and new ones to boot. Read more...

Women on hijab

Very entertaining, at some points wasn't even sure if it was a satire. But it's what may be women's various understanding of what it means to them to be hijabi. I also like it because it's Malaysian or Indonesian muslims which are always forgotten these days. The vast majority of Muslims are not Arabs. Click here...

EGYPT'S FIRST LADIES

This is a great site chronicling Egyptian high society with some interesting comparisons. Samir Rafaat's commitment to recording these fascinating stories is invaluable. To see click here.