Thursday, November 20, 2008

Peres booed at Oxford



From Instablogs:
Israeli president Shimon Peres was at Ofxord yesterday to deliver a speech on world peace, ironically, as the head of state of Israel. The lecture was titled The Globalization of Peace that is part of a series of lectures Peace Lectures: Inaugurated by Shimon Peres.
...
While Peres was giving his speech, student protests could be heard outside throughout the entire duration. At one point, several student stood up and stated “I represent all the Palestinians who...”. One of them was forced out of the venue.

Urge Wiesenthal Center to Halt Construction of Museum on Muslim Cemetery

Urge Wiesenthal Center to Halt Construction of Museum on Muslim Cemetery

Monday, November 17, 2008

Thursday, November 13, 2008

Employee Religious Accommodation News


According to the Workplace Prof. Blog, the recent consent decrees preliminarily approved by a district court judge in Minnesota may be the first of their kind. The EEOC charges against Gold’n Plump Poultry, Inc.and The Work Connection regarding the rights of Muslim employees with respect to prayer breaks look like they will be settled!

The issue in question:
  • The religious discrimination prohibition found in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
The consent decrees requires that:
  • Gold'n Plump employees will receive an additional paid break, for one of the plant areas, during the 2nd half of each shift.
  • Break timings will fluctuate year round to accommodate prayer times.
  • Gold'n Plump will pay $215,000 to a group of Muslim employees "who may have been [improperly] disciplined or discharged when they took breaks to pray."
  • Gold'n Plump will pay $720,000 in attorneys' fees.
Additional good news:
  • The Work Connection, the employee placement service that referred workers to Gold'n Plump, will pay $150,000 to the class as a consequence of having asked potential workers to sign a form verifying they "would not refuse to handle pork" in the course of their work as well as for rejecting workers who refused to sign the form.
  • The Work Connection will discontinue it's use of the questionable form and will forward placement offers to those workers it had previously turned away.
Sources:

Alhamdulillah for the courageous workers whose dedication to their faith brought us this fabulous example of good law!



Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Extending an Olive Branch



For Ali Malik, who visited Israel and Palestine in September with 13 other UC Irvine students, the trip’s highlight wasn’t on the official itinerary. During the group’s stay in Jerusalem, Malik walked every morning to the Dome of the Rock – the Muslim mosque – to pray.

“On the way, I’d see Christians going to church and Jews going to the Wailing Wall, and I realized we were all going for the same purpose – to worship and please our lord,” says Malik, who took the trip as part of the student-led Olive Tree Initiative. “It had a huge impact on me.”

Founded in 2007, the initiative comprises student leaders from Jewish, Muslim, Christian, Druze and unaffiliated backgrounds. They include members of Anteaters for Israel, Hillel, Muslim Student Union, Society of Arab Students, Middle East Studies Student Initiative and other campus organizations. Finding common ground and opening dialogue on the Middle East conflict among people with different ideologies is a key goal of the initiative.

After spending several months studying Arabic in Damascus through the International Opportunities Program, Malik joined his fellow students on the two-week visit to Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Ramallah, Hebron, Bethlehem, Haifa and other cities within Israel and Palestinian territories. They talked with academics, community and religious leaders, and activists in the region.

“You can study these things in books, but being there brings them to life,” Malik says. “The trip revamped my opinion of the conflict. I now feel that, although it’s a deeply complicated issue, it’s resolvable if we can talk to each other.”

...

For their efforts, Malik and Moran Cohen (to be featured in a Nov. 10 Spotlight) both received the XIV Dalai Lama Endowed Scholarship, which recognizes UCI students committed to ethics and leadership on campus and in the community.

He and Cohen will use their scholarship – which includes individual awards of $7,500 and a shared award of $2,500 – to “work rationally for peace” and foster more conversations about the conflict. They participated in Olive Tree Initiative’s first public forum Oct. 23 before a packed crowd in the Student Center’s Crystal Cove Auditorium, and they hope to do more at local mosques, synagogues and campus venues. They also want to recruit new initiative members and organize another Middle East trip next fall.




Full press release here

I don't know much about the initiative but sounds like a step in the right direction...may Allah (swt) put barakah in your efforts Br. Ali. Praying in al-Aqsa everyday...a dream come true...

Monday, November 10, 2008

Just Sayin...

Emanuel Is Bad on More Than Just Palestine

Illinois Congressman Rahm Emanuel is a member of the so-called New Democrat Coalition (NDC), of group of center-right pro-business Congressional Democrats affiliated with the Democratic Leadership Conference, which is dedicated to moving the Democratic Party away from its more liberal and progressive base. Numbering only 58 members out of 236 Democrats in the current House of Representatives, the NDC has worked closely with its Republican colleagues in pushing through and passing such legislation as those providing President Bush with "fast-track" trade authority in order to bypass efforts by labor, environmentalists and other public interest groups to promote fairer trade policy.

Emanuel began his political career as a senior adviser and chief fundraiser for the successful 1989 Chicago mayoral campaign of Richard M. Daley to seize back City Hall from reformists who had challenged the corrupt political machine of this father, Richard J. Daley. Emanuel later became a senior adviser to Bill Clinton at the White House from 1993 to 1998, serving as Assistant to the President for Political Affairs and then Senior Advisor to the President for Policy and Strategy, and was credited with playing a major role in shifting the Clinton administration's foreign and domestic policy agenda to the right. Emanuel was the single most important official involved in pushing through the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the bill ending Aid for Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), and Clinton's draconian crime bill, among other legislation.

Source: AlterNet

We might be more relevant if we stopped honing in only ONE issue, and formulated arguments about why this man is bad on so many more levels than just Palestine. It isn't just about our brothers and sisters in the Holy Land. It's about our millions of neighbors who have been left "barely" living as a result of NAFTA and bad AFDC legislation. When will we see that?

Wednesday, November 5, 2008

Did You Miss the CAIR Banquet?

Here is something nice, a piece that explores what it means to be an American Muslims, from the sacrifices to the challenges and the triumphs. Enjoy.


Monday, November 3, 2008

Do Not Let Another Vote Be Lost, Yet Again


Guest Post by Fariha Tayyab

After interviewing with a reporter from the Houston Chronicle mid last week on the Muslim community's reaction to recent racial uproar in both campaigns, I got to thinking, thinking a lot to where I felt a bit trapped. And now I've decided to speak or rather explain to everyone who is confused as to why I support who I do and why it matters.

(Side note: For those of you who would like to read a critique of Obama and his campaign addressing each issue area please let me know. I have a great thorough email sent from a friend titled "Obama and the Muslim vote")

Maybe it's not about the lost vote, maybe it's about a sincere vote that is lost yet again.

We live in a bi-world. Bi-partisan to be more specific. It is so because well we didn't really do anything and more importantly because we chose not to. Ross Perot, as is well known, a 3rd party candidate came really close to being in the main race, but yet he was polling below 10percent. Ralph Nader, who is running as an independent this year and a fourth time in national polls. He polled above 5 percent and event reached 10percent at one time. Therefore, a vote like Ralph Nader's isn't wasted or 'lost'...That's just a myth what we're taught. The democrats even wrongly blamed, Nader for Bush's victory in 2000 (with logic in mind that if Nader's voters would have voted for Kerry maybe he would have won stepping aside all other significant reasons why Gore lost). Furthermore, Bush defeated Al Gore in FL by around 500 votes and Nader received close to 100k votes in Florida. Many other 3rd party candidates also received more than those 500 or so votes... A point to just let flush through your mind, so your vote is not lost, it's not unheard, its not overlooked. Those who do stand up for their principles, well its seen. More, here.

In eight years, everyone seems to have been worked up and passionate about this election. We seem to be taking no more of Bush-it. So the word change resonates throughout our political thought processes. And yet really its just not change, just a tweek in how things were and a beacon of hope that seems to shift and sway to where it almost obliterated concept of reliability and consistency. Whether it be the children from Ron Clark elementary, or the pyscho 'kill him' chanters at McCains rally's, or the man who names his baby Sarah McCain Palin, or even the movie Obsessions, or even Republican leadership changing their stance or shifting out of the scene because "Palin is like a cancer", or any of the enthused Obama supporters and all their interesting actions, or maybe even all the Muslims who vote together.

Your best teacher is your last mistake.

Vote together for a man who knows he has gotten our vote; who understands he doesn't have to step into ONE MOSQUE, because he already has our vote. He doesn't have to stay consistent and can unconditionally support [apartheid] Israel and offer more than 3billion in aid annually, create tension and talk about proactive action for Pakistan insurgencies, or the many other issues a Muslim vote would be 'concerned' with and seem to have always been a bit too concerned with. He has our vote, and he will regardless. Not because we love Obama, but because we choose to be involved to not get another Bush or McCain, who God forbid wins. The thought of that makes us cringe. Expediency or sincere voting?

What about the issues that McCain doesn't mention? Obama does? What about the issues neither mentions? The one's that affect us first and foremost? What about the military budget? Alternative Energy? Corporate welfare and crime? the Justice system? US Policy on Middle East? Etc. All these affect us but yet Obama doesn't address them. Address the real issues.

He's a writer, a professor, a lawyer, a politician, a activist, a journalist, a speaker, a trooper, a hero. A man who started more than 10 nonprofits, one who broke Guinness book of world records for most speeches given in a day, whose one of multiple books was ranked 38th amongst 100 top pieces of Journalist for 20th century, who both Life and Time magazine named 100 most influential Americans in 20th century and even in history. Not to mention his running mate, Matt Gonzalez, who is also phenomenal in a myriad of ways, that this email would only drag on, but most of us know him as the one who almost won mayoral race in San Francisco in 2003.

Other campaigns are driven by organizations and political action committees and platforms that definitely have their own agenda. Their money is supporting within both campaigns. Has anyone really stopped to think about this, in depth or even on surface level? It's almost as if you pay and you get your voice heard. So then what is change? Because the people putting money in don't seem to be wanting it. Nader only accepts money from individuals and in turn for the last 30+ or so years Nader puts interest of the people at the front. "Nader raiders" didn't just come and go, they came and stayed, they wrote books about him, their hero, they worked to continue to establish his non profits, they amongst everything else voted for him, and shifted the trend.

The only difference between the Republican and Democratic parties is the velocities with which their knees hit the floor when corporations knock on their door. That's the only difference.

One's not sure what to say, let's just say Obama is Muslim, its a disgust for him to ever admit maybe 1% of him was or could be. It would hurt his campaign which is honestly understandable, because he is all about change and voting for the people. If those who are voting on more shallower terms on basis of surface level and minority status, well maybe there is some triggering factor for doing so. On a shallow note, Nader is first Arab American presidential candidate (his parents were from Lebanon and Catholic) and not only is his stance pro Palestine but he's also not hiding in corners erasing his identity and rather embracing it amongst other things. Random point that doesn't really matter unless your voting on a 'I vote minority' basis. At his fourth round of elections, there is some merit and sincerity in Nader, a trooper. It's about challenging the status quo, and about not giving up. And now he is on the ballot in 45 states.

A leader has the vision and conviction that a dream can be achieved. He inspires the power and energy to get it done.

So the biggest, most comprehensive, overall argument remains: If We don't want McCain, so we vote Obama. Expediency at it's best. However, this doesn't seem to hold immense amounts of logical thought or firmness it just seems to be to some, borderline jargon. As those of us who are Muslim peoples, we come from our ideals. Rather we are our ideals. And our religion and it's fundamental concepts were strived for, even if they weren't achievable within a short time. It was the ideal that mattered, the overall message, and the true values we stood for, that was what kept Muslim thought alive. Never ending struggle now, and the never ending struggle then. We aren't a people to trade off in the least, rather we have patience to the most. So even on an "Islamic" note this doesn't have much standing. What isn't a reality now in four years, isn't going to be a reality ever really if we don't start to make it one and mold things. For those who aren't voting and seem to be a more political Islamic inclined kind of ideology, its because you don't support these candidates because they are both evil. This also to some is flawed logic, however there is an alternative? Yes, indeed.

Once you don't vote your ideals, that has serious undermining affects. It erodes the moral basis of our democracy.

So as Americans we believe in democracy, what was once brought up as democratic ideals and values, but what is not. And not only what has not been but what will not become if we as a people aren't proactive. Change is there, change is real. and if you let it be change is possible. However it is not through the avenues of Mu-Barack. There is no really blessing in that, if we vote for him out of the dislike for McCain.

As Nader explains in an interview, "One feels an obligation, Tim, to try to open the doorways, to try to get better ballot access, to respect dissent in America in the terms of third parties and, and independent candidates; to recognize historically that great issues have come in our history against slavery and women rights to vote and worker and farmer progressives, through little parties that never ran--won any national election. Dissent is the mother of ascent. And in that context, I have decided to run for president."

Be real with yourself. Be a trooper. Be a true American and holdup democratic ideals, in whichever candidate you find it in and God bless. But today only Ralph Nader seems to be real and about change.

Do not let another vote be lost, yet again!

*Nader/Gonzalez 08
*All italics where Nader quotes. Glad you enjoyed

Sunday, November 2, 2008

Support Obama But Vote McKinney?


The Green Party Presidential ticket of Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente brings something special and unprecedented to U.S. politics. Not only are they the first all women-of-color ticket in recent memory to get ballot access in most states. These women take racial justice seriously, and have made strides to put gender at the center of a progressive agenda. For these two, it's more than skin deep.

They're the Presidential ticket that talks about amnesty for undocumented workers, that opposes guest worker programs as riddled with abuses, because they believe a just immigration reform means addressing the trade and economic policies fueling poverty and migration. They're the ticket that demands reparations in the form of federal investment in low-income families and communities of color, to end racial disparities in health, housing, education, and incarceration. They call for the right of return for Katrina survivors; an end to prisons for profit, to the War on Drugs. And they speak of reproductive justice – not just the right to abortion, but actual healthcare access; of freedom from coerced or uninformed medication and sterilization.
Nowhere do we see Nader, or white male Third-Party-politics-as-usual, bringing in these issues – this slice on life, or sensitivity. McKinney, for instance, points out that Social Security cuts will disproportionately harm women. The Green Party candidates offer to do us the public service of contesting Palin's brand of "feminism." Let's take them up on it.
. . .
But each vote for them contributes towards building unprecedented ballot access, federal funds, and an inroad to the national debates, for the Green Party. If McKinney / Clemente get 5% of the national vote, the Green Party qualifies for millions of dollars in federal matching funds for 2012 – a significant dent in the two-party system. Under the electoral college's winner-takes-all system, not every vote for a major candidate counts; but by supporting a minor candidate, we can strategically use our votes to institutionalize a progressive platform.
. . .
In the words of McKinney herself: "We are in this to build a movement. We are willing to struggle for as long as it takes to have our values prevail in public policy." She reminds us, "Voters in this country are scared into not voting their hopes, their dreams, their aspirations. But in Bolivia and Ecuador and Argentina and Chile and Nicaragua and Spain, and India and Cote d'Ivoire and Haiti, voters were not afraid to vote their hopes and dreams, and guess what. Their dreams came true. Ours can, too."
. . .
There is not a contradiction between supporting Obama's victory over McCain, and spreading the word on McKinney – because we believe her politics should be included in the debates; and believe all voters should be aware she and the Greens exist as an option.
There is not a contradiction between spending time to campaign for Obama in key swing states, and pledging your own vote to McKinney – particularly in Democratic strongholds such as California, Massachusetts, Illinois, New Jersey, Connecticut, Vermont, Oregon, or Washington, where Obama will win landslide; or Republican states where McCain is assured of victory.

As an example, in 2004, Kerry beat Bush in Massachusetts 62% to 32%, by over 700,000 votes. 5% of the vote would have been around 140,000 ballots, but third party candidates actually got around 1% altogether, or 27,000. This election, 35 states are not swing states.
. . .
In August, AntiWar.com featured a line-up of McCain, Obama, Nader, and Barr. Incidentally, reflecting a common trend in much progressive media, over 80% of the site's columnists and regular contributors are male. When challenged by readers about McKinney's absence, the editors explained that both she, and ultra-rightwing, xenophobic, anti-abortion Chuck Baldwin – who seeks to cut all federal investment in communities of color – were omitted. Not due to bias against McKinney as a black woman, but because, an editor flippantly wrote, both of the candidates are "pretty perfect" on foreign policy. If McKinney's stance was so perfect, why wouldn't the site choose to promote her as a standard-bearer? And why instead place her on equal footing with a racist, sexist Baldwin? Besides not considering economic inequality, immigration policy or internal colonization as relevant to imperialism, AntiWar.com must simply have not viewed her as a serious contender.
Why has McKinney had more trouble getting attention from left organizations and institutions compared to Nader, Green Party candidate in 2000? After all, she, too, champions universal healthcare under a single-payer system; progressive taxation; repealing free trade agreements and abolishing the anti-union Taft-Hartley act. She takes a stronger stance against war and occupation, urging an immediate and orderly withdrawal from both Iraq and Afghanistan. And she has vocally opposed the bail out.
. . .
The right-wingers have meticulously learned to rig the electoral system in their favor. Let's take it back.

Vote truth this year, and work for it next.
Source: OpEd News