Our Announcements

Not Found

Sorry, but you are looking for something that isn't here.

Archive for January, 2017

6 Rules Of Islamophobia In America by www.huffingtonpost.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

6 Rules Of Islamophobia In America

The Huffington Post tracked Islamophobia in the U.S. throughout 2016.

Here’s what we learned.

After the 2015 terror attack in Paris, when Donald Trump and other GOP presidential candidates were ratcheting up their anti-Muslim political speech, we started a running list of Islamophobic acts. Sadly, in less than two months, the list became so long the webpage often wouldn’t load.
This made us recognize the very real surge in anti-Muslim incidents sweeping the nation — a surge many wanted to deny was happening at all. (Think Fox News host Eric Bolling saying he “hadn’t heard of any” anti-Muslim hate crimes.)
So we developed The Islamophobia Project, and committed to tracking anti-Muslim violence, vandalism, discrimination, public policy and political speechjam throughout 2016.

CAIR-St Louis
America, 2016. A man with a gun screams at a Muslim family near St. Louis. “You Muslim?” he allegedly said. “All of you should die.”
The timing of the incidents we collected helped reveal patterns. We discovered that Trump supporters attacked, harassed, or plotted to kill Muslims at least 13 times during the election cycle, proving a potential link between Trump’s rhetoric and the actions of supporters. We documented apparent surges in anti-Muslim incidents during Muslim holidays.
It’s now been a year, and our project is a sad and seemingly endless scroll through nearly 400 stories of Muslims in America being attacked, threatened, scapegoated, and profiled, seeing their places of worship vandalized and their faith denigrated.
An email address we set up as a source for tips — islamophobia@huffingtonpost. com — generated hundreds of responses. Many people expressed gratitude for the project. One email led to a story about a Muslim Army veteran who found the word “terrorist” written on his locker. Mostly, we received anti-Muslim hate mail.
Our reporters and editors were attacked on anti-Muslim hate group sites and trolled relentlessly on Twitter ― signs that the project was making waves.
And, if you scroll through the tracker to March 10, 2016, you’ll read about the then-frontrunner in the Republican presidential primary saying: “I think Islam hates us.”
So much cynicism and misinformation was packed into those five words. That Trump could say them and go on to get elected president of the United States underscores just how successfully Muslims have been designated the “other” in this country.
When a group is an “other,” it’s easier to attack them, or to strip them of their civil rights. Our tracker documented this time and again.
But in another sense, Islamophobia isn’t something that can ever be tracked comprehensively. There’s too much of it, and not every instance becomes a headline.
It’s ubiquitous in the daily lives of Muslim Americans. It’s when a Muslim mom tells her daughter to maybe not wear the hijab today. It’s a Muslim father having to explain to his children that no, they’re citizens, they can’t be deported. It’s how almost every Muslim in a movie is depicted as a terrorist, and it’s why cable news channels only ask Muslims if they condemn terrorism.
With the rise of Trump, the silver lining is that now, more people seem to be paying attention to anti-Muslim hate. Media organizations are covering the subject more robustly. The nonprofit investigative news organization ProPublica has launched its own project, called “Documenting Hate,” and The New York Times has started a weekly column on the subject called, “This Week in Hate.”
This year, we won’t be updating the Islamophobia Tracker. The story is so much bigger than a dataset now. But we will continue telling stories of hate and extremism. And we will pay close attention to the new presidential administration that seems hell-bent on vilifying Muslims and persecuting them.
Having tracked hate for a year, we’re able to see that people who disparaged Muslim Americans are mostly reading from the same old script. It’s possible even to look at our project as a kind of how-to guide for anti-Muslim bigotry ― a list of six “rules” of Islamophobia in America.
And if we’re going to help protect our Muslim neighbors, coworkers, friends and family, these are six “rules” that desperately need to be dismantled and destroyed.

Rule 1: Muslims are not American.

Mark Wilson via Getty Images
“Go back to your country,” a man screamed at worshipers leaving a Connecticut mosque. “C**t, you don’t belong in this country. Go back to your f****** country,” another man shouted at a Muslim woman and her family in Ohio.
“Get the hell out of the country you bitch-ass Muslims,” a woman screamed at a Muslim mother and daughter in Maryland. “You’re not even from here, motherf*****! F*** you and your family, you terrorist!” a man yelled at a Moroccan Uber driver in Queens, New York.
“Get out of America, bitches,” a woman in Brooklyn, New York, screamed at two Muslim women pushing their babies in strollers. “This is America — you shouldn’t be different from us.”
And when pundits and politicians decried San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick for kneeling during the national anthem, they were quick to baselessly blame this alleged act of unAmerican-ness on the influence of Kaepernick’s Muslim girlfriend.
Muslims just can’t be from here, the thinking goes ― even though Muslims fight in our military and die in our wars, and even though a United States without Muslims has never existed.

Rule 2: All Muslims are terrorists.

A hate-filled voicemail left at the San Francisco chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
“You’re a terrorist,” a woman yelled at a Muslim woman inside a New Mexico grocery store.
“We don’t want niggers and terrorists here. #Trump,” read a note taped to the door of a Muslim family’s home in Iowa.
Mohamed Abbas, a 32-year-old Iraq War veteran and American citizen with PTSD who happens to be Muslim, found “terrorist” written on his locker inside a California Marine Corps base.
“When you say the word ‘Islam’ to Mike Goodman, it means ‘terrorist,’” Goodman, a member of a Massachusetts town commission, said of himself. “When you say ‘Muslim,’ it means a person. Islam is nothing but full of terrorists.”
That’s just not true, Mike.

Rule 3: Pork is to Muslims as a crucifix or garlic is to vampires.

A Texas anti-Muslim militia group dips bullets in pig’s blood. Why? To send Muslims “straight to hell.”
In Florida, a man allegedly trashed a mosque with a machete before leaving bacon on the front doorstep. At mosques in Nebraska and Las Vegas, men wrapped bacon around mosque door handles. In Raeford, North Carolina, a man carrying a handgun left packages of bacon at the mosque and threatened to kill worshippers.
In Philadelphia, someone left a severed pig’s head outside a mosque. And outside a mosque in Lawton, Oklahoma, someone dumped a whole pig carcass.
And then there’s Trump, who in 2016 was fond of telling an apocryphal story of how a U.S. general killed Muslim insurgents with bullets dipped in pig’s blood.
Like Judaism, Islam generally prohibits its followers from eating pork. While these pork-based acts of hate are undoubtedly meant as insults, the perpetrators also seem to ascribe mythical or inhuman qualities to Muslims, as if pork could magically fend them off, or send them straight to hell. As one anti-Muslim activist told comedian Samantha Bee on her show this year: “A pig head to Muslims is like a crucifix to a vampire.”
Muslims, of course, don’t believe this. Most don’t eat pork ― and that’s about the extent of it. As one Muslim HuffPost employee put it recently after reading about the pig carcass in Oklahoma: “I swear I need to spread a rumor that Muslims don’t eat cupcakes.”

Rule 4: All brown people are potentially Muslim, and are therefore potentially terrorists.

Courtesy of the Jabara family
Khalid Jabara, an Arab-American Christian, was fatally shot by a neighbor who often called the Jabaras “dirty Arabs,” “Aye-rabs” and “Mooslems.”
Simran Jeet Singh was running in the New York City Marathon when he said someone called him a “dirty Muslim.” Harmann Singh said a man called him a “f****** Muslim” inside a Cambridge, Massachusetts, store. “You’re trying to blow up this country, I should (expletive) kill you right now, you know,” Balmeet Singh said a man told him outside a California burger restaurant.
All three Singhs, who are not related, wear turbans and are Sikh, not Muslim. Sikhs are commonly perceived as Muslims in the U.S., and are targeted in anti-Muslim hate crimes, even though Sikhism and Islam are completely different religions ― not that it should matter.
In Oklahoma in August, a 61-year-old ex-convict named Stanley Majors allegedly shot and killed a 37-year-old man named Khalid Jabara outside his home. Majors reportedly had harassed the Jabara family for years. He called the Jabaras “dirty Arabs,” “Aye-rabs” and “Mooslems.” The Jabaras are Christian immigrants from Lebanon.
This phenomenon is sometimes called the “racialization of Islam,” and it helps explain why nearly 30 percent of Americans, including possibly Trump, still think the country’s first black president is secretly a Muslim.

Rule 5: Islam is not a religion, it’s a violent ideology.

Retired Lt. General Michael Flynn, President Donald Trump’s national security adviser and an anti-Muslim conspiracy theorist, saying that Islam isn’t a religion.
Islam “is an ideology posing as a religion. Islam is intolerant and deceitful, and its adherents are ordered to overthrow our way of life and to replace it with ‘Sharia’ law,” Republican New Hampshire state Rep. Ken Weyler wrote in testimony submitted to the state House.
In Pennsylvania, a school board member said that Islam is “not a religion” and is “not only godless, but pagan.” In Virginia, a member of the Republican State Central Committee tweeted that Islam is a “death cult organized by Satan” and “is not a religion of peace but an ideolgy (sic).”
And in Utah, the state’s third-largest political party called for outlawing Islam altogether, arguing that because it’s not a religion, it’s not protected under the First Amendment.
Merriam-Webster defines Islam as “the religious faith of Muslims including belief in Allah as the sole deity and in Muhammad as his prophet.” It is practiced by 1.6 billion people and is the world’s second-largest religion, after Christianity. It is no more inherently violent or peaceful than any other religion.
Rule 6: There’s a secret Muslim plot to take over and/or destroy the United States and/or Western civilization from within.

Richard Ellis/Getty Images
Frank Gaffney, an advisor to Sen. Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign, has long pushed the “civilization jihad” conspiracy theory. In a press release for a bill that could destroy American Muslim groups, Cruz cited “civilization jihad.”
Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson warned of a “civilizational jihad” against the U.S., wherein “jihadists” who “disguise themselves as moderate Muslims” would “infiltrate, multiply and take positions of power” in order to “replace our Judeo-Christian values with Islam.”
Former Rep. Michele Bachmann described the influx of Muslim migrants and refugees into Europe and the U.S. as a “planned invasion” meant to destroy “western Christendom.” It’s part of a “civilization jihad,” the tea party Minnesota congresswoman explained, aimed at “Islamizing” the West.
The news site The Hill published an article by Frank Gaffney, an adviser to presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), in which Gaffney wrote that Muslims in the U.S. have a “civilization jihad” aimed at “destroying Western civilization.” This Muslim conspiracy, he explained, uses “stealthy, subversive means like influence operations to penetrate and subvert our government and civil society institutions.”
The idea of a “civilization jihad” is a thoroughly debunked conspiracy theory. But it’s also a popular one that has contributed to this country’s dim view of Muslims. A recent survey revealed that Americans think there are 54 million Muslims in America. There are only about 3 million.
“If you’re promoting anti-Muslim bigotry and your theory is that a small percentage of the population is going to take over, it doesn’t work very well,” Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman at the Council on American-Islamic Relations, told HuffPost recently. “You have to create the impression that there’s a flood of Muslims taking over America.”

 

Reference
Preview YouTube video Armed and Vigilant: In Fear of a Muslim Uprising in Texas

Armed and Vigilant: In Fear of a Muslim Uprising in Texas

, , ,

No Comments

Role of USA-Israel-India in fomenting Islamic radicalism by Brig (r) Asif Haroon Raja, Director General Measac Research Centre

Role of USA-Israel-India in fomenting Islamic radicalism

Asif Haroon Raja

Non-resolution of Palestinian and Kashmir dispute gave rise to Islamic radicalism. After the Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979, the ten-year Iran-Iraq war ended inconclusively in 1988 but militarized and radicalized the two countries. Iraq under Saddam Hussain was supported by the two super powers, the west and the Arab world. While Iran completed its revolutionary cycle under Imam Khomeini and started to assert its authority in the region, Saddam claimed the leadership of Arab world. Israeli aggression in Lebanon and persecution of Palestinians gave birth to Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza Strip and heightened radicalism.     

The war in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989 in which Pakistan played a key role, radicalized the region. CIA assisted by Saudi Arabia was instrumental in collecting Jihadis from Muslim countries, converting religious seminaries into training venues and providing funds and weapons to organize proxy war and converting FATA into a base of operation. The collective effort succeeded in pushing out occupying Soviet forces from Afghanistan in February 1989, but the whole muck of ten-year war fell upon Pakistan. Harsh US sanctions from 1989 till 2001 impeded Pakistan’s development and economic growth. It also curtailed efforts to reduce poverty and to counter the fallout effects of the Afghan war in the form of Kalashnikov and drug cultures and sectarianism. Marriage between USA and India enabled India to intensify its human rights violations against the Kashmiris in Indian occupied Kashmir (IOK), which further intensified radicalism in Pakistan and gave birth to several Jihadi groups.    

On November 9, 1989, Berlin wall fell, reuniting East and West Germany after 40 years of division. In retaliation to capture of Kuwait by Iraqi forces in August 1991, the US under George H. W. Bush militarily intervened in Iraq with the blessing of Gorbachev. Soviet Union collapsed on December 26, 1991 and Yeltsin replaced Gorbachev.  These earth shaking events paved the way for the US to become the unchallenged sole super power and none could compete its political, diplomatic, economic and military strength. Bush senior drafted the neocons inspired New World Order (NWO), which gave out broad outlines of making America great. The threat of communism was replaced with Islam

After fragmentation of Yugoslavia, dissolution of Warsaw Pact and integration of East Europe into Western Europe, membership of NATO was gradually increased to 28 members and made into a formidable military machine. Bill Clinton who took over from Bush senior, being highly pro-India, treated Pakistan unfairly. His 5-hour officious visit to Pakistan in March 2000 during which he behaved like a Viceroy visiting a colony cannot be forgotten by Pakistanis. It was during his tenure that a Jerusalem based Israeli think tank ‘Institute for Advanced Strategic & Political Studies’ (IASPS) came out with a paper in 1996, titled “Clean Break”, which envisaged rebuilding Zionism, atomization of Iraq and breaking it into three states based on ethnic-sectarian lines.

IASPS wrote another paper in 2000, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses’ for a New American Century.  The two documents openly spoke of the need to destabilize the Middle East so as to reshape Israel’s strategic environment. The plan focused on destruction of oil rich Iraq and removal of Saddam Hussain and installation of Hashemite monarchy in Baghdad, followed by systematic destruction of oil rich Libya, and then Syria and Egypt. It suggested increasing the number of forward US military bases.

Although the apparent objective of Zionists is to crush all dissent and make USA all powerful so that it could rule the world unopposed, in reality the Zionists consider themselves to be the chosen people to rule the world. They want to achieve their goal by placing their gun on the shoulder of USA.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Overall recommended strategy hinged on fomenting open-ended chaos to achieve overlapping strategic objectives in Middle East. The brains behind these rabid thoughts were a gang of eight Israeli-American neocons. They were Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks Jr, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, Meyrav Wurmser and Paul Wolfowitz. This group had got influenced from Israeli journalist Adid Yenon’s book ‘Breakup of Syria’ published in 1982. He had suggested that Israel should breakdown all Arab states into small quasi states. Israeli leaders have all along advocated regime changes in Arab world to install puppets but their preferred choice is Balkanization.

Lt Col Ralph Peter wrote an article ‘Blood Borders’ in 2006 suggesting change of boundaries in Middle East.  His write up and the map are in use in training of NATO Defense College for senior officers.

When the US became the sole super power, it was infused with the ambition of gaining complete hegemony over the world for next 100 years. Its aim has been to disempower and neo-colonize 1.5 billion Muslims, and rob their oil, gas and wealth. The US succeeded in establishing bases in almost all Gulf States after encouraging Saddam to capture Kuwait in August 1991 and then destroying Iraqi infrastructure in November 1991 and imposing harsh sanctions on Iraq. Capture of Iraq in May 2003, Arab Spring, regime change in Libya and civil war in Syria were in accordance with the pre-conceived plan to foment chaos in whole of Middle East, let Muslims kill Muslims on ethnic and sectarian basis and to divide the targeted states one after the other. Splitting of Yugoslavia into seven states engineered by Richard Holbrooke was in their mind.  

Former Supreme Allied Commander NATO Gen. Wesley Clark had revealed in 2004 that Pentagon had made a plan to target seven countries in five years. The countries in order of priority were Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran. He also disclosed that initial target after 9/11 till as late as 20 September 2001 was Iraq and not Afghanistan.

Once George W. Bush junior assumed power with the support of Israel and Neocons in January 2001, he unfolded his Muslims specific offensive doctrine based on pre-emption, preventive action against rogue states, shock and awe, opening of torture chambers and unilateralism. Global war on terror was launched to achieve geostrategic and geo-economic interests. He boasted that terrorism will be eliminated from the face of the globe to make the world peaceful. He crowed, ‘We will launch a crusade against terrorism’; ‘we will smoke them out of their holes’. Drunk with power, he had arrogantly stated that, ‘21st century will be New-American Century’. He defined Iran-Iraq-North Korea as axis of evil.

Man from Texas was thunderously applauded by the home audience and European allies.  Tomahawk cruise missiles, cluster bombs, daisy cutters, B-52 bombers, drones and laser guided munitions were used extensively to destroy Afghanistan and enable Northern Alliance forces to capture power. He used a huge hammer to kill a fly. The country was destroyed but the fly flew away.

His next target was heavily sanctioned Iraq which was invaded in March 2003 under fake charges and after raining tons of bombs, it was captured in May with the help of Iraqi Shias and Iraqi Kurds. Even after destroying Afghanistan and Iraq and installing puppet regimes in the two occupied countries to launch reign of terror against opponents, radicalism rather than getting curbed touched new heights since he was never sincere in eliminating it.

Once Obama took over power in January 2009, he introduced Pakistan specific Af-Pak policy with ulterior motives. He reinforced US combat force in Afghanistan with two troop surges, accelerated drone war in Waziristan, twice changed the top ISAF commanders abruptly, and chanted the slogan of disrupting, defeating and destroying Al-Qaeda in Af-Pak region by making full use of drones and availing the services of so-called ally Pakistan that had been silently bled from within under a pre-planned scheme to steal its nukes. Emphasizing on counter terrorism and drones while disregarding root causes of terrorism heightened radicalism in Pakistan.

Behaving like a ‘good boy’, Pakistan fought the US imposed war on terror on its soil as a frontline state and helped the US in netting about 600 Al-Qaeda operatives, thereby forcing Al-Qaeda to shift its base to Arabian Peninsula. Soon Al-Qaeda under the leadership of Egyptian Ayman al-Zawahiri with its main base in Yemen morphed into an international organization. Killing of Osama bin Laden in May 2011 brought no change in the fighting capability and grit of Al-Qaeda since it gave birth to more dangerous terror groups like ISIS, Al-Nusra Front, Khurasan group and Boko Haram. ISIS is now the most dangerous terror group which has made inroads into Afghanistan as well. Likewise, the Afghan Taliban couldn’t be defeated despite using full force and torture and divisive tactics.

The US-NATO troops pulled out of Iraq in 2011 and from Afghanistan in December 2014 without achieving any of the stated objectives of eliminating Al-Qaeda, defeating Taliban, eradicating terrorism, imposing its brand of democracy and improving the lives of the common people of the occupied countries. The US property/security contractors, arms merchants, drug mafias and oil tycoons made billions under the garb of rebuilding the devastated cities and infrastructure of the two countries.  

Not satisfied with the ruination of the two sovereign states Afghanistan and Iraq that were stable and well governed, and are now in a mess and rived in deep turmoil, the US then destroyed prosperous Libya in 2011 and initiated civil war in Syria the same year, which was also a stable country. The US has now got badly stuck in Syria.

Fate of Iraq has been sealed and has no future as a unitary state. Likewise Libya and Syria have been sufficiently debilitated. Sudan has been divided and oil-rich South Sudan that had been independent is mired in turmoil. Yemen and Lebanon are also unstable and considerably enervated. Iran has been forced to roll back its nuclear program, but several sanctions have not been lifted. Somalia has been turned into a failed state. CIA has been using drone extensively as a choice weapon.

The 21st century crusaders have succeeded in altering the geography and demography of the Arab world. 250 million Arabs are today defenceless, destitute and despondent and tens of thousands have sought refuge in Europe.

Pakistan has rendered maximum sacrifices in war on terror and has suffered 60,000 human casualties and financial loss of $118 billion but is in bad books of USA despite the fact that it is the only country which has defeated and ousted the foreign backed terrorists from FATA.

As a result of anti-Islam and anti-Muslim policies and injustices, the US is rated as the most unjust and hateful country of the world. Both Bush and Obama along with their western allies are solely responsible for wreaking havoc upon the targeted countries in the Muslim world through senseless war on terror and for making the world much more insecure and dangerous than it was prior to 9/11. Over 4 million people, mostly innocent men, women and children have lost their lives in this insane war and 12 million have become refugees. Countless numbers have been crippled, orphaned, widowed, rendered homeless, or have lost sense of living.

Israel and India, the strategic partners of USA, have taken full advantage of war on terror, and have been brutally massacring and torturing the hapless Palestinians in Gaza and West Bank, and in IOK respectively. The US has been fully supporting India and Afghanistan in their massive covert war against Pakistan since 2003 using Afghan soil. USA, Israel and India are hand in glove stirring up radicalism and terrorism in pursuit of their imperialist agenda.

With this dismal background, Donald Trump has come on the centre stage and is chanting the old slogan of eradicating Islamic terrorism from the face of the earth. He has already begun to flex his muscles against the peeved Muslims. Like his predecessors, he is pleasing Israel and India at the cost of severely bruised Muslim world. His target countries are no different to the ones disclosed by Gen. Wesley Clark. His predecessors have used all kinds of most deadly weapons against the militants for the last 15 years but to no avail. He is also pro-use of force, but it is to be seen what new weapon or strategy he has up his sleeve? The only weapon that has so far not been used is the nuclear weapon! The other course open to him is to trample few more Muslim countries.

One thing which puzzles me is the exclusion of Pakistan from the list of seven. It’s an open secret that nuclear Muslim Pakistan, which has now become the pivot of CPEC is a thorn in the flesh of Indo-US-Israel-Afghanistan nexus.

Pakistan must remain cautious and vigilant of this most dangerous nexus, and without annoying USA, play its cards dexterously to fit into the emerging axis of Russia-China-Iran, which will surely act as a safety valve against isolation and military adventurism. At the same time, it should keep its armed forces in readiness and nuclear deterrence serviceable. Last but not the least, the snakes in the grass towing foreign agenda must be dealt with an iron hand. Opportunist political leaders must desist from pursuing politics of agitation and animosity and should keep national interests uppermost in these critical times.       

The writer is retired Brig, war veteran, defence analyst, columnist, author of five books, Vice Chairman Thinkers Forum Pakistan, Director General Measac Research Centre, Member Executive Council Ex Servicemen Society and Tehreek Jawanan Pakistan.  asifharoonraja@gmail.com

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Integration: “Two -Way Street” by Iftikhar Ahmad London School of Islamics Trust http://www.londonschoolofislamics.org.uk

Integration: “Two -Way Street”

Iftikhar Ahmad

London School of Islamics Trust

http://www.londonschoolofislamics.org.uk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“We’re as British as fish ‘n’ chips,” UK Muslims tell PM – Al Arabiya English

British people should think of integration as a “two-way street” and learn other languages such as Polish and Urdu, a Cambridge academic has said. Wendy Ayres-Bennett, professor of French philology and linguistics, said learning other languages is considered “something difficult and only for the intellectual elite” by many in Britain. She backed calls for immigrants to learn English once they arrive, as she warned migrant communities could develop “exclusive social networks and alternative labour markets” without learning the native  language.

Prof Ayres-Bennett, who also leads the MEITS (Multilingualism: Empowering individuals, transforming societies) project promoting multilingualism, spoke out after two major reports into integration in British society, published by Dame Louise Casey and the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Social Integration. Many more English speakers should think of immigration as a ‘two-way street’ and be able to communicate in another language to aid integration and social cohesion, said academic Wendy Ayres-Bennett. The call flies in the face of two major reports into integration in British society which called on immigrants to learn English if they want to live in the UK.

 

 

 

 “It is very important to think of integration as a two-way street,” she said. “Considering the issue from the point of view of language learning, we rightly expect immigrants to learn English but, as a nation, we often don’t see the need ourselves to learn another language, and consider it to be something difficult and only for the intellectual elite. She went on to say that society made a mistake in making significant effort to accommodate people coming in from the outside and that the onus should mostly be on immigrants themselves to adapt to British culture.
 

“I would like to see more opportunities for British people to learn some of the community languages of the UK, such as Polish, Punjabi and Urdu, particularly in areas where there are high numbers of those speakers, so that there is some mutual effort in understanding the others’ language and culture.

A primary school teacher asking her pupils in the classroom: What do you call a person who speaks 3 languages? Trilingual! what do you call the person who speaks 2 languages? Bilingual. And what do you call a person who speaks only one language? British!
 
Bilingualism is an asset but British schooling considers it as a problem. This is the main reason why 99.9% of native Brits are unable to speak any other foreign language. There are even seven million native Brits who are unable to read and write English.
 
Well to tell the truth it is amazing how being a bilingual or polyglot broadens the point of view on how u see the world how u understand it . Is even more painful to see what’s happening today in this world. Watching the hate brought about from peoples that don’t understand and a accept other cultures hurt each other I feel teaching of languages and cultures should be accentuated in schools to kids . Languages are gift from God. Ability to handle languages makes you confident and optimistic. In my view of point being multilingual is the best way to know the other cultures and tradition in close.. The place where I Iive more than seven languages spoken ,so it gives me the ability to grasp languages swiftly….  Speaking more than one language and knowing more than 1 language is also kind of knowledge & knowledge enlightens one’s mind.
 
The sound knowledge of one’s owns language would appear to help – not hinder the acquisition of a second language and bilingual children may even have cognitive advantages and that the ability to speak more than one language is going to be increasingly important for the world of the future. Therefore, Muslim children and young Muslims have potentially a major educational advantage, although sadly this is not being developed well at present. British policy makers now recognise bilingualism as an educational asset rather than a problem. Education plays a central role in the transmission of languages from one generation to the next. The teaching of mother tongues is essential in terms of culture and identity. Arabic is a religious language for the Muslims but for Pakistanis, Urdu is also essential for culture and identity. Blind Muslim children in Bradford are learning to read Arabic and Urdu Braille, by a blind teacher who travelled from Pakistan. Now blind Muslim children are not going to miss out on culture, religion, language and the social aspects and integration into their own community and identity.
 
I have always said, the more languages you know, the broader your cultural knowledge. Those who say you must only use one language narrow their perception of the world. Also, people who can learn languages are good at playing musical instruments. Languages should be taught more in school. When I speak in Arabic I feel like a poet and when in English, I feel like a philosopher. “This mental flexibility pays big dividends especially later in life: the typical signs of cognitive ageing occur later in bilinguals – and the onset of age-related degenerative disorders such as dementia or Alzheimer’s are delayed in bilinguals by up to five years.” We are amazed by being able to speak multilingual which is great Ever thought of the One God Creator Who made these languages.
 
Majority of Muslim children are from Pakistan. They must learn and be well versed in Arabic and Urdu to keep in touch with their cultural heritage and enjoy the beauty of their literature and poetry. On top of that they must learn and be well versed in standard English to follow the national Curriculum and go for higher studies and research to serve humanity. Schools do not allow Bilingual children to speak in their mother tongue. “A good grasp of one’s mother tongue is an essential base for a child who then has to get to grips with the language of their host country,” reckons Amelia Lambelet of the Fribourg Institute of Multilingualism. Therese Salzmann, an expert in multilingualism at the Swiss Institute of Youth and Media, agrees. “The teaching of mother tongues reinforces self-confidence and gives the child a feeling of security.” She adds that “taking account of a child’s double cultures is a determining factor in their social integration and professional success.” Our education system has always been fairly bad at teaching different languages. I guess the only way to ensure better linguistic skills is to be born into a family who uses more than one language during the child’s formative years.
 
‘Children who do not have English as their mother tongue generally perform as well as native speakers and are valued in many schools for creating linguistic and cultural diversity. Data published last year found that these pupils were now actually more likely to gain good GCSE grades in a range of academic subjects such as English, maths, science and foreign languages.’ I wouldn’t want any child in Britain to complete their education without excellent intelligible command of English – the language in which the school teaches and that of the bulk of the community in which they can make their way as an adult.
 
Why bother learning another language when English is the world’s language..?? Do you really think English is the world’s language? It’s only third in the list of the world’s most spoken languages. English people couldn’t learn other languages so they forced everyone to speak their language; and now confronted with their own disability with all these immigrants with multilingual tongues they lash out at the immigrants because of jealousy – the cold reality of their own linguistic shortcomings is harsh. People are speaking 10 languages and you can barely speak one. I can see why they would resent and hate immigrants. The superiority is right in your face.
 
Speaking English does not promote integration into British, American and Australian societies, and broaden opportunities. English speaking Muslim youths are angry, frustrated and extremist, thanks to state schools with monolingual non-Muslim teachers and English language. English language is not only a lingua franca but also lingua frankensteinia. Human right are also covers linguistic right. Cultural and linguistic genocide are very common. British schooling is murdering community languages like Arabic, Urdu and others. English is today the world killer language. Linguistic genocide is a crime against humanity and British schooling is guilty of committing this crime. Language is not just a language. It defines one’s culture, identity and consciousness. It defines how we think, communicate and express ourselves. The fact is the most South Asian Muslims have come to know Islam by way of Urdu, the children’s alienation from the language that connects them the heritage of their parents and grandparents is disturbing. As a matter of fact, one has to get to know his mother tongue well if one is to master any other language.
 
Bilingual Muslims children have a right, as much as any other faith group, to be taught their culture, languages and faith alongside a mainstream curriculum. More faith schools will be opened under sweeping reforms of the education system in England. There is a dire need for the growth of state funded Muslim schools to meet the growing needs and demands of the Muslim parents and children.
 
There are hundreds of state primary and secondary schools where Muslim pupils are in majority. In my opinion all such schools may be opted out to become Muslim Academies. This mean the Muslim children will get a decent education. Muslim schools turned out balanced citizens, more tolerant of others and less likely to succumb to criminality or extremism. Muslim schools give young people confidence in who they are and an understanding of Islam’s teaching of tolerance and respect which prepares them for a positive and fulfilling role in society. Muslim schools are attractive to Muslim parents because they have better discipline and teaching Islamic values. Children like discipline, structure and boundaries. Bilingual Muslim children need Bilingual Muslim teachers as role models during their developmental periods, who understand their needs and demands.
 

The Casey review and the APPG’s report highlighted the need for more English language classes to reach communities that predominantly speak other languages. Prof Ayres-Bennett said the reports reinforced the importance of languages in social cohesion as she supported their recommendations for immigrants to learn English. “Without English, immigrants are likely to develop exclusive social networks and alternative labour markets,” she said.

“For most people, language is at the very heart of their identity. “We need to respect and celebrate this and to see English as adding to their multilingual and multicultural identities, rather than trying to force immigrants to suppress or even lose their home language and culture.” “Even a basic knowledge would be beneficial, which might be acquired formally or through engaging in joint community projects.

In my opinion, native Brits and Muslim children must learn Arabic and Urdu to make Muslims feel at home. The teaching of these languages will help native Brits to understand the needs and demands of the Muslim community and healthy community relations. It will help Muslim children to keep in touch with their cultural heritage and enjoy the beauty of their literature and poetry.
 
I live in a very multi-cultural area but the races rarely interact. One road is entirely populated by the Asian community, with sari shops and Indian gold sold. Rarely do you see any other race walk down it. On the high street there are a number of polish shops sprouting up. When I hear people passing by talking, it is never the English language. Immigrants do not think it necessary to integrate. Polish stick with Polish, Indians stick with Indians. It will never change no matter what the government say.
 
Why complain when it’s the British who first migrated into other lands enslaving those people? When it is a question on immigration, the feelings are so strong. I wonder why. Serves you right! Britain! When the British colonised the world, it was ok. But now when people from the former colonies and from other countries come to Britain, its not ok?
 
During colonial days, British did not follow local customs or culture. They didn’t exactly “go native”. They even forced the native Americans and native Australian to adopt all the evils of their culture and customs. They are still the underdogs of American and Australian societies. At least Australian Prime Minister apologised to the natives for their evil deeds. Brits living in Spain and France don’t even bother learning the language of the new adopted country.Frankly suggesting that people don’t want to become “British” they should move elsewhere is extremely irritating. Immigrants are in UK because they are needed, it was never an act of charity. Without migration, British economy and society will bleed to death. British culture and customs will undoubtedly change as it has for millennium due to immigration. I am not quite sure why Brits would be worried about that.
 
The linguistic abilities of large number of Muslim children were being ignored because they had to learn another European language as well as mastering English. The Government must promote the status of Arabic/Urdu languages instead of languages of European origin. Tim Benson, head of Nelson primary school in Newham said that the “nationalistic curriculum failed to recognize the staggering array of linguistic abilities and competencies” in schools such as his, where the pupils spoke more than 40 languages. The linguistic dexterity of families speaking an array of languages was celebrated but the “awesome achievements” of children mastering three or four languages were barely recognised by the education system. Social and emotional education comes with your own language-literature and poetry. A DFE’s document clearly states that children should be encouraged to maintain and develop their home languages.
 
A study shows that bilingualism is a positive benefit to cognitive development and bilingual teacher is a dire necessity and is a role model. The price of ignoring children’s bilingualism is educational failure and social exclusion. Bilingualism could be developed by bringing a partner from Pakistan. The kids will get better at both languages. One will speak English while the other will speak Urdu.
 
Stop treating foreigners like garbage and they will stop ruining your precious country. Why did you let them in in the first place if you didn’t want them here? They left everything in their countries because of your promises. Are you so anxious to please that you can’t say “no”? I would love to see you go to a foreign land where you don’t have any friends, you don’t even know anyone and you don’t speak the language, and start from scratch. I would just LOVE to watch you do that. Let them integrate and stop segregating them. What I want is people being nice to each other. I don’t care about race.
Iftikhar Ahmad
London School of Islamics Trust

 

 

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

India’s Great Power game by AMB. MUNIR AKRAM

 Editors Note: We apologize for the poor formatting of this article.

India’s Great Power game

The writer is a former Pakistan ambassador to the UN.
The writer is a former Pakistan ambassador to the UN.

THE election of Narendra Modi as prime minister and geopolitical developments — particularly the US pivot to Asia and the Russia’s new Cold War with the West — have revived India’s prospects of achieving Great Power status. In quick succession, Modi has visited Japan’s ‘nationalistic’ prime minister; hosted China’s president; and will be received this week by the US president in Washington.

The US obviously wishes to embrace India as a partner in containing a rising China, responding to a resurgent Russia and fighting ‘Islamic terrorism’.

It is prepared to bend over backwards to secure India’s partnership. During his Washington visit, Modi is likely to be offered the most advanced American defence equipment; military training and intelligence cooperation; endorsement of India’s position on ‘terrorism’; investment, including in India’s defence industries; nuclear reactor sales; support for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, and a prominent role in Afghanistan after US-Nato withdrawal. There will be no mention of the Kashmir dispute, nor of past or current human rights violations in India.

The reticence, if any, in this love fest is likely to emanate from India rather than the US. While seeking all the advantages of a strategic partnership with the US, India is unwilling to relinquish the benefits of its relationships with Russia, China, Iran and other power players.

India’s evolving relationship with China is complex. Both Asian giants see the benefits of trade and investment cooperation and want to ‘democratise’ the post-Second World War economic order dominated by America. During President Xi Jinping’s recent visit China offered to invest $20 billion in industrial parks including in Modi’s home state of Gujarat and to support India’s infrastructure development.


The most proximate impediment to India’s quest for Great Power status remains Pakistan.


Yet, there are obvious limitations in the Sino-Indian relationship. Memories of its defeat in the 1962 border war with China still rankle in India. The border dispute has been managed but not resolved. There is an expectation of future strategic rivalry, felt more strongly in India than China. New Delhi wishes to become China’s military and economic equal in Asia and the world. In particular, India desires an end to China’s strategic relationship with and support to Pakistan — a price Beijing is unwilling to pay.

Without compromising its strategic options, China is prepared to adopt a benign posture towards India, in part to prevent its incorporation in the US-led Asian alliances around China’s periphery. As some Chinese officials put it: “When you have the wolf [US] at the front door, you do not worry about the fox [India] at the back door.” If India does eventually emerge as a US strategic partner, Beijing will exercise its options to neutralize it including through greater support to Pakistan. For the present, China’s advice to Pakistan is to avoid a confrontation with India.

The complexity of the Sino-Indian relationship was on display during President Xi’s visit when news surfaced of a face-off between Chinese and Indian troops on China’s border with India-held Kashmir. It is unlikely that the Chinese would have instigated the incident while their president was in India. According to Indian sources, the “robust” Indian troop deployment to confront Chinese border forces could only have been authorized by the Indian prime minister. Was this then a demonstration of Modi’s muscular credentials meant for his hardline domestic constituency or perhaps a message of common cause to the US on the eve of Modi’s Washington visit?

The new Russia-West Cold War over Ukraine will enhance the ability of India (and other non-aligned countries) to play the two sides against each other. But it will also lower the tolerance of both protagonists for third-party positions that are seen as inimical to their vital interests.

So far, the Russians have been quite accommodative of India’s developing relationship with the US and the growing diversification of India’s huge arms purchases away from Russia.

Until now, Moscow has maintained its undeclared embargo on defense supplies to Pakistan in deference to its long-standing relationship with India. However, given India’s closer relationship with the US, Russia’s reinforced strategic cooperation with China, and the slow divorce between Pakistan and the US, the Russian reticence towards Pakistan, and its emotional bond with India, are receding. Moscow is now more likely to adopt a more ‘balanced’ posture towards India and Pakistan on defense and other issues, including Afghanistan.

The most proximate impediment to India’s quest for Great Power status remains Pakistan. So long as Pakistan does not accept India’s regional pre-eminence, other South Asian states will also resist Indian diktat. India cannot feel free to play a great global power role so long as it is strategically tied down in South Asia by Pakistan.

India under Modi has maintained the multifaceted Indian strategy to break down Pakistan’s will and capacity to resist Indian domination.

This strategy includes: building overwhelming military superiority, conventional and nuclear, against Pakistan; isolating Pakistan by portraying it as the ‘epicentre’ of terrorism; encouraging

Baloch separatism and TTP terrorism (through Afghanistan) to destabilize Pakistan; convincing Pakistan’s elite of the economic and cultural benefits of ‘cooperation’ on India’s terms.

In this endeavor, India is being actively assisted by certain quarters in the West.

Insufficient thought has been given in New Delhi and Western capitals to the unintended consequences of this strategy. It has strengthened the political position of the nationalists and the Islamic extremists in Pakistan. Islamabad’s vacillation in confronting the TTP was evidence of this. Further, the growing asymmetry in India-Pakistan conventional defense capabilities has obliged Pakistan to rely increasingly on the nuclear option to maintain credible deterrence.

The combination of unresolved disputes,especially Kashmir, the likelihood of terrorist incidents and a nuclear hair-trigger military environment, has made the India-Pakistan impasse the single greatest threat to international peace and security.

New Delhi’s bid for Great Power status could be quickly compromised if another war broke out, by design or accident, with Pakistan.

The writer is a former Pakistan ambassador to the UN.

Published in Dawn, September 28th, 2014

, , , , ,

No Comments

PM Malik Feroze Khan Noon Minar at Gwadar: By Col. Riaz Jafri (Retd)

LETTER TO EDITOR

 

 

 

November 17, 2016

Noon Minar at Gwadar:

 

 

It was during the period of Prime Minister Malik Feroze Khan Noon that Pakistan purchased the Gwadar enclave from the Sultanate of Muscat and Oman for USD $3 million – a huge amount from the reckoning then and Gwadar formally became part of Pakistan on 8 December 1958 – ironically the day Martial Law was imposed –  after 174 years of Omani rule.  It took PM Noon more than six months of hard negotiations – assisted by the United Kingdom – to clasp the deal, much to the dismay of Nehru who had his eyes on Gwadar for its far-reaching strategic value. 

Now that the port has been formally opened, the first cargo load shipped out and the massive economic potential along with its immensely strategic importance for Pakistan is well established, it was time that in recognition of the enormous favour done to Pakistan by it great benefactor late Malik Feroze Khan Noon we paid him a tribute by erecting some monument at Gwadar. I think a befittingly tall Light House tower with very strong rotating light beams beaconing the incoming ships from miles be erected at the port and named “Noon Meenar to commemorate his name forever.

 

 

Col. Riaz Jafri (Retd)
30 Westridge 1
Rawalpindi 46000
Pakistan
Tel: (051) 5158033
E.mail: jafri@rifiela.com

Image result for Malik Feroz Khan Noon
Feroz Khan Noon
Former Prime Minister of Pakistan
Sir Malik Feroz Khan Noon, KCSI, KCIE, OStJ was a politician from Pakistan. He held many posts in government both before and after independence and was an important figure in the Pakistan movement.Wikipedia
Born: May 7, 1893, Punjab Province
Died: December 9, 1970, Nurpur Noon, Pakistan
Previous office: Prime Minister of Pakistan (1957–1958)

,

No Comments


Skip to toolbar