[wormhole] Islamic Certitude
EpSil0n-// <[email protected]> Mon, 4 Jan 2010 08:28:39 -0600 (CST)
| Newsgroups | gmane.politics.progressive.news |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
--UuTl2L7SMD1LnjVflmuWhalg3XaJ7ahzfcxD1KI
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
For many I have met, social networking and blogs are popular because those
who are enthrawed are, many of them, social misfits, but don't be deluded.
The net today CAN be a huge waste of time unless you are smart enough to
be discrimating about what you choose to believe as the truth (in science,
a theory better than those which came before it). Much of the InterNUT is
agenda driven and simply psycho babel for the otherwise lonely and
delusional who invent their own reality. Take it all with many grains of
salt. Read books, NOT blogs - Check credentials before you accept
someone's views as informed. Separate the real from the fantasy, the
customary world of us naked apes. Our species will eventually go extinct -
as we should. There is nothing special about us BUT the greatest
accomplishment you can ever have is (1) love and to (2) enjoy the journey.
As for the truth, you will always find it unblemished and as true as I
believe it to be when you read what is here. And if you don't agree, say
so, but keep it sincere and as honest as you dare to be - and as honest as
I always strive to be.
HR
Hank Roth, on the InterNUT since 1982 Past (post) Commander Jewish War
Veterans - Cryptologist and Voice Security in the White House and NSA
(assigned in civilian capacity [not uniformed] with officer status)
(58-59). War Room for JCS (63)at the Pentagon/worked for Chiefs of Staff
during Vietnam War. COMZREAR (Orleans. France - 59-62). Yom Kipper War
1973 - Israel.
BIO [with pics] http://inyourface.info/bio/
--------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
H O M E - C R Y P T - B I O
Islamic Certitude
"...Self-denigration is said to be a peculiarly English vice; but, it
is in fact far more prevalent throughout the Western world than one would
imagine...The truth is that not all cultures have the same values, and not
all values are worthy of respect." (Ibn Warraq)
Islam is a religion where children are taught the religious obligation of
jihad and martyrdom at a very early age so that a suicide belt is not as
disturbing to them as it is abhorrent to us. The glorification of jihad
makes the idea of jihad desirable. They are taught that if their faith is
strong enough they would welcome the opportunity to kill infidels for
Islam and this kind of death wiill even hasten their trip to paradise. It
says to the children they are not murderers; they are religious martyrs.
There is no question about fearing death when it is an act of religious
sacrifice. This is their core belief. And it is crazy.
The following from Why I Am Not a Muslim by Ibn Warraq - published by
Prometheus Books (1995) is excerpted here in compliance with the Fair Use
Doctrine provision of the Copyright Law for educational and discussion
purposes. Use the comments (or trackback) link at the end of the article
to post your views. If this excerpt interests you, it is my hope that you
will also read the book, obtaining it from your favorite bookseller and
tell others about it also.
Hank Roth
(from chapter 17)
Islam in the West
by Ibn Warraq
In Europe, the riots, demonstrations, and book burnings carried out by
fanatical Muslims subsequent to the Rushdie affair woke Europeans up to
the consequences of the presence, in their midst, of several million
people who did not espouse secular values, who even explicitly set out to
defy those values. Since 1989, France and Great Britain have taken
different positions on the Muslim spokesmen's increasingly shrill demand
for greater freedom in following their own customs, sometimes in defiance
of the secular laws of the two countries.
Muslims were urged to murder a British citizen. Scandalously, the British
police did not take a single step to arrest the people concerned, those
who had publicly incited Muslims to murder Rushdie. During the same period
in France, the then-prime minister, Michel Rocard, clearly and firmly told
the Muslims that anyone advocating murder would be arrested immediately.
The British police showed themselves unresolved and feeble when Dr.
Siddiqui of the Muslim Institute, in London, urged a crowd of Muslims at a
public meeting not to obey British laws if they went against the sharia,
the Islamic law. In France, on the other hand, a Turkish imam who had
claimed that the sharia had precedence over French laws was deported
within forty-eight hours!
Nowhere are the different approaches more apparent than in the case of
genital mutilation, sometimes known as female circumcision. In an article
in the British daily, the Independent 7 July 1992, we read that: "Local
authorities and social workers have turned a 'blind eye' to the genital
mutilation of young girls among African and other Third World communities
in Britain for fear of being labeled racist," even though genital
mutilation was made illegal in 1985. The article goes on to say, "Social
and health service staff are also 'nervous' about preventing or reporting
mutilation as they feel it conflicts with anti-racist policies. 'There
continues to be confusion as to what is legitimate in culture, which
should be respected, and what is human rights abuse.' " More than ten
thousand girls are said to be at risk. The year before in France in March
1991, three Malians were in court. One, Armata Keita, was charged with
voluntary assault resulting in the mutilation of a child under 15; the
other two, Sory and Semit Coulibaly, the parents of the children excised,
were accused of abetting the crime. In a report in Le Monde, later
reprinted in English in the Guardian Weekly 24 March 1991, Catherine
Sviloff, a lawyer representing the Enfance et Partage association, is
quoted as saying that she did not doubt the honorable intentions of those
who practiced excision: "But just because one understands a 'respectable'
motive doesn't mean the act is necessarily justifiable. That would be the
same thing as authorizing excision." The report continues, "Sviloff
therefore took the view that there was 'room for repression' and that
failure to condemn would be tantamount to 'condoning' the act. Monique
Antoine, representing the Planning Familial association, also stressed
that an overcomprehensive attitude could result in 'inverted racism."
The prosecutor went on to remark: "Excision is unacceptable. To pardon
such acts today is to condemn many children living on French soil and
refuse them the protection of the law." Armata Keita was sentenced to a
five-year prison term and the Coulibalys were given a five-year suspended
sentence and two years' probation. The two cases raise very fundamental
issues about cultural relativism, multiculturalism, equality before the
law, and the dangers of fragmenting French and British society into
religious and cultural ghettos, each with its own laws. What kind of
society do we want to live in and create? Are we going to revert to a
destructive tribalism, or remain united with allegiance to a common core
of values?
[...]
Britain is said to have approximately one-and-a-half million Muslims, a
majority from the Indian subcontinent. Most, if not all, are there of
their own free will, seeking to better their economic situation. In the
last fifteen years, many Muslims have made it clear that they have no
intention of being assimilated into the host society; instead, it is up to
the host society to change, to accord them separate rights, and separate
privileges. Some of their most articulate spokesmen have spelled out what
they hope to achieve. Dr Zaki Badawi, former Director of the Islamic
Cultural Centre, London, wrote: "A proseletyzing religion cannot stand
still. It can either expand or contract. Islam endeavors to expand in
Britain.Islam is a universal religion. It aims at bringing its message to
all comers of the earth. It hopes that one day the whole of humanity will
be one Muslim community, the Umma."
An imam, a prayer leader of Muslims, in Bradford, England, rejected all
Gods other than Allah and dismissed the Christian doctrine of the Trinity
as "an extreme and absurd example of the false divination of humans." As
for Britain, "it is a sick and divided nation," and only the imposition of
Islam can heal it. For him, "The implementation of Islam as a complete
code of life cannot be limited to the home and to personal relationships.
It is to be sought and achieved in society as a whole."
The government must be brought into line with what is appropriate for an
Islamic, not a secular state. Every Muslim must "extend the sphere of
Islamic influence in the world." We notice the double standards inherent
in all such Muslim demands. While the Muslims feel free to insult
Christianity, they themselves go into paroxysms of rage and violence at
the slightest hint of criticism of Islam, which must be "accepted
uncritically as divine revelation by non-Muslims as well as by Muslims,
and that this must be reflected in the structure and conduct of the state,
and of society." A report on Muslim attitudes to education in Britain,
prepared by the Islamic Academy, Cambridge, and the Islamic Cultural
Centre, London, makes it clear that Muslims are not happy about the
secular approach to education. Muslims want to keep their basic, Islamic
values, which are threatened by the values of the host community, even if
it means disobeying the laws of Britain. [...]
Implications of Muslim Demands
The implications of the Muslim demands on the wider British are enormous.
Unless great vigilance is exercised, we are all likely to find British
society greatly impoverished morally, and all the gains, social and moral,
may well be squandered in an orgy of multicultural liberalism. Take the
issue of ritual slaughter of animals. In Britain, slaughterhouses are
tightly controlled by humane slaughter legislation, that is, laws whose
aim is to reduce the unnecessary suffering of animals. And yet, in the
words of Peter Singer in his classic Animal Liberation,
"...slaughter according to a religious ritual need not comply with the
provision that the animal be stunned before being killed. Orthodox Jewish
and Moslem [Muslim] dietary laws forbid the consumption of meat from an
animal who is not "healthy and moving" when killed. Stunning, which is
thought to cause injury prior to cutting the throat, is therefore
unacceptable. The idea behind these requirements may have been to prohibit
the eating of flesh from an animal who had been found sick or dead; as
interpreted by the religiously orthodox today, however, the law also rules
out making the animal unconscious a few seconds before it is killed. The
killing is supposed to be carried out with a single cut with a sharp
knife, aimed at the jugular veins and the carotid arteries. At the time
this method of slaughter was laid down in Jewish law it was probably more
humane than any alternative; now, however, it is less humane, under the
best circumstances, than, for example, the use of the captive- bolt pistol
to render an animal instantly insensible."
As Singer points out, it is absurd to think that those who attack ritual
slaughter are "racists"; one does not have to be anti-Muslim to oppose
what is done to animals in the name of religion.
"It is time for adherents of both these religions to consider again
whether the current interpretations of laws relating to slaughter are
really in keeping with the spirit of religious teaching on compassion.
Meanwhile, those who do not wish to eat meat slaughtered contrary to the
current teachings of their religion have a simple alternative: not to eat
meat at all. In making this suggestion, I am not asking more of religious
believers than I ask of myself; it is only that the reasons for them to do
it are stronger because of the additional suffering involved in producing
the meat they eat."
The British legislation concerning slaughter was passed for ethical
reasons, in other words, any method of slaughter other than that
recommended by these laws was considered immoral. And in giving in to
Muslim and Jewish demands for their own methods of butchering we in effect
condone behavior that we have previously judged immoral. We sanction
immorality because of our respect for the religion of others. Cruelty to
animals is all right as long as it is religious cruelty!
Similar double standards seem to exist in our attitude to Muslim women in
the West. After the Rushdie affair, several organizations were set up by
Muslim women who felt threatened by fundamentalists, for example, Women
Against Fundamentalism. Hannana Siddiqui, a founding member, says:
"Women are being forced into arranged marriages, homelessness and
denial of education. The multiculturalists fail to intervene and support
these women. For them it is all part of a culture and religion which must
be tolerated. And the anti-racists allow this to continue because they see
the fight against racism as the central struggle."
Multiculturalists are incapable of critical thought, and in a deep sense
are more racist than the racists they claim to fight. Instead of fighting
injustice wherever it occurs, they turn a blind eye if it is
black-on-black violence or Muslim-on-Muslim barbarity. Many young Muslim
girls running away from home, some to escape arranged marriages, are
hunted down by professional bounty hunters and returned to their families,
sometimes with tragic results: The murder of the girl concerned, or her
suicide, or her severe punishment from all the male members of the family.
The police and even social workers turn a blind-eye in the name of
multiculturalism, and hence the need for women's organizations such as
Women Against Fundamentalism.It is tragic that these British women do not
feel protected by the British laws, and in a sense they are not, if the
police continue to turn a blind eye.
Undoubtedly the most articulate advocate of a theocratic Islamic world
order is Dr. Kalim Siddiqui, director of the Muslim Institute, London. He
was one of the founding members of the so-called Muslim Parliament of
Great Britain, whose aim was to "define, defend and promote the Muslim
interest in Britain." Dr.Siddiqui has written an enormous number of books
and articles on Islam and its mission in the West, and the world.
Constantly recurring themes are the coming Islamic global dominion, the
greatness of the Ayatollah Khomeini; the need for an armed struggle; the
need to eliminate all political, economic, social, cultural, and
philosophical influences of the Western civilization that have penetrated
the world of Islam; all the transcendent authority belongs to Allah; and
the indivisible unity of religion and politics.
Scattered throughout his writings is his hatred for democracy, science,
philosophy, nationalism, and free will. He has nothing but contempt for
the "compromisers who have been trying to prove that Islam is compatible
with their secular ambitions and western preferences" and who tried to
reestablish Iran as a liberal and democratic nation-state with a few
cosmetic "Islamic features." Such people "must realize that their
[Western] education has equipped them to serve the political, social,
economic, cultural, administrative and militarily systems that we must
destroy." Muslims must accordingly, "attack those intellectuals who are
infatuated with the west and the east, and recover your 'true identity.'
... with a population of almost one billion and with infinite sources of
wealth, you can defeat all the powers."
[...]
Multiculturalism
One would have thought that education ought to have played an important
part in the assimilation of the children of immigrants into mainstream
British culture. But something has gone drastically wrong. Assimilation is
no longer in vogue. Multiculturalism and bilingualism have been the
fashion since the 1970s at least. The notion that one could produce a good
little Englishman or Englishwoman out of raw immigrants is now condemned
as chauvinism, racism, cultural imperialism, or cultural genocide.
But multiculturalism is based on some fundamental misconceptions. There is
the erroneous and sentimental belief that all cultures, deep down, have
the same values; or if these values are different, they are all equally
worthy of respect. Multiculturalism, being the child of relativism, is
incapable of criticizing cultures, of making cross-cultural judgements.
The truth is that not all cultures have the same values, and not all
values are worthy of respect. There is nothing sacrosanct about customs or
cultural traditions, they can change under criticism. After all, the
secularist values of the West are not much more than two hundred years
old. Respect for other cultures, for values other than our own is a
hallmark of a civilized attitude. But if these other values are
destructive of our own cherished values, are we not justified in fighting
them, by intellectual means, that is, by reason, argument, criticism, and
legal means, by making sure the laws and constitution of the country are
respected by all? It becomes a duty to defend those values that we would
live by. Hiskett makes the point that "while religious beliefs are
tolerated, religious practices and institutions may not necessarily be
accorded the same freedom if they conflict with the law or constitution of
the wider state." This, unfortunately, is unacceptable to many Muslims, as
we saw earlier. While, in a democracy, a Muslim has absolute freedom of
personal religion, it is another matter altogether if he goes on to demand
the death penalty of those of whom he does not approve; if he tries to
demand his own literary censorship across the public domain; constrain his
daughter, born and educated as a British citizen, with all the rights that
carries, into a distasteful marriage; slaughter his beasts in a manner the
non-Muslim majority considers inhumane (the Muslims are not alone in
this); require that the school curriculum omit the theory of evolution
from the biology lesson because his sons and daughters attend that school;
insist that the academic year be disrupted to accommodate his movable
annual festivals and so on.
The Betrayal by the Politicians
As Hiskett put it,
"In Britain, at any rate, a further requirement toward controlling the
extent to which the leaven of Islam spreads, to the detriment of the
democratic, secularist mainstream, is greater political will and public
awareness. One spur to Islamic forwardness is the short-term expediency of
non-Muslim politicians trawling for Muslim votes."
[...]
The Conservative government, for reasons of trade, has equally betrayed
democratic principles. In order to protect its economic interests in Saudi
Arabia, in the form of arms sales worth millions of pounds by British
firms, successive British governments have failed to criticize the
undemocratic practices of Saudi Arabia and have even censored BBC
television programs that were critical of Saudi Arabia.The various British
governments have also tolerated humiliating conditions for British
Christians working in Saudi Arabia who are forced to practice their
religion in hiding, in sharp contrast to the freedom of worship allowed
Muslims in Britain, to the extent of permitting the construction of a
mosque, financed by Saudi Arabia, in the heart of London without respect
for the surrounding architectural tradition.
France has also compromised with fundamentalist Iran in the interest of
trade, by refusing to prosecute Iranian assassins, or by refusing to hand
them over to a third country where these men were wanted for questioning
in connection with certain murders of Iranian dissidents.
One can understand the reluctance of Western governments to criticize
Muslim states, for reasons of realpolitik, but surely the West should be
more positive in defending its democratic principles, threatened by its
own Muslim minorities within its own borders."
The Betrayal by the Educators
How can schools possibly succeed in integrating the children of immigrants
when teachers are spending large parts of their time in class pointing out
ethnic, racial, and religious differences among the students, and
encouraging the same children and their parents in persisting in attitudes
that "contradict the most basic requirements of integration"? There is no
absolute separation of state and religion in Great Britain, and the law
requires schools to have an act of collective worship. Under the
philosophy of multiculturalism, this has resulted in the introduction of
Islam and Islamic propaganda into the classroom. I believe that only the
disestablishment of the Church of England and the introduction of a
strictly laic educational system will lead to integration.
The laical, or state schools should thereupon maintain an attitude of
courteous agnosticism to all religions (not the mealy-mouthed 'celebratory
approach' of the multiculturalists); but should partake of none. Not only
should there no longer be a requirement of collective worship; religious
education of any kind, Christian, Islamic and, most importantly,
multiculturalist, should be removed from the curriculum of
non-denominational [i.e., nonreligious] state schools and from the
National Curriculum. However, British and European history should be
taught to all pupils in all state schools; and this should include a
comprehensive and strictly historical account of the development of
Judaeo-Christian culture, and the Celtic-Anglo-Saxon Christian heritage.
It should be taught with the deliberate intention to help the children
identify with this culture in its modern, largely post-Christian
expression.
The Betrayal by the Intellectuals
[...]
A shared national identity is an essential part of citizenship. We can
take pride in our country, and still respect cultural differences. A
nation "cannot reform itself unless it has an identity, rejoices in it,
reflects upon it and tries to live up to it." We might feel ashamed of our
country, but the emotion of shame is only appropriate insofar as we
identify with our country, feel that it is our country. At any rate, I am
convinced that despite all the shortcomings of Western liberal democracy,
it is far more preferable to the authoritarian, mind-numbing certitudes of
Islamic theocracy. Karl Popper defends democracy and also laments the
propensity of Western intellectuals to self-hatred:
Democracies have serious drawbacks. They certainly are not better than
they ought to be. But corruption can occur under any kind of government.
And I think that every serious student of history will agree, upon
consideration, that our Western democracies are not only the most
prosperous societies in history~W that is important, but not so very
important~Wbut the freest, the most tolerant, and the least repressive
large societies of which we have historical knowledge.... One must fight
those who make so many young people unhappy by telling them that we live
in a terrible world, in a kind of capitalist hell. The truth is that we
live in a wonderful world, in a beautiful world, and in an astonishingly
free and open society. Of course it is fashionable, it is expected, and it
is almost demanded from a Western intellectual to say the opposite.
On the world stage, too, we need to have far more confidence in our
values. Judith Miller, writing in Foreign Affairs, makes the same point:
Ultimately, the triumph of militant Islam in the Middle East may say
as much about the West as about the Arabs and the failure of their
existing systems. Islamists, by and large, have come to power when no one
is willing to oppose them at home and abroad. In any world order,
Americans should not be ashamed to say that they favor pluralism,
tolerance and diversity, and that they reject the notion that God is on
anyone's side.... Islamic militancy presents the West with a paradox.
While liberals speak of the need for diversity with equality, Islamists
see this as a sign of weakness. Liberalism tends not to teach its
proponents to fight effectively. What is needed, rather, is almost a
contradiction in terms: a liberal militancy, or a militant liberalism that
is unapologetic and unabashed.
The West needs to be serious about democracy, and should eschew policies
that compromise principles for short-term gains at home and abroad. The
rise of fascism and racism in the West is proof that not everyone in the
West is enamored of democracy. Therefore, the final battle will not
necessarily be between Islam and the West, but between those who value
freedom and those who do not.
by Ibn Warraq
Comments: (2)
Trackbacks
Related Content
###
All quoting per the Fair Use Doctrine
for educational and discussion purposes pursuant to
Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, Copyright Law.
Permalink: http://inyourface.info/ArT/ZuLu/IslamicCertitude.shtml
Today is Monday January 04, 2010
G 0 l e m D e s i g n s
Hank Roth (on the Internet since 1982)
Worm Hole (Home) - The Crypt - Hank Roth (Bio)
While I don't use a standard blog (weblog software) mostly because I've
been doing this too long - having been there with Ike when the precursor
to the Internet, Arpanet got started and every step of the way since, I
can't get into all the many fads over the years (now it is social
networking), but I have been an observer and participant in events which
shape the world since my time with NSA and with Army Security and as a
voice security cryptologist in the White House for the President, and the
War Room at the Pentagon for the Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff plus two
wars. You could say this site is one of the better kept secrets [grin] on
the InterNUT. You are invited back as often as you would like to see what
I and others, I trust, may be saying.
For many I have met, social networking and blogs are popular because those
who are enthrawed are, many of them, social misfits, but don't be deluded.
The net today CAN be a huge waste of time unless you are smart enough to
be discrimating about what you choose to believe as the truth (in science,
a theory better than those which came before it). Much of the InterNUT is
agenda driven and simply psycho babel for the otherwise lonely and
delusional who invent their own reality. Take it all with many grains of
salt. Read books, NOT blogs - Check credentials before you accept
someone's views as informed. Separate the real from the fantasy, the
customary world of us naked apes. Our species will eventually go extinct -
as we should. There is nothing special about us BUT the greatest
accomplishment you can ever have is (1) love and to (2) enjoy the journey.
As for the truth, you will always find it unblemished and as true as I
believe it to be when you read what is here. And if you don't agree, say
so, but keep it sincere and as honest as you dare to be - and as honest as
I always strive to be.
-- Hank Roth
[viewed 2001 times]
===============================================
* To subscribe to wormhole, send mail to
[email protected] and on the subject line
(without quotes) write: "subscribe wormhole" -
To unsubscribe, do the same in reverse; send
"unsubscribe wormhole" on the subject line
to [email protected]
Hank Roth
http://inyourface.info/
--UuTl2L7SMD1LnjVflmuWhalg3XaJ7ahzfcxD1KI
Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body style="background-color: #fff;">
<span style="display:none"> </span>
<!--~-|**|PrettyHtmlStartT|**|-~-->
<div id="ygrp-mlmsg" style="position:relative;">
<div id="ygrp-msg" style="z-index: 1;">
<!--~-|**|PrettyHtmlEndT|**|-~-->
<div id="ygrp-text" >
<p><br>
For many I have met, social networking and blogs are popular because those<br>
who are enthrawed are, many of them, social misfits, but don't be deluded.<br>
The net today CAN be a huge waste of time unless you are smart enough to<br>
be discrimating about what you choose to believe as the truth (in science,<br>
a theory better than those which came before it). Much of the InterNUT is<br>
agenda driven and simply psycho babel for the otherwise lonely and<br>
delusional who invent their own reality. Take it all with many grains of<br>
salt. Read books, NOT blogs - Check credentials before you accept<br>
someone's views as informed. Separate the real from the fantasy, the<br>
customary world of us naked apes. Our species will eventually go extinct -<br>
as we should. There is nothing special about us BUT the greatest<br>
accomplishment you can ever have is (1) love and to (2) enjoy the journey.<br>
As for the truth, you will always find it unblemished and as true as I<br>
believe it to be when you read what is here. And if you don't agree, say<br>
so, but keep it sincere and as honest as you dare to be - and as honest as<br>
I always strive to be.<br>
<br>
HR<br>
<br>
Hank Roth, on the InterNUT since 1982 Past (post) Commander Jewish War <br>
Veterans - Cryptologist and Voice Security in the White House and NSA <br>
(assigned in civilian capacity [not uniformed] with officer status) <br>
(58-59). War Room for JCS (63)at the Pentagon/worked for Chiefs of Staff <br>
during Vietnam War. COMZREAR (Orleans. France - 59-62). Yom Kipper War <br>
1973 - Israel.<br>
<br>
BIO [with pics] <a href="http://inyourface.info/bio/">http://inyourface.<wbr>info/bio/</a><br>
<br>
------------<wbr>---------<wbr>---------<wbr>---------<wbr>---------<wbr>--<br>
------------<wbr>---------<wbr>---------<wbr>---------<wbr>---------<wbr>--<br>
<br>
H O M E - C R Y P T - B I O<br>
Islamic Certitude<br>
<br>
"...Self-denigratio<wbr>n is said to be a peculiarly English vice; but, it<br>
is in fact far more prevalent throughout the Western world than one would<br>
imagine...The truth is that not all cultures have the same values, and not<br>
all values are worthy of respect." (Ibn Warraq)<br>
<br>
Islam is a religion where children are taught the religious obligation of<br>
jihad and martyrdom at a very early age so that a suicide belt is not as<br>
disturbing to them as it is abhorrent to us. The glorification of jihad<br>
makes the idea of jihad desirable. They are taught that if their faith is<br>
strong enough they would welcome the opportunity to kill infidels for<br>
Islam and this kind of death wiill even hasten their trip to paradise. It<br>
says to the children they are not murderers; they are religious martyrs.<br>
There is no question about fearing death when it is an act of religious<br>
sacrifice. This is their core belief. And it is crazy.<br>
<br>
The following from Why I Am Not a Muslim by Ibn Warraq - published by<br>
Prometheus Books (1995) is excerpted here in compliance with the Fair Use<br>
Doctrine provision of the Copyright Law for educational and discussion<br>
purposes. Use the comments (or trackback) link at the end of the article<br>
to post your views. If this excerpt interests you, it is my hope that you<br>
will also read the book, obtaining it from your favorite bookseller and<br>
tell others about it also.<br>
Hank Roth<br>
<br>
(from chapter 17)<br>
Islam in the West<br>
by Ibn Warraq<br>
<br>
In Europe, the riots, demonstrations, and book burnings carried out by<br>
fanatical Muslims subsequent to the Rushdie affair woke Europeans up to<br>
the consequences of the presence, in their midst, of several million<br>
people who did not espouse secular values, who even explicitly set out to<br>
defy those values. Since 1989, France and Great Britain have taken<br>
different positions on the Muslim spokesmen's increasingly shrill demand<br>
for greater freedom in following their own customs, sometimes in defiance<br>
of the secular laws of the two countries.<br>
<br>
Muslims were urged to murder a British citizen. Scandalously, the British<br>
police did not take a single step to arrest the people concerned, those<br>
who had publicly incited Muslims to murder Rushdie. During the same period<br>
in France, the then-prime minister, Michel Rocard, clearly and firmly told<br>
the Muslims that anyone advocating murder would be arrested immediately.<br>
The British police showed themselves unresolved and feeble when Dr.<br>
Siddiqui of the Muslim Institute, in London, urged a crowd of Muslims at a<br>
public meeting not to obey British laws if they went against the sharia,<br>
the Islamic law. In France, on the other hand, a Turkish imam who had<br>
claimed that the sharia had precedence over French laws was deported<br>
within forty-eight hours!<br>
<br>
Nowhere are the different approaches more apparent than in the case of<br>
genital mutilation, sometimes known as female circumcision. In an article<br>
in the British daily, the Independent 7 July 1992, we read that: "Local<br>
authorities and social workers have turned a 'blind eye' to the genital<br>
mutilation of young girls among African and other Third World communities<br>
in Britain for fear of being labeled racist," even though genital<br>
mutilation was made illegal in 1985. The article goes on to say, "Social<br>
and health service staff are also 'nervous' about preventing or reporting<br>
mutilation as they feel it conflicts with anti-racist policies. 'There<br>
continues to be confusion as to what is legitimate in culture, which<br>
should be respected, and what is human rights abuse.' " More than ten<br>
thousand girls are said to be at risk. The year before in France in March<br>
1991, three Malians were in court. One, Armata Keita, was charged with<br>
voluntary assault resulting in the mutilation of a child under 15; the<br>
other two, Sory and Semit Coulibaly, the parents of the children excised,<br>
were accused of abetting the crime. In a report in Le Monde, later<br>
reprinted in English in the Guardian Weekly 24 March 1991, Catherine<br>
Sviloff, a lawyer representing the Enfance et Partage association, is<br>
quoted as saying that she did not doubt the honorable intentions of those<br>
who practiced excision: "But just because one understands a 'respectable'<br>
motive doesn't mean the act is necessarily justifiable. That would be the<br>
same thing as authorizing excision." The report continues, "Sviloff<br>
therefore took the view that there was 'room for repression' and that<br>
failure to condemn would be tantamount to 'condoning' the act. Monique<br>
Antoine, representing the Planning Familial association, also stressed<br>
that an overcomprehensive attitude could result in 'inverted racism."<br>
<br>
The prosecutor went on to remark: "Excision is unacceptable. To pardon<br>
such acts today is to condemn many children living on French soil and<br>
refuse them the protection of the law." Armata Keita was sentenced to a<br>
five-year prison term and the Coulibalys were given a five-year suspended<br>
sentence and two years' probation. The two cases raise very fundamental<br>
issues about cultural relativism, multiculturalism, equality before the<br>
law, and the dangers of fragmenting French and British society into<br>
religious and cultural ghettos, each with its own laws. What kind of<br>
society do we want to live in and create? Are we going to revert to a<br>
destructive tribalism, or remain united with allegiance to a common core<br>
of values?<br>
[...]<br>
<br>
Britain is said to have approximately one-and-a-half million Muslims, a<br>
majority from the Indian subcontinent. Most, if not all, are there of<br>
their own free will, seeking to better their economic situation. In the<br>
last fifteen years, many Muslims have made it clear that they have no<br>
intention of being assimilated into the host society; instead, it is up to<br>
the host society to change, to accord them separate rights, and separate<br>
privileges. Some of their most articulate spokesmen have spelled out what<br>
they hope to achieve. Dr Zaki Badawi, former Director of the Islamic<br>
Cultural Centre, London, wrote: "A proseletyzing religion cannot stand<br>
still. It can either expand or contract. Islam endeavors to expand in<br>
Britain.Islam is a universal religion. It aims at bringing its message to<br>
all comers of the earth. It hopes that one day the whole of humanity will<br>
be one Muslim community, the Umma."<br>
<br>
An imam, a prayer leader of Muslims, in Bradford, England, rejected all<br>
Gods other than Allah and dismissed the Christian doctrine of the Trinity<br>
as "an extreme and absurd example of the false divination of humans." As<br>
for Britain, "it is a sick and divided nation," and only the imposition of<br>
Islam can heal it. For him, "The implementation of Islam as a complete<br>
code of life cannot be limited to the home and to personal relationships.<br>
It is to be sought and achieved in society as a whole."<br>
<br>
The government must be brought into line with what is appropriate for an<br>
Islamic, not a secular state. Every Muslim must "extend the sphere of<br>
Islamic influence in the world." We notice the double standards inherent<br>
in all such Muslim demands. While the Muslims feel free to insult<br>
Christianity, they themselves go into paroxysms of rage and violence at<br>
the slightest hint of criticism of Islam, which must be "accepted<br>
uncritically as divine revelation by non-Muslims as well as by Muslims,<br>
and that this must be reflected in the structure and conduct of the state,<br>
and of society." A report on Muslim attitudes to education in Britain,<br>
prepared by the Islamic Academy, Cambridge, and the Islamic Cultural<br>
Centre, London, makes it clear that Muslims are not happy about the<br>
secular approach to education. Muslims want to keep their basic, Islamic<br>
values, which are threatened by the values of the host community, even if<br>
it means disobeying the laws of Britain. [...]<br>
Implications of Muslim Demands<br>
<br>
The implications of the Muslim demands on the wider British are enormous.<br>
Unless great vigilance is exercised, we are all likely to find British<br>
society greatly impoverished morally, and all the gains, social and moral,<br>
may well be squandered in an orgy of multicultural liberalism. Take the<br>
issue of ritual slaughter of animals. In Britain, slaughterhouses are<br>
tightly controlled by humane slaughter legislation, that is, laws whose<br>
aim is to reduce the unnecessary suffering of animals. And yet, in the<br>
words of Peter Singer in his classic Animal Liberation,<br>
<br>
"...slaughter according to a religious ritual need not comply with the<br>
provision that the animal be stunned before being killed. Orthodox Jewish<br>
and Moslem [Muslim] dietary laws forbid the consumption of meat from an<br>
animal who is not "healthy and moving" when killed. Stunning, which is<br>
thought to cause injury prior to cutting the throat, is therefore<br>
unacceptable. The idea behind these requirements may have been to prohibit<br>
the eating of flesh from an animal who had been found sick or dead; as<br>
interpreted by the religiously orthodox today, however, the law also rules<br>
out making the animal unconscious a few seconds before it is killed. The<br>
killing is supposed to be carried out with a single cut with a sharp<br>
knife, aimed at the jugular veins and the carotid arteries. At the time<br>
this method of slaughter was laid down in Jewish law it was probably more<br>
humane than any alternative; now, however, it is less humane, under the<br>
best circumstances, than, for example, the use of the captive- bolt pistol<br>
to render an animal instantly insensible."<br>
<br>
As Singer points out, it is absurd to think that those who attack ritual<br>
slaughter are "racists"; one does not have to be anti-Muslim to oppose<br>
what is done to animals in the name of religion.<br>
<br>
"It is time for adherents of both these religions to consider again<br>
whether the current interpretations of laws relating to slaughter are<br>
really in keeping with the spirit of religious teaching on compassion.<br>
Meanwhile, those who do not wish to eat meat slaughtered contrary to the<br>
current teachings of their religion have a simple alternative: not to eat<br>
meat at all. In making this suggestion, I am not asking more of religious<br>
believers than I ask of myself; it is only that the reasons for them to do<br>
it are stronger because of the additional suffering involved in producing<br>
the meat they eat."<br>
<br>
The British legislation concerning slaughter was passed for ethical<br>
reasons, in other words, any method of slaughter other than that<br>
recommended by these laws was considered immoral. And in giving in to<br>
Muslim and Jewish demands for their own methods of butchering we in effect<br>
condone behavior that we have previously judged immoral. We sanction<br>
immorality because of our respect for the religion of others. Cruelty to<br>
animals is all right as long as it is religious cruelty!<br>
<br>
Similar double standards seem to exist in our attitude to Muslim women in<br>
the West. After the Rushdie affair, several organizations were set up by<br>
Muslim women who felt threatened by fundamentalists, for example, Women<br>
Against Fundamentalism. Hannana Siddiqui, a founding member, says:<br>
<br>
"Women are being forced into arranged marriages, homelessness and<br>
denial of education. The multiculturalists fail to intervene and support<br>
these women. For them it is all part of a culture and religion which must<br>
be tolerated. And the anti-racists allow this to continue because they see<br>
the fight against racism as the central struggle."<br>
<br>
Multiculturalists are incapable of critical thought, and in a deep sense<br>
are more racist than the racists they claim to fight. Instead of fighting<br>
injustice wherever it occurs, they turn a blind eye if it is<br>
black-on-black violence or Muslim-on-Muslim barbarity. Many young Muslim<br>
girls running away from home, some to escape arranged marriages, are<br>
hunted down by professional bounty hunters and returned to their families,<br>
sometimes with tragic results: The murder of the girl concerned, or her<br>
suicide, or her severe punishment from all the male members of the family.<br>
The police and even social workers turn a blind-eye in the name of<br>
multiculturalism, and hence the need for women's organizations such as<br>
Women Against Fundamentalism.<wbr>It is tragic that these British women do not<br>
feel protected by the British laws, and in a sense they are not, if the<br>
police continue to turn a blind eye.<br>
<br>
Undoubtedly the most articulate advocate of a theocratic Islamic world<br>
order is Dr. Kalim Siddiqui, director of the Muslim Institute, London. He<br>
was one of the founding members of the so-called Muslim Parliament of<br>
Great Britain, whose aim was to "define, defend and promote the Muslim<br>
interest in Britain." Dr.Siddiqui has written an enormous number of books<br>
and articles on Islam and its mission in the West, and the world.<br>
Constantly recurring themes are the coming Islamic global dominion, the<br>
greatness of the Ayatollah Khomeini; the need for an armed struggle; the<br>
need to eliminate all political, economic, social, cultural, and<br>
philosophical influences of the Western civilization that have penetrated<br>
the world of Islam; all the transcendent authority belongs to Allah; and<br>
the indivisible unity of religion and politics.<br>
<br>
Scattered throughout his writings is his hatred for democracy, science,<br>
philosophy, nationalism, and free will. He has nothing but contempt for<br>
the "compromisers who have been trying to prove that Islam is compatible<br>
with their secular ambitions and western preferences" and who tried to<br>
reestablish Iran as a liberal and democratic nation-state with a few<br>
cosmetic "Islamic features." Such people "must realize that their<br>
[Western] education has equipped them to serve the political, social,<br>
economic, cultural, administrative and militarily systems that we must<br>
destroy." Muslims must accordingly, "attack those intellectuals who are<br>
infatuated with the west and the east, and recover your 'true identity.'<br>
... with a population of almost one billion and with infinite sources of<br>
wealth, you can defeat all the powers."<br>
[...]<br>
Multiculturalism<br>
<br>
One would have thought that education ought to have played an important<br>
part in the assimilation of the children of immigrants into mainstream<br>
British culture. But something has gone drastically wrong. Assimilation is<br>
no longer in vogue. Multiculturalism and bilingualism have been the<br>
fashion since the 1970s at least. The notion that one could produce a good<br>
little Englishman or Englishwoman out of raw immigrants is now condemned<br>
as chauvinism, racism, cultural imperialism, or cultural genocide.<br>
<br>
But multiculturalism is based on some fundamental misconceptions. There is<br>
the erroneous and sentimental belief that all cultures, deep down, have<br>
the same values; or if these values are different, they are all equally<br>
worthy of respect. Multiculturalism, being the child of relativism, is<br>
incapable of criticizing cultures, of making cross-cultural judgements.<br>
The truth is that not all cultures have the same values, and not all<br>
values are worthy of respect. There is nothing sacrosanct about customs or<br>
cultural traditions, they can change under criticism. After all, the<br>
secularist values of the West are not much more than two hundred years<br>
old. Respect for other cultures, for values other than our own is a<br>
hallmark of a civilized attitude. But if these other values are<br>
destructive of our own cherished values, are we not justified in fighting<br>
them, by intellectual means, that is, by reason, argument, criticism, and<br>
legal means, by making sure the laws and constitution of the country are<br>
respected by all? It becomes a duty to defend those values that we would<br>
live by. Hiskett makes the point that "while religious beliefs are<br>
tolerated, religious practices and institutions may not necessarily be<br>
accorded the same freedom if they conflict with the law or constitution of<br>
the wider state." This, unfortunately, is unacceptable to many Muslims, as<br>
we saw earlier. While, in a democracy, a Muslim has absolute freedom of<br>
personal religion, it is another matter altogether if he goes on to demand<br>
the death penalty of those of whom he does not approve; if he tries to<br>
demand his own literary censorship across the public domain; constrain his<br>
daughter, born and educated as a British citizen, with all the rights that<br>
carries, into a distasteful marriage; slaughter his beasts in a manner the<br>
non-Muslim majority considers inhumane (the Muslims are not alone in<br>
this); require that the school curriculum omit the theory of evolution<br>
from the biology lesson because his sons and daughters attend that school;<br>
insist that the academic year be disrupted to accommodate his movable<br>
annual festivals and so on.<br>
The Betrayal by the Politicians<br>
<br>
As Hiskett put it,<br>
<br>
"In Britain, at any rate, a further requirement toward controlling the<br>
extent to which the leaven of Islam spreads, to the detriment of the<br>
democratic, secularist mainstream, is greater political will and public<br>
awareness. One spur to Islamic forwardness is the short-term expediency of<br>
non-Muslim politicians trawling for Muslim votes."<br>
<br>
[...]<br>
<br>
The Conservative government, for reasons of trade, has equally betrayed<br>
democratic principles. In order to protect its economic interests in Saudi<br>
Arabia, in the form of arms sales worth millions of pounds by British<br>
firms, successive British governments have failed to criticize the<br>
undemocratic practices of Saudi Arabia and have even censored BBC<br>
television programs that were critical of Saudi Arabia.The various British<br>
governments have also tolerated humiliating conditions for British<br>
Christians working in Saudi Arabia who are forced to practice their<br>
religion in hiding, in sharp contrast to the freedom of worship allowed<br>
Muslims in Britain, to the extent of permitting the construction of a<br>
mosque, financed by Saudi Arabia, in the heart of London without respect<br>
for the surrounding architectural tradition.<br>
<br>
France has also compromised with fundamentalist Iran in the interest of<br>
trade, by refusing to prosecute Iranian assassins, or by refusing to hand<br>
them over to a third country where these men were wanted for questioning<br>
in connection with certain murders of Iranian dissidents.<br>
<br>
One can understand the reluctance of Western governments to criticize<br>
Muslim states, for reasons of realpolitik, but surely the West should be<br>
more positive in defending its democratic principles, threatened by its<br>
own Muslim minorities within its own borders."<br>
The Betrayal by the Educators<br>
<br>
How can schools possibly succeed in integrating the children of immigrants<br>
when teachers are spending large parts of their time in class pointing out<br>
ethnic, racial, and religious differences among the students, and<br>
encouraging the same children and their parents in persisting in attitudes<br>
that "contradict the most basic requirements of integration"<wbr>? There is no<br>
absolute separation of state and religion in Great Britain, and the law<br>
requires schools to have an act of collective worship. Under the<br>
philosophy of multiculturalism, this has resulted in the introduction of<br>
Islam and Islamic propaganda into the classroom. I believe that only the<br>
disestablishment of the Church of England and the introduction of a<br>
strictly laic educational system will lead to integration.<br>
<br>
The laical, or state schools should thereupon maintain an attitude of<br>
courteous agnosticism to all religions (not the mealy-mouthed 'celebratory<br>
approach' of the multiculturalists)<wbr>; but should partake of none. Not only<br>
should there no longer be a requirement of collective worship; religious<br>
education of any kind, Christian, Islamic and, most importantly,<br>
multiculturalist, should be removed from the curriculum of<br>
non-denominational [i.e., nonreligious] state schools and from the<br>
National Curriculum. However, British and European history should be<br>
taught to all pupils in all state schools; and this should include a<br>
comprehensive and strictly historical account of the development of<br>
Judaeo-Christian culture, and the Celtic-Anglo-<wbr>Saxon Christian heritage.<br>
It should be taught with the deliberate intention to help the children<br>
identify with this culture in its modern, largely post-Christian<br>
expression.<br>
The Betrayal by the Intellectuals<br>
[...]<br>
<br>
A shared national identity is an essential part of citizenship. We can<br>
take pride in our country, and still respect cultural differences. A<br>
nation "cannot reform itself unless it has an identity, rejoices in it,<br>
reflects upon it and tries to live up to it." We might feel ashamed of our<br>
country, but the emotion of shame is only appropriate insofar as we<br>
identify with our country, feel that it is our country. At any rate, I am<br>
convinced that despite all the shortcomings of Western liberal democracy,<br>
it is far more preferable to the authoritarian, mind-numbing certitudes of<br>
Islamic theocracy. Karl Popper defends democracy and also laments the<br>
propensity of Western intellectuals to self-hatred:<br>
<br>
Democracies have serious drawbacks. They certainly are not better than<br>
they ought to be. But corruption can occur under any kind of government.<br>
And I think that every serious student of history will agree, upon<br>
consideration, that our Western democracies are not only the most<br>
prosperous societies in history~W that is important, but not so very<br>
important~Wbut the freest, the most tolerant, and the least repressive<br>
large societies of which we have historical knowledge...<wbr>. One must fight<br>
those who make so many young people unhappy by telling them that we live<br>
in a terrible world, in a kind of capitalist hell. The truth is that we<br>
live in a wonderful world, in a beautiful world, and in an astonishingly<br>
free and open society. Of course it is fashionable, it is expected, and it<br>
is almost demanded from a Western intellectual to say the opposite.<br>
<br>
On the world stage, too, we need to have far more confidence in our<br>
values. Judith Miller, writing in Foreign Affairs, makes the same point:<br>
<br>
Ultimately, the triumph of militant Islam in the Middle East may say<br>
as much about the West as about the Arabs and the failure of their<br>
existing systems. Islamists, by and large, have come to power when no one<br>
is willing to oppose them at home and abroad. In any world order,<br>
Americans should not be ashamed to say that they favor pluralism,<br>
tolerance and diversity, and that they reject the notion that God is on<br>
anyone's side.... Islamic militancy presents the West with a paradox.<br>
While liberals speak of the need for diversity with equality, Islamists<br>
see this as a sign of weakness. Liberalism tends not to teach its<br>
proponents to fight effectively. What is needed, rather, is almost a<br>
contradiction in terms: a liberal militancy, or a militant liberalism that<br>
is unapologetic and unabashed.<br>
<br>
The West needs to be serious about democracy, and should eschew policies<br>
that compromise principles for short-term gains at home and abroad. The<br>
rise of fascism and racism in the West is proof that not everyone in the<br>
West is enamored of democracy. Therefore, the final battle will not<br>
necessarily be between Islam and the West, but between those who value<br>
freedom and those who do not.<br>
by Ibn Warraq<br>
Comments: (2)<br>
Trackbacks<br>
<br>
Related Content<br>
<br>
###<br>
<br>
All quoting per the Fair Use Doctrine<br>
for educational and discussion purposes pursuant to<br>
Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, Copyright Law.<br>
Permalink: <a href="http://inyourface.info/ArT/ZuLu/IslamicCertitude.shtml">http://inyourface.<wbr>info/ArT/<wbr>ZuLu/IslamicCert<wbr>itude.shtml</a><br>
Today is Monday January 04, 2010<br>
<br>
G 0 l e m D e s i g n s<br>
Hank Roth (on the Internet since 1982)<br>
Worm Hole (Home) - The Crypt - Hank Roth (Bio)<br>
<br>
While I don't use a standard blog (weblog software) mostly because I've<br>
been doing this too long - having been there with Ike when the precursor<br>
to the Internet, Arpanet got started and every step of the way since, I<br>
can't get into all the many fads over the years (now it is social<br>
networking), but I have been an observer and participant in events which<br>
shape the world since my time with NSA and with Army Security and as a<br>
voice security cryptologist in the White House for the President, and the<br>
War Room at the Pentagon for the Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff plus two<br>
wars. You could say this site is one of the better kept secrets [grin] on<br>
the InterNUT. You are invited back as often as you would like to see what<br>
I and others, I trust, may be saying.<br>
<br>
For many I have met, social networking and blogs are popular because those<br>
who are enthrawed are, many of them, social misfits, but don't be deluded.<br>
The net today CAN be a huge waste of time unless you are smart enough to<br>
be discrimating about what you choose to believe as the truth (in science,<br>
a theory better than those which came before it). Much of the InterNUT is<br>
agenda driven and simply psycho babel for the otherwise lonely and<br>
delusional who invent their own reality. Take it all with many grains of<br>
salt. Read books, NOT blogs - Check credentials before you accept<br>
someone's views as informed. Separate the real from the fantasy, the<br>
customary world of us naked apes. Our species will eventually go extinct -<br>
as we should. There is nothing special about us BUT the greatest<br>
accomplishment you can ever have is (1) love and to (2) enjoy the journey.<br>
As for the truth, you will always find it unblemished and as true as I<br>
believe it to be when you read what is here. And if you don't agree, say<br>
so, but keep it sincere and as honest as you dare to be - and as honest as<br>
I always strive to be.<br>
<br>
-- Hank Roth<br>
[viewed 2001 times]<br>
<br>
============<wbr>=========<wbr>=========<wbr>=========<wbr>========<br>
* To subscribe to wormhole, send mail to<br>
<a href="mailto:ecartis%40inyourface.info">ecartis@inyourface.<wbr>info</a> and on the subject line<br>
(without quotes) write: "subscribe wormhole" -<br>
To unsubscribe, do the same in reverse; send<br>
"unsubscribe wormhole" on the subject line<br>
to <a href="mailto:ecartis%40inyourface.info">ecartis@inyourface.<wbr>info</a><br>
Hank Roth<br>
<a href="http://inyourface.info/">http://inyourface.<wbr>info/</a><br>
</p>
</div>
<!--~-|**|PrettyHtmlStart|**|-~-->
<div style="color: #fff; height: 0;">__._,_.___</div>
<div id="ygrp-actbar" style="clear: both; margin-bottom: 10px; white-space: nowrap; color: #666; padding-top: 15px;">
<div>
<a href="mailto:[email protected]?subject=[wormhole] Islamic Certitude ">
Reply to <span style="font-weight: 700;">sender</span></a>
| <a href="mailto:[email protected]?subject=[wormhole] Islamic Certitude ">
Reply to <span style="font-weight: 700;">group</span></a>
</div>
<a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PNEWS-L/message/17490;_ylc=X3oDMTM3anE4aWxtBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE5NDc5MjAwBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA4MzQ0OARtc2dJZAMxNzQ5MARzZWMDZnRyBHNsawN2dHBjBHN0aW1lAzEyNjI2MTUzMjkEdHBjSWQDMTc0OTA-">Messages in this topic</a>
(<span style="font-weight: 700;">1</span>)
</div>
<!------- Start Nav Bar ------>
<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->
<div id="ygrp-vital" style="background-color: #e0ecee; font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px; padding: 10px;">
<span id="vithd" style="font-weight: bold; color: #333; text-transform: uppercase; ">Recent Activity:</span>
<ul style="list-style-type: none; margin: 0; padding: 0; display: inline;">
</ul>
<div style="clear: both; padding-top: 2px; color: #1e66ae;">
<a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PNEWS-L;_ylc=X3oDMTJmaHRoYXV1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE5NDc5MjAwBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA4MzQ0OARzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzEyNjI2MTUzMjk-" style="border-right: 1px solid #000; padding-right: 5px; margin-right: 2px; text-decoration: none;">Visit Your Group</a>
<a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PNEWS-L/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJmcDJ1dm5pBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE5NDc5MjAwBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA4MzQ0OARzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNudHBjBHN0aW1lAzEyNjI2MTUzMjk-" style="font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none;">Start a New Topic</a>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ygrp-grft" style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 12px; padding: 15px 0;">
<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->
POINTERS - News/Views <BR>
<BR>
<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->
</div>
<div id="ygrp-mkp" style="border: 1px solid #d8d8d8; clear: both; float: left; font-family: Arial; margin: 5px 0 10px 0; padding: 0 10px;">
<div id="hd" style="color: #628c2a; font-size: 85%; font-weight: 700; line-height: 122%; margin: 10px 0;">MARKETPLACE</div>
<div id="ads" style="margin-bottom: 10px;">
<div class="ad" style="color: #628C2A; font-family: Arial; font-weight: 700; padding: 0 0;">
<p><a href="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=14kv7o9l3/M=493064.13814333.13821539.13298430/D=groups/S=1705083448:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1262622530/L=/B=I0HBWUSO5.o-/J=1262615330105508/K=7Qxpw1ThprfUUiqz1BpyZg/A=5922843/R=0/SIG=11ckn2mo6/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/green/">Going Green: Your Yahoo! Groups resource for green living</a></p> </div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ft" style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 11px; margin-top: 5px; padding: 0 2px 0 0; clear: both;">
<a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlcGNkcW5wBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzE5NDc5MjAwBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA4MzQ0OARzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTI2MjYxNTMyOQ--" style="float: left;"><img src="http://l.yimg.com/a/i/us/yg/logo/us.gif" height="15" width="137" alt="Yahoo! Groups" style="border: 0;"/></a>
<div style="color: #747575; float: right;">Switch to: <a href="mailto:[email protected]?subject=Change Delivery Format: Traditional" style="text-decoration: none;">Text-Only</a>, <a href="mailto:[email protected]?subject=Email Delivery: Digest" class="margin-rt" style="text-decoration: none;">Daily Digest</a> • <a href="mailto:[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe" style="text-decoration: none;">Unsubscribe</a> • <a href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/" style="text-decoration: none;">Terms of Use</a></div>
</div>
<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->
</div> <!-- ygrp-msg -->
<!-- Sponsor -->
<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->
<div id="ygrp-sponsor" style="width:160px; float:right; clear:none; margin:0 0 25px 0; background: #fff;">
<!-- Start Recommendations -->
<div id="ygrp-reco">
</div>
<!-- End Recommendations -->
</div> <!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->
<div style="clear:both; color: #FFF; font-size:1px;">.</div>
</div>
<img src="http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=19479200/grpspId=1705083448/msgId=17490/stime=1262615329/nc1=3848643/nc2=5922761/nc3=5733759" width="1" height="1"> <br>
<div style="color: #fff; height: 0;">__,_._,___</div>
<!--~-|**|PrettyHtmlEnd|**|-~-->
</body>
<!--~-|**|PrettyHtmlStart|**|-~-->
<head>
<style type="text/css">
<!--
#ygrp-mkp {
border: 1px solid #d8d8d8;
font-family: Arial;
margin: 10px 0;
padding: 0 10px;
}
#ygrp-mkp hr {
border: 1px solid #d8d8d8;
}
#ygrp-mkp #hd {
color: #628c2a;
font-size: 85%;
font-weight: 700;
line-height: 122%;
margin: 10px 0;
}
#ygrp-mkp #ads {
margin-bottom: 10px;
}
#ygrp-mkp .ad {
padding: 0 0;
}
#ygrp-mkp .ad a {
color: #0000ff;
text-decoration: none;
}
#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc {
font-family: Arial;
}
#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc #hd {
margin: 10px 0px;
font-weight: 700;
font-size: 78%;
line-height: 122%;
}
#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc .ad {
margin-bottom: 10px;
padding: 0 0;
}
a {
color: #1e66ae;
}
#actions {
font-family: Verdana;
font-size: 11px;
padding: 10px 0;
}
#activity {
background-color: #e0ecee;
float: left;
font-family: Verdana;
font-size: 10px;
padding: 10px;
}
#activity span {
font-weight: 700;
}
#activity span:first-child {
text-transform: uppercase;
}
#activity span a {
color: #5085b6;
text-decoration: none;
}
#activity span span {
color: #ff7900;
}
#activity span .underline {
text-decoration: underline;
}
.attach {
clear: both;
display: table;
font-family: Arial;
font-size: 12px;
padding: 10px 0;
width: 400px;
}
.attach div a {
text-decoration: none;
}
.attach img {
border: none;
padding-right: 5px;
}
.attach label {
display: block;
margin-bottom: 5px;
}
.attach label a {
text-decoration: none;
}
blockquote {
margin: 0 0 0 4px;
}
.bold {
font-family: Arial;
font-size: 13px;
font-weight: 700;
}
.bold a {
text-decoration: none;
}
dd.last p a {
font-family: Verdana;
font-weight: 700;
}
dd.last p span {
margin-right: 10px;
font-family: Verdana;
font-weight: 700;
}
dd.last p span.yshortcuts {
margin-right: 0;
}
div.attach-table div div a {
text-decoration: none;
}
div.attach-table {
width: 400px;
}
div.file-title a, div.file-title a:active, div.file-title a:hover, div.file-title a:visited {
text-decoration: none;
}
div.photo-title a, div.photo-title a:active, div.photo-title a:hover, div.photo-title a:visited {
text-decoration: none;
}
div#ygrp-mlmsg #ygrp-msg p a span.yshortcuts {
font-family: Verdana;
font-size: 10px;
font-weight: normal;
}
.green {
color: #628c2a;
}
.MsoNormal {
margin: 0 0 0 0;
}
o {
font-size: 0;
}
#photos div {
float: left;
width: 72px;
}
#photos div div {
border: 1px solid #666666;
height: 62px;
overflow: hidden;
width: 62px;
}
#photos div label {
color: #666666;
font-size: 10px;
overflow: hidden;
text-align: center;
white-space: nowrap;
width: 64px;
}
#reco-category {
font-size: 77%;
}
#reco-desc {
font-size: 77%;
}
.replbq {
margin: 4px;
}
#ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {
/* border-right: 0px solid #000;*/
margin-right: 2px;
padding-right: 5px;
}
#ygrp-mlmsg {
font-size: 13px;
font-family: Arial, helvetica,clean, sans-serif;
*font-size: small;
*font: x-small;
}
#ygrp-mlmsg table {
font-size: inherit;
font: 100%;
}
#ygrp-mlmsg select, input, textarea {
font: 99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;
}
#ygrp-mlmsg pre, code {
font:115% monospace;
*font-size:100%;
}
#ygrp-mlmsg * {
line-height: 1.22em;
}
#ygrp-mlmsg #logo {
padding-bottom: 10px;
}
#ygrp-mlmsg a {
color: #1E66AE;
}
#ygrp-msg p a {
font-family: Verdana;
}
#ygrp-msg p#attach-count span {
color: #1E66AE;
font-weight: 700;
}
#ygrp-reco #reco-head {
color: #ff7900;
font-weight: 700;
}
#ygrp-reco {
margin-bottom: 20px;
padding: 0px;
}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov li a {
font-size: 130%;
text-decoration: none;
}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov li {
font-size: 77%;
list-style-type: square;
padding: 6px 0;
}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov ul {
margin: 0;
padding: 0 0 0 8px;
}
#ygrp-text {
font-family: Georgia;
}
#ygrp-text p {
margin: 0 0 1em 0;
}
#ygrp-text tt {
font-size: 120%;
}
#ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {
border-right: none !important;
}
-->
</style>
</head>
<!--~-|**|PrettyHtmlEnd|**|-~-->
</html>
<!-- end group email -->
--UuTl2L7SMD1LnjVflmuWhalg3XaJ7ahzfcxD1KI--