“By the dawn. By the ten nights (i.e. the first ten days of the month of Dhul-Hijjah).” (89:1-2)
• According to Ibn ‘Abbas radhiyallahu anhu, Qatadah, Mujahid and other leading commentators of the Noble Qur’an, the ‘ten nights’ in the above verse refers to the (first) ten nights of Dhul Hijjah. Ibn Abbas radhiyallahu anhu also said that these are the ten nights that are mentioned in the story of Nabi Musa alayhis salaam ‘…then We supplemented them with ten.’ (7:142) These were ten days which Allah had designated to Nabi Musa alayhis salaam.
• Abdullah Ibn ‘Abbas radhiyallahu anhu related that Rasulullah sallalahu alayhi wasallam said, ‘Good deeds performed on other days are not superior to those performed on these (first ten days of Dhul Hijjah).’ The Sahabah radhiyallahu anhum inquired, ‘Not even Jihad?’ He replied, ‘Not even Jihad, except for that person who goes out putting himself and his wealth in danger and does not return with anything.’ (Bukhari)
• Abu Hurairah radhiyallahu anhu related that Rasulullah sallalahu alayhi wasallam said, ‘On no days is the worship of Allah more superior than in the (first) ten days of Dhul Hijjah. The fast of each of these days is equal to the fast of a whole year, and the worship of each of these nights is equal to the worship of Laylatul Qadr.’ (Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah)
• Hafsah radhiyallahu anha reports that Rasulullah sallalahu alayhi wasallam used to fast on the (first) nine days of Zul Hijjah. (Nasa’i, Ahmad, Abu Dawud)
• Abdullah Ibn ‘Umar radhiyallahu anhu related that Rasulullah sallalahu alayhi wasallam said, ‘No days are as weighty with Allah and so liked by Him for good deeds more than the first ten days of Dhul Hijjah. So on these days recite inabundance: Subhanallah, La ilaaha illallah, Alhamdulillah and Allahu Akbar.’ (Musnad Ahmad)
• Umm Salamah radhiyallahu anhu related that Rasulullah sallalahu alayhi wasallam said, ‘When you see the new moon of Dhul Hijjah, and one of you wants to offer a sacrifice, let him refrain from (removing anything) from his hair or nails.’ (Muslim). According to another version: ‘Let him not remove anything of his hair or skin.’ This is preferable and not a compulsory act.
• ‘Aishah radhiyallahu anha reports that Rasulullah sallalahu alayhi wasallam said, ‘There is no day in which Allah sets free more souls from the fire of hell than on the day of Arafah. And on that day Allah draws (with His mercy) near to the earth and by way of exhibiting His Pride remarks to the angels, ‘What is the desire of these (servants of mine)?’ (Muslim)
• Talhah radhiyallahu anhu reports that Rasulullah sallalahu alayhi wasallam said, ‘Apart from the day of the Battle of Badr there is no day on which the Shaytan is seen to be more humiliated, more rejected, more depressed and more infuriated, than on the day of Arafah, and indeed all this is only because of the abundance of descending mercy (on the day) and Allah’s forgiveness of the great
sins of the servants.’ (Mishkat)
• Abu Qatadah Al-Ansari radhiyallahu anhu reports that Rasulullah sallalahu alayhi wasallam was asked about the fast on the day of Arafah. He said, ‘It compensates for the (minor) sins of the past and the coming year.’ (Muslim, Tirmidhi, Ibne Majah)
• Abu Umarah radhiyallahu anhu related that ‘Aishah radhiyallahu anha reports that Rasulullah sallalahu alayhi wasallam said, ‘Whosoever stays awake and performs ‘Ibadah (worship) on the nights of the two ‘Eid, with hope for abundant reward (from Allah), his heart will not die on the day (i.e. Qiyamah) when all hearts will be dead.’ (Targheeb)
• Mu’aadh ibn Jabal radhiyallahu anhu relates that Rasulullah sallalahu alayhi wasallam said, ‘Jannah is incumbent for those who stay awake with the intention of worshipping Allah on the following nights: 8th, 9th and 10th of Dhul Hijjah, the night of ‘Eidul Fitr and the night of the 15th of Sha’ban.’(Targheeb)
• Rasulullah sallalahu alayhi wasallam said, ‘There is nothing dearer to Allah during the days of sacrifice than the slaughtering of animals. The sacrificed animal shall come on the Day of Judgement with its horns, hair, and hooves (to be weighed). The sacrifice is accepted by
Allah before the blood reaches the ground. Therefore sacrifice with an open and happy heart.’ (Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah)
• It is incumbent for every adult Muslim to recite these Takbiraat of Tashreeq audibly once after every fardh salaah which is performed with congregation from the Fajr of 9th Dhul Hijjah to the ‘Asr of 13th Dhul Hijjah (i.e. total of 23 salah). The Takbiraat of Tashreeq are: Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar, Laa ilaaha illallahu wallahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar, Walil lahil hamd. Women should recite it in a soft tone.
Taken from http://www.jamiat.co.za/newsletter/online_newsletter_0445.htm
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Are you Caught in the Cycle of Emails?
The boon and conveniences brought about by technology have been phenomenal. However, there seem to be a negative correlation between technological advancement and our thoroughness and communication skills.
Save for those account bills, as postal mail is becoming obsolete, the standard of the written word and handling of emails leaves a lot to be desired.
In the era of 'snail' mail, each and every letter one received would be a treasured item that was read over and over again if not for the joy it brought, at least for the memories it would kindle between correspondents.
When it was strictly ink and paper, one would sit down and think through what he/she would be committing to paper. Without 'undo' and 'delete,' one would carefully weigh the value of each written word over its not-so-perfect substitute in order to communicate effectively and yet politely.
Today, we have SMS language and emoticons. We can 'cut' and 'paste.' We can also forward an inbox item, not to one or two but literally, to scores of recipients.
As Muslims, we cannot be helplessly nostalgic without an attempt to restore order. It is appropriate to adhere to an etiquette that is consistent with rules of our faith that govern our social interactions. Some noteworthy points below should serve as guidelines:
1. The Prophet Sallallahu 'alayhi wasallam said it is sufficient for a person to be called a liar if one repeats everything that he hears. The moral standard of a Muslim is high. Echoing everything one hears/reads, even if it is the truth, can make one a liar! Let's remember: "…If what you say about him is true, you are backbiting him, but if it is not true then you have slandered him." (Muslim)
2. “… Neither backbite one another. Would one of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? You would hate it (so hate backbiting)…” (49:12) Do we resist forwarding 'too juicy not to share' emails that would tantamount to backbiting? “And why did you not, when you heard it, say: 'It is not right of us to speak of this…?'” (24:16)
3. Once Umar Radhi-Allahu anhu would use the lamp with oil from the public treasury only when he was doing work of the treasury. He would extinguish it even if he had no light as soon as he finished the work of the official work of the treasury. Does your firm allow you to use corporate email service for private purposes? Do we ever consider the consequences of an email that we send or forward to others jeopardising the interests of your employer in the process albeit unwittingly?
4. The impersonal nature of the Internet gives a false sense of anonymity. For this reason, it is common that uncouth language thrives in chat-rooms, online forums and in emails. Rules of hijab are forgotten as netizens 'open up' to each other. We have to be mindful that an offence in cyberspace is neither lighter nor less serious than in actual space. “Modesty is part of faith, and faith leads to Heaven; while vulgarity is part of unfaith, and unfaith leads to Hell.” (Bukhari)
5. Attending to the amount of trivia that arrive in our inboxes proves to be a real time stealer. Do you have to read and/or respond to each and every message that we receive? Ibn Abbas Radhi-Allahu anhu narrated that Prophet Muhammad Sallallahu 'alayhi wassalaam said: "There are two blessings which many people lose: (They are) health and free time for doing good." Why do we forfeit our precious time attending to insignificant matters just like losers?
6. Chain emails that claim luck when you forward 'to seven people' while at the same time threatening 'misfortune' if you ignore them deserve nothing but a 'delete'. Does it occur to us that the best you can do to certain items in your inbox is just delete?
7. It is an obligation of everyone to treat other users with respect. Learn how to use your mail client software appropriately so that you neither cause offence nor compromise the privacy of others.
Taken from http://www.jamiat.co.za/newsletter/online_newsletter_0445.htm
Save for those account bills, as postal mail is becoming obsolete, the standard of the written word and handling of emails leaves a lot to be desired.
In the era of 'snail' mail, each and every letter one received would be a treasured item that was read over and over again if not for the joy it brought, at least for the memories it would kindle between correspondents.
When it was strictly ink and paper, one would sit down and think through what he/she would be committing to paper. Without 'undo' and 'delete,' one would carefully weigh the value of each written word over its not-so-perfect substitute in order to communicate effectively and yet politely.
Today, we have SMS language and emoticons. We can 'cut' and 'paste.' We can also forward an inbox item, not to one or two but literally, to scores of recipients.
As Muslims, we cannot be helplessly nostalgic without an attempt to restore order. It is appropriate to adhere to an etiquette that is consistent with rules of our faith that govern our social interactions. Some noteworthy points below should serve as guidelines:
1. The Prophet Sallallahu 'alayhi wasallam said it is sufficient for a person to be called a liar if one repeats everything that he hears. The moral standard of a Muslim is high. Echoing everything one hears/reads, even if it is the truth, can make one a liar! Let's remember: "…If what you say about him is true, you are backbiting him, but if it is not true then you have slandered him." (Muslim)
2. “… Neither backbite one another. Would one of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? You would hate it (so hate backbiting)…” (49:12) Do we resist forwarding 'too juicy not to share' emails that would tantamount to backbiting? “And why did you not, when you heard it, say: 'It is not right of us to speak of this…?'” (24:16)
3. Once Umar Radhi-Allahu anhu would use the lamp with oil from the public treasury only when he was doing work of the treasury. He would extinguish it even if he had no light as soon as he finished the work of the official work of the treasury. Does your firm allow you to use corporate email service for private purposes? Do we ever consider the consequences of an email that we send or forward to others jeopardising the interests of your employer in the process albeit unwittingly?
4. The impersonal nature of the Internet gives a false sense of anonymity. For this reason, it is common that uncouth language thrives in chat-rooms, online forums and in emails. Rules of hijab are forgotten as netizens 'open up' to each other. We have to be mindful that an offence in cyberspace is neither lighter nor less serious than in actual space. “Modesty is part of faith, and faith leads to Heaven; while vulgarity is part of unfaith, and unfaith leads to Hell.” (Bukhari)
5. Attending to the amount of trivia that arrive in our inboxes proves to be a real time stealer. Do you have to read and/or respond to each and every message that we receive? Ibn Abbas Radhi-Allahu anhu narrated that Prophet Muhammad Sallallahu 'alayhi wassalaam said: "There are two blessings which many people lose: (They are) health and free time for doing good." Why do we forfeit our precious time attending to insignificant matters just like losers?
6. Chain emails that claim luck when you forward 'to seven people' while at the same time threatening 'misfortune' if you ignore them deserve nothing but a 'delete'. Does it occur to us that the best you can do to certain items in your inbox is just delete?
7. It is an obligation of everyone to treat other users with respect. Learn how to use your mail client software appropriately so that you neither cause offence nor compromise the privacy of others.
Taken from http://www.jamiat.co.za/newsletter/online_newsletter_0445.htm
Sunday, November 15, 2009
“U.K. troops abused Iraqis”
Hasan Suroor
LONDON: The British government has ordered an inquiry into politically damaging allegations that its troops were involved in more than 30 cases of Abu Ghraib-style torture and abuse of Iraqi civilians. It, however, rejected calls for a public inquiry arguing that allegations did not mean these were fact.
Since British troops moved out of Iraq earlier this year, a number of Iraqis have come forward with shocking accounts of how they were allegedly tortured and humiliated simply because they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
The incidents, reported from six different locations in Basra where British troops were deployed, allegedly involved mock executions, rape, exposure to pornography and electric shocks.
Complainants said that they did not speak out while British troops were still there because of fear of retribution.
The inquiry follows a front-page expose in The Independent under the heading “Britain’s Abu Ghraib”. In one case, British soldiers allegedly piled bodies of Iraqi prisoners on top of each other and subjected them to electric shocks in an echo of the abuse by American soldiers at Abu Ghraib jail in Baghdad.
Nassir Ghulaim, a young Iraqi, claims he was playing football with friends in April, 2007 when he and another Iraqi were picked up and taken to a British base where they were asked to strip, sexually humiliated and forced to squeeze while one soldier stood on top of them.
Armed forces Minister Bill Rammell said: “Allegations of this nature are taken very seriously. However allegations must not be taken as fact.”
This is the latest in a series of allegations of abuse involving British soldiers.
http://www.hindu.com/2009/11/15/stories/2009111555451100.htm
LONDON: The British government has ordered an inquiry into politically damaging allegations that its troops were involved in more than 30 cases of Abu Ghraib-style torture and abuse of Iraqi civilians. It, however, rejected calls for a public inquiry arguing that allegations did not mean these were fact.
Since British troops moved out of Iraq earlier this year, a number of Iraqis have come forward with shocking accounts of how they were allegedly tortured and humiliated simply because they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
The incidents, reported from six different locations in Basra where British troops were deployed, allegedly involved mock executions, rape, exposure to pornography and electric shocks.
Complainants said that they did not speak out while British troops were still there because of fear of retribution.
The inquiry follows a front-page expose in The Independent under the heading “Britain’s Abu Ghraib”. In one case, British soldiers allegedly piled bodies of Iraqi prisoners on top of each other and subjected them to electric shocks in an echo of the abuse by American soldiers at Abu Ghraib jail in Baghdad.
Nassir Ghulaim, a young Iraqi, claims he was playing football with friends in April, 2007 when he and another Iraqi were picked up and taken to a British base where they were asked to strip, sexually humiliated and forced to squeeze while one soldier stood on top of them.
Armed forces Minister Bill Rammell said: “Allegations of this nature are taken very seriously. However allegations must not be taken as fact.”
This is the latest in a series of allegations of abuse involving British soldiers.
http://www.hindu.com/2009/11/15/stories/2009111555451100.htm
Recession is the mother of invention
Richard Wray
Necessity is the mother of invention, at least when it comes to the conception of technology companies. Many of America’s biggest names in the technology world were born or rose to prominence in downturns, from Cisco and Hewlett-Packard to Apple and Google.
The harsh economic winds that blew in the 1930s, 1970s and 1980s — and the disappearance of capital after the dotcom crash at the turn of this century - blew away many old ways of doing business, clearing spaces for new companies to spring up.
Finding themselves laid-off, many experienced workers decided to set up shop on their own, often bringing to fruition projects they had been working on within large organisations. At the same time, the next generation of bright young things discovered that the traditional job market was closed to them and struck out on their own.
Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard, for instance, emerged from Stanford University in 1935. Either man could have found themselves within traditional American business had it not been for the Great Depression but instead they set up business in a Palo Alto garage.
A garage just to the north, in Menlo Park, meanwhile, played host to another pair of Stanford graduates, Larry Page and Sergey Brin. Their company, Google, was up and running in 1998 and got its only major round of funding in 1999 when the dotcom boom was still in full swing. But its rise to global web domination came between 2001 and its $23bn flotation in 2004 when its potential rivals were scaling back or disappearing in the dotcom crash.
The aftermath of that crash also saw the creation of Facebook and LinkedIn.
But taking advantage of the so-called creative destruction of a recession requires not just innovative minds with good ideas, but investors with vision.
One name that often appears in the U.S. when it comes to injecting cash in a downturn is Sequoia Capital. The venture capital firm put $2.5m into a telecoms start-up called Cisco just a few months after the 1987 stock market crash. Thirteen years later the dotcom boom would take the company’s stock market valuation to half a trillion dollars.
As the recession of the 1970s was cutting a swath through middle America, California’s Silicon Valley experienced rapid growth with companies such as Atari and Apple appearing on the scene and helping to create entirely new markets. The 1970s also saw the creation of Oracle, which received its first major cash injection from Sequoia in 1984. — © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2009
http://www.hinduonnet.com/2009/11/11/stories/2009111155640900.htm
Necessity is the mother of invention, at least when it comes to the conception of technology companies. Many of America’s biggest names in the technology world were born or rose to prominence in downturns, from Cisco and Hewlett-Packard to Apple and Google.
The harsh economic winds that blew in the 1930s, 1970s and 1980s — and the disappearance of capital after the dotcom crash at the turn of this century - blew away many old ways of doing business, clearing spaces for new companies to spring up.
Finding themselves laid-off, many experienced workers decided to set up shop on their own, often bringing to fruition projects they had been working on within large organisations. At the same time, the next generation of bright young things discovered that the traditional job market was closed to them and struck out on their own.
Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard, for instance, emerged from Stanford University in 1935. Either man could have found themselves within traditional American business had it not been for the Great Depression but instead they set up business in a Palo Alto garage.
A garage just to the north, in Menlo Park, meanwhile, played host to another pair of Stanford graduates, Larry Page and Sergey Brin. Their company, Google, was up and running in 1998 and got its only major round of funding in 1999 when the dotcom boom was still in full swing. But its rise to global web domination came between 2001 and its $23bn flotation in 2004 when its potential rivals were scaling back or disappearing in the dotcom crash.
The aftermath of that crash also saw the creation of Facebook and LinkedIn.
But taking advantage of the so-called creative destruction of a recession requires not just innovative minds with good ideas, but investors with vision.
One name that often appears in the U.S. when it comes to injecting cash in a downturn is Sequoia Capital. The venture capital firm put $2.5m into a telecoms start-up called Cisco just a few months after the 1987 stock market crash. Thirteen years later the dotcom boom would take the company’s stock market valuation to half a trillion dollars.
As the recession of the 1970s was cutting a swath through middle America, California’s Silicon Valley experienced rapid growth with companies such as Atari and Apple appearing on the scene and helping to create entirely new markets. The 1970s also saw the creation of Oracle, which received its first major cash injection from Sequoia in 1984. — © Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2009
http://www.hinduonnet.com/2009/11/11/stories/2009111155640900.htm
Why was the Afghan journalist left to die?
Hasan Suroor
More than two months after the incident, the controversy over the circumstances of Sultan Munadi’s death refuses to go away.
Local stringers and interpreters who work for international news organisations in Iraq and Afghanistan are the unsung heroes behind many of the big stories that appear under the byline of high-profile foreign correspondents. Graham Greene’s novel, The Quiet American, in which The Times fictional Saigon correspondent gets his best stories thanks to his Vietnamese factotum who does everything from running his office to giving him n ews tips and tracking down news sources for him is an accurate portrayal of those who are often rather dismissively referred to as “local hire.”
Because of their local contacts and knowledge of their region’s affairs stringers are indispensable to international reporters operating in an alien and hostile environment and, quite often, risk their lives to oblige their bosses. Yet, their efforts are poorly acknowledged and when, in trouble, they are abandoned to their fate. Or at least that’s the perception.
The recent case involving The New York Times Kabul correspondent Stephen Farrell and his Afghan interpreter Sultan Munadi appears to have reinforced this impression. They were kidnapped by Taliban militants on September 5 in Kunduz where they had gone to report on the aftermath of a NATO air strike that killed many civilians fuelling widespread anger against foreign forces. Four days later, in a controversial move British commandos mounted a dramatic raid to free them ignoring the advice of intermediaries who were said to be close to a deal with the kidnappers and feared that any hasty military intervention could lead to loss of lives.
While the commandos managed to rescue Mr. Farrell, a British-Irish national, Munadi was killed after being shot. It is not clear whether the fatal shot was fired by a militant or a commando who did not recognise him as a hostage. Mr. Farrell was rushed to safety after he identified himself as a “British hostage” leaving Munadi’s body behind even though, according to Mr. Farrell, he kept telling the troops that his colleague had been shot.
“I twisted around and pointed to where Sultan was lying 5-10 yards away — in clear sight even at night — slumped over the mud ridge of the ditch inside which I had taken shelter,” Mr. Farrell recalled in a detailed e-mail to U.S.-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ).
According to him, though the troops told him they had a photograph of Munadi he “never saw if they acted on the information I gave them, as they were already pushing my head down close to the ground because of the gunfire in or beyond the trees around us. I was very quickly rushed away from the scene, and did not see Sultan again.”
The British government may have genuinely intended to save both the hostages but, judging from independent accounts of the incident and Mr. Farrell’s own version, it is clear that the soldiers’ priority was rescuing the “British hostage.” Mr. Farrell’s emails reinforce previous reports that despite his repeated pleas, they were totally indifferent to what happened to Mr. Munadi. They were simply not interested in him and made no attempt even to find out whether he was still alive.
More than two months after the incident, the controversy over the circumstances of Munadi’s death — suggesting that the British forces lost interest in him once they had Mr. Farrell out safely — refuses to go away and, last week, the CPJ intervened to demand an independent investigation by British authorities.
In a strongly-worded letter to Prime Minister Gordon Brown, it said that as an organisation dedicated to the defence of press freedom it was concerned about the incident. Such an investigation was necessary in order to clear up the “many unanswered questions” raised by CPJ’s own “two-month long effort” to document events that led to Munadi’s death.
The questions that the CPJ wants answered include: Was the recovery of both Mr. Farrell and Munadi an explicit objective of the military operation? What were the circumstances of Munadi’s death? Is there any evidence Munadi was shot accidentally by British forces who did not recognise him as a hostage? After Mr. Farrell pointed out Munadi to British forces, did anyone check for vital signs? Why were Munadi’s remains left at the scene of the firefight?
The CPJ believes that a “thorough” and “transparent” investigation would help western forces in their stated aim of winning the hearts and minds of the people of Afghanistan whose trust, it stresses, is essential to their military success. Equally importantly, it would assure Afghan journalists “without whom international reporters could not operate independently on the ground that they can report with the same degree of safety as their western colleagues when encountering British and other foreign troops.”
The CPJ’s letter confirms previous reports that The New York Times had strong reservations about the wisdom of launching a rescue mission without first exhausting all other means.
Meanwhile, Mr. Farrell, who formerly worked for The Times, London, and was briefly captured in Iraq five years ago, has been criticised for his gung-ho style. The problem is not Mr. Farrell’s style but the ruthlessly competitive nature of western journalism because of which correspondents on foreign assignments — especially in conflict zones — are under tremendous pressure to produce “exclusives” forcing them to take avoidable risks — often with disastrous consequences as the Farrell-Munadi incident shows.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/2009/11/11/stories/2009111155600900.htm
More than two months after the incident, the controversy over the circumstances of Sultan Munadi’s death refuses to go away.
Local stringers and interpreters who work for international news organisations in Iraq and Afghanistan are the unsung heroes behind many of the big stories that appear under the byline of high-profile foreign correspondents. Graham Greene’s novel, The Quiet American, in which The Times fictional Saigon correspondent gets his best stories thanks to his Vietnamese factotum who does everything from running his office to giving him n ews tips and tracking down news sources for him is an accurate portrayal of those who are often rather dismissively referred to as “local hire.”
Because of their local contacts and knowledge of their region’s affairs stringers are indispensable to international reporters operating in an alien and hostile environment and, quite often, risk their lives to oblige their bosses. Yet, their efforts are poorly acknowledged and when, in trouble, they are abandoned to their fate. Or at least that’s the perception.
The recent case involving The New York Times Kabul correspondent Stephen Farrell and his Afghan interpreter Sultan Munadi appears to have reinforced this impression. They were kidnapped by Taliban militants on September 5 in Kunduz where they had gone to report on the aftermath of a NATO air strike that killed many civilians fuelling widespread anger against foreign forces. Four days later, in a controversial move British commandos mounted a dramatic raid to free them ignoring the advice of intermediaries who were said to be close to a deal with the kidnappers and feared that any hasty military intervention could lead to loss of lives.
While the commandos managed to rescue Mr. Farrell, a British-Irish national, Munadi was killed after being shot. It is not clear whether the fatal shot was fired by a militant or a commando who did not recognise him as a hostage. Mr. Farrell was rushed to safety after he identified himself as a “British hostage” leaving Munadi’s body behind even though, according to Mr. Farrell, he kept telling the troops that his colleague had been shot.
“I twisted around and pointed to where Sultan was lying 5-10 yards away — in clear sight even at night — slumped over the mud ridge of the ditch inside which I had taken shelter,” Mr. Farrell recalled in a detailed e-mail to U.S.-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ).
According to him, though the troops told him they had a photograph of Munadi he “never saw if they acted on the information I gave them, as they were already pushing my head down close to the ground because of the gunfire in or beyond the trees around us. I was very quickly rushed away from the scene, and did not see Sultan again.”
The British government may have genuinely intended to save both the hostages but, judging from independent accounts of the incident and Mr. Farrell’s own version, it is clear that the soldiers’ priority was rescuing the “British hostage.” Mr. Farrell’s emails reinforce previous reports that despite his repeated pleas, they were totally indifferent to what happened to Mr. Munadi. They were simply not interested in him and made no attempt even to find out whether he was still alive.
More than two months after the incident, the controversy over the circumstances of Munadi’s death — suggesting that the British forces lost interest in him once they had Mr. Farrell out safely — refuses to go away and, last week, the CPJ intervened to demand an independent investigation by British authorities.
In a strongly-worded letter to Prime Minister Gordon Brown, it said that as an organisation dedicated to the defence of press freedom it was concerned about the incident. Such an investigation was necessary in order to clear up the “many unanswered questions” raised by CPJ’s own “two-month long effort” to document events that led to Munadi’s death.
The questions that the CPJ wants answered include: Was the recovery of both Mr. Farrell and Munadi an explicit objective of the military operation? What were the circumstances of Munadi’s death? Is there any evidence Munadi was shot accidentally by British forces who did not recognise him as a hostage? After Mr. Farrell pointed out Munadi to British forces, did anyone check for vital signs? Why were Munadi’s remains left at the scene of the firefight?
The CPJ believes that a “thorough” and “transparent” investigation would help western forces in their stated aim of winning the hearts and minds of the people of Afghanistan whose trust, it stresses, is essential to their military success. Equally importantly, it would assure Afghan journalists “without whom international reporters could not operate independently on the ground that they can report with the same degree of safety as their western colleagues when encountering British and other foreign troops.”
The CPJ’s letter confirms previous reports that The New York Times had strong reservations about the wisdom of launching a rescue mission without first exhausting all other means.
Meanwhile, Mr. Farrell, who formerly worked for The Times, London, and was briefly captured in Iraq five years ago, has been criticised for his gung-ho style. The problem is not Mr. Farrell’s style but the ruthlessly competitive nature of western journalism because of which correspondents on foreign assignments — especially in conflict zones — are under tremendous pressure to produce “exclusives” forcing them to take avoidable risks — often with disastrous consequences as the Farrell-Munadi incident shows.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/2009/11/11/stories/2009111155600900.htm
Need for creativity in classroom
The former President, A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, writes:
I was happy to see the article “I only want to enjoy my childhood, ma” by Inumella Sesikala (Open Page, Nov. 8). I liked the article very much, which is a dream of every child. Creativity of children has to come out from the classroom. Some of us had such opportunities. Our children should go to primary school only at the age of six. Till then, we have to promote creativity of the children with great teachers and an innovative classroom environment.
Yesterday, when I was reading the book Spiritual Intelligence, The Ultimate Intelligence by Danah Zohar and Ian Marshall, I came across the poem, “The Student’s prayer.”
“The young son of a Chilean biologist, Umberto Maturana, became unhappy at school because he felt his teachers were making it impossible for him to learn. They wanted to teach him what they knew, rather than drawing out what he needed to learn. As a result Maturana wrote “The Student’s Prayer”, of which this translation is an abridged version. It perfectly expresses the spiritually intelligent individual’s response to the conforming pressures of parents, teachers, bosses or the crowd.
The Student’s Prayer
Don’t impose on me what you know,
I want to explore the unknown
And be the source of my own discoveries.
Let the known be my liberation, not my slavery.
The world of your truth can be my limitation;
Your wisdom my negation.
Don’t instruct me; let’s walk together.
Let my richness begin where yours ends.
Show me so that I can stand
On your shoulders.
Reveal yourself so that I can be
Something different.
You believe that every human being
Can love and create.
I understand, then, your fear
When I ask you to live according to your wisdom.
You will not know who I am
By listening to yourself.
Don’t instruct me; let me be.
Your failure is that I be identical to you.”
I thought, there is a connectivity among young hearts even beyond ocean — “I only want to enjoy my childhood, ma” and “The Student’s Prayer.”
http://www.hinduonnet.com/2009/11/12/stories/2009111254570900.htm
I was happy to see the article “I only want to enjoy my childhood, ma” by Inumella Sesikala (Open Page, Nov. 8). I liked the article very much, which is a dream of every child. Creativity of children has to come out from the classroom. Some of us had such opportunities. Our children should go to primary school only at the age of six. Till then, we have to promote creativity of the children with great teachers and an innovative classroom environment.
Yesterday, when I was reading the book Spiritual Intelligence, The Ultimate Intelligence by Danah Zohar and Ian Marshall, I came across the poem, “The Student’s prayer.”
“The young son of a Chilean biologist, Umberto Maturana, became unhappy at school because he felt his teachers were making it impossible for him to learn. They wanted to teach him what they knew, rather than drawing out what he needed to learn. As a result Maturana wrote “The Student’s Prayer”, of which this translation is an abridged version. It perfectly expresses the spiritually intelligent individual’s response to the conforming pressures of parents, teachers, bosses or the crowd.
The Student’s Prayer
Don’t impose on me what you know,
I want to explore the unknown
And be the source of my own discoveries.
Let the known be my liberation, not my slavery.
The world of your truth can be my limitation;
Your wisdom my negation.
Don’t instruct me; let’s walk together.
Let my richness begin where yours ends.
Show me so that I can stand
On your shoulders.
Reveal yourself so that I can be
Something different.
You believe that every human being
Can love and create.
I understand, then, your fear
When I ask you to live according to your wisdom.
You will not know who I am
By listening to yourself.
Don’t instruct me; let me be.
Your failure is that I be identical to you.”
I thought, there is a connectivity among young hearts even beyond ocean — “I only want to enjoy my childhood, ma” and “The Student’s Prayer.”
http://www.hinduonnet.com/2009/11/12/stories/2009111254570900.htm
Nothing wrong with Haj subsidy
ABDUL KHADER
This is with reference to Umer Khalidi’s article “Haj subsidy” (Open Page, October 4). All the argument is based on the interpretation of the word manis ta taa‘a found in the scripture. It literally means affordability; whether it is physical, monetary, by own self or through other source, is not defined. So all the observations are made based on the assumption that it refers to monetary affordability. Verse 97 of chapter 3 part 4 states that pilgrimage to Makkah is a duty to God for him who can afford the journey (manistataa ‘a ). There is no definition of the word manis ta taa ‘a.
Norms
The established norms for interpretation are that, in case the meaning of any word is not clear, it should be understood with reference to such a word occurring elsewhere in the text of the Koran, if it is not found in the Koran, then we should refer to the Hadis (sayings of the Prophet).
1. This word occurs in almost 15 places in the Koran, chapter 2 (verse 217, 273) chapter 4 (25, 98, 129) chapter 11(20) chapter 17(48) chapter 18 (41, 97, 101) chapter 21(43) chapter 36 (67, 75) and chapter 51(45).
Verse 25 of chapter 4 says that if anyone cannot afford to marry a freewoman, he can very well marry any maid under his possession. Here an alternative is given for non affordability. So this does not apply to the subject in discussion. All the other 14 instances clearly indicate the physical capability of the person.
Hazrat Akrama stands by this description (Tafseer Ibn Kaseer). Hence the entire argument of the opposition gets shattered in the light of the above clarification.
2. Let us examine it with reference to Hadis. Interpretation in Tafseer Ibn Kaseer, page 6 says that the Prophet explained this verse as the affordability for food and conveyance. The pilgrim may have the affordability by himself or he may have it through other source. The tafseer also quotes from Akrama, the Prophet’s disciple, that it refers to physical health only. Hence the utilisation of Haj subsidy does in no way mar the sanctity of the pilgrimage.
3. The author says that God is pure and He likes pure things. Subsidy money is what we pay as tax which is paid back to us in deserving cases as per government policy. To say that this money is impure is nothing but unfair.
4. The pilgrim performs the Haj with his own money and not with the subsidy. The money is therefore unpolluted. The subsidy comes after the completion of the pilgrimage.
5. The enjoying of benefits derived in the performance of Haj without affecting the rituals, is considered to be the bounty of God and the same is permitted by the Koran vide chapter 2 verse 197 which runs as follows: “It is no sin that you seek the bounty of your Lord (by trading)”.
The subsidy which is given to the pilgrims is a bounty of God for mankind in recognition of the inconveniences encountered by him vide the interpretation by the Presidency of Islamic Research, IFTA. Published by the custodian of the two Mosques. It will, thus, be seen that the utility of Haj subsidy is no where forbidden in the Koran.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/op/2009/11/15/stories/2009111550031600.htm
This is with reference to Umer Khalidi’s article “Haj subsidy” (Open Page, October 4). All the argument is based on the interpretation of the word manis ta taa‘a found in the scripture. It literally means affordability; whether it is physical, monetary, by own self or through other source, is not defined. So all the observations are made based on the assumption that it refers to monetary affordability. Verse 97 of chapter 3 part 4 states that pilgrimage to Makkah is a duty to God for him who can afford the journey (manistataa ‘a ). There is no definition of the word manis ta taa ‘a.
Norms
The established norms for interpretation are that, in case the meaning of any word is not clear, it should be understood with reference to such a word occurring elsewhere in the text of the Koran, if it is not found in the Koran, then we should refer to the Hadis (sayings of the Prophet).
1. This word occurs in almost 15 places in the Koran, chapter 2 (verse 217, 273) chapter 4 (25, 98, 129) chapter 11(20) chapter 17(48) chapter 18 (41, 97, 101) chapter 21(43) chapter 36 (67, 75) and chapter 51(45).
Verse 25 of chapter 4 says that if anyone cannot afford to marry a freewoman, he can very well marry any maid under his possession. Here an alternative is given for non affordability. So this does not apply to the subject in discussion. All the other 14 instances clearly indicate the physical capability of the person.
Hazrat Akrama stands by this description (Tafseer Ibn Kaseer). Hence the entire argument of the opposition gets shattered in the light of the above clarification.
2. Let us examine it with reference to Hadis. Interpretation in Tafseer Ibn Kaseer, page 6 says that the Prophet explained this verse as the affordability for food and conveyance. The pilgrim may have the affordability by himself or he may have it through other source. The tafseer also quotes from Akrama, the Prophet’s disciple, that it refers to physical health only. Hence the utilisation of Haj subsidy does in no way mar the sanctity of the pilgrimage.
3. The author says that God is pure and He likes pure things. Subsidy money is what we pay as tax which is paid back to us in deserving cases as per government policy. To say that this money is impure is nothing but unfair.
4. The pilgrim performs the Haj with his own money and not with the subsidy. The money is therefore unpolluted. The subsidy comes after the completion of the pilgrimage.
5. The enjoying of benefits derived in the performance of Haj without affecting the rituals, is considered to be the bounty of God and the same is permitted by the Koran vide chapter 2 verse 197 which runs as follows: “It is no sin that you seek the bounty of your Lord (by trading)”.
The subsidy which is given to the pilgrims is a bounty of God for mankind in recognition of the inconveniences encountered by him vide the interpretation by the Presidency of Islamic Research, IFTA. Published by the custodian of the two Mosques. It will, thus, be seen that the utility of Haj subsidy is no where forbidden in the Koran.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/op/2009/11/15/stories/2009111550031600.htm
The saga of the second girl child
M. P. PADMAKUMAR
The saga of the second girl child makes the case for some wilful introspection by all and sundry in these heady times. In scores of low to upper middle class households, this second-person-singular happens to be the most unsolicited intruder into the peace and tranquility of the delicate domestic air.
Her arrival many a time unsettles the delicate balance of equations in households to the extend that fathers go gloomy, mothers end up cursing themselves and the elder sibling, though happy, yet unhappy over the prospects of dwindled future shares. Yet, despite the ominous presence of utrasonograms and deceitful in-laws, the second girl child makes her unpleasant mark in the households of uninspired, yet benevolent parents, even though to be eternally chided, perhaps unknowingly, over the slightest of pretexts. She is the bad omen of the ever-wavering modern middle class, not to speak of the classes lower to it. She arrives mostly at the most inopportune time when the family, after experiencing the perils of and coming to terms with the not-so-pleasant event of the arrival of the first girl child, in all desperation pins hopes on the next progeny, is all eager and hopelessly poised for the revelations of the cruel and impassionate ultrasonogram.
As the female doctor, always in hushed guilt-ridden tone, reveals the news, the father braves a smile that resembles an unshaven premier of a failed country and the mother yet again in all sobs, wilfully taking the blame for herself and future generations. Yet like in all magical societies of all banana republics, the girl survives, consistently crushed by the weight of her legacy, that is never to leave her at the least till she had set up her own household to perpetuate it still further.
Betrayal
And, alas, the egalitarian society too, the illogical legislative musings of which incidentally is the cause of this piece, despite all the rhetoric, betrays her in every significant way that law could lay hands on. Ironically enough, in the name of the girl child, it crucifies the second sibling of the same sex. Laws of the egalitarian land shamelessly stipulate that the sops for the single girl child, if ever any, vanish the moment the second girl arrives on the screen. Unlike China, where single child norm is in practice, this country has not as yet made one family one child a norm. Yet, to those who brave the irresistible temptations of ultrasonograms and intended misconceptions, life is even made harder, for the crime of deciding to opt for the hard way of the second girl.
The hapless parents are constantly at a loss to fathom why on earth the alms for single girl child vanish the moment the second sex of the same feather is born. Is it not politically correct to double the benefit when the next girl arrives at least to clear off the stigma of her birth and to offset the unbalance it creates? If, for the argument that the parents who sacrificed the benefits of a could-be male child by sticking to one girl sibling only must be compensated through law, then much in the same breath can it not be argued that the parents of the second girl child must be more vigorously lauded for resisting the temptations of female foeticide? Are not these sops for the single girl child indirectly abetting the termination of the second one of the same gender? Are not the visionaries formulating such politically correct laws not privy to the common sense that single children growing up in lonely surroundings end up problem children more often adding up staggering counselling costs to the society? Can a step in the right direction make the distance twice further? All these and more are questions that make the saga of the second girl child all the more poignant and also a true indicator of the yet another paradox of the times we are in.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/op/2009/11/15/stories/2009111550091600.htm
The saga of the second girl child makes the case for some wilful introspection by all and sundry in these heady times. In scores of low to upper middle class households, this second-person-singular happens to be the most unsolicited intruder into the peace and tranquility of the delicate domestic air.
Her arrival many a time unsettles the delicate balance of equations in households to the extend that fathers go gloomy, mothers end up cursing themselves and the elder sibling, though happy, yet unhappy over the prospects of dwindled future shares. Yet, despite the ominous presence of utrasonograms and deceitful in-laws, the second girl child makes her unpleasant mark in the households of uninspired, yet benevolent parents, even though to be eternally chided, perhaps unknowingly, over the slightest of pretexts. She is the bad omen of the ever-wavering modern middle class, not to speak of the classes lower to it. She arrives mostly at the most inopportune time when the family, after experiencing the perils of and coming to terms with the not-so-pleasant event of the arrival of the first girl child, in all desperation pins hopes on the next progeny, is all eager and hopelessly poised for the revelations of the cruel and impassionate ultrasonogram.
As the female doctor, always in hushed guilt-ridden tone, reveals the news, the father braves a smile that resembles an unshaven premier of a failed country and the mother yet again in all sobs, wilfully taking the blame for herself and future generations. Yet like in all magical societies of all banana republics, the girl survives, consistently crushed by the weight of her legacy, that is never to leave her at the least till she had set up her own household to perpetuate it still further.
Betrayal
And, alas, the egalitarian society too, the illogical legislative musings of which incidentally is the cause of this piece, despite all the rhetoric, betrays her in every significant way that law could lay hands on. Ironically enough, in the name of the girl child, it crucifies the second sibling of the same sex. Laws of the egalitarian land shamelessly stipulate that the sops for the single girl child, if ever any, vanish the moment the second girl arrives on the screen. Unlike China, where single child norm is in practice, this country has not as yet made one family one child a norm. Yet, to those who brave the irresistible temptations of ultrasonograms and intended misconceptions, life is even made harder, for the crime of deciding to opt for the hard way of the second girl.
The hapless parents are constantly at a loss to fathom why on earth the alms for single girl child vanish the moment the second sex of the same feather is born. Is it not politically correct to double the benefit when the next girl arrives at least to clear off the stigma of her birth and to offset the unbalance it creates? If, for the argument that the parents who sacrificed the benefits of a could-be male child by sticking to one girl sibling only must be compensated through law, then much in the same breath can it not be argued that the parents of the second girl child must be more vigorously lauded for resisting the temptations of female foeticide? Are not these sops for the single girl child indirectly abetting the termination of the second one of the same gender? Are not the visionaries formulating such politically correct laws not privy to the common sense that single children growing up in lonely surroundings end up problem children more often adding up staggering counselling costs to the society? Can a step in the right direction make the distance twice further? All these and more are questions that make the saga of the second girl child all the more poignant and also a true indicator of the yet another paradox of the times we are in.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/op/2009/11/15/stories/2009111550091600.htm
‘I only want to enjoy my childhood, ma’
(Dear co-parents, some of us might hear a small, fading voice making yet another attempt to reach us)
Inumella Sesikala
Amma, I don’t want to go to school.
I am just a child, Ma. I want someone to tell me stories and teach me. I want to watch tadpoles and butterflies and know what they eat, where they sleep. I want to climb a hill and catch a cloud to see what it is made of.
I want to wait with my hands in the stream and feel the fish swimming.
I want to run with the puppies, sing with the birds, and play with paper-boats in the rain.
I want to lie down on the soft green grass and hear the wind whisper.
Only then I want to learn more about them from the printed word.
Only after my imagination is fired, my thirst to know more has begun, a seed of ‘Why?’ is planted in my brain.
Amma, I feel trapped in the prison-like classroom. I feel my spirit slowly weakening with the monotonous teaching. Often, when I ask a basic question our teachers say, “No time for all that. Let us finish the syllabus.”
I get tired of studying just for marks without pausing to truly understand.
I want to go to the museum with my classmates and hear my teacher explain the stories of the artefacts.
I want plenty of nature trips where real Biology classes would be held.
I want to see colourful videos of volcanic eruptions and deep-sea dwellings.
I want our whole school to visit together the historic and cultural places in my city.
I want to learn astronomy after looking through a telescope once.
I don’t want to just read them in my textbooks; I want to see, hear, touch, smell and taste whatever I can. I want to experience.
Why can’t the school make at least one such trip every year?
And, I cannot stoop down anymore to carry my school sack. My back is ready to break. Why should I carry all the books everyday? Why can’t we have only two subjects per day? Or, why don’t we have lockers like in the Western schools? And, why should I squeeze in that over-crowded auto?
But, Amma, growing up no longer seems to be fun. I see only more of homework, winter projects, summer classes, weekly tests, monthly tests, quarterly, half-yearly and annual exams, external competitive exams, more tests, more competitions, more pressure, more stress…
When can I sing, paint, dance, swim, or cycle?
When I can just play cricket or even hide-and-seek?
What happened to that minimum sleep that you always say a child needs?
Why should I always study, study?
Amma, I am scared of increasing atrocities by untrustworthy teachers, ragging-raving seniors, acid-loving nuts, perverted adults…
Ma, right now, I don’t want to be a doctor, engineer or anything else.
I just want to feel safe and secure, play and learn without any stress before I become an adult like you.
I only want to enjoy my childhood, Ma.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/op/2009/11/08/stories/2009110851351400.htm
Inumella Sesikala
Amma, I don’t want to go to school.
I am just a child, Ma. I want someone to tell me stories and teach me. I want to watch tadpoles and butterflies and know what they eat, where they sleep. I want to climb a hill and catch a cloud to see what it is made of.
I want to wait with my hands in the stream and feel the fish swimming.
I want to run with the puppies, sing with the birds, and play with paper-boats in the rain.
I want to lie down on the soft green grass and hear the wind whisper.
Only then I want to learn more about them from the printed word.
Only after my imagination is fired, my thirst to know more has begun, a seed of ‘Why?’ is planted in my brain.
Amma, I feel trapped in the prison-like classroom. I feel my spirit slowly weakening with the monotonous teaching. Often, when I ask a basic question our teachers say, “No time for all that. Let us finish the syllabus.”
I get tired of studying just for marks without pausing to truly understand.
I want to go to the museum with my classmates and hear my teacher explain the stories of the artefacts.
I want plenty of nature trips where real Biology classes would be held.
I want to see colourful videos of volcanic eruptions and deep-sea dwellings.
I want our whole school to visit together the historic and cultural places in my city.
I want to learn astronomy after looking through a telescope once.
I don’t want to just read them in my textbooks; I want to see, hear, touch, smell and taste whatever I can. I want to experience.
Why can’t the school make at least one such trip every year?
And, I cannot stoop down anymore to carry my school sack. My back is ready to break. Why should I carry all the books everyday? Why can’t we have only two subjects per day? Or, why don’t we have lockers like in the Western schools? And, why should I squeeze in that over-crowded auto?
But, Amma, growing up no longer seems to be fun. I see only more of homework, winter projects, summer classes, weekly tests, monthly tests, quarterly, half-yearly and annual exams, external competitive exams, more tests, more competitions, more pressure, more stress…
When can I sing, paint, dance, swim, or cycle?
When I can just play cricket or even hide-and-seek?
What happened to that minimum sleep that you always say a child needs?
Why should I always study, study?
Amma, I am scared of increasing atrocities by untrustworthy teachers, ragging-raving seniors, acid-loving nuts, perverted adults…
Ma, right now, I don’t want to be a doctor, engineer or anything else.
I just want to feel safe and secure, play and learn without any stress before I become an adult like you.
I only want to enjoy my childhood, Ma.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/op/2009/11/08/stories/2009110851351400.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)