Free speech, human rights,Freedom, equality and accountability. We all human are same.Balochistan act for justice on a wide range of issues.Event and News related to Balochistan and world. Baloch In Balochistan have been disappeared and hanged and or murdered by Pakistan's military and securities agencies and Iran regime. Pakistan rarely allows journalists or human rights organizations to travel freely in Balochistan and coverage in the world press is inadequate.
Thursday, October 4, 2012
people of Canada for standing with the oppressed people of Occupied Balochistan
Demonstration held in front of Pakistani high commission in ottawa
Canada, to protest against the ongoing human rights violations committed
by pakistan in Balochistan, Organised by Baluchistan House
Balochistan flood victims at risk of contracting malaria
QUETTA - Tens of thousands of people, sheltering along roadsides and
canals in the flood-ravaged region of Balochistan, face the risk of
contacting malaria infection.
Sources said about 30,000 patients of gastroenteritis, malaria, skin infection, and waterborne diseases had been treated so far in 24 medical camps set up in Naseerabad and Jaffarabad districts. “The risk of contracting malaria has increased largely because the displaced people are now exposed to mosquitoes,” Health Secretary Asmatullah Kakar said while briefing reporters at his office.
Kakar said the Balochistan government had approached the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) to supply them at least 150,000 Insecticide Treated Nets (ITNs) to cope with the emerging challenge. He said rendering thousands of families homeless, the recent floods triggered by heavy downpours had forced them to take shelter on the roadsides, adding that the Health Department promptly responded with its full capacity and set up medical camps in rain-hit areas. Giving details about the steps taken by the Health Department for the flood affected, he said the flood victims had been provided with medicine of Rs 60 million during the last 10 days, while Rs 40 million worth of medicine were available with the Health Department for emergency situations.
Sources said about 30,000 patients of gastroenteritis, malaria, skin infection, and waterborne diseases had been treated so far in 24 medical camps set up in Naseerabad and Jaffarabad districts. “The risk of contracting malaria has increased largely because the displaced people are now exposed to mosquitoes,” Health Secretary Asmatullah Kakar said while briefing reporters at his office.
Kakar said the Balochistan government had approached the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) to supply them at least 150,000 Insecticide Treated Nets (ITNs) to cope with the emerging challenge. He said rendering thousands of families homeless, the recent floods triggered by heavy downpours had forced them to take shelter on the roadsides, adding that the Health Department promptly responded with its full capacity and set up medical camps in rain-hit areas. Giving details about the steps taken by the Health Department for the flood affected, he said the flood victims had been provided with medicine of Rs 60 million during the last 10 days, while Rs 40 million worth of medicine were available with the Health Department for emergency situations.
Why Arabs are so Easily Offended.
Published: Sunday, September 30, 2012 3:07 PM
The writer analyzes a culture that is diametrically opposed to what we are taught.
“Call
me Ishmael”, is the opening sentence that opens the novel “Moby Dick”
authored by Herman Melville. Ishmael, who is telling the story of Moby
Dick, recounts that he is sailing to sea out of a sense of alienation
and cultural inadequacy.
In Muslim culture it is the opposite; it is honorable to respond aggressively and to engage in a physical fight in order to scare or force critics to withdraw, even if this results in a prison sentence or even death. They see non-aggressive responses to such threats and violence as a sign of a vulnerability that is to be exploited. They do not interpret a peaceful response as an invitation to enter into a dialogue, diplomacy, intellectual debate, compromise or peaceful coexistence but the opposite.
"Locus of control" is a term used in psychology, and relates to the way in which people feel that their lives are controlled. In Western culture, we are brought up to have an "inner locus of control," meaning that we see our own inner emotions, reactions, decisions and views as the main deciding factor in our lives. There may be outer circumstances that influence our situation, but in the end, it is our own perception of a situation and the way we handle it that decides our future and our state of mind. The "inner locus of control" leads to increased self-responsibility and motivates people to become able to solve their own problems.
Muslims are brought up to have an "outer locus of control." Their constant use of the term inshallah ("Allah willing") when talking about the future, as well as the fact that most aspects of their lives are decided by older traditions, clan tribal affiliations and authorities, leaves very little space for individual freedom. Independent initiatives are often severely punished. This shapes their way of thinking, and means that when things go wrong, it is always the fault of others or the situation.
Finally, identity plays a big role when it comes to psychological differences between Muslims and Westerners. Westerners are taught to be open and tolerant toward other cultures, races, religions, etc. This makes us less critical, impairs our ability to discriminate, and makes our societies open to the influence of other cultural trends and values that may not always be constructive.
Muslims, on the other hand, are taught again and again that they are superior, and that all others are so bad that Allah will throw them in hell when they die. Muslim culture's self-glorification achieves the opposite with their culture and identity. In general, Westerners are taught to be kind, self-assured, self-responsible and tolerant, while Muslims are taught to be aggressive, insecure and intolerant.
The spreading and sprawling map of open Muslim violence against Americans and against America as the leader of the Western World in recent years was brought home with the assassination of America's Ambassador to Libya. All this despite President Obama's attempt to "reset" relations between the U.S. and the Muslim World and put Israel on "stand-by" mode.
In effect, American foreign policy towards the Middle East since Obama came to power has been characterized by a public relations practice called “public diplomacy" a nebulous term meant to hide the true intention: "soft power".
The cornerstone of this policy was the statement: “America is not at war with Islam.”
In June 2009, newly elected President Obama went to Egypt and made a pronouncement that raised false expectations in the Arab world: “I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear. This stunning pronouncement flies in the face of the First Amendment and by committing to protect the image of a specific religion and political philosophy,
Obama gave the Muslim world the false impression that he could control media content in America — like dictators control the media in the Arab-Islamic countries.
Unfortunately Obama's natural inclination to go overboard with a destructive need to self- blame and take responsibility when it is wholly unwarranted has resulted in the opposite result. This mix of a Western tendency to being overly forgiving in response to Muslim self-pity and blame is the psychological crowbar that has opened the West to invite escalating Muslim violence against what we know in the West as "the other".
Newt Gingrich has stated that "the Islamists cannot reconcile with a secular system of laws. They cannot tolerate a West that maintains a presence in the Arabian Gulf or that would defend Israel's right to survive as a country. They cannot tolerate freedom of speech, freedom of religion, or freedom for women. In short, their demands are irreconcilable with the modern world. While trying to understand the volatility of millions of Middle Easterners taught from birth to hate America and to despise Israel, we in the West should be asking one basic question.
The real question to be asked is why we feel the need to pander and apologize to the most radical, violent and intolerant extremes around the world, to let them set the tone; a tone designed to stifle all criticism of Islam, to declare as blasphemy any attempt to reform radical Islam.
This more than anything else might explain why Arabs are so easily offended.
Ishmael describes the behavior
of Captain Ahab who is so relentless in his obsession to kill the great
white whale, that he is willing to endanger the entire ship, all of his
sailors, just to kill the great white whale. The name Ishmael, the son
of the Patriarch Abraham from the old Testament as well as the Koran
symbolizes more than anything the sense of being rejected and being
scorned my one’s peer’s and by one’s civilization.
Ever
since the days of Napoleon's landing upon the shores of Egypt at the
very end of the 18th Century and bringing with him the modern era to the
Middle East, Islam has been unable to free itself from the shackles of
inferiority and self-destructive primal rage that typifies the hatred of
modern day Islamic radicalism against Western civilization.
In
recent years, despite Israel being at the foci of much of what has been
termed the "war of civilizations" between the Western world and Islam,
Europe is undergoing a rapid demographic transition that will lead to a
large Muslim population harboring an unchanging, hostile attitude toward
their national communities.
Nicolai Sennels, a Danish
psychologist who has had extensive experience with treating Muslim
youths has identified four main differences that are important in order
to understand the behavior of Muslims and how they interact with Western
influences. Without dismissing the intrinsic value of multiculturalism
or the need to identify with ones cultural roots Sennels has identified
four main differences that are important in order to understand the
behavior of Muslims. They concern anger, self-confidence, the so-called "locus of control" and identity.
Westerners are brought up to think of anger as a sign of weakness, powerlessness and lack of self-control.
In Muslim culture, anger is seen as a sign of strength. To Muslims, being aggressive is a way of gaining respect. When we see pictures
of bearded men hopping up and down and shooting in the air, we should
take it for what it is: these are the true role models of acceptable
behavior.
In Western culture, self-confidence is connected with the ability
to meet criticism calmly and to respond rationally. We are raised to
see people who easily get angry when criticized, as insecure and
immature.In Muslim culture it is the opposite; it is honorable to respond aggressively and to engage in a physical fight in order to scare or force critics to withdraw, even if this results in a prison sentence or even death. They see non-aggressive responses to such threats and violence as a sign of a vulnerability that is to be exploited. They do not interpret a peaceful response as an invitation to enter into a dialogue, diplomacy, intellectual debate, compromise or peaceful coexistence but the opposite.
"Locus of control" is a term used in psychology, and relates to the way in which people feel that their lives are controlled. In Western culture, we are brought up to have an "inner locus of control," meaning that we see our own inner emotions, reactions, decisions and views as the main deciding factor in our lives. There may be outer circumstances that influence our situation, but in the end, it is our own perception of a situation and the way we handle it that decides our future and our state of mind. The "inner locus of control" leads to increased self-responsibility and motivates people to become able to solve their own problems.
Muslims are brought up to have an "outer locus of control." Their constant use of the term inshallah ("Allah willing") when talking about the future, as well as the fact that most aspects of their lives are decided by older traditions, clan tribal affiliations and authorities, leaves very little space for individual freedom. Independent initiatives are often severely punished. This shapes their way of thinking, and means that when things go wrong, it is always the fault of others or the situation.
Finally, identity plays a big role when it comes to psychological differences between Muslims and Westerners. Westerners are taught to be open and tolerant toward other cultures, races, religions, etc. This makes us less critical, impairs our ability to discriminate, and makes our societies open to the influence of other cultural trends and values that may not always be constructive.
Muslims, on the other hand, are taught again and again that they are superior, and that all others are so bad that Allah will throw them in hell when they die. Muslim culture's self-glorification achieves the opposite with their culture and identity. In general, Westerners are taught to be kind, self-assured, self-responsible and tolerant, while Muslims are taught to be aggressive, insecure and intolerant.
The spreading and sprawling map of open Muslim violence against Americans and against America as the leader of the Western World in recent years was brought home with the assassination of America's Ambassador to Libya. All this despite President Obama's attempt to "reset" relations between the U.S. and the Muslim World and put Israel on "stand-by" mode.
In effect, American foreign policy towards the Middle East since Obama came to power has been characterized by a public relations practice called “public diplomacy" a nebulous term meant to hide the true intention: "soft power".
The cornerstone of this policy was the statement: “America is not at war with Islam.”
In June 2009, newly elected President Obama went to Egypt and made a pronouncement that raised false expectations in the Arab world: “I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear. This stunning pronouncement flies in the face of the First Amendment and by committing to protect the image of a specific religion and political philosophy,
Obama gave the Muslim world the false impression that he could control media content in America — like dictators control the media in the Arab-Islamic countries.
Unfortunately Obama's natural inclination to go overboard with a destructive need to self- blame and take responsibility when it is wholly unwarranted has resulted in the opposite result. This mix of a Western tendency to being overly forgiving in response to Muslim self-pity and blame is the psychological crowbar that has opened the West to invite escalating Muslim violence against what we know in the West as "the other".
Newt Gingrich has stated that "the Islamists cannot reconcile with a secular system of laws. They cannot tolerate a West that maintains a presence in the Arabian Gulf or that would defend Israel's right to survive as a country. They cannot tolerate freedom of speech, freedom of religion, or freedom for women. In short, their demands are irreconcilable with the modern world. While trying to understand the volatility of millions of Middle Easterners taught from birth to hate America and to despise Israel, we in the West should be asking one basic question.
The real question to be asked is why we feel the need to pander and apologize to the most radical, violent and intolerant extremes around the world, to let them set the tone; a tone designed to stifle all criticism of Islam, to declare as blasphemy any attempt to reform radical Islam.
This more than anything else might explain why Arabs are so easily offended.
Al-Qaeda blamed for Europe-wide forest fires
Al-Qaeda has been blamed for a recent series of forest fires across Europe, as the head of Russia's Federal Security Service claimed they were set by arsonists as part of the group's low-cost attack strategy.
Deadly fires have swept through forest land in EU countries such as Portugal and Spain. Photo: GETTY
7:10PM BST 03 Oct 2012
"One should note that setting fires to forests in the countries of the
European Union is a new tendency in al-Qaeda's
strategy of a 'thousand cuts'," Alexander Bortnikov said, according to
state news agency RIA Novosti, at a meeting of heads of security agencies.
"This method allows (al-Qaeda) to inflict significant economic and moral
damage without serious preliminary preparations, technical equipment or
significant expenses."
In linking al-Qaeda to the deadly wildfires, Mr Bortnikov pointed to calls to
launch a "forest jihad" by various extremist websites which he
said also publish detailed instructions about how and where to best carry
out arson.
He said it was very difficult for special services to find and prosecute such
arsonists.
Deadly fires have swept through forest land in EU countries such as Portugal
and Spain over the past few months, killing scores of people and forcing
thousands to evacuate.
Last month, a forest fire in the Spanish region of Valencia forced authorities
to evacuate around 2,000 people from their home.
More than 184,000 hectares of land in Spain alone were destroyed by fires between January 1 and September 16, according to its agriculture ministry, the highest amount in a decade.
In its continuing campaign against the West, al-Qaeda has vowed to "bleed the enemy to death" by resorting to inexpensive, low-scale attacks it refers to as a "strategy of a thousand cuts".
In September last year David Petraeus, the director of the CIA, said that while al-Qaeda had been weakened by the death of Osama bin laden, the organisation still remained a significant threat to the US, because of a willingness to embrace these smaller-scale attacks.
Source: AFP
More than 184,000 hectares of land in Spain alone were destroyed by fires between January 1 and September 16, according to its agriculture ministry, the highest amount in a decade.
In its continuing campaign against the West, al-Qaeda has vowed to "bleed the enemy to death" by resorting to inexpensive, low-scale attacks it refers to as a "strategy of a thousand cuts".
In September last year David Petraeus, the director of the CIA, said that while al-Qaeda had been weakened by the death of Osama bin laden, the organisation still remained a significant threat to the US, because of a willingness to embrace these smaller-scale attacks.
Source: AFP
The Muslim Obsession with Jews
The Muslim Obsession with Jews
In their daily conversations, Muslims around the world blame a
‘Jewish conspiracy’ being responsible for all their internal and
external conflicts. It is unfortunate that these conspiracy theorists
include even the educated Muslims.Muslim media, especially the media in Arab countries, routinely declare Jews as their enemies. People believing in some Jewish conspiracy, also propagate that the only solution of Palestinian conflict is the destruction of Israel. They argue, Israelis have no right to live in the land of Palestine.
Those Muslim who deny Israelis the right to live in Palestine, forget the injunctions of The Quran (5:20-21), where God specifically ordered Moses and the ‘children of Israel’ to enter the ‘Holy Land’ and settle there. When the Jews resisted because of their fear of the rulers of those lands at that time, God admonished them. Finally, the ‘bani Israel’ conquered Palestine under Joshua.
Nearly all the modern experts of Quranic exegesis including, Syed Maudoodi, Yusuf Ali, and Waheeduddin Khan agree that the ‘Holy Land’ mentioned in Quran for the Jews is what is today roughly the State of Israel. This proves that the Israelis have the divine right to live in the Holy lands. Any Muslim believer, who denies the right of Israelis in what was once Biblical Palestine, does in fact refute the command of Allah.
Some extremist Muslims maintain that according to Quranic teachings, God later withdrew the privileges granted to Jews and therefore they lost their rights to live in the environs of Jerusalem. However, the Quran is silent about such revocation, and it will always be a debatable issue in Islam. Jews by definition do not have to accept any Quranic injunctions and instead they will always rely upon The Old Testament to interpret their perceived divine rights.
Muslims who perceive Jewish conspiracies either willfully or naively ignore the objective history of the Jewish people. They base their perception of conspiracies upon the Jewish ascendancy in the matters of finance, sciences, learning, and other fields of industry, including their influence on the global spheres of power. Such perceptions have also strengthened due to Muslims’ own decline and the establishment of Israel.
An objective review of Jewish history clearly informs us that the Jews have been in the Diaspora from about 600 BC until the creation of the State of Israel under the Zionist movement. During this period they have been severely persecuted by Babylonians, Pagans, Romans, and Christians. They were periodically uprooted and their temples were destroyed including the Temple of Solomon, the site of Bait al Maqdis (Dome of the Rock), the Muslim Holy Site, in Jerusalem.
During their various exiles, a large number of Jews settled in various European countries where they faced extreme anti-Semitism that led to The Holocaust, the worst genocide of Jews in human history. The Holocaust as a crime against humanity is universally accepted; though anti-Semites deny it and some Muslim extremists also adopt this denial. Even those Jews who settled in the US faced persecution and anti Semitism, which still exists in various forms.
To overcome their persecution, and to survive, Jews worked hard to excel in the fields of learning, sciences, medicine, trade, financial businesses including banking, and other material fields.
Despite their excellence in various fields of knowledge, Jews have been stereo-typically labelled as bloodthirsty usurers. Such stereotypes emanate from biblical stories of Jesus throwing out the money lenders from the temple, as well as through literature like Shakespeare’s Merchant of Venice.
Due to their dedication to excellence in various fields, Jews have been able to influence the ruling classes and establishments in various countries, in order to insure their own survival and existence.
They have also established charitable institutions including hospitals, centres of education, and other fields of learning. They have also strived to promote the development of laws protecting Universal Human Rights that benefit all minorities, including Muslims. These laws include the laws protecting Freedom of Expression based on the principles of US constitution, and UN Declaration of Human Rights.
Their difficulties with Muslims began due to their conflict with the Prophet of Islam and they were exiled from Medina. In the later Muslim empires Jews had an ambivalent relationship with the Muslim rulers where they enjoyed privilege as well as suffered persecution, and biases, under various extremist Muslim rulers whether in Baghdad, in Spain, or under the Ottoman rulers. In the Muslim empires Jews were employed in the centres of learning in Baghdad and Spain and contributed in transfer and preservation of knowledge.
It is an established fact that Muslims and their rulers benefit from all the excellent medical facilities in the West. No one has ever complained that Jews have prescribed harmful medicines or injection for Muslims under some vicious schemes. They have also not denied Muslims admissions to various institutes of higher learning.
Jewish promotion of knowledge, charitable work, their work in the human rights, and their promotion of freedom of expression, further strengthens their influence in the West and elsewhere.
It is this influence that Muslims deem as The Jewish Conspiracy.
They also criticize the West and the US for their support of Freedom of Expression– that allows ordinary citizens to insult Islam and its Holy personalities — and for their support of declaring the denial of Holocaust as a crime in various countries.
The fact is that under the US Constitution and Canadian Charter of Rights, it is not a crime to deny the Holocaust. Muslim anti-Semites also ignore that Holocaust Denial is a crime in many European countries because this is where the Jews suffered the worst atrocities in human history. There is always a fear in these countries that due to various strains of antisemitism, some atrocities may again arise and these should be preempted.
The real problem between Jews and Muslims is the issue of Palestine. The creation of Israel has affected the lives of Palestinians who gave been living there for at least a thousand years under various Muslim rules.
After the end of World War II, British Palestine was divided by the UN into constitute two states–one Arab and the other Jewish with the Jerusalem under UN control. This led to the war of 1948 between Israel and its Arab neighbours. The Arab league joined the conflict that resulted in the occupation of the West Bank by Jordan and the Gaza Strip by Egypt. Israel got the rest of the land that was granted to it under the UN mandate.
It is this conflict that continues till today and the West’s support of Israel’s right of existence further strengthens the perception of a Jewish Conspiracy in naïve Muslim minds. A real two-state solution is not on the horizon, and both Muslims and Israel blame each other for this impasse.
Muslims will be better off if they strive for excellence in all the fields that Jews have excelled in and seriously work for a two-state solution of the Palestinian conflict. They need to banish the idea of some Jewish Conspiracy from their minds, and forget any notions of the destruction of Israel.
At the same time Israel should also show seriousness about a two-state solution, and stop building new settlements in the Palestinian areas. Only this will insure mutual coexistence and world peace.
http://munirsaami.ca/?p=127
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)