Solsticewitch13's BOS

http://www.stonegateinstitute.org/2802/london-school-of-economics-blasphemy

Be the first of your friends to like this.

A Dutch Muslim politician has called for a ban on dogs in The Hague, the third-largest city in the Netherlands.

Islamic legal tradition holds that dogs are "unclean" animals, and some say the call to ban them in Holland and elsewhere represents an attempted encroachment of Islamic Sharia law in Europe.

This latest canine controversy -- which the Dutch public has greeted with a mix of amusement and outrage -- follows dozens of other Muslim-vs-dog-related incidents in Europe. Critics say it reflects the growing assertiveness of Muslims in Europe as they attempt to impose Islamic legal and religious norms on European society.

The Dutch dustup erupted after Hasan Küçük, a Turkish-Dutch representative on The Hague city council for the Islam Democrats, vehemently opposed a proposal by the Party for the Animals (Partij voor de Dieren) to make the city more dog friendly.

According to a January 28 report in the Amsterdam-based newspaper De Telegraaf, Küçük counter-argued that keeping dogs as pets is tantamount to animal abuse and he then called for the possession of dogs in The Hague to be criminalized.

According to its website, the Islam Democrats [ID] party is "founded on the Islamic principles of justice, equality and solidarity. ID is a bottom-up response to the large gap between the Muslim and immigrant communities and local politics…ID focuses on the political awareness within the Muslim and immigrant communities. Awareness about the need to organize, but also the need for mutual support."

Paul ter Linden, who represents the Dutch Freedom Party (PVV) on The Hague city council, responded to Küçük by saying: "In this country pet ownership is legal. Whoever disagrees with this should move to another country."

Dutch political commentators believe Küçük's declarations are a provocation designed to stir up the Muslim population in The Hague. Muslims -- who now make up more than 12% of the city's population of 500,000 -- view dogs as ritually unclean animals and Küçük's call for a ban on them is a sure vote-getter, they say.

The incident in Holland follows dog-related controversies in other European countries.

In Spain, two Islamic groups based in Lérida -- a city in the northeastern region of Catalonia where 29,000 Muslims now make up around 20% of the city's total population -- asked local officials to regulate the presence of dogs in public spaces so they do not "offend Muslims."

Muslims demanded that dogs be banned from all forms of public transportation including all city buses as well as from all areas frequented by Muslim immigrants. Muslims said the presence of dogs in Lérida violates their religious freedom and their right to live according to Islamic principles.

After the municipality refused to acquiesce to Muslim demands, the city experienced a wave of dog poisonings. More than a dozen dogs were poisoned in September 2011 (local media reports here, here, here, here and here) in Lérida's working class neighborhoods of Cappont and La Bordeta, districts that are heavily populated by Muslim immigrants and where many dogs have been killed over the past several years.

Local residents taking their dogs for walks say they have been harassed by Muslim immigrants who are opposed to seeing the animals in public. Muslims have also launched a number of anti-dog campaigns on Islamic websites and blogs based in Spain.

In Britain, which has become "ground zero" for Europe's canine controversies, blind passengers are being ordered off buses or refused taxi rides because Muslim drivers or passengers object to their "unclean" guide dogs.

In Reading, for example, one pensioner, a cancer sufferer, was repeatedly confronted by drivers and asked to get off the bus because of his guide dog. He also faced hostility at a hospital and in a supermarket over the animal.

In Nottingham, a Muslim taxi driver refused to carry a blind man because he was accompanied by his guide dog. The taxi driver was later fined £300 ($470).

In Stafford, a Muslim taxi driver refused to carry an elderly blind couple from a grocery store because they were accompanied by their seeing-eye dog.

In Tunbridge Wells, Kent, a blind man was turned away from an Indian restaurant because the owner said it was against his Muslim beliefs to allow dogs into his establishment.

In London, a bus driver prevented a woman from boarding a bus with her dog because there was a Muslim lady on the bus who "might be upset by the dog." As the woman attempted to complain, the doors closed and the bus drove away. When a second bus arrived, she again tried to embark, but was stopped again, this time because the driver said he was Muslim.

Also in Britain, police sniffer dogs trained to spot terrorists at train stations may no longer come into contact with Muslim passengers, following complaints that it was offensive to their religion.

A report for the Transport Department advised that the animals should only touch passengers' luggage because it is considered "more acceptable." British Transport Police still use sniffer dogs -- which are trained to detect explosives -- with any passengers regardless of faith, but handlers are now more aware of "cultural sensitivities."

Sniffer dogs used by police to search mosques and Muslim homes are now being fitted with leather bootees to cover their paws so that they do not cause offense.

Critics say the complaints are just another example of Muslims trying to force their rules and morals on British society. Tory MP Philip Davies said: "As far as I am concerned, everyone should be treated equally in the face of the law and we cannot have people of different religious groups laying the law down. I hope the police will go about their business as they would do normally."

Meanwhile, Muslim prisoners in Britain are being given fresh clothes and bedding after sniffer dogs search their cells.

The inmates say their bedclothes and prison uniforms must be changed according to Islamic law if they have come anywhere near dog saliva. Government rules mean prison wardens must hand out replacement sets after random drug searches to avoid religious discrimination claims.

The dogs have also been banned from touching copies of the Islamic holy book the Koran and other religious items. Prisoners are handed special bags to protect the articles.

In Scotland, the Tayside Police Department apologized for featuring a German shepherd puppy as part of a campaign to publicize its new non-emergency telephone number. The postcards are potentially offensive to the city's 3,000-strong Muslim community.

In Norway, Gry Berg, a blind woman, was denied entry into four taxis in the center of Oslo because she was accompanied by her guide dog.

In France, Marie Laforêt, one of the country's most well-known singers and actresses, appeared in a Paris courtroom in December to defend herself against charges that a job advertisement she placed discriminated against Muslims.

The 72-year-old Laforêt had placed an ad on an Internet website looking for someone to do some work on her terrace in 2009. She specified in the ad that "people with allergies or orthodox Muslims" should not apply "due to a small Chihuahua."

Laforêt claimed that she made the stipulation because she believed the Muslim faith saw dogs as unclean.

The case was taken up by an anti-discrimination group called the Movement against Racism and for Friendship between Peoples (MRAP), which lodged a complaint against Laforêt.

Laforêt's lawyer said his client "knew that the presence of a dog could conflict with the religious convictions of orthodox Muslims. It was a sign of respect." But Muslims rejected her defense.

Soeren Kern is Senior Fellow for Transatlantic Relations at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook.

Related Topics: Soeren Kern

London School of Economics Passes Anti-Blasphemy Law

by Henry Jackson Society
January 31, 2012 at 4:45 am

http://www.stonegateinstitute.org/2792/ireland-economy

Be the first of your friends to like this.

The London School of Economics [LSE] Student Union has passed a mtion effectivly making it impossible for students on campus to criticize Islam.

The LSE has arecently been embroiled in another scandal on campus - notably the shutting down of a union-affiliated "Atheist, Humanist and Secularist Society" for the posting of a cartoon entitled "Jesus and Mo." The cartoon depicts Jesus and the Prophet Muhammed having a drink together in a pub and is a regular cartoon shared within the atheist community.

In response to the cartoon being posted, students at the London School of Economics forced through motions denouncing "Islamophobia" which defined the act as "a form of racism expressed through the hatred or fear of Islam, Muslims, or Islamic culture, and the stereotyping, demonisation or harassment of Muslims, including but not limited to portraying Muslims as barbarians or terrorists, or attacking the Qur'an as a manual of hatred." Critics have argued that the loose terminology -- i.e. Islamic culture -- makes parody or criticism of Islam impossible.

Secularists and atheists on campus noted that the motion was put through directly as a result of the Jesus and Mo cartoon, calling the motion a "blasphemy law" which would stop criticism and parody of Islam and other religions as a result - a key feature of secular society. The motions passed with only a 6% turnout from the student body.

The union also voted to disenfranchise hundreds of LSE students by revoking the right to vote online. A move which Student Rights has called "Putin-esque."

Raheem Kassam, director of campus-watchdog Student Rights said: "This is an extremely worrying day for the London School of Economics. Shutting out people from voting online, effectively leaving the Union in the hands of political extremists who turn out day-in day-out, and passing what is a flimsy motion on Islamophobia means that freedom of speech, expression and effective representation is being curtailed on campus by those with a distinct political agenda."

Contact: Raheem Kassam, director, Student Rights - 07872833322, raheem.kassam@studentrights.org.uk

How To Turn Around An Economy
Ireland Wins

by Peter Martino
January 31, 2012 at 4:30 am

http://www.stonegateinstitute.org/2798/hamas-islamic-jihad

Be the first of your friends to like this.

The eurozone, the group of European Union countries using the euro as their currency, remains a crisis zone. But there is also good news. Ireland, one of the countries hit most severely by the crisis, has clearly begun to reverse its economic fortunes. Dublin, which in 2010 received €85bn from the IMF and the European bailout fund EFSF, will not need additional aid. On the contrary, it may soon be able to return to the international capital markets.

While the situation in other countries such as Greece and Portugal is rapidly deteriorating and the crisis is also threatening to drag down Spain, Italy and even France, Ireland is the only European country where the situation is improving.

The Irish difficulties began when a real estate bubble burst. In 2010, several Irish banks went bankrupt. They were saved by the Irish government, which as a result saw the budget deficit explode to a staggering 32% of GDP, the highest deficit in the EU. In one year, the Irish government debt expanded from 64% to 98.6% of GDP.

Last year, the situation in the southern European eurozone countries rapidly deteriorated. Despite EFSF bailouts and severe austerity programs, their economies contracted. Ireland, however, benefitted from an export-led recovery.

In early 2011, Ireland still had to pay 8% interest on 5-year government bonds, compared to 6% for Portugal. Today, however, Ireland pays less than 6%, while Portugal has to pay almost 19%. This begs the question: Why is Ireland doing so well, although its situation was initially worse than other nations that have made no improvements?

The answer is: low corporate taxes.

Ireland's low corporate tax rate accounted for the country's spectacular growth in the years before the financial crisis: it encouraged foreign investment. Many multinationals and American companies, including Pfizer, Merck, Google and Microsoft, chose Ireland for their European operations. Although France and Germany have been pressuring Dublin for years to raise its corporate tax level, the Irish have never wavered in their resolution to keep the corporate tax at its low level. France's corporate tax rate is 33%, Germany's is 30%, Britain's is 28%. In Europe, only Iceland, which is not an EU-member and has a rate of 15%, comes close to Ireland's 12.5%.

Last year, thanks to the European bailout money and the low corporate tax level, Irish exports managed to grow while in southern European crisis countries they kept falling. The emerald isle has remained attractive to foreign investors who benefit from Ireland's low corporate taxes and its competent workforce who prefer to work rather than strike. Although unemployment levels remain high, Ireland's per capita gross domestic product is today the seventh highest in the EU, surpassing Belgium, Germany, France, and the United Kingdom. Only Luxemburg, the Scandinavian countries, the Netherlands and Austria do better. The Irish decision to consider their corporate tax rate non-negotiable, despite European threats that the EU would no longer help Ireland with emergency funds, has turned out to be the right decision: Ireland no longer needs the European funds.

At the World Economic Forum in Davos last week, Enda Kenny, the Irish Prime Minister, said that Ireland could act as an example to other countries embroiled in the eurozone crisis. "The ship has been turned around," he said. Unfortunately, however, instead of learning the lesson from the Irish example, the leading politicians of the eurozone keep insisting on raising taxes -- in particular corporate taxes.

Last Tuesday, Germany's Chancellor Angela Merkel and France's President Nicolas Sarkozy wrote a joint letter to their colleagues, arguing that European tax coordination is needed "in order to foster growth, removing obstacles to the functioning of the single market and preventing tax abuse and harmful tax practices." By the end of February, Merkel and Sarkozy will present proposals for the convergence of their corporate taxes. Franco-German convergence is the first step towards the introduction of a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) for the entire EU. The European Commission, the EU's (unelected) executive body, wants to introduce such a EU-wide CCCTB.

Under the CCCTB plan, companies operating in different European countries will have their taxes assessed and collected at the EU level. The tax income is then divided by the EU member states based on the size of the company's business within their borders. An Ernst & Young study revealed last year that a CCCTB regime would increase tax receipts for France by 6%. For years, the Commission, France and Germany have been complaining about Dublin's low corporate tax level, which they consider harmful to their own economies. Tax "coordination" or "convergence" is intended to force Ireland and other countries with low rates to raise their tax levels.

Irish Prime Minister Kenny has voiced strong opposition to the CCCTB plan. In February last year, France's Sarkozy tried to intimidate Kenny's predecessor, Brian Cowen, threatening that the EU would not come to Ireland's rescue anymore with additional bailout funds if the Irish did not drop their "American tax model." This proposal did not make much of an impression on the Irishman. Cowen pointed out that "our 12.5% corporate tax rate is a central plank of our drive for competitiveness and an indispensable part of our strategy for recovery."

The intimidation has not stopped. Last October, Olli Rehn, the European Commissioner for monetary and fiscal affairs, announced that "Ireland in the coming decade will not be a low-tax country, but it will rather become a normal-tax country in the European context." In other words: The EU will not tolerate any "American models" in Europe.

The EU's tax harmonizers are not restricting their intimidation to the EU member states alone. For many years, the EU has been pressuring Switzerland -– not an EU member –- to lower its company tax, which, according to the European Commission, is "incompatible" with the free-trade agreement which has been in force between the EU and Switzerland since 1972. Switzerland has an average corporate tax rate of 21%, though some cantons have much lower rates than the national average. The Swiss central government has never attempted to harmonize Swiss tax levels. Contrary to the EU, Switzerland is a real federal state and as such does not need tax harmonization and tax convergence to give the union a semblance of unity.

Europe had better adopt the Swiss example and allow its member states to set their own tax rates. Tax harmonization will eliminate competition and centralize Europe when the opposite is necessary. The fact that tax competition helped Ireland to recover should inspire Europe to allow countries to adopt their own policies, rather than bully them and impose policies from above.

Related Topics: Peter Martino

Hamas and Islamic Jihad: An Unholy Marriage?

by Khaled Abu Toameh
January 31, 2012 at 4:00 am

http://www.stonegateinstitute.org/2801/football-players-study-for-finals

Be the first of your friends to like this.

The Palestinians' two most radical groups, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, have launched talks aimed at merging under one organization.

This is, of course, bad news for moderate Palestinians who believe in the two-state solution and peace with Israel. It is also bad news for secular Palestinians, especially those living in the West Bank.

Hamas and Islamic Jihad are the two dominant groups in the Gaza Strip, home to some 1.5 million Palestinians.

Although most Palestinians do not understand the real differences between the two Islamist groups, Islamic Jihad has always been viewed as being more extremist than Hamas.

Hamas is different from Islamic Jihad the same way a red apple is different from a green one.

Both groups seek the elimination of Israel and do not recognize the Oslo Accords that were signed between the Israelis and the PLO in 1993.

Hamas and Islamic Jihad advocate the path of an "armed resistance" against Israel to "liberate all Palestine, from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River."

Bo groups are responsible for countless terror attacks that have resulted in the killing of hundreds of Israelis over the past two decades.

Hamas and Islamic Jihad agree on everything except reconciliation with Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah faction, participation in Palestinian elections and incorporation into the Palestinian Authority.

Islamic Jihad leaders have come out in public against Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal's attempts to achieve reconciliation between his movement and Fatah.

Islamic Jihad is also strongly opposed to participation in the next presidential and parliamentary elections, which Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas says he hopes to hold in May this year. Unlike Hamas, Islamic Jihad boycotted the 2006 parliamentary elections which were won by Hamas.

More recently, Islamic Jihad voiced its staunch opposition to Hamas's agreement to form a unity government with Fatah -- a move that would see Hamas officially being incorporated into the Palestinian Authority.

Hamas says its plans to join the Palestinian Authority -- and perhaps the PLO -- do not mean that the movement accepts the peace process with Israel. Hamas believes that the reconciliation with Fatah would be the first step toward taking control over the Palestinian leadership. The next step would be to abolish the Oslo Accords and resume the fight against Israel.

Islamic Jihad, on the other hand, believes that the peace process can be destroyed only through terror attacks and without having to run in elections or join Palestinian Authority institutions.

Some Palestinians say the planned merger between the two radical groups reflects Hamas's fear of the rising power of Islamic Jihad in the Gaza Strip.

Although Islamic Jihad has only a few thousand militiamen, the organization has in recent months openly challenged Hamas's totalitarian rule in the Gaza Strip. On several occasions, Islamic Jihad militiamen have defied Hamas instructions to honor an undeclared truce with Israel.

Hamas leaders are also worried about increased Islamic Jihad control over dozens of mosques and religious institutions throughout the Gaza Strip.

The expected merger between Hamas and Islamic Jihad is a by-product of the "Arab Spring" that has seen the rise of Muslim fundamentalists to power in a number of Arab countries.

There is nothing Abbas can do to stop the merger between Hamas and Islamic Jihad. All he can do for now is to join forces with Israel in making an effort to block the Islamic fundamentalist groups from extending their control from the Gaza Strip to the West Bank.

Related Topics: Khaled Abu Toameh

Do Football Players Study For Finals?

by Herbert I. London
January 31, 2012 at 3:45 am

http://www.stonegateinstitute.org/2794/female-genital-mutilation-conference

Be the first of your friends to like this.

December is the month of bowls, football bowls -- some of them with obscure names and others quite familiar such as the Cotton Bowl, the Rose Bowl and the Sugar Bowl. Christmas has become as much a football festival as a time for religious reflection and gift sharing.

It is also a time for final exams with the winter semester coming to a close…but I began to wonder how gridiron heroes can meet their academic obligations.

After calling several athletic departments with teams in bowls, I learned that it is customary to have two practices a day in preparation for the big game. Ordinarily, it is a nine-to-noon practice with pads and running plays and a two-to-five pm practice to go over X's and O's. How then can anyone study for exams?

Presumably there are student-athletes who do, but for the large majority of communication majors and those attending basket weaving courses or their equivalent, there isn't any need to be concerned. These are student-athletes in name only. They are actually in college to play football.

These athletes give alumni something to cheer about on Saturday afternoon. What happens, though, to those athletes who do not qualify for a pro team. In many cases, they have little to fall back on: their educational experience is a sham which most serious academics acknowledge.

How many LSU football players will graduate from the university? There is a long-standing joke that is a companion statement to this question: How many LSU football players does it take to change a light bulb? Answer: All of them, as they get credit for the experience.

December is also the month of hypocrisy. While most students are in the library preparing for finals, football players are out on the field practicing blocking and tackling. They haven't any time for study and apparently very few worry about that matter. Football coaches, who generally earn more than college presidents, are paid to produce winning teams, not scholars. It doesn't make the slightest bit of difference if the quarterback read Kant's Critique of Pure Reason if he hasn't read the playbook. His goal is reading defenses, not books.

So when you sit in that easy chair watching bowl game after bowl game, it is worth asking if any players on your screen prepared for final exams or are even taking the finals. Football generates a lot of revenue for bowl-bound teams; students may do the cheering, but they do not score touchdowns or add significantly to the schools' bottom line. As a consequence, it doesn't mean much if the players cannot write or read very well: they aren't in college to promote cognitive skills, just bottom lines.

Herbert London is president emeritus of Hudson Institute and author of the book Decline and Revival in Higher Education (Transaction Books).

Related Topics: Herbert I. London

Middle East Conference Against Female Genital Mutilation

by Irfan Al-Alawi
January 31, 2012 at 3:30 am

http://www.stonegateinstitute.org/2799/imprisoned-journalists-increases-turkey

Be the first of your friends to like this.

On January 19, the first conference on female genital mutilation (FGM) in the Middle East opened in Beirut, Lebanon. The event was called by two non-governmental organizations, the Dutch-based Humanist Institute for Cooperation (HIVOS) and WADI, the Association for Crisis Assistance and Solidarity Development Cooperation. Founded by Germans, WADI has worked extensively in Iraqi Kurdistan, where it is in the forefront of opposition to FGM.

FGM is most commonly found in African countries, where it may be inflicted on women by Christians and animists as well as by Muslims. For example, Egyptian Copts and Ethiopian Orthodox Christians subject their daughters to this cruel and inhumane degradation. FGM is not a religious-based practice, although it has been legitimised by certain Islamic clerics, including the Egyptian radical preacher Yusuf Al-Qaradawi. Even Al-Qaradawi, nevertheless, states that the alleged justification for FGM among Muslims is based on weak hadiths (oral commentaries) of Muhammad, and that it therefore cannot be considered obligatory. It has no basis in Qur'an and, fortunately, is absent from much of the Muslim world.

With the political ascendancy in Egypt of the Muslim Brotherhood, with which Al-Qaradawi has been associated, there is a real danger that FGM will increase as a feature of the ostensible "re-Islamisation" of Egypt. Such an outcome would be paradoxical, in that FGM is considered by many a pre-Islamic custom prevalent in Pharaonic Egypt, and its encouragement, rather than supporting Islam, would represent a return to a cultural pattern to which Islam was historically, and definitively, opposed. But the perverse notion that FGM, which predates Islam, reinforces Islamic society, has led to its increase in Indonesia, where FGM was undertaken typically by local shamans or folk healers.

The Beirut conference on FGM brought together activists and experts from Iraqi Kurdistan, central Iraq, Yemen, Egypt, and Indonesia. Their primary goal is to establish an anti-FGM network with a permanent structure and an effective strategy to eliminate FGM.

Among Arab countries, FGM is also known to exist in Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Oman. It has been reported in Iran, although Shia Muslims have no tradition of FGM. Iraqi officials deny its existence in the Arab part of their republic, and open discussion of it is almost nonexistent. But it is especially well-known in Iraqi Kurdistan, where religious scholars have engaged in extended debate over whether it is permissible, with some claiming it is required. Last year, the government of Iraqi Kurdistan prohibited FGM in a general law against domestic violence.

A 2005 article in the Arab News, published in Saudi Arabia, admitted that FGM was common in the southern region of the kingdom, even being performed in medical clinics and hospitals. In countries where it is prohibited, it continues to be carried out in private by midwives.

The Arab News noted "The instruments used by the midwife will vary and could include broken glass, a tin lid, razor blades, knives, scissors or any other sharp object. These items usually are not sterilized before or after usage and often the same instrument is used on several girls at the same time. Once the genital area for removal is gone, the child is stitched up and her legs are bound for up to 40 days.

"This procedure can cause various side-effects and, in extreme cases, death. Some of the results of this procedure are serious infections, abscesses and small benign tumors, hemorrhages, shock and clitoral cysts.

"A family physician at a public hospital told Arab News that a Saudi mother presented her six-year-old daughter because she was in pain; on examination, doctors found a benign tumor due to recent cutting. When she asked the mother where she had this done to her daughter, the mother said at a small clinic in their village.

"The long-term effects of these procedures may also include kidney stones, sterility, sexual dysfunction, depression, various urinary tract infections, and gynecological and obstetric problems."

Dr. Nasr Khabbaz, pediatric surgeon at the Children and Maternity Hospital in Jeddah, told the Arab News then that he had interviewed mothers who had been victims of FGM, and that "Many of them refuse to perform it on their daughters and curse their fathers for doing it to them. But it is not easy for them to convince the fathers not to do it."

Victims of extreme FGM, in which the sexual organ is closed almost completely, may have to undergo second and third vaginal cutting procedures after marriage, to allow sexual relations with their husbands, and when giving birth. In all cases, the risk of serious damage to health from such atrocities is undeniable.

The Beirut conference attendees proposed that citizens and government authorities in the Middle East, as well as international organisations, to implement six policies:

1. Calling on Middle Eastern governments to recognize that FGM is a gross offence against human rights.

2. Demanding that regional governments take responsibility for recording empirical and statistical information about FGM.

3. Encouraging local civil society groups to collect data on FGM in each country.

4. Maintaining a regional anti-FGM network.

5. Pressing the United Nations to address FGM in the Middle East.

6. Appealing to the UN, the European Union, and the US government to include abolition of FGM as a basic principle in their diplomatic relations with Middle East governments.

As described by the World Health Organization, FGM violates the rights of female minors as well as adult women. It reinforces existing gender inequality, as a violent expression of discrimination against women.

Moderate and traditional Muslim clerics, scholars, and leaders should join the campaign to rid the world of this nefarious practise. They should endorse and extend the findings and principles articulated at the Beirut conference.

Related Topics: Irfan Al-Alawi

Number of Imprisoned Journalists Increases in Turkey
And more from the Turkish Press

by AK Group
January 31, 2012 at 3:00 am