RSS
 

I have a way to help our economy

10 Jan

/start soap box

Hey.

So according to this:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/59217.html

We are going to be printing up $1 Trillion to help get us out of this mess.  Do you realize that this amount is more than what has been spent on all US wars combined?  If you want to kick start this economy, stop taking 20% of my monthly income as taxes!  I’ll be glad to spend it in the economy!!  Even for a little while until things get back to normal.

/end soap box

Whew! Glad to get that off my chest.

Hugs and kisses,

Mario

 

Jihâd: A Struggle for Meaning

22 Dec

Everyday, my young son (now four years old) uses words improperly.  My wife and I giggle and try to guide him to the correct word and meaning.  Sometimes, we have no clue what he means and must acknowledge his point with a simple “Wow” or “OK.”  Many times children are not the only people who use words incorrectly or without knowledge of their meanings.  Too often, people watch their favorite media outlet accepting the implied meaning and connotation of words without a passing thought.  Americans often hear the word “jihâd” incorrectly and assume its meaning to be as implied.

Jihâd derives from the verb jahada which means to struggle or make an effort and appears in the Qur’an forty-one times (Quinlan par. 6).  The Qur’an, the holy book of the Muslim religion, describes jihâd as a duty and gives many hints that lead to a deeper meaning (Haq par. 10).  “Islamic literature speaks of jihâd as a total endeavor” that practitioners struggle with every day (Haq par. 9).  In Chapter five, verse 35 of the Qur’an, we read, “Seek the means to come to Him [God], and struggle in His [God’s] way.”  To Muslims, the “struggle” of God’s way has an inner and outer meaning.  Muhammad called the inner jihâd “the greater jihâd” which signifies the struggle to be a good person and become closer to God (Quinlan par. 6).  The outer meaning has several connotations.

One meaning of the outer or lesser jihâd is the armed struggle one has using life’s successes while staying true to the cause of God (Haq par. 9).  Referring to Chapter 9, verse 41, we read: “Struggle in God’s way with your possessions and your selves.”  Another meaning  deals with actual combat (Quinlan par. 7).  Muslims can look to the Qur’an for direction to what that means and when combat is allowed.  There are four main ideas found in the Qur’an.  S. Nomanul Haq, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, eloquently describes each and provides chapters and verses:

First, there exist in the Qur’ân verses that enjoin forgiveness for offenses and encourage invitation to Islam by peaceful persuasion (e.g., 2:109; 3:157-159).  Second, one finds verses that enjoin fighting but only in defense to ward off aggression, expressly forbidding aggression (e.g., 2:190).  Third, there are those that permit initiative in fighting but not within the four sacred months (e.g., 9:5).  And finally, those that allow taking the initiative in fighting at any time and at any place, provided that there are compelling reasons of being actually or potentially wronged, oppressed, or threatened (e.g., 2:217).  (par. 11)

While jihâd may end using combat, it also ends with a transforming nature that corrects wrongdoing and restores “goodness , order, and justice” (Quinlan par. 7).

The combat aspect is what causes most of the commotion as the Qur’an, like the Bible, can be read and interpreted differently (Quinlan par. 12).  However, inflicting injury to women, children, and civilians is not allowed and is “completely forbidden by Islamic Law” (Quinlan par. 26).  A general observation is that unlawful aggression generated from the ego is not allowed or encouraged in the Qur’an or Hadîth (Haq par. 12).  Unlawful aggression is often linked to terrorism, and labeled jihâd; but, given the scriptures above, we find the two cannot be connected.  Why media outlets continually force feed this false connection to their unknowing viewers or readers is a mystery.

Recently, the Economist entitled an article “Jailhouse jihad” which immediately misuses the term and left a bad taste in my mouth.  The title implies to me that people struggling with their own jihâd must or should be in jail.  The article asserts that “jihadists” in prison may be plotting attacks on France and that Muslim prisoners should not be held together to prevent a conspiracy.  Unless these Muslim prisoners are being kept unlawfully or being repressed, why would they perform jihâd against France?  The answer is easy: They would not.

The Wall Street Journal published an article entitled “China Terms Assault a ‘Jihad’ ” that tries to link an attempt to disrupt the Beijing Olympics with a jihâd.  The article also cites an attack that killed 16 people and wounded 16 others.  Both instances victimized innocent people including women and children.  These actions are termed jihâd, but where do you see the result helping someone be more like God or bring more people to Islam?  Does the result right a wrongdoing?  Both questions can be answered with an emphatic no.  The precepts of Islam are not anywhere near the reasons for such horrific actions.

The New York Times published an article in June 2007 by Abby Goodnough about Jose Padilla and his “secret plans to travel overseas and wage jihad.”  Jose Padilla used code words in conversations as he planned terrorist activities that included detonating a radioactive “dirty bomb.”  Those conversations were allegedly in code for engaging in jihâd.  “Dirty bombs” are not target specific weapons and are used as area weapons.  This means its detonation would impact civilians and possibly harm women and children which is forbidden by Islamic Law and is not jihâd.  Jose Padilla is a terrorist and his attempted terroristic actions are not a jihâd.

Newspapers are not the only media outlets misusing the word jihâd.  Paul Gigot on Fox News spoke on the story “Jihad in Britain” during his The Journal Editorial Report segment where jihâdist terrorist doctors were allegedly plotting to hurt patients in the name of religious fanaticism.  As we look at what we have learned,  we know that the words “jihâdist” and “terrorist” cannot be used together as a true jihâdist is not interested in terrorizing people and especially killing their own patients.  It would be more appropriate to term them “terrorist doctors.”  However, because of their religion, the word jihâd is added and ignorance about its meaning is perpetuated.

These are just a few instances that illustrate the media’s disrespect for Islam and its follower’s struggle to be closer to God.  When I put myself in the shoes of a Muslim who sees this blasphemy, I am saddened, angered, and hurt.  A Muslim’s internal jihâd is a personal tribulation which takes hard work and preservarance.  The coupling of this sacred jihâd with terroristic actions insults the very ideas Muslims hold dear.  The demonization of Muslims and their religious struggle must end.

People watch and read media outlets and assume their words are fact.  These media outlets misuse the word jihâd often enough that people cannot see the insult.  The public then begins to perpetuate the misuse to their family and friends causing unfounded stereotypes to blossom.  The constant linking of jihâd with terrorism is causing the public to believe all Muslims are terrorists.  The only way to change this activity is to demand the proper use of jihâd through the re-education of those who use it badly.  The daily struggle to correct my son will invariably spill over to those who attempt to misuse the word jihâd around me.  In this instance, practice just might lead to perfection.

—–
Works Cited

Areddy, James T. “World News: China Terms Assault a ‘Jihad’; Official Says Attack On the Police Aimed To Disrupt Games.” Wall Street Journal  [New York, N.Y.] 6 Aug. 2008, Eastern edition: A.6. Wall Street Journal. ProQuest. Scarborough-Phillips Library, Austin, TX. 29 Nov. 2008 <http://www.proquest.com.ezproxy.stedwards.edu:5000/>.

Goodnough, Abby. “F.B.I. Agent Tells Padilla Jury of Coded Plans for Jihad.(National Desk) (Federal Bureau of Investigation)(Jose Padilla).”The New York Times (June 9, 2007): A10(L). Academic OneFile. Gale. St Edwards University. 28 Nov. 2008
<http://find.galegroup.com.ezproxy.stedwards.edu:5000/itx/start.do?prodId=AONE>

Haq, S. Nomanul. “Revisiting the Question of Islam and Violence.” Dialog: A Journal of Theology 40.4 (Winter2001 2001): 302. Religion and Philosophy Collection. EBSCO. Scarborough-Phillips Library, Austin, TX. 29 Nov. 2008 <https://ezproxy.stedwards.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.stedwards.edu:5000/login.aspx?direct=true&db=rlh&AN=6638367&site=ehost-live>.

“Jailhouse jihad.” Economist 387.8598 (20 Sep. 2008): 69-69. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Scarborough-Phillips Library, Austin, TX. 29 Nov. 2008 <https://ezproxy.stedwards.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.stedwards.edu:5000/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=34438581&site=ehost-live>.

“Jihad in Britain.” The Journal Editorial Report. Paul Gigot.  Fox News Channel.  7 Jul. 2007.

Quinlan, Esther Sakinah. “The Jihâd Question.” Tikkun 17.5 (Sep. 2002): 55. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Scarborough-Phillips Library, Austin, TX. 29 Nov. 2008 <https://ezproxy.stedwards.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.stedwards.edu:5000/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=7199749&site=ehost-live>.

 

OCCUPATION: A Dying Idea

19 Dec

When one thinks of the creation of the state of Israel, one may immediately assume that Jews around the world are completely supportive of the idea.  The idea of having a home to call their own is a wonderful idea.  This idea is not only a personal home for their families, but for their religion.  After all, it seems Jewish people and their religion have been driven from more places than welcomed.  The questions of how and when were answered in 1948, but the question of “at what cost” is still being debated.  Since 1948, the supplanting of many Palestinians for Jewish people is termed the occupation.  The cost of having a Jewish state is becoming more apparent and some believe are against the teachings of Judaism.  Many Jewish practitioners are coming out in their objection to the manner of implementation and overall need.

One group, Peace Now, has advocated “a freeze on further settlements” while advocating peace throughout the region (Peretz 134).  There have been reports of owners’ homes being bulldozed in order to make room for the new settlements which further widens the occupation and increases tensions between Israelis and Palestinians.  These bulldozing incidents have generated high levels of defamatory feelings toward Jews from around the world.  In his article, “Ha’aretz: Colonial Zionism,”  Zeev Sternhell gives the opinion that he has considered this destructive behavior “a large question mark over Israel’s future” (par. 1).  One can derive that the government of Israel is very intent on a goal of creating a place for Jews while squeezing out Palestinian people.  The effect reaches farther than just the Palestinian people.

Some Jews are whole heartedly against the idea of taking land that may have belonged to a family for more than 100 years and giving it to their Jewish counterparts.  Those Jews who agree with that notion may not speak out when other Jews are around.  Fear is the main reason.  Opposing the occupation is such a sensitive topic that Jews who criticize the occupation can earn the nick name “self-haters” by their friends and other Jews (Terkel par. 45).  Many are beginning to realize that the actions used to create the state are at odds with some of the core teachings of Judaism.  Sternhall boldly asserts that, “if Israeli society is unable to muster the courage necessary to put an end to the settlements, the settlements will put an end to the state of the Jews and will turn it into a bi-national state” (par. 11).  Personally, given the massive support Israel receives from other countries, I believe Israel has the military might to never let Sternhall’s assertion happen.

Israel receives an estimated $113 billion of military aid directly from the United States (McArthur par. 1).  This amount of funding portrays an agreement of the actions of the Israeli government and an indication that the United States wants Israel to continue on its current track.  An interesting fact is that the United States gives Israel cash for its aid (McArthur par. 4).  As American Jewish opponents to the occupation increase and speak out, the support of this type of aid will diminish.  The main sticking point referring to this aid seems to revolve around the occupation and many proponents of the end of this aid require aid to stop while occupation exists (Kamel).  Kamel also believes that talking about decreasing aid is not controversial, but better described as “taboo.”  However, the calls for change are echoing from the United State’s highest office.

In January 2008,  President Bush called on the Israeli government to end its occupation of many territories while predicting that a treaty would be signed and in force before he leaves office in 2009 (Attewell).  This call to action solidifies the change in support from the United States and echoes many American Jews.  However, the money still flows in the direction of Israel.  President Bush’s “lame duck” status may not garner a full policy change.

Another goal of the occupation has been to create an exclusive presence of Jewish people while being more or less tolerant of any Arabs that remain (Aruri 117).  This exclusivity is not one of the teachings of Judaism.  Many Jews strive to spread the word of God to everyone.  However, due to the hate generated from the occupation, many Jews find themselves wanting the protection of the military and separation from Arab life.  Realizing this vicious cycle has lead many Israeli military reservists to refuse to serve in occupied territories (Terkel).  This is inherently hard for the Israeli government to swallow.

The switch of viewpoint in the United States may be because many younger Jews are not as attached to the idea of Israel.  With every generation, the populace begins to lose sight of past issues and events.  Many older living Americans can tell you what they were doing when President John F. Kennedy was assassinated.  However, because President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated generations ago, it is not a current topic of conversation.  Many of these younger Jews are becoming old enough to vote and that spurs politicians in non-occupation directions.  Some of these younger Jews may end up in public office further strengthening the opposition.  The phenomenon of the loss of attachment of younger Jews to Israel may end up being the end of the idea of occupation.   Allen Brownfield quoted the results of a study where respondents prove this phenomenon:

“For example, less than half (48 percent) of respondents under 35 agreed that ‘Israel’s destruction would be a personal tragedy,’ compared to 78 percent of those 65 and older. And just 54 percent of the younger group are ‘comfortable with the idea of a Jewish state,’ compared to 81 percent of those 65 and older, 74 percent of those 50-64 and 64 percent of the 35-49 age group.” (par. 6)

Some Jewish organizations are going further than letting the populace lose the idea of a state by saying Jews should not have a state altogether; one such group is Jews United Against Zionism (JUAZ).  In a 2006 interview, Neil Cavuto explores this notion of whether there is supposed to be a Jewish state with Rabbi Yisroel Weiss of JUAZ.  Weiss contends that rabbinical authorities say that the goal of having a state or land is against Judaism teachings.  Further Weiss says that it is, “expressly forbidden by the Torah because we are in exile by God.”  Does this mean Jews should not have a state at all?  Weiss says “Yes.”

The assumption that all Jews desire, require, or even believe in a Jewish state is a false one.  Many Jews are becoming quick to remind society the manner of creating Israel is not conducive to the teachings of Judaism.  Jews strive to remind everyone to love others as you would love yourself.  Causing the pain and suffering of men, women, and children is not the way Jews would love themselves.  The Torah’s influence on Jews include the ten commandments.  Many Jews believe the occupation violates the eight commandment: You shall not steal. Many Jews believe the occupation is to blame for the crisis in Israel.  While the government of Israel continues to build settlements and increase the occupation, Jews everywhere are beginning to call for a halt.

The creation of Israel has caused people to be dispersed and lose their homes.  This realization reminds Jews of their own previous tribulations and causes remorse among them.  As Jews continue to face taboo looks and name calling, they will increase their voice of displeasure with the occupation.  This voice will cause the people of the United States and other countries to rethink their support of the state of Israel.  Steadily, the populace will age and the idea of Israel may lose its luster to the history books.  While many like the idea of having a home for their religion, maybe the home of Judaism is meant to be dispersed through many countries and not just in one.

—–

Works Cited
Amiel, Barbara.  “A Plague Without a Cure.” MacLean’s.  08 Mar. 2004     <http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20040308_76758_76758&source=srch>

Aruri, Naseer H., ed. Occupation: Israel Over Palestine. Massachusetts: Association of Arab-American     University Graduates, 1983.

Atapattu, Don. “How to Lose Friends and Alienate People.” CounterPunch.  13 Dec. 2001         <http://www.counterpunch.org/finkelstein1.html>

Attewill, Fred.  “Bush calls on Israel to end occupation of Palestinian land.” Guardian. 10 Jan. 2008     <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jan/10/usa.israelandthepalestinians1>

“Blame Israel.” Your World with Cavuto. Neil Cavuto.  Fox News Channel.  4 Aug. 2006.

Brownfeld, Allan C. “Debunking Israel Lobby, Study Shows Growing Alienation of American Jews     From Israel.” Washington Report on Middle East Affairs 26.9 (Dec. 2007): 69-81.

Kamel, Rachael. “Jews, Israel, and the United States: Talking Points for Jewish Antiwar Activism.”     EndTheOccupation. 27 Oct. 2008 <http://www.endtheoccupation.org/article.php?id=12>

McArthur, Shirl. “A Conservative Estimate of Total Direct U.S. Aid to Israel: Almost $114 Billion.”     Washington Report on Middle East Affairs 27.8 (Nov. 2008): 10-11.

Peretz, Don. The West Bank: History, Politics, Society, and Economy. Colorado: Westview Press, 1986.

Sternhell, Zeev. “Ha’aretz: Colonial Zionism.” PeaceNow. 17 Oct. 2008     <http://www.peacenow.org/readings.asp?rid=&cid=5483>.

Terkel, Jon. “Israel and the Jewish soul.” OnlineReport. 14 Apr. 2002         <http://www.fims.uwo.ca/olr/apr1502/Israelfeature.html>