By George Packer for The New Yorker

President Kennedy’s 1960 speech on religious freedom makes Rick Santorum “throw up.” “What kind of country do we live in that says only people of nonfaith can come into the public square and make their case?” Santorum says. It’s a central part of his campaign strategy to distort such things as a Kennedy speech, or an Obama speech, to whip up outrage at the supposed war on religious people in America. Here’s what Kennedy said:

I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute; where no Catholic prelate would tell the President—should he be Catholic—how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote; where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference, and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the President who might appoint him, or the people who might elect him… I believe in a President whose religious views are his own private affair.

Kennedy said much more, but this is the strongest passage of that famous campaign speech to a group of ministers in Houston, in which he argued that the election of a Catholic President who believed in the Constitution shouldn’t concern any American who believed in the Constitution—and, Santorum says, “That makes me throw up.” Santorum’s rhetorical eloquence is about equal to his analytical skill. Kennedy had nothing to say against believers entering public life, or believers bringing their religious conscience to bear on public policy. He spoke against any move to make religion official. The Constitution speaks against this, too—Article VI establishes an oath to the Constitution as the basis for public office, and explicitly prohibits a religious test, while the First Amendment forbids the official establishment of religion and protects its free practice. Santorum claims to be a constitutionalist, but that’s just rhetoric and opportunism. Santorum believes in a religious test—that may be all he believes in. (Mitt Romney believes in a religious test of a slimy, halfway, Romneyesque variety: in 2007, he reportedly dismissed the idea of appointing a Muslim to his Cabinet, saying, “Based on the numbers of American Muslims [as a percentage] in our population, I cannot see that a Cabinet position would be justified.” So does Newt Gingrich, who has made atheist-baiting a central part of his political business.)

Kennedy seemed to have someone like Santorum in mind when he warned, “For while this year it may be a Catholic against whom the finger of suspicion is pointed, in other years it has been—and may someday be again—a Jew, or a Quaker, or a Unitarian, or a Baptist. It was Virginia’s harassment of Baptist preachers, for example, that led to Jefferson’s statute of religious freedom. Today, I may be the victim, but tomorrow it may be you—until the whole fabric of our harmonious society is ripped apart at a time of great national peril.” In 1960, it would have been hard to imagine how thoroughly religious sectarianism and intolerance would infect American politics, and especially one major party. The outcry over Obama’s policy on health insurance and contraception has almost nothing to do with that part of the First Amendment about the right to free religious practice, which is under no threat in this country. It is all about a modern conservative Kulturkampf that will not accept the other part of the religion clause, which prohibits any official religion.

Santorum, like most conservatives these days, says he is a constitutionalist. Jefferson wrote, and Madison worked to pass, the Commonwealth of Virginia’s Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom, which held that “all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.” Jefferson included an even stronger phrase that was eventually struck out by amendment: “the opinions of men are not the object of civil government, nor under its jurisdiction.” Presumably, all of this originalist nonsense makes Rick Santorum heave, gag, vomit, and puke.

What makes me throw up is the story of Hamza Kashgari. It’s a shame that every American doesn’t know his name. He’s a young, slender, philosophical-minded columnist and blogger from Saudi Arabia who, earlier this month, dared to tweet phrases of an imagined conversation with the Prophet Mohammad: “I have loved things about you and I have hated things about you and there is a lot I don’t understand about you…I loved the rebel in you…I will not pray for you.” Within twenty-four hours, more than thirty thousand furious replies had been posted on Twitter. Within a few days, more than twenty thousand people had signed on to a Facebook page called “Saudi People Want Punishment for Hamza Kashgari.” (So much for Arab liberation by social media.) One commenter wrote, “The only choice is for Kashgari to be killed and crucified in order to be a lesson to other secularists.”

Kashgari backed down, apologized profusely, and continued to be attacked. He went into hiding. Clerics and government officials threatened him with execution for blasphemy. He fled to Malaysia, hoping to continue to fly to New Zealand, where he would ask for asylum. But Malaysian officials, behaving against law and decency, had him detained at the airport and sent back to Saudi Arabia, where he was promptly arrested. Since mid-February there’s been no word of Kashgari. The Saudis have said they will put him on trial. What a pity there’s no First Amendment to protect him.
If only he had more powerful friends—if only Christopher Hitchens were still alive—Hamza Kashgari would be called the Saudi Rushdie. There would be a worldwide campaign to pressure the Saudis into releasing him. The United States would offer him asylum and quietly push our friends the Saudis into letting him go. But we’ve come to expect these things from our friends the Saudis.

We’ve come to expect these things from the Muslim world. We expect Afghans to riot for days and kill Americans and each other because a few NATO soldiers were stupid enough to burn copies of the Koran along with other objects discarded from a prison outside Kabul. Yes, those soldiers were colossally, destructively insensitive. Yes, we should know by now. Yes, the reaction has a lot to do with ten years of war and occupation and civilian deaths and marines urinating on Taliban corpses. Still, can we have a little outrage at the outrage? Can we reaffirm that human lives are more sacred than books? Can we point out that every time something like this happens, there’s a manufactured and whipped-up quality to much of the hysteria, which has its own cold political calculation (not unlike the jihad against secularists by Sean Hannity and other Salafist mouthpieces)?

Saudi Arabia needs an absolute separation of religion and state so that Hamza Kashgari can say things that other people don’t like without having to flee for his life. Afghanistan needs it, too, and so does Pakistan, so that mob violence and political assassination can’t enjoy the encouragement of religious authorities and the tolerance or acquiescence of government officials. And America needs it so that our Presidents’ religious views remain their own private affairs, and Rick Santorum and his party can’t impose dominion of one narrow, sectarian, Bible-based idea of the public good over a vast, pluralist, heterodox, freedom-loving democracy.

Filed under: Democracy, Freedoms, Hate Crime, Islam, Muslims, Mysticism, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sufism, United States, US Commission on International Religious Freedom Tagged: Afghanistan, American Muslims, Baptist, Catholic President, Commonwealth of Virginia, Constitution, First Amendment, Hamza Kashgari, JFK, Kabul, Kennedy Speech, Malaysia, Mitt Romney, New Zealand, Newt Gingrich, Obama Speech, Pakistan, President John F Kennedy, Quaker, Rick Santorum, Saudi Arabia, Unitarian, US Constitution

By Wajahat Ali for Salon.com

Muslims worldwide groaned upon hearing the news that Oliver Stone’s son, Sean, converted to Islam while filming a documentary in Iran.

Although we — the collective 1.5 billion Muslims worldwide — assume Sean Stone is a fine, upstanding man and sincerely wish him spiritual contentment, we earnestly ask Allah why Islam only attracts controversial celebs (in this case, the son of a controversial celeb) who further tarnish our already toxic brand name?

We plead to the heavens for an answer as to why he converted in Iran, of all places, which is currently the most feared and loathed country in America and about as popular as herpes.

We have patiently endured, oh, Allah.

We miraculously survived Mike Tyson, who converted to Islam while incarcerated, and then angrily threatened Lennox Lewis in an infamous interview: “I want your heart. I will eat his children. Praise be to Allah.”

Awesome.

Islam has the lowest favorability rating of any religion in America. If Islam were a world economy, it would be Greece. If it were a professional athlete, it would be San Francisco 49ers punt returner Kyle Williams, who muffed two critical punts, which helped the New York Giants reach the Super Bowl. If Islam went to the prom, it would be the ugly girl with freckles and an overbite standing in the corner with a bucket of pig’s blood teetering precariously over its head. If Islam were a Republican presidential candidate, it would be Newt Gingrich.

A diverse jirga of American Muslim leaders decided “enough was enough” and held an emergency meeting at Lowes’ Home Improvement store in Dearborn, Mich., to strategize how to bolster Islam’s faltering image.

A consensus emerged that we needed to draft popular, mainstream celebrities whose successful addition to our starting lineup would boost our international brand name. After all, 1,400 years of civilization and the religious practices of 1.5 billion solely rest on the tanned shoulders of the rich, famous and beautiful.

Inspired by comedian Dave Chappelle, one of the few Muslim converts who could be considered a net gain, the Muslims held a “Religious Draft” this week, inviting major religions to participate on hallowed ground: McDonald’s.

The following is a summary of the proceedings.

THE FIRST ROUND PICK

Since it was universally accepted Islam was the 2011 Indianapolis Colts of world religions, they had first pick.

Predictably, the Muslims drafted free agent Liam Neeson, who recently said, “There are 4,000 mosques in [Istanbul]. Some are just stunning and it really makes me think about becoming a Muslim.” The Irish actor is experiencing a pop cultural rebirth as the 21st century embodiment of uncompromising, kick-ass masculinity and sage paternalism. On behalf of Muslims, he took revenge against France, which recently caved into hysteria and banned the burqa. Neeson single-handedly destroyed the entire country with his bare fists in the blockbuster action film “Taken.” Muslims believe Neeson will help rebrand them as Jedi Knights, due to his portrayal of Jedi Qui-Gon in “Star Wars: The Phantom Menace,” and replace their current image as Dark Lords of the Sith.

Rumors circulated that many Evangelical Christians felt slighted by this pick since Muslims stole their digital Avatar of Jesus: Neeson voices “Aslan the Lion” from the “Narnia” movies.

The rest of the day’s picks were organized according to different types of celebrity.

ATHLETES

In a surprise move, the Buddhists requested Mike Tyson from the Muslims. Exhausted from voluntarily suffering for the past 2,500 years, the Buddhists decided Tyson’s crushing right uppercut could “really eff up China.”

In turn, the Buddhists decided to offer the Beastie Boys — the aging, versatile, hip-hop trio from Brooklyn – sensing they peaked with their 1998 “Hello Nasty” album. The Muslims accepted, acknowledging the songs “Sabotage” and “Shake Your Rump” as perennial favorites in Egypt and Lebanon.

The Buddhists selflessly threw in Richard Gere and DVD copies of “American Gigolo” to sweeten the deal.

The Jews intervened and said they wanted the Beastie Boys back on their team. They offered the Muslims Ben Roethlisberger, two-time Super Bowl champion quarterback of the Pittsburgh Steelers. Having read about Big Ben’s dubious history of sexual impropriety, the Muslims passed, but decided to donate Mike D of the Beastie Boys to the Jews as a truce offering. Allegedly, the Muslims could never forgive Mike D for the horribly weak rhyme “Everybody rappin’ like it’s a commercial, acting like life is a big commercial” on the song “Pass the Mic.”

The Jews accepted the offer.

The Muslims, feeling emboldened, made an ambitious pitch to the Christians for Denver Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow, who “just wins.”

Muslims offered former NBA all-star Shaquille O’Neal, who fell from their graces after he acted as a giant genie in the box-office bomb “Kazaam.” They also threw in Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf, the controversial Denver Nuggets star who converted to Islam and refused to stand for “The Star-Spangled Banner” before games. The Christians were initially enticed, seeing this as a perfect “born-again” moment, but they passed.

The Muslims went aggressive and promised they wouldn’t supplant the Constitution with Shariah and replace the White House with minarets unless Tebow and Mel Gibson crossed over.

The Christians, anxious to excommunicate Gibson, agreed. For the 2012 NFL season, Tebowing will now consist of prostrating and praising Allah after every touchdown. The Christians asked the Muslims to preserve Tebow’s chastity and not introduce him to Miss USA Rima Fakih or hot Arab women from the reality TV show “All-American Muslim”; the Muslims said they’d try, but they promised nothing.

COMEDIANS

The Jews made a play for comedian Dave Chappelle, a Muslim, citing his hit series on Comedy Central “Chappelle’s Show” as a creative juggernaut that still influences the masses — especially several rabbis, who apparently love saying, “I’m Rick James, bitch!” after performing circumcisions.

The Muslims immediately rejected the offer, saying Chappelle is perhaps the only living proof that Muslims can be intentionally funny.

Instead, they offered Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as an example of an unintentional comedian and provocateur in exchange for Israel cooling down its dangerous rhetoric of a preemptive strike on Iran.

Furthermore, the Muslims offered the newly acquired Mel Gibson straight up for Jerry Seinfeld.

The Mormons tried to intercept Seinfeld by playing one of their highest cards: “Napoleon Dynamite” actor Jon Heder. The Jews pretended not to hear this mockery and allowed the Mormons to slink away with some shred of remaining dignity.

The Jews finalized a deal with the Muslims and rumors have circulated since that Mel and Ahmadinejad are under house arrest in Tel Aviv, forced to watch “The Chosen” and “Fiddler on the Roof” on repeat while listening to Jerry Lewis perform comedy.

MUSICIANS

Sensing friendly relations, the Jews humbly approached the Muslims for rapper Ice Cube, citing his immense street cred and respect from the hip-hop and African-American communities. The Jews conceded the Matisyahu experiment, although initially promising, had failed, as the Hasidic reggae rapper never lived up to his “King Without a Crown” potential.

The Muslims mulled it over for a considerable time. The jirga decided they would retain eternal rights to Cube’s 1993 hit single “It Was a Good Day” from his multi-platinum album “Predator,” but ultimately release him because he inexplicably starred in the awful family comedy “Are We There Yet?”

Muslims in return asked the Jews for Kabbalah-worshipping Madonna, sensing serious comeback potential after her excellent Super Bowl halftime show.

Catholics made a request for multi-talented actor and hip-hop artist Mos Def from the Muslims, who soundly rejected any and all future offers, stating the entirety of the Middle East and North Africa could never bear to part with Def’s song “Ms. Fat Booty.”

Instead, Muslims counter-offered with alternative rock artist Everlast, whose 1998 single “What It’s Like” has made a surprising comeback on radio stations due to the economic recession. The Catholics still remember Everlast as the lead singer of the hip-hop band House of Pain, who produced the classic party anthem “Jump Around,” before his conversion to Islam. The Catholics accepted; South Asian Muslims danced to “Jump Around” one last time; and the Muslims in return received Taylor Swift and her legions of pubescent female fans, along with her former boyfriend Taylor Lautner, who played the ethnic werewolf in the “Twilight” movies.

The Muslims had finally secured their most promising young-adult celebrity.

POLITICIANS

The Mormons halfheartedly offered Mitt Romney. The Evangelicals promised Michele Bachmann and her lifetime supply of blinks. The Catholics, out of sheer desperation and embarrassment, bartered Newt Gingrich and his third wife, Callista.

The Muslims decided to stick with their boy, Barack Hussein Obama, in hopes of retaining the White House in 2012.

MISCELLANEOUS

Muslims threw a Hail Mary and asked fundamentalist Christians for Chuck Norris, who so thoroughly kicked the Middle East’s entire ass during the ’80s. The Muslims respected Norris for his ability to fire an Uzi, perform a roundhouse kick and wave an American flag at the same time. In return, Muslims offered the infamous WWF wrestler the Iron Sheikh and even agreed to teach the Christians the impregnable camel clutch. Norris, humbled by the offer, respectfully declined, and admitted that although he enjoyed killing hordes of fictional Arabs in jingoistic action movies like “Delta Force,” he currently fancied himself an intellectual and activist committed to exposing the nonexistent threat of Shariah infiltrating America. The Muslims were saddened, but collectively agreed to watch Norris in the summer action film “Expendables 2.”

The Hindus decided to play their strongest card, actress Julia Roberts, and made a request for journalist Lauren Booth, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s sister in law, who converted to Islam in 2010. The Hindus saw her as the perfect revenge and giant, henna-painted middle finger to England for the British Empire’s previous colonization and exploitation of India’s resources. The Muslims thought this was reasonable and now the “Pretty Woman” flashes her million-dollar smile behind a burqa.

THE CHOSEN ONE

Finally, the draft ended with all the religions coveting “the chosen one,” who would single-handedly redeem their public image both at home and abroad.

The Mormons offered former Republican presidential candidate Jon Huntsman, highlighting his excellent Chinese and fine hair. The Muslims initially offered NBA Hall of Famer and current cultural ambassador Kareem Abdul Jabbar. They sweetened the deal and threw in President Obama. The Jews presented Steven Spielberg and his entire film library. The Hindus humbly offered Bollywood actors Amitabh Bachan, Aishwarya Rai and a picture of Gandhi signed by Ben Kingsley. The Buddhists presented Tina Turner, Herbie Hancock and Tiger Woods.

But, it was sadly to no avail.

The Christians and Church of New York decided to keep NBA superstar and New York Knicks point guard Jeremy Lin. Rumors circulated that they were talking to China about a potential trade to ensure the ambitious superpower does not ask the United States to repay its debt, thus financially crippling and utterly destroying our great nation.

All in all, “it was a good day” for the Muslims in the first Religious Draft.

Wajahat Ali is a playwright, attorney, journalist and essayist. His award winning play”The Domestic Crusaders,” was published by McSweeney’s in 2011. He is the lead author of “Fear Inc., Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America.” He is currently writing a pilot for HBO. He is co-editing the anthology “All American: 45 American Men on Being Muslim” published in June 2012. More Wajahat Ali

Filed under: American Muslims, British Muslims, Freedoms, Islam, Muslims, Mysticism, Sufism, United States, US Commission on International Religious Freedom Tagged: All American Muslims, America, American Muslims, Beastie Boys, Bollywood, Buddhists, Celebrity Muslims, Christians, Dave Chappelle, Famous Converts, Famous Muslim Americans, Famous Muslims, France, Islam, Jeremy Lin, Judaism, Judaism And Islam, Kabbalah, Kyle Williams, Liam Neeson, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Matisyahu, Mike Tyson, Mitt Romney, Muslim Americans, Muslim Celebrities, Muslims, Newt Gingrich, Richard Gere, Shaquille O’Neal, Shariah, Star Wars: The Phantom Menace, Taylor Swift, Tim Tebow, Wajahat Ali

http://www.facebook.com/nadeemmalik

NADEEM MALIK

Do You Think President Asif Zardari Should Enjoy Blanket Immunity?

A Gallup poll shows 38% Pakistanis do not know about the President’s immunity, 37% believe that the President enjoys NO immunity whereas 25% believe that the President enjoys immunity provided to him by the constitution.

NADEEM MALIK

وزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھ دیں اور عدالت سے معافی مانگ لیں ورنہ چارجز لگ جایں گے۔ ایس ایم ظفر
میرے خیال میں اب یہ مشکل ہے کہ وزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھیں۔ وزیراعظم کے لئیے اس وقت صورت حال خاصی مشکل ہے۔ یاسین آزاد
عدالت اپنے فیصلوں پر عمل نہیں کروا پائی۔ اگر وزیراعظم کیس لڑے اور ہار گئے تو پھر وہ وزیراعظم نہیں رہ سکیں گے۔ احمد رضا قصوری

ISLAMABAD TONIGHT WITH NADEEM MALIK
nadeemmalik.wordpress.comوزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھ دیں اور عدالت سے معافی مانگ لیں ورنہ چارجز لگ جایں گے۔ ایس ایم ظفر میرے خیال میں اب یہ مشکل ہے کہ وزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھیں۔ وزیراعظم کے لئیے اس وقت صورت حال خاصی مشکل ہے۔ یاسین آزاد عدالت اپنے فیصلوں پر عمل نہیں کروا پائی۔ اگر وزیراعظم کیس لڑے اور ہار گئے تو پھ…

NADEEM MALIK

وزیراعظم نے بلا ضرورت اور بے وقت اپنی قربانی دی ہے۔ وزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھ دیں اور عدالت سے معافی مانگ لیں ورنہ چارجز لگ جایں گے۔ ایس ایم ظفر
میرے خیال میں اب یہ مشکل ہے کہ وزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھیں۔ وزیراعظم کے لئیے اس وقت صورت حال خاصی مشکل ہے۔ یاسین آزاد
عدالت اپنے فیصلوں پر عمل نہیں کروا پائی۔ اگر وزیراعظم کیس لڑے اور ہار گئے تو پھر وہ وزیراعظم نہیں رہ سکیں گے۔ احمد رضا قصوری
این …آر او بڑے لوگوں کو کی گئی چوری سے بچانے کے لئیے کیا گیا ہے۔ آج لوگوں کا سارے اداروں پر سے اعتماد اٹھ چکا ہے۔ ہر طرف کرپشن ہے اور لوگ مر رہے ہیں۔ بھاشا ڈیم پر دی جانے والی کمپینسیشن میں سے دو ارب روپے غائب ہیں۔ اعظم سواتی
عدالت صبر سے کام لے رہی ہے ورنہ حالات خراب ہو سکتے ہیں۔ لوگوں کا عدالت پر اعتماد ہے اور یہ عدالت کا بہت بڑا امتحان ہے۔ احمد رضا قصوریSee More

Islamabad Tonight – 2nd February 2012
www.awaztoday.comوزیراعظم نے بلا ضرورت اور بے وقت اپنی قربانی دی ہے۔ وزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھ دیں اور عدالت سے معافی مانگ لیں ورنہ چارجز لگ جایں گے۔ ایس ایم ظفر میرے خیال میں اب یہ مشکل ہے کہ وزیراعظم سوئس عدالت کو خط لکھیں۔ وزیراعظم کے لئیے اس وقت صورت حال خاصی مشکل ہے۔ یاسین آزاد عدالت اپنے فیصلوں پر عمل نہ…

NADEEM MALIK

Islamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik -:-
Guest: S.M. Zafar, Yaseen Azad, Ahmed Raza Kasuri, Azam Swati and Nayyar Bokhari on Contempt of the Court

Islamabad tonight – 2nd february 2012
www.zemtv.comIslamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik -:- Guest: S.M. Zafar, Yaseen Azad, Ahmed Raza Kasuri, Azam Swati and Nayyar Bokhari on Contempt of the Court

NADEEM MALIK

تمام ادارے پارلیمنٹ کو جوابدہ ہیں، وزیراعظم

NADEEM MALIK

GILANI GUILTY OF CONTEMPT:
After the preliminary hearing, we are satisfied that prima facie there is a case for further proceeding into the matter. Adjourned for February 13, for framing charges. The Prime minister is required to remain present in the Supreme Court.

NADEEM MALIK

سپريم کورٹ نے وزير اعظم گيلاني پر توہين عدالت کيس ميں فرد جرم کرنے کے لئے انہيں 13فروري کو طلب کر ليا ہے.عدالت نے مختصر فيصلے ميں کہا کہ وزير اعظم توہين عدالت کے مرتکب ہوئے ہيں ، ان پر 13فروري کو فرد جرم عائد کي جائے گي.

NADEEM MALIK

سینٹ کے الیکشن کے بعد فوری طور پر ملک میں الیکشن کا اعلان کر دیا جائے گا۔ شیخ رشید
الیکشن کی پہلی دھاندلی آئندہ بجٹ ہو گا جو ایسا بنایا جائے گا کہ آئندہ آنے والا اس پر پورا نہ اتر سکے۔مسلم لیگ ن ایک دفعہ پھر ٹریپ ہو گئی ہے۔ نواز اور شہباز شریف کی سوچ میں بڑا فرق ہے شہباز فرنٹ فٹ پر کھیلتے ہیں۔ مسلم لیگ ن شروع سے کوئی فیصلہ نہیں کر پائی ڈرتی رہی کہ کہیں فوج نہ آ جائے جبکہ فوج کے آنے کا کوئی امکان ن…ہیں-اسحق ڈار وزیر خزانہ ہوتے تو اتنی کرپشن نہیں ہوتی۔ میمو کے مسئلہ پر پیچھے ہٹنے سے فوج کی ساکھ پر اثر پڑا ہے۔ میرا خیال تھا کہ جنرل کیانی مدت ملازمت میں توسیع نہیں لیں گے لیکن انہوں نے لے لی۔ فوج کے نزدیک میمو ایک بہت سنجیدہ معاملہ تھا لیکن پھر پتہ نہیں کہ کیوں پیچھے ہٹ گئی۔
لوگ فوج عدلیہ اور سیاست سے بہت مایوس ہوئے ہیں اور تھک کر بیٹھ گئے ہیں۔ میں نہیں سمجھتا کہ فوج کسی سیاسی جماعت کو سپورٹ کر رہی ہے۔ بہت سے لوگ صرف اس لئیے عمران کے ساتھ چلے گئے ہیں کہ فوج اس کے ساتھ ہے۔ میں قوم کو بتاؤں گا کہ کہ چور کون ہے اور چوکیدار کون ہے۔ شیخ رشیدSee More

Islamabad Tonight – 1st February 2012
awaztoday.comسینٹ کے الیکشن کے بعد فوری طور پر ملک میں الیکشن کا اعلان کر دیا جائے گا۔ شیخ رشید الیکشن کی پہلی دھاندلی آئندہ بجٹ ہو گا جو ایسا بنایا جائے گا کہ آئندہ آنے والا اس پر پورا نہ اتر سکے۔مسلم لیگ ن ایک دفعہ پھر ٹریپ ہو گئی ہے۔ نواز اور شہباز شریف کی سوچ میں بڑا فرق ہے شہباز فرنٹ فٹ پر کھیلتے ہیں۔ مسلم…

NADEEM MALIK

In a major development toward ending a decade of war in Afghanistan, US Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said on Wednesday that American forces would step back from a combat role there as early as mid-2013, more than a year before all American troops are scheduled to leave Afghanistan.

NADEEM MALIK

Islamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik -:-
Guest: Sheikh Rashid Ahmed

Islamabad tonight on aaj news – Shaikh rasheed interview – 1st febuary 2012
www.zemtv.comIslamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik -: – Guest: Sheikh Rashid Ahmed

NADEEM MALIK

Efroze Chemical Industries confessed on Wednesday that the batch of IsoTab produced for Punjab Institute of Cardiology (PIC) was tainted with Pyrimethamine, an anti-malarial.

NADEEM MALIK

Anthrax Threat: A parcel containing anthrax was sent to the Prime Minister’s Secretariat in Islamabad during the month of January 2012.Police investigations are underway and a case has been registered against unknown people. The packet was sent from Jamshoro.

NADEEM MALIK

اعتزاز احسن صدر کا استثني ثابت کرديں تو عدالت مزيد کارروائي نہيں کرے گي,عذر گناہ، بدتر از گناہ ہوتا ہے-سپريم کورٹ
اعتزاز احسن نے کہاکہ وزيراعظم ايڈوائس ليتے ہيں،جو انہيں وزير قانون اور سيکريٹري قانون نے دي، وزيراعظم ديانت داري سے سمجھتے ہيں کہ صدر کو استثني حاصل ہے، جسٹس آصف سعيد کھوسہ نے کہاکہ وزيراعظم نے کہاکہ اس ايشو پر جيل جانا پڑا تو جاوں گا ،کيايہ کہنا کيا حکم عدولي نہيں ہے، جسٹس آصف کھوسہ نے کہاکہ سترہ ججوں نے بہت واضح حکم ديا، کيا آپ ايک اور حکم چاہتے ہيں. اعتزازاحسن نے کہاکہ سوئس حکام کو خط کے حکم پر ابھي عمل ممکن نہيں، وزيراعظم کا عدالت کے سامنے بيان، غير رسمي تھا- سپريم کورٹ نے اعتزاز احسن کو کل ابتدائي دلائل مکمل کرنے کي ہدايت کي

NADEEM MALIK

لندن کي ليبارٹري نے پنجاب ميں ہلاکتوں کا سبب بننے والي ايک اور دوا کو غير معياري قرار دے ديا. پنجاب انسٹي ٹيوٹ آف کارڈيا لوجي کي طرف سے لندن کي ليبارٹري ميں ٹيسٹ کيلئے بھيجي گئي دوا آئسو ٹيب کي رپورٹ موصول ہوگئي ہے. يہ دوا دل ميں خون کي گردش بڑھانے کيلئے استعمال کي جاتي ہے. آئسو ٹيب ميں انسداد مليريا کي دوا پيري ميتھا مائن PYRIMETHAMINE کي بہت زيادہ مقدار ميں آميزش پائي گئي

NADEEM MALIK

‎-NATO report alleges Taliban in Afghanistan are being directly assisted by Pakistani security services

-Afghan civilians frequently prefer Taliban governance over the Afghan government, usually as a result of government corruption

Pakistan ‘backs Afghan Taliban’
www.bbc.co.uk‎-NATO report alleges Taliban in Afghanistan are being directly assisted by Pakistani security services -Afghan civilians frequently prefer Taliban governance over the Afghan government, usually as a result of government corruption

NADEEM MALIK

Missing Pakistanis: After the Supreme Court Orders Two Missing Brothers Found in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Unit of the Lady Reading Hospital

Relatives allowed to see ‘missing’ brothers
www.dawn.comPESHAWAR, Jan 31: Five family members of two missing men, Abdul Basit and Syed Abdul Majid, were allowed to visit the plastic and reconstructive surgery unit of the Lady Reading Hospital and meet them for a few minutes

NADEEM MALIK

Leading lights in American Politics, Presidential candidates, have released their tax and asset details and Americans voters are asking questions from them about legality of sources of income and welath accumulation patterns. Do we know how much our President, Prime Minister or leading politicians pay taxes and what is their net worth?

NADEEM MALIK

Mitt Romney won the Florida primary, a victory expected to cement his status as the Republican front-runner. Voters picked Romney over former House speaker Newt Gingrich as the best positioned to take on President Obama in November.

NADEEM MALIK

PPP to support changes proposed by PML (N) in the 20th Constitutional Amendment: Qamar Zaman Kaira
Amendment to regularize 28 senators, MNAs, MPAs elected after 18th amendment as a one-time special case- Law to be amended for regularization of women reserved seats- Ishaq Dar
PPP Must also negotiate appoitment of Chief Election Commissioner and Caretaker setup for the next elections as agreed in the 18th amendment- Ishaq Dar
PPP should transfer control of Sheikh Zaid Hospital to Punjab government to get support of the provincial government for setting up Drug Regulatory Authority- Ishaq Dar
DRA issue should not be linked with Sheikh Zaid Hospital- Kaira

Islamabad tonight – 31st january 2012
www.zemtv.comPPP to support changes proposed by PML (N) in the 20th Constitutional Amendment: Qamar Zaman Kaira Amendment to regularize 28 senators, MNAs, MPAs elected after 18th amendment as a one-time special case- Law to be amended for regularization of women reserved seats- Ishaq Dar PPP Must also negotiate …

NADEEM MALIK

ہم فئیر اینڈ فری الیکشنز چاہتے ہیں تا کہ کوئی انگلی نہ اٹھے۔ بہتری کی خاطر آئین اور قانون میں کسی بھی ترمیم کے لئیے تیار ہیں۔ قمر زمان کائرہ
بیسویں ترمیم کے لئیے چیف الیکشن کمشن کی تقرری اور عبوری حکومت کی تشکیل پر مزید مشاورت کی ضرورت ہے۔ اسحق ڈار
چیف الیکشن کمشن کی تقرری کے لئیے پارلیمانی کمیٹی بن چکی ہے۔ قمر زمان کائرہ
پارلیمانی کمیٹی کو چیف الیکشن کمشنر کےلئیےتین نام دئیے جایں گے جن میں سے ایک… پر اتفاق کیا جائے گا۔قمر زمان کائرہ
چیف الیکشن کمنشنر کے لئیے ایک ہی نام ایسا آنا چاہئیے کہ جس پر کسی کو کوئی اعتراض نہ ہو۔ اسحق ڈار
عبوری حکومت کے قیام کے معاملہ کا چیف الیکشن کمشن کی تقرری کے ساتھ کوئی تعلق نہیں ہے۔ قمر زمان کائرہ
شیخ زید ہسپتال پنجاب کو نہ دئیے جانے کی وجہ سے ڈرگ ریگولیشن اتھارٹی نہیں بن پا رہی۔ اسحق ڈار
شیخ زید ہسپتال مل جائے گا پنجاب ڈرگ ریگولیشن اتھارٹی بننے دے۔ قمر زمان کائرہ
ایم کیو ایم غیر جانبدار چیف الیکشن کمشنر کی تقرری کی حمایت کرتی ہے۔ حیدر عباس رضویSee More

Islamabad Tonight – 31st January 2012
awaztoday.comہم فئیر اینڈ فری الیکشنز چاہتے ہیں تا کہ کوئی انگلی نہ اٹھے۔ بہتری کی خاطر آئین اور قانون میں کسی بھی ترمیم کے لئیے تیار ہیں۔ قمر زمان کائرہ بیسویں ترمیم کے لئیے چیف الیکشن کمشن کی تقرری اور عبوری حکومت کی تشکیل پر مزید مشاورت کی ضرورت ہے۔ اسحق ڈار چیف الیکشن کمشن کی تقرری کے لئیے پارلیمانی کمیٹی بن…

NADEEM MALIK

Subscribe @ http://www.facebook.com/nadeemmalik

Nadeem Malik

NADEEM MALIK

توہین عدالت کیس میں وزیراعظم سید یوسف رضا گیلانی کے وکیل اعتزاز احسن نے کہا ہے کہ سپریم کورٹ اگر واضح ہدایت دے تو سوئس حکام کو خط لکھ دیا جائے گا، توہین عدالت کیس کے حوالے سے عدالت میں کچھ دستاویزات جمع کرائی ہیں جن کے بارے میں وہ کچھ نہیں بتا سکتے۔

NADEEM MALIK Punjab Institute of Cardiology: 122 dead so far. No responsibility fixed yet. NADEEM MALIK YOUTUBE: http://www.youtube.com/NadeemMalikLive Nadeem Malik : ندیم ملک www.youtube.comISLAMABAD TONIGHT: The programme gives independent news analysis of the key events shaping future of Pakistan. A fast paced, well rounded programme covers almost every aspect, which should be a core element of a current affairs programme. Discussion with the most influential personalities in the fed… NADEEM MALIK عوام سے غلط بیانی کی جا رہی ہے ڈرون حملے حکومت کی اجازت سے ہو رہے ہیں۔ ہمارے جاسوسی کے ادارے اب بھی نہیں سمجھ رہے۔ صبح شام اسلام کا ڈھنڈورا پیٹا جاتا ہے کیا اسلامی ملک ایسا ہوتا ہے۔ قائد اعظم کے علاوہ کسی نے عوام کو فیصلے کا حق نہیں دیا۔ میمو کی تحقیقت شروع ہو گئیں لیکن مشرقی پاکستان کی علحیدگی کی آج تک تحقیقات نہیں ہوئیں۔ جو بھی آئین توڑے عوام کو اس کے خلاف سڑکوں پر آ جانا چاہئیے۔ سٹیٹ کا کام ہے… کہ لوگوں کو عزت دے اور ان کا تحفظ کرے۔محمود اچکزئی وزیراعظم کی کوئی کریڈیبلٹی نہیں ہے ان کی کسی بات کا اعتبار نہیں کیا جا سکتا۔ خواجہ آصف میرے خیال میں حکومت کے پنڈی والوں سے بھی معاملات طے ہو چکے ہیں۔ تمام ادارے زاتی مفاد کی خاطر امریکی مفاد کا تحفظ کر رہے ہیں۔ خواجہ آصف میرے خیال میں پیپلز پارٹی اور مسلم لیگ ن دونوں الیکشن پر متفق ہیں۔ محمود اچکزئیSee MoreIslamabad Tonight – 30th January 2012 www.awaztoday.com عوام سے غلط بیانی کی جا رہی ہے ڈرون حملے حکومت کی اجازت سے ہو رہے ہیں۔ ہمارے جاسوسی کے ادارے اب بھی نہیں سمجھ رہے۔ صبح شام اسلام کا ڈھنڈورا پیٹا جاتا ہے کیا اسلامی ملک ایسا ہوتا ہے۔ قائد اعظم کے علاوہ کسی نے عوام کو فیصلے کا حق نہیں دیا۔ میمو کی تحقیقت شروع ہو گئیں لیکن مشرقی پاکستان کی علحیدگی کی… NADEEM MALIK امريکا ميں پاکستان کے سابق سفير حسين حقاني ابوظہبي روانہ ہوگئے. حسين حقاني کووزيراعظم ہاؤس سے اسلام آبادپوليس کي حفاظت ميں ايئرپورٹ پہنچايا گيا. امريکا نے کہا ہے کہ پاکستان کي سپريم کورٹ کي جانب سے سابق سفير حسين حقاني پر سفري پابندياں ختم ہونے کي خوشي ہے.امريکي محکمہ خارجہ کي ترجمان وکٹوريا نولينڈ نے بريفنگ ديتے ہوئے کہا کہ امريکا ميں پاکستان کے سابق سفير حسين حقاني اب آزاد ہيں اور جہاں چاہيں جاسکتے ہيں.10,775 People Reached · 199 People Talking About This

NADEEM MALIK

US President Barack Obama has confirmed that the US drones have struck Taliban and Al Qaeda targets within Pakistan – operations that until now had not been officially acknowledged.
A lot of these strikes have been in the FATA – Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas. This is a targeted focused effort at people who are on a list of active terrorists, who are trying to go in and harm Americans, hit American facilities, American bases, and so on. Barack Obama

7,646 People Reached · 79 People Talking About This

NADEEM MALIK

عوام سے غلط بیانی کی جا رہی ہے ڈرون حملے حکومت کی اجازت سے ہو رہے ہیں۔
ہمارے جاسوسی کے ادارے اب بھی نہیں سمجھ رہے۔ صبح شام اسلام کا ڈھنڈورا پیٹا جاتا ہے کیا اسلامی ملک ایسا ہوتا ہے۔ قائد اعظم کے علاوہ کسی نے عوام کو فیصلے کا حق نہیں دیا۔ میمو کی تحقیقت شروع ہو گئیں لیکن مشرقی پاکستان کی علحیدگی کی آج تک تحقیقات نہیں ہوئیں۔ جو بھی آئین توڑے عوام کو اس کے خلاف سڑکوں پر آ جانا چاہئیے۔ سٹیٹ کا کام ہے …کہ لوگوں کو عزت دے اور ان کا تحفظ کرے۔محمود اچکزئی
وزیراعظم کی کوئی کریڈیبلٹی نہیں ہے ان کی کسی بات کا اعتبار نہیں کیا جا سکتا۔ خواجہ آصف
میرے خیال میں حکومت کے پنڈی والوں سے بھی معاملات طے ہو چکے ہیں۔ تمام ادارے زاتی مفاد کی خاطر امریکی مفاد کا تحفظ کر رہے ہیں۔ خواجہ آصف
میرے خیال میں پیپلز پارٹی اور مسلم لیگ ن دونوں الیکشن پر متفق ہیں۔ محمود اچکزئیSee More

Islamabad tonight – Mehmood Khan Achakzai – 30th january 2012
www.zemtv.comعوام سے غلط بیانی کی جا رہی ہے ڈرون حملے حکومت کی اجازت سے ہو رہے ہیں۔ ہمارے جاسوسی کے ادارے اب بھی نہیں سمجھ رہے۔ صبح شام اسلام کا ڈھنڈورا پیٹا جاتا ہے کیا اسلامی ملک ایسا ہوتا ہے۔ قائد اعظم کے علاوہ کسی نے عوام کو فیصلے کا حق نہیں دیا۔ میمو کی تحقیقت شروع ہو گئیں لیکن مشرقی پاکستان کی علحیدگی کی آ…

NADEEM MALIK Islamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik -:- Guest: Mahmood Khan Achakzai Chairman PKMAP and Khawaja Muhammad Asif PML (N)Video Islamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik 30th January 2011 – Mehmood Khan Achakzai www.friendskorner.comIslamabad Tonight with Nadeem Malik -:- Guest: Mahmood Khan Achakzai Chairman PKMAP and Khawaja Muhammad Asif PML (N) NADEEM MALIK TWITTER: http://twitter.com/nadeemmalik Twitter twitter.comTWITTER: http://twitter.com/nadeemmalik

Filed under: CURRENT AFFAIRS

The next Republican Party candidate to challenge Barack Obama in the United States 2012 presidential elections became a little clearer in January, after Mitt Romney claimed a second victory by winning the New Hampshire primary and became a clear front-runner for the role. Romney had already won the Iowa caucuses in early January with 25 percent of the vote, but took New Hampshire by an impressive 39 percent, making him a clear favourite to challenge Obama in the November presidential elections.

Primaries and caucuses are party elections held in every US state, and the winner won’t be decided until August. However, if Romney wins, his attitude towards Pakistan may be cause for alarm, as he has a complete lack of experience on foreign affairs, besides a few months spent living in Europe and a few holidays and international cruises abroad.

Romney’s Views on Pakistan

With Barack Obama facing stiff criticism over the state of the United States’ economy, the winner of the Republican Party election could well become the next President of the United States. As the US President is the most powerful figure in world politics, Romney’s views of foreign affairs could well have a huge impact on Pakistan and future US activities in the region.

In a series of interviews on foreign policy, Romney has described Pakistan as like “dealing with a child,” a borderline “failed state,” and full of “radicals and extremists.” When asked how he would approach the relationship between the United States and Pakistan, Romney said:

“It’s more like dealing with an adolescent – I don’t mean to compare any nation to an adolescent, but just the fact that there’s no easy answer for how you bring a child to adolescence.” He added: “I don’t want to suggest that a country is like a child, but in the way that when you deal with another person we think of all these dimensions on which we try to influence them.”

He also suggested that he would counter those organisations within Pakistan that refused to cooperate with the United States. He said: “The right way to deal with- Pakistan is to recognize that Pakistan is not a country like other countries, with a strong political centre that you can go to and say, ‘Gee, can we come here? Will you take care of this problem?’ This is, instead, a nation, which is close to being a failed state. I hope it doesn’t reach that point, but it’s a very fragile nation … so we have to work with our friends in that country to get them to do some of the things we can’t do ourselves.”

He also said that he would continue to use drones in Pakistan, despite the tensions use of such military hardware causes. He said: “We have agreement with the people that we need to have agreement with to be able to use drones to strike at the people that represent a threat.”

Who is Mitt Romney

Romney is the son of the former Governor of Michigan, George Romney. He is a member of the Church of Latter Day Saints, and spent time in a Mormon Missionary in France during his youth. He first entered politics in 1994 as the Republican candidate for the 1994 Senate election in Massachusetts, but lost. He was elected Governor of Massachusetts in 2002, but stepped down in 2006 after seeing through a series of austere spending cuts to eliminate the state’s $3 billion deficit. And while this economic experience may prove favourable with the American electorate, most of whom are tired of the failing economy, his views on Pakistan, could lead to increased destabilisation in the area, and result in further cooling between the two countries.

However, despite being frontrunner, Romney is far from being crowned the next president. First, he has to win the other caucuses and primaries, where he may face increased competition from the other Republican hopefuls: Jon Huntsman, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul and Rick Perry. Texas Congressman Ron Paul, in particular, may prove a tough rival, and whoever wins the Republican Party’s nomination, still has to beat the more liberal Barack Obama, who, while flagging in the opinion polls, has nearly a year to win back the favour of the American people.

 

Israeli and American politicians alike are using the same playbook — attacking the media and often diverting attention from the real problems at hand.

In U.S. politics, GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich gave a stunning rebuke to CNN anchor John King during the South Carolina Republican debate last night, drawing applause and a standing ovation from the largely conservative crowd.

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu might have done the Israeli equivalent, as news reports suggest that he pegged the New York Times and left-leaning Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz  as Israel’s two greatest threats. (While Netanyahu’s alleged comments have been denied, the anti-media rhetoric is most certainly real, as has been demonstrated by a letter from the Prime Minister’s Office declining an invitation to submit an op-ed to the New York Times last year.)

That’s right. Israel, a country surrounded by enemies that want nothing more than to push its citizens into the sea, is scared of “left-wing” journalists. Israel, a nation who’s only regional friends — such as Egypt and Turkey — are quickly turning their backs on it, is terrified of editorial writers. Israelis, a people who have overcome adversity and built a thriving, democratic and Western country in less than a hundred years, is trembling at the thought of a mustached columnist.

The contention that the press and the influence of the media over populations are Israel’s biggest threats is patronizing to Israelis, diminishes the country’s successes, and understates the very real challenge of ensuring bombs don’t rattle Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, the Galil and the Negev at any second.

The New York Times is clearly the “paper of record,” but it has a challenge to overcome its alleged left-wing bias to garner credibility. While Ha’aretz  only captures approximately 6 percent of the Israeli audience, it has a far wider international reach and credibility. The paper is distributed along with the International Herald Tribune, which is, effectively, the international New York Times. Further, Ha’aretz visually looks similar to many credible U.S. papers — like the Washington Post and New York Times – and unlike it’s main competitors Yediot Achronot and Ma’ariv, which both have extensive pictures, graphics and more New York Daily News-type feels.

Ha’aretz and the New York Times clearly have in-roads with the U.S. and international communities and influence public policy, which can impact aid to Israel, pressure on the Arab world, and the prospects of interventions preventing the development of an Iranian nuclear warhead. Therefore, the true threat of these publications are their impact on public officials, which could lead to major changes in Israel-related policies.

However, the allegiance between Israel and its closest friend, the United States, is still rock-solid, where U.S. policymakers have overwhelmingly expressed their support for a safe and secure Israel. Both the New York Times and Ha’aretz have been in business for quite some time and been unable to derail that relationship.

Israelis for decades have been forging that strong bond, which is based on shared values and mutual interests. To suggest that all that hard work can be unraveled by editorial bias discounts the long-standing relationship and mutual concerns, effectively characterizing the two countries’ bond as superficial — which it most certainly is not.

Further, Israelis transformed what was once largely swamp and desert into a thriving economic and military powerhouse that has maintained freedoms and democracy. That achievement, forged from the sweat of the first kibbutz worker to the blood of today’s most recent army draftee, will not be decimated by a few choice journalistic words or the influence of a snarky columnist. Israelis’ perseverance will continue defeating all odds, even if so-called liberal publications sway opinion.

Lastly, the perception of fear from these publications largely undercuts arguments that Iran, terrorists, and Muslim extremists are very tangible threats that could cause the deaths of hundred or thousands of Israelis. From extremists in Egypt transforming a former Israeli ally into a threat to the prospects of a nuclear Middle East to rockets from terrorists on Israel’s borders, the country faces substantial security challenges. Solutions to those problems, whether military or economic, would benefit from policymakers’ accurate understanding of these threats, which are far more dangerous than a bad pun or a critical headline.

The declaration of the “liberal” media being more threatening merely diminishes the correct assertions that these very real dangers could jeopardize Israel’s security at any minute.

Elected officials’ obsession with attacking the so-called liberal media merely skirts the real issues of today, and threatens to downplay the most serious threats facing their country.  Netanyahu has thus far been a champion building international understanding of the true threat Iran and Muslim extremists face to Israel and the world at-large.  He should maintain that path and not let political kowtowing unravel his year’s of effective advocacy on behalf of Israel.

 

By David Horsey for The Los Angeles Times

Newt Gingrich is surging and the guy ahead of him, Mitt Romney, as well the guy behind him, Rick Santorum, are rattled.

Only days ago, Romney was sitting on a comfortable lead in South Carolina’s Republican primary race. Santorum was anticipating a positive bump in his numbers, thanks to the endorsement he received from top Christian evangelical leaders and the good chance that a final, official count of votes in the Iowa caucuses would show he actually beat Romney in that state.

Instead, with Saturday’s vote just two days away, the portly, aloof, intellectually promiscuous and thrice-married ex-speaker of the House seems to be winning the minds, if not the hearts, of more and more staunch conservatives in the Palmetto State.

In fact, Gingrich was even getting a bit of love, as well as respect, from a crowd of several hundred jammed into the banquet hall of Bobby’s Bar-BQ Buffet in Warrenville on Wednesday. Every seat was filled; those without seats stood along the walls and those that couldn’t get inside craned their necks to get a peek through the front door.

Gingrich spoke in front of a Model T Ford – a car only a little more ancient than a great many members of the audience. Clever lines that fell flat when Gingrich delivered them at the tea party convention Tuesday got big laughs with this much-less-grim crowd — like his somewhat-stale knee-slapper about letting Barack Obama use a teleprompter when the two debate.

They loved the parts of his stump speech that are well worn – our rights come from God and cannot be taken away by government – and a new attack on Obama spun off the day’s news – the president’s refusal to approve the Keystone oil pipeline is stupidly driving Canada into the arms of China. And they loved Callista, Newt’s exquisitely coiffed wife.

One audience “question” was this: “I think your wife would make a beautiful first lady, don’t you?”  In the receiving line after the event, a Callista fan said, “I’m anxious to see how you do Christmas in the White House.” There seemed to be a lot of warmth for the once-controversial Callista and for her candidate husband, though he is not all that good at exhibiting warmth himself.

In campaign mode, Gingrich is the polar opposite of Mitt Romney. Reportedly a bit shy, Romney, nevertheless, dives in, shakes every hand, signs every autograph, banters with everyone and smiles, smiles, smiles. It may be rehearsed and straight from some “How to Succeed in Politics” primer, but he’s as good at it as any TV game show host.

Mitt’s even good with babies. At a rally on the outskirts of Columbia on Wednesday night, he held a baby for the cameras and then pretended to walk off with her, delighting the crowd – even the child’s mother. And the baby never cried.

In contrast, Gingrich seems more like the queen of England. On Monday afternoon, at the end of his remarks at Rioz Brazilian Steakhouse in Myrtle Beach, Gingrich remained on the speaker’s platform while the crowd lined up like kids waiting to see a department store Santa. They were shuffled through rapidly; the candidate barely made eye contact, offered the tiniest of smiles and made the briefest request for support.

Is he merely reserved? Awkward? Overly formal? Or simply a man with a busy mind and a lot to get done; sort of like a college professor who resents wasting attention on the undergrads who mob him after class.

Of course, Gingrich actually is a former college professor, and his campaign speech is a lively academic ramble. He interprets history, dives into interesting new economic theories, wickedly picks apart the fallacious ideas of competing practitioners of the political arts and uses terminology that tells you he’s oh-so-much smarter than your typical governor of Texas or Massachusetts.

Gingrich drops names of the intellectual and political elite he has known and boldly lays claim to a major share of the legacy of two presidents, Reagan and Clinton. He brags that his candidacy is so historically significant and so utterly different from any other that it is nearly incomprehensible to the dullards in the media. In front of the South Carolina Chamber of Commerce, after presenting a litany of intractable problems faced by the nation, he said of himself, “If you have a leader who knows what he is doing, we can turn this around in a year.”

Just one year? The guy seems so full of himself that it is surprising he has caught on with so many voters. He is not the cliche candidate Americans are supposed to prefer – somebody you’d want to have a beer with because he’s just like you. Yet, here he is, still very much in the race and on the verge of messing up smiling Mitt Romney’s big-money campaign.

Filed under: Democracy, Freedoms, President Obama, United States Tagged: American Elections, American politics, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Democrats, GOP, Mitt Romney, Myrtle Beach, Newt Gingrich, Nikki Haley, Republican Party, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, Ronald Reagan, South Carolina, South Carolina Chamber of Commerce, Tea Party

I’ve watched a number of Republican debates in this primary season. The first thing I would say about them is that they provide a very revealing window in a world I am very unfamiliar with. I don’t read right wing blogs (with the exception of Greg Mankiw’s econ blog) , I don’t really have many right-wing friends, I don’t watch Fox News, and I don’t click on email forwards with the subject “Socialists Pelosi and Obama destroying America, here’s how”. All of my American friends pronounce the first “A” in “America”. You could say I live a pretty cloistered life, ideologically speaking.

So these Republican debates are very useful in that regard, because they give me a sense of what’s going on in that world. Not a completely accurate sense, obviously — there’s only so much you can infer from the reality-TV-ized version of politics that plays out on our screen every few weeks — but some sense. For instance, before watching these debates, I had no idea Ben Bernanke was such a hated (or even known) figure on the right. After watching these debates, these google search suggestions for Bernanke made a whole lot more sense:

This then leads me to the point of this post, which is Newt Gingrich’s racially charged comments in the South Carolina debate two nights ago. Check them out for yourself:

Now, there’s a couple of things to be said about this. An innocuous reading of Gingrich’s comments would be: well, what’s the issue? He wants to help black people find jobs! Even if they happen to be janitorial jobs for children in the very schools that they’re supposed to be learning, they’re still jobs! Black people should be thrilled!

Of course, no one can do a better job of skewering this view than Jon Stewart, so I would strongly encourage you to watch this clip as well as this one.

Moreover, it’s hard for someone not in the US or relatively well-versed in American politics to understand why his comments were so over the top. This was not some innocent exhortation for disadvantaged minorities to help themselves. This was dog-whistle racial politics at its finest. By calling Obama a “food stamp President” and reinforcing the belief that minorities can do better in the US simply by working harder, Gingrich was pressing exactly the right buttons, given his audience (southern Republicans). As Charles Blow writes,

Gingrich seems to understand the historical weight of the view among some southern whites, many of whom have migrated to the Republican party, that blacks are lazy and addicted to handouts. He is able to give voice to those feelings without using those words. He is able to make people believe that a fundamentally flawed and prejudicial argument that demeans minorities is actually for their uplift. It is Gingrich’s gift: He is able to make ill will sound like good will.

Or as James Fallows notes in a post I strongly encourage you to read:

Newt Gingrich knows exactly what he is doing when he calls Obama the “food stamp” president, just as Ronald Reagan knew exactly what he was doing when talking about “welfare Cadillacs.” There are lots of other ways to make the point about economic hard times — entirely apart from which person and which policies are to blame for today’s mammoth joblessness, and apart from the fact that Congress sets food stamp policies. You could call him the “pink slip president,” the “foreclosure president,” the “Walmart president,” the “Wall Street president,” the “Citibank president,” the “bailout president,” or any of a dozen other images that convey distress. You decide to go with “the food stamp president,” and you’re doing it on purpose.

If Joe Lieberman had been elected, I would be wary of attacks on his economic policy that called him “the cunning, tight-fisted president.” If Henry Cisneros had or Ken Salazar does, I would notice arguments about ineffectiveness phrased as “the mañana administration.” If Gary Locke were in office, then “the Manchurian candidate” jokes that had been used on John Huntsman would have a different edge. And so on. This reader may not recognize it as a dog whistle, but I have no doubt that Newt Gingrich knows what it is. I don’t think that Gingrich has had a racist-style political career; on the contrary. But he knows what this language does.

The second thing to note about Gingrich’s comments is the shrieking joy in the crowd that greeted them. I honestly should not be surprised anymore — this is the same party whose debates have prompted wild applause at sick people dying because of a lack of insurance — but I am, for whatever reason. And this goes full circle to my comments at the beginning of the post. These debates and the crowd reactions in them give me a great insight as to what the Republican base thinks and feels about certain issues. From booing the fact that Romney’s father was born in Mexico to cheering for Bernanke’s treason trial, from electric fences to torture, it’s illuminating. And then I have to remind myself that this is one of the two major parties in the most powerful country in the world, and that’s when I bury my head in my hands.

What amazes me is that even discounting one’s moral and ethical revulsion at rhetoric like this, don’t Republicans realize that if they keep saying stuff like this, black people won’t vote for them? That if they keep demonizing Hispanics and immigration, that Latinos won’t vote for them? That if they publicly call for racial profiling of Muslims, that Muslims won’t vote for them? I have been taught in graduate school the remarkable tenet that political parties like attracting votes. The Republicans have a very strange way of going about it.

By Nida Khan for The Huffington Post

While many Muslims (and people outside the faith for that matter) were heavily embedded in a debate over the controversy surrounding hardware store Lowe’s and its recent decision to remove ads from TLC’s reality show All American Muslim, a more detrimental attack against their future was all but finalized. Reversing an earlier decision to veto provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2012, President Obama made the disturbing announcement that he would sign this legislation into law and thereby solidify the ability of the military and other factions to indefinitely detain anyone they deem an enemy of the state. And on New Year’s Eve, the President unfortunately made good on this promise with the stroke of his pen. At a time when the United States is grossly engaged in both active combat and covert drone campaigns in a multitude of Muslim nations, and when loosely defined terms like ‘terrorist’ can be arbitrarily thrown about, Muslims specifically — and all of society generally — shouldn’t take this disturbing development lightly.

In post-9/11 America, many have sadly grown accustomed and tolerant to routine practices of racial profiling, bias and even attacks against Muslims and those perceived to be Muslim. But in addition to blatant violence, workplace discrimination and subliminal acts of racism, Muslims have also become aware of another nuance that other Americans may not even realize exists — hesitation to give to charity. Because of fear that any charitable Muslim organization or mosque could suddenly be called out for links to a lone extremist faction (whether it’s justified or not), many pulled their money and cut back on donations to the extent that long-established charities found it virtually impossible to survive. Usually without any valid reason, many stopped supporting Muslim aide groups for the simple notion that anyone, anywhere could at any moment single out that organization and in turn put all those who gave money out of goodwill at risk for associating with them. The victims in all this? The impoverished and destitute in many “third world” countries.

At the same time, tragically, other active Muslims who were entrenched in the community or worked in an organizing capacity (much like our president once did for the disenfranchised), ceased their activities over trepidation as to how their efforts towards equality could one day be misconstrued for something nefarious. The climate of society forced many followers of the Islamic faith to alter their involvement on a plethora of levels. Even today, as forces like the NYPD keep Muslims under intrusive surveillance and continued cases of FBI entrapment emerge, many have stopped attending mosques or interacting too much within the community out of sheer apprehension over unwarranted government action. It is an unfortunate reflection of how marginalized groups often times suffer under the radar without a representative voice in government and in the mainstream.

Throughout modern history, we’ve had other instances of outrageous fear mongering, bias and injustice against those whose patriotism we questioned. Though it is rarely covered in classrooms, the internment of hundreds of thousands of Japanese and those of Japanese ancestry during WWII is a perfect example. Literally rounded up and “excluded” from living in the cities and towns they resided in, these “suspicious” individuals were interned in camps because their allegiance to the country “could not be determined.”

In 1950, at the height of the great red scare, Congress passed the Internal Security Act which required the American Communist Party, affiliated organizations and all ‘subversives’ to get fingerprinted and officially register with the Attorney General. This draconian law was so outrageous that then-President Harry Truman even vetoed it (though Congress overruled his veto in the end). The truly tragic and troubling thing about today’s NDAA is that President Obama isn’t even attempting to veto it anymore; he is instead giving it his stamp of approval. Even though the president stated that he has “serious reservations” regarding the detention, interrogation and prosecution of suspected terrorists, and even though he emphasizes that his administration will not indefinitely militarily detain American citizens without trial, what happens after he is no longer in office? Future leaders of the free world, after all, have absolutely no obligation to honor Obama’s signing statement, nor follow in his footsteps.

Yes, our first African American president has changed much of the vitriolic language used when covering the topic of terrorism, and yes he has taken great caution to ensure that Muslims and terror itself are not juxtaposed together. For that, he should be commended. But by finalizing the ability of any president to deem persons — including U.S. citizens (if they so interpret this bill) — an enemy that could then be indefinitely detained without charge or without trial, he sets into motion a frightening precedent. As a former constitutional law professor, President Obama should be inherently aware of the impending ramifications.

During the struggle for civil rights, many journalists, activists and those vocal citizens working alongside Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X and other leaders suddenly found themselves targeted for their activities. Countless advocates became political prisoners and others saw their careers and lives ruined. Now at a time when we already have legislation like the Patriot Act renewed, and warrantless wiretapping is openly put into practice, this defense act not only indoctrinates AUMF (2001 Authorization for use of Military Force) and many activities that were previously in existence, but it also leaves open the possibility of silencing anyone on a level with which we never even imagined.

As American Muslims, we’re happy that some are starting to ease the negative imaging and stereotyping against us, and are instead open to learning more about what the Islamic faith truly stands for. As a routinely alienated group, we’re overly ecstatic when a program like All American Muslim actually portrays us in a light other than that of some extremist radical. But while we should embrace the boycott of Lowe’s for its open bigotry, and praise folks like Russell Simmons for stepping up to the plate to purchase ads for the program, we should put just as much focus into the potential of someone like a Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum taking over the White House and having full reign to detain whomever he pleases. Just remember the Bush-era verbiage of “you’re either with us or against us” and the atmosphere of intolerance that permeated under his presidency, and couple that with the ability of someone with his mentality being able to willfully determine any one of us a “traitor,” lock us up and throw away the key.

If Muslims scaled back their activities in the community and their charitable donations out of paranoia over the unrealistic possibility of being tied to something suspicious, just imagine the fear that will ensue if anyone can be instantly and militarily detained over accusations where the burden of proof won’t even be on the accuser. It is indeed an alarming scenario that can (and in all likelihood will) give new meaning to the term reality — no TV required.

Nida Khan is an independent journalist and producer working in print, radio and TV. As a news correspondent for WRKS 98.7 Kiss FM NY, she has covered everything from Barack Obama’s presidential campaign to protests for the defense of Sean Bell.

Filed under: American Muslims, Democracy, Freedoms, Islam, Muslims, President Obama, United States, US Commission on International Religious Freedom Tagged: All American Muslims, American Muslims, Civil Rights, George W. Bush, Islamophobia, Lowe’s, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King Jr, Muslim Americans, Muslim Charities, National Defense Authorization Act, Newt Gingrich, NYPD, Patriot Act, President Obama, Racial Discrimination, Rick Santorum, TLC

Last week, Newt Gingrich said the following about Palestinian nationalism:

Remember, there was no Palestine as a state — (it was) part of the Ottoman Empire. I think we have an invented Palestinian people who are in fact Arabs and historically part of the Arab community and they had the chance to go many places.

For this, Gingrich has been roundly criticized from a variety of angles. The thing to note, however, is that strictly speaking, he is right — if by “invented” we mean “socially and politically constructed”. The fact of the matter is that all “nations” are invented. It’s just a question of when and how.

The point to be made is that nationalism, as a general political force, arose out of discrete events and processes in the post-medieval age. The invention of the printing press, the spread of vernaculars, the rise of commercial capitalism, the imposition of administrative boundaries by colonial states, the rise of centralizing state — each of these meant that national identities congealed in ways that were simply absent before.

That last word is crucial: before. Whichever national identity you care to choose — French or Filipino, whatever — I can find a point in time when that national identity did not exist, either at all or in particularly stark terms. Creating nations takes effort. Some of it is by accident. Some of it is deliberate — by changing school textbooks, by changing what students read, by changing which languages of instruction are employed,  by changing which language is deemed to be “official” or the court’s language, by imposing conscription, by creating flags and national anthems, by ethnically cleansing certain territories to purify them, and so on.

The problem with Gingrich’s statement was not his assertion of the contingency of Palestinian national identity. Hell, even Rashid Khalidi would agree with him on that. No, the problem with his statement was the implicit supposition that there exist other national identities that are more primordial in nature. That is, while the Palestinians were invented, the French or the Americans or the Arabs were not. I’m afraid that belief is simply incorrect. They were just “invented” at different times in different ways.

As Eugen Weber says in reference to nationalism in late nineteenth-century France, “A lot of Frenchmen did not know they belonged together until the long didactic campaigns of the later nineteenth century told them they did, and their own experience as conditions changed told them that this made sense…France is a deliberate political construction for whose creation the central power has never ceased to fight.” Indeed, we see manifestations of that very same process ongoing today; to wit, the fact that the census in France, unlike most Western democracies, has no provision for marking one’s race or ethnicity. Is the French nation any less “invented” than the Palestinians?

Moreover, when one sees that Gingrich’s “defense” of his original statement is “Somebody ought to have the courage to tell the truth. These people are terrorists. It’s fundamentally time for somebody to have the guts to stand up and say, ‘Enough lying about the Middle East,’” it becomes clear that discovering the antecedent institutional conditions that gave rise to Palestinian group identity is probably not the object of his grand historicizing.

A leading Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has said that .Pakistan’s nukes are at risk of being seized by extremists. He was talking to CNN in the second week of this December in Washington. He said, “My guess is Pakistan … Continue reading →

Related posts:

1. U.S. Exit Strategy – Intrigues against Pakistan
2. Weak Leadership – Would Cause Collapse of Pakistan
3. Dangerous Quest for Arms in South Asia
4. Promoter Of Terrorism In Afghanistan?
5. Pakistan Planned Redeployment of Troops along Border?