During 2000 Presidential elections, Al Gore and Lieberman were on the Democratic ticket. The American Jewish population was thrilled to see one of their own at the ticket for vice President. But many conservative Muslims were worried about the possibility of Jewish politician only a heartbeat away from becoming the President of United States. It was a hard to swallow scenario so they voted for George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. But eight years of Bush and Cheney turned out to be worst nightmare for Muslims.

As the things stand now in Presidential Primaries, there is a strong possibility that Bernie Sanders, competing for Democratic nomination, and Donald Trump, competing for Republican nomination, will emerge as nominees of their respective parties. The Jewish reaction to Bernie Sanders, a non-practicing Jew, is low key as compared to enthusiasm for Joseph Lieberman in 2000. Mr. Nicholas Confessore writes in NYT:

“Did Bernie Sanders Just Grab Jewish Crown in New Hampshire?” asked a headline in The Forward. An essay published by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency questioned why Mr. Sanders’s victory received less attention as an emblem of acceptance and accomplishment than the selection of Joseph I. Lieberman as the Democrats’ vice-presidential nominee in 2000.”

Despite the low key reaction, one can still expect overwhelming Jewish support for Bernie Sanders. But how the conservative Muslims will choose between Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders?   

And how Mr. Trump, who has offended every minority, will react to a Jewish opponent with overwhelming Jewish support? Mr. Donald is already upset about his cancelling of Israeli visit  and he may turn ugly against Jewish minority as he has done with other minorities. Mr. Dana Millbank writes in Washington Post:

“This year’s Holocaust remembrance comes at a time when Donald Trump, the front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination, retweets to his nearly 6 million followers a message from @WhiteGenocideTM based in “Jewmerica,” and a time when his nearest challenger, Ted Cruz, brandishes the endorsement of a minister who says Hitler was a “hunter” sent after the Jews by God. There has never been a more important time for Americans to heed the moral authority of the Holocaust survivors still among us.”

Mr. Dana Milbank further writes:

“I am exceptionally concerned about demagogues,” the 85-year-old Weiss told me at Wednesday’s commemoration at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. “They touch me in a place that I remember. I know their influence and, unfortunately, I know how receptive audiences are to demagogues and what it leads to.”

“It has echoes, and maybe more so to me than to native-born Americans,” she said after lighting a candle for Hitler’s victims. “I’m scared. I don’t like the trend. I don’t like how many people are applauding when they hear these demagogues. It can turn.”

Mr. Dana Milbank continues;

“Munzer, who lost two sisters and his father to the Nazis, said he never thought such things could happen in America, but now he’s not so sure. “Thinking that Germany was somehow unique is wrong,” he said.

If the choice is between Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, I hope Muslims has the wisdom to join Jewish friends to support Bernie Sanders and stop a bigot who may turn out to be worse than Bush and Cheney.

F. Sheikh

It is interesting to see the map below of Middle East, its Shia population and major oil fields. Perhaps it explains why Saudi Arabia, and may be even West, is extremely concerned about any Shia uprising or Shia as predominant force in Middle East. Red areas are oil fields, Green areas are Shia population. Although there are no oil fields next to Yemen shia population, but uprising there can inspire the Shia in East, next to Bahrain. It also explains why Saudi Arabi sent tanks to Bahrain, perhaps with green light from West, during uprising two years ago, and war in Yemen. Is this a self created sectarian war for control of oil?

Map below is of Middle East , red is Gas fields, Black oil fields. Read description in the map for details of population.

Geocurrents map.

Although it is a continuation of the discussion on Noor Salik’s talk on Iqbal’s sixth lecture on November 29th, 2015, but I am posting it separately because I think it is a bit different subject.  

I think poetry is like a one liner islated thought and is not necessarily a well thought out comprehensive opinion. For example take the following verses;

Judda Ho Deen siyasaat se to……………………………

Jis khait se Kissan ko muyassir…………………………

These are so powerfully written inspirational one liner isolated thoughts that one spontaneously feels like clapping and rising up in praise, but reader has to complete this thought with one’s own imagination. It does not necessarily mean that the poet has the capability or has fully thought out opinion in detail as is required in prose. Although one is always curious to know more, but it is not fair either to ask the poet to express his thought in detail in prose or in speech even if that thought is related to religion or politics. The poet, like an artist, portrays only the snipes of circumstances with big gaps to be filled by the observer or reader’s own imagination.

The public at large, in awe by the power of Iqbal’s poetry, thought that he must have comprehensive opinions behind the one liner thought poetry, and pressed him to explain in detail his thoughts from religion to politics during uncertain times. Even though Iqbal was not an Islamic scholar and has ventured from Wahabbism to Sufism, he agreed to do so and the result was his six lectures on Reconstruction Of Islamic Thought. It was natural to have contradictions not just between his poetry, which represented snipes of thought without full picture, and speeches but also within the speech itself because he was not a scholar on the subject he was venturing into.  

How much importance one should give to six lectures of Iqbal? I think it depends on one’s personal motives and whether one looks at Iqbal more than a poet.        

Fayyaz Sheikh  

A study by George Washington University titled, “ISIS in America: From Retweets to Raqqa,”  is worth reading by all Muslims in USA, especially Muslim  leaders. Many of us will try to find in this study holes and entrapment, which may be true to some extent, but discarding it entirely is a self-denial and self-defeating proposition. It is not purely religious fanatics who are attracted to ISIS, but the sympathizers and active supporters come from all demographics. In the last 18 months, on terrorist charges 40 % of arrested in USA are under age 21 and 40 % of total arrested are newly converts.

It requires open discussion at homes and in Mosques/Islamic Centers to address the issues, especially (a) why our teenagers, from all demographics are more at risk and what should be done? (b) Why 40 % of the newly converts are attracted to ISIS? How to remedy it? ( F. Sheikh )

ISIS in America – Full Report

Link to article in NYT

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/02/us/politics/56-arrests-in-us-this-year-related-to-isis-study-says.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news