NEWS HEADLINES

 

Hookah smoking: A dangerous trend Our local community, particularly our vulnerable children, some as young as 8 years old, are falling prey to this trend of hookah smoking sweeping the US and Europe (an age-old practice imported from the Middle East). The saddest and frighteningly dangerous practice of local hujaj , returning from Makkah, with  "a gift for the children", a hookah pipe, needs to be discouraged and stopped. There is nothing religious  or good about this practice and healthcare givers need the support of parents, teachers and the ulema and to condemn and eradicate this developing potential scourge.

 

 

 

 

 

Text Box: Hookah smoking: A dangerous trend
 
HOOKAH USE  Could inhale as much smoke in one session as puffing on 100 cigarettes. 
Photo by Dan Kelleher/Dreamstime.com
You've given your kids the "cigarettes can kill" lecture, but what about the lecture on water pipes? You might not even know what a water pipe—also known as a hookah, shisha or hubble-bubble—is, but most college students do. In fact, a recent study at Johns Hopkins University found that 15 percent of college freshmen surveyed there currently use one.
That might not sound like a lot, so let's put that in perspective: Of Hopkins' 411 freshmen surveyed, about 60 of them smoke water pipes on a regular basis. Equally scary, the researchers found that 37 percent of those students perceive water pipes to be less harmful than cigarettes. Yet the process, in which the smoker draws air from heated coals and flavored tobacco, with the smoke finally bubbling up through water, could be just as hazardous. An advisory from the World Health Organization warns that a water-pipe smoker could inhale as much smoke during one session as a cigarette smoker would inhale through 100 or more cigarettes.

A list of water-pipe-related concerns includes the use of charcoal as a heat source, the inhalation of nicotine, tar, and heavy metals, and the exposure to carbon monoxide, or CO. A study published in a January 2008 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association examined the latter. Though CO exposures experienced by water-pipe smokers aren't quite at the levels that are known to kill coal miners, the increase in exposure is still quite notable. "We saw an increase of about 40 parts per million," said the study's lead author, Wael El-Nachef, "which poses particular risks to pregnant women and people with cardiovascular conditions." Inhaling that much carbon monoxide could lead to chest pains, a decreased ability to engage in prolonged exercise, drowsiness, and difficulty concentrating.
And that's not all that has doctors worried. "The real danger of this trend is the nicotine addiction and the downhill effect that will come 20 and 40 years down the road," said pulmonologist Edward Rosenow III, M.D., of the Mayo Clinic. Rosenow is concerned that because hookah smoking is more of a social activity, users will turn to cigarettes to get their nicotine high between hookah sessions. That could lead to more incidences of emphysema and cancer.

When asked which was worse—cigarettes or water pipes—El-Nachef and Rosenow were in agreement: "They're both bad," said El-Nachef. While the study of water pipe use in the U.S. is at a very early stage, the little we know certainly seems persuasive enough to support advice to steer clear.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IMASA COMMEMORATE  60 YEARS OF THE NAKBA

 

The members of the Islamic Medical Association of South Africa and our families, indeed all freedom-loving people in the world, share with our Palestinian brothers and sisters in Palestine and those in exile, the 60th anniversary of the Nakba, the Catastrophe

We share your pain and anguish, your humiliation and oppression at the hands of the ruthless occupiers of your land. We and our children bear testimony with revulsion to the inhuman acts of terror perpetrated by the Zionists and their allies in the US and Europe, the massacre  of your noble leaders, among other, Shaykh Yasin and Dr Al-Rantisi, and the acquiescence of the Arab states  in the Middle East to your call for help.

We hail the selfless efforts of your resistance and the courage of of the community. The signs of the fall of the oppressor are manifest: your superior power lies in your faith and forbearance: they can control and regiment your bodies, but not your souls.  May Allah relieve the pain and suffering and help us overcome the enemy! 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 O Palestine, 60 Years On, You're Still Our Palestine

Mohamad Shmaysani

 

A land without a people for a people without a land or a nation. A saying coined by Zionist intellectuals to justify their occupation of Palestine.
 
Initially, Palestine was not the target.
But, it's suffering throughout ages due to occupations and conflicts on its sacred land made it a dreamland for every greedy entity; and the pretext was religious.
 
"There is a country, and its name is by chance Palestine. A country without a people and on the other hand, there is the Jewish people without a homeland."
This is what the president of the enemy state during Nakba, Hayeem Wiseman, who played a significant role in issuing the Belford promise said.
 
The Ottoman occupation fell in the trap of the Zionist plot that worked on offering money as allurements to bring Jewish emigrants to dwell near sacred sites.
 
The first agricultural settlement was built in 1878, it was a preface to bring thousands of Jews from Diaspora.  Four years later, the first batch of Jews comprising 25 thousand people arrived from Eastern Europe.
 
The idea of creating a national homeland for Jews began to show in different articles and opinions compiled by Austrian Jewish author and journalist (Theodore Herzl).
 
Herzl established the international Zionist organization to bring Jews in Diaspora together. The organization's first conference was held in Basle, Switzerland in 1897.
 
40 thousand Jews arrived in Palestine during World War 1.  Jewish inhabitants now formed 6% of the population.
 
In 1917, the Sayks-Piko Treaty was signed. Soon after, British Foreign Minister, Belford, made his promise to create a homeland for Jews.  To realize this, Britain should control Palestine and this is waht happened one year after the promise.
 
Creating a national homeland for Jews means draining the land from its original residents, and this requires an army, weapons and international cover. Ethnic cleansing was top priority for the new occupier to lodge the coming Jews on the ruins of more Palestinian lands.
 
In 1920, The League of Nations was formed as a prelude to give independence to the occupied country, or the country under mandate as they called it, by preparing it officially, constitutionally, politically and socially.
 
Palestine was mandated to the British Kingdom.
 
Instead of achieving independence for the Palestinian state, it cleared the way, since 1921, for Zionist gangs like Haganah and Irgun, to heavily arm themselves.  Haganah determined that the ages of immigrants should be between 15 and 40, because the people, they said, should be young and strong for the battle to come.
 
The number of settlers increased in Palestine to change the demographic reality. Britain's census in 1922 revealed that 89% of the population were Palestinians with 757,182 residents, whereas Jews constituted less than 9% of the population. This indicates that Palestine was not empty as the Zionists had claimed.  The increasing flow of settlers prompted the Palestinian leadership to seek an end to it.
 
The Palestinian people took to the streets to protest the flow and deterred the new occupation.
 
In the early 30's, the Britons issued the so called "White Paper" that determined the quotas for Jewish emigrants with an annual cut to 15 thousand Jews for five years. Ten years later, according to the "Paper", the Palestinians would rule their own unified state after they declare their independence.
 
However Zionists sought to nullify this "Paper" in 1939.
 
Then Zionist leader Ben Gorion said:
"We will fight the war (WW2) as if there were no White Paper and we will fight the White Paper as if there were no war."
 
The situation in Palestine got worse.
 
Zionist control began to appear during the British occupation, through committing massacres against hundreds of Palestinians, destroying their homes and displacing them.
 
Before "Nakba", half of the Palestinians had been displaced under the eyes of the United Nations which replaced the League of Nations. Ten years later (1947), and instead of declaring the independence of Palestine, The United Nations divided the country when the General Assembly issued resolution 181 that stipulated taking 56.5% of Palestinian land to build the Jewish state and leaving 43% of the territories for the Palestinian State, whereas Quds (Jerusalem) remains under international supervision.
 
The Palestinians rejected the decision to divide their country of which they own 94% at a time Zionists, as foreigners, owned less than 6% of it.
 
The Arab League was entrusted with the mission of liberating Palestine on behalf of its people because they did not have the means.
 
They were backed by the Salvation Army which lacked arms and wise leadership. The number of Arab soldiers was small compared to the heavily armed Zionist militias whose number reached in 1948, 120 thousand combatant Zionist.
 
Horrifying massacres took place, as well as terrorist acts and schemes to fully control lands leaving one-third of the Palestinian population with no other choice but to run for their lives.
 
On the 15th of May 1948, Ben Gorion declared the "State of Israel" thus chronicling the return of the Palestinians after their "Nakba" had begun.
 
60 years on, nothing has changed for the oppressed Palestinians.
60 years on, the west and, unfortunately, some Arab governments are colluding against the right of the Palestinians to return.
60 years on and Bush comes to occupied Palestine to celebrate the creation of the Zionist state that was built on the blood and flesh of the Arab people, and then takes off to visit some Arab leaders and receive red carpet treatment.
O Palestine, 60 years on, you are still and you'll always be Palestine.
 
Gaby Jaafar contributed to this report.

To download this article click here

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PRO-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ZIONIST  ACADEMIC  DEMONISES  MUSLIM COMMUNITY

 

Hussein Solomon, currently Director of the Centre for International Political Studies at the Pretoria University,  for reasons best known to himself and his sponsors in Israel and beyond, appears determined to vilify the local South African Muslim community and denigrate our schools, mosques and cultural institutions as training centres for promoting terrorism. Needless to say his baseless research is causing much pain and consternation in the ummah. In expressing our condemnation of his actions, we reproduce an open letter  written by Suraya Dadoo, researcher of the Media Review Network:

 

Dear Professor Solomon,

Re: Presentation made at Counter-Terrorism Conference, 10 September 2007

On 10 September 2007, you made a presentation, in your capacity as Director of the Centre for International Political Studies, at the 7th International Conference of the International Institute for Counter Terrorism in Herzliya, Israel, where you discussed “radical” Islam in South Africa. It was not surprising that you chose to accept Rueven Paz’s invitation, and joined other well-known Islamophobes such as Steven Emerson, Daniel Pipes, and Binyamin Netanyahu.

 

While your participation in this conference is objectionable, your statement that you “could have done the same presentation on something called mainstream Islam in South Africa” is shocking.  Your assertion that “mainstream Islam = Radical Islam” demonises the entire Muslim community of South Africa.

 

The rest of your presentation consisted of sweeping generalisations about various areas of Muslim life, without reference to any research or findings. That your hosts allowed these baseless allegations to masquerade as an academic presentation, reveals how desperately they wanted to portray Muslims as the enemy.  Indeed, the content of your presentation is one of the most vicious forms of Islamophobia I have ever encountered.

 

During your presentation, you claimed, amongst other things, that: 

    Muslims in South Africa would like to know how you reached these conclusions. Nowhere in your presentation did you provide a shred of evidence to

    substantiate your claims.

 

Your attack was also not limited to local Muslims. You even claimed that the movement of Pakistani and Algerian clerics into South Africa was problematic, and that Lebanese communities in South Africa had links with Hizbollah. Again, you seemed to have ignored the fundamental rule of academia: always provide references and sources! 

 

You used the examples of Dr. Firoz Ganchi, Zubair Ismail, and the Dockrats as supposed proof that South Africans were involved in terror activities. Like most of the inmates at Guantanamo Bay and other secret prisons around the world, not one of these men were ever charged with any crime, despite being detained for lengthy periods of time.  How you can use them as a concrete example of Muslim participation in terror is mind-boggling!

 

Why are there no names mentioned in the supposed plot to blow up the final of the African Nations Cup in Cairo?

Who is the “South African connection” that you mention?  Were they ever charged or convicted?

Also, who is this “gentleman” caught trying to smuggle $130 000 across the border to his contact?

I have never read or heard anything about this before. Surely, the arrest of such an important terror facilitator would have made front-page news?

 

Your attack on Islamic educational structures is appalling. The Muslim community is proud of the strides that it has made in terms of the establishment of madressahs and Islamic schools. However, your insinuation that foreign-trained ulema are influencing Muslim children places unwarranted attention and suspicion on madressahs.

What was almost laughable was that immediately after making this claim, you said: “to the best of my knowledge, I do not know if we actually have a database on this” !

You also claim that it is a “fact” that military training is occurring at various Muslim high schools. I am certain that organizations like the Association of Muslim Schools, as well as educators, members of school governing bodies and others involved in Muslim school structures in South Africa, would be eager to know which schools are involved. I hope that you will provide the evidence to prove this “fact”.

 

Why are you so worried about the World Cup being hosted in South Africa? What evidence is there that shows that hosting this event would be a “problem”, as you put it?

It would also be both in the community and the country’s best interests if you exposed which Muslim organizations, mosques and madressahs and, Muslim media, were “psychologically preparing Muslims for terrorism”, and creating a “siege mentality”.

Surely, you understand that these irresponsible claims sustain the misconception that Islam and Muslims are a threat to domestic and world peace? Your reckless statements will contribute to the unfair profiling of Islamic schools, charities and religious organizations in South Africa, and help create a climate where all Muslims are feared and despised.

As an academic you are obligated to provide indisputable evidence to support these serious allegations. If you cannot, then you must retract your statements and apologise. If, however, you persist in making these allegations, then we demand to know how you arrived at such ludicrous conclusions. I believe that this is a fair demand.  I look forward to receiving your response.

Yours sincerely,

Suraya Dadoo

Researcher, Media Review Nework

FURTHER READING: Solomon's truth-abuse reveals mushrooming industry in the camp of "Security Experts" by Iqbal Jassat

 

 

 

 

A fight for life in a power struggle

Paralysed in a car crash, Maher al Aseli relies on an electric respirator to breathe. So, every time the power supply is cut, it is up to his family to man the pump to keep him alive

By Donald Macintyre
Wednesday, 30 January 2008

It's 8pm on Monday evening and the Aseli family is in full emergency mode. The power has just gone down in their apartment – for the second time that day – blacking out the lights and the electric heater.

Abed al Aseli, father of the household, rises to light a lamp powered by cooking gas while one of his sons moves in a swift, practised way towards the bed of Maher, 12, in what is literally a life-or-death mission. Maher, paralysed from the neck down for the past six and a half years, normally relies on an electric respirator to breathe. When there is no power, the only alternative, however long the outage lasts, is to maintain his breathing manually with an Ambo hand pump.

Which is why, since last week's cut in fuel supplies to Gaza's power station, Mr al Aseli has recruited his five teenage nephews and nieces to help him, his wife, Alia, and their four other sons and two daughters, aged between eight and 21, working in rotation throughout the night, if necessary, with the nerve-racking, exhausting, task of keeping Maher alive.

Mr al Aseli says this is stressful for the whole family, and that his wife has to spend a disproportionate amount of time caring for Maher in what the family has made, in effect, into a home intensive care unit. "It is very difficult," he says. "If the power goes out at 1am, I have to shout and immediately wake up the kids."

The tragedy which first put Maher into this state had nothing to do with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. As Mrs al Aseli explains, when Maher was five and a half years old, he was driven by his father to a local supermarket. Mr Maher left his son in the car while he nipped into the store, but as he started to make his way back, he saw in horror that Maher had managed to get out of the car and was crossing the road towards him. Mr Maher shouted at him to stop where he was but Maher was run down close to the family car by a fast-moving taxi whose driver failed to see him. Maher's spinal cord was injured between the second and third vertebrae, leaving him quadriplegic.

 

Reuters

Eating fish: good for heart, bad for environment?

 

 

Sat Aug 11, 2007 10:13PM

 By Ed Stoddard

 

HALIFAX, Nova Scotia (Reuters) - Doctors recommend a good dose of salmon or tuna in the diet because of its benefits to the heart. But is it good for the environment?

 

Surging demand for salmon in particular has been spurred in part by numerous studies touting the health benefits of omega-3 fatty acids, which are present in some kinds of fish.

 

A study published in June in the American Heart Association journal Circulation said a diet with liberal servings of fish, nuts and seeds rich in such nutrients can help lower a person's blood pressure. Other studies have shown benefits to eye and brain development and preventing heart disease, Alzheimer's disease and eye disorders.

 

Conservationists point out that while global fish stocks were getting hammered long before sushi became chic, health trends could add pressure to already vulnerable fisheries.

 

"Over-fishing has predated the interest in omega-3 and healthy eating. But now there are places where it is certainly going to accentuate it," said Jason Clay, vice president of markets at the World Wildlife Fund (WWF).

 

"The FAO (U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization) estimates that by 2030 average annual per capita global consumption of fish will increase by 1.5 kgs (3.4 pounds) and some of it will be driven by health-related demand," he said.

 

SUSTAINABLE VERSUS UNSUSTAINABLE

 

When it comes to omega-3 fatty acids, not all fish are equal. Fatty fish such as trout, salmon, mackerel and Alaska pollock are rich in this crucial group of nutrients.

 

Tuna are, too, but few wild tuna fisheries are regarded by conservationists as sustainable.

 

"It depends on your source ... Omega-3s are very high in wild salmon and the Alaskan salmon fishery is well-managed," said Phil Kline, an ocean campaigner with Greenpeace.

 

Alaska salmon are among the fisheries that have been certified as sustainable by the British-based Marine Stewardship Council. It uses stringent criteria for a fishery to get its seal of approval and the right to bear its eco-label.

 

It has not yet given its blessing to any tuna fishery but is assessing the sustainability of the U.S. Pacific coast albacore tuna industry.

 

Demand for salmon has certainly been soaring.

 

According to the U.S. National Fisheries Institute, American per capita consumption of salmon has risen from 0.87 pounds (0.39 kg) per year in 1992 to 2.026 pounds (0.92 kg) in 2006. The species also went from being America's sixth most popular fish to eat to its third over the same period of time.

 

In a well-managed situation, such demand can lead to conservation: it's in no one's interest to deplete something of value.

"In the long run, the more valuable wild salmon are the better they are likely to be protected," said Gunnar Knapp, a professor of economics at the University of Alaska's Institute of Social and Economic Research.

 

He said high demand and prices gave people an incentive to protect vital salmon habitat such as spawning grounds in rivers from other industries such as logging and mining.

 

"In Alaska, even if the price of salmon were to quadruple it would not lead to too many fish being caught because the limiting factor is not the price but how much the managers allow the fishermen to catch, and they make that assessment purely on biological grounds," Knapp told Reuters by phone from Anchorage.

 

But he said Russia's salmon fishery, for example, was not so well managed and could suffer overfishing as prices rise.

 

Much of the burgeoning demand for salmon is being met by the rapidly growing aquaculture industry, but experts say there are environmental concerns linked to that, too.

 

WWF's Clay said fish being caught for fishmeal to feed the aquaculture industry include species such as anchovies, which are rich in omega-3s but which have questions over their sustainability.

 

"One out of every three fish that is caught right now is used to make feed for other fish," he said.

 

Fish don't actually produce omega-3 fatty acids, they capture it from the food chain.

 

And there are plenty of substitutes out there such as walnuts, flaxseed and canola oil, which can provide the same omega-3-related benefits as fish.

 

In the past, children in many parts of the world were given cod liver oil as a health supplement. These days, they are more likely to take fish oil capsules made from other species.

 

For conservationists, the question is whether the latest health trend will result in salmon and other species going the same way as eastern Canada's cod fishery, once one of the world's richest which utterly collapsed last decade.

 

To DOWNLOAD this article click here

 

 

 

The Plight of the Physically Disabled

On Friday 30 March 2007 the General Assembly of the United Nations hosted some 80 member states at a special ceremony to sign the historic Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which had been adopted in December 2006.  This new human rights treaty marked the culmination of nearly 20 years of work on protecting and promoting the rights of persons with disabilities and a major shift in the way the world treats its  650 million disabled people.

In her opening remarks, Sheikha Haya Rashed Al Khalifa (Bahrain), President of the General Assembly, said all Member States had now committed to promoting and protecting the human rights, freedoms and dignity of all persons with disabilities. The Convention was an "opportunity to reaffirm the universal commitment to the rights and dignity of all people without discrimination" that could likewise provide the much-needed impetus for wider cultural changes in the world's perception of disabled people.

The Islamic Medical Association of South Africa welcomes the adoption of the convention that grants the physically oppressed  greater  hope that they would, at last,  be respected as active members of society rather than objects of charity. We urge that all member states sign the Protocol.  Please read the presentation remarks of Asha-Rose Migiro (UN Deputy Secretary-General) below:                                                                                                                                       

Deputy Secretary-General

Department of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York

30 March 2007


 

VIGOROUS NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION, OVERSIGHT MUST FOLLOW TREATY RATIFICATION,  SAYS DEPUTY SECRETARY-GENERAL AT SIGNING OF DISABILITIES CONVENTION

Following is the text of UN Deputy Secretary-General Asha-Rose Migiro’s remarks at the ceremony marking the opening for signature of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, as delivered in New York, today, 30 March 2007:

Let me extend my own welcome to all of you.

Six hundred and fifty million men, women and children around the world are currently known to live with disabilities.  The actual number is bound to be even higher, because all of us could become disabled at any point of our lives.  All humankind, therefore, has cause to celebrate the opening for signature today of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Optional Protocol.

 

We would not be here today without the sustained efforts of the disability community.  This landmark moment is a direct outcome of their vigorous advocacy to right a historic wrong.  The United Nations family and our Member States responded to the challenge.

 

In three short years, the Convention went from dream to reality.  On its adoption by the General Assembly late last year, it became the first human rights treaty of the twenty-first century, and the fastest negotiated international human rights instrument in history.

 

The substance of the treaty is more encouraging still.  The Convention specifically prohibits discrimination against persons with disabilities in all areas of life, including employment, access to justice and the right to education, health services and access to transportation.  It requires that public spaces and buildings be accessible to persons with disabilities, and it seeks improvements in information and communications infrastructure, as well.

 

The Convention also recognizes that a change of attitude is vital if disabled people are to achieve equality.  States parties will not only have to combat negative stereotypes and prejudices; they will also be expected to promote awareness of people’s abilities and contributions to society.

 

The treaty breaks ground in other ways as well, including through its stress on social development.  It recognizes that the input, ideas and efforts of the disability community are critical to society’s overall progress.  It emphasizes that their contributions can supply a crucial boost to the development agenda, while simultaneously accommodating the needs of this important constituency as well.

 

Now that the Convention and its Optional Protocol are open for signature, the focus will shift to Member States and their national legislatures.  These instruments require 20 ratifications to enter into force.  Given the strong representation of Member States at this ceremony, I believe that number will not be long in coming.

 

But I hope we will go much further than that, and achieve universal ratification.  Currently, fewer than 50 countries have specific legislation that protects persons with disabilities.  I know we can do better, and today’s gathering shows us the way.

 

Of course, ratification has to be followed by vigorous implementation and oversight at the national and local levels.  Only then will the real benefits of this legislation be felt by millions of persons with disabilities through the world.  Only then will our own high expectations prove truly justified.

 

So I urge all Member States to consider signing, ratifying and implementing this important Convention and its Optional Protocol without delay.  And I congratulate all who have worked so hard towards this day.

 

Useful Links: Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (full text)

                    Asia-Pacific Development Centre on Disability

                    Child rights information network (CRIN)

 

 

             &