Group items tagged

The first word in the holy book of Islam is "Read". So Muslims pay an attention in the study according to Allah's decision. Contributions from the Muslims in world history has been quite remarkable. Particularly, in the field of architecture, Muslims made a great difference. Muslim architecture began with calligraphy during prophet Muhammad. They mainly started it to beautify texts. Later calligraphy decorated different objects such as mosques, houses and much more places. Decoration in Islamic architecture is a major unifying factor. Though Islamic architecture is based on two dimensions, with the use of variations in color and texture, it creates the illusion of different planes. The sense of Geometry helped Muslim architects to use the concept of symmetry and changing scale mirror to create light effects. The use of marble and mosaic is common in Islamic architectures. As Islam spread in the middle east in the early age, the geographical effect of hot climate is quite clear. Fountains and courtyard pools are one of the unique characteristics of Muslim architecture. The presence of water not only beautifies the architectures by creating a reflective effect, but it cools the atmosphere.

The founding fathers were very concerned about the danger of democracy and spoke quite openly about the need to construct the democratic institutions so that threat would be contained.  That's why the Senate has so much more power than the House, to mention just one example.

There is a lot of talk about Mr. Obama's character, or lack thereof, these days. He's not a fighter, he's too conciliatory, he's weak, he's unprepared, he's a secret Republican, etc. I have an outside-the-box theory about Obama that may explain all this: Stockholm Syndrome.

What is Terrorism Terrorism is the use of force and threats against individual people, groups, or governments, for political or other various purposes. Terrorism is not a modern activity. Hundreds of years ago, societies were not as organized as they are today with modern facilities like roads, telephone, regular police forces. Back then, heads of strong groups of people such robbers, and warriors made use of force and threats to life and property to achieve their aims. Now, terrorism itself is quite an organized activity. There are terrorist organizations and societies which train terrorists for their purposes. Sometimes these organizations are supported by foreign governments with huge funds and modern weapons.

Islam is a religion of peace and purity. No doubt every single word of love, affection and optimism can be used for this religion. It is that religion on the earth which is not difficult to follow. What makes a Muslim say that his religion is the best? What is it which attracts a non-Muslim to turn into a Muslim? Surely, there is something! A Jewish living in Australia himself carried a research on all the religions including Islam in depth and the reason for him being so curious about knowing Islam was his neighbor. He was really impressed by him. From the way he lived his life till the way he worshiped the one he believed. He stated, "Islam is the best religion." This was the first half of his sentence but the other half was quite disappointing for him as well as the stupendous Muslims. He stated in the next half sentence, "but unfortunately with majority of worst followers of it." Now what is supposed to be noticed are the words "worst people." These are those people of have ruined the reputation of Islam and are the main cause of American Islamophobia. Their brutal and cruel acts of spreading Islam in the modern era or taking revenge from the non-believers have simply dug the REAL image of the Islamic community, its ethics and culture. Islamophobia is a danger because many Muslims fear the day when rest of the world will completely boycott from them and they will not have any kind of support. No doubt, the religion permits to carry out "Jihad" which is a war in the way of Allah against the non-believers who do respect their religion. All they need is to live peacefully but what annoys them is when a non-believer who does not even know even a bit of their religion, insults them on being Muslims or underestimates their religion along with disobeying the one they worship. On the other way while we observed what the image that Muslims have throughout the world we find that Islamophobia is still having a severe affect on the lives of innocent Mu

almost certainly under-stated conclusion that it has "found that since Obama took office three years ago, between 282 and 535 civilians have been credibly reported as killed including more than 60 children." And targeting rescuers and funeral attendees of your victims is quite the opposite of keeping the drone program on a "very tight leash." 

Just watched Barney Frank's embarrassing performance on Hardball tonight (scroll to 9:15 unless you can handle 9 minutes of Mrs. Alan Greenspan), and it is quite clear the spin is in for the flotilla mess, and it is all hands on deck to cover Israel's ass. ...

By Glenn GreenwaldHere again, we see one of the principal and longest-lasting effects of the Obama presidency: to put a pretty, eloquent, progressive face on what (until quite recently) was ostensibly considered by a large segment of the citizenry to be

Nothing quite makes neoclassical economists go apoplectic than reading or hearing the argument that an increase in the minimum wage doesn't cause unemployment. Just ask David Card and Alan Krueger (here's one example, from Gary Becker).

Earlier today I posted video of a Civil Liberties and Terrorism speech I gave last night at the University of Wisconsin, along with some notices of events and media appearances tomorrow, but I wanted to separately post this 13-minute discussion I had on MSNBC this afternoon with Dylan Ratigan and Cenk Uygur about the Obama presidency, progressives and the Democratic Party, because I thought the discussion was quite good and touched on some important issues:

Walking past the bodies of Iraqi soldiers, a member of the 3rd Brigade Combat Team asks quitely, "Why do we do these things to one another?"

Extensive radar mapping of the middle-latitude region of northern Mars shows that thick masses of buried ice are quite common beneath protective coverings of rubble.

Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari and U.S. President Barack Obama have become quite the pen pals as of late. Yet, cutting through the niceties contained within letters they had recently exchanged, one can sense an underlining tension between the so-called strategic partners, exposing a vitreous relationship filled with mistrust.

Obama has won the War on Terror debate -- for the American Right.  And they're quite appreciative

Regardless of the promises made by President Obama in the State of the Union speech to improve the economy and create jobs, the pain quotient for many Americans is quite high now!

Paul Ryan had reason to be upset after a Democrat won Tuesday's election in New York's 26th Congressional District. He's experienced quite a comedown.

AS Election Day approaches, serious discussion about economic policies is hamstrung by the devotion of both parties to reducing taxes. The big reason, of course, is that President Bush emphasizes tax cuts, including elimination of the estate tax, to the exclusion of almost everything else. The Democrats, in turn, hesitate to propose an economic plan that does not include long-term reductions for middle-income workers, and most refuse to talk about rescinding the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. But the degree of misleading information emanating from both Washington and the media about how taxes affect the economy is disturbing. As I listen to the radio, watch TV news and read a variety of newspapers, it seems that quite a few Americans, including economics writers and media hosts, think that low-tax countries unquestionably grow faster than high-tax economies. Right and left, they seem to attribute more rapid growth in America to lower taxes. What may surprise them is that there is no evidence for that. ''You can make a theoretical case that high taxes impede economic growth, but it is just not supported by the evidence in the U.S. or across countries,'' said William Easterly, a former World Bank economist soon to join the faculty of New York University.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports today no jobs were created in August. Zero. Nada. Well, not quite. The strike at Verizon reduced the labor force by 45,000. Minnesota government employees returned to work, adding 22,000. So in reality, America added 23,000 jobs. Almost zero. In reality, worse than zero. We need 125,000 a month merely to keep up with population growth. So the hole continues to deepen. Since this Depression began at the end of 2007, America's potential labor force - working-age people who want jobs - has grown by over 7 million. But since then the number of Americans with jobs has shrunk by more than 300,000.

A Libertarian rebuttal to the post two links down on my profile, written a little more intelligently than most, from somebody who I find myself liking a little - but still showing some of the glib blindness that drove me away from that movement. Eg. responding to the report of the selling of tainted meat by saying that one could prevent the problem by cooking the meat until it's medium (ie. greyish red, instead of grey outright, and only mostly tasteless). "See", she seems to be saying, "even without governmental regulation, you have a choice", not quite getting that it isn't a reasonable choice. Selling meat that doesn't have to be cooked to death to be safe is absolutely possible; my grocery does it with regularity and I cook it rare with regularity, without problems following. So is it reasonable that people in places where the merchants or those they buy from are not as ethical should have to maybe choose between enjoying their meals, or surviving them, just so that somebody else be slimy without undue interference? With how ever much charm, the author of this piece answers that question with a resounding "yes", and shows why Libertarianism is, as I've said, not about the promotion of personal freedom so much as it is about the promotion of personal irresponsibility.

So bad it's worth reading, because you're going to see this argument, again, I'm sure. The author argues that universities are, themselves, victims of censorship if they are not free to fire faculty members for expressing political viewpoints which they don't like, because they are being forced to support views they don't like. This is question begging, because it presupposes that by allowing them to stay on its payrolls, a university has allowed those faculty members to speak for it; that the very act of allowing them to stay signals support for their views. This is nonsense. They are paid to teach. Their political views are their own business. Making the point, quite unintentionally I would guess, that the last thing Libertarianism promotes is individual liberty. If you're not free to speak your views openly without fear of destitution, then just how free is speech, really?