SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Truth About Islam -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck who wrote (9270)7/31/2007 1:44:48 PM
From: one_less  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 20106
 
Like I said, you aren't man enough to accept the responsibility that comes with being truthful, so you will always spin and lie to get to your next sentence, the path of weaklings and cowards. I figure you think it saves face for you somehow, to come back with some lame, chronically wrong allegation/insinuation or bigoted slam. You're also wrong if you think that strategy saves face.



To: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck who wrote (9270)7/31/2007 2:30:02 PM
From: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck  Respond to of 20106
 
Saudi in the Classroom
A fundamental front in the war.

By Stanley Kurtz
National Review Online

The Stealth Curriculum
There's certainly something troubling here. And once you grasp the Saudi connection, it begins to make sense. Stotsky didn't quite put all the pieces together, but she came very close. Her stint at the Massachusetts Department of Education, and her bad experience with Harvard's Center for Middle East Studies prompted Stotsky to publish The Stealth Curriculum: Manipulating America's History Teachers under the auspices of the Fordham Foundation.

Introducing Stotsky's study, Fordham Foundation president, and noted education expert, Chester Finn, calls the use of teacher-training seminars a "vast dark continent within our public (and private) educational system." According to Finn "interest groups and ideologues" have used these seminars to "fly under the radar" of ordinary curriculum safeguards, promulgating "bias, misinformation, and politically charged conclusions, though never acknowledging their semi-covert agendas." All too often, says Finn, those agendas include viewing "the history of freedom as the history of oppression" and urging students "to be more sympathetic to cultures that don't value individual rights than to those that do." It's a sad commentary on Title VI subsidies to American universities to think that this high-profile federally-funded program has become the parade example of a much broader educational scandal.

Even in 2004, Stotsky had more than an inkling of Saudi financial involvement in Title VI outreach programs. In The Stealth Curriculum, she wrote: "Most of these materials have been prepared and/or funded by Islamic sources here and abroad, and are distributed or sold directly to schools or individual teachers, thereby bypassing public scrutiny." Stotsky goes on to note that after 9/11, the Saudi government sent U.S. schools thousands of packages of educational material that, for example, attributed the Middle East's problems to Western colonization.

Saudi Money
Yet the full extent of Saudi curricular funding, and the magnitude of its influence over university outreach programs funded under Title VI, was only revealed in late 2005 by a special four-part investigative report by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA). As the JTA put it: "Saudi Arabia is paying to influence the teaching of American public schoolchildren. And the U.S. taxpayer is an unwitting accomplice....Often bypassing school boards and nudging aside approved curricula....These materials praise and sometimes promote Islam, but criticize Judaism and Christianity....Ironically, what gives credibility to...these distorted materials is Title VI of the Higher Education Act....Believing they're importing the wisdom of places like Harvard or Georgetown, they are actually inviting into their schools whole curricula and syllabuses developed with the support of Riyadh."

Riyadh achieves this by supporting a number of groups devoted to the development and dissemination of English-language curricula about the Middle East. This includes funding from Saudi Aramco, a Saudi government-owned oil company, for a Berkeley, California-based group called, Arab World and Islamic Resources, or AIWAR.

According to the JTA, AIWAR's founder, Audrey Shabbas, also edits the controversial "Arab World Studies Notebook." Shabbas, in turn, is employed by the Middle East Policy Council (MEPC) to conduct its teacher-training and seminar programs, says JTA. And MEPC (formerly the Arab American Affairs Council) is headed by a former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia and, according to the JTA, receives direct funding from Saudi Arabia.

According to the JTA, the Middle East Policy Council was seeking major funding for its teaching efforts from Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal bin Abdulaziz in late 2005. Alwaleed himself initiated contacts with MEPC after hearing about its seminars designed to shape American teachers' perceptions of the Middle East. It appears that the partnership between MEPC and Prince Alwaleed has borne fruit. This past March, Prince Alwaleed announced that he was supplementing his earlier donation of $100,000 to MEPC with a $1 million gift for its teacher-training programs. By the way, this is the same Prince Alwaleed whose $10 million post-9/11 gift was returned by Rudy Giuliani because that gift was accompanied by a letter blaming American foreign policy for the attack on the Pentagon and World Trade Center. (For more on massive gifts by Prince Alwaleed to Harvard and Georgetown for programs Islamic studies, see this item by Martin Kramer.)

The final piece of the puzzle discovered by the JTA is a little-known but clearly influential foundation called Dar al Islam ("Abode of Islam"), located in Abiquiu, New Mexico. Created with Saudi funding, according to the JTA, Dar al Islam runs teacher-training programs and has employed a number of individuals who've gone on to work in or with public outreach programs at federally-funded Title VI university centers of Middle-East Studies.

According to JTA, for example, Betty Shabbas, who edits the Arab World Studies Notebook and whose work is promoted by outreach coordinators at several Title VI Middle East National Resource Centers, was herself director of Dar al Islam's summer teacher-training program in 1994 and 1995. JTA also notes that an outreach coordinator at Georgetown University's Center for Contemporary Arab Studies, a Title VI National Resource Center on the Middle East, was for several years assistant director of Dar al Islam's teacher-training institute. The precise funding and affiliation history of Dar al Islam is complex and in dispute. According to the JTA, after it began investigating the topic, Dar al Islam changed some of the information on its website. (For details, readers should consult the four-part JTA series linked above, especially parts 1 and 3.)

Although this complex web of financial and organizational involvement was illuminated with unprecedented clarity by the JTA report, Saudi involvement with Title VI Middle East Studies centers has never been entirely secret. For example, a volume published to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of Harvard's Center for Middle Eastern Studies notes three specific sources of funding for the center's public outreach program: federal Title VI subsidies, matching funds from Harvard itself, and funding from the Saudi-government owned oil company, Aramco.

Not College
The upshot of all this is that the close links between Saudi funded curriculum-development and teacher-training programs, on the one hand, and federally subsidized university programs of Middle East Studies, on the other, has opened up a back-door route to Saudi influence over America's K-12 curriculum.

Stotsky's work and the JTA report have been public for some time, yet virtually no-one has noticed. I myself testified before the House in 2003 on the need to reform Title VI. The problem of bias in public outreach programs was one of my key concerns, yet even I was shocked when I discovered Stotsky and the JTA story. The extent of Saudi influence raises the already deep-lying problems with Title VI to a whole new level.

It's also important to emphasize that Title VI public outreach programs are not part of the college curriculum. In my testimony before the House, I addressed broader issues of bias in university programs of Middle East Studies. Yet I invoked that context to explain problems in Title VI public outreach programs, which are creatures of Congress -- yet without real oversight. Opponents of Title VI reform have consistently misrepresented the issue as a question of academic freedom, when every piece of legislation aimed at reforming Title VI has contained a provision preventing the federal government from mandating or controlling the content of college curricula. Moreover, I have publicly endorsed that provision.

The real effect of blocking federal oversight of Title VI has been to create a public outreach program that is not part of the college curriculum -- a program funded by the American taxpayer, yet answerable to no-one. The unsupervised state of these university outreach programs leaves them open to exploitation by foreign interests seeking control of America's K-12 curriculum on the Middle East. That is an intolerable situation. Congress must restore federal oversight to Title VI of the Higher Education Act.

Hope?
The good news is that Congress may soon help to solve this problem. Despite the polarization and inaction in the current session of Congress, senators Kennedy and Enzi have reached bipartisan agreement on an excellent plan of reform for Title VI -- including the creation of grievance procedures to handle complaints about the public outreach program. (Stotsky recommends a similar solution). The question is, will the House adopt the bipartisan Senate compromise on Title VI, or will the higher-education lobby move to block reform? This issue could easily devolve into an ugly political battle. Yet if the House decides to model its reauthorization of the Higher Education Act on the Kennedy-Enzi Title VI compromise, Title VI reform could become one of the few bipartisan bright spots of the current congressional session.

That's the good news. The catch is that even -- or especially -- if reform does pass, it's still going to take tremendous effort to counteract the growing Saudi use of Title VI as a lever to gain influence over how America teaches its children about the Middle East. The creation of a grievance procedure for public-outreach programs in no way guarantees the outcome of any grievances that might be filed. This battle isn't over, it's only just begun.

— Stanley Kurtz is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

American Congress for Truth
P.O. Box 6884
Virginia Beach, VA 23456
member@americancongressfortruth.org
americancongressfortruth.org

Every day, American Congress for Truth (ACT) a 501c3 non-profit organization is on the front lines fighting for you in meeting with politicians, decision makers, speaking on college campuses and planning events to educate and inform the public about the threat of Islamofascism.



To: DeplorableIrredeemableRedneck who wrote (9270)7/31/2007 7:10:31 PM
From: Proud_Infidel  Respond to of 20106
 
Guantanamo Cell Is Better Than Freedom, Says Inmate Fighting Against Release
Times Online ^ | July 31, 2007 | Sean O’Neill

timesonline.co.uk

An inmate of Guantanamo Bay who spends 22 hours each day in an isolation cell is fighting for the right to stay in the notorious internment camp.

Ahmed Belbacha fears that he will be tortured or killed if the United States goes ahead with plans to return him to his native Algeria.

The Times has learnt that Mr Belbacha, who lived in Britain for three years, has filed an emergency motion at the US Court of Appeals in Washington DC asking for his transfer out of Guantanamo to be halted. He was cleared for release from Camp Delta in February and his lawyers believe that his return to Algerian custody is imminent.

Mr Belbacha says that if he returns to Algeria, he faces the threat of torture by security services and murder by Islamist terrorists.

Zachary Katznelson, senior counsel with the human rights lawyers Reprieve and Mr Belbacha’s lawyer, has asked the US courts to block any transfer. “Ahmed is being held in camp six, the harshest part of Guantanamo,” he said. “His cell is all steel, there are no windows, he is not allowed to communicate with other prisoners and he gets just two hours exercise each day in a metal cage.

“He says his cell in Guantanamo is like a grave and that although it sounds crazy he would rather stay in those conditions than go back to Algeria. The fact is that he is really, really scared about what might happen to him in Algeria.”

Mr Belbacha, 38, fled Algeria in 1999 at the height of the brutal civil war between the Armed Islamic Group (GIA) and the Algerian Government.

He was an accountant for a state-owned oil company, Sonatrach, when he was called for a second spell of military service. The call-up was followed by death threats to him and his family from the GIA, which killed thousands of state employees during the 1990s.

Mr Belbacha went first to France and then to Britain, where he applied for asylum. He was given exceptional leave to remain pending the outcome of his application.

He lived in Bournemouth, Dorset, and worked as a cleaner at the Highcliff Hotel, where he cleaned John Prescott’s room during the 1999 Labour Party conference. The former Deputy Prime Minister left him a thank-you note and a £30 tip.

Mr Belbacha claims that in July 2001 he was persuaded by friends to go to Pakistan to undertake religious study. While there he crossed the border into Afghanistan.

When the US-led invasion began in response to the September 11 attacks he crossed back into Pakistan. He claims that in December 2001 he was apprehended by villagers near Peshawar, in northwest Pakistan, and sold to the authorities for a bounty.

American agents took him to a prison camp near Kandahar where, Mr Belbacha says, he was repeatedly beaten. In March 2002 he was flown to what was then Camp X-Ray at the US naval base in Cuba.

A military tribunal alleged that he had associated with the Taleban in Afghanistan and ruled that his detention was justified. But in February this year the US deemed him fit for release.

Mr Katznelson said: “Even though the Americans say he poses no threat, Ahmed fears that he has the stamp of Guantanamo Bay on him and he will be treated by the authorities as a terrorist if he is returned to Algeria.

“It is a bizarre situation because the reason he left in the first place was because the Islamist terrorists were threatening to kill him.”

Reprieve has asked the British Government to accept Mr Belbacha’s return here, but ministers have repeatedly said that they will intervene only in the cases of Guantanamo detainees who are British citizens.

Mr Belbacha lost his British asylum claim in 2003 because he failed to turn up for the hearing. Mr Katznelson said: “Ahmed knows he could be stuck in Guantanamo for a long time. However, he could be released tomorrow if the British Government would allow him to come back here.”

Mr Belbacha’s appeal to stay was rejected by a district court last week after the judge ruled that she had no jurisdiction in the case, despite believing the strength of his claims. His lawyers are prepared to go to the Supreme Court to prevent his transfer.

The men who wait

2002 The detention centre at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, opened

750 men have been held there

360 remain

7 Britons were freed in 2004-05

7 British residents are still there

95% Proportion of Guantanamo detainees who posed at least a “potential threat”

Sources: Amnesty International, US Dept of Defence, Times archive, Reprieve