How did it become December already??

BTW I linked this in the sidebar earlier (graphic soldier accounts of Iraq) but it continues to make an impression on me. I feel awful for both the Americans and the Iraqis.

A personal plea, please vote on the City of Brass thingy, sick of being the bridesmaid and never the bride...

Does anyone have any nifty links or something to say about barriers to investment in Morocco(i.e. why Morocco doesn't get as much FDI as one might expect based if one were looking mostly at factor fundamentals and surface moves towards liberalization)?

Bint: thanks, didn't realize those things were on again. I edited the front page post with the link you were too lazy to provide. (EDIT: oops, guess it was right there on the side of the page, silly me.)

We should be posting more links to the Brass Crescent site, but I always feel so lethargic about vote-based awards. I know most of our readers are lazy bastards too.

Being nominated is nice enough.

Oh, on the Iran war watch front: US Says Iran Ended Atomic Arms Work (new york times link, go ahead and register or use bugmenot already).

Also, the unclassified portion of the DNI report on Iran is here.

You got my vote. I am lazy, but not that lazy.......yet.

Some of us (we know who we are, even if it isn't at the front of our minds) are supposed to vote early and often.

On a different note, with the holidays coming up, I thought I'd pass on this video Christmas card I got from Pat Robertson. For me, it really sums up the true meaning of the season.

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=1586561662

The amount of self-delusion lefties are capable of is impressive. Ibn Kafka, who I otherwise appreciate a lot, denying any validity or status for Milton Friedman over here...

Just read the article you linked to Tom.

While I generally agree with his conclusion about demographics, quite a few statements of his are quite out of touch with ground reality for anyone who knows it. Absolutely right on birth rates becoming native, but assimilation rates (as in having kids called Jean-François rather than Mohamed) are fairly low even among 3rd generation French Muslims.

Also, while language loss between generations is common indeed, identity loss is very low. He's only half-right when he says that there's no *native* French Muslim consciense. In fact it won't be as strong as the French Jewish one for example, but there's definitely a common identification with the common (usually Maghrebi) origin, more often than not common socio-economic class, common religious origin if not religion itself, etc.

If that "going native" is operating among French Muslims, it's certainly not in the sense of becoming "Gaulois" in general like Spaniards or Italians did before them, it's more along the lines of becoming a hyphened-like community, similar to Jews or Africans in the US with whom they share a few traits.

Hi! Thanks for the link, first off.

Shaheen:

"While I generally agree with his conclusion about demographics, quite a few statements of his are quite out of touch with ground reality for anyone who knows it. Absolutely right on birth rates becoming native, but assimilation rates (as in having kids called Jean-François rather than Mohamed) are fairly low even among 3rd generation French Muslims."

While I stand by a lot of the basic conclusions of the essay, I'm quite willing to agree that some of my finer points might be quite off--it _has_ been three and a half years ago since I wrote it as a distraction from graduate school essay-writing. (Don't ask--I've a strange sense of fun.)

"Also, while language loss between generations is common indeed, identity loss is very low. He's only half-right when he says that there's no *native* French Muslim consciense. In fact it won't be as strong as the French Jewish one for example, but there's definitely a common identification with the common (usually Maghrebi) origin, more often than not common socio-economic class, common religious origin if not religion itself, etc.

If that "going native" is operating among French Muslims, it's certainly not in the sense of becoming "Gaulois" in general like Spaniards or Italians did before them, it's more along the lines of becoming a hyphened-like community, similar to Jews or Africans in the US with whom they share a few traits."

This makes perfect sense, though I do wonder whether Italians and Spaniards ever did become that "Gaulois." If they did, I'd be tempted to speculate wildly about the characteristics of post-1960 immigration, from Portugal and the Maghreb and Turkey--did the French social model of integration falter _that_ badly in the 1970s? And if it did, how can it start up again?

Incidentally, Shaheen, I thought of your ideas about government financing through investment portfolios as I read this.

An curious remark from City of Brass on the upcoming BC awards:

However, there's a more subtle form of recognition that I think also speaks volumes about the growth of the Awards, and that is the attention the Awards are drawing from muslims online. For one thing, this year even larger blogs such as 'Aqoul have taken notice of their nominations and are urging readers to vote.

It didn't occur to me that we were "larger" or part of the "Islamsphere" - but I suppose both might be true.

If I were more than a half-assed editor, I'd be hitting up previous winners/nominees to write here.

Is the Ibn Kafka home on Aqoul still going to happen?

I don't want to be part of any sphere other than Earth, which isn't one entirely as it is flat around the poles.

This being the New Month Open Thread, I would hope that some of the Lebanon-based `aqouliyin could write a bit about the presidential mess over there. Or, since there is tons of Lebanon material online right now, point to whatever else is worth reading -- good summaries, sharp analysis, or whatever. It's too much to sift through for me...

Apart from that, credit to all involved for some great posts and debates lately. I was even moved to vote for the blog-prize thing for the first time in my life.

Randy,

I do wonder whether Italians and Spaniards ever did become that "Gaulois."

Russians at the beginning of the 20th century, southern Europeans at its middle, etc. all completely melted in the majority. You don’t have anything like an Italian French community or the like. Their descendants are represented across all levels of society and the whole political spectrum. They’re as French today as the National Front would want them to be.

If they did, I'd be tempted to speculate wildly about the characteristics of post-1960 immigration, from Portugal and the Maghreb and Turkey--did the French social model of integration falter _that_ badly in the 1970s? And if it did, how can it start up again?

Portuguese as the above melted too.

There has never been such a practical thing as a French social model of integration except in French theoretical public discourse. Up to the 60s, France was a colonial empire. Waves of immigration to metropolitan French was essentially from White Catholic countries who would completely assimilate after one generation of public schooling without the slightest racial and/or religious difference. Any significant minority who didn’t completely assimilate was consistently and violently wiped out throughout French history.

The 50s and 60s mass immigration waves from ex-colonies (mostly the Maghreb) were never managed. If there is or was a social integration model, I want to see something beyond the buzzword. Give me a draft plan, a blueprint, a set of actual measures, or any applied policy. I don’t know if there was enough rational approach to public policies in France at that time to manage immigration rationally, but it’s irrelevant because the perception on both sides was that those were temporary migrants anyway. Today French political culture is certainly anything but rational (everything being relative, when compared to say, the UK, Australia, Canada…), so don’t expect any rational management any time soon either.

The question also assumes that the problem is with integration. Many of those accused of lacking integration are born and raised in France. Heck, many of their parents are born and raised in France. But it’s still too common in France to have an image of it frozen in the 50s. France is today a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural state – even though those minorities are small as you correctly point out, 10% at most for French Muslims, their concentration around big urban areas make their proportion much higher there. Recognizing that reality instead of the jacobine wishful thinking would help deal with associated challenges.

So some will tell you they were ghettoized, they were discriminated against, etc., but the issue is bigger and is more socio-economic at this point. We’re talking about a French Muslim population whose majority is working class, way over-represented at that level. A heritage of the economic needs that brought the first and biggest migrations waves from which it originates that is evolving too slowly as a result of the lack of social mobility. If changing that is an actual objective, then building a political and economic system that allows social mobility must be a goal in itself. Both this and the above would require such a revolution in French mainstream thinking that I don’t see it happening anytime soon.

Tom,

So some public owned portfolios are taking a hit as a result of the subprime mortgage crisis? Doesn’t invalidate the idea of governments self-financing like other economic agents. What’s the probability that government-wide diversified portfolios would go bankrupt? Really low, as probable as that of the economy itself going bankrupt. In such a case, any tax-based financing would take a very bad hit too. But let’s assume that worst case scenario, your gov portfolio vaporizes and you have to rebuild it through taxation again. You’d save 75 years of taxation out of 100? That would be a pretty good deal as far as I’m concerned. Fact is, a government investing while respecting market rules is just taking the same money in a less coercive form than taxes. This is not only more respectful of individual choices, it’s also a strong incentive to healthier public policies and eliminates the negative disincentives of taxes.

Alle,

If you give me a set of questions on the LebPrez issue I'd be happy to write something up.

Most important piece of information already right here: people in the city/country are so sick & tired of it all that at this point they almost don't care who's gonna be president as long as the country leaves the economic paralysis.

But seriously - and that goes for all here - post some specific questions & I'll write something up over the weekend.

--MSK*

Okay! All private speculation welcome.

1. - What is Aoun up to now? If Suleiman becomes president, will he (and can he) settle for the role of just another Christian zaïm, or will he (and can he) obstruct the whole process to preserve a chance of becoming president -- after two years, etc, as per his initiative? If so, would he have ANY supporters in this?

2. - And Jumblat? I saw he had been talking about Hizbullah as "resistance" etc. Is this the start of something new, or just a trial balloon?

3. - Suleiman as president: how pro-Syrian is he really? What is his image in Lebanon, among different sects?

4. - The Annapolis conference and Syria's presence there, what happened in regard to Lebanon? Whatever it was, it seems to have been important. And that French FM visit?

5. - And finally, have you noticed any large-scale armed Hizbullah incursions into East Beirut lately? Just checking.

This is more of a blatant attempt to provoke a stream of obscenity from Lounsbury than something directly related to MENA, but The Guardian has an editorial about Venture Capital by Naomi Klein, where she describes how investment in security firms has moved ahead of investment in green technologies, and how this means that the world's wealthy are less interested in solving global warming than in protecting themselves from its victims.

Sorry, there was supposed to be a link. http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2219530,00.html

Russians at the beginning of the 20th century...all completely melted in the majority.

Ummm, WHAT? News to me, and this was my master's thesis topic. Unless, of course, I am totally misunderstanding you; please elaborate.

Dear alle,

Will do it over the weekend, except #5, of course, as I don't want to get abductedtorturedshot by the thousands of HA militiamen roaming the streets ...

Dear all,

Please feel free to add to the list of questions re: Lebanon.

--MSK*

Shaheen - upon further caffeination and re-reading, it occurs to me that you are probably discussing Russian integration into Frech society, not integration of various ethnicities into Soviet or Russian society - please confirm (though I suspect my half-Italian, half-Corsican French friend, both of whose parents were born in France proper, would take issue with the prospect that her family retains neither a separate Italian nor a separate Corsican identity).

Eva,

I was talking about Russians in France indeed. There has been a wave of migration after the 1917 revolution, though to be honest I don't know what numbers they were.

Corsicans have their own language and a national identity of their own, a constant thorn in French politicians' foot. That may be a factor in your friend's view.

Or not, the point is really not about particular cases or small percentages. 25% of French population has at least one grandparent who's not French. Garcia is the second most common French last name. Etc., etc. The idea nonetheless of a Spanish French, or Italian French community is totally foreign to French mentality. So even though these people will obviously not deny the mere fact of their ancestry when known, it won't necessarily play any significant role in their identity or day to day culture. Exceptions notwithstanding.

That is not the case though for visible and/or religious minorities. Jews, Africans, Arabs/Muslims, definitely develop(ed) native but seperate identities which express themselves in different ways, consciously or not.

". . . I suspect my half-Italian, half-Corsican French friend, both of whose parents were born in France proper, would take issue with the prospect that her family retains neither a separate Italian nor a separate Corsican identity)."

The key question then, did Napoleon Bonaparte assimilate successfully? Discuss.

I mean he did promote French emigration to Russia.

MSK: how is the dollar's fall affecting people/life in Lebanon?

Ever hear of a Turkish writer called Adnan Oktar or his book An Atlas of Creation, a weird Creationist diatribe of high production value and nil intellectual content, which has been sent gratis to many universities and government offices, including that of the US Secretary of Commerce?

Ayaan Hirsi Ali: the gift that keeps on giving.

We should be posting more links to the Brass Crescent site, but I always feel so lethargic about vote-based awards. I know most of our readers are lazy bastards too.

Bah. I dislike online awards. How we get nominated escapes me given our iconoclasm though.

As for the Naomi Klein item I refuse to read it at the moment as I need to concentrate.

So did Richard Perle actually say this?

"If we let our vision of the world go forth and we embrace it entirely, and we don't try to piece together clever diplomacy but just wage a total war ... our children will sing great songs about us years from now."

The amount of self-delusion lefties are capable of is impressive. Ibn Kafka, who I otherwise appreciate a lot, denying any validity or status for Milton Friedman over here...

Posted by: Shaheen at December 3, 2007 07:09 PM

Well, isn't that excessive? I certainly acknowledge that he's one of the tallest winners ever of the Nobel Prize in economics. The amount of hateful and baseless propaganda from John-Birchers & Ayn-Randers is simply staggering...

Klaus, apparently that quote actually belongs to Michael Ledeen in an AEI conference in late October 2001:

transcript found at: http://www.casi.org.uk/discuss/2003/msg02926.html

"MR. LEDEEN: [In progress]--about all the jots and tiddles of legal principles and so forth. ecause, if you lose, there will be no discussion of these things, whatsoever. The first thing is to win.

"Second thing is--and this concerns me a lot--no stages. This is a total war. We are fighting a variety of enemies. There are lots of them out there. And all this talk about, well, first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq, then we will take a look around and see how thing stand, that is entirely the wrong way to go about it. Because these guys all talk to each other and are all working with one another.
...
"If we just let our own vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don't try to be clever and piece together clever diplomatic solutions to this thing, but just wage a total war against these tyrants, I think we will do very well and our children will sing great songs about us years from now."

Dawud: Michael Ledeen seems to me to be a sick f*** - faster, please - and seems to really believe that he's working for liberation - I think of souls from their bodies, but he seems to believe of American freespirits from their Arab islamofascist corpses...

Ledeen, yeah, that makes more sense. To have Perle say this would seem out of character, he's intelligent enough to steer clear of fascist phrasing. Ledeen, though, is utterly barmey. Perfect match.

Thanks, Dawud. Interesting transcript, in a sifting-through-the-garbage way. What a bunch of delusional pricks. Also, first I ever heard of Lyndon LaRouche.

Somebody with thread-starting privileges should really make this into its own thread but, for the moment, I'll ask the question here.

Is Barak Hussein Obama a muslim? And, if so, so what?

Now I know that he doesn't think he's a muslim but, as far as sharia is concerned, it's not really up to him. My understanding is that, per sharia, children of muslim fathers are, by definition, muslims. Worse, they become apostates if they try and "convert" to christianity. It appears that Obama's father was, in fact, a Muslim so, per sharia, it would seem that he is, too.

Does this multi-cultural oddity make any difference as to how he is/will be perceived in MENA? Will his father's Muslim roots help him connect with the region or will his "apostasy" bring out the crazies and cause diplomatic incidents?

as far as sharia is concerned, it's not really up to him

Which sharia?

Shaheen, this is obviously a troll - unless it's a blistering idiot, which is a possibility.

which Shariah? I converted to Islam, and understand it not as a culture or political creed, but as a faith which one accepts freely or not at all.

Apostasy is possible, and a protected right in America, which has a legal understanding of a seperation of powers. If Barak was an apostate of the kind implied, then he would almost certainly be using that in his campaign speeches, given the climate in the US right now - saying that since he knew how EEEVIL the MUSLIMS were, he should be entrusted with imprisoning, torturing and bombing them, as opposed to someone else who'd just muck it up.... - but I'm neither that blinkered nor is Obama that stupid....

is that enough food for trolls?

I don't think it's a troll Dawud, just our regular Anonymous friend who's sometimes a bit confused when it comes to Islam-related stuff...

Anon,

Sharia is in the eye of the beholder. It's like a***holes, everyone has their own.

OTOH, the Quran makes apostasy a *right*.

18:29 - Let him who will believe, and let him who will, reject

2:256 - Let there be no compulsion in religion

So to answer your question:
1) Obama is still purely internal US politics, it didn't reach the shores of MENA yet
2) IF he ever reaches MENA shores by becoming US president (still a long way to go), there's no indication his Muslim descent would be widely known
3) IF² it is, I'd bet it's more likely to attract sympathy than the opposite - then again, opinion are like a***holes, and Arabs not being an exception, everyone would have their own.

I think it's from this verse.

Sharia, sharia baybi, sharia, sharia baybi, sha sha-sha sha-sha-sharia uh bay ay bee, sharia baybee. Sha-ah-ah-ah-ria, won't you come out tonight? Come, come, come out tonight. For lo Allah is Merciful.(Surah 3.1417: 666-665 (read right to left).

First, Shaheen, thanks for making at least an attempt to answer my question, which was both serious and reasonable.

You are, however, incorrect that sharia is entirely in the eye of the beholder. Certainly, parts of it are subject to different interpretations, that's why there are contradictory fatwas. But many tenets are pretty basic, e.g., muslim men can marry non-muslim women but muslim women cannot marry non-muslim men. There was, IIRC, a pretty extended discussion of this very tenet of sharia family law just a couple of weeks ago.

My understanding of the justification for this rule is that a)muslim parents have a duty to raise muslim children and b)a child's religion follows that of the father. So muslim fathers will, automatically, as it were, have muslim children, regardless of the religion of the mother whereas muslim mothers will not.

As to whether it will become widely known, well, once folks in MENA realize that one of the likely candidates to become the next U.S. president is named "Barack Hussein," they're likely to suspect something's up.

Now, for Dawud,

I converted to Islam, and understand it not as a culture or political creed, but as a faith which one accepts freely or not at all.

Goody for you. But as you apparently have the in-depth knowledge and intellectual skills of a lima bean, your understanding isn't all that special.

In fact, apostasy is a serious offense in many muslim countries. It can get you killed in Saudi Arabia, jailed and involuntarily divorced in Egypt and is actually legally impossible in moderate and (relatively) democratic Malaysia.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/selective-tolerance-is-not-tolerance-at-all/2007/11/18/1195321603784.html

Apostasy is possible, and a protected right in America, which has a legal understanding of a seperation of powers.

Yes indeed it is. That's why the call of the question was, "how he is/will be perceived in MENA." Given the kind of things neo-salafi agitators have gotten up to in the past, it's hardly a stretch to wonder whether this will become an issue and, if so, what sort.

This issue has been floating around the political blogosphere for a while now. But the question is usually, and incredibly stupidly, framed as whether Obama is a closet muslim. I don't care about that because it is, as I say, incredibly stupid. Whether he will be perceived as an apostate by nutty neo-salafis is another question all together.

Matthew: Correct quote, wrong Sura. Should be 867:5309

Dear Anon,

I think it is a valid question. However, the answer may not be as mechanistic - in terms of shari'a - as you think.

How long has Obama lived with his father? Was he raised Muslim? How did he "become" a Christian? Maybe he was never raised Muslim, in which case his father would be 'culpable' but Obama would not. Maybe he was then raised Christian, in which case again it's the responsibility of his parents.

I think most Muslims would look at it & say "His parents raised him wrong" but that's about it. The think with apostasy is that only a believer, i.e. someone who has known the Truth, who rejects the Truth is an apostate. And under-age children cannot be classified 'complete' Muslims.

Now, is there a chance that some crazy über-Salafi types try to paint him as an apostate? Sure. Just as there are people in the US who keep talking about UFOs. But both are ignored.

Hope this helps.

--MSK*

How long has Obama lived with his father? Was he raised Muslim? How did he "become" a Christian? Maybe he was never raised Muslim, in which case his father would be 'culpable' but Obama would not. Maybe he was then raised Christian, in which case again it's the responsibility of his parents.

Obama didn't live with his father after age 2. I haven't read his whole bio, but the bulk of his upbringing was not in a primarily Muslim environment.

Anonymous-

I for one would like a cite for that assertion that under Sharia the children of a Muslim man are considered Muslim and if they were to be raised otherwise they are apostates. That seems odd to me.

What I know from Islamic theory is that all children are born Muslim (a principle known as fitrah) and it is up to the parents to raise them according to their religion.

I think you may be influenced by the way some people 'discover' they are Jews when they find out one of their grandmothers was Jewish. I am not aware of any such automatic rule in Islam and I would honestly like to know.

Ali,

I tried to find some more info on this myself and what I discovered seems to make it worse than I originally thought.

First, there's actually an accepted term for this, "Murtad Fitri." MSK's approach sounds less unreasonable but my cursory search wasn't finding any language to support it. On the contrary, I kept finding stuff like this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Rechtsgutachten_betr_Apostasie_im_Islam.jpg

I can't, of course, vouch for the accuracy of this translation (hopefully one of you can see if it's accurate) but it sounds like it is pretty much identical to Obama's "case."

Anonymous-

Yes that linked document seems to bear out your claim, and for that I have no comment.

I did a search on my own for 'Murtad Fitri' both in Arabic and English. All of the sources I found seem to be Shia.

Of the Shia sources, all of them agree that a Murtad Fitri is someone who was born a Muslim and who then rejects Islam. However, only a few elaborated on what born a Muslim means (both or any parent Muslim), and one went on to say that this ruling only applies to those in Muslim land.

On the specific 'case' of Mr Obama, one source had this to say:
"One thing to note: It is not enough to be considered a Murtad Fitri to be born of a Muslim and a Kafir or two Muslims, but to affirm the Shahadas after puberty. If born as such but believed in Judaism or Christianity before puberty, he is not to be considered a Murtad Fitri so that he is killed ... because apostasy requires a Muslim to reject Islam and a child before puberty is not truly Muslim"

The overall impression I get - notwithstanding the Azhar ruling linked to - is that to be considered an apostate you have to have been raised a Muslim first.

"I googled a link that proves my preconceptions" aside, I stand by what I said in regard to your average Moe. Plus what MSK said.

The rest is intellectual masturbation for MENA-illiterates thinking that your average Moe is a robot programmed by the nuttery Google can dig or by the ramblings of fuckhead imams.

Addendum. If he ever is perceived as anything remotely with the smell of a Muslim by (Muslim) Arabs, the attitude towards him and whether he is an apostate(=traitor) or not IF² Obama's elected president is likely to be measured against their expectations of what "a friend of ours"' US policy in MENA should be than him being a Muslim.

"I googled a link that proves my preconceptions" aside, . . ."

As opposed to not googling a link that proves your preconceptions.

I'm the first to admit that there are different strains of thoughts in Islam. IIRC, the Imam debating Wafa Sultan in that famous transcript was quite outspokenly opposed to punishing apostates.

Nor are we discussing the "average Moe." The average Moe/pious middle has much better things to do than worry about Barak Obama's religious life, no doubt.

"The rest is intellectual masturbation for MENA-illiterates thinking that your average Moe is a robot programmed by the nuttery Google can dig or by the ramblings of fuckhead imams."

Come now, Shaheen, surely you know better than this. As I say, we're not taking about the average guy in the streets. Do I really need to list instances where "the ramblings of fuckead imams" have caused serious international incidents? If there's any "intellectual masturbation" going on, it is being done by those same fuckhead imams seeking excuses for offense, not those trying to divine what new demogoguery they may propogate next.

I was interested to see the translation of the link by Ali K. That's one of the reasons I posted the question. The stuff I was finding in English seemed pretty harsh. But I'm not entirely sure that the UFO/alien abductee comparison is apt, given the thing from Al-Azhar. True, it's 35 years old but Egypt seems quite harsh on "apostates" to this day.