Dec 31, 2011
Friends
The best thing about having good friends is that they don’t like you, they love you. ~ Shandalynn Gore”
Dec 30, 2011
Dec 23, 2011
Mark Twain
"A round man cannot be expected to fit in a square hole right away. He must have time to modify his shape." - Mark Twain”
Dec 21, 2011
Dec 20, 2011
تشي جيفارا
مثل الذي باع بلاده وخان وطنه مثل الذي يسرق من بيت ابيه ليطعم اللصوص فلا أبوه يسامحه ولا اللص يكافئه . - تشي جيفارا -
Dec 19, 2011
Mandela
When a man is denied the right to live the life he believes in, he has no choice but to become an outlaw.. Mandela
Dec 18, 2011
Dec 12, 2011
Napoleon Hill
What the mind of man can conceive & believe, the mind of man can achieve. ~Napoleon Hill
Dec 10, 2011
كلمة جميلة
عندما تفرح تذهب إلي آكثر شخص تحبه وعندمآ تحزن تلجأ إلي آكثر شخص يحبك وما آروع آن يكون نفس آلشخص في آلحآلتين
Sent from my iPhone
Sent from my iPhone
Mandela
After climbing a great hill, one only finds that there are many more hills to climb.
~ Nelson Mandela
Sent from my iPhone
~ Nelson Mandela
Sent from my iPhone
Napoleon Hill
Edison failed 10,000 times before he made the electric light. Do not be discouraged if you fail a few times. ~ Napoleon Hill
Sent from my iPhone
Sent from my iPhone
Dec 9, 2011
جدة
أنا الان بالطائرة متوجة لجدة، قضيت في جدة ١٨ شهرا من عمري ، كانت تلك الفترة من افضل ايام عمري داخل المملكة. احب الحجاز و اهله و افتخر بالصداقات التي كونتها فيها.
The wretched Middle East
AT THE end of this month the last American troops will leave Iraq, marking the conclusion of an eight-year misadventure in which some 4,500 American soldiers and many, many more Iraqis lost their lives. On December 1st Vice-President Joe Biden told American and Iraqi troops in Baghdad that even after its soldiers had left, America would be a loyal partner of the new Iraq and stay “deeply engaged” throughout the region. Back home, however, a subversive new idea has taken hold among the makers of foreign policy. Isn’t it time for America to turn away from the scorpions’ nest of the Middle East and pivot towards Asia?
Since the wish is father to the deed, the supposed “pivot” has started already. Barack Obama declared last month that America had made “a deliberate and strategic decision” to be “all in” in the Asia-Pacific arena in the 21st century. Nobody in the administration thinks that the superpower can turn away from the wretched Middle East immediately, but a certain theory of the case is doing the rounds. Not right now, but soon, it is argued, America might at least be able to lower its profile there.
The thinking runs something like this. First, the Arab awakening gives America a chance to align its interests with its values: instead of supporting the rulers against the street it can at last go with the grain of history. Second, Mr Obama has Iran well and truly “contained” by sanctions. Third, the dictatorship of Bashar Assad is about to collapse, and that will pull down the evil axis of Iran, Syria and Hizbullah. Fourth, as America’s influence wanes, Turkey’s is growing—and Turkey is a NATO member and American ally. Last, America no longer imports more than 10% of its oil from the Middle East, so it can afford to take a more relaxed view than it once did of the region’s combustible dynamics.
All these points have some merit. But to see in them a case for America to lean back as it turns to Asia you have first to plant a pair of rose-tinted spectacles on your nose. As Britain discovered after withdrawing from east of Suez nearly half a century ago, great powers that think they can leave the Middle East behind them are sooner or later sucked back in.
Start with Iraq. Despite Mr Biden’s breezy optimism, the politics of Iraq remain as volatile as gelignite. Many analysts fear that the departure of American troops makes it far likelier that an Iraq which has failed to resolve its internal rifts will fall back into sectarian war. As for the Arab awakening, it is true that Mr Obama did a fair job in February of using America’s influence over Egypt’s army to prevent a bloodbath. But now that the army that defended the revolution looks tempted to steal it, and radical Islamists of all stripes have prospered at the polls, the trick of aligning America’s interests with its values looks a bit harder to pull off. American energy independence? That is still an aspiration, not a reality. Oil is a globally traded commodity, which means that if the supply from the Gulf is pinched the price will rise in America, even though America buys most of its oil elsewhere.
Into Iran?
Apart from oil, the other issue that anchors America in the region is its bipartisan commitment to the safety of Israel. And Israel right now believes that it is facing an extraordinary threat, in the shape of Iran’s nuclear programme.
Mr Obama has worked harder on Iran than he gets credits for. Tom Donilon, his national security adviser, noted last month that Mr Obama had persuaded allies to impose “unprecedented” sanctions that have left Iran boxed-in and isolated. If sanctions fail, Mr Donilon added, Iran should remember that America had taken no “options off the table”. In other words, the president who sent SEALs and drones into Pakistan to kill Osama bin Laden and decimate al-Qaeda might in the end use force in Iran too.
It is a good story. The trouble is that nothing America has done or may have done—not the sanctions, not the threats, not a mysterious campaign of assassination and sabotage—has yet stopped Iran from continuing defiantly to enrich uranium. And it is not only Iran that seems to doubt whether Mr Obama will ever take military action against it. Plenty of Americans, some glum, some relieved, have reached the same conclusion. In the Weekly Standard, the parish magazine of the Republican Party, Thomas Donnelly of the American Enterprise Institute argued recently that, contra Mr Donilon, Iran is probably pretty satisfied with the course of events. America was leaving Iraq and about to “bug out” of Afghanistan too. Iran has silenced its internal opposition and the Arab spring has plunged its Sunni foes into disarray.
To judge by its public agitation, Israel too is losing faith in Mr Obama. Yes, the president has shown that he is not afraid of military action. But he also wants to be re-elected, and pushing Iran too hard could hoist the oil price and hurt the recovery on which his re-election depends. A meeting last weekend of the Saban Forum, an annual colloquium in Washington of high-ups from Israel and America, saw sulking, scolding and mixed messages from both sides. While exhorting Israel to “just get to the damn table” with the Palestinians, and mend relations with Turkey, Leon Panetta, America’s defence secretary, said a military attack might delay an Iranian bomb for only a year or two, at the price of a regional war. That statement hardly makes it sound as if the military option is genuinely still on the president’s table. Little wonder that Israel, unsure whether Mr Obama would in fact ever strike Iran, is debating whether a tight election year, one in which the Republicans are in full cry against Mr Obama’s alleged “betrayal” of the Jewish state, might be the very time to do so itself.
A pivot to Asia? Of course. That, says Martin Indyk of the Brookings Institution, a former ambassador to Israel, is where the great game has moved. Even so, this is decidedly not the moment for America to relax its vigilance in the Middle East.
Since the wish is father to the deed, the supposed “pivot” has started already. Barack Obama declared last month that America had made “a deliberate and strategic decision” to be “all in” in the Asia-Pacific arena in the 21st century. Nobody in the administration thinks that the superpower can turn away from the wretched Middle East immediately, but a certain theory of the case is doing the rounds. Not right now, but soon, it is argued, America might at least be able to lower its profile there.
The thinking runs something like this. First, the Arab awakening gives America a chance to align its interests with its values: instead of supporting the rulers against the street it can at last go with the grain of history. Second, Mr Obama has Iran well and truly “contained” by sanctions. Third, the dictatorship of Bashar Assad is about to collapse, and that will pull down the evil axis of Iran, Syria and Hizbullah. Fourth, as America’s influence wanes, Turkey’s is growing—and Turkey is a NATO member and American ally. Last, America no longer imports more than 10% of its oil from the Middle East, so it can afford to take a more relaxed view than it once did of the region’s combustible dynamics.
All these points have some merit. But to see in them a case for America to lean back as it turns to Asia you have first to plant a pair of rose-tinted spectacles on your nose. As Britain discovered after withdrawing from east of Suez nearly half a century ago, great powers that think they can leave the Middle East behind them are sooner or later sucked back in.
Start with Iraq. Despite Mr Biden’s breezy optimism, the politics of Iraq remain as volatile as gelignite. Many analysts fear that the departure of American troops makes it far likelier that an Iraq which has failed to resolve its internal rifts will fall back into sectarian war. As for the Arab awakening, it is true that Mr Obama did a fair job in February of using America’s influence over Egypt’s army to prevent a bloodbath. But now that the army that defended the revolution looks tempted to steal it, and radical Islamists of all stripes have prospered at the polls, the trick of aligning America’s interests with its values looks a bit harder to pull off. American energy independence? That is still an aspiration, not a reality. Oil is a globally traded commodity, which means that if the supply from the Gulf is pinched the price will rise in America, even though America buys most of its oil elsewhere.
Into Iran?
Apart from oil, the other issue that anchors America in the region is its bipartisan commitment to the safety of Israel. And Israel right now believes that it is facing an extraordinary threat, in the shape of Iran’s nuclear programme.
Mr Obama has worked harder on Iran than he gets credits for. Tom Donilon, his national security adviser, noted last month that Mr Obama had persuaded allies to impose “unprecedented” sanctions that have left Iran boxed-in and isolated. If sanctions fail, Mr Donilon added, Iran should remember that America had taken no “options off the table”. In other words, the president who sent SEALs and drones into Pakistan to kill Osama bin Laden and decimate al-Qaeda might in the end use force in Iran too.
It is a good story. The trouble is that nothing America has done or may have done—not the sanctions, not the threats, not a mysterious campaign of assassination and sabotage—has yet stopped Iran from continuing defiantly to enrich uranium. And it is not only Iran that seems to doubt whether Mr Obama will ever take military action against it. Plenty of Americans, some glum, some relieved, have reached the same conclusion. In the Weekly Standard, the parish magazine of the Republican Party, Thomas Donnelly of the American Enterprise Institute argued recently that, contra Mr Donilon, Iran is probably pretty satisfied with the course of events. America was leaving Iraq and about to “bug out” of Afghanistan too. Iran has silenced its internal opposition and the Arab spring has plunged its Sunni foes into disarray.
To judge by its public agitation, Israel too is losing faith in Mr Obama. Yes, the president has shown that he is not afraid of military action. But he also wants to be re-elected, and pushing Iran too hard could hoist the oil price and hurt the recovery on which his re-election depends. A meeting last weekend of the Saban Forum, an annual colloquium in Washington of high-ups from Israel and America, saw sulking, scolding and mixed messages from both sides. While exhorting Israel to “just get to the damn table” with the Palestinians, and mend relations with Turkey, Leon Panetta, America’s defence secretary, said a military attack might delay an Iranian bomb for only a year or two, at the price of a regional war. That statement hardly makes it sound as if the military option is genuinely still on the president’s table. Little wonder that Israel, unsure whether Mr Obama would in fact ever strike Iran, is debating whether a tight election year, one in which the Republicans are in full cry against Mr Obama’s alleged “betrayal” of the Jewish state, might be the very time to do so itself.
A pivot to Asia? Of course. That, says Martin Indyk of the Brookings Institution, a former ambassador to Israel, is where the great game has moved. Even so, this is decidedly not the moment for America to relax its vigilance in the Middle East.
Mecca for the rich: Islam's holiest site 'turning into Vegas'
Historic and culturally important landmarks are being destroyed to make way for luxury hotels and malls, reports Jerome Taylor
Over the past 10 years the holiest site in Islam has undergone a huge transformation, one that has divided opinion among Muslims all over the world.
Once a dusty desert town struggling to cope with the ever-increasing number of pilgrims arriving for the annual Hajj, the city now soars above its surroundings with a glittering array of skyscrapers, shopping malls and luxury hotels.
To the al-Saud monarchy, Mecca is their vision of the future – a steel and concrete metropolis built on the proceeds of enormous oil wealth that showcases their national pride.
Yet growing numbers of citizens, particularly those living in the two holy cities of Mecca and Medina, have looked on aghast as the nation's archaeological heritage is trampled under a construction mania backed by hardline clerics who preach against the preservation of their own heritage. Mecca, once a place where the Prophet Mohamed insisted all Muslims would be equal, has become a playground for the rich, critics say, where naked capitalism has usurped spirituality as the city's raison d'être.
Few are willing to discuss their fears openly because of the risks associated with criticising official policy in the authoritarian kingdom. And, with the exceptions of Turkey and Iran, fellow Muslim nations have largely held their tongues for fear of of a diplomatic fallout and restrictions on their citizens' pilgrimage visas. Western archaeologists are silent out of fear that the few sites they are allowed access to will be closed to them.
But a number of prominent Saudi archaeologists and historians are speaking up in the belief that the opportunity to save Saudi Arabia's remaining historical sites is closing fast.
"No one has the balls to stand up and condemn this cultural vandalism," says Dr Irfan al-Alawi who, as executive director of the Islamic Heritage Research Foundation, has fought in vain to protect his country's historical sites. "We have already lost 400-500 sites. I just hope it's not too late to turn things around."
Sami Angawi, a renowned Saudi expert on the region's Islamic architecture, is equally concerned. "This is an absolute contradiction to the nature of Mecca and the sacredness of the house of God," he told the Reuters news agency earlier this year. "Both [Mecca and Medina] are historically almost finished. You do not find anything except skyscrapers."
Dr Alawi's most pressing concern is the planned £690m expansion of the Grand Mosque, the most sacred site in Islam which contains the Kaaba – the black stone cube built by Ibrahim (Abraham) that Muslims face when they pray.
Construction officially began earlier this month with the country's Justice Minister, Mohammed al-Eissa, exclaiming that the project would respect "the sacredness and glory of the location, which calls for the highest care and attention of the servants or Islam and Muslims".
The 400,000 square metre development is being built to accommodate an extra 1.2 million pilgrims each year and will turn the Grand Mosque into the largest religious structure in the world. But the Islamic Heritage Foundation has compiled a list of key historical sites that they believe are now at risk from the ongoing development of Mecca, including the old Ottoman and Abbasi sections of the Grand Mosque, the house where the Prophet Mohamed was born and the house where his paternal uncle Hamza grew up.
There is little argument that Mecca and Medina desperately need infrastructure development. Twelve million pilgrims visit the cities every year with the numbers expected to increase to 17 million by 2025.
But critics fear that the desire to expand the pilgrimage sites has allowed the authorities to ride roughshod over the area's cultural heritage. The Washington-based Gulf Institute estimates that 95 per cent of Mecca's millennium-old buildings have been demolished in the past two decades alone.
The destruction has been aided by Wahabism, the austere interpretation of Islam that has served as the kingdom's official religion ever since the al-Sauds rose to power across the Arabian Peninsula in the 19th century.
In the eyes of Wahabis, historical sites and shrines encourage "shirq" – the sin of idolatry or polytheism – and should be destroyed. When the al-Saud tribes swept through Mecca in the 1920s, the first thing they did was lay waste to cemeteries holding many of Islam's important figures. They have been destroying the country's heritage ever since. Of the three sites the Saudis have allowed the UN to designate World Heritage Sites, none are related to Islam.
Those circling the Kaaba only need to look skywards to see the latest example of the Saudi monarchy's insatiable appetite for architectural bling. At 1,972ft, the Royal Mecca Clock Tower, opened earlier this year, soars over the surrounding Grand Mosque, part of an enormous development of skyscrapers that will house five-star hotels for the minority of pilgrims rich enough to afford them.
To build the skyscraper city, the authorities dynamited an entire mountain and the Ottoman era Ajyad Fortress that lay on top of it. At the other end of the Grand Mosque complex, the house of the Prophet's first wife Khadijah has been turned into a toilet block. The fate of the house he was born in is uncertain. Also planned for demolition are the Grand Mosque's Ottoman columns which dare to contain the names of the Prophet's companions, something hardline Wahabis detest.
For ordinary Meccans living in the mainly Ottoman-era town houses that make up much of what remains of the old city, development often means the loss of their family home.
Non-Muslims cannot visit Mecca and Medina, but The Independent was able to interview a number of citizens who expressed discontent over the way their town was changing. One young woman whose father recently had his house bulldozed described how her family was still waiting for compensation. "There was very little warning; they just came and told him that the house had to be bulldozed," she said.
Another Meccan added: "If a prince of a member of the royal family wants to extend his palace he just does it. No one talks about it in public though. There's such a climate of fear."
Dr Alawi hopes the international community will finally begin to wake up to what is happening in the cradle of Islam. "We would never allow someone to destroy the Pyramids, so why are we letting Islam's history disappear?"
Under Threat
Bayt al-Mawlid
When the Wahabis took Mecca in the 1920s they destroyed the dome on top of the house where the Prophet Mohammed was born. It was thenused as a cattle market before being turned into a library after a campaign by Meccans. There are concerns that the expansion of the Grand Mosque will destroy it once more. The site has never been excavated by archaeologists.
Ottoman and Abasi columns of the Grand Mosque
Slated for demolition as part of the Grand Mosque expansion, these intricately carved columns date back to the 17th century and are the oldest surviving sections of Islam's holiest site. Much to the chagrin of Wahabis, they are inscribed with the names of the Prophet's companions. Ottomon Mecca is now rapidly disappearing
Al-Masjid al-Nawabi
For many years, hardline Wahabi clerics have had their sites set on the 15th century green dome that rests above the tomb holding the Prophet, Abu Bakr and Umar in Medina. The mosque is regarded as the second holiest site in Islam. Wahabis, however, believe marked graves are idolatrous. A pamphlet published in 2007 by the Saudi Ministry of Islamic Affairs, endorsed by Abdulaziz Al Sheikh, the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, stated that "the green dome shall be demolished and the three graves flattened in the Prophet's Masjid".
Jabal al-Nour
A mountain outside Mecca where Mohammed received his first Koranic revelations. The Prophet used to spend long spells in a cave called Hira. The cave is particularly popular among South Asian pilgrims who have carved steps up to its entrance and adorned the walls with graffiti. Religious hardliners are keen to dissuade pilgrims from congregating there and have mooted the idea of removing the steps and even destroying the mountain altogether.
Over the past 10 years the holiest site in Islam has undergone a huge transformation, one that has divided opinion among Muslims all over the world.
Once a dusty desert town struggling to cope with the ever-increasing number of pilgrims arriving for the annual Hajj, the city now soars above its surroundings with a glittering array of skyscrapers, shopping malls and luxury hotels.
To the al-Saud monarchy, Mecca is their vision of the future – a steel and concrete metropolis built on the proceeds of enormous oil wealth that showcases their national pride.
Yet growing numbers of citizens, particularly those living in the two holy cities of Mecca and Medina, have looked on aghast as the nation's archaeological heritage is trampled under a construction mania backed by hardline clerics who preach against the preservation of their own heritage. Mecca, once a place where the Prophet Mohamed insisted all Muslims would be equal, has become a playground for the rich, critics say, where naked capitalism has usurped spirituality as the city's raison d'être.
Few are willing to discuss their fears openly because of the risks associated with criticising official policy in the authoritarian kingdom. And, with the exceptions of Turkey and Iran, fellow Muslim nations have largely held their tongues for fear of of a diplomatic fallout and restrictions on their citizens' pilgrimage visas. Western archaeologists are silent out of fear that the few sites they are allowed access to will be closed to them.
But a number of prominent Saudi archaeologists and historians are speaking up in the belief that the opportunity to save Saudi Arabia's remaining historical sites is closing fast.
"No one has the balls to stand up and condemn this cultural vandalism," says Dr Irfan al-Alawi who, as executive director of the Islamic Heritage Research Foundation, has fought in vain to protect his country's historical sites. "We have already lost 400-500 sites. I just hope it's not too late to turn things around."
Sami Angawi, a renowned Saudi expert on the region's Islamic architecture, is equally concerned. "This is an absolute contradiction to the nature of Mecca and the sacredness of the house of God," he told the Reuters news agency earlier this year. "Both [Mecca and Medina] are historically almost finished. You do not find anything except skyscrapers."
Dr Alawi's most pressing concern is the planned £690m expansion of the Grand Mosque, the most sacred site in Islam which contains the Kaaba – the black stone cube built by Ibrahim (Abraham) that Muslims face when they pray.
Construction officially began earlier this month with the country's Justice Minister, Mohammed al-Eissa, exclaiming that the project would respect "the sacredness and glory of the location, which calls for the highest care and attention of the servants or Islam and Muslims".
The 400,000 square metre development is being built to accommodate an extra 1.2 million pilgrims each year and will turn the Grand Mosque into the largest religious structure in the world. But the Islamic Heritage Foundation has compiled a list of key historical sites that they believe are now at risk from the ongoing development of Mecca, including the old Ottoman and Abbasi sections of the Grand Mosque, the house where the Prophet Mohamed was born and the house where his paternal uncle Hamza grew up.
There is little argument that Mecca and Medina desperately need infrastructure development. Twelve million pilgrims visit the cities every year with the numbers expected to increase to 17 million by 2025.
But critics fear that the desire to expand the pilgrimage sites has allowed the authorities to ride roughshod over the area's cultural heritage. The Washington-based Gulf Institute estimates that 95 per cent of Mecca's millennium-old buildings have been demolished in the past two decades alone.
The destruction has been aided by Wahabism, the austere interpretation of Islam that has served as the kingdom's official religion ever since the al-Sauds rose to power across the Arabian Peninsula in the 19th century.
In the eyes of Wahabis, historical sites and shrines encourage "shirq" – the sin of idolatry or polytheism – and should be destroyed. When the al-Saud tribes swept through Mecca in the 1920s, the first thing they did was lay waste to cemeteries holding many of Islam's important figures. They have been destroying the country's heritage ever since. Of the three sites the Saudis have allowed the UN to designate World Heritage Sites, none are related to Islam.
Those circling the Kaaba only need to look skywards to see the latest example of the Saudi monarchy's insatiable appetite for architectural bling. At 1,972ft, the Royal Mecca Clock Tower, opened earlier this year, soars over the surrounding Grand Mosque, part of an enormous development of skyscrapers that will house five-star hotels for the minority of pilgrims rich enough to afford them.
To build the skyscraper city, the authorities dynamited an entire mountain and the Ottoman era Ajyad Fortress that lay on top of it. At the other end of the Grand Mosque complex, the house of the Prophet's first wife Khadijah has been turned into a toilet block. The fate of the house he was born in is uncertain. Also planned for demolition are the Grand Mosque's Ottoman columns which dare to contain the names of the Prophet's companions, something hardline Wahabis detest.
For ordinary Meccans living in the mainly Ottoman-era town houses that make up much of what remains of the old city, development often means the loss of their family home.
Non-Muslims cannot visit Mecca and Medina, but The Independent was able to interview a number of citizens who expressed discontent over the way their town was changing. One young woman whose father recently had his house bulldozed described how her family was still waiting for compensation. "There was very little warning; they just came and told him that the house had to be bulldozed," she said.
Another Meccan added: "If a prince of a member of the royal family wants to extend his palace he just does it. No one talks about it in public though. There's such a climate of fear."
Dr Alawi hopes the international community will finally begin to wake up to what is happening in the cradle of Islam. "We would never allow someone to destroy the Pyramids, so why are we letting Islam's history disappear?"
Under Threat
Bayt al-Mawlid
When the Wahabis took Mecca in the 1920s they destroyed the dome on top of the house where the Prophet Mohammed was born. It was thenused as a cattle market before being turned into a library after a campaign by Meccans. There are concerns that the expansion of the Grand Mosque will destroy it once more. The site has never been excavated by archaeologists.
Ottoman and Abasi columns of the Grand Mosque
Slated for demolition as part of the Grand Mosque expansion, these intricately carved columns date back to the 17th century and are the oldest surviving sections of Islam's holiest site. Much to the chagrin of Wahabis, they are inscribed with the names of the Prophet's companions. Ottomon Mecca is now rapidly disappearing
Al-Masjid al-Nawabi
For many years, hardline Wahabi clerics have had their sites set on the 15th century green dome that rests above the tomb holding the Prophet, Abu Bakr and Umar in Medina. The mosque is regarded as the second holiest site in Islam. Wahabis, however, believe marked graves are idolatrous. A pamphlet published in 2007 by the Saudi Ministry of Islamic Affairs, endorsed by Abdulaziz Al Sheikh, the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, stated that "the green dome shall be demolished and the three graves flattened in the Prophet's Masjid".
Jabal al-Nour
A mountain outside Mecca where Mohammed received his first Koranic revelations. The Prophet used to spend long spells in a cave called Hira. The cave is particularly popular among South Asian pilgrims who have carved steps up to its entrance and adorned the walls with graffiti. Religious hardliners are keen to dissuade pilgrims from congregating there and have mooted the idea of removing the steps and even destroying the mountain altogether.
Dec 5, 2011
مطار الرياض
صالة الفرسان زحمة مرة لدرجة ان ما في كرسي فاضي، أنا الان في انتظار صعود الطائرة متوجة للدمام في رحلة عمل
Dec 1, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)