the Irish Film Institute

Dear Community Member,

I would like to inform you about an upcoming event in the Irish Film Institute: The Moving Worlds - Cinemas of Migration film festival, organised by FOMACS and EUNIC, which will be a series of film screenings, related masterclasses, and Q&A sessions (please see the link to the programme below).

I would particularly like to draw your attention to three films: 'Neukolln Unlimited', 'Family Exile Movie', and 'Return to Hansala'. In all these films questions of Muslim faith and identity are addressed, in the context of immigration, cross-cultural communication, and social integration. The screenings are accompanied by after-film Q&A sessions with the filmmakers. Related special masterclasses (please see the link to the programme below) will also be held.
Perhaps this event will be of interest to you personally; however, I would also like to ask you to forward this message to your contacts, as well as other Muslim student- and professional organisations you might be involved in.

We hope that the films will be attended by members of Muslim communities in Ireland.
Thank you very much for your support and I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Best,
Agnes Kakasi

0857353337

The nerve of the delusional

To: "swasty" The English translation of an article in Alwatan newspaper of Saudi Arabia.

The nerve of the delusional

“Is the decision of the high court to start “DHUL QUIDAH” on that day, which is in accordance with the astronomical calculation of “Um ALQURAH”, an admission of the validity of that calculation? Or is it because the physical sighting is required only for Ramadhan, Shawwal, and Dhul-Hijjah, and for the other months we accept the astronomical calculation of the King Abdelaziz city of astronomy.”

The decision of the high court to announce the beginning of Dhul Hijjah was the sacrifice for those who rushed to sight what they imagined as the crescent of the beginning of the month in the Hijri calendar.

This acceptance of this delusional crescent sighting by the high court is not the only one worth mentioning. On 27-11-1431; they published a request asking people to observe the crescent of Dhul-Hijjah the afternoon of Saturday 29-11-1431 in accordance to the Um ALQURAH calendar. They issued this request, as they mentioned, after they looked at all the reports of the committees which were formed to observe the crescent throughout the kingdom, in coordination with the King Adbdelaziz city of astronomy, and which reported that the crescent was not seen on Saturday 1-11-1431 (aided or un-aided eye). And it was expected, in this situation, that the high court will take a decision similar to the one that decided on the beginning of last Shawwal. That is, they will complete 30 days for the month of Shawwal for the lack of a positive sighting of the crescent of the Dhul-Qidah on the afternoon of Saturday 10/29. And if they did, Saturday 11-29-1431 in accordance to Um ALQURAH calendar would have been 11-28-1431, and Sunday 12-1 in accordance to Um ALQURAH would have been the 29th of Dhul-Qidah and the first of Dhul-Hijjah would have been Monday 12-2-1431 according to Um ALQURAH calendar.

If all this actually happened, it would have meant that the high court had asked the committees to observe the crescent of Dhul-Hijjah on the 28th of Dhul-Qidah and not on 29th; and a mistake like this is not acceptable.

So what compelled the high court make such a decision validating the Um ALQURAH calendar knowing very well that the Um ALQURAH calendar is based on two conditions set by the King Abelaziiz city for science and technology? The first condition is that for the birth of the moon to happen before the sun set and the second, for the moon to be on the horizons after the sun set even for a very short time! And indeed Um ALQURAH predicted that the first of Dhul-Hijjah to be on Sunday because the two conditions have been met. On that day the conjunction of the moon did happen before the sun set and the moon set 18 minutes after the sun set.

So, is the decision of the high court to start “Dhul-Quidah” on that day, which is in accordance with the astronomical calculation of “Um Al-Qurah”, an admission of the validity of that calculation? Or is it because the physical sighting is required only for Ramadhan, Shawwal, and Dhul-Hijjah, and for the other months we accept the astronomical calculation of the King Abdelaziz city of astronomy.

The expectation is for high court to clarify its position concerning this important matter so that its decisions are clear and understood. The question now is: Why the “just witnesses” did not see the crescent of Dhul-Quidah despite being two degrees high in the horizon in Riyadh after the sun set on Saturday 10/29 in accordance to Um Al-Qurah calendar and they are the ones who always rush to witness the sighting before the sun set, or high in the horizon one degree or less as it happened for the beginning of Ramadhan and the beginning of Dhul-Hijjah this year, nay below the horizon as it happened many times before.

The problem is not limited to this! There are other problems in the acceptance of the high court the sighting of the “Just witnesses” of the beginning of Dhul-Hijjah. The beginning of Dhul-Hijjah, in accordance to the King Abdelaziz city of Science and Technology calendar is “right”. But according to the Um Al-Qurah calculations, on Saturday 11/29, the moon was a quarter of a degree high in the surrounding of Riyadh, and half a degree high in the blessed Makkah. It is well known amongst the astronomers that, a crescent this low in the horizon and very faint is impossible to be seen with the human eye even aided with the sharpest advanced instrument.

Also no one of all the observation committees which were tasked to observe the moon for the beginning of Dhul-Hijjah, in Saudi Arabia or outside, have reported sighting the crescent, even using technological instruments.

Amongst them Professor Salih Assaab, an expert of Astronomy at the King Abdelaziz city of Science and Technology, sent a report to the Islamic Crescent Observation Project (ICOP) stating that: “the weather conditions surrounding Riyadh that day was partially cloudy and the use of CCD was not effective. No one sighted the moon; not with naked eye, nor with any instrument (binoculars or telescope…). No one in Saudi Arabia or anywhere in the Muslim world saw it that night.

So how could these ”Just Witnesses” see the crescent while no one in the Kingdom or the surrounding areas have not seen it? And why the high court keeps trusting them while they proved their untruthfulness, and do not listen to the trusted committees.

Could the reason for accepting such reports be because they knew from early on that King Abdelaziz city of Science and Technology has predicted that the moon would be above the horizon that night? Or is the high court taking a middle road, accepting reports only confirmed by King Abdelaziz city of Science and Technology?

But this brings up two important issues. The first has to do with witnessing. Witnessing is a matter independent of anything else. What could be a support for this witnessing could be also a proof against it. As an example, take the fact that the moon is above the horizon, which could support the sighting of the moon. Since the moon in above the horizon, so it is possible to sight it. However, this same proof could be used as a proof for not sighting the moon. All expert astronomers agree that the moon being few degrees high in the horizon is impossible to see, as it was the case in this latest sighting of the month of Dhul-Hijjah,

The second issue is the position of the high court concerning astronomical calculations. Accepting a sighting because the Astronomers say it is above the horizon is an indirect acceptance of astronomical calculations. So the high court use of astronomical calculations sometimes and rejecting it at others is a contradiction and is not acceptable. This position of the high court cannot be justified neither by Shari’ah or scientifically.

This delusional claim is in contradiction to science and to any sighting that has been reported around the world. If they still stand by their claim, than this is very exceptional, and should be brought out forward, and we should be proud of it as it breaks all known records of moon sighting by the naked eye. These records then would be something our country should be proud of, and give our countrymen the chance to shine in the world as we will be proud of their achievements.

http://www.alwatan.com.sa/Articles/Detail.aspx?ArticleId=3180

Mr. Mubarak vs. Mr. Obama

Washington Post Editorial


EGYPT'S PARLIAMENTARY election is on Sunday, but already the principal result is known: a step away from political liberalization and genuine democracy. In the weeks before the vote, more than 1,000 political activists have been rounded up by security forces, and many have been abused. Opposition media commentators have been forced off the air, television channels closed and restrictions placed on text messaging. Meanwhile, the government has issued strident statements rejecting the Obama administration's calls for international observers and severely limited the access of domestic monitoring groups.

None of this is particularly surprising, given the apparent determination of 82-year-old President Hosni Mubarak to preserve his autocracy through next year's presidential election and pave the way for his son Gamal to succeed him. But it is of great importance to the United States and its interests in the Middle East. The attempted perpetuation of a Mubarak dynasty risks leaving a key U.S. ally with an illegitimate government that would be vulnerable to nationalist or Islamist opponents. Mr. Mubarak's rude dismissal of what have been gentle U.S. calls for change is making the Obama administration look weak in a region that can be quick to act on such perceptions.

That's why what will matter most is not the results of the vote but how President Obama responds to them. The president and his secretary of state have brought up democracy and human rights in private conversations with Egyptian leaders but shied away from them in public. They have failed to make any connection between Mr. Mubarak's domestic repression and the more than $1 billion in U.S. aid Egypt receives every year, much of it directed to the military. They have not supported efforts in Congress to pass legislation or even nonbinding resolutions linking bilateral relations to political reform.

This week would be an ideal moment to begin changing those policies. Mr. Obama should let Egyptians - and Arabs around the Middle East - know what he thinks about an election in which peaceful opponents are banned or beaten, votes are stolen and observers excluded.

He should end the State Department's practice of allowing Egypt to exercise a veto over which civil society groups receive U.S. aid, and he should encourage Congress to link military funds to human rights, as it has for several democracies that are U.S. allies. Most of all, Mr. Obama should make it clear that he will not be dismissed or pushed around by Arab strongmen. If Mr. Mubarak gets away with it, others will be quick to follow his example.